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

[SDG]

One day I'm going to teach you Spanish .. Epley ... so you can read the New Testament in Spanish .. there you would see that remission and forgiveness are used interchangeably like in the Greek ... with the word PERDON ... like our word Pardon... You are reading the bible based on the KJV ... and your string theology ...

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Thank you for restating your position.

Didn't want you to forget since your getting old and all that!

[SDG]

Let go ... and let God.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

One day I'm going to teach you Spanish .. Epley ... so you can read the New Testament in Spanish .. there you would see that remission and forgiveness are used interchangeably like in the Greek ... with the word PERDON ... like our word Pardon... You are reading the bible based on the KJV ... and your string theology ...

Pardon is a good word and criminal can be forgiven the family or person he trespassed against can forgive him totally but he is not leaving the prison until the pardon is signed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you.. Little by little your eyes are being opened.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Pardon is a good word and criminal can be forgiven the family or person he trespassed against can forgive him totally but he is not leaving the prison until the pardon is signed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you.. Little by little your eyes are being opened.

adding more steps are we, Epley ?????

[Truly Blessed]

What seems to be lost in this discussion is that the blood of the OT sacrifices was shed as a covering for sin and an atonement. A primary weakness in the offering up of bulls and goats was that it could never deal with the guilt of sin. Every sacrifice only drove home once again man's sinfulness and heightened his sense of guilt before a holy God.

"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." (Hebrews 10:1-3)

"Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. (V.11)

It was only when Jesus offered Himself up as the Lamb of God who would take away the sins of the world that the sins (that had been covered by the shed blood of the OT sacrifices) could be forgiven and thus no longer remembered. Hebrews 10:15-18 says,

"The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this.

First he says:
"This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds."

Then he adds:
"Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more."And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.

Now note with me an important point made in verses 1 & 2.

"For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins."

The writer of Hebrews says that if the sacrifices offered could have made perfect those who drew near to worship God, they would have stopped offering sacrifices because they would have been cleansed once for all, and would not have felt guilt for sin.

Because Jesus offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice for us that is exactly what happens today. Those who draw near to God in faith to worship are cleansed once and for all and no longer feel guilty for sin. Why? Because "we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (V.10) and "because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." (V.14)

"Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water."(VV.19-22)

The writer of Hebrews makes it clear that the new and living way is opened up to us through His (Christ's) body offered up for us and we enter into The Most Holy Place by the blood of His sacrifice, NOT by some ceremonial act such as baptism.

Note that it's all about a cleansed conscience that is the result of a pure heart and a body that has been washed with water by the Word. "That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word," (Ephesians 5:26)

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

What seems to be lost in this discussion is that the blood of the OT sacrifices was shed as a covering for sin and an atonement. A primary weakness in the offering up of bulls and goats was that it could never deal with the guilt of sin. Every sacrifice only drove home once again man's sinfulness and heightened his sense of guilt before a holy God.

"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." (Hebrews 10:1-3)

"Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. (V.11)

It was only when Jesus offered Himself up as the Lamb of God who would take away the sins of the world that the sins (that had been covered by the shed blood of the OT sacrifices) could be forgiven and thus no longer remembered. Hebrews 10:15-18 says,

"The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this.

First he says:
"This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds."

Then he adds:
"Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more."And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.

Now note with me an important point made in verses 1 & 2.

"For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins."

The writer of Hebrews says that if the sacrifices offered could have made perfect those who drew near to worship God, they would have stopped offering sacrifices because they would have been cleansed once for all, and would not have felt guilt for sin.

Because Jesus offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice for us that is exactly what happens today. Those who draw near to God in faith to worship are cleansed once and for all and no longer feel guilty for sin. Why? Because "we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (V.10) and "because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." (V.14)

"Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water."(VV.19-22)

The writer of Hebrews makes it clear that the new and living way is opened up to us through His (Christ's) body offered up for us and we enter into The Most Holy Place by the blood of His sacrifice, NOT by some ceremonial act such as baptism.

Note that it's all about a cleansed conscience that is the result of a pure heart and a body that has been washed with water by the Word. "That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word," (Ephesians 5:26)

More wisdom, brother TB

Just would like to add that all of this promised from the OT prophets, like Ezequiel and Joel ... who spoke of this New Covenant ....

Ezekiel 36:24-28

It reads:

For I will take you from among the nations,
gather you out of all countries
and bring you into your own Land

Then I will sprinkle clean WATER on you,
and you shall be clean;
I will cleanse you from all your filthiness
and from all your idols.

I will give you a new heart
and put a new SPIRIT within you;
I will take he heart of stone out of your flesh
and give you a heart of FLESH.

I will put My SPIRIT within you
and cause you to walk in My statutes,
and you will keep My judgments and do them.

Then you shall dwell in the Land that I gave to you fathers;
you shall be my people,
and I will be your God.

[JN Anderson]

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.

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.

Outstanding Post!


Great to see you Sab, welcome aboard!

[SDG]

A lot of verbosity, some concessions, more analogies and the same stuff repackaged.

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?

Can't agree with you more. We are definitely on the same page. By stating that we are declared righteous before God before any baptism then you have conceded that if someone were to die before being water baptized or Spirit baptized they are saved ... a view that many in your ranks will not admit.

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.

I too believe we are identified with Christ in baptism. I also believe it's necessarily important to be obedient to all of His commands. This being an initial command He has made for all of His children. Willful disobedience of this command will send you to hell ... as will not loving your neighbor or any other of His necessary and important commands - it constitutes unbelief my learned brother

If they aren't all necessary and important He wouldn't ask us to do it. Then, of course, there are promises and gifts ... the baptism of the Holy Ghost being one.

However, to claim some type of synergy takes place during baptism is being BAPTISMAL REGENERATIONIST at its finest .... no amount of verbal contortion will can justify such statements ... when you have zero bible to support it.

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.

Baptism, loving you neighbor, living a holy life, etc. are all optional because we have free will, Sabellius .... but if we have placed our faith in Jesus and want to see Him one day ... all of His Words are necessary and important. Please refrain from the the playbook tactic of somehow marginalizing someone's by mentioning trinitarians in the same breath. Most of the Protestant faith stands with me on this Sabellius, sorry.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program ....