Are the Assemblies of God Baptist Churches?

[Squire Robertsson]

Considering the electrons expended thus far in this discussion, all IO can say in my considered opinion is: no. Nor have I heard of them claiming to be so.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

This is what you responded to Michael:

It seems you have a poor understanding of what soul liberty is.
On one hand soul liberty is like freedom of speech; the right for every individual to practice as he sees fit, including Mormons, J.W.'s and even Muslims and Hindus.

Soul liberty, however does not give that person the right to believe that which is against the doctrine of a said church. When a person denies the virgin birth and the resurrection of Jesus Christ, that is not soul liberty, it is a denial of the fundamentals of our faith. You cannot be a Christian and deny those fundamental doctrines. There is no room for soul liberty. The same thing applies: You cannot be a Muslim and a Christian at the same time. There is no soul liberty. One has to make a choice.

In the Full Gospel Baptist, it is my opinion that the same differentiation that is there. One cannot be "Full Gospel" or AOG and be a Baptist at the same time. This is my opinion. I am thankful I live in Canada where we are able to express our opinions freely in Canada and not be castigated and attacked as you did me, when you called me the Baptist Pope for simply stating my belief. What? Did they take away your freedoms in the U.S.A.??

The church has an hierarchical form of church government. I disagree on their church government.
The church believes that the spiritual gifts are operational today.
The church is a denomination. I don't believe in denominations. I belong to an IFB church and steer clear of anything that remotely resembles a denomination.
As demonstrated above: [/COLOR]the General Council stripped him of his credentials to serve as a minister in the Assemblies of God.
There is nothing Baptist about that.
God calls a man. Man ordains a man that God has called simply recognizing God's call upon his life. The above is totally unscriptural
This Council is nothing more than a dumbed-down Catholic hierarchy IMO.
That is not the way the congregational government of a Baptist Church operates.

No, I don't believe that this church is representative in any way of a Baptist Church.

What I responded to was your charge that Baptist churches which are charismatic or have female pastors are not Baptist. You have no right to say that; such is exclusively up to the local church. You claim to be Baptist, but you thus violate more than one Baptist principle by your statement.

 

[drfuss]

Jimmy Swaggart was AOG. When he refused to submit to the two year disciplinary action required by the AOG for his actions, he had to leave the AOG. He took all of the church property with him.

 

[DHK]

What I responded to was your charge that Baptist churches which are charismatic or have female pastors are not Baptist. You have no right to say that; such is exclusively up to the local church. You claim to be Baptist, but you thus violate more than one Baptist principle by your statement.

Again, by your misinterpretation of soul liberty (freedom of speech), you would disallow me to speak or express my opinion, and then have the audacity to say that I am violating a Baptist principle--the very one you are trying to advocate--soul liberty. How ironic! :laugh:

Why are you so afraid that I express my opinion? Why is my opinion to you a violation of soul liberty? Why do you want to throw me in jail for preaching the truth. I am not in your church, archbishop. I don't need to venerate you.

Baptist and Charismatic are at odds with each other. How can two walk together except they be agreed, said Amos. Baptists believe in closed revelation; Charismatics believe in open revelation, and that is enough that never the twain shall meet. It violates that fundamental principle of what Baptists believe: "The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine." As long as there is open revelation, as Charismatics believe, then they cannot believe in the above statement.

 

[Aaron]

Considering the electrons expended thus far in this discussion, all IO can say in my considered opinion is: no. Nor have I heard of them claiming to be so.

But we have those espousing their doctrines claiming to be so right on this board.

 

[drfuss]

But we have those espousing their doctrines claiming to be so right on this board.

So? The doctrines between Calvinists and Non-Calvinists Baptists are rather basic and are greater than the differences between the Non-Calvinists Baptists and the AOG. Consider Calvinists and Non-Calvinists differences: Who Christ died for, man's response to God, etc. People here are just used to the Calvinists/Non-Calvinists differences and accept them.

 

[Bronconagurski]

Again, by your misinterpretation of soul liberty (freedom of speech), you would disallow me to speak or express my opinion, and then have the audacity to say that I am violating a Baptist principle--the very one you are trying to advocate--soul liberty. How ironic! :laugh:

Why are you so afraid that I express my opinion? Why is my opinion to you a violation of soul liberty? Why do you want to throw me in jail for preaching the truth. I am not in your church, archbishop. I don't need to venerate you.

Baptist and Charismatic are at odds with each other. How can two walk together except they be agreed, said Amos. Baptists believe in closed revelation; Charismatics believe in open revelation, and that is enough that never the twain shall meet. It violates that fundamental principle of what Baptists believe: "The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine." As long as there is open revelation, as Charismatics believe, then they cannot believe in the above statement.

Is this a good definition of open revelation?
Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians generally believe that Christians, especially "Spirit-filled" Christians can receive revelations from God in the form of dreams, visions, and audible or inaudible voices. They also believe that certain individuals are able to transmit revelations from God in the form of prophecy, words of knowledge, and speaking in tongues and interpretation of tongues.


I once attended a Faith Missionary Alliance Church for a little less than a year, my only time in the last 30 years that I have been a member of a non- Baptist Church. I left because of a charismatic persuasion that the Pastor would not deal with. He ended up leaving the church as well because others were at odds with the ideology. Anyway, this one couple were the ringleaders. They would try and give word of knowledge all the time and claim to heal people, pray in tongues, etc., to receive revelation. My brother in law was working as an airplane mechanic at US Air at the time and a labor strike was very possible. This couple told my brother in law after a service one night not to worry, that God had given them a word of knowledge that the strike would not happen. A week later, they went on strike. Oops!

I like the way the Net Bible reads here:

2 Peter 1:19-21 (NET1)
19 Moreover, we possess the prophetic word as an altogether reliable thing. You do well if you pay attention to this as you would to a light shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
20 Above all, you do well if you recognize this: No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination,
21 for no prophecy was ever borne of human impulse; rather, men carried along by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

 

[Aaron]

So? The doctrines between Calvinists and Non-Calvinists Baptists are rather basic and are greater than the differences between the Non-Calvinists Baptists and the AOG. Consider Calvinists and Non-Calvinists differences: Who Christ died for, man's response to God, etc. People here are just used to the Calvinists/Non-Calvinists differences and accept them.

What then, does it mean to be a Baptist? That's a rhetorical question. I already know what it means. I'm simply asking for a little honesty in those who are trying to broaden the term.

 

[DHK]

Is this a good definition of open revelation?
Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians generally believe that Christians, especially "Spirit-filled" Christians can receive revelations from God in the form of dreams, visions, and audible or inaudible voices. They also believe that certain individuals are able to transmit revelations from God in the form of prophecy, words of knowledge, and speaking in tongues and interpretation of tongues.


I once attended a Faith Missionary Alliance Church for a little less than a year, my only time in the last 30 years that I have been a member of a non- Baptist Church. I left because of a charismatic persuasion that the Pastor would not deal with. He ended up leaving the church as well because others were at odds with the ideology. Anyway, this one couple were the ringleaders. They would try and give word of knowledge all the time and claim to heal people, pray in tongues, etc., to receive revelation. My brother in law was working as an airplane mechanic at US Air at the time and a labor strike was very possible. This couple told my brother in law after a service one night not to worry, that God had given them a word of knowledge that the strike would not happen. A week later, they went on strike. Oops!

I like the way the Net Bible reads here:

2 Peter 1:19-21 (NET1)
19 Moreover, we possess the prophetic word as an altogether reliable thing. You do well if you pay attention to this as you would to a light shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
20 Above all, you do well if you recognize this: No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination,
21 for no prophecy was ever borne of human impulse; rather, men carried along by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

Yes, it is the often the direct "God told me in a dream,...." as to make no mistake that it is revelation.

Those days are over.
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, (Heb 1:1)
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; (Heb 1:2)
--The author of Hebrews makes it fairly clear that it was to OT prophets that he spoke through dreams, visions, etc.
Today he speaks through His Son, who is revealed to us through His Word.

 

[DHK]

So? The doctrines between Calvinists and Non-Calvinists Baptists are rather basic and are greater than the differences between the Non-Calvinists Baptists and the AOG. Consider Calvinists and Non-Calvinists differences: Who Christ died for, man's response to God, etc. People here are just used to the Calvinists/Non-Calvinists differences and accept them.

Perhaps those differences are not as great as you suppose, but only seem to be because of the heated debates that are rehashed century after century on the BB.
The truth is that we came from both the General and the Particular Baptists in England, who though their differences in those areas, seemed to get along with each other. Both were persecuted for their faith by the same "persecutors," and for the same reasons. It was William Carey, the founder of modern missions, that was sent out from a Calvinist Baptist Church.

 

[drfuss]

Perhaps those differences are not as great as you suppose, but only seem to be because of the heated debates that are rehashed century after century on the BB.
The truth is that we came from both the General and the Particular Baptists in England, who though their differences in those areas, seemed to get along with each other. Both were persecuted for their faith by the same "persecutors," and for the same reasons. It was William Carey, the founder of modern missions, that was sent out from a Calvinist Baptist Church.

That is all well and good, and it is good that they were able to get along. However, but the basic doctrinal differences between the Calvinists Baptists and the Non-Calvinists Baptists still remain; and those differences are more basic and far reaching than the lesser differences between the Non-Calvinists and the AOG.

 

[Yeshua1]

Again, by your misinterpretation of soul liberty (freedom of speech), you would disallow me to speak or express my opinion, and then have the audacity to say that I am violating a Baptist principle--the very one you are trying to advocate--soul liberty. How ironic! :laugh:

Why are you so afraid that I express my opinion? Why is my opinion to you a violation of soul liberty? Why do you want to throw me in jail for preaching the truth. I am not in your church, archbishop. I don't need to venerate you.

Baptist and Charismatic are at odds with each other. How can two walk together except they be agreed, said Amos. Baptists believe in closed revelation; Charismatics believe in open revelation, and that is enough that never the twain shall meet. It violates that fundamental principle of what Baptists believe: "The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine." As long as there is open revelation, as Charismatics believe, then they cannot believe in the above statement.

classic pentacostalists such as the AOG would TOTALLY agree with baptists as regards to the Bible ALONE ids the final and only source of revelation from God in faith and practices, its the modern chasamatics that deny that and add additional revelations of modern day prophets/apostles!

 

[Yeshua1]

That is all well and good, and it is good that they were able to get along. However, but the basic doctrinal differences between the Calvinists Baptists and the Non-Calvinists Baptists still remain; and those differences are more basic and far reaching than the lesser differences between the Non-Calvinists and the AOG.

most AOG churches would feel like arminian Baptist churches, as you would go weeks, maybe months before ANYTHING that might be troubling would arise!

And the AOG would check ANYTHING said and done in their midst by the Bible, and would reject that which does not line up with it!

Charasmatics the ones that tend to accept all things as from the "Holy Spriit!"

 

[Squire Robertsson]

And I'll oppose their assumption\presumption of Baptist privileges.

But we have those espousing their doctrines claiming to be so right on this board.

 

[Yeshua1]

And I'll oppose their assumption\presumption of Baptist privileges.

At least they would be seen as being "baptist like" correct?

 

[Jerome]

Or we're seen as being 'Pentecostal like'?

No.

 

[Yeshua1]

Or we're seen as being 'Pentecostal like'?

No.

More that we agree on though than what we would divide over!

That is assuming freew ill/arminian baptist churches the focus here, not the calvinistic/reformed bethren!

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Not even close, considering the number of non-AOG Baptistic Bible churches out there. To my way of thinking (and it matters he says putting on his Admin hat), the AOG fails the Baptistic test on at least two points of the Baptist distinctives:
Bible- The only rule for Faith and practice.
Autonomy and Independence of the Local Church

And I'll oppose their assumption\presumption of Baptist privileges.

At least they would be seen as being "baptist like" correct?

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Again, by your misinterpretation of soul liberty (freedom of speech), you would disallow me to speak or express my opinion, and then have the audacity to say that I am violating a Baptist principle--the very one you are trying to advocate--soul liberty. How ironic! :laugh:

Why are you so afraid that I express my opinion? Why is my opinion to you a violation of soul liberty? Why do you want to throw me in jail for preaching the truth. I am not in your church, archbishop. I don't need to venerate you.


I hope you do express your opinion; by doing so, you expose yourself as denying what you claim to affirm. But actually you have done more than state your opinion; you are trying to dictate to others what makes them Baptist and what disqualifies them from that. And don't slander and insult me; we don't venerate anyone in my communion. But perhaps you would feel at home in one that venerated you.


Baptist and Charismatic are at odds with each other. How can two walk together except they be agreed, said Amos. Baptists believe in closed revelation; Charismatics believe in open revelation, and that is enough that never the twain shall meet. It violates that fundamental principle of what Baptists believe: "The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine." As long as there is open revelation, as Charismatics believe, then they cannot believe in the above statement.

See my answer in red.

 

[DHK]

See my answer in red.
I hope you do express your opinion; by doing so, you expose yourself as denying what you claim to affirm. But actually you have done more than state your opinion; you are trying to dictate to others what makes them Baptist and what disqualifies them from that. And don't slander and insult me; we don't venerate anyone in my communion. But perhaps you would feel at home in one that venerated you.

You are one very confused individual.
I believe in soul liberty/freedom of speech/ the right to say and believe what I believe to be right.
You want to take away that right, a Baptist principle fought for by Baptists with their very blood; a principle upon which America was founded upon; a principle so dear to the hearts of the founders of this nation that they fled from England and the Netherlands, and some other nations to have that tolerance that is given in that Baptist principle. The exercise of that principle in Britain got one thrown in jail, or worse.

Me, dictate to you or others?? Be realistic!
I can "dictate" to you to go jump out of a plane. Are you going to submit to what I dictate? Are you my subject? What on earth are you talking about?

Your lack of understanding in the principle of soul liberty is astonishing. You think that I should be hog-tied and imprisoned or kept from saying what I believe is true--the very opposite of soul liberty. How confused you are. You want to take soul liberty away from me--freedom of speech?

What has happened to you? Have your freedoms been taken away from you that you think others should have their freedoms taken away also. I don't understand you. I am not in Canada right now. I am posting from a nation where Christians don't have the freedoms you have, where soul liberty is not always granted, where Christian freedom comes at a price.

I can define terms because I know what those terms are. If you don't know what those terms are you need to learn them. Learn what the Baptist distinctives are while you are at it. Be able to define and understand what they mean.
It is simple math. 2 +2 does not equal 5.
One cannot be a Muslim and a Christian at the same time.
One cannot be a Charismatic and a Baptist at the same time.
You have not heard that from me alone. There are many others that agree.