View Full Version : The Current PAJC Beliefs
I, like, Charlie would like to examine what they are and how they differ from the old-timers.
WHAT SAY YE????
LadyChocolate
02-24-2007, 04:24 PM
STOP IT PLEASE This used to be a nice fun place and now yall are driving me in sane with all the pci pajc ind upc lmnop stx suv cooljc coolit paw maw taw beliefs. !!!!!!!!!!!
okay, got that out of my system, carry one wit yo thread!:heeheehee
Charlie Brown
02-24-2007, 04:29 PM
I think a few of the current PAJC beliefs are as follows:
1) The New Birth = Repentance, water baptism in Jesus name, and infilling of the Holy Ghost with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues
2) Live a holy life, separated (sanctified) unto God
hammondb3klingon1
02-24-2007, 04:35 PM
PAJC hmmm is there a site for them?
Charlie Brown
02-24-2007, 04:38 PM
PAJC hmmm is there a site for them?
The UPCI holds what we call the PAJC views.
But there is a PAJC still in existence.
www.pajc.org
Steve Epley
02-24-2007, 06:35 PM
Yes the PAJC is still in existance though small and mostly regional.
Felicity
02-24-2007, 06:48 PM
Holy Ghost or hell!
:)
ManOfWord
02-24-2007, 07:43 PM
I'll give this one a try as well: It is a "simple" 3 step plan
#1 Repentance is similar to "conception."
#2 Water baptism, in Jesus' name washes away sin.
#3 Holy Ghost baptism, speaking in tongues "certifies" that you are now rapture ready.
NOTE: One is not rapture ready until the completion of step #3
The logical conclusion of this view is that NO ONE from Pentecost until now will make the rapture other than those who have followed the 3 step plan.
I'll give this one a try as well: It is a "simple" 3 step plan
#1 Repentance is similar to "conception."
#2 Water baptism, in Jesus' name washes away sin.
#3 Holy Ghost baptism, speaking in tongues "certifies" that you are now rapture ready.
NOTE: One is not rapture ready until the completion of step #3
The logical conclusion of this view is that NO ONE from Pentecost until now will make the rapture other than those who have followed the 3 step plan.
Now in my case .. I received the baptism of the HG on ,October 4, 1981 before I was water baptized on November 8th, 1981...
hence ...I was certified with sin still upon me????
http://respiracreative.com/baptism.jpg
EN EL NOMBRE DE JESUS ....BRONX, NY
Nahum
02-24-2007, 07:51 PM
I'll give this one a try as well: It is a "simple" 3 step plan
#1 Repentance is similar to "conception."
#2 Water baptism, in Jesus' name washes away sin.
#3 Holy Ghost baptism, speaking in tongues "certifies" that you are now rapture ready.
NOTE: One is not rapture ready until the completion of step #3
The logical conclusion of this view is that NO ONE from Pentecost until now will make the rapture other than those who have followed the 3 step plan.
Oh, I don't know about that last little dig - friend.
I am a tee-total three stepper. All I know is what I see in the word that Peter preached at Pentecost. I just preach what's there. I'm not God, and it would be foolish of me to question his plan.
I have never been in the business of deciding who will be in Heaven, and who will be in Hell. There is only one Judge. I'm not him. So, I'll just keep on preaching truth, and leave the saving up to Him. :praying
Oh, I don't know about that last little dig - friend.
I am a tee-total three stepper. All I know is what I see in the word that Peter preached at Pentecost. I just preach what's there. I'm not God, and it would be foolish of me to question his plan.
I have never been in the business of deciding who will be in Heaven, and who will be in Hell. There is only one Judge. I'm not him. So, I'll just keep on preaching truth, and leave the saving up to Him. :praying
PP ... it's how it's taught by many .... :sad
Felicity
02-24-2007, 07:56 PM
All I know is what I see in the word that Peter preached at Pentecost. I just preach what's there. I'm not God, and it would be foolish of me to question his plan.But you see boys .... this is the thing ....... we all preach and teach Acts 2:38 and we all get the same results!!
Now in my case .. I received the baptism of the HG on ,October 4, 1981 before I was water baptized on November 8th, 1981...
hence ...I was certified with sin still upon me????
http://respiracreative.com/baptism.jpg
EN EL NOMBRE DE JESUS ....BRONX, NY
According to the way I understand what we call PAJC beliefs, you were not born again until your water baptism because that is considered "born of water" and you were still in your sins because the name of Jesus in water baptism washes away or remits (or forgives to some) sins. So, one is not "rapture ready" until all three steps are completed --but that only meets minimum qualifications --after those three steps you must be under the authority of a pastor and completely obey whatever he/she tells you.
Nahum
02-24-2007, 07:58 PM
According to the way I understand what we call PAJC beliefs, you were not born again until your water baptism because that is considered "born of water" and you were still in your sins because the name of Jesus in water baptism washes away or remits (or forgives to some) sins. So, one is not "rapture ready" until all three steps are completed --but that only meets minimum qualifications --after those three steps you must be under the authority of a pastor and completely obey whatever he/she tells you.
Yeah, there are some freaky-cons out there. I am not one of them.
Don't stereotype us all.
RevDWW
02-24-2007, 07:59 PM
According to the way I understand what we call PAJC beliefs, you were not born again until your water baptism because that is considered "born of water" and you were still in your sins because the name of Jesus in water baptism washes away or remits (or forgives to some) sins. So, one is not "rapture ready" until all three steps are completed --but that only meets minimum qualifications --after those three steps you must be under the authority of a pastor and completely obey whatever he/she tells you.
Are you rapture ready if you are not obedient?
According to the way I understand what we call PAJC beliefs, you were not born again until your water baptism because that is considered "born of water" and you were still in your sins because the name of Jesus in water baptism washes away or remits (or forgives to some) sins. So, one is not "rapture ready" until all three steps are completed --but that only meets minimum qualifications --after those three steps you must be under the authority of a pastor and completely obey whatever he/she tells you.
so I was filled and baptized by His Holy Spirit while still dirty w/ sin???
Felicity
02-24-2007, 08:00 PM
According to many PAJCers if you don't follow the holiness standards you still ain't saved regardless of whether you've completed Steps 1-3 or not.
You seriously have to wonder sometimes if and when the poor souls ever get to go to heaven because there are so many steps. :depressed
ManOfWord
02-24-2007, 08:01 PM
Oh, I don't know about that last little dig - friend.
I am a tee-total three stepper. All I know is what I see in the word that Peter preached at Pentecost. I just preach what's there. I'm not God, and it would be foolish of me to question his plan.
I have never been in the business of deciding who will be in Heaven, and who will be in Hell. There is only one Judge. I'm not him. So, I'll just keep on preaching truth, and leave the saving up to Him. :praying
No dig, friend! That is an Epleyism.
so I was filled and baptized in by His Holy Spirit while still dirty w/ sin???
Here you may get a couple answers.
1. Yes, you were still in sin until water baptized in Jesus' name.
2. You didn't get the REAL Holy Ghost.
Number 1 could be considered a breech birth or a backward birth by some.
Here you may get a couple answers.
1. Yes, you were still in sin until water baptized in Jesus' name.
2. You didn't get the REAL Holy Ghost.
Number 1 could be considered a breech birth or a backward birth by some.
WOW!!!!
Ronzo
02-24-2007, 08:06 PM
No dig, friend! That is an Epleyism.
Exactly...
Here it is
From Pentecost until the rapture not ONE soul is saved without obeying Acts 2:38.:drawguns :drawguns
PCI Merger thread, post 751
freeatlast
02-24-2007, 08:18 PM
I find interersting that some 3 steppers don't want to be broadbrushed with other three steppers.....but have no problem painting all us one steppers as easy believism greasy gracers.
Mmmmmmmm
There are many 3 steppers who won't allow God to be the judge. Like Epley implies...nobody will be in heaven without obeying Acts 2:38 the way he sees it.
ManOfWord
02-24-2007, 08:22 PM
Exactly...
Here it is
PCI Merger thread, post 751
There ya go! I knew someone could find it. Our esteemed Bro "E" has made this statement more than once. Thanks, Ronzo!!! :D
I find interersting that some 3 steppers don't want to be broadbrushed with other three steppers.....but have no problem painting all us one steppers as easy believism greasy gracers.
Mmmmmmmm
There are many 3 steppers who won't allow God to be the judge. Like Epley implies...nobody will be in heaven without obeying Acts 2:38 the way he sees it.
Perhaps he's getting a VIP suite in heaven with rest of the bunch ... while the rest of us enjoy the Holy City.
Nahum
02-24-2007, 08:24 PM
I find interersting that some 3 steppers don't want to be broadbrushed with other three steppers.....but have no problem painting all us one steppers as easy believism greasy gracers.
Mmmmmmmm
There are many 3 steppers who won't allow God to be the judge. Like Epley implies...nobody will be in heaven without obeying Acts 2:38 the way he sees it.
I've been so wrong!!!!!! :ty
I've been so wrong!!!!!! :ty
I told you so!! :killinme :killinme :killinme :killinme :killinme
But you see boys .... this is the thing ....... we all preach and teach Acts 2:38 and we all get the same results!!
Before I turn in, let me say that this is a good point that no one seemed to jump on, and it leads me to ask...
Remembering folks that I am of the 'PAJC' view, if we all get the same results, is it that important at what point salvation takes place?! Are we reaching too hard for the differences rather than building on that which we agree?!
Before I turn in, let me say that this is a good point that no one seemed to jump on, and it leads me to ask...
Remembering folks that I am of the 'PAJC' view, if we all get the same results, is it that important at what point salvation takes place?! Are we reaching too hard for the differences rather than building on that which we agree?!
Wasn't that the idea when two groups merged in 1945 and agreed to disagree around a "fundamental doctrine statement" and allowed both views to be presented in their new magazine called "The Pentecostal Herald"?
Wasn't that the idea when two groups merged in 1945 and agreed to disagree around a "fundamental doctrine statement" and allowed both views to be presented in their new magazine called "The Pentecostal Herald"?
Kinda seems like it, Bro. Sam...
But you see boys .... this is the thing ....... we all preach and teach Acts 2:38 and we all get the same results!!
Before I turn in, let me say that this is a good point that no one seemed to jump on, and it leads me to ask...
Remembering folks that I am of the 'PAJC' view, if we all get the same results, is it that important at what point salvation takes place?! Are we reaching too hard for the differences rather than building on that which we agree?!
Thought I'd bump these posts and see if anyone else cares to chime in with a response...I like Bro. Sam's point...
Wasn't that the idea when two groups merged in 1945 and agreed to disagree around a "fundamental doctrine statement" and allowed both views to be presented in their new magazine called "The Pentecostal Herald"?
Exactly...
Here it is
PCI Merger thread, post 751
for the record, Brother Epley has said 'From Pentecost until the rapture not ONE soul is saved without obeying Acts 2:38."
More than a few times over the years I have posted with him. He does not waiver on the issue at all.
Ronzo
02-25-2007, 10:00 AM
No one said he did waiver from it, however, PP made it seem like MOW was making that comment up to paint people with a broad brush.
I wanted to show PP that MOW did not make it up but was pretty much an exact quote of Epley's words.
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:05 AM
Holy Ghost or hell.
:)
stmatthew
02-25-2007, 12:00 PM
I agree with Bro Epley. And I really do not think someone can say it take Acts 2:38 to be saved, and not agree with Bro Epley. Either it does, or it doesn't.
BTW - I rejoice that anyone would be what I consider "born again", whether it be in a PCI type church, or a PAJC type church.
ManOfWord
02-25-2007, 01:20 PM
Wasn't that the idea when two groups merged in 1945 and agreed to disagree around a "fundamental doctrine statement" and allowed both views to be presented in their new magazine called "The Pentecostal Herald"?
That is the "fly in the ointment" of the whole discussion and has been for quite some time. The problem is, IMO, the that some of the PAJC'ers polarized so much that they could no longer tolerate the PCI'ers, so the "exlax contingency" (AS) was executed by those who felt the urge to purge. :D
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 01:27 PM
for the record, Brother Epley has said 'From Pentecost until the rapture not ONE soul is saved without obeying Acts 2:38."
More than a few times over the years I have posted with him. He does not waiver on the issue at all.
I would not waste my time and the time of folks I have preached to for going on 40 years if I thought for one second anyone would be saved outside this Acts 2:38 message. Why send missionaries?????????????
So I ask again:
Are Catholics saved???????????
Are Mormons saved??????????????
Are JW's saved?????????
Christian Scientists saved????????????:ranting
No only OUR family who for some reason did not obey the gospel are saved.
Good Baptists-Methodists-Trinitarian(what a misnomer)Pentecostals are saved.
The disciples after hearing the confused folks on this forum would have asked the question "Who then can be lost.":highfive
Crakjak is on the ONLY honest one of the bunch he thinks everyone is going to be saved and y'all are trying to catch up with him. Heaven has enlarged and Hell has shut down.:ty
Maybe if y'all took the time to read the Bible instead of that Calvinist and baptist stuff it might help.:tease
Got to go to church but I will return the Lord willing to fight you Baptist in Pentecostal clothing.:drawguns
Nahum
02-25-2007, 01:59 PM
No one said he did waiver from it, however, PP made it seem like MOW was making that comment up to paint people with a broad brush.
I wanted to show PP that MOW did not make it up but was pretty much an exact quote of Epley's words.
Look, I agree wih Brother Epley on what the bible teaches it takes to be saved.
By that I mean Acts 2:38. I do not agree with freaky-cons that all that extra junk needs to be added for security reasons.
LadyChocolate
02-25-2007, 02:12 PM
the PAJC
Peanut butter
And
Jelly
Crackers
hammondb3klingon1
02-25-2007, 02:49 PM
PAJC - Pablo And Julia Cortez. Not an organization just a real nice family I go to church with :)
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 07:50 PM
I would not waste my time and the time of folks I have preached to for going on 40 years if I thought for one second anyone would be saved outside this Acts 2:38 message. Why send missionaries?????????????
So I ask again:
Are Catholics saved???????????
Are Mormons saved??????????????
Are JW's saved?????????
Christian Scientists saved????????????:ranting
No only OUR family who for some reason did not obey the gospel are saved.
Good Baptists-Methodists-Trinitarian(what a misnomer)Pentecostals are saved.
The disciples after hearing the confused folks on this forum would have asked the question "Who then can be lost.":highfive
Crakjak is on the ONLY honest one of the bunch he thinks everyone is going to be saved and y'all are trying to catch up with him. Heaven has enlarged and Hell has shut down.:ty
Maybe if y'all took the time to read the Bible instead of that Calvinist and baptist stuff it might help.:tease
Got to go to church but I will return the Lord willing to fight you Baptist in Pentecostal clothing.:drawguns
Bump any takers???????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????
commonsense
02-25-2007, 10:08 PM
AS always, there is a wealth of information on this forum. I grew up in a UPC family and UPC church. Although I was taught, accepted, believed the PAJC 3 stepper message for salvation and understood it to be essential, it was with a different attitude.
My dad came into the truth in 1929, along with his family and in the next couple of years they were all Baptized and received the HG. My mother received the HG in 1934 and was Baptized in Jesus name in 1935. I'm giving background in order to support my statements.
My parents had been serving God for a few years before the UPC was on the scene, so when I was born their knowledge of "truth" was imbedded in their lives.
The Acts 2:38 message was solid in our house and never questioned, BUT, by the same token I was not taught some of the intolerance so prevelant today. I don't know if it was the loving spirit of my parents or the teaching they received but I do not recall the mean spiritedness of today. We were indeed taught that we had the "truth"; but all the "others" weren't condemned.
Since my mother had attended ABI (pre 1945) and two of my dad's brothers also went to ABI it is possible that the way Bro Norris approached the subject was influencial but none the less I think the church today has changed from the 1950's . My father and mother are not alive so I'm not able to question them on the PCI or other teachings of the 30's and 40's. I still love the
Acts 2:38 message, but find that we have attached addendums to the original.
Originally Posted by Felicity
But you see boys .... this is the thing ....... we all preach and teach Acts 2:38 and we all get the same results!!
Originally Posted by Barb
Before I turn in, let me say that this is a good point that no one seemed to jump on, and it leads me to ask...
Remembering folks that I am of the 'PAJC' view, if we all get the same results, is it that important at what point salvation takes place?! Are we reaching too hard for the differences rather than building on that which we agree?!
Originally Posted by Sam
Wasn't that the idea when two groups merged in 1945 and agreed to disagree around a "fundamental doctrine statement" and allowed both views to be presented in their new magazine called "The Pentecostal Herald"?
___________________________________
Thought I'd bump these posts and see if anyone else cares to chime in with a response...I like Bro. Sam's point...what say ye?!
Fireside
02-25-2007, 10:32 PM
*Pass the tissues*
*Pass the tissues*
Meaning?!:dunno
ManOfWord
02-25-2007, 10:42 PM
AS always, there is a wealth of information on this forum. I grew up in a UPC family and UPC church. Although I was taught, accepted, believed the PAJC 3 stepper message for salvation and understood it to be essential, it was with a different attitude.
My dad came into the truth in 1929, along with his family and in the next couple of years they were all Baptized and received the HG. My mother received the HG in 1934 and was Baptized in Jesus name in 1935. I'm giving background in order to support my statements.
My parents had been serving God for a few years before the UPC was on the scene, so when I was born their knowledge of "truth" was imbedded in their lives.
The Acts 2:38 message was solid in our house and never questioned, BUT, by the same token I was not taught some of the intolerance so prevelant today. I don't know if it was the loving spirit of my parents or the teaching they received but I do not recall the mean spiritedness of today. We were indeed taught that we had the "truth"; but all the "others" weren't condemned.
Since my mother had attended ABI (pre 1945) and two of my dad's brothers also went to ABI it is possible that the way Bro Norris approached the subject was influencial but none the less I think the church today has changed from the 1950's . My father and mother are not alive so I'm not able to question them on the PCI or other teachings of the 30's and 40's. I still love the
Acts 2:38 message, but find that we have attached addendums to the original.
Thank you for your input. It continues to give credence to the fact that the current "stinky" attitude displayed in some circles was more of a recent addition than an original intent.
Felicity
02-25-2007, 10:45 PM
Look, I agree wih Brther Epley on what the bible teaches it takes to be saved.
By that I mean Acts 2:38. I do not agree with freaky-cons that all that extra junk needs to be added for security reasons. "For security reasons". I like that. :heeheehee
But what do you mean by "freaky-cons"?!! How are they different from regular cons?
And what is the "extra junk"? How extra is extra? :) ;)
Some lingering questions.
If one is saved @ repentance, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost is gravy how do you explain the fact many get the Holy Ghost before completing the other two steps?
On the surface it seems like the pci view doesn't reflect a "oneness" theology. Does a pci view differentiate between Jesus and the Holy Spirit? By most writings I've seen on this thread, it doesn't appear to be the case.
How can the pci position reconcile their views with the parable of the ten versions. If the oil represents the Holy Ghost, and five virgins were not able to join the bridegroom in the wedding, how can one say the infilling of the Holy Ghost is not essential to salvation?
The glass half full/half empty analogy doesn't stand up to what Jesus taught about the Holy Ghost. Either you have it or you don't. If one claims the Spirit of Jesus lives in them without receiving the Holy Ghost, than one is espousing something more than a oneness viewpoint.
These are a few lingering questions that doesn't seem to reconcile the validity of salvaion at repentance in my book. I'm no theologian, but I am a thinker, and I play chess. From what I see, the logical implications of the pci view changes does more than than just a salvational formula...
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 10:54 PM
Some lingering questions.
If one is saved @ repentance, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost is gravy how do you explain the fact many get the Holy Ghost before completing the other two steps?
On the surface it seems like the pci view doesn't reflect a "oneness" theology. Does a pci view differentiate between Jesus and the Holy Spirit? By most writings I've seen on this thread, it doesn't appear to be the case.
How can the pci position reconcile their views with the parable of the ten versions. If the oil represents the Holy Ghost, and five virgins were not able to join the bridegroom in the wedding, how can one say the infilling of the Holy Ghost is not essential to salvation?
The glass half full/half empty analogy doesn't stand up to what Jesus taught about the Holy Ghost. Either you have it or you don't. If one claims the Spirit of Jesus lives in them without receiving the Holy Ghost, than one is espousing something more than a oneness viewpoint.
These are a few lingering questions that doesn't seem to reconcile the validity of salvaion at repentance in my book. I'm no theologian, but I am a thinker, and I play chess. From what I see, the logical implications of the pci view changes does more than than just a salvational formula...
Very good.
Felicity
02-25-2007, 10:57 PM
There are too many problems with the "not born again/saved until you speak in tongues" doctrine for me to be able to accept it. That's the bottom line.
It's not that I don't want to. I mean why wouldn't I want to accept this as being truth if it was? Makes no sense that I wouldn't.
If we preach Acts 2:38 as it's written it's not problematic at all. And we get the same results .... those of us who believe and preach it.
People are receiving the baptism of the Spirit all over the world who've never heard tell of the "three steps to salvation" doctrine. God is true to His promise and His Word to pour out His Spirit on all mankind. Pentecost is the largest religious movement in the world today.
TV ... Sam answered your same questions in the PCI beliefs thread ....
Here it goes again ...
1. At salvation/regeneration/justification Jesus comes into a person's heart as the Holy Spirit/Spirit of Jesus Christ/Spirit of the Lord/Holy Ghost. He is Christ in you the hope of glory.
2. Baptism in the Spirit is an immersion/overwhelming/saturation/empowerment experience in the Spirit subsequent to salvation
At salvation, the Holy Spirit comes in and takes over and transforms the individual. This is living water within according to John 4 and drinking from the well of salvation according to Isaiah 12. The HGB (Holy Ghost Baptism) is rivers of living water flowing out according to John 7:37-39.
At salvation the Holy Spirit comes in and is like a pilot light (for you who are old enough to remember that term). At HGB the pilot light becomes a flame, energizing, anointing, and releasing gifts in us.
John chapter 20 was a maternity ward. Acts chapter 2 was a bapsitmal tank.
It has been described this way.
Imagine an empty water glass and a pitcher full of water on a table.
1. Lift the pitcher and fill the glass. Set the pitcher back on the table. The glass is full of water. This represents salvation/regeneration.
2. Pick up the glass full of water, and gently lower it into the pitcher of water until it is sitting on its bottom in the pitcher. Now the glass is not only filled with water, it is also submerged/immersed/saturated in the water. This represents the Holy Ghost baptism.
Nahum
02-25-2007, 10:59 PM
"For security reasons". I like that. :heeheehee
But what do you mean by "freaky-cons"?!! How are they different from regular cons?
And what is the "extra junk"? How extra is extra? :) ;)
a. regular con: 1. John 3:5, 3:16, Acts 2:38 salvational preacher who believes a righteous life will be the product of a proper response to the gospel.
b. freaky-con: 1. John 3:5, 3:16, Acts 2:38 preacher who believes any enjoyment beyond breathing will send you straight to the bottemless depths of the Lake of Fire.
Nahum
02-25-2007, 11:00 PM
"For security reasons". I like that. :heeheehee
But what do you mean by "freaky-cons"?!! How are they different from regular cons?
And what is the "extra junk"? How extra is extra? :) ;)
Extra is anything of private interpretation. I assumed we all understood that.
a. regular con: 1. John 3:5, 3:16, Acts 2:38 salvational preacher who believes a righteous life will be the product of a proper response to the gospel.
b. freaky-con: 1. John 3:5, 3:16, Acts 2:38 preacher who believes any enjoyment beyond breathing will send you straight to the firey depths of the Lake of Fire.
You're a regular con???
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:00 PM
a. regular con: 1. John 3:5, 3:16, Acts 2:38 salvational preacher who believes a righteous life will be the product of a proper response to the gospel.So then according to your definition here we're all conservatives because we all believe this regardless what doctrinal persuasion we hold to about any number of things.
So then according to your definition here we're all conservatives because we all believe this regardless what doctrinal persuasion we hold to about any number of things.
Card carrying members ... awesome .. Im back in.
Nahum
02-25-2007, 11:03 PM
So then according to your definition here we're all conservatives because we all believe this regardless what doctrinal persuasion we hold to about any number of things.
Absolutely!
To the rest of the world we would be considered right-wing conservative freaks. That would include the majority of the posters on this forum.
I think most of us have the whole "come out from among them and be ye separate" thing down stone-cold.
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:04 PM
Thus TWO Baptisms of the Spirit in reality!!!! Not two fillings but to baptisms.
But LIFE begins at CONCEPTION NOT BIRTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Holy Ghost draws
The Holy Ghost convicts
The Holy Ghost works repentance
Baptism is an operation of the Spirit
BUT the baptism of the Holy Ghost evidenced by tongues is the birth of the Spirit. Sound accompanies a normal birth............. hearest the sound thereof so is EVERYONE that is born of the Spirit of God.
Thus TWO Baptisms of the Spirit in reality!!!! Not two fillings but to baptisms.
But LIFE begins at CONCEPTION NOT BIRTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Holy Ghost draws
The Holy Ghost convicts
The Holy Ghost works repentance
Baptism is an operation of the Spirit
BUT the baptism of the Holy Ghost evidenced by tongues is the birth of the Spirit. Sound accompanies a normal birth............. hearest the sound thereof so is EVERYONE that is born of the Spirit of God.
huh???
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:06 PM
huh???
My answer to your post on the HGB not being the new birth.
Nahum
02-25-2007, 11:07 PM
You're a regular con???
I am increaingly socially liberal, in ideology, as compared to the most conservative among us. But if you were to visit me and my family, you would think we were very old-fashioned by our lifestyle.
Visit this blog www.pastorposter.blogspot.com and you will see the evidence for yourself.
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:07 PM
Thus TWO Baptisms of the Spirit in reality!!!! Not two fillings but to baptisms.
But LIFE begins at CONCEPTION NOT BIRTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Holy Ghost draws
The Holy Ghost convicts
The Holy Ghost works repentance
Baptism is an operation of the Spirit
BUT the baptism of the Holy Ghost evidenced by tongues is the birth of the Spirit. Sound accompanies a normal birth............. hearest the sound thereof so is EVERYONE that is born of the Spirit of God.There are different operations of the Spirit of God. One Spirit but many different operations of the Spirit. I've posted this so many times.
I don't understand why people have such a difficult time understanding that the Spirit of God can touch an individual and indwell them before they're baptized in the Holy Ghost.
Belief and faith that results in spiritual regeneration has to precede a baptism in the Spirit.
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:09 PM
Absolutely!
To the rest of the world we would be considered right-wing conservative freaks. That would include the majority of the posters on this forum.
I think most of us have the whole "come out from among them and be ye separate" thing down stone-cold.I think many of us on this forum would be considered backslid or at least spiritually lukewarm by many of the old timers. ;)
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:10 PM
There are different operations of the Spirit of God. I've posted this so many times. I don't understand why people have such a difficult time understanding that the Spirit of God can touch an individual and indwell them before they're baptized in the Holy Ghost.
Belief and faith that results in spiritual regeneration has to precede a baptism in the Spirit.
The indwelling part is the problem. I think a repented person is like someone who has his lunch with him but a Holy Ghost filled person has eaten his lunch.
A man might get exited because he has his lunch but nothing like having to have eaten your lunch. There is NO regeneration until the HGB only conception. Must have conception before birth.
I am increaingly socially liberal, in ideology, as compared to the most conservative among us. But if you were to visit me and my family, you would think we were very old-fashioned by our lifestyle.
Visit this blog www.pastorposter.blogspot.com and you will see the evidence for yourself.
Little House on the Prairie Relived ...:killinme .... It's kool, PP ...
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:12 PM
I think many of us on this forum would be considered backslid or at least spiritually lukewarm by many of the old timers. ;)
Not doubt we all would. They turned the world upside down I can't even turn myself right side up on some days.
The indwelling part is the problem. I think a repented person is like someone who has his lunch with him but a Holy Ghost filled person has eaten his lunch.
A man might get exited because he has his lunch but nothing like having to have eaten your lunch. There is NO regeneration until the HGB only conception. Must have conception before birth.
One giant leap for mankind....
T
...
BUT the baptism of the Holy Ghost evidenced by tongues is the birth of the Spirit. Sound accompanies a normal birth............. hearest the sound thereof so is EVERYONE that is born of the Spirit of God.
That's similar to what Bro. S.G. Norris taught at A.B.I. He taught that the HGB with tongues was the birth of the Spirit and that unless speaking with tongues (crying)
happened it was a still birth. Verses he quoted were Gal 4:6 "...God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, CRYING, Abba, Father" and Romans 8:15 "...we have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we Cry, Abba, Father."
That's similar to what Bro. S.G. Norris taught at A.B.I. He taught that the HGB with tongues was the birth of the Spirit and that unless speaking with tongues (crying)
happened it was a still birth. Verses he quoted were Gal 4:6 "...God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, CRYING, Abba, Father" and Romans 8:15 "...we have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we Cry, Abba, Father."
Epley ... Haywood's wrong ... now Norris too????
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:16 PM
Not doubt we all would. They turned the world upside down I can't even turn myself right side up on some days.I've been reading Charles Finney's autobiography this week so I'm kind of feeling the affects of that still.
Tell me that we have anywhere near the effect on people or spend anywhere near the amount of time in prayer and live anywhere near the sacrificial lifestyle this man did?
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:17 PM
That's similar to what Bro. S.G. Norris taught at A.B.I. He taught that the HGB with tongues was the birth of the Spirit and that unless speaking with tongues (crying)
happened it was a still birth. Verses he quoted were Gal 4:6 "...God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, CRYING, Abba, Father" and Romans 8:15 "...we have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we Cry, Abba, Father."Well that certainly isn't speaking in tongues.
Nahum
02-25-2007, 11:17 PM
I think many of us on this forum would be considered backslid or at least spiritually lukewarm by many of the old timers. ;)
Maybe, and let's be honest - some are backslid. I take no enjoyment in that sad fact. But I think the real proof of a person's committment is in their desired proximity to the Master.
Standards and traditions fade in importance when the Holy Ghost's refining fire is applied to the flesh and spirit of a saint of Jesus Christ. A lot of these silly issues we discuss become invalid and inconsequential at that point.
The greatest word I could possibly leave you is this: It is important to be separate FROM the world. But even more important to be separate UNTO my Jesus.
I find the closer I get to Him, the less I want my own desires to be met.
No manual or bylaws can accomplish a sovereign imputation of righteousness.
Only me and Jesus can do that.
Maybe, and let's be honest - some are backslid. I take no enjoyment in that sad fact. But I think the real proof of a person's committment is in their desired proximity to the Master.
Standards and traditions fade in importance when the Holy Ghost's refining fire is applied to the flesh and spirit of a saint of Jesus Christ. A lot of these silly issues we discuss become invalid and inconsequential at that point.
The greatest word I could possibly leave you is this: It is important to be separate FROM the world. But even more important to be separate UNTO my Jesus.
I find the closer I get to Him, the less I want my own desires to be met.
No manual or bylaws can accomplish a sovereign imputation of righteousness.
Only me and Jesus can do that.
Wow ...great post .... before you know it you'll be PCI ... :killinme ...
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:19 PM
That's similar to what Bro. S.G. Norris taught at A.B.I. He taught that the HGB with tongues was the birth of the Spirit and that unless speaking with tongues (crying)
happened it was a still birth. Verses he quoted were Gal 4:6 "...God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, CRYING, Abba, Father" and Romans 8:15 "...we have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we Cry, Abba, Father."
Well Elder Norris was correct on THIS anyway.:highfive
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:20 PM
The indwelling part is the problem. I think a repented person is like someone who has his lunch with him but a Holy Ghost filled person has eaten his lunch.
A man might get exited because he has his lunch but nothing like having to have eaten your lunch. There is NO regeneration until the HGB only conception. Must have conception before birth.To me conception is the Word of God preached and planted in the heart and mind and/or the Spirit of God working in a person's life .... i.e. conviction..
That leads to faith and belief that results in repentance .... i.e. spiritual regeneration. Scripture - many of them - testifies and gives credence to this.
Well Elder Norris was correct on THIS anyway.:highfive
Epley buckles???? :bliss
Nahum
02-25-2007, 11:21 PM
Wow ...great post .... before you know it you'll be PCI ... :killinme ...
That will never happen, but I appreciate the humor. :heeheehee
Well that certainly isn't speaking in tongues.
agreed, but Bro. Norris taught that it was, and used the analogy of CRYING and filling the lungs with air at birth to speaking with tongues.
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:21 PM
Wow ...great post .... before you know it you'll be PCI ... :killinme ...
It no longer exist?????????????????????????????? There is NO PCI and hasn't been for 60 years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!
So are you saying if PP continues he will no longer exist like the PCI??:tease :tease
That will never happen, but I appreciate the humor. :heeheehee
There was a time you said that about some standards ... slippery slope :killinme :tease
mizpeh
02-25-2007, 11:22 PM
There are different operations of the Spirit of God. One Spirit but many different operations of the Spirit. I've posted this so many times.
I don't understand why people have such a difficult time understanding that the Spirit of God can touch an individual and indwell them before they're baptized in the Holy Ghost.
Belief and faith that results in spiritual regeneration has to precede a baptism in the Spirit.
Maybe if you could post some scriptures that explain your beliefs it may help some of us to see it. I don't see spiritual regeneration in faith alone in the scriptures.
Faith has to precede spiritual regeneration but where in the Bible do you find spiritual regeneration of be something other than the baptisms of water and Spirit?
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:23 PM
To me conception is the Word of God preached and planted in the heart and mind and/or the Spirit of God working in a person's life .... i.e. conviction..
That leads to faith and belief that results in repentance .... i.e. spiritual regeneration. Scripture - many of them - testifies and gives credence to this.
The seed of the word of God is concieved in repentance and birthed by water and the Spirit.
Nahum
02-25-2007, 11:24 PM
There was a time you said that about some standards ... slippery slope :killinme :tease
Nope, never said that about any standards. And I have not changed the way I live one iota. There's really nothing I want to do that I'm not (other than a big screen :killinme ).
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:25 PM
Good night to all both those who believe the truth and the confused.:tease
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:27 PM
The seed of the word of God is concieved in repentance and birthed by water and the Spirit.Not in my case it wasn't.
Repentance was a DIRECT RESULT of conviction of the Holy Ghost and a knowledge of my sinful condition. I was made spiritually alive by the Holy Ghost before I ever even knew about speaking in tongues in any kind of cognitive way.
Maybe if you could post some scriptures that explain your beliefs it may help some of us to see it. I don't see spiritual regeneration in faith alone in the scriptures.
Faith has to precede spiritual regeneration but where in the Bible do you find spiritual regeneration of be something other than the baptisms of water and Spirit?
I think there is a direct correlation between (Ezekiel 36:24-28) and John 3
It reads:
For I will take you from among the nations,
gather you out of all countries
and bring you into your own Land
Then I will sprinkle clean WATER on you,
and you shall be clean;
I will cleanse you from all your filthiness
and from all your idols.
I will give you a new heart
and put a new SPIRIT within you;
I will take he heart of stone out of your flesh
and give you a heart of FLESH.
I will put My SPIRIT within you
and cause you to walk in My statutes,
and you will keep My judgements and do them.
Then you shall dwell in the Land that I gave to you fathers;
you shall be my people,
and I will be your God.
____________________________
This new birth comes from above ... as it is translated from the Aramaic and Greek .... It was the promise of a new covenant that the prophets had spoken about ... Nicodemus knew of it ... the crowd that gathered at Pentecost knew of it ...
Nope, never said that about any standards. And I have not changed the way I live one iota. There's really nothing I want to do that I'm not (other than a big screen :killinme ).
but you will not teach what you once believed ... and was taught.
crakjak
02-25-2007, 11:29 PM
I would not waste my time and the time of folks I have preached to for going on 40 years if I thought for one second anyone would be saved outside this Acts 2:38 message. Why send missionaries?????????????
So I ask again:
Are Catholics saved???????????
Are Mormons saved??????????????
Are JW's saved?????????
Christian Scientists saved????????????:ranting
No only OUR family who for some reason did not obey the gospel are saved.
Good Baptists-Methodists-Trinitarian(what a misnomer)Pentecostals are saved.
The disciples after hearing the confused folks on this forum would have asked the question "Who then can be lost.":highfive
Crakjak is on the ONLY honest one of the bunch he thinks everyone is going to be saved and y'all are trying to catch up with him. Heaven has enlarged and Hell has shut down.:ty
Maybe if y'all took the time to read the Bible instead of that Calvinist and baptist stuff it might help.:tease
Got to go to church but I will return the Lord willing to fight you Baptist in Pentecostal clothing.:drawguns
Okay, let's see Bro. Steve, do you make any exceptions? Infants? Mentally disabled folks? Heathen that NEVER came close to hearing you preach or anyone else? Folks that are in the process of the three step? ANY EXCEPTIONS AT ALL??:dunno
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:30 PM
Not in my case it wasn't.
Repentance was a DIRECT RESULT of conviction of the Holy Ghost and a knowledge of my sinful condition. I was made spiritually alive by the Holy Ghost before I ever even knew about speaking in tongues in any kind of cognitive way.
There is NO fuss here I certainly believes the Holy Ghost draws and convicts but neither is regeneration or the new birth. Just like flirting is not having a child. But flirting comes first, the Holy Ghost woos us and convicts then the word of God is conceived in our hearts at repentance then the birth.
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:31 PM
Good night to all both those who believe the truth and the confused.:teaseGoodnight Bro. Epley. I know you're not going to change your mind about what you understand to be truth but more than you has had mis-understanding and mis-comprehension of what "truth" is.
Somehow or other the Lord puts up with ALL of us regardless of any misperception and miscomprehension of what the TRUTH is. I'm just thankful for what I do know and I know that it works and I'll not ever give up the wonderful truths I do know.
We had a few people receive the Holy Ghost this week. It wouldn't make much sense for me to tell them that they weren't already born again believers before this event took place (re speaking in tongues) .... that's for sure. :)
Thanks for your participation in this discussion. It always makes for a more interesting one! :)
Nahum
02-25-2007, 11:31 PM
but you will not teach what you once believed ... and was taught.
Partially correct.
I do not believe there is a chronological formula for salvation. Many have received the Holy Ghost without repenting and/or being baptized. I am not a big fan Do this, then do that and this will happen. Just some quick calculations suggest there are at least 6 different combinations to follow the steps to salvation.Repent
Baptized
Holy Ghost
Baptized
Holy Ghost
Repent
Holy Ghost
Repent
Baptized
Baptized
Repent
Holy Ghost
Repent
Holy Ghost
Baptized
Holy Ghost
Baptized
Repent
There may be more combinations, feel free to add to the list.
Another question. Were the Samaritans saved before Peter and John went to Samaria and laid hands on them to receive the Holy Ghost? These are questions that haven't been adequately answered, at least to this inquiring mind.
There are too many problems with the "not born again/saved until you speak in tongues" doctrine for me to be able to accept it. That's the bottom line.
It's not that I don't want to. I mean why wouldn't I want to accept this as being truth if it was? Makes no sense that I wouldn't.
If we preach Acts 2:38 as it's written it's not problematic at all. And we get the same results .... those of us who believe and preach it.
People are receiving the baptism of the Spirit all over the world who've never heard tell of the "three steps to salvation" doctrine. God is true to His promise and His Word to pour out His Spirit on all mankind. Pentecost is the largest religious movement in the world today.
There is NO fuss here I certainly believes the Holy Ghost draws and convicts but neither is regeneration or the new birth. Just like flirting is not having a child. But flirting comes first, the Holy Ghost woos us and convicts then the word of God is conceived in our hearts at repentance then the birth.
Lots of analogies ... no Word.
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:32 PM
Maybe if you could post some scriptures that explain your beliefs it may help some of us to see it. I don't see spiritual regeneration in faith alone in the scriptures.
Faith has to precede spiritual regeneration but where in the Bible do you find spiritual regeneration of be something other than the baptisms of water and Spirit?Mizpeh.....
The main theme in regards to salvation throughout the New Testament including Acts is faith and belief.
Mizpeh.....
The main theme in regards to salvation throughout the New Testament including Acts is faith and belief.
and OT ...
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:34 PM
Okay, let's see Bro. Steve, do you make any exceptions? Infants? Mentally disabled folks? Heathen that NEVER came close to hearing you preach or anyone else? Folks that are in the process of the three step? ANY EXCEPTIONS AT ALL??:dunno
You know I do not believe babies or the mentally disabled go to Hell they can't believe or disbelieve. If the heathen are hungry God will send them a One God Jesus Name preacher just like he did to those in Acts if not they will just have to go to Hell. Folks who have the ability to choose and do not choose to obey the truth then to Hell they go.
crakjak
02-25-2007, 11:35 PM
Some lingering questions.
If one is saved @ repentance, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost is gravy how do you explain the fact many get the Holy Ghost before completing the other two steps?
On the surface it seems like the pci view doesn't reflect a "oneness" theology. Does a pci view differentiate between Jesus and the Holy Spirit? By most writings I've seen on this thread, it doesn't appear to be the case.
How can the pci position reconcile their views with the parable of the ten versions. If the oil represents the Holy Ghost, and five virgins were not able to join the bridegroom in the wedding, how can one say the infilling of the Holy Ghost is not essential to salvation?
The glass half full/half empty analogy doesn't stand up to what Jesus taught about the Holy Ghost. Either you have it or you don't. If one claims the Spirit of Jesus lives in them without receiving the Holy Ghost, than one is espousing something more than a oneness viewpoint.
These are a few lingering questions that doesn't seem to reconcile the validity of salvaion at repentance in my book. I'm no theologian, but I am a thinker, and I play chess. From what I see, the logical implications of the pci view changes does more than than just a salvational formula...
You are simply defining the gospel thru the lens of your belief system, your analogy is just that YOUR analogy.
Steve Epley
02-25-2007, 11:37 PM
You are simply defining the gospel thru the lens of your belief system, your analogy is just that YOUR analogy.
The belief system as in the Book of Acts a very good belief system.:tease
Nahum
02-25-2007, 11:37 PM
I do not believe there is a chronological formula for salvation. Many have received the Holy Ghost without repenting and/or being baptized. I am not a big fan Do this, then do that and this will happen. Just some quick calculations suggest there are at least 6 different combinations to follow the steps to salvation.Repent
Baptized
Holy Ghost
Baptized
Holy Ghost
Repent
Holy Ghost
Repent
Baptized
Baptized
Repent
Holy Ghost
Repent
Holy Ghost
Baptized
Holy Ghost
Baptized
Repent
There may be more combinations, feel free to add to the list.
Another question. Were the Samaritans saved before Peter and John went to Samaria and laid hands on them to receive the Holy Ghost? These are questions that haven't been adequately answered, at least to this inquiring mind.
WHOA NELLIE!!!!!!!
No one has EVER, EVER, EVER received the Holy Ghost without repentance!
Sheeesh!
__________________
commonsense
02-25-2007, 11:38 PM
That's similar to what Bro. S.G. Norris taught at A.B.I. He taught that the HGB with tongues was the birth of the Spirit and that unless speaking with tongues (crying)
happened it was a still birth. Verses he quoted were Gal 4:6 "...God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, CRYING, Abba, Father" and Romans 8:15 "...we have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we Cry, Abba, Father."
I don't recall this line of teaching, but since I'm ancient, my memory may be failing me.
I don't recall this line of teaching, but since I'm ancient, my memory may be failing me.
Who was sleeping in class .. Sam or Commonsense???
I know Sam attempted to answer the question, but I see some flaws in the explaination. Other questions as my tired mind attempts to disemninate the info...
Were the five foolish virgins in pilot light mode when they missed the bridegroom?
TV ... Sam answered your same questions in the PCI beliefs thread ....
Here it goes again ...
1. At salvation/regeneration/justification Jesus comes into a person's heart as the Holy Spirit/Spirit of Jesus Christ/Spirit of the Lord/Holy Ghost. He is Christ in you the hope of glory.
2. Baptism in the Spirit is an immersion/overwhelming/saturation/empowerment experience in the Spirit subsequent to salvation
At salvation, the Holy Spirit comes in and takes over and transforms the individual. This is living water within according to John 4 and drinking from the well of salvation according to Isaiah 12. The HGB (Holy Ghost Baptism) is rivers of living water flowing out according to John 7:37-39.
At salvation the Holy Spirit comes in and is like a pilot light (for you who are old enough to remember that term). At HGB the pilot light becomes a flame, energizing, anointing, and releasing gifts in us.
John chapter 20 was a maternity ward. Acts chapter 2 was a bapsitmal tank.
It has been described this way.
Imagine an empty water glass and a pitcher full of water on a table.
1. Lift the pitcher and fill the glass. Set the pitcher back on the table. The glass is full of water. This represents salvation/regeneration.
2. Pick up the glass full of water, and gently lower it into the pitcher of water until it is sitting on its bottom in the pitcher. Now the glass is not only filled with water, it is also submerged/immersed/saturated in the water. This represents the Holy Ghost baptism.
Without taking the risk of hijacking the thread, it is possible and it has happened. The key is not to make repentenace something it isn't. Plus if repentance was necessary for the Holy Ghost than the HG wouldn't be a free gift. Repentance is a prerequisite for salvation, not the Holy Ghost.
WHOA NELLIE!!!!!!!
No one has EVER, EVER, EVER received the Holy Ghost without repentance!
Sheeesh!
__________________
I know Sam attempted to answer the question, but I see some flaws in the explaination. Other questions as my tired mind attempts to disemninate the info...
Were the five foolish virgins in pilot light mode when they missed the bridegroom?
Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is begotten by God[born of God], and everyone who loves the father loves (also) the one begotten by him.
If a full tank of oil was needed for the virgins, is it not need for the Bride of Christ? Thus a person has to be filled w/ the Holy Ghost to be saved.
Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is begotten by God[born of God], and everyone who loves the father loves (also) the one begotten by him.
Without taking the risk of hijacking the thread, it is possible and it has happened. The key is not to make repentenace something it isn't. Plus if repentance was necessary for the Holy Ghost than the HG wouldn't be a free gift. Repentance is a prerequisite for salvation, not the Holy Ghost.
No one disagrees with you TV.
If a full tank of oil was needed for the virgins, is it not need for the Bride of Christ? Thus a person has to be filled w/ the Holy Ghost to be saved.
Didn't you just finish saying that being filled w/ the Holy Ghost is a free gift???
Felicity
02-25-2007, 11:49 PM
There is NO fuss here I certainly believes the Holy Ghost draws and convicts but neither is regeneration or the new birth. Just like flirting is not having a child. But flirting comes first, the Holy Ghost woos us and convicts then the word of God is conceived in our hearts at repentance then the birth.I never said that the drawing, wooing and conviction of the Holy Ghost constitutes new birth. You have to respond to that appropriately i.e. express faith and belief in Jesus Christ and the atonement and turn to God in repentance and leave a life of sin behind before spiritual regeneration takes place.
There is no way that a person can be radically and spiritually transformed without spiritual new birth and this most often takes place before a person ever speaks in tongues.
But the change wrought by the baptism of the Spirit is profound and equips us for service. Or should anyhow. Sometimes I seriously wonder what a lot of people are receiving at Pentecostal altars because they sure don't effect anything much for the kingdom of God.
Reread post #98....
No one disagrees with you TV.
Truly Blessed
02-25-2007, 11:51 PM
There is NO fuss here I certainly believes the Holy Ghost draws and convicts but neither is regeneration or the new birth. Just like flirting is not having a child. But flirting comes first, the Holy Ghost woos us and convicts then the word of God is conceived in our hearts at repentance then the birth.SE, do you have scripture that says the Word is conceived in our hearts and is simply a seed planted in our hearts at repentance and therefore the believer must go through a gestation period before he can be born again?
J-Roc
02-25-2007, 11:52 PM
I never said that the drawing, wooing and conviction of the Holy Ghost constitutes new birth. You have to respond to that appropriately i.e. express faith and belief in Jesus Christ and the atonement and turn to God in repentance and leave a life of sin behind before spiritual regeneration takes place.
There is no way that a person can be radically and spiritually transformed without spiritual new birth and this most often takes place before a person ever speaks in tongues.
But the change wrought by the baptism of the Spirit is profound and equips us for service. Or should anyhow. Sometimes I seriously wonder what a lot of people are receiving at Pentecostal altars because they sure don't effect anything much for the kingdom of God.
:highfive
SE, do you have scripture that says the Word is conceived in our hearts and is simply a seed planted in our hearts at repentance and therefore the believer must go through a gestation period before he can be born again?
Do analogies count?
Yes, but that doesn't contradict anything. There is no suggestion the oil costs anything. There were 5 foolish virgins who decidied not keep their lamps "full" or immersed.
Didn't you just finish saying that being filled w/ the Holy Ghost is a free gift???
J-Roc
02-25-2007, 11:54 PM
SE, do you have scripture that says the Word is conceived in our hearts and is simply a seed planted in our hearts at repentance and therefore the believer must go through a gestation period before he can be born again?
No he does not...those are just preconceived notions that sound so kewl to him...
I know Sam attempted to answer the question, but I see some flaws in the explaination. Other questions as my tired mind attempts to disemninate the info...
Were the five foolish virgins in pilot light mode when they missed the bridegroom?
Ten virgins/bridesmaids went to meet the bride and groom. These ladies were not the bride. There were not 10 potential brides but only 5 of them actually married the groom. Some of the bridesmaids went to the wedding and some did not. Those who did not were not prepared. I don't think (my opinion only) that oil here represents the Holy Spirit. My pastor taught that the lamp was the word (Ps 119:105) and the oil was faith. Their faith failed them or ran out. I don't know if that is what the parable means or not. There may just be a general lesson here of preparedness or you will miss out on what God is doing. There might not be an interpretation for each detail of the story. The bridesmaids may be Israel and how some of Israel misses out on participating/attending the wedding of Christ and His Bride.
J-Roc
02-25-2007, 11:57 PM
Holy Ghost or hell!
:)
And some proud to "send" them there with their lips....
crakjak
02-25-2007, 11:58 PM
So then according to your definition here we're all conservatives because we all believe this regardless what doctrinal persuasion we hold to about any number of things.
The truth is until we come to understand the inescapable love of God, we will continue to blow about how right we are, and how everyone that is not just like us has missed it.
In contrast to EP's declaration I will make a biblical declaration: SINCE CALVARY NOT ONE SIN HAS BEEN IMPUTED TO ANY HUMAN BEING THAT HAS EVERY LIVED! That's right God does not count your sins against you, BECAUSE EVERY TIME HE LOOKS AT YOU HE IS LOOKING THRU THE SIN CLEANSING BLOOD OF JESUS! JUST LIKE WHEN ADAM SINNED SIN WAS IMPUTED TO EVERY HUMAN BEING THAT WAS EVER BORN. WHEN JESUS BLOOD WAS SHED EVERY SIN WAS PAID FOR, AND YOU WERE MADE RIGHTEOUS.
Romans 4.5 "But to him who DOES NOT WORK but BELIEVES on Him who justifies the UNGODLY, his FAITH is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness APART FROM WORKS.
Steve, it time to read Romans as well as Acts, there is much more to scripture than "apostolic" pet verses. The whole counsel of God, is to seek and to save that which is lost. They are lost to the LIFE of God not to some "hellhole" of human imagination.
Some interesting observations, but if oil always represented the annointing of the Spirit throught out scripture, why would the analogy change for one parable. Is there solid biblical evidence or is this speculation?
Ten virgins/bridesmaids went to meet the bride and groom. These ladies were not the bride. There were not 10 potential brides but only 5 of them actually married the groom. Some of the bridesmaids went to the wedding and some did not. Those who did not were not prepared. I don't think (my opinion only) that oil here represents the Holy Spirit. My pastor taught that the lamp was the word (Ps 119:105) and the oil was faith. Their faith failed them or ran out. I don't know if that is what the parable means or not. There may just be a general lesson here of preparedness or you will miss out on what God is doing. There might not be an interpretation for each detail of the story. The bridesmaids may be Israel and how some of Israel misses out on participating/attending the wedding of Christ and His Bride.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 12:01 AM
I have never viewed this parable as valuable or instructional re the doctrine of salvation.
A person can be backslid whether they have ever received the Holy Ghost and spoken in tongues or not. And that's what this parable is teaching ....... that if you grow cold spiritually and allow the Spirit of God to seep out of your life that you can end up lost.
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 12:02 AM
According to many PAJCers if you don't follow the holiness standards you still ain't saved regardless of whether you've completed Steps 1-3 or not.
You seriously have to wonder sometimes if and when the poor souls ever get to go to heaven because there are so many steps. :depressed
Wow....what troubling news...and this is called the "good news" of the gospel??? Oy vey...
g-nite all... I'm only going to get 4 hours of sleep. I hope you pci'ers don't take my questions as condemning your positions. I'm trying to understand the validity of your views. I do that by asking questions.
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 12:05 AM
I have never viewed this parable as valuable or instructional re the doctrine of salvation.
A person can be backslid whether they have ever received the Holy Ghost and spoken in tongues or not. And that's what this parable is teaching ....... that if you grow cold spiritually and allow the Spirit of God to seep out of your life that you can end up lost.
Wow...everything that comes out of this dear sister's mouth is loaded with wisdom!
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 12:07 AM
The truth is until we come to understand the inescapable love of God, we will continue to blow about how right we are, and how everyone that is not just like us has missed it.
In contrast to EP's declaration I will make a biblical declaration: SINCE CALVARY NOT ONE SIN HAS BEEN IMPUTED TO ANY HUMAN BEING THAT HAS EVERY LIVED! That's right God does not count your sins against you, BECAUSE EVERY TIME HE LOOKS AT YOU HE IS LOOKING THRU THE SIN CLEANSING BLOOD OF JESUS! JUST LIKE WHEN ADAM SINNED SIN WAS IMPUTED TO EVERY HUMAN BEING THAT WAS EVER BORN. WHEN JESUS BLOOD WAS SHED EVERY SIN WAS PAID FOR, AND YOU WERE MADE RIGHTEOUS.
Romans 4.5 "But to him who DOES NOT WORK but BELIEVES on Him who justifies the UNGODLY, his FAITH is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness APART FROM WORKS.
Steve, it time to read Romans as well as Acts, there is much more to scripture than "apostolic" pet verses. The whole counsel of God, is to seek and to save that which is lost. They are lost to the LIFE of God not to some "hellhole" of human imagination.
The book of Romans teaches salvation from the beginning to the end of the book....
Felicity
02-26-2007, 12:07 AM
The truth is until we come to understand the inescapable love of God, we will continue to blow about how right we are, and how everyone that is not just like us has missed it.
In contrast to EP's declaration I will make a biblical declaration: SINCE CALVARY NOT ONE SIN HAS BEEN IMPUTED TO ANY HUMAN BEING THAT HAS EVERY LIVED! That's right God does not count your sins against you, BECAUSE EVERY TIME HE LOOKS AT YOU HE IS LOOKING THRU THE SIN CLEANSING BLOOD OF JESUS! JUST LIKE WHEN ADAM SINNED SIN WAS IMPUTED TO EVERY HUMAN BEING THAT WAS EVER BORN. WHEN JESUS BLOOD WAS SHED EVERY SIN WAS PAID FOR, AND YOU WERE MADE RIGHTEOUS.
Romans 4.5 "But to him who DOES NOT WORK but BELIEVES on Him who justifies the UNGODLY, his FAITH is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness APART FROM WORKS.
Steve, it time to read Romans as well as Acts, there is much more to scripture than "apostolic" pet verses. The whole counsel of God, is to seek and to save that which is lost. They are lost to the LIFE of God not to some "hellhole" of human imagination.I agree in large part with what you say here (if I'm understanding you correctly) and what a wonderful truth it is .... BUT .... at the same time Scripture teaches that we can still sin and even be lost if we don't give proper attention to our spiritual lives.
You have to balance the fact that we're made perfect through the shed blood of Jesus with the fact that we're still in the flesh and can and do sin. The blood of Christ is ever flowing and available for cleansing and we have to avail ourselves of that fairly often.
I don't believe at all in a doctrine of eternal security ..... that a person can't be lost after having been born again. :nah
crakjak
02-26-2007, 12:07 AM
Maybe if you could post some scriptures that explain your beliefs it may help some of us to see it. I don't see spiritual regeneration in faith alone in the scriptures.
Faith has to precede spiritual regeneration but where in the Bible do you find spiritual regeneration of be something other than the baptisms of water and Spirit?
Try read Romans, particularly 4.5-8.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 12:09 AM
g-nite all... I'm only going to get 4 hours of sleep. I hope you pci'ers don't take my questions as condemning your positions. I'm trying to understand the validity of your views. I do that by asking questions. Appreciated your participation in this discussion bro.
Your sleep will be short .... trust it's also sweet!
crakjak
02-26-2007, 12:12 AM
Not in my case it wasn't.
Repentance was a DIRECT RESULT of conviction of the Holy Ghost and a knowledge of my sinful condition. I was made spiritually alive by the Holy Ghost before I ever even knew about speaking in tongues in any kind of cognitive way.
The reason PAJCers have no spiritual regeneration before they speak in tongues is simply the lack of faith due to lack of teaching. Faith comes by hearing the Word, lack of the word limits the growth. I pray in tongues almost everyday, so I am a believer.
crakjak
02-26-2007, 12:15 AM
You know I do not believe babies or the mentally disabled go to Hell they can't believe or disbelieve. If the heathen are hungry God will send them a One God Jesus Name preacher just like he did to those in Acts if not they will just have to go to Hell. Folks who have the ability to choose and do not choose to obey the truth then to Hell they go.
What about the spiritually disabled? There are many of such folks, does God's mercy fail with those that just cannot understand?
Felicity
02-26-2007, 12:18 AM
The reason PAJCers have no spiritual regeneration before they speak in tongues is simply the lack of faith due to lack of teaching. Faith comes by hearing the Word, lack of the word limits the growth. I pray in tongues almost everyday, so I am a believer.Oh my goodness! I so agree with this!
If people are taught that they have no relationship with God and that they're not born again until they speak in tongues then it messes them up royally in my opinion.
They think it's all about getting ready for heaven. So they go to the altar begging and crying and pleading for the Holy Ghost which to most is all wrapped up in tongue talking. They're seeking for tongues more than they are the power and authority and gifting and anointing that comes with the baptism of the Spirit because speaking in tongues is proof that they're "saved" i.e. born again.
Then the majority sit back on their laurels - they're ready now for heaven after all - and become largely unproductive to the church and the kingdom of God.
I may be over generalizing here a bit but I think to a large extent this is true.
This idea that a person isn't spiritually alive or born again until they speak in tongues is very problematic I think.
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 12:25 AM
Are you rapture ready if you are not obedient?
I think it is good to distinguish between willful disobedience or recalcitrant behavior toward the Word of God and the standard disobedient sinning we do daily in our lives...I mean, a wrong or evil thought toward another is sin and requires that we look to the blood of Christ that covers us...for none of us is righteous, no not even one (not even Epley) and we count on and trust in the righteousness of Jesus Christ who lived a perfect life and is our sacrificial lamb...for he is our mediator!
A note to Jesus: :ty
So, back to the question: are you rapture ready if you are not obedient? I'll let you answer this by thought process: Do you think when Jesus comes in the clouds that every single person alive that is part of the Church of God will be in uniform and synchronized "purity" having not disobeyed or sinned in some form or another...do you think that at the twinkling of an eye all the millions of believers that are saved will be 100% holy and separate from an act of sin? And furthermore, do you think that Epley will be lost because one second before the rapture he called his brother "Raca" and didn't get a chance to apologize...will he lose out on eternity on that technicality? Is there anything in the Word of God that leads you to believe he operates under these technicalities....or do we have a better hope? do we have a salvation that does not lead us to live in fear of the flames? You decide for yourself what you wish to believe.... I have decided to believe that I have life in Jesus Christ and I wont go back to my old life....
Felicity
02-26-2007, 12:27 AM
Wow...everything that comes out of this dear sister's mouth is loaded with wisdom!Oh my! Thank you but many would surely disagree with you! :heeheehee
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 12:30 AM
Oh my goodness! I so agree with this!
If people are taught that they have no relationship with God and that they're not born again until they speak in tongues then it messes them up royally in my opinion.
They think it's all about getting ready for heaven. So they go to the altar begging and crying and pleading for the Holy Ghost which to most is all wrapped up in tongue talking. They're seeking for tongues more than they are the power and authority and gifting and anointing that comes with the baptism of the Spirit because speaking in tongues is proof that they're "saved" i.e. born again.
Then the majority sit back on their laurels - they're ready now for heaven after all - and become largely unproductive to the church and the kingdom of God.
I may be over generalizing here a bit but I think to a large extent this is true.
This idea that a person isn't spiritually alive or born again until they speak in tongues is very problematic I think.
Felicity, I lived this so I can attest that this is true...that message is anything but a Good News message...
crakjak
02-26-2007, 12:30 AM
I agree in large part with what you say here (if I'm understanding you correctly) and what a wonderful truth it is .... BUT .... at the same time Scripture teaches that we can still sin and even be lost if we don't give proper attention to our spiritual lives.
You have to balance the fact that we're made perfect through the shed blood of Jesus with the fact that we're still in the flesh and can and do sin. The blood of Christ is ever flowing and available for cleansing and we have to avail ourselves of that fairly often.
I don't believe at all in a doctrine of eternal security ..... that a person can't be lost after having been born again. :nah
I appreicate very much your heart for God and the Word, your posts add clarity.
Felicty, we focus way too much on what we all do, and way too little on the power of what Jesus accomplished. NOT one person on this forum has taken up to refute the fact: that just as Adam's sin MADE all humans sinners, JESUS blood has made all righteous.
If this forum would do an unbaised look at all the scripture that declares this so, then God's ultimate intentions would be made very clear. What a sad position to hold that the vast majority of God's created children will send eternity in "endless torment".
Truth is I don't believe one person on this forum actually believes that, in spite of what is espoused.
Truly Blessed
02-26-2007, 12:32 AM
If you want to be safe I recommend that you accept the explanation that Jesus gave when Nicodemus asked in John 3:9 "How can these things be?" referring to the statements by Jesus that he must be born again. The only thing Jesus told him in response was a message telling him that whosoever would BELIEVE on Him would not perish but have eternal life. John apparently understood this to be what Jesus was saying for he stated in 1John 5:1 that whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God. Of course we know that no one can say this apart from the Spirit opening their understanding. (1Cor.12:3)
How can someone receive the LIVING WORD and not be made alive? How can someone who is dead in trespasses and sins which have not yet been forgiven (according to PAJC doctrine) obey what his sinful flesh opposes? Paul taught in 1Cor.2:14, "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
Jesus is our example. Born of the Spirit, water baptized to identify with the Father and fulfill all righteousness through our obedience, and then anointed with the Holy Ghost empowering us to exercise the authority we need to do the work of the Kingdom of God.
This conception teaching does not explain how a person who has come in contact with the message of the cross which is the POWER of God unto salvation to them who BELIEVE suddenly begins acting like a living, breathing person who has passed from death unto life, and from darkness into the light through the Word of God.
crakjak
02-26-2007, 12:39 AM
If you want to be safe I recommend that you accept the explanation that Jesus gave when Nicodemus asked in John 3:9 "How can these things be?" referring to the statements by Jesus that he must be born again. The only thing Jesus told him in response was a message telling him that whosoever would BELIEVE on Him would not perish but have eternal life. John apparently understood this to be what Jesus was saying for he stated in 1John 5:1 that whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God. Of course we know that no one can say this apart from the Spirit opening their understanding. (1Cor.12:3)
How can someone receive the LIVING WORD and not be made alive? How can someone who is dead in trespasses and sins which have not yet been forgiven (according to PAJC doctrine) obey what his sinful flesh opposes? Paul taught in 1Cor.2:14, "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
Jesus is our example. Born of the Spirit, water baptized to identify with the Father and fulfill all righteousness through our obedience, and then anointed with the Holy Ghost empowering us to exercise the authority we need to do the work of the Kingdom of God.
This conception teaching does not explain how a person who has come in contact with the message of the cross which is the POWER of God unto salvation to them who BELIEVE suddenly begins acting like a living, breathing person who has passed from death unto life, and from darkness into the light through the Word of God.
Well said, this is so true. I have seen this over and over, and it changed my view. (underlined bolded) Goodnight all!
Truly Blessed
02-26-2007, 12:51 AM
The PAJC salvation doctrine takes what the Bible calls a gift of the Holy Ghost which believers get to receive from God as empowerment and make it something we must receive to experience salvation. It places the focus on the receiver instead of on Christ the baptizer. Yet scripture teaches the very role of the Spirit is to glorify Jesus Christ. PAJC teaching elevates the Holy Ghost as our salvation whereas the Bible teaches Jesus Christ is our salvation and the Holy Ghost as His servant to bring us to the salvation that is by faith in Christ alone.
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 01:11 AM
The PAJC salvation doctrine takes what the Bible calls a gift of the Holy Ghost which believers get to receive from God as empowerment and make it something we must receive to experience salvation. It places the focus on the receiver instead of on Christ the baptizer. Yet scripture teaches the very role of the Spirit is to glorify Jesus Christ. PAJC teaching elevates the Holy Ghost as our salvation whereas the Bible teaches Jesus Christ is our salvation and the Holy Ghost as His servant to bring us to the salvation that is by faith in Christ alone.
:highfive
philjones
02-26-2007, 06:35 AM
so I was filled and baptized by His Holy Spirit while still dirty w/ sin???
Nope, while still carrying the weight of forgiven sin! :)
Nope, while still carrying the weight of forgiven sin! :)
Not biblical ... sorry.
philjones
02-26-2007, 07:31 AM
Not biblical ... sorry.
From where you now stand... It is totally Biblical from where I stand.
Isn't it amazing what a difference perspective makes?:tease
Rhoni
02-26-2007, 07:40 AM
The PAJC salvation doctrine takes what the Bible calls a gift of the Holy Ghost which believers get to receive from God as empowerment and make it something we must receive to experience salvation. It places the focus on the receiver instead of on Christ the baptizer. Yet scripture teaches the very role of the Spirit is to glorify Jesus Christ. PAJC teaching elevates the Holy Ghost as our salvation whereas the Bible teaches Jesus Christ is our salvation and the Holy Ghost as His servant to bring us to the salvation that is by faith in Christ alone.
I was always curious trying to understand why the Holy Ghost is referred to as a gift, and then taught it is expedient to salvation. I would think a gift is something that is given after an act of obedience or as a freewill gift one would give just because they could? Just thinking out loud.
Blessings, Rhoni
philjones
02-26-2007, 08:09 AM
I was always curious trying to understand why the Holy Ghost is referred to as a gift, and then taught it is expedient to salvation. I would think a gift is something that is given after an act of obedience or as a freewill gift one would give just because they could? Just thinking out loud.
Blessings, Rhoni
Sis. Rhoni,
Wasn't it ALL given (made available) upon the death, burial, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ? Are we not through faith and obedience entering into the full gift of grace made available by the gospel?
It is my opinion that nothing is being given each time someone receives the "gift of the Holy Ghost", rather that the penitent is entering into the grace already given!
What do you think?
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
so I was filled and baptized by His Holy Spirit while still dirty w/ sin?
Originally Posted by Phil Jones
Nope, while still carrying the weight of forgiven sin!
______________
My question...
How do we answer those who would ask us why God would forgive us at repentance but keep our sins in a 'holding' place so to speak, allowing us to "carry the weight of forgiven sin" until they are washed away/remitted in baptism?!
What is the correct explanation we are to give?!
Originally Posted by Felicity
But you see boys .... this is the thing ....... we all preach and teach Acts 2:38 and we all get the same results!!
Originally Posted by Barb
Before I turn in, let me say that this is a good point that no one seemed to jump on, and it leads me to ask...
Remembering folks that I am of the 'PAJC' view, if we all get the same results, is it that important at what point salvation takes place?! Are we reaching too hard for the differences rather than building on that which we agree?!
Originally Posted by Sam
Wasn't that the idea when two groups merged in 1945 and agreed to disagree around a "fundamental doctrine statement" and allowed both views to be presented in their new magazine called "The Pentecostal Herald"?
___________________________________
Thought I'd bump these posts and see if anyone else cares to chime in with a response...I like Bro. Sam's point...what say ye?!
Still no response...am I being ignored?!:(
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 08:51 AM
SE, do you have scripture that says the Word is conceived in our hearts and is simply a seed planted in our hearts at repentance and therefore the believer must go through a gestation period before he can be born again?
It was Jesus who used natural birth as an analogy to spiritual birth not I.
Using the natural compared to the spiritual-like the tabernacle plan.
altar-laver-door!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 08:54 AM
The PAJC salvation doctrine takes what the Bible calls a gift of the Holy Ghost which believers get to receive from God as empowerment and make it something we must receive to experience salvation. It places the focus on the receiver instead of on Christ the baptizer. Yet scripture teaches the very role of the Spirit is to glorify Jesus Christ. PAJC teaching elevates the Holy Ghost as our salvation whereas the Bible teaches Jesus Christ is our salvation and the Holy Ghost as His servant to bring us to the salvation that is by faith in Christ alone.
So Jesus is NOT the Holy Ghost??????????????? Holy Ghost NOT the Spirit of Jesus?????????????????????? Holy Ghost servant of Jesus???????????
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 08:58 AM
Much has been made as Holy Ghost is a gift thus not essential is Eternal Life essential it is a gift. Justification is a gift does one recieve it without faith and repentance. Thus your gift has a requirement via repentance but according to your "logic" on the gift of the Holy Ghost if a person does anything it is NOT a gift!!!!!!!!!!!
GIVE'M ENOUGH ROPE THEY ALWAYS HANG THEMSELVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!:highfive :highfive
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 09:01 AM
Still no response...am I being ignored?!:(
Barb the penitent that heard the PCI preacher or the PAJC and obeyed Acts 2:38 recieved the same idential experience the new birth whether they understood it or not. How those who claim to be the same as the PCI men of the past don't have the same emphasis they stress faith alone NOT even true repentance thus they do not recieve the same experience. So they are not the same.
Barb the penitent that heard the PCI preacher or the PAJC and obeyed Acts 2:38 recieved the same idential experience the new birth whether they understood it or not. How those who claim to be the same as the PCI men of the past don't have the same emphasis they stress faith alone NOT even true repentance thus they do not recieve the same experience. So they are not the same.
Respectfully that is not the question I asked, Elder E...does it matter in the grand scheme of things at what point someone says that salvation has taken place if we all get the same results and Acts 2:38 is fulfilled?!
And again, I know no one HERE who stresses 'faith alone'...
Fireside
02-26-2007, 09:19 AM
Respectfully that is not the question I asked, Elder E...does it matter in the grand scheme of things at what point someone says that salvation has taken place if we all get the same results and Acts 2:38 is fulfilled?!
And again, I know no one HERE who stresses 'faith alone'...
Barb, truth matters.
Pragmatism will only take you so far when it comes to the things of God.
The drift evidenced by many of the PCI persuasion reveals why it is important to keep things in order.
Christ Church in Nashville is a prime example.
Over time, what is not deemed essential becomes marginalized.
They do not stress the importance of Baptism in Jesus Name or receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost as they once did.
The first generation PCI believers were thrilled with their new revelation and the experience that came with it.
But because they did not see it as essential, many of their descendants do not emphasize it.
Truth always matters.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 09:21 AM
Respectfully that is not the question I asked, Elder E...does it matter in the grand scheme of things at what point someone says that salvation has taken place if we all get the same results and Acts 2:38 is fulfilled?!
And again, I know no one HERE who stresses 'faith alone'...
Salvation is experiencing the death-burial-resurrection through faith. I have NEVER said it was three steps that has been enjoined on us but rather three componants that agree in one birth blood-water-Spirit!!!!!!! Men in the NT recieved the Spirit before baptism but were immediately baptized. Thus all three cpmponants are present.
Barb, truth matters.
Pragmatism will only take you so far when it comes to the things of God.
The drift evidenced by many of the PCI persuasion reveals why it is important to keep things in order.
Christ Church in Nashville is a prime example.
Over time, what is not deemed essential becomes marginalized.
They do not stress the importance of Baptism in Jesus Name or receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost as they once did.
The first generation PCI believers were thrilled with their new revelation and the experience that came with it.
But because they did not see it as essential, many of their descendants do not emphasize it.
Truth always matters.
Coonskinner, I love ya dearly, but this is not an answer. I understand truth matters, but does it matter at what point salvation takes place if we have all obeyed Acts 2:38?!
Respectfully...
Salvation is experiencing the death-burial-resurrection through faith. I have NEVER said it was three steps that has been enjoined on us but rather three componants that agree in one birth blood-water-Spirit!!!!!!! Men in the NT recieved the Spirit before baptism but were immediately baptized. Thus all three cpmponants are present.
I understand this...*sigh*
Fireside
02-26-2007, 09:26 AM
Coonskinner, I love ya dearly, but this is not an answer. I understand truth matters, but does it matter at what point salvation takes place if we have all obeyed Acts 2:38?!
Respectfully...
Re-read the post, Barb.
I explained why it matters.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 09:28 AM
Barb, truth matters.
Pragmatism will only take you so far when it comes to the things of God.
The drift evidenced by many of the PCI persuasion reveals why it is important to keep things in order.
Christ Church in Nashville is a prime example.
Over time, what is not deemed essential becomes marginalized.
They do not stress the importance of Baptism in Jesus Name or receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost as they once did.
The first generation PCI believers were thrilled with their new revelation and the experience that came with it.
But because they did not see it as essential, many of their descendants do not emphasize it.
Truth always matters.
Very True.
Re-read the post, Barb.
I explained why it matters.
I must have a learning problem...I did read it, CS...several times. I am not referring to CC...*sigh*
Thank you anyway for responding, CS...
Respectfully that is not the question I asked, Elder E...does it matter in the grand scheme of things at what point someone says that salvation has taken place if we all get the same results and Acts 2:38 is fulfilled?!
And again, I know no one HERE who stresses 'faith alone'...
Barb keep reminding him ..... repitition is the best teacher.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 09:34 AM
I must have a learning problem...I did read it, CS...several times. I am not referring to CC...*sigh*
Thank you anyway for responding, CS...
Barb CC is NOT an isolated situation have you read what is being posted here much of it is the same. They no more think baptism and HGB is any more important than the Baptist.
I can name church after church that has roots and those churches NO longer stress baptism or HGB in any way. The pray the sinner's prayer and join the church just like the denominal world and there is NO change of lifestyle whatsoever. Just like the rest of the religious world. Thus belief matters.
It was Jesus who used natural birth as an analogy to spiritual birth not I.
Using the natural compared to the spiritual-like the tabernacle plan.
altar-laver-door!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is the laver supposed to represent baptism ... Elder???
Barb CC is NOT an isolated situation have you read what is being posted here much of it is the same. They no more think baptism and HGB is any more important than the Baptist.
I can name church after church that has roots and those churches NO longer stress baptism or HGB in any way. The pray the sinner's prayer and join the church just like the denominal world and there is NO change of lifestyle whatsoever. Just like the rest of the religious world. Thus belief matters.
Yes, I have read the posts here, and some of these churches see more Spirit filled and baptized than my own church.
So where are they NOT placing the importance?!
As for belief, it certainly DOES matter...we can't even come to God unless we believe He is. But I will stand by my statements till I kick that I know no one here who says that faith alone is enough.
Yes, I have read the posts here, and some of these churches see more Spirit filled and baptized than my own church.
So where are they NOT placing the importance?!
As for belief, it certainly DOES matter...we can't even come to God unless we believe He is. But I will stand by my statements till I kick that I know no one here who says that faith alone is enough.
Say it one more time .....:beatdeadhorse
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 09:43 AM
Much has been made as Holy Ghost is a gift thus not essential is Eternal Life essential it is a gift. Justification is a gift does one recieve it without faith and repentance. Thus your gift has a requirement via repentance but according to your "logic" on the gift of the Holy Ghost if a person does anything it is NOT a gift!!!!!!!!!!!
GIVE'M ENOUGH ROPE THEY ALWAYS HANG THEMSELVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!:highfive :highfive
- Eternal life is a gift and given because of what Jesus did
- Justification is a gift and is received by God's grace through faith, and not by works so that nobody (not even Epley) can boast
- Speaking in tongues is a gift and does not take place by any lingual calisthenics on your part...you can't twist God's arm (unless you think you are above Him)
- Lastly, when we talk about "free gift" it simply means that it is unearned (i.e. without merit, undeserving, unworthy). It is not implied that in receiving this gift, it is void of any form of action whether mental or physical on our part...it just means we are not righteous enough to receive any of His gifts.
:highfive :highfive
Say it one more time .....:beatdeadhorse
No more, Daniel...I am bowing out of all of these discussions before my questions become something else in the mind of the faithful.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 09:45 AM
Is the laver supposed to represent baptism ... Elder???
It is the initial representation of course like most types there are more fulfillments than the first but it is the first they washed withal!!!!!!!!!!!
Blood-water-oil-fire fulfilled the worshipper's journey to leave out any of those elements would disannul the the journey. Death would be the outcome of not having ONE element!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
More faulty theology ... I could quote Gillespie but according to you he's an apostate ... so here's Daniel Seagraves on the myth of equating the laver to baptism.
The author recognizes that "the Bible itself is the source of doctrinal typology" and that "it is imperative to avoid speculative and subjective interpretations concerning baptismal typology." He seems, however, not to have heeded his own advice on this matter. While the Tabernacle of old was definitely a figure (Greek parabole) (Hebrews 9:9), no New Testament verse seeks to interpret the meaning of each item associated with Tabernacle worship. By necessity, then, much of the interpretation regarding the Tabernacle is speculative at best. What the New Testament does clearly indicate is that the essential purpose of the Tabernacle worship, as a whole, was to prefigure the coming Christ and His role as the final and only efficacious sacrifice (Hebrews 9:8-14, 23-26; 10:1-21; Colossians 2:16-17; Galatians 3:24).
There are several reasons why the laver seems not to be an adequate type of water baptism:
1. Contrary to the author's assumption that the laver was "scheduled after the initial approach and sacrifice at the brazen altar and before entering the Holy Place," the laver was the first destination of the priest, even before approaching the brazen altar (Exodus 30:20; 40:12, 30-32). If the brazen altar represents repentance and the laver water baptism, this would place baptism before repentance in typology.
2. While the New Testament does assign specific typological meaning to certain Old Testament events and practices, it nowhere specifies the laver as a type of water baptism.
3. The laver was not a place of immersion, but mere washing.
4. The priests had to wash at the laver repeatedly each time they planned to minister. Water baptism is a one-time event.
If the laver is typical of any New Testament truth, it would seem more appropriate to consider it to be typical of the daily washing of believers by the Word of God, as seen in Ephesians 5:26: "That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word."
The laver would seem an appropriate symbol of this for the following reasons:
1. It was covered with mirrors, reflecting the approaching priest's image. The New Testament compares the Word of God to a mirror in which men behold themselves (James 1:23).
2. The washing at the laver was a continual thing; the washing of water by the Word is a continuing process.
Nahum
02-26-2007, 09:54 AM
Coonskinner, I love ya dearly, but this is not an answer. I understand truth matters, but does it matter at what point salvation takes place if we have all obeyed Acts 2:38?!
Respectfully...
I think this is all a misrepresentation of facts.
Those of the so-called PCI camp view Acts 2:38 completely different than I, and traditional Apostolics, do. It matters because it seems there is an attempt to place less and less importance on the NECESSITY of water baptism and the Holy Ghost baptism. I mean, my goodness people, some of you have even went off the deep end and claimed repentance is not necessary to receive the Spirit of God! :beatdeadhorse
The big dfference I see is that some of us believe obedience to Acts 2:38 is necessary for salvation. Others believe it is just a second blessing that would be terrific to receive if you ever get around to it. Those folks SAY they preach Acts 2:38, but I don't believe it.
The reason I don't believe it is because of the vitriol spewn on anyone who says this is THE way to respond to the gospel. If you loved the message, you wouldn't find ways to rip and tear it.
Let's not pussy-foot around the issue here. Some of you no longer believe it is necessary to be baptized in Jesus name, and receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Some don't even believe repentance is a requirement. This. my dear misguided friends, is the very definition of backslid. What is even worse is that you lead others into this heresy.
Now, go ahead and crucify me if you can't handle what I just said.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 09:54 AM
Barb the penitent that heard the PCI preacher or the PAJC and obeyed Acts 2:38 recieved the same idential experience the new birth whether they understood it or not. How those who claim to be the same as the PCI men of the past don't have the same emphasis they stress faith alone NOT even true repentance thus they do not recieve the same experience. So they are not the same.Phooey!
Now, go ahead and crucify me if you can't handle what I just said.
Can someone please pass a hammer???? :killinme :tease
Nahum
02-26-2007, 09:57 AM
If you all believe Acts 2:38 so fervently, why do you continually rip and tear at it? It is as if you despise it. There have been many supposedly humorous remarks made against an emphasis on this response to the gospel, on this thread and others, in the last few days.
Fireside
02-26-2007, 09:59 AM
If you all believe Acts 2:38 so fervently, why do you continually rip and tear at it? It is as if you despise it. There have been many supposedly humorous remarks made against an emphasis on this response to the gospel, on this thread and others, in the last few days.
The mockery tells the tale, Brother.
You have hit the nail on the head.
Nahum
02-26-2007, 09:59 AM
I think this is all a misrepresentation of facts.
Those of the so-called PCI camp view Acts 2:38 completely different than I, and traditional Apostolics, do. It matters because it seems there is an attempt to place less and less importance on the NECESSITY of water baptism and the Holy Ghost baptism. I mean, my goodness people, some of you have even went off the deep end and claimed repentance is not necessary to receive the Spirit of God! :beatdeadhorse
The big dfference I see is that some of us believe obedience to Acts 2:38 is necessary for salvation. Others believe it is just a second blessing that would be terrific to receive if you ever get around to it. Those folks SAY they preach Acts 2:38, but I don't believe it.
The reason I don't believe it is because of the vitriol spewn on anyone who says this is THE way to respond to the gospel. If you loved the message, you wouldn't find ways to rip and tear it.
Let's not pussy-foot around the issue here. Some of you no longer believe it is necessary to be baptized in Jesus name, and receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Some don't even believe repentance is a requirement. This. my dear misguided friends, is the very definition of backslid. What is even worse is that you lead others into this heresy.
Now, go ahead and crucify me if you can't handle what I just said.
bump
I would like a response to this post.
The mockery tells the tale, Brother.
You have hit the nail on the head.
Backslider, slack jawed comprimiser , pathetic , apostate, ??? :tease :killinme
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:00 AM
More faulty theology ... I could quote Gillespie but according to you he's an apostate ... so here's Daniel Seagraves on the myth of equating the laver to baptism.
The author recognizes that "the Bible itself is the source of doctrinal typology" and that "it is imperative to avoid speculative and subjective interpretations concerning baptismal typology." He seems, however, not to have heeded his own advice on this matter. While the Tabernacle of old was definitely a figure (Greek parabole) (Hebrews 9:9), no New Testament verse seeks to interpret the meaning of each item associated with Tabernacle worship. By necessity, then, much of the interpretation regarding the Tabernacle is speculative at best. What the New Testament does clearly indicate is that the essential purpose of the Tabernacle worship, as a whole, was to prefigure the coming Christ and His role as the final and only efficacious sacrifice (Hebrews 9:8-14, 23-26; 10:1-21; Colossians 2:16-17; Galatians 3:24).
There are several reasons why the laver seems not to be an adequate type of water baptism:
1. Contrary to the author's assumption that the laver was "scheduled after the initial approach and sacrifice at the brazen altar and before entering the Holy Place," the laver was the first destination of the priest, even before approaching the brazen altar (Exodus 30:20; 40:12, 30-32). If the brazen altar represents repentance and the laver water baptism, this would place baptism before repentance in typology.
2. While the New Testament does assign specific typological meaning to certain Old Testament events and practices, it nowhere specifies the laver as a type of water baptism.
3. The laver was not a place of immersion, but mere washing.
4. The priests had to wash at the laver repeatedly each time they planned to minister. Water baptism is a one-time event.
If the laver is typical of any New Testament truth, it would seem more appropriate to consider it to be typical of the daily washing of believers by the Word of God, as seen in Ephesians 5:26: "That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word."
The laver would seem an appropriate symbol of this for the following reasons:
1. It was covered with mirrors, reflecting the approaching priest's image. The New Testament compares the Word of God to a mirror in which men behold themselves (James 1:23).
2. The washing at the laver was a continual thing; the washing of water by the Word is a continuing process.
I do not agree with Elder Seagraves on this I have read this before MANY other Pentecostal scholars have agreed with me.
However I will acknowledge FIRSTLY every act or piece of furniture first is fulfilled in Christ and his atoning work then that work as we experience it in our personal lives.
The priest did wash WITHAL firstly.
The placement is important since it was made after the PATTERN!
Yes beyond our inital washing there is a continual washing our hands-feet what we do and where we go our actions and walk are cleansed daily through the word by his blood.
Sometimes trying somewhat to accomodate the OUTSIDE theological world some men feel pressured I think the same of Reeves. Not castigating them but i am not obliged to give an inch to the religious world to placate them.
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:00 AM
I think this is all a misrepresentation of facts.
Those of the so-called PCI camp view Acts 2:38 completely different than I, and traditional Apostolics, do. It matters because it seems there is an attempt to place less and less importance on the NECESSITY of water baptism and the Holy Ghost baptism. I mean, my goodness people, some of you have even went off the deep end and claimed repentance is not necessary to receive the Spirit of God! :beatdeadhorse
The big dfference I see is that some of us believe obedience to Acts 2:38 is necessary for salvation. Others believe it is just a second blessing that would be terrific to receive if you ever get around to it. Those folks SAY they preach Acts 2:38, but I don't believe it.
The reason I don't believe it is because of the vitriol spewn on anyone who says this is THE way to respond to the gospel. If you loved the message, you wouldn't find ways to rip and tear it.
Let's not pussy-foot around the issue here. Some of you no longer believe it is necessary to be baptized in Jesus name, and receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Some don't even believe repentance is a requirement. This. my dear misguided friends, is the very definition of backslid. What is even worse is that you lead others into this heresy.
Now, go ahead and crucify me if you can't handle what I just said.
Amazing how this place cleared out so suddenly - isn't it?
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:01 AM
Barb CC is NOT an isolated situation have you read what is being posted here much of it is the same. They no more think baptism and HGB is any more important than the Baptist.
I can name church after church that has roots and those churches NO longer stress baptism or HGB in any way. The pray the sinner's prayer and join the church just like the denominal world and there is NO change of lifestyle whatsoever. Just like the rest of the religious world. Thus belief matters.This has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.
Let's not forget that many of the churches who do not teach your interpretation of what doctrinal truth is are full of people who have received the Holy Ghost baptism. People are receiving this all over the world. It doesn't belong to one group of apostolics or representative of a certain doctrinal persuasion.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:01 AM
Amazing how this place cleared out so suddenly - isn't it?Oh really? Hehe. :)
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:01 AM
If you all believe Acts 2:38 so fervently, why do you continually rip and tear at it? It is as if you despise it. There have been many supposedly humorous remarks made against an emphasis on this response to the gospel, on this thread and others, in the last few days.
Now there is a point.:highfive
bump
I would like a response to this post.
A smoke screen ... not a real question ... just a re-direction ... No one has shredded Acts 2:38 ... just the unbiblical and exegetical distortion some have twisted it to mean.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:04 AM
This has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.
Let's not forget that many of the churches who do not teach your interpretation of what doctrinal truth is are full of people who have received the Holy Ghost baptism. People are receiving this all over the world. It doesn't belong to one group of apostolics or representative of a certain doctrinal persuasion.
Anyone who genuinely recieves the Spirit I rejoice if they did if they follow it then it will lead them to the truth if not:
1. their experience was not geniune
2. the experience was genuine but they ceased to follow it.
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:05 AM
This has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.
Let's not forget that many of the churches who do not teach your interpretation of what doctrinal truth is are full of people who have received the Holy Ghost baptism. People are receiving this all over the world. It doesn't belong to one group of apostolics or representative of a certain doctrinal persuasion.
Hogwash!
They may have received the Holy Ghost, but they reject His name. I suppose the name no longer matters either?
Tell me friend, what doctrinal absolutes does the so-called "PCI" group on this thread still adhere to in 2007?
Hogwash!
They may have received the Holy Ghost, but they reject His name. I suppose the name no longer matters either?
Tell me friend, what doctrinal absolutes does the so-called "PCI" group on this thread still adhere to in 2007?
The truth police are out today ... :drawguns
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:06 AM
A smoke screen ... not a real question ... just a re-direction ... No one has shredded Acts 2:38 ... just the unbiblical and exegetical distortion some have twisted it to mean.
Daniel, that is a load of bull, and you well know it.
There is an attempt to delegitimize Acts 2:38 as the proper response to the gospel. Don't insult my intellegence by impling otherwise.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:08 AM
The truth police are out today ... :drawguns
That is good because error is also out today.:tease :tease
That God for the police!!!!!!!!!!!!!:highfive :bliss
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:09 AM
He is speaking of those who claim the HGB but reject baptism in Jesus Name.
Daniel, that is a load of bull, and you well know it.
There is an attempt to delegitimize Acts 2:38 as the proper response to the gospel. Don't insult my intellegence by impling otherwise.
Load her up boyz ... Acts 2:38 is part of the response to the gospel ... What has insulted your intelligence is to see that there are God-fearing, heaven-bound Christians other than 'THE SELECT FEW' ... we've been around our whole lives ... it can be a shock ... was for me.
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:09 AM
How can one reject the Name if they have been baptized in the Name?!
Did you actually read Felicity's post and my subsequent response?
Please do so. You may find a need to redirect the question.
The point is, I don't believe baptism is being given the levelof imprtance it once was by some on this thread. It is apparently not NECESSARY. I am left with the impression that when a thing becomes unnecessary we sooncast off the bonds of its unnecessariness. After all, if its unnecessary, isn't it legalistic?
That is good because error is also out today.:tease :tease
That God for the police!!!!!!!!!!!!!:highfive :bliss
Sir, yes, sir. It must be burndensome to think you are the police ...
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:11 AM
Load her up boyz ... Acts 2:38 is part of the response to the gospel ... What has insulted your intelligence is to see that there are God-fearing, heaven-bound Christians other than 'THE SELECT FEW' ... we've been around our whole lives ... it can be a shock ... was for me.
You just did it again. You twisted your response to reflect a lack of importance on Acts 2:38.
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:11 AM
Hogwash!
They may have received the Holy Ghost, but they reject His name. I suppose the name no longer matters either?
Tell me friend, what doctrinal absolutes does the so-called "PCI" group on this thread still adhere to in 2007?
Reject his name? who in this forum has rejected his authority?
DOCTRINAL ABSOLUTE: Jesus' shed blood on the cross washes away my sin as I believe and trust in his work for me and his righteousness sets me free.
:bliss
There ya go...
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:12 AM
Can't help but smile at some of the statements I read. :) :) :)
I can tell you this........ those of you who like to hammer on the point that the PCIers of today ain't the same as the ones back at the time of the merger.....
Neither are many of the PAJCers!
And the fact is you have MANY people who believe no differently than I who are standing in your pulpits today (in UPCI particularly) who are preaching with the exact same emphasis we do and with the same emphasis that the old timers did and getting the same results!
People around the world who are not preaching a "tongues or hell" doctrine are praying scores of people through to the Holy Ghost baptism with the initial sign of speaking in tongues.
You don't have ownership of this thing. It was prophesied and promised in Acts .... "to as many as the Lord shall call". And God lives up to and fulfills all his promises.
Owning a water/Spirit doctrine in no way gives you any leverage or favour with God nor does it ensure you're going to have more success at ushering people into the kingdom of God than anyone else. You might think it would be the opposite, but the fact is, it is not. And that's that. :)
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:12 AM
Sir, yes, sir. It must be burndensome to think you are the police ...
Hard job but someone has to do it.:highfive I am set for the defence of the gospel.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:14 AM
Did you actually read Felicity's post and my subsequent response?
Please do so. You may find a need to redirect the question.
The point is, I don't believe baptism is being given the levelof imprtance it once was by some on this thread. It is apparently not NECESSARY. I am left with the impression that when a thing becomes unnecessary we sooncast off the bonds of its unnecessariness. After all, if its unnecessary, isn't it legalistic?Where have you gotten this impression?
We have always and still preach baptism in Jesus name STRONG!!! Every preacher I know personally who has left the UPC still believes in the necessity of baptism and baptizes in Jesus name only. And that includes PCIers if that's the preferred label.
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:14 AM
Did you actually read Felicity's post and my subsequent response?
Please do so. You may find a need to redirect the question.
The point is, I don't believe baptism is being given the levelof imprtance it once was by some on this thread. It is apparently not NECESSARY. I am left with the impression that when a thing becomes unnecessary we sooncast off the bonds of its unnecessariness. After all, if its unnecessary, isn't it legalistic?
Warped interpretation... :tease
You just did it again. You twisted your response to reflect a lack of importance on Acts 2:38.
PP ... for the last time !!!!!!!!
Repentance important
Jesus name baptism important
Baptism of the HG important
Now ...Take off your Acts 2:38 glasses PP .. and maybe you'll discover there are more commands and promises ....
1Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death,[a] and of faith in God, 2instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3And God permitting, we will do so.
9Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case—things that accompany salvation.
:beatdeadhorse
Did you actually read Felicity's post and my subsequent response?
Please do so. You may find a need to redirect the question.
The point is, I don't believe baptism is being given the levelof imprtance it once was by some on this thread. It is apparently not NECESSARY. I am left with the impression that when a thing becomes unnecessary we sooncast off the bonds of its unnecessariness. After all, if its unnecessary, isn't it legalistic?You are quick...I deleted my post because I wasn't going to continue discussing this...
Yes, I did read Felicity's post and yours. She mentioned Spirit filled, but how do you know that those who have been Spirit filled have not been baptized? It's an assumption on your part, PP, based on what?!
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:16 AM
Can't help but smile at some of the statements I read. :) :) :)
I can tell you this........ those of you who like to hammer on the point that the PCIers of today ain't the same as the ones back at the time of the merger.....
Neither are many of the PAJCers!
And the fact is you have MANY people who believe no differently than I who are standing in your pulpits today (in UPCI particularly) who are preaching with the exact same emphasis we do and with the same emphasis that the old timers did and getting the same results!
People around the world who are not preaching a "tongues or hell" doctrine are praying scores of people through to the Holy Ghost baptism with the initial sign of speaking in tongues.
You don't have ownership of this thing. It was prophesied and promised in Acts .... "to as many as the Lord shall call". And God lives up to and fulfills all his promises.
Owning a water/Spirit doctrine in no way gives you any leverage or favour with God nor does it ensure you're going to have more success at ushering people into the kingdom of God than anyone else. You might think it would be the opposite, but the fact is, it is not. And that's that. :)
Well said...sound delivery!!
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:16 AM
Can't help but smile at some of the statements I read. :) :) :)
I can tell you this........ those of you who like to hammer on the point that the PCIers of today ain't the same as the ones back at the time of the merger.....
Neither are many of the PAJCers!
And the fact is you have MANY people who believe no differently than I who are standing in your pulpits today (in UPCI particularly) who are preaching with the exact same emphasis we do and with the same emphasis that the old timers did and getting the same results!
People around the world who are not preaching a "tongues or hell" doctrine are praying scores of people through to the Holy Ghost baptism with the initial sign of speaking in tongues.
You don't have ownership of this thing. It was prophesied and promised in Acts .... "to as many as the Lord shall call". And God lives up to and fulfills all his promises.
Owning a water/Spirit doctrine in no way gives you any leverage or favour with God nor does it ensure you're going to have more success at ushering people into the kingdom of God than anyone else. You might think it would be the opposite, but the fact is, it is not. And that's that. :)
Those who stress Acts 2:38 and folks obey it then I rejoice. Folks who minimize it and honestly seem as they despise it then I fight them boldly. That is the difference your tact is not the same as those who somewhat claim to be as you are in case you have not noticed. The distain reeks from them as they are handling dirty socks when they speaking of the Name above every name in baptism.
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:18 AM
Can't help but smile at some of the statements I read. :) :) :)
I can tell you this........ those of you who like to hammer on the point that the PCIers of today ain't the same as the ones back at the time of the merger.....
Neither are many of the PAJCers!
And the fact is you have MANY people who believe no differently than I who are standing in your pulpits today (in UPCI particularly) who are preaching with the exact same emphasis we do and with the same emphasis that the old timers did and getting the same results!
People around the world who are not preaching a "tongues or hell" doctrine are praying scores of people through to the Holy Ghost baptism with the initial sign of speaking in tongues.
You don't have ownership of this thing. It was prophesied and promised in Acts .... "to as many as the Lord shall call". And God lives up to and fulfills all his promises.
Owning a water/Spirit doctrine in no way gives you any leverage or favour with God nor does it ensure you're going to have more success at ushering people into the kingdom of God than anyone else. You might think it would be the opposite, but the fact is, it is not. And that's that. :)
I respect you, but I don't believe this is true.
Felicity, can't you - just for one moment - begin to look around at the other posters who are identifying with the so called PCI view? They do not hold the same level of love you claim to have for the Acts 2:38 message. In fact, they quite despise it.
I have watched this junk for several days now, and for the most part I have remained remarkably civil and tolerant. But this is whacked! Don't tell me you love the message, and then slam it, and everyone who preaches it, as often as possible.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:19 AM
Where have you gotten this impression?
We have always and still preach baptism in Jesus name STRONG!!! Every preacher I know personally who has left the UPC still believes in the necessity of baptism and baptizes in Jesus name only. And that includes PCIers if that's the preferred label.
Christ Church-Bethel-Vanhoose church-Fender's church-nad many others do not emphasize baptism in Jesus Name.
I respect you, but I don't believe this is true.
Felicity, can't you - just for one moment - begin to look around at the other posters who are identifying with the so called PCI view? They do not hold the same level of love you claim to have for the Acts 2:38 message. In fact, they quite despise it.
I have watched this junk for several days now, and for the most part I have remained remarkably civil and tolerant. But this is whacked! Don't tell me you love the message, and then slam it, and everyone who preaches it, as often as possible.
The Seer. :heeheehee
You are quick...I deleted my post because I wasn't going to continue discussing this...
Yes, I did read Felicity's post and yours. She mentioned Spirit filled, but how do you know that those who have been Spirit filled have not been baptized? It's an assumption on your part, PP, based on what?!
Based on they've got the truth and we don't
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:20 AM
Those who stress Acts 2:38 and folks obey it then I rejoice. Folks who minimize it and honestly seem as they despise it then I fight them boldly. That is the difference your tact is not the same as those who somewhat claim to be as you are in case you have not noticed. The distain reeks from them as they are handling dirty socks when they speaking of the Name above every name in baptism.
Dan, willya find him a mirror please... :tease
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:21 AM
I respect you, but I don't believe this is true.
Felicity, can't you - just for one moment - begin to look around at the other posters who are identifying with the so called PCI view? They do not hold the same level of love you claim to have for the Acts 2:38 message. In fact, they quite despise it.
I have watched this junk for several days now, and for the most part I have remained remarkably civil and tolerant. But this is whacked! Don't tell me you love the message, and then slam it, and everyone who preaches it, as often as possible.
I can read and think and what you are saying is openly evident!
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:21 AM
Where have you gotten this impression?
We have always and still preach baptism in Jesus name STRONG!!! Every preacher I know personally who has left the UPC still believes in the necessity of baptism and baptizes in Jesus name only. And that includes PCIers if that's the preferred label.
You may, but mark my word, when a think becomes unnecessary, it is only a matter of time before it is tossed out in the garbage. That is what is happening here. Maybe not by you, but many others have this attitude.
It is no longer necessary to them. It is legalistic.
In time they will cast off the bands of this "legalism".
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:21 AM
Christ Church-Bethel-Vanhoose church-Fender's church-nad many others do not emphasize baptism in Jesus Name.I don't know those people. I said the people I know. Of course there are some who go gradually into apostasy. That has nothing to do with me.
I don't like the broad-brushing that goes on here so it's necessary to speak up and insert reality where it seems to have disappeared. :heeheehee
You may, but mark my word, when a think becomes unnecessary, it is only a matter of time before it is tossed out in the garbage. That is what is happening here. Maybe not by you, but many others have this attitude.
It is no longer necessary to them. It is legalistic.
In time they will cast off the bands of this "legalism".
anti-TV argument just repackaged ... C'mon PP!!!
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:23 AM
Christ Church-Bethel-Vanhoose church-Fender's church-nad many others do not emphasize baptism in Jesus Name.
Felicity I name some here and there are many others?
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:23 AM
I respect you, but I don't believe this is true.
Felicity, can't you - just for one moment - begin to look around at the other posters who are identifying with the so called PCI view? They do not hold the same level of love you claim to have for the Acts 2:38 message. In fact, they quite despise it.
I have watched this junk for several days now, and for the most part I have remained remarkably civil and tolerant. But this is whacked! Don't tell me you love the message, and then slam it, and everyone who preaches it, as often as possible.
The Seer. :heeheehee
:heeheehee
Elder Epley ... would you please comment on Seagraves comments on the Tabernacle and the laver.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:24 AM
You may, but mark my word, when a think becomes unnecessary, it is only a matter of time before it is tossed out in the garbage. That is what is happening here. Maybe not by you, but many others have this attitude.
It is no longer necessary to them. It is legalistic.
In time they will cast off the bands of this "legalism".PP........
Honestly, I appreciate you but I'm not reading where anyone is saying anything is necessarily unnecessary. And if they ARE making that kind of remark .... necessary for what? Unnecessary for what?
Let's keep a clear head here. ;) :)
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:24 AM
anti-TV argument just repackaged ... C'mon PP!!!
Daniel, you are rapidly becoming incoherent.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:24 AM
Felicity I name some here and there are many others?And?
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:26 AM
You may, but mark my word, when a think becomes unnecessary, it is only a matter of time before it is tossed out in the garbage. That is what is happening here. Maybe not by you, but many others have this attitude.
It is no longer necessary to them. It is legalistic.
In time they will cast off the bands of this "legalism".
...some more warped interpretation :killinme
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:28 AM
And?
You said you do not know any yet you yourself have lamented the path CC has taken???????????? I rejoice if you still emphasize Acts 2:38 however many no longer do. It is relegated to some church sacrament.
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:30 AM
anti-TV argument just repackaged ... C'mon PP!!!
Daniel, you are rapidly becoming incoherent.
He is referring to the same slippery slope argument that anti-TV zealots are using...and the same that you have condemned as committing spiritual abortion... Did I interpret you correctly Dan?
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:33 AM
You said you do not know any yet you yourself have lamented the path CC has taken???????????? I rejoice if you still emphasize Acts 2:38 however many no longer do. It is relegated to some church sacrament.I don't know CC or Bro. Hardwick personally. Does he not still baptize in Jesus name? I thought he did.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:34 AM
He is referring to the same slippery slope argument that anti-TV zealots are using...and the same that you have condemned as committing spiritual abortion... Did I interpret you correctly Dan?
Dan's interpeter Peat and repeat!:tease However both the peater and the repeater are incorrect.:highfive
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:35 AM
I don't know CC or Bro. Hardwick personally. Does he not still baptize in Jesus name? I thought he did.
Now Felicity that is not fair you yourself have lamented with CC! & Pianoman about the lack of emphasis on baptism and the HGB. And yes they do baptize in Jesus Name.
Sarah
02-26-2007, 10:36 AM
Can someone please pass a hammer???? :killinme :tease
Nope.....I'M more inclined to give him a medal!
Preach it, Bro PP. You have my favor, and I believe the Lord's also!
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:37 AM
Dan's interpeter Peat and repeat!:tease However both the peater and the repeater are incorrect.:highfive
Says Robo-COP. :killinme
http://www.mctoys.ca/catalog/images/18_robocop.jpg
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:39 AM
Says Robo-COP. :killinme
http://www.mctoys.ca/catalog/images/18_robocop.jpg
Thus saith the truth police!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:ranting :ranting
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:41 AM
PP........
Honestly, I appreciate you but I'm not reading where anyone is saying anything is necessarily unnecessary. And if they ARE making that kind of remark .... necessary for what? Unnecessary for what?
Let's keep a clear head here. ;) :) LOL!
So, lets recap shall we? Five threads about the issue in the last few days?
All in opposition to it. This is no longer a discussion, it is a lecture by those against the necessity of water and Holy Ghost baptism.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:44 AM
Now Felicity that is not fair you yourself have lamented with CC! & Pianoman about the lack of emphasis on baptism and the HGB. And yes they do baptize in Jesus Name.I've never heard about a lack of emphasis on baptism. I have heard what's been said about his position and the way he deals with people receiving the Holy Ghost and I don't agree with that at all!
No way would I ever attend a church where the Holy Ghost is relegated and pushed off into a back room. No way!
But as far as I know they still baptize in Jesus name and baptize people regularly.
I'm being fair Bro. Epley. :haloplug
:)
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 10:49 AM
So, lets recap shall we? Five threads about the issue in the last few days?
All in opposition to it. This is no longer a discussion, it is a lecture by those against the necessity of water and Holy Ghost baptism.
more warped interpretation.
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 10:50 AM
I've never heard about a lack of emphasis on baptism. I have heard what's been said about his position and the way he deals with people receiving the Holy Ghost and I don't agree with that at all!
No way would I ever attend a church where the Holy Ghost is relegated and pushed off into a back room. No way!
But as far as I know they still baptize in Jesus name and baptize people regularly.
I'm being fair Bro. Epley. :haloplug
:)
If you don't remember then I don't impugn you I forget myself but I am getting older what is your excuse??:couch
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:50 AM
So, lets recap shall we? Five threads about the issue in the last few days?
All in opposition to it. This is no longer a discussion, it is a lecture by those against the necessity of water and Holy Ghost baptism. Look ...... :) ....... I don't know most of these other posters. I'm not aligning myself with anybody nor am I on any kind of team or anything like that.
I'm just stating my position and trying to bring some balance and fairness to all of this discussion and doing my best to represent a large segment of Oneness Pentecostalism.
This kind of discussion has been taking place since I first got involved in these OP forums. It comes up occasionally and I think it's important discussion. Very important!
I've learned from it and I know others have as well. I haven't changed my doctrinal belief although my own study has made me believe even stronger about the absolute necessity of water baptism. But I don't believe it the way some here do.
I agree with some of what you all say. I don't have to discount a person or everything they say to maintain and defend what I believe.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 10:54 AM
If you don't remember then I don't impugn you I forget myself but I am getting older what is your excuse??:couchHey, I'm getting there too. You're probably not much older than I am. Want to tell me how old you are? :heeheehee
I honestly don't remember PM or CC saying that there is less emphasis on baptism. Probably Bro. Hardwick doesn't believe it's necessary for salvation. If that's the case then he and I differ.
I don't read every post or thread and don't have memory recall like some of you do. I have a tendency to skim a lot, get the gist of what's said and miss some of the details. Bad me! :)
Nahum
02-26-2007, 10:58 AM
more warped interpretation.
Hey J, post something with substance, okay? :praying
Right now I picture you as a parrot on Daniel's shoulder -echoing everything he says. Care to share some original thoughts on the subject?
Steve Epley
02-26-2007, 11:03 AM
Hey, I'm getting there too. You're probably not much older than I am. Want to tell me how old you are? :heeheehee
I honestly don't remember PM or CC saying that there is less emphasis on baptism. Probably Bro. Hardwick doesn't believe it's necessary for salvation. If that's the case then he and I differ.
I don't read every post or thread and don't have memory recall like some of you do. I have a tendency to skim a lot, get the gist of what's said and miss some of the details. Bad me! :)
They said it was NEVER mentioned from the pulpit only taught in private classes if someone asked for them and baptism in Jesus Name was not necessary to be a member or leader in Christ Church.
Felicity
02-26-2007, 11:04 AM
They said it was NEVER mentioned from the pulpit only taught in private classes if someone asked for them and baptism in Jesus Name was not necessary to be a member or leader in Christ Church.Okay. Well if that's the case I'm sorry to hear it.
I know there are those who go down this path. It saddens me and never ever would I attend a church like that. No thank you very much.
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 11:06 AM
Hey J, post something with substance, okay? :praying
Right now I picture you as a parrot on Daniel's shoulder -echoing everything he says. Care to share some original thoughts on the subject?
As much as you continue with your warped interpretation repeatedly saying that people in this forum are claiming baptism is unnecessary...I'll continue exposing that warped thinking. :tease
Maybe if you post something substantive, it may move me to do likewise... :heeheehee
Sister Alvear
02-26-2007, 11:08 AM
Acts 2:38 still works in Brazil...
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 11:09 AM
He is referring to the same slippery slope argument that anti-TV zealots are using...and the same that you have condemned as committing spiritual abortion... Did I interpret you correctly Dan?
Dan, I see that you are back...did I understand your comment correctly?
Nahum
02-26-2007, 11:23 AM
He is referring to the same slippery slope argument that anti-TV zealots are using...and the same that you have condemned as committing spiritual abortion... Did I interpret you correctly Dan?
There is a huge problem with your logic here.
1. If you lump me in with the anti-television zealots, you are saying that my definition of Acts 2:38 is as heretical as saying "watching a television will send you to Hell". I cannot imagine Daniel thinking or saying such a thing about me.
2. Spiritual abortion comes in many guises. Which is worse, addiing an unnecessary obstacle to a new believers pathway to Jesus, or never even telling them how to properly respond to the gospel?
There is a huge problem with your logic here.
1. If you lump me in with the anti-television zealots, you are saying that my definition of Acts 2:38 is as heretical as saying "watching a television will send you to Hell". I cannot imagine Daniel thinking or saying such a thing about me.
2. Spiritual abortion comes in many guises. Which is worse, addiing an unnecessary obstacle to a new believers pathway to Jesus, or never even telling them how to properly respond to the gospel?
PP ... this is exactly what Felicity and others have been trying to say about those who would make the gift of the Holy Ghost as an obstacle ... or forcing others to accept your exact soteriological view ....
Nahum
02-26-2007, 11:38 AM
PP ... this is exactly what Felicity and others have been trying to say about those who would make the gift of the Holy Ghost as an obstacle ... or forcing others to accept your exact soteriological view ....
So you think that because I preach that the Holy Ghost baptism is necessary for salvation I am heretical, and a spiritual abortionist?
I do not view the Holy Ghost as an obstacle, I view it as the Power that removes obstacles.
Right now I picture you as a parrot on Daniel's shoulder -echoing everything he says. Care to share some original thoughts on the subject?
J-Roc ... my parrot, lol... He's my mentor.
So you think that because I preach that the Holy Ghost baptism is necessary for salvation I am heretical, and a spiritual abortionist?
I do not view the Holy Ghost as an obstacle, I view it as the Power that removes obstacles.
No one said you do ... but would you acknowlege it's pervasive in your movement???
Nahum
02-26-2007, 11:42 AM
No one said you do ... but would you acknowlege it's pervasive in your movement???
I thought we were part of the SAME movement? :ranting
I thought we were part of the SAME movement? :ranting
No answer ... I used the term movement so not be accused of org bashing
Nahum
02-26-2007, 11:44 AM
No one said you do ... but would you acknowlege it's pervasive in your movement???
Pervasive no, present yes.:dunno
Pervasive no, present yes.:dunno
Then ... why no righteous indignation? ... why then are you so focused on standards ... and not examining how many are entering our churches and leave damaged.
Nahum
02-26-2007, 11:51 AM
Then ... why no righteous indignation? ... why then are you so focused on standards ... and not examining how many are entering our churches and leave damaged.
You lost me there, pardner.
????
Damaged how?
You lost me there, pardner.
????
Damaged how?
Maybe it will become clearer, one day... or perhaps someone can elaborate on the effects of preaching Holy Ghost or Hell as preached by the PACJers.
Nahum
02-26-2007, 12:12 PM
Maybe it will become clearer, one day... or perhaps someone can elaborate on the effects of preaching Holy Ghost or Hell as preached by the PACJers.
Well I believe if you don't have His Spirit, you are none of His.
:dunno Does that make me a bad preacher?
Kutless
02-26-2007, 12:17 PM
Well I believe if you don't have His Spirit, you are none of His.
:dunno Does that make me a bad preacher?Has elvis left the bldg.?
Bad preacher Bad Preacher
You know your supposed to go on the paper!
Bryan
02-26-2007, 12:35 PM
I endorse this thread...
J-Roc
02-26-2007, 12:53 PM
There is a huge problem with your logic here.
1. If you lump me in with the anti-television zealots, you are saying that my definition of Acts 2:38 is as heretical as saying "watching a television will send you to Hell". I cannot imagine Daniel thinking or saying such a thing about me.
2. Spiritual abortion comes in many guises. Which is worse, addiing an unnecessary obstacle to a new believers pathway to Jesus, or never even telling them how to properly respond to the gospel?
I guess I did read into his comment accurately...
PP ... this is exactly what Felicity and others have been trying to say about those who would make the gift of the Holy Ghost as an obstacle ... or forcing others to accept your exact soteriological view ....
Right now I picture you as a parrot on Daniel's shoulder -echoing everything he says. Care to share some original thoughts on the subject?
J-Roc ... my parrot, lol... He's my mentor.
Hey PP, put that little fish down...and man up...step up your game!
See my avatar! :heeheehee
crakjak
02-26-2007, 04:28 PM
What about the spiritually disabled? There are many of such folks, does God's mercy fail with those that just cannot understand?
Bump for Bro. Epley?
crakjak
02-26-2007, 04:30 PM
The truth is until we come to understand the inescapable love of God, we will continue to blow about how right we are, and how everyone that is not just like us has missed it.
In contrast to EP's declaration I will make a biblical declaration: SINCE CALVARY NOT ONE SIN HAS BEEN IMPUTED TO ANY HUMAN BEING THAT HAS EVERY LIVED! That's right God does not count your sins against you, BECAUSE EVERY TIME HE LOOKS AT YOU HE IS LOOKING THRU THE SIN CLEANSING BLOOD OF JESUS! JUST LIKE WHEN ADAM SINNED SIN WAS IMPUTED TO EVERY HUMAN BEING THAT WAS EVER BORN. WHEN JESUS BLOOD WAS SHED EVERY SIN WAS PAID FOR, AND YOU WERE MADE RIGHTEOUS.
Romans 4.5 "But to him who DOES NOT WORK but BELIEVES on Him who justifies the UNGODLY, his FAITH is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness APART FROM WORKS.
Steve, it time to read Romans as well as Acts, there is much more to scripture than "apostolic" pet verses. The whole counsel of God, is to seek and to save that which is lost. They are lost to the LIFE of God not to some "hellhole" of human imagination.
:bump
:bump
Care to list some of those "apostolic" pet verses.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.