Pentecostal (Apostolic) Q&A

First topic message reminder :

Ask any questions you have and I will do my best to answer them.

What kind of ministries does your church engage in?

Is witnessing important to the Pentecostals?

What is your opinion of the prosperity gospel?

Bren wrote:It was God talking with the angels.

Hmm, that's interesting. I never knew Angels were now Gods. It does say: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." and in the next breath says: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him." Actually, I read something interesting on this by John Chrystostom, an early Church Father, about Jews who claimed God was talking to the angels in Genesis. After being rather negative to the Jews, he points to how ridiculous the statement is.

John Chrystostom, in Homily 8 on Genesis, wrote:What reason do you have for saying, human being that you are, that an angel is party to the counsels of the Lord, creatures sharing the Creator's thought? Not for angels is it to be party to the counsels of the Lord, but to stand in waiting and fulfil [sic] sacred ministry. Listen to Isaiah, most articulate of the prophets, when he says about the angelic powers above that "I saw the Cherubim and the Saraphim standing at God's right hand; they kept covering their faces and feet with their wings." From which it is obvious that they could not bear the radiance beaming from that source, but stood in great fear and trembling. To stand in waiting before the Lord is, after all, proper to creatures.

He than says the only logical thing is to say God was talking to "the Angel of Great Counsel, Wonderful Counselor, Figure of Authority, Prince of Peace, Father of the age to come, Only-begotten Son of God, like the Father in being, through whom all things were created." That seems to make much more sense to me.

Bren wrote:Well, as I mentioned before, that's not what it actually said if you go back and check the original translation. But even, if that was the translation, they understood that the name to be used was Jesus. And there is no other name under heaven, Given among men whereby we must be saved.

I don't think Baptism is the same as being saved. Sure, we can be saved by Jesus, I think that He is the one who died for us and who is the mediator between us and the Father. But that says nothing about whether the Trinity exists. 

By the way, I guess it's really up to interpretation, because I did some research and found that there is very little proof that the original did not say mention the full trinity. Yes, there is Eusebius, who recorded the verse, in about 300 AD, saying:

Eusebius, in History, Chapter 5, Section 2, wrote:“Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name.”

However, a writing from the Early Church called the Didache was written somewhere between 50-150 AD. And this document does mention the Trinitarian formula in Matthew 28:

Didache, 7:1 wrote:Concerning baptism, you should baptize this way: After first explaining all things, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in flowing water.

(my source)

I apologize if I have overwhelmed you or are being a tad rough... I know I'd feel a little upset if someone sprung a huge debate on me.

Does your particular form of Pentecostalism do snake handling? Do you believe in faith healing?