Apostolic Friends Forum - Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)

- Fellowship Hall (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7)

- - Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=25079)

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquila (Post 773976)

Here's what disturbs me. When asked what sin is most answer with "missing the mark", "lawlessness", "whatever isn't of faith", and all this ooey gooey stuff. None of these is an answer. Why? Because anyone can expand on any of them and make anything a sin. I want to specifically know... what is "sin"? What things constitute "sin"? Personally, I believe the answer is simple. But most will expand on one of the answers above and list sports, beards, smoking, drinking, pants on women, women with cut hair, blah, blah, blah, as being "sin". None of these is specifically said to be "sin" in Scripture. Defining "sin" is very important.

Aquila, I categorically disagree with you. I understand your worry for the "sin campaign" and those that want to label anything and everything, but we need to use the Text for defining sin, and all the ooey gooey is from the Text.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherri (Post 773998)

MOST DEFINITELY!! I believe that with all my heart.

Me too.

You know, some people on this forum think you can receive the HG and not speak in tongues. I don't see how they can read the book of Acts and think that.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Moses. poor guy. He had standards. He also had no scripture to back it up.
We all have standards. No exceptions. The question is where they come from.
He did leave them in writing. Popular for sharing standards? Not so much.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarah (Post 774026)

Me too.

You know, some people on this forum think you can receive the HG and not speak in tongues. I don't see how they can read the book of Acts and think that.

"wishfull thinking" "

self justification
Catholics teach recieving the Holy Ghost upon infant water baptism

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

I just found this thread a few moments ago and have tried to read every page before jumping in. This is exactly what I need to talk about!!!
When I met and married my husband 12 years ago, he was a new convert and did not understand all that we did (ie.. women no pants and long hair, and men no facial hair and no shorts etc). But at this time it was no longer being preached from the pulpit like I had been used to growing up. I remember having a heated discusion with my husband over this matter about 10 yrs ago, and I told him then that I felt like it wouldn't be long before we would see changes in the the members concerning outward appearance.
Well it has slowly come to pass and I myself have made some changes that i thought would never happen. I wear a moderate amount of make-up, I paint my toe nails, I still have long hair but it's a lot shorter than it has ever been and I decided to dye it about 5 weeks ago to get ride of the gray that was starting. Just this summer I have opening started wearing Capri pants and I allowed my 7yr old to have her ears peirced.
I still hold a position in the church, (on stage) but there are times that I have this overwhelming since that I am doing something wrong. The first time I wore Capri pants out of the house we were going to a theme park and I told my husband that it must have been a pentecostal convention going on because everytime I turned around I saw some one I knew or someone that I knew was pentecostal because of the hair and clothes.I wanted to hide!!!
But My husband told me a few month later that to him.... it was as if I had been brain washed all my life and now he understood why people thought our church was a cult. I grew up believing that I would go to hell for doing the things I do now. I was scared as a 12 yr old because my mom cut my hair and put in layers because of the headaches I had due to my thick long hair, but I felt condemned.

It is hard, I am having to retrain myself and search the scriptures for myself (which is what i should have been doing all along). It's like I read on page 1 or 2 of this thread "you remove outward standards or guidelines and you find out real fast how strong someone's relationship with God is." I found that mine was not very strong at all!! I have had a real eye opener in the last 6 months and it has been a real battle for me. But I have to keep on keeping on and trust that the lord will lead me through! I'm still finding my way.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrowingPains (Post 774006)

Oh I see. You don't teach the HG is essential to salvation, FreeAtLast does, but teaches it comes packages with baptism. You believe the HG is the empowerment for ministry to a believer, and that it is still evidenced with tongues. Do I have that correct?

Thanks for the clarification.

We do not teach baptismal regenertion. Christ moves into a persons life when they hear in faith, and believe the gospel is for them.

Baptism follows a persons commitment to Christ.

Salvation is a procees my friends, always ongoing. We error when we want to define "the moment" salvation takes place.

I'll ask you all a question. Is salvation and conversion the same thing??

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrowingPains (Post 774006)

Oh I see. You don't teach the HG is essential to salvation, FreeAtLast does, but teaches it comes packages with baptism. You believe the HG is the empowerment for ministry to a believer, and that it is still evidenced with tongues. Do I have that correct?

Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, correct on my part. Freeatlast would have to speak for himself.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarah (Post 774026)

Me too.

You know, some people on this forum think you can receive the HG and not speak in tongues. I don't see how they can read the book of Acts and think that.

I actually know a lot of people who believe it that way. They just interpret the Scriptures differently than we do, and that's between them and God. But for us.........this is how we see it. And I've seen so many filled with the Holy Ghost, I can't deny the tongues part.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrowingPains (Post 773438)

Aquila, I don't think sin is black and white. We can ignore God's promptings in our personal life, and begin to resist and disobey Him, and it still not be a uniform law for mankind. (James 4:17)

I believe that when it comes to “sin” it is black and white. Something is sin or it isn’t, else there isn’t an absolute standard and sin becomes relative. That’s one of the problems with Pentecost today. We’ve set aside God’s Word on the issue and we’ve allowed men to define what is and isn’t sin leading to a confusing mess of legalistic standards that differ from church to church. Then when these standards begin to fall people loose their way because they were never truly taught about sin and living for God. All they’ve been taught are rules and traditions of men.

Quote:

Circumcision wasn't sin, eating pork wasn't a sin --- but this was the issues Paul had to deal with when he talked about considering your brother. This has to mean something to us today. How do you interpret it?

Circumcision’s purpose was to serve as a covenantal sign setting apart the Israelites from idolaters. So too was the rule against eating swine’s flesh (something commonly consumed in pagan rituals). Essentially these ceremonial laws were designed to re-enforce the 1st and 2nd Commandments. When Paul addresses these issues in the early church it’s in the context of a dominant pagan culture, a captive Jewish culture, and a new born church. Jewish Christians felt circumcision was a law to be obeyed because it would continually separate the Church from idolaters. Likewise some “weaker brothers” had been idolaters and consuming meat sacrificed to idols deeply troubled or tempted them back into various idolatrous practices. Paul had to set a tone between those who felt the ceremonial laws were still necessary and those who didn’t. Paul explains that the ceremonial laws of Moses were unbeneficial to true Christian Spirituality. But today if a person feels “offended” over a ham sandwich it’s because they are uppity wimps with a chip on their shoulder who want to try to control what other people do. These don’t need to be catered to… they need to be given a quick spiritual kick in the hinder parts and told to lighten up and let go of their passive aggressive spirituality.

But please take note… these ceremonial laws were not designed to be eternal. They were designed to reinforce something far greater, God’s moral law - the Ten Commandments. (This is a glaring clue of where I’m going here.)

Quote:

I'm not talking about individual-by-individual, but I'm referring to it in the context of this thread: of larger, seasoned churches suddenly changing. In the individual context, I will be as cognizant as I can without offending my brother. Does that mean I keep my face smooth at all times? No. It's not written down, it's just an attitude. And it's not about seeing the other brother weaker than I, it's about understanding our mutual human condition, and fragileness. If we love our brother, our personal liberty won't be as important as our concern with their harm. How we dice that up... I'll keep it on this level. Slow is the way to go. Then again, like I previously posted, someone will force your hand, and what will you say? God give grace to our minister's lips. Let us not turn from rules and questionable doctrines into free-spirited asses that have no yoke... but let us realize the severe importance of God's soft and easy yoke, turning when we feel his tender nudge.

But there again… how would your wearing facial hair “harm” a weaker brother? There’s nothing in Scripture condemning facial hair. Why would this harm anyone? That’s like me being upset that you bought a Toyota instead of a Chrysler. What is there to be offended about? Maybe it could be said that I’m a weak and offended brother who feels like your purchase only strengthened the pagan culture of Japan and I’ve always been tempted to become Buddhist (No offense to any of our Buddhist friends who may be reading). But the truth is… you shouldn’t have to walk on spiritual eggshells around anyone. I can understand if a behavior or practice tempted one to sin. But let’s get real. Some people are offended over unbiblical traditions. Instead of tip toeing around these individuals, they need to be nourished and instructed in the Word of God.

So I think it’ of the utmost importance to establish exactly what is and what isn’t sin.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest

Quote:

Originally Posted by missourimary (Post 773996)

Sin is anything that hurts another person, hurts oneself, or separates us from God. For example:

Prov 16
16These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

1 Cor 6
9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Mt 19
16And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
20The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?
21Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Ex 20
3Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
6And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
8Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
12Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13Thou shalt not kill.
14Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15Thou shalt not steal.
16Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Excellent answer! Now THAT'S what I was looking for.

I think everything listed above can find it's classification somewhere in the Ten Commandments themselves. I believe that the Ten Commandments define sin and reveal God's Holiness. A violation of one of the Ten Commandments is sin. The rest is just filler.