Originally Posted by Ferd (Post 698490)

On that subject I think you are right. I think there is an Action/REAction taking place.

There is a wierd thing going on where there is a massive struggle for the soul of a movement.

One side wants to abandon everything and fit in with the rest of christiandom and if that means letting go of core doctrines then well, fine and good.

another side wants to hold fast to traditional teaching and to do so they are willing to accept very wrong views to reinforce those traditions (Holy Magic Hiar is an example).

then there are those of us who just understand we live in this time, and the core is still the core. we wont walk away from truth so we are despised by those wanting to join the orthodox christians and we are despised by those who want to return to 1952.

I plan on latching on to those who still believe the Gospel is still the Gospel and Acts2:38 incapulates the proper response to the Gospel; Holiness is demanded by God and Sanctification is still the process a christian must walk thru to be the Purified Gold that Peter talks about.

Originally Posted by rgcraig (Post 698492)

Ed, this isn't going to be clear with just reading words, but I'll try.

Does identifying with "Pentecost" just mean something to you or those in Pentecost because it's what we know - what we are use to?

Those outside Pentecost don't have a clear picture of what it really means anyway - there are too many other whacky beliefs that we have nothing to do with (as Ferd has stated).

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin (Post 698498)

Excellent post!

There seems to be no middle.

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin (Post 698508)

Not at all.

With me, it has nothing to do with tradition.

It has everything to do with my Pentecostal experience.

To me, it seems as though there is less emphasis on that experience, and its doctrinal root, than there is on "Apostolic identity."

The new focus is on works. How I look, how separate I am, how different I am than everyone else. This focus is very religious. Very exclusive.

The old focus was on Pentecostal power, and how it changed me. How it cleansed me. How the Gospel set me free. That focus was on what God did for me, by His Spirit. The focus was on the experience, the feeling, the empowerment.

I truly believe we are not growing because we have lost the emphasis on our power source. Pentecost is about "dunamis" power. Dynamite power. Power to witness.

When we minimize that power, and focus on our own feeble, self-righteous works, the growth of the church is stunted.

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin (Post 698508)

Not at all.

With me, it has nothing to do with tradition.

It has everything to do with my Pentecostal experience.

To me, it seems as though there is less emphasis on that experience, and its doctrinal root, than there is on "Apostolic identity."

The new focus is on works. How I look, how separate I am, how different I am than everyone else. This focus is very religious. Very exclusive.

The old focus was on Pentecostal power, and how it changed me. How it cleansed me. How the Gospel set me free. That focus was on what God did for me, by His Spirit. The focus was on the experience, the feeling, the empowerment.

I truly believe we are not growing because we have lost the emphasis on our power source. Pentecost is about "dunamis" power. Dynamite power. Power to witness.

When we minimize that power, and focus on our own feeble, self-righteous works, the growth of the church is stunted.

Originally Posted by rgcraig (Post 698571)

I understand what you are saying.

Guess what I'm trying to process is why do we equate that POWER, what God did for us by His Spirit, the experience, the empowerment to the word Pentecost. I understand it has to do with the Day of Pentecost, but maybe in the past we've focused too much on the word Pentecost and not all that you mentioned - - the gospel, the power, the life change that HE does for us. Pentecost doesn't do it.

Just trying to talk it all out.

Originally Posted by Ferd (Post 698441)

Edward, honestly I started using the term Apostolic when I moved to Dallas in the mid-1990s. And that was before I heard it openly among Oneness Pentecostals.

My reasoning was that every mothers son in Dallas is some form of Pentecostal and none of them are the form I am.

Its hard to avoid the question "You mean like" name your favorite wacko charismatic with a TV program....when you say "I am a Pentecostal".

So I started going with Apostolic and that led to the question "what is an Apostolic".... can you say opportunity to share the Gospel?

For me Pentecostal has been appropriated by people who preach God will fill your teeth with gold and cause you to go into hysteric convulsions or baptize you in the name of hoochie magoochie.



I have no desire to be associated with those that baptize in the name of hoochie magoochie.

Now that doesn't mean that Apostolic means wild eyed reactionary conservative. I've never been one of those... It isn't likely that I will. But it does mean I still believe in the Oneness of the Godhead, and that I still believe that the doctrine of sanctification is necessary in the life of a born again believer..... and while we are talking about terms, Apostolic means I believe the term "Born Again" requires repentance, baptism in Jesus Name and being infilled with the Holy Ghost in the same manner as those in the upper room. (even if I allow room for the PCI view to be called Apostolic too....)

I am happy to point out that EVERY Apostolic is a Pentecostal, so long as we can agree that NOT every Pentecostal is an Apostolic... (reference baptizers in the name of hoochie magoochie).


But I get your drift. WE AGREE on 1Cor11. there is nothing magic about hair. We also agree that there are those within the movement that would exclude far too many and that these same will save far too few.
I am not willing to die on a hill defending a label (Pentecostal or Apostolic), but you can rest assured that I am right there with you when it comes to the underlying problems you bring up.