Apostolic Litumus Test: Do you affirm - Yes or no? - Page 28

Jack Shephard · #**271** 07-01-2008, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

This verse might be one of the most taken out context verses used by 3 steppers ...

1. The religious elite of Jerusalem .... Annas, Caiphas and others asked a very simple and direct question to Peter and John ... and they defined what they meant by name ....

in verse 7 they ask....

And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?

They were asking under who's authority or power have you been preaching...

2. Peter answers with the personage ... not the articulation of a name.

8Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,

9If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;

10Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

11This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.

12Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

-----------------------------------------------------

He is speaking of the person of Jesus Christ ... and that they were standing before them under His authority ..

He then says there is no salvation outside of any other ... other than Jesus Christ ...

This is the part of verse 12 that is cropped out of the lips of 3 steppers ... they only quote the latter half of a verse that is dealing w/ authority rather than the articulation of a name during a properly administered baptism.

Context is everything ... yet 3 steppers love to use Scripture in isolation.

agreed!

SDG · #**272** 07-01-2008, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico

Brother Epley, maybe you can convince Dan and others what it is I was referring to. I wasn't there and don't know enough about history to do much more than repeat what I have heard you and others say regarding this new breed of "PCIer", as Dan has referred to himself as. You see what me asking him for some proof led to yesterday, so good luck getting anything other than Ankerberg out of him. lol

I could post Urshan and Haywood and you would think they were PCI ... when they were not ...

Your disdain for trinitarians shines through in every post ... you are not concerned w/ getting to the pulp of this watermelon but with spitting out seeds...you'd rather to marginalize the Body of Christ that you consider anathema.

Jack Shephard · #**273** 07-01-2008, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I also pointed out that he clearly tells some of his disciples in John 3.

Guessed I missed that one, sorry. Dan it looks as if no one in the 3-step camp are even listening to your brilliance.

Baron1710 · #**274** 07-01-2008, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico

Brother Epley, maybe you can convince Dan and others what it is I was referring to. I wasn't there and don't know enough about history to do much more than repeat what I have heard you and others say regarding this new breed of "PCIer", as Dan has referred to himself as. You see what me asking him for some proof led to yesterday, so good luck getting anything other than Ankerberg out of him. lol

Rico, I don't know why they are saying this is a new breed of PCI, it simply isn't true. Ask Loren Yadon what his dad and uncle taught from the beginning of the UPC. I also quoted for you Raymond Crownover who is an adjunct at UGST, and holds the PCI view. Here it is again so you don't have to go looking for it.

“A small minority of PCI [Pentecostal Churches Inc.]and a vocal portion (possibly a majority) of PAJC [Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ] ministers preached “Holy Ghost or Hell” (the old timer’s term for a doctrine that anyone not baptized in the name of Jesus and not evidencing Spirit baptism by speaking in tongues was damned, perhaps better referred to as the “No Mercy” position).” It also seems clear to me that the “No Mercy” position is losing its dominance (if it ever actually was dominant). The most vocal group in the UPCI may remain “No Mercy,” but I question the assertion that they are the majority.” Raymond Cownover who's father came in under the PCI teaching.

Rico · #**275** 07-01-2008, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron1710

I have this thing called a job and sometimes they want me to work, it's a rough life but that's the way it goes. Those quotes are all I have access to here at work but there are plenty more.

So, are these guys PCI folk or PAJC folk? Based on Dan's last post to me, it seems they aren't PCI folk. Maybe I should start writing some of these names down so I will know who is who. I do know some names, like Haywood and Urshan, but I don't know where they fit into the whole scheme of the PCI vs PAJC debate.

Rico · #**276** 07-01-2008, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I could post Urshan and Haywood and you would think they were PCI ... when they were not ...

Your disdain for trinitarians shines through in every post ... you are not concerned w/ getting to the pulp of this watermelon ...but rather to marginalize the Body of Christ that you consider anathema.

Dan, I am done talking with you about this. It's plain to see all you are interested in doing is mocking, and I don't have the patience to deal with such foolishness today.

SDG · #**277** 07-01-2008, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico

So, are these guys PCI folk or PAJC folk? Based on Dan's last post to me, it seems they aren't PCI folk. Maybe I should start writing some of these names down so I will know who is who. I do know some names, like Haywood and Urshan, but I don't know where they fit into the whole scheme of the PCI vs PAJC debate.

Haywood was PAW .... and he just told you Urshan even held license with the AG as a Oneness Believer in 1917 (*gasp*).

Many of these quotes come before there was even a PCI ...

This again only proves that are not concerned to delving into the soundness of argument but only with the Christological view of the messenger ....

Enough ... said about this, Rico. Basta, contigo.

Rico · #**278** 07-01-2008, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Rico, I don't know why they are saying this is a new breed of PCI, it simply isn't true. Ask Loren Yadon what his dad and uncle taught from the beginning of the UPC. I also quoted for you Raymond Crownover who is an adjunct at UGST, and holds the PCI view. Here it is again so you don't have to go looking for it.

“A small minority of PCI [Pentecostal Churches Inc.]and a vocal portion (possibly a majority) of PAJC [Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ] ministers preached “Holy Ghost or Hell” (the old timer’s term for a doctrine that anyone not baptized in the name of Jesus and not evidencing Spirit baptism by speaking in tongues was damned, perhaps better referred to as the “No Mercy” position).” It also seems clear to me that the “No Mercy” position is losing its dominance (if it ever actually was dominant). The most vocal group in the UPCI may remain “No Mercy,” but I question the assertion that they are the majority.” Raymond Cownover who's father came in under the PCI teaching.

Ok. So this guy is someone who is still alive, part of the UPC, and is a one stepper, correct? Does he believe one has to be baptized and baptized in the name of Jesus to make Heaven? He seems to be making an observation in your quote, more than stating his position on baptism. In other words, I have heard of one steppers who believe one is saved at repentance, but still needs to be baptized in Jesus name to stay saved. Unless my memory is failing me (which is entirely possible), I think this is the way Felicity and her hubby believe.

Rico · #**279** 07-01-2008, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Haywood was PAW .... and he just told you Urshan even held license with the AG as a Oneness Believer in 1917 (*gasp*).

Many of these quotes come before there was even a PCI ...

This again only proves that are not concerned to delving into the soundness of argument but only with the Christological view of the messenger ....

Enough ... said about this, Rico. Basta, contigo.

Good. I am glad you are done with answering my posts on this, not that you actually answered anything, but whatever. Baron has done more to answer my questions in two posts than you have, so I will let him answer my questions. Now shoooo.

Baron1710 · #**280** 07-01-2008, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico

Ok. So this guy is someone who is still alive, part of the UPC, and is a one stepper, correct? Does he believe one has to be baptized and baptized in the name of Jesus to make Heaven? He seems to be making an observation in your quote, more than stating his position on baptism. In other words, I have heard of one steppers who believe one is saved at repentance, but still needs to be baptized in Jesus name to stay saved.

The point of quoting him was not to get his view but to show that the view that one would go to hell if not baptized in Jesus name was not the majority view of the PCI.

Yes, both Loren Yadon and Crownover are alive.