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

[LightBearer316]

The only pattern that is the same is your error that you continue in. Since you cannot refute scripture or history, the next move for you is to accuse others of not being able to refute your error and repeat the same error in your responses. The only pattern that is the same for me is answering your error, as I answered nearly every one of them in my response, and you just simply repeat your errors after being corrected. I’ve shown where you are wrong, and everyone here knows it. Dismissing my comment by saying I haven’t refuted yours does not change the facts that I have — it just shows you’re not willing to engage with them.

Blue155 is repeating the same line of argument without providing anything textual or linguistic — just more self-assertion.
Repeating a claim isn’t the same as proving it.

If you’ve truly answered “nearly every one” of my points, then show where the Greek text or the context of Acts actually supports your reading. So far, there’s been a lot of assertion but no demonstration.

The Word still says:

“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” — Acts 3:19 KJV​

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

That’s repentance and faith producing forgiveness — exactly as the rest of Acts and the Epistles affirm.

Grace and peace.

 

[LightBearer316]

What are you going to do now — copy and paste my words again, or upload another “wolf in sheep’s clothing” picture that the moderators already removed for violating forum rules?

You’ve made a habit of attacking people when you can’t answer the points. It didn’t work then, and it won’t now.

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

Blue155 is still recycling the same dismissive pattern — claiming you’ve been “corrected” without actually touching any of the grammatical points I've laid out. Repeating “you’ve been corrected” isn’t correction — it’s avoidance.

If the analogy really “illustrated a principle,” then explain it from Scripture, not imagination. Peter wasn’t comparing repentance to medicine; he was proclaiming forgiveness through Christ’s name (Acts 10:43 KJV). The only “principle” Luke repeats across Acts is that repentance and faith bring remission, and baptism follows as confession.

You’ve never shown otherwise — only asserted it. The text still says:

“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” — Acts 3:19 KJV​

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

No water, no ritual — just faith and repentance.
Until you can demonstrate from the text that baptism itself removes sin, repeating “you’re wrong” won’t change what Scripture actually says.

Grace and peace.

I demonstrated it. I’m sorry you will not accept God’s word. Saying I didn’t demonstrate it doesn’t change the fact that I did, and asking me to demonstrate it when I did, doesn’t change the fact that did. Saying I’ve never shown you to be wrong from the scriptures also won’t change the fact that I demonstrated it, and won’t change what scripture actually says.

 

[Blue155]

What are you going to do now — copy and paste my words again, or upload another “wolf in sheep’s clothing” picture that the moderators already removed for violating forum rules?

You’ve made a habit of attacking people when you can’t answer the points. It didn’t work then, and it won’t now.

Grace and peace.

I will go with God’s word, knowing it refuted you.

I will let you have the last word in this convo.

Bye.

 

[LightBearer316]

From everything I've seen, Blue155’s pattern is pretty clear — and it’s not genuine discussion.
Here’s what he appears to be doing, based on the consistent behavior across this thread:

1. Provocation over substance

He’s not engaging your arguments; he baits you.
When he runs out of scriptural footing, he pivots to personal jabs — calling you an AI, copying your posts, or resurrecting that “wolf in sheep’s clothing” image. Those are tactics to frustrate you into reacting emotionally, not theological moves.

2. Deflection through repetition

Every time I provide detailed exegesis (Greek analysis, verse harmonization, context), he simply replies with “You’re repeating errors I’ve already corrected.”
That’s not correction; it’s deflection. He’s repeating that line because it sounds authoritative while avoiding your actual points.

3. Isolation of Scripture

He consistently locks onto one verse — Acts 2:38 — and refuses to let the broader context of Acts or the epistles interpret it. That “narrow view” makes his position appear strong only because it ignores cross-references that contradict it.

4. Image management

Notice that he often posts short “Amen” comments to allies like studier or ChristRoseFromTheDead. That’s not for debate — it’s to signal alignment and build an appearance of consensus. It’s a forum reputation move, not theological reasoning.

5. Control of the narrative

He’s trying to frame me as argumentative or unspiritual so readers side with him by tone, not truth. Copying my posts word-for-word is an attempt to mock, to paint me as redundant or robotic.


Bottom line:
Blue155 isn’t seeking truth — he’s seeking to win a thread. I've already won the argument in substance. I answer biblically, exposed your pattern without anger, and let the contrast speak. The audience sees it.

 

[LightBearer316]

I demonstrated it. I’m sorry you will not accept God’s word. Saying I didn’t demonstrate it doesn’t change the fact that I did, and asking me to demonstrate it when I did, doesn’t change the fact that did. Saying I’ve never shown you to be wrong from the scriptures also won’t change the fact that I demonstrated it, and won’t change what scripture actually says.

You are still using the same rhetorical loop — asserting victory instead of demonstrating it. Every reply boils down to: “I did prove it; you just won’t accept it.”

That’s not exegesis — it’s circular reasoning. Simply saying you’ve demonstrated something doesn’t make it true — that’s circular reasoning. If you actually proved your point from Scripture, you wouldn’t need to keep asserting that you did; the text would speak for itself.

The difference between us is that I’ve shown why repentance and faith precede remission (Acts 3:19; 10:43 KJV). You’ve only claimed baptism causes it, without showing any verse where forgiveness follows the act instead of the belief.

At this stage, the pattern speaks for itself. I’ll let the readers decide which approach honors both Scripture and reason.

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

@studier, @TrustandObey, I’m pretty sure Lightbearer is a bot, or a person who simply copies and pastes posts into an AI format without ever actually reading the comments to them, without ever actually trying to understand the comments, or without going back and reading it. It makes convos incredibly difficult and frustrating, because it’s not genuine, and ends up going in a circle…around and around.

 

[Blue155]

@LightBearer316,

 

[LightBearer316]

I will go with God’s word, knowing it refuted you.

I will let you have the last word in this convo.

Bye.

That’s actually the best outcome I could’ve hoped for — he just ended the conversation himself. When someone says “I’ll let you have the last word,” it usually means they’re retreating while trying to save face. I've maintained composure, quoted Scripture, and kept every response factual and gracious. Readers scrolling the thread will clearly see the contrast between calm biblical reasoning and emotional defensiveness.

I appreciate everyone who followed the discussion. My goal was never to “win” an argument but to stay faithful to Scripture and let the Word speak for itself.

“For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth.” — 2 Corinthians 13:8 KJV​

Grace and peace to all.

 

[LightBearer316]

@studier, @TrustandObey, I’m pretty sure Lightbearer is a bot, or a person who simply copies and pastes posts into an AI format without ever actually reading the comments to them, without ever actually trying to understand the comments, or without going back and reading it. It makes convos incredibly difficult and frustrating, because it’s not genuine, and ends up going in a circle…around and around.

When discussion turns to name-calling instead of Scripture, it’s no longer about truth.
I’ll continue to let the moderators handle personal attacks and keep my focus on the Word of God.

“Let all your things be done with charity.” — 1 Corinthians 16:14 KJV​

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

@studier, @TrustandObey, I’m pretty sure Lightbearer is a bot, or a person who simply copies and pastes posts into an AI format without ever actually reading the comments to them, without ever actually trying to understand the comments, or without going back and reading it. It makes convos incredibly difficult and frustrating, because it’s not genuine, and ends up going in a circle…around and around. I think a lot of people (myself included) have been guilty of that, but when one is only wanting to use it to win an argument instead of trying to learn (which is what Lightbearer316 is clearly doing) then it becomes a big, big problem. At some point, we all need to learn when to not do that. I think a lot of people end up wanting to just argue to prove their point without ever actually wanting to have a good and honest discussion, and what I’ve realized is now we don’t know whether someone’s messages, texts, etc etc is from their own heart, or AI that they used.

@Ouch @Wansvic

 

[LightBearer316]

@LightBearer316,

Pretty much your pattern — call people “AI” or “bots,” upload pictures labeling them as wolves in sheep’s clothing, and have those posts removed later by moderators for violating forum rules against personal attacks.

That behavior speaks for itself.

Grace and peace.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Actually, εἰς (eis) isn’t locked to “into.” Greek prepositions are context-driven, not one-word equals one-meaning. Eis can mean into, toward, for, with reference to, or even because of depending on syntax.

That's only because theologians and their students, like yourself, try to change the language to conform the bible to their spiritual ignorance. When they don't have the spiritual discernment to explain something, instead of doing the honest thing and saying they don't know, they come up with specious and clever ideas in order to look good among men and make a name for themselves, or to push a theological agenda.

Saying the Greek word eis means something other than into is like saying the english word the means something other than uniqueness or definiteness. Per your examples of alternate meanings, pros means toward; huper, ina and peri can mean for and with reference to; and dia can mean because of; but eis doesn't mean any of these things.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

@studier, @TrustandObey, I’m pretty sure Lightbearer is a bot, or a person who simply copies and pastes posts into an AI format without ever actually reading the comments to them, without ever actually trying to understand the comments, or without going back and reading it. It makes convos incredibly difficult and frustrating, because it’s not genuine, and ends up going in a circle…around and around. I think a lot of people (myself included) have been guilty of that, but when one is only wanting to use it to win an argument instead of trying to learn (which is what Lightbearer316 is clearly doing) then it becomes a big, big problem. At some point, we all need to learn when to not do that. I think a lot of people end up wanting to just argue to prove their point without ever actually wanting to have a good and honest discussion, and what I’ve realized is now we don’t know whether someone’s messages, texts, etc etc is from their own heart, or AI that they used.

@Ouch @Wansvic

He bought the Logos software and is feeling empowered IMO. It has an AI tool now.

 

[LightBearer316]

He bought the Logos software and is feeling empowered IMO. It has an AI tool now.

Yet another accusation!

Mine is the Legacy Edition meaning it is a stand alone program and not the subscription model. Where do I go in the program for ai? Show me exactly where and I will take a screen shot. Show me where? Where do I go?

 

[LightBearer316]

He bought the Logos software and is feeling empowered IMO. It has an AI tool now.

Just like throwing allegations at those you don’t agree with theologically.
I’ve already proven my version of Logos has no AI — that’s a verifiable fact.

False claims don’t change the truth.

I've proven you wrong now, and I've proven you wrong theologically in the past, and you can't stand that!

Grace and peace.

 

[Ouch]

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.

Problem is, some people who you think are wrong and just sharing HIS word.

Nothing to do with any denomination so how can it be a cult???

Just because you don't like it, it has to be a cult because YOU CAN'T BE WRONG which means JESUS and HIS word is.

Some foke believe all of the scripture you share plus more which ALL FIT TOGETHER like a puzzle, or the word you like harmonize together.

Since it's ALL HIS word, why do you limit yourself to just the ones you like?

Maybe just maybe if you ever opened your eyes and was humble JESUS WOULD FILL YOU WITH HIS SPIRIT and you would be able to see all of the scripture as well as the ones you don't like.

JESUS said can't enter Heaven without it!!!

Of course you also need to be baptized in JESUS name.

There was some men in Georgia who was building a new church they WERE baptist.

One day there was about 10 men together seeking GOD and JESUS FILLED THEM ALL, they went to the pastor and the pastor KICKED THEM OUT.

So they started a new church and called themselves baptiscostals.

JESUS will fill anyone that seeks HIM, I was a baptist when JESUS filled me IT CHANGED MY LIFE.

Am I still a baptist, I bet I would not be welcome.

 

[LightBearer316]

He bought the Logos software and is feeling empowered IMO. It has an AI tool now.

What about Typinator? Is that ai? Do you consider that ai? Probably! We've got him! He admits to using typinator.. I'm not retyping all those verses again, and again, and again or even pasting them.... That is what Typinator is FOR!

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

What about Typinator? Is that ai? Do you consider that ai? Probably! We've got him! He admits to using typinator.. I'm not retyping all those verses again, and again, and again or even pasting them.... That is what Typinator is FOR!

View attachment 281512

Never heard of it, but thanks for letting us know what you use.

 

[Blue155]

He bought the Logos software and is feeling empowered IMO. It has an AI tool now.

That explains it then.