DA No Longer an OP

[Dedicated Mind]

Direct quote:

"Since the initial evidence doctrine is used to define the nuanced difference between Pentecostals and Charismatics ... with the understanding they're under a similar umbrella ... I do not see myself as Pentecostal."

another quote:

"The Incarnation is a wonderful mystery ... I am as Oneness as I am Triunitarian ... and Trinitarian. These models seek to define an infinite and multi-dimensional God ..."

the slippery slope...

[mfblume]

Aside from DA's status, I know many charismatics that believe initial evidence of the Holy Ghost is speaking in tongues.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Aside from DA's status, I know many charismatics that believe initial evidence of the Holy Ghost is speaking in tongues.

Almost all Pentecostals and Charismatics would say it is the initial evidence.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Almost all Pentecostals and Charismatics would say it is the initial evidence. Yet that is a different issue than whether one believes in Oneness.

Exactly. It's not a ONENESS issue.

[Michael The Disciple]

But the modern versions of Oneness are wittling away great truth so that soon one wont be able to tell much difference between Oneness and Trinity imo.

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

Direct quote:

"Since the initial evidence doctrine is used to define the nuanced difference between Pentecostals and Charismatics ... with the understanding they're under a similar umbrella ... I do not see myself as Pentecostal."

another quote:

"The Incarnation is a wonderful mystery ... I am as Oneness as I am Triunitarian ... and Trinitarian. These models seek to define an infinite and multi-dimensional God ..."

the slippery slope...

I'm not sure He would admit in three eternal persons like you and I are a person. If the term "person" is described differently, It does get a little closer to oneness.

As for the initial evidence, its not an explicit word for word doctrine.
FOr they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. This is based on what we read in the Bible that they experienced with the baptism of the HG. The initial evidence doctrine to me is more for the desire to experience the genuine infilling, rather than just a theological one.

[Sister Alvear]

I know lots of people that are not oneness that believe initial evidence of the HG is speaking in tongues...

[Jason B]

The problem with the initial evidence doctrine is that if one really holds to it then everyone who has never spoken in tongues is lost, no exceptions. That and of course that it is absent from scripture.

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

The problem with the initial evidence doctrine is that if one really holds to it then everyone who has never spoken in tongues is lost, no exceptions. That and of course that it is absent from scripture.

how can you be "born of the spirit" without speaking in tongues? You can believe in initial evidence and the light doctrine and see people saved who haven't spoken in tongues. what is your opinion of that idea?

[Aleks Fife]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

Direct quote:

"Since the initial evidence doctrine is used to define the nuanced difference between Pentecostals and Charismatics ... with the understanding they're under a similar umbrella ... I do not see myself as Pentecostal."

another quote:

"The Incarnation is a wonderful mystery ... I am as Oneness as I am Triunitarian ... and Trinitarian. These models seek to define an infinite and multi-dimensional God ..."

the slippery slope...

I saw that on The316.com as well. Does that surprise anyone. These ceased believing years ago. It's tragic.