-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Something I noticed about pentacostals
- Thread starter Chemnitz
- Start date
Nope we believe that you have to repent and bebaptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the holy Ghost.</font>[/QUOTE]Why did Jesus shed His blood? I find it interesting that you hardly ever mention the blood. That is what God will look for , if the blood has been applied or not.
GrannyGumbo
<img src ="/Granny.gif">
After hours of just such badgering from our son, I don't know if it's him or us that is the little lab mouse-in-the-maze, haha...but at least I know we can walk away because of pure grace & know liberty & joy & be free from bondage. And, btw, I've NEVER had a desire to willfully sin, but I don't DARE say I live without sin! (They have this subtle spiritual pride that irritates me).
[ May 17, 2002, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: GrannyGumbo ]
[ May 17, 2002, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: GrannyGumbo ]
Chemnitz, I'm assuming that you do go by the KJV. If so, what do you call sin? Do you not go by all of the scriptures that Oneness posted? Or better yet, do you all call anything sin after you have once believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, which you call the second person in the Trinity?
Carol
Wow!!! I hardly know where to begin!! I guess first by saying that I am really suprised to read that anyone still follows an "easy believism" approach to what directly contradicts scripture! I apologize for my abruptness, but for the sake of time, I must approach this topic with such.
Simply believing that Jesus Christ bled and died on the cross for us and that He was both Lord and Saviour doesn't carry much weight, when Scripture itself tells us that, "the devils believe and tremble."
Surely you wouldn't have me to believe that the devils are "saved" as well?!
Secondly, my dear friend Chemnitz has not yet done enough study on what he titles, "pentecostal theology", for he feels that Pentecostals (such as Peter and Paul, two of the early church's "Pentecostals") believe they are saved through their works.
Nothing could be further from the Truth. Simply spoken, (Apostolic) Pentecostals simply believe that the Word of God is the only thing that will judge us. (Not even Jesus will do that)
And for Apostolics to to believe the Word of God, they must read and follow all of the Scriptures, not simply our favorite ones.
I particularly enjoy Matthew 28:19, in conjunction with Acts 2:38. (Please understand that there is no contradiction in Scripture here.)
If read the way you believe there must be contradiction, however if read within the confines of God's Word, they are read to mean the same thing.
Next, and lastly, I want to explain more in depth the reason why Baptism is not simply "works" no more than believing or receiving the Holy Ghost is.
The Bible teaches of the Death, burial and resurection of Jesus Christ. This is the Gospel, the same Gospel we are told in scripture to take on.
They way that we are to take on the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ is as such;
Death - Repentance
Burial - Baptism
Resurrection - Infilling of the Holy Ghost
Should we attempt salvation (Not believing, but salvation) in any other wise, we would be contrary to Scripture and thus the Blood of Christ would be shed in vain.
I have not come to this board to be contentious, but by request. I would be happy to further discuss this either by way of email, AIM, in person or via telephone should anyone be interested.
I also would like to say that my efforts are not to diminish what you may already have with the Lord, but on the contrary, to bring more to your relationship with Him.
If I am in error, than I simply ask for someone, in love, (A brother offended is harder to win than a strong city) to show me, as my eternity could or could not rest on my right-ness.
I wish you God Speed,
In love,
Matthew E. Drake
Matthewdrakenc@hotmail.com
SolaScriptura
New Member
I saw 2 things to which I must respond:
This quote is from way back on the other page, but I must address it:
"Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:" (Hebrews 12:14)
Your accusation: "I can bet ya if you aren't living a holy life they will tell you that you are in danger of hell fire."
The Bible's answer: "...holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord."
It looks pretty cut and dry there.
Jesus is the author of salvation to who?? To those that passively believe? NO! - "To them that obey HIM"
Now, some imagine a contradiction between Paul's "not of works" and James "justified by faith & works together". HOWEVER, if you will look closely at the context of Paul's writings about "not of works" you will notice the phrase "of the law" popping up a whole lot - "not of the works OF THE LAW" - why? Why this phrase "of the law"? James & Paul speak of different works. Paul speaks of the works of the law which are worthless because they deny Christ's sacrifice. If the law of Moses could save men, then why did Christ die on the cross? If the law was sufficient, then no sacrifice was needed. Thus, to those who went back to the law, Paul said "ye are fallen from grace."
Now, James speaks of a different type of works, which unlike the works of the law, do justify IF AND ONLY IF accompanied by faith. THESE ARE NOT THE WORKS OF THE LAW NOR ARE THEY WORKS THOUGHT UP IN MAN'S OWN HEART, BUT WORKS COMMANDED BY CHRIST HIMSELF. James says "Did not works mixed with faith justify Abraham?" Now, if Abraham had believed that God said "Sacrifice your son" and never did it (contrary to Baptist theology) HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN JUSTIFIED. His faith had to motivate him to obey Christ, for Christ is the author of salvation to THEM THAT OBEY HIM. James says "Do you not see that a man is justified by faith and works together?" Why does James say this??? The works of which he speaks are not the works of the law, but the works of obedience to Christ, who is the author of salvation to them that OBEY HIM. Now, the works themselves DO NOT SAVE us - only the blood of Christ saves us. The works have no efficacy - Christ's blood has the efficacy! Look at Abraham again. If Abraham had sacrifices Isaac as a burnt offering in obedience to Christ, this WOULD NOT HAVE JUSTIFIED HIM IF CHRIST DID NOT SHED HIS BLOOD. Even if Abraham had lived sinless his entire life, without the shedding of Christ's blood there is no remission of sins. BUT BECAUSE CHRIST SHED HIS BLOOD, HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF SALVATION TO THEM THAT OBEY HIM - thus, by obeying Him, Abraham could be saved! Why then do we need these works??? Christ will not save us unless we do the works, FOR says he, "He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that OBEY HIM" - Christ will not apply the blood to us without the works, for he says "He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him" - thus, if we are to recieve this salvation we must obey him.
[ May 20, 2002, 04:45 AM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura ]
This quote is from way back on the other page, but I must address it:
Now, I'm not a Pentecostal, but I have to jump in here, because here you are openly declaring ignorance of the Scriptures that is dangerous to your soul. No offense intended, but you need to know what Hebrews 12:14 says:
"Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:" (Hebrews 12:14)
Your accusation: "I can bet ya if you aren't living a holy life they will tell you that you are in danger of hell fire."
The Bible's answer: "...holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord."
It looks pretty cut and dry there.
The doctrine of salvation by passive belief sounds nice, but the Bible says the following: "And being made perfect, he [Jesus] became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;" (Heb 5:9)
Jesus is the author of salvation to who?? To those that passively believe? NO! - "To them that obey HIM"
Now, some imagine a contradiction between Paul's "not of works" and James "justified by faith & works together". HOWEVER, if you will look closely at the context of Paul's writings about "not of works" you will notice the phrase "of the law" popping up a whole lot - "not of the works OF THE LAW" - why? Why this phrase "of the law"? James & Paul speak of different works. Paul speaks of the works of the law which are worthless because they deny Christ's sacrifice. If the law of Moses could save men, then why did Christ die on the cross? If the law was sufficient, then no sacrifice was needed. Thus, to those who went back to the law, Paul said "ye are fallen from grace."
Now, James speaks of a different type of works, which unlike the works of the law, do justify IF AND ONLY IF accompanied by faith. THESE ARE NOT THE WORKS OF THE LAW NOR ARE THEY WORKS THOUGHT UP IN MAN'S OWN HEART, BUT WORKS COMMANDED BY CHRIST HIMSELF. James says "Did not works mixed with faith justify Abraham?" Now, if Abraham had believed that God said "Sacrifice your son" and never did it (contrary to Baptist theology) HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN JUSTIFIED. His faith had to motivate him to obey Christ, for Christ is the author of salvation to THEM THAT OBEY HIM. James says "Do you not see that a man is justified by faith and works together?" Why does James say this??? The works of which he speaks are not the works of the law, but the works of obedience to Christ, who is the author of salvation to them that OBEY HIM. Now, the works themselves DO NOT SAVE us - only the blood of Christ saves us. The works have no efficacy - Christ's blood has the efficacy! Look at Abraham again. If Abraham had sacrifices Isaac as a burnt offering in obedience to Christ, this WOULD NOT HAVE JUSTIFIED HIM IF CHRIST DID NOT SHED HIS BLOOD. Even if Abraham had lived sinless his entire life, without the shedding of Christ's blood there is no remission of sins. BUT BECAUSE CHRIST SHED HIS BLOOD, HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF SALVATION TO THEM THAT OBEY HIM - thus, by obeying Him, Abraham could be saved! Why then do we need these works??? Christ will not save us unless we do the works, FOR says he, "He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that OBEY HIM" - Christ will not apply the blood to us without the works, for he says "He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him" - thus, if we are to recieve this salvation we must obey him.
[ May 20, 2002, 04:45 AM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura ]
Now, I'm not a Pentecostal, but I have to jump in here, because here you are openly declaring ignorance of the Scriptures that is dangerous to your soul. No offense intended, but you need to know what Hebrews 12:14 says:
"Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:" (Hebrews 12:14)
Your accusation: "I can bet ya if you aren't living a holy life they will tell you that you are in danger of hell fire."
The Bible's answer: "...holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord."
It looks pretty cut and dry there.
The doctrine of salvation by passive belief sounds nice, but the Bible says the following: "And being made perfect, he [Jesus] became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;" (Heb 5:9)
Jesus is the author of salvation to who?? To those that passively believe? NO! - "To them that obey HIM"
Now, some imagine a contradiction between Paul's "not of works" and James "justified by faith & works together". HOWEVER, if you will look closely at the context of Paul's writings about "not of works" you will notice the phrase "of the law" popping up a whole lot - "not of the works OF THE LAW" - why? Why this phrase "of the law"? James & Paul speak of different works. Paul speaks of the works of the law which are worthless because they deny Christ's sacrifice. If the law of Moses could save men, then why did Christ die on the cross? If the law was sufficient, then no sacrifice was needed. Thus, to those who went back to the law, Paul said "ye are fallen from grace."
Now, James speaks of a different type of works, which unlike the works of the law, do justify IF AND ONLY IF accompanied by faith. THESE ARE NOT THE WORKS OF THE LAW NOR ARE THEY WORKS THOUGHT UP IN MAN'S OWN HEART, BUT WORKS COMMANDED BY CHRIST HIMSELF. James says "Did not works mixed with faith justify Abraham?" Now, if Abraham had believed that God said "Sacrifice your son" and never did it (contrary to Baptist theology) HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN JUSTIFIED. His faith had to motivate him to obey Christ, for Christ is the author of salvation to THEM THAT OBEY HIM. James says "Do you not see that a man is justified by faith and works together?" Why does James say this??? The works of which he speaks are not the works of the law, but the works of obedience to Christ, who is the author of salvation to them that OBEY HIM. Now, the works themselves DO NOT SAVE us - only the blood of Christ saves us. The works have no efficacy - Christ's blood has the efficacy! Look at Abraham again. If Abraham had sacrifices Isaac as a burnt offering in obedience to Christ, this WOULD NOT HAVE JUSTIFIED HIM IF CHRIST DID NOT SHED HIS BLOOD. Even if Abraham had lived sinless his entire life, without the shedding of Christ's blood there is no remission of sins. BUT BECAUSE CHRIST SHED HIS BLOOD, HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF SALVATION TO THEM THAT OBEY HIM - thus, by obeying Him, Abraham could be saved! Why then do we need these works??? Christ will not save us unless we do the works, FOR says he, "He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that OBEY HIM" - Christ will not apply the blood to us without the works, for he says "He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him" - thus, if we are to recieve this salvation we must obey him.</font>[/QUOTE]Don go ahead and take a seat in this discussion. Stick around and you might learn something just as I continue to do.
Sola when I posted before I wanted to add that in but for a lack of time I did not and for that Matter I am glad, b/c you gave a much better explanation than I could have
God Bless
[ May 20, 2002, 09:31 AM: Message edited by: ONENESS ]
Sola,
I would like to comment on my previous statement:
I should have said if you aren't living a holy lifestyle by thier own definitions, guidelines and rules, then they will accuse you of being in danger of hellfire.
Holy living follows anyone who truly has the Spirit and you don't need extra rules and regulations to spell out for you what is and is not holy. The Word of God and the Holy Spirit are sufficient in defining those.
The Bible speaks often of our freedom in Christ yet Pentecostals put such an emphasis on holy living as to ignore that freedom and to add the burden that Christ lifted for us.
I don't believe, as some have accused me of, in "easy believism". I believe that belief is enough, but that true belief will bear fruits for the Spirit will enable you to do so.
The problem is, those who like to add other burdens to make salvation necessary never take to the time to find out what true faith and belief are all about. They are too busy putting thier faith in the extra experiences and their own power to live a holy life.
~Lorelei
[ May 20, 2002, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: Lorelei ]
I would like to comment on my previous statement:
I worded it poorly. Yes, we are supposed to live a Holy lifestyle, but not on our own, only through the Spirit.
I should have said if you aren't living a holy lifestyle by thier own definitions, guidelines and rules, then they will accuse you of being in danger of hellfire.
Holy living follows anyone who truly has the Spirit and you don't need extra rules and regulations to spell out for you what is and is not holy. The Word of God and the Holy Spirit are sufficient in defining those.
The Bible speaks often of our freedom in Christ yet Pentecostals put such an emphasis on holy living as to ignore that freedom and to add the burden that Christ lifted for us.
I don't believe, as some have accused me of, in "easy believism". I believe that belief is enough, but that true belief will bear fruits for the Spirit will enable you to do so.
The problem is, those who like to add other burdens to make salvation necessary never take to the time to find out what true faith and belief are all about. They are too busy putting thier faith in the extra experiences and their own power to live a holy life.
~Lorelei
[ May 20, 2002, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: Lorelei ]
I worded it poorly. Yes, we are supposed to live a Holy lifestyle, but not on our own, only through the Spirit.
I should have said if you aren't living a holy lifestyle by thier own definitions, guidelines and rules, then they will accuse you of being in danger of hellfire.
The Bible speaks often of our freedom in Christ yet Pentecostals put such an emphasis on holy living as to ignore that freedom and to add the burden that Christ lifted for us.
I don't believe, as some have accused me of, in "easy believism". I believe that belief is enough, but that true belief will bear fruits for the Spirit will enable you to do so.
The problem is, those who like to add other burdens to make salvation necessary never take to the time to find out what true faith and belief are all about. They are too busy putting thier faith in the extra experiences and their own power to live a holy life.
~Lorelei</font>[/QUOTE]
.
So if you are going to look at it like that then there would have been no need for the Epistles to be written. So everything I posted before is of no effect b/c Paul preached against those things. So just b/c Paul says those things we should not obey them?
See that is where you cannot open your eyes. There is a Bondege in Freedom and there is a Freedom in Bondege. Like I said before This is how we choose to live. You will never meet a more free individual than one who has submitted thmeselvs to the will of GOd.
No one is adding any burdens to make salvation necessary. The only thing we do is preach what was preached in the book of acts and all throughout the NT. Why do you thing repenting is such a burden? Why do you think baptisim is such a burden? Why do you think the Holy Ghost is such burden? Why do you think living a holy life is such a burden?
We neither add to or take away from the word of God. There are something beside sins that Paul told us to lay aside. I believe it was every weight as well. So do you accuse Paul of Adding burdens to others? No and one thousand times NO. It is not a burden to live a life totaly sold out to Jesus Christ.
Oneness,
You don't even listen to me, I never said any of those things were burdens. What is a burden are the rules your church adds to the Bible. What is a burden is your 3 part plan of salvation. That is never taught in the Bible.
You are so ready to heed the words of holiness yet you reject Paul's words of order in worship. Why is that?
We are told to walk in the Spirit, the letters are there to encourage us to do so and to show us what walking in the Spirit is. See we can choose whether or not we obey the Spirit. If you notice he doesn't say that walking in the Spirit is to have some great out of body experience where gibberish comes forth from your mouth and no one understands you or is edifiend. Walking in the Spirit will bring forth the fruits of the Spirit. Nothing else.
~Lorelei
You don't even listen to me, I never said any of those things were burdens. What is a burden are the rules your church adds to the Bible. What is a burden is your 3 part plan of salvation. That is never taught in the Bible.
You are so ready to heed the words of holiness yet you reject Paul's words of order in worship. Why is that?
We are told to walk in the Spirit, the letters are there to encourage us to do so and to show us what walking in the Spirit is. See we can choose whether or not we obey the Spirit. If you notice he doesn't say that walking in the Spirit is to have some great out of body experience where gibberish comes forth from your mouth and no one understands you or is edifiend. Walking in the Spirit will bring forth the fruits of the Spirit. Nothing else.
~Lorelei
Well I hate that you feel that way, but I will be here until..... I will continue to share how good the grace of God is and how he filled me with his Holy Spirit.
Well if you want to call what Peter Preached a three part plan of salvation burden than that is fine. I am not your judge.
God Bless
ATTN BOARD......
THE PEOPLE THAT WERE PRESENT ON THE DAY OF PENTECOST WERE PRICKED IN THEIR HEARTS AFTER THEY HEARD THE WORDS OF PETER. THEY FELT SO BAD FOR WHAT THEY HAD DONE AND WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THEY COULD DO TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT. THEY SAID "MEN AND BRETHREN WHAT SHALL WE DO"? AND PETER REPLIED WITH THE ANSWER AND SAID UNTO THEM.
THE QUESTION NEVER CHANGED SO WHY SHOULD THE ANSWER
If you believe this to be so truly and figuratively speaking of water baptism then why doesn't everyone receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit as soon as they are baptized with water? Did Peter leave something out? Did he lay hands on all 3000? Did they speak in tongues?
The only signs recorded were preformed by the apostles, no one else.
Peter said if you did those things you would receive the Holy Spirit. Why doesn't everyone then receive the Holy Spirit upon coming out of the water? Is that how it happens in your church?
~Lorelei
If the "name of Jesus" is the correct baptismal formula (denying the words of Christ in Matthew 28) then why is it lacking?
Peter said if they repented and were baptized in the name of Jesus they would receive the Holy Ghost. Why did they have to wait? Why couldn't they demand it and seek it before Peter came?
~Lorelei
PS. I have a secret, there is more to the Bible then Acts chapter 2:38. Read it all, it will make alot more sense!
Why couldn't Philip baptize them with the Holy Spirit? Why wasn't this baptism considered complete? Were they missing something???
Peter said if they repented and were baptized in the name of Jesus they would receive the Holy Ghost. Why did they have to wait? Why couldn't they demand it and seek it before Peter came?
~Lorelei
PS. I have a secret, there is more to the Bible then Acts chapter 2:38. Read it all, it will make alot more sense!
DocCas
New Member
When we see the words "in the Name of" in the bible we must understand what is being said. There is no magic power in pronouncing the Name Jesus. When we see "in the Name of" we must understand it in the context of authority. Anybody old enough to remember the old "Keystone Cops" serials? "Stop in the name of the law!" Nobody in their right mind would think the cops name was "Law." He was making a statement of authority! "The authority of the law commands you to stop!" The same is true of the bible. "In the Name of" is a statement of authority. I was baptized because Jesus, in the bible, commands me to be baptized. I was baptized "in the Name of the Lord" - that is, because He has the authority to tell me to do so. That is what Matthew 28:18 and following is all about. Verse 18 states with, "All power (IE authority) is given unto to me . . . Go ye therefore . . ."
When the believers in Acts were baptised "in the Name of Jesus" they were simply saying "because Jesus has authority to command us to be baptized, we are obeying His command." To try to make that verse into a "baptismal formual" is false doctrine and indicative of ignorance of the bible. (2 Cor 2:14?)
When the believers in Acts were baptised "in the Name of Jesus" they were simply saying "because Jesus has authority to command us to be baptized, we are obeying His command." To try to make that verse into a "baptismal formual" is false doctrine and indicative of ignorance of the bible. (2 Cor 2:14?)