Full Gospel

I agree with your analysis.

Are you wondering if that family was perhaps correct about your church? If they call those other things part of the Gospel, aren't they "requiring" tongues, slain in the spirit, etc to be a necessary part of salvation? That's not the "full gospel" that my Bible teaches.

 

Full Gospel = death, burial and resurection of Jesus Christ.

I have often thought that churches that focus on tongues, slain in the spirit, etc would do better to call themselves the "Full Works" church.

 

dh1948, I'v have seen those churches and wondered just what do they mean? As you said, just waht do they eman about the rest of us. Are they saying we negelect part of the gospel.
And as pastorSBC said, the gospel is death, burial, resurection of Jesus Christ. If your church is teaching that, they are teaching the full gospel.
Seems to me this family is seeking a sign, which Jesus condemned. And making tongues a requirement for salvation.

 

If I were you I'd be sad that they left, but glad that they left and didn't take anyone with them.

 

These people who spout full gospel all of the time need to do a good study of 1st Corinthians chapters 12-14.Where is slain in the spirit found in the Bible?

 

Well, friends anyway.

 

I am fully convinced that most Charismatics are indeed believers.

 

Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Adding anything to grace destroys grace and is not grace. We can only be saved by grace, no one is a brother or sister who claims to be saved any other way. There is no such thing as grace plus something. This is Paul's (God's) teaching and purpose in the entire book of Galatians.

 

PastorSBC1303 wrote:

You are just kidding, are you not?

 

Art,

Most Charismatics do not teach that you have to have "the baptism" to be saved. As far as adding works to salvation, I am in full agreement with you. A gospel of salvation by grace through faith plus anything (Rom 11:6) is a different gospel (Gal 1:8). On the other hand, I have seen almost as many Baptists confused about the relationship between faith and works as charismatics.

Oh, by the way, I rejoice in the fact that this is all typed. If I wrote it by hand, many of you could not read it without a special gift. One of my spiritual gifts is "writing in tongues". I write a note and someone asks my wife what I wrote, she replies,
"I do not know,
I cannot tell,
I read it slow,
but, Oh well."

She does not have the gift of interpreting writing in tongues!

Sorry, please excuse the slight seussism there... I do not like green eggs and ham, Sam I am.

 

Artimaeus wrote,

Just exactly what are you suggesting is the meaning of "grace" in the New Testament?

Just exactly what does “the baptism in the Holy Spirit” as evidenced by speaking in other tongues have to do with Paul’s teaching about the gospel in Galatians?

You are totally confusing two very different concepts that are not related to each other.

 

Not the two concepts but I very well may be confusing what in the world we are discussing on this board at times.

I'll try to explain what I think we are discussing.

Gospel = The good news of salvation by grace. the bad news was that salvation by the law (or any law involving works) was not going to cut it.

Full Gospel = ??? I am sure that there are as many definitions and opinions on this as on everything else but it must be a definition which states that the gospel that isn't full is not the "real" gospel and since theirs is "full" it has added something (tongues, miracles, prophecy, etc.)

If the gospel is right then the full gospel isn't.
If the full gospel is right then the gospel isn't.

 

Artimaeus,

By far and away the largest “full gospel” denomination is the Assemblies of God, and I was saved in an Assembly of God church. At the time, I was also regularly fellowshipping at a Baptist coffee house that was open every night except for Sunday and Monday night. Before I even got saved, I could see very clearly that the Assembly of God folks interpreted the Bible differently than did the Baptist folks. And when I got saved, I wanted to know who was right and who was wrong. I especially wanted to know what the Bible really teaches about the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Therefore I began to study what the Bible says about the Holy Spirit and about baptism. I also began to study what the Assemblies of God teaches about these subjects.

The outcome of this was that I decided that both the Assemblies of God and the Baptists were partially correct and partially wrong. Both groups teach salvation by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law. The Assemblies of God teach that, subsequent to salvation, a second work of grace is to be experienced by faith. They call this “second work of grace” the baptism in/with the Holy Spirit, and they believe that the initial evidence of the reception of the baptism in/with the Holy Spirit is “speaking in tongues.” From this they arrive at the expression, “full gospel,” that is, the good news of both salvation and the baptism in/with the Holy Spirit through faith.

Some individuals in the Assemblies of God do teach that the baptism in/with the Holy Spirit is some kind of a reward for obedience to Christ, but the Assemblies of God, as a denomination, does not teach that at all. The Christian Missionary Alliance church also believes in and teaches a very similar doctrine of the baptism in/with the Holy Spirit, but they do not believe that the initial evidence is always speaking in other tongues. The Church of the Nazarene teaches a similar doctrine but they use very different terminology and they believe that speaking in tongues today is a counterfeit gift. They refer to this “second work of grace” as entire sanctification or the second blessing.

We find this “second work of grace” occurring in the lives of men and women throughout the history of the church, beginning in the Book of Acts, and sometimes the gift of tongues is mentioned, and other times it is not. But this “second work of grace” is seen as a work of grace apart from the works of the Law. Some individuals have experienced what they interpret to be three distinct works of grace, and there are Christian denominations made up of such individuals.

Basically, we are talking about the experiences of Christians and their interpretation of these experiences as they look to the Bible for help in understanding their experiences. They all teach the gospel of salvation by grace through faith, but many of them teach a “fuller” gospel that includes a “second work of grace” through faith.

 

How does this square with ICor 12:1-11 ?

 

How do most Baptists explain the phrase, "He (Jesus) will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire."? Was this only for the first century?


LK 3:15 The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in their hearts if John might possibly be the Christ. 16 John answered them all, "I baptize you with water. But one more powerful than I will come, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

 

I've heard of "full gospel" churches since I wa a kid. I never gave it any consideration, and never considered it condescending. To some, the term "Baptist" may be condescending because it might suggest that we're the only ones with baptimal authority. I suspect that the condescendence in this case is an innocent perception and nothing more.

 

2 + 2 = 4 + 1

Am I partially correct because my answer includes the right answer plus something else? No, I am incorrect. If the Assemblies of God and the Baptists are parially correct then they are both wrong. Please, explain the parts where the Baptists are right and the parts where they are wrong concerning the gospel.