Who identifies as Charismatic

[psalms 91]

lol just chalk me up to all

 

[Alithis]

lol just chalk me up to all

lol ouh that it were so simple ..

yeh this is just in the interest of to and from conversation -nothing heavy

so .. you believe that if there is no manifestation of tongues ..one is not baptised in the holy Spirit ?as i understand that is what the early full gospel (aog) denomination believed .

personally im not fully convinced either way but must admit(keeping it honest) a leaning toward "tongues" being a sign of the occurrence of the baptism of the holy Spirit as opposed to "no sign" .


this week i' v been attending a very interdenominational (though small) gathering in line with the feast of tabernacles . for a couple of hours every nite we gather and just worship the lord and pray .. and i observe many times ..those that are moved in the gifts ..al the gifts .. the most repeatedly are those that also manifest the presence of the lord in tongues .
which i find interesting .
NO ..its not a set rule . just a notable observation .

 

[psalms 91]

lol ouh that it were so simple ..

yeh this is just in the interest of to and from conversation -nothing heavy

so .. you believe that if there is no manifestation of tongues ..one is not baptised in the holy Spirit ?as i understand that is what the early full gospel (aog) denomination believed .

personally im not fully convinced either way but must admit(keeping it honest) a leaning toward "tongues" being a sign of the occurrence of the baptism of the holy Spirit as opposed to "no sign" .


this week i' v been attending a very interdenominational (though small) gathering in line with the feast of tabernacles . for a couple of hours every nite we gather and just worship the lord and pray .. and i observe many times ..those that are moved in the gifts ..al the gifts .. the most repeatedly are those that also manifest the presence of the lord in tongues .
which i find interesting .
NO ..its not a set rule . just a notable observation .

No, I believe in toungues, and baptism of the Holy Spirit. I am a firm beleiver of gifts for today

 

[Alithis]

lol ouh that it were so simple ..

yeh this is just in the interest of to and from conversation -nothing heavy

so .. you believe that if there is no manifestation of tongues ..one is not baptised in the holy Spirit ?as i understand that is what the early full gospel (aog) denomination believed .

personally im not fully convinced either way but must admit(keeping it honest) a leaning toward "tongues" being a sign of the occurrence of the baptism of the holy Spirit as opposed to "no sign" .


this week i' v been attending a very interdenominational (though small) gathering in line with the feast of tabernacles . for a couple of hours every nite we gather and just worship the lord and pray .. and i observe many times ..those that are moved in the gifts ..al the gifts .. the most repeatedly are those that also manifest the presence of the lord in tongues .
which i find interesting .
NO ..its not a set rule . just a notable observation .

No, I believe in toungues, and baptism of the Holy Spirit. I am a firm believer of gifts for today

maybe you misread or i wasn't clear .. in response to you saying"chalk me up to all of them " i was asking if you then believe that a person is not baptized in the holy Spirit if they do not speak in tongues ...
you see there are these quiet but very distinct point of difference which makes it not so simple to chalk up to all ..

 

[psalms 91]

maybe you misread or i wasn't clear .. in response to you saying"chalk me up to all of them " i was asking if you then believe that a person is not baptized in the holy Spirit if they do not speak in tongues ...
you see there are these quiet but very distinct point of difference which makes it not so simple to chalk up to all ..

I believe speaking in toungues is a very tangible manifestation but I do notdiscount someone being baptized in the spiritwithout it.

 

[Biblicist]

I believe speaking in toungues is a very tangible manifestation but I do notdiscount someone being baptized in the spiritwithout it.

This would make for an interesting thread if one hasn't been started already.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I believe speaking in tongues is a very tangible manifestation but I do not discount someone being baptized in the spirit without it.

The Lord says, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5 NASB) thus linking baptism with reception of the Spirit. The Lord also says, "He who has believed and has been baptised shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned." (Mark 16:16 NASB) thus linking baptism with faith and salvation. Evidently receiving the Holy Spirit, being baptised, and receiving salvation coincide as a norm for Christian experience.

 

[psalms 91]

The Lord says, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5 NASB) thus linking baptism with reception of the Spirit. The Lord also says, "He who has believed and has been baptised shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned." (Mark 16:16 NASB) thus linking baptism with faith and salvation. Evidently receiving the Holy Spirit, being baptised, and receiving salvation coincide as a norm for Christian experience.

I agree completely there is strong biblical support for batism and salvation going hand in hand.

 

[Alithis]

I agree completely there is strong biblical support for batism and salvation going hand in hand.

and i maintain that having a man stick his hand on your head and state "i baptise you i the holy spirit " is not receiving the baptism of the holy Spirit .. it is having a man put his hand on your head and say some words .. quite different actually .

 

[Alithis]

I believe speaking in toungues is a very tangible manifestation but I do notdiscount someone being baptized in the spiritwithout it.

yeah thats fine i have no problem with that lol . but my side line point was .. we cant "chalk you up to all of them because ..for instance .. the aog (i think only parts of it now ) maintain that tongues is evidence of the baptism .. .. thus no tongues , no baptism .

that was my drift ..

 

[popsthebuilder]

So would you argue that it is within the core theology to demote Jesus to "a Christ, a son of the living God" because we can have the same "Christ anointing" that Jesus had and claim that Jesus performed miracles as "a man in right relationship with God" but "not as God"? Or would you say that such claims would tag a teacher as bringing another gospel and a false Jesus?

If I can have the same "Christ anointing" that Jesus had then doesn't it logically follow that I don't need a Saviour at all? If I can have the same "Christ anointing" that Jesus had then I end up more or less at the same level as Jesus himself, no?

Not at all as Jesus lead the way and none will ever be his equal as all have sinned. Without Jesus and his teachings and sacrifice we cannot know salvation. If one professes that they don't need Christ for salvation or his teachings then you know without a doubt that they are misguided and a false teacher/ prophet.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

 

[popsthebuilder]

So if he didn't operate as God how did he forgive sins? Did he have a "God hat" that he'd put on and take off, so he could put on his magic hat to forgive sins, then take it off again to heal, then put it back on to confound the Pharisees, then take it back off again to hang out with the disciples for a bit, then put it back on again to convict someone of their sins, then take it off again to have a drink?



So when was he anointed? Did he only gain his anointing at the end of his life, when it was known he hadn't sinned at all?



Except the word translated "works" is the Greek word ergon which relates to works of the hands, not miracles. The word translated as "sign" in the gospels is semeion.



Except that God doesn't give the gifts to everybody.

1Co 12:7-11 NKJV But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: (8) for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, (9) to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, (10) to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. (11) But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills. (italics mine)

If God has not given me the gift of tongues I will not speak in tongues. If God has not given me the gift of prophecy I cannot prophesy. If God has not given me the gift of working miracles I cannot do that.



It seems Paul disagrees with you:

1Co 12:29-30 NKJV Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? (30) Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?



You still don't overcome Paul's assertion that the gifts are given individually. Perhaps God wants some of us to focus on our prayer lives and never do anything that unbelievers would see as supernatural. Perhaps God wants some of us to perform signs and wonders so people marvel and give him glory. Perhaps God wants some of us to be imprisoned for our faith so we can reach the prison staff with the gospel.



Sadly the silly fringes of the charismatic and pentecostal movements have given people good reason to scoff. When people make grandiose claims that never seem to actually come true it's hard to see what response we should expect other than scoffing.



None of us are perfect. Paul was very open about the fact he was far from perfect. Peter openly denied Jesus and look how God used him.

I don't dispute there is a lot of imperfection in the church today, but to say that if we could just get rid of that then we'd all be working miracles daily flies in the face of what Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians.

He said nothing about all. He said any that are fully without sin of the flesh. And subsequently of spirit only under the narrow path and direction of God made possible by the sacrifice of Christ.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

 

[tango]

The Lord says, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5 NASB) thus linking baptism with reception of the Spirit. The Lord also says, "He who has believed and has been baptised shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned." (Mark 16:16 NASB) thus linking baptism with faith and salvation. Evidently receiving the Holy Spirit, being baptised, and receiving salvation coincide as a norm for Christian experience.

Interestingly "he who has believed and has been baptised" shall be saved but "he who has disbelieved" is condemned. No mention is made of the person who has believed but not been baptised. We can probably safely assume that the thief on the cross wasn't taken down, baptised, and put back up there.

In an ideal world I would say people should be baptised as an outward show of their faith but I'd be a little wary about elevating baptism to a critical part of the salvation process.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Interestingly "he who has believed and has been baptised" shall be saved but "he who has disbelieved" is condemned. No mention is made of the person who has believed but not been baptised.

I've heard that before, this "believe & baptised = saved" while "disbelieved = condemned" thing, but what seems more interesting is that even after baptism one appears to be able to disbelieve and thus be condemned as if even the grace conferred in the giving of the water [of baptism] and the Spirit [of God] is not by itself a guarantee of eternal life if one truns away from the living God through a wicked heart of unbelief.

We can probably safely assume that the thief on the cross wasn't taken down, baptised, and put back up there.

I reckon you're right about the thief on the cross not being taken down, baptised, and then re-crucified but I think it is a case of being right only in the most trivial of ways. But tell me, do you think that the thief might have been willing to be baptised if he knew that the Lord Jesus Christ commanded it be done? Do you think that might be something God sees and takes into account in his judgement of this thief?

In an ideal world I would say people should be baptised as an outward show of their faith but I'd be a little wary about elevating baptism to a critical part of the salvation process.

Can you point me to any passage of holy scripture that attaches the meaning "an outward show of their [the baptised person's] faith" to baptism? And are there any passages in holy scripture that attach "wash away your sins" to baptism?

 

[tango]

I've heard that before, this "believe & baptised = saved" while "disbelieved = condemned" thing, but what seems more interesting is that even after baptism one appears to be able to disbelieve and thus be condemned as if even the grace conferred in the giving of the water [of baptism] and the Spirit [of God] is not by itself a guarantee of eternal life if one truns away from the living God through a wicked heart of unbelief.

Oooh, the OSAS / NOSAS issue. That really is one for another thread I suspect

I reckon you're right about the thief on the cross not being taken down, baptised, and then re-crucified but I think it is a case of being right only in the most trivial of ways. But tell me, do you think that the thief might have been willing to be baptised if he knew that the Lord Jesus Christ commanded it be done? Do you think that might be something God sees and takes into account in his judgement of this thief?

Sure, as with so much it seems to come back to where our heart lies. Since the thief had clearly repented and not had opportunity to be baptised he would presumably have been judged accordingly. And since Jesus told him he would be in paradise it seems fair to conclude that he did enter into heaven. I wouldn't use the thief's example as justification for endlessly choosing not to be baptised, but it does counter the notion that baptism is an absolute must.

Can you point me to any passage of holy scripture that attaches the meaning "an outward show of their [the baptised person's] faith" to baptism? And are there any passages in holy scripture that attach "wash away your sins" to baptism?

Let me come back to this tomorrow so I can give it the time it warrants (it's after midnight and I'm just checking in before bed). If I overlook it do please nudge me as that's not intended as a dodge.

 

[Alithis]

Oooh, the OSAS / NOSAS issue. That really is one for another thread I suspect



Sure, as with so much it seems to come back to where our heart lies. Since the thief had clearly repented and not had opportunity to be baptised he would presumably have been judged accordingly. And since Jesus told him he would be in paradise it seems fair to conclude that he did enter into heaven. I wouldn't use the thief's example as justification for endlessly choosing not to be baptised, but it does counter the notion that baptism is an absolute must.



Let me come back to this tomorrow so I can give it the time it warrants (it's after midnight and I'm just checking in before bed). If I overlook it do please nudge me as that's not intended as a dodge.

osas .. oh there is another thread and its been thrashed haha

 

[Alithis]

water baptism is an act of obedience ... Once a person is made aware of the need to obey God in it they better do so.. if they refuse to then all that would do is display they are not yet saved .. being saved is not and has never been a mater of believing only .. the devils believe and they won't be saved . it is obeying god because you believe his word .. so you obey his word .. that is the evidence that you actually do believe .