Billy Graham

[Esaias]

Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Those beliefs which are not Biblical, are not faith at all, but delusion.

The Bible shows people becoming Christians. It shows how it happened. Those things did not take place at Billy's meetings. Nor did Billy direct seekers to do those things.

Therefore, nobody "got saved" or became a Christian at his meetings in response to his preaching. It is likely Billy preached "how to get saved" the same way he (supposedly) "got saved". If that's true, then Billy never got saved either.

You can know how to be saved. You can know how to become a Christian. Just look at how they did it in the Bible, and do the same. You'll get the same result they got.

Do other things, find some other way, and you leave the realm of genuine faith, and enter the realm of deception.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Seeker sensitive malarky.

You're right. Why be sensitive to seekers? We must crush them. lol

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?"

Everyone who quotes this argues that it applies to someone else. lol They never assume that it might be themselves. Which... ultimately is the point. Check yourself. Let us not judge another man's servant.

Salvation isn't about how long someone has prayed, preached or wept. You can't earn it by works. But that's exactly what's being said in statements like the above. "Well, this minister prayed a month without stopping! So God is too sovereign and merciful to let such a minister die lost..."

Yep. If flew over your head. The point is... I've known folks who had no defined theology who had a "relationship" with God that is irrefutable. Of course, their theology isn't so spit and polished, and you'd judge them as doomed to Hell. But they know Him.

No. God is sovereign because He does not change what a person must do to be saved, based on what they've done, how much they've prayed nor any other works.

Evidently you're not grasping absolute sovereignty.

[Aquila]

None of you get it.

Okay, I give.

Yay, Billy is in Hell. He's a heretic. Rah, rah, rah. Gooooo Oneneess!

None of you are getting it. And, you never will. Not until you realize that God alone is the judge of all men... and not you. And you must realize that even your view of Apostolic doctrine isn't complete. There's more to learn. There's more to be revealed. There's so many layers to this thing, it is beyond imagination. But... you guys can't see it. lol

Some of you guys act like you have it all so figured out. So, why do you continue to study? Why do you say you discovered something new? If you have it all figured out, and you know that God agrees only with you, you should put your Bible on a shelf and pat yourself on the back. You've figured it out.

I haven't. I've seen the horizon and it's vast. So much more vast that what I'm seeing most realize.

[Aquila]

We are the revival so many Christians down through the ages prayed for as they wrestled with the Catholic doctrines that infected the church. And yet we disown them, curse them, and almost celebrate the view that they are all in Hell.

Let's beat a drum and read our Trinitarian translations of the Bible, and tell the world that no one was saved after 325 AD... or before 1906 AD.

It's evident that this is a lost cause. Things are so much greater than you guys realize. But... you're stuck in thinking far too small. Truth is truth. And that truth has been longed for down through the ages. But for those of us who received it... it's just a bat to bludgeon those who sacrificed so much to get us to where we are.

What's funny... Had someone only said, "You know Chris, your right. I don't see Billy making it without some sovereign act of God.", we'd have agreed and continued on our day. But some of you seem to take joy at the notion that a man is in Hell. I was taught not to speak ill of the dead. Where is your tact? Just plain human decency? Some might say, "I don't think he made it." I'd agree with that too. But the issue is that there is an attack on the notion of God's sovereignty. God is God. We ain't. And all our pet interpretations are just like a toddler's drawings in the sands of truth.

The point is... God is absolutely sovereign. Do you think you can bend the knee of God to our human interpretations?

Can anyone show me a "formula" in Acts?

There is so much error in the Apostolic movement, it is heart breaking. But everyone's sold on the notion that they have the absolute truth. But if you talk to Apostolics more specifically... they ALL have different interpretations. LOL

Can anyone explain that?

[Aquila]

Let me ask another question...

Many brethren here believe in soul sleep and Annihilationism. Will they be saved in such grave error?

Yes or no?

While we're so dedicated to bashing a dead man, whom I only wish to give respect to, let's turn our brooms and sweep our own house. We banter back and forth with the soul sleepers on these threads all the time.

Are those who profess soul sleep and Annihilationism saved? Or will they be lost?

I vote on a Sovereign God knowing the thoughts and intents of the heart. But, if doctrinal purity is the litmus test. Let's throw down. I'm curious as to how much error is tolerated.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

You're right. Why be sensitive to seekers? We must crush them. lol

You're not getting it.

Originally Posted by Aquila

Everyone who quotes this argues that it applies to someone else. lol They never assume that it might be themselves. Which... ultimately is the point. Check yourself. Let us not judge another man's servant.

You're not getting it.

Originally Posted by Aquila

Yep. If flew over your head. The point is... I've known folks who had no defined theology who had a "relationship" with God that is irrefutable. Of course, their theology isn't so spit and polished, and you'd judge them as doomed to Hell. But they know Him.

Doesn't matter that we know Him. Matters that He knows us.

"Depart . . . I never knew you."

Originally Posted by Aquila

Evidently you're not grasping absolute sovereignty.

I get it. What you're not getting is that absolute sovereignty is of non-effect if the person holding absolute sovereignty changes His mind depending on the person. Being absolutely sovereign requires being absolute. Fixed. No variables. Non-relative. Absolute - you MUST be born again. Not you must be born again, but if you're not but you pray a lot it's okay.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

You're not getting it.

You're not getting it.

Doesn't matter that we know Him. Matters that He knows us.

"Depart . . . I never knew you."

I get it. What you're not getting is that absolute sovereignty is of non-effect if the person holding absolute sovereignty changes His mind depending on the person. Being absolutely sovereign requires being absolute. Fixed. No variables. Non-relative. Absolute - you MUST be born again. Not you must be born again, but if you're not but you pray a lot it's okay.

Who can judge that though? You? Me? Based on what? Our own 20th Century understanding of Pentecost? Must there be a tambourine? Must there be drums? Must there be the rhythmic banging of the base drum and people jerking around uttering unintelligible tongues (I'm not making fun, that was my personal experience.)?

Repentance - That is indeed a turning from sin and self to God. Few would deny that the devout Christians in other traditions haven't repented.

Water baptism - There isn't a formula. If you can show me one, I'll stand corrected. But baptism's efficacy is predicated not upon the formulaic mutterings of some priest or preacher, but rather one's calling upon the name for remission.

Receiving the Holy Spirit - Many down through history have experienced what was called in their day a "spiritual ecstasy" that brought ecstatic utterances, unintelligible weeping, groanings, moanings, visions, miracles, etc. Must they use terms exactly as we do? Do we discount these things simply because they might not look exactly like what we have come to know as "Pentecostal tongues" in the 20th Century?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Aquila

There is no set "formula" for water baptism in the book of Acts. What we see is a universal invocation of the name of Jesus, for the remission of sins. This is akin to a prayer, or plea, more than a formula. One must remember, a "formula" is a set form of words. Let's look....

(Acts 2:38-41 KJV)
(38) 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 Ghost. (39) For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. (40) And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. (41) Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

(Acts 8:14-17 KJV)
(14) Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: (15) Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (16) (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) (17) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

(Acts 10:44-48 KJV)
(44) While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (45) And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. (46) For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, (47) Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? (48) And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

(Acts 19:1-6 KJV)
(1) And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, (2) He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. (3) And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. (4) Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. (5) When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (6) And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

In every event above, no formula is given. Instead, we do see the implication that the name of Jesus was invoked as part of the act of baptism. In Paul's case, we see something additional:

(Acts 22:16 KJV)
(16) And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Here, Paul, the one being baptized, was instructed to be baptized, calling on the name of the Lord. This draws into this subject an extra dimension, the prayer of the one being baptized. Here, Paul is instructed as part of his baptism to call upon, orally invoke, the name of Jesus, to wash away his sins.

That isn't a formula, mindlessly repeated as ritual... it's a plea. A prayer.

Consider this. And please reason with me honestly. In the churches I've attended in the past something like this was the formula repeated over one being baptized, and it was repeated almost word for word at every baptism:

"By the authority invested in my by the United Pentecostal Church, I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins."

Now, that IS a formula. The problem is... that formula isn't found in the Bible either. It's just as extra-biblical as the Trinitarian formula:

"By the authority invested in me by the First Church of the Frozen Chosen, I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Both are formulas. And both are unbiblical.

Now, the Oneness formula invokes the name. Which is biblical. But the formula itself isn't. If you can find the common word for word formula typically used by the churches in Scripture, I have a crisp $100 dollar bill for you.

The early church baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. That means, by the authority and command of, Jesus Christ. And, Christ alone was invoked, be it worded as "Jesus Christ", "the Lord Jesus Christ", "the Lord", or, "the Lord Jesus". There was no set "formula".

In addition, based on Acts 22:16, the one being baptized was to call upon the name of the Lord at this time also. They weren't to sheepishly stare into the eyes of a preacher depending upon him to utter the formulaic magic words to get his or her sins forgiven. THEY cried out, called upon, orally invoked, pleaded to, the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins as part of their baptism.

The idea of a baptismal "formula" was imposed by the early Trinitarians who established that baptism must be performed, and the words spoken, in accordance to their decree... and this required quoting the verbiage found in Matthew 28:19 as the candidate was dunked (typically three times, once for each title). This was the introduction of the error of formula. And its purpose was to establish Trinitarianism.

Sadly, in the 20th Century, Oneness organizations who came out of Trinitarian organizations didn't banish the formula to the Hell it came from. Instead, they just modified it to focus on the name of Jesus in their efforts to oppose Trinitarianism. And so, while their "formula" is closer to the reality we see in Scripture... it is still a formula... which is what we don't see in Scripture.

If anyone can find a single baptismal "formula" (2.a fixed form of words, especially one used in particular contexts or as a conventional usage), I'll stand corrected. But I assure you... no formula is mentioned. All you'll find are various implied invocations to the Lord Jesus.

There isn't even a fixed method of invoking the name of Jesus. One could simply say, "I baptize you in the name of the LORD!" (Acts 10:48), and it would be sufficient.

Amen. This is where I am at. I have learned there is some false premise used by those who DO claim a prescribed formula of invocation... and I don’t even judge their intent - I think it’s mostly pure. It is unfortunate though, that this very premise becomes the foundation of an argument to condemning other Christians. For me, it is beyond the pale...

[thephnxman]

His NAME is Jesus!

Originally Posted by Aquila

Who can judge that though? You? Me? Based on what? Our own 20th Century understanding of Pentecost? Must
there be a tambourine? Must there be drums? Must there be the rhythmic banging of the base drum and people
jerking around uttering unintelligible tongues (I'm not making fun, that was my personal experience.)?

Repentance - That is indeed a turning from sin and self to God. Few would deny that the devout Christians
in other traditions haven't repented.

Water baptism - There isn't a formula. If you can show me one, I'll stand corrected. But baptism efficacy
is predicated not upon the formulaic mutterings of some priest or preacher,but rather one's calling upon
the name for remission.

Receiving the Holy Spirit - Many down through history have experienced a spiritual ecstasy that brought
ecstatic utterances, unintelligible weeping, groanings, moanings, visions, miracles, etc. Do we discount
these things simply because they might not look exactly like what we have come to know as "Pentecostal
tongues" in the 20th Century?

Let me see...

Repentance - hearing God's calling to turn to the son and confessing that one
is a sinner in need of salvation; believing that Jesus, the son of God, is become
THE ultimate sacrifice that has been paid for our sins;

Water baptism - obeying the call of repentance and submitting to the waters
of baptism for the remission of sins...and having the NAME "...that is above
every name..." invoked over the repentant sinner for remission if sins;

Receiving the Holy Spirit - receiving a portion of God himself (which we call
the Holy Spirit), and the Spirit comes taming the tongue and enduing with us the
promise of eternal life and the ability to learn the [self]-control of [of our body];

Now this:
When a sinner "calls upon" the NAME of the Lord, it is because God is calling him
(or her) to repent. The promise, ["...shall be saved..."] is then activated and
God will put someone in their path to offer the gospel that saves! Be aware: none
can be saved outside of the gospel [that saves]!

Brother Villa

[Tithesmeister]

Just a general question . . .

Does God hold everyone to the same standard?

A popular saying is "God grades on the cross, not on the curve.

To the question posed above, I believe the Bible would say no.

What say ye?