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.
no matter what name they have Don't you think it is an inaccurate statement to say that different churches divide the body of Christ? Most Baptists and Assembly of God, Methodists, Reformers, and Presbyterians will agree that we are all one body in Christ and all agree on the most important aspects of salvation and consider one another brothers and sisters in Christ.
Many of them still join together for evangelistic events and let the people who get saved decide which church they want to attend on their own.
Many of them still join together for evangelistic events and let the people who get saved decide which church they want to attend on their own.
Not at all.
Instead, we should ask: if divisions of location are the only Biblically permitted form of division then why do we tolerate these other forms?
We should begin with the standard of the scripture and compare from there, not make concessions for our differences. If we find that our differences do no violence to the scriptures then we are free to permit them. But, if they are contrary, we should examine them closely with skepticism.
Instead, we should ask: if divisions of location are the only Biblically permitted form of division then why do we tolerate these other forms?
We should begin with the standard of the scripture and compare from there, not make concessions for our differences. If we find that our differences do no violence to the scriptures then we are free to permit them. But, if they are contrary, we should examine them closely with skepticism.
As we all probably are, in one way or another.
If you look at the New Testament, many of the books were written to churches that were missing the mark in one way or another, or in several ways..... still, Paul called them "brothers". We have a lot of freedom in Christ... in my understanding, there are very few "absolutes". Most everything else is left up to the maturity/understanding of the Spirit led individual. Where we usually get into trouble and create factions is when we try to impose OUR understanding and conscience on others. "I believe this way, so YOU must, also"
If you look at the New Testament, many of the books were written to churches that were missing the mark in one way or another, or in several ways..... still, Paul called them "brothers". We have a lot of freedom in Christ... in my understanding, there are very few "absolutes". Most everything else is left up to the maturity/understanding of the Spirit led individual. Where we usually get into trouble and create factions is when we try to impose OUR understanding and conscience on others. "I believe this way, so YOU must, also"
Paul would write to the Corinthians: "Therefore I urge you, imitate me. For this reason I have sent Timothy to you, who is my beloved and faithful son in the Lord, who will remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every church."
And also: "Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."
There are many more examples.
It sounds like Paul was saying "I believe this way, so you must also". Also, if Paul is to be trusted, we do not have freedom in Christ to divide.
And also: "Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."
There are many more examples.
It sounds like Paul was saying "I believe this way, so you must also". Also, if Paul is to be trusted, we do not have freedom in Christ to divide.
-
1
- Show all
And nobody is saying to "divide"... at least I am not. I am saying that each believer has to walk his own walk with God, as the Spirit guides him and gives him understanding. You should not force a weaker (or stronger) believer to believe the exact same way that you do. Scripture backs this up....
-
1
- Show all
Clarifying question: So, all believers are left to their own interpretations of scripture? If that is the case, that's a recipe for lawlessness where each one does what they think is right in their own eyes, or perhaps thousands of denominations (But, perhaps you weren't saying that).
Regarding "You should not force a weaker (or stronger) believer to believe the exact same way that you do". I'm not sure where "forcing others" came into the discussion. However, Paul clearly said that the saints were to imitate him as he imitates Christ and that he desired that all would be of the same mind about everything. If I follow the thread, Paul was clearly saying that all should think like him.
And just to be clear, we are not talking about the unique perspective and experiences of the soul. Paul was talking about life in the Body of Christ.
Regarding "You should not force a weaker (or stronger) believer to believe the exact same way that you do". I'm not sure where "forcing others" came into the discussion. However, Paul clearly said that the saints were to imitate him as he imitates Christ and that he desired that all would be of the same mind about everything. If I follow the thread, Paul was clearly saying that all should think like him.
And just to be clear, we are not talking about the unique perspective and experiences of the soul. Paul was talking about life in the Body of Christ.
not at all. Jesus Christ is the foundation on which all scripture must be built. All scripture has ONE interpretation as God intended it to be, however, all scripture can have more than one application.
The foundational truth of God's word all stands today. Orthodox Christianity must hold to the Word of God concerning Christ to which if any were not true Our faith would be in vain.
The foundational truth of God's word all stands today. Orthodox Christianity must hold to the Word of God concerning Christ to which if any were not true Our faith would be in vain.
- the One true God
- The Deity of Christ
- the Holy Spirit
- The authoritative word of God
- the creation of man
- the fall of man
- Gods salvation
- the virgin birth
- literal the death burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ
- return of Christ.
It seems that you are pretty well prejudiced against the Pentecostal movement, flavouring your interpretation of the history. The fact is that "Pentecostal" describes many different Christian groups right around the world who believe in the continuation of the spiritual gifts, including the gift of tongues. Prominent figures such as Kenny Copeland, Benny Hinn, Bill Johnson, represent just particular factions of Pentecostalism which are exaggerated forms of it. The hard core of those calling themselves Pentecostal are spread across the world in small churches and groups, either as stand alone fellowships or part of traditional denominations, the vast majority you've never heard of. You will never see any of these groups featured on Youtube videos.
-
1
- Show all
