I just talked with "Thomas Fudge"

[Neck]

Originally Posted by Ferd

It is an acadimic work. it is supposed to be like that.

and Acadimics are supposed to write books like that.

this history and the results form the exhaustive interviews is fantastic.

it is part of the history of our little corner of the Pentecostal movement, and it is valuable. however, I suspect that even TF would tell you it is not all of the story.

I still contend that the direction of the book was decided on before the first interview was done. That takes nothing away from the content except to suggest that one cannot take this work alone as the final autority on the subject the way some do.

Take a look at the 3 new threads I just started.

Fuge in his own words...

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by philjones

Pelthais,

What you have described in the beginning of your post as "sympathetic magic" is, according to Hebrews "faith"... Now faith is evidence and substance of that which is not seen and that which is hoped for. Am I missing something here? Is not living as though the answer has already come when it has not "faith", i.e. evidencing that which you have not yet seen and showing substance of that for which you hope?

It may be closely related. The two Old Testament examples of Jacob and Elisha would appear on the surface to be "magic." The appearance of a stick cannot influence the appearance of livestock being sired in the field, at least not in any natural sense.

I was just thinking about the "magic" that happens at baptism. And I am using a specialized meaning for "magic" here. But what happens? What is the best way to articulate this?

When I was baptized in Jesus name I understood that I was going through a 1, 2, 3 step process. I was confused by what seemed like everyone's insistence that I "pray through first." I was just a kid and had not been raised in the church. The fact that I was compelled to follow "the process" and take each thing in the order that Christ had experienced it was puzzling to some of those around me. One man questioned my sincerity.

At the time, for me it was Death (Repentenance), Burial (Baptism in Jesus' name) and then Resurrection (Receiving the Holy Ghost). I didn't really know about Cornelius yet. But what has carried me forward and sustained me through some pretty terrible times was the faith that I had before I ever did any of those "3 steps." The faith that in my heart I am a child of God and that He cares for me.

Today, the only thing that the "3 Steps" appear to do for me is qualify me for certain privileges and acceptance among Apostolic people. But for the pain and the sickness in my body, I need the faith. To overcome depression and despair, I need the faith. To see any point in just getting along with my life, I need the faith. What tangible and eternal benefit did I recieve from the "3 Steps?"

Everything seems to point back to the faith I had when I showed up at a Pentecostal church and told those folks to baptize me in Jesus' name.

[Adino]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

....It's the process of new birth....

The new birth is when the spirit of man is born of the spirit of God (John 3:6). This takes place the moment LIFE is born in the heart of man. This life is the Spirit of Christ. Do not look at salvation in light of natural child birth. When does the spark of life appear in the human soul? This is the moment the spirit passes from death to life. This is the moment life is born in the spirit of man and he is spiritually born again from the dead.

Now this is the part that none of you have been able to explain from the scriptures except in abstract concepts or figures of speech.

When do we receive the Spirit of Christ? What does the Bible say?

At the moment of faith. The man who has faith has life and has Christ. Galatians 2:20; John 3:15-16, 36; John 5:24; John 6:40,47; John 11:25,26; 1John 5:12

When are our sins remitted/washed away? What does the Bible say?

At the moment of faith. The believer has imputed righteousness and is justified of all things. Acts 10:43; Acts 13:38-39; Romans 4:5

The Spirit of God is involved in water baptism directly performing an act of circumcision see Romans 2:28-29 NASB and Colossians 2:11-12.

Do not make the mistake of confusing the circumcision of the heart with that ritual which points to it. While baptism points to the circumcision made without hands it is not that circumcision, nor is it the occasion of this circumcision. Just like Abraham was justified prior to physical circumcision, the external sign of his being right with God, so the saint is justified and has circumcision of the heart prior to the external sign which points to this inward existing reality.

God gives the new heart to enable a man to walk in his statutes (Ezekiel 11:19-20; Ezekiel 36:26-27). We are created in Christ Jesus unto good works (Ephesians 2:10). The newly created heart precedes the external manifestation of that new heart. Regeneration engenders regenerate behavior. Cause and effect. Baptism is an effect of the circumcised heart. It is neither the cause nor the occasion.

Explain if you will why after our new birth, if and when we sin, we are advised to confess our sins and the blood of Jesus Christ will cleanse us from all unrighteousness. I'm assuming you do not take this literally. But there is a washing available even after our initial cleansing when our sins were first remitted.

I understand 1John 1:9 to be addressed to those gnostics who believed sin did not defile the spirit. John's audience is both to believers and to those gnostics in their midst. When he speaks of confession of sin he is not meaning that the saved person should confess every time he stumbles for forgiveness, it is a call to the gnostics to confess their depravity before God in order to receive forgiveness.

I guess my experience influences my thoughts on this subject as well. When I was baptized in Jesus name, I felt clean on the inside and while under the water I had an overwhelming sense of peace with God.

Do not let your emotions influence the objective truth of Scripture.

Something happens spiritually when we are baptized.

Yes, but it does not concern salvation of the soul.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by pelathais

But what happens when our experience is out of step with the sequence of events that Christ experienced? One also thinks of Cornelius and the Gentiles in his household. They were "resurrected" before they were "buried." This is an obvious case where the pattern of salvation at least appeared to fail to follow the example of Christ's death, burial and resurrection.

The fact that the type we are to follow (Christ's death burial and resurrection) would be a ridiculous event if it occurred out of sequence would seem to impy that if a literal following of that type were necessary, then there would be no Biblical examples of other than the sequential occurrence of the "3 steps."

In other words, if the antitype must follow the type in order for there to be salvation, then we should find that point emphasized in the experiences of the New Testament church. Instead what we find is a group of Apostles (Apostolics?) who are reluctant to ascribe salvation to others and only the manifest evidence of God's Spirit overcomes their reluctance.

Could it be that in trying to be "Apostolic" that we have also managed to obtain the prejudices of the original Apostles. Prejudices for which they were continually rebuked by others among them and by the Lord Himself?

The sequence of the baptisms is not always the same in all accounts. But the end result is the same. Paul received the Spirit before he was baptized as did the Gentiles of Cornelius' household. Water baptism took place immediately after someone received the Holy Spirit. The order of the baptisms doesn't seem to be that big a deal in the book of Acts or anywhere else. The only ones making it a big deal are the one steppers. Once again the end result, no matter the sequence, is every believer died, was buried, and rose to newness of life. It's a likenessof what Christ went through: Rom 6:5For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection, NASB

You lost me with antitype. I don't see a rigid 3 steps in Acts. I never have. I see the need to believe, repent, and be baptized in the water and the Spirit or Spirit and water, which ever comes first, to become part of the body of Christ. The prejudices of the Apostles? toward the Gentiles? and how does that relate to current day apostolics?

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Do you lend the same support to the many other churches who see baptism as effectual, efficacious or regenerative to salvation?

By far the majority of todays Christians fall into these catagories. I wonder why the crossless Christianity vitrol is reserved for the UPC?

The title would hold true to anyone who taught like doctrine. I thought the title in the context of the water/spirit doctrine was very fitting. I would think it fitting to others who, as you put it, "see baptism as effectual, efficacious or regenerative to salvation" as well. Though, I would strongly disagree that a majority of Christians place such salvational emphasis on baptism.

Btw, I thought the accompanying picture on the front kind of witty.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Adino

The title would hold true to anyone who taught like doctrine. I thought the title in the context of the water/spirit doctrine was very fitting. I would think it fitting to others who, as you put it, "see baptism as effectual, efficacious or regenerative to salvation" as well. Though, I would strongly disagree that a majority of Christians place such salvational emphasis on baptism.

Btw, I thought the accompanying picture on the front kind of witty.

Catholic, Lutheran, Church Of Christ, Eastern Orthodox and Anglican (ironically) do not make up a majority of Christendom?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by pelathais

It may be closely related. The two Old Testament examples of Jacob and Elisha would appear on the surface to be "magic." The appearance of a stick cannot influence the appearance of livestock being sired in the field, at least not in any natural sense.

I was just thinking about the "magic" that happens at baptism. And I am using a specialized meaning for "magic" here. But what happens? What is the best way to articulate this?

When I was baptized in Jesus name I understood that I was going through a 1, 2, 3 step process. I was confused by what seemed like everyone's insistence that I "pray through first." I was just a kid and had not been raised in the church. The fact that I was compelled to follow "the process" and take each thing in the order that Christ had experienced it was puzzling to some of those around me. One man questioned my sincerity.

At the time, for me it was Death (Repentenance), Burial (Baptism in Jesus' name) and then Resurrection (Receiving the Holy Ghost). I didn't really know about Cornelius yet. But what has carried me forward and sustained me through some pretty terrible times was the faith that I had before I ever did any of those "3 steps." The faith that in my heart I am a child of God and that He cares for me.

Today, the only thing that the "3 Steps" appear to do for me is qualify me for certain privileges and acceptance among Apostolic people. But for the pain and the sickness in my body, I need the faith. To overcome depression and despair, I need the faith. To see any point in just getting along with my life, I need the faith. What tangible and eternal benefit did I recieve from the "3 Steps?"

Everything seems to point back to the faith I had when I showed up at a Pentecostal church and told those folks to baptize me in Jesus' name.

The just shall live by faith. Everything we do is by faith because we serve an invisible God. We walk by faith and not by sight. Our entire walk with God is a walk of faith. Believing that God is good, just, loving, slow to anger, longsuffering, ready to forgive, compassionate, real, .....if I didn't believe (have faith) in these things I would be miserable.

Sometimes, during the dark trials when I can't see any light, I've found myself clinging to God's word by faith and recalling the times when God saved me and heard my prayer, or when God kept me from a deadly disease, or the God who has been faithful when I haven't been so, or the God who has made a way for me when the sea was in front and the chariots behind me....Its by His grace and through our faith that we are saved when we obey his word. Faith is the starting point and ending point until we see Jesus face to face.

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Catholic, Lutheran, Church Of Christ, Eastern Orthodox and Anglican (ironically) do not make up a majority of Christendom?

I've posted Luther's ultimate position on baptism and justification. Baptism, in his mind, had absolutely nothing to do with justification. I do not personally equate Catholics to Christendom. Those saved in their ranks are saved by faith in spite of Catholicism not because of it. Without these, no, not the majority.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

You lost me with antitype. I don't see a rigid 3 steps in Acts. I never have. I see the need to believe, repent, and be baptized in the water and the Spirit or Spirit and water, which ever comes first, to become part of the body of Christ. The prejudices of the Apostles? toward the Gentiles? and how does that relate to current day apostolics?

The type is Christ's death, burial and resurrection. The antitype is the believer. If we are attempting to ascribe some efficacy to water baptism after the pattern of Christ's burial then water baptism should hold the same place that burial did for Christ. In other words, there should be a sequential order.

The whole point of the Gospel is that Jesus rose from the dead after He died and was buried. There would be no Gospel if He "mixed things up." If we want to ascribe a very strict salvational aspect to baptism, and we do, and if we want to use the pattern of Christ's death, burial and resurrection as a type, then we must accept the sequential order.

The book of Acts, however, seems to make a point of emphasizing that such a sequential order is not necessary. This leads me to question the absolute and unconditional tone that we pronounce judgement upon other Christians. We should follow the example of Christ, but there's got to be a better reason than just our own symbolic reenactment of Calvary.

I suggested the prejudice because it is often said among Apostolics that other Christians don't really have the Holy Ghost or that other Christians are not saved. Peter didn't think the Gentiles could be saved until he himself personally saw God working in their midst. What are we to say when we see God working in the midst of others?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Adino

I've posted Luther's ultimate position on baptism and justification. Baptism, in his mind, had absolutely nothing to do with justification. I do not personally equate Catholics to Christendom. Those saved in their ranks are saved by faith in spite of Catholicism not because of it. Without these, no, not the majority.

Regardless of his ultimate position, Luther's position speaks quite strongly through his actions...

...ask the Anabaptists who baptized only upon confession of faith, and who suffered and died specifically because of their rejection of Luther's baptism.

His justification for doing so was to instill fear for their bodies to and hopefully save their soul.

As to the "in spite of" statement I guess I agree - but feel that way concerning organized religion in general.

The fact is, God can, and does wade through a lot of religion to save the lost.