Read the Seagraves Document....

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Repentance is never out of sight (IMHO) in any of this. And by "repentance" I mean the full acknowledgment of one's sin AND the realization that there is a new life ahead.

does that include TURNING FROM ALL?

All of this is motivated by faith - Hebrews 11:6 -

Yes, I would agree!

"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is , and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."

correct! The opposite of faith though is enmity which is not doing his commandments.

Faith includes the concept that the new life is worthwhile. It is not just a "mental acknowledgment of God's existence ("that he is..."). We believe that God "is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." We are not looking for trinkets and such as our "reward," of course. We are looking and seeing that a life lived for Christ in holiness and dedication to Him is a worthwhile way to live. It ennobles us in this life and presents a foretaste of the Kingdom to come.

I would agree that is is a worthwhile way to live but it's simply not about HEY this is a good thing to do but it is a contract issue of abiding to obtain.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I feel like this comment was directed at me a little. Maybe just my own self- consciousness. None of these questions are easy to answer and should be wrestled with.

It was a general statement reflecting on no one specifically, but noting that we (me included) often think we know enough of something to make a conclusion on it, when none of us can say that. That's all.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

1) "justification" must be defined by what is being referenced. .... Mental assent does not save.

When you read his paper, he does not make the argument that mere mental assent is what saves.


One of the strongest points in his article is the rightousness that God imputed into Abraham was imputed into him at the moment of faith-- not at the moment of action.

He believed God.

Since Abraham believed God, Abraham did what he did out of honor and obedience to the One he believed.




He draws the parallel to the New Testament church, just like Paul did in the Book of Romans. Paraphrased, we are righteous in the same way that Abraham is righteous-- by faith.

Now that faith will be the source of what we do, but Paul is very clear in distinguishing that Abraham and the New Testament church are justifed by faith-- and it is ONLY the Blood of Jesus that makes this imputation of righteousness possible.


In light of the covenant that Abraham had with God, he was circumcised-- a very Biblically defensible correlation with water baptism.



As far as the Promised Land, did Abraham ever see it? I don't think so. Nevertheless, Abraham still believed God and God called him righteous.

Would you like to draw a parallel here for the New Testament church? Acts 2:39 states, "For the PROMISE is unto you, and to your children and all those that are afar off...."



I think you should read his article, along with your Bible.

[A.W. Bowman]

I admit that I have not read the Seagraves paper, but from what I have gathered from this thread, he presented a good ‘alternative’ view concerning salvation, justification, and sanctification. In truth, these are difficult subjects and have been the center of debates for well over four thousand years. There have also been a number of excellent and insightful posts on this thread, So, here are some additional ‘alternate’ views for consideration, as they are added to the mix.

The much overplayed Acts 2:38 religious mantra has lost its original meaning and has become a stumbling block for many.

First, salvation has always been by faith, with that faith expressed by obedience to God (works of the Law). Of course, we in the West see this statement as “salvation by works and not of faith”, and nothing could be more in error. One verse that has become all but invisible within the Apostolic world is Acts 2:21, quoting Habakkuk 2:4b. “And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Both Old and New Testaments say the same thing. Then, faith without works is dead being of its self. Faith without works cannot save anyone! (James 2:14-26) Even Abraham established his faith by obeying God’s instructions (voice), laws, commandments, and statutes. (Genesis 26:5)

Second, there is the question of when does one ‘get saved’? Well, according to Jesus (if one is actually predisposed to take His word for anything serious), one is ‘saved’ once that individual has entered into a Rabbi/Talmid (Teacher/Student) relationship – before receiving the Holy Ghost in any form or manifestation.

Please note carefully the following passages:

Malachi 3:16 (KJV)
Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard [it], and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.

Philippians 4:3 (KJV)
And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and [with] other my fellow labourers, whose names [are] in the book of life.


Revelation 3:5 (KJV)

He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Plus five additional related references in the book of Revelation.

However, for me the most telling scripture is Luke 10:20 (KJV)

Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven.

[A.W. Bowman]

Note that these seventy Talmidim (disciples/students) had spiritual authority imputed to them by Jesus, which they freely exercised. However, they still had no spiritual power of their own to support that authority. Then, can a person be ‘saved’ and still loose their salvation? According to the above reference in Rev.3:5, absolutely! However, they all became eligible for the master’s spiritual examination because they were all in ‘good standing’ with Him. First, they had all be baptized into His name (became publicly bonded to Him). The Teacher would only baptize the few senior students, as with the twelve disciples, but from that point on, it was the responsibility of the disciples to baptize the other students as they joined ‘the teacher’s school’. See John 3:22-36; 4:1-3.

Third, when did the disciples of Jesus receive the Holy Spirit? At Pentecost? No. It was a couple of weeks earlier. See John 20:21-23. Here we see the disciples receiving the Holy Ghost – spiritual authority imparted to them in their right, even as God breathed into the nostrils of Adam and made him a living soul – the same Spiritual authority that He Himself exercised (John 14:12). However, the power (strength) of the Spirit was not yet given to them. That came during the feast of Shavuot (Pentecost), which is the same day celebrated even today among the Jews on the 6th of Sivan, the day God spoke to the entire nation of Israel and gave them Torah. On this day, God made available to all mankind His Spirit which is also the Spirit of Truth which is the Spirit of God’s Law (Instructions in Righteous Living to be written on hearts of flesh, Jeremiah 31:33), which is also the Spirit of power (e.g., John 14:12, Acts 3:6 and 5:1-12.

We should also remember that the gift of the Holy Ghost is a ‘gift’ that results from the act of salvation, not a requirement for salvation. The question in Acts 2:27, “What shall we do?” is not a question concerning how does one get ‘saved’, Rather, according to Acts 2:21 and 37a, the question is, “Now that we believe and call upon the name of the Lord, what shall we do?” The answer: Repent. Turn from your sinful ways and lusts. Be baptized in (or into) the name of Jesus – become one of us, disciples (students op) Jesus Christ, and you too shall receive the same gift of power that you have witnessed here to day. (Act 2:38). Then, the church continued in the Apostle’s doctrines. Which are?

Except for a few notes written by Paul concerning questions and/or problems within some of the churches, plus a couple of letters written by a few others, such as James and Peter, exactly what did all of the other Apostles teach? The answer is found in the Gospels. If any remained true to their calling, and it would seem that they all did, they taught (made disciples/students) of the nations, teaching ‘all that Jesus commanded them to observe (to do). (Matthew 28:19-20)

Fourth, as to the gift of tongues, much has been said and written. I will note only that on the Day of Pentecost, no heavenly (or prayer) language was uttered. See Acts 2:5-12. The languages may have been ‘unknown’ to the speaker, but not to those who heard them. (the word ‘unknown’ (G57, ἄγνωστος, agnostos, adj, 1. not known, unknown 2. (mentally) ignorant 3. (figuratively) obscure occurs only once in the New Testament, Acts 17:23, in reference to the Greek’s ‘Unknown’ god. Among the ‘unknown’ tongues spoken that day not one reference was made concerning a heavenly language (prayer language or any angelic language).

[A.W. Bowman]

Fifth, concerning a side note. Reference Acts 2:11-15. According to most Apostolics, these disciples of Christ were drunk on grape juice (what the scriptures identifies as ‘new wine’). Ever wonder why it is not a good idea to put new wine in an old wine skin? Because as the ‘new wine’ ferments, the gasses created will literally burst the old, weakened wine skin. Of course, while many of us declare the drinking of wine to be a sin, God ordained not only the drinking or wine but also commanded the drinking a ‘hard’ liquor (Deuteronomy 14:22-27). Of course we also accuse Jesus of being a sinner, along with His detractors of the time (Luke 7:33-35) and the tempter of men into sin (John 2:1-11). Yes, there are a good many verses speaking of the evils of getting drunk, and for some selected individuals no alcohol was to be touched, some for a short period of time and for others for their entire life time. The scripturally required prohibitions concerning drunkenness are will met, however, we will not allow the word of God to interfere with our church dogma, even if that dogma witnesses against Jesus Christ as a sinner and a tempter of men.

Finally: This series was not meant to be an all inclusive Bible study. Rather, just to point out the major fallacy in many of our doctrines, i.e., that many of our teachings are based on very carefully selected scriptures that, at least on the surface, seem to support the point of view we want others to accept and adhere to.

Conclusion: Any doctrine that is developed and published by any one individual, group, or organization, must take into consideration all the scriptures that have a bearing on the subject at hand – and accommodate those scriptures in the doctrine its self – even those scriptures that cast doubt upon, or questions the subject’s generally accepted view point. This offering was meant only to present some scriptures that are usually overlooked or simply ignored when preaching/teaching religious propaganda, as opposed to teaching the whole word of God.

Now, take these verses as starting points, search out the scriptures on your own. Don’t try to make the word of God fit your precepts, doctrines, or theology – rather, make these things of yours fit the word! When one runs into a wall and cannot rightly divide the word of Truth, do not despair. Set it aside for a while. Pray about it. Meditate on it. Review all of the scriptures relating to the subject your struggling with. Discuss it with some people you can trust to examine the subject with you – without attempting to do violence to the word of God for their own purposes. It requires men and women of spiritual integrity, not those seeking control (power) over, or to acquire the wealth of the children of God.

May your own studies be fruitful.

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by Sam

Look at the original fundamental doctrine statement of the UPC. It did not say water baptism was for the remission of sins. It did not say salvation was by repentance, water baptism and by Spirit baptism but said that FULL salvation i.e. our life time experience in the Lord has three steps:
1- repentance/justification/regeneration/forgiveness
2- water baptism
3- Spirit baptism

Maybe Bro. Segraves is trying to point people back to the PCI doctrine of salvation from sin at justification/repentance/faith and then our ultimate or full salvation at death and some time between repentance/salvation/justification and death we should be baptized in water and in the Spirit.

Ya think?

I see that someone said that there is a link somewhere for this paper. If it found can it be reposted in here?

NO debating we are saved by faith alone, but is he saying that he has more of a one-stepper mindset? Sam have you read the paper?

[Jack Shephard]

Is the paper that is being talked about here the one about Letting Your Hair down or something?

[Justin]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

I see that someone said that there is a link somewhere for this paper. If it found can it be reposted in here?

NO debating we are saved by faith alone, but is he saying that he has more of a one-stepper mindset? Sam have you read the paper?

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

Is the paper that is being talked about here the one about Letting Your Hair down or something?

Here is the link where the document can be found.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

Is the paper that is being talked about here the one about Letting Your Hair down or something?

Try the link on this post by Sam:

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...79&postcount=6