DKB's Impassioned Plea For Iranian Branhamite?

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

They still baptize in Jesus name and have a Oneness view of the Godhead. All that "not exactly Trinitarian or Oneness" to me is just an "we're different" elitist crud that many OPs have towards other groups.

Consider the True Jesus Church of Asia...they are Oneness but they have a slight take on baptism that involves being baptized face down. They insist the rest of us need to be rebaptized

Yet they baptize in Jesus name, have a Oneness view of God and speak in tongues.

I don't see the problem here

I think there are sharper contrasts in their Godhead theology, Praxeas ... not ritual nuances... that deviate from anything resembling the doctrine of the apostles ... or relating to them ... or remotely Apostolic in the 20th century Oneness Pentecostal view.

Branham on the nature of God and Christ:

William Branham taught that God, as a being, is not literally omnipresent (everywhere at once):

"Now, you cannot be omnipresent without being omniscient. God's not even omnipresent; God's omniscient. Omniscient which means--makes Him omnipresent (He knows all things). But in order to be a being He has to be in one being."
The Masterpiece, 1964 (tape #64-0705)

"He's [God]--He's infinite, and He's--He's omnipresent, omniscient, therefore He knows all things. He can't be present everywhere. By being omniscient, knowing all things, then He can be present everywhere."
The Harvest Time, 1964 (tape #64-1212)

Branham taught a form Adoptionism, See also Bishop of Antich, Paul of Samosota :

Jesus was not God before His baptism--

He was--He was Jesus when He was born. But when the Holy Ghost came upon Him after His baptism, He was anointed with God. God was in Him, 'cause He come to fulfill the Word.
The Messiah, January 17, 1961 (tape #61-0117)

And this little Boy, twelve-year-old Child, no wisdom at all, why, but just a twelve-year-old Boy... The Father didn't dwell in Him at that time, because He come on the day when He baptized Him; he saw the Spirit of God coming down (See?), and went in Him.
Paradox, February 6, 1964 (tape #64-0206B

The Spirit left Jesus in Gethsemane and He became just a man-- When God looked down upon the body... (The Spirit left Him in the Garden of Gethsemane; He had to die a man.)
It Is the Rising of the Sun, April 18, 1965 (tape #65-0418M

"And when Jesus, a carpenter's Son, physically speaking, when He come to the earth here that's all He was known of, and the day that when John baptized Him, God a vindicated Him. God spoke from the heavens. John saw Him coming in the form a dove, and said, 'This is My beloved Son in Whom I'm pleased to dwell.' The right translation there is, 'In whom I am pleased to dwell in.' Jesus immediately anointed with God, He was just a man till that time, but now He becomes the God-man.'"
Jesus Christ the Same Yesterday, Today and Forever, preached in Campbellsville, KY, 1955 (tape #55-0806J)

Other non-apostolic views include Mary, not Jesus' biological mother ... but rather "an incubator" ...which seems to contradict the adoptionist view.

Successive modalism ...
"You see, you misunderstand it… It’s One God in three dispensations. The dispensation of “Fatherhood”, “Sonship”, and now, the Holy Spirit.:

----------------------------
That doesn't include the stuff on Adam being a theophany, the saints being theophanies when they enter glory, Serpent Seed, or being the Seventh Angel messenger of which we must accept his message to be saved.

This is another gospel.

Rejecting the Trinity ... makes you unothordox ... and so did Unitarians ....

... dunking in Jesus name ... the Celtic Catholic church did that ...

but even to the 20 and 21st century Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal ... simply denying evidentiary tongues ... sounds the alarms and in their view a unmistakable "red flag"... and who gives a flying fajita if the leader himself, refused to be defined by the word "oneness" or "pentecostal".

but heck, if the two owners of this "Apostolic" forum can accept Branhamites as being Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal .... in every sense of the word ... then so be it ...

DKB thinks they are the reason for "continued revival" in Iran, right?

[Hoovie]

We are not examining Branham though are we? The question is more about whether some under today's Branhamite umbrella confess Jesus as Son of God and have been baptized in Jesus Name and received the Spirit, warranting a OP/Apostolic label.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

We are not examining Branham though are we? The question is more about whether some under today's Branhamite umbrella confess Jesus as Son of God and have been baptized in Jesus Name and received the Spirit, warranting a OP/Apostolic label.

OP ... as in PENTECOSTAL ... which you are not ... and Branham was not.

Your litmus test .... is defective, distorted, deviant and dangerous ... especially among your cohorts.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by DAII

OP ... as in PENTECOSTAL ... which you are not ... and Branham was not.

Your litmus test .... is defective, distorted and dangerous ... even among your cohorts.

Lol! You assume too much! I have been Pentecostal (even the right brand) for twenty five years.

Next you will say Christians must be questioned and vetted to enter the body of Christ.

[houston]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

They still baptize in Jesus name and have a Oneness view of the Godhead. All that "not exactly Trinitarian or Oneness" to me is just an "we're different" elitist crud that many OPs have towards other groups.

Consider the True Jesus Church of Asia...they are Oneness but they have a slight take on baptism that involves being baptized face down. They insist the rest of us need to be rebaptized

Yet they baptize in Jesus name, have a Oneness view of God and speak in tongues.

I don't see the problem here

...and they keep the sabbath.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by houston

...and they keep the sabbath.

THIS JUST IN .... THE GNOSTICS OF THE FIRST CENTURY WERE APOSTOLICS!

They believed in an illusory Christ but believed in his Deity and One good God.

MOST IMPORTANTLY they baptized in the Name of Jesus!

Praise Jesus!!! ... The Apostles Paul and John can rest confidently that the evangelistic efforts of their Gnostic brethren will result in continued revival among those who baptize in the Name ... the Whole Gospel to the Whole World!

They repeat the "sacred name of the Redeeder" over and over again using the same Christian ritual of baptism .... and assures ascent to the heavens .... this is FROM GOD .... JESUS NAME PREACHING!!! EVEN THEY SAW THE IMPORTANCE OF THE INVOCATION OF THE NAME!




Source: Encyclopedia Britannica - http://books.google.com/books?id=jjE...20paul&f=false

Thank you Kal Boora for sending this in to command central.

[Justin]

Originally Posted by DAII

Branham on the nature of God and Christ:

William Branham taught that God, as a being, is not literally omnipresent (everywhere at once):





Branham taught a form Adoptionism, See also Bishop of Antich, Paul of Samosota :

Jesus was not God before His baptism--


Other non-apostolic views include Mary, not Jesus' biological mother ... but rather "an incubator" ...which seems to contradict the adoptionist view.

Besides these items, what else did Branham teach that differs from the Gospel?

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Justin

Besides these items, what else did Branham teach that differs from the Gospel?

I just realized Branham believed and taught his followers .... Jesus was only God-man from his baptism to Gethsemane .... from the previously posted quote:

The Spirit left Jesus in Gethsemane and He became just a man-- When God looked down upon the body... (The Spirit left Him in the Garden of Gethsemane; He had to die a man.)
It Is the Rising of the Sun, April 18, 1965 (tape #65-0418M

I will do some more research. The import of his recordings being played at many of Branhamite meetings is of consequence .... as it frames the present-day theology of message believers ... who believe he was sent with the Message for today.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by DAII

but heck, if the two owners of this "Apostolic" forum can accept Branhamites as being Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal .... in every sense of the word ... then so be it ...

DKB thinks they are the reason for "continued revival" in Iran, right?

"In every sense of the word"?

Why do you assume all "Oneness Pentecostals" or "Apostolics" are, or need to be monolithic?

There are quite large disparities within most denominational labels - especially when used in the generic sense, such as Baptist, Catholic, Lutheran, Mennonite.
All of these have fringe elements among them.

The fact is you and I gripe that the UPCI is narrow and needs a "bigger tent", then when a bit more inclusive approach is used you are quick to judge the salvation of any and all associated.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Why do you assume all "Oneness Pentecostals" or "Apostolics" are monolithic?

There are quite large disparities within most denominational labels - especially when used in the generic sense, such as Baptist, Catholic, Lutheran, Mennonite.
All of these have fringe elements among them.

And why do you continue to try to include a fringe element who for the most part rejects the term "Oneness" and do not view themselves as "Pentecostal" ...

Hoovie, say it with me .... they are NOT PENTECOSTAL.

Even this Church of Iran ... considers their theology to be in between Baptist and Pentecostal ... laying no claim to be either one.

Choosing to be labeled as non-denominational and "free evangelicals"

WORDS MEAN THINGS. AND YOU'RE FORCING YOUR LABEL ON THEM.