Featured Let’s review some basic Christian understanding

Christianity, so called...

... has not been faithful. Most of Christendom is not following Jesus the Christ. They are nominal Christians. Most follow the commandments of men instead of the whole counsel of God. This is not new. This goes all the way back to Adam and his firstborn: Cain. All of mankind has disobedience to God in their genes. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. There are none righteous not one. Jesus paid it all.

Jesus: Why do you call me Lord and do not what I say? What we believe and practice does make an eternal difference: see Mt. 7:13-29. There really are pseudo-Christians.

Beware the wolves dressed like sheep.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

Possibly.

I understand how you mean it. You're talking about what Pentecostals call the second baptism which they believe must be evidenced by speaking in tongues. And it is to that point which I am speaking. However, I disagree with Pentecostals in how that operation of being filled with the Holy Spirit works. For instance I don't believe that it must be evidenced by speaking in tongues. Secondly, I believe that upon faith you recieve the Holy Spirit in his entirety and that there is a special grace what you call the second baptism which empowers the Christian for service in the Church (Universally speaking).

I understand what you mean.

Yes, I understand what you mean. But unfortunately what you are describing is often mistaken for emotionalism. Which is why in Pentecostal circles you get ridiculous teachings like "When you don't feel the spirit, you need to get your life right." Or instances of "running the aisles, growtesque jigs, and chatter in tongues for which there is no interpretation." Many times the power of the Holy Spirit filled to over flowing bursting with spiritual power isn't reliant on the person's emotions in reciept of it. They can be emotionally down but thats irrelevant of the Holy Spirit empowering them in his service to bring about the Fathers will. That doesn't mean I think people are wrong when they do get excited emotionally about God and what he's doing but I don't think emotional outburst are necissarily the evidence of the Holy Spirit.

I do understand these things. I may not agree with the entirety of Pentecostal teaching however.

Which the Holy Spirit is involved in each of these aspects that you refer.

He is

Are not our bodies the temple of the Holy Spirit? How then can you say the Holy Spirit is not in the people who belong to him?

Obviously you never heard of the Catholic Charasmatics!

 

baptism in the Holy Spirit was done to ALl saved by God when they were born again!

We can either be indwelt by the Spriit, or also infilled by Him, our choice in that, but NO secondary aspect of grace as you teach!

And do you view jesus equal fully to God the father? Just as much God?

 

the baptism in the Holy Spirit as you understand it is NOT in the Bible!

ALL today receive the same Sprit, ALL have been gifted, ALL drank of same Sprit, ALL one in christ...

Up to us to chose whether to walk in surrender to the Sprit and experience the fullness of that in us, or to limit and hinder him by 'walking our own way!"

 

Well several pentecostals have this as a hard fast rule. For instance in the Church of God's doctrinal statements we have this

Even in the Assemblies of God we have a similar statement

What did I actually say?

And there are actually more verses in the NT that speak on tongues here is one you conveniently forget.

Having studied with Pentecostals and participated in worship with them I have to say that there are a lot of "clanging cymbals" going on. Not that there aren't those who act in love. But again that was my point to begin with. I think there are many Pentecostals who are given in to emotionalism and confused it with the Holy Spirit. Generally when God moves in our lives in a palpable way we get excited but not always. Those verses in Acts certainly point to the Holy Spirit moving in their lives. But that doesn't mean everyone who acts excited are being moved by the Holy Spirit which I pointed to in my examples. You also forget almost how dismisive Paul is when it comes to the practice of speaking in tongues

Tongues for Paul unlike Pentecostal Churches is a low priority and is used as a sign for unbelievers like in Acts where everyone heard their own tongue and witnessed to the mighty things of God.

First of all I don't know what "difficulties, dangers, persecutions" you personally experienced. But empowering Christians is building up the church in all aspects of the Church (universally) is what I meant. It applies to evangelist, pastors, workers in charity, teachers. Paul says

and

That is what I meant.

Just because 1) you don't actually know what Catholics actually teach. 2) and since you can't claim to have studied Catholicism as closely as I've studied Pentecostalism I doubt that my "credibility is actually in question". Maybe to you since we disagree about doctrine. But think of it this way when I wanted to learn what Pentecostals believed what did I do? I went to a Pentecostal University to learn. I went to the source. I didn't read about them from non Pentecostal perspectives. I found out for myself from their own writers. Their own teachers. Did you take equal steps to learn about your so called "false doctrines of the RCC"? I rather doubt it.

Well, the actual scripture verse would have a better translation of being born from above and we have those type of people in all Christian denominations. And some who claim to speak in tongues.

You error is your lack of historical knowledge. There have been Charistmatic Catholics in all the long years of her history. It is only recently that we've titled them charismatics. Think of it this way Pentecostal suggest that during a spirit filled services when people are being prayed over they fall down and its termed "being slain in the spirit". This phenominon happened with Wesleys sermons but it was called swooning. Its a modern term "being slain in the Spirit."

I actually have no axe to grind with Pentecostals. I learned what they believed came to disagree with it. The only real axe I have is those specific Pentecostals who were dealing in nonsense but we have those in all denominations! Let me give you an example. One Church of God Pastor decried education in his sermon down in Lakeland Florida and felt that formal training in the bible limited the Holy Spirit. I suppose he didn't mind trading in erronious understanding of scripture from people who didn't have much more than an 8th grade education. How about a student of theology who when we had a particularly good convocation service in the Student Chapel which said that if this was really a Spirit filled college then they would cancel classes (for which he hadn't completed his assignment) so we could praise God all day by singing praise songs despite the fact that he (or his parents) were paying a lot of money to have him educated so he could be a pastor. Or how about a pastor who preached that he didn't let himself or his family shake hands with people because he didn't want unknown demons to transit unknowingly from a person to himself. Or how about the young Pastor want to be who went forward for the alter prayer and only laid hands on the young pretty women of the crowd. I could go on. But you get my point. However, there are Pentecostals that I respect who really attempt to live their life for God.

I think this is untrue. People believe in it. They just don't agree with you about its import or how it performs in operation.

 

That is a big assumption on your part. And its a poor argument. I can easily say that you don't know about a lot of this topic rather you feel alot about this topic. And that for you feeling equates to knowing. You don't know if I have ever spoke in tongues or not. Neither do you know whether or not I had similar experiences to you. Note I'm not the only person to turn from Pentecostalism eventually ending up Catholic. There is Dr. Paul Thigpen, and Tim Staples (who went to Jimmy Swaggart Bible college) just to name two. And both of these men can attest to their speaking in tongues experience. The point of bringing them up is that they can attest to having been "baptized with the Holy Spirit" and yet have come to a different conclusion than you repudiating your assumption that I or anyone who disagrees with you "don't have a lot of spiritual revelation about spiritual matters." The fact is you just don't know whether I have or not. You can make an assertion but you really have nothing to back it up.

Paul had it and minimized its import. Are you suggesting that you know better than the Apostle Paul?

Funny all I did was quote what Paul actually said and you come up with "this is ONLY for those who have this baptism". The point of God enabling people is to build up the Church as Paul says. And all Christians are members of the Body and thus called to build it up. Everyone is gifted differently to build up a different section of the Body thus it is for everyone. However, priorities must be that they take second place to Love and being incontrol of your senses in order to properly explain the faith. This is what Paul said. He didn't say God created a special class of people who knows better than everyone else about spiritual matters so everyone not selected to this elite class must shut up about spiritual matters. That type of thinking goes against the scriptures and the truth that God calls us all to a knowledge of the truth. 1 Tim 2:4. Notice Paul doesn't say apart of the truth, or a truth but truth which is inclusive of all truth including spiritual matters.

That is certainly your opinion. Why don't you go to the source documents and actually study it for yourself?

again your opinion. Whether factual or not is debatable. Certainly we can say certain men went against God. But that is a case by case basis. You can't say every person for the past 1900 years were not "God-appointed". You should actually do some research before attempting to use a broad brush on christian history.

\
This certianly isn't true. I've been all over the world and everywhere I've been there are Christians. When I consider that 2,000 years ago Europe was plagued by pagan druids and believed in a pantheon and lived in cruelty with each other. To see that continent now set the standard for Human Rights can only be attributed to the Christianization of that contenent. Just that place alone is amazing that whole cultures were overturned by Christ to gentil a cruel barbaric people that now people look to them and us in the US as their decendents for percieving a humanitarian standard. Certainly we have a ways yet to go but certainly the Gospel is out in just about every part of the earth. Whether people believe in it is another matter but fewer today than ever can say they never heard that Jesus saves.

 

ALL christians have SOME type/kind of Gift from the Holy Spirit!

He decides who gets which gift...

Sign /revealtory gifts ceases when Apsotle John passed away, as Offices of BOTH prophet/Apostle passed!

There is NO additional grace of the holy spirit today, ALL saved have EXACTLY same salvationexperience done to them, its just IF you chose to walk in Him or yourself!

 

Actually I haven't. You were speaking about being baptized in the Holy Ghost (excuse me that may sound archaic...Holy Spirit). Which I pointed out that "I don't believe that it must be evidenced by speaking in tongues". To which you replied

to which I replied "Well several pentecostals have this as a hard fast rule." and as an example I quoted the doctrinal statement from the Church of God and the Assemblies of God regarding this view

In both statements we see the doctrinal belief of Pentecostals is that for the idea of the "Baptism with the Holy Spirit" that no matter what gifting God has provided it is necissarily evidenced by "Speaking in Tongues." Tongues for Penticostals isn't just a confirmation but evidence of a greater work of the Holy Spirit. So no I didn't change the topic but the topic is unified. However, reading Paul we see how he views speaking in tongues and doesn't place such an emphasis or even expectation of it. His teaching is clear he doesn't think its a great idea that the whole congregation speaks in tongues lest a stranger think all Christians have lost their minds. However, he doesn't forbid the practice of speaking in tongues either. He wants us to go for the greater thing which is Love. And the ability to rationally explain the reasons for our faith. You incorrectly dichotomize the gift of Tongues.

Satan attacks anyone who orders their life to the gospel whether they speak in tongues or not. Note speaking in tongues is no guarantee that the person is what you call "baptized with the Holy Spirit."

Well, I will once again give my testimony but it will be shorter. I was born into the Catholic Church. However, my family working in Africa sent me to an American Boarding school so I could get an education and strangely enough my father also wanted me to have a biblical education. So I was sent to a missionary boarding school. During our spiritual emphasis week and evangelist message got to me and I wanted to accept Jesus Christ into my life and so experienced a "born again" conversion. The School was non-denominational runned by the Africa Inland mission and so I didn't have any preferrence for denominations. My only guide was that what ever church I participated in was a Bible teaching church. Having studied scriptures under varied Protestant missionaries I informed my father when I was 15 that I would leave the Catholic Church believing it to be a false religion so that I could follow Christ. I was baptized again as a Public Testimony that I had accepted Jesus into my heart. After graduating and coming back to the States I then joined the Air Force and became involved in several bible studies ran by oversees Christian servicemans Centers and the Navigators. I attended a King James Only Baptist church just outside the base. However, they were the type that believed women should only wear dresses and were extremely legalistic. Having no ties to any denomination I came across a pentecostal Pastor with whom I became good friends with and since I didn't really know about Pentecostalism and I was planning on getting out of the military and having no ties anywhere in the States I went to Lee to learn about Pentecostals while getting a degree so I minored in bible and theology. In the end I disagreed with certain Pentecostal beliefs and joined a bible teaching Southern Baptist church where I was for many years. And it was in the process of actually Studying Scripture and Christian History over starting at Grad school but continuing after it as well that I came to understand everything I thought I understood about Catholic beliefs was wrong. I came to understand from study and prayer that the Catholic Faith was the authentic faith established by Jesus and is a biblical faith and returned to it. Now that was longer than I had intended it to be. But that is the jist of it.

I also encourage you to find out the facts for yourself.

 

You're welcome.

Yes it was and is.

I'm curious what you think was drastically altered? It has consitent teaching that can be viewed by documents going all the way back.

I'm sorry I thought I did.

I don't differentiate today's church with the ancient church. In fact I can look at the Didache and say see we still do that or hold to that. Pentecostals cannot do that.

What makes you say that?

 

Great I hate paying money!!!!

Prominance is hardly an argument against something. As far as praying to Mary you should do a study about the consept of "The Communion of Saints" as well as the historical perspective. And I encourage you to read source documents rather than read what someone else has to say about the source documents. I can tell you simply that in the Christian faith it has long been held that all Christians when they leave this mortal life they aren't dead but alive in Christ and though in heaven are still apart of the Body of Jesus Christ. They aren't nihalated but live in Christ. Thus Catholics ask Mary as a living person to pray for them. That is the sum of it. We can see in the New Testament this connection between those who have left this mortal life and the connection to those still here by the actions described in the Church at Corinth in 1 Cor 15:29

showing a staunch believe in the resurrection also holds a strong connection of the Church present here to those there in heaven. We also have a clear indicator of this as Jesus himself speaks to Moses who had died of this body and was yet alive in the hereafter. He does this in front of his 3 disciples. Matthew 17:3

Also Luke 9:30-31

Clearly indicating that Moses knew what was currently going on in the world to speak of Jesus comming trials.

Well I can't attest to what was actually said however Peter did say in Acts 2:38-39

And it is clear from reason and natural law that infants do not of themselves have faith. Faith must be given to them so that by the age of their ability to have faith that they will have faith. What Catholics call the age of reason and Protestants call the age of accountability. For doesn't scripture say

Not at all as I have shown you. And thank you for wishing me well!