[votivesoul]

Yes. Receive me as I describe myself to be. But do not necessarily receive my thoughts.

Not all that glitters is gold, Don. You saying something about yourself and that thing being factually true to reality are not the same. Surely you know this? Surely you know people claim all kinds of things about themselves, without making those claims true in any sense. Since I cannot believe you do not know this, I can only surmise you are playing games.

Toe the party line whether or not it disagrees with the Bible? Your point is clearly made.

Don, you’re a piece of work, you know that? I am the last person to toe the party line, and if you had spent any length of time here and gotten to know me, you’d know that. Nevertheless, there are actual Apostolic hermeneutics available to you, and you don’t make use of them. I don’t mean UPCI hermeneutics, or ALJC hermeneutics, but Biblical hermeneutics as used by the Apostles, and therefore, Apostolic in origin, and yet you do not avail yourself of them. Rather, you approach the Scriptures from what can be described as a Gnostic hermeneutic. You seek subtextual knowledge. You read “between the lines” to gather information and formulate doctrine. This is the work of a Gnostic, not an Apostolic.

Pray tell, how does providing an example for clarity portray something as ridiculous? It doesn't. Does your use of such a word then demonstrate a bias against the one saying it?

In all the realms of the world, some things in life are ridiculous, and those with a lick of common sense know it. Immediately after I locked your 1 Corinthians 11 IV thread, you create this thread and make use of your novel doctrine as the prime example of how Romans 14 has been routinely ignored or misrepresented, thereby indicating that men have been unfairly denied teaching and preaching positions in local Apostolic congregations because they dare to have a unique view of a particular topic. Sure, I can agree that men have been unfairly denied teaching and preaching roles in local Apostolic churches at time, but that doesn’t make your example and the hypothetical that follows, not ridiculous in nature.

This is indeed true, with my having stated so other times. I have not denied this.

But we’re just all supposed to believe your hypothetical isn’t about you, simply on your word that it isn’t? Well, guess what? You haven’t given your word that your hypothetical isn’t about you, because you refuse to say, even when directly asked, hence playing coy.

You've asked me to be honest, votivesoul. Plz be honest with me. Was the closing of the 1Co11 thread motivated by the personal revulsion your Apostolic hermeneutics felt?

I told you why I closed your thread in a PM. Believe me or not, I gave you my reasons. As far as your hermeneutic goes, you interpret the Scriptures however you want, man. I don’t care. You and Jesus are going to work it out in the end, same as me and everyone else. If I’ve expressed revulsion (kind of a strong word, but I’ll go with it for your sake), it’s because I think you’re manner of interpreting the Scriptures is bunk. You regularly employ eisogesis, you ignore context, and read the text, not as it presents itself on the page, but rather, by looking instead through some subjective cypher you’ve concocted in your own mind. You allege things against God, and the Apostles Christ personally chose, etc. Anyone in their right mind would be revolted. You even contradict the clear teachings of the Scriptures, claiming Moses wasn’t faithful when he was called, even though we are told Moses was faithful in all his house (Hebrews 3:5). You would have us believe you, and not the Word.

I'd deny any temper tantrum. Surely there are other phrases which would have been more apt to use. But what's the big deal about whether or not it is so? Why is it worth highlighting here? My arguments/views wouldn't be affected by this one way or another. It is moot for you to mention it.

Not moot. It is germane to who you are as a man, as someone professing himself to be a teacher of the Holy Scriptures on this forum. And as far as tantrum is concerned, it is entirely appropriate. You were asked some direct questions. Easily answered, had you the courage and forthrightness of heart to answer them. But you decided to take your ball and go home. That is to say, you acted like a child, like a brat who can’t play well with others, hence “tantrum”.

My yea and nay are just that.

Then answer the questions. If you were interviewing for a pastoral or preaching position, or for a license with an Apostolic organization, you’d answer these questions without hesitation. But here, amongst the strangers and nobodies of the internet, you won’t even try. But since you prefer to forfeit your turn, let me show you how it’s done:

Votivesoul,

1.) How long have you been in the Apostolic (i.e. Oneness Pentecostal) Faith?

Nearly 23 years. I personally don’t care for the labels, and don’t associate myself with them, but as far as experience goes, that’s how long.

2.) When were you baptized in the name of Jesus?

March 9th, 2003, by Assistant Pastor Mark Showalter, under the ministry of founding shepherd Pastor Dwight Davis (deceased) at an affiliated UPCI church called Rock of Jesus Apostolic Church, formerly of Elkhorn, WI, USA, but now dissolved.

3.) When did you receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit, speaking with other tongues?

March 9th, 2003, at my baptism.

4.) Are you currently attending an Apostolic (i.e. Oneness Pentecostal) Faith Church?

For the last few months, I am currently attending an independent, local, Acts 2:38 preaching Church of Christ after I was invited there to minister by the widow and daughter of the founding shepherd, who passed away last summer. Before that, I’ve only ever attended Apostolic/Oneness Pentecostal Churches, having converted as an adult, with no prior church history as a child.

5.) Are you the BS of your own hypothetical in this thread?

Clearly not.

6.) Are you the one who was denied a "word serving position" at your local congregation for holding the IV view?

No.

Ouch! get lost sets the stage for my expulsion.

No. Breaking forum rules sets the stage, and you haven’t broken any rules. Otherwise, see previous comments above.

No one needs to dance to my tune. The tune I play can be silenced easily, by showing the error of the reasoning I've used to present it or showing my scriptural interpretations with fault. Dom has adequately presented much evidence to a view I agree with. But Dom's doing this has not destroyed the foundations I've shown for my views. Dom misses the mark he should target. (And so also in my other threads.)

None are so blind as those who refuse to see. In your closed thread on the IV view of 1 Corinthians 11, I asked you what evidence would you be willing to accept to show that your view of the text is wrong. Instead of giving me or AFF an idea of what you think could help disprove your view to you, according to your own metrics, you only answered me by saying “What a strange question”.

You thereby show, as far as you’re concerned, no one can disprove your claims and beliefs. In the Eschatology Section of the forum, our resident Biblical Historist, Esaias created a thread inviting members to post criticisms and problems with the Historist view of Prophecy, thus showing his integrity and honesty, that his position and view could actually be assailed. You, however, were taught the IV by Jesus Christ. You said so yourself. Dance around that all you like, like you did before, but I am quoting you verbatim and you know it. So, how can you be wrong since Rabbi Jesus teaches you to believe the IV view, without the Son of God Himself being wrong. It’s all wrapped up in a tidy little bow of self-aggrandizement and deception. Sad.

Labels mean little. Whether I am called an Apostolic or a Christian, it changes nothing of the thoughts I present. I'm surprised you would make demands of any one particular member to provide such proofs.

You’re surprised. This is a forum where people share themselves, their lives, their beliefs and views, their prayer needs, their testimonies, and updates on life and love and etc. But someone who lurked here for 4 years before posting waltzes in, expecting us to receive him and his teachings, while refusing to tell us something of his experience in the Apostolic Faith, who only wants us to debate views and ideas, but care not for the man behind the curtain? The Great and Powerful Oz, indeed!

As someone in AFF pointed out, about using pseudonyms in AFF and not real names, anyone can make any claims in AFF they want and no one would be the wiser. Fake 'real-names' would not be really exposed until the givers of them reveal themselves. So also with any titles of believers, or responses in answers to the questions you've asked of me. AFF operates on trust.

Come off it, you hypocrite. You know exactly why I made those comments to you. You were virtue signaling about how you used your real name as a screenname, while accusing me of hiding behind a screenname, as if doing so gave you some moral high ground from which to stand and proclaim.

My real name is Don Friesen. I'm known here in AFF, and a Youtube replier, as donfriesen1. User10859 in Stack Exchange.

I'll not answer your questions unless all members are required to do so to be a poster/member. Why do I get special treatment?

Required? No. But it would be to your benefit and might help engender some trust with you. As it stands, that doesn’t appear to be something you desire. So, good on you. You do you, and keep on rocking in the free world, and all that.

I'm an Apostolic. Apostolics are so because of Jn3 and Ac2. Those who comply with its requirements are Apostolic. I am Apostolic. It matters little if some do not call me one. Nothing changes. But even that much is not needed to be known for Bible discussion forum membership.

This is all it takes to be of and/or pertaining to the Apostles and their Doctrine? Please.

(Continued...)