The Difference Between the PCI of the Merger and the Current Counterfeits

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Sabellius

"The three verbs [as] primarily metaphors of salvation, each expressing a special facet of their conversion in light of the preceding sentences: they had been “washed” from the filth of their former life-styles expressed in the preceding list; they had been “sanctified,” set apart by God for holy, godly living that stands in stark contrast to their former wickedness; though formerly “unjust,” they had been justified, so that now right with God they may inherit the kingdom that before they could not. Each of the verbs is thus chosen for contextual, not dogmatic, reasons; and their sequence is theologically irrelevant. "*

* Gordon D. Fee, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987), 246.

Thank you Sabellius, when do you consider a person to be saved?

I think this verse could be used both ways, metaphorically and literally. Just as the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord are metaphorically used when we say we are crucified to sin in repentance, buried with Christ in baptism and risen in newness of life with the infilling of the Spirit.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Thank you Sabellius, when do you consider a person to be saved?

I think this verse could be used both ways, metaphorically and literally. Just as the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord are metaphorically used when we say we are crucified to sin in repentance, buried with Christ in baptism and risen in newness of life with the infilling of the Spirit.

Baptismal regenerationist????

[SDG]

Sabellius ... some questions for you at the Justification thread ...

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...?t=706&page=12

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Baptismal regenerationist????

Why do you think I have been asking all these questions?

The only place I have heard the PCI teaching on salvation is in my discussions with Trinitarians. Not until the last few months have I heard a Oneness person say we are saved by faith alone.

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Sabellius

I believe that Justification occurs before any baptism. I believe that Justification refers, naturally, to the declaring of an individual as righteous. God declares us just. How else could the Spirt of God enter Cornelius (c.f. Acts 10:1-46) prior to water baptism?

I believe that baptism requires a synergistic effort and that it means both--symbolic and that genuine spiritual realities are conferred at water baptism. Symbolicly, we are buried with Him in the likeness of His death (Colossians 2:12) and are identified with Christ at baptism. Literally, we are now in the "Kingdom of God"; have a record of sin with a penalty of death, remitted or discharged.

How can one "need" something yet receiving what is needed is not important? No analogy is perfect, but here goes one. When HP tells me that a power cord is needed to operate my laptop then I would logically apply a severe degree of importance to the power cord. Because, if I fail in this then my laptop will not be operable. In other words, I do not think we can make a logical distinction between needing to be baptized and baptism essentiality, as it regards baptism alone.

Alicea's view is an anachronism. I cannot substantiate this presently (not enough time), but I believe the biblical writers as well as many trinitarian fathers placed very strong opinions about baptism and a good amount held to baptismal regeneration (baptismal regeneration is not the position of myself nor the UPCI). I believe that the idea of baptism being optional is anachronistic to the normative view.

I can't see anything here that I could disagree with. Good post!

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Wasn't Nestorius a Trinitarian?

Yes.

Is the man, Jesus Christ, called God in the Bible?
Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Mt 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

No, the MAN isn't called God, the Word (logos) is called God. Notice also that the passage in Isaiah says the child's name shall be called (among other things) the mighty God; it doesn't say the child would be called the mighty God (particularly since the child was begotten and, as such, had a beginning - God, by His very nature, is without beginning or end).

Even Jesus distinguished between Himself and GOD when He said "to my God and to your God."

My point, of course, is that we must be careful not to confuse, commingle, intermix, etc. Jesus' divinity and His humanity.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Chan

No, the MAN isn't called God, the Word (logos) is called God. Notice also that the passage in Isaiah says the child's name shall be called (among other things) the mighty God; it doesn't say the child would be called the mighty God (particularly since the child was begotten and, as such, had a beginning - God, by His very nature, is without beginning or end).

Even Jesus distinguished between Himself and GOD when He said "to my God and to your God."

My point, of course, is that we must be careful not to confuse, commingle, intermix, etc. Jesus' divinity and His humanity.

The Son which is born is called the mighty God. The Son is a man. It does say the child would be called the mighty God. The names in Isa 9:6 are all descriptive names of the child not of an eternal Son. Everything the man, Jesus Christ, did and said is predicated on who he was, God manifest in flesh.

Go to Revelations. Who is the Almighty God? Re 1:8 Re 4:8 Re 11:17

Originally Posted by mizpeh

The Son which is born is called the mighty God. The Son is a man. It does say the child would be called the mighty God. The names in Isa 9:6 are all descriptive names of the child not of an eternal Son. Everything the man, Jesus Christ, did and said is predicated on who he was, God manifest in flesh.

Go to Revelations. Who is the Almighty God? Re 1:8 Re 4:8 Re 11:17

Who said anything about that oxymoron of an eternal Son? It is not in His humanity that Jesus is the mighty God, it is in His divinity that He is the mighty God. Otherwise, you must say that God was begotten, that God had a beginning.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

Have you read the New Testament lately? You don't really expect me to believe that there is no distinction between Father, Son, and Holy Ghost presented in Scripture?

If you don't understand that we come to the Father, through Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit, than you've really missed the truth of God's eternal purpose in redemption.

For example, have you not read how that God (Father) raised up Jesus Christ (Son) from the dead, by the Holy Spirit?

For this reason Paul states in Ephesians 2:18, "For through him[Jesus] we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father."

I feel quite comfortable using the language of the Bible to express God's eternal purpose in reconciling us unto Himself. It's not trinitarian to understand what I have stated above.

Acts 2:24
“Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.”

b. Romans 8:11
“But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.”

Seems to me that Scripture makes no definite delineation between the Father/Spirit raising Jesus from the dead. For obvious reasons, of course.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by rrford

Acts 2:24
“Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.”

b. Romans 8:11
“But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.”

Seems to me that Scripture makes no definite delineation between the Father/Spirit raising Jesus from the dead. For obvious reasons, of course.

RR .. I understand you points. However, is there a distinction to be made when it comes to our salvation, as it applies to our redemption?