The Difference Between the PCI of the Merger and the Current Counterfeits

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

I like it when you get your dander up!

This is a very "between the eyes" post and will be hard for many to accept, but it rings so true.

There are times to get the guns out and start using them. LOL!

But I got to go to work .... .... wish I could stay and discuss this more. There's more that could and should be said.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Okay then, freeatlast, Sherri and Daniel, we are all friends right?
I have nothing but respect for you. But give me a little latitude to explain myself, please.

1. Would you all agree that you have left what you once believed, or that you have left what you were once identified as?

2. Can you see Coonskinner's point that our doctrine is continually slammed and poked at, and dissed on these forums? Yet when we state any disdain for "belief only" doctrine we are viewed as intolerant and judgemental.

Surely you have viewed my posts enough to know that I try very hard to be anything but judgemental? We simply disagree - thats all.

No one has "left" what we believe PP ... by rightly dividing the Word ... it has become clearer ... at least in my book. It's ok to disagree .... but to put your head in the sand ... and act like the same segment you speak about when it comes to standards is not persecuting the rest of the Apostolic family on the issue of soteriology is missing it.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

Yes, that's why they spoke in togues at Cornelius household, to convince the Jews who would not believe that the gentiles could be a part of the church.

Same thing with the Samaritans, who the Jews could never believe could be added the church.

God added this sign to their experience to help the UN believing Jew's to accept these other's into the church.

Henceforth Pauls admonition the Corinthian church that tongues were a sign to those who believe not.

Well said, what God uses for His purpose men make idols of, for example the brazen serpent in the desert. God used it to deliver for a particular sickness, and men maintained it on a pole and worshiped as an idol. Tongues did and do have a purpose, men force everyone to "get it" and thereby create false and counterfeit. Tell a man under duress that he must do all most anything and he will make it happen. In every reference of Spirit infilling the Spirit "fell" on them, absolutely no begging in sackcloth and ashes, it is a sovereign work of God.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Perhaps PP you haven't examined your own wording of the PCI view

preach repentance, baptism and Holy Ghost infilling as necessary - but perhaps not necessary for salvation. They feel these things should be fulfilled to ensure obedience, or to enhance the believers life.

PP ... what is really going on here is an attempt to polarize/ or unite the Apostolic family under the "Acts 2:38" banner .... even MA was keen enough to pick up on this ... notice how he carefully crafted his support for TV evangelism by rallying the cry.

-----------------------

bump for PP.

But friend, you do the same thing when you continually slam my belief that Acts 2:38 is the proper response to the gospel message, and the only way to properly identify oneself as a believer.

Let me be clear. I am wondering if some of us are really part of the same movement. Our message is not unified. We are as different as apples and oranges. Our definition of what is Apostolic is so varied, it lacks a truly recognizable brand.

That being said, I would consider almost everyone on this board a dear friend.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

I don't really care when you consider a person a church member.

God calls you his when you believe and recieve the word.

When a person comes to a realizatrion that they cannot save themselves , that Christ is all sufficient savior. When they trust him fully for their salvation and forgivness of sins. when they profess this faith to others and thru Godly sorrow for their past , they repent or turn from the direction of their before sinful life.

So yes, I beleive the word is clear that they are His or in "the church" before they ever seek and recieve the gift of tongues.

You have clearly defined the GATE or door to the sheepfold, and those that enter in find the life of God, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little, until the full image of Jesus is formed in them.

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Okay then, freeatlast, Sherri and Daniel, we are all friends right?
I have nothing but respect for you. But give me a little latitude to explain myself, please.

1. Would you all agree that you have left what you once believed, or that you have left what you were once identified as?

2. Can you see Coonskinner's point that our doctrine is continually slammed and poked at, and dissed on these forums? Yet when we state any disdain for "belief only" doctrine we are viewed as intolerant and judgemental.

Surely you have viewed my posts enough to know that I try very hard to be anything but judgemental? We simply disagree - thats all.

Every side gets poked at PP.

Yes I feel we are all friends here.

I disagrere with Epley and Coonskinner on some issues but have much respect for them at the same time.

Yes, I have used to see the tongues and clothlines isssuse as they do but admit I have seen the light and embraced it.

But I still liove ya all.

Sorry if my zeal to see others realize the error of their doctrinal exegisis and come to a better understanding of Christ, as slamming them.

No worse than the slams we "coutetrfeit PCI" receice.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

But friend, you do the same thing when you continually slam my belief that Acts 2:38 is the proper response to the gospel message, and the only way to properly identify oneself as a believer.

Let me be clear. I am wondering if some of us are really part of the same movement. Our message is not unified. We are as different as apples and oranges. Our definition of what is Apostolic is so varied, it lacks a truly recognizable brand.

That being said, I would consider almost everyone on this board a dear friend.

I am not slamming ... your belief in Acts 2:38 ... PP ... never ... I believe it too ... I am questioning how the the new PAJCers are using it and have made it THE MESSAGE ... rather than part of the response ...

I love the word Apostolic ... and consider myself one ... but I prefer ... like my Dad taught me .. that the highest position we hold in His Kingdom ... is ... A CHILD OF GOD.

[Sherri]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Okay then, freeatlast, Sherri and Daniel, we are all friends right?
I have nothing but respect for you. But give me a little latitude to explain myself, please.

1. Would you all agree that you have left what you once believed, or that you have left what you were once identified as?

2. Can you see Coonskinner's point that our doctrine is continually slammed and poked at, and dissed on these forums? Yet when we state any disdain for "belief only" doctrine we are viewed as intolerant and judgemental.

Surely you have viewed my posts enough to know that I try very hard to be anything but judgemental? We simply disagree - thats all.

I don't think you come across as judgmental, PP, but I think we can all agree to disagree without calling people backsliders just because they have a different view.

As to point number 1.--I don't believe the way I did once, you are right on that. I was raised to be judgemental and I didn't even understand God's grace. I believed whatever was taught to me as a child without ever searching the Word for myself. I took on everything ANYONE preached against and quit doing it, just because I wanted so badly to be right and I just thought that men of God knew everything. I found out that they are fallible too, and that you have to work out your own salavation. I am much more secure in Christ that I used to be. I used to go to bed at night scared that the Rapture would happen, and I would be lost, just because I wasn't yet good enough (and that was AFTER we were in ministry).

As for #2--I would never slam your doctrine. I love what UPC stands for, and what they did for me in my life, in bringing me to the Lord. I don't disrespect anyone for what they believe. The difference is that I would never call them unsaved or backslidden just because they differ from me. I think that anyone who pushes some kind of "belief only" doctrine only wants an easy route to heaven and they don't really seek to please God. However, saying that, I don't know anyone on this forum who would fit in that slot.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

No one has "left" what we believe PP ... by rightly dividing the Word ... it has become clearer ... at least in my book. It's ok to disagree .... but to put your head in the sand ... and act like the same segment you speak about when it comes to standards is not persecuting the rest of the Apostolic family on the issue of soteriology is missing it.

I do agree there is a very small, but extremely vocal, segment of Apostolics that have made it their goal to pare off as many folks as possible. I am not one of them, and neither is Coonskinner.

My head is not in the sand. I am a very reality based and clear-thinking sort of fellow. This very often leads to my hands getting slapped.

But Daniel, if someone from outside of the movement, who had never been an Apostolic, viewed the changes in you, Sherri, and even Felicity, they would assume that you had left something you once believed in, and I'm not just talking about standards here.

Thats all I'm saying.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

I do agree there is a very small, but extremely vocal, segment of Apostolics that have made it their goal to pare off as many folks as possible. I am not one of them, and neither is Coonskinner.

My head is not in the sand. I am a very reality based and clear-thinking sort of fellow. This very often leads to my hands getting slapped.

But Daniel, if someone from outside of the movement, who had never been an Apostolic, viewed the changes in you, Sherri, and even Felicity, they would assume that you had left something you once believed in, and I'm not just talking about standards here.

Thats all I'm saying.

PP ... PREPARE FOR COVER .. FIRE IN THE HOLE ....