Oneness pentecostalism, Christian or Cult

[MEE]

Originally posted by menageriekeeper:
Tell me please MEE, why do you suppose the disciples disobeyed the direct command of Jesus in Matthew 28:19 by baptizing only in Jesus' name? Why would they set the church up for a position of disobedience by baptizing only in Jesus' name when Jesus himself clearly commanded them to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit?

You know, I'm glad you asked that question.

If you look real close, you will see that the apostles did baptize in the 'NAME' of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is 'JESUS CHRIST.'

If you will notice where it says, "..in the 'name' ...it doesn't have an (s) on the end, which would say, "...in the name (s) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Which brings us to Acts 4:12) Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other 'NAME' under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

That was a free Bible lesson and it didn't cost a thing.

MEE

 

[manchester]

When somebody says "stop in the name of the law," you don't ask "what name is that? Steve? Bob?" The "name" refers to authority. The name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is their authority. No, God wasn't playing a malicious trick trying to fool you into using the wrong baptismal formula. Never in the Bible was a "Jesus name" baptism ever used. It was always done using the formula Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

We know that's how every early Christian did it because the earliest Christian documents tell us that. The Didache very clearly tells the words you use to have a valid baptism. The early Christians condemned as heretics those who used the so-called "Jesus baptism."

Jesus never said to baptize using his name Jesus, and Jesus explicitly said to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And that's exactly what the apostles did. The only baptism in Jesus's authority (ie, name) is one using the words Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Acts 19:1-3 is instructive. Paul comes upon disciples in Ephesus. He asks them, "Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?" They answer, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Spirit." Paul is dumbfounded, and asks, "Unto what then were you baptized?" It was simply unthinkable to Paul that somebody could hear the words spoken during baptism and not have heard of the Holy Spirit. If they had used a "Jesus name" baptism, Paul wouldn't have even asked the question.

 

[Marcia]

Posted by MEE
If you look real close, you will see that the apostles did baptize in the 'NAME' of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is 'JESUS CHRIST.'

If you will notice where it says, "..in the 'name' ...it doesn't have an (s) on the end, which would say, "...in the name (s) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

The "name" of the Father, of the Son, and of the HS, is just what it says - it does not say the "name of the F, S, and HS equals the name of Jesus. You are adding that on. Jesus is NOT the same as God the Father and God the HS.

Also, the reason it is "name" and not "names" is because the Trinity is not 3 gods, as the Oneness followers (and the JW's) like to charge. The name of the Father, Son, and HS is the Trinitarian God: God the Father, God the Son, and God the HS.

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by manchester:
When somebody says "stop in the name of the law," you don't ask "what name is that? Steve? Bob?" The "name" refers to authority. The name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is their authority. No, God wasn't playing a malicious trick trying to fool you into using the wrong baptismal formula. Never in the Bible was a "Jesus name" baptism ever used. It was always done using the formula Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

**No, I don't think God was trying to play a trick on anyone. He said to be baptized,..."in the name. Peter knew, as well as the other Apostles what that name was and how to obey the command that was given in Matt. 28:19.

**Anytime that water baptism was preformed, in the NT, it was always done in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. You will never find it done, in the Bible, using the titles, F,S, or HG.

We know that's how every early Christian did it because the earliest Christian documents tell us that. The Didache very clearly tells the words you use to have a valid baptism. The early Christians condemned as heretics those who used the so-called "Jesus baptism."

**They were condemned by the Catholic Church, which were the ones who changed water baptism to the titles, F,S,and HG. This was to help institute the doctrine of the Trinity.

Jesus never said to baptize using his name Jesus, and Jesus explicitly said to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And that's exactly what the apostles did. The only baptism in Jesus's authority (ie, name) is one using the words Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

**manchester, would you show me where the Apostles baptized using the titles, Father, Son, or Holy Ghost? I may have missed it.

Acts 19:1-3 is instructive. Paul comes upon disciples in Ephesus. He asks them, "Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?" They answer, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Spirit." Paul is dumbfounded, and asks, "Unto what then were you baptized?" It was simply unthinkable to Paul that somebody could hear the words spoken during baptism and not have heard of the Holy Spirit. If they had used a "Jesus name" baptism, Paul wouldn't have even asked the question.

**You are correct, it would have been confusing to Paul if the disciples at Ephesus had been baptized in the titles F,S, and HG, that they hadn't heard of the Holy Spirit...the thing is they hadn't been baptized with anyone using the titles F,S, or HS/HG.

**The diciples that Paul was addressing were still under the the doctrine of John's baptism, which was of repentance. Paul proceeded to tell them that they were to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

**Acts 19:3-5)

3)And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4) Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is on Christ Jesus.
5) When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Hope this helps,
MEE

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by Marcia:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Posted by MEE
If you look real close, you will see that the apostles did baptize in the 'NAME' of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is 'JESUS CHRIST.'

If you will notice where it says, "..in the 'name' ...it doesn't have an (s) on the end, which would say, "...in the name (s) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

The "name" of the Father, of the Son, and of the HS, is just what it says - it does not say the "name of the F, S, and HS equals the name of Jesus. You are adding that on. Jesus is NOT the same as God the Father and God the HS.

***Marcia, I didn't add anything on. If I'm wrong about water baptism, being done in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is Jesus Christ, then Peter and the rest of the apostles baptized all of the NT converts wrong. But...I think Peter and the rest knew what they were doing. It was the CC that is responsible for that little mistake. Look it up in the Catholic Church history.
</font>[/QUOTE]MEE

 

[menageriekeeper]

No Mee, you still haven't explained why Jesus specifically said to baptize in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. And remember when he gave this command the Holy Ghost had yet to come to the disciples yet Christ still gave a command to baptize in the three names.

Who do you give your allegience to MEE? Christ or the apostles? If Christ you will obey his direct command! It can't be two ways.

 

[manchester]

Originally posted by MEE:
[qb] **No, I don't think God was trying to play a trick on anyone. He said to be baptized,..."in the name. Peter knew, as well as the other Apostles what that name was and how to obey the command that was given in Matt. 28:19.

There was never a baptism in the Bible using the words "in the name of Jesus." You can't find a single one where it says they used those words, or any words similar to it. Jesus said to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Every baptism was done in that manner.

**Anytime that water baptism was preformed, in the NT, it was always done in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. You will never find it done, in the Bible, using the titles, F,S, or HG.

See above. You are teaching false doctrine and it is not found in scripture. Again, Jesus said to baptize in F,S & HS. It has always been done that way in history, and we know this from historical documents. When somebody tried to tamper with the Christian teachings, they were heretics and excommunicated by the Christian church.

**They were condemned by the Catholic Church, which were the ones who changed water baptism to the titles, F,S,and HG. This was to help institute the doctrine of the Trinity.

Show some evidence for your claims. All historical evidence shows it has always been F, S & HS. There was never a change, and never a time it was done using the words "in the name of Jesus." Occasionally a person would come up with a false doctrine like that, and they would be excommunicated for it. The doctrine of the trinity was also taught from the very beginning, and history shows this as just as scripture does. If you want to claim that the Catholic Church changed it, show some historical evidence. The historical evidence shows the very opposite. The Didache, written just after Jesus's death, memorialized how baptisms were performed at that time. Many Church fathers wrote about how it was done. It was clearly F,S & HS.

The Christian church did not "create" new doctrines. They believed what they were taught by Jesus, and only defined doctrines (like the Trinity) when heretics taught false doctrine. The Trinity is clearly in the Bible, and it's always been believed by true Christians.

**manchester, would you show me where the Apostles baptized using the titles, Father, Son, or Holy Ghost? I may have missed it.

Sure. Every single Christian baptism in the Bible was done using the words F, S and HS. In order to have a baptism in Jesus's name (ie, authority), you need to use those words. Jesus said to use those words, and the apostles did so. The Church has always done so. People who did not were always called heretics and non-Christians.

Acts 19:1-3 is instructive. Paul comes upon disciples in Ephesus. He asks them, "Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?" They answer, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Spirit." Paul is dumbfounded, and asks, "Unto what then were you baptized?" It was simply unthinkable to Paul that somebody could hear the words spoken during baptism and not have heard of the Holy Spirit. If they had used a "Jesus name" baptism, Paul wouldn't have even asked the question.

**You are correct, it would have been confusing to Paul if the disciples at Ephesus had been baptized in the titles F,S, and HG, that they hadn't heard of the Holy Spirit...the thing is they hadn't been baptized with anyone using the titles F,S, or HS/HG.

Paul heard they received a Christian baptism. To Paul, a Christian baptism is ALWAYS accompanied with the words F, S & HS, which is why he was confused. And then they explained it to him - they had received John's baptism, not a Christian (F,S, HS) baptism. Then it made sense to Paul, and they were then given a Christian baptism.

If the false doctrine of baptism "in Jesus name" were true, Paul would not have asked about the name of their baptism when they said they hadn't heard about the Holy Spirit. The false doctrine of Jesus Name is clearly refuted by scripture and by history.

[ January 24, 2005, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: manchester ]

 

[manchester]

Jesus said to baptize in the authority (or "name," same difference) of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. If you are baptizing in the authority of a non-Trinitarian person or god, you are not baptising in the authority of the Christian God, and you are not giving a Christian baptism.

To return to Acts 19:1-6, it refutes the teaching of "Jesus name" baptisms. If Christians were baptising using the words "in Jesus name," and John's baptism was done (however), then Acts 19:3 makes no sense. Paul hears the new Christians were baptized, and they tell him that they haven't heard of the Holy Spirit. Paul is confused: "You said you were baptized, but haven't heard the words 'Holy Spirit.' I don't understand. Unto what were you baptized then?"

This shows that the formula Christians used to baptize included the words "Holy Spirit." That strongly suggests it was a F, S and HS baptism, and it DEFINITELY was not a "Jesus name" baptism.

The mystery is solved when they tell him that it was John's baptism. "Oh," says Paul, "now I understand. I thought you received a Christian baptism, which always includes the words 'Holy Spirit' in it, so I just couldn't understand how you never heard of the Holy Spirit. Nobody ever receives a Christian baptism without the words 'Holy Spirit' being used in the formula. But you received John's baptism. Let's get you baptized with a Christian baptism now."

 

[MEE]

I tried! Manchester, are you sure you aren't of the Catholic Church?

MEE

 

[manchester]

MEE, your teachings are not only opposed by the Roman Catholics, but just about every church. I have explained that scripture, as well as history, shows the Oneness cult of the 1900s to teach false doctrine. The Oneness beliefs are a recent invention of the flesh.

You believe that from the very beginning, all the Christians agreed to change Christian beliefs to other doctrine. You believe the gates of Hell prevailed against the Christian church until the 1900s. Then, "real Christianity" was suddenly discovered through out-of-body mystical experiences in America. Nobody could understand the scriptures or the salvation plan until the 1900s? Please.

The UPC teach that the only valid baptism is by a UPC minister, who was validly baptized, etc. But there were no UPC ministers until the 1900s, so all of the baptisms from the 1900s onward would be invalid on that ground, too.

Oneness is also debunked by Acts 2:38. It teaches that all who repent and are baptized receive the Holy Spirit. The Oneness teach that God broke that promise, and only some who repent and are baptized receive the Holy Spirit - that is, only those who "speak in tongues."

 

[John 8:32]

When Jesus gives us a command to do something...should we quote Him or Obey Him?

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by John 8:32:
When Jesus gives us a command to do something...should we quote Him or Obey Him?

Both if the command requires it.

MEE

 

[MEE]

Manchester, I am not of the UPC!

Now, go away boy! I'm tired of talking to you. If you were interested, it would be different.

MEE

 

[John 8:32]

Mat 28:19 is a command

To obey it requires baptism in Jesus' name

 

[Marcia]

Manchester, MEE is not UPC, but she is Oneness. She lists her religion as "Apostolic." There are several Oneness churches/groups: United Pentecostal Church International, Apostolic World Christian Federation, Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ, Church of the Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, Pentecostal Assemblies of the World.

Interesting that she is tired of talking to you.

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by Marcia:
Manchester, MEE is not UPC, but she is Oneness. She lists her religion as "Apostolic." There are several Oneness churches/groups: United Pentecostal Church International, Apostolic World Christian Federation, Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ, Church of the Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, Pentecostal Assemblies of the World.

Interesting that she is tired of talking to you.

Marcia, why do you find it interesting? It's plain to see that he doesn't understand the Bible.

It's very easy to see that water baptism was only practiced, according to the Bible, in the name of Jesus Christ. There is no other way that one can interpret it, without going against scripture.

MEE

 

[Marcia]

MEE, you didn't give any refutations to his arguments; you just told him to go away. Your arguments do not hold water (pun intended), and water baptism as part of salvation has been ably refuted on many threads.

Also, you and I have gone round and round on this before, and you know that my main issue with Oneness is their view of who Jesus is. I consider the baptism issue to be a problem, but secondary to the Jesus issue. Your view of Jesus was denounced by Christians back in the 3rd century.

 

[Nevertheless]

Manchester said:

There was never a baptism in the Bible using the words "in the name of Jesus." You can't find a single one where it says they used those words, or any words similar to it.

MEE already quoted one for you from Acts 19, but here it is again:
4 Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.

DHK said:

Baptists believe in sola scriptura. That is why we use the Scripture to back up our believes.

So what will it be? Is manchester automatically right because he disagrees with MEE, or will we believe what scripture tells us? That one verse alone shows us that manchester is wrong, but here are others.

Acts 10: Then Peter said, 47 “Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

Romans 6:3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

Galatians 3:26 You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Acts 8:14 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.

And let's not forget Acts 2:38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Manchester, I think you need to do a bit more studying before making such sweeping statements.

And DHK, I think you owe MEE an apology. You said, "Baptists believe in sola scriptura. That is why we use the Scripture to back up our believes. That is why we consider Oneness Pentecostal a cult. Their beliefs cannot be backed up by Scripture." MEE believes that baptism should be done in the name of Jesus. According to scripture, so did Peter and Paul. As a moderator, I would hope that you are big enough to admit mistakes. But perhaps it is I who is mistaken about that.


Never

 

[Nevertheless]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
To be honest, i do not really care about the "personal beliefs" someone holds. I can have a "personal belief," for example, that George W. Bush is in fact a cleverly disguised jelly doughnut; unless I can offer evidence supporting said claim I am merely taking up bandwidth.

Well, tragic, if you don't care about others' beliefs, why are you here? Why do you read what others write? That's what message boards are for!

 

[Bro. James Reed]

If one baptized "in Jesus' name" isn't that the same? Jesus' name is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

ex...

I am an Uncle, a Son, and a Brother. If someone says James, I still answer and it carries the same meaning as the above. I am James, but I am also Uncle, Son, and Brother.

If you want to get into technicalities though, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit(Ghost) is more to my liking and I would view it as the correct way to baptize someone simply based on Christ's instruction.