stevehut

My thoughts exactly. Hence, my bewilderment.

Alright, guys, there's an issue that has bothered me for some time; maybe someone here can offer an insight... 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." Here's the text of acts 2:38. Some people in here have suggested that the word "for" (Greek: eis) causes the sentence to mean "because your sins are already forgiven." But if this is the case, then...at what point were they forgiven? I don't know, what do you think? As far as I can tell, up this point, the people did nothing and nothing happened to them. Given the broader teaching of the Bible, in both testaments, it seems strange to suggest that repentance should follow salvation. Any takers?

Not necessarily. Many people believe (me, for one) that baptism is the normal channel of grace, but we also believe that God isn't constrained by it. He can do as he wants. But that doesn't mean that we can just do "whatever," and assume that God will honor it.

Can someone tell me why this is important?

I think you missed it, OneLight. Scripture, by its very nature, IS prophecy. It means a message from God. Sometimes a message from God is about the future, and sometimes it isn't.

Why is this important?

I will ask this again: Can someone tell me why this is important?

No I didn't. But the nature of their mission became clear pretty quickly.

1- I don't understand 2- Well it wasn't me, it was some people I knew. But they didn't know they weren't welcome.

Why is any of this important? I don't understand...

There's an all-black church down the street from here, and they have several wonderful public outreach ministries. One of them is a health-care service for children, that is, black kids only. Through my son's school, I met a couple of parents who took their white kids to the clinic (they were unclear on the concept) and were turned away. So I went to the church and asked why they won't serve white kids. After a 10-minute conversation, they still didn't understand the question. I finally gave up. Thoughts?

I think you missed the point here. Do these barcodes contain the number six hundred sixty-six, or not?

Another thought: I recently read a book by Pastor Bob Russell, called "When God Builds a Church." One interesting stat: Survey after survey has shown that when women lead a church, Mom and the kids come every week, but Dad stays home. But when men lead, Dad comes and brings everyone with him. And of course, in most churches, men are definitely a minority. Isn't this what we all want, to attract as many people into the fold as possible?

1- I don't follow your reasoning here, axe. As early as Genesis, Eve was commanded to submit to her husband. I don't think she and Adam had were enslaved to a pile of cultural customs. And if a woman is commanded to submit to her husband, does it make sense that she can go to church and be in charge? Seems to me that Paul's instruction is perfectly consistent with the larger the Bible record, and there isn't much to "interpret." 2- Who has suggested that women can't serve in the Kingdom?

"In a sense?" Ummm...no, either it's there, or it's not. Last time I checked, the number was six hundred and sixty-six, not a six here and a six there.