Is Trinitarian-Bashing Right?

[nightwatchman]

Is Trinitarian-Bashing Right?

by
Jason Dulle
JasonDulle@attbi.com



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Q: I am a new convert. I was previously a Trinitarian believer. I have been discomforted by various preachers who seem to bitterly attack Trinitarian believers, saying that they are idolatrers and damned to hell. It seems to me that this is not the approach to take. Do you agree.

A: I could not agree more. I do not agree with bitter anit-Trinitarian attitudes. I do believe that Trinitarianism is false doctrine, but shouting against it does not accomplish anything. It is most unfortunate that some of our preachers resort to this approach. I find such behavior inappropriate for several reasons. First, most Trinitarians are only Trinitarian by name. When asked to explain their concept of God, you will find that they are usually either Oneness or Tritheists. I estimate that only 1% of Trinitarians actually have any understanding of the Trinity, and confess it as such. This observation was confirmed by my experience with Trinitarians in seminary. When discussing the Godhead, many of the students' comments revealed a Oneness understanding of God, or revealed their belief in three separate Gods. Even the Trinitarian professor confessed that 99% of confessing Trinitarians do not understand the Trinity, but fall towards Oneness or Tritheism.

The second reason Trinitarian-bashing is unproductive is because too many preachers have no idea what Trinitarianism actally is. They confuse Trinitarianism with Tritheism, thinking that all Trinitarians believe in three separate Gods. In fact, most of our polemics directed against Trinitarianism do not disprove Trinitarianism at all, but rather disprove Tritheism. Trinitarians do not claim to believe in three separate Gods, but in one God (substance) consisting of three distinct, but unified persons.

My final reason for disagreeing with Trinitarian-bashing is that there are many good people who would call themselves Trinitarians simply because they do not know any other way to think about God. They have always heard the word "Trinity" and believe that it is part of the Christian gospel. They have never heard the Oneness message. It is not that they are opposing the truth, but that they are ignorant of the truth. They need to be taught, not scorned. I take issue with this because such behavior makes us look like brute beasts who hate others because of a lack of doctrinal understanding. I pray for those who do it will realize their faults and approach the issue from a doctrinal perspective, rather than a personal perspective.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[nytxn1971]

Pro 10:12 Hatred stirreth up strifes: but love covereth all sins.

[Adoniyah]

Brother Dever:

Jason is exactly right.

I have talked to a number of Trinitarians about their doctrine. Very often they will say, "Why, I don't believe that."

In truth, though they may call themselves Trinitarians, they do not believe that kind of doctrine. Many of them, in truth see one God, unaware of the actual teaching of their own doctrine.

Give my love to "Queen Dever."

[nytxn1971]

I come from the trinitarian camp... I had the Holy Ghost and I attended a trinitarian 'holiness' church.

I was confused by the the real meaning of the trinity and my own ideas about it were very close to what I NOW understand about Oneness.

I'd always been told that Oneness folks were Jesus only. I never took the time to dig into the depth of the whole doctrine. If I had, I may have come to understand it sooner than I did.


**

By the way... bashing anyone isn't right. No matter what they believe. Condemning them and the like only pushes them further away...
If you want to win a trinitarian, keep your mouth closed until GOD gives you the opportunity to talk with them about it.

However, if you insist on bringing it up, do it in the right spirit. Not with an attitude...

[Xerf]

Bashing a trinitarian--only if he is unabashed :)

[nytxn1971]

ba-dum-bumm-CHEE!
;)

[survivor4christ]

I know this sounds a little immature, but it seems to me that if anyone is guilty of bashing anyone, it is trinitarians bashing Apostolics. They mock that we dress the way we do, and accuse apostolics of being divisive. Not walking in love.

I think many who attend trinitarian churches have a wrong concept of what love is. Love is not agreeing with error, or agreeing just for the sake of agreeing. That old saying, "we can agree to disagree..." really means that there is no TRUE unity. It is pseudo-unity.

This is why I had to stop attending Trinitarian churches. I knew deep in my heart this Truth and could not let it go. No matter how much we get ridiculed, mocked, persecuted....I love this truth.

There are a few (Apostolics) who seem to bash trinitarians, but I believe it is only b/c we get persecuted, mocked, thrown out of the synagogues, we as Apostolics go through a lot. We are misunderstood. And even though we are gloriously saved, and filled with the Holy Ghost, sometimes we get tired of hearing the nonsense, the mockery, the rantings of those in the trinitarian churches. Who are so misled and carnal that all they think of the church that Jesus Christ died for is that it is just about the standards....

(Admittedly we do taut the standards a lot....)

But it is so much more than just standards....

Being born again is the beginning, the foundation, of a wonderful journey with Christ. A constant revealing of who He is. We are so blessed to be partakers of His Salvation and His Power. His Anointing and His Glory. His Sufferings and Persecutions even.

No Cross, no crown!

If they could only see that...but then again Jesus did say if one is not born of the Water and of the Spirit they cannot even see the kingdom of God....

Love, Sis. Wenona

[tufluv]

I'm just glad no one "bashed" me when I was a trini, and didn't even know it, had never heard of this "label", in the manner of which I've read in this forum lately. GOD chose the time/place/persons-to-use of when I was to receive the revelation of the ONENESS doctrine, acts2:38 salvation, [he knew the beginning from the end!]

I have always had an enquiring mind, so if I had been bashed back then, I think I would not so much have gotten mad, but gotten busy researching! It depends a lot on the person's character, what drives them, etc., as to whether they will keep on going, or fall back further [if bashed].
Also their current degree of darkness lifestyle., which can prohibit clear thinking.

YET, THE ANSWER IS YES, ITS WRONG!
BUT also wrong is "leading them on", to continue in false security, that they are alright in their current state.

[Xerf]

"ba-dum-bumm-CHEE!"

Have I been the victim of a bashing?

As soon as I find out what that means I will know if I was bashed or not?

:)

[servant]

No, it ain't right!!!

Serv :)

[servant]

Xerf,
That was supposed to be the drum and cymbals you hear after a comedian says something meant to be funny.

Serv :)

[Xerf]

I must get out more.......................

[Xerf]

But the answer to the question is:

NO it is not right to bash trinitarians and we will whip anyone who says different!!

[truemessianic]

As a former Trinity believer and a former Trinity basher, I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is absolutely wrong to bash anyone.
Challenge the doctrine, but do not bash the person.

[John Atkinson]

Yep, Apostolic Bashing is a poular hobby among Trinitarians. The monikker "Jesus-Only" isn't designed to be a compliment.

Trintarian bashing is bad, sinner bashing is bad. Post-Pre-Mid-Partial-Preterist Bashing is Bad. Admin bashing is REALLY bad.

Bashing, except perhaps Saddam Bashing, is bad.

Admin has been bashed because I don't allow trinitarians to post their view here. I warn them once, then I ban them forever.

That is not trinitarian bashing. Most trinitarians have no clue what they really believe. Trinity is a word they use to describe God. nothing more, nothing less. Many of them understand oneness with out being able to describe it as such.

We sure don't want to bash them for that.

I know, y'all never thought you would hear me say those words :D

That don't mean it is ok to start posting that stuff here though...
:mad:

[survivor4christ]

What exactly constitutes 'bashing' of Trinitarians?

At what point does revealing and illuminating truth become bashing?

Telling the truth to someone bound by deception and false doctrine...is that bashing?

I am not trying to be facetious here, I need a little input as to how to relate to trinitarians w/o offending them. I still have friends in trini churches and we always disagree. I still love them and am praying for them, but I still feel such a burden for them.

Love, Sis. Wenona

[Hnovilla]

His NAme is Jesus!

Beloved, 'trinitarian-bashing' is NEVER right; preaching the Gospel IS ALWAYS right.
I like to make a difference between an individual and the 'institution'. I will offer and expound on the Gospel to the individual. However, dealing with the 'institution' is another matter.
It has been my experience that those who profess faith in an institution have hardened their hearts so, that they become a danger and a stumbling block to "...as many as should be saved..." I believe that the 'higher' they have climbed in the echelon of their respective 'denomination' (which might include some 'apostolics'), they more they must harden their hearts. The scriptures say that the Word of the Lord "...is like a hammer that breaks the rock..." Some folks NEED to feel the power of the hammer in order to be saved; other need only to fall upon the Rock. Personally, I needed the hammer, and it could not have come in a more oportune time.

Brother Villa

[John Atkinson]

Tough call, what you percieve as preaching truth, they may percieve as bashing. All I can say is follow the leading of the Holy Ghost.

There is no hard fast set of rules which apply to every situation.

[truemessianic]

Originally posted by John Atkinson
Yep, Apostolic Bashing is a poular hobby among Trinitarians. The monikker "Jesus-Only" isn't designed to be a compliment.

Trintarian bashing is bad, sinner bashing is bad. Post-Pre-Mid-Partial-Preterist Bashing is Bad. Admin bashing is REALLY bad.

Bashing, except perhaps Saddam Bashing, is bad.

Admin has been bashed because I don't allow trinitarians to post their view here. I warn them once, then I ban them forever.

That is not trinitarian bashing. Most trinitarians have no clue what they really believe. Trinity is a word they use to describe God. nothing more, nothing less. Many of them understand oneness with out being able to describe it as such.

We sure don't want to bash them for that.

I know, y'all never thought you would hear me say those words :D

That don't mean it is ok to start posting that stuff here though...
:mad:

Bro. John,
You mean I can't bash you?! Oh, man, and I had some good ones lined up!!!:laugh:
Anyway, since we can get on Saddam and bash him...
Oh, wait, too late. The 3rd already did a real good job of that in Baghdad.:D

[Goodshepherd]

I second that no bashing is right...... I have had alot of bashing especially from family members that are trinitarians. It does not feel good so I cannot and by the grace of GOd will not bash them because it is wrong!!

[witness4jesus]

I dont believe that bashing any person is right.
I just believe that trinitarians are lost, and need
to know who Jesus is. When folks exalt them,
and act like they have something that Oneness
people need, I think that is very dangerous.

But as to the people themselves, they need the
truth. I am just believing that the more we hold
up Jesus, the more we lift up the one true and
living God, the more everything else falls before
Him.

sis pam

[O2blikehim]

I agree with Dulle.

Also, I think my all time favorite Oneness Article (outside of scripture) is by Jason Dulle. He presented the paper at the 2002 Urshan Graduate School of Theology Symposium.

The title is, "Avoiding the Achilles Heel of Modalistic Monarchianism: The Acknowledgement and Proper Placement of the Distinction Between the Father and Son."

It is a wonderful paper that I wish every Apostolic could read. It confronts the difficult passages that many Oneness believers conveniently dismiss.

He conclusivly demonstrates the Father/Son distinction is EXTERNAL to Christ rather than INTERNAL as many have taught. This "proper placement" of distinctions will defuse many of the charges that are brought against Oneness believers and gives a renewed emphisis to the heart of the incarnation. Jesus was not simply God living in a human body, or "robed in flesh" but God CAME TO BE AND EXIST AS MAN.

I would encourage all interested to get the paper from Urshan Graduate Shcool of Theology.

In Christ, Stephen

[jbenjesus]

That paper can be found at:

http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/ugstsymposium.htm

[nytxn1971]

Great paper. It's answered some questions I've had.

[light]

Originally posted by nightwatchman
Is Trinitarian-Bashing Right?

by
Jason Dulle
JasonDulle@attbi.com

First, most Trinitarians are only Trinitarian by name. When asked to explain their concept of God, you will find that they are usually either Oneness or Tritheists. I estimate that only 1% of Trinitarians actually have any understanding of the Trinity, and confess it as such. This observation was confirmed by my experience with Trinitarians in seminary. When discussing the Godhead, many of the students' comments revealed a Oneness understanding of God, or revealed their belief in three separate Gods. Even the Trinitarian professor confessed that 99% of confessing Trinitarians do not understand the Trinity, but fall towards Oneness or Tritheism.




Anyone can quote % like those above. Because someone dose, it dosn't make what they are quoting correct.
Below you will find the statement of faith of the AOG. They clearly state three PERSONS in the God head.


PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLIES OF GOD OF AMERICA
STATEMENT OF FAITH

1. In the verbal inspiration and inerrancy of the Scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments.

2. Our God is a trinity in unity, manifested in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

The Holy Trinity

God eternally exists as three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and each person is fully God, and there is one God.

Trinity is the technical name given to the teaching about God, which says that there is only one God, but this God exists in three persons. So while there is only one God, God the Father is God, Jesus Christ is God and the Holy Spirit is God. They are distinct persons, that is, the Father is not Jesus, and Jesus is not the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is not the Father. Yet there is only one God.

This is the Biblical teaching I show further below, but it must be remembered that the Trinity is taught in the Bible, even though, quite frankly, we don't understand how it works. Still, we would be getting ahead of ourselves to expect to understand the existence of God! As Milne puts it: "If we did not encounter deep mystery in God's nature there would be every reason for suspicion concerning the Bible's claims. For all its difficulty the Trinity is simply (!) the price to be paid for having a God who is great enough to command our worship and service.


When someone tries to tell me Trinitiarians are almost oneness I SAY HOGWASH!!!!!!

[jbenjesus]

Originally posted by light
When someone tries to tell me Trinitiarians are almost oneness I SAY HOGWASH!!!!!! And whenever I read one of your posts I say to myself, "Sheesh. He still doesn't see the 'light'."

[mfblume]

Trinity's error in a nutshell is in three persons who are conscious of each other and love each other and communicate with each other for eternity past and future. If they fall into that category they are absolute trinitarians. And in reality, though semantics is their only tool against it, they are thereby tritheists.

They may use the term ONE GOD, but their perceptual grid takes that term and translates it into the idea of a committee. Thus, a three-god compromising, due only to the lack of the statement "three gods" in the Bible.

So what should be asked is whether these people actually believe there were three persons in that sort of relationship for all eternity past. That makes it easy for them to answer and easy for us to determine.

I do know that most common trinitarians I have run across do not believe in three persons in relationship like that for all eternity past.

Light,

The point Dulle made is that although their creed states what it states, most trinitarians do not think that way at all. They think like we do... oneness.

Yes, their statement of faith is trinitarian through and through.

However, the common trinitarian pays so little heed to those things, and actually agree with us more than their own organization's statement of faith.

[Sandy]

I believe any bashing of another is wrong, no matter who is doing it, and needs to be repented of by the believer. But it does happen all the time, therefore being a fact of life. Many believe Pauls thorn in the flesh was persecution from others. Which is a form of bashing whether being done physically or not.

When is another bashing somebody then in a non physical way with words? I believe it is occurring whenever someone desires in their heart another see or agree with them for any other reason other than the love of God. In the case of religion, it would mean that if you are not telling that person something because you love them, but rather are doing it for selfish purposes of desiring for them to agree with you, you will end up doing what we are talking about here toward that one that is disagreeing with you. So it depends on your true heart felt motives from deep within IMO. Which is not always easy to know either, sometimes even when you are doing it, but especially when it is coming from another. Therefore mistakenly believing someone is bashing someone else, when they are not, but simply trying to tell them something that they truly believe to be correct. But doing it for a purpose, that purpose being love in some way or another. And in our case, it should be because of the love of God we are walking in that is the only pure kind of unselfish love to begin with. And therefore, as another here said, Spirit led always. At least as much as is possibly within you.

And having said that, then why is it any different for a Trinitarian to bash an Apostolic compared to an Apostolic bashing or persecuting a Trinitarian? Because the Apostolic should not be walking in flesh but the Spirit to begin with, since they are the ones that are at least supposed to be representing Jesus Christ, having been cleansed of filthiness at least within anyway. And therefore should be doing whatever they are doing out of the love of God that comes forth within them. Where the man in the world, whether claiming to be Trinitarian or not, isn't in that condition of cleansing. And therefore not always responsible for what they are doing either, whereas we are supposed to be at least anyway. Not that we cannot make mistakes either, as we can. But when we do, we need to repent, and correct that mistake, whereas they need to simply repent and obey Acts 2:38, so they can be cleansed just as we are. And that is the difference IMO. We are held accountable, where they cannot be yet because of where they are at to begin with. Yet sometimes our actions are the reverse it seems anyway.

Truth is truth. But truth can become a spiritual bullet used for the wrong purposes just as much as for the right purposes too. And when it is used for wrong, such as animosities that lie within that one toward others, then it is wrong, even when it is truth they are speaking. And will most generally never be accepted to begin with by the other even though they know it to be truth. But when it is given by the love of God, then while truth is never confortable to be recieved when it is correction toward another, often after a time, it will indeed be recieved when God is behind it. But sometimes it takes time, and sometimes a lot more time than we realize too, for the Lord to do His work in that ones life too.

So really, it depends on what is in the heart to begin with, which we as human beings do not always know about the other unless God reveals that heart of that one to us. True, we can see some things by what another says and does, but still might be wrong, none the less until God shows us that heart. Which I suspect is the reason the scriptures tells us to discern the heart.

For instance, Witness may sound hard to some, but I do not believe she is hard at all, but does what she does with a pure heart after the things of the Lord, whether the right way or the wrong way. I am saying this here because I want her to know that I do not see her as being hard at all within, but rather completely the opposite, whether we agree on everything or not. And she may have gotten the wrong impression about what I really do think of her. I know she loves the Lord with all of her heart.

But I believe that it would behoove us all to examine our own motives first determining whether what we are doing is Spirit led, then do it. But often we go ahead and engage mouth first, then think about what we said afterward. I don't know about any of you, but I do know many times I do anyway. And sometimes end up bashing another, not realizing that is really what I am doing, until the Lord reveals it to me.

It would probably be a good idea that all of us remember, we are not the ones that are going to do the changing of anyone, nor are we the ones that are going to end up doing the correcting of anyone either, just as we are not the ones that are going to reveal Christ to another as well, even though the Lord does indeed use us to do all of this to begin with. It still takes both the husband and His bride. And when we realize that, the bashing will begin to at least subside, and slowly stop. Because we are not in this alone whether we are witnessing to another, or sharing what we believe to be truth. And the more one begins to really see this, the more all bashing of others begins to cease entirely.

That is my two cents regarding this issue, hoping it is the Lords too.

[light]

J maybe you will answer the following questions.

#1 Are Holy Ghost filled Trinitiarians your brothers? Yes or No

#2 is it all right for a trinitiarian Filled with the Holy Ghost and baptsed in Jesus Name to stay in the Trinity church? Yes or No

#3 Do you personly believe Holy Ghost filled Trinitiarians will be in heaven? (Please don't say God is the Judge) A yes or No?

[Webmaster]

Admin bashing, Bro. John? No one would ever do that!;)

Bro. Flemming

[witness4jesus]

Brother Blume, you said:

Light,

The point Dulle made is that although their creed states what it states, most trinitarians do not think that way at all. They think like we do... oneness.

I find that statement very interesting, and Dulles' as well, considering. I have seen a lot of "Christian" websites out there, from One God, to Trinitarian, to Christadelphian. If there were no difference in viewpoint on the Godhead, one would not be able to see much difference, would they? But I can and do. I can tell by the way they talk about God, about Jesus, that they do not see the same God I do. They will say Jesus is the One God, but it always decays into seeing separation, necessitated by their fractured view.

Case in point: I found a book set recently called trinity. I have the picture that goes on the cover: a fragmented picture of the Godhead. And that is the problem with trinity, with anything but seeing one God.

sis pam

[Webmaster]

My perception of this type of topic is as follows:

I am oneness through and through. I have preached for trinitarians, they have never preached for me, when I used to pastor. I am glad for the revelation of the mighty God in Christ Jesus. There is no other name under heaven whereby we must be saved other than Jesus name.

However, we will never win one soul to the Lord, much less convert anyone to our doctrine by bashing them, or what they believe. If you hit a dog long enough, he will not come home for supper. I wholeheartedly believe we will win more souls with sugar cubes than with ball bats.

Bro. Flemming

[ddc101]

I think bashing is a pride issue.When one person thinks they are more spiritual or more loved by God because they have received revelation on a particular issue.When you receive revelation there is temptation that follows that would cause uou to be lifted up in pride to the point where your sharing of that revelation becomes unfruitful.No one wants to hear anyone share that is full of HIMSELF..we need to be filled with the Holy Ghost and be dead to self.My bibles says the Holy Ghost is a gentleman and that he leads you and guides you into all truth.I think our impatience with humanity is born out of fleshly pride.We must be patient and

2 Tim 2:24-26
24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
(KJV)

Apt to teach.lv sis.c

[Webmaster]

Oh, here is another thought. Many times when we see websites or books by trintarians, they are either designed or authored by trintarian ministers, or those who have been educated in the depths of that doctrine, either at seminary or other form of indoctrination.

When many say that most trinitarians think like we do, I believe they are making reference to the laity. Most laity in those churches do not have a clue about the nature of the trinity that is professed. I have Nazarene neihbors who after talking with us, have made it plain we believe much the same about the Godhead. Well, those neighbors may feel the same, but I am sure their minister would not!

I will sing my way out of this message, "One, one, one, one way to God,"........

Bro. Flemming

[nytxn1971]

Originally posted by mlflemming

However, we will never win one soul to the Lord, much less convert anyone to our doctrine by bashing them, or what they believe. If you hit a dog long enough, he will not come home for supper. I wholeheartedly believe we will win more souls with sugar cubes than with ball bats.

Amen, Bro. Flemming.

[Xerf]

I think bashers ought to be drawn and quartered!

[Webmaster]

Quartered? And here I am with only 2 dimes and a nickle!

Sorry....couldn't resist!

Bro. Flemming

[nightwatchman]

Yes Bro. Xerf,a "cat of nine tails" would be better

[mfblume]

mlflemming,

That is exactly the case I am speaking about. The "laity" agree with one person. The ministers are the cuplrits in tritheism.

The writers and the ministers and the preachers are most generally all tritheistic in reality. But the laity, Pam, are who we are speaking about.

[ddc101]

I agree with Bro.Blume on this one.The first time I ever heard about the "Godhead" was from an apostolic.Never once did it dawn upon me as a catholic.In fact one day when I was down at church praying(pre-enlightenment) and made the sign of the cross after prayer...I remember it going like this....In the name of the Father,Son,and Holy Ghost....and I distinctly heard a still small voice say.....are One God!! I paused and prayed....Lord what do you mean are One God? That was the beginning of an incredible journey.God by the way wants to use us but can clearly speak truth to a hungry heart himself.lv sis.c

[Faithchild]

Trinity-bashing is fine. Trinitarian-bashing is wrong. (Don't you like the way my halo shines?)

[light]

[i]Originally posted by mlflemming


When many say that most trinitarians think like we do, I believe they are making reference to the laity. Most laity in those churches do not have a clue about the nature of the trinity that is professed. I have Nazarene neihbors who after talking with us, have made it plain we believe much the same about the Godhead. Well, those neighbors may feel the same, but I am sure their minister would not!

I will sing my way out of this message, "One, one, one, one way to God,"........

Bro. Flemming [/B]

Br. Flemming greetings in Jesus name.
I mean no disrespect, but if that is true why are they still in the Nazerene churches?

Now to Trinity bashing.

In our church we now have a family of 5. They started 9 mo. ago.
We started working with this trinity(use to be trinity) family 6 years ago.
Dosen't sound like bashing to me.
Three are baptized in Jesus Name. Two have recieved the Holy Ghost in this family.
Two sisters were filled with the Holy Ghost in the AOG. When we witnessed to them they left the false doctrine of the trinity. One is now my daughter in law of one year.
Dosen't sound like bashing to me.

This is supposidly a oneness Jesus Name cafe. The way the threads have been going it makes me wonder. I ask three questions about Trinitiarians and can not get anyone to answer. I will ask just one here.

Are Holy Ghost filled Trinitiarians our brothers in Christ?

[Sandy]

I think your halo is cute this time Faithchild. That was a good point. :D

[Webmaster]

Faithchild,

Great halo! hehehe

Light,

No, they are not yet born into the family if they have not come through the salvation plan of Acts 2:38. Of this there can be no debate. I did not take anything you said as disrespect. The reason they are still in trinitarian nazarene church is because I am the first one to tell them the difference.

All,

Some will probably disagree, but I believe God desires to work through His body! Who is that body? WE ARE! Yes, God can certainly deal with people on His own, but he did tell us what to do with this great truth! Go into all the world and PREACH the Gospel to every creature. If we want to see more souls saved, let's do what Jesus said. Light hit on something I find very commendable towards him, he had been working with a family for six years! Most would have given up! Praise God we still have folks ready to work for God!

Bro. Flemming

[ddc101]

Bashing is never an option.Sharing bible and revelation maybe but not bashing.lv sis.c

[Sandy]

Actually, if you ask many of the denominal ministers, they couldn't tell you what and why they believe to begin with either. Which is the reason I began to question all of this at the age of 12 in Lutheran Catechism to begin with. And finally asked the Lord about it a few years after repenting, His telling me then that He was not three persons, but one, by simply telling me I was basically a spirit, soul and body, yet not three persons either, and this same principle was true of Him too. He used that example probably so I would begin to get some idea of the fact that He was not three individual entities at all, which I did, never seeing God again as three after that happened. Even though I still called myself a Trinitarian. So I know the Lord reveals truth to others too, opening ones eyes to it despite what they are taught, or for that matter, whenever He decides to do so, as well as how He decides to do it too.

Peter was not filled with the Holy Ghost when He received the revelation of Jesus Christ in the beginning for example.

Yet it says John the Baptist and His mother and father were, even before the Holy Ghost was poured out. Yes, I believe there was a difference in their being filled compared to us, that difference, I believe, being they were not delivered from the bondages of sin the old nature held them in. Yet the scriptures says they were still filled none the less. So go figure. Sometimes I think I have it all figured out, and what happens, God comes along and messes it up showing me I don't know as much as I thought I did at all. :D

[Mike]

Hi Light,

I consider anyone who is filled with the Holy GHOST my brother.

And Bro. Blume is right. Most in trinity Churches dont understand the doctrine. When I first heard it after being in trinitarian groups for 6 years I knew that was NOT what I believed.

Would a Holy Ghost filled Trinitarian enter Heaven? IF they were Holy Ghost filled at their death or the second coming the answer is yes.

But another question is if one continued to reject truth and walk in error would not God take his Spirit from them? I could not imagine someone filled with the Spirit being thrown into hell. God would not throw part of himself into hell.

Also would God ever even give his Spirit to one who ACTUALLY believed in the classic trinity doctrine?

3 Co equal, co eternal persons each one God in his own right. Each one seperate from the other.

But would he fill people with imperfect understanding? Because they have faith that Jesus is the Saviour? It has happened I believe many times. Possibly more have received outside of the modern Apostolic movement and THEN came into it than have received IN the Oneness Churches.

Bottom line from my perspective there are a lot of mixed up people with at present imperfect understanding.

The Lord has used me to bring a number of people into the One God truth. It is ALWAYS from this pool of the mixed up or searching that they have come. They THOUGHT they were a trinitarian or questioned it in their heart.

He that is of God heareth Gods words. Therefore there is no need to bash. If they are of God they will hear his words. There heart will agree to the sound of Jesus being lifted above all. mike

[survivor4christ]

Well put, Sis. Sandy.

Love, Sis. Wenona

[light]

Originally posted by Mike
[B]Hi Light,

I consider anyone who is filled with the Holy GHOST my brother.

Would a Holy Ghost filled Trinitarian enter Heaven? IF they were Holy Ghost filled at their death or the second coming the answer is yes.




Mike just as it is in marriage so it is in the church. They must have his name, just as my wife took my name.
Without his name they are none of his. God gives them the Holy Ghost to lead them into all truth. If they refuse the rest of the truth(baptizm in Jesus name, oneness) they are not my brother. They don't have the same name.

As for them going to heaven could you explain how they do this when they have not follwed the apostles doctrine?

How long God will deal with them is up to God and not man.

[dllong]

I bash the doctrine of trinity, but not the person that beleives in it.

Does that make sense?

[Adoniyah]

Trinity bashing is deplorable. Sister Cooper is right, it is pride issue. On the opposite side of the coin of revelation is temptation. The temptation is pride. "Knowledge puffeth up." That is the condition of many Apostolics that have the revelation of Jesus. Knowledge on one side of the revelation coin, puffed up on the other side.

I have also preached for Trinitarian Pastors. I have known some of them to be very humble and sweet men, full of the Holy Ghost. Yet, it breaks my heart to know that, according to Jesus, except ye believe that "I am he, ye shall die in your sins." This causes a great, overwhelming compassion for these dear men to come upon me. I do not leave such a meeting without dealing with them in private concerning their own souls. I have had a little success.

Brother Blume and others are right, I have had many lay persons to exclaim that they do not believe in three when the doctrine of the trinity is explained to them. My wife was an Assemblies of God from Central Assembly of God in Biloxi, Miss. She never believed in three. Her Pastor, who later came to the truth, never preached the trinity to the church. He was a dear, dear precious man, full of the HOly Ghost. I would be very happy if every Apostolic was as sweet as that beloved, humble man.

[Goodshepherd]

Dave state:
I bash the doctrine of trinity, but not the person that beleives in it.

Does that make sense?

Goodshepherd state:
I think I understand what you are saying.

[Goodshepherd]

Great post Elder

[survivor4christ]

Grace and Peace.

I have found many in trinitarian churches neglect to even preach doctrine.

I have heard on more than one occasion people tell me they were glad that so and so and such and such didn't preach doctrine!

That is amazing to me!

Why on earth would someone want to go to a church where (sound) doctrine, or any doctrine for that matter, is not being preached?

That is what bothered me (when I was a part of these churches). Don't give me fluff and hype and glorify flesh and not tell me (or the poor souls coming in who are hungry for God) what we need to do to be saved.

I agree, Elder, that love and charity is important. How we present ourselves is important; and b/c God has revealed Himself to us, the risk of having spiritual pride is always there. Something we must constantly bring b4 the Lord...I do anyway.

What I am doing/saying I really do not consider bashing. It is merely, as Bro. William's website proclaims, defending this truth that has saved my life. I do take it personally when others make fun of Apostolics. Maybe I should not, but I know that not only are they mistaken in their perception of us, but they are deceived and bound to destruction. Unless they repent.

I know I didn't 'come around' right away. I need prayer to have patience with others who reject truth....I simply do not understand why anyone would, especially if you call yourself a preacher and say you care about souls....how can they reject truth? How can they sleep at night knowing they are misleading people, lying, deceiving....

That breaks my heart.

Maybe I come across so strongly as I do against trini. churches b/c of all the h.e. double toothpicks I suffered at the hands of them when I was a part of their churches. I endured over and over again hearing mockings of Apostolics, which was very painful, even though I was not a part of one. I knew in my heart this is the TRUTH. It was who I was, and am. Couldn't get with wearing the makeup for too long, or cutting my hair, wearing revealing clothing while singing up front....

Couldn't continue to sing one thing, and live another...which was going on a lot.

You all know of the other things I went through in these churches. The assault happened in a church that claimed to be Apsotolic, but really was not!

Some of the most traumatic experiences of my life occurred in these churches. I almost lost my mind, my life, my children, everything b/c I compromised this truth! I can never, ever do that again. My stance against them is so strong b/c of the stench of hypocrisy, flesh, religiosity, and deception that is so rampant in these churches. SO many lies! So many deceived people!

I am very, very passionate about this. Maybe too much so.

I am not being unforgiving, but I feel like I must defend this truth. If it is taken as bashing, I am sorry. Sometimes the truth hurts, just like a vaccination shot. But then afterward, you reap the benefits of the inoculation (sp).

I do not know, maybe I need a little more love....but just what is love? As it pertains to revealing truth to those lost in their sins? Do I shut up b/c I do not wish to offend? To Keep the Peace?

Sis. Sandy said it is all about being led of the Spirit of God. I remember when I first got born again, God led me to a scripture in Jeremiah. In the first chapter, God told Jeremiah to

5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
6 Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child.
7 But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.
8 Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the LORD.
9 Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.
10 See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.

I also was led to Ezekial 2....

2 And the spirit entered into me when he spake unto me, and set me upon my feet, that I heard him that spake unto me.
3 And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me, even unto this very day.
4 For they are impudent children and stiffhearted. I do send thee unto them; and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD.
5 And they, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear, (for they are a rebellious house,) yet shall know that there hath been a prophet among them.
6 And thou, son of man, be not afraid of them, neither be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among scorpions: be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.
7 And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.
8 But thou, son of man, hear what I say unto thee; Be not thou rebellious like that rebellious house: open thy mouth, and eat that I give thee.
9 And when I looked, behold, an hand was sent unto me; and, lo, a roll of a book was therein;
10 And he spread it before me; and it was written within and without: and there was written therein lamentations, and mourning, and woe.

Now I am not calling myself a prophet or anything, just someone who loves the Lord and His Truth and has this passion to defend it. Not that He needs me to, but if He speaks, I must speak.

The Lord is my Light and my Salvation, whom shall I fear? I will not be afraid what man shall do unto me. If God be for me, He is more than the world against me.

If God has my back (and He does) then I must go forth. Even at the risk of it being called bashing, not walking in love, unforgiveness, whatever.

Please forgive the long post; and do know I mean no disrespect to anyone here. I love you all so much. Even those I disagree with; but I have to follow what I believe is the mandate of God for me.

If I am in error, or perceiving this thing wrong, keep me in prayer. It is my desire to please Him. And I am not above receiving correction or reproof...

Love, Sis. Wenona

[Goodshepherd]

2 Timothy 4:1-8

1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.

6 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.

7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

[ddc101]

Amen Brothers and Sisters,
I heard sis.Nona Freeman once say that her mom Sister Carrie
Eastridge and her mother in law were on the way to Louisiana Camp Meeting on summer.Her mom in law had the Holy Ghost but was never baptised.Though she loved God she had never seen Baptism in Jesus Name to be necessary.Well Sis.Eastridge being the soulwinner she was turned to her and said,"Mother Freeman
you have had a long love affair with Jesus.When are you going to take on his name in baptism?" Mother Freeman was baptised at the campmeeting that week.God is good.Sometimes we have to step out on the limb for Jesus.But when you do step out make sure the message you are sharing is digestable by the hearer.
A dog on a chain who has been starving appreciates a steak but do we have to throw it on the ground and step on it and grind it into the mud before we give it to him.The same goes for the truth.
We don't need to candy coat the message...just coat it with love and kindness and common decentcy as though you were the one being shared with.lv sis.c

[O2blikehim]

The thing is OUR responsibility may be much greater than we realize. The truth of the matter may be that many of us hold to and even teach views of Christ that are erroneous.

If we hold to a faulty Oneness perception of God (and there are several) how can we be a quick judge on those who believe in one God but view Him in Trinitarian terms?


I again encourage all to check out this Article: http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/ugstsymposium.htm

Thank You for the web address jbenjesus! I did not know where it was online.

In Christ, Stephen

[O2blikehim]

Light asks,
"Are Holy Ghost filled Trinitiarians our brothers in Christ?"

My answer is YES, certainly some are.
Jesus Christ sent Ananias to preach to "Brother Saul", one who was not baptised in Jesus name nor even had recieved the Holy Spirit. Now it is evident that it was not Sauls' understanding of the Godhead that qualified him as "brother". Saul was a Jewish anti-Christ who had simply acknowledged the one who struck him with blindness as his unidentified "Lord".

In Christ, Stephen

[Sandy]

O2 thanks for sharing that page. I bookmarked it to read later, as it is lengthy, but what I did read looks good.

Sister cooper, you said it so well. It isn't that we should not speak truth, but do it in the love of the Lord.

Sister Wenona, I believe those scriptures might have been the Lord revealing to you what He has called you to do.

I guess I was fortunate not to be involved in any churches that did bash Apostolics at all. In fact, there were times while I was attending the Assembly of God we would often visit the Apostolic church in the community where we lived. Especially if they had a revival going on. Or if they did, I never heard it. The first time I ever saw this happening was when I was on the other end, then proclaiming the One God message to be honest. Not that it probably didn't go on either. Am sure it did. But I just didn't see it myself.

[ddc101]

Bro.Stephen,
I am not arguing with you but that was a poor analogy as Bro.Saul was already oneness.lv sis.c

[O2blikehim]

Yea, and the Muslims are too. And I know some people who are oneness - their belly is their god!

Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antiChrist who denies the Father and the Son.
Whosoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also. I John 2:22,23


How would Saul have answered the following Questions?
How would your Trinitarian friends answer?

Did Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, come in the flesh?

Do you believe that eternal life is found only in and through the Son of God by the gift of his own blood on the cross?

Is Jesus Christ God?

Trinitarians are much, much closer to our Apostolic doctrines than are antichrist Jews or other religions who deny Christ.

In Christ, Stephen

[Adoniyah]

I am personally aware that Bro. Goss and some of the earliest 20th century Apostolics called their former Trinitarian fellows, "brethren."

In fact, the Assemblies of God church in Hot Springs, Arkansas founded by brother Goss honored him during their anniversaries having him in attendance for the celebrations even when he was the General Supt. of the UPC. They called each other "brothers."

[witness4jesus]

That's funny. The post I put on here by Brother Ewart,
in his own words, he said that they were not a part of
the bride.

sis pam

[jbenjesus]

Originally posted by ddc101
Bro.Stephen,
I am not arguing with you but that was a poor analogy as Bro.Saul was already oneness.lv sis.c I think Bro. Stephen's point was that Ananias called Saul "brother" before he laid hands on him to receive the Spirit and before Saul/Paul immersed himself in the waters calling on Jesus' name.

I know Stephen didn't just come out and say that, but as he brought that up, I remembered, for some reason, that Ananias indeed called Saul/Paul, "Brother Saul...".

Act 9:17 - And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, [even] Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.

[witness4jesus]

I think sis cooper's point was,
Saul already believed in One God,
as did Cornelious and Apollos, not
as the Muslims do, or even as modern
Judaism does.

sis pam

[Mike]

Stephen,

You said:

Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antiChrist who denies the Father and the Son.
Whosoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also. I John 2:22,23


How would Saul have answered the following Questions?
How would your Trinitarian friends answer?

Cant speak for others but I would answer it this way.


6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, the everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6

The true Christ must be BOTH. A son who was given and also EVERLASTING FATHER.

The Son of God the scriptures speak of cannot be seperated from the EVERLASTING FATHER. If Jesus were not BOTH he was not the Christ at all.

Jason Dulle errs in this respect in his article by saying we should not call Jesus the Father. Isaiah said the Son would be called the EVERLASTING FATHER. When we do that we fulfill his prophecy.
peace, mike

[jbenjesus]

Originally posted by Mike
Jason Dulle errs in this respect in his article by saying we should not call Jesus the Father. Isaiah said the Son would be called the EVERLASTING FATHER. When we do that we fulfill his prophecy.
peace, mike I could be wrong but didn't Dulle say that it would actually be improper to call the Son the Father and the Father the Son???

I believe that is what he said, if not Mike, let me know where he said that, ok?

[nytxn1971]

Rom 8:9-17 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. (10) And if Christ in you, the body [is] dead because of sin; but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness. (11) [b]But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. (12) Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. (13) For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. (14) For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. (15) For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. (16) The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: (17) And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together.

Hmmm... looks like if God puts his Spirit inside someone, they are my brother... at least, that's what HIS word says...


J,
He said this...

Appendix II

The Biblical Use of "Father" and "Son"

In light of the distinction arising in the incarnation we cannot use the terms "Father" and "Son" interchangeably. While it is true that the Father and Son are the same personal deity, and not two distinct persons within God, it is not true that "Father" and "Son" are synonymous referents. Biblically speaking "Son" refers to God's existence in the incarnation, while "Father" refers to God's existence beyond the incarnation. The Father-Son distinction is not indicative of two distinct persons in the Godhead, nor is it indicative of a internal distinction between Christ's two natures, but of the one uni-personal God's two modes of existence: as God, as man. To erase the distinction of terms simply because we understand Jesus' deity to be the same as the Father's is to disrespect God's revelation, and to obliterate the distinction between God's existence as man, and His continued existence beyond the incarnation as God.


The deity of the Son is known as "YHWH" before the incarnation, and "Son" only after the incarnation for the purpose of distinguishing God's new existence as a human being from God's continued existence beyond humanity. In the incarnation "Son" and "Father" are relational terms used to describe the temporal40 relationship between God as He exists beyond the incarnation, and God's limited existence as a genuine human being with a genuine human consciousness.


It cannot be said that the Son is the Father, or that the Father is the Son because the Son is by definition both divine and human, while the Father is only divine. Although the deity of the Son is of the same essence as that of the Father, the deity of the Son is inextricably joined with the humanity to form an existence distinct from God's existence as transcendent Spirit. The deity of the Father is in the Son, but the Son's existence is different from the Father's. There is, therefore, a distinction between the Son and the Father, but there is no separation.


While we understand the Scripture to teach that the deity of Jesus is the deity of the Father, this does not mean that we should call Jesus "the Father." We can recognize His deity to be that of the Father, but nevertheless, because His identity goes beyond that of the Father in the hypostatic union, and due to the fact that His human existence was fathered by God's Spirit, He is called the "Son of God, Jesus Christ." Jesus' identity may include the deity of the Father, but we do the Scripture an injustice when we insist on saying that Jesus' name is "Father." Jesus' name is "Jesus," not "Father." "Jesus" and "Son of God" are terms incorporating Jesus' existence as deity and humanity perfectly united in one theandric existence.

[light]

Originally posted by Adoniyah
I am personally aware that Bro. Goss and some of the earliest 20th century Apostolics called their former Trinitarian fellows, "brethren."

In fact, the Assemblies of God church in Hot Springs, Arkansas founded by brother Goss honored him during their anniversaries having him in attendance for the celebrations even when he was the General Supt. of the UPC. They called each other "brothers."

Because some man said it dosn't make it true.

What fellowship hath light with darkness?

[light]

Hey nytxn who was the book of Romans written to?

#1 to those already in the Kingdom?
#2 to the world?

[Mike]

Hi Benjesus

Jason said:

While we understand the Scripture to teach that the deity of Jesus is the deity of the Father, this does not mean that we should call Jesus "the Father."

Me:

I found some agreement with the article and some disagreement. It is to me written in complicated fashion. He quotes the heretics Origen, Tertullian, and Hippolytus as if they were part of the early church and at least seems to reject the doctrine of Noetus, Praxeus, Sabellius who were historically leaders of the groups who taught Oneness.

And if the deity of Jesus is the Father who else SHOULD we call the Father?

But then Jason says that which I can agree with:

There is, therefore, a distinction between the Son and the Father, but there is no separation.
mike

[nytxn1971]

Originally posted by light
Hey nytxn who was the book of Romans written to?

#1 to those already in the Kingdom?
#2 to the world?

To those who had the Spirit of the Living God in them...

[Mike]

Light,

6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Acts 15:6-9

God bore them witness by giving them the Spirit. What did he bear witness TO?

Good post by NYTXN.

[nytxn1971]

Some people 'get it', Mike... and some people don't.

[O2blikehim]

Mike , I am sorry you misunderstood my questions. The scriptures I posted were not the questions I posed. I will re-post that portion for you.

How would Saul have answered the following Questions?
How would your Trinitarian friends answer?

Did Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, come in the flesh?

Do you believe that eternal life is found only in and through the Son of God by the gift of his own blood on the cross?

Is Jesus Christ God?

Trinitarians are much, much closer to our Apostolic doctrines than are antichrist Jews or other religions who deny Christ.


As to the Isaiah 9:6 "Everlasting Father" passage, I don't know that Dulle addressed it specificly. But there seems to be a concensus that the verse means, Jesus would be the Eternal One, the Father of Time etc. (before Abraham was "I AM") There is no supporting scripture to show that Son of Isaiah 9:6 was his own Father.

In Christ, Stephen

[stmatthew]

So Mike and Ron,


Do you believe baptism in Jesus name is necessary to be born into the Kingdom, or is Holy Ghost baptism enough??

I could take this either way. I understand that a baby is a baby wether born, or in the womb. And a boy in the womb would still be called a brother wether it was birthed or miscarried.

If someone has received the Holy Ghost, it is because the Word was planted within them, and they believed. God has begun the new birth process. If they do not finish that process by being born of the water, they will ultimately be lost. You cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven unless you have been born of water and of the spirit.

JMHO

[O2blikehim]

It is no secret that many Oneness leaders have not held to a strictly exclusionary veiw concerning non-Oneness believers.

Many have held that the "Bride of Christ" was something "separate and special."

Howard Goss the first UPC General Superintendent belived in the "light" doctrine, and stated "I have not and do not teach that a person will go to hell if he has not been baptised with the Holy Spirit"

W T Witherspoon assistant General Superintendent of the UPC wrote "they that have not been taught concerning the Bible New Birth but have thoroughly repented and lived what they know of the Christian life will be on the right hand at the white throned Judgement..." and will be "Delegated to the Kingdom prepared from the foundation of the world".

G T Haywood Taught there were "levels of status in the Kingdom of God".

S G Norris taught the "Holy, Righteous, and Wicked" the "Righteous" were to inhabit the new earth.

Ralph Reynolds made a distiction bettween those who were "begotten" and those who were "born again."

Frank Ewart wrote about parting with his dear friend when the Oneness camp left the AG. " But despite all these things our love for each other survived, and this divine love will be renewed in glory where we will all see eye to eye and doctrinal differences will never again intrude."

In 1995 the UPC changed their articles of faith from "repentance and conversion" to simply "repentance".

My own veiws are still developing but have in the past been that there may be a sort of "light" doctrine that God will judge Christians according to what we know... and the condition of our heart.

I believe that some "Oneness" views of God are perhaps as heretical as the Trinitarian veiws and should be addressed before we can come to appreciate them and their walk with the Lord.


In Christ, Stephen

[O2blikehim]

Mike , I am sorry you misunderstood my questions. The scriptures I posted were not the questions I posed. I will re-post that portion for you.

How would Saul have answered the following Questions?
How would your Trinitarian friends answer?

Did Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, come in the flesh?

Do you believe that eternal life is found only in and through the Son of God by the gift of his own blood on the cross?

Is Jesus Christ God?

Trinitarians are much, much closer to our Apostolic doctrines than are antichrist Jews or other religions who deny Christ.


As to the Isaiah 9:6 "Everlasting Father" passage, I don't know that Dulle addressed it specificly. But there seems to be a concensus that the verse means, Jesus would be the Eternal One, the Father of Time etc. (before Abraham was "I AM") There is no supporting scripture to show that Son of Isaiah 9:6 was his own Father.

In Christ, Stephen

[light]

Originally posted by nytxn1971
To those who had the Spirit of the Living God in them...

Why is it you continualy leave out baptism in Jesus Name.
The books from Romans to Rev. were written to people that obeyed Acts 2:38.
Nytxn is Jesus Name Baptism necessary to go to heaven? YES OR NO?

[light]

Originally posted by Mike
Light,

6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Acts 15:6-9

God bore them witness by giving them the Spirit. What did he bear witness TO?

Good post by NYTXN.
Mike you as nytxn leave out scripture. Peter is talking about the household of Cornelius. What happened when Peter preached to them? The Holy Ghost fell on all of them because they heard them speak with tongues. My dear friend Peter did not stop and leave, he baptised them in Jesus name.

[Adoniyah]

I do not fully agree with this following statement allegedly made by brother Jason quoted by Mike which he says here that he agrees with:

"But then Jason says that which I can agree with:

There is, therefore, a distinction between the Son and the Father, but there is no separation."

Indeed there is no separation being one, but there are no distinctions as to person. The only distinction can be understood as to office, to wit: the son suffered, accomplishing redemption by death and resurrection, the father did not.

[light]

Isn't this something nytxn1971 is serfing this board at this very min. yet he refuses to say if he believes Jesus Name Baptism is necessary. Come on nytxn tell us. you have avoided this question from the first day of this new format.
Do you need to be baptised in Jesus name to go to heaven?

[stmatthew]

Go ahead Light, You gottem now!!!! :realmad: The noose is almost on their neck. Stone them I say, Stone them!!!!!! :mad: Make them pay for their evil ways!!!!!! They deserve every headache they git!!!!!!!!:realmad:

[tufluv]

Bro.Light:
Isn't that one of the main tenets to claiming acts2:38 as being THE ONLY WAY to be saved, invoking the name of JESUS at water baptism, after repentance of sins, and then receiving the gift of the HOLY GHOST? PERIOD? I professed that already and obeyed it, nothing less can be total obedience.
It seems pretty elementary for a "saint" in the APOSTOLIC way, being THE Way, [the only way to GOD is thru JESUS]that JESUS commands us to do, so we may be with him forever and ever, AMEN! and HALLELUYAH! :bow:

STMATT: Your'e funny, but must we be so dramatic?!

[Sandy]

But was there not a distinction between the two while Jesus walked on the earth as the Son of Man Adoniyah? And perhaps still in regards to having flesh and bone still that will return?

I am asking only.

I also believe that it is possible for one to be saved, yet not have obeyed all of Acts 2:38.

One reason I believe this to be possible is becuase of what it says in Rev. 2:10, after having looked up the meaning of days is in the Greek, then determining that if that one holds fast to what they do know to do, even though still in bondage to the old nature because of it remaining within them unto the death, nor being buried, thus keeping them in the devils prison, they will receive a crown of life too. But then I do not believe this nature is cut off when one repents either, but when one is baptized into Christ at the water.

Additinally, if those in the OT could receive the Holy Ghost even before it was poured out on all flesh to receive by faith, then what makes us think one cannot receive same before being baptized in His name as well. When in fact, the scriptures tell us one can in Acts chapter 10.

But I do not believe anyone can be saved without repenting, which is clearly stated in Lk. 13:3 and again in verse 5.

The question is, does one receive the Holy Ghost when they indeed do repent, or is this not received until the baptism takes place, with the evidence of speaking in tongues.

Well I personally believe the seed of Christ at the very least is planted within one when they repent, being indicated by what took place even before Pentecost according to John 10:22. I know that most Apostolics do not believe this, but something happened when Jesus breathed on them, telling them to receive His Spirit according to those scriptures, whether man denies it or not. And I believe they received something right then and there. I also believe that becuse the Holy Ghost came on the day of Pentecost, our natural mind tells us that they could not have received anything before. But that is simply not true at all. Because the Spirit of Christ is omnipresent, and therefore can come again and again, filling you up even though He is already within you. We cannot see spiritual things by our own natural thinking, which is IMHO what has happened by the assumption that Jesus did not give them anything before Pentecost at all, other than speaking about what they would receive. He breathed the breath of everlasting life within them right then I believe, after having considered this many times over. And therefore, I believe that one receives the same when they repent only, even though they may not yet be filled within their spirits until later. And cannot be filled within the soul until they begin in Him, which takes place when you are baptized into or in His name at the water, going by what it says in 2nd Cor. 3:14-16. Because it is not enough just to turn to the Lord only, for the vail to be done away, but one must begin in Christ as well, for this to take place. And therefore, those that have not yet been baptized in His name, have not begun in Christ yet, even though they have indeed turned to Him and repented, and therefore the vail remains with them until they do begin in Him at the water. But it is ok if you disagree with me on this too, as many do. But not all.
But if you do, it is something to consider anyway, looking at the scriptures that deal with this subject.

So therefore, yes I do believe one can be saved in the end, yet not have obeyed all of Acts 2:38. But I don't go around telling people that either, because it isn't fun to walk in that outer court at all, being trod over by others, having to continuously repent over and over again because you cannot really overcome the way God planned for you to and desires for you.

I also do not believe these are the bride. But I also tend to believe one can have obeyed Acts 2:38, yet still not be the bride as well, but one of the guests only.

And now I am out of breathe and shall quit for now. :D

[Xerf]

Keyboards at 40 paces, coffee for one!

[Sandy]

Exucse me, that scripture I posted as John 10:22, should have been John 20:22 instead. Sorry. Should have read it over before posting, but got lazy.

[Xerf]

toooooooooo late i've already built a doctrine from john 10:22!

[Adoniyah]

SisterSandy, you asked:

"But was there not a distinction between the two while Jesus walked on the earth as the Son of Man Adoniyah?"

My answer:

Yes, there was a sharp difference between the two while Jesus walked on the earth as the Son of Man. This was before he became united with his father through the process of glorification. There are no longer distinctions postglorification as to person, only to office.

You further asked:

"And perhaps still in regards to having flesh and bone still that will return?"

My answer:

No more distinction as to person. No more distinction than there is a distinction in my spirit and my flesh and bones. I am one. That is to say, I am one person.

What brother Jason and others seem to be missing are the truths of Jesus that can only be understood by understanding the pre/post glorification of Jesus.

[Thelordisone]

Funny Xerf!!

Sandy,

Biblically, nobody can be save except thru Acts 2:38!!

Amen to light & tuf!!

If anyone wishes to attribute salvation to anyone that the WORD OF GOD does not. That foundation is on sand to say the least.

One must be careful of justifying anyone that the word of God does not justify. And we are justified thru the faith of Jesus Christ(Acts 2:38).

Now, are we to condem those that dont believe and or obey Acts 2:38. Not at all. Our mission is to tell them the truth. Just like Aquila & Priscilla did with Apollos.

Bro John,

I thought this GNC was APOSTOLIC(Acts 2:38)??

God Bless!!

[Xerf]

Lordisone, when you are right, you are sooooooo right!

[light]

Originally posted by O2blikehim
It is no secret that many Oneness leaders have not held to a strictly exclusionary veiw concerning non-Oneness believers.

Many have held that the "Bride of Christ" was something "separate and special."

Howard Goss the first UPC General Superintendent belived in the "light" doctrine, and stated "I have not and do not teach that a person will go to hell if he has not been baptised with the Holy Spirit"

W T Witherspoon assistant General Superintendent of the UPC wrote "they that have not been taught concerning the Bible New Birth but have thoroughly repented and lived what they know of the Christian life will be on the right hand at the white throned Judgement..." and will be "Delegated to the Kingdom prepared from the foundation of the world".

G T Haywood Taught there were "levels of status in the Kingdom of God".

S G Norris taught the "Holy, Righteous, and Wicked" the "Righteous" were to inhabit the new earth.

Ralph Reynolds made a distiction bettween those who were "begotten" and those who were "born again."

Frank Ewart wrote about parting with his dear friend when the Oneness camp left the AG. " But despite all these things our love for each other survived, and this divine love will be renewed in glory where we will all see eye to eye and doctrinal differences will never again intrude."

In 1995 the UPC changed their articles of faith from "repentance and conversion" to simply "repentance".

My own veiws are still developing but have in the past been that there may be a sort of "light" doctrine that God will judge Christians according to what we know... and the condition of our heart.

I believe that some "Oneness" views of God are perhaps as heretical as the Trinitarian veiws and should be addressed before we can come to appreciate them and their walk with the Lord.


In Christ, Stephen
You know what Steven it dosn't matter what they believed or taught. What matters is the word of God. It's Acts2:38 or the Lake of Fire. No if, ands, or butts.

[tufluv]

Smoking, :redcool: :eek:
or NON-Smoking :angel: section, please?

YOUR CHOICE!

[Webmaster]

Again, I weigh in on the matter. In Acts 2, those men asked Peter what MUST we do to be saved? Peter's answer was good then and NOW!

However, as much as I feel that the only way to be saved is through the total obedience to Acts 2:38, getting people to believe that will be much easier using kindness and wisdom, than with ballbats. Wise as a serpent, harmless as a dove.

Bro. Flemming

[mfblume]

Survivor said, "I have found many in trinitarian churches neglect to even preach doctrine."

Amen!!!!!

You know, this is the culprit.

In the late 1800's the liberal movement began that felt doctrine was divisive, so churches ought to disregard differences in doctrine. The idea that Russ Taff ecumenically sang about, "If you believe in Jesus, then you're part of me," started. And now its the overall going thing in 95% of all whatever-denomination churches

Even trinitarian Spurgeon attacked that trend and was mocked and eventually cast aside after so many loved his teachings during his hey-day.

However, most churches teach NOTHING. And they regard teachings on godhead to be divisive. Now, I know some ONENESS people who feel the same way!!! They beleive oneness, but do not teach it nor feel its important.

But this liberal demon is the reason most churches teach nothing. And that only leads to the saints concocting their own ideas and doctrines, coming up with God-only-knows what, making the trinity circles worse and worse.

satan surely smiles at that mess.

[John Atkinson]

Yet Again I gotta throw out this warning. I am getting really sick of having to repeat myself. The Good News Café is Apostolic.

If you don't believe it is necessary to be baptized in the name of Jesus, you had better not express that here. I will ban you, you will not be welcome back. Ever. I don't care how popular and liked you are or how long you have been a member. This is an Apostolic Forum and will remain so if the only members are me and BroRutledge. Someone out there will be happy that someone stands for truth.

To the rest, please don't egg them on. Don't ask them blunt questions, because if they answer that blunt question and it doesn't line up with the doctrine, they are done.

To you who got the liberal bent that says that maybe there is another way, enjoy the other discussion and steer very clear from salvation discussions.

I am not going to go around this mountain again.

Acts 2:38 literally or literal HELL. Don't suggest another way, don't insinuate that there might be another way.

If you can't take that go to Godplace. Because this is my last warning.

This isn't trinitarian bashing. This is the strong straight truth that will save trinitarians. A bunch of compromising wimps will only make them a two fold child of hell. If you aren't Apostolic, email me, I will be delighted to delete your account.

[O2blikehim]

Originally posted by mlflemming
Again, I weigh in on the matter. In Acts 2, those men asked Peter what MUST we do to be saved? Peter's answer was good then and NOW!

However, as much as I feel that the only way to be saved is through the total obedience to Acts 2:38, getting people to believe that will be much easier using kindness and wisdom, than with ballbats. Wise as a serpent, harmless as a dove.

Bro. Flemming

I don't know that you meant to quote those men in Acts 2, but since this is a most often misquoted verse I thought I would call it to our attention. The men did not ask what they must do to be saved.

"Men and brethren, what shall we do?" NKJV , KJV

I certainly agree that kindness and wisdom is key to changing another's belief system.

In Christ, Stephen

[John Atkinson]

Originally posted by O2blikehim
"Men and brethren, what shall we do?" NKJV , KJV


What shall we do to be saved is there in context if not content.

Did my big red letters just get ignored? There are three very close to being ex-GNC members posting in this thread. I urge you to go post in another one.

That isn't a manifestation of a lack of love and kindness to you, that is the solid and steadfast rule that will not change for this forum.

The GNC is for Apostolics to discuss issues relevent to Apostolics.

For the purposes of this forum, Apostolic is defined as having passed through all of Acts 2:38. The reason I am forberaring a bit is because you all been members awhile. Any newbie would be gone, don't believe me, ask revcharles and Nathan.

The next time someone twitches in that direction you are done. Don't even post something that I might interpret as a twitch. The post before this one was what I consider a twitch.

In Christ,

[O2blikehim]

John, I am sooo sorry!

I did not see your post before I posted mine. Thank you for the forbearance.

I do understand the rules of the GNC and what is required to be a member here. I have shown that many of the Oneness leadership would not have measured up to those requirements. As for me, I was born again of water and Spirit, Acts 2:38 all the way. I am a 18 year Apostolic (UPC) church member. I seek nothing other than the Apostolic way.

Again, I apologize, and will take to heart your warnings.

In Christ, Stephen

[John Atkinson]

Thank you so much. And I also apologize if I am tough on this point.

I have a vision for this that most of the members here do not see. I haven't really expressed it much, because it is something that God is bringing together, that is going to be a very powerful tool in days to come.

That is why I strive so hard to keep it free of doctrines that suggest that Acts 2:38 is an option, not a requirement. I see what God has shown me as to where this is going, where others who post here may not as yet.

Please Bear with me and hang in here with us as we move forward!

God Bless

[Mike]

Stephen,

You ask:

Did Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, come in the flesh?

Me:

Strictly speaking I believe that God the Everlasting Father came in the flesh. When we say Jesus Christ we should not consider "Christ" as it were a last name for Jesus.

Jesus is THE CHRIST. I believe "Christ" is ONLY defined by the Isaiah 9:6 prophecy. Son who was given, Everlasting Father.
Everytime he is called Christ or "the Christ" it is referring to THAT BEING.

So God was manifest in the flesh. How? Through the Son who was given. Much more could be said about the subject if time were available. A great missing part of who Jesus is concerns who is THE WORD?

You:

Do you believe that eternal life is found only in and through the Son of God by the gift of his own blood on the cross?

Me:

I believe the blood of Jesus is the basis for salvation. Because it was shed we can be saved. But I believe it takes faith in all of what Jesus has said to experience full New Testament salvation.

Is it the blood alone?

8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. 1 John 5:8

Also I believe salvation comes both initially and finally. When one has repented, been baptized into the name of Jesus and received the Spirit that is initial salvation. That is the foundation experience for a Christian.

Yet one will not FINALLY be saved and enter the kingdom unless their works are perfect before God. See Rev. 3:1-5

You:

Is Jesus Christ God?

Trinitarians are much, much closer to our Apostolic doctrines than are antichrist Jews or other religions who deny Christ.

Me:

Jesus is the Only God there is. Certainly trinitarianism is closer to truth than those you mentioned. But a TRUE TRINITARIAN BELIEF of co equal, co eternal persons, each one God in his own right is not a One God belief. As I stated before I think there are a few true trinitarians and a multitude of confusionarians.

You:

As to the Isaiah 9:6 "Everlasting Father" passage, I don't know that Dulle addressed it specificly. But there seems to be a concensus that the verse means, Jesus would be the Eternal One, the Father of Time etc. (before Abraham was "I AM") There is no supporting scripture to show that Son of Isaiah 9:6 was his own Father.

Me:

A consensus of who? All scholars who reject the Oneness message? I believe in only One God. The Everlasting Father IS the MIGHTY GOD. God the Father. If Jesus is not the Father what is the purpose of the Oneness movement and doctrine?

If Jesus is God at all he is the Father. Every scripture that proves Jesus is God proves he is the Father.

I believe he is BOTH Father and Son. If that must include believing he is his own Father I plead GUILTY. That in my understanding is the mystery "secret" of the faith. Yes I believe in the distinction between his humanity and his deity. But I have proved biblically for many years that either Jesus is his own Father
or there are 2 I AMS.

Stephen- I am glad for the agreement you and I have had on more than one occasion. peace, mike

[Webmaster]

Whether misquoted or not, the connotation is certainly there. If there were another way to be saved, it would have been mentioned there in that verse as an honest answer to an honest question.

For the record, when someone disagrees with me, I do not hold a grudge! I have never perceived anyone here holding a grudge against me. If this world is to be saved, we must present a united front as best we can. I imagine that is why Bro. John enforces the policy here as strongly as he does.

Bro. Flemming

[light]

Originally posted by John Atkinson

To the rest, please don't egg them on. Don't ask them blunt questions, because if they answer that blunt question and it doesn't line up with the doctrine, they are done.

To you who got the liberal bent that says that maybe there is another way, enjoy the other discussion and steer very clear from salvation discussions.

I am not going to go around this mountain again.

Acts 2:38 literally or literal HELL. Don't suggest another way, don't insinuate that there might be another way.

If you can't take that go to Godplace. Because this is my last warning.



I have respect for Sandy at least she is woman enough to tell the truth. There is hope that the lord will show her the error of her thinking.
Br. John You say don't ask them blunt questions. WoW??????
I thought this was Apostolic?

How many time does one have to post **sigh** or **not again** when the apostolic doctrine is posted. Is this not and indication of thier beliefs?
Just my thoughts.

[Webmaster]

Hello Light!

This is Apostolic! You will not find another doctrine espoused by the operators of this establishment. It simply does no one justice to argue about doctrine. An old saying comes to mind, "A man convinced against his will is really of the same opinion still." We may convince people and they may gain head knowledge, but the question is, is it in their heart?

I am not sure as to why there seems to be a discrepancy in belief here, maybe just semantics, maybe not. All I can testify to is that you won't see a twitch ( nice description, Bro. John) in my doctrine, one one one, one way to God!

Bro. Flemming

[Mike]

All,

The statement of faith on my web site reads thus. Point 10.

http://thediscipleship.homestead.com/

10. The complete and original plan of salvation was first preached on the day of Pentecost. Acts 2:1
Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:38

I have suffered much for this truth over 20 years. Yet I would embrace it all over again because it leads men to the real Jesus.

Having said that I also present this.

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. John 14:15-20

Jesus is speaking of the Holy Spirit baptism. When it is received Jesus has come to that person. Verse 18

When received you are in him and he in you. Verse 20

In him means in his body. What else could it mean?

On that basis I conclude anyone who has that Spirit is organically
joined to Christ.

I believe in baptism into the name of Jesus for the remission of sins. It is part of the new creation experience. Not just an outward sign.

I received the Spirit 4 years before baptism in Jesus name. The Holy Spirit experience I knew prior to that was every bit as real and dynamic and glorious as afterward. Was Jesus not my Father then? This is unthinkable to me. Was my initial salvation COMPLETE without baptism in his name? I dont believe so.

I stand by my statement if anyone has the Spirit I call them
brother. Will one FINALLY be saved just because they have the Spirit? No. Will one be FINALLY saved just because they are baptized in Jesus name and filled with the Spirit at one time in their life? No.

I would give no assurance of heaven to anyone who leaves his works incomplete.

The Good News Cafe was the first forum I became part of coming to the net 3 years ago. I will miss it. peace to you all, mike

[ddc101]

Much of what you posted may be true Mike but a person who leaves this world and has not been saved scripturally simply does not have what it takes to enter paradise.We have to preach the whole truth.It takes putting on the helmet of salvation daily.
This walk is a daily walk.The only way were are assured of salvation is to die daily and take up the Cross of Jesus Christ and follow him.I think you misunderstood Bro.Atkinsons point.We cannot undermine the message of salvation.I too had to come to fullness of truth but I also understand that before I took on Jesus Name I was not saved.lv sis.c

[Thelordisone]

Mike,

"The baptism that now corresponds to this, saves us not taking away the desires of the flesh!"

Baptism in Jesus Name SAVES US!! "For there is no name under heaven given among by which they MUST be saved, save Jesus Christ!!"(Acts 4:12)

The whole nation of Israel was baptized in the RED SEA(ie Christs Blood) we must do the same!!

God Bless!!

[Sandy]

Adoniyah, thanks for your repsponse. I understand what you are saying regarding there being a difference when Christ returns.

Bro John,
It is not that I do not preach Acts 2:38 as the way to be saved, as I most certainly do. that I feel I need to be clear about. Regarding anything further I might believe, I will try my very best never to say again as long as I am posting here, and certainly apologize for doing so in the first place, as I knew the rules. My only excuse is that I did not think before engaging mouth, or in this case fingers, so to speak. But did not answer to be disobedient to your rules, but rather just didn't think when I did so. But that does not excuse the fact that I did so either, I know.

I do want to say about this, Bro. John, specific questions were asked, and have been many times before by others as to whether one can be saved yet not obey Acts 2:38. And to be perfectly honest, if one cannot respond to them honestly, then I don't believe they should be allowed to be asked in the first place, that being a rule as well. And to allow it to be asked, is IMHO unjust, when one is not allowed to answer them.
Which I believe is how all of this started to begin with. And I personally have been asked this over and over many times on here by certain people.

My vision for others is and has been for many years is for them to obey Acts 2:38, no matter what my opinion on whether one can be saved or not without doing so possibly is. If you knew my husband and I, and what we have been doing for the last 18 years, giving our lives to sharing this, you would know that. And we are doing what we are doing because of kowing what it is like not to have obeyed this all to well, yet still desiring to serve God entirely and totally daily.

At any rate, that is all I have to say about this, and within this subject as well for now anyway.

Mike, for the first time in several years, I to thought about leaving here. But please, if you have not yet done so, pray about it anyway. As I believe you have a lot to offer.

I also know your heartfelt and total conviction regarding sharing the Acts 2:38 message with others as well, whether anyone else realizes it or not, knowing of a few that you have been instrumental in baptizing that would not have received it had it not been for you and your wife most likely. So my prayers go with you both whether you stay or go. And will, I am sure, see you on your own forum as well.

[survivor4christ]

Bro. Blume, Sis. Cooper...

Bro. Blume's last post kinds of feeds into the thread about hiding the Word of God in our hearts...

Something he said about the chuches not teaching anything.

There is indeed a famine of the Word in the land.

So, so sad...

Love, Sis. Wenona

[Sandy]

Sister Cooper,

I believe I was saved when I first began to follow Jesus Christ. But I just was not finished yet by any stretch of the imagination. Nor am I yet finished either. But had I have died then, I sincerely do not believe for one minute I would have gone to hell.

[Xerf]

uhhhhhhhhhhhh,................that's ok IF your walk began at ACTS 2:38, if not it is just as ddc has said, there can be NO biblical salvation oUTSIDE of Acts 2:38, period!

[Sandy]

Xerf,

thanks for your opinion, but no thanks as to getting drawn into that discussion again here whatsoever.

[light]

[QUOTE]

Originally posted by Sandy
Sister Cooper,

I believe I was saved when I first began to follow Jesus Christ. But I just was not finished yet by any stretch of the imagination. Nor am I yet finished either. But had I have died then, I sincerely do not believe for one minute I would have gone to hell. QUOTE]




You do not believe this Acts 2:38 message at all. You are using it as a just in case you are wrong safetynet. Your being baptised in Jesus name does you no good unless you understand the importance.

You keep telling everone on this board YOU don't need to be baptised in Jesus name . If you don't need it nobody needs it. What you are saying is death. From the heart the mouth speaks. you don't believe this APOSTOLIC MESSAGE

[Sandy]

Light,

I have never told anyone here or otherwise they did not need to be baptized in Jesus name. And you sir are accusing me very unjustly of doing so.

But I am not going to defend myself any further to you or anyone else here for that matter. Because I do not have to, simply because God knows what I believe, and what is in my heart, and what my husband and I preach to others as well.

To be perfectly honest, I just pray I never ever get like what I see within some of you because of what you speak, as a result of believing this Apostolic message.

[tufluv]

:eek: :eek:

[light]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sandy
Sister Cooper,

I believe I was saved when I first began to follow Jesus Christ. But I just was not finished yet by any stretch of the imagination. Nor am I yet finished either. But had I have died then, I sincerely do not believe for one minute I would have gone to hell.

I have never told anyone here or otherwise they did not need to be baptized in Jesus name. And you sir are accusing me very unjustly of doing so.

QUOTE]


You Just Told the whole world that you believed you would go to heaven when you first started and in many posts you have said you were not in truth when you started.

I have not said any thing until today,sence Br. John said not to. You are the one that keeps bringing it up.

BTW Br. John, Br Rutledge I thought yall said ????????????????

[Sandy]

:cry:

[Sandy]

Light,

In the first place, what I said was to Sister Cooper, not you. And it was simply as you copied, no more no less.

You are the one bringing up what you think I said previously, not I.

And you are the one accusing me unjustly of not believing in the Jesus name baptism as well.

And now you call upon the moderators in an attempt to get me in trouble for a post that said nothing about where I was at in the beginning whatsoever.

[light]

Originally posted by Sandy
Light,

In the first place, what I said was to Sister Cooper, not you. And it was simply as you copied, no more no less.

You are the one bringing up what you think I said previously, not I.

And you are the one accusing me unjustly of not believing in the Jesus name baptism as well.

And now you call upon the moderators in an attempt to get me in trouble for a post that said nothing about where I was at in the beginning whatsoever.

Sandy it realy matters little who you were talking to. You posted for all to see. This is supposedly an Acts 2:38 cafe. You don't believe that by the very words you post.
We were told to stop asking you and others blunt questions that put you on the spot. We obeyed while you continue doing what you were ask not to do.
Im sorry It's Acts 2: 38 or The Lake of Fire.

[Sandy]

Light, according to your way of thinking I have not done what I was asked to do. But nobody has told me I have not so far, except you.

"Now I simply made a statement in response to Sister Coopers remark regarding her own salvation, except I did not go into any detail about it in saying what I did. Is it really fair that I cannot say anything about my own, without getting technical about it? What is the justice in that I ask?

You know, if something is not to be discussed, it should not be discussed by anyone should it, no matter what kind of forum this is or is not. That is only fair IMO.

Not only that, it is apparently ok for you to now insult me by attempting to claim the following about me you wrote, which is very simply and totally untrue:

__________________________________________________
"You do not believe this Acts 2:38 message at all. You are using it as a just in case you are wrong safetynet. Your being baptised in Jesus name does you no good unless you understand the importance.

You keep telling everone on this board YOU don't need to be baptised in Jesus name . If you don't need it nobody needs it. What you are saying is death. From the heart the mouth speaks. you don't believe this APOSTOLIC MESSAGE "
__________________________________________________ __

And that is ok? When in fact you have no proof of those remarks whatsoever, except what you have concocted to believe in your own mind. Because I have never ever told anyone they did not need Jesus name baptism, nor have I ever given any indication I did not need it either. You, sir are reading things into what I did say. But things that are totally untrue about me and what I believe and do not believe. And I take offense at your doing so too.

[In His Service]

Sis. Sandy,
Just wanted to refresh your memory where you stated someone didn't have to obey Acts 2:38 to be saved.
Sandy
GNC Ultra Poster

Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 173
But was there not a distinction between the two while Jesus walked on the earth as the Son of Man Adoniyah? And perhaps still in regards to having flesh and bone still that will return?

I am asking only.

I also believe that it is possible for one to be saved, yet not have obeyed all of Acts 2:38.

Bro. Timothy

[light]

Sandy here is a post I posted after Br. John ask me not to ask you and nytxn blunt questions.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by John Atkinson

To the rest, please don't egg them on. Don't ask them blunt questions, because if they answer that blunt question and it doesn't line up with the doctrine, they are done.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Light


I have respect for Sandy at least she is woman enough to tell the truth. There is hope that the lord will show her the error of her thinking.
Br. John You say don't ask them blunt questions. WoW??????
I thought this was Apostolic?

How many time does one have to post **sigh** or **not again** when the apostolic doctrine is posted. Is this not and indication of thier beliefs?
Just my thoughts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy I have nothing against you, but i am against what you believe. I hope and pray you change.

[light]

Originally posted by Dale
Okay, let’s say you had been teaching a home bible study to someone. He repented of his ways and understands that Baptism in the name of Jesus is more than just the appellation of a name but the full body of faith behind it. He wants to get baptized. His property sits on a river. You head out the back door and down towards the river for the baptism. A hunter was in the woods and a stray bullet kills the poor guy.

What about this guys fate?
Does God ask more than is possible?
Or are there instances like the thief on the cross; he could not get down to be baptized? I understand the thief was before the testator died, but do you see what I mean?

Im sorry except you are born of the water and the spirit you can not enter the Kingdom of God!!.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Dale Jesus said no man can come to him except the Father draw him. If God is drawing someone what you perposed would not happen. God does not play around with us. If he draws he gives the oppertunity for you to obey.

[In His Service]

Dear Light,
Amen. I have heard many state about someone dying before they could get baptized. Well they saw the baptism, but didn't get baptized or filled with the Holy Ghost. The Word says no entrance. Not you, not I but God.

If God is big enough to call them and they see, he will keep them until they get the main thing done and born again. Has anyone really ever heard someone speak of a concrete example where this happened? Not I in all my discussions.

Blessing for more truth for us all,
Bro. Timothy

[Xerf]

Nor have I, using hypothetical examples are just that, THINGS THAT DID NOT HAPPEN.

Its Acts 2:38 FULLY or no dice!

[In His Service]

Xerf,

Praise the Lord, We are agreeing on something!!!!! :~)

Smiles,
Bro. Timothy

[Xerf]

That we are matey!!

[Norman]

I agree that there is a right way and a wrong way to approach Trinitarianism, and many people go about it in an unproductive way.
Before continuing with any discussion about the Trinity with someone, I think we should first ask them exactly what they mean by "three persons." Many do not know. Many say they don't mean "persons" in the normal sense of the word. Actually I have found very few if any to actually define what a "person" is in regard to three persons in one God. They define what a person does, but not what a person actually is.

"Trinitarians do not claim to believe in three separate Gods, but in one God (substance) consisting of three distinct, but unified persons."

but their insistance on saying there are three distinct "persons" each being God is contradictory to the claim that they believe in one God, and they usually fail to acknowledge that. Unless they don't really mean "persons" but then what do they really believe? Three separate Spirit beings? The first "person" pouring out the third "person"? Something like 3-in-one oil?
Actually the Catholic explanation says that within each of the "persons" are the other two; but there are not three Fathers, but one Father, etc.
Then some insist that they are three and one at the same time.
how do you prove somebody wrong when they don't know what they believe? You can't.

[tufluv]

I, for one, can't STAND IT, when I hear on the so-called christian radion station, and in referring to a "trinity" say " in the person of..." :eek: :realmad:
Makes me wanna scream, and I often do talk back to the radio, saying smething like:" just how many persons does it take to make ONE GOD! HELLO-O!!"
Aggravating, and so I just turn the radio off, pop in a cassette with good ole apostolic music, (if one is handy) and cool off, especially while driving!
:D

[Sandy]

In His Service,

I know I said that.

But I have never said Jesus name baptism was not important. Not everything is for us to save our necks. There are some things that are for us to walk in the rightreousness of Christ for His glory, rather than our own. And that is one of them, as well as being filled with the Spirit. At lest according to what Jesus said in Mt. 3:15 about this issue.

Some of you seem to have a one track mind, thinking everything is so we can obtain a place in Heaven. But that is not true. I would walk with the Lord here, whether I ever got anything out of it over there because I love Him here.

[Sandy]

Light,

Light, I never said you had anything against me personally. How could you. You don't even know me. For that matter you don't even understand what I do believe to begin with, and why I believe what I do, let alone know me. But I do not believe what I do without any scriptural proof whatsoever, some I already gave previously.

But please do pray for me. But pray for the Lord to reveal HIS truth please, if you would.

[Sandy]

Dale,

The thief on the cross didn't need baptism, because baptism is for those that are still living on this earth, not the dead I believe. And he was already dead in a sense. I say that because baptism is for our deliverance so we can walk in His righteousness right here on this earth as I see it.

Being born again is also for the same thing. Because Jesus was not speaking of a kingdom in the sweet by and by in John 3:3 & 5, but rather the one that He brought to us for us to walk in right here, in the here and now beginning when He came according to Mk. 1:15. So if being born again is the qualifications to enter in the sweet by and by eventually, he did not say. What He did say according to John 3:12 was that all he told Nicodemus up until he asked the second question pertained to earthly things, and the heavenly thing was the how this had come to begin on earth. Now if it means more than that I personally don't know. Maybe, maybe not. I just know the Lord told me. Which was to stop reading things into the scriptures that was not there. So I have done my best to do so once something is revealed to me such as this was after seeing what Jesus said in John 3:12.

Also, I believe the scriptures say that Jesus baptized his own disciples while on earth too. If you study closely what is written in John chapter 3, you will see this as well. Especially where it speaks of John the Baptists disciples complaining because of the one baptizing that he bore witness to. Was this Jesus's disciples that John bore witness to? No, certainly not. Oh, I know that most believe John 4:2 says his disciples were baptizing, and not Jesus. But does it? Take another look at that. Becuse it could also read that Jesus baptized nobody else but his own disciples instead. And in light of the other two scriptures in John chapter 3, I believe it is saying just that. But alas, I was taught the opposite regarding this too.

It is amazing what you will begin to see when you begin to study for yourself instead of listening to every jack and tom that comes down the pike.

Baptisms entire purpose, along with being filled with the Holy Ghost is so we can walk in the righteousness of Christ even on this earth. And therefore, since the thief was dieing. he really had no need for it anyway at that point. But we do that are still here in these bodies or tabernacles. So I therefore believe it to be very important, un-beknowest to some I guess.

[Sandy]

Norman, I agree. They really don't know what they are talking about. I determined that at the age of 12 in Lutheran Catechism after asking the pastor about this very issue. Which was the reason for my inquring of the Lord regarding this years ago. And since that time, never again seeing God as three persons.

[BroDane]

Again Friends, Almost every topic is debate-able here in the GNC (without making it personal)

Except Salvation..these are our guidelines...

http://www.goodnewscafe.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51

Now, you Dont have to like em..you Dont have to agree with em, But those who wish to stay here Will follow em...

PLEASE READ EM FRIENDS! :)

(Because some in the cafe could be banned soon)