The Initial Physical Evidence

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

The simple fact is, your story above does not line up with scripture. I find nowhere in scripture where folks had to go through the ritual of becoming a chronic seeker. The Holy Ghost is a gift to be received, not something you beg for. But again, that does not change the fact the the Holy Ghost is where Christ, the Spirit of truth, comes into a persons life.

And again, while I have seen the chronic seekers, I have also seen those that knew nothing of the holy Ghost come forward and after tears of repentance, just simply receive it and stat talking in tongues. No one told them they had to talk in tongues. It just came with the package.

stmatthew: you make a good apologist for the PCI view here.

You are CORRECT..no where in scripture do we find anything that resembles what we put people thru. Chronic seekers as you call them.

Good and godly people who have repented and have believed in faith..and we tell them week after week, nice try..you almost got it !!!!!

You almost got it ??? good grief..this is....errrrr never mind...don't wanna get banned.

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by ChTatum

I may not be as liberal as I thought......

Don't be so hard on yourself, Chatum

[ChTatum]

Wasn't this view espoused by Branham? That tongues was not the initial sign?

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by ChTatum

Wasn't this view espoused by Branham? That tongues was not the initial sign?

Dunno ChTatum..don't know much about his views

It is a view of mine though.

But in disagreeing with a view that is always best, just label them a Branhamite....or Cambelite. I can assure you I am niether.

I am merely a light

[ChTatum]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

Dunno ChTatum..don't know much about his views

It is a view of mine though.

But in disagreeing with a view that is always best, just label them a Branhamite....or Cambelite. I can assure you I am niether.

I am merely a light

My apologies, I did not mean to label you, I just have a friend who is into Branham, and this is his feeling.

[mizpeh]

Welcome David,

Glad you could join us.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Nicene Creed
(fourth century)

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Trinitarians believe the Son of God existed as the Son (second person of the Trinity) prior to his birth in Bethlehem. OP's believe Jesus is the Son of God because He was conceived of the Holy Spirit in the womb of the virgin, Mary. And the Holy Spirit is God not an agent of God. Luke 1:35.

But you used the Roman Catholic/Protestant version and not the REAL version. The REAL version says "begotten before all worlds."

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Chan

But you used the Roman Catholic/Protestant version and not the REAL version. The REAL version says "begotten before all worlds."

To some Trinitarians it means the same thing, although I think you believe in the plan of God Christ was begotten before all worlds, just as the lamb was slain before the foundation of the world, is that correct?

[tbpew]

Originally Posted by Chan

Tongues as "the initial physical evidence" is nothing more than an assumption being made based mainly on the event in Acts 2. It is not an actual doctrine in scripture. While I do believe that tongues are the initial evidence, it is nothing more than an assumption, i.e. that just because this appears to have been what happened in Acts 2 that this is to be considered the norm. THERE IS NO PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE THAT SAYS TONGUES IS THE INITIAL EVIDENCE OF THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST.

At some point I really hope I learn how to interact with the line of thought that says "No where in the bible does it say [insert any exact set of words strung together]".

We must engage the Spirit to lead us and guide us in the scriptures, otherwise we will be ever studying and never coming into any knowledge of truth.

Many parse the scriptures to wrestle with whether you must be Born Again, then among those, wrestling may involve whether being born again involves a birth of water and a birth of spirit, then among those who believe in a birth of spirit, we will wrestle with whether tongues are an initial physical evidence of this new birth.

Apparently the bible ALONE can be a "party zone" for the wisdom of men and their philosophies to have endless rhetoric. Apparently, the answer involves something more than JUST the SCRIPTURES.

I am hopeful that most of us will come to appreciate the "two key" system God has provided; they that will serve me MUST serve me in Spirit AND in Truth.

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by ChTatum

My apologies, I did not mean to label you, I just have a friend who is into Branham, and this is his feeling.

Well then I'd say they are right about some things and wrong about some things...just like all the rest of us.