Religious Cults & False Prophets~ Discussions and DebatesCritical Identity of BaptismLet's see whose teaching heresy here. I have never heard such perversion of plain and clear Scripture:
Yes, John the Baptist spoke that phrase, "baptize you with the Holy Ghost" and it as if God Himself spoke that phrase with His own lips - that's what divine inspired means. Or is that part of the Bible not the inspired Word of God? The phrase John the Baptist used, "baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire" (Matt 3:11) can be understood in meaning by the use of the word "and" which is the Greek, "kai". "Kai" in the Greek means "and" or "even" in the sense of "as the same as" and is the word used for "and" in Matthew 28:19. So the phrase in question could read as, "with the Holy Ghost [even the same as] fire". The "fire" is simply a descriptive name for the Holy Ghost for God who is Spirit is a consuming fire (Deut 4:24, Heb 12:29). So to be baptized with fire is to be baptized with the Spirit of God which is the Holy Ghost. Really? Let's see... Peter was one of the 120 gathered in the upper room on the day of Pentecost. What happened in that upper where Peter was with the others? "They were ALL filled with the the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4). The "ALL" would include Peter because he was there. You're not being honest with God's Word. How shameful to wrest and distort Scripture the way you do. Yes, Peter did preach in his native language because to preach is to prophesy (1 Cor chapter 14) which is of no value unless it can be understood. Notice "They were amazed and marveled and bewildered". Why was that? Because all those speaking in tongues were Galileans. What's so significant about that? Because to be a "Galilean" meant to be ignorant and illiterate. The Galileans were the lower uneducated class. So what amazed those hearing them speak in tongues was the fact the Galileans were not multilingual and it was a miracle to hear such speak in a real language unknown to the speaker. When my mother was baptized in the Holy Ghost at the church she was heard praising God in fluent Chinese because Chinese people in the congration heard her and were equally amazed as those hearing the Galileans. There are numerous testimonies of people in foreign countries when they receive the Baptism of the Holy Ghost are heard praising Jesus in fluent English when English was an unknown tongue to them doing the speaking. You obviously do not speak in tongues yourself do you? That in itself disqualifies you as one who should even comment on the subject. It's like taking swimming lessons from someone who has never gotten their feet wet. So what? You have admitted to two verses that do. If it's for two verses it is for all. Matthew 28:19 is only one verse that mentions the titles in baptism and yet that is the verse that is taken for the trinitarian baptismal formula when in all the accounts in Acts it is never used once. I have the two witness (two verse) testimony supporting the truth here. Where do you get that from - "a gentile"? Peter commanded "all them" which received the Holy Ghost. Who was the "all them"? The "all them" was "Cornelius and his kinsmen and near friends" (Acts 10:24). There was a whole group of them that received the Holy Ghost and Peter commanded that "all them" to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ [notice not the titles of Math 28:19]. Now I have caught you in an outright lie. Furthermore, what you said, "Peter did not order Cornelius to be baptized, Peter ordered or commanded the Jews to baptize a gentile" makes no sense. First Peter did not order then he did order? Peter commanded "all them" to be baptized - whether Peter performed the actually baptisms is irrelevent. But given the fact God sent Peter directly to Cornelius it would not be unreasonable to discern that Peter in fact performed the baptisms. So according to you, God only requires Jews to repent and everyone else is exempt? Are you saying when a gentile hears about Jesus they do not need to hear the mesage to repent? No man can be sin conscious unless they have a sense of conviction which is wrought by hearing the Word of God preached and by the conviction of the Holy Ghost. For no man comes unto God lest they be drawn by Him (John: 6:44, 12:32). Who was Peter preaching to? "For the promise is unto you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even [kai] as many as the Lord our God shall call? (Acts 2:39) The plan of salvation contained in Acts 2:38 is for ALL that are afar off [all mankind], even [kai- the same as] as many the Lord our God shall call. Who is God calling? He is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance". (2 Peter 3:9) Peter was preaching not only to the Jews but to everyone in every generation.
You speak about yourself. It's obvious to everyone that will read this post who is disregarding sound doctrine. You have been exposed and you're not fooling anyone but yourself.
Grace is obtained through FAITH. Faith is believing what God said and DOING what God said. Faith without works is dead. You propagate nothing but DEAD faith that leads to death. I preach what the Apostles' preached, SAVING faith, faith that saves. This is the difference between you and me, "Dead Faith" and "Saving Faith". God requires all to come to repentance. Repentance is a grace that God extends to the sinner and the faith of the sinner is to do the repenting, to do the water baptism, to do receiving the Holy Ghost in faith to obtain the grace. If a sinner never repents they do not benefit from God's grace. Jude spoke well about the type of grace you proclaim, "...turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness..." (Jude 4) |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame