Calling all Apostolics! I am here to help.

[1Corinth2v4]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I know a couple of guys who do. Besides, I don't want to argue salvation. I just want to know what the arguments are with scriptural support.

From the Gospel of 1corinth2v4, 8th chapter,

9) Know ye, they that haven't received the holy ghost infilling, nor have repented and been baptized in Jesus name, know ye that they shall not enter God's kingdom; thus it is written

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I want to have a thread that plainly spells out the salvation doctrine of the three-steppers. I want to keep this simple and as easy to follow as possible, so for this thread lets just assume that we all believe the same thing about repentance.

We seem to have issues because people seem to not understand what each group believes.

So, for all you guys who want scripture and believe in the Bible only as our source for doctrine then this is the chance to show what you believe and why.

I tried this once before and it didn't really work. I just want a simple thread that deals with the basic doctrine and then support for that doctrine.

I will not argue yet but will help the three-steppers and try to understand what they believe.

Personally, I'm a zero-stepper. I think it's insane to think we can take any steps. Jesus has taken all the steps!!!

[Praxeas]

Its hard to believe anyone honestly pretends 3 steppers have never given their argument with scriptural support.....in fact there is an online book on the subject by Bernard.

I think its the kinda of "three steppers need help, they never use scriptura...Ill get my popcorn because I know they won't answer" attitude they tend to avoid now. It's gotten old. They have defended their doctrines but they feel it's pointless to be told they have not and face the same ad nauseum accusations over and over and over and I don't blame them

You want a real discussion on scriptures Delta? Challenge Jason or someone to a debate in the moderated section

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Its hard to believe anyone honestly pretends 3 steppers have never given their argument with scriptural support.....in fact there is an online book on the subject by Bernard.

I think its the kinda of "three steppers need help, they never use scriptura...Ill get my popcorn because I know they won't answer" attitude they tend to avoid now. It's gotten old. They have defended their doctrines but they feel it's pointless to be told they have not and face the same ad nauseum accusations over and over and over and I don't blame them

You want a real discussion on scriptures Delta? Challenge Jason or someone to a debate in the moderated section

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Amen to everything Prax posted, but this last line is what we really need.

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Personally, I'm a zero-stepper. I think it's insane to think we can take any steps. Jesus has taken all the steps!!!

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by Jason

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Amen to everything Prax posted, but this last line is what we really need.

[simplyme]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I kind of wanted a fresh thread. That other one got off on repentance.

And whats wrong with that? Without repentance, its all moot.

[deltaguitar]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Its hard to believe anyone honestly pretends 3 steppers have never given their argument with scriptural support.....in fact there is an online book on the subject by Bernard.

I think its the kinda of "three steppers need help, they never use scriptura...Ill get my popcorn because I know they won't answer" attitude they tend to avoid now. It's gotten old. They have defended their doctrines but they feel it's pointless to be told they have not and face the same ad nauseum accusations over and over and over and I don't blame them

You want a real discussion on scriptures Delta? Challenge Jason or someone to a debate in the moderated section

No, I am not a debater. I don't care about winning or losing. I really care about truth and once people start having to take a side then all they do is stick to that side no matter what. I have always been one to concede a point if I am wrong.

When discussing something with someone you have to first know what they believe and all I want from this thread is to find common ground with those of Apostolic beliefs so that we can then discuss the issues we each have with the others doctrine.

When John Piper wrote his book criticizing some points of N. T. Wright's he actually sent the book to Wright to read ahead of time so that anything Piper might have gotten wrong. I think this is a good spirit to have. So many times we get to slinging stuff around here and arguing and all the while the other guy is saying he doesn't believe that.

I have read almost all of Bernard's books. My dad is a great teacher of the word and I knew Bernard before I knew anything else. I was raised in a very good balanced UPC home with wonderful parents who did everything right concerning teaching me the doctrine.

My change came because I saw things in the bible that didn't line up. The first time I read Romans I actually put my bible up and didn't read it again for probably two years because it shook me so much and I loved the UPC and being pentecostal.

It wasn't until I was at the bottom of trying to find hope that I went back to the word and found something I had never known before. The word set me free.

I have been advised that I am doing the wrong thing on this forum by engaging with Apostolic because I am not apostolic anymore. For at least a year I haven't even considered myself Pentecostal and I don't speak in tongues and I don't seek for it anymore. When I first came to this forum I was desperate for a move of God in my life. I tried every Pentecostal trick to get it but I just couldn't do it. I have been delivered from it so why bother you people who love it and maybe even are supposed to be this way. I just don't have the patience for that doctrine anymore.

Don't know how I got into all that. Probably just sleepy.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

No, I am not a debater. I don't care about winning or losing. I really care about truth and once people start having to take a side then all they do is stick to that side no matter what. I have always been one to concede a point if I am wrong.

Neither am I, the only debate I've ever participated in was here on AFF. However in a debate both point of views are presented in a way that the observers can judge for themselves. True the ones involved in the debate rarely change tier posistion during the debate (though some do after time), but again, it is for the benefit of the hearers/readers.

If your not up to this, perhaps a more seasoned poster of your persuasion would be interested. I am convinced that we are being charged with alot of things that we do not believe here lately.

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I read almost all of Bernard's books. My dad is a great teacher of the word and I knew Bernard before I knew anything else. I was raised in a very good balanced UPC home with wonderful parents who did everything right concerning teaching me the doctrine.

mistake one, commonly made by ex-pentecostals. Bernard is not scripture. Though I personally like alot of what He writes, I've read so many ex-pentecostals speak about or boast how their goal was to defend the doctrine.

IMO that's why many of them couldn't serve God like they ought, their focus became on their organization rather than God. For the record, I'm not necessarily accusing you, DG of such things, but have seen statements similar to what you made many times. In the first place amongst whom Gregory Boyd comes immediately to mind.

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

My change came because I saw things in the bible that didn't line up. The first time I read Romans I actually put my bible up and didn't read it again for probably two years because it shook me so much and I loved the UPC and being pentecostal.

DG, do you think you were the first pentecostal to read Romans? This statement is a big red flag to me. It tells me that your mind set was very skewed somehow, if Romans was that a big a shock to you. No wonder you harp on grace so much, because you apperently, truly did not understand grace.

Romans is one of the greatest books in the New Testament, but it in no way tears down the importance of repentance, water baptism and Spirit baptism, in fact a large portion of Romans is devoted to salvation, chapters 6-8.
I mean how can you see baptism as a "work" and have nothing to do with salvation when Paul (who not only shared the importance of baptism in his testimony-Acts 22:16) writes:

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also [in the likeness] of [his] resurrection:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
ROMANS 6:1-6

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I have been advised that I am doing the wrong thing on this forum by engaging with Apostolic because I am not apostolic anymore.

DG, I'm glad you here. I don't always appreciate what your promoting (Calvinism), but you seem like a nice, sincere guy, and I do honestly believe you love God.

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

For at least a year I haven't even considered myself Pentecostal and I don't speak in tongues and I don't seek for it anymore. When I first came to this forum I was desperate for a move of God in my life. I tried every Pentecostal trick to get it but I just couldn't do it.

Just seek to serve God, pray, study, and walk with God. If He wants you to speak in tongues, you will. I think your doing the right thing by NOT seeking tongues. Just serve God, and if it so happens that you speak in tongues, quench not the Spirit. I do believe tongues (at least in our current day) are over-rated. Yes I believe and speak in tongues, but also believe the act of seeking tongues more than God has done people more harm than good.

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I have been delivered from it so why bother you people who love it and maybe even are supposed to be this way. I just don't have the patience for that doctrine anymore.

Because of tongues, you threw the baby out with the bath water. DG, you come on here talking about how your going to "set us free" and such, but can't even answer the scriptures we bring. Just say, well "your interpretation is wrong."

What makes our interpretaion wrong? Do you deny that Paul is speaking of baptism in Romans 6:3-4 or Colossians 2:11-13. Baptism is our circumcision. Not an outward circumcision, but inward, circumcision of the heart. And circumcision wasn't optional in the old covenant, and isn't optional in the New.

Baptism is the completion of repentace and our initiation into the New Covenant...................ok, it's late and I'll stop there. I'm tired too.

Perhaps someone will take up the offer to debate the topic.

That is unless I'm busy in a tithing debate, still waiting on someone to answer that open challenge

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Its hard to believe anyone honestly pretends 3 steppers have never given their argument with scriptural support.....in fact there is an online book on the subject by Bernard.

I think its the kinda of "three steppers need help, they never use scriptura...Ill get my popcorn because I know they won't answer" attitude they tend to avoid now. It's gotten old. They have defended their doctrines but they feel it's pointless to be told they have not and face the same ad nauseum accusations over and over and over and I don't blame them

You want a real discussion on scriptures Delta? Challenge Jason or someone to a debate in the moderated section

BINGO! I have seen Delta totally ignore clear point as well as KWS on baptism. The points on the expectation of a manifestation of the HS in Acts cannot be argued against. It is clear "belief" alone does not bring about reception per how Acts shows the early church and conversion. This has been pointed out before and ignored. So what is the point? Very little because delta really doesn't care he just wants to play the old worn out chorus.... show me when people already have. Many have asked for evidence of baptism not being shown as a necessity and simply an unimportant symbol that has no real impact spiritually? Seen it? No! Yet they still argue for such. In the end it gets tiresome. As they say the squeeky wheel gets the oil.... well I'm going to limit how much oil certain people get as I don't like wasting my time to closed ears who have already heard and argued and denied it. Nothing else much to do.