Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Sanctuary > Deep Waters
Facebook

Notices

Deep Waters 'Deep Calleth Unto Deep ' -The place to go for Ministry discussions. Please keep it civil. Remember to discuss the issues, not each other.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05-18-2007, 12:45 PM
SDG SDG is offline
Guest


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: H-Town, Texas
Posts: 18,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh View Post
I've had the book for a month now. I'll read it when I'm done studying Romans and we can discuss it!
Sounds good.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-18-2007, 12:47 PM
mizpeh mizpeh is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea View Post
Sounds good.
Your signature line is gross!

That's what happens when you're around preteens all day long!
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-18-2007, 12:56 PM
SDG SDG is offline
Guest


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: H-Town, Texas
Posts: 18,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh View Post
Your signature line is gross!

That's what happens when you're around preteens all day long!
Actually it's the inverse ... I torture these little buggers.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-18-2007, 01:03 PM
Ferd's Avatar
Ferd Ferd is offline
I remain the Petulant Chevalier


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 17,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea View Post
Let's define gospel ....

define doctrine ....

If you are not careful .... Mizpeh ... you will fall among the ultra-ultra cons who now assert that Acts 2:38 IS THE GOSPEL ... and not part of the proper response to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
There are some ignorant folk out there that believe Acts 2:38 is the gospel, but our Ultra Cons here are not among them.....at least the good ones.

The Gospel is the death burial and resurection of Jesus Christ.

Acts 2:38 is the proper response to the gospel.
__________________
If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
My Countdown Counting down to: Days left till the end of the opressive Texas Summer!
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-18-2007, 01:09 PM
Ferd's Avatar
Ferd Ferd is offline
I remain the Petulant Chevalier


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 17,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea View Post
No .... I have not .... nor do I subscribe to his 3 steps = justification model
your a one stepper...

what is the difference between 1 step and 3?

or are you a 2 stepper like the baptists?
__________________
If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
My Countdown Counting down to: Days left till the end of the opressive Texas Summer!
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 06-12-2007, 07:38 AM
Iron_Bladder
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by revrandy View Post

Sorry for the length.. BUT Doctrine Matters!!! One Lord.. One Faith.. One Baptism...

Not what men think.. But What Does Say the Word of the Lord..

just a thought...



Well doctrine does matter, which is why it concerns me that your teaching baptismal regeneration, i.e. the heresy that water baptism is necessary for salvation. We're saved by grace through faith, not be works (Ephesians 2:8-9), the Roman Catholics and Christadelphians teach that Gods' grace is mediated to us through the sacrament of water baptism. Please can we discuss this error.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 06-12-2007, 01:52 PM
Praxeas's Avatar
Praxeas Praxeas is offline
Go Dodgers!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 45,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder View Post
Well doctrine does matter, which is why it concerns me that your teaching baptismal regeneration, i.e. the heresy that water baptism is necessary for salvation. We're saved by grace through faith, not be works (Ephesians 2:8-9), the Roman Catholics and Christadelphians teach that Gods' grace is mediated to us through the sacrament of water baptism. Please can we discuss this error.
baptismal regeneration is the doctrine the Catholics teach that water baptism itself results in someone be filled with the Spirit and regenerated. Not that it is necessary for salvation. Water baptism also is not a work, please define work
__________________
Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:


  1. There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
  2. The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
  3. Every sinner must repent of their sins.
  4. That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
  5. That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
  6. The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 06-15-2007, 08:18 AM
Iron_Bladder
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by revrandy View Post

I do believe Doctrine is important. Not knowing Who God is or confused by the Doctrines set forth by men not founded in the Word will not save men.
Jesus said if you've seen me you have seen the Father. ...



“He who has seen Me, has seen the Father.” John 14:9b.

Oneness people such as Rev Randy use this verse in an attempt to argue that Jesus is God the Father. They assume that jesus is saying; 'If you've seen me then you've seen the Father becasue I AM the Father.' OK here is my reply:



Firstly, The word for “seen” in John 14:9 is not Blepo, which is the normal Greek word translated as “to see,” but “horao” (3708 in Strongs) which has the meaning here of to understand. For instance I can see my printer as I type, now to express this in Greek, I would use the word “Blepo.” But I could also say that I can see how my PC’s bios works, now this word for ‘see’ corresponds with the Greek “horao.” So Jesus’ use of horao instead of Blepo, means that he was not saying that he was the Father.

Secondly, God the Father is never seen; Colossians 1:15, “the Son is the image of the invisible God (Father),” which means that he is not himself the invisible God (Father). Also John 1:18 “No one has seen God at anytime …Son … he has declared Him.” At John 5:37 Jesus addresses his critics and speaking to their faces, tells them himself that they have not seen the Father’s face, nor heard his voice. What more must he say to convince us that he is the Son, and not God the Father (John 20:31, 2nd John 3), for it was the Son who was manifested in the flesh, and not God the Father (1st John 3:8).

Thirdly, John in a parallel verse to John 14:9, states of the Son; “He who sees Me sees Him who sent Me.” John 12:45. John is here speaking of the Father, and reveals that the Father, though unseen, is only revealed to us in the incarnation of his Son. Jesus cannot be the Father, else how can he send himself into the world from himself?

Fourthly, John tells us that “the Son of God was manifested” (1st John 3:8), at the incarnation. Now Oneness pentecostals will try to read “God the Father” into the text of the KJV rendering of 1st Timothy 3:16. But in the light of 1st John 3:8, this verse can only be speaking of the Son, and not of the Father. John again confirms that it was the Son, and not God the Father who was sent into this world; “sent his only begotten Son into the world.” 1st John 4:9b. And that the Son was sent into this world by the Father; “the Father has sent the Son as saviour of the world.” (1st John 4:14b).

Finally, a distinction between the Father and the Son is clearly taught within John chapter 14. At John 14:6, a distinction is made between the Son and Father, as it’s only “through” the Son that we can gain access to the Father. So the Son is the intercessor, and the Father is the one through whom intercession is made. At verse 7 the word “also” again implies two distinct persons, who relate to each other, consequently proving that they cannot be each other. At John 14:10, Jesus does not say of himself “I am the Father.” Instead he again distinguishes between himself and the Father by using the word “in,” and saying; “I am IN the Father and the Father is IN me.” Then at John 14:23 Jesus refers to himself and the Father together not as “I” in the first person singular, but as “we are” which is the verb ‘to be’ in the first person plural present tense; “We will come to him and make our abode with him.” This plural form of verb ‘to be’ proves that Jesus is not the Father, but that he is rather “with” the Father. Then at verse 28 Jesus states that he is “going to his Father,” proving that he is other than the Father. Lastly in verse 31 the Son says that he “loves the Father.” But how can two impersonal natures love each other? Or can God be only one person who loves himself in different manifestations as Oneness claims?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 06-15-2007, 08:22 AM
Iron_Bladder
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd View Post
There are some ignorant folk out there that believe Acts 2:38 is the gospel, but our Ultra Cons here are not among them.....at least the good ones.

The Gospel is the death burial and resurection of Jesus Christ.

Acts 2:38 is the proper response to the gospel.



OK Ferd, I understand your point, but can a person be saved if they have not even obeyed Acts 2:38 as you understand it? SO are Trinitarians who're not baptised correctly (in Jesus' name) as you understand it and who haven't spoken in tongues ... saved? Are people like Luther, Spurgeon and John Wesley in hell becasue they weren't baptised correctly, didn't speak in tongues and were Trinitarians?
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 06-16-2007, 05:36 PM
mizpeh mizpeh is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder View Post
OK Ferd, I understand your point, but can a person be saved if they have not even obeyed Acts 2:38 as you understand it? SO are Trinitarians who're not baptised correctly (in Jesus' name) as you understand it and who haven't spoken in tongues ... saved? Are people like Luther, Spurgeon and John Wesley in hell becasue they weren't baptised correctly, didn't speak in tongues and were Trinitarians?

What did Peter tell those who were pricked in their hearts after they heard the gospel in Acts 2 and asked Men and brethren, what shall we do??
You would be wise to follow suit.

Do you believe Jesus taught the gospel when he went from town to town? Did he teach repentance? Did he teach baptism? Are these part of the gospel that he taught?
__________________
His banner over me is LOVE.... My soul followeth hard after thee....Love one another with a pure heart fervently. Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?

To be a servant of God, it will cost us our total commitment to God, and God alone. His burden must be our burden... Sis Alvear
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Oneness Doctrine In The Aramaic New Testament Michael The Disciple Deep Waters 31 12-21-2021 04:34 AM
Does Dan Seagraves Believe in the LIght Doctrine???? Thad Deep Waters 95 03-28-2011 09:24 PM
Libs believe in salvation by works Steve Epley Deep Waters 85 05-13-2007 01:39 AM
Salvation Does Not Cease at Great White Throne Judgment crakjak Deep Waters 10 04-17-2007 07:54 PM
What do you think of this Financial equality doctrine? COOPER Deep Waters 59 03-22-2007 06:03 PM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by Amanah
- by Amanah

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.