Official Stance of UPC?

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

can anyone explain why john 3:5, "born of the water" would not refer to water baptism?

Dedicated,

One explanation as to why is found in the next verse that more fully explains the preceding verse. Or a parallelism.
John 3:5,
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
John..3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

The water simply refers to our natural birth. The Spirit birth is from above.

John..3:7
Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
John..3:8
The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Water baptism doctrine as a New Birth requirement is greatly misunderstood. It's up to you to come to your own conclusions, but jmo this prerequisite to salvation has hindered rather than helped revival, replacing the emphasis on cross and our burden bearer, Jesus Christ, and placing it upon "the ministry".

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I am amazed how we can ignore basic context and messages of scripture to pull out what we want to teach. Jesus told the diciples that they would receive "power after the holy ghost came upon them". This after Jesus gave thme the spirit of the holy ghost already.
Joh 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit.

What was this if they had not received the spirit of God into their hearts? As with the promise of being "baptized in the holy spirit" which was the promise of the father which could not come until Christ had been taken from them.

Act 1:4 And having met with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to await the promise of the Father which you heard from Me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days from now.

There is a differance between the spirit of God that comes into our lives at conversion, then when we are baptized with his spirit receiving the promise of the father that brings power into our lives.

Hence we ignore the simplicity in our drive to prove our own agenda.

Let us look at Acts 2 closer than with the eyes of religious tradition.

Act 2:3 And tongues as of fire appeared to them, being distributed; and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The first 120 were given the promise of the father, the baptism of the holy ghost.

At the missunderstaning of the Jews that had come to Jerusalem to celibrate the passover and Pentecost, Peter began to quote from Joel. "This is that " within the first part of his message Peter states salvation comes to those that "call on the name of the Lord". He then goes on to condem those devout Jews, that it was thier hands that did crucify the Lord Jesus Christ the anionted one of God. When they understood the gravity of thier deeds they then ask Peter "what shall we do?" this being the most missed stated quote in the scripture other than John 3:5. Assuming that the question is how can we be saved? Or what must we do to be saved? neither of which is the quetion!!! The question is realizing what they have been accused of doing and understanding that they are in fact guilty of putting Christ on the cross. The question is how can we rectify our guilt. What can we do the make things right.

Now if your child disobeys you what is the first thing you want him/her to do? repent!!! Not just ask forgiveness but to refrain from doing that thing again. Peter give the same command, REPENT, Now haveing the promise that by the death of Christ our sins are forgiven, and understanding that in those days cerimonial washing was the out ward way men professed thier siding with one religious sect with another. Peter tells them to publicly profess thier commitment to Christ through water baptism, because Christ has forgiven their sins.

And then they too shall receive the Holy ghost, As this "promise of the father" was what it was all about.

so are you saying we all should have tounges of fire set on top our heads as they did?
or the ability to go into a foriegn country and speak english and they will here me in there own native tounge?

[faithit166]

Originally Posted by Sabby

Dedicated,

One explanation as to why is found in the next verse that more fully explains the preceding verse. Or a parallelism.
John 3:5,
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
John..3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

The water simply refers to our natural birth. The Spirit birth is from above.

John..3:7
Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
John..3:8
The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Water baptism doctrine as a New Birth requirement is greatly misunderstood. It's up to you to come to your own conclusions, but jmo this prerequisite to salvation has hindered rather than helped revival, replacing the emphasis on cross and our burden bearer, Jesus Christ, and placing it upon "the ministry".

water baptism is not replying to our natural birth even jesus was naturally born thru virgin mary and then was also water baptized by john why would jesus set us an example but not expect us to follow it, bottom line unless your born of the water and the spirit you cannot,cannot enter the kingdom of god pretty plain god bless

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I am amazed how we can ignore basic context and messages of scripture to pull out what we want to teach. Jesus told the diciples that they would receive "power after the holy ghost came upon them". This after Jesus gave thme the spirit of the holy ghost already.
Joh 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit.

What was this if they had not received the spirit of God into their hearts? As with the promise of being "baptized in the holy spirit" which was the promise of the father which could not come until Christ had been taken from them.

Act 1:4 And having met with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to await the promise of the Father which you heard from Me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days from now.

There is a differance between the spirit of God that comes into our lives at conversion, then when we are baptized with his spirit receiving the promise of the father that brings power into our lives.

Hence we ignore the simplicity in our drive to prove our own agenda.

Let us look at Acts 2 closer than with the eyes of religious tradition.

Act 2:3 And tongues as of fire appeared to them, being distributed; and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The first 120 were given the promise of the father, the baptism of the holy ghost.

At the missunderstaning of the Jews that had come to Jerusalem to celibrate the passover and Pentecost, Peter began to quote from Joel. "This is that " within the first part of his message Peter states salvation comes to those that "call on the name of the Lord". He then goes on to condem those devout Jews, that it was thier hands that did crucify the Lord Jesus Christ the anionted one of God. When they understood the gravity of thier deeds they then ask Peter "what shall we do?" this being the most missed stated quote in the scripture other than John 3:5. Assuming that the question is how can we be saved? Or what must we do to be saved? neither of which is the quetion!!! The question is realizing what they have been accused of doing and understanding that they are in fact guilty of putting Christ on the cross. The question is how can we rectify our guilt. What can we do the make things right.

Now if your child disobeys you what is the first thing you want him/her to do? repent!!! Not just ask forgiveness but to refrain from doing that thing again. Peter give the same command, REPENT, Now haveing the promise that by the death of Christ our sins are forgiven, and understanding that in those days cerimonial washing was the out ward way men professed thier siding with one religious sect with another. Peter tells them to publicly profess thier commitment to Christ through water baptism, because Christ has forgiven their sins.

And then they too shall receive the Holy ghost, As this "promise of the father" was what it was all about.

[NorCal]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I am amazed how we can ignore basic context and messages of scripture to pull out what we want to teach. Jesus told the diciples that they would receive "power after the holy ghost came upon them". This after Jesus gave thme the spirit of the holy ghost already.
Joh 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit.

What was this if they had not received the spirit of God into their hearts? As with the promise of being "baptized in the holy spirit" which was the promise of the father which could not come until Christ had been taken from them.

Act 1:4 And having met with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to await the promise of the Father which you heard from Me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days from now.

There is a differance between the spirit of God that comes into our lives at conversion, then when we are baptized with his spirit receiving the promise of the father that brings power into our lives.

Hence we ignore the simplicity in our drive to prove our own agenda.

Let us look at Acts 2 closer than with the eyes of religious tradition.

Act 2:3 And tongues as of fire appeared to them, being distributed; and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The first 120 were given the promise of the father, the baptism of the holy ghost.


And then they too shall receive the Holy ghost, As this "promise of the father" was what it was all about.

So the question comes down to this. Is talking in tongues the evidence of the power of The Spirit?

If so, Paul emphatically addresses this issue in 2 Timothy 3:1-5. "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away."

It is a very slippery slope to say that Tongues is not required, for all instruction is REQUIRED biblically, or you are in rebellion to the Word.

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by NorCal

It is a very slippery slope to say that Tongues is not required, for all instruction is REQUIRED biblically, or you are in rebellion to the Word.

not its not, tounges isnt required for salvation, they are a gift of the Spirit, and paul also asked a rhetoric question in 1 corinthians.
Does all speak with tounges?
does all prophesy?

of course they dont, if they all did he would have stated other wise.

whats happened is a bad use of hermenuetics to try and proove a point, but i could do the same and use it and state not only do we have to speak in tounges we also must prophesy

so really there is no biblical point in the bible that a person must speak with tounges, what we have is a hand full of example were people did, but we also have a hand full of examples were they didnt.

so a doctrine was made off of that, and not considering that the word Charisma is the same word used to describe the free gift of God

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by faithit166

water baptism is not replying to our natural birth even jesus was naturally born thru virgin mary and then was also water baptized by john why would jesus set us an example but not expect us to follow it, bottom line unless your born of the water and the spirit you cannot,cannot enter the kingdom of god pretty plain god bless

Say faith, you are free to believe this if you wish.
Jesus being born naturally proves my point all the more. He wouldn't have been the the son of man had he not been incarnate, born in a human body. The only people needing to be born again are human beings...
I agree it's plain, you must have the Spirit of God or you (or me or anybody else) are "none of His". It's a spiritual birth, of His spirit.

As far as the initial evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism is concerned, we should preach a hunger for the baptism of the Spirit. This baptism will result in a physical manifestation of tongues, prophesying, seeing visions, dreaming dreams, etc, all as promised by the O.T. prophet Joel.
These signs are as valid an outward manifestation as is speaking in tongues.

Determined Mind, (if you are reading this) I agree with Jim Ellis in recommending Christianity Without The Cross by Tom Fudge as a book to read.
It is, for this season in the "pentecostal" church, probably the most revealing but as to where oneness (particularly UPC) folk have gone off track.
It is thoroughly, nearly numbingly researched, but if you have been in Pentecost any amount of time, you will recognize many of the hundreds of preachers and ministers interviewed for the book listed in the index.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by faithit166

water baptism is not replying to our natural birth even jesus was naturally born thru virgin mary and then was also water baptized by john why would jesus set us an example but not expect us to follow it, bottom line unless your born of the water and the spirit you cannot,cannot enter the kingdom of god pretty plain god bless

Jesus was born by the power of the Holy Spirit.
About 30 years later He submitted to mikveh/baptism/ritual (symbolic) cleansing and afterward received the anointing of God for His ministry. The Spirit did not enter Him at Jordan after water baptism. He was the Son of God since birth. He did not become the Son of God at Jordan. The Spirit had been within Him since birth. The Spirit came upon Him at Jordan to anoint Him for ministry.

We teach that same pattern.
1. birth of the Spirit
2. water baptism
3. Spirit empowerment
Three separate experiences.

[NorCal]

Originally Posted by acerrak

not its not, tounges isnt required for salvation, they are a gift of the Spirit, and paul also asked a rhetoric question in 1 corinthians.
Does all speak with tounges?
does all prophesy?

of course they dont, if they all did he would have stated other wise.

whats happened is a bad use of hermenuetics to try and proove a point, but i could do the same and use it and state not only do we have to speak in tounges we also must prophesy

so really there is no biblical point in the bible that a person must speak with tounges, what we have is a hand full of example were people did, but we also have a hand full of examples were they didnt.

so a doctrine was made off of that, and not considering that the word Charisma is the same word used to describe the free gift of God

Others would say that you are mixing evidence with gifts. The problem is, according to Acts 2:4, "they ALL spoke with other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance".

As you see, we have 2 historical records that contradict each other. One where Jesus said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" and one that saids they "all filled with the Holy Ghost as the Spirit gave them utterance."

So when we obviously look at it, one must say that historically, the first was only partial detail or information. Not that it is incorrect, but incomplete.

Who is to say that when Jesus said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" they were not all speaking in tongues then.

They Holy Ghost could not be given until Jesus had been glorified. In John 20:22 when know that Jesus had been crucified, and risen again. He had a Glorified Body. But we do not have a record of how the disciples responded when he said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost".

However, we do know that when God Breath on the 120 in the upper room, they did speak with other tongues.

So the proper way to look at it, Historical Grammatical.

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by NorCal

Others would say that you are mixing evidence with gifts. The problem is, according to Acts 2:4, "they ALL spoke with other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance".

As you see, we have 2 historical records that contradict each other. One where Jesus said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" and one that saids they "all filled with the Holy Ghost as the Spirit gave them utterance."

So when we obviously look at it, one must say that historically, the first was only partial detail or information. Not that it is incorrect, but incomplete.

Who is to say that when Jesus said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" they were not all speaking in tongues then.

They Holy Ghost could not be given until Jesus had been glorified. In John 20:22 when know that Jesus had been crucified, and risen again. He had a Glorified Body. But we do not have a record of how the disciples responded when he said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost".

However, we do know that when God Breath on the 120 in the upper room, they did speak with other tongues.

So the proper way to look at it, Historical Grammatical.

nope not mixing the greek word charisma is ephesians 2:8-9 charisma Gift.


im all about people getting the Holy ghost, i just do not agree with the tounge doctrine as the only evidence or proof of the spirit. that is not biblical.

do people speak with tounges yes. do they all ..... No Paul pointed this out.