Billy Graham

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Aquila

You see, in my position it is okay to believe that they were wrong. In fact, I'd probably argue that they were wrong on a number of things. However, I believe in taking a step back and allow God to be the judge of their eternity. And that was their position too, especially when dealing with those Christians who do not follow us.

You see, we often make these judgments... but we don't know every moment of the lives of such sincere Christians. We know that many historic Christians were baptized, and while baptized in some crazy formula, they, themselves, were crying out to Christ for salvation. We also know from the study of history that many of these individuals had moments of weeping in prayer, weeping unintelligible utterances, in sobbing tears (the baptism of the Holy Ghost). Who is to say that God will not accept such, having mercy on their misunderstandings?

I just back up and give it to God.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why so many Apostolics have such a hard time with the simple yet profound statements you made here.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

What are the titles of these books? I'd like to check them out.

I have several boxes full of books, most on the reading list, from my days in the UPCI. I quoted David. K. Bernard (hardly a founder) earlier to show how the position isn't alien to mainstream Apostolic teaching. In Bernard's book, The New Birth, he writes...

"We do not reject those who have not received the
New Testament experience, but we simply encourage
them to receive everything God has for them. There are
many sincere, and even repentant, people like Apollos
and the disciples of John at Ephesus who need to be led
to further truth so they can have an apostolic new birth.
Our experience and doctrine should conform to the complete
biblical, apostolic pattern; those who seek God
without fulfilling this pattern will answer to God. Our
responsibility is clear: we must act on what we know to
be the truth.
In considering these matters, the following principles
are important:

1. God is sovereign, and He alone is judge
(Romans 2:16; 9:15; Hebrews 12:23).
2. We are not to condemn or attack others, but to
preach the gospel and offer salvation to all (Mark
9:39-40; John 3:17; Philippians 1:15-18).
3. The Bible is the sole authority for doctrine and
instruction in salvation (John 5:39-40; Galatians
1:8-9; II Timothy 3:15-17). We cannot impose nonbiblical
demands or offer nonbiblical exceptions. We cannot rely
on or be swayed by human reasoning, hypothetical situations,
great numbers of people, heroic figures in church
history, or pious ancestors.
4. God will lead the diligent seeker to salvation
(Jeremiah 29:13-14; Matthew 7:7; Acts 10:1-6; Hebrews
11:6).
5. God’s judgment will take into account the light
available to each individual (Luke 12:42-48; Mark
12:38-40; Romans 2:6, 11-16).

Some hypothesize that God may allow an unusual or
irregular fulfillment of His stated plan. For example,
might He accept a person’s genuine desire to be baptized
if that person is prevented from being baptized before
death? (Roman Catholicism teaches that there is a “baptism
of desire” in such cases.) Might God accept a person’s
sincere faith in Christ as God and Savior at baptism
even if he did not know about or understand the Jesus
Name formula? Might God give some the Holy Ghost
without the sign of tongues because they did not know
about or understand tongues? Might God save some people
today outside the New Testament church or without
the full New Testament experience, perhaps after an Old
Testament pattern? Possible analogies would be Jethro,
Balaam, Nineveh, and Hezekiah’s irregular celebration of
the Passover (II Chronicles 30). Might there be a lesser
degree of salvation or another chance after death?
The problem with these theories is they have no clear
scriptural support, so we have no authority to teach them
as doctrine. Moreover, Scripture as a whole seems to
exclude the ideas of salvation outside the church, two levels
of salvation or a second chance after death. If God has
plans beyond what He has revealed to us, or if He chooses
to accept an unusual fulfillment of His plan, that is His
prerogative. We can only preach and practice what the
Bible states. Rather than trying to justify extrabiblical
approaches, we should uphold and obey the clear teaching
of Scripture, thereby enjoying certainty and assurance
of salvation. We can only leave unusual or hypothetical
cases in God’s hands.

This is essentially my position.

I cannot teach, preach, or say with any certainty or assurance that those outside the Apostolic movement are saved. That would be to establish such a notion a doctrine.

However, I can pray that God have mercy, and leave their destiny in the hands of God, who is sovereign, gracious, and merciful. And should I see them in Heaven, I will rejoice. And should they not make it, I will still rejoice and praise the God who gives... and takes away.

Personally, I see the scorched earth theology of those who are certain that everyone else will burn as being a major stumbling block that has cost the salvation of an untold number of souls that just couldn't embrace such a harsh approach. Tender sincere souls that have experienced Acts 2:38 have even had their faith shaken at the thought that God will have absolutely NO MERCY upon devout, and even sometimes Spirit filled, members of their family who have faithfully served God in the only way they knew and understood for generations.

I see this certainty that so many will be damned as being just as much an error as professing that such Christians are certainly saved.

If we say that they are certainly lost, we deny God's sovereignty as Judge of all men.

If we say that they are certainly saved, we compromise the entire message we see in Scripture.

We don't know every detail of their spiritual lives. We do best to back up and leave their judgment in the hands of God, while offering no assurance outside of Acts 2:38.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Originalist

For the life of me, I cannot understand why so many Apostolics have such a hard time with the simple yet profound statements you made here.

Because those statements reflect a legalistic, merit-based works salvation, that's why.

Let God be the judge? He is, and God the Judge has spoken on the subject of what people must do. He has also spoken on the subject of alternative gospels and alternative messages.

So why don't you folks actually let God be the Judge, instead of trying to second guess Him?

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Personally, I see the scorched earth theology of those who are certain that everyone else will burn as being a major stumbling block that has cost the salvation of an untold number of souls that just couldn't embrace such a harsh approach. Tender sincere souls that have experienced Acts 2:38 have even had their faith shaken at the thought that God will have absolutely NO MERCY upon devout, and even sometimes Spirit filled, members of their family who have faithfully served God in the only way they knew and understood for generations.

I see this certainty that so many will be damned as being just as much an error as professing that such Christians are certainly saved.

If we say that they are certainly lost, we deny God's sovereignty as Judge of all men.

If we say that they are certainly saved, we compromise the entire message we see in Scripture.

We don't know every detail of their spiritual lives. We do best to back up and leave their judgment in the hands of God, while offering no assurance outside of Acts 2:38.

Chris I have family members who are lost and it breaks my heart. There are times when I can't sleep because of it.

But it just makes me that more determined to save [others] with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. (Jude 1:23)

Because knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men (2 Cor 5:11)

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Because those statements reflect a legalistic, merit-based works salvation, that's why.

Let God be the judge? He is, and God the Judge has spoken on the subject of what people must do. He has also spoken on the subject of alternative gospels and alternative messages.

So why don't you folks actually let God be the Judge, instead of trying to second guess Him?

You make an interesting statement. What are these "legalisms" that you are concerned about?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Chris I have family members who are lost and it breaks my heart. There are times when I can't sleep because of it.

But it just makes me that more determined to save [others] with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. (Jude 1:23)

Because knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men (2 Cor 5:11)

I commend you. I too feel the same way about those I love who are lost.

But with regards to "other Christians" I'm more than willing to point out what I believe to be errors in their theology, but their judgment, I feel it only appropriate to leave in the hands of God. If they are still alive, all I can do is encourage that they see the fullness of Acts 2:38 salvation.

[Aquila]

The truth is... and I don't think anyone will deny this...

God will judge all men as He desires to judge them.

I'd never insist that God MUST judge men according to what I believe I see in Scripture, because I'm a human being. I do not have all knowledge. I am not omniscient. I am in no place to make such a judgment. Now, I can agree that if what I read and understand is correct, they aren't saved. But I close the book praying that God have mercy on their souls.

Some here almost seem to relish in the idea that those who do not follow us are lost. I don't find that attitude in Christ. In fact, when confronted with such, Christ's response was much different from that of His disciples:

Mark 9:38-41 King James Version (KJV)
38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.

Luke 9:49-50 King James Version (KJV)
49 And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.
50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.

When dealing with such a one, I personally believe that it is best to leave their judgment in the hands of God. God will judge as He sees fit regardless of what any of us think. Frankly, this is a position everyone should be able to get behind. It gives such situations to God and allows Him to be the only righteous judge.

[Aquila]

Many of the Preterists here used to be Futurists. What this testifies to is the reality that they walked in error for many years and after study and prayer have come to the conclusion that they were in error, that is why they changed their position. They seem to so quickly forget how God was with them, even as they were stumbling through the darkness.

In this, we know that they are not above being wrong. Though they will speak with an infallibility that rivals that of the Pope himself.

Not being above being wrong, who's to say that they are right regarding their new found Preterism? What if the Historicist is actually right? What if they only traded an error for an error?

Are they humble enough to see this? Did their perceived error while being futurists humble them? Clearly not.

It humbled me. It caused me to realize... I'm not always right. And that reveals that I may very well still be mistaken on a number of things. And this goes for them too.

Error is error. Is there such a thing as a "white lie"? A false teaching is a false teaching. Is there such a thing as a not-so-false-false-teaching? How do they claim that teaching a false teaching on prophecy is any different from teaching a false teaching on Godhead, or regarding the application of the Gospel?

They make excuse for their own error... and assume that God will have mercy... while condemning all comers who are in the very same shoes they are in.

[houston]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Brother Chris has a Quaker/Apostolic background, so I guess we can say he is a Quakostolic.

(teasing)

Qhak will suffice

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Error is error. Is there such a thing as a "white lie"? A false teaching is a false teaching. Is there such a thing as a not-so-false-false-teaching? How do they claim that teaching a false teaching on prophecy is any different from teaching a false teaching on Godhead, or regarding the application of the Gospel?

Teaching dispensationism vs preterism vs futurism is not the same as teaching the Trinity with 3 co-existant, co-eternal persons or especially teaching that you only need to pray the Sinner's Prayer and accept Jesus as Lord and Savior.

The first may be an error, but the latter two will cause a person to be lost.