What's your AUTHORITY?

[Evang.Benincasa]

I just eat bacon smothered in pizza sauce, wait for the voice.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I just eat bacon smothered in pizza sauce, wait for the voice.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Honestly, I have been thinking that most "apostolics" do not have any solid framework within which to learn scripture and determine doctrine and practice. The responses so far seem to bear that out.

What I mean is this: OPs have not defined any reasonable, systematic, consistent method for determine faith and practice. Instead, we are, as a movement, highly inconsistent in our approach to scripture and the faith. Inconsistent not only with one another, but with ourselves, even.

Thus we have the following results:

Practically no unity in faith except in literally one or two, maybe three beliefs.

No unity in regards to several important practices (including "standards").

Unity in large measure regarding certain practices, but no rational and scripturally consistent explanation for why it is so. (In other words, traditions we keep without really knowing or understanding where they come from or why we keep them.)

Lots of private conjecture being propagated as doctrine, as binding, as obligatory, as truth, without any solid scriptural basis and usually in opposition to all the other private conjectures floating around.

"Just trust me, I'm the pastor" attitudes.

A lack of united front against heresies. We don't really have a clear and consistent mechanism for even identifying heresies in our own midst, let alone "out there", much less presenting a consistent witness to the truth.

A general across the board inability to maintain a rational examination of doctrine and practice, due to everybody coming at it from a completely different, unharmonized paradigm, point of view, worldview, etc. In other words, we make communication almost impossible because nobody is starting on the same page. We have no common framework within which to discuss or debate, examine, prove, etc. One's refutation is unheeded because the other can't even recognize the argument, for example. People disagree with each other without really understanding how and why they disagree.

And so many different views, doctrines, opinions, everyone screaming to be heard and believed, nobody in agreement... why, isn't that called confusion? And God is not the author of confusion...

So I submit we ought to get crackin' and figure out a reasonable, biblical, and apostolic approach to scripture, that can be taught to others. If the approach or method is correct, then the results ought to be consistent... and consistency is sorely lacking these days.

All of this has been attempted, going back to Acts 15, then forward in time to 325 AD. In general, it doesn't work. It wouldn't matter what any council decides, there will always be those who reject the decisions of said council and go their own way.

Every year, various Oneness Apostolic orgs have a general conference, and positions papers are issued, reviewed, and adopted. This doesn't really affect much, apart from the licensed ministers. The average apostolic on the street just goes about his or her day as he or she always did.

I fear that any attempt to make such ideas as you suggest the law of apostolic land will eventually result in witch hunts and inquisitions, just as they did in the false church. The "affirmation statement", for example, did just that. As Robert Sabin explained in his letter against the idea, no one has the right to govern the believer's mind. To create councils and hand down official rulings causes division and uncertainty.

[votivesoul]

It seems to me very little has to be agreed upon in order to be a Christian. I think the list looks like this:

1.) Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
2.) God raised Jesus from the dead.
3.) We must be born again through the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, a.k.a. Gospel.
4. Salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, and not of works.
5. We need to love God and one another, i.e. the 1st and 2nd Commandments
6. We need to love Jesus at His appearing, i.e. maintain our blessed hope.
7. The Bible is the final authority for faith and practice.

Granted, all of the above can get difficult to agree upon, when we start in on specifics, but if we all could agree on the above, even if we didn't agree on every specific thing, I think, by love, grace, and forbearance, we could maintain unity of the Body and be pleasing to Christ.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I seek the Holy Spirit's guidance and illumination upon the texts of the Holy Scripture, i.e. the 66 books of the Bible.

When I am reading the Scriptures, I expect my natural intelligence to understand the English words I am reading. This is a basic level comprehension. As I understand the text, I absorb it into my way of thinking and way of life.

But, if I don't understand a text, or if in general I want to make certain I do, I pray and ask God for insight through the Holy Spirit. I wait for inspiration from the parakletos.

If it doesn't seem to be forthcoming, I use an assortment of various resources (e.g. Bible lexicons, commentaries, and other books) to see what others have come to understand. I then try to filter that with what I know to be truth, to see if any of it makes sense/is worthy to be accepted as accurate.

Sometimes I seek the counsel of my peers, who might have greater insight. I listen to them and make a choice to determine if what they are saying is accurate. I often ask my wife her opinion, as well.

But most of all, I seek the counsel of the true author and inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, God Himself.



Teaching.



I find doctrine in the Holy Scriptures, Old and New Covenant. But I also look to the Spirit for understanding. I might read a verse in the Bible, but the verse in question doesn't make any sense to me a part from additional information. I might need a Bible dictionary or atlas, for example. Then, with the new information in hand, I reread the verse and come to understand what God is, through the verse, attempting to teach (i.e. what doctrine He is looking to formulate in the minds of those who read and believe His Word).



The Holy Spirit has to bear witness to the Truth. Jesus is the Truth. He said the Holy Spirit would bare witness of Him. Therefore, we must rely upon the Holy Spirit to lead us into all Truth, as an extension and expression of the Messiah. Anything that doesn't jive with Jesus must be rejected out of hand.

This leads us back to the Gospels. Jesus is the foundation for all that we are and believe. Everything must go through Him. If it doesn't fit with what He said and did in the Gospel narratives, it can be tossed out.



I practice something along of the lines of Occam's Razor, or parsimony, when it comes to Bible interpretation. I believe cutting an interpretation down to it's most basic meaning is the right approach.

If I have to bend and twist and try to make things fit, or if I have to spiritualize a text in order to make sense of it, that is, the more complicated I make a verse in order to understand it, the less likely my understanding is accurate. I therefore parse it down to it's basic meaning.

An example:

Give us this day our daily bread.

A complex interpretation requires us to make assumptions about Jesus meant. We jump to Ezekiel and Revelation to see God compare His Word to bread. We then assume that all of the Word of God is "bread". We add to that verses that talk about feeding, as in "feed my sheep". We then assume that what Jesus meant was "give us this day our daily Word of God". We then assume Jesus wants us to read the Bible every day.

This is overly complex and too spiritualized, so I reject it, since it takes too much information and calculation to make sense of it. I have to make too many assumptions before I can determine what Jesus meant.

Here is an interpretation that has been parsed down, or put through Occam's Razor:

Give us this day our daily bread means we should pray and trust in God to give to us the food we need to eat on a daily basis. It's about provision, not a Bible reading program.

Much simpler, pretty literal, and it doesn't make any assumptions about what Jesus must have meant in a hidden way.

I try to leave gnostic interpretations that require secret knowledge of God and His Word alone.

In addition to the above, I follow what I call a "Three-fold Prolegomenon of the Christian Faith". It involves, as is indicated, a three step approach.

1.) Orthodoxy, or right belief
2.) Orthopraxy, or right practice
3.) Orthopathy, or right experience

It's a little too in-depth to get into here, but I have a powerpoint I am working on to explain the above. The basic premise is that, if all three are correctly held in the life of a believer, Christlikeness will be achieved. It involves the theory and philosophy of faith, with an interpretive framework upon which to build (this includes the hermeneutical spiral, grammatical-historical method, and the role of the Spirit of Truth).

[votivesoul]

I also, when I teach Bible studies, especially with babes in Christ, I focus on the "ologies" of the Bible. They include:

- Bibleology
- Theology
- Christology
- Angelogy
- Anthropology
- Soteriology
- Hamartiology
- Ecclesiology
- Cosmology
- Eschalotogy

Such a study is very long term, and honestly, I haven't gotten all the way through with anyone.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

All of this has been attempted, going back to Acts 15, then forward in time to 325 AD. In general, it doesn't work. It wouldn't matter what any council decides, there will always be those who reject the decisions of said council and go their own way.

Every year, various Oneness Apostolic orgs have a general conference, and positions papers are issued, reviewed, and adopted. This doesn't really affect much, apart from the licensed ministers. The average apostolic on the street just goes about his or her day as he or she always did.

I fear that any attempt to make such ideas as you suggest the law of apostolic land will eventually result in witch hunts and inquisitions, just as they did in the false church. The "affirmation statement", for example, did just that. As Robert Sabin explained in his letter against the idea, no one has the right to govern the believer's mind. To create councils and hand down official rulings causes division and uncertainty.

I said NOT A THING about establishing a Council replete with Canons, making law throughout Apostolica.

I am simply asking about a truly correct method of learning God's revelation to us.

It's like we forget that Jesus actually taught some things, as did his apostles. So now we all just do our own thing, however we want, and any who don't agree are either wrong (for no articulable reason) or else it's all relative, nobody knows who or what is right, and so ultimately WHO CARES?

This nothing but moral relativism poisoning the church. "Everybody has different beliefs and we cannot change that so why try?"

So I guess one should just go with whatever doctrine doesn't give ya gas. I mean, might as well, what's the difference? That criteria is no less irrational than having NO criteria, right?

Nobody even wants to try to figure it out. It's hopeless, so quit trying. Just follow the Spirit, be led by inner impulses and who cares about an objective method of testing them.

"Just stick to the Bible." Which amounts to an empty platitude if one cannot explain what that encompasses or entails.

I am beginning to think Oneness Pentecostalism, as a movement, is dead in the water, for failing to grow.

But 'let the Church roll on!' I am being forced to a conclusion, that God is moving on and the OP movement in general is not.

Maybe I'm just having a bad day. Might be the cell towers today. I dunno??? lol

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

It seems to me very little has to be agreed upon in order to be a Christian. I think the list looks like this:

1.) Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
2.) God raised Jesus from the dead.
3.) We must be born again through the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, a.k.a. Gospel.
4. Salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, and not of works.
5. We need to love God and one another, i.e. the 1st and 2nd Commandments
6. We need to love Jesus at His appearing, i.e. maintain our blessed hope.
7. The Bible is the final authority for faith and practice.

Granted, all of the above can get difficult to agree upon, when we start in on specifics, but if we all could agree on the above, even if we didn't agree on every specific thing, I think, by love, grace, and forbearance, we could maintain unity of the Body and be pleasing to Christ.

You gave seven DOCTRINES. Now demonstrate your AUTHORITY for those doctrines?

How do arrive at those doctrines? What METHOD did you use to come to those seven conclusions?

See what I am asking?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I just eat bacon smothered in pizza sauce, wait for the voice.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I said NOT A THING about establishing a Council replete with Canons, making law throughout Apostolica.

I am simply asking about a truly correct method of learning God's revelation to us.

It's like we forget that Jesus actually taught some things, as did his apostles. So now we all just do our own thing, however we want, and any who don't agree are either wrong (for no articulable reason) or else it's all relative, nobody knows who or what is right, and so ultimately WHO CARES?

This nothing but moral relativism poisoning the church. "Everybody has different beliefs and we cannot change that so why try?"

So I guess one should just go with whatever doctrine doesn't give ya gas. I mean, might as well, what's the difference? That criteria is no less irrational than having NO criteria, right?

Nobody even wants to try to figure it out. It's hopeless, so quit trying. Just follow the Spirit, be led by inner impulses and who cares about an objective method of testing them.

"Just stick to the Bible." Which amounts to an empty platitude if one cannot explain what that encompasses or entails.

I am beginning to think Oneness Pentecostalism, as a movement, is dead in the water, for failing to grow.

But 'let the Church roll on!' I am being forced to a conclusion, that God is moving on and the OP movement in general is not.

Maybe I'm just having a bad day. Might be the cell towers today. I dunno??? lol

The point is, to overturn/undo all that you see wrong with the movement, movement wide, would require movement size councils. It's not enough that one local assembly has a system. That would only have a local effect. If you want the whole movement to change, adapt, strategize, and get its butt in gear to grow, then councils will have to be convened. I submit such councils are already convened on at least a yearly basis, and they don't do anything to help the Apostolic movement grow.

To become overly systematic in a process is to become locked into the process. This leads to people ever learning but never coming to the truth, as the process, and not the reason for the process, receives greater importance.

Look at your average seminary. Lots of systematic approaches to studying the Bible, proving doctrine, and etc. Yet, almost all of them are as dry and dead as leaves in the fall.