Homosexuality Or Legalism--Which Is Worse?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by pelathais

No. In fact you depart from basic Apostolic teaching with that application. The Larkin chart that I showed you, though somewaht dated (but it's free to post it!) shows the majority teaching of the UPCI and most Apostolic groups.

Sorry I was baptized by a non-Dispensationalist Post Tribulation Pre-Mill. My old pastor was also a non-Dispensationalist Post Trib and both ministers were true Israel of God. They thought Larkin was wrong, and one of the ministers would teach Search for Truth and NEVER teach the prophecy part of the chart. As far as the apostolic movement is concern her eschatology is pretty much up in the air. The Apostolic Faith movement with Parham was British Israel and not Dispensationalists, but there were futurists, and then you had those who joined the group later who were Dispensationalists. Still to say that the Apostolics had the corner market on eschatology is a great leap to say the least. United Pentecostal Church International is definitely without a doubt Pre-Tribulationist, although Brother Irving Baxter Jr with Endtime Magazine and his teachings of Dispensational Post Trib Pre-Mill teaching did a lot to sway ministers towards his teaching.

As we sit at this point we have a hodge podge of beliefs within Pentecost concerning eschatology. I have met a great deal of ministers who claim what is termed "Pan-Trib", which is a belief that as time goes on everything will "pan-out" and so they will get a better view of their ever evolving eschatology.
I myself felt that "pan-tribs" really didn't care much about eschatology and never really bothered trying to explain it, hence their title of "Pan-Trib".

Still you may want to take a shot at Matthew 16, I think you will see a clear view that your 1000 year spaced out between resurrections both have "works" that both groups MUST be judge for. So whether you are Dispensationalist or non-Dispensationalist futurist you still have both groups having to be judged by works. Calvinism was formulated due to a pendulum swing far off from the Roman Catholic Church; I said that because Calvinism predestination and eternal security of the soul is an extreme from the works based salvation of the Roman Catholics. The truth lies between with balance.

Originally Posted by pelathais

The "we all must appear..." statement Paul is making is understood to be an Apostle talking to the Church. The "all" is "all believers," or "The Church." The Corinthians were famously wayward and Paul is admonishing them.

Wayward? What would wayward mean? The all are all those who are concerned in avoiding the second death. You mentioned the term wayward, and I would like to deal with that. If they were wayward, what would they have to do to get back in proper standing? They would have to do works of repentance. The individual who was having an affair with his fathers wife needed to be cast out of the church until he did the proper works to return him back into the fold. The first letter of Corinth is being written to a church that was being admonished to get out of their carnality, which if they continued they would of lost out with God. So what did they need to do to get on the same page with the teaching of the Apostle Paul?

Saying the βήμα is not the same as the Λευκός θρόνος or white light throne, Jesus isn't jumping from seat to seat and all these are symbols to explain the power of the One True Living God giving out judgement to those who were goats and those who were sheep. One group Jesus welcomes in and the other Jesus tells them to depart into an everlasting burning torment.

Originally Posted by pelathais

The Bema is not the Mega Shining Thronos.

Both seats are seats of reward and punishment, and you are having heaven and earth fleeing from the presence of the face of He who sits upon the white light throne. The white light is the brilliance of the truth that is upon the throne. The bema seat is being used to explain the same throne, but it is being told to a people who understand the analogy of the Greek games and the giving of the laurel wreaths to those who completed their race.

It's pretty simple, but still no matter what eschatology you might adhere to you still have both groups being judged by works. As in the fig tree being cursed by Jesus, she was cursed because she would not produce fruit, and if we come into this fellowship with Christ and never produce we are discarded.

Originally Posted by pelathais

The believer does not appear before the Great White Throne judgment at the end of the age because the believer has already been judged at Calvary,

What Apostolic Pentecostal Bible study were you smoking? Where is that taught? Already judged at Calvary? Search for Truth? Into HIS Marvelous light? My Father's House? Then why is Paul telling the churches that they were not judged yet? Again let's look at the book of Revelation.

Rev 2:5

"Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first WORKS; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will REMOVE thy candlestick out of his place, EXCEPT thou repent."

It's about produce, and this is being asked at least 37 years after the crucifixion. If you're a late date believer, then it's 60 years after the crucifixion.

Let's now consider your Christian judgement at the cross and the bema seat?
Why the Bema seat? If you have all Christians past, present, and future being judged at the cross, then why are they to meet before the Bema?

We are not made perfect or τέλειος which means FULL AGE or completed, matured, at the cross, are the blood of Christ has paid for sins. and the price He paid, but we are to come to Christ as a new born babe and we are to grow up into Him and come to His stature, His image. Your teaching is not found in any United Pentecostal International material I have ever heard of or read before.

Originally Posted by pelathais

throughout his walk and then received his reward or watched his works be burned at the Bema judgment following the Rapture.

A yeah, right...could you maybe lay some scripture on me as to what you're talking about here?

Originally Posted by pelathais

Your attempts to marginalize this understanding

Now stop that, it's once late again over here on the East Coast and I'm trying to have a discussion with you and you start this? You understand Clarence Larkin Cartoons? Wonderful turn that old school Marvel comic into some scripture and present it chapter and verse and lets see how the both groups are not required to be judged by their works.

If you don't understand Dispensationalism don't worry most of Pentecost doesn't understand either.


"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your
grandmother." - Albert Einstein

Originally Posted by pelathais

shows that you probably haven't spent a lot of time in the Apostolic movement-

Why because my pastors and teachers didn't believe Dispensationalism?
Oh another thing the group I came up with didn't allow visiting ministers to climb behind the the pulpit and teach the congregation their views of eschatology. I didn't load down myself with Dispensaationalism until later in my life. Honestly I rather have my teeth pulled then study that stuff.
If my Brothers believe it fine I love them dearly and want to respect what they feel about eschatology.

Originally Posted by pelathais

no big deal there,

Oh but it is a big deal with you, or you wouldn't of tried to insult me over it.

Originally Posted by pelathais

but ask around, check with people you respect.

How about you Mr. Darby, why don't you bring it forward?

Originally Posted by pelathais

I can't speak for the PCI since it went out of existence long before I was born. However, I do know that what I have presented here includes nothing resembling "Inclusionist" teachings, but rather the basics that a first year Bible College student gets from any UPCI endorsed Bible College. This also is expounded in the Search for Truth and Exploring God's Word home bible studies available from the PPH, UPCI Home Missions Division and other Apostolic publishers.

Apostolics have been teaching this as a standard component of their doctrine for... well for really longer than there's been a modern Apostolic movement. Either...

1) You've completely misunderstood the things that I've posted, or

I understood completely.

Originally Posted by pelathais

2) You are tired and not really comprehending what is being said, or

Total comprehension.

Originally Posted by pelathais

3) You haven't gone through a Home Bible Study with an Apostolic

Thank you sir may I have another.


In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

I have said on several occasions that I believe a person can forfeit the gift of salvation by committing sins that the Bible clearly declares as sins that will prevent a person from inheriting the kingdom of God.

So you can lose your soul through works? Is that correct?

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

So then you MUST be baptized in the name of Jesus, and you MUST be re-baptized if you had been baptized in titles father, son, spirit? You get to repent because you MUST repent. That's simple, you get to have a drivers license as a Canadian, but you MUST have a license to operate a vehicle on the highways of Canada. Therefore you get to repent by virtue of the Gospel message to the entire human race, but you MUST repent in order to operate in the Kingdom. When you posted that you were DIFFERENT in that you believed that we get to repent, and that others believed that we MUST repent sounded as you felt all were either saved prior or all we GET TO, be saved. Even seems as if you believe in Predestination? I'm not saying you do it just looked that way.





Good this sounds like you believe in FREE WILL and therefore a person must repent and be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ because they OBEYED the form of doctrine that was preached to them. They're convicted by the persuasion of the Holy Ghost and the preacher preaching and teaching and then they make a decision that they will follow the Lord. They then must continue to follow as the SPIRIT LEADS, yes, no, maybe, what do you think TB?




You changed your mind by coming into agreement with the information that was presented to you. As for the pricked in the heart, wording in Acts 2:37.

How can two walk together except they be agreed.


In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Perhaps I have used a poor choice of words to express myself here. I have explained it many times on AFF before, but will state it again. I believe one is saved as a result of placing their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Repentance is a vital part of the transformation that takes place in one's heart and mind as a result of being born again of the Spirit. If one has been truly born again they will be baptized, thus identifying them with Christ and the church. A person receives the gift of the Holy Ghost because they have become a son of God and the Spirit is the earnest of their inheritance acknowledging that sonship. The Spirit also imparts anointing and power for service in the kingdom of God.

So when I said you get to repent and be baptized and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, I am simply stating that it is the privilege of one who has come to faith in Jesus Christ that they can repent and be forgiven, be identified with Christ and receive the power of the Holy Ghost.

Using the example of a driver's license. It is true that here in BC one must have a driver's license if they want to drive a car. However, over and over again people who abuse their license to drive are reminded by the judge that a driver's license is not a right, it's a privilege.

So what I was trying to convey was the personal feeling that I have that the whole process of being saved is not a right that I have earned, but a privilege I am given because of God's mercy and grace.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

Perhaps I have used a poor choice of words to express myself here. I have explained it many times on AFF before, but will state it again. I believe one is saved as a result of placing their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Repentance is a vital part of the transformation that takes place in one's heart and mind as a result of being born again of the Spirit. If one has been truly born again they will be baptized, thus identifying them with Christ and the church. A person receives the gift of the Holy Ghost because they have become a son of God and the Spirit is the earnest of their inheritance acknowledging that sonship. The Spirit also imparts anointing and power for service in the kingdom of God.

So when I said you get to repent and be baptized and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, I am simply stating that it is the privilege of one who has come to faith in Jesus Christ that they can repent and be forgiven, be identified with Christ and receive the power of the Holy Ghost.

Using the example of a driver's license. It is true that here in BC one must have a driver's license if they want to drive a car. However, over and over again people who abuse their license to drive are reminded by the judge that a driver's license is not a right, it's a privilege.

So what I was trying to convey was the personal feeling that I have that the whole process of being saved is not a right that I have earned, but a privilege I am given because of God's mercy and grace.

So then what is the difference you once spoke of? I say again, you spoke of that you GET TO be baptized, and that I say one MUST be baptized.

I have discussed this with you on FCF, NFCF, and now on AFF. Brother Curtis, I have to say you must have taken your first driver’s test totally in reverse.

What did you mean by the DIFFERENCE? Where is the difference, you MUST be born again of the water baptism in Jesus name and the in filling of the Holy Ghost with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.

Yes ALL humanity GETS TO, and all humanity MUST, but not all humanity WILL.

If one can lose his soul through wicked works that automatically makes the opposite true. That's why a Calvinist refuses to see that one can lose his salvation through works, because as the Calvinist says "there is nothing you can do to achieve salvation and therefore nothing you can do to lose it"

You pretty much have a stalemate with your teaching TB.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

Hey, TB, how do I get to listen to you preach on your web site?

Where are you preaching about water baptism in Jesus name?

Give me a link, and you go and listen to me preach on holiness on www.OnTimeJournal.com go to media page, and click on holiness unto the Lord.

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

So you can lose your soul through works? Is that correct?

The Bible clearly teaches that there are "works of darkness", "works of the flesh", "wicked works", etc. that have their roots in the devil himself. 1John 3:8 says, "For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."

My observation of Scripture is that "works" as mentioned above will result in the person doing them being lost. It is for this reason that we are told to "...cast off the works of darkness..." (Rom.13:12)

However, it seems that while works of darkness will condemn a person to a lost eternity, good works in themselves will not result in eternal life. Our good works identify who we are and constitute the justification of our faith.

Jesus said in John 5:36, "But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me."

Again in John 10:25, "Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me."

No where in Scripture do I remember it said that works would save us. Contrariwise Paul said to Timothy, "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,"(2Tim.1:9)

In Titus 3:5 we read, "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;"

So, even when the works that one does are righteous works they cannot save him. We have to distinguish in Scripture the difference between "acts of obedience" done in response to the Spirit's promptings and "works", which do earn us rewards, but not salvation.

While works cannot save us, we are called unto good works because these good works prove the genuineness of our faith. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." (Eph.2:8-10)

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Hey, TB, how do I get to listen to you preach on your web site?

Where are you preaching about water baptism in Jesus name?

Give me a link, and you go and listen to me preach on holiness on www.OnTimeJournal.com go to media page, and click on holiness unto the Lord.

www.peopleschurch.bc.ca Go to Sermons Online and click on more details. Then click on "Become a 4 Stepper"

[tv1a]

You may have missed an earlier point when I stated legalists consistently change principles to fit their dogma. See how they compare with leglists today. Not much difference. And the homosexual operates the same way the pharisees did but with a lot less religion. Even that may be debatable.


I am not an apostolic by anyone's definition. There are more definitions of apostolics than nekkid elbows on the beach. The word apostolic is a term man made so they have something to brag about. I'd rather make my boast in the Lord and not in a self grandoising word.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

ANYONE, Legalist or NON legalist, can be inconsistant. That is NOT THE definition of a legalist and if it is then you should be comparing a legalist to everyone or everyone is a legalist because I have rarely seen a person that was never NOT inconsistant at any time in their lives. Just showing an example does not mean definition. The Pharisees also ate beef, does that make all beef eaters legalists?

Are you sure that is irony?

It's fine with me. I NEVER disputed the dictionary definition of the word Apostolic. I admitted Oneness Pentecostals have their OWN definition.

Well here is an interesting conundrum....do you agree with that definition or do you have your own here too?

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

So then what is the difference you once spoke of? I say again, you spoke of that you GET TO be baptized, and that I say one MUST be baptized.

I have discussed this with you on FCF, NFCF, and now on AFF. Brother Curtis, I have to say you must have taken your first driver’s test totally in reverse.

What did you mean by the DIFFERENCE? Where is the difference, you MUST be born again of the water baptism in Jesus name and the in filling of the Holy Ghost with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.

Yes ALL humanity GETS TO, and all humanity MUST, but not all humanity WILL.

If one can lose his soul through wicked works that automatically makes the opposite true. That's why a Calvinist refuses to see that one can lose his salvation through works, because as the Calvinist says "there is nothing you can do to achieve salvation and therefore nothing you can do to lose it"

You pretty much have a stalemate with your teaching TB.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

This is where the difference becomes apparent. You believe one must repent and must be baptized and must speak in tongues in order to be born again. I believe one is born of the Spirit when he believes the Word and repents. He must be baptized, but not for the reasons you give. He does so to identify with Christ and the kingdom of God. The Holy Ghost is a gift given to those who have become a son of God as an acknowledgment of their sonship and anointed with power and authority to act on behalf of the Father as they minister on His behalf.

Jesus was born of the Spirit, then was baptized to fulfill all righteousness and identify with the Father and His plan and purpose for His life, and then anointed with the Holy Ghost for the ministry He was entering into.

So, what I am saying is that I too believe that a person must repent, must be baptized, and must receive the Holy Ghost, but not for the same reasons you put forth.

I will withdraw my statement of "get to" since it seems to cause confusion. I know what I mean, but obviously others don't.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I didn't mean to say that he's "afraid." I don't even know the guy, but his avatar has a nice smile.

I should have said, "prefers." "He prefers to avoid using overly legalistic language."

And I'm certain that his students understand that there are responsibilities that come with their belief. Parsing everyone's words too closely in a forum board leads to too much misunderstanding and distrust. I try reading past somethings like they were typos.

For example the guy who's web site didn't say "full immersion in Jesus Name..." I trusted that based upon everything else he said that he probably did baptize with full immersion in Jesus Name; even tho he left that part out at that time.

From the comments about legalists I would say I think many are afraid of being associated with legalism