Forum for ex-members of Revival Churches
Revival_Centres_Discussion_Forums > Bible, Beliefs, Scriptures and 'The Word' > Speaking in Tongues Go to subcategory:
Author Content
Ex_Member
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Date Posted:28/09/2005 1:55 PMCopy HTML

Hi guysI know you think I am a dirty heathen, and fair enough. alhtough I do shower, I don't believe in Xianity anymore. But I do believe, whether the Bible is true or not, it is the final word on Xian theology. Tradition and history play a part too though and cannot be dismissed.That being said, when I was a Xian I thoroughly researched the RC salvation message and found that the idea of tongues evidence of salvation at every occurance is baseless. According to Church history, there has never been a group preaching this RCI type doctrine until the early 1900s. 1st century church aside (and I believe I can show that the early church didn' t preach it either, but let's look at that using the NT), that means from the 3rd Century until the 20th, there was no tongues only group. That's 1800 years. Unless you agree with the Mormons that God's authority was lost from the earth and in need of a restoration of some kind, then you have a problem. Jesus said he would build his church and the gates of Hell would NOT prevail against it. According to tongues only groups, the gates of Hell did prevail for 1800 years as the true salvation message (and that's a crucial message don't you think?) was lost from the earthI would like to issue a challenge to you to debate this in this room. You pull out yourargumentsto support tongues as evidence of salvation and I'll do the opposite.All are welcome to get into this one as they please.And I promise to keep it out of the GRC room so as not to upset those sensitive newbies.
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #1
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:28/09/2005 2:02 PMCopy HTML

Ok, so I'll start then...

Rather than reinvent the wheel, I call your attention to the following article written by a former RCI pastor:

Fifteen Other Salvation Accounts From Acts

An Examination of Salvation in the Book of Acts

By Drew Dixon

http://pleaseconsider.info/articles/acts/salvation_in_acts.htm

Summary

Taking into account the all the Acts events, there are 19 salvation 'type' accounts in total (for arguments sake I have included the Revivalist view that Pentecost was a salvation account, though it was not). Of the 19, only 3 specific groups spoke in tongues, for very specific reasons and in a very specific manner. Of the 15 accounts that I have listed above, where signs are described, they are attributed to the Apostles / original Disciples. Not a single sign is attributed to a 'believer'.

Tongues was never mentioned as a sign to look for regarding salvation or the Spirit, nor was anybody ever told to 'seek' to receive Holy Ghost for salvation. Paul was told that he may be 'filled', and in Ephesus, they were asked if they had received the Spirit, which task the Apostle completed through the laying on of hands).

Where tongues do occur, they are never the sole 'sign'. Pentecost had wind, fire, praise of God and miraculous known languages. Ephesus had accompanying prophecy, while Cornelius also had Praising of God (yes this was one of the signs, see the text). 

Quite simply, the Revivalist picture of unknown tongues as the 'sign' of conversion is completely un-biblical if one wishes to be 'according to the Scriptures' on this topic. 

Of course this does not mean that one cannot speak in tongues at conversion or evidence any other spiritual gifting at that time, however, the Bible nowhere maintains that it is to be sought after as a mandatory evidence or 'sign'. To do so diverts people from the true gospel, and is a diversion that can have disastrous long term effects.

If it is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, it is not the Gospel, no matter how 'powerful' and individuals experience may or may not be.

===================================

Once you've read this entire article then we can pick out the problems you have with it. 

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #2
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:09/10/2005 12:09 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : pilinut

I am looking forward to your reply in this thread.  As I said, it needn't get emotional.

If you like, we could discuss it via email and then post our correspondance here so that we don't get sidetracked.

We can take it any way you want to...as long as we get cracking hey?

Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #3
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:20/10/2005 5:33 PMCopy HTML

$%*'`[Brett]%*'`@

I BELIEVE THAT ON THIS FORUM PEOPLE ARE FREE TO SAY WHAT THEY THINK AS LONG AS THEY DONT STOOP TO THE LOW LEVEL OF PERSONAL INSULT AND NAME CALLING, SO I'M GOING TO EXERCISE THAT FREEDOM AND DEFEND THE EXPERIENCE OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES.

THERE ARE THOSE IN THIS FORUM WHO RIDICULE SPEAKING IN TONGUES SO I AM GOING TO DEFEND THE LEGITIMATE REAL EXPERIENCE DESCRIBED IN THE BIBLE.

I BELIEVE NOEL HOLLINS AND THE RCS DESERVE TO BE DENOUNCED AND EVEN ATTACKED IN THE SENSE OF EXPOSING THEIR LIES, HYPOCRISY AND UN-CHRISTIAN CHARACTER.

I MYSELF HAVE POSTED SUCH "ATTACKS" ON NOEL AND HIS SYSTEM ON THIS FORUM. I BELIEVE SUCH "ATTACKS" ARE JUSTIFIED AND NECESSARY BUT I DONT BELIEVE THAT THE LEGITIMATE EXPERIENCE OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES DESERVES TO BE ATTACKED, RIDICULED OR BELITTLED.

THERE IS A GENIUNE EXPERIENCE OF MIRACULUOSLY SPEAKING IN ANOTHER LANGUAGE WHEN FILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT DESCRIBED IN THE BIBLE, AVAILABLE FOR EVERYBODY.

I MYSELF HAVE HAD SUCH A GENIUNE EXPERIENCE AND I DID'NT "STAMMER" MYSELF INTO IT, OR SAY "LA LA LA SHIGA DIG" IN ORDER TO RECEIVE IT. I AM OPPOSED TO THE RC PRACTICE OF TELLING PEOPLE THEY CAN EXPECT TO "STAMMER" AND REPEAT SYLABLES SUCH AS "LA LA" OVER AND OVER BEFORE THEY SPEAK IN A REAL LANGUAGE.

I BELIEVE THAT PRACTICE DOES CAUSE PEOPLE TO GET JUMBLED IN THEIR WORDS AS THEY REPEAT "ALLELUIA" OVER AND OVER AND FASTER AND FASTER. I DONT AGREE WITH THAT METHOD OF GETTING PEOPLE FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT AND SPEAKING IN TONGUES. IT INVITES VALID CRITICISM AND RIDICULE. I AGREE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN PEOPLE WHO WERE TOLD THEY HAD SPOKEN WITH TONGUES AND THEREFORE HAD
RECEIVED THE SPIRIT AND THEY HAD NOT RECEIVED. UNFORTUNATELY THIS HAS HAPPENED AND NOT JUST IN THE Rcs BUT IN OTHER CHARISMATIC AND PENTECOSTAL CHURCHES ALSO.

BUT THERE IS THE REAL THING.

WE ARE AGAINST N.H. AND HIS ABUSIVE, CULTIC CHURCH SYSTEM BUT WE ARE NOT AGAINST THE TEACHING THAT SPEAKING IN TONGUES IS THE REQUIRED SIGN OF RECEIVING THE SPIRIT AND IS THEREFORE PART OF THE SALVATION EXPERIENCE.

THE QUESTION IS THIS.

WHAT DOES THE BIBLE TELL US SHOULD AND WILL HAPPEN AT THE MOMENT A PERSON RECEIVES THE SPIRIT?

WHERE CAN WE FIND THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION IN THE NEW TESTAMENT?

WE CANT FIND THE ANSWER IN THE GOSPELS OF MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE AND JOHN BECAUSE THEY DESCRIBE EVENTS BEFORE THE HOLY SPIRIT WAS GIVEN. THE HOLY SPIRIT WAS NOT TO BE GIVEN TILL AFTER JESUS HAS DIED, ROSE AGAIN, ASCENDED AND BE GLORIFIED. SO, WE CANT READ ABOUT PEOPLE RECEIVING THE SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS, CAUSE NO ONE DID. IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE.

YOU CANT USE THE EPISTLES TO FIND OUT WHAT HAPPENED AT THE MOMENT OF RECEIVING COZ THEY ARE ADDRESSED TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALL ALREADY RECEIVED IN THE PAST. RECEIVING THE SPIRIT IS TAKEN FOR GRANTED AS SOMETHING THAT HAD ALREADY HAPPENED TO ALL THOSE ADDRESSED IN THE EPISTLES. ALL THE WRITERS OF THE EPISTLES KNEW THAT THOSE THEY WERE WRITING TO HAD ALL RECEIVED THE SPIRIT SO THEY DIDNT HAVE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED AT THE MOMENT OF RECEIVING.

THAT LEAVES ONLY ONE BOOK.

THE BOOK OF ACTS.

ACTS IS THE ONLY BOOK IN THE N.T. WHERE WE CAN READ ABOUT THE APOSTLES PREACHING THE GOSPEL AND PEOPLE RESPONDING AND RECEIVING THE SPIRIT AS THEY WERE SAVED. IT IS THE ONLY BOOK WHERE IT IS RECORDED WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED TO PEOPLE THE VERY MOMENT OF RECEIVING THE SPIRIT. SO THE ONLY SCRIPTURES WE HAVE FOR TELLING PEOPLE WHAT TO EXPECT WHEN THEY RECEIVE ARE IN THE BOOK OF ACTS.

MANY THEOLOGIANS OBJECT TO THIS BY SAYING THAT WE CANT USE ACTS FOR CONSTRUCTING DOCTRINE BECAUSE IT IS MERELY "NARRATIVE". THEY SAY IT JUST A HISTOICAL RECORD TELLING US WHAT DID HAPPEN NOT WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN, SO FOR DEFINING DOCTRINE WE SHOULD ONLY USE SCRIPTURE THAT IS EXPLICITLY "TEACHING" AND NOT NARRATIVE.

BUT THIS OBJECTION IS TOTALLY WRONG BECAUSE IT SAYS IN 1st TIMOTHY 3:16 THAT: "ALL SCRIPTURE IS USEFUL FOR...... DOCTRINE....".
SINCE ACTS IS SCRIPTURE WE CAN THEREFORE USE IT TO DEFINE DOCTRINE, SO, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG OR UNSCRIPTURAL WITH CONSTRUCTING A DOCTRINE OF RECEIVING THE SPIRIT FROM THE BOOK OF ACTS. IN FACT, AS I'VE ALREADY SAID, IT IS THE ONLY PART OF THE N.T. THAT YOU CAN DO SO FROM.

WHAT DO WE FIND HAPPENING IN THE BOOK OF ACTS AT THE MOMENT PEOPLE RECEIVE THE SPIRIT?

SPEAKING IN TONGUES.

IN ACTS 2, ON THE DAY OF PENTECOST, WHEN THE FIRST DISCIPLES RECEIVED THE SPIRIT, WHAT DID THE NON-CHRISTIAN CROWD SEE AND HEAR THAT SO AMAZED THEM AND CAUGHT THEIR ATTENTION?

DID THEY SEE THE "LOVE" OF THE DISCIPLES? WERE THEY AMAZED COZ THEY SAW THE "PATIENCE" OR "GENTLENESS" OF THE DISCIPLES?
NO. IT WAS TONGUES.

IN ACTS 10, WHEN PETER SAW CORNELIUS AND HIS FRIENDS RECIVE THE SPIRIT IN FRONT OF HIM, WHAT DID HE SEE THAT TOTALLY CONVINCED HIM THAT THERE WAS NO DOUBT THEY HAD RECEIVED? DID HE SEE THEIR "LOVE", OR "PEACE" OR "MEEKNESS"?
HE SAW AND HEARD TONGUES.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ACTS 19 WHEN THE NEW CONVERTS RECEIVED THE SPIRIT? WE ALL KNOW THE ANSWER. TONGUES AGAIN.

IN ACTS 8, WHEN PETER AND JOHN CAME TO SAMARIA AND PRAYED FOR ALL THE NEW CONVERTS TO RECEIVE THE SPIRIT, WHAT HAPPENED WHEN THEY RECEIVED? THE SAMARITANS HAD REPENTED, BELIEVED IN CHRIST, ACCEPTED THE WORD OF GOD AND BEEN BAPTIZED IN WATER, BUT WHEN PETER AND JOHN CAME TO THEM THEY KNEW THAT NONE OF THEM HAD RECEIVED THE SPIRIT.. IF THERE WAS NO SIGN TO PROVE RECEIVING THE SPIRIT HOW COULD PETER AND JOHN HAVE KNOWN THAT THEY HADNT RECEIVED? AND FURTHERMORE, HOW DID THEY KNOW THAT THEY HAD RECEIVED?

MANY PEOPLE SEIZE UPON THE FACT THE RECORD IN ACTS 8 DOESNT SAY THAT THE SAMARITANS SPOKE IN TONGUES WHEN THEY RECEIVED, BUT IF THEY DIDNT GET TONGUES, WHAT DID THEY GET THAT SO AMAZED AND ASTONISHED SIMON THE MAGICIAN, WHOSE SPECIALITY WAS AMAZING PEOPLE WITH MIRACLES AND SIGNS?

OBVIOUSLY PETER AND JOHN WERE LOOKING FOR SOME KIND OF SIGN OR IMMEDIATE OUTWARD EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE SAMARITANS HAD RECEIVED, AND BECAUSE THEY DIDNT FIND WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR, THEY DECIDED NONE OF THE SAMARITANS HAVE RECEIVED THE SPIRIT.

ACTS CHAPTER 8 PROVES THAT THE APOSTLES EXPECTED A CERTAIN SIGN OR MANIFESTATION TO PROVE PEOPLE HAD RECEIVED.
IF IT WASNT TONGUES, WHAT WAS IT?

SIMON THE MAGICIAN HAD ALREADY SEEN MIRACLES OF HEALING, DEVILS COMING OUT OF PEOPLE, CRIPPLED LEGS AND ARMS WORKING AGAIN AND "GREAT JOY" IN THE PEOPLE. NO DOUBT THE PEOPLE EXPERIENCING THE GREAT JOY AND THE MIRACLES AND THE HEALINGS WOULD HAVE BEEN SPONTANEOUSLY CRYING OUT WORDS OF PRAISE AND THANKS TO GOD.

BUT WHEN HE SAW PEOPLE RECEVING THE SPIRIT HE SAW SOMETHING MIRACULUOUS AND AMAZING HE HAD NEVER SEEN BEFORE.

DO YOU THINK HE OFFERED MONEY TO THE APOSTLES SO THAT WHEN HE LAID HIS HANDS ON PEOPLE TO RECEIVE THE SPIRIT THEY WOULD FALL OVER BACKWARDS, CRY, SING, LAUGH, FEEL HAPPY, SAY "HALLELUIA" OR "PRAISE GOD" IN A LOUD VOICE, OR PROCLAIM "BECAUSE I'VE ACCEPTED JESUS AS MY LORD AND SAVIOUR I BELIEVE THAT I NOW HAVE THE HOLY SPIRIT"?

SIMON SAW A MIRACLE HE HAD NEVER SEEN BEFORE. WHY NOT ACCEPT THAT IT WAS TONGUES? THE POWER THAT CAN CAUSE A PERSON TO SUDDENLY SPEAK A LANGUAGE HE HAS NEVER LEARNT OR SPOKEN BEFORE, IS CERTAINLY A GREAT POWER, AND THAT WAS THE POWER THAT SIMON SAW.

THE COMMON BELIEF TODAY IS THAT WHEN ONE "ACCEPTS JESUS AS LORD AND SAVIOUR" AND "INVITES HIM INTO THEIR HEART" BY REPEATING A BRIEF PRAYER, YOU AUTOMATICALLY RECEIVE THE SPIRIT, WITHOUT ANY OUTWARD SIGN OR MIRACULOUS MANIFESTATION.

THIS MODERN TEACHING WAS NOT WHAT THE APOSTLES BELIEVED OR TAUGHT.
ACTS 8 ALONE MAKES THIS CLEAR.

SCRIPTURE TELLS US THAT IF A DECISION HAS TO BE MADE WHETHER SOMETHING IS TRUE OR NOT, 2 OR 3 RELIABLE WITNESSESS ARE SUFFICIENT FOR A DECISION TO BE MADE (2 COR.13:1).

REGARDING THE QUESTION "SHOULD WE EXPECT AND DEMAND TONGUES AS THE SIGN PROVING THE SPIRIT HAS BEEN RECEIVED?".... WE HAVE FOUR WITNESSESS (ACTS 2, ACTS 8, ACTS 10, ACTS 19) THAT WE SHOULD.

THAT WOULD BE ENOUGH TO WIN THE CASE IN A COURT OF LAW.

IF PEOPLE CAN RECEIVE THE SPIRIT WITHOUT TONGUES IT IS NOT RECORDED IN THE N.T., AND THEREFORE CANT BE PROVED FROM THE BIBLICAL RECORD.

IF PEOPLE DID RECEIVE THE SPIRIT WITHOUT TONGUES IN THE EARLY CHURCH IN THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES, THE BOOK OF ACTS IS SILENT ABOUT IT.

I BELIEVE OUR DOCTRINE OF RECEIVING THE SPIRIT SHOULD BE BUILT ON WHAT SCRIPTURE DOES SAY, NOT ON WHAT SCRIPTURE DOESNT SAY.

I DIDNT WRITE THIS ARTICLE TO CHANGE THE MIND OF THOSE ON THIS FORUM WHO DONT AGREE WITH IT. I DONT EXPECT I WOULD CHANGE THE MIND OF SUCH PEOPLE.

PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH WHAT I'VE SAID IN THIS ARTICLE ARE FREE TO SAY SO ON THIS FORUM, AND IM SURE THEY WILL.

I TRUST THAT I HAVE THE SAME FREEDOM TO SAY WHAT I THINK AS WELL.

IT TAKES CONSIDERABLE MATURITY TO BE ABLE TO CAREFULLY LISTEN TO SOMEONE YOU INTENSELY DISAGREE WITH, WITHOUT GETTING ANGRY AND "LASHING OUT" WITH EMOTIONAL, INTEMPERATE LANGUAGE.

I HOPE, IN EXPRESSING DISAGREEMENT WITH EACH OTHER ON THIS FORUM, WE WILL BE MATURE, AND NOT SHOW OURSELVES TO BE IMMATURE, CHILDISH, ANGRY AND EMOTIONAL.



(This article was dictated by Jeremiah (Brett Warren) to faithful scribe Baruch (Marc Reyes) from Hebrew to Celtic to English and received by Tamar Tehphi (Sabrina Warren) and posted for the benefit of the Lost Tribe of Dan Australia) Hello to all you Danites! :-)
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #4
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:20/10/2005 10:33 PMCopy HTML




IF PEOPLE DID RECEIVE THE SPIRIT WITHOUT TONGUES IN THE EARLY CHURCH IN THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES, THE BOOK OF ACTS IS SILENT ABOUT IT.



Well... Paul's story is one example...

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

[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
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #5
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:21/10/2005 7:58 AMCopy HTML

"..... But I should say I literally bellowed out the unutterable gushings of my heart."

- Charles Grandison Finney  (The Memoirs of Charles G. Finney  (The complete Restored Text) Zondervan Publishing House - Garth M Rosell & Richard A.G. Dupuis Editors 1989 ..

Definition 

 Bellow

1) To roar, as a bull does.

2) To shout in a deep voice.

3) To utter in a loud and powerful voice.

1) The roar of a bull, elephant, or other large animal. 2) A very loud utterance, a shout. 3) The sound of artillery, thunder or the like...

boy oh boy !!  Wow !! that must have been some loud "glossa" that Charles Finney experienced...  

 

Anonymous

----------------

Obey your thirst  !!!!

 

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #6
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:21/10/2005 3:34 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Brett

Thanks for the thoughful post.  Truly.  I appreciate the time you took to put it online.

I will not attack te validity of tongues  in these posts.  I will assume for the time being, for the sake of argument,  that the gift is legit.  So please keep that in mind as u read my posts here.

Before I address the nitty gritty of your post, I would like to talk about your bias towards tongues and where it came from. 

Firstly, the belief that tongues was/is a necessary sign of one's salvation has no real historical basis.  What I mean is, until the United Pentecostal Church came up with it early last century, it was unheard of.  Both Lloyd Longfield and Noel Hollins were 'saved' into the National Revival Crusade which was basically the AOG except they subscribed to BI.  The AOG wouldn't buy into BI and so Leo Harris and Tom Foster started the NRC.  It wasn't until after Lloyd and Noel cut themselves off from the NRC (later the CRC) in 1958 that they began to entertain the idea of a tongues salvation message.  From what I can piece together, they didn't start teaching that until about 1961 or 1962.  This is around the same time that they cut themselves off from all other Pentecostal churches.

I make that point to say that this is the origin of your teaching.  We can get into what the Bible says a little later, but you do really need to accept that this teaching was delivered unto you by divisive cult leaders whose legacy is heresy, church splits, broken families, broken lives.  I truly believe that this is something you really need to take into account when reassessing the tongues doctrine.  In other words, the tongues as salvation doctrine has no historical heritage other than those men and their cults.  And their fruit shows them to be well short of Christ's disciples.  Your heritage of that doctrine is not even 50 years old.  THESE ARE THINGS YOU MUST REALLY CONSIDER!!!

Next, you have to consider that you are the products of the cult.  Tongues for salvation is what defines the Revival Centres.  You spent years and years being conditioned and controlled by the groups and this was the 'sacred cow'.  Could it be that you have simply been indoctrinated?  Could it be that these men have left you with more of their legacy than just BI?

Now if you wish to say that they, in the midst of their folly, somehow rediscovered a truth then you are faced with two big issues.  The first is:

1. The 'truth' of salvation was lost from the earth from the times of the apostles until the until 19XX when it was rediscovered by the UPC and the Revival Centres.  Jesus said he would build his church and the gates of hell would not prevail against it, but you seem to believe the gates knocked the church out of the game for almost 2000 years.  And...

2.  The majority of people who share your tongues experience and have the Holy Spirit do not believe it is necessary for salvation.  While the numbers don't necessarly mean they are correct, you have to stop and really look at how and why God allows these people to be filled with the Holy Spirit, speak in tongues, and then preach a watered down or false gospel.  These people have accepted a belief in Christ, have been baptised, and have even revcieved the Spirit and spoken in tongues...and yet, God doesn't give them the truth?  And these people have not been in the cult...but you have.  And these people's churches are experiencing growth at a phenomenal rate.  WHAY IS IT THAT FARE MORE  PENETECOSTALS DON'T BELIEVE IN THE TONGUES AS SALVATION DOCTRINE THAN THE VERY SMALL NUMBER THAT DO?  WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS ACCORDING TO YOUR CURRENT BELIEF?

Ok, my next post will address your doctrinal points...  Thanks for listening. 

 

Warrick 007 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #7
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:21/10/2005 3:51 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : HeatandServe

IF PEOPLE DID RECEIVE THE SPIRIT WITHOUT TONGUES IN THE EARLY CHURCH IN THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES, THE BOOK OF ACTS IS SILENT ABOUT IT.Well... Paul's story is one example...

What Must I Do To Be Saved?

 

Is it 'repent,be baptised, and receive the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in other tongus"? Well thats what the Revival Centers Leaders teach, and what thier congregations are told to believe to the death. Now, if you are new to all this, be assured that the Revival Center idea is nonsence. You are saved by believing in Jesus. That means holding firmly to the message that Christ died, was buried, and on the third day rose again (1cor 15:1-4)

If you are a Revival center person or ex Revivalist, well, you'll probabley need a bit more convincing. Your probable even wondering whether it is right for you to be reading an alternate viewpoint. But 2 Cor 13v5 says its right to examine yourself to see whether you are living in the faith. Its easy just to obey your Revival Center Cult leaders and ignore what concerned friends and family bring up. You can even end up ignoring your own thoughts and beliefs, i know i did. But its best to be sure of the truth, after hearing BOTH sides of the matter PRO 18V13 says "if one gives an answer before hearing, it is a folly and sham".

Its very possible to be sure you are right, then find out you were wrong. For a good part of  20 years i was raised on the GRC DOCTRINE on Tongues. But deep down in my heart when ever i was preaching to someone and said to them "Un less you speak in Tougues you are not saved! and have not got the Holy Spirit"  time and time again i felt a deep pain, like i was stubbing myself in the guts.

Problem 1, if we proclaim a false gospel, we are damned.

I believe we must be very careful about the gosple we preach. If we preach a false gospel, we are accursed ( GK. 'anathema' ) There's nothing wrong with tougues, but if we say they are part of salvation and they are not, that is preaching a false gosple. Ps read the waring in GAL 1v7-9

Problem 2, the gospel the first christians "recevived" was not tongues

please pay specical attention to what paul said to the Galatians " I WOULD REMIND YOU, BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF THE GOOD NEWS (GOSPLE) THAT I PROCLAIMED TO YOU, WHICH IN TURN YOU RECEIVED, IN WHICH ALSO YOU STAND, THROUGH WHICH ALSO YOU ARE SAVED, IF YOU HOLD FIRMLY TO THE MESSAGE THAT I PROCLAIMED TO YOU, FOR I HANDED ON TO YOU AS OF FIRST IMPORTANCE WHAT IN TURN HAD RECEIVED: THAT CHRIST DIED FOR OUR SINS IN ACCORDACE WITH THE SCRIPTURES, AND THAT HE WAS BURIED, AND THAT HE WAS RAISED ON THE THIRD DAY"

So the early Christains received a gosple of Christ's death and resurrection. Unfortunately the Revival Centers Pervert that gosple, and now proclaim a gosple of tongues

Notice that Christ was of "first importance", not tongues. In preaching Salvation Paul even said he knew nothing but JESUS!  But why was Jesus important? Jesus is important because Jesus died and was buried. Jesus died as a sacrifice for you, atoning for your sins. By dying he showed us the incredible love God must have for us. Then he was raised up from the dead, and as the first fruits of the great resurrection Jesus showed us he had conquered death. In doing so, Jesus showed us that we are able to trust him to save us from death as well. Or in theology terms, our righteousness comes from putting our faith in Christ finished work on the cross. Paul said by "receiving" and "standing" in this gosple or good news, "you are saved"

Paul was actually following the lead of all the early disciples. When they came to a town that hadn't been evangeliized, they didn't set up bible prophecy boards, and harass people about tongues and pyramids or get the piano accordians out and have a sing song, no they would enter the town, usually find an open place for evangelism, and talk about Jesus. Nothing strange about this, as Jesus asked the disciples to be his wittnesses (ie not tongues,pyramind,brittishIsrael)

Problem3, but what about what the revival centers say?

We have to point first that there is nothing in the bible that explicitly says "you must speak in tongues"   What the revival center leader's say is that the doctrine is taught implicitly- by piecing together statements found throughout the bible.

Despite there need to do this, they maintain that their doctrine is indisputably correct. Those who doubt it doubt the clear word of God. People who sincerely believe the Revival Centers doctrine to be wrong are said to be "lukewarm, have itching ears, attacking the Holy Spirit, and are not interested in the truth.

The revival centers also try to discredit the idea, like John3v16 that salvation comes through believing in Jesus. Maybe its because its to difficult for them? Most often they are quickly sheved with an explanation the Greek word for 'believe' doesnt really mean 'believe'-it means 'obey'. We must obey Jesus by receiving the Spirit and speaking in tongues. Well thats nonsense ( firstly, there is a separate word for obeying and that word transliterated is 'hupakoe') You should ask the revival center pastar to show you any COMMANDS in the scripture to receive the Spirit or speak in tongues. There is none! So if there are no commands to speak in tongues, it has nothing to do with 'obey' anyway.

Do you know what God actully does command us? It is set out in 1st John3

"this is the His commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ"

So the christian good news is Jesus Christ! not tonguesthe focus should be on him, everything else comes latter. Some asked Paul  " what must i do to be saved?"  Do you know that Paul didn't even talk about tongues?  he talked about  Christ.  Paul said to him, 'believe on the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved" (acts 16v30-31)  So be clear. Is your salvation only in tougues, or in Christ? Will you stay a tonguesian, or will you become a christain? For all my years in the GRC, I can truely say i didnt know who Jesus was. I did not know him the way i am becaming to know him know. But i sure knew alot about toungues!

 

Wazza. 

A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #8
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:21/10/2005 8:28 PMCopy HTML

I apologise B&S for my rudeness. My tactless and rude net personality gets out of my control sometimes... often. Karma has her wicked way with me though and I feel tremendously guilty. So, for what it's worth, I am truly sorry for what seems to have been immature personal attacks.

Now, on with the discussion... no scriptures here just some 'what ifs' and, I agree, it's almost pointless to try and persuade people (or such people) to change their beliefs. That seems to only feed one's ego to prove one's own rightness. The scary thing is.. tongues is an incredibly important subject to R/R/G because if we really fear preaching a half-truth of salvation then we would be desparate not to pervert it lest we damn ourselves, and the blind one's we preach to, of falling into the ditch because of our inability to properly discern scripture. An inabitlity that R/R/Gs believe that the vast majority of christians have.

if the R/R/G minority's salvation doctrine is true and indisuputable (and let's face it,  they think they are an amazingly blessed group of people because the truth of tongues/salvation has been revealed to them, yet their fruits, in the main, do not show spiritual prosperity - quite vain really) then the rest of us are proclaiming a bastardised watered-down gospel leading to misconceived salvation, eternal death, and the occasional lucky christian who speaks in tongues haphazardly down their christian walk somewhere. IF they are right then their remnant of 'saved' souls are signed sealed and delivered (unless of course they steer free of all the 'bad' things that can cost them salvation).

And herein lies the conundrum... If they are wrong then they miss out on joining in on the mainstream christian church that moves onwards and around them, blissfully unaware of their patronising views and they spend valuable time arguing and persuading would be converts rather than just preaching a simple and beautiful truth... as PopeWazza reminds us -  "this is the His commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ"

 

 

[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
Chartdoctor Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #9
  • Rank:Regular User
  • Score:2630
  • Posts:127
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:29/08/2005 1:06 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:21/10/2005 8:49 PMCopy HTML

Mr Jonah,
I was impressed with your sincerity,regarding your enquiry to some who believe speaking in tongues is essential to salvation, Brett has addressed your answer more than adequately,however here are a few more pointers as to the nature of why Drew Dixon speaks as he does. The devil knows human nature and its frailty more than anyone,and he simply states the opposite of what God says and he knows he will be able to trick a very high percentage of people.We buy it ,we are flesh and weak our minds are fragile. Drew said not to worry about 3 of Gods verses on salvation, there is the first worry,where does the bible say to leave out bits here and there,if we do everything the bible says,we are told we are scarcely saved,best to do all that Jesus requires of us. Who gave Drew the authority to leave out 3 verses on salvation. Genesis chap 3 v3/4 states "Ye shall not eat of it,neither shall ye touch it,lest ye die" And the serpent said unto the woman, "Ye shall NOT surely die" . ITS OPPOSITES,When the human mind encounters it,many would prefer it over Gods Written word.
In the book of Acts after the obligatory introduction,Verses 5 to 9 are indicative of what the entire book of Acts is about as a result of Jesus being on the cross,and the resulting Holy Sprit. v5 but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.v8 But ye shall receive power,after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you, and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and in Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth,(includes China)v9 And when he had spoken these thing while they beheld,he was taken up and a cloud received him out of their sight.
I suggest Jonah,that you focus on the Word of God,as at the judgement seat of Christ you will not be tested on your knowledge of Church History,but on how you view,believe on,and practice the Word of God,Up to now you are saying you reject the power that Jesus is offering you,you are picking and choosing certain salvation scriptures, you are listening to negative and erronnous advice, if you cannot understand that tongues and the Holy Spirit are synonymous then I dont know what we can do to help,Acts 2v4 :and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost,and began to speak with Other tongues,as the Spirit gave them utterance.you have tongues sandwiched between the Holy spirit which is mentioned twice to make it real obvious for anyone.
and !corr chap 14 v14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue,my spirit prayeth,but my understanding is unfruitful,
If you have trouble understanding anything Paul says about tongues,understand that Peter wrote of this in 2nd Peter chap 3 v15/17 indicating that some would confuse some things which are hard to understand that Paul wrote and miss out on the Kingdom,however it is said that he was writing with the wisdom of God.
We are told to love the Lord thy God with all our mind,heart and soul,God is the only safe place for our minds to feed on the word,anyone else will lead us astray.
Do you prefer what Drew Dixon says or the word of God,your choice.
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #10
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:21/10/2005 11:12 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Chartdoctor

I was impressed with your sincerity,regarding your enquiry to some who believe speaking in tongues is essential to salvation,

Thank you Chardoctor.  As you can see, I put a lot of thought into my post.

The devil knows human nature and its frailty more than anyone,and he simply states the opposite of what God says and he knows he will be able to trick a very high percentage of people.We buy it ,we are flesh and weak our minds are fragile.

Look, according to the Bible the believers are enlightened as to the truth of God's plan.  I agree with that.  However, what is taught in the Bible is not hidden.  Christianity is NOT a mystery religion such as the pagan religions of Roman times.  Everything is made plain and God grants people faith in him to believe it to be true.  He does not hide his plan of salvation and then make this secret knowledge plain to a select few.  Rather the simple message is there for people to see and hear and then accept it or reject it.  Believers and unbelievers alike can read the gospel narratives and both understand the narrative, the events that took place etc.  But the beliver will affirm that these things actually occurred and that Jesus was who he claimed to be and did rise from the dead etc.  What you are supposing is quite different from that.  You are saying that the truth of the Bible has been covered by Satan and that only a smal  few enlightened ones can see past his deception.  That sir, is giving the devil far more power than he actually has.  You are saying the Bible plan of salvation has been hidden from mankind even though it is there in the Bible.  How preposterous.  Do you really think the devil has power over the Bible?  Sure, he can attempt to misquote it, etc, but the Bible does not come under the devil's domina according th Christian teaching.

Drew said not to worry about 3 of Gods verses on salvation,

Drew never said that at all.  Did you read the article?  He made the point that while these few verses ALONE have been misconstrued to say what the RCs teach, when put in the context of all the other salvation related verses, they do not in fact say what the RCs want them to say.

In the book of Acts after the obligatory introduction,Verses 5 to 9 are indicative of what the entire book of Acts is about as a result of Jesus being on the cross,and the resulting Holy Sprit. v5 but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.v8 But ye shall receive power,after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you, and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and in Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth,(includes China)v9 And when he had spoken these thing while they beheld,he was taken up and a cloud received him out of their sight.

We have begun to discuss this in another thread: http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=443300&CategoryID=148056&startcat=1&ThreadID=2295441

Pop in and have a look.

I suggest Jonah,that you focus on the Word of God,as at the judgement seat of Christ you will not be tested on your knowledge of Church History,but on how you view,believe on,and practice the Word of God,

And so will you my friend...so will you.  Are you THAT secure in your teaching?  Or do you strive to impress God by your right doctrine and right actions in the hope that he will not reject you?

Up to now you are saying you reject the power that Jesus is offering you,you are picking and choosing certain salvation scriptures, you are listening to negative and erronnous advice,

I would say the same about you.  Funny isn't it?

if you cannot understand that tongues and the Holy Spirit are synonymous then I dont know what we can do to help,

BUZZ!!!!!  Wrong.  The Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity, a distinct personage.  Tongues is a gift given by him.

Acts 2v4 :and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost,and began to speak with Other tongues,as the Spirit gave them utterance.you have tongues sandwiched between the Holy spirit which is mentioned twice to make it real obvious for anyone.

Again, pop into that other thread.

and !corr chap 14 v14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue,my spirit prayeth,but my understanding is unfruitful,If you have trouble understanding anything Paul says about tongues,understand that Peter wrote of this in 2nd Peter chap 3 v15/17 indicating that some would confuse some things which are hard to understand that Paul wrote and miss out on the Kingdom,however it is said that he was writing with the wisdom of God.
We are told to love the Lord thy God with all our mind,heart and soul,God is the only safe place for our minds to feed on the word,anyone else will lead us astray.

Let's get into all that later shall we?

Do you prefer what Drew Dixon says or the word of God,your choice.

To be honest, I only listen to what Drew wrote on that matter because it made sense.  Now maybe you should look at what the Bible ACTUALLY says rather than listen to the heretical ramblings of Lloyd Longfield and Noel Holins...

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

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:21/10/2005 11:14 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Chartdoctor


at the judgement seat of Christ you will not be tested on your knowledge of Church History, but on how you view, believe on, and practice the Word of God, Up to now you are saying you reject the power that Jesus is offering you

2nd Peter chap 3 v15/17 indicating that some would confuse some things which are hard to understand

you are picking and choosing certain salvation scriptures


There's a test coming!? Drat. I hope it's multiple choice lol... and that He hasn't made the bell curve too unrealistic! I'm sure the big soffy will give us a make up test if we muck up the first one. He certainly understands that some people are "confusing things which are hard to understand"... and some are even complicating things which are simple to understand. Remember, there are many more scriptures that define the ease of salvation without mentioning tongues than otherwise.

I'll start cramming for the finals the night before.. always worked in the past...

[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
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #12
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:22/10/2005 10:02 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : MrJonah



Reply to : BrettThanks for the thoughful post. Truly. I appreciate the time you took to put it online.I will not attack te validity of tongues in these posts. I will assume for the time being, for the sake of argument, that the gift is legit. So please keep that in mind as u read my posts here.Before I address the nitty gritty of your post, I would like to talk about your bias towards tongues and where it came from.Firstly, the belief that tongues was/is a necessary sign of one's salvation has no real historical basis. What I mean is, until the United Pentecostal Church came up with it early last century, it was unheard of. Both Lloyd Longfield and Noel Hollins were 'saved' into the National Revival Crusade which was basically the AOG except they subscribed to BI





REPLY TO MR. JONAH'S POST OF OCT. 22 - FROM BRETT

YOU HAVE RAISED SOME VERY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS ABOUT CHURCH HISTORY THAT I DO BELIEVE NEED TO BE FACED BY PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF WHO BELIEVE WHAT WE DO. IN THIS ARTICLE I'LL TRY TO ANSWER YOUR MAIN POINTS THE BEST I CAN.

IT IS TRUE THAT WHEN WE EXAMINE CHURCH HISTORY, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE MAJORITY OF PROFESSING CHRISTIANS HAVE NOT BELIEVED THAT BEING BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT WITH TOUNGUES WAS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION.

IT IS ALSO TRUE THAT I AND OTHERS HAD THIS TEACHING HANDED DOWN TO US FROM LLOYD LONGFIELD AND NOEL HOLLINS WHO HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES TO BE RAVENING WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING.

BUT THOSE TWO FOREMENTIONED POINTS DONT PROVE THE DOCTRINE WRONG.

THE "ONLY" AUTHORITY FOR DEFINING AND SETTLING DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES IS THE TEACHINMG OF CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES OF THE FIRST CENTURY. THERE IS "NO OTHER SOURCE" WE CAN APPEAL TO IN DETERMINING THE RIGHT OR WRONG OF ANY DOCTRINE IF WE ARE SERIOUS CHRISTIANS.

WHAT CERTAIN ESTEEMED CHURCH LEADERS SAID OR THOUGHT, IN THE THIRD, SIXTH, NINTH, 15TH, 18TH, OR 20TH CENTURIES IS NOT BINDING OR AUTHORITIVE FOR CHRISTIANS. A LOT OR SOME OF WHAT THEY SAID MAYBE INTERESTING AND HELPFUL, BUT IT IS NOT THE AUTHORITY WE MUST SURRENDER OUR OPINIONS TO.

FOR MOST OF THE LAST 2000 YEARS, MANY, MAYBE THE MAJORITY OF PROFESSING CHRISTIANS, WERE "BAPTIZED" AS BABIES THRU SPRINKLING. THEY WERE LED TO BELIEVE THAT THEY HAD BEEN BAPTIZED ACCORDING TO CHRIST COMMAND, BUT PRESENT DAY BAPTISTS, PENTECOSTALS AND OTHERS WOULD SAY THAT ALL THOSE PEOPLE WERE NOT TRULY BAPTIZED AT ALL. SO HERE IS ONE EXAMPLE OF THE MAJORITY OF PROFESSING CHRISTIANS, FOR AT LEAST THE LAST 1500 YEARS NOT FOLLOWING WHAT THE BIBLE TEACHES.

FROM ABOUT THE 5TH OR 6TH CENTURIES TO THE 16TH CENTURY, THE MAJORITY, AND BY MAJORITY I MEAN LITERALLY NEARLY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF PROFESSING CHRISTIANS ON THIS EARTH, WERE BOWING DOWN TO AND "VENERATING" RELIGIOUS STATUES AND PICTURES. THIS WAS A CLEAR AND OBVIOUS VIOLATION OF THE TEACHING OF SCRIPTURE, YET THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF CHRISTIANS WERE DOING IT FOR 1000 YEARS AT LEAST.

FROM AROUND THE 4TH CENTURY UNTIL THE 17TH CENTURY, THE MAJORITY OF PROFESSING CHRISTIANS ON THIS PLANET BELIEVED THAT IN IN EATING AND DRINKING THE BREAD AND WINE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER, THEY WERE EATING AND DRINKING THE LITERAL PHYSICAL BODY OF CHRIST. THEY ALSO BELIEVED THAT THAT EATING AND DRINKING WAS NECESARRY FOR SALVATION.

MODERN PENTECOSTALS AND EVANGELICALS DONT BELIEVE THAT EATING THE LORD'S SUPPER IS A LITERAL EATING AND DRINKING OF CHRIST'S BODY & BLOOD, NOR DO THEY BELIEVE THAT IT IS NECESARRY FOR SALVATION, BUT THAT IS AGAINST WHAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF CHRISTIANS HAD BELIEVED FOR ALMOST 1300 YEARS.

MORE EXAMPLES COULD BE GIVEN, BUT THE FEW I HAVE GIVEN ARE ENOUGH TO SHOW US SOMETHING IMPORTANT.

DURING MOST OF THE CENTURIES SINCE THE TIME OF CHRIST, THE MAJORITY OF PROFESSED BELIEVERS HAVE FOLLOWED DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES THAT MODERN EVANGELICALS AND PENTECOSTALS WOULD CONSIDER HERESY.

NOT JUST PENTECOSTALS, BUT BAPTISTS AND SIMILAR PROTESTANT GROUPS, HAVE BEEN A VERY VERY SMALL MINORITY COMPARED TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF PROFESSING CHRISTIANS DURING MOST OF THE LAST 2000 YEARS,
WHO HELD RADICALLY DIFFERENT BELIEFS ABOUT SALVATION AND THE HOLY SPIRIT FROM MODERN PENTECOSTALS AND EVANGELICALS.

THE MAJORITY HAVE NEARLY ALWAYS BEEN WRONG AND THIS SAD STATE WAS PREDICTED BY CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES.
MATTHEW 7:21-23 - THE MAJORITY OR MANY WHO ACKNOWLEDGE JESUS AS "LORD" ARE REJECTED AS BEING FALSE
MATTHEW 24:4-5 - THE MAJORITY OR MANY WHO WOULD SAY "JESUS IS THE CHRIST" WOULD BE WRONG AND LEAD MANY OR THE MAJORITY OF PROFESSING BELIEVERS INTO DECEPTION.
MATTHEW 24:11 - THE MANY OR MAJORITY OF PROFESSIN BELIEVERS WOULD BE DECEIVED.
2 TIMOTHY 4:3-4 - PROFESSING CHRISTIANS, THE PROFESSING CHURCH, WOULD REJECT TRUTH AND EMBRACE LIES, OR FALSE TEACHING.
2 THES. 2:3-4 - IN THE PROFESSING CHRISTIAN CHURCH, OR THE TEMPLE OF GOD, THERE WOULD BE A DEPARTURE OR FALLING AWAY FROM THE ORIGINAL CHRISTIAN FAITH AND PRACTICE INTO A COUNTERFEIT FORM OF CHRISTIANITY.

EVEN IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THESE PREDICTIONS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH TONGUES, I THINK YOU CANT DENY THAT CHRIST AND THE APOSTLES PROPHESIED THAT THE MAJORITY OF PROFESSING CHRISTAINS WOULD BE DECEIVED. IN OTHER WORDS. I.E. THEY WOULD BELIEVE FALSE DOCTRINES. SO IT WOULD BE THE FEW, THE MINORITY, WHO WOULD NOT BE DECEIVED AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. THE MANY WOULD BE DECEIVED, NOT THE FEW. I'M NOT SAYING THE REVIVAL CENTERS ARE THOSE FEW BUT IM JUST COMMENTING ON WHAT THESE SCRIPTURES SAY.

WHETHER A DOCTRINE IS TRUE OR FALSE MUST NOT BE DECIDED BY MAJORITY VOTE. THE SCRIPTURES I LISTED SHOULD MAKE US CAUTIOUS WHEN WE START THINKING "HOW COULD SO MANY PEOPLE BE WRONG?" AND "HOW COULD SO FEW BE RIGHT?".

SO FOR HISTORICAL AND BIBLICAL REASONS I HAVE NO TROUBLE BELIEVING THAT CERTAIN ESSENTIAL TRUTHS "FELL AWAY" OR "DEPARTED" FROM THE PROFESSING CHURCH AND THAT THERE WOULD THEREFORE BE A NEED FOR THOSE TRUTHS TO BE RESTORED OR "RE-DISCOVERED".

IF WE SAY THAT THE PREDICTED FALLING AWAY AND DEPARTURE FROM THE TRUTH IN THE PROFESSING CHURCH HAS NOT YET HAPPENED, THEN WE ARE SAYING THAT PROFESSING CHRISTIANS HAVE KEPT THE PURITY AND TRUTH OF THE ORIGINAL CHRISTIAN FAITH FOR THE LAST 2000 YEARS. IS THAT WHAT WE SEE IN HISTORY?

THE PENTECOSTAL DOCTRINE OF THE BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT WAS PART OF THIS RESTORATION OR "RE-DISCOVERY"
OF ORIGINAL APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY. THE UPC AND RC STAND THAT THE BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT WAS PART OF THE SALVATION EXPERIENCE AND NOT MERELY AN ENDUREMENT FOR POWER WAS ALSO A PART OF THIS RESTORATION OR "RE-DISCOVERY" PROCESS. UNFORTUNATELY, THE TRUTH THAT THEY RESTORED WAS MIXED WITH SERIOUS FALSE DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE WHICH HAS DISCREDITED THE TRUTH THEY HAD.

DESPITE ALL THE DECEPTION, ERROR AND "FALLING AWAY" AMONG PROFESSING CHRISTIANS OVER A LARGE PART OF THE LAST 2000 YEARS, THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN THOSE HUNGRY SOULS, WHO REACHED OUT TO THE LORD FOR MORE
THAN WHAT THEY WERE TAUGHT THEY COULD HAVE, AND WERE FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT AND SPOKE IN TONGUES. MOST OF THE TIME THEY WERE FEW, AND DIDNT FULLY REALISE WHAT HAD HAPPENED TO THEM, BUT THEY WERE THERE. THE FACT THAT THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SOME PEOPLE SPEAKING IN TONGUES THROUGHOUT CHURCH HISTORY HAS BEEN VERIFIED AND DOCUMENTED BY VARIOUS SCHOLARY STUDIES BY THEOLOGIANS AND CHURCH HISTORIANS WHO THEMESELVES WERE NOT EVEN PENTECOSTALS.

IF THERE WERE NO PEOPLE WHATSOEVER BEING FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT WITH TONGUES FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME THEN THE GATES OF HADES WOULD HAVE PREVAILED AGAINST THE CHURCH. IN OTHER WORDS THE CHURCH WOULD HAVE BEEN EXTINCT, BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IT IS BY THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING BAPTIZED IN THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT ONE ENTERS THE CHURCH (1ST COR.12:13).

IT IS ALSO TRUE THAT THE MAJORITY OF PENTECOSTALS TODAY BELIEVE THAT BEING FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT WITH THE EVIDENCE OF TONGUES IS NOT NECESSARY FOR SALVATION, EVEN THOUGH THEY THEMSELVES HAVE HAD THE EXPERIENCE.

I BELIEVE THE REASON FOR THIS IS EASY TO EXPLAIN.

THEIR CHURCH LEADERS ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THEIR TEACHING.

PENTECOSTAL CHURCHES TEACH THAT TONGUES ARE THE ONE AND ONLY SIGN OF RECEIVING THE OUTPOURING OR BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT. THE ASSEMBLES OF GOD AND NEARLY ALL OTHER PENTECOSTAL CHURCHES TEACH THIS.

SO THEY TEACH THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO RECEIVE THE OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT WITHOUT TONGUES, BUT AT THE SAME TIME THEY TEACH IT'S NOT NEEDED FOR SALVATION.

THEY ARE SO UNBELIEVABLY INCONSISTENT!

IN TITUS 3:5-6 PAUL SAYS THAT CHRIST SAVES US BY POURING OUT THE SPIRIT ON US. IN OTHER WORDS WE ARE SAVED WHEN WE RECEIVE THE OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, WHICH MEANS WE ARE NOT SAVED UNTIL WE HAVE THAT EXPERIENCE.

IF A CHURCH TEACHES THAT TONGUES IS THE NECESSARY SIGN OF THE OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT, THEY SHOULD BE CONSISTENT, AND MAY I SAY HONEST ENOUGH, TO TEACH THAT IT IS NECESARRY FOR SALVATION.

SO HERE IS THE PROBLEM :
MOST PENTECOSTAL CHURCHES TEACH THAT TONGUES ARE THE OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT.

THE APOSTLE PAUL TEACHES THAT RECEIVING THE OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION.

SO THE PENTECOSTAL CHURCHES SHOULD TEACH THAT RECEIVING THE OUTPOURING WITH TONGUES IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION. BUT THEY DONT.

WHY?

AT THE VERY LEAST THEY ARE BEING INCONSISTENT. ARE THEY BEING HONEST?

THE PENTECOSTAL LEADERS DONT TEACH WHAT PAUL SAYS ABOUT THE OUTPOURING AND OF COURSE ALL THEIR CHURCH MEMBERS JUST FOLLOW AND BELIEVE WHAT THEY ARE TAUGHT.

THAT IS WHY THE MAJORITY OF PENTECOSTAL CHRISTAINS DONT BELIEVE WHAT THEY HAVE RECIEVED IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION, EVEN THOUGH PAUL SAYS IT IS.

CONSISTENCY, AND HONEST HANDLING OF SCRIPTURE, DEMANDS, THAT IF A CHURCH BELIEVES THAT TONGUES ARE THE SIGN OF THE SPIRIT'S OUTPOURING, THEY SHOULD BE TEACHING THAT IT IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION COZ THATS WHAT PAUL SAYS IN TITUS 3.

AT LEAST THE REVIVAL CENTRES WERE CONSISTENT ON THAT POINT, AND THE MAJORITY OF PENTECOSTALS HAVENT BEEN.

MR. JONAH, YOUR POSTINGS ARE THOUGHTFUL AND CHALLENGING. I HOPE WE CAN CARRY ON A DIALOGUE, OR YOU MAY PREFER TO CALL IT A DEBATE, IN A RESPECTFUL AND MATURE MANNER. YOU HAVE SOMETIMES SAID "IS THE CULT OUT OF YOU? EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE OUT OF THE CULT?". YES THAT IS SOMETHING I HAVE OFTEN CONSIDERED OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.

THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE REVIVAL CENTRES WAS TO PERSONALLY ATTACK AND CALL PEOPLE NAMES WHO DISAGREE WITH THEM. THEIR ATTITUDE TOWARDS OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS WAS TO ATTACK THEM, MAKE IT PERSONAL, DONT LISTEN TO THEM, OR TELL THEM JUST TO SHUT UP. SO, IF WE START BEHAVING LIKE THAT TOWARDS EACH OTHER IT WILL SHOW WHO STILL HAS THE WAYS OF THE CULT IN THEM. I CAN ASSURE YOU I CAREFULLY READ AND CONSIDER EVERY POINT YOU MAKE EVEN THOUGH I DONT LIKE IT. I TRUST YOU WILL DO THE SAME WITH ME. LETS KEEP THE DIALOGUE GOING.


Text to be made boldNECESARRY FOR SALVATIONTHE MAJORITYMINORITYTHEY ARE SO UNBELIEVABLY INCONSISTENT!SHOULDSHOULD
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #13
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 12:19 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : Brett

Brett, it's late here so I don't have time to respond right now in detail.  I will in the next day or so though.  I did however want to comment on this paragraph:

THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE REVIVAL CENTRES WAS TO PERSONALLY ATTACK AND CALL PEOPLE NAMES WHO DISAGREE WITH THEM. THEIR ATTITUDE TOWARDS OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS WAS TO ATTACK THEM, MAKE IT PERSONAL, DONT LISTEN TO THEM, OR TELL THEM JUST TO SHUT UP. SO, IF WE START BEHAVING LIKE THAT TOWARDS EACH OTHER IT WILL SHOW WHO STILL HAS THE WAYS OF THE CULT IN THEM. I CAN ASSURE YOU I CAREFULLY READ AND CONSIDER EVERY POINT YOU MAKE EVEN THOUGH I DONT LIKE IT. I TRUST YOU WILL DO THE SAME WITH ME. LETS KEEP THE DIALOGUE GOING.

Well said and I couldn't agree more.  I am really glad to see that's your attitude to this dialogue.  Let's go for it.

Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #14
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 9:04 AMCopy HTML

You can debate about tongues till the cows come home.

Last night we met a friend of my daughters in Macdonalds I opened my Bible about 5 seconds into the conversation and showed him Acts 2:4, 10:44-48, 19:1-7. Then I left. He asked my daughter why did I stop? He wanted to hear more. He'd been waiting to hear that for years. He was a Rastafarian but he said he hadn't found what he was looking for. So Kate brought him to the house. (Brett's still out of town) So I spoke to him a bit longer about receiving the Holy Spirit, he got on his knees and prayed and within a few minutes was speaking in tongues

After he asked us when the next meeting was and would he be allowed to come.

He is a 28 year old muso here with waist length dread locks.

Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #15
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 10:41 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : Anonymous

You can debate about tongues till the cows come home.Last night we met a friend of my daughters in MacdonaldsI opened my Bible about 5 seconds into the conversation and showed him Acts 2:4, 10:44-48, 19:1-7.Then I left. Heasked my daughter why did I stop? He wanted to hear more. He'd been waiting to hear that for years. He was a Rastafarian but he said he hadn't found what he was looking for. So Kate brought him to the house. (Brett's still out of town) So I spoke to him a bit longer about receiving the Holy Spirit, he got on his knees and prayed and within a few minutes was speaking in tonguesAfter he asked us when the next meeting was and would he beallowedto come.He is a 28 year old muso here with waist length dread locks.

Oh PIllnut, you poor little Revivalist.  Have you learned nothing here? 

You met this guy and preached what?  Acts 2:4, 10:44-48, 19:1-7.  But let's compare that with what Paul (and Wazza) said again shall we?

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which [was bestowed] upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. Therefore whether [it were] I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed. (1 Cor 15:1-11).

That's the message you are supposed to preach Pillnut...according to the Bible.

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #16
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 12:07 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Brett

BUT THOSE TWO FOREMENTIONED POINTS DONT PROVE THE DOCTRINE WRONG.

You're 100% right.  It doesn't at all.  But it does cast some serious doubt over this very recent belief though.  But again, you're right and it doesn't PROVE anything.

THE "ONLY" AUTHORITY FOR DEFINING AND SETTLING DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES IS THE TEACHINMG OF CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES OF THE FIRST CENTURY. THERE IS "NO OTHER SOURCE" WE CAN APPEAL TO IN DETERMINING THE RIGHT OR WRONG OF ANY DOCTRINE IF WE ARE SERIOUS CHRISTIANS.

"Sola Scriptura" or Scripture Alone, a legacy of the Reformation.  I'm prepared to go along with that.  After all, we decided to look at what the Bible has to say after all right?

WHAT CERTAIN ESTEEMED CHURCH LEADERS SAID OR THOUGHT, IN THE THIRD, SIXTH, NINTH, 15TH, 18TH, OR 20TH CENTURIES IS NOT BINDING OR AUTHORITIVE FOR CHRISTIANS. A LOT OR SOME OF WHAT THEY SAID MAYBE INTERESTING AND HELPFUL, BUT IT IS NOT THE AUTHORITY WE MUST SURRENDER OUR OPINIONS TO.

Sure, but Brett, and here is the doozy...  THERE IS NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE TO DEMONSTRATE ANYONE HOLDING A REVIVALIST UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE IN ALL OF CHURCH HISTORY UNTIL LAST CENTURY.  It's not that only a minority believed it...some kind of true remnant.  it's not that the belief was discredited at such and such a Church council.  It's not that the leader of some small group who held this belief was excommunicated from the Church or even put to death.  THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL.  Zip, zilch nada.  We can trace so many unique doctrines back (for up to 1700 years) through Church history.  Things such as the Trinity, Person of Christ, Baptism, etc.  And yet there is absoluitely nothing about tongues for salvation.  Surely something this important would have caused more of a stir than...than...NOTHING?  But that's what you have....nothing.

FOR MOST OF THE LAST 2000 YEARS, MANY, MAYBE THE MAJORITY OF PROFESSING CHRISTIANS, WERE "BAPTIZED" AS BABIES THRU SPRINKLING...BOWING DOWN TO AND "VENERATING" RELIGIOUS STATUES AND PICTURES.... BELIEVED THAT IN IN EATING AND DRINKING THE BREAD AND WINE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER, THEY WERE EATING AND DRINKING THE LITERAL PHYSICAL BODY OF CHRIST. THEY ALSO BELIEVED THAT THAT EATING AND DRINKING WAS NECESARRY FOR SALVATION....MORE EXAMPLES COULD BE GIVEN, BUT THE FEW I HAVE GIVEN ARE ENOUGH TO SHOW US SOMETHING IMPORTANT.

While we could debate the validity of these beliefs, that would take us WAY off track.  Instead I will say that I see your point and agree.  The majority don't necessarily have truth on their side.  You're right.  Look at the current US administration...they had the majority on their side to get back into office and they are just WRONG.

But again Brett, we have evidence of these beliefs and those who subscribed to them...and even of those who didn't.  Why don't we have ANY evidence of the tongues for salvation gospel?


SO FOR HISTORICAL AND BIBLICAL REASONS I HAVE NO TROUBLE BELIEVING THAT CERTAIN ESSENTIAL TRUTHS "FELL AWAY" OR "DEPARTED" FROM THE PROFESSING CHURCH AND THAT THERE WOULD THEREFORE BE A NEED FOR THOSE TRUTHS TO BE RESTORED OR "RE-DISCOVERED".

Sure.  That's what the Preotestant reformation was ALL about.  A re-discovry of the teachings of Paul.  I agree.  But that teaching is plain to see.  It is not hidden away in a handful of scriptures in Acts strung together.  It is based on whole discourses...and even whole epistles.  And it has some historical support.  I am sorry to labour this point again Brett, but there is nothing at all anywhere in history to support your belief that someone, somewhere preached tongues for salvation.


THE PENTECOSTAL DOCTRINE OF THE BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT WAS PART OF THIS RESTORATION OR "RE-DISCOVERY"
OF ORIGINAL APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY. THE UPC AND RC STAND THAT THE BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT WAS PART OF THE SALVATION EXPERIENCE AND NOT MERELY AN ENDUREMENT FOR POWER WAS ALSO A PART OF THIS RESTORATION OR "RE-DISCOVERY" PROCESS. UNFORTUNATELY, THE TRUTH THAT THEY RESTORED WAS MIXED WITH SERIOUS FALSE DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE WHICH HAS DISCREDITED THE TRUTH THEY HAD.

Well, you could see it that way and who can argue with it.  but one could also see it as a heresy with matching fruit.  Bad trees, bad fruit.  These two groups were fairly isolated from one anojther and yet they both smack of abuse, broken lives and such.  Don't you think that is smething to consider too?


DESPITE ALL THE DECEPTION, ERROR AND "FALLING AWAY" AMONG PROFESSING CHRISTIANS OVER A LARGE PART OF THE LAST 2000 YEARS, THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN THOSE HUNGRY SOULS, WHO REACHED OUT TO THE LORD FOR MORE
THAN WHAT THEY WERE TAUGHT THEY COULD HAVE, AND WERE FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT AND SPOKE IN TONGUES. MOST OF THE TIME THEY WERE FEW, AND DIDNT FULLY REALISE WHAT HAD HAPPENED TO THEM, BUT THEY WERE THERE. THE FACT THAT THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SOME PEOPLE SPEAKING IN TONGUES THROUGHOUT CHURCH HISTORY HAS BEEN VERIFIED AND DOCUMENTED BY VARIOUS SCHOLARY STUDIES BY THEOLOGIANS AND CHURCH HISTORIANS WHO THEMESELVES WERE NOT EVEN PENTECOSTALS.

Brett, wat you're suggesting here is what we heard in the RCI ALL the time.  That somewhere...out there is the haze of Church history, God has always had a faithful remnant of people who spoke in tongues and believed it was necessary to do so to be saved.  If that was the case then we have to assume that they were never an organised group or group of groups as in the New testament AS THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THAT ALL.  What you would have to concede is that there was, at most, people scattered throughout the earth who spoke in tongues but who never organised themsleves as congregations, never preached their message and never challenged the beliefs of their day.   This hardly sounds like the Church.  It hardly sounds like the Gates of Hell did not prevail against it.  Rather it sounds like the Gates of Hell did prevail for well over 1800 years only to be finally defeated when some Americans and Australians (namely a former school teacher (NHH) and a delictaessan owner(LRL)) FINALLY helped poor God out by re-establishing his Church on the earth.



IF THERE WERE NO PEOPLE WHATSOEVER BEING FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT WITH TONGUES FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME THEN THE GATES OF HADES WOULD HAVE PREVAILED AGAINST THE CHURCH. IN OTHER WORDS THE CHURCH WOULD HAVE BEEN EXTINCT, BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IT IS BY THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING BAPTIZED IN THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT ONE ENTERS THE CHURCH (1ST COR.12:13).

Yes Brett, the Church is the people.  but the Church is also elders, pastors, evangelists, teachers, prophets, etc.  The Church is a body, in fellowship with one another.  What you are saying is that the church prior to the Revival Centres was just individuals floating around waiting for Lloyd and Noel to come along and save the day.  Sorry but that isn't the church of the NT and we have no reason to believe that God would EVER allow the TRUE church to become such.  You are supposing a lot and a lot that makes God look impotent rather than omnipotent.

PENTECOSTAL CHURCHES TEACH THAT TONGUES ARE THE ONE AND ONLY SIGN OF RECEIVING THE OUTPOURING OR BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT. THE ASSEMBLES OF GOD AND NEARLY ALL OTHER PENTECOSTAL CHURCHES TEACH THIS. ... SO THEY TEACH THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO RECEIVE THE OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT WITHOUT TONGUES, BUT AT THE SAME TIME THEY TEACH IT'S NOT NEEDED FOR SALVATION. ..THEY ARE SO UNBELIEVABLY INCONSISTENT!

Whoa Bessie!!!  Yiu have to understand where their teachings came from and how it evolved into what it is today.  In their minds they are not being inconsistent at all.  Mind you, I can see how it would appear so to you and to others.  I am AOG trained, that is, I have an AOG Bible College degree and local church leadership training and was briefly in pastoral ministry in the AOG.  I also did extensive research into the history of the Pentecostal movement and their beliefs, so I feel somewhat able to answer this for you.  I am not saying I subscribe to these beliefs anymore, rather I am just trying to explain it for you.

The belief in a two stage work of the Spirit predates Pentecostalism.  Put simply, many early evangelicals believed in a work of the Spirit at salvation and then a further work of the Spirit as an equipping for service.  Finney taught the first was salvation by faith alone and the second as the Baptism in the Spirit, while the Welseyans talked of the second blessing or second work of grace, etc.  I suggest you look into this yourself by doing some reading on the matter.  There are a few books documenting Finney's beliefs on the Baptism in the HS.  Martyn Lloyd-Jones also has a good book explaining the non-Pentecostal side of this teaching.

When people started to speak in tongues around the time of the Azuza Street Revival, many had come from church tradtions that subscribed to the two stage theology, so it wasn't much for them to simply attach tongues to that and happily go on in their walk as Pentecostals.  They later cemented tongues as being the definitive and ONLY sign of this second stage or baptism in the Holy Spirit, formed denominations etc amd the rest you know.

So they have their Scriptural arguments for defending their beliefs, just as you do, and I suggest you really look into them.  I am not suggesting you subscribe to their beliefs, rather seek first to understand their position beofre you label them as heretics..  They don't believe they are being inconsistent at all.

So while yes, I agree with you in that I think they may have misinterpreted Scripture, I do know where they are coming from and why they do not consider themselves to be inconsistent in their understanding.

THAT IS WHY THE MAJORITY OF PENTECOSTAL CHRISTAINS DONT BELIEVE WHAT THEY HAVE RECIEVED IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION, EVEN THOUGH PAUL SAYS IT IS.

BUZZ!!!  Well, they would say that there are different works of the HS in different stages.  Regeneration at the point of faith...and baptism in the HS as an equipping for service.  Rreally Brett, you should have a read of some classical Pentecostal litertaure forst rather than accuse them of being dishonest or inconsistent.


AT LEAST THE REVIVAL CENTRES WERE CONSISTENT ON THAT POINT, AND THE MAJORITY OF PENTECOSTALS HAVENT BEEN.

All the Revivalists have done is to combine a one stage theology with the two stage tongues theology and then drop the second stage.  That much is clear from the way their history and the way that their present doctrine evolved.  I wrote a paper on that if you'd like to read it.  I have posted it here: 

http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=443300&CategoryID=148056&startcat=1&ThreadID=2297476

Cheers Brett and thanks again for your openess and desire to talk.  It's refreshing.

MrJ

Warrick 007 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #17
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 2:51 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : pilinut



Reply to : AnonymousOh PIllnut, you poor little Revivalist. Have you learned nothing here?Amazing. I had a wonderful witness and saw someone come into the kingdom of God - and you call me poor. I prefer my "poverty" to your "theological riches."You can go on and on with all this theological blather and see and experience nothing. And we will give people a simple witness and see them receive the riches of the fulness of God.What are you doing? All you do is try and talk people out of it. If we hadn't had such a great evening we might feel down reading all this stuff.What am I going to learn from you? I find you more insulting than some of the worst pastors in the GRC.



Get your facts straight auntie! i said that to say that countless people from my old cult, were told they WHERE speaking in unknow tongue, when in fact the where saying no more than the same 10 words over and over again.
The FALSE Doctrine's of the GRC go much deeper than just BI.

A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"
Warrick 007 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #18
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 3:29 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : pilinut



I prefer my "poverty" to your "theological riches.

theological riches? no pilinut, try simple bible truth.

The fact you are accuseing me coming close to cursing the Holy Gost, well what can i say to that? Maybe it would'nt be wise to say what i would love to say to you on this forum, as i dont wish to be banned. So i will just forgive you, and pray you get your head out of the little back yard you once told me about, remember the joy and freedom you told me about the joy you had to look and go to other churchs? It is you and Brett that i have to thank with all my heart for helping me to get out of the GRC, and for now having the blessed life i know enjoy with my new friends and faimly in a fantastic church. Paul asks the Question. Are all Apostles? No, Are all prophets? NO, Are all teachers, No, In other words, within the body of Christ, different people are called by God to have different gifts. If someone states that all are supposed to speak in tongues, but that not all do, then are all supposed to be apostles as well but not all are? Are all called to be prophets? Are all called to be teachers? No. Likewise, not all are called by God to speak in tongues.
The true sign of the indewelling Spirit of God is listed in GAL 5-22V23 IS THE REAL SIGN OF SALVATION I
A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #19
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 5:34 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : pilinut

Amazing. I had a wonderful witness and saw someone come into the kingdom of God - and you call me poor. I prefer my "poverty" to your "theological riches."

Ah yes, but I would be more than happy to give you some to lift you out of your 'poverty'.

You can go on and on with all this theological blather and see and experience nothing. And we will give people a simple witness and see them receive the riches of the fulness of God.

So you go right ahead and interpret the Bible based on your experience then.  That leads many Moromns to thier church too.

What are you doing? All you do is try and talk people out of it. If we hadn't had such a great evening we might feel down reading all this stuff. What am I going to learn from you? I find you more insulting than some of the worst pastors in the GRC.

I think you will find I patronised you, not insulted you.    Now THAT is semantics.

Your fruit is evident. H&S is as close to blaspheming the Holy Spirit as I've ever heard. Wazza is going the same way. What I've learned from these posts is that I wouldn't want to touch Baptist doctrines with a 40 foot pole.

Take a deep breath Pillnut.  We're just talking.  No one is forcing you to change anything.   You're among friends here.  It's ok.

Mr J

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #20
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 6:34 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : pilinut

Pilnut, no-one is taking or trying to take your tongues experience away from you.  And no one ever can.  If you believe that God is real because of tongues then that's fine.  These threads are not about disproving tongues as a Xian gift.  Please believe that.  Tongues is in the Bible and one cannot deny that.

THE ISSUE HERE IS MUST ONE SPEAK IN TONGUES TO BE SAVED?

Please try to keep that in mind ok?

Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #21
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 9:42 PMCopy HTML

$%*'`[BRETT]%*'`@Reply to : popeWazza2nd



Reply to : HeatandServeIF PEOPLE DID RECEIVE THE SPIRIT WITHOUT TONGUES IN THE EARLY CHURCH IN THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES, THE BOOK OF ACTS IS SILENT ABOUT IT.Well... Paul's story is one example...What Must I Do To Be Saved?Is it 'repent,be baptised, and receive the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in other tongus"? Well thats what the Revival Centers Leaders teach, and what thiercongregations are told to believe to the death. Now, if you are new to all this, be assured that the Revival Center idea is nonsence. You are saved by believing in Jesus. That means holding firmly to the message that Christ died, was buried, and on the third day rose again (1cor 15:1-4)If you are a Revival center person or ex Revivalist, well, you'



REPLY TO popeWazza2nd POSTING OF 10-22-2005
FROM: BRETT


YES, WE ARE SAVED BY BELIEVING JESUS. BY FAITH.

BUT ARE WE SAVED BY FAITH ALONE? THERE ARE SCRIPTURES THAT SAY THAT WE ARE SAVED BY REPENTANCE, THE BLOOD OF CHRIST, CONFESSION, CALLING ON THE LORD, GRACE, THE WORD OF GOD, BAPTISM IN WATER, THE OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND OF COURSE FAITH.

CAN WE TAKE ANY ONE OF THE FOREMENTIONED ELEMENTS, SEPARATED FROM ALL THE OTHERS AND SAY IT IS BY THAT ELEMENT ALONE THAT WE ARE SAVED, WITHOUT THE OTHERS? FOR EXAMPLE, ARE WE SAVED BY CONFESSION ALONE? BY THE BLOOD OF CHRIST ALONE? BY BAPTISM ALONE? BY THE OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT ALONE?

I PRESUME THAT YOU ARE SUBSCRIBING TO THE BELIEF THAT ONE IS SAVED BY FAITH "ALONE"?


WE ARE SAVED BY FAITH, BUT WHERE DOES SCRIPTURE SAY BY FAITH ALONE? IS THERE A SCRIPTURE THAT SAYS THAT? CAN YOU QUOTE IT FOR ME?

WE DO FIRMLY HOLD TO THE MESSAGE THAT CHRIST DIED, WAS BURIED , AND ON THE THIRD DAY ROSE AGAIN. PEOPLE MUST BELIEVE AND CONFESS THIS TO BE SAVED. WE WOULD NEVER BAPTIZE ANYBODY OR PRAY FOR THEM TO RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT IF THEY WERE NOT BELIEVING THAT JESUS DIED, WAS BURIED AND ROSE AGAIN.

CHRIST DIED SO THAT WE COULD RECEIVE THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT (GAL.3:13-14). OBVIUOSLY, IF A PERSON DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT JESUS DIED, WAS BURIED AND ROSE AGAIN ON THE THIRD DAY, THEY WILL NOT CALL ON HIM TO POUR OUT THE HOLY SPIRIT ON THEM AND SAVE THEM, WILL THEY?

THE MESSAGE THAT THE EARLY CHURCH RECEIVED ALSO INCLUDED THE FACT THAT IF PEOPLE TURN TO CHRIST FOR SALVATION HE WOULD POUR OUT THE HOLY SPIRIT UPON THEM IN A TANGIBLE AND REAL WAY ( ACTS 2:17, TITUS 3:5-6).

YOU QUOTE THE APOSTLE PAUL IN 1ST COR. 15 WHERE HE SAYS BY "RECEIVING" AND "STANDING' IN THE GOOD NEWS OF JESUS DEATH AND RESURRECTION THEY WOULD BE SAVED. YOU SHOULD HAVE ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE APOSTLE PAUL ALSO SAID THAT CHRIST SAVES US BY POURING OUT THE SPIRIT UPON US, OR BAPTIZING US IN THE SPIRIT (TITUS 3:5-6).

YOU COMMENT THAT SCRIPTURE DOESN'T EXPLICITLY SAY WE MUST SPEAK IN TONGUES TO RECEIVE THE SPIRIT.

SCRIPTURE DOES NOT EXPLICITLY SAY THAT WE MUST BELIEVE THAT MARY WAS A VIRGIN WHEN SHE GAVE BIRTH TO JESUS. ITS NOT TAUGHT AS DOCTRINE IN ANY "TEACHING" PORTIONS OF SCRIPTURE, BUT THE WHOLE DOCTRINAL TRUTH OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH & INCARNATION OF CHRIST IS DEDUCED FROM BIBLICAL NARRATIVE. BY "PIECING TOGETHER STATEMENTS" FOUND THROUGHOUT THE NARRATIVES IN THE GOSPELS WE ARE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT A DOCTRINE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH & INCARNATION OF CHRIST.

IT IS ALSO BY " PIECING TOGETHER STATEMENTS" FROM DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE BIBLE THAT THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY WAS CONSTRUCTED. THERE IS NO SCRIPTURE THAT EXPLICITLY AND DIRECTLY SAYS "YOU MUST BELIEVE GOD IS A TRINITY. GOD THE FATHER. GOD THE SON. GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT." THE DOCTRINE IS IMPLICIT IN CERTAIN SCRIPTURES AND BY "PIECING TOGETHER" THOSE SCRIPTURES IT WAS DEFINED.

SO WE THINK "PIECING TOGETHER" CERTAIN SCRIPTURES THAT IMPLICITLY TEACH SOMETHING TO CONSTRUCT A DOCTRINE IS A VALID PRACTICE.

THE DOCTRINE OF BEING BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT WITH TONGUES AS EVIDENCE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED BY "PIECING TOGETHER" CERTAIN SCRIPTURES IN ACTS, BUT SINCE OTHER DOCTRINES HAVE BEEN FORMULATED THE SAME WAY, WHY IS IT WRONG TO BUILD A DOCTRINE OF SPIRIT BAPTISM FROM THE BOOK OF ACTS?

AFTER ALL, IT'S THE ONLY PORTION OF SCRIPTURE THAT ACTUALLY RECORDS WHAT HAPPENED TO PEOPLE AT THE MOMENT OF BEING BAPTIZED WITH THE SPIRIT, SO WHAT IS WRONG WITH USING IT?

ALSO, SINCE "ALL SCRIPTURES IS USEFUL FOR.... DOCTRINE...", AND ACTS IS SCRIPTURE, WE CAN USE IT FOR OUR DOCTRINE OF BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT.

YOU MENTIONED HOW JOHN 3:16 TEACHES THAT SALVATION COMES THRU JESUS. OF COURSE WE BELIEVE THAT. WE ALSO BELIEVE JOHN 3:5, THAT TEACHES SALVATION COMES BY BEING "BORN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT". JESUS SAID THAT TOO, DIDN'T HE? AS WELL AS JOHN 3:16. IF YOU'RE GONNA QUOTE JOHN 3:16 AS TO HOW TO BE SAVED, YOU SHOULDN'T FORGET TO QUOTE JOHN 3:5. AFTER ALL IT WAS THE SAME JESUS WHO SAID BOTH STATEMENTS, SO DON'T QUOTE ONE AND IGNORE THE OTHER.

SO BY BELIEVING JOHN 3:16 AND JOHN 3 :5, WE CAN SAY THIS: IF A PERSON IS TO BE SAVED, HE MUST BELIEVE IN CHRIST AND BE BORN OF WATER AND SPIRIT. I.E. IF YOU WANT TO BE SAVED, PUT YOUR FAITH IN CHRIST AND BE BAPTIZED IN WATER AND SPIRIT.

IF YOU SAY THAT BEING BORN OF WATER AND SPIRIT, IS NOT BAPTIZED IN WATER AND SPIRIT, THEN WHAT IS IT?

MAYBE WHEN JESUS SAID WATER, HE DIDN'T REALLY MEAN WATER, EH?
JUST LIKE WHEN HE SAID SPIRIT HE DIDN'T REALLY MEAN SPIRIT, EH? THAT WOULD'VE CLEARED UP NICODEMUS' CONFUSION, WOULDN'T IT?

YOU SAY THERE IS NO COMMAND IN SCRIPTURE TO RECEIVE THE SPIRIT OR SPEAK IN TONGUES.

IN ACTS 1:4 CHRIST COMMANDED HIS APOSTLES TO REMAIN IN JERUSALEM TILL THEY WERE BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT.

IN OTHER WORDS, HE COMMANDED THEM TO BE BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT, OR RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT.

IN ACTS 2:4 THEY RECEIVED WHAT HE HAD COMMANDED TO HAVE.
IN MATTHEW 28:20 JESUS SAID TO THESE SAME APOSTLES THAT THEY MUST TEACH THEIR CONVERTS TO OBSERVE WHATEVER HE HAD COMMANDED THEM.

SINCE HE HAD COMMANDED THEM TO BE BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT THAT'S WHAT WHAT THEY WOULD'VE COMMANDED THEIR CONVERTS, AND WHEN THE APOSTLES WERE BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT THEY ALL SPOKE IN TONGUES.

BUT I SUPPOSE YOU WOULD HAVE US IMAGINNING THOSE APOSTLES TELLING THEIR NEW CONVERTS SOMETHING LIKE THIS:
"CHRIST COMMANDED ALL OF US TO BE BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT, SO IT IS A COMMAND FOR ALL OF YOU NEW CONVERTS AS WELL. WHEN WE WERE BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT WE ALL SPOKE IN TONGUES, BUT WHEN IT HAPPENS TO YOU IT'LL BE DIFFERENT FROM THE WAY IT HAPPENED TO US. YOU WONT SPEAK IN TONGUES LIKE WE DID WHEN YOU RECEIVE THE SAME BAPTISM, THAT WAS ONLY FOR US ALONE."

YOU QUOTE THE APOSTLE PAUL'S WORDS TO THE PHILIPIAN JAILER IN ACTS 16:31..."BELIEVE ON THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND YOU SHALL BE SAVED."

BUT THE VERY SAME PAUL THAT YOU QUOTED IN ACTS 16:31 ALSO SAID IN TITUS 3 THAT WE ARE SAVED BY CHRIST WHEN HE BAPTIZES US IN THE HOLY SPIRIT. YES, CHRIST SAVES US. HE IS THE SAVIOR, NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT, BUT, HE SAVES US.... HOW? HE SAVES US "THROUGH THE WASHING OF RE-BIRTH AND RENEWAL BY THE HOLY SPIRIT, WHOM HE POURED OUT ON US...." (TITUS 3:5-6). PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO MENTION THIS STATEMENT OF PAUL WHEN YOU QUOTE OTHER STATEMENTS BY HIM DESCRIBING HOW WE ARE SAVED.

AND JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK YOU, SINCE YOU STILL CLAIM TO BE A CHRISTIAN AND THEREFORE SAVED, WHEN DID CHRIST POUR OUT THE HOLY SPIRIT ON YOU, AND WHAT HAPPENED AT THE MOMENT HE DID SO?

I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HEAR YOUR ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, IF YOU ARE ABLE TO ANSWER IT. I HOPE YOU OR ANYBODY ELSE CAN SEE THAT MY QUESTION TO YOU IS NOT IN ANY WAY A PERSONAL ATTACK, ITS JUST AN HONEST QUESTION RELATING TO THE SUBJECT WE ARE DEBATING. NOTHING PERSONAL. SO I HOPE NOBODY CRITICIZES ME FOR ASKING YOU THAT QUESTION.

IN ACTS 8 IN SAMARIA, PEOPLE BELIEVED IN CHRIST AND WERE BAPTIZED BUT DIDN'T RECEIVE THE OUTPORING OF THE SPIRIT TILL PETER AND JOHN ARRIVED.

SINCE, AS PAUL SAYS, WE ARE NOT SAVED TILL THE SPIRIT IS POURED OUT ON US, THOSE SAMARITANS WERE NOT SAVED UNTIL PETER & JOHN PRAYED FOR THE SPIRIT TO BE POURED OUT ON THEM, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAD BELIEVED IN CHRIST, RECEIVE THE WORD OF GOD AND BEEN BAPTIZED, ALONG WITH EXPERIENCING "GREAT JOY".

THIS TEACHES THAT PEOPLE CAN BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST AND YET AT THE SAME TIME NOT HAVE RECEIVED THE SPIRIT AND SO NOT YET HAVE ENTERED INTO SALVATION.

YOU ASK THE QUESTION "IS YOUR SALVATION ONLY IN TONGUES OR IN CHRIST?"

WE HAVE NEVER TAUGHT HERE THAT OUR SALVATION IS "ONLY IN TONGUES", AND WE WOULD NEVER TEACH SUCH A THING. I HAVE NOTICED THAT CERTAIN ONES REFER TO US AS THE BELIEVERS THAT TEACH "THE TONGUES AS SALVATION GOSPEL". AS IF THE ONLY THING WE EVER TALK ABOUT IS TONGUES AND THAT WHEN WE TELL PEOPLE HOW TO BE SAVED THE ONLY THING WE TELL THEM IS THAT THEY HAVE TO SPEAK IN TONGUES. THIS IS A MISREPRESENTATION OF WHAT WE ACTUALLY TEACH. WE DON'T TEACH "SPEAK IN TONGUES TO BE SAVED".

WHAT WE DO TEACH IS THIS: TO BE SAVED YOU NEED TO BELIEVE OR EXPERIENCE CALLING ON THE LORD, GRACE, FAITH, CONFESSION, THE CROSS, THE BLOOD OF CHRIST, REPENTANCE, THE WORD OF GOD, BAPTISM IN WATER, AND THE OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. ALL THOSE ELEMENTS WORK TOGETHER IN PRODUCING THE WONDERFUL GLORIOUS EXPERIENCE OF BEING SAVED BY CHRIST.

WE BELIEVE THAT TONGUES ALWAYS ACCOMPANIES THE OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT, SO TONGUES HAVE A PART IN THE TOTAL SALVATION EXPERIENCE, BUT THEY ARE BY NO MEANS THE WHOLE OF IT, JUST PART OF IT.

SO LET IT BE CLEAR WE DON'T TEACH THE SO CALLED TONGUES AS SALVATION GOSPEL.

WE TEACH THE FAITH FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, REPENTANCE FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, THE GRACE OF GOD FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, THE CROSS OF CHRIST FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, THE BLOOD OF CHRIST FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, THE CONFESSION OF CHRIST FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, THE BELIEF IN THE WORD OF GOD FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, THE CALLING ON THE LORD FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, THE BEING BAPTIZED IN WATER FOR SALVATION GOSPEL, AND YES, THE OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT FOR SALVATION GOSPEL. AND THIS OUTPOURING HAPPENS TO BE ACCOMPANIED BY TONGUES, SO THEREFORE WE GIVE TONGUES A PART IN THIS WHOLE PROCESS OF BEING SAVED.

WELL WAZZA, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IN YOUR POST ABOUT THIS ISSUE, I CERTAINLY DON'T LIKE AND NO DOUBT IN YOUR PRESENT STATE OF MIND YOU STRONGLY DISLIKE WHAT I AM SAYING. BUT AS TROY HAS REMINDED US, LETS BE REMINDED AGAIN, "YOU'RE OUT OF THE CULT, BUT IS THE CULT OUT OF YOU?" IF THE CULT IS NOT "OUT OF YOU" YOU WILL WANT TO ABUSE ME, ATTACK ME AND TELL ME TO JUST SHUT UP, AND MAYBE TRY TO STOP ME FROM HAVING MY POSTS POSTED. THAT WOULD BE THE RESPONSE OF A REVIVALIST.

I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT I READ EVERYTHING YOU SAY AND DO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER YOUR POINTS. I DO THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DO THE SAME WITH MY POSTS, BUT I AM DOING IT WITH YOURS.

STAY CALM,
BRETT
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #22
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 9:46 PMCopy HTML

"Your fruit is evident. H&S is as close to blaspheming the Holy Spirit as I've ever heard." (ahhh, an inviation to speak) What is blaspheming anyway (not subscribing to Revival interpelations)? Wait, let me check if I can speak in tongues... *turns away from pc for a sec* Yep... I can still do it. wow... still blessed... Still doesn't seem that supernatural to me but yours may (must) be different... okay, trying not to be disrespectful to your beliefs... (my sorrys are losing their meaning now aren't they) Trying to be good... but that blasphemy bit brought the mischievousness out of me again... hmmm. I must say I am offended by a works-based tongues-ability gospel and I hold back quite a lot, I must say!

Did someone say they were quoting baptist doctrines? Evil Baptists, gawd they're awful aren't they? *Sigh*, I remember that mindset so well... and that's the reason why I keep coming back here, I think. I'm just so fascinated by Revivalists et al. who spurn other christians because they don't conform to their interpretation.  Are you judging all baptists because of a few guys in this ex-cult forum who may or may not believe the baptist doctrine (whatever the heck that is - hang on, I'll get the baptist pamphlet from my file cabinet *ferrets about for a few minutes* - hey! no list of beliefs in it! Silly billies, I'll send 'em an e-mail - and man I use way too many brackets that go on for way too long).

I think a few things are coming to light here. What are our motives for posting here? I'm appreciating that yours is to lend a shoulder to ex-grcers, and that's commendable.... as long as you're not helping them out of the fire and into the non-stick tefal frying pan. I'm getting a huge kick out of reading these discussions and really really hope and pray (in engish or in my own head - shock) that someone might read Troy's stuff and wonder... 'what if'... what if God isn't interested in their ability to roll their tongue. When I left the Rev I felt incredible guilt about leaving the only 'true' church I knew of. I worried myself sick about the Lord returning before my kids spoke in tongues.. balancing that supposed grey area between the blameless innocense of a child to the 'age of understanding' where they had to speak in tongues. I rejoiced when I read pleaseconsider this.... Tongues for salvation..? witnessing and arguing these convolutions endlessly? It ain't necessariy so... and my kids... I'm not worried at all about their eternal salvation.

I've apologised to you for my badly formed personal pokes but am definitely not sorry for a seemingly blasphemous belief system. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs... that's why we call them beliefs, so that's ok, ignorance is bliss, even mine.  I've never felt so loved by "His holiness the God" since I realised that tongues weren't all dat and I sort of resent your comment. I do understand why you feel that way though. I've been witnessing churches who do so much more for their community rather than trying to get 'em wet and rambling (I reserve copyrite on the 'wet and rambling') not that I'm saying yours doesn't, just that the revival ilk become bogged down in punctuating everything with tongue tongue tongues... Does one need it for salvation.... I believe no... does one even need it to cope with everyday life? Amazingly... no.

"Rattling the cages" - Batman (Batman Begins)

have you (or chart doctor) even been reading these posts or just passing over them so you can get a chance to yell blasphemy. I find that a great pity. I've seen the fruit of the local RF, the arrogance of the assembly is palpable (and it's a nice one)... the new pastor there is actually a great guy and we talk often. I've even visited Fred's church in NZ this year... and had good chats with aquaintances there. They shun selectively and speak as contemptually as any ex-Rev I've ever met (and that was by admittance of some I spoke to there - go figure - not many happy people stuck in that eddy, I can assure you... (but you'll have to take my word on that.. and i've got a feeling you wouldn't...) but they do all speak in tongues so all is good eh... blimey!

After attending one of Fred's Sunday meetings, I was asked by some excited members and family, "Wasn't that great? Wasn't that soooo different to the RCI where Fred and we came from?" - They were stunned when I said, "no, it seems EXACTLY like the Revival meetings I used to attend. EXACTLY..." ... well, it was!

- Jesus take me as I am, I can come no other way -

[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
Warrick 007 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #23
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 10:27 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : BRETT


Thanks Brett i am glade you are even taking the time to consider the things i say, and i  am sorry if i have not shown much interest in the things you have brought up, its just that after a good part of 20 years of GRC doctrine i tend to shut off to it.

Wazza.

A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #24
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 10:44 PMCopy HTML

$%*'`[BRETT]%*'`@Reply to : popeWazza2nd



Reply to : BRETTThanks Brett i am glade you are even considering the things i say, and i am sorry if i have not shown much interest in the things you have brought up, its just that after a good part of 20 years of GRC doctrine i tend to shut off to it.Wazza.




Text to be set font.

OK I CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHEN WE FIRST CAME OUT OF THE GRC, I HAD THE SAME TENDENCY AS THAT. I DOUBTED EVERYTHING I EVER HEARD OR LEARNT IN THE GRC AND WAS PREPARED TO CHANGE OUR SALVATION DOCTRINE IF IT REALLY WAS JUST A FABRIACTION OF LLOYD LONGFIELD AND NOEL HOLLINS. I EVEN ENROLLED IN THE ASSEMBLIES OF GOD I.C.I. THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE AND TOOK A THEOLOGICAL COURSE ON THE HOLY SPIRIT. I REALLY WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THE THINKING OF OTHER CHRISTIANS ABOUT RECEIVING THE HOLY SPIRIT. I HAVE SAT DOWN AND HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH AOG, VINEYARD AND OTHER PASTORS ABOUT THIS MATTER, SO I DO BELIEVE I ACCURATELY AND FAIRLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY TEACH AND WHY. HOWEVER, I COULDNT GET AWAY FROM CERTAIN SCRIPTURES AND SO DECIDED TO RETAIN THE DOCTRINE THAT I HAD RECEIVED. NOT, I REPEAT, BECAUSE I GOT IT FROM N.H. BUT IT WAS THE APOSTLE'S DOCTRINE. IM GLAD YOU ARE OUT OF THE GRC BUT I AM NOT GLAD ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE NOW SAYING ABOUT TONGUES.

STAY CALM,
BRETT
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #25
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 10:47 PMCopy HTML

$%*'`[BRETT]%*'`@Reply to : popeWazza2nd



Reply to : BRETTThanks Brett i am glade you are even considering the things i say, and i am sorry if i have not shown much interest in the things you have brought up, its just that after a good part of 20 years of GRC doctrine i tend to shut off to it.Wazza.




Text to be set font.

OK I CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHEN WE FIRST CAME OUT OF THE GRC, I HAD THE SAME TENDENCY AS THAT. I DOUBTED EVERYTHING I EVER HEARD OR LEARNT IN THE GRC AND WAS PREPARED TO CHANGE OUR SALVATION DOCTRINE IF IT REALLY WAS JUST A FABRIACTION OF LLOYD LONGFIELD AND NOEL HOLLINS. I EVEN ENROLLED IN THE ASSEMBLIES OF GOD I.C.I. THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE AND TOOK A THEOLOGICAL COURSE ON THE HOLY SPIRIT. I REALLY WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THE THINKING OF OTHER CHRISTIANS ABOUT RECEIVING THE HOLY SPIRIT. I HAVE SAT DOWN AND HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH AOG, VINEYARD AND OTHER PASTORS ABOUT THIS MATTER, SO I DO BELIEVE I ACCURATELY AND FAIRLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY TEACH AND WHY. HOWEVER, I COULDNT GET AWAY FROM CERTAIN SCRIPTURES AND SO DECIDED TO RETAIN THE DOCTRINE THAT I HAD RECEIVED. NOT, I REPEAT, BECAUSE I GOT IT FROM N.H. BUT IT WAS THE APOSTLE'S DOCTRINE. IM GLAD YOU ARE OUT OF THE GRC BUT I AM NOT GLAD ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE NOW SAYING ABOUT TONGUES. YOU SHOULD SHUT OFF TO WHAT CAME FROM THE MIND OF NOEL HOLLINS, BUT YOU SHOULDNT SHUT OFF TO WHAT COMES FROM THE APOSTLES PETER AND PAUL. NOEL HOLLINS DID SAY SOME THINGS THAT WERE RIGHT AND ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE, I SUPPOSE ITS HARD FOR US EX-REVS TO CONCEDE THAT.

STAY CALM,
BRETT
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #26
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:23/10/2005 10:50 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : pilinut

AND JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK YOU, SINCE YOU STILL CLAIM TO BE A CHRISTIAN AND THEREFORE SAVED, WHEN DID CHRIST POUR OUT THE HOLY SPIRIT ON YOU, AND WHAT HAPPENED AT THE MOMENT HE DID SO?

At the risk of really looking like I have no life... (too sick to go to work lately) can I try to answer that one puh-lease? This is the crunch isn't it? Is there a moment of initial salvation? If there is I missed it. Could someone miss it? So many questions. Is there a nanosecond in time where we punch into the river of life and it gushes into our hearts like turning on a tap?

16 years ago when I first spoke in tongues I only did so so to get rid of all the guys who were crowding around me while I sat there half naked in a batismal tank in front of a whole assembly. There was pressure and it was easy to stutter away and get accepted. I've told many pastors that over the years. They reassured me and said that somewhere along the line it REALLY happened. See, I used to use tongues just about every second meeting and definitely every housemeeting. I got good at it and it miraculously loosened up.

I definitely made it up at the start. I was 16 and very cheeky. During the next 15 years I must have received the spirit in your interpretation, surely. I used the gifts a million times. I prayed in tongues for at least an hour on average every week. BUT WHAT MOMENT DID I RECIEVE THE SPIRIT!!!!! I HAVE NO IDEA... NONE WHATSOEVER... in your judgement, did I recieve at all? Surely during one of those millions of instances the tongue was 'real'...? There's no way I felt like one was more supernatural than another time. And remember, I was a zealous member. Dedicated and as much obsessive as I am now.

When was the moment... ? I honestly don't know. Anyone else?... honestly? Wazza?

[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
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #27
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:24/10/2005 12:01 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : HeatandServe

Reply to : pilinutAND JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK YOU, SINCE YOU STILL CLAIM TO BE A CHRISTIAN AND THEREFORE SAVED, WHEN DID CHRIST POUR OUT THE HOLY SPIRIT ON YOU, AND WHAT HAPPENED AT THE MOMENT HE DID SO?At the risk of really looking like I have no life... (too sick to go to work lately) can I try to answer that one puh-lease? This is the crunch isn't it? Is there a moment of initial salvation? If there is I missed it. Could someone miss it? So many questions.Is there a nanosecond in time where we punch into the river of life and it gushes into our hearts like turning on a tap?16 years ago when I first spoke in tongues I only did so so to get rid of all the guys who were crowding around me while I sat there half naked in a batisma

The most important discovery and revelation I made after leaving the RCI  (13 years ago now) was that the Holy Spirit is a person..... The Holy Spirit is NOT a language - He is a person..  And you are meant to have an interactive relationship with Him....  Yes an interactive relationship with Him which includes being able to hear His voice, feel and know His power and know what Grieves Him and know what makes Him pleased... Just like a man is meant to have an interactive relationship with His wife, so must a Human Being have an interactive relationship with the Holy Spirit.... and the key here is to NOT seek the Gift but to seek the Giver of the Gift ... This simply means that if you want provision then seek the provider, if you want healing then seek the healer.. You MUST always look to the source and not the supply.  So if you are not satisfied with your relationship with the divine then you have only one avenue to seek and find that satisfaction and His name is Jesus...

anonymous

mf doom Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #28
  • Rank:Poster Venti I
  • Score:6110
  • Posts:262
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:13/03/2005 7:23 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:24/10/2005 8:22 AMCopy HTML

hi. no offence to anyone, especially the proponets of salvation-by-tongues - this would be boring without you. i guess this is for everyone. i'll try and keep it concise.

salvation from what? - what are you scared of?

the bit about the cows coming home is about right... same with strangers coming home.

devil - opposites? no, deception. nemesis of god = too smart for you. mythical being anyway. male like god?

event - scribes - translation. and everything else in that span of time... including people who could be inspired by the devil.

you spoke in tongues, congratulations. you knew it was god - you didn't need any scriptures - want other people to know about it, why would they trust old scriptures more than you? 

why do people join church? ask yourself - was it a selfish motive? honestly. go further.

acts - death of an idol - mass hysteria? a prophesy open to fulfil

something is vague - it can be explained by anyone. depends what you're trying to sell, justify, disprove, defend.

personally - i would be worried if i was preaching the 'gospel of tongues'. brave move guys. saying that THAT is the gospel, especially based on what you base it on... i would seriously be scared that i am blaspheming!

the bible - interesting. part of it says it's complete and that it's true and that god wrote it! cool. how can anyone expect to escape it's clutches? it's a vortex. and nobody would probably liken it unto a fetish or golden calf.

thanks

 

 

 

 

 

if it gives you joy, enjoy! life aint pretty without it
mf doom Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #29
  • Rank:Poster Venti I
  • Score:6110
  • Posts:262
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:13/03/2005 7:23 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:24/10/2005 10:00 AMCopy HTML

the first thing on tongues i came across while almost looking up the greek definition

nothing special, but interesting to see in the form of a formal debate. the justice/grace binary oppostion is a different take...


SUMMARY: There are abuses in the body of Christ. God is just and God is full of grace. Abuses come when one takes either justice alone or grace alone. With justice alone, one is legalistic and focuses on doctrine as a means of salvation. With grace alone, one uses it as a license for sin or lack of order. This can occur in this debate, too. Don't abuse tongues (grace alone), but don't make the concordance your Bible. Tongues refers to both man-made langues and the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues. There are places in the Bible where the man-made languages are specified as well as at least the couple I have said, where speaking in tongues is specified. I put this here so that debaters can be cautious as to not commit blasphemy of the Holy Spirit as in Mark 3:29 (fully done when one denies who the Holy Spirit is as in dying and not knowing Christ as Savior and Lord -- denying Him -- for God is the Father, SON, and HOLY SPIRIT). Finally, what saves a man? Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross, His resurrection, and the sealing of a man's heart by the Holy Spirit. I believe the debater is likely saved (and definitely does great research and argues well), and I know I am saved. Neither he nor I fully know and understand scripture. What he or I believe about tongues is not a salvation issue. I believe he is mistaken. He likely believes I am (at least where I deviate from the ONLY MAN-MADE LANGUAGES to the speaking in TONGUES argument). We need to seek God and not cast judgment. Whoever is mistaken, may God direct to fullness and truth. I lack the gift of tongues, so that is not my motivation. As the debater and I disagree, I am confident that we will both see one another in Heaven and both be aghast by that which we did not fully understand in our finiteness. May we not be foolish in our argument. --BeaknDeakn
if it gives you joy, enjoy! life aint pretty without it
Warrick 007 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #30
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:24/10/2005 12:15 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : BRETT [Anonymous]

Text to be set font.OK I CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHEN WE FIRST CAME OUT OF THE GRC, I HAD THE SAME TENDENCY AS THAT. I DOUBTED EVERYTHING I EVER HEARD OR LEARNT IN THE GRC AND WAS PREPARED TO CHANGE OUR SALVATION DOCTRINE IF IT REALLY WAS JUST A FABRIACTION OF LLOYD LONGFIELD AND NOEL HOLLINS. I EVEN ENROLLED IN THE ASSEMBLIES OF GOD I.C.I. THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE AND TOOK A THEOLOGICAL COURSE ON THE HOLY SPIRIT. I REALLY WANTED TO

   I am really amazed that after all you seaching in to the Holy Ghost you would still retain a Tongues base church, GoD works in mighty ways in people who don't speak in tongues in the Body Of Christ today. Can u tell me what happens to people in your church if they dont't speak in tongues for a few months, and how you get them to speak in Toungues? And also what happens to some one in your group  if they do not speak in Tongues for say 12 months or even 2-3 years. You know very well  that these people feel shame and guilt  because every one else dose, but them! and most of these souls simply move on. Can you tell me how u have delt with such people in the pass, do u after some time stop them coming to your group? ALL of this happends in tongues base churchs. So what do you do?

 

ps You are saying at the end of your letters to me, STAY CALM, why? we are only talking, what on earth makes you think i'm getting worked up over a little chat room like this? I think its mrs pilinut who needs to take a chill pill.

A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"
Warrick 007 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #31
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:24/10/2005 1:05 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : HeatandServe


well i guess i would need hours to write my full story, i hope to one day.

     Well in short i was only 10 years old when  i was brought to the GRC. Up untill then i had a pritty wacked!!  upbringing, my pearents where hevey into heroin, armed robbery, atemped murder,  mum went to jail,so you get the picture?  I even saved my parents life's on 5 or 6 different time's beacuse of drug over dose, they werent breathing and the ambulance guys brought em back. So after this sort of life i could remember wondering what sort of a XXXX up life is this?

Then one day , after my Dad stole a heep of speed from a Bikey Gang, LOL... I swear it 's all true!  he had to get out of geelong because they wonted to kill him, so my dad dropped me and my younger brother  off on my grandma's door step and took off, and never came back for years. My grandam was a member of the GRC. My grandma was the most wonderful person,i never loved or cared for any one more than i did for her. So when i AM SAYING I i went through hell in the GRC, I AM IN NO WAY REFERING TO HER. BUT THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE GRC.

So to answer your Question when did i feel i was saved? well for me i went from a fire,into a bigger fire. If i had the choice between my childhood life, and the life i had in the GRC, I would have chose the hell of my childhood ten times over.  But one day i do remember walking to school and i was really calling out to God with all my heart for him to fill me with the HolyGhost, And i really felt his touch, and i felt an infilling of the spriit. and a peace and joy like i never had know in my troubled life, I straight way felt changed, i couldn't even swear at school, i really belieive i was filled then, and it wasn't till six months latter that i was told i was speaking in tongues. But i no it was 6 months before, that i received the Holy Ghost during that hard time with my dad.

 

wazza.

 

A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #32
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:24/10/2005 7:45 PMCopy HTML

$%*'`[Brett]%*'`@

Post deleted at the poster's request
-Moderator

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:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:24/10/2005 10:24 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Brett [Anonymous]

I must say to the moderator of this site that Wazza has made a violent, insulting personal attack on a GRC member, who is now dead and cannot reply to the terrible things that Wazza has implied about her. That person is my own mother.

We didn't know who Wazza was talking about until YOU made it public Brett. I think that reply belongs in a PM. You gave it much more life then it had and have gone way off topic and made a judgement about Wazza's christian soul that you have no right to do. No right at all, no matter who he was talking about. The question Wazza was asking in relation to this thread is as follows:



So to answer your Question when did i feel i was saved? ... one day i do remember walking to school and i was really calling out to God with all my heart for him to fill me with the HolyGhost, And i really felt his touch, and i felt an infilling of the spriit. and a peace and joy like i never had know in my troubled life, I straight way felt changed, i couldn't even swear at school, i really belieive i was filled then, and it wasn't till six months latter that i was told i was speaking in tongues. But i no it was 6 months before, that i received the Holy Ghost during that hard time with my dad.


and my question was as follows and I invite you to judge me as you just did Wazza... "Wazza I hope you do become a real Christian, coz your hateful, disgusting posting indicates that you're not" - Does the Lord take His spirit out of people nowadays? The tongue stand demands that you make some pretty tough calls now.



16 years ago when I first spoke in tongues I only did so so to get rid of all the guys who were crowding around me while I sat there in a batismal tank. There was pressure and it was easy to stutter away and get accepted. I definitely made it up at the start. During the next 15 years I must have received the spirit in your interpretation, surely. BUT WHAT MOMENT DID I RECIEVE THE SPIRIT!!!!! I HAVE NO IDEA... NONE WHATSOEVER... in your judgement, did I recieve at all? Surely during one of those thousands of of times I used the tongue it was 'real'...? There's no way I felt like one was more supernatural than another at any time. And remember, I was a zealous and dedicated member. When did I recieve it Brett? Did i recieve it at all in your opinion.


Some major issues are being avoided here.

 

[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
Warrick 007 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #34
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:24/10/2005 11:04 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Brett [Anonymous]

In this post I will respond to Wazza's comments in which he says that he preferred to be living with violent,criminal, murderous heroin users rather than with Christians who were trying to help him. Those Christians included my own now deceased mother and others.Yes, they were GRC, yes, they were deceived,yes, they were in a Christian cult, but they were decent people who were trying to do what they thought was right.I must say to the moderator of this site that Wazza has made a violent, insulting personal attack on a GRC member, who is now dead and cannot reply to the terrible things that Wazza has implied about her. That person is my own mother. Wazza's comments have crossed the line and because of the extremely vicious personal attack he has made against my deceased mother on a public forum, I must respond to him, which means that I will have to
Brett it made me sick in the guts to even think you thought i was  making a violent attack on my dear grandmar whom i loved and cared for with all my heart. i think your true colours are starting to show. I am sorry if my words made you think i was. I was only replying to Heart and Serve and to his question ABOUT WHEN I THOUGH IT WAS WHEN I RECIVED THE HOLY GOHST AND I HAD TO GIVE A LITTLE BACK GROUND IMFORMATION ABOUT MY LIFE,. When i said i went through hell in the GRC, IT HAD NOTHING TO WITH MY HOME AND PERSONAL LIFE!  WITH MY GRANDMA. WHOME I LOVED, SHE WAS THE BIGGEST INSPERATION IN MY LIFE, SHE MADE ME A GRATE MUSICIAN, TRAINED ME IN GODS WAY IN THE ONLY WAY SHE KNEW, I COULD NOT HAVE HOPE FOR A BETTER MUM, SHE WAS THE BEST! I MISS HER DEEPER THAN U WOULD EVER KNOW.
A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"
mf doom Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #35
  • Rank:Poster Venti I
  • Score:6110
  • Posts:262
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:13/03/2005 7:23 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:25/10/2005 6:20 AMCopy HTML

so let me get this straight, brett is popewazza's dad?
if it gives you joy, enjoy! life aint pretty without it
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #36
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:25/10/2005 10:07 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : pilinut

Reply to : popeWazza2ndit also made us feel 'sick to the guts' because that was how your first post could be understood before you edited it. After you called and cleared it upwe asked the moderator to delete that message. We couldn't delete it because Brett is not a member and posts made without logging in can't be modified by the poster.
deep down you both knew that Wazza was not talking about his Grandmother, how stupid of you both!
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #37
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:25/10/2005 2:26 PMCopy HTML

$%*'`[Brett]%*'`@Reply to : Anonymous

deep down you both knew that Wazza was not talking about his Grandmother, how stupid of you both!
Well what happened was very unfortunate.
After I posted my response to what I THOUGHT was an attack on my mother by Wazza, he called me up by phone and insisted to me that he didn't have her in mind whatsoever. I accepted that and told him we would ask that my post be deleted.
 However, I must state that the way Wazza phrased his comments DID cause me to think the way I did.
For example: I have lived in the Philippines for 19 years.If, for example, over the last year, and only the last year,I went thru some absolutely horrible and terrible experiences that made me feel like I had gone thru hell, and so I said " my life in the Philippines has been absolutely hell compared to my previous life in Australia", what impression will that give?
 I am sorry that things can get so misunderstood, I think it shows that when we post we need to be very exact and precise in how we express ourselves so as to avoid unfortunate incidents as this.
 I hope nobody wants to put me in a coma coz of what I've said.
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #38
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:25/10/2005 4:56 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Brett [Anonymous]

Well what happened was very unfortunate... I hope nobody wants to put me in a coma coz of what I've said.

These things happen.  As long as you guys worked it out and didn't resort to the ol' Revivalist tactic of never talking to each other again.  You only get one family after all...shame you can't pick them though.

But I do think you should both be put out of 'cyber' fellowship for 3-6 months and only be allowed back when you repent and when Ps Wrongfield says its ok.    (That's a joke people...a JOKE!)

 

Warrick 007 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #39
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:25/10/2005 5:51 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Brett [Anonymous]

Reply to : Anonymousdeep down you both knew that Wazza was not talking about his Grandmother, how stupid of you both!Well what happened was very unfortunate.After I posted my response to what I THOUGHT was an attack on my mother by Wazza, he called me up by phone and insisted to me that he didn't have her in mind whatsoever. I accepted that and told him we would ask that my post be deleted.However, I must state that the way Wazza phrased his comments DID cause me to think the way I did.For example: I have lived in the Philippines for 19 years.If, for example, over the last year, and only the last year,I went thru some absolutely horrible and terrible experiences that made me feel like I had gone thru hell, and so I said " my life in the Philippines has

  Brett as much as i would have loved to put you in a coma when i first read your post, lets move on and get back to the topic at hand shall we?, and that is Must You "Speak With Other Tongues" To Be Saved?

  Some say you must "speak with other tongues" or YOU CANNOT BE SAVED!  Believers are encouraged to " BE BAPTIZED with the Holy Ghost and with fire. Some are told to just "let their minds go to allow 'their word to came to them" and then to utter the special words God will give them. Is speaking in tongues the ONLY SURE PROOF you have been baptized with the Holy Ghost? MOST people in Tongues base church are very SINCERE!

Too often, we human beings adopt a hostile attiude toward those with different opinions, inwhich i heard for a good part of 20 years from my GRC pastar.

These millions today that say 'speaking in tongues" is the only proof one has the Holy Spirit. NONSENCE! Plainly the scripure says " For to one is given by the Spirit the gift of Wisdom, to ANOTHER (a different person) the word of wisdom, to ANOTHER Kinds of tongues(languages) Paul said " There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit such as wisdom, knowlege or faith.

Clearly, some had superior gifts of the Spirit , such as wisdom, knowlege, faith. Others had gifts of inspired Preaching. Others the gift of healing, and another the gift of discernment of spirits Another had the gift of tongues, or speaking in other, know, intelligible languages. Paul shows Not All OF THEM POSSESSED ALL THE GIFTS!!!  "Have all the gifts of healing? Do all Speak in Toungues? Do all discern? Are all TEACHERS?

So, since the Bible clearly shows tongues is only ONE of the nine spiritual gifts, and is listed EIGHTH among them, since it shows NOT ALL HAD THAT GIFT, the claim that the only evidence one has the Holy Spirit is "tongues-speaking" is not true.

What is the real proof of the HOLY SPIRIT?  God says, 'By ONE SPIRIT are we all baptized into one body. He says Repent, and be baptized every one of you of you for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the Holy Spirit.  WHEN we repent, and are baptised, God promises to give us the Holy Spirit. The proof of the Holy Spirirt is said to be LOVE, JOY,PEACE,  longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,meekness, temperance NOT tongues,tongues,tongues.

In closing i would just like to note-

1-The first time in all history anyone spoke in Tongues with other languages was to communicate the gosple to those of the foreign languages.

2-The miracle was in both the speaking and the HEARING.

3-John the Baptist, said by Jesus Christ to have been one of the greatest men to have ever lived, and a man who came in the "power and spirit of Elijah" never spoke in tongues, yet will be IN Gods Kingdom!

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, all the prophets, King David, Moses, Elijah and many others(see HEB 11) will be in Gods Kingdom yet None ever spoke with tongues. It is sad that many thousands, seeking for a "deeper" or more "fulfilling" religious experience have allowed themselves to be caught in the charismatic movement. They seek a "spiritual high" and believe the most important manifestation of Gods Holy Spirit is exercising what they call "speaking in unknown tongues" True to the prediction of Jesus Christ the MANY are being deceived. i have heard of individuals who where counseled to just let their minds go, and think of their word, which they would be encouraged to begin to repeat, endlessly over and over again! This is merely a form of self-hypnosis, and can be DANGEROUS, for it might invite"spiritual participation" from unwanted, and dangerous quarters!

Surely such people are Sincere.But sincerity, is not the test of TRUTH!.

wazza

 

 

 

A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #40
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:26/10/2005 10:25 AMCopy HTML

Just wondering what RCI'ers think about all the denominations that speak with tongues (ie. Catholics, mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses', Baptists, etc.).  So many people speak with tongues, but have different beliefs, are they all saved?  If they are all saved according to RCI, then it doesn't really matter what you believe to be saved.  If they aren't saved according to RCI - then tongues is not the sign of salvation.
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #41
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:26/10/2005 11:54 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : Anonymous

Just wondering what RCI'ers think about all the denominations that speak with tongues (ie. Catholics, mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses', Baptists, etc.). So many people speak with tongues, but have different beliefs, are they all saved? If they are all saved according to RCI, then it doesn't really matter what you believe to be saved. If they aren't saved according to RCI - then tongues is not the sign of salvation.

My dear old mum is a devout Catholic but regularly speaks in tongues at her Catholic Charasmatic meetings. I loathed and despised her during my time in the RCI/RF because of her ties with this 'evil' organisation. I pretty much gave her the cold shoulder for 14 years. Nice hey? We believed that although she had the spirit of God, she was stiffling it being unequally yoked with Pope Satan the 13th. "In with a chance", we'd say, but it doesn't look good.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

I'm still wondering when G/R/Rers believe I received the spirit? The first day I pretended to... or one of the subsequent times during the next 14 years? I honestly don't recall any singular moment. Some people give their life over in a moment but others make the decision slowly over time before the spirit fills their lives. I don't doubt my salvation but I wonder if others do?

What about Seeker's meetings? I used to go to these prayer sessions often and pray for people to recieve. Many left these meetings depressed and confused. They would seek every meeting - sometimes for months! Their heart was in it but we told them something along the lines of 'better luck next time' or 'Humble yourself more' or 'blah'... Where do we see such seekers in the bible who seek the spirit this way? That kinda sux.

I even saw one husband, who finally came along to his wife's church very humbly pray for the HS but never could get a hold of speaking gibberish... he hung around for ages trying.. but sadly gave up. HE WAS LIED TOO... and it was very sad to see. He looked and felt very rejected by God. It was then I started to doubt something about our tongues doctrine.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com
[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
Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #42
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:28/11/2005 11:17 PMCopy HTML

To the Pilinuts

What is your attitude or position on people falling under the power or getting slain in the Spirit ?? To be quite honest, I absolutely love it but I guess your past association with the Noel Hollins group it would be unmentionable but at the CRC where the the Rev centre fellowships came from, it is an accepted phenomenom and it is also accepted at CAI if it happens. It is documented that the founder of Rev Center International, Lloyd Longfield was slain in the Spirit when he first encountered the Holy Spirit... So to put it simply, I am just curious to know your position on this phenomenom.. 

anon

 

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #43
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:29/11/2005 1:29 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : Anonymous

It is documented that the founder of Rev Center International, Lloyd Longfield was slain in the Spirit when he first encountered the Holy Spirit...

Ahem... 

I am not going to argue the validity of the 'slain in the Spirit' experience here, but...Documented fact?  Documented where? 

In my  years of researching the Revival Centres, I too heard the story that LL was 'slain in the Spirit' mostly from ex-members who had joined other Pentecostal churches.  I think the idea came from Barry Chant's Heart of Fire book which says that Lloyd 'dropped to the floor'.  Now I agree, Barry's description could possibly read as a 'slain the Spirit' experience.  But it could also be taken other ways.  Longfield dropped to the floor how?  But all the same, Chant's book is a secondary source.  He wasn't there. 

More importantly, when I actually interviewed Tom Foster and Lloyd Longfield, primary sources who were both there, neither corroborated that LL was 'slain in the Spirit' at all. 

Foster claimed that Longfield dropped to his knees, lifted his hands and spoke out in tongues. [Telephone interview with Thomas Foster, 1994.] Longfield confirms this at least in part by saying,

...I went along one night to a little hall in Melbourne and out of the blue received the Holy Spirit. [Recorded interview with Lloyd Longfield. Hawthorn, Victoria. 1/9/1994.]

Foster said that LL 'dropped to his knees' and 'lifted his hands'.   The slain in the Spirit experience is usually a falling backward or even a kind of crumpling, with a psuedo unconsciousness.  I really don't believe there is any evidence that LL was 'slain in the Spirit' as you would identify the experience.

Now as I said, my comments here are not meant to undermine the validity of the experience for you and others.  I am simply disputing your 'documented fact' concerning Longfield for the sake of historical accuracy.

Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #44
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:29/11/2005 8:57 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : MrJonah

Reply to : AnonymousIt is documented that the founder of Rev Center International, Lloyd Longfield was slain in the Spirit when he first encountered the Holy Spirit...Ahem...I am not going to argue the validity of the 'slain in the Spirit' experience here, but...Documented fact? Documented where?In my years of researching the Revival Centres, I too heard the story that LL was 'slain in the Spirit' mostly from ex-members who had joined other Pentecostal churches.I think the idea came from Barry Chant'sHeart of Firebook which says that Lloyd 'dropped to the floor'. Now I agree, Barry's description could possibly read as a 'slain the Spirit' experience. But it could also be taken other ways.&nb

Ahem,

I ACTUALLY heard the story for the first time 24 years ago coming from non other than LL's ex-No 1 Son who is Paul Longfield and Paul said from my memory of all those years ago that his father actually fell on his face... Now time has faded my memory of it but truthfully I can tell you that I first heard the story from Paul Longfield..... Your documentation on your web site and the Barry Chant Heart of Fire of Fire Book only confirmed to me the "narrative" that I FIRST heard from Paul Longfield at a Rev Centre meeting all those years ago.... 

anon 

Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #45
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:29/11/2005 9:28 AMCopy HTML

To Mr Jonah, this link is probably an associate of yours:

 
HISTORY OF BRITISH-ISRAEL (THE AOG SPLIT)

Have you ever noticed that strange statement at the bottom of the Revival Centre 'We Believe' list? The first point starts off, "We believe in the infallibility of the Bible...". Sounds great. A few other beliefs follow. Then, hidden at the bottom, is "We believe the Bible identifies the Anglo-Saxon people with the Old Testament nation of Israel ...". What? Where on earth did they come up with that one!?

In fact, how the Revival Centres inherited this doctrine, called 'British-Israelism', is quite interesting.

Hundreds of years before the first Revival Centre, the first 'British-Israel' manifesto was issued. British-Israelism was first hinted at by the British Member of Parliament, John Sadler, in his Rights of the Kingdom (1649). But the movement began in the eighteenth century after the self-styled 'Nephew of the Almighty', Richard Brothers, published his book A Revealed Knowledge of the Prophecies and Times (1794). Brothers was, as one source puts it, "a Canadian madman". He became troubled by visions, and said that the British parliament was the 'beast' of Revelation. Brothers believed he was a descendant of King David, and that only he had the right to be king of England. Unfortunately for him, King George III disagreed. The Cambridge Biographical Enyclopedia (1994) says:

Brothers, Richard (1757-1824) British religious fanatic and ex-naval officer, born in Newfoundland, Canada. He announced himself in 1793 as the 'nephew of the Almighty', apostle of a new religion, the Anglo-Israelites. In 1795, for prophesying the destruction of the monarchy, he was sent to Newcastle and subsequently to an asylum.

Brothers was confined to the mental asylum from 1795-1806. Despite this, and the failure of his prophecy that Jerusalem would be restored to the Hebrews in 1798, his movement flourished. By the end of the nineteenth century, there were said to number two million adherents of British-Israelism, most of them Church of England members. In 1859, John Taylor of London expanded the theory into the field of Pyramidology. In the book The Great Pyramid, Why Was It Built and Who Built It? John Taylor tried to show how Israelites built the Pyramid of Cheops, and how British Inches and measurements could be found in its design.

In 1928, a man called Tom Foster visited the pyramids of Egypt and seems to have been 'hooked'. When, in 1930, he became 'born again' he retained his ideas about it with a new Christian slant - seemingly taking on these new teachings about Pyramids and Lost Tribes.

Getting in to more modern times, the Revival Centre position on British-Israel can be traced back to the one-time Assembly of God ('AoG') preacher, Leo Harris. Leo was on a Revival tour in Victoria in 1941. He and his brother Allan were staying in the house of a Miss Finlayson, who was very interested in Bible prophecy. She informed them that Tom Foster would be speaking in the Ballarat City Hall on Sunday 30 November, 1941 (3PM). When they found out that the talk would be on British-Israelism, they informed Miss Finlayson that they held opposing views and were not interested. In the end, they went with the elderly lady to satisfy her. They left, after the meeting, thinking it was the end of the matter.

When, however, Tom showed up to their AOG meeting at the Manchester Unity Hall, Leo Harris was quite upset. He told his brother Allan to 'do the courtesies', but Tom stayed behind and eventually got into conversation with Leo. Leo reluctantly agreed to get together with Tom for general fellowship on 1 December, 1941. Now, that morning, Leo became very impressed with Tom's views of Revelation. Over lunch, he also acceded to the British-Israel teaching. Because of these new views, the Assemblies of God no longer accepted Leo Harris in their fellowships.

In 1944-5, Leo came to Adelaide and started up a 'National Revival Crusade Centre' (in 1963 they became known as the 'Christian Revival Crusade'), and taught British-Israel. From Adelaide, Leo Harris planted assemblies in other Australian cities. In 1949, a car salesman named Lloyd Richard Longfield was baptised and 'slain in the Spirit' under Tom Foster. During World War II, Lloyd had been a staff sergeant in the AIF in Egypt. He also had visited the Great Pyramid, and was also 'hooked' (Voice of Revival, Vol.14, No.2). From there the story is well known. After disagreements, Lloyd Longfield left the fellowship. With Noel Hollins of Geelong, the "two Victorian Assemblies in 1958 aligned themselves as the Melbourne and Geelong Revival Centres".

We know from old Revival Crusade books that they taught British-Israel and Pyramidology until about 1977. But after Leo Harris' death in that year, British-Israel theology gradually disappeared from their 'belief' list. The Revival Centres International, however, continued to teach British-Israel, and the doctrine was ardently preached by Lloyd Longfield in National Conventions. In 1995, when the Revival Centres split, both the Revival Centres International (Melbourne) and the Revival Fellowship (Adelaide) continued to teach British-Israel.

What do reputable historians and anthropologists say about British-Israelism? The theory can quickly be set aside as having no basis. One anthropologist, Dr. Calvin Kephart, says that the Anglo-Saxons and the Israelites are genetically different races. So, they cannot be the same peoples! In his book, Races of Mankind (1961), page 150, he states, "Since the original Hebrews were Kassites, of typically Turkic build, i.e., with tawny complexion, of medial height and stocky build, with prominent nose, and brachycephalous, all efforts to identify Aryan Nordic people of Europe as descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel are doomed to failure. A more futile task is inconceivable".

 

?1997, Adelaide Revival Centre Information. P.O. Box 494, Glenside, South Australia, 5065. All rights reserved. Feel free to copy and distribute any information on this page as you like, but please don't try to sell it without my permission. Unless otherwise indicated, the Scripture quotations contained herein are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, Copyright 1989, by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

 

Anonymous Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #46
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re:(Pillnut) - Tongues as evidence of Salvation

Date Posted:29/11/2005 10:06 AMCopy HTML

 

RCI prophesies
Copyright © 2000-2019 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.