MM>  SH> Now for a mess of other problems.  No matter what you do with the
MM>  SH> text in Acts 2, verse 38 teaches that "the gift of the Holy
MM>  SH> Ghost" (not the gift of "speaking in tongues) IS NOT AVAILABLE TO
MM>  SH> A MAN UNLESS HE HAD BEEN BAPTIZED IN WATER.
MM> There is a simple problem with your logic.  What happened to the 
ousehold
MM> of Cornelius?  They received the gift of the Holy Ghost prior to water
MM> baptism.  Acts 2:38 does NOT teach a specific order, apparently.
 Why didn't' you leave the rest of the quote directly after that in which I
 said, "And Acts 8:15, 16 and Acts 10:44-47 show conclusively that this was a
 TEMPORARY SETUP in accordance with the truth revealed up to that time.  To
 go on with this transitional passage through 19 centuries of church history,
 applying it to unsaved sinners as "the plan of salvation" or as "obeying the
 gospel" (cf. Romans 6:17; 16:26,and 10:16), is theological and spiritual
 INSANITY.
 The example of Cornelius proves my point.  They didn't not have to get
 baptized in water FIRST in order to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
 Thus, Acts 2 was a TEMPORARY SETUP in accordance with the truth revealed at
 that time.  Now if you wish to say that Acts 2:38 does not teach a specific
 order, then WHY is it that way in Acts 2:38?  Acts 2:38 specifically shows
 that the Holy Ghost was not available to them unless he had been baptized
 in water first.
MM>  SH> And Acts 8:15, 16 and Acts 10:44-47 show conclusively that
MM>  SH> this was a TEMPORARY SETUP in accordance with the truth
MM>  SH> revealed up to that time.
 Oh, so you did quote.
MM> Do me one favor.  Show me where the Baptism of the Holy Ghost as 
videnced
MM> by speaking in tongues has been done away with.
 When you can tell me it has been active all through the centuries.  Did the
 great soul winners of the past like Billy Sunday, Whitefield, Moody,
 Finney, to name a few, ever claim to believe and practice "unknown tongues"?
 Did Paul claim to speak in "unknown tongues?"  Aren't you aware that the
 "modern tongues" movement actually began around 1900?
 Also, where does it say in the Bible that speaking in tongues is the
 evidence of having received the baptism of the Holy Spirit?  Where does it
 say that a convert must seek the gift of tongues?
MH>Show me where it is
MM> temporary, as you say.  SPECIFICALLY, show me when it was supposed to 
ave
MM> ended.
 Your question shows that you are not comprehending what you are reading.
 The "temporary setup" I was referring to had to do with a person having to
 get in WATER FIRST before he got the gift of the Holy Ghost.  That is NOT
 the case today.
MM>  SH> To go on with this transitional
MM>  SH> passage through 19 centuries of church history, applying it
MM>  SH> to unsaved sinners as "the plan of salvation" or as
MM>  SH> "obeying the gospel" (cf. Romans 6:17; 16:26, and 10:16),
MM>  SH> is theological and spiritual INSANITY.
MM> First, it is NOT transitional.
 Then you must believe that a person is not saved unless he is baptized in
 water first?  The Roman Catholic Church, besides the Church of Christ, teach
 that a man is not saved unless he is baptized in water.  Baptism in city
 water isn't going to save one soul.  The gospel is not Acts 2:38.
MH>Secondly, the Holy Ghost baptism does not
MM> apply to unsaved sinners.  One must be a believer before receiving this
MM> baptism.
 You are telling me one doesn't get baptized by the Holy Ghost until AFTER
 he is saved???? (Rom 8:9)
>>> Continued to next message
---
 þ OLX 2.2 TD þ Every mighty oak was once a nut that stood its ground.
--- GEcho/32 1.20/Pro
---------------