Pentecostalism's sketchy origins
- Thread starter ResidentAlien
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
HEALTH:
I think it is appropriate, and healthy, to have "polite" debate about doctrinal issues.
PRIORITIES:
However, although the issue of continuationism vs cessationism may have been the most prominent issue 20 years ago, I don't feel it's the most pressing issue right now.
TODAY'S PROBLEM:
We literally have churches "deconstructing" the entire bible based on philosophical relativism - claiming that "object truth" either does not exist, or cannot be known. They are having "metaphysical bible studies", where they sit around, with big glassy eyes, and everyone just guesses at what a passage means "to them." People have done this for a while, but NOW it's with the explicit understanding that this subjective interpretation is the ONLY interpretation that exists... there IS NO OBJECTIVE MEANING TO THE BIBLE AT ALL.
The bible doesn't really mean anything at all... nothing... so let's just guess at what it means to US.
TODAY'S DESOLATION:
In this new and desolate philosophical landscape:
There ARE NO REAL DOCTRINES,
there ARE NO CLEAR MEANINGS,
there ARE NO PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION.
There is just US... just US... and we interpret the bible in whatever blind and bizarre way feels good to US... whatever suits our views, our proclivities, and our predispositions... whatever suits US.
POPULAR:
This is what is POPULAR in the churches.
Because... this is what is POPULAR in the culture.
The culture, as it is ever prone to do, continues to infect the churches, in every generation, with some new and increasingly malignant illness.
CONCLUSION:
1.) It is good and healthy to debate, politely, doctrinal differences.... it's part of how we all learn and grow. It's good.
2.) Right now, for me, the charismatic debate is at the bottom of my list.
3.) Why?
The cessationist says, "our view is true", the coninuationist says, "Our view is true", the progressive says, "There is no truth., except how I happen to feel."
Take care everyone, and I hope you all have a blessed week.
.
I think it is appropriate, and healthy, to have "polite" debate about doctrinal issues.
PRIORITIES:
However, although the issue of continuationism vs cessationism may have been the most prominent issue 20 years ago, I don't feel it's the most pressing issue right now.
TODAY'S PROBLEM:
We literally have churches "deconstructing" the entire bible based on philosophical relativism - claiming that "object truth" either does not exist, or cannot be known. They are having "metaphysical bible studies", where they sit around, with big glassy eyes, and everyone just guesses at what a passage means "to them." People have done this for a while, but NOW it's with the explicit understanding that this subjective interpretation is the ONLY interpretation that exists... there IS NO OBJECTIVE MEANING TO THE BIBLE AT ALL.
The bible doesn't really mean anything at all... nothing... so let's just guess at what it means to US.
TODAY'S DESOLATION:
In this new and desolate philosophical landscape:
There ARE NO REAL DOCTRINES,
there ARE NO CLEAR MEANINGS,
there ARE NO PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION.
There is just US... just US... and we interpret the bible in whatever blind and bizarre way feels good to US... whatever suits our views, our proclivities, and our predispositions... whatever suits US.
POPULAR:
This is what is POPULAR in the churches.
Because... this is what is POPULAR in the culture.
The culture, as it is ever prone to do, continues to infect the churches, in every generation, with some new and increasingly malignant illness.
CONCLUSION:
1.) It is good and healthy to debate, politely, doctrinal differences.... it's part of how we all learn and grow. It's good.
2.) Right now, for me, the charismatic debate is at the bottom of my list.
3.) Why?
The cessationist says, "our view is true", the coninuationist says, "Our view is true", the progressive says, "There is no truth., except how I happen to feel."
Take care everyone, and I hope you all have a blessed week.
.
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all
The false doctrine of 'cessation of Gifts' and 'philosophical relativism' are directly related and the first one leads to the other.
Every truth of God will come under attack from the enemy.
Which brings us full circle to "the Promise of the Father which we have heard from Christ" as the Remedy that God grants to His Children to combat the spirit of error and antichrist.
Every truth of God will come under attack from the enemy.
Which brings us full circle to "the Promise of the Father which we have heard from Christ" as the Remedy that God grants to His Children to combat the spirit of error and antichrist.
By this I mean the absence of living witnesses is irrelevant.
False accusations.
Calling Pentecostals liars.
Stuck in the OT.
accusing them of being propagandists.
Attacking their beliefs.
Comparing Pentecostals to LDS & Jehovah's witnesses.
Claiming there's no living witnesses when you're surrounded by them.
By the anger you've stirred up you've proven it doesn't bother you to offend the brethren.
I once gave you the shadow of the doubt that maybe you was simply ignorant of some things... but no more.
Pardon me sir, but your evil fruits are showing.
I can only hope the mods can see what I see.
-
2
- Show all
Shouldn't you stop and consider the feelings of those you are attacking?
I agree that insulting people and name calling is wrong. However, let's not allow the truth to be clouded by getting upset.
-
1
- Show all
I suggest that you read 1st Corinthians chapter 1
'What I mean is this: Individuals among you are saying, “I follow Paul,” “I follow Apollos,” “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.”'
You are telling me that this is not the root of denominationalism? No other church was rebuked in this manner.
'What I mean is this: Individuals among you are saying, “I follow Paul,” “I follow Apollos,” “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.”'
You are telling me that this is not the root of denominationalism? No other church was rebuked in this manner.
-
1
- Show all
Praise God Brother that you know this from 1 Corinthians and it is essential you SEE this scripture for in it is the revelation of where and when the divisions began.
Make no mistake that the dividing of the Body of Christ into factions is of satan and was well planned.
Dwell on what I said and pray.
PEACE
Make no mistake that the dividing of the Body of Christ into factions is of satan and was well planned.
Dwell on what I said and pray.
PEACE
-
1
- Show all
How?
By getting in the gutter and searching youtube for "bizarre baptist behavior"?
Accusing all Baptists of being liars and being exactly like Westborough ?
Showcasing hank hannegraff,s scandalous behavior, and plagiarism?(putting out a thread that says Hank is like all baptists,they are all crooks and con artists.?)
I do not have any need to do what RA does on this forum.
Total waste of time.
By getting in the gutter and searching youtube for "bizarre baptist behavior"?
Accusing all Baptists of being liars and being exactly like Westborough ?
Showcasing hank hannegraff,s scandalous behavior, and plagiarism?(putting out a thread that says Hank is like all baptists,they are all crooks and con artists.?)
I do not have any need to do what RA does on this forum.
Total waste of time.
-
1
- Show all
I think he is targeting all of the different denominations and non denominations and charismatics in one lump attempt to paint them all with a broad brush based on bad characters and doctrinal errors found in historical accounts of various individuals or teachings that have cropped up.
It is very similar to discounting all protestants because of the scandalous errors both personal and doctrinal in people like Luther and Calvin, and because they came out of Catholicism. Root bad/ tree bad..reasoning just does not work in the way he is attempting to paint it.
If I really felt like discussing Pentecostal doctrine with someone who did not agree with my interpretation of scriptures I would focus on the hermeneutics of the scriptures that we disagree on instead.
This idea that examining the worst examples in a branch of the christian church is how to decide on interpretation of a scripture is not logical. It is not one of the rules of hermeneutics.
I would examine the scriptures in question and discuss those instead. I care about what the scriptures mean, and what God intended when he inspired the writers and how I am to apply them and live them.
I don't determine that based on the history of various characters in Church history, of any movement. I focus on the scriptures themselves and decide what is the best interpretation.
Discussing the scandals of fallen preachers or wierdos involved in any branch of Church history is not one of the rules of hermeneutics and not something I study about when examining a text.
And you are right about finding bad examples and wierdos in every branch of the christian church. Have you heard what Calvin was guilty of? Or some of the things that Luther wrote? Don't even get me started on Augustine.
The truth is that almost everything in many non pentecostal churches are disengenuious and long since given over to dead formalism and questionable sincerity such that the whole daily operation is eat up with falsity and fakeness and hardly a genuine born again saint to be found, but the Pentecostal churches are filled with holy living, on fire for God, bible students who are living the Gospel, acting like Jesus, and faultless in word and deed, and one must look far and wide to find an example who is fake, or a hypocrite so they can use them to paint the whole basket as rotten. Meanwhile their own non pentecostal denomination is twice rotten, plucked up by the roots, apostate and hasn't seen a soul saved in 10 years. But they love it because of the "tradition" and the stained glass and the quietness when they sit in the pew and listen to their monotone alcoholic preacher say nothing Sunday after Sunday.
Yeah... It's the Pentecostals turning the world upside down in the last days with world wide evangelism that we need to expose? sure...
It is very similar to discounting all protestants because of the scandalous errors both personal and doctrinal in people like Luther and Calvin, and because they came out of Catholicism. Root bad/ tree bad..reasoning just does not work in the way he is attempting to paint it.
If I really felt like discussing Pentecostal doctrine with someone who did not agree with my interpretation of scriptures I would focus on the hermeneutics of the scriptures that we disagree on instead.
This idea that examining the worst examples in a branch of the christian church is how to decide on interpretation of a scripture is not logical. It is not one of the rules of hermeneutics.
I would examine the scriptures in question and discuss those instead. I care about what the scriptures mean, and what God intended when he inspired the writers and how I am to apply them and live them.
I don't determine that based on the history of various characters in Church history, of any movement. I focus on the scriptures themselves and decide what is the best interpretation.
Discussing the scandals of fallen preachers or wierdos involved in any branch of Church history is not one of the rules of hermeneutics and not something I study about when examining a text.
And you are right about finding bad examples and wierdos in every branch of the christian church. Have you heard what Calvin was guilty of? Or some of the things that Luther wrote? Don't even get me started on Augustine.
The truth is that almost everything in many non pentecostal churches are disengenuious and long since given over to dead formalism and questionable sincerity such that the whole daily operation is eat up with falsity and fakeness and hardly a genuine born again saint to be found, but the Pentecostal churches are filled with holy living, on fire for God, bible students who are living the Gospel, acting like Jesus, and faultless in word and deed, and one must look far and wide to find an example who is fake, or a hypocrite so they can use them to paint the whole basket as rotten. Meanwhile their own non pentecostal denomination is twice rotten, plucked up by the roots, apostate and hasn't seen a soul saved in 10 years. But they love it because of the "tradition" and the stained glass and the quietness when they sit in the pew and listen to their monotone alcoholic preacher say nothing Sunday after Sunday.
Yeah... It's the Pentecostals turning the world upside down in the last days with world wide evangelism that we need to expose? sure...
I think you misunderstood Oncefallen's point.
He didn't mean you should "do" some external thing, he meant you should "do" an internal thing... you should simply refuse to be upset by unkind words toward your denomination.
We do possess the ability to control our anger.
(I'm not suggesting it's easy... just that it can be done.)
And if you want to do something more proactive, you can always:
a.) Place RA on ignore.
b.) Stop reading his posts
c.) Debate him well, and disprove his contentions.
Take care, and if you all kill each other by tomorrow... I'll see you all on the other side.
: )
.
He didn't mean you should "do" some external thing, he meant you should "do" an internal thing... you should simply refuse to be upset by unkind words toward your denomination.
We do possess the ability to control our anger.
(I'm not suggesting it's easy... just that it can be done.)
And if you want to do something more proactive, you can always:
a.) Place RA on ignore.
b.) Stop reading his posts
c.) Debate him well, and disprove his contentions.
Take care, and if you all kill each other by tomorrow... I'll see you all on the other side.
: )
.
-
1
- Show all
