The Current PAJC Beliefs

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Did you actually read Felicity's post and my subsequent response?
Please do so. You may find a need to redirect the question.

The point is, I don't believe baptism is being given the levelof imprtance it once was by some on this thread. It is apparently not NECESSARY. I am left with the impression that when a thing becomes unnecessary we sooncast off the bonds of its unnecessariness. After all, if its unnecessary, isn't it legalistic?

Where have you gotten this impression?

We have always and still preach baptism in Jesus name STRONG!!! Every preacher I know personally who has left the UPC still believes in the necessity of baptism and baptizes in Jesus name only. And that includes PCIers if that's the preferred label.

[J-Roc]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Did you actually read Felicity's post and my subsequent response?
Please do so. You may find a need to redirect the question.

The point is, I don't believe baptism is being given the levelof imprtance it once was by some on this thread. It is apparently not NECESSARY. I am left with the impression that when a thing becomes unnecessary we sooncast off the bonds of its unnecessariness. After all, if its unnecessary, isn't it legalistic?

Warped interpretation...

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

You just did it again. You twisted your response to reflect a lack of importance on Acts 2:38.

PP ... for the last time !!!!!!!!

Repentance important
Jesus name baptism important
Baptism of the HG important

Now ...Take off your Acts 2:38 glasses PP .. and maybe you'll discover there are more commands and promises ....

1Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death,[a] and of faith in God, 2instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3And God permitting, we will do so.

9Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case—things that accompany salvation.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Did you actually read Felicity's post and my subsequent response?
Please do so. You may find a need to redirect the question.

The point is, I don't believe baptism is being given the levelof imprtance it once was by some on this thread. It is apparently not NECESSARY. I am left with the impression that when a thing becomes unnecessary we sooncast off the bonds of its unnecessariness. After all, if its unnecessary, isn't it legalistic?

You are quick...I deleted my post because I wasn't going to continue discussing this...

Yes, I did read Felicity's post and yours. She mentioned Spirit filled, but how do you know that those who have been Spirit filled have not been baptized? It's an assumption on your part, PP, based on what?!

[J-Roc]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Can't help but smile at some of the statements I read.

I can tell you this........ those of you who like to hammer on the point that the PCIers of today ain't the same as the ones back at the time of the merger.....

Neither are many of the PAJCers!

And the fact is you have MANY people who believe no differently than I who are standing in your pulpits today (in UPCI particularly) who are preaching with the exact same emphasis we do and with the same emphasis that the old timers did and getting the same results!

People around the world who are not preaching a "tongues or hell" doctrine are praying scores of people through to the Holy Ghost baptism with the initial sign of speaking in tongues.

You don't have ownership of this thing. It was prophesied and promised in Acts .... "to as many as the Lord shall call". And God lives up to and fulfills all his promises.

Owning a water/Spirit doctrine in no way gives you any leverage or favour with God nor does it ensure you're going to have more success at ushering people into the kingdom of God than anyone else. You might think it would be the opposite, but the fact is, it is not. And that's that.

Well said...sound delivery!!

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Can't help but smile at some of the statements I read.

I can tell you this........ those of you who like to hammer on the point that the PCIers of today ain't the same as the ones back at the time of the merger.....

Neither are many of the PAJCers!

And the fact is you have MANY people who believe no differently than I who are standing in your pulpits today (in UPCI particularly) who are preaching with the exact same emphasis we do and with the same emphasis that the old timers did and getting the same results!

People around the world who are not preaching a "tongues or hell" doctrine are praying scores of people through to the Holy Ghost baptism with the initial sign of speaking in tongues.

You don't have ownership of this thing. It was prophesied and promised in Acts .... "to as many as the Lord shall call". And God lives up to and fulfills all his promises.

Owning a water/Spirit doctrine in no way gives you any leverage or favour with God nor does it ensure you're going to have more success at ushering people into the kingdom of God than anyone else. You might think it would be the opposite, but the fact is, it is not. And that's that.

Those who stress Acts 2:38 and folks obey it then I rejoice. Folks who minimize it and honestly seem as they despise it then I fight them boldly. That is the difference your tact is not the same as those who somewhat claim to be as you are in case you have not noticed. The distain reeks from them as they are handling dirty socks when they speaking of the Name above every name in baptism.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Can't help but smile at some of the statements I read.

I can tell you this........ those of you who like to hammer on the point that the PCIers of today ain't the same as the ones back at the time of the merger.....

Neither are many of the PAJCers!

And the fact is you have MANY people who believe no differently than I who are standing in your pulpits today (in UPCI particularly) who are preaching with the exact same emphasis we do and with the same emphasis that the old timers did and getting the same results!

People around the world who are not preaching a "tongues or hell" doctrine are praying scores of people through to the Holy Ghost baptism with the initial sign of speaking in tongues.

You don't have ownership of this thing. It was prophesied and promised in Acts .... "to as many as the Lord shall call". And God lives up to and fulfills all his promises.

Owning a water/Spirit doctrine in no way gives you any leverage or favour with God nor does it ensure you're going to have more success at ushering people into the kingdom of God than anyone else. You might think it would be the opposite, but the fact is, it is not. And that's that.

I respect you, but I don't believe this is true.

Felicity, can't you - just for one moment - begin to look around at the other posters who are identifying with the so called PCI view? They do not hold the same level of love you claim to have for the Acts 2:38 message. In fact, they quite despise it.

I have watched this junk for several days now, and for the most part I have remained remarkably civil and tolerant. But this is whacked! Don't tell me you love the message, and then slam it, and everyone who preaches it, as often as possible.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Where have you gotten this impression?

We have always and still preach baptism in Jesus name STRONG!!! Every preacher I know personally who has left the UPC still believes in the necessity of baptism and baptizes in Jesus name only. And that includes PCIers if that's the preferred label.

Christ Church-Bethel-Vanhoose church-Fender's church-nad many others do not emphasize baptism in Jesus Name.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

I respect you, but I don't believe this is true.

Felicity, can't you - just for one moment - begin to look around at the other posters who are identifying with the so called PCI view? They do not hold the same level of love you claim to have for the Acts 2:38 message. In fact, they quite despise it.

I have watched this junk for several days now, and for the most part I have remained remarkably civil and tolerant. But this is whacked! Don't tell me you love the message, and then slam it, and everyone who preaches it, as often as possible.

The Seer.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Barb

You are quick...I deleted my post because I wasn't going to continue discussing this...

Yes, I did read Felicity's post and yours. She mentioned Spirit filled, but how do you know that those who have been Spirit filled have not been baptized? It's an assumption on your part, PP, based on what?!

Based on they've got the truth and we don't