Water/Spirit

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Guess that depends, grew up on the west coast so you figure that part out. Spent the last 5 years in southern Virginia, now in southern Maryland where they are still trying to join the Confederacy, I don't have the heart to tell 'em they lost already.

Well you're a transplant then. But just don't go mixing with those political types in Maryland. They might corrupt you.

[bkstokes]

Originally Posted by Ron

Epesians 4:5 says, "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism!"

Which Baptism, Water or Holy Ghost?
If it is Holy Ghost, then Water Baptism is null, because it is not needed.
It is Water Baptism, then we can see that we don't need the Spirit.
Both are foolish.

Both are two aspects of One Baptism!

In this scripture Baptism is Water. Holy Ghost -- "Baptism" shows how the Spirit completely covers an individual. If you will notice that a believer is described as receiving the Holy Ghost in many different ways (In other words there are various adjectives to describe it).

[Sam]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

It does seem to describe you based on your rebuttles. I do not know you personally, but I am just giving my opinion. You say there are other W/S verses give me some that actually say that. I know most of what OP' use and most of them are not accurate. Michael gave some, but what I gather from reading these are that the response to the gospel was baptism and many received the HG, but there is no inferrence that W/S was salvation.

A couple verses some OP's would like to use but can't because it doesn't agree with the way they divide the Word and insist that nothing in the Epistles can be used to define/describe/reference/hint at salvation are:

not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, Titus 3:5

And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Thanks, and good point. You got to emphasis that AAAANNNNNDDDD.

Ya welcome. Kinda like the emphasis in Matt 5:28 is on the "to". One word can make all the difference in understanding scripture.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Ferd

lets back up. lets not talk about the deep end.

lets talk about guys like you. with you you changed from W/S first or at least the same time as you seperated from seperation (that was funny I couldnt resist)

this is what I am talking about.

I think most of those that now claim a Neo-PCI view are people that jettisoned standards and doctrine either at the same time or one after the other with generally standards going first.



I still suspect we have some very fine folk right here on AFF (people that I call friend and have NO problem fellowshipping with) who left standards, then left doctrine, and now have children who may or may not be going to a Oneness church or even care about the Oneness doctrine.

I offer no judgement. only observation.

You know for me I followed the dress standards because it's what my parents and pastor expected. It was never something I was convinced of, though I did follow it, I didn't go to school and change into something different like some did. When I got to the point where I had to make those decisions for myself and for my family I just didn't carry them over. I did spend a lot of time in the Pacific Northwest though and many of those PCI guys were pretty big on dress standards, at least everyone in their church followed them, and that doesn't happen without someone telling you to.

[Mrs. LPW]

Originally Posted by Sam

A couple verses some OP's would like to use but can't because it doesn't agree with the way they divide the Word and insist that nothing in the Epistles can be used to define/describe/reference/hint at salvation are:

not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit Titus 3:5

And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God

Not a true statement, in that context.

[bkstokes]

Originally Posted by Ron

Epesians 4:5 says, "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism!"

Which Baptism, Water or Holy Ghost?
If it is Holy Ghost, then Water Baptism is null, because it is not needed.
It is Water Baptism, then we can see that we don't need the Spirit.
Both are foolish.

Both are two aspects of One Baptism!

I am a one stepper, so I don't have to justify that other two aspects as necessary for regenration.

You must ask yourself these questions:

If it takes water baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost to produce regenration then:

How could the Spirit dwell in the unregenrated (Acts 10) before baptism?

How could a Phillip leave the Ethiopian Eunich without him receiving the Holy Spirit? Because then he would still have been without regenration.

-----------------------------------

Just like Abraham was justified before circumsion, so are we before baptism in water.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by StMark

Yes Ferd,

When the standard goes, the doctrine always changes. what concerns me the most is, most who have left progress to the point where the baptism of the holy ghost is almost non exisitent and I'm NOT going to take that back. I know many who are more "evangelical" in their belief system then even "spirit filled charismatic".
Even more frieghtening are the types that have even "evolved" into what we now see in people like Reba Rambo and carlton Pearson. Many are starting to go in that direction - some with whom I wont even say the names here on the forum

and frankly, this is what worries me about change.

That's usually referred to as "the slippery slope" idea.
first: think that salvation doesn't depend on how long or short we keep our hair and sleeves
second: chuck the whole thing and sink to the depths of degradation.

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by Sam

A couple verses some OP's would like to use but can't because it doesn't agree with the way they divide the Word and insist that nothing in the Epistles can be used to define/describe/reference/hint at salvation are:

not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, Titus 3:5

And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God

It is funny you mention the latter verse. The word used there is the word used to also describe baptism in the Bible and to describe washing hands. It is the same word also used in describing the person we call John the baptist or John the washer. Though it is the same word it does not prove baptism is essential it just proves that the word used for baptism in scripture is a remedial word that means the samething as wash, dunk, drowned, baptized, cover, pour over....yada it is a very broad word.

[Cindy]

There are a lot of confused people in this world.