Acts 2:38 Comparison: Evangelical vs. Oneness / Baptismal-Regeneration View

[lrs68]

But I personally believe God is triune in Nature and works in the Titles of Father, Son, Holy Ghost.

I just don't believe God is a person. He manifested Himself into the flesh but the WORD was always Spirit before becoming flesh.

 

[LightBearer316]

Nowhere does the Bible claim God is a person.
That is what man said.
I thought this Thread was about what the Bible says not how people choose to interpret it?

The word Trinity isn’t found in the Bible, just like the word omnipresent or rapture isn’t either.
But the truth it describes absolutely is.

Scripture reveals one God (Deuteronomy 6:4 KJV) who exists as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost — all divine, all distinct, all united (Matthew 3:16-17 KJV; Matthew 28:19 KJV; John 14:16-17 KJV).
The Church simply used the word Trinity later to summarize what the Scriptures already teach.

So we don’t build doctrine on words man invented — we build it on what God revealed, and the Bible plainly shows the triune nature of the one true God.

Acts 17:11 (KJV): “They received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”

Grace and peace

 

[LightBearer316]

But I personally believe God is triune in Nature and works in the Titles of Father, Son, Holy Ghost.

I just don't believe God is a person. He manifested Himself into the flesh but the WORD was always Spirit before becoming flesh.

You are still blending truth with Oneness-style error, by trying to sound orthodox (“triune in Nature”) while still denying the personal distinctions within the Godhead? — which is what defines the biblical Trinity. Oops, that word Trinity isn't in the bible. ;-)
In the end doesn't matter what you believe; it matters what the Bible says.

Brother, I appreciate that you affirm God’s triune nature; that’s an essential truth.
But Scripture doesn’t just show God as triune in function or titles; it reveals real personal distinctions between the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.


The Father loves the Son (John 17:24 KJV).
The Son prays to the Father (John 17:1 KJV).
The Father sends the Spirit in the Son’s name (John 14:26 KJV).
Those aren’t mere titles — they’re relational realities within the one divine essence.


Yes, the Word was Spirit before becoming flesh (John 1:1, 14 KJV), but when “the Word was made flesh,” it wasn’t the Father or the Spirit who became incarnate — it was the Son.
That’s why at Jesus’ baptism (Matthew 3:16–17 KJV), all three Persons act together, not successively.


God is indeed Spirit (John 4:24 KJV), but He’s not impersonal — He is personal in every sense.
The triune God is one in being, three in Person — not one Person wearing three titles.


Acts 17:11 (KJV): “They received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”


Grace and peace,

 

[lrs68]

You are still blending truth with Oneness-style error, by trying to sound orthodox (“triune in Nature”) while still denying the personal distinctions within the Godhead? — which is what defines the biblical Trinity. Oops, that word Trinity isn't in the bible. ;-)
In the end doesn't matter what you believe; it matters what the Bible says.

Brother, I appreciate that you affirm God’s triune nature; that’s an essential truth.
But Scripture doesn’t just show God as triune in function or titles; it reveals real personal distinctions between the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.


The Father loves the Son (John 17:24 KJV).
The Son prays to the Father (John 17:1 KJV).
The Father sends the Spirit in the Son’s name (John 14:26 KJV).
Those aren’t mere titles — they’re relational realities within the one divine essence.


Yes, the Word was Spirit before becoming flesh (John 1:1, 14 KJV), but when “the Word was made flesh,” it wasn’t the Father or the Spirit who became incarnate — it was the Son.
That’s why at Jesus’ baptism (Matthew 3:16–17 KJV), all three Persons act together, not successively.


God is indeed Spirit (John 4:24 KJV), but He’s not impersonal — He is personal in every sense.
The triune God is one in being, three in Person — not one Person wearing three titles.


Acts 17:11 (KJV): “They received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”


Grace and peace,

I have said what the Bible said. You however explain it the same way man does.

 

[LightBearer316]

I have said what the Bible said. You however explain it the same way man does.

Brother, I understand — but what “man says” isn’t the issue; it’s what Scripture actually reveals in full.

You say you’ve only stated what the Bible says — and yet the Bible itself draws distinctions that can’t be explained away as mere “titles” or “modes.”

Jesus spoke to the Father (John 17:1 KJV).
The Father loved the Son before the foundation of the world (John 17:24 KJV).
The Spirit was sent by the Father in the Son’s name (John 14:26 KJV).

That’s not human interpretation — that’s divine revelation.
It’s not man explaining God — it’s God revealing Himself as He truly is.

Like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 (KJV), I’d simply encourage all of us to “search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”

Truth never fears examination.

Grace and Peace.

 

[LightBearer316]

I've noticed a pattern....
Most of the time when people quote the Bible, they’ll pull out one verse and build an entire doctrine on it — without harmonizing it with the rest of Scripture.

That’s how confusion spreads. You can make the Bible “say” almost anything if you isolate one verse from its chapter, book, or the full counsel of God’s Word. But truth is established when Scripture confirms Scripture — line upon line, precept upon precept.

Isaiah 28:10 (KJV):

“For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little.”​

Acts 17:11 (KJV):

“They received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”​

That’s how we guard against error — by letting the whole Bible interpret itself.

Grace and Peace.

 

[LightBearer316]

I’ve noticed a pattern…

Most of the time when people quote the Bible, they’ll pull out one verse and build an entire doctrine on it — without ever harmonizing it with the rest of Scripture. Probably because they don’t know the rest of Scripture well enough to harmonize any of it.

 

[Ouch]

Of course, I absolutely agree with every word of Acts 2:38-39 KJV and Acts 2:4 KJV. The question isn’t whether they’re true, but how they’re rightly understood within the whole counsel of Scripture.

Peter’s call in Acts 2:38 was to a Jewish audience that had just rejected their Messiah (Acts 2:36-37 KJV). His command to “repent and be baptized… for the remission of sins” meant they were to turn from unbelief and publicly identify with the very Christ they crucified. Their baptism didn’t produce forgiveness; it proclaimed the faith that received it.

We know this because:

• In Acts 10:43-47 KJV, the Gentiles received the Holy Ghost before baptism — proving salvation comes by faith alone in Christ’s name, not by the act of water.
• The word “for” (Greek eis) in Acts 2:38 can mean “because of” or “in reference to,” as in “be baptized because of the remission of sins.” Compare Matthew 12:41 KJV — “They repented at (eis) the preaching of Jonas.”

And yes, Acts 2:4 happened exactly as written — the Spirit filled the disciples, and they spoke in known tongues as a sign of the Spirit’s coming (Acts 2:6-8 KJV). But tongues were a sign, not a requirement for salvation (1 Corinthians 12:30 KJV).

So yes — I believe every verse, but also the balance of Scripture:

“To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” — Acts 10:43 KJV​

Grace and peace — always comparing Scripture with Scripture (1 Corinthians 2:13 KJV).

Really no need to go on.

I tried to make you see by asking you a question why you point your fingers at others while you are doing the same thing.

You have made statements which are not true which is your foundation for the way you think.

My goal was for you to look in HIS word to prove what you say that would put a crack in your foundation.

JESUS loves us all the same, your walk is between you and JESUS when you stand in front of HIM it will be you and HIM, HE will be the one judging you with HIS rule book.

I'm sorry if I was rude in anyway I have no tact, please forgive me.

Best of luck, I will continue to pray for JESUS to open eyes.

 

[Ouch]

At this point, the babes in Christ have read enough from both sides to clearly discern that OUCH’s theology doesn’t align with sound doctrine. That’s what truly matters — that they can see the truth for themselves in the Word.

As for OUCH, it’s evident there’s no real desire to learn or rightly divide Scripture. My focus remains on those who do have ears to hear.

Grace and peace to all who love His truth.

FYI, Ouchs plan was to share HIS word only and keep Ouch's opinion out of it.

It's between US and JESUS, we need to be humble.

Be great if people would listen to JESUS and not have so much personal pride, it's keeps there eyes closed.

Best of luck.

 

[Ouch]

Of course I agree with all Scripture.

I do also, it's not about any denomination, it's about HIS word.

Then we would get along fine, GOD IS GOOD.

GOD BLESS YOU IN YOUR WALK.

 

[LightBearer316]

Really no need to go on.

I tried to make you see by asking you a question why you point your fingers at others while you are doing the same thing.

You have made statements which are not true which is your foundation for the way you think.

I'm sorry if I was rude in anyway I have no tact, please forgive me.

Best of luck, I will continue to pray for JESUS to open eyes.

It’s evident there’s no real desire for you to learn or rightly divide Scripture. My focus remains on those who do have ears to hear.

Grace and peace to all who love His truth.

 

[LightBearer316]

I do also, it's not about any denomination, it's about HIS word.

Then we would get along fine, GOD IS GOOD.

GOD BLESS YOU IN YOUR WALK.

There’s no real desire for you to learn or rightly divide Scripture. My focus remains on those who do have ears to hear.

Grace and peace to all who love His truth.

 

[studier]

Brother, I’m not deflecting from Scripture; I’m calling for the spirit in which it’s discussed. The Bible doesn’t separate truth from character.

James 3:14–17 (KJV) reminds us:

But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth… But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits.​

And in Acts 17:11 (KJV) we’re told,

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.​

That’s the spirit I’m encouraging; open hearts, humble minds, and readiness to examine the Scriptures together. My concern isn’t avoiding the Word, but that it be handled with the same Spirit that inspired it.

Let’s reason together through the Word, but let’s do so with grace and humility.

Grace and Peace.

This is more deflecting from Scripture and continuing pretense.

You've not responded to all Scripture in this posting of Scripture or to this post showing where you deflected from responding to that post.

Once we apply a little logic and linguistic rule and reality to the interpretation of Scripture, your doctrine breaks down. Once we show your doctrine breaks down, your discussion methods turn to ad hominem and other reasoning fallacies.

Your erroneous doctrine is not unique, nor are your discussion methods.

 

[LightBearer316]

I’ve noticed a pattern…

Most of the time when people quote the Bible, they’ll pull out one verse and build an entire doctrine on it — without ever harmonizing it with the rest of Scripture. Probably because they don’t know the rest of Scripture well enough to harmonize any of it.

 

[Ouch]

It’s evident there’s no real desire for you to learn or rightly divide Scripture. My focus remains on those who do have ears to hear.

Grace and peace to all who love His truth.

Just like the pope does, he also has lot of followers.

Just think of what will happen to those who keep them out of the water.

 

[LightBearer316]

This is more deflecting from Scripture and continuing pretense.

You've not responded to all Scripture in this posting of Scripture or to this post showing where you deflected from responding to that post.

Once we apply a little logic and linguistic rule and reality to the interpretation of Scripture, your doctrine breaks down. Once we show your doctrine breaks down, your discussion methods turn to ad hominem and other reasoning fallacies.

Your erroneous doctrine is not unique, nor are your discussion methods.

If your view is that I’m just “feeding data to an AI,” then honestly — why even ask further? Just paste your question into some AI and see what it spits out.

But I can tell you right now — it won’t match what I’ve been posting. Anyone who’s read my posts knows I give detailed explanations with plenty of Scripture, not deflection, pretense, or ad hominem. My approach has always been to reason from the Word, line by line, verse by verse, comparing Scripture with Scripture — the very thing Acts 17:11 commends.

This is more deflecting from Scripture and continuing pretense.

You've not responded to all Scripture in this posting of Scripture or to this post showing where you deflected from responding to that post.

Once we apply a little logic and linguistic rule and reality to the interpretation of Scripture, your doctrine breaks down. Once we show your doctrine breaks down, your discussion methods turn to ad hominem and other reasoning fallacies.

Your erroneous doctrine is not unique, nor are your discussion methods.

If your view is that I’m just “feeding data to an AI, model” then honestly — why even ask further? Just paste your question into some AI and see what it spits out.

But I can tell you right now — it won’t match what I’ve been posting. Anyone who’s read my posts knows I give detailed explanations with plenty of Scripture, not deflection, pretense, or ad hominem. My approach has always been to reason from the Word, line by line, verse by verse, comparing Scripture with Scripture — the very thing Acts 17:11 commends.

For anyone else, I'd offer to engage on that basis, but I've learned from OUCH and others on this forum that sadly for some there’s no real desire for you to learn or rightly divide Scripture. Hence, I've noticed a pattern.... Most of the time when people quote the Bible, they’ll pull out one verse and build an entire doctrine on it — without harmonizing it with the rest of Scripture.

That’s how confusion spreads. You can make the Bible “say” almost anything if you isolate one verse from its chapter, book, or the full counsel of God’s Word. But truth is established when Scripture confirms Scripture — line upon line, precept upon precept.

Grace and Peace have fun playing around with your Ai.

 

[LightBearer316]

Just like the pope does, he also has lot of followers.

Just think of what will happen to those who keep them out of the water.

Um… yeah, okay — thanks...

 

[mailmandan]

I’ve noticed a pattern…

Most of the time when people quote the Bible, they’ll pull out one verse and build an entire doctrine on it — without ever harmonizing it with the rest of Scripture. Probably because they don’t know the rest of Scripture well enough to harmonize any of it.

I see this all the time. Folks will isolate a pet verse or even a handful of few pet verses, build doctrine on those verses then try to force the rest of scripture to "conform" to their preconceived beliefs surrounding their pet verses. Such folks (who are typically members of false religions and cults) are more interested in accommodating their preconceived beliefs and biased church doctrine at all costs than they are in properly harmonizing scripture with scripture before reaching their conclusion on doctrine.

 

[studier]

If your view is that I’m just “feeding data to an AI,” then honestly — why even ask further? Just paste your question into some AI and see what it spits out.

But I can tell you right now — it won’t match what I’ve been posting. Anyone who’s read my posts knows I give detailed explanations with plenty of Scripture, not deflection, pretense, or ad hominem. My approach has always been to reason from the Word, line by line, verse by verse, comparing Scripture with Scripture — the very thing Acts 17:11 commends.

Actually, I can see that your posts have changed and are less precise and differently formatted now so maybe you're settling into your own a bit more. In this response you've even repeated yourself between its 2 sections.

Also, AI isn't all knowing and will follow the foundation its user establishes and build up its user. It'll also bounce between different theologies until that foundation is better established. It'll also provide detailed Scriptural information pursuant to your chosen tradition and has access to the many resources you were taught from and more. You seem a bit offended re: my having had AI review your writing style and format.

You have been deflecting, pretending that I'm being emotional, and have been using ad hominem.

Most every one of us will say our approach is what you say yours is. I'm sure you don't think you're the only one who has ever read Acts17:11.

For anyone else, I'd offer to engage on that basis, but I've learned from OUCH and others on this forum that sadly for some there’s no real desire for you to learn or rightly divide Scripture. Hence, I've noticed a pattern.... Most of the time when people quote the Bible, they’ll pull out one verse and build an entire doctrine on it — without harmonizing it with the rest of Scripture.

That’s how confusion spreads. You can make the Bible “say” almost anything if you isolate one verse from its chapter, book, or the full counsel of God’s Word. But truth is established when Scripture confirms Scripture — line upon line, precept upon precept.

Maybe there's just no desire to learn from you because some of us disagree with your chosen tradition and can see where you are in error. And maybe you should consider your own outward pattern recognition and turn it inward. You're using Scriptures selectively and ignoring what goes against you. You're not harmonizing to the extent you think you are and again all of us likely make similar claims of harmonizing.

I agree with your last paragraph and apply it to all of us, including you.

If you'd like to go back to those posts I linked and actually discuss those Scriptures in detail and focus, let me know. Until then, obedience to God is appositional and functionally equivalent to genuine faith. It's pretty easy to see in Scripture once we let go of the distortion of what faith-alone was first meant to stand against vs. what it has been turned into.

 

[LightBearer316]

Actually, I can see that your posts have changed and are less precise and differently formatted now so maybe you're settling into your own a bit more. In this response you've even repeated yourself between its 2 sections.

Also, AI isn't all knowing and will follow the foundation its user establishes and build up its user. It'll also bounce between different theologies until that foundation is better established. It'll also provide detailed Scriptural information pursuant to your chosen tradition and has access to the many resources you were taught from and more. You seem a bit offended re: my having had AI review your writing style and format.

You have been deflecting, pretending that I'm being emotional, and have been using ad hominem.

Most every one of us will say our approach is what you say yours is. I'm sure you don't think you're the only one who has ever read Acts17:11.



Maybe there's just no desire to learn from you because some of us disagree with your chosen tradition and can see where you are in error. And maybe you should consider your own outward pattern recognition and turn it inward. You're using Scriptures selectively and ignoring what goes against you. You're not harmonizing to the extent you think you are and again all of us likely make similar claims of harmonizing.

I agree with your last paragraph and apply it to all of us, including you.

If you'd like to go back to those posts I linked and actually discuss those Scriptures in detail and focus, let me know. Until then, obedience to God is appositional and functionally equivalent to genuine faith. It's pretty easy to see in Scripture once we let go of the distortion of what faith-alone was first meant to stand against vs. what it has been turned into.

Um… yeah, okay — thanks...