Question about Acts 2:38

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Timmy

To me, Acts 2:38 looks like a promise (the gift of the Holy Ghost) with two conditions (repent and be baptized). Oneness Pentecostals apparently see it as the way (the only way) to be saved, with four items in the list of requirements: repent, be baptized, receive the Holy Ghost, and speak in tongues (somehow implicit to the verse, but that's another topic!).

Can you explain how you get four (or even three) commands from it? Again, to me it looks like two commands, and a result of following the commands. And the promised result is a "gift". How can receiving a gift be considered a command? It's up to the giver of the gift to fulfill that part, not the recipient!

Well when you start off with a logical fallacy it sort of sets the mood for the rest of the post. Sorry but OPs do NOT say tongues is a necessary act to be saved nor do we say it is implicit in the verse...sigh

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Well when you start off with a logical fallacy it sort of sets the mood for the rest of the post. Sorry but OPs do NOT say tongues is a necessary act to be saved nor do we say it is implicit in the verse...sigh

Okaaaay. Sorry, coulda sworn I've heard many OPs say that. Let me rephrase the question then. Is Acts 2:38 a 3-part command or a 2-part command and a promise? Or is it something else?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Timmy

Okaaaay. Sorry, coulda sworn I've heard many OPs say that. Let me rephrase the question then. Is Acts 2:38 a 3-part command or a 2-part command and a promise? Or is it something else?

It seems to be a two part command but that does not make receiving the Spirit NOT necessary to being saved according to Romans 8:9

Originally Posted by drummerboy_dave

And I thought I was talking to "Timmy".

You were.

When the heart is convicted and the question arises, "What shall we do?" The answer is always the same. If a person has not yet recieved the gift of the Holy Ghost, then Acts 2:38 has not yet been fulfilled in that person's life. Just as it had not yet been fulfilled in the lives of the folks at Ephesus. They had yet to be baptised in the name of Jesus.

That doesn't answer my questions. Where exactly does the Bible specifically say that being filled with the Holy Ghost is necessary to receiving salvation (and at which point did the Apostles receive it; when Jesus breathed on them and said "Receive ye the Holy Spirit" or on the day of Pentecost)? Where does the Bible specifically say that speaking in tongues is the first evidence that one has received the Holy Ghost? I'm well aware of how passages such as Acts 2:4 and Acts 2:38 are interpreted but I'm not interested in interpretations. I want you to show the rest of us how what you're claiming (that one must receive the Holy Ghost in order to be saved and that tongues is the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Ghost "is all within the book" (meaning that this is what the Bible actually says and not how one interprets it).

Your questions, Chan, are quite silly to me. They require nothing more than simply recognizing what happened on the day of pentecost.

They're only silly to people who take their interpretations of what the Bible says and claim that their interpretations are what the Bible says. I'm sorry that you can't seem to tell the difference between what the Bible says (the actual words of scripture) and someone's interpretations of what the Bible says but claiming that your interpretations are what the Bible says is nothing less than lying because you know that there's a difference between your interpretations and the actual words of scripture.

Like most non-oneness Pentecostals, I believe that the baptism of the Holy Ghost is what the AoG and other Pentecostal denominations have called a "second blessing" or "second work of grace" that a Christian can receive (and should seek). Along those lines, I also believe that tongues are the initial evidence of this "baptism of the Holy Ghost." I also believe that God's Spirit does come to dwell in a person the moment he obeys the gospel call (the call to repent and to put one's trust in Christ). I believe there may very well be a difference between Jesus having breathed on His disciples and telling them to "receive the Holy Spirit" and the event in Acts 2. However, and this is the point you and people like you seem to miss, these are nothing more than interpretations of scripture - just like what you're saying is nothing more than an interpretation of scripture.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Well when you start off with a logical fallacy it sort of sets the mood for the rest of the post. Sorry but OPs do NOT say tongues is a necessary act to be saved nor do we say it is implicit in the verse...sigh

Will you admit that some OPs do, in fact, believe that since receiving the baptism of the Holy Ghost is necessary for salvation, and that tongues is the initial evidence of this, that some OPs thus believe that speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation?

Originally Posted by Timmy

Okaaaay. Sorry, coulda sworn I've heard many OPs say that. Let me rephrase the question then. Is Acts 2:38 a 3-part command or a 2-part command and a promise? Or is it something else?

There seems to be within the OP camp those who believe it's a three-part command and those who believe it's a two-part command and a promise.

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

It seems to be a two part command but that does not make receiving the Spirit NOT necessary to being saved according to Romans 8:9

OK, now that makes sense. Not sure if all of your brethren would agree, necessarily. (Especially if Timmy agrees! )

So the two commands are my responsibility, and it is up to God to give the gift (the HG) in response. Got it.

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Chan

Where exactly does the Bible specifically say that being filled with the Holy Ghost is necessary to receiving salvation

In fact, the remission of sins part of Acts 2:38 is tacked onto just the "requirements" part of the verse, before the "promise" part.

1. Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and

2. ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

You do part A and B, and your sins are remitted! Then you will receive the gift.

[drummerboy_dave]

Originally Posted by Timmy

In fact, the remission of sins part of Acts 2:38 is tacked onto just the "requirements" part of the verse, before the "promise" part.

1. Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and

2. ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

You do part A and B, and your sins are remitted! Then you will receive the gift.

I can agree, that this is what the bible says. Does it not also say, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. A man who has done only A and B has not and can not enter the kingdom of God according to John 3:5

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by drummerboy_dave

I can agree, that this is what the bible says. Does it not also say, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. A man who has done only A and B has not and can not enter the kingdom of God according to John 3:5

So remission of sins, alone, is not enough?

OK, but again, the second part is not up to me. It's God's doing. So, if I do A and B (which I have), and if the promise is kept (and we must assume it is), I guess I'm in! (Except that being baptized in the name of the Father, the name of the Son, and the name of the Holy Spirit doesn't count, according to you guys. But that's another topic!)