Jail house Christianity and Jesus Name People

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith

I could be wrong, but I find it a rare thing for someone to be calling on the name of Jesus while going down in the titles, of course the same could be said for those be baptized in Jesus name, my hope is that this changes to where the baptizee is instructed to call on the name of Jesus before baptism.

Hard to do while going under, but maybe with technology that can happen sometime soon.

Calling on the name of the Lord, Pastor K ... is a phrase that does not mean invoking the proper name of Jesus ... it has never meant that throughout Scripture. I have to assume you are basing this on Acts 22.

Calling on the name of the Lord has scriptural precedent and meaning.

Romans 10 reads

9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."[e] 12For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."[f]


One of the gravest errors we make in rightly dividing the word is our failure to understand idiomatic expressions of the Hebraic language.

In the OT ... to call upon the name of the Lord, the word upon is the particle preposition b or beth. There is no Strong's number that corresponds. Only the use of this Hebrew preposition separates to call the LORD or to call to the LORD from to call upon the LORD or to call upon the name of the LORD.

Almost every use of to call on the name of the LORD involves the construction of an altar and the offering of a sacrifice (Genesis 12:8, 13:4, 21:33--implied, 26:25; 1 Kings 18:24).

All of the Old Testament sacrifices were only as effective as the believing of the one offering them.All of these sacrifices entailed acknowledging God's lamb who would be revealed in the future. To call “upon the name of the LORD” was to formally enter into a covenant by coming into His presence.

Notice that it was between the believer and God ... not the officiator of a baptismal ceremony invoking it on someone else.

CrazyHomie once stated:

If we are going to be called "Apostolic" and a "new testament church", obviously one would think we would want to be biblically based in our baptism. Baptism was a ritual cleansing incorportated into the mosaic law. If a woman was on her monthly, she would go and "cleanse" herself. If you were healed of leprosy, etc. one would obey the law and cleanse themselves. These baptism pools were all over the holy land and were called "Mikvahs". When Peter preached in Acts 2, he told them to go wash according to the "new covenant" which was Christ. They were no longer to cleanse themselves according to the "old covenant" which was the law. Also, it was a public confession as to their new found faith in this messiah called Jesus Christ. In those days to public confess ones faith away from the law to follow Jesus, was inviting persecution if not death from the religious community. Three thousand obeyed Peter and went and washed themselves. I am not saying an individual is not saved by invocation, rather biblically speaking, it is always up to the believer to call on Christ for salvation.

Entering this new covenant is through our confession of faith in the Lamb ... as it was for Abraham, Jacob, Moses (See Hebrews 11)

Paul in Romans 10 is echoing a biblical truth and a promise from OT scripture ...

These too are the words of the prophet Joel and Peter ... and others also ... there is witness in Scripture .... and calling upon the name has alway fell upon the believer as it relates to salvation ... not the utterances of third party ... i.e. baptizer.

The name is undoubtedly attached to the person and His authority and whole nature.

A sinner, Jew or Gentile, who has sincerely believed and calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved ....

John says

And his commandment is this: we should believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another just as he commanded us

As does Joel:

Quote:
32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

As does the Psalmist:

Quote:
Psalm 116:4, "Then called I upon the name of the LORD [YHWH] ; O LORD [YHWH], I beseech thee, deliver my soul."
As does Paul:

Quote:
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

As does Ananias, in Acts:

Quote:
"And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

As does Peter, in the book of Acts:

Quote:
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

when Paul speaks about confessing the Lord w/ their mouth ... he is speaking of a believing upon the sacrifice found as part of a covenant being made. Hence, Paul expounds in the next few verses that this confession is calling upon the name of the Lord - a phrase that has deep significance thoughout the Word of God. The Epistles often explain to the believer and the non-believer how we are saved ... through Jesus Christ.

Calling upon the name of the Lord is not a one-time invocation or equational formula .... but faith/trust/reliance on the testator.

[KWSS1976]

As elizabeth quotes:I am struggling teaching the Celebrate Recovery stuff, it does NOT mention Baptism with it's salvation study at all-then it goes to suggest that repeating a prayer and teaches one is saved forever--this is not the normative biblicial experience./.

Liz this is not a normative biblical experience either when you are praying and some people come up to you and lay there hands on you and start yelling its the holyghost let it go let it out its the holyghost your almost there no one did this in the bible...

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Normative initiation ... I'll accept ... normative "replicative" experiences ... with superior type baptisms adding to a birth in and by His Spirit ... nope.

Daniel don't you see that we are not the only ones guilty of this?

Where do you think the sinners prayer came from? It came from a -as you put-replicative experience.

I think you have to becareful here with this-we are bound to replicate something. Hope when we do it,we will replicate what is right.

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

As elizabeth quotes:I am struggling teaching the Celebrate Recovery stuff, it does NOT mention Baptism with it's salvation study at all-then it goes to suggest that repeating a prayer and teaches one is saved forever--this is not the normative biblicial experience./.

Liz this is not a normative biblical experience either when you are praying and some people come up to you and lay there hands on you and start yelling its the holyghost let it go let it out its the holyghost your almost there no one did this in the bible...

Ha ha!

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Obviously, Keith you have retained the Water and Spirit message ... even now ... which I believes still hinders your view of the entire Body of Christ ...
After reading your statement I can only infer that somehow only those who have gone through the birth process properly are the MOST HEALTHY... the others are spiritually defective?

Are you suggesting a person filled with the baptism of the Holy Spirit ... but has not been "unified w/ Christ" through a properly administered baptism, is not dressed with all of Christ????

I am all for making a parallel with natural birth when we speak of our spiritual birth ... Christ did ....but since when is the baby the catalyst ...? Where does God call us mid-wives?

Max Lucado makes a great point when he says:

Born again. Birth, by definition, is a passive act. The enwombed child contributes nothing to the delivery. Postpartum celebrations applaud the work of the mother. No one lionizes the infant. (“Great work there, little one.”) No, give the tyke a pacifier not a medal. Mom deserves the gold. She exerts the effort. She pushes, agonizes, and delivers.

When my niece bore her first child, she invited her brother and mother to stand in the delivery room. After witnessing three hours of pushing, when the baby finally crowned, my nephew turned to his mom and said, “I’m sorry for every time I talked back to you.”

The mother pays the price of birth. She doesn’t enlist the child’s assistance or solicit his or her advice. Why would she? The baby can’t even take a breath without umbilical help, much less navigate a path into new life. Nor, Jesus is saying, can we. Spiritual rebirthing requires a capable parent, not an able infant.



Who is this parent? Check the strategically selected word again. The Greek language offers two choices for again:

• 1. Palin, which means a repetition of an act; to redo what was done earlier

• 2. Anothen, which also depicts a repeated action, but requires the original source to repeat it. It means “from above, from a higher place, things which come from heaven or God.” In other words, the one who did the work the first time does it again. This is the word Jesus chose.

The difference between the two terms is the difference between a painting by da Vinci and one by me. Suppose you and I are standing in the Louvre, admiring the famous Mona Lisa. Inspired by the work, I produce an easel and canvas and announce, “I’m going to paint this beautiful portrait again.”

And I do! Right there in the Salle des Etats, I brandish my palette and flurry my brush and re-create the Mona Lisa. Alas, Lucado is no Leonardo. Ms. Lisa has a Picassoesque imbalance to her—crooked nose and one eye higher than the other. Technically, however, I keep my pledge and paint the Mona Lisa again.


Jesus means something else. He employs the second Greek term, calling for the action of the original source. He uses the word anothen, which, if honored in the Paris gallery, would require da Vinci’s presence. Anothen excludes:

• Latter-day replicas.

• Second-generation attempts.

• Well-meaning imitations.

He who did it first must do it again. The original creator recreates his creation. This is the act that Jesus describes.

• Born: God exerts the effort.

• Again: God restores the beauty.

We don’t try again. We need, not the muscle of self, but a miracle of God.

I want to address this, I don't think you know my full background. My roots go back to the Foursquare movement, my family has been in the UPCI or Oneness Pentecostalism for 5 generations or more. I graducated from a UPCI Bible College etc. My graduate degree came from one of 2 Prestigious Baptist Seminaries on the West Coast.

One man who I consider a brilliant mentor is a out right tri-theist in every since of the world. I have no problem believing that he has a relationship with God, the fruit is evident. I have no problem mingling with those who don't see eye to eye with me, I don't every speak ill or down play their faith experience. I accept them as children of the King, but that won't stop me from sharing what I believe to be normative and effectual in regards to the New Birth teaching.

My greatest influence in that regard comes from a British, Trinitarian Bapticostal preacher. While I regard what I teach to be full salvation or full gospel message it is clear that others without the same experience have something significant in their lives, I embrace that, celebrate that and tell them what has happened to me, and why I feel it to be important.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith

I want to address this, I don't think you know my full background. My roots go back to the Foursquare movement, my family has been in the UPCI or Oneness Pentecostalism for 5 generations or more. I graducated from a UPCI Bible College etc. My graduate degree came from one of 2 Prestigious Baptist Seminaries on the West Coast.

One man who I consider a brilliant mentor is a out right tri-theist in every since of the world. I have no problem believing that he has a relationship with God, the fruit is evident. I have no problem mingling with those who don't see eye to eye with me, I don't every speak ill or down play their faith experience. I accept them as children of the King, but that won't stop me from sharing what I believe to be normative and effectual in regards to the New Birth teaching.

My greatest influence in that regard comes from a British, Trinitarian Bapticostal preacher. While I regard what I teach to be full salvation or full gospel message it is clear that others without the same experience have something significant in their lives, I embrace that, celebrate that and tell them what has happened to me, and why I feel it to be important.

Do you feel these people are lost?

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Do you feel these people are lost?

You are kidding right?

[KWSS1976]

If they are not lost Elizabeth then there way must be correct also I asume by this..(You are kidding right?) You would think they are not lost and are saved..

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Do you feel these people are lost?

No, because ultimately faith saves us, but salvation is a rich full orbed experience. Faith is transforming and leads the truly faith filled person to want to obey.

Without repentance and faith there is no response to the Gospel, without baptism into Christ Jesus then the body of sins remains, without the Spirit no one can overcome the sin nature.

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Calling on the name of the Lord, Pastor K ... is a phrase that does not mean invoking the proper name of Jesus ... it has never meant that throughout Scripture. I have to assume you are basing this on Acts 22.

Calling on the name of the Lord has scriptural precedent and meaning.

Romans 10 reads

9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."[e] 12For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."[f]


One of the gravest errors we make in rightly dividing the word is our failure to understand idiomatic expressions of the Hebraic language.

In the OT ... to call upon the name of the Lord, the word upon is the particle preposition b or beth. There is no Strong's number that corresponds. Only the use of this Hebrew preposition separates to call the LORD or to call to the LORD from to call upon the LORD or to call upon the name of the LORD.

Almost every use of to call on the name of the LORD involves the construction of an altar and the offering of a sacrifice (Genesis 12:8, 13:4, 21:33--implied, 26:25; 1 Kings 18:24).

All of the Old Testament sacrifices were only as effective as the believing of the one offering them.All of these sacrifices entailed acknowledging God's lamb who would be revealed in the future. To call “upon the name of the LORD” was to formally enter into a covenant by coming into His presence.

Notice that it was between the believer and God ... not the officiator of a baptismal ceremony invoking it on someone else.

CrazyHomie once stated:

If we are going to be called "Apostolic" and a "new testament church", obviously one would think we would want to be biblically based in our baptism. Baptism was a ritual cleansing incorportated into the mosaic law. If a woman was on her monthly, she would go and "cleanse" herself. If you were healed of leprosy, etc. one would obey the law and cleanse themselves. These baptism pools were all over the holy land and were called "Mikvahs". When Peter preached in Acts 2, he told them to go wash according to the "new covenant" which was Christ. They were no longer to cleanse themselves according to the "old covenant" which was the law. Also, it was a public confession as to their new found faith in this messiah called Jesus Christ. In those days to public confess ones faith away from the law to follow Jesus, was inviting persecution if not death from the religious community. Three thousand obeyed Peter and went and washed themselves. I am not saying an individual is not saved by invocation, rather biblically speaking, it is always up to the believer to call on Christ for salvation.

Entering this new covenant is through our confession of faith in the Lamb ... as it was for Abraham, Jacob, Moses (See Hebrews 11)

Paul in Romans 10 is echoing a biblical truth and a promise from OT scripture ...

These too are the words of the prophet Joel and Peter ... and others also ... there is witness in Scripture .... and calling upon the name has alway fell upon the believer as it relates to salvation ... not the utterances of third party ... i.e. baptizer.

The name is undoubtedly attached to the person and His authority and whole nature.

A sinner, Jew or Gentile, who has sincerely believed and calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved ....

John says

And his commandment is this: we should believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another just as he commanded us

As does Joel:

Quote:
32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

As does the Psalmist:

Quote:
Psalm 116:4, "Then called I upon the name of the LORD [YHWH] ; O LORD [YHWH], I beseech thee, deliver my soul."
As does Paul:

Quote:
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

As does Ananias, in Acts:

Quote:
"And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

As does Peter, in the book of Acts:

Quote:
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

when Paul speaks about confessing the Lord w/ their mouth ... he is speaking of a believing upon the sacrifice found as part of a covenant being made. Hence, Paul expounds in the next few verses that this confession is calling upon the name of the Lord - a phrase that has deep significance thoughout the Word of God. The Epistles often explain to the believer and the non-believer how we are saved ... through Jesus Christ.

Calling upon the name of the Lord is not a one-time invocation or equational formula .... but faith/trust/reliance on the testator.

Dan Segraves said that James 2:7 speaks about baptism,

7 Do they not blaspheme that noble name by which you are called?