Salvation The Pentecostal Way 1

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

Thank you Brother Matthew for your response to my post.  I probably
should have waited until  the entire article was completed before it was
posted, but I thought it would take a little more time before there were
some responses. 

I have visited your web site and read some of your writings.  I have
also seen your posts on CPI.  I know that you study the Bible Brother
Matthew.  I would appreciate your criticism of my posts from a biblical
perspective.  One reason this post was so long was that I wanted to
provide a biblical foundation for what I was saying. I  will repost my
charts on salvation in Luke-Acts in a clearer format, perhaps this was
the reason no comment on my interpretation of Scripture was made.

Also, could you please comment on the influences of Protestant
Scholasticism, Evangelicalism, and Fundamentalism on Apostolic theology.
I know that you have access to a good library.

I have readily acknowledged on higher-fire before that I believe
Apostolics are unique Christians, not the only Christians.  This post is
intended to answer some of the questions Sis. Lynne asked from a
biblical, historical, and theological perspective.  These questions are
very serious and require a thorough answer.

In your reply you said that  Acts 2:38 was universally accepted by
Apostolics as the New Birth message.  I suggest that you reread the
history of the United Pentecostal Church and investigate other Apostolic
organizations.  I mentioned in my post that Apostolics are unaware of
the diversity in their movement.  I am disappointed that you are not
familiar with Apostolic history.  

When I finish my article I hope it is clear that I do believe the Acts
2:38 message.  In fact, most of the second part of my post was given to
an instructor at Christian Life College in Stockton who received it as a
well written, biblical,and a scholarly defense of the Apostolic faith
embraced by the United Pentecostal Church.  However, he, like you, would
have difficulty accepting the first part of the post which  examined the
experiential, historical, and biblical basis for this faith. It seems
that excluding other Christians from salvation is to be accepted without
question in some Apostolic circles. But how does believing that there
are other Christians undermine the Apostolic faith?  In what way will
Apostolics be lost if other Christians are saved?  Do these Christians
have to be lost in order for you to be saved? Do you have to establish
that someone is wrong and lost to justify your faith?

For your information, I believe that the Bible teaches a universalism of
hope, salvation is available to all, not a universalism of salvation,
all are saved. I explicitly interpreted Luke as saying that all will not
be saved! But consigning people to hell is very serious business.  I can
not peer into their heart and examine their faith.  And I have been in
the Apostolic movement long enough to know that everyone who is baptized
in Jesus name, filled with the Holy Ghost, speaking in tongues, and
embracing strong holiness standards, is not a child of God.  It seems we
have to look not only at what people are believing but how they are
behaving!  It seems that salvation should be a way of life, a way of
living for Jesus in the present world as he intends us to live.  For
Apostolics, this involves proclaiming the Apostolic message.  But it
also involves a critical examination of our faith in a manner similar to
our Apostolic fore fathers.  Do you have an openness to embrace new
scriptural understandings of your faith Brother Matthew?  Does the Holy
Spirit still speak to Apostolics as he did in the past?  Or do
Apostolics possess all truth, all wisdom, and all knowledge, so that the
Holy Spirit is no longer required to reveal new truths?  How then are
Apostolics different from conservative Catholics who equate their
"inspired" traditions with Scripture and use them to demonstrate the
truthfulness of their faith?  It is a Protestant principle to engage in
criticism of the Christian faith.  It is a Catholic principle to
uncritically accept traditions and question any criticism.  It is a
Protestant principle to continually want to reform the church.  It is a
Catholic principle to accept the church as having arrived and in need of
no new expression.  I am a Protestant Apostolic, critical of Apostolic
traditions and desiring to reform the the Apostolic Church.  But this
criticism and desire for reformation is not rooted in a desire to
undermine the faith of Apostolics but in a desire to see Apostolics
firmly established in their faith, that means the Acts 2:38 message,
while being tolerant and accepting of other Christians.  

God bless you Brother Matthew,

Steve

P.S.  I am employed full time and run a program for Seriously
Emotionally Disturbed adolescents for a local school district in Fresno.
I also run an electrical contracting business with one full time and one
part time employee.  My wife and I  teach a house church for the church
we attend.  Only the first 5 pages of the post which appeared on Friday
were written on Thursday night.  In one of my past posts I mentioned
that God had convicted me of the sin of "silence".  Although I was
silent, not dialogueing with other Apostolics, I never stopped thinking,
reading, and writing.  I hope to present these writings on The Apostolic
Pentecostal Journal web site soon.  I hope you will prepare some
articles for this web site Brother Matthew.  I admired your courage in
posting an article on Holiness on CPI.