Bait and Switch: Pentecostal Deception?

[EA]

For most of my life, I have been told that we must "catch 'em before we clean 'em." This phraseology is used to explain how the church should teach its traditions to visitors and new converts. The implication being that we should woo the visitor with great preaching, anointed singing and a great deal of love. The further implication being that traditions or "standards" shouldn't be preached to newcomers for fear they will walk away before partaking in the full Pentecostal experience.

To that end, many pastors in Oneness Pentecostal circles do not address traditions and standards from the puplit. These issues are normally addressed in a new convert's class, well after a newcomer has rubbed shoulders with the church for a while. Often newcomers have no idea what is expected of them, and what practical Pentecostalism involves, until they have felt a measure of acceptance within the local assembly.

However, at some point, perhaps months down the road, an effort will be made to assimilate the new convert into our shared culture. At this juncture, core disciplines such as standards of appearance, tithing, and other lifestyle expectations will be broached with the new convert. So, a new convert comes in with a wrong perception of what Pentecostalism is, because we hide things from them from the beginning of our new relationship. This leads to confusion, hurt and a sense of distrust.

I do realize not all churches practice this sort of deception, but I also realize that Pentecostal "bait and switch" does occur.

Wikepedia defines "bait and switch" as follows:

In retail sales, a bait and switch is a form of fraud in which the party putting forth the fraud lures in customers by advertising a product or service at an unprofitably low price, then reveals to potential customers that the advertised good is not available but that a substitute is. The goal of the bait-and-switch is to convince some buyers to purchase the substitute good as a means of avoiding disappointment over not getting the bait, or as a way to recover sunk costs expended to try to obtain the bait. It suggests that the seller will not show the original product or product advertised but instead will demonstrate a more expensive product.

I suppose I am most concerned about an incorrect view of Pentecostalism being fed to newcomers. I believe this is why we have so many folks experiencing the New Birth that leave after a short time. They were told to "come as you are" only to later find that statement changed to "come as we are."

Pardon my candor, but I believe we Pentecostal ministers should be honest in our dealings with newcomers. No relationship can withstand deception, especially church relationships.

I honestly do not believe it is proper to tell a potential visitor/convert, who has expressed concern over our standards, to "just come as you are, and God will take care of that." I think they should know what will be expected of members of the local assembly. It is wrong to minimize things we will later tell them are extremely important.

I am not, by any means, advocating beating them over the head with our standards. I am just saying that we should not be ashamed of who we are, and what we believe. "Bait and switch" tactics have no place in Oneness Pentecostalism.

[EA]

We preach Holy Ghost baptism to new people who don't understand it.

IF we believe holiness is as essential as the New Birth (and we do), why wouldn't we preach it as stridently?

[EA]

While someone may be a "babe in Christ" they are still an adult, capable of rationalization. We view holiness traditions as core doctrine in this movement, and I categorically reject the notion that we view them as somehow secondary in importance to repentance, baptism and the infilling of the Holy Ghost. For goodness sake, we have reams of documents stating such.

Let's be honest here, we know full well what we will expect of any convert. We know what we want them to look like, what we want them to get rid of and so on. We know because we fully expect conformity to our traditional views concerning holiness.

So, why not be up front about it?

[EA]

This thread focuses on intent.

If a pastor is conservative, he shouldn't hide that to "catch fish." I am not advocating he preaches standards 24/7. I'm just saying that there should not be an attempt to minimize standards at the beginning, only to change course later.

I seriously doubt most on this forum would consider me ultra-conservative, and some would not even consider me conservative at all. That's cool. But I do try to be consistent. Often I fail, but I do try.

I think the whole "catch 'em before you clean 'em" motto is revealing.

[CC1]

Next you will be pointing out some of the old time Pentecostal church sites that use stock photo's of women with makeup and cut hair as if those women are members!

I thnk it is done to make "sinners" feel welcome but I find it an interesting practice.

[mizpeh]

I think the whole "catch 'em before you clean 'em" motto is revealing.Is it a hidden agenda?

[mizpeh]

Next you will be pointing out some of the old time Pentecostal church sites that use stock photo's of women with makeup and cut hair as if those women are members!

I thnk it is done to make "sinners" feel welcome but I find it an interesting practice.Are you serious?

[Ron]

Not relevant at all.
To the carnal mind, Holiness is foolishness, plain & simple.

Why would you want to explain "Holiness Principles" to an unregenerate sinner?

[EA]

Not relevant at all.
To the carnal mind, Holiness is foolishness, plain & simple.

Why would you want to explain "Holiness Principles" to an unregenerate sinner?

Easy.

We are constantly fed the garbage that "Holiness is a salvational issue."

If my eternal destiny depends on how I dress, you'd better be telling me so.

[EA]

And of course I believe in holiness.

I just don't believe some of the tripe we trot out concerning "holiness."

[EA]

Next you will be pointing out some of the old time Pentecostal church sites that use stock photo's of women with makeup and cut hair as if those women are members!

I thnk it is done to make "sinners" feel welcome but I find it an interesting practice.

Bingo!

Exactly my point!

Why do we do that?

And btw, I could point you to sites like you just mentioned.

[EA]

I think the whole "catch 'em before you clean 'em" motto is revealing.

Is it a hidden agenda?

Certainly, don't you think?

[CC1]

Are you serious?

Yup. I have seen a few. I don't think they are trying to be duplicitous. Probably just trying to be welcoming to all people. Which actually goes back to what Edwardo Anglican started this thread about - not being totally upfront about a church's stringent dress code requirements.

[Ron]

Easy.

We are constantly fed the garbage that "Holiness is a salvational issue."

If my eternal destiny depends on how I dress, you'd better be telling me so.

Doesn't the Bible say that we are to, "Perfect holiness?":thumbsup

[*AQuietPlace*]

Easy.

We are constantly fed the garbage that "Holiness is a salvational issue."

If my eternal destiny depends on how I dress, you'd better be telling me so.
Interesting point.

[soldoutochrist]

Next you will be pointing out some of the old time Pentecostal church sites that use stock photo's of women with makeup and cut hair as if those women are members!

I thnk it is done to make "sinners" feel welcome but I find it an interesting practice.

I've seen a few websites with pictures of smiling women wearing pants...it's also made me laugh as to wonder why churches do this.

[CC1]

Doesn't the Bible say that we are to, "Perfect holiness?":thumbsup

If only it had said "perfect dress codes"!

[*AQuietPlace*]

There's a preacher I heard of who says that when he gets a new convert, he preaches standards hot and heavy for a month. If they're still there when he's done, he knows they've got the right stuff in them.

I don't think much of that approach myself, but if you do believe that standards are salvational, I guess that is the way to go.

[pelathais]

Is it a hidden agenda?
In many cases, yes. I think EA has pointed out a real problem that gives Pentecostal/Apostolics a black eye all too often.

People end up feeling betrayed by their friends and "brethren." After bonding they end up being bitterly disposed of if they don't go along. Their "failure to mature" is then attributed to some fault or flaw with their carnal nature.

They end up being told that they are "pig's filth" and "dog vomit" for failing to go along with a set of crazily and haphazardly concocted "holiness standards" that vary even from church to church in the same town.

I ended up wondering if it wouldn't be better if we didn't ecompass land and sea to make a complete stranger twice the child of hell that we are. Then, I found a new and better way.

[OnTheFritz]

I've seen a few websites with pictures of smiling women wearing pants...it's also made me laugh as to wonder why churches do this.

Better than the sites with the smiling women wearing no pants... :lol

[pelathais]

I've seen a few websites with pictures of smiling women wearing pants...it's also made me laugh as to wonder why churches do this.
They probably farmed out their website development to some designer who either wasn't "in the know" and used the free stock photos that are available, or a designer who was "in the know" and decided to have some fun by pretending otherwise. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[CC1]

Edwardo Anglican,

You don't sound like a man worried anymore about your associates dropping you in the grease and costing you your license with the Mothership!

[OnTheFritz]

People end up feeling betrayed by their friends and "brethren." After bonding they end up being bitterly disposed of if they don't go along.

Reminds me of Amway... ;)

[Ron]

If only it had said "perfect dress codes"!

Hey, no problem, dress like a harlot, God don't care, in fact he is everybody's big buddy!:thumbsup

[CC1]

reminds me of amway... ;)

roflmbo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[EA]

Edwardo Anglican,

You don't sound like a man worried anymore about your associates dropping you in the grease and costing you your license with the Mothership!

:ursofunny

I am not worried about it.

1. I have not "bashed" anyone.

2. I have not spoken against any published positions.

3. They probably think I am a lost cause.

Look, I love the mothership. I just think we should be up front.

[EA]

Hey, no problem, dress like a harlot, God don't care, in fact he is everybody's big buddy!:thumbsup

There ya go.

Again, if my salvation depends upon adherance to a dress code, you have an obligation to tell me so.

Don't wait a few months.

What if I die before you tell me I need to shave to be saved?

[EA]

In many cases, yes. I think EA has pointed out a real problem that gives Pentecostal/Apostolics a black eye all too often.

People end up feeling betrayed by their friends and "brethren." After bonding they end up being bitterly disposed of if they don't go along. Their "failure to mature" is then attributed to some fault or flaw with their carnal nature.

They end up being told that they are "pig's filth" and "dog vomit" for failing to go along with a set of crazily and haphazardly concocted "holiness standards" that vary even from church to church in the same town.

I ended up wondering if it wouldn't be better if we didn't ecompass land and sea to make a complete stranger twice the child of hell that we are. Then, I found a new and better way.

I used to get really mad at people who cornered the new folk about their "look."

Not any longer.

At least they are being truthful.

[mizpeh]

Ed, How does the Bible define holiness? Is it a separation unto God from something? from sin? from the world? from the customs of the world?

[Theophil]

There ya go.

Again, if my salvation depends upon adherance to a dress code, you have an obligation to tell me so.

Don't wait a few months.

What if I die before you tell me I need to shave to be saved?

EA are you trying to make the point that "standards" (what are called holiness standards, but are not) are NOT and NEVER WILL BE salvational issues??

[EA]

Ed, How does the Bible define holiness? Is it a separation unto God from something? from sin? from the world? from the customs of the world?


Separation is, first and foremost, UNTO God.

We are separated, consecrated and/or set apart for Him.

It's like shopping. When we grocery shop, we choose items from the shelves, and place them in our cart with the full intent of purchasing them. The shopper, when choosing, sets the items apart for purchase. He pays the price for them. He purchases them for his own pleasure and purpose.

We are holy because He declares us holy. Because of the price He paid.
Not through works that we have done.


Secondly, we exhibit holiness through a consistent disdain for "worldliness." We separate ourselves FROM ungodly thoughts, actions and locales. We do so in order to maintain right relationship. The aim is to steer away from anything that threatens our relationship with God.

[EA]

EA are you trying to make the point that "standards" (what are called holiness standards, but are not) are NOT and NEVER WILL BE salvational issues??

Not at all.

I am only saying that if a person believes all tradition lifestyle standards are salvational, he better be preaching it as plainly as Acts 2:38.

Don't hold anything back.

[mizpeh]

Secondly, we exhibit holiness through a consistent disdain for "worldliness." We separate ourselves from ungodly thoughts, actions and locales. We do so in order to maintain right relationship.Customs are different all over the world. True holiness shouldn't be subject to the whims of a society's culture.

For instance, in the middle east, western clothing is not considered holy. How could we win someone to the Lord if we allowed to go there and witness to someone while at the same time offending them by the clothes we wear? What we think is modest and holy in our culture may not be in another culture. Is there a different holiness standard from culture to culture? How can it be true holiness if can vary?

[jrpreacher]

EA are you trying to make the point that "standards" (what are called holiness standards, but are not) are NOT and NEVER WILL BE salvational issues??
AMEN

[mizpeh]

Not at all.

And please stop bringing the UPC into this.

I am only saying that if a person believes all tradition lifestyle standards are salvational, he better be preaching it as plainly as Acts 2:38.

Don't hold anything back.

This makes sense. The whole counsel of God should be taught.


Acts 20:26 Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. 27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God

[EA]

Customs are different all over the world. True holiness shouldn't be subject to the whims of a society's culture.

For instance, in the middle east, western clothing is not considered holy. How could we win someone to the Lord if we allowed to go there and witness to someone while at the same time offending them by the clothes we wear? What we think is modest and holy in our culture may not be in another culture. Is there a different holiness standard from culture to culture? How can it be true holiness if can vary?


There's the rub.

Plus, I think two ladies could be wearing the exact same style of clothing, but with different spirits. In some cases, the clothing is not the issue, it's the attitude of the wearer. Otherwise, there are some objects that are definitely contrary to a spirit of holiness.

What do you think?

[CC1]

There's the rub.

Plus, I think two ladies could be wearing the exact same style of clothing, but with different spirits. In some cases, the clothing is not the issue, it's the attitude of the wearer. Otherwise, there are some objects that are definitely contrary to a spirit of holiness.

What do you think?

I think you have "gone charismatic". You will find no logic or rhyme or reason for the tradition of Pentecostal legalism in dress code. It is largely based on the traditions of a close religous culture and not clear mandates from the Bible. Once you start questioning them you are on that slippery slope. They cannot be looked at with human logic. They are "pretzel logic" and undestanding pretzel logic is obviously a God given special talent.

[EA]

For instance, a Playboy emblem represents a very ungodly system.

IMO, that is an ungodly object, and shouldn't be worn on clothing.

[CC1]

For instance, a Playboy emblem represents a very ungodly system.

IMO, that is an ungodly object, and shouldn't be worn on clothing.

I actually have a pair of socks with that emblem on them (didn't realize it when I bought them) but since my pants leg covers it up I wear them.

I can't believe you don't like rabbits!!!!:bigbaby

[EA]

I think you have "gone charismatic". You will find no logic or rhyme or reason for the tradition of Pentecostal legalism in dress code. It is largely based on the traditions of a close religous culture and not clear mandates from the Bible. Once you start questioning them you are on that slippery slope. They cannot be looked at with human logic. They are "pretzel logic" and undestanding pretzel logic is obviously a God given special talent.

Si Si Juan,

I live "the old-time way" for the most part.

I do so because I think boundaries are needed.

We go over the cliff, however, when we mandate our own personal boundaries on everybody in the natural born world.

[CC1]

This makes sense. The whole counsel of God should be taught.


Acts 20:26 Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. 27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God

Yup. We all know how much time Jesus spent in his ministry dealing with outward dress codes!

[EA]

I actually have a pair of socks with that emblem on them (didn't realize it when I bought them) but since my pants leg covers it up I wear them.

I can't believe you don't like rabbits!!!!:bigbaby

Well aren't you just a raging porn supporter!:smack

I'm tellin' Sister Cee Cee One.

[CC1]

Si Si Juan,

I live "the old-time way" for the most part.

I do so because I think boundaries are needed.

We go over the cliff, however, when we mandate our own personal boundaries on everybody in the natural born world.

Here is my test to see if you really live the "old time way";

1. Do you own any shirts in a color other than white?
2. Do you own any short sleeve shirts?
3. Do you not shave when you are at deer camp or on a multiple day fishing trip?

If you have answered yes to any of these questions you are NOT living the "old time way"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:thumbsup

[CC1]

Well aren't you just a raging porn supporter!:smack

I'm tellin' Sister Cee Cee One.

The funny thing is that these socks are some of my oldest. Apparently the clothes dryer gremlin who steals socks is Pentecostal and won't touch these and they must be well made because they still don't have any holes in them!

[EA]

Here is my test to see if you really live the "old time way";

1. Do you own any shirts in a color other than white? Yes.
2. Do you own any short sleeve shirts? Many
3. Do you not shave when you are at deer camp or on a multiple day fishing trip? I only shave on Wednesdays and Sunday morning.

If you have answered yes to any of these questions you are NOT living the "old time way"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:thumbsup

Oh sweet mamie, I'm as lost as a man with no TomTom.:sad

[EA]

The funny thing is that these socks are some of my oldest. Apparently the clothes dryer gremlin who steals socks is Pentecostal and won't touch these and they must be well made because they still don't have any holes in them!

Woah, that's some pretty evil socks.

Have you considered it may just be the smell?

[mizpeh]

There's the rub.

Plus, I think two ladies could be wearing the exact same style of clothing, but with different spirits. In some cases, the clothing is not the issue, it's the attitude of the wearer. Otherwise, there are some objects that are definitely contrary to a spirit of holiness.

What do you think?I agree with you, my friend. :thumbsup

[mizpeh]

The funny thing is that these socks are some of my oldest. Apparently the clothes dryer gremlin who steals socks is Pentecostal and won't touch these and they must be well made because they still don't have any holes in them!It's just the opposite. The dryer gremlin is of the debbil and wants you to keep those socks so you can unknowingly continue to promote an ungodly lascivious lifestyle every time you cross your legs.

[Ron]

There ya go.

Again, if my salvation depends upon adherence to a dress code, you have an obligation to tell me so.

Don't wait a few months.

What if I die before you tell me I need to shave to be saved?

I don't see shaving in the Bible!

Come on Ed, you are better than that, you are either trying to stir the pot, or you are grossly ignorant of scripture.

The Bible tells us in many places in the NT that a Christian grows, matures, into the fullness of the stature of Christ.
I see my kids acti8ng a certain way because they are immature, if they act that way when they grow up, I am going to wonder what is wrong.

Same in the Kingdom.

You need a better argument!:thumbsup

[RevDWW]

I don't see shaving in the Bible!

Come on Ed, you are better than that, you are either trying to stir the pot, or you are grossly ignorant of scripture.

The Bible tells us in many places in the NT that a Christian grows, matures, into the fullness of the stature of Christ.
I see my kids acti8ng a certain way because they are immature, if they act that way when they grow up, I am going to wonder what is wrong.

Same in the Kingdom.

You need a better argument!:thumbsup

Ron, I can assure you that there are those that would place a soul in hell for a lot of things that are not in the bible.

[Praxeas]

That's not bait and switch. There is no switch. Peter didn't explain every doctrinal nuance on the day of Pentecost. Look at the other conversion events in Acts...It was enough to get them to repent and convert. You don't need to become a greek scholar or a have a Doctorate in Theoology before converting. So that stuff about standards is unnecessary to teach to a sinner

[mizpeh]

Holiness should be universal across all cultural lines, IMHO.

[MrMasterMind]

EA has a point. It is Pentecostal Gnosticism.

Come in, and once you are saved and ready, we will teach you the secret deeper hidden meanings which all believers don't have the revelation on, or may not be able to handle.

[CC1]

That's not bait and switch. There is no switch. Peter didn't explain every doctrinal nuance on the day of Pentecost. Look at the other conversion events in Acts...It was enough to get them to repent and convert. You don't need to become a greek scholar or a have a Doctorate in Theoology before converting. So that stuff about standards is unnecessary to teach to a sinner

Kind of like a man on his first, second, or even third date. He doesn't want the girl to hear him fart or belch or anything else unattractive that might keep the relationship from developing further?

[rgcraig]

Kind of like a man on his first, second, or even third date. He doesn't want the girl to hear him fart or belch or anything else unattractive that might keep the relationship from developing further?

...and then she marries him.

[Praxeas]

Kind of like a man on his first, second, or even third date. He doesn't want the girl to hear him fart or belch or anything else unattractive that might keep the relationship from developing further?
No. Look Peter said this

2Pe 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him,
2Pe 3:16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.

You don't need to teach them every little doctrinal issue before they can convert. It's not necessary. It can or will just distract them from the real goal of converting to Christ. They are babes still and need to get what they need spiritually.

[Sam]

Holiness should be universal across all cultural lines, IMHO.

Real holiness is.

[EA]

No. Look Peter said this

2Pe 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him,
2Pe 3:16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.

You don't need to teach them every little doctrinal issue before they can convert. It's not necessary. It can or will just distract them from the real goal of converting to Christ. They are babes still and need to get what they need spiritually.

Prax, you've missed the whole point.

Many folks feel like conformance to "holiness" standards is salvational.

Knowing this, why do they wait months before they teach them to new folks?

[EA]

This is what we should be teaching.


1. Genuine Faith.

2. Repentance.

3. Baptism.

4. Holy Ghost infilling.

5. No britches.

6. No TV.

7. No jewelry.

8. No cosmetics.

9. No movies.

10. No mixed bathing.

11. No hair coloring.

and on and on and on.



Perhaps it would be good to have visitors read leaflets with this info as they enter the building?

[rgcraig]

This is what we should be teaching.


1. Genuine Faith.

2. Repentance.

3. Baptism.

4. Holy Ghost infilling.

5. No britches.

6. No TV.

7. No jewelry.

8. No cosmetics.

9. No movies.

10. No mixed bathing.

11. No hair coloring.

and on and on and on.



Perhaps it would be good to have visitors read leaflets with this info as they enter the building?
You lost me after four.

[Praxeas]

Prax, you've missed the whole point.

Many folks feel like conformance to "holiness" standards is salvational.

Knowing this, why do they wait months before they teach them to new folks?
BUT I DON'T...

Here is what I think could be it. Those that teach it's salvific necessity don't teach it is a pre-requisite to being saved. Rather they teach it is a part of maturing. I think if you ask them if that new convert will go to hell if they die before learning of standards they would say no.

[EA]

I suppose I am most concerned about an incorrect view of Pentecostalism being fed to newcomers. I believe this is why we have so many folks experiencing the New Birth that leave after a short time. They were told to "come as you are" only to later find that statement changed to "come as we are."

Why do we tell folks to "come as you are?"

[Dedicated Mind]

Bro. Ed, do you teach holiness standards to new converts?

[crakjak]

This is what we should be teaching.


1. Genuine Faith.

2. Repentance.

3. Baptism

4. Holy Ghost infilling.

5. No britches.

6. No TV.

7. No jewelry.

8. No cosmetics.

9. No movies.

10. No mixed bathing.

11. No hair coloring.

and on and on and on.


Perhaps it would be good to have visitors read leaflets with this info as they enter the building?

Salvation is not a list of do's and don't's, it is a relationship with a person, Jesus Christ. You won't find him dealing with a laundry list. So get over it and preach the Good News, and trust the Holy Spirit to teach. Many Pentecostals do not need the HS because the church will tell them what they must and mustn't do.

[mizpeh]

Why do we tell folks to "come as you are?"You're putting the cart before the horse now, Mister Ed.

[Praxeas]

Why do we tell folks to "come as you are?"
Because it would be asinine to expect sinners to come to church to conform when they have not even heard the preaching and believe it.

Jesus did not have the Apostles standing as guards refusing anyone to come and hear his words if they did not have on certain kinds of clothings or whatever

[MrMasterMind]

EA has a point. It is Pentecostal Gnosticism.

Come in, and once you are saved and ready, we will teach you the secret deeper hidden meanings which all believers don't have the revelation on, or may not be able to handle.

BUMP

[Praxeas]

Why call them "Holiness" if you expect as part of conversion, before being saved, someone makes themselves Holy by dressing a certain way. That really is a works based system.

Holiness is a by-product of BEING saved

[EA]

BUT I DON'T...

Here is what I think could be it. Those that teach it's salvific necessity don't teach it is a pre-requisite to being saved. Rather they teach it is a part of maturing. I think if you ask them if that new convert will go to hell if they die before learning of standards they would say no.



Why would they go to Hell for it AFTER they're saved, but not before or during the conversion process?

This all seems so arbitrary!!!

When is the cut-off point?

When do they need to start "living holy?"

Hell is not a game. This is too important to mess up.

[EA]

Bro. Ed, do you teach holiness standards to new converts?

This is not about me.

[Sam]

Salvation is a gift to receive
not a goal to achieve.

[Praxeas]

Why would they go to Hell for it AFTER they're saved, but not before or during the conversion process?

This all seems so arbitrary!!!

When is the cut-off point?

When do they need to start "living holy?"

Hell is not a game. This is too important to mess up.
Ask your Ultra Con friends Ed! Im a moderate!

[EA]

Because it would be asinine to expect sinners to come to church to conform when they have not even heard the preaching and believe it.

Jesus did not have the Apostles standing as guards refusing anyone to come and hear his words if they did not have on certain kinds of clothings or whatever


Think about what you just said, Prax.

[Praxeas]

Think about what you just said, Prax.
Ok....now what?

[EA]

EA has a point. It is Pentecostal Gnosticism.

Come in, and once you are saved and ready, we will teach you the secret deeper hidden meanings which all believers don't have the revelation on, or may not be able to handle.


Yeppers.

Full disclosure baby!

[Praxeas]

Yeppers.

Full disclosure baby!
So before they can be saved you have to teach them Every single doctrine? What about eschatology? Did Peter do that? Did Paul? If so please show me the Standards in Acts 2

[mizpeh]

So before they can be saved you have to teach them Every single doctrine? What about eschatology? Did Peter do that? Did Paul? If so please show me the Standards in Acts 2
He is saying that if standards are necessary to salvation they should be taught right along with the gospel, faith in Christ, repentance, the new birth.

[EA]

So before they can be saved you have to teach them Every single doctrine? What about eschatology? Did Peter do that? Did Paul? If so please show me the Standards in Acts 2

If it takes old time holiness to be saved then, yes. You'd better be teaching them all about it from the word go.

[EA]

He is saying that if standards are necessary to salvation they should be taught right along with the gospel, faith in Christ, repentance, the new birth.

Exactly!

[Dedicated Mind]

you are preaching to the choir, most on aff don't believe standards are salvific. you need to post to the morons in the conservative forums.

[EA]

However, at some point, perhaps months down the road, an effort will be made to assimilate the new convert into our shared culture. At this juncture, core disciplines such as standards of appearance, tithing, and other lifestyle expectations will be broached with the new convert. So, a new convert comes in with a wrong perception of what Pentecostalism is, because we hide things from them from the beginning of our new relationship. This leads to confusion, hurt and a sense of distrust.

Does anyone else agree with this?

[EA]

you are preaching to the choir, most on aff don't believe standards are salvific. you need to post to the morons in the conservative forums.


:spit

[Praxeas]

He is saying that if standards are necessary to salvation they should be taught right along with the gospel, faith in Christ, repentance, the new birth.
Standard teachers don't teach standards are a pre-requisite to being saved though. Actually they teach it is something you grow into as a matter of holiness...changing from glory to glory and that it pertains to not getting saved but staying saved. So still, why teach that to a sinner?

[Praxeas]

Does anyone else agree with this?
No because that is painting with a broad brush.

[Praxeas]

If someone teaches standards "in order to become saved" then yes they should be up front about it.

[Hoovie]

Very thought provoking thread start. (I have not read all)

Along these same lines I have been thinking... IT IS GENERALLY not a wise thing to make snap desicions about anything. Why should religion be different? Why do we place such a huge emphasis on "setting the mood" and developing an expectation of a climax at the end of service? Should we not allow the evidence of the preached word and the Holy Spirit do the sales job?

[Praxeas]

Maybe as a selling point we can say "while others may charge 10 even 20% tithes we only charge 8.5%"

[RandyWayne]

Maybe as a selling point we can say "while others may charge 10 even 20% tithes we only charge 8.5%"

As an introductory offer for the first 12 months of course.

[Praxeas]

As an introductory offer for the first 12 months of course.
Yes, unless you sign up for a lifetime contract, then we will lower the rate to 7.5%...that would be our Platinum club membership or more affectionately known as "The Super Spiritual" Club....of course if you really WERE super spiritual you would double that amount.

[RandyWayne]

Yes, unless you sign up for a lifetime contract, then we will lower the rate to 7.5%...that would be our Platinum club membership or more affectionately known as "The Super Spiritual" Club....of course if you really WERE super spiritual you would double that amount.

Come to our "Double Comp" night on Saturday, where if you use your card for for any offerings (tithes not included) or prayer room time, reward points will be doubled!

[pentecostalguy]

I agree with what Brother Edward has to say. I think many on here have missed the point of thread. The thread is not to discuss holiness or if holiness standards should be abided by. The thread is simply a question do we think its right or wrong for a church that believes in standards to not mention standards at all to people wanting to convert. As a Pentecostal that believes in standards it has never set right with me that we don't mention to people wanting to convert what we really believe. My previous pastor used to say well the goal is to get them baptized first then a little later we will tell everything else we believe in. I have always felt that to be wrong at some point we need to be upfront with people wanting to convert and tell them exactly what we believe. A person should know exactly what they are getting into. Back in the day I remember some preachers would talk to a person right before baptism and restate the standards and make sure that person was willing to make such a commitment to God.

[Pastor Keith]

I have 2 intial reactions, the first one is that spiritual truths (if that it was standards are) should be taught over time, sanctification is a process. Salvation in and of itself is like a man in darkness walking into the light. A person can only handle so much light until his eyes adjust. That is of course if you believe them to be salvational.

The second reaction we shouldn't be teaching these things as salvational especially if there is no scripture at all for them to be addressed. Keep in mind the Epistles were written to saved folks, telling them what to do now that they are saved, revealing not everything comes up front, some things have to be taught over time. The writer of Hebrews said that he had much to share but because of the immaturity of the hearers they were not ready to receive it.

[Aquila]

1 Corinthians 3:2
2I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

I have a son who's going to be three in a few months. He was drinking milk and eating soft foods before the little McDonald's hamburgers. As he grows his diet changes. I see it the same way. People aren't stupid. They see the way we dress and our standards if they attend church. They know that there is a certain "way" we live. They fellowship and visit our homes for bible studies etc. But we get them grounded in doctrine first. The simple milk of the Word. Then we move into some of the stuff that's a little difficult to chew as they develop.

[Praxeas]

I agree with what Brother Edward has to say. I think many on here have missed the point of thread. The thread is not to discuss holiness or if holiness standards should be abided by. The thread is simply a question do we think its right or wrong for a church that believes in standards to not mention standards at all to people wanting to convert. .
No, we ALL got that. Whether or not they SHOULD tell them before they are even saved or converted depends on whether or not you have to do them before being saved

[Praxeas]

I have 2 intial reactions, the first one is that spiritual truths (if that it was standards are) should be taught over time, sanctification is a process. Salvation in and of itself is like a man in darkness walking into the light. A person can only handle so much light until his eyes adjust. That is of course if you believe them to be salvational.

The second reaction we shouldn't be teaching these things as salvational especially if there is no scripture at all for them to be addressed. Keep in mind the Epistles were written to saved folks, telling them what to do now that they are saved, revealing not everything comes up front, some things have to be taught over time. The writer of Hebrews said that he had much to share but because of the immaturity of the hearers they were not ready to receive it.
Thank you! :thumbsup

[iceniez]

In many cases, yes. I think EA has pointed out a real problem that gives Pentecostal/Apostolics a black eye all too often.

People end up feeling betrayed by their friends and "brethren." After bonding they end up being bitterly disposed of if they don't go along. Their "failure to mature" is then attributed to some fault or flaw with their carnal nature.

They end up being told that they are "pig's filth" and "dog vomit" for failing to go along with a set of crazily and haphazardly concocted "holiness standards" that vary even from church to church in the same town.

I ended up wondering if it wouldn't be better if we didn't ecompass land and sea to make a complete stranger twice the child of hell that we are. Then, I found a new and better way.

WOW,OUCH,OOOOOOOO..........Boy did we experience this when we came in to the church.We were baptised in a traditionalaly all black congregation.[these don't seem to harp on standards probably a subject for another thread] then we went to a upc church and boy what a shock.I agree with you.

[Sister Alvear]

I think we should have a balanced service. The preacher should be lead of God and following the leading you will never go wrong.

[CC1]

I agree with what Brother Edward has to say. I think many on here have missed the point of thread. The thread is not to discuss holiness or if holiness standards should be abided by. The thread is simply a question do we think its right or wrong for a church that believes in standards to not mention standards at all to people wanting to convert. As a Pentecostal that believes in standards it has never set right with me that we don't mention to people wanting to convert what we really believe. My previous pastor used to say well the goal is to get them baptized first then a little later we will tell everything else we believe in. I have always felt that to be wrong at some point we need to be upfront with people wanting to convert and tell them exactly what we believe. A person should know exactly what they are getting into. Back in the day I remember some preachers would talk to a person right before baptism and restate the standards and make sure that person was willing to make such a commitment to God.

Don't you think the idea is that once a person is baptized and receives the Holy Ghost they will be more receptive to the non biblical legalism that is going to be thrust upon them?

To upfront, in every evangelistic service I guess, go down the clothesline of what will be expected of them IF they come to an altar, repent, are baptized, and receive the Holy Ghost seems absurd to me.

[rgcraig]

I agree with what Brother Edward has to say. I think many on here have missed the point of thread. The thread is not to discuss holiness or if holiness standards should be abided by. The thread is simply a question do we think its right or wrong for a church that believes in standards to not mention standards at all to people wanting to convert. As a Pentecostal that believes in standards it has never set right with me that we don't mention to people wanting to convert what we really believe. My previous pastor used to say well the goal is to get them baptized first then a little later we will tell everything else we believe in. I have always felt that to be wrong at some point we need to be upfront with people wanting to convert and tell them exactly what we believe. A person should know exactly what they are getting into. Back in the day I remember some preachers would talk to a person right before baptism and restate the standards and make sure that person was willing to make such a commitment to God.See, here's where I have a problem. WE, we, we......what's up with that? What about letting GOD take care of it? If it's something that's required of God wouldn't that make more sense?

[rgcraig]

I have 2 intial reactions, the first one is that spiritual truths (if that it was standards are) should be taught over time, sanctification is a process. Salvation in and of itself is like a man in darkness walking into the light. A person can only handle so much light until his eyes adjust. That is of course if you believe them to be salvational.

The second reaction we shouldn't be teaching these things as salvational especially if there is no scripture at all for them to be addressed. Keep in mind the Epistles were written to saved folks, telling them what to do now that they are saved, revealing not everything comes up front, some things have to be taught over time. The writer of Hebrews said that he had much to share but because of the immaturity of the hearers they were not ready to receive it.

Excellent post!

[Sister Alvear]

I have seen people aborted...so much wisdom is needed working with people.

[Barb]

I have 2 intial reactions, the first one is that spiritual truths (if that it was standards are) should be taught over time, sanctification is a process. Salvation in and of itself is like a man in darkness walking into the light. A person can only handle so much light until his eyes adjust. That is of course if you believe them to be salvational.

The second reaction we shouldn't be teaching these things as salvational especially if there is no scripture at all for them to be addressed. Keep in mind the Epistles were written to saved folks, telling them what to do now that they are saved, revealing not everything comes up front, some things have to be taught over time. The writer of Hebrews said that he had much to share but because of the immaturity of the hearers they were not ready to receive it.

Good post... :thumbsup

I was almost 24 yrs. in the COOLJC, and the pastor's wife always said, "If we set a good example, the new convert will follow the pattern they see."

I remember as a child in school comeone asking me what our church believed. My response was, "Well, let me tell you what we don't believe..." and I listed it all...we don't do this, and we do this and the other..

When I went home and told my parents, they said that I should never do that..."Tell them how a person is saved..."

[Barb]

I have seen people aborted...so much wisdom is needed working with people.

Amen...

[*AQuietPlace*]

I remember as a child in school comeone asking me what our church believed. My response was, "Well, let me tell you what we don't believe..." and I listed it all...we don't do this, and we do this and the other..

When I went home and told my parents, they said that I should never do that..."Tell them how a person is saved..."
That was my response as a child, when asked about my 'religion'...... "we believe in One God, we don't believe in the Trinity, we believe you have to get the Holy Ghost and speak in tongues, and we don't watch tv, or wear pants, or cut our hair, or wear makeup, or......."

Kids just tell it like it is. ;) To me, those things defined our 'religion'.

[coadie]

Don't you think the idea is that once a person is baptized and receives the Holy Ghost they will be more receptive to the non biblical legalism that is going to be thrust upon them?

To upfront, in every evangelistic service I guess, go down the clothesline of what will be expected of them IF they come to an altar, repent, are baptized, and receive the Holy Ghost seems absurd to me.

I am sure glad we don't have legalism.
My son sings in a choir at a large public university. At the last concert all the women wore black dresses and men black suits and ties. Nothing legalistic about it. very little make up. Good people of good character welcome and follow directions and leadership. Rebellious folks have patterns of reacting when told what to do.

If someone offers a suggestion you react to, always keep a legalist card handy. Play the legalism card quickly and frequently.

[Jack Shephard]

I think it is like fishing. You put the bait out there that will tempt them to bite. Once they do they are reeled in, cleaned, skinned, cooked and consumed. Very bad.

[Fiyahstarter]

For goodness sake, we have reams of documents stating such.

Let's be honest here, we know full well what we will expect of any convert. We know what we want them to look like, what we want them to get rid of and so on. We know because we fully expect conformity to our traditional views concerning holiness.

So, why not be up front about it?

Sad, but true.

So why NOT be honest? Surely money doesn't have anything to do with it????

[*AQuietPlace*]

I have honestly NEVER been to a church that was obsessed with money. If they were that worried about the money, they'd NEVER tell the new converts about the 'standards'.


People throw that accusation out there a lot, and I know there are some pastors who are way obsessed with money.... but most I know are NOT.

[Neck]

We preach Holy Ghost baptism to new people who don't understand it.

IF we believe holiness is as essential as the New Birth (and we do), why wouldn't we preach it as stridently?

I have never heard a sermon on standards that caused me to think.

Wow he is right I will never wear shorts again while cutting my grass.

Praching Standards is not a message that will bring conviction upon the sinner.

It is the preaching of the Cross.

If you put standards into a box of sin you are not on the right track.

[Fiyahstarter]

I have honestly NEVER been to a church that was obsessed with money. If they were that worried about the money, they'd NEVER tell the new converts about the 'standards'.


People throw that accusation out there a lot, and I know there are some pastors who are way obsessed with money.... but most I know are NOT.

"Numbers" is about money. If they were to preach from the pulpit that "FULL TRUTH" they are so proud of (which includes the holiness standards), they'd lose half of their congregation.

Withholding truth is dishonesty. Place your right hand on the bible and repeat after me... "I swear to tell the truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God."

If they believe it is PART OF TRUTH... it should be preached as such.

What I've noticed is, keep them coming, they are good enough to sit in the pews and give... and maybe someday they'll GROW UP...:bigbaby

Ends up in hurt feelings and lack of trust and respect.

[OnTheFritz]

I am sure glad we don't have legalism.
My son sings in a choir at a large public university. At the last concert all the women wore black dresses and men black suits and ties. Nothing legalistic about it. very little make up. Good people of good character welcome and follow directions and leadership. Rebellious folks have patterns of reacting when told what to do.

If someone offers a suggestion you react to, always keep a legalist card handy. Play the legalism card quickly and frequently.

Awesome tip! I nip it in the bud by not taking suggestions.... :thumbsup

[EA]

I have 2 intial reactions, the first one is that spiritual truths (if that it was standards are) should be taught over time, sanctification is a process. Salvation in and of itself is like a man in darkness walking into the light. A person can only handle so much light until his eyes adjust. That is of course if you believe them to be salvational.

The second reaction we shouldn't be teaching these things as salvational especially if there is no scripture at all for them to be addressed. Keep in mind the Epistles were written to saved folks, telling them what to do now that they are saved, revealing not everything comes up front, some things have to be taught over time. The writer of Hebrews said that he had much to share but because of the immaturity of the hearers they were not ready to receive it.

That is the point of this thread.

Many OPs believe "these things" are salvational.

With that in mind, it is unconscionable to hide these things until "later."

[CC1]

I am sure glad we don't have legalism.
My son sings in a choir at a large public university. At the last concert all the women wore black dresses and men black suits and ties. Nothing legalistic about it. very little make up. Good people of good character welcome and follow directions and leadership. Rebellious folks have patterns of reacting when told what to do.

If someone offers a suggestion you react to, always keep a legalist card handy. Play the legalism card quickly and frequently.

If you can't even acknowledge that your movement has legalism at it's very core then we don't have much to have a dialogue about. I have been either in or around old time Pentecost (UPC in my case) for 49 years and it is eat up with legalism and psychological conditioning.

[Pastor Keith]

That is the point of this thread.

Many OPs believe "these things" are salvational.

With that in mind, it is unconscionable to hide these things until "later."

Kinda flies in the face of the admonition to the Galatian Church,
Gal. 3:2 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?

Come to Jesus, freely, obey the Gospel, but in order to keep Jesus, you have to do all this stuff.

[Praxeas]

Kinda flies in the face of the admonition to the Galatian Church,
Gal. 3:2 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?

Come to Jesus, freely, obey the Gospel, but in order to keep Jesus, you have to do all this stuff.
But here is the question or point I made. Who really teaches we receive the Spirit by keeping these standards? Nobody I know teaches that. Thus they do not teach it is a matter of becoming saved. They teach though, it's a matter of staying saved, which I disagree with but that is beside the point.

IF they don't teach you have to start keeping standards before or in order to be saved, why in the world would they include standards in trying to convert a sinner?

[Pastor Keith]

But here is the question or point I made. Who really teaches we receive the Spirit by keeping these standards? Nobody I know teaches that. Thus they do not teach it is a matter of becoming saved. They teach though, it's a matter of staying saved, which I disagree with but that is beside the point.

IF they don't teach you have to start keeping standards before or in order to be saved, why in the world would they include standards in trying to convert a sinner?

Actually there were those that taught it in the past, the 2nd work of grace people, the idea that is you got sanctified by tarrying, repenting etc. and when you got sanctified enough then the Holy Spirit came. COGIC still teach this to some degree. I am not say we do, but we have taught, that after you get it, here are something you must do in order to keep it. Now to be clear I am not against scriptural standards that have a strong textual foundation, but the other stuff we deem to be equally salvic I am against.

[coadie]

If you can't even acknowledge that your movement has legalism at it's very core then we don't have much to have a dialogue about. I have been either in or around old time Pentecost (UPC in my case) for 49 years and it is eat up with legalism and psychological conditioning.

You need deliverance. Reframe your experience. Our church doesn't have it nor the psychological progrramming. If you were worshipping in a mechanical way, that was totally your decision.

[coadie]

But here is the question or point I made. Who really teaches we receive the Spirit by keeping these standards? Nobody I know teaches that. Thus they do not teach it is a matter of becoming saved. They teach though, it's a matter of staying saved, which I disagree with but that is beside the point.

IF they don't teach you have to start keeping standards before or in order to be saved, why in the world would they include standards in trying to convert a sinner?

We follow standards to stay out of trouble. Safety in having healthy boundaries with the world is not salvation.

[Pastor Keith]

We follow standards to stay out of trouble. Safety in having healthy boundaries with the world is not salvation.

Do you really follow standards? Or in following Christ, you have some standards?

[CC1]

You need deliverance. Reframe your experience. Our church doesn't have it nor the psychological progrramming. If you were worshipping in a mechanical way, that was totally your decision.

LOL!! What in my post had anything to do with "worshipping in a mechanical way"? You are one strange dude!

[Praxeas]

Actually there were those that taught it in the past, the 2nd work of grace people, the idea that is you got sanctified by tarrying, repenting etc. and when you got sanctified enough then the Holy Spirit came. COGIC still teach this to some degree. I am not say we do, but we have taught, that after you get it, here are something you must do in order to keep it. Now to be clear I am not against scriptural standards that have a strong textual foundation, but the other stuff we deem to be equally salvic I am against.
Right, but that is my point I have made several times now. Why teach standards to people that are unsaved when standards in their teaching have no place in getting them saved?

[CC1]

I heard that Keith tells visitors that his church has bingo once a months just like the local RC church does and then after they have been there a month he confesses that was just a ruse to get them to hang in there until he could indoctrinate them.

[Praxeas]

We follow standards to stay out of trouble. Safety in having healthy boundaries with the world is not salvation.
that's nice, but beside the point.

[KWSS1976]

Standards to stay out of trouble I have heard it all now.. LOL just take Jesus out of the picture all the way around why don't ya LOL ha ha ha ha ha ha Jesus keeps me out of trouble not standards...

[Praxeas]

Standards to stay out of trouble I have heard it all now.. LOL just take Jesus out of the picture all the way around why don't ya LOL ha ha ha ha ha ha Jesus keeps me out of trouble not standards...
I can understand a "standard" that helps keep us out of trouble. But I would say a standard of praying, reading the bible, walking in the Spirit to keep your faith strong and healthy and avoiding certain things like certain movies or other media.

[CC1]

I can understand a "standard" that helps keep us out of trouble. But I would say a standard of praying, reading the bible, walking in the Spirit to keep your faith strong and healthy and avoiding certain things like certain movies or other media.

I go much further in you regarding standards. Here are a few I think the church should protect the saints with;

1. Don't step off the curb in front of cement trucks.
2. Don't make fat women angry
3. Don't display the confederate flag on the back of your pickup while touring
Harlem.
4. Don't spit in the wind
5. Don't believe a Democrat politican

[CC1]

Standards to stay out of trouble I have heard it all now.. LOL just take Jesus out of the picture all the way around why don't ya LOL ha ha ha ha ha ha Jesus keeps me out of trouble not standards...

Yup. Heaven forbid we would let the Holy Spirit, prayer, the knowldege of God's word, common sense, etc guide us. We need someone handing us a laundry list of do's and don'ts that go far beyond any moral law and into the very details of every day existence.

[Praxeas]

I go much further in you regarding standards. Here are a few I think the church should protect the saints with;

1. Don't step off the curb in front of cement trucks.
2. Don't make fat women angry
3. Don't display the confederate flag on the back of your pickup while touring
Harlem.
4. Don't spit in the wind
5. Don't believe a Democrat politican
Never utter "Blue Denim Whale" in mixed company

[CC1]

never utter "blue denim whale" in mixed company

roflmbo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!