Forum for ex-members of Revival Churches
Revival_Centres_Discussion_Forums > Bible, Beliefs, Scriptures and 'The Word' > Didaktikon debunks Revivalist 'Theology' Go to subcategory:
Author Content
Didaktikon
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Date Posted:17/01/2008 4:22 AMCopy HTML

All,

Anyone remotely interested in reading a handful of perfect examples of how not to interpret Scripture (or perhaps, "How to Read the Bible without Engaging the Brain") could do worse than to browse through Brad Smith's offerings at the BRF website! I've just had a look at his latest piece, "God's True Rest and Refreshing"; and I was actually laughing out loud before I finished the second paragraph [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE]

But to be serious for a moment, there seems to be something of a trend appearing in the recent published works of TRF pastors, and the trend isn't positive. So how do you RF-er's do it?! How do you allow yourselves to be led by men who are so very clearly lacking in the simple skills and intellectual honesty that's needed to adequately handle God's Word? [EMOTE]smiley-undecided.gif[/EMOTE]

Amazed!

Ian

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
my_dogs_on_fire Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #1
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:09/01/2008 9:01 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:17/01/2008 4:57 AMCopy HTML

Yes Ian it's very apparent that these pastors have never been to any theologian college, as you know they refute these schools of learning now thats wisdom for you!
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #2
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:17/01/2008 5:18 AMCopy HTML

Yes Ian it's very apparent that these pastors have never been to any theologian college, as you know they refute these schools of learning now thats wisdom for you!

Woof!

Here's the interesting thing, one doesn't need to be a graduate of a theological college to be a half-decent (or in respects, competent) expositor of Scripture. One simply needs to be honest and rigorous in one's research. However, in my opinion every pastor should have a solid theological education behind him or her in order to function in such a capacity. After all, how many people would be prepared to take their sick children to a "quack" -- to someone who has never studied medicine and proven him/herself competent in its practice -- for treatment? Not moi, that's for sure! So should the healing of the soul be any different?

Anyway, Brad's small essays at the BRF website simply serve to demonstrate that those who choose to remain ignorant can't make others who are equally as ignorant (or worse), wise. I challenge anyone with half a brain to read the proof-texts quoted by Brad, and his subsequent commentary, and walk away firmly convinced that "this means that!" [EMOTE]smiley-embarassed.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #3
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:17/01/2008 6:22 AMCopy HTML

You are banging your head against a very hard brick wall there.. This "Brad Smith" obviously has very little or negligent understanding of Hebrew script..

cheers
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #4
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:17/01/2008 9:48 PMCopy HTML

You are banging your head against a very hard brick wall there.. This "Brad Smith" obviously has very little or negligent understanding of Hebrew script..

Sure, but I don't mind "banging" my head in this way, as it eventually brings results (sometimes you just have to wear them down) [EMOTE]smiley-wink.gif[/EMOTE]

I think it a given that not a single Revivalist pastor has any competence in either Hebrew or Greek (actually, it's an established fact); consequently, I don't expect them to be able to read and exegete Scripture in the original. But surely these men could approach biblical passages with some empathy for the range of contexts that come into play before they start twisting things this way and that in an effort to make 2 + 2 = 11! [EMOTE]smiley-yell.gif[/EMOTE]

Further, I don't think too many people here would dispute the fact that their are some pretty "thick" Revivalist pastors getting around. Look to the GRC for starters, they seem to be able to breed them by the bushel! But Brad Smith isn't such a person. Opiniated? Sure. Dogmatic? Sure. Stupid? Not by a long shot! And that's the particularly galling thing: that an otherwise intelligent man can approach Scripture in such a cavalier fashion, to wrest and wrench meanings that were (and are) completely foreign to the clear intent of the various authors as they wrote. [EMOTE]smiley-cry.gif[/EMOTE]

Do you know? The cynic is me would offer that if a study was undertaken into the effects of the Revivalist "tongues" dogma upon one's intelligence, the data would clearly support the finding that the phenomenon causes reduced brain function! What other concludion could you draw?! [EMOTE]smiley-innocent.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian 

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #5
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:12/02/2008 6:38 AMCopy HTML

Hi Ian,

Had a read of your new essay on Acts and I want to congratulate you on presenting such a good and solid hermeneutic... Well done !!


Also had a thought about your main "Please Consider" site and I thought that it might be appropriate if either yourself or Drew compose and include a short historical essay in your own wording and research on the backkground history of the "Revival Fellowhips/Centres" ... Nothing laborious and long but a general outline..
I feel that "Pleaseconsider" needs an introduction to educate a world wide audience that in some way alerts and informs and identifies more clearly of who these centes and fellowships are. The site in its present form fits well with us who " have been there " but for the curious and interested seeker, I see a need for a better clarity that would set your site apart from other  " revivalist " web sites and also give you some clearer disassociation as well...

Anyway Ian, well done on your essay... blessings

Eric
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #6
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:12/02/2008 9:27 PMCopy HTML

Hi Ian,

Had a read of your new essay on Acts and I want to congratulate you on presenting such a good and solid hermeneutic... Well done !!

Also had a thought about your main "Please Consider" site and I thought that it might be appropriate if either yourself or Drew compose and include a short historical essay in your own wording and research on the backkground history of the "Revival Fellowhips/Centres" ... Nothing laborious and long but a general outline..
I feel that "Pleaseconsider" needs an introduction to educate a world wide audience that in some way alerts and informs and identifies more clearly of who these centes and fellowships are. The site in its present form fits well with us who " have been there " but for the curious and interested seeker, I see a need for a better clarity that would set your site apart from other  " revivalist " web sites and also give you some clearer disassociation as well...

Anyway Ian, well done on your essay... blessings

Eric
Eric, chaire!

Thanks for the positive feedback, the "thing" seems to be generating a range of reviews (depending on who it is that you listen to) [EMOTE]smiley-innocent.gif[/EMOTE] But I'm happy enough with the general contours of the paper.

With respect to "PC", both Drew and I are happy enough to just let the site sit,"as is" for a while. It was never our intention for the website to be anything but a repository of exegetical and theological evaluations of Revivalist doctrine, which is why we never got into the whole "history" thing. Anyway, info of that sort currently exists elsewhere [EMOTE]smiley-wink.gif[/EMOTE]

Finally, "Please Consider" was conceived of as being a resource for current and former Revivalists. It was never our aim to pitch the site at the "average joe", again, there are already media on the 'Net that do this well enough.

But thanks again for the feedback, and for sharing your thoughts.

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #7
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:18/02/2008 2:22 PMCopy HTML

Mark 16v16  He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Squabble over the meaning of that one for a few hours guys! he he

GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #8
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:18/02/2008 8:07 PMCopy HTML

Mark 16v16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Squabble over the meaning of that one for a few hours guys! he he


Seems like you might believe in the RF salvation message. If so here's one for you ...

Why doesn't it say 'He that doesn't speak in tongues doesn't have the Holy Spirit'?

Hopefully, it won't take more than a few seconds to realise that the RF 'salvation message' is b;own out of the water.
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #9
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:18/02/2008 9:12 PMCopy HTML

Mark 16v16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Squabble over the meaning of that one for a few hours guys! he he


Dave,

Well, it would only take a few seconds, actually [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE] You, your kith and your kin have misunderstood this passage as well.

Drop me an email and I'll explain why (I've got a nice little exegetical essay, already prepared) [EMOTE]smiley-tongue-out.gif[/EMOTE] But tell me, if Mark 16 is a such a 'biggie' for you, how come you don't cast out demons and gulp down poison?

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #10
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:19/02/2008 1:53 PMCopy HTML

Ian

Thanks, I've already read vast chunks of your discussion with GWM.

From your other posts you admit to being a calvanist agnostic who likes playing the devil's advocate.

I doubt we would even agree what day it is! 

I hope you don't mind a happy Revivalist visiting your site though?  Or is it only for Revival flag burners?



GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #11
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:19/02/2008 9:27 PMCopy HTML

Ian

Thanks, I've already read vast chunks of your discussion with GWM.

From your other posts you admit to being a calvanist agnostic who likes playing the devil's advocate.

I doubt we would even agree what day it is!

I hope you don't mind a happy Revivalist visiting your site though? Or is it only for Revival flag burners?


Good morning, bloke.

Great, then given your reading you know doubt fully understand why your position on salvation, et cetera, is biblically untenable [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE]

Now, whilst I believe there to be much of worth in the Calvinist approach to understanding doctrinal matters, I'm at a complete loss to comprehend where you came by the idea that I'm agnostic! Fella, I'm 110% Christian [EMOTE]smiley-tongue-out.gif[/EMOTE] And further, I never play the Devil's advocate; I advocate for the Saviour.

Blessings,

Ian

P.S. This ain't my site, it belongs to the ever mysterious Moderator
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #12
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:21/02/2008 3:25 AMCopy HTML

Ian it must have been someone else's post that I thought was yours.  Sorry about that.

But still a Calvinist ay?  Here's some food for thought.

A REVIEW OF DAVE HUNT’S

WHAT LOVE IS THIS? CALVINISM’S

MISREPRESENTATION OF GOD

LAURENCE M. VANCE*

Vance Publications

Pensacola, Florida

"It is high time that Calvinism is exposed for what it is: a theological

aberration that has deceived many erstwhile and contemporary preachers

and theologians. Will this book by Dave Hunt convert the Calvinist from

the error of his way? Probably not. It should, however, help keep many

from straying in that theological direction. Although Tim LaHaye is

probably a little presumptuous in his claim that “this book could well be

the most important book written in the twenty-first century for all

evangelical Christians,” in spite of its deficiencies, What Love is This? is

still an admirable introduction to the flaws in the doctrines of Calvinism."


 

GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #13
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:21/02/2008 4:12 AMCopy HTML

Ian it must have been someone else's post that I thought was yours. Sorry about that.

But still a Calvinist ay? Here's some food for thought.

A REVIEW OF DAVE HUNT’S

WHAT LOVE IS THIS? CALVINISM’S

MISREPRESENTATION OF GOD

LAURENCE M. VANCE*

Vance Publications

Pensacola, Florida

"It is high time that Calvinism is exposed for what it is: a theological

aberration that has deceived many erstwhile and contemporary preachers

and theologians. Will this book by Dave Hunt convert the Calvinist from

the error of his way? Probably not. It should, however, help keep many

from straying in that theological direction. Although Tim LaHaye is

probably a little presumptuous in his claim that “this book could well be

the most important book written in the twenty-first century for all

evangelical Christians,” in spite of its deficiencies, What Love is This? is

still an admirable introduction to the flaws in the doctrines of Calvinism."

 


Bloke,

Popular fiction never is a sound substitute for informed fact. Try harder [EMOTE]smiley-wink.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Sea Urchin Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #14
  • Rank:Poster Venti III
  • Score:9110
  • Posts:436
  • From:Australia
  • Register:15/02/2007 7:34 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:21/02/2008 11:25 AMCopy HTML

Mark 16v16  He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Squabble over the meaning of that one for a few hours guys! he he
    ___________________________________________________________________________

M.Member

Totally agree, yes, that IS definitely verse 16 all right!

As for the signs following in verse 17 (of which you so casually pick and choose as though its a multiple choice) tell me, was Sunday communion meeting the last time you cast out demons? No, I didn't think so! You only choose to believe two of the 'signs following' don't you - speaking with NEW tongues and healing for the sick.

If you are going to quote Mark 16 then shouldn't you have ALL the signs in the order that they are written;
1)  casting out devils 
2)  speak with new tongues
3)  take up serpents
4)  drink any deadly thing 
5)  lay hands on the sick

As we all know, the Revival groups do NOT believe in devils so how can they be cast out?
Because you don't acknowledge Satan and his demons (or understand how subtle he is) you are so easily deceived by him and you are unable to see the spirit of oppression that hangs over your organisation like a heavy grey cloud.
 
I am not a revival 'flag burner' or whatever strange term you use - in fact I pray regularly that the spirit of oppression is lifted from the RF and that people wake up and get a REAL revelation of God.  I don't expect you to understand any of this because I know where you're coming from - I too was a good 'proud' RF'er for over 20 years and I couldn't see Jesus clearly because of it. It is only after stepping out from under that cloud that one is able to 'see' Him clearly. 

Try pray earnestly and passionately with all your heart (acknowledging that it is only JESUS CHRIST that saves) and ask God to reveal and open up scripture to you and by His grace you may see things a little differently.

Urchin

Your unfailing love, O Lord, is as vast as the heavens; your faithfulness reaches beyond the clouds. Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains, your justice like the ocean depths.
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #15
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:23/02/2008 2:32 PMCopy HTML

  • More falsehoods promoted by this unrighteous forum

    There have been a few posts hissing at me about why I don’t believe in all of Mark 16 v 17 i.e casting out devils.  A lot of Revival people, including myself, DO believe in casting out of devils.  And I have always believed it! 

    A few years ago a pastor also told me there had been a shift away from the ‘no-devils’ interpretation of that verse.  Yes there are some who don't believe in casting out of devils. 

    I will deal with other ignorant assertions of some forum members as I find the time.

    Especially the post that casts doubt on whether we can trust our Bible!!!  This is academia gone mad surely? 

    Hallelujah, even mainstream Pentocostals are starting to get it...

    AOG statement of belief… (excerpt)

 We believe that in order to receive forgiveness and the 'new birth' we must repent of our sins, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and submit to His will for our lives.

We believe that in order to live the holy and fruitful lives that God intends for us, we need to be baptised in water and be filled with the power of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit enables us to use spiritual gifts, including speaking in tongues which is the initial evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit.


See their website...
GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #16
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:23/02/2008 10:44 PMCopy HTML

 

     "More falsehoods promoted by this unrighteous forum"

There are a collection of people from all sorts of beliefs here at one stage or another so there will be a lot of information that will be interpreted as falsehoods by various individuals... but probably and especially your ilk of Revivalism.

     "A lot of Revival people, including myself, DO believe in casting out of devils.  And I have always believed it!"

In your neck of the woods hey? In all the churches in my part of the state, in my 17 years at Revival, the whole devil casting out doctrine was pooh-poohed with disdain. Pastor Brad Smith was a vehemenent 'expert' when it came to what the Revival stand was... The Voice of Revival also made the stand of Revival on this subject very clear. Maybe you should look up one of your pastors (Brad maybe if you're RF) and ask what it is you're supposed to be believing.

That they DON"T believe the doctrine of demon possession and exorcism was actually something I respect them for, but if now you say the tide is turning, and the bogeyman beliefs of spiritual monsters roaming around and possession the free-will mind of others... well... it kinda explains the tongues mentality that if it sounds foolish, then it belongs to the holy 'peculiar' people.

     "A few years ago a pastor also told me there had been a shift away from the ‘no-devils' interpretation of that verse.  Yes there are some who don't believe in casting out of devils."

Oh... I didn't notice this bit... well maybe your church will get some 'unity' on some of these doctrines after a while.

     "I will deal with other ignorant assertions of some forum members as I find the time."

I certainly hope you do. Bring some scriptures with you next time... if you can find the time. They always help when some parties are using it as the authority on the subjects they're talking about.

     "Especially the post that casts doubt on whether we can trust our Bible!!!  This is academia gone mad surely? 

I personally think that there's a lot about the bible that makes little sense, but I can see how much of it is a satisfying list of ethical ideals to hang your hat on.

     "Hallelujah, even mainstream Pentocostals are starting to get it...AOG statement of belief... (excerpt) The Holy Spirit enables us to use spiritual gifts, including speaking in tongues which is the initial evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit."

Even mainstream Pentecost??!! Wow, where have you been for the last few decades? This is not a new statement and has been found sporadically around Christendom, but yes, 'mainstream' churches have been babbling incoherently in made up languages and blaming it on receiving a magic power from god when initially joining his club. The recent 50 years in church history is littered with this mistranslation... some even built church franchises on the crazy idea.

[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #17
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:24/02/2008 11:26 PMCopy HTML

There have been a few posts hissing at me about why I don’t believe in all of Mark 16 v 17 i.e casting out devils.  A lot of Revival people, including myself, DO believe in casting out of devils.  And I have always believed it! 

A few years ago a pastor also told me there had been a shift away from the ‘no-devils’ interpretation of that verse.  Yes there are some who don't believe in casting out of devils. 

 
Hissing????

But to the substantive issue. You seem to be missing the point that is being made. Here's the issue as I see it. The RF (and RCI before them) teaching that I have always received is that Mk 16 is a clear indication that each and every Christian will speak in tongues. Therefore, according to that reasoning each and every Christian will cast out demons, pick up serpents and lay hands on the sick.(...Well some said 'have the potential to do it' but to be consistent if all Christians are expected to actually speak in tongues, then they should be expected to actually do the other stuff).

Simple observation of what happens today, even within RF, contradicts that. E.g. how many RF's would copy the 'snake handlers' within parts of the UPC. (Full marks, though, for practising what they preach.) Would you? If we go to the bible, there are even fewer examples of Christians handling snakes than there are of tongues. (If I recall correctly one - 1, uno, ein, single, solitary - case is recorded and that was when Paul was bitten while collecting wood for a fire.) Similarly with casting out demons - each and every Christian? No, simple examination of the bible, and your own experience should lead you to realise that this is talking about signs accompanying believers as a group. Personally, I came to that conclusion a decade or two ago.

As it tuns out, the koine Gk readers amongst us say that the original language unambiguously uses collective plurals here, so sorry no cigar.

PS
  Before you claim AOG as supporting the RF 'salvation message', you would be well advised to come to grips with the history of the formation of the aforementioned UPC, and consider what the AOG website statement of beliefs says about the point of salvation.

M&R ...
  As far as I'm aware there has not been an official pronouncement on the existence of demons, though I could be wrong. Certain individuals such as Brad (according to what you say) and certainly Hedley Joske (I've read one of his papers) may have heavily promoted their views on this issue, but there's more than one long-term RF'r I've met who think that view is full of manure!! 
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #18
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 3:10 AMCopy HTML

Hallelujah!  Just found another church with the same salvation message as Revival churches...

About Sin and Salvation:
Everyone has sinned and needs salvation. Salvation comes by grace through faith based on the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. As the Bible teaches, we believe that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works. Faith in Jesus is the means by which a person is justified. At the same time, a sinner must believe the gospel. They are commanded to repent of their sinful life, to be baptised in water in the name of Jesus Christ, and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit with the initial sign of speaking with other tongues (Acts 2:38; 4:12; 8:12-17; 10:43-48; 19:1-6). Thus the various aspects of faith and obedience work together in God's grace to reconcile us to God.

 

 

United Pentecostal Church of Adelaide
GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #19
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 3:51 AMCopy HTML

Hallelujah!  Just found another church with the same salvation message as Revival churches...

United Pentecostal Church of Adelaide

Gee I most certainly hope not!!![EMOTE]smiley-surprised.gif[/EMOTE]

UPC preach Jesus-only baptism (the trinitarian formula being considered invalid) as vital to salvation and that is derived from a heresy they preach called "dynamic-modalism" which is completely at odds with the Trinity.
 
My pastor believes RF is 100% trinitarian, and LRL was pleased to proclaim that he'd protected RCI from Jesus-only baptism. Do you know something different?

BTW I wouldn't be surprised if you find a group of people somewhere who preach the same as RF. The question I think you would be wise to ask is, "Is this what the bible preaches?"
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #20
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 4:39 AMCopy HTML

  • More falsehoods promoted by this unrighteous forum

    There have been a few posts hissing at me about why I don’t believe in all of Mark 16 v 17 i.e casting out devils. A lot of Revival people, including myself, DO believe in casting out of devils. And I have always believed it!

    A few years ago a pastor also told me there had been a shift away from the ‘no-devils’ interpretation of that verse. Yes there are some who don't believe in casting out of devils.

    I will deal with other ignorant assertions of some forum members as I find the time.

    Especially the post that casts doubt on whether we can trust our Bible!!! This is academia gone mad surely?

    Hallelujah, even mainstream Pentocostals are starting to get it...

    AOG statement of belief… (excerpt)

We believe that in order to receive forgiveness and the 'new birth' we must repent of our sins, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and submit to His will for our lives.

We believe that in order to live the holy and fruitful lives that God intends for us, we need to be baptised in water and be filled with the power of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit enables us to use spiritual gifts, including speaking in tongues which is the initial evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit.


See their website...

Bloke,

To begin with, there is nothing inherently wrong/unrighteous/bad in discussing/debating biblical issues, or even for that matter, with reaching conclusions that run contrary to the position adopted bythe majority others. But there is something gravely wrong in simply assuming the status quo to be correct, and therefore, with failing to investigate matters for onesself [EMOTE]smiley-wink.gif[/EMOTE] At the heart of open and honesty inquiry should be concern for the "truth".

Now, and with respect to your claim that a lot of Revivalist people do believe in the clear and obvious teaching concerning Mark 16 and demons, well ... that's good [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE] However, it remains the official stance of the RCI, the RF and the GRC that literal, malevolent spiritual entities commonly known as demons do not, in fact, exist. So you may be faced with something of a dichotomy: popular/'folk' belief in direct conflict with official dogma [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE]

And finally, with respect to what you think the 'mainstream' Pentecostals might believe, a suggestion: it's probably best that you check your facts a little more carefully first [EMOTE]smiley-kiss.gif[/EMOTE] What the AOG understands about being "filled with the power of the Holy Spirit", and what Revivalists understand with respect to be filled with Spirit aren't the same [EMOTE]smiley-wink.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian

P.S. Wow! You think the UPC provides a "good" character witness of the Revivalist belief system? Okaaaay [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE]
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Sea Urchin Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #21
  • Rank:Poster Venti III
  • Score:9110
  • Posts:436
  • From:Australia
  • Register:15/02/2007 7:34 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 5:23 AMCopy HTML

Hallelujah!  Just found another church with the same salvation message as Revival churches...
          __________________________________________________________

M Member, I'm going to have to presume that you are either;
a) very young or
b) very new to RF or
c) very very naive!

If you believe that the RF endorse/agree with the United Pentecostal Church, you are VERY mistaken. You are obviously not of the oversight and must know very little about the RF/RCI etc to even MAKE such a statement!

And no, I'm not 'hissing', 'coming at you' or anything else. Just pointing out something that you're obviously not aware of. I was in RF/RC for well over 20 years and was involved with oversight so I do know just a little about their beliefs and did in fact stupidly agree with them until the last couple years.

There are other churches that have the same/similar 'salvation messages' as RF, but does that make them all right? And if so, why?  For years I listened to pastors bagging Pentecostal churches from the platform every single Sunday so why then would they knock churches with the 'same salvation message'?  Ask yourself some of these questions and search your heart and search the scriptures before coming up with these silly statements please.

You  can't just pick out the bits that you like (or that support your view) from the AOG statement of beliefs - in the same way that you can't pick out the bits from the scriptures that suit you and ignore the rest. Learn to read the whole, then discuss what you've read if you want to but don't just pick and choose bits and pieces that 'suit' you.

Urchin

Your unfailing love, O Lord, is as vast as the heavens; your faithfulness reaches beyond the clouds. Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains, your justice like the ocean depths.
Sea Urchin Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #22
  • Rank:Poster Venti III
  • Score:9110
  • Posts:436
  • From:Australia
  • Register:15/02/2007 7:34 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 6:28 AMCopy HTML

Hallelujah, even mainstream Pentocostals are starting to get it..               ______________________________________________________________________

EVEN 'mainstream Pentecostals' huh?  Where do you think the RF originated from MM?  However the RF/RC were not content with just believing in the gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ - they decided to 'add' extras to the salvation message.  Ask John Kuhlmann about his origins and how the RF/RCI evolved or read 'Please Consider' - the history is there. There was actually a conscious decision made to introduce the 'tongues for salvation' doctrine a long time after the organisation was formed even though several years later they were unsure that it was correct after all! Ask J.K. about a statement made many many years ago.."We couldn't go back now because people would lose confidence in us and in the church if we did".  MM, it seems that many people know more about the history of the RF than you do so please be very careful about defending an organisation that you don't know enough about.

As for the AOG statement of belief - we ( yes, I attend an AOG affiliated church ) most certainly do NOT believe that one MUST speak in tongues to be saved! Speaking in tongues has nothing whatsoever to do with our salvation! Can you see the difference? RF believe that to be saved, one MUST speak in tongues. That is not the message of salvation in the scriptures. And yes, I do pray in tongues but I spend much more time just talking to Jesus because He is my closest friend. Contrary to what I was 'taught' in RF, the Holy Spirit is in fact the third person of the Trinity and has a specific role to play - His job is to point the way to Jesus Christ. (try reading some of the old posts about the Holy Spirit if you're interested)

I'm not sure why YOU think that you are on this forum but it would seem that you are searching for answers - if you're happy at RF and believe that your salvation message is 100% correct, then by all means stay there - just remember, it's YOUR salvation so YOU have the responsibility to search out answers from the scriptures. But be careful because if your pastors know that you are frequenting this forum you will be at the least 'cautioned' or at the most 'put out of fellowship'.

Urchin
Your unfailing love, O Lord, is as vast as the heavens; your faithfulness reaches beyond the clouds. Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains, your justice like the ocean depths.
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #23
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 9:19 AMCopy HTML

"Hallelujah!  Just found another church with the same salvation message as Revival churches..."

I wonder if JWs make similar excited proclamations when they find other organisations that forbid blood transfusions... Yeehaaa... we're not alone! We're not alone! Yay.

United Penties huh? Hmmm... nice association there; the odd church that does list tongues as a 'must-have' certainly do produce some mutant fruit hey? Strange bed-fellows these be... they share the same major flaw and then build the church on similar sand. I used to be amazed at the clarity of our 'tongues' doctrine and marvel at the other doctrines we were able to confirm due to getting the basics right... Pyramidology, British-Israelism, keeping comany 'guidelines', Bible Numerics, Babylon/Iraq WWIII set up... to name a few. Ohh yeah... The Revival spindoctors knew their stuff.

I remember making the same excited statement years ago while in Revival. I even contacted the U.P. to share my enthusiasm for their 'wisdom'. They certainly did not want anything to do with my little Revival fellowship. Funny, they seem to think 'their' church was the only true and correct church - sigh... of course it is, of course it is... which one isn't?
[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #24
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 9:41 AMCopy HTML

It's simply amazing the sorts of people and groups some people here will get all excited about, and recommend to others [EMOTE]smiley-undecided.gif[/EMOTE] I've said it on another thread, I'll repeat it again here: blind guys and ditches!

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #25
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 10:06 AMCopy HTML

There's a certain desparation in finding other churches tarred with the same tongue-brush. We felt a lot of anguish when we discussed leaving their fellowship when we felt things weren't quite right. I discussed it with Pastor B at the time and we all shrugged and said, "Where else does one go? Where else are you going to find a church that passionately promotes the tongues as the 'be all and end all' of Holy Spirit indwelling?"

It was that utter confusion that kept us in their church far longer than we should have been. Most who left the Sunshine Coast felt that the best they could do was start their own little tongue churches... but with the extra magic touch of 'love'... ahhh... Revival doctrine! Now with added 'love'. Nice idea... same destiny though. We know what lies down the road for churches that play these cards.
[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #26
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:25/02/2008 10:30 AMCopy HTML

There's a certain desparation in finding other churches tarred with the same tongue-brush. We felt a lot of anguish when we discussed leaving their fellowship when we felt things weren't quite right. I discussed it with Pastor B at the time and we all shrugged and said, "Where else does one go? Where else are you going to find a church that passionately promotes the tongues as the 'be all and end all' of Holy Spirit indwelling?"

It was that utter confusion that kept us in their church far longer than we should have been. Most who left the Sunshine Coast felt that the best they could do was start their own little tongue churches... but with the extra magic touch of 'love'... ahhh... Revival doctrine! Now with added 'love'. Nice idea... same destiny though. We know what lies down the road for churches that play these cards.

Moth,

Sure. People always believe themselves capable of improving upon things/avoiding the old pitfalls/not making the same mistakes, but ... you just can't build a half-ways decent house on a cracked foundation! It's also for this reason that I always recommend former Revivalists to spend some time in non-Pentecostal churches. It's not that their foundations are necessarily cracked (although many clearly are), but rather it's a good way to break the old paradigm and try to establish a little equilibrium  [EMOTE]smiley-wink.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #27
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:28/02/2008 3:28 PMCopy HTML

I reckon a joke could be made from this blatantly hypocrital forum.

"Oooh don't go to Revival meetings," said one.

"Oooh I never would!" said another. "They're wicked!"

"Come to my church then." said the first.

"Oh no I don't agree with them!" said another. "Nice people though."

Then another forum member chimed in: "Nah I don't go to church no more."

Just then another forum member bounded in.

"You're all wrong! Although you're not as bad as a Revivalist.  And I've got the proof."

After several hours of mind numbing exegism, which included a seven-part series on Bible hermeneutical methods, the members stood looking at each other in silence.

Finally someone spoke: "Well, see you tomorrow online!"

"Yeah."  Another member grinned.  "I've got some news from Melbourne RCI that will curl your toes!"

They all began to titter with excitement as they said their goodbyes.

*********

Blind guys and ditches... yep look in the mirror guys.

 





GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #28
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:28/02/2008 3:32 PMCopy HTML

Oh yes typo, first line... should read Hypocritical... that was my main point!
GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #29
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:28/02/2008 10:06 PMCopy HTML

Oh yes typo, first line... should read Hypocritical... that was my main point!

Bloke,

Methinks you have completely missed the point [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #30
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:29/02/2008 6:24 AMCopy HTML

Reply to Male Member (16/01/2008 22:22:33).

*********

Blind guys and ditches... yep look in the mirror guys.


Haha, that was kinda funny to read actually, good joke... some interesting ex-Revival stereotyping there. Looks like you've read enough to get a handle (of sorts) on things. Hard to look away isn't it. People watching on forums can be pretty entertaining. I find this forum to be fairly boring, to tell you the truth, but I still can relate to people who leave Revival and are trying to get a grip on life. What exactly is the "hippo-critical" part of the forum? That it serves to create a place of discussion for ex-church members, but itself has an environment of churchiness?

I have been visiting a lot of forums of late that have a faith vs faithless theme (eg. The Friendly Atheist http://www.friendlyatheist.com/phpBB3/index.php, whose book, blog and forum are cordial and non-offensive. I like reading the conversation between learned people from both sides discuss spirituality and the nature of the universe... I have nothing to add on those levels, but it's fun to read. This particular forum only has a couple of well read christian participants, and although I admire them for their input and expertise, I'd love to have someone to rebuttle them from a non-christian stance.  

I think most people are in some sort of ditch - some are just better ditches than others, and everyone's blind to some degree, but I appreciate people who don't just blindly follow a belief or culture because that's all they know. I blindly followed Revival, in blissful ignorance, then followed some pentecostal jerk, then followed an agostic. I'm a follower and not a leader, but meh.. some men lead and others follow.

I try to question and experience whatever I can nowadays and match it up to how I perceive reality. I may have developed a skewed view of this reality in my ongoing years, but it's my reality and it seems to be working out ok, both now and my short term future. As for my long term future... I'll wrinkle up and die some time relatively soon and I don't really expect any after-life, yet alone a magical kingdom, and if I do wake up in a pit of fire, well... ha... that'll certainly be surprising.

Wow, four paragraphs of ramble... I love Friday afternoons. Now for a nap, and then a night out with the gang. Well, see you tomorrow online!! Titter titter.
[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
cruel twist Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #31
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Australia
  • Register:15/10/2006 5:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:29/02/2008 8:09 AMCopy HTML

                          "After several hours of mind numbing exegism"






Hi male member could you please tell me what "exegism" means? as i can't find it in my dictionary.
I'm always willing to learn.
"Try not to burn the toast"
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #32
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:29/02/2008 12:53 PMCopy HTML

Mothster,

Thoroughly capital! I doubt I would find a similar example of post-Enlightenment existentialism if I tried! [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE] But, if I may limit myself to one, particular comment?

This particular forum only has a couple of well read christian participants, and although I admire them for their input and expertise, I'd love to have someone to rebuttle them from a non-christian stance. 

Well, as I recall there have been several non-Christians who've sought to rebut the "couple of well read Christian participants" over the years [EMOTE]smiley-wink.gif[/EMOTE] But, if my memory serves me properly, they invariably tripped over their own feet, time and again. But, meh, they were fun times [EMOTE]smiley-innocent.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #33
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:29/02/2008 3:32 PMCopy HTML

Troy gave it a red hot go, but I'm not sure if there were enough 'other' people to deem the 'number' of  non-christians a 'several'... haha. I did mean 'well-read' non-christians, and they were fun times - lol.

Luckily for you, you don't belong to the basket of what I kindly call, 'Completely Stupid Christians'. They're the ones who:

- are young earth creationists
- preach eternal torment gospel (ala earth5 and Wazza - no offense actually intended...)
- fall over backwards, roll on the floor and bark while hyperventilating to Hillsong ditties.
- Preach 'tongues' as a spiritual linguistic necessity for eternal salvation.
- believe god talks through them in voice gifts as messages to his scattered church groups.
- Protest with placards at the funerals of gay men's funerals.
- believe that athiests are incapable of decent moral actions or thoughts.
[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #34
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:02/03/2008 7:46 AMCopy HTML

Troy gave it a red hot go, but I'm not sure if there were enough 'other' people to deem the 'number' of non-christians a 'several'... haha. I did mean 'well-read' non-christians, and they were fun times - lol.

Luckily for you, you don't belong to the basket of what I kindly call, 'Completely Stupid Christians'. They're the ones who:

- are young earth creationists
- preach eternal torment gospel (ala earth5 and Wazza - no offense actually intended...)
- fall over backwards, roll on the floor and bark while hyperventilating to Hillsong ditties.
- Preach 'tongues' as a spiritual linguistic necessity for eternal salvation.
- believe god talks through them in voice gifts as messages to his scattered church groups.
- Protest with placards at the funerals of gay men's funerals.
- believe that athiests are incapable of decent moral actions or thoughts.

Batmothman,

Hmmm. I think it might help if you, and the other non-Christians here, realise that this place is by-and-large something of a post-Revivalist Christian support site. At the very least it is if you consider that the overwhelming majority of people who contribute here personally subscribe to a Christian POV [EMOTE]smiley-tongue-out.gif[/EMOTE] And given the lack of credible opposition, I'm left guessing that the category of "well read Christians" seriously outnumber the category of "well read Atheists".

Second, I must thank you for not considering me to be a "completely stupid Christian" [EMOTE]smiley-laughing.gif[/EMOTE] And that in spite of the fact that: (1) I do believe there will be eternal torment for those who reject Jesus Christ, and (2) I do believe that God does communicate to Christians via "gifts of speaking" (which includes teaching/preaching alongside prophecy, etc). I suppose such an admission must place me in (what I imagine is) the larger group of simply "stupid Christians". However, I remain content, given that I reckon there exist a considerably larger number of "completely stupid Atheists" out there in the wider world [EMOTE]smiley-innocent.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #35
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:02/03/2008 10:26 AMCopy HTML

 Ouch Ian, actually in some ways thank you, ( im proberly still a bit stupid though) have calmed down a lot and will get to read some of the things that you have been recomending to others soon. just not to studious however  no excuse "a".

God Bless

e5
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #36
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:02/03/2008 12:16 PMCopy HTML

Hmmm. I think it might help if you, and the other non-Christians here, realise that this place is by-and-large something of a post-Revivalist Christian support site.

     I'm very aware of this, but would hate for the minority groups to feel left out - heh.

At the very least it is if you consider that the overwhelming majority of people who contribute here personally subscribe to a Christian POV And given the lack of credible opposition, I'm left guessing that the category of "well read Christians" seriously outnumber the category of "well read Atheists".

     Certainly... go for it.

Second, I must thank you for not considering me to be a "completely stupid Christian"

     See how careful I was there? [EMOTE]smiley-tongue-out.gif[/EMOTE] - stupid is definitely the wrong word and I must apologise for insinuating partial stupidity. Maybe confused... or ignorant... or misguided. I dunno.

And that in spite of the fact that: (1) I do believe there will be eternal torment for those who reject Jesus Christ, and (2) I do believe that God does communicate to Christians via "gifts of speaking" (which includes teaching/preaching alongside prophecy, etc). I suppose such an admission must place me in (what I imagine is) the larger group of simply "stupid Christians".

     Well... yeah. That's true I guess, it would. I could probably entertain the latter statement as a possibility for god, seeing as though he 'wrote' through people (but not without contradicting himself) but the belief in eternal torment? Maybe deluded is a better word than 'stupid', but I've no doubt the feeling is mutual. Sure, it has to be true because the bible says so... but we've been over that ground before.

However, I remain content, given that I reckon there exist a considerably larger number of "completely stupid Atheists" out there in the wider world.

     Of the ration of smart christians to stupid christians compared to smart atheists and dumb atheists I can only speculate, but that's now what you meant. Stupidity is thoroughly relative...
[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #37
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:05/03/2008 12:10 AMCopy HTML

"Not once have I read anywhere, has a Revivalist spoken out to defend the Gospel of salvation according to your teaching."

****************CONGRATULATIONS BROLGA************************

You have just won the award for STUPIDIST sentence EVER posted in this forum!

If you had bothered to look at other threads on this site you would have seen PAGES upon PAGES of people discussing what they believe to be the correct salvation message.

I'm surprised Ian hasn't said something... as he has been heavily involved in it.
GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #38
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:05/03/2008 1:13 AMCopy HTML

"Not once have I read anywhere, has a Revivalist spoken out to defend the Gospel of salvation according to your teaching."

****************CONGRATULATIONS BROLGA************************

You have just won the award for STUPIDIST sentence EVER posted in this forum!

If you had bothered to look at other threads on this site you would have seen PAGES upon PAGES of people discussing what they believe to be the correct salvation message.

I'm surprised Ian hasn't said something... as he has been heavily involved in it.

Personally, I think your statement that the UPC has 'the same salvation message' as Revival churches' wouldn't be far behind. It certainly deserves a commendation of some kind. [EMOTE]smiley-embarassed.gif[/EMOTE]

PS Since Brolga's sentence seems so silly, if I were you, I'd ask him to clarify what he meant.
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #39
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:05/03/2008 4:00 PMCopy HTML

Brolga your squirming... please stop... it's embarrassing... your award's already in the mail.

Now let me turn my sights back to Rusty's question.

Why do I claim the forum is hypocritical...

hypocrite Definition

hypo·crite (hip'? krit')

noun

a person who pretends to be what he or she is not; one who pretends to be better than is really so, or to be pious, virtuous, etc. without really being so


I have said this before and it just doesn't seem to be getting through...

Some forum members are quick to attack Revival churches with a pack like mentality, but the pack doesn't have consensus on ALL scriptural matters.  I have seen the pack turn on each other in this forum!

And again... Some forum members jump on the bandwagon for bashing Revival but are still marching to the beat of a different denominational drum...  of which there are over 33,000 distinct denominations in 238 countries (Barrett et al, volume 1, page 16, Table 1-5).

Which one will the pack attack next?



GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #40
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:05/03/2008 9:57 PMCopy HTML

Reply to Male Member (16/01/2008 22:22:33).

Brolga your squirming... please stop... it's embarrassing... your award's already in the mail.

Now let me turn my sights back to Rusty's question.

Why do I claim the forum is hypocritical...


Male Member, I think what is great about this forum is that we can all join and allowed to have various views (of which are discussed sometimes in heat and passion) but i would rather this than been told what to do by a group of so called "pastors" who really know very little of scripture and twist it to suit themselves to control people.

Your views as are otheres are welcome on this forum, im sure and when we see differences that is ok, its all a learning journey, its about have a humble enough spirit to listen to others and sometimes learn from each other. to encourage each other as best we can, dose it always happen, no, but overall we all try to work together understand each others pov and grow.

off to catcha flight so will c u al l8r

e5

 





Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #41
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:05/03/2008 10:13 PMCopy HTML

Brolga your squirming... please stop... it's embarrassing... your award's already in the mail.

Now let me turn my sights back to Rusty's question.

Why do I claim the forum is hypocritical...

hypocrite Definition

hypo·crite (hip'? krit')

noun

a person who pretends to be what he or she is not; one who pretends to be better than is really so, or to be pious, virtuous, etc. without really being so


I have said this before and it just doesn't seem to be getting through...

Some forum members are quick to attack Revival churches with a pack like mentality, but the pack doesn't have consensus on ALL scriptural matters. I have seen the pack turn on each other in this forum!

And again... Some forum members jump on the bandwagon for bashing Revival but are still marching to the beat of a different denominational drum... of which there are over 33,000 distinct denominations in 238 countries (Barrett et al, volume 1, page 16, Table 1-5).

Which one will the pack attack next?

Bloke, interesting ramble.

For what it's worth, I think (and will state as much again), that you've completely missed the point Laughing If one wishes to apply the definition, then this forum is about as far removed from fitting the term "hypocritical" as one can get! Consider, the purpose of the thing is to provide "democratic" opportunity for open discussion of Revivalism and Revivalist teaching. And open discussion, by virtue of the fact that it is "democratic" quite often involves disputation. It simply won't do to make banal statements here; one must be prepared to justify all of ones silly claims. And when the dust eventually settles, I think you'll find that the person who marshalls the strongest argument from Scripture, the one who best demonstrates that his or her position best accords with biblical teaching, invariable wins the debate Laughing

Given that you're very clearly a Revivalist, I can well understand why it is that you find such "democratic" open discussion of your fellowship's teaching disconcerting . However, and to be honest, I've not seen you present a single argument that is, or has been, backed up by a shred of biblical proof. Banal and silly statements by the "bushel", tightly argued Scriptural propositions, not at all.

Now in the hope that this will broaden your lexical horizons a little (and hopefully your thought processes as well): disagreement, a lack of "...consensus on ALL Scriptural matters" and similar, in no way, shape or form describes "hypocsrisy" (check the dictionary). Further, before one dares to accuse others of holding to a "pack mentality", it might be best to first reflect inwardly. After all, the term "pack mentality" describes what is a complete lack of individual thought, total compliance with and to the "group", and an "us versus them" approach to matters in general. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you just finish stating that the posters of this forum aren't quite so "unified" as all that?! But don't you find it somewhat interesting that the very term, "pack mentality" better applies to you and yours in Revivalism, than it does to non-Revivalists? And to press the point of this point to its logical conclusion, doesn't this kind of make you the hypocrite here? Undecided

Think about it.

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #42
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:05/03/2008 11:19 PMCopy HTML

Yo MM

After you come to grips with the meaning of 'hypocrite' I'd like to offer another challenge based on Covey's 'Seven Habits', viz seek first to understand, then be understood. I challenge you to *understand what the various correspondants to this forum are saying*. I see a number of perspectives, including the following:

1) I've been hurt and I want to vent some anger
2) I've been hurt and I want to warn others to avoid or move away from abuse
3) 'Revival' are preaching a false gospel which contradicts the bible and makes it likely that followers are in danger when it comes to 'that day'
4) 'Revival' are preaching a false gospel which contradicts the bible and means that its preachers are going to have to deal with the implications of Ga 1:6-9
5) My 'contact' with God in 'Revival' centred around tongues; I had to disengage my mind while I was there; in retrospect I can't say I met any 'living God'; atheism or agnosticism fits much better with my understanding and experience than the idea that babbling incoherently means I've met God (and my experience of said activity)
6) 'Revival' is full of leaders who are abusive and often exhibit the antithesis of Godly behaviour

PS Since you raise the no. of denominations issue, how do you feel about the fact that 'Revival' has spawned more than 4 denominations (RCI, RF, CAI, GRC etc), who aren't even in communion with each other, in its short history?
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #43
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:06/03/2008 3:41 AMCopy HTML

Oh but I HAVE looked at what Ian has written dear friends.  And I've read a great many things over the years from many authors.  Some have glorified God and some deny the existence of God.  Ian is just another man with his own beliefs and erudition.  But unlike thousands of passionate Christian men,  Ian hasn't started his own denomination... yet!

And yes Ian, I will be presenting some scriptural challenges to your views... I am studying... I'm really having trouble finding other sources that support your view that only the apostles spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost.  I haven't found ONE Bible translation that supports your view.  Can you provide another reference... which is not you... hehe   
GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #44
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:06/03/2008 4:51 AMCopy HTML

MM. Sounds good, but careful you don't fall off that high horse.:cyclops:
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #45
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:06/03/2008 6:14 AMCopy HTML

Welcome to the pack M&M. Nice to see you're engaging with people outside of your institution and that you're prepared to 'study up' and bring something to the table.

You'll notice that the 'individuals' here are of different persuasions and beliefs. Even the United Pentecostals in whom you gave such praise are vastly different to your church, as are many branches of the original Longfield doctrine (old news) and good point RFedgy... I could also list many other Revivalish sister churches that have sprung up over the years.

As exciting as it is to think that a 'pack' are up against you, you'll find that many issues will bring up a challenge to all posters. We're not all nodding at each other and rote learning a creed of beliefs to memorise. I might call all of you guys a 'pack' for picking on any agnostic/atheistic statements I make. I've been learning very slowly not to think less of people because of their religious beliefs. It frightens me when I feel the disdain I do for the Jehovah Witness student in my classroom. I actually feel disdain for her and feel stupid for letting the religious bigotry still rise up in me.

The Christian students in my class make my eyes roll most of the time too... but this is still a form of bigotry on my part and I recognise it. I don't respect everyone's beliefs, but I respect their right to believe what they like (to some degree). I think this is hypocritical of me actually, to think I'm 'better' than anyone else for 'my' lack or lack of various religious beliefs. I don't want to be that arrogant shmuck. Anyway, looking forward to reading some of your studies. Have you thought of addressing any of Ian's recent essay? Ask for a copy.

[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #46
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:06/03/2008 6:22 AMCopy HTML

MM

... and hundreds of millions of passionate Christians haven't started their own denominations ... do you *like* leading with your chin?

I look forward to your 'scriptural challenges'. Surely you could start now with scriptures which show that if one doesn't speak in tongues, one isn't Christian? I know I used to have them ready to present at a moment's notice.

Hint 1: RF tongues doctrine wrt salvation is *clearly* unscriptural even if one concedes that the 120 did speak in tongues. (Did you actually consider my previous reference to the ESV and KJV. You can now add the NIV. But again, can you read koine Greek?)

Hint 2: What I'm interested in is 'majoring in the majors' ie defending the RF position that if one doesn't speak in tongues one can't be sure that one is a Christian ... eg to quote trf.org.au "You will 'speak in tongues' as promised to all believers" ... or would you phrase your 'salvation message' differently?

Personally, I'm interested in you defending RF views, not challenging Ian's views, and that's what will matter for you on 'that day'.

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #47
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:06/03/2008 10:06 AMCopy HTML

Oh but I HAVE looked at what Ian has written dear friends. And I've read a great many things over the years from many authors. Some have glorified God and some deny the existence of God. Ian is just another man with his own beliefs and erudition. But unlike thousands of passionate Christian men, Ian hasn't started his own denomination... yet!

And yes Ian, I will be presenting some scriptural challenges to your views... I am studying... I'm really having trouble finding other sources that support your view that only the apostles spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost. I haven't found ONE Bible translation that supports your view. Can you provide another reference... which is not you... hehe
Good evening, bloke.

Hmmm ... so you HAVE looked at what I've written, huh? Would your "looking" extend as far as the 42 page exegetical essay that I wrote and recently distributed on Acts? If so, then hows-about you engage with what appears there first, m'kay? Laughing Gotta admit, though, this bit of your previous post tickled me pink: "But unlike thousands of passionate Christian men, Ian hasn't started his own denomination... yet!" Yep. I suppose that's one thing that separates me from Lloyd Longfield, John Kuhlman, Scott Williams and the bloke who started the GRC! Unlike them, I didn't start my own denomination because I didn't get my own way in a previous one Wink

Now please, why don't you start with the promised scriptural challenges. I'd love to see what charming new piece of info you think you can bring to the table of this discussion! And you even go so far as to claim to be experiencing some trouble finding sources that support my view concerning the apostles at Pentecost, huh? Well, not that I wish to cast any sort of doubts regarding your capacity for thorough research, but I might suggest that you begin at the beginning, with the Greek New Testament. It doesn't really matter which version: UBS, NA, MT, etc. Having done this much, you may then care to consult the standard Greek reference grammars (beginning with Blass, Debrunner and Funk), and from them move onto certain of the commentaries (I'd recommend that you start with the 4th century exegete, Ephrem Syrus). Having done all this, if you still find yourself to be persisting in unbelief, well, I might recommend one or two Greek professors who teach the language at a couple of universities and theological colleges Laughing

Up to the task, big boy? Kiss

Blessings,

Ian

P.S. To be honest, I find it very difficult to take you seriously.
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #48
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:06/03/2008 10:14 AMCopy HTML

Hey guy's, don't hold your breath, Male Member full of hot air, me thinks.

Ralph,

Well he's full of something! Innocent

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Male Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #49
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:15/03/2007 9:26 PM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:07/03/2008 1:07 AMCopy HTML

Well I know its hard to take someone with the name Male Member seriously! hehe

But your head would have to be phallus shaped if you think running to the Greek versions will win your argument.

And a 4th Century hermit/monk!  C'mon son is that your best shot!

And rest assured, I'll be finding my own theological experts, not YOUR henchmen.... thanks

But for the rest of our ENGLISH speaking friends here.  Yes ENGLISH! Its the lingua franca of Australia you silly little theologian.  I have done some research and found some INDEPENDENT references and I suppose they can be trusted... they are ENGLISH versions of the BIBLE.

oooh was that too snooty! ;)

Acts 2 (Contemporary English Version)

The Coming of the Holy Spirit

 1On the day of Pentecost [a] all the Lord's followers were together in one place. 2Suddenly there was a noise from heaven like the sound of a mighty wind! It filled the house where they were meeting. 3Then they saw what looked like fiery tongues moving in all directions, and a tongue came and settled on each person there. 4The Holy Spirit took control of everyone, and they began speaking whatever languages the Spirit let them speak.

 

 

Acts 2 (New Living Translation)

The Holy Spirit Comes

 1 On the day of Pentecost[a] all the believers were meeting together in one place. 2 Suddenly, there was a sound from heaven like the roaring of a mighty windstorm, and it filled the house where they were sitting. 3 Then, what looked like flames or tongues of fire appeared and settled on each of them. 4 And everyone present was filled with the Holy Spirit and began speaking in other languages,[b] as the Holy Spirit gave them this ability.

 

Acts 1 (New Life Version)   Not sure if the versification is wrong on this site.

The Holy Spirit Comes On The Followers Of Jesus

 1 The followers of Jesus were all together in one place fifty days after the special religious gathering to remember how the Jews left Egypt. 2 All at once there was a sound from heaven like a powerful wind. It filled the house where they were sitting. 3 Then they saw tongues which were divided that looked like fire. These came down on each one of them. 4 They were all filled with the Holy Spirit. Then they began to speak in other languages which the Holy Spirit made them able to speak.

 

Acts 2 (New International Reader's Version)

The Holy Spirit Comes at Pentecost

 1 The day of Pentecost came. The believers all gathered in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound came from heaven. It was like a strong wind blowing. It filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw something that looked like tongues of fire. The flames separated and settled on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit. They began to speak in languages they had not known before. The Spirit gave them the ability to do this.

 

 

 

Wycliffe New Testament

Acts 2

 1 And when the days of Pentecost were filled [were fulfilled], all the disciples were together in the same place.

    2 And suddenly there was made a sound from heaven, as of a great wind coming, and it filled all the house where they sat [and it filled all the house where they were sitting].

    3 And diverse tongues as fire appeared to them, and it sat on each of them. [And tongues diversely parted as fire appeared to them, and it sat upon each of them.]

    4 And all were filled with the Holy Ghost, and they began to speak in diverse languages [and they began to speak with diverse tongues], as the Holy Ghost gave to them to speak.

 

GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

Sea Urchin Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #50
  • Rank:Poster Venti III
  • Score:9110
  • Posts:436
  • From:Australia
  • Register:15/02/2007 7:34 AM

Re:Light reading - Discussion with Male Member of RF

Date Posted:07/03/2008 1:37 AMCopy HTML

Male Member - (strange name for a 'revival boy'?)

1) Hypocrite: a person who pretends to be what he or she is not; one who pretends to be better than is really so, or to be pious, virtuous, etc. without really being so

 This definition certainly fits many people I used to know!  I distinctly remember a young lady who suffered from depression being told by a senior pastor - "don't go around telling people you have depression, we don't have depression in this assemby so you'd better get over it".  In other words, just pretend to be other than what you are, pretend to be healed, pretend that everything is just fine, but don't tell the truth!!  Sounds a little hypocritical don't you think?

2) Some forum members are quick to attack Revival churches with a pack like mentality, but the pack doesn't have consensus on ALL scriptural matters.  I have seen the pack turn on each other in this forum!

Yes MM, we are all DIFFERENT people and as such we have differing views at times and what is wrong with that? It's called tolerance, something that I never saw evidence of at RF. Whilst the RF appear to have 'consensus' on scriptural matters, there are various assemblies around the place that blatantly disagree with other assemblies.  And even if you agree 'most' of the time on scriptural matters that doesn't necessarily mean you are RIGHT. Look to the scriptures to measure up - not to your doctrine.

3) Some forum members jump on the bandwagon for bashing Revival but are still marching to the beat of a different denominational drum...  of which there are over 33,000 distinct denominations in 238 countries (Barrett et al, volume 1, page 16, Table 1-5).

The fact that Christianity is made up of different denominations bothers you for some reason?? Ahh yeah, it should ONLY be revival, huh? But is that Revival Centres, Revival Fellowship etc etc? They have all broken away from each other so which denominational drum DO you march to?

I would like to state here, that it is all about the body of Christ and therefore NOT about denominations at all!  The body of Christ IS the church!

4) Which one will the pack attack next?

Ignorant people that have no understanding of truth/tolerance/compassion/love/mercy/grace and think that everyone else should also remain in the dark?

Urchin
Your unfailing love, O Lord, is as vast as the heavens; your faithfulness reaches beyond the clouds. Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains, your justice like the ocean depths.
RCI prophesies
Copyright © 2000-2019 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.