All Trinitarians are Lost!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Originalist

I stand firm that only those who have obeyed Acts 2:38 will go to heaven. However, some here are going to be surprised at who God has given credit for having obeyed Acts 2:38.

I stand firm that only those who trusted in the person and work of Jesus Christ will be saved.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

I stand firm that only those who trusted in the person and work of Jesus Christ will be saved.

I stand firm on the fact that those who trust in Christ's work of the cross and obey what the apostles told people to obey in order to benefit from it will be saved. All else is speculation and no foundation for doctrine.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Jabez

Bet you all are going to be surprised at who you see in heaven!

You make a doctrine out of that assumption and I cannot.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Originalist

This whole thread is a hypothetical in spite of the name pastor Epley gave it.

Well, then, we need to insist and remind folks that hypotheticals are silly things from which to stem a doctrine.

[Abiding Now]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

I would think most Trinitarian Evangelicals DO have a problem invoking the name of Jesus only at baptism. Most Trinitarian Evangelical pastors, especially those governed by presbyterian government systems, would be removed from their pastorate once their leadership found they invoked any other formula at baptism other than the trinitarian formula.

They don't have a problem using the Name in prayer, prophecy or about anything else, but stop flat when they get to the waters of baptism.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Well, then, we need to insist and remind folks that hypotheticals are silly things from which to stem a doctrine.

The initial evidence doctrine is a hypothetical. Until Topeka no one in history connected tongues as being the one and only universal sign/evidence of the baptism of the Spirit (ie regeneration/salvation). The whole Pentecostal movement is built on a very questionable interpretation of scripture and at odds with all Christianity that cones before it. Yet claims to have rediscovered the truth.

If oneness Pentecostals rediscovered truth then we can't help but wonder about Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons. Both groups are older (though not much) than the oneness pentecostal movement and both have had greater success in terms of both evangelism, zeal to get out their "truth" based on their unique interpretation of scripture, and we see much greater unity amongst them that the multi fragmented always fighting and dividing OP church.

I do believe that both JWs and Mormonism are cults. And I don't think that age alone really proves anything as far as truth....BUT when your movements beginnings are newer than the JWs and Mormons that should be a red flag. When your view of Bible salvation flies in the face of 20 centuries of church history, including every other non OP denomination that exists concurrently with your group, that should be a red flag.
When your soteriology excludes 99% of all CHRISTIAN people if all time, and teaches that no Christian leader, missionary, scholar, or martyr in the last 20 centuries went to heaven (who can you name in Church history who has "obeyed Acts 2:38" according to your movements private interpretation?), that should be a red flag. When your group has historically been more concerned with whether or not a woman trims her hair, wears red, has an earring, or if a man has a been or LITERALLY hundreds if not thousands more of man made standards than with preaching the gospel (ie the gospel is secondary to their tradition and private interpretation not just if soteriology but also of sanctification) that should be a red flag.

To me everything about the oneness movement screams watch out. And a lot I didn't see while I was in. I remember saying to my wife a few months after we left, it was like we lived 10 years in a bubble and never even realized it.

But I'm getting off track. The point is there is no greater assumption in all Christendom than the assumption that every single person in the first century spoke in tongues when they received the Holy Ghost. If that's not assumption tell me what is.

It begins with your watershed text, Acts 2:38. Where is there any indication whatsoever that the 3,000 of v.41 spoke in tongues? It must be ASSUMED. Where is there any indication the 5,000 in Acts 4:4 spoke in tongues? It must be ASSUMED. What about the Ethiopian Eunuch? Assumption again. The Philippian jailer? You have to ASSUME he spoke in tongues. The entire Corinthian church? You gave to ASSUME (against pretty strong evidence to the contrary in 1 Cor 12:30) that they All, every single one, spoke in tongues.

And you have to Assume that every where else in the world wherever the gospel was preached and received they all spoke in tongues. Despite no Biblical evidence if it. If Gentiles spoke in tongues every single time why didn't Paul and Barnabas just say so at the Jerusalem Council instead Peyer had to testify about Cornelius's house speaking in tongues several years back to end the debate about whether or not Gentiles were accepted by God without circumcision.

Then after making all those assumptions and explaining away multiple texts necessary to arrive at your conclusion you have to explain why no one in post biblical church history was apparently saved (and especially why we see no group or sect teach your interpretation if Acts 2:38 through the 2,3,4,5 and so on centuries until the 20th). Even groups with some relation to oneness groups were not the same. The Sabellians apparently did not believe tongues were the initial evidence. The Montanists were a oneness group (Tertullian is the most well known Montanist). There is no biblical or historical evidence that anyone ever believed salvation to be what you posit it to be.

That's a big assumption. The foundation and very bedrock of the modern oneness Pentecostal movement is ASSUMPTION.

[Abiding Now]

Anyone ever done any research on the "great awaking of 1800 in Bourbon county Kentucky" or a guy named Barton Stone?

http://veritasvenator.com/2013/07/31...e-and-baptism/

[AR Pastor]

ACTS 2:38 the only saving message.
IF a person has not spoken in tongues they have not received the Holy Ghost and are
lost.


Let the posting begin.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Abiding Now

Anyone ever done any research on the "great awaking of 1800 in Bourbon county Kentucky" or a guy named Barton Stone?

http://veritasvenator.com/2013/07/31...e-and-baptism/

Barton Stone was one of the "founding fathers" of what is known today as the Churches of Christ. I was a member of that denonimation for the first 48 years of my life, leaving it when I received the baptism of the Holy Ghost 27+ years ago.

With that being said, I perceive there's something of significant import that has been overlooked during this discussion, namely, the words which our Lord said when He gave unto apostle Peter the "keys" to the kingdom of heaven ...

"And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18).

For anyone to assert, suggest, or otherwise intimate that ANY element of the doctrines, customs, or practices of the 1st Century One God Apostolic Church did NOT exist during the period following the decease of the apostles UNTIL the present day, is the same as saying "the gates of hell" have prevailed during that same period, and that our Lord's words were not fulfilled.

There has NEVER been a single moment during the past 2000+ years that the church which Jesus Christ instituted on that 1st Pentecost following His bodily ascension to the throne of God located in the invisible heavens, that "the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood" has ceased to exist somwhere in the earth.

Albeit His church, during this period, may not have been as prominent, or widely renown as it is today, nevertheless it has always been, and will continue to be until He comes again! That fact is indisputable! To say otherwise, IMHO, is to give our enemy more power than our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! That I will never do!!!

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Abiding Now

Anyone ever done any research on the "great awaking of 1800 in Bourbon county Kentucky" or a guy named Barton Stone?

http://veritasvenator.com/2013/07/31...e-and-baptism/

And your point is? You follow my post about all the assumption that must be made by oneness pentecostals and not one group in church history agreeing or subscribing to your soteriology and it being a 20th century movement, and your reply is something from the 19th century?!! Come on man. And then your it is Barton Stone, who along with Alexander Campbell were influential in forming the Churches of Christ (which is some cases did baptize in Jesus name) but have almost always (and especially now) are extremely hostile toward oneness and speaking in tongues. I don't see the connection.

There have been groups in history who denied the trinity.
There have been individuals who baptized in Jesus name.
There have been a few who even spoke in tongues (though none of those people/groups equated the speaking in tongues with the initial evidence of the Spirit baptism nor as necessary to salvation)
And there have been a few groups with very strict codes for holiness.

There has NEVER been in documented church history a group or even an individual who believed all of those things were necessary for salvation prior to 1913 (and some could argue prior to the 1940's).

So Barton Stone is your smoking gun? Why not some of the phenomena in the Wesley revivals? There have been scattered charismatic type things in church history, but again, absolutely no one who teaches what you, Steve Epley, AR Pastor, or Mike Blume teach are essential for salvation. All of you guys take a position never taken before the 20th century. And in your eyes, according to your doctrine, Barton Stone is in hell, so what good is it to use him to support your position?