Parallel between Catholic and Charismatic

Actually, they don't practice Pentecost. The tongues at Pentecost were "dialects" understood by native speakers. And, 3,000 got saved in one service!

 

What I can't for the life of me figure out is why the truth on tongues hasn't gotten out more?
The tongues were genuine human languages, yet unknown to the one speaking. This seems so simple, yet Charismatics refuse to listen to anyone on this.

 

Becaue false teachers have them decieved to believe lies. They can't even see scripture anymore. It shows you just how effective satan can be. It should keep us on gaurd to watch what we beleive and to test the spirits. But some get angry with you when you mention testing the spirits becasue it may reveal more then they want to know, or it may reveal them wrong. Personal opinion too many times is given presdence over scripture for some.

 

The simple truth is, some people just want more. The plain word of God is not sufficient to satisfy what God has said and the people believed. All through scriptures we read about the people of God asking for evidence,,for proof,,,,,,yea, hath God said?

We have great difficulty aligning the emotional and intellectual qualities of redemption. Some of us fear emotion, and others fear the intellectual aspects, then some of us put undo emphasis on both.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Although my old church was not charismatic, it
had some of the characteristics of typical
charismatta. When I left it, I realized that I had
been addicted to the charismatic-like aspects of
it: </font>

• the need for human approval and
  striving for it</font>
• leadership's approval was equal to,
  and defined, our God's approval</font>
• excitement, religious highs, religious
  experiences</font>
• Whatever was spoken from the pulpit,
  no matter how preposterous, was
  accepted as all right; if it was in error,
  one kept one's mouth shut. (This one
  added because it made the ones above
  acceptable.)</font>

Away from there and finally at peace, I began to
realize that our God is enough. What a difference!

 

Y'all are absolute right. Hitting the nail right on the head. I believe that the refusal to give up Charismata is rooted in spiritual pride. And this type of pride is blinding. And needless to say , it is a sin.

Tonya

 

How true Dr Griffin, how true. The road is paved with good intentions.

Tonya

 

Quote from Dr. Bob:

It seems to me that you are also describing the arminian who goes to the altar time and time again to be saved time and time again.

 

I suspect that the arminian that keeps going to the altar has not learned that forgiveness takes place in the mind of God; preferring to believe that forgiveness takes place in the heart of man. Hence when the arminian no longer feels saved, then a return trip is needed.

Tonya

 

I think I have fallen into a trap here, speaking only
for myself. It is easy to converse this way when
we all agree. We can all pat one another upon the
back and say, "That's right! We're right! We have it
all nailed down! We're good!" Perhaps this should
be taken to a place where we have a little
contention, a little disagreeing, so that we can think
this through, using the knowledge of those who
disagree.

 

I think we should beware not to but all Charismatics in the same corner. They are a very diverse group. Probably as diverse as Baptists. Most are Arminian but Arminianism is well within the bounds of Orthodox Christianity (I can't believe a Calvinist like me is saying this! )Arminianism despite it's errors does not teach you can be saved today, lost tommorrow, then saved again. Many do follow the Word of Faith heresy of health and wealth(Hinn, Price, Copeland, TBN etc..)but not all.

Not all teach speaking in tongues is the sign of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit but just believe it is a gift that is still given (The Vineyard churches) and Charismatics also have a few Calvinist among them such as Dr. Wayne Grudem, Samual C. Storms (Yes there are Calvinist Charismatics! ) and even one Calvinist Charismatic denomination (P.D.I. http://www.pdinet.org/) and some Southern Baptist churches are fully Charismatic in theology but still teach Once Saved, Always saved(James Robison, Ron Phillips are Southern Baptists)

So, No Charismatics and Pentecostals (Not referring to the Modalist Pentecostals such as the United Pentecostal Cult) though we may disagree with them on many things are not in the same league as Catholics but generaly teach the truth of the Holy Trinity, Salvation by faith in Christ alone, Deity of Christ etc...

[ June 08, 2003, 01:20 AM: Message edited by: Kiffin ]

 

I am wondering why the UPC is listed as a cult.
What do you believe makes it a cult? I ask not to
criticize but to understand.

I call my old church a cult because the leaders
took a god-like stance, not to be questioned, not
to be second guessed, always "'right"' no matter
how wrong they were, always getting special
treatment, adding rules to salvation that are not in
the Bible, saying that they were the only ones with
the whole truth, and encouraging praise for
leadership and the church in general that belonged
to our God.

 

The UPC is considered a cult because it is anti-trinitarian. Its official view on the Trinity is the same as that of Praxas and Sabellius (3rd century heretics) and is known as Modalism. (God shows different "faces" at different times, but there is only one personality within the Godhead).

Secondly, the UPC official stance on salvation is that of Baptismal Regeneration, that is, that a person is regenerated in the waters of baptism.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't think they believe in
such a baptism. ???
</font>

• I wonder who decided that a parti-
  cular belief regarding the Godhead
  constituted a cult?</font>
• From what I gather, there are many
  differing understandings of the Godhead
  within Christianity; why is this one singled
  out as cultish?</font>
• The R.Catholic church has a particular
  understanding of the Godhead; would it,
  alone, make the R.Catholic church a cult?</font>

 

"Parallel between Catholic and Charismatic"

hmmm lets see, sections of both think they are the "One True Church"?? Dunno why, everyone knows it's BAPTISTS!

*...Pete again reaches for flak jacket...*

Pete

 

Historically, the broadest circle of Christianity drew the line at the Trinity. From the early 300s on, no Trinity, no Christian. This is so broad that it is a shared view of Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant, and Free Churhces (baptist, etc.). The particular view of the Godhead that the UPC holds has been considered by Christians to be heretical and cultic since about 260 AD.

It is an article of faith in the UPC church that salvation occurs in the waters of baptism.

Among evangelical Christians, the additional lines that determine true Christianity are Biblcal infallibility, Justification by Faith, Salvation by Grace, and the Person and Work of Christ (the Virgin Birth, Sinless Life, Substitutionary Atonement, Bodily Resurrection and Ascension, and Visible, bodily, return of Christ).

 

Well, 8o) I believe all the things you list, but I
cannot claim I understand the Godhead. I cannot
say that I understand Him and that I know the
trinity of Him. He is a mystery to me. He is
beyond my pea-sized brain. I cannot claim I
have His being in time and space nailed down to
a science and that I understand it. Would that
make me cultish? I ask because I wonder what
is thought of those who are not so sure of His
Being.

 

From the Official UPC statement of faith:

We believe in the Bible standard of full salvation, believing on the Lord through repentance, baptism in water by immersion in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and receiving the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the initial sign of speaking with other tongues as the Sprit gives utterance.
This is the most extreme view of baptismal regeneration to be found.

This is a classic statement of modalism, fully in agreement with the Sabellian Heresy of the third century.

Contrast this with The Abstract of Principles:

III. The Trinity.
God is revealed to us as Father, Son and Holy Spirit each with distinct personal attributes, but without division of nature, essence or being.