The Strange New World

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Thanks again Brother Clifton for you questions and discussion.  Somehow
all of your post did not get forwarded to me so that I will be replying
to only those portions I received.


> If a new convert is struggling with living for the Lord and hears
> that the difference between the Pentecostals and the Baptists is just perspective then
> the flesh will encourage them to be Baptist and take the easy road.

I would hope that the Pentecostal experience of these young Christians
would be powerful enough to "bond" them to the Apostolic faith. 
However, from my conversation with those who have left the Apostolic
movement  I have learned that it is not what they have to affirm to be
Apostolics which drives them from the Apostolic movement, but that which
they have to deny.  Later in your post you mentioned that you choose not
to recognize the truth which exists in the faith of other Christians. 
Other Apostolics see this truth and desire to acknowledge it without
losing their Apostolic identity or feeling threatened by it.  The faith
of young Apostolic Christians is in jeopardy because credible
explanations are not given for what they know to be true from their
spiritual and human experience.  Once again, the simplistic answers of a
previous generation of Apostolics which denies the faith and life of
other Christians are not satisfying.   


> Or it is the same reason that there are so many Baptist, Luthern,
> Methodist and other denom
> organizations. There are problems with men forming orgs. Everyone has
> personal pet peeves and
> sometimes people just can not get along. To blanketly blame the
> doctrine is a bit tunnel visioned
> and removes the basic problem of people being people. There is also
> the problem of bad leadership
> within an organization. A great group lead by an idiot will have the
> appearance of an idiot!


I am getting really confused Brother Clifton.  From your previous posts
it is clear that you  do not want to believe that plurality and
ambiguity exists in Christendom.  But in this passage you seem to
understand quite well that it does exist!  Could we extend your
observations to the several hundred different Apostolic organizations
who interpret their salvation differently?  Could you please explain to
me the perfect human doctrine you embrace?  If it is perfect, then I
assume you place it on the same level as Scripture.  Once again it seems
we are back to the question of how Apostolics can have doctrines which
exist outside of the Biblical canon control their interpretation of
Scripture.  We are also back to the question of human infallibility.  Do
you believe the pope is infallible?  Do you believe that any man is
infallible?  Do you believe that anyone can give an infallible
interpretation of the Bible?


> I acknowledged that there is not a verbatium repeated (of Acts 2:38), but I never
> acknowledged that there was ever another message stated. I stated that there was very simular
> responses. Please stop putting extra meaning into every thing I respond.
> You state that the lack of the verbatium repeating of Act 2:38 is
> proof that there are many paths to salvation. I state that the lack of repetition means that it never
> changed since the change is not recorded. Who is right is a matter of faith, but do not say that I
> agree with you...when God changed the covenants He was very through in making sure we had the
> change recorded and there is no recording of a complete salvation message that differs from the Act
> 2/Act 10 messages of Peter.

Similarity does not mean identity, unless of course you interpret these
passages from a "big picture" which necessitates that they all conform
to a preconceived message.  I believe in the Acts 2:38 message Brother,
but that doesn't mean I have go beyond the very clear writings of Luke
and find a repetition of Acts 2:38 present when it is not.  I have done
a very thorough study of salvation in Acts and hope to have it available
soon on a Web site.  You might check out the Higher-fire archives for a
post I made entitled Apostolic salvation.

Regarding Christian differences in salvation you said:

> This is wrong, unless you beleive that salavtion is accomplished by
> absolution of a priest and
> other church edicts (RCC) , or by a short prayer one in your life
> (SBA) or by adhering to mans new
> rules (LDS) or other salvation doctrines. Now compare oneness
> pentecostals to trinitarian
> pentecostals and I might agree that the diffs are less but there is
> still a diff.

When I said all true Christians agree that salvation is found in Jesus
Christ I was speaking of their fundamental orientation, not of their
explicit doctrines.  Like me these Christians have experienced Jesus
Christ and seek to interpret this experience and faith in the light of
Holy Scripture.  The faith of these  Christians has the right
orientation in contrast to cults.  I think you are uncomfortable with a
definition of salvation which does require intellectual understanding
and absolute doctrinal correctness.

> Your statement just confirms to me that you have a very eucaminical
> (sp) view. This is a view that
> is held by people that believe that easy believism is salvation and
> that Apostolics are better
> classified as radical Fundie Christians. All Christians are saved and
> the diffs are not important
> all we should do is love one another and forget about doctrine. hmmm
> forget about doctrine, forget
> about the do's and don'ts the Lord has given us and just get along in
> mans unity (since there is
> no hard teaching of God's Word it is man's teaching). Sorry not me,
> the Lord wrote His law in my
> heart and the Holy Ghost tells me that this is a lie to lead away from
> the truth, to water down
> the will of the Lord.

I hope you have some time to reread some of my past posts.  I am not
drifting into relativism.  What Christians believe is very important! 
But I have to acknowledge that confessions of faith, doctrines, and
theology, are very human enterprises which can err.  How do you
incorporate the fact that you are a fallible human being into your faith
Brother Clifton?  How can you account for the fact that their is a
possibility that you could be wrong?  How can we as men proclaim that we
possess a complete and absolute understanding of Holy Scripture?  

I am ecumenical!  But my ecumenism is centered on dialogue.  As an
Apostolic I want to learn of other Christian faiths and share my
Apostolic faith with them.  I am not afraid of believing a lie or being
led astray.  The faith I possess is to great for that!  My primary
concern has always been that the greatest opposition to my understanding
of the Apostolic faith will come from those within the Apostolic
movement itself.  Perhaps it is a family thing.  I receive criticism
pretty good if it is made by those outside the Apostolic movement
although the Lord has to continually remind me to react according to the
Spirit I possess. But harsh criticisms from Apostolics hurt deeply.  I
can present sound intellectual defenses of the the distinctive doctrines
of the Apostolic faith but if I do it in a way that acknowledges other
Christians my motives, Apostolic identity, and salvation are
questioned.  But God is binding my wounds and refreshing me with his
Holy Spirit.  Through Higher-fire I have learned that there are a whole
lot of Apostolics like me in the world.  And, Brother Clifton, because
we fellowship with those outside the Apostolic movement the world is
hearing about the Apostolic faith from our perspective.

 
> Alas you are confused by other denom's teaching and preaching and we
> all know that God is not the
> author of confusion. The catholics are wrong there is little doubt to
> that. The Prots are actually
> getting closer to us is some circles (those fundie ones). Are the
> Apostolics right? I think that
> it offers the best total explination, I do beleive that too many are
> too focused on the dress and
> the standards and not enough on the spiritual, but I wont toss the
> baby out with the bath, I wont
> let the probs of a bro or a sis detract from what I beleive.

What is confusing to me are these few sentences.  Once again you have
acknowledged Apostolic diversity.  For the consistency of your argument
you would have to say that all Apostolics have the "truth" and believe
the same.  


Of Christian denominations you wrote:


> Sure there is truth, the devil can quote scripture and twist the
> truth, but does that mean you
> listen to Him to get a few morsels of truth?

Once again I hope you are consistent Brother Clifton.  Do you ever read
books by anyone outside of the Apostolic movement?  Do you realize that
the Apostolic authors are dramatically influenced by other Christians,
whether they acknowledge it or not?  Past discussions on higher-fire
have questioned the appropriateness of book burning.  Do you really
believe that you can live in the 20th century and be uninfluenced by the
world, history, culture?  


> Either Acts 2:38 is the way ( the Apostolic Doctrine ) or it is not
> (the Evangelical Doctrine).

This is classic either/or thinking Brother Clifton.  It is a
characteristic of Fundamentalism and of modern Scottish Common Sense
philosophy.  I used to be a Fundamentalist, but someone challenged me to
examine the "modern" baggage I used to interpret my faith.  I challenge
you to really understand the ideology and philosophy you have embraced
and use to interpret the Bible and as a justification for denying the
reality of salvation for other Christians.

The Path Christians are on:

> Different paths, different ways...kinda goes against the narrow path
> and straight way. I do not deny that others are seeking Jesus as I am. Are they saved, the same
> Judge will judge me and them.

True Christians are on the same Path as you Brother Clifton.  They pray,
worship God, sing hymns, and base their faith on the Bible like you and
me.  I am glad you do not deny that other Christians are seeking Jesus
and that you will allow God to Judge their faith.  It our preliminary
judgments I am concerned about.  Even in this post you have questioned
the salvation of other Christians.  This is a very serious and weighty
matter.  Long ago I learned that I can not peer into a human heart and
judge their salvation condition.  Let us leave the judgment to God!


> I see one way in the Bible, not multiple and that is what I bring to
> the table. 

Theologians call "what you bring to the table" your presuppositions 
your pre understandings.  These radically influence our interpretation
of the Bible and our understanding of the Christian faith.  I am
challenging you presuppositions, not your Apostolic faith.  


> other brands of Christians love the Lord and seek Him and I tell them
> my thoughts and know that
> most goes in one ear and out the other, but I tell them that there is
> so much more. I never
> condemn, but I never waiver either.


This is a pretty ecumenical paragraph.  I am glad you refer to those who
love the Lord and seek Him as Christians. That is what they are!  The
something more you tell them about is our "unique" Pentecostal
perspective that they are unfamiliar with.  I am glad you do this in a
tolerant way without condemning. I am also glad that you do not waiver
in your Apostolic faith.

Let me see if I have the content of this paragraph right.  There are
other brands of Christians.  They love the Lord and seek him just like
Apostolics do.  That means there is diversity in the Christian faith. 
Christians serve the same Lord but have different expressions of their
faith. Plurality and ambiguity do exist in Christendom!  What should be
our response to to other Christians?  We should engage them in a
meaningful dialogue about our common faith without condemnation even
though they may not listen.  At the same time we should remain steadfast
in our Apostolic faith, without wavering.  I agree with you Brother
Clifton! Whew!!!  Its taken a lot of talk, dialogue, but I think we've
reached some sort of understanding.  

Sorry I didn't get the rest of your post.  But what I did get ended on a
very positive note.

God Bless you and all Apostolics now and always!

Steve