What the World Sees as Apostolic

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

I wonder what people in the "world" saw as the Tabernacle?

Badger skins dyes red.

The gold was on the inside.

The prophet said of the Messiah, "He hath no form nor comeliness, and when ye shall see him, there is no beauty that ye should desire him."

Now, holiness is beautiful to me. I could give you just as many anecdotes of people who speak admiringly of our ladies and their standards. But neither my anecdotes nor yours really matter.

Following the principles of the Scripture is what matters, regardless of what the world and its unregenerate children think.

The natural man doesn't comprehend spiritual things. He isn't able to.

You start trying to establish doctrine and practice based on what the world finds appealing, and you will become totally apostate faster than you can say "mini-skirt."

[OGIA]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

You start trying to establish doctrine and practice based on what the world finds appealing, and you will become totally apostate faster than you can say "mini-skirt."

Excellent thought, CS!!

And that is exactly what too many "Apostolics" do today-- they let the criticism of the world (which we know is mostly born out of ignorance and/or rebellion) bring into question if "we" are really right about this separation thing.

Just because some educated, religious woman doesn't understand what Apostolic means, personally and scripturally, and just because she has come up with a definition based (most likely) on her refusal to ever adhere to such separation doesn't mean we are wrong. Ya' ever think SHE is wrong?


Disclaimer: I'm referring strictly to outward standards, as this is what the lady focused on. She is inwardly still not holy, so why would I (we) expect her to have anything but a skewed perception of what Apostolic is?

[Old Paths]

Originally Posted by OGIA

Excellent thought, CS!!

And that is exactly what too many "Apostolics" do today-- they let the criticism of the world (which we know is mostly born out of ignorance and/or rebellion) bring into question if "we" are really right about this separation thing.

Just because some educated woman doesn't understand what Apostolic means, personally and scripturally, and just because she has come up with a definition based (most likely) on her refusal to ever adhere to such separation doesn't mean we are wrong. Ya' ever think SHE is wrong?


Disclaimer: I'm referring strictly to outward standards, as this is what the lady focused on. She is inwardly still not holy, so why would I (we) expect her to have anything but a skewed perception of what Apostolic is?

Very good and applies to MANY.

Originally Posted by OGIA

Excellent thought, CS!!

And that is exactly what too many "Apostolics" do today-- they let the criticism of the world (which we know is mostly born out of ignorance and/or rebellion) bring into question if "we" are really right about this separation thing.

Just because some educated, religious woman doesn't understand what Apostolic means, personally and scripturally, and just because she has come up with a definition based (most likely) on her refusal to ever adhere to such separation doesn't mean we are wrong. Ya' ever think SHE is wrong?


Disclaimer: I'm referring strictly to outward standards, as this is what the lady focused on. She is inwardly still not holy, so why would I (we) expect her to have anything but a skewed perception of what Apostolic is?

1. But if people don't even know what Pentecostals stand for, other than their outward appearance (after 2000 years of continuous oneness Apostolic preaching), then hasn't something gone wrong somewhere? Especially if the "mission" is to bring the whole gospel to the whole world.

2. And we know that criticism is born of ignorance and rebellion? To address ignorance, see my point number 1 above. To adress rebellion... how can you rebel against something that you do not even know exists?

[OGIA]

Originally Posted by Sheltiedad

1. But if people don't even know what Pentecostals stand for, other than their outward appearance (after 2000 years of continuous oneness Apostolic preaching, then hasn't something gone wrong somewhere? Especially if the "mission" is to bring the whole gospel to the whole world.

2. And we know that criticism is born of ignorance and rebellion? To address ignorance, see my point number 1 above. To adress rebellion... how can you rebel against something that you do not even know exists?

Ignornace on their part is partly our responsibility, yes.

Rebellion? I have someone very close to me who clearly rebels against the outward standards that my pastor teaches. These teachings are well known to this person. They've repeatedly said that they will NOT adhere to those teachings.

That is rebellion and ignorance. I can only help them with one of those problems.

[tv1a]

Originally Posted by OGIA

Excellent thought, CS!!

And that is exactly what too many "Apostolics" do today-- they let the criticism of the world (which we know is mostly born out of ignorance and/or rebellion) bring into question if "we" are really right about this separation thing.
[QUOTE]tv1a: It has nothing to do with fear of criticism. The Bible says we would be persecuted for His Name's Sake. The separation comes with a relationship with Jesus which many substitue with a clothesline doctrine.[/QUOTE]

Just because some educated, religious woman doesn't understand what Apostolic means, personally and scripturally, and just because she has come up with a definition based (most likely) on her refusal to ever adhere to such separation doesn't mean we are wrong. Ya' ever think SHE is wrong?

[QUOTE]tv1a: Post after post after post shows anyone and their mother has a "biblical" definition of apostolic. Give the Gieco cavemen some time and they could come with a definition of apostolic. How can she be wrong in her definition of apostolic when there isn't a biblical or universal definition anyone can agree on? She is just as right in her definition of apostolic as you are. Did you ever think the light you thought you were shining wasn't coming from the bulb you thought it would was? [/QUOTE]

Disclaimer: I'm referring strictly to outward standards, as this is what the lady focused on. She is inwardly still not holy, so why would I (we) expect her to have anything but a skewed perception of what Apostolic is?[QUOTE] tv1a: The lady only focuses on what she sees. If she saw a little more God and a little less legalism she may have had a different conclusion.
The more I read this thread and others like this, the more I see the skewered definition of apostolic comes from the inside. [/QUOTE]

...

[Whole Hearted]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

I wonder what people in the "world" saw as the Tabernacle?

Badger skins dyes red.

The gold was on the inside.

The prophet said of the Messiah, "He hath no form nor comeliness, and when ye shall see him, there is no beauty that ye should desire him."

Now, holiness is beautiful to me. I could give you just as many anecdotes of people who speak admiringly of our ladies and their standards. But neither my anecdotes nor yours really matter.

Following the principles of the Scripture is what matters, regardless of what the world and its unregenerate children think.

The natural man doesn't comprehend spiritual things. He isn't able to.

You start trying to establish doctrine and practice based on what the world finds appealing, and you will become totally apostate faster than you can say "mini-skirt."

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

I wonder what people in the "world" saw as the Tabernacle?

Badger skins dyes red.

The gold was on the inside.

I have to assume you are speaking of the Tabernacle of Moses ... here CS ....

I wonder how many in the "world" came in to plain sight of this tabernacle in the middle of the wilderness and surrounded by the tribes of Israel ?? How many lost, post-conquest, were there in Gilgal, Shiloh, Nob, and Gibeon .... who knows?

... it seems to me that it was God's people, on a daily basis, who got the scenic view of Badger skins dyed red ..... and not the "lost".

Israel's enemies could care less about the badger skins .... they knew of the gold inside and it was this ...they sought to plunder.

The Tabernacle of David ... may have been a better example of "moderation" because of it's simplicity ... it was not an eyesore ... and I'm sure it blended in ....

.... moderation is not a mark of isolation ... or shouldn't be a medal of superior spirituality .... nor a trophy of stark distinction.

Conner (1976:108) shares the following insight about the Tabernacle of David: “The Tabernacle was simply a Tent, pitched in Jerusalem, in Mt. Zion. It was there until the erection of the Temple of Solomon. It certainly could not be compared with the Tent or Tabernacle of Moses and its three places as far as structure was concerned. The very fact that David’s Tabernacle was simply a Tent attested to the truth that its construction was temporary and transitional. It was not the ultimate as a structure. That which was established in it was incorporated in the Temple order. Both the revelation of the Tabernacle of David and the Temple of Solomon had been given to King David”

It is this Tabernacle ... one that worshiped God in Spirit and in Truth ... that is promised to be restored.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

I wonder what people in the "world" saw as the Tabernacle?

Badger skins dyes red.

The gold was on the inside.

The prophet said of the Messiah, "He hath no form nor comeliness, and when ye shall see him, there is no beauty that ye should desire him."

Now, holiness is beautiful to me. I could give you just as many anecdotes of people who speak admiringly of our ladies and their standards. But neither my anecdotes nor yours really matter.

Following the principles of the Scripture is what matters, regardless of what the world and its unregenerate children think.

The natural man doesn't comprehend spiritual things. He isn't able to.

You start trying to establish doctrine and practice based on what the world finds appealing, and you will become totally apostate faster than you can say "mini-skirt."

Coonskinner there are folks here who have never been on the inside beyond the badger's skin so they do not have a clue. We must go outside the camp bearing his reproach. Some on here have more in common with TBN than the Apostolic church.

I have to admit, my whole life when I have tried to explain the relatively obscure religion that I was raised in, I do not see a glimmer of recognition until I say, "you know, the one where the women only wear dresses, don't cut their hair, and don't wear make-up or jewelry"... at that time they usually go, "Oh, now I know the one you are talking about, I think one of those ladies works down the hall from me"...

If they HAVE heard of Pentecostals, they think you are Assembly of God.

I'm sure this means something but I'm not sure what... (actually I am but can't decide which path to take. lol)... I'm sure that those who only hang out with other Pentecostals will believe I am lying or be shocked to know that the majority of people do not even know what a Pentecostal is, let alone a Oneness Pentecostal.