Welcome Fellow Christians - Steve Pixler 8/17/14

[Abiding Now]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Bump. Just worth saying again....in case it was missed.

so glad I left

Somewhere, I imagine there's a preacher and congregation that IF they ever even think of you are rejoicing with you and are HAPPY you left.

[houston]

Originally Posted by Abiding Now

Somewhere, I imagine there's a preacher and congregation that IF they ever even think of you are rejoicing with you and are HAPPY you left.

I am glad he left. I am thrilled that I left. I am elated.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

What do you define as freedom in Christ? Some mistake freedom from sin and freedom to sin. I am not saying this to JB specifically, but to whoever wants to give me a view of Christian liberty.

You are correct in noting that some people mistake freedom from sin as freedom to sin. I began typing a long explanation of my theories as to why that is, then deleted it. Suffice it to say for right now, I believe you are absolutely right, and really it all comes down to what someone loves.

Do they love Christ or do they love the world. If they love the world their "freedom" will be to indulge in the world, which will eventually ensnare them. In which case did they ever really belong to Christ anyway, or in the oneness pentecostal vernacular-did they ever really have the Holy Ghost?

However if someone truly LOVES Jesus Christ, and they LOVE the Word of God, and their hearts desire is NOT to indulge in the things of the world, but to truly know Him. To glorify Him. To grow in holiness. Then this world won't ensnare them, because it has nothing to offer them. I'd like to think I fall into this group of people, but only God knows my heart.

So this leads me to your question about freedom. As a UC-OP myself for a decade my lifestyle revolved around the holiness code. I threw my TV out. I would not even wear a weeding ring though they were permitted. I wouldn't even wear a watch. Like Paul said "I was a Pharisee of Pharisees". Like Luther said "If ever a monk could be saved by monkery, I was he." I kept standards to a T. I denied myself things that I enjoyed that weren't sinful, yet I was told they were worldly. I can't say I kept the standard perfectly, but there was a stretch of about 6 of those 10 years where I was the poster boy for UC oneness pentecostalism, the champion of standards. The harder the preaching the better. That's why I said I'd amen every word of Steve Epley, because I would amen every word of Lee Westburg preaching about "we need a Phineas to put a spear through the heart of those trinitarian loving dudes!" I was ok with those types of sentiments. But in the back of my mind it didn't sit right, however I justified it, because it was "truth".

Nevertheless, (I digressed) if someone truly loves Christ, and years to know Him more, to draw close to Him, to dwell in His Kingdom of righteousness here and forever. Then this world has nothing for them, and that where freedom comes in . I believe Augustine is credited with the saying "Love God and do what you'd like." That is so true if people could ever get a hold of it. If people truly love God they don't need to be told what to watch on TV, because when they watch something that is ungodly the Holy Ghost will convict them. They will not get pleasure or entertainment from ungodly TV (the same for movies and music--that which entertains us often reveals what we love. If we love Christ we can never long be entertained by those things which are contrary to His Character and commandments).
If someone love God they will know how to cover up their body, without a laundry list of rules. If someone loves Christ they are not likely to go to places where ungodliness abounds (they don't need to be told to avoid them, they do so by choice). And in the instances they do intermingle with the world (which really all of us do. OPs don't go to ballgames and theme parks -least didn't used to, but still go to the grocery store, restaurants, and the mall )--we do it as salt and light. I enjoy going to Texas Rangers ball games. I don't drink. I don't cuss. I don't even boo (I boo'd Josh Hamilton, a local heel, one time and then felt bad about it). I believe I can go to a baseball game and not have committed sin, much less an unforgivable sin (so many times in UC-OP its all of nothing-"If you go to a baseball game, you'll go to hell. If you have a beard, you'll go to hell. If you read the funny papers you'll go to hell).

YET, I still have not answered your question about freedom in Christ. My freedom in Christ comes from realizing that I am saved by His righteousness alone. I can never be righteous enough to meet God's standard of perfect righteousness. If my salvation in any way hinges on my ability to keep standards I am doomed and hopeless. I kept standards for years yet still had imperfect motives, thoughts, and deeds. When we realize that when we stand before God on judgment day God imputes our sin to Christ and has imputed Christ's righteousness to us, that gives great peace. That being so, what can I add to His perfect righteousness by not cutting my hair, not wearing an ear ring, not wearing a pair of shorts, not playing recreational softball, not having a TV in my home? I can add nothing at all to His perfect record, so I have peace and rest in Him.

And that is what some UC-OPs are concerned about. They think that attitude and theology leads to antinomianism and "greasy grace". But it does not, not in those who have truly been born again and have the Spirit dwelling within them. For if the Spirit indeed dwells within us, then our greatest desire is to live a life of holiness. No one who truly is born of the Spirit would ever take Christ's sacrifice on our behalf for granted. No one who has the Spirit dwelling within would count His blood a common thing. It is realizing the sacrifice He made for us, and the penalty that sin demands, that we forever live the rest of our lives in gratitude to Jesus Christ. And as we live in the shadow of that thankfulness for the unspeakable kindness of God toward us, how could we ever truly desire NOT to live a life which glorifies Him?

And so freedom in Christ is rooted in understanding that we have been justified by faith in His blood. God has imputed His righteousness to us. We no longer have to labor, and keep all the rules/standards to be saved. We don't have to fret about whether a dress is too short or a sleeve is too short. Or if this a slide show or a moving picture. Or any of the hundreds of meticulous standards various people have preached over the last 60 years have to be observed to be saved. We're free to love God and live how we'd like. Because if we truly LOVE God (in the Biblical sense-with our ALL our heart, soul, mind, and strength) then our desire will be to please Him, and so as we do what we "want" we are actually doing what He "wants". And so in this way we actually fulfill the Law as the Apostle Paul wrote. Yet without all the mental anguish of "did I do good enough today?" "What if I die in my sleep?" Or "I wore pants today because it was cold, no one saw me, but what if I die in a car accident, I'm guilty of rebellion" all such spiritual burden and oppression is gone.

I am free to live my life. I am free from sin. I am free from standards. And yet in being made free from sin, I willingly submit to Jesus Christ as my Lord, Savior, and Master, and I say "put the awl in my ear, I want to be a bond servant in your house forever".

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Abiding Now

Somewhere, I imagine there's a preacher and congregation that IF they ever even think of you are rejoicing with you and are HAPPY you left.

Probably.

Actually the last oneness pastor I had preached against me for 6 months after I left. He also said I would backslide within 3 years. And 1 year ago last May He prophesied to my face that the Lord would kill me for not teaching the initial evidence doctrine.

Don't get me wrong, I may die, I can't take a single day for granted, every day is a gift of God, but I've had a lot of doom and spoken to me, and yet all I've found is a growing relationship with Christ. And also an ability even to love the man (and pray for him, and buy his hamburgers-he recently opened a business) who prophesied these things to me.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

I wore pants today because it was cold, no one saw me, but what if I die in a car accident, I'm guilty of rebellion" all such spiritual burden and oppression is gone.

I think the bigger question should be, what happens when it's not cold and people see you aren't wearing pants?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Probably.

Actually the last oneness pastor I had preached against me for 6 months after I left. He also said I would backslide within 3 years. And 1 year ago last May He prophesied to my face that the Lord would kill me for not teaching the initial evidence doctrine.

Don't get me wrong, I may die, I can't take a single day for granted, every day is a gift of God, but I've had a lot of doom and spoken to me, and yet all I've found is a growing relationship with Christ. And also an ability even to love the man (and pray for him, and buy his hamburgers-he recently opened a business) who prophesied these things to me.

Is that the preacher whose CDs you gave me?

[MissBrattified]

I understand the great disappointment and misgivings that any conservative Apostolic would have over Steve Pixler going a liberal direction, assuming that's what he's doing. Obviously if you feel strongly enough about [any particular] doctrine to believe that it's a salvation-maker-or-breaker, then you would feel strongly enough to want people to be under different leadership--out of concern for their souls.

That said, I don't understand the complete departure from biblical protocol for someone who is going astray. Shouldn't each minister who is concerned set up a private meeting with Steve Pixler to try to dissuade him from his views? If that doesn't work out, shouldn't there then be a meeting with a few more ministers present? And if that doesn't work, shouldn't an open-to-the-whole-church-meeting be called to discuss his views and decisions?

Who knows what kinds of agreements, resolutions, and compromises could be reached if people simply followed the NT prescription for precisely these types of situations. Instead, the modus operandi is to isolate oneself from the offending party, gossip about them, tear up their reputation, criticize, "warn" other people against them, etc.

It always amazes me, the lengths to which we'll go to avoid any given biblical method. God gives us the perfect solution, and we still set about doing it all our way--the way that most pleases our flesh. The problem is that doing things carnally results in destruction, chaos and death. There's a reason why Paul said to let those who are "spiritual" restore those who are taken in a "fault"--in a spirit of meekness.

Mind you, I'm not making statements about SP or drawing conclusions about his recent messages. I haven't had time to listen to any of the sermons that have been linked on this forum, and I'm not privy to any personal facts about this situation (not that I would share them, even if I were). It does seem to me that biblical protocol ought to matter. Actually, it should be of the utmost importance to anyone who is truly concerned for Steve Pixler and his congregation.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Is that the preacher whose CDs you gave me?

Yep. Indeed.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I understand the great disappointment and misgivings that any conservative Apostolic would have over Steve Pixler going a liberal direction, assuming that's what he's doing. Obviously if you feel strongly enough about [any particular] doctrine to believe that it's a salvation-maker-or-breaker, then you would feel strongly enough to want people to be under different leadership--out of concern for their souls.

That said, I don't understand the complete departure from biblical protocol for someone who is going astray. Shouldn't each minister who is concerned set up a private meeting with Steve Pixler to try to dissuade him from his views? If that doesn't work out, shouldn't there then be a meeting with a few more ministers present? And if that doesn't work, shouldn't an open-to-the-whole-church-meeting be called to discuss his views and decisions?

Who knows what kinds of agreements, resolutions, and compromises could be reached if people simply followed the NT prescription for precisely these types of situations. Instead, the modus operandi is to isolate oneself from the offending party, gossip about them, tear up their reputation, criticize, "warn" other people against them, etc.

It always amazes me, the lengths to which we'll go to avoid any given biblical method. God gives us the perfect solution, and we still set about doing it all our way--the way that most pleases our flesh. The problem is that doing things carnally results in destruction, chaos and death. There's a reason why Paul said to let those who are "spiritual" restore those who are taken in a "fault"--in a spirit of meekness.

Mind you, I'm not making statements about SP or drawing conclusions about his recent messages. I haven't had time to listen to any of the sermons that have been linked on this forum, and I'm not privy to any personal facts about this situation (not that I would share them, even if I were). It does seem to me that biblical protocol ought to matter. Actually, it should be of the utmost importance to anyone who is truly concerned for Steve Pixler and his congregation.

I think you're right Bratti, except I doubt there would be compromise. But if these methods were followed while differences would likely still exist it is likely that people would understand where a brother is coming from and still love him, pray for him, and give him the right hand if fellowship as a brother even if not within the boundaries of the same org.

IOW perhaps they could say "I don't agree with Steve Pixler on everything, but He's my brother in Christ and I love him and pray for his church to have revival.". Instead of praying "every last saint leaves that church and he repents".

Reminds me of the claim I read on a chain email once about praying for Obama and the scripture was "let another take his place" a quotation from Psalms applied to Judas. Granted they were technically "praying" for our president but completely missed the spirit of the scripture. In the same way SEs "prayers" for SP.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Yep. Indeed.

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

I am still friends with him but we did part ways when I saw the truth of justification by faith and denied that tongues was the only universal initial evidence of the baptism of the HG.

What a friend.