What does Acts 2:38 really mean ??

Acts 2:38 should be taken literally and at face value. So should Mark 16:15-16. Most Baptists do not take these passages in this way, but they explain them away.

 

I was right with up to this point.

Poor example because the author is obviously pointing to the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Again an interesting use of the passage which shows that the law (purpose was to condemn) could no longer act in condmenation nor the ceremonies governed by it. The Shadow of things to come is the writing of the Law on our hearts rather than stone and the true celebration of the bride with the bridegroom. I think you partly misapply these verses.

Now you sound like Socrates. Ever hear of Socrates Caverns?

amen

Amen

Amen

Amen

Your getting caught in crossing legal terms with theological ones.

And who acted on his faith. As in Hebrews.

So Laman was cleansed before he washed in the water? Hmmm. Not sure I buy that one.

That was really round about.

Question if you could obey the law would you gain eternal life?

You take a future premise and back track to say you can expect when you know right well its used. Like I said round about.

And Noah obeyed God as even Abraham did. Wasn't the covenant sealed when God passed through the two halves of the Cow?

 

You refuse to committ yourself to any specifics concerning Acts 2:38 and then say you have answered it when in fact all you have done is provide an even more vague and general undefinable response by saying you believe Peter is carrying out the Great commission - whateover and however you might define that! Who knows what YOU BELIEVE about the Great Commission or the significance YOU ATTACH to baptism in the Great Commission. It is like asking a person who says "watch out for that stickafud", "what is a stickafud?" and they reply "I mean just what I said" - stupid!!!

 

Do you take Mat.3:11?
If you can take Mt.3:11 then you can take Acts 2:38 literally in the same way? Why are you making things so difficult on yourself.

I think I know the answer to that question.
Do you belong to the Church of Christ?

 

I am a member of Christ and a member of all others who are members of Christ. This is the only membership that matters to God.

 

That is your primary problem. You cannot intepret scripture with secular philosophy of Plato. The Bible must interpret the Bible and that you will not allow.

As far as I am concerned you are a covert Catholic under the "Baptist" name. Instead of supporting ex-catholics who stand up for the truth of the gospel, you spend 99.9% of your posts attacking them and supporting your Catholic friends. Anyone with eyes in their head that knows the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ can easily see you are not a "Baptist" but in NAME ONLY but the historic enemy of Baptists. I have read enough of your posts to know your fruits and I am a fruit inspector (Mt. 7:15,20).

 

Not according to the inspired Word of God. Look and see:

1 Corinthians 1:11-12 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

These Christians were contentious and divisive. They were carnal. It was the most carnal church in the NT.
Look at the divisiveness of these members

"I am a follower of Paul."
"I am a follower of Apollos."
"And I am better than all of you; I am a follower of Christ."!!!
--They were the real snooty ones; the ones that called themselves "followers of Christ." They weren't really. They were just carnal Christians, wanting to cause contention among the brethren. And that is what Paul said they were.

Apparently you have defined yourself in the same way.
Quite a Biblical term. It is the only way that it is used in the Bible. So this is how you describe yourself??

 

I am well-aware of the problems that existed in Corinth. One of the biggest problems in that city was the misunderstanding on the part of some Christians that the one true church and body of Christ can be legitimately divided by man. It cannot be so divided.

If you and I are both members of Christ, then we are also members one of another. This is not an arrogant statement, and it does not reflect an arrogant attitude. If we fully accept each other because of our mutual membership in Christ, we demonstrate an attitude of Christian humility.

 

Are you a member of a denomination that is known by the name The Church of Christ, or not? You should not be a member of a church you are ashamed of. Come on, man up!

 

No, I am not a member of any church except the one true church and body of Christ. I am not ashamed to be a member of this church, but I am not proud about it, either. I am just grateful to God.

 

In the church that you attend are musical instruments used?

 

Christians do not GO to church; they ARE the church! Denominational thinking creates confusion about this point.

 

You are avoiding the question I asked. For I am sure that you don't stay holed up in the four walls of your house all the time. I am sure that you have some sort of fellowship with other believers. In fact I believe that you gave that fellowship of believers a name on another thread. Why is it so hard to admit to it on this thread?

 

The one true church and body of Christ has no formal, official name. It has no church buildings, church signs, church letterhead, or church business cards. It is called the church of God because it was purchased with His own blood. It is called the church of Christ because it consists of all who are in Him. It is called the church of the firstborn ones because its members have their names written in heaven.

 

Alright. Does the true believes you worship with meet in a building where they use musical instruments?

 

OK. To be frank you are messed up in the area of ecclessiology. Think about it. There is no such church as you describe it. It doesn't exist--period! The word for church is ekklesia and it means assembly. Assemblies assemble and they must have a place to do so. Every church in the NT was a local assembly or a local church.

Here is something for you to think about:
Acts 20:17 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.
--At Miletus Paul called for the elders or pastors of the local church in Ephesus. From Ephesus these pastors came to meet with Paul. If you read the following verses you will see the advice that he gives them.

After telling them that he is going to go to Jerusalem this is what he says:
Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
--Note that he is speaking to the church at Ephesus. It is to this church that he calls the Church of God. It is to this church that he states that Christ (God) purchased with his own blood. He doesn't say that about other churches. He says it about the local church at Ephesus.

What is the application here? Just as Christ purchased the local church of Ephesus with his own blood so he purchased every other local church with his own blood. The local church is important to the Lord. There is no such thing as a universal assembly or church. It doesn't exist.

Paul went on three different missionary journeys and in those three journeys established over 100 local churches; not a universal church, not a denomination or organization, but local autonomous churches.

Every epistle that Paul ever wrote was written either to a local church or to a Pastor of a local church. God places a great value on the local church.

The local church is a picture of the bride of Christ.
Christ died for the local church, as the Bible says. In that he says that, he means that he died for every Bible-believing church. He is the foundation of every bible-believing church.

There is no such thing as a universal church, the nebulous thing that you talk of, that you think you are a member of; it doesn't exist. You speak of a dream world. What you speak of does not exist in the world. Get down in the real world of the Bible where it speaks of local churches, assemblies that gathered together.
The church in Acts 12 met in John Mark's mother's house. They met first in the Temple, then in synagogues, and then in houses or wherever they could meet. They had places where they could assemble together.

 

Friend, your focus is upon the many so-called churches that surround us today. These are just man-made religious organizations, and they are terribly divisive. My focus is upon the unity of the one true church and body of Christ. If you and I are both New Covenant Christians, we are members of Christ and members one of another.

 

Hey DHK, you can't smoke 'em out that way anymore. Some CofC are 'instrumental' now. The ones in Northern California that allowed musical instruments attach a music note to their church signs.

 

That is an opinion based on your imagination and not on the Bible.
Inevitably you have just called the Apostle Paul's work "man-made religious organizations that are terribly divisive."
You are the one that is divisive, as the ones in 1Cor.1 were.
Study your Bible. Stop philosophizing.

 

I have diligently studied the Bible for 42 years and have learned that there is only one true church and body of Christ. It consists of those human beings who are members of Christ and members one of another. I have also learned that denominationalism is of the Devil.

The Apostle Paul understood these truths very well. In large measure, I learned them from His writings.