Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170511)

First off, Joseph Prince is a trinitarian "the grace of God covers everything" kind of preacher. I'd be very careful of opening my spirit to anyone who's not Apostolic.

Second, tell which Holiness standards you are referring to. Some people have different definitions.

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170511)

First off, Joseph Prince is a trinitarian "the grace of God covers everything" kind of preacher. I'd be very careful of opening my spirit to anyone who's not Apostolic.

Second, tell which Holiness standards you are referring to. Some people have different definitions.

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind (Post 1170519)

what doesn't the grace of god cover?

Originally Posted by CC1 (Post 1170521)

Yup cause heaven knows Oneness people know everything

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170524)

In other words, it doesn't matter if I sin, it doesn't matter if I'm in the will of God, the grace supercedes and makes it all better for me.
You cannot earn righteousness, Romans 5 outlines this pretty well.

My personal standards are to keep me separate from the world and to please the Lord.

I will not say people who do not follow holiness are going to hell. But I will say that it is probably not pleasing to the Lord.

That's really what we should want to do...is please the Lord.

Remember, my good works are not counted to me as righteousness, but my good works are because of the debt that I owe Him. (See Romans 4:4)

Originally Posted by CC1 (Post 1170521)

Yup cause heaven knows Oneness people know everything and cannot possibly be ministered to by trinitarians.

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind (Post 1170528)

joseph prince does not condone sin. he does teach that all of our sins, past present and future are forgiven when we believe.

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170526)

I'm sorry if I inferred that "oneness people" know everything. But I do believe oneness apostolic pentecostals are the one's that got it nailed when it comes to the godhead....

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 1170531)

We oneness people don't even agree among ourselves on "the godhead." There is no singe oneness doctrine of "the godhead" just like there is no single trinitarian doctrine of "the godhead."

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 1170616)

OSAS
Once Saved Always Saved
Isn't once enough?

Originally Posted by Bro. Robbins (Post 1170592)

Back tot he original post...

I believe Prince is dangerous in that I believe he teaches Enternal Security, once in grace always in grace. I was born into that doctrine and know all the arguments, and I believe he cheapens grace to be honest.

Regarding the standards... the issue isn't the standard itself, but the heart of the person keeping the standard, so you have to go on a person by person basis.

Grace brings about Righteousness... that is not something anyone can earn. It is a free gift of God. We must walk in that grace... walk in that covenant, and that requires a daily walk making the decision to pick up our cross and live a life like Jesus, but we cannot earn it.

It's just like a ticket to enter into a beautiful park. There is a price, but someone paid the price for me and gives me the ticket for free. I must not only accept the ticket, but decide to walk into the park and enjoy it. I do have the choice to step out of that park at anytime... and give my ownership of the ticket up anytime. That's not me earning, or unearning the ticket... it's me deciding to walk in what's mine or not.

NOW..... the standards, in my opinion and teaching, have nothing to do with Righteousness. They have to do with Holiness, which means nothing about Righteousness. Holiness is about separation.... I believe living the standards that I'm convicted on and find in Scripture earn me nothing regarding righteousness. It does bring about separation in my life, or Holiness... but it does not bring forth righteousness.

Righteousness comes from nothing but the shed blood of Calvary. And

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170532)

Love you bro Sam.

With all respect, and all honor due to you as an elder, I've never experienced disagreeing with any other oneness apostolic other than on this forum. I'm also United Pentecostal and I'm speaking from that viewpoint.

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 1170529)

But we read a Bible translated by trinitarians which was authorized by a pervert for use in a trinity church ---the Anglican (English Catholic) Church; we sing songs written by trinitarians, we read textbooks, Bible Study material and sermons written by trinitarians, etc.

One time several years ago some of us were watching one of the Gaither videos and enjoying the singing with the anointing and blessing of God and someone said, "How come trinitarians write all the good songs?" and a preacher answered, "Because we're too busy fighting with one another to write songs.

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170530)

That's bogus.

One example. If future sins are forgiven when one believes, then why was Annanias and Sapphira struck dead for lying to the Holy Ghost?

If they were already forgiven, why would this have happened?

We were born into sin, shapen in iniquity. Yes, when we come to Christ and receive the new birth experience, the power of sin is broken over our lives but that's not a free ticket to live like the devil and yet still enjoy the grace of God and that power he gave to us.

I don't have the power over sin, but the Holy Ghost gives me the power over sin when He takes residence in my life.

Galatians 5:16 says "This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh."

1 John 2:16 says "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."

You have a choice to walk in the Spirit, which will give you the power over sin. You also have the choice to walk in the lust of the flesh.



I do not believe He will be pleased if all of a sudden I started dressing in a provacative fashion, letting my hair grow long, etc.

Here's the reason why. If I were to do that, it would only be out of a spirit of rebellion.

Some things I'm told to do that I don't agree with. For example, no shorts for men. I'm not personally convicted for that. I believe that if a lady can wear a skirt to her calf or below her knee, then I should be able to wear shorts the same length.

But I obey my Pastor out of obedience. I believe a spirit of obedience is much better than a spirit of rebellion.

(By the way, I love my Pastor very much and he is far from a control freak.)

Bottom line. If you feel that dressing any way you want doesn't matter to the Lord, that's between you and Him. I'm not placing myself as the judge between you and your convictions. All I can say is that, personally, I feel God is pleased when I dress modestly, when my speech is clean, and when I'm living holy.

Godliness is profitable.

Originally Posted by Amanah (Post 1170613)

I don't know DM, I think it's hard to live for God without some personal standards.

For instance, if Friday night finds me getting drunk and sleeping around with a few of my closest friends,

Sat finds me laying on the couch with a hangover watching porn on Dish and snorting coke,

Sun most likely will not find me in a proper state to worship God,

Just saying.

"My life is my message." ~ Gandhi

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind (Post 1170721)

like i told bro joe. prince does not condone sin. he argues that radical grace makes you fall in love with jesus and overcome sin. i am just saying that standards as a means of earning righteousness is nonbiblical. not condoning sin at all, but i was mainly referring to hair, pants, jewelery and makeup.

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170736)

I'm telling you bro, Dr. Bernard explains all of your inquiries in that video series I posted. He explains it much better than I can.

Standards always point back to the condition of the heart. I follow and have standards because of my relationship with Jesus, not because I'm trying to attain righteousness. Jesus is my righteousness. My righteousness is as filthy rags.

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170524)

In other words, it doesn't matter if I sin, it doesn't matter if I'm in the will of God, the grace supercedes and makes it all better for me.



You cannot earn righteousness, Romans 5 outlines this pretty well.




My personal standards are to keep me separate from the world and to please the Lord.

I will not say people who do not follow holiness are going to hell. But I will say that it is probably not pleasing to the Lord.

That's really what we should want to do...is please the Lord.

Remember, my good works are not counted to me as righteousness, but my good works are because of the debt that I owe Him. (See Romans 4:4)

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170737)

It's amazing to me that anyone who has any types of boundaries, any type of standards about clothing, conduct, and speech, people automatically begin to cry legalism.

I can't say this enough. It's the condition of my heart and the relationship with Jesus that drives me to live holy.

Originally Posted by tv1a (Post 1170754)

Gotta love people who can articulate intelligently about a book they haven't read. Still waiting for that person to show up.

Originally Posted by tv1a (Post 1170755)

Legalism as defined by Paul in Galatians the the imposition of non-biblical mandates as a requirement for salvation.

Legalism is the imposition of one's personal convictions (for the lack of a better word) on another person.

Legalism is the selective application of principles.

Paul says legalism is demonic. He asked the Galatians who put a spell on them to turn from faith in the power of the cross.

When you judge another's relationship with God based your personal convictions you are a legalist.

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170530)

That's bogus.

One example. If future sins are forgiven when one believes, then why was Annanias and Sapphira struck dead for lying to the Holy Ghost?

If they were already forgiven, why would this have happened?

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind (Post 1170716)

if god hasn't forgiven all future sin what does heb 10:12 mean?

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

i haven't finished the book but christ was judged for sin once.

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind (Post 1170766)

second quote bump for bro joe

Joseph Prince says that annanias and saphira were not christians. they are referred to in acts as "there was a man named annanias" whereas to christians the book of acts would say, "there is a disciple named...". The name of annanias means grace, but when saphira is added it means mixing grace with law because the law was written on saphire stone. christ was judged for the sins of believers, there is no more judgement for believers. all of our future sins were forgiven at repentance and faith in christ. Knowing that your sins are forgiven should empower you to live above sin.

Originally Posted by HolyFire

They were in the church. Dude's way off base. He's trying to say there is no backsliding, which is unscriptural. See Hebrews.

Originally Posted by BroJoe (Post 1170530)

That's bogus.

One example. If future sins are forgiven when one believes, then why was Annanias and Sapphira struck dead for lying to the Holy Ghost?

If they were already forgiven, why would this have happened?
...

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 1170784)

I don't really know if Ananias and Sapphira were saved or not.
One explanation of what happened is that they were delivered over to satan for the destruction of the flesh that their spirits might be saved" according to 1 Corinthians 5

Originally Posted by houston (Post 1170773)

What about Hebrews?

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind (Post 1170740)

i believe I watched that series several months ago. But even bro Bernard is now talking about apostolic "identity". standards are about identity not biblical holiness.

Originally Posted by Bro. Robbins (Post 1170624)

You know what is meant by that terminology.