Where are they?

[deltaguitar]

Our church is mainly exUPC but we don't tell anyone. Also, we don't necessarily teach that the Baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues. However, the bible is very clear that you must have the holy spirit to be saved. This doesn't mean tongues tough.

GP, the truth is that once you get away from the Apostolic roots you realize you can look at the bible for what is says and not what folks have told us it says.

[deltaguitar]

We are a very balanced church. Our bylaws do state that we believe the Baptism of the Holy Ghost is an experience for every believer. http://www.myspace.com/worldofgrace

[Scott Hutchinson]

Bishop Williams never was UPCI,but I believe Pastor Kelly was.
http://christtemplechurch.com

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

So much for that -- at the end of his message on Gifts & Callings, he slips in there "not that the Holy Ghost is salvific."

A friend of mine sent me that particular video and I pointed out to him what the end of the video says. Cross them off your list as those who haven't adjusted doctrine as well. What was the point? Why not just say "you need the Holy Ghost!"

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

Check out the link that someone sent me. They wanted to know too because they really thought Suber still believed Acts 2:38 as essentiality to salvation. His statement was "not that the Holy Ghost is salvific" -- nothing about tongues, although I would be disappointed to learn he thought the initial evidence for the HG changed. I'll give him room, he may have misspoke in the sermon or not have intended that to be his point. Nevertheless, he said it. It's online for the public.

I didn't get to finish the whole message, but at one point he made the statement that he didn't believe you could lose the Holy Ghost, but that you, with it, can't be saved if you are in sin. He said something like, it's not salvific for you, if you are in sin.

Is that what you heard or did he say something further toward the end of the message? I think I was at around 14 minutes into the message when the electricity turned off. Arghh! We get that a lot around here! It's a wonder I still have a computer!

[GrowingPains]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I didn't get to finish the whole message, but at one point he made the statement that he didn't believe you could lose the Holy Ghost, but that you, with it, can't be saved if you are in sin. He said something like, it's not salvific for you, if you are in sin.

Is that what you heard or did he say something further toward the end of the message? I think I was at around 14 minutes into the message when the electricity turned off. Arghh! We get that a lot around here! It's a wonder I still have a computer!

No, that's not it. It's near the end. I was in to the entire message... found it to be very good. It was near his closing.

I'm interested because it seems some of us would rather join the masses of Christendom and become baptists. You can say you read the Word differently when you realize some standards don't have Scriptural support, but this then concludes what many caution: you give up the one, and the rest goes with you. So, I'm looking for Apostolics in core doctrine that don't uphold unbiblical standards.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

No, that's not it. It's near the end. I was in to the entire message... found it to be very good. It was near his closing.

I'm interested because it seems some of us would rather join the masses of Christendom and become baptists. You can say you read the Word differently when you realize some standards don't have Scriptural support, but this then concludes what many caution: you give up the one, and the rest goes with you. So, I'm looking for Apostolics in core doctrine that don't uphold unbiblical standards.

I'll listen to it in it's entirety later. That's weird and sounds really contradictory to the first 14 minutes of the message.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

No, that's not it. It's near the end. I was in to the entire message... found it to be very good. It was near his closing.

I'm interested because it seems some of us would rather join the masses of Christendom and become baptists. You can say you read the Word differently when you realize some standards don't have Scriptural support, but this then concludes what many caution: you give up the one, and the rest goes with you. So, I'm looking for Apostolics in core doctrine that don't uphold unbiblical standards.

I listened to Part I and II, but I didn't hear him say it. Can you give me which part you are referring to and the time frame? If you have the time to go back and check it, of course. Thanks!

[Pressing-On]

Okay, GrowingPains, I found it:

Starting at 13:03 - Giftings, calling and election. This is what Romans 12, and I'm going to read these quickly and then I'll be out of here, but Romans 12 mentions several spiritual gifts and the we go to I Cor and then we go to Peter. It lines it all up, so I want to read all of them, quickly, to you. Many of you have taken the test. But, these are the gifts that come after, say after, you have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit or the gift of the Holy Ghost. You can't operate in the gifts of the Spirit until you are filled with the Spirit. That's not popular, but I can't find anyway around it. I'm not even saying operating in the spiritual gifts has anything to do with your salvation because I just read that the gifts and the callings are without repentance. So, you can operate in the gift and God will not revoke the gift even if you are in sin. So that means that the Holy Ghost is not salvific, it's empowering.

I posted this earlier:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I didn't get to finish the whole message, but at one point he made the statement that he didn't believe you could lose the Holy Ghost, but that you, with it, can't be saved if you are in sin. He said something like, it's not salvific for you, if you are in sin.

It sounds like he contracted himself here. I would go with his second statement, but I can't, Biblically, go with the the Holy Ghost not being salvific, only empowering.

First, he even says that you can't operate in the "gifts" without the "gift" - true. Leaving the "gifts" aside, what did he think the "gift" was for?

Romans 8:8 "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

(9)But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

If you are none of his, you can't be saved - pretty simple!

[GrowingPains]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Okay, GrowingPains, I found it:



I posted this earlier:



It sounds like he contracted himself here. I would go with his second statement, but I can't, Biblically, go with the the Holy Ghost not being salvific, only empowering.

First, he even says that you can't operate in the "gifts" without the "gift" - true. Leaving the "gifts" aside, what did he think the "gift" was for?

Romans 8:8 "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

(9)But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

If you are none of his, you can't be saved - pretty simple!

Sounds like he may be of the belief that the HG was only missional (exclusively) and not salvific. I was troubled by the statement as was the friend who sent it to me. This post was about guys who left, acknowledging the unbiblical standards, and the mistake of focusing on these little distractions, but that also maintained Apostolic doctrine. It seems most are identical to AOG, but prefer to remove the word "trinity" from their belief statement. My buddy sent him a note, but so far no response.

[GrowingPains]

Anyone hear rumor that some South Texans are wanting to start their own fellowship, along with some fellas from the West Coast? Heard that one today. This matches my thread because these are card-carrying preachers that have public said they don't care to ever preach standards again. Curious about their doctrine on salvation.