Apostolic JESUS ONLY CHURCH i nc

[Anonymous (68.119.47.6)]

does any one have experiance or have had an experiance with the pastor of this church. he calls all who dont beleive as he does dirt bags and scum. this is unchristain. would like to hear about it

[Anonymous (68.119.47.6)]

i also meant to add that this pastor is very abusive in calling people false, hypocrties deceived, dirt bags, scum. i pity any one who gets in a church like that

[Anonymous (68.119.47.6)]

sombody out there surley has heard of this man write pleease

[Anonymous (69.242.21.100)]

there is some of them on the local cable channel ,one guy reads and then the pastor reads and expounds ,they say women cant wear pants , have to cover their heads , etc. they got traditions of men , making the word of God of none effect by their vain traditions

[Anonymous (68.119.47.6)]

AS FAR AS I KNOW THE MAN I AM REFERRING TOO DOES NOT HAVE HAVE A T/V/ PROGRAM HE IS VERY DOWN ON BEING BAPTISED IN THE NAME OF JESUS AND SAYS ANY ONE WHO ISNT IS LOST AND A FALSE SCUM AND MANY OTHER THINGS
HE TOLD ME THE BLOOD DID NOT SAVE THAT OBEDIANCE DID

[Anonymous (172.158.25.78)]

Then he is not a Christian. (John 3:16) He is a Jew and is lost himself.

[steve (68.119.205.144)]

as far as i know he is not a JEW he does not mention JEWS. he only hollers about being baptised in THE NAME OF JESUS. HE CALL PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT BAPTISED IN THAT NAME scum false relighious dity bags and many other names that border on crussing or cussing in the more famialr tone

[EDDIE (68.119.37.147)]

WHAT HAS BOWEL MOVEMENT GOT TO DO WITH THIS BOARD. ISNT THIS A BOARD ABOUT JESUS AND RELIGIOUS TALK

[Anonymous (172.148.33.176)]

If he adds baptism as a requirement to salvation then he is a Jew. John 3:16 does not mention baptism. Baptism of the spirit is part of being born again. But not the physical dunking in the water. Jews live by man made law. Christians are saved by faith alone. So the guy you are referring to is, for all intents and purposes is not a Christian but, a Jew. Do you get my point?

[WALTER (68.119.37.147)]

THE MAN IS GENTILE. NOT JEWISH. HE IS OFF ON HIS DOCTRINE WAY OFF AND PERHAPS NOT EVEN SAVED BUT FOOED INTO A FALSE DOCTRINE BUT HE IS NOT A JEW. CHRISTIANS ARE SAVED BY FAITH PLUS NOTHING BUT THEY SHOULD FOLOW THE LORD IN BAPTISUM NOT TO BE SAVED BUT AS A SIGN OF THEIR NEW LIFE IN CHRIST. GET YOUR OWN DOCTRINE STRIAGHT ARE YOU SAVED.

[anon (68.119.37.147)]

waiting for some one else to write in..

[ANON (68.119.37.147)]

this man as far as i know is still spouting his vile raveings against every on who beleives in THE TRINITY

[Anon 172 (205.188.117.20)]

Baptism by water is symbolic (not required) of the baptism of the Holy Spirit required for salvation. Yes.

[WALTER (68.119.37.147)]

THEN IF WATER IS REQUIRED FOR SALVATION JESUS WOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO DIE AND SHED BLOOD FOR THE BIBLE SAYS WITH OUT THE SHEDING OF BLOOD THERE IS NO... NO... REMISSION OF SINS

[Anonymous (216.119.139.236)]

What do we do with this Bible Verse? Acts 2:38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

[Anonymous (64.12.117.20)]

Don't add to John 3:16. Baptism by water is symbolic of the real thing. Baptism of the Holy Spirit. That comes from our belief in Jesus Christ. Not water baptism. (Poor people in the desert who have no fresh water to spare.) Does that verse mean if you don't get baptised by water, that you won't receive the Holy Spirit and won't be saved? No.

[Anonymous (216.119.134.153)]

I did not add to John 3:16. Did you read only John 3:16? Can we just cut up the rest of the Bible and only keep one verse? Was John the Baptist in the Garden when he Baptized Jesus? Sounds like we can delete or change God's Holy Word like the New Bibles are doing to suit our own teaching and not all of God's Word as it was written.

[walter (68.119.37.147)]

acts 2:38 means under the authority of... when we say stop in the name of the law we actuly mean in the name of the law

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

I am a Jesus only. I do not come against any trinity people. Though there are members of both sides of the issue who give out terrible tirades on the other.
Only thing I know, is I researched trinity baptism. And, it was not used until after the Nicean Counil which formed the Catholic church. Until then according to historical documents every one was baptized Acts 2:38.
Even Catholic Scholars acknowledged this. I am not saying you are lost for being baptized that way. But, don't tell me I am lost either. God Bless you in Jesus name.

[arron (arron)]

i beleive in baptizing the way JESUS HIMSELF taught to be baptized.. in the name OF THE FATHER THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST
I DO NOT THINK ANY ONE IS LOST JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF JESUS. WE ARE ALL SAVED BY THE GRACE OF GOD NOTHING ELSE

[franklin (franklin)]

What is a Jesus Only Church all about?

[arron (arron)]

THEY BELEIVE THAT THERE IS NO TRINITY. THAT JESUS IS THE FATHER JESUS IS THE HOLY GHOST ALL OF WHICH IS FALSE DOCTRINE AND THEY BELEIVE IN BEING BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF JESUS WHICH IS ALSO A FALSE DOCTRINE

[rockin4jesus (rockin4jesus)]

I had to check this one out... I came from a Jesus only church, and c'mon people there are many references to baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ, all over the book of acts.. how can that be a false doctrine, find the word trinity in scripture, or one time someone is actually baptized, in scripture, having said over them "in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost.... As far as the abusive pastor, sounds like a control freak, and unfortunatley they loom in all churches... Ever consider that the name of the father and of the son and of the holy ghost might just be Jesus Christ, just for a moment consider that... that's all I ask...

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

John 1:1,14

In the beginning was the Word(Jesus), and the Word was with God, and the Word WAS God. And, the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.

John 11:30
I and my Father are one.

Acts 2:36
...God hath made this same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, BOTH Lord and Christ.


Isaiah 43:11-12
I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour. I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore you are my witnesses, saith the Lord(Jesus), that I AM GOD.

That is why we believe in one and not three. And, as far as trinitarian baptism goes. Peter was there when Jesus said to baptize in Father So and Holy Ghost. So when he baptized people in Jesus Christ's name. I guess he knew what he was doing.

If anyone should know what Jesus meant it should be Peter. He was the one to know he was Christ. He also walked on water. And, Jesus did say he would build his church on him.


Revelation 19:1
...I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; salvation, and glory, and honor, and power, unto the LORD OUR GOD.

[arron (arron)]

then if they were baptized in any other way than IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER , AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY GHOST they were not baptised as JESUS said to befor those were HIS WORDS . no where does the BIBLE say that JEHOVAH ( THE NAME OF THE FATHER) nor THE HOLY GHOST is named JESUS. the are ONE in perfect unity, yet there are three, JESUS prayed to THE FATHER, NOT TO HIMSELF

[rockin4jesus (rockin4jesus)]

I would like everyone to know, I am not upc... And I don't believe in arguing over this issue, I don't believe in a trinity. God is not a split personlality. But what is needed is only to know that Jesus is the Son of God. But people, The only way people were baptized was in the Name of Jesus Christ, plain and simple. Even our secular or worldy history proves this. It was changed by the Catholic Church they say be divine right in 325 A.D. Check it out for yourself, the scripture only confirms this. Not only were all converts baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins, but it was done at the moment of conversion. Read the book of Acts people. Jesus told his deciples to baptize in the name, (he did not say repeat these words) of the father, and of the son, and of the Holy Ghost. Here is a question who fathered Jesus Christ. For it says that Mary was over shadowed of the Holy Ghost. Therefore their cannot be three. God is the Holy Ghost, that is who he is. God is a spirit. Jesus was completly a man, and completly God. When he was praying he was weak in the flesh, and was completly human. The man Christ Jesus was praying to God. Don't make it so complicated. As a man, he was completly human. Colossians 2:8-9 reads Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Do not get stuck on tradition, because my pastor says this, or it's always been this way. Again read Acts. Read it, and pray it with an open mind. Don't fall into the trap of following tradition rather than Christ. We are told to beware, it's a warning from God people, this issue could cost you your salvation...

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

There is one Spirit. Different offices of that Spirit. When It was in Heaven, it was in capacity of God the Father. When he was on earth he was God the Son. When he ascended he came back as the Holy Ghost.

There is one Lord. And, the Lord is that Spirit. And, Jesus Christ is Lord. Jesus is the name of the father, son, and Holy Ghost.

Like rockin5jesus said. Jesus name baptism was the only one used for the first three hundred years of christianity. Even catholic scholars acknowledge this. But, they say that The Church supercedes that with their doctrine of trinitarian baptism.

[turtle (turtle)]

does any one have experiance or have had an experiance with the pastor of this church. he calls all who dont beleive as he does dirt bags and scum. this is unchristain. would like to hear about it
above is orginal post.
If you are still on this board the one that post this. That preachers first name isn't Gary by some chance.

[arron (arron)]

no his name is not gary his first name is steve. he is very abusive in talk. he call all scum bags i can imagine the torment his children and wife go through. he has long fuzzy hair on his face and says that GOD told him to wear it. in my estmation he is a nut

[turtle (turtle)]

REason for asking was he sounded alot like this so called pastor i meet. He use bad language and such from the pulpit. No beard. Like to make fun of people in his congregation and people his congregation new.

[acts238 (acts238)]

jason_stone and rockin4jesus are correct. I had my Oneness revelation after much studing and after reading 1timothy 3:16
16And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

here is a web-site that has information on the oneness of God http://www.gloriouschurch.com/html/Oneness-Questions-And-Answers.asp

Hope this helps anyone that has questions on the Oneness of God. I am so thankful my God put on a rob of Flesh and died for me.
}

[rhino_co (rhino_co)]

"Go therefore and teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of the father and of the son and of the holy spirit" Mathew 28:17

To deny the trinity is denying the multi dementional powers of god. By practiing oneness you are confining God into your demensions. You are therefore being idolitrous.

You cannot fully understand Gods meaning by simply taking snipits here and there out of scripture. You have to look how it has been for centeries. The Catholic church has recorded documentation of the Baptisms being performed in the trinitarian method. They are not the only church that recognizes this, the greek orthodox, and anglican churches do it this way. Hell even the Mormons got it right on this one. You can deny the truth and hold n arrogant stance that you know all or you can be on the road seeking it with an open mind. Tradition shows that the baptisms were done Trinitarian.

And dont even start on your montra on tradition, you Pentecosts, because the verse in the bible that you guys profane has nothing to do with heretical traditions; as your hateful pastor probably shouted at the top of his lungs.

If you have an open mind you will be scrutinizing your worship.

There are 38,200 different sects of protestantism in this country alone! Each church reading the bible his own way. Somehow I dont think God intended the written word to be an instruction manual to set up you own self rightous church.

38,200 different translations of what the true meaning of scripture. Wouldn't it be nice to have a central teaching authority to preserve the truth. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

[acts238 (acts238)]

Matthew 28:19 instructs of baptism in the NAME(SINGULAR) of the FATHER (John 5:43 "I am come in my Father's name", the SON (Matthew 1:21 "And thou shalt call his name Jesus"), and the HOLY GHOST, Whom the Father will send in my name") In all of these titles we find but one name;the NAME of JESUS!

[acts238 (acts238)]

When the council of Nicea met in 325 A.D. the trinitarian fromula for the baptism was adopted. From this time forward, the trinity was embraced and the Trinitarian baptismal formula gained prominence. It was immediately after this council that the Catholic church began to be the influence in Christian circles, and even the political world. For the next 1200 years the Catholic church was without rival. Then in 1517 Martin Luther began what was later to be known as the Protestant Reformation. Luther and others kept the Trinitarian formula but began to break away from the other traditional beliefs of the Catholic Church.
I also wanted to say my Pastor never speaks of any other church nor relgion in a ill manner. It is not of Christian Character. }

[arron (arron)]

you better read the BIBLE it says to baptize .. in THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY GHOST. JESUS said this and this is how HE said to baptize. if you dont you are not fulfilling the great commision

[acts238 (acts238)]

It says baptize in the name of....so what is the NAME? What is the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost?

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

Jesus is the NAME of the father, the son, and the holy ghost.

Hebrews 1:8

But unto the son(Jesus) he(God)saith, thy throne (catch it now) O God, is forever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

As far as the the great commission goes. I believe in Mark 16:15-20.

Do you really think you know better than the Apostles, who walked with Jesus, what Jesus meant in Matthew? You who didn't witness the miracles and greatness of Christ. They were there and we weren't. So they knew what Jesus meant when he said things. And, we should follow their examples.

[rhino_co (rhino_co)]

You are partially right about Nicea but you do not have the whole story. It is true that the council solidified the doctrine. This is only because the church was just starting to come out its infancy stages of forming itself. There were inconsistencies of the Doctrine as the way outlying churches were teaching and practicing it. As a result once the church got established in Rhome they decided to get this council of bishops together to solidify the doctrine. But even prior to this the church in Rhome has recognized baptisms to be done Trinitarian. The earliest papal writings dating back to 70 CE around the first successor of Peter show that Baptism was done Trinitarian.

This is why the church was established. In order to solve differences and rectify conflicts of doctrine we have the Papacy as the CENTRAL teaching authority. Holy tradition is what backs up and fulfills the scripture. It has been unchanged, it will never change It is what we have to prevent 38,200 different sects Protestantism, each defining scripture for themselves.

When the Protestant reformation occurred it had nothing to do with holy tradition. It mainly had to do with discipline issues. Most of which involved power and how much say Layman had in church policies. This is why tradition stayed the same.

This is why we have Holy Tradition, it is how we better fulfill what the meaning is. Traditions supplement the Bible. Your scripture only method is a fallacy because the only way to deliver the message back in the day was through the spoken word not written. It obviously was important to consolidate the scriptures and form the Bible but it was never meant for people to form their own church. The study for yourself method that the Pentecostals attribute to, lacks reason because bibles were not readily available to the public until the printing press.

This is why a church founded in 1901 inTopeka Kansa is wrong. I think I will stay with the church that has 2005 years of heritage versus a 104 year old one.

The Catholic Dideche goesback to 70 AD. And references Trinitrinan Baptism.

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

I would go with the people who were with Jesus, at the time of his ministry, death, ressurrection, and great commission. They knew a lot better than a group of men who had not been with Jesus.

Jews had traditions as well. And, Jesus said their traditions made the word of God of none affect. And, i find in many churches(any denomination) have traditions in them that do not let the Holy Ghost have control.

By the way, are you a catholic? What church are you speaking of that was founded in kansas in 1901?

[rockin4jesus (rockin4jesus)]

This will be my final remark. MATTHEW 11:27
All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

Only Jesus Christ can reveal to you whom he is. Instead of fighting over this, I pray that everyone who reads this gets a revelation of who Jesus Christ is. And all of you should pray this very thing on whatever side of the fence you preside on. The fact is this, I personally don't care who baptized when or where. The fact, Jesus did in fact say, to baptize in the name of the father and of the son and of the holy ghost. But He did not say REPEAT THESE WORDS. Plain and simple if you don't believe that Jesus is the name of the father and of the son and the Holy Ghost, then you better study and find out what the other two names are so you can baptize right. Again, he did not say repeat these words, but said baptize in the name of.

We were warned by the apostle in Colossians not to follow the traditions of man. Guess what we do. I've seen it in every single church including yours... I don't care what a preacher preaches if it does not match up with scripture he's following traditions. Their are denominational traditions, traditions in our culture, traditions in our races and our familes. Traditions are fine unless they contradict scripture then we are in danger of putting tradition over Jesus Christ, and we are just as guilty as the pharisees.

COLOSSIANS 2:8-9
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

I agree wholeheartedly with rockin4jesus.

[acts238 (acts238)]

Amen! I still love 1 Timothy 3:16
16And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

So if God was manifest in the flesh Then who else could he be other then Jesus. I agree with rockin4jesus and Jason Stone.

[rhino_co (rhino_co)]

Just food for thought Jesus told Peter "Upon this rock I shall build my church." He appointed Peter to be his successor to hold his traditions, and to preserve his teachings. He NEVER appointed Peter to form a church with 38,200 heads. If you believe that Peter was tasked to build the church than it would only make sense that Peter then would appoint his successor and that man would appoint his and so on. This of course is a faith issue which after all, isn't that what religion is all about anyways faith.

So I have the FAITH that my church,that is backed up by other writings, as well as unchanged tradition that we have preserved Gods teachings. And I believe that Benidict XVI is the current successor to Peters charge which of course is Jesus's. This has been unchanged throughout centuries. It has been documented since the first successor to the peter all the way to now of where that liniage has been. It has been with the Holy SEE in Rhome, not in Topeka Kansas with a bunch of students that starved for 21 days started going dillusional and bagan babbling incoherantly and figured they were speaking in tounges. This by the way was how the Penticostal Movement got started. So you can my church the Whore of babylon and rejoice to the passing of John Paul II. But faith is strong that I believe that God never intenteded for the written wordto be the sole source of his teachings. You can read the bible litteraly all damn day, tell catholics they are idolitrous and wrong.

I think I will trust the church that can prove its existance beyond the borders of white trash America ie Kansas and every other state alongthe thumper belt.

Not everything made in the USA is a good product.

I don't knock your faith except it ****es me off when I here Pentecostals talk about the whore of Babylon and try to persuade me to leave a church with a 2000 year legacy for one that has a 104 year one. Just my .02

(Message edited by rhino_co on April 27, 2005)

[rockin4jesus (rockin4jesus)]

I have something I would like to address, yes I said I wasn't going to say anything else. I read this last email and it touched me. One thing we should never ever do, is knock someone's faith. Like I said in a previous post, what we must absolutely believe is that Jesus is the son of God, and that he is the only way to God. No one, else, not Peter, not any pope or preacher or anyone person, only Jesus Christ... This however is a oneness topic, and I see myself as defending myself, I do not wish to tell anyone they are wrong. We cannot win anyone to the Lord if we say guess what, your wrong. We surely cannot hate people to Christ, we must love them to him. We will be known as Christians for our love and our love for each other and sinners. I would like to be the first to apologize to rhino if I or anyone else has offended you. The scripture tells us to follow peace with everyone. And please remember even the whore of babylon in Revelations God says come out of her my people. We cannot point fingers and we cannot, hate, Christ told us to love one another, let us debate these topics in brotherly love.

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

I agree again with rockin4jesus. Downing anyone never solves anything. I too apologize to any one who feels I have hurt them or been unkind to them.

You have the right to state your beliefs. And, I have a right to state mine. I do not go by scripture alone but by the Holy Ghost. If my beliefs do not agree with what the Holy Ghost shows me. I change them.

In my opinion,(not wanting to offend), I do not think any man could be the sole leader of christians. I do not believe that wine and bread are the flesh and blood of Christ. He is a Spirit, so our communion with Him must be Spiritual. Again, my opinion. I see nothing wrong with that kind of communion as a commemoration of what Jesus did for us. But, no man has the power to cgange bread and wine into the flesh and blood of christ.

I do agree with catholicism in Ideal. Meaning universally we all should believe the same way. I do not believe in praying to dead saints. That to me seems almost like idol worship.(my Opinion) I believe in praying to Jesus alone. He is our intercessor.

I also believe if a person is ONE with body of Christ he could forgive sins. But, I haven't seen anyone who is one like that since the early christian days.(I hope soon there will be).

Like I said, I am just stating my opinion. Not trying to down anyone. Just stating part of my personal beliefs.

As far as John Paul goes. I think he was a wonderful man. He seemed to truly love people. And, he seemed sincere in what he did to help them. I have no problem with him whatsoever.

[arron (arron)]

it doesnt say in the name of the father, son and holy ghost but... in the NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY GHOST... THREE IN ONE.
ALSO WHO WAS JESUS PRAYING TO IN THE GARDEN, WHO DID GOD SAY LET ... US... MAKE MAN INOUR OWN IMAGE... DONT BE SO STUPID.. GOD IS GOD IN THREE PERSONS.

[rockin4jesus (rockin4jesus)]

I'd like to address arron, This was just too good, to pass up. Now I don't like to argue scripture, but there is not one place that says that God is three persons. That my friend would make God a slipt personality, and he's not. However Colossians 2:8-9 tells us not to heed the traditions of man or the rudiments of the world but that we need to be in Christ, "For in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead."

Jesus, "the man," was just that a man, he prayed to God like any other. But remember God was in Christ reconciling the world to ,HIMSELF. And to sound to STUPID but hmmmmm God was not in the practice of talking to himself. Who was also made in his image, but angels... Common sense. Lets make man in our image. But the issue is not Is Jesus God, but that he's the son of God. Only Christ can reveal himself to you... And the requirement for Salvation is believing that Jesus is the son of God, and then being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, for the promise is unto you and to your children, and to all (even you arron) that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. Do notice that it was singular in the name of the Father, and of the son, and of the Holy Ghost. Here's a brain teaser if there are three God's in one, who is the father of Jesus Christ. For the bible says Mary was found with child of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost overshadowed Mary. The Holy Ghost is who God is. And guess what he had a son, that makes him a father. And he was in Christ reconciling the world unto who? HIMSELF... NOT OURSELVES... Their is a duality of Christ for he is both completely human, and yet completey God, that my friend is the mystery..... Not this three in one mumbo jumbo... That is a load of tripe....

[turtle (turtle)]

Curious any of you read Acts nineteen. The Apostle Paul traveling ran across a group that had only received John baptizism. So then he baptised them in the Lord Jesus then layed hands on them for them to received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. My question to the ones that are pencostal oness have you received John's baptism and then the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. This maybe why the apostle were baptizing in the name of the Lord Jesus only at that time is they ran across people that only received the one baptism. I am a tritrian.

[rhino_co (rhino_co)]

You hit the nail right on the head Turle. People need to understand that being baptized in Jesus signified the difference from the old covenenant.

In effect when you are baptized in the name of the father ... son ...etc you are being baptised in the New covenant. When the new testiment said be baptized in Jesus they were talking to the jews and stating to them that their salvation was the baptism of the spirit.

This is the differentiation, betwwen the jews and the old covenant. Everything prior to the fullfillment of that covenant was done in the flesh. Jews were not baptized in spirit but water only. Jews had to do blood sacrifices. Jews that were land owners, had to give a tenth of their increase to the levite temple. Christ is the fullment of that covenant. Christ fullfilled the ultimate sacrifice and that is why baptism is done in water and in spirit, as well as why we do not do blood sacrifices anymore.

Food for thoughthttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

You have to keep in mind that most of the teachings and parables in the bible were directed to the Jews, not the gentiles.

[turtle (turtle)]

Food for thought

You have to keep in mind that most of the teachings and parables in the bible were directed to the Jews, not the gentiles.
_________________________________________________

Little more thought even though Christ was speaking to the jewish nation at that time the books of Mark, Luke and John were written for gentile that were not necessarily understanding of jewsih customs. But if you think about it no matter your background as opposite as yours and mine are rhino_co we basically believe the same. But this Apostolic movement does n't agree with what is taught in traditional church. We as Christians despite are backgrounds need to still look at the historical background of the bible and who the conversation was directed towards so we can began to grasp the message God gave to all mankind.

[rhino_co (rhino_co)]

Thats true. The parables do speak to a wide audience. There are deffinetly places though were christ was speaking directly to the Jews. They still are valid to the gentiles but one must understand the target culture to get a better appreciation of what is said.

The point that I was trying to get across, was the fact that people try to interpret to the letter the scriptures and loose out on the big picture of the whole story.

I may have sounded like I was stating that they did not apply to us. But, the application needs to be looked at who were they talking to and what was the purpose of the conveyed message.

Too many times I have seen my friend open his bibe and make erronious conclusions from one or two lines simply because he did not understand the context of the message that was being delivered to a particular audience, Jew or Gentile.

Your right, you deffenately need look at the background of the historical context. That was the point I was attempting to get across.

I am glad you see it that way because alot of contemporary Christains unfourtunately do not.

[arron (arron)]

i dont feel the catholic church was founded in 1901 in kansas or any other place he is probally talking about the movement that spured the HOLINESS CHURCH IN 1901 at stones folly with the rev parham i beleive

[turtle (turtle)]

Arron you lost me. Pencostal movement started in Acts after Christ arose but has continued.

[curious1 (curious1)]

A BRIEF HISTORY OF PENTECOSTALISM
(The Three Waves)*

From the second century to the nineteenth century, there is no historical evidence that godly, orthodox believers spoke in tongues. We do have instances of tongues speaking in these centuries, but in every case the people speaking in tongues belonged to heretical groups. From Montanus (2nd Century) to Edward Irving (19th century), instances of "tongues" within the church were never considered to be part of genuine Christianity. Also, we should note that these "heretics" who spoke in tongues were speaking some kind of emotional, nonsense gibberish and not real languages as was the case in Acts chapter 2.



Wave #1
Old Pentecostalism or Classic Pentecostalism

In 1901 at Bethel Bible College, Topeka, Kansas, Agnes Ozman received what she called the baptism of the Spirit and spoke in "tongues." The practice then became part of the Holiness movement of the church in the United States. In 1906, tongues were spoken on Azusa Street in Los Angeles, California, and out of these two events in 1901 and 1906 grew the mainline Pentecostal denominations which are still with us today (Assemblies of God, etc.).


Wave #2
New Pentecostalism or Charismatic Renewal

This is sometimes referred to as the New Charismatic Movement. It was like the old charismatic, Pentecostal movement in that it gave special emphasis to certain gifts, most notably the gift of tongues. It was a new movement in the sense that it crossed denominational lines and barriers.

In 1960, in Van Nuys, California, the modern Charismatic movement began in an Episcopalian Church (St. Mark's, with Dennis Bennett as rector). There was an outburst of tongues speaking in this church. This event was so significant that both Time and Newsweek covered the story. After that, the movement spread like wildfire in the Episcopalian Church and then among Lutherans and Presbyterians as well.

The movement soon entered the universities. This began in New England. In October of 1962, the glossolalia phenomenon broke out at Yale University, among members of the Evangelical Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship. Included in this new-Pentecostal revival were Episcopalians, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, and even one Roman Catholic. Five were members of Phi Beta Kappa, and some were religious leaders on campus (they were soon called "GLOSSO YALIES"). Thereafter, the movement spread to Dartmouth College, Stanford University, and Princeton Theological Seminary.

Even more significant than these events is what happened in 1967. All roads lead to Rome. At the time of Spring vacation in 1967, there were in the Notre Dame area about 30 zealous Catholics who had received the "baptism of the Holy Spirit." In 1968, about 100 to 150 met for a Catholic Pentecostal conference. In 1969, there were about 450 Catholic Charismatics who met including about 25 or 30 priests. In 1970, the increase was more spectacular. Almost 1,300 attended the conference, including Catholics from Canada. In 1973, 22,000 Catholic Charismatics met together at Notre Dame, including Catholic participants from at least 10 foreign countries. In 1974, the Notre Dame conference was attended by 30,000 people. And finally, the 1975 international conference held in Rome attracted 10,000 pilgrims from 50 countries to hear Pope Paul VI express his warm appreciation for the movement. The movement was mushrooming not only in the Roman Catholic Church, but in all of the major Protestant denominations.

The Kansas City Charismatic Conference was held in the summer of 1977. All three wings of the Pentecostal movement were present: (1) Old Pentecostals (sometimes called "classical Pentecostals"); (2) Protestant Charismatics; and (3) Catholic Charismatics. This was the biggest and most inclusive gathering of "baptized in the Spirit believers" in modern history. There were nearly 50,000 participants in this 5-day conference. One speaker proudly hailed this conference as "the largest and most inclusive ecumenical assembly in the history of American Christianity." Almost half of the participants were Roman Catholics.

A newspaper article published in 1977 (AP), reported that there were 10 million charismatics in America (5 million Classical Pentecostals and 5 Million New Pentecostals). Thus, the new charismatic movement grew to 5 million in only 17 years (1960 to 1977)! Today, the movement is still very much alive and growing, although we probably will not see the same kind of mushrooming growth as we saw in the '60s and early '70s. The 1/7/83 Christianity Today reported that the Assembly of God denomination (Pentecostal) is the fastest growing American denomination. At that time there were 1.6 million Assembly of God adherents and the number was growing fast.

The New Charismatics are not separatist but rather reformist in character. They are not interested in separating from old ecclesiastical structures. Rather, they are told to stay in these churches and to renew them by their continued presence within. This is what is meant by Charismatic Renewal.



Wave #3
The Signs and Wonders Movement

The term "third wave" was first coined by C. Peter Wagner in 1983:

"I see historically that we're now in the third wave. The first wave of the moving of the Holy Spirit began at the beginning of the century with the Pentecostal movement. The second wave was the charismatic movement which began in the fifties in the major denominations. Both of those waves continue today.

"I see the third wave of the eighties as an opening of the straight-line evangelicals and other Christians to the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit that the Pentecostals and charismatics have experienced, but without becoming either charismatic or Pentecostal. I think we are in a new wave of something that now has lasted almost through our whole century" (Peter Wagner, "The Third Wave?" Pastoral Renewal, July-August 1983, pp. 1-5).

This movement is also called the Signs and Wonders Movement and the Vineyard Movement. It has been a rapidly growing movement, drawing adherents from both charismatic and non-charismatic churches. The movement stresses "power evangelism" whereby the gospel is explained and demonstrated by way of supernatural signs and wonders.

There are three key leaders of this movement: (1) John Wimber, probably the central figure of the movement. He was the founder of the Vineyard church movement upon coming out of Chuck Smith's Calvary Chapel movement, and he taught with C. Peter Wagner at Fuller Seminary. The course was entitled "Signs, Wonders and Church Growth." (2) C. Peter Wagner, professor at Fuller Seminary School of World Missions, where he co-taught with John Wimber. (3) Paul Cain, an influential "modern day prophet," a disciple of William Branham whom Cain called "the greatest faith healer of our time" and the "greatest prophet of all time." Branham was a heretical false prophet who held erroneous view on the Godhead and on the Trinity.

In the Signs and Wonders movement, tongues speaking can be found, but the gift of tongues is not stressed as much as it is in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements. The Signs and Wonders movement (Vineyard movement) does stress the gift of prophecy (insisting on the importance of modern day prophets) and the gift of healing.




This report has been adapted from the Appendix of a paper ("The Charismatic Movement: 35 Doctrinal Issues") by Pastor George Zeller, The Middletown Bible Church, 349 East Street, Middletown, CT 06457 [(860) 346-0907].

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/char/abrief.htm



Biblical Discernment Ministries - 12/97

[turtle (turtle)]

Curious 1
you left out one of the movements. Azusa street revival took place before the one in topeka. And actually there were a split between leders of the one that was in topeka and AZusa cant remember names. What is interesting is the shady past of the one in topeka. Rumor has it he was KKK person. If this is true I wonder about the movement.
Now the signs and wonders started in Acts. But if you stop and think Tongues is not the only manifestation of the Spirit. Men and women were lead through those non years of speaking in tongues by the Holy Spirit. John Wesley, Martin luther and many more. Just because someone doesn't speak in tongues does not mean that the Holy spirit wasn't around. Doesnt mean men and women were not lead by God.

[curious1 (curious1)]

The need for evidence of signs and wonders negates faith and the evidence of things not seen. that, in itself, questions the validity of the signs and wonders movement.

As to signs and wonders in Acts the scriptures are very specific upon whom the Holy Spirit poured Itself out onto. There is no evidence this continued beyond the disciples and only through proof-texting can a case even be brought to attempt to substantiate anyone beyond the disciples as receiving that sort of outpouring.

Interpreters, according to scripture, are, without doubt, required as a means to substantiate vocalization involving the gift of tongues; non-sensical babbling is never an actual language; it is even questionable as to whether or not (especially without an actual language and in the absence of an interpreter) such is demonic in origin for if it is not of God what then is its source? There would appear, under such a scenario, only three possibilities, demonic, psychological abnormalities or both.

It might also be of worthy note that often times in the case of babbling that this occurs during a pastor delivering a sermon. I do not believe The Holy Spirit interrupts Itself for this would be an evidence of confusion, in the which case, either or both are without the indwelling of The Holy Spirit.

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

I agree with Turtle. Everyone doesn't speak in tongues. There are a lot of other manifestatons as well. Divine healing is a great manifestation of the Spirit. As eel as casting out devils. It is God showing himself thru his children.

With the real there is always a fake. An impersonation. If you have the Spirit of God, and, you are not inclined to think carnally. You can distinguiash the two.

William Branham was a humble man of God. Who taught sound doctrine. His revelations of the Word were proven true by the signs and wonders God preformed thru him. Just as Jesus said "If you don't believe me, believe my works".

Turtle, William Branham was one of the first people to preach on the seven church ages. And, how the Spirit traveled thru John Wesley and Martin Luther. He used scripture and history to show the seven church ages from the Apostles to modern day.

He was visited by an Angel of the Lord while praying one night. And, the angel told him he would be given two signs, as was the Prophet Moses. He said if people did not believe, the signs were to help them believe. They were to confirm that he was God's servant. One sign was healing, the other was discernment.

Just as Jesus talked to the woman at the well, and, told her all about herself. He would wait for the Angel of the Lord to appear to him. And, he could tell people all about theirselves. Down to details so precise it was incredible. Then if they believed that God was with Him. They would be healed.

Once he had a vision of a boy killed by a car, and, the lord used him to raise the boy from the dead. He told that vision to every church he preached in. All over the us and Canada people had the details of the vision wrote down in their fly leafs of their bibles. Then not long after that. He was traveling down the road in Scandinavia. There was a group of people huddled around something on the side of the road. He got out of the car and it was the same boy in his vision. He had one of the rothers get out his bible and read what he wrote. It was the same boy. Right down to the clothes described in the vision. They put the boy to the car to take him to the hospital. The boy was dead. No pulse and no breathing. Brother Branham got down in the floorboard of the car and began to pray. All of a sudden the boy began to move. He began to cry nd he was alive again. The vision came to pass exactly how God had shown him.

That night when it was told at a evangelical meeting. Tens of thousands of people gave their life to God. Becuase they knew that if this man was false. God wouldn't use him. Just like the blind man Jesus healed. When the Pharisees told him we know this man is a sinner. The blind man said All he knew was he was blind and now he could see. And, god don't hear sinners.

Now, I don't agree with the way his followers have gone. They went right against the things he taught. They lifted him up just like he said not to. They organized just like he said not to.

I am not a branhamite. I just know he was a man of God. God was with him. And, if people think they are so good. And, so right. Then why doesn't God do thru you what he did William Branham? If what you teach and believe is so right, why doesn't God confirm it? It is easy to criticize. Mostly out of jealousy. They are constantly looking for ways to condemn others. Just like the Pharisees. Hmmm. Makes you wonder don't it.

[turtle (turtle)]

Jason was doing some looking at above post and one place you are explaining Father is the Holy Ghost. I know you love scripture like I do. So lets exam it.
"John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." KJV.

"John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:"KJV

Who sends the Holy Spirit where does it come from? I believe Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one but you see Jason Father sent Christ, The Father sent the HOly Spirit. Christ ask the Father for the Holy Spirit to come.

Trinity doctrine might not of been a term used by Christ disciples I can give you that. But they were aware of the Three yet one.

[turtle (turtle)]

William Branham was a humble man of God. Who taught sound doctrine. His revelations of the Word were proven true by the signs and wonders God preformed thru him. Just as Jesus said "If you don't believe me, believe my works". by jason.

______________________________________________

I have never heard of him but just did a quick search of this character and I find it alarming. Do you realize he believe he talked to an angel. Not to God. I will pray for you Jason and that is all I will say.

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

Make sure you look thoroughly when you read about william branham. There a lot of people who try to twist his words and try to discredit him.

He talked to God. If you have ever heard him preach and pray you would hear him pray and talk to God. The Angel of the Lord was sent to Mary and Joseph. Did he not speak for God? The Angel of the Lord appeared to Mary Magdelen after the ressurection. So what is unscriptural about talking to an Angel?

And, if you don't believe he was God's servant. Why did God use him to preform so many miracles? And, why did tens of thousands of people come to God thru his ministry?

John 1:35
And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the son of God.

Matthew 1:18
Now the birth of Jesu Christ was one this wise; When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

There John says he is the son of God. But, matthew says he is of the Holy Ghost. Now there aren't two fathers are they? God is a spirit. He is the Holy Ghost. Jesus and the father are one. That is Jesus' own words. So if There is One, then there is only One. Three manifestations but only one God. And, his name is Jesus. Which means God is our salvation.

I have no problem with people who believe in the trinity. I think oneness is just a deeper understanding of the trinity. I don't think trinity is wrong. I don't condemn no one for being trinity. I only hope you would extend to me the same courteousy.

Back to William Branham. You get his tapes yourself. And, don't take others opinion on what he said. Find out for yourself. And, you cannot say that talking to an angel is unscriptural. There were many instances where God sent angels to talk to his people. Maybe that is good enough reason you should listen to him. There wasn't a ministry since the days of the early christians that can come close to the magnitude of William Branham.

He did the very same things that Jesus did. That should show you that God was with him. And, God wouldn't be with someone who was false. Or, someone who was against him. There is not a preacher today can compare to him. Not any denomination or otherwise.

I have watched him preach. And, then he would have a healing service. He would wait for the angel of the Lord to come to him. He woukld tell him about the people. And, then he would tell it to them. And, it would be just exactly right. Then he would pray for them. Cancers fell right off. Tumors went away. The dead were brought back to life. So if God wasn't with him. And, if he was preaching false teachings God would not have been with him. Then how can you explain that?

I thank you for your prayers turtle. That is very considerate. I will try to do the same for you.

[curious1 (curious1)]

Curious1 = -->
jason_stone = >

-->There are no substitutes for Jesus.
-->Like the Highlander, in the end there can be only One.


--->when we talk to God it's called prayer.
--->when God talks to us it's called schizophrenia.


> Posted by jason_stone (jason_stone) on Thursday, May 19, 2005 - 10:14 pm:

>So what is unscriptural about talking to an Angel?

--->1 Corinthians 6:3, "Know ye not that we shall judge angels?..."

> John 1:35
> And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee;
> therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the son of God.


--->um, that's Luke, not John.


>
> Matthew 1:18
> Now the birth of Jesu Christ was on this wise; When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found
> with child of the Holy Ghost.
>


--->Matthew presented our Lord as Jehovah's KING
--->Mark presented our Lord as Jehovah's SERVANT
--->Luke presented our Lord as Jehovah's MAN
--->John presented our Lord as Jehovah HIMSELF


>
> I have no problem with people who believe in the trinity.


--->while the word itself is not to be found in the scriptures its evidences are found and cannot be ignored..


>I think oneness is just a deeper understanding of the trinity.


--->that's a slippery word and favored by virtually all of the supporting branches leading up to and including the New Agers and of which its use also demands extreme caution.


>I don't think trinity is wrong. I don't condemn no one for being trinity. I only hope you would extend to me the same courteousy.


--->would you care to shed some light on what's beginning to sound like maybe some left wing adventist influence?


> Back to William Branham.

--->In Christianity, Sabellianism (also known as modalism) is the second-century belief that the three persons of the Trinity are merely different modes or aspects of God, rather than three distinct persons. It is attributed to Sabellius, who taught a form of this doctrine in Rome in the second century. Hippolytus knew Sabellius personally and mentioned him in the Philosophumena. He knew Sabellius disliked Trinitarian theology, yet he called Modal Monarchism the heresy of Noetos, not that of Sabellius. Hippolytus thought he had very nearly reconciled Sabellius to the mainstream church. However, during the controversy surrounding Paul of Samosata, the Patriarch of Antioch who was deposed in 268 for his Christology, Sabellius' name was mentioned. No one in Antioch had heard of him, but his name was associated with Rome. So they wrote to Rome about him. Pope Dionysius replied in a letter of which only a small fragment has been preserved, but this letter was enough to make Sabellius famous among the Greek theologians.

--->Sabellianism was also embraced by Christians in Cyrenaica, to whom Demetrius, Patriarch of Alexandria, wrote letters arguing against this belief.

--->Another name for this doctrine is Patripassianism from the Latin words patris for "father", and passus for "to suffer". This name was given because the doctrine implies that God the Father came to earth and suffered in the form of God the Son. Some Trinitarians argue that Sabellianism logically leads to Nestorianism.

--->Today, Sabellianism is rejected by most types of Christianity. It is accepted primarily by some Pentecostal groups, sometimes referred to as Oneness Pentecostals or "Jesus Only" Pentecostals.

--->Historic Sabellianism taught that God the Father was the only person of the Godhead, as do Oneness Pentecostals today. This teaching proports that the identity of God the Father and Jesus is the same. According to this belief, the terms "Father" and "Holy Spirit" both describe the one God who dwelt in Jesus. Some Oneness detractors call this the "Jesus-Only doctrine".



>There wasn't a ministry since the days of the early christians that can come close to the magnitude of William Branham.


--->In his early ministry, he came in contact with "Jesus-Only" Pentecostals. This sect broke away from the traditional Pentecostal movement denying the doctrine of the Trinity.


>
> He did the very same things that Jesus did.

--->In 1946, Branham received what he came to call his "charge" from the recurrent audible voice.

--->Not long after [his] commission as the forerunner of the second coming of Christ, Branham was visited by an angel.


>That should show you that God was with him. And, God wouldn't be with someone who was false. Or, someone who was against him. There is not a preacher today can compare to him. Not any denomination or otherwise.


--->TRINITY: Like the "Jesus-Only" Pentecostals Branham denied the Trinity doctrine teaching a form of Modalism. Instead of three Persons in the Godhead, Branham taught that there was only one Person (Jesus) going under different titles or modes at various times in history. Branham's teaching is a variation of a second century heresy taught by Sabellius know as Modalistic Monarchianism or Patripassianism


--->Branham explained, "...not one place in the Bible is trinity ever mentioned...It's Catholic error and you Protestants bow to it". "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is offices of one God. He was the Father; He was the Son; He is the Holy Ghost. It's three offices or three dispensations,..." (Ibid., p. 392). This view of the Godhead is called Modalism and has been held to be heretical by both Catholic and Protestant churches.


>There is not a preacher today can compare to him. Not any denomination or otherwise.


--->BAPTISM: Branham claimed that proper baptism was needed to avoid the "Mark of the Beast" of denominational churches and escape the danger of missing the rapture and entering the Tribulation. Proper baptism must be in the name of Jesus only. Baptism with the Trinitarian formula of Matthew 28:18 ("in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost") is unacceptable to God.



>
> I have watched him preach. And, then he would have a healing service. He would wait for the angel of the Lord to come to him. He woukld tell
> him about the people.


--->Serpent's Seed: Branham taught that Eve's sin in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3) was sexual in nature. According to Branham, Eve was seduced into a sexual relationship with the serpent and became pregnant with Cain.



>And, then he would tell it to them. And, it would be just exactly right. Then he would pray for them. Cancers fell right off. Tumors went away. The dead were brought back to life.


--->Last Days Prophet: Branham's followers claim that he held a special role as God's uniquely empowered end-time prophet.

--->Branham's followers identified him as the prophetic Elijah of Malachi 4 and the seventh angel of Revelation 10.

--->According to his disciples, Branham is not just a prophet but a major prophet. "A MAN SENT FROM GOD. That the ministry of William Branham qualifies to be that of a major prophet and thus fulfill Malachi 4, 5 and 6 and Revelation 10:7


>So if God wasn't with him. And, if he was preaching false teachings God would not have been with him. Then how can you explain that?


---------------------------------------------
--->BIBLICAL RESPONSE
1) The Trinity doctrine cannot be fully comprehended by finite man. However, any other view of the Godhead will not satisfy God's self revelation in Scripture. Modalism teaches that there is only one Person in the Godhead functioning through relational "modes." When He is in the Father mode, the Son and Spirit modes are not functional. In Matthew 3:13-17, however, the Son is baptized, the Spirit descends and the Father speaks. Also, "in the name of" (Matthew 28:19) or in the authority of does not limit the nature of God's unity to one Person but connotes equality of essence within the Godhead (2 Corinthians 13:14).

2) Baptism in the name of Jesus only may have been the early practice in the Jerusalem church. However, all manuscripts of Matthew 28:19 have the Trinitarian formula as being commissioned by Jesus. One document, dating from A.D. 60, the Didache, prescribes the Matthew formula (Father, Son and Holy Ghost) for baptism within the church. Regardless of the formula, baptism is not a requirement for being raptured or avoiding the Tribulation. Full salvation is by grace though faith and not of works such as baptism (Ephesians 2:8-9).

3) The Serpent's Seed doctrine is an improper interpretation of Genesis 3 that is allegorical and arbitrary. Eve's sin was not sexual. She partook of literal fruit from a literal tree. Adam also partook of the same fruit as Eve (Genesis 3:6). This is not a reference to sexual sin. The Serpent's Seed doctrine artificially limits the atonement by race or genetics. While it is true that most of humanity will not benefit from the sacrificial death of Christ (Matthew 7:13-14), Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). Christ's atonement is not limited to a certain family or race of people.

The Serpent's Seed doctrine did not originate with Branham. Branham's version of the doctrine parallels the racist views of some groups within the Identity movement and the speculative philosophies of Sun Myung Moon.

4) In light of claims that Branham was God's end-time prophet, it is significant that he falsely predicted that America would be destroyed in 1977 (The Seven Church Ages, p. 322). Branham was guilty of false prophecy (Deuteronomy 18:20-22). While he tried to call it a prediction rather than a prophecy (without explaining the difference), he firmly stressed that the 1977 date was based on his thirty year study of the Bible and "Divine inspiration." Branham's ministry and claims were supported by alleged supernatural verification. Signs and wonders, however, are not infallible proofs. Many conflicting sects and ideologies boast similar subjective "proofs" (2 Thessalonians 2:9, Matthew 12:39, 24:24, Hebrews 1:1, I John 4:1-3).

RESOURCES
1) Oneness Pentecostals & The Trinity. Gregory A. Boyd. This work focuses on the movement which greatly influenced William Branham. The issues of Modalism, the One Name, baptismal regeneration and others are examined. 234 pages. $12.

2) God In Three Persons. E. Calvin Beisner. Beisner examines the historic roots of and biblical evidences for the Trinity doctrine. Included in Beisner's work is a refutation of Modalism. 160 pages.


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

Sources:
http://www.watchman.org/profile/branpro.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modalism
http://onelook.com/?w=Modalism&ls=b

[turtle (turtle)]

Curious, Good Job thanks for setting the recorded straight. thanks. I think I could of typed all day but never would of thought of putting it like you did in that format.

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

The apostle Peter I am sure knew a lot better than others what Jesus meant when he said in the NAME of the father son and Holy Ghost. And, you admitted that they taught and practiced that. So if it was good enough for the men and woman who walked with Christ, it is good enough.

I believe in oneness so that is not a problem for me. Speaking of Branham. I also believe in the Serpent Seed. It is bared out in the word. Which is why Able is not in the line of Adam, Because in the new testament he was said to be Of the devil.

Everyone is always trying to call Branham a false prophet. When he PREDICTED, not PROPHESIED. And, there is a difference. He was speaking not what God had showed him, but, what he figured would be the end. He was a man. So he is not perfect. To predict something would go as follows. If that girl don't stop running with that boy she is gonna get pregnant. Now, she may never get pregnant. But, in my estimation she might. That is a prediction. It is not infallible. But, if God showed me in a dream or vision. And, it was God. It would come to pass. Otherwise it is just a guess or estimation.

And, you are incorrect about his baptism. He baptized Lord Jesus Christ. Not Jesus only. He was actually quite against Jesus only baptism. He said there were many Jesus's. So you should have Lord or Christ to make it specific.

The actual trinity doctrine was established by the Catholic church. Not the Apostles. Even tho they warned that people would come in and teach heresies. Now if Pual or Peter didn't teach it. Then others that come later start to. I would be more inclined to believe the apostles.

In Jesus dwells all the fullness of the Godhead. So where is God the father? Jesus has all power in Heaven and earth. So where is God the father? He has all of it becuase he is one with the father. His own words. So you can't be three if you are one. You can have different functions. But, you are one not three.


Thank you for the correction on the Gospel. But, you still did not answer my question. One says he is of the Holy Ghost. But, the other says God is his father. So how can he have two fathers?

In Isaiah 9:6 there is prophecy of Jesus. In that prophecy he is referred to as The Mighty God. Now the Lord is God. The old bible is full of references of that. Right? So the new testament says there is one Lord. Then it says every knee shall bow, and, every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.

The Lord of the Old, is the Lord of the new. In the old bible God says he is the First and the Last. In revelation Jesus says he is the first and the last. Why? Becuase he is one with the father. You can't seperate them into two different things. It is one. Now, if they are seperate. How could Jesus be the Mighty God that is prophesied about in the old testament? How could he be Lord? There is only one Lord of Lords right? The bible teaches Jesus is the Lord of Lords. So if the Lord of the old was God the father. Then Jesus would be his Lord. Which would mean God the father would not be the all powerful God of the Old. He would be second in command. And, we know this is not right. Jesus was God manifest in the flesh. You can quote all the names and history you want. It doesn't pertain to me. Because, I didn't know anything about it. So how could I adopt a doctrine from a man no one I know has ever even heard of?

God is God. He is a Spirit. Which is the Holy Ghost. Jesus is Lord. The bible says the Lord is that Spirit. So if God is that Spirit, and, Jesus is that Spirit. Then they are one and the same. Jesus is the Word. He is the same yesterday today and forever, Right. So if he is the word, and, he changes not. The in the beginning the word was with God and the Word WAS God. So if Jesus is the Word. And, he is the same yesterday, today, and forever. And, in the beginning he was God. Doesn't that mean he is still God?

[curious1 (curious1)]

"...there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and *these three are one*."-1 John 5:7

"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth."-John 1:14

When confronted between the choice of following Jesus or believing idolizing fans of someone else who claims to be equal to or better than Jesus there is no choice. It's Jesus, only Jesus.

"For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ."-2 Corinthians 11:13

It is impossible for idolizing fans to follow Jesus for they worship idols; and idols are false, idols are liars, idols are heretics that deceive the unsuspecting many by espousing their misguided brand of poisonous heresy, there is no truth in them.

"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."-2 Corinthians 11:14

For such we are instructed on how to proceed. We are to present the Gospel and, if refused then

"...whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them."-Luke 9:5

It is impossible to change someone's mind. They must first be willing to change themselves and, if they are not, then to persist we not only are wasting our time on them, we are also wasting precious time that could better be spent on many more that are ready and willing to accept the simple saving grace of God.

Our view should be to willingly }seek the truth wherever it leads. When we can no longer do that but, instead, find ourselves trying to find all verses that sound like they are in agreement with our preconceived notions and beliefs we are no longer being open and receptive to the truth and word of God for we are not allowing scripture to support itself but, rather, we are forcing scripture to affirm what we want to be right and, in the process we're also forcing scripture to affirm ourselves as well. That sort of error ridden convoluted "study" is known as "proof-texting".

When this sort of response is received there can be no discussion where two could ever reach a logical single minded conclusion; in which case, it will never be a concerted desire to seek the truth but, instead, can only and always degeneratingly end in an argument where each tries to win by proving the other wrong. Such is a waste to be avoided.

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."-Colossians 2:8

[rhino_co (rhino_co)]

quote"i dont feel the catholic church was founded in 1901 in kansas or any other place he is probally talking about the movement that spured the HOLINESS CHURCH IN 1901 at stones folly with the rev parham i beleive"

That is what I was talking about

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

Curious, I am not for sure where you are coming from with idolizing fans. Was that for someone else?

And, you did not answer my question. If Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. And, Jesus is the Word made flesh. And, in the beginning the Word was God. Doesn't that mean Jesus was God in the Beginning? And, God in the End? And, God everywhere in between?

[arron (arron)]

of course the pentacostal CHURCH started at pentacost... THE BIBLE says that these three... three .. are one.... one that is enough for me

[rhino_co (rhino_co)]

I guess it took a two thousand year hiatushttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/lol.gif

I am glad that Americans are so smart that we can revive it 1900 years later. What would the world be like without southern accent american preachers shouting at the top of their lungs.


It would be alot quieterhttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/wink.gif

[rhino_co (rhino_co)]

I guess it took a two thousand year hiatushttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/lol.gif

I am glad that Americans are so smart that we can revive it 1900 years later. What would the world be like without southern accent american preachers shouting at the top of their lungs.


It would be alot quieterhttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/wink.gif

[jason_stone (jason_stone)]

The early Spirit filled church were killed off. The Life went on thru the catholic church. Just not in the same form. Then came on down to the protestants. Right on down to the pentecostals. That Life is trying to get back into its original form.

Follow along if you will. You take a grain of corn. It cannot reproduce if it doesn't die. But, if it does die, it comes thru as a stalk. That stalk is in no way like the original. But, it is carrying the life. It comes on up and branches out. There are your offshoots of the Catholic church. The protestants. They still do not resemble the original. But, they are carrying the Life.

Then comes the formation of the ear. with its little tassles and so forth. There is your pentecostal. It is still not like the original, but, there is a manifestation of Life. Then out of that would come the full corn in the ear. It is just like the original, but, multiplied. That is where the church is headed.

It had to go thru all those stages, with all the different churches carrying the Life. Until one day the Life will come back into its original form.

Now, a farmer who sows and reaps. He sows his corn not for the stalk. Not for the branch. Not for the ear. But, the full corn in the ear. So when Jesus comes back. He isn't coming for pentecostals, baptist, methodist, catholic, ect. He is coming back for those who are in the form of the original. Those who are without spot or blemish. Only They will make it.

[checkmate (checkmate)]

RE: Jason_stone

There are so many different denominations or offsprings as you call them because people fear a one world religion. See there is only two religions in the world. That of Gods and that of Satans.
People out of their own fears have scattered themselves into different denominations, and have done only what satan wanted them to do. For in daniel chapter 12 verse 6 and 7 you will read that satan will scatter the power of the holy people.
That is just what happened.
The problem is that everyone has the written words of God (the bible) but dont take time to read it themselves, but would rather someone else tell them what is truth and what is not. problem again is that preachers have the truth but do not teach nor follow that which is written.
But you are right about one thing and that is God is coming and he is coming not for a certain denomination, but those that know him and his words and do them.

[tam (tam)]

Hi, I am new to this board, and I am Oneness. I would just like to say to Jason and whoever that believes like I do. Their is no sense arguing with these people, because until Jesus takes the scales off of their eyes and open their hearts they will never see the Truth as we see it. You could argue until your blue in the face, and no one would see it, untill they are willing to let Jesus to open them up. As the Apostles said when they went somewhere that the people refused to listen, shake the dust off of your feet and move on to others that are ready to hear the Truth. That doesn't want what everyone else has, but so much more. A personal walk With Jesus!!!
This will flare many up and I will read, but I will not participate in the arguing anymore!!
God Bless to All!!

[franklin (franklin)]

"Those who are without spot or blemish. Only They will make it."

Too bad for you you believe this. That is legalism. According to your belief, you are not going to make it.

My Lord will accept me with my spots and blemishes because I believe in Him.

[arron (arron)]

i am not upc. i have founf that the upc people are very dogmatic and very critical of all other persons. those who are saved but have not been baptised in THE NAME OF JESUS are looked upon as unsaved people. i dont beleive that.
i know i am saved by THE BLOOD water did not save me.

[franklin (franklin)]

Amen! http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

[lakishajenkins (lakishajenkins)]

I am a mother, a daughter, and sister does that mean I am three separate people? What does it mean that we have an omnipresent God? How did God manifest himself throughout the Bible... the burning bush, pillar of smoke, an angel... do we pray to God the burning bush or the pillar of smoke??? I hope not.

[arron (arron)]

there is ONE GOD... COMPOSED OF OR YET THREE. THE FATHER , THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST.

[turtle (turtle)]

lakishajenkins, I find your last post an interesting thought. And here is my answer. Do we pray to the God of the burning bush. I hope so if the God that spoke to Moses is the one and true God. What i hope and think you might of meant do we worship a burning bush. The answer is no but do we worship the God of Moses, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, elisha, Sameuel, so forth and so on, I believe we do as a christian If we worship the One true God that is manifested in three persons, Father,Son and Holy Ghost united as one. Take a look In John 17 and also chapter 14-16. It talks of God the Father sending Jesus and the HOly Spirit and the fact they are one together.

[lakishajenkins (lakishajenkins)]

turtle... what I was indeed trying to say was that God is one not three. Just as I am one person not three but called by different names. God is called different names as he relates to different ppl... I am a mother as I relate to my child, I am a sister as I relate to my siblings, I am a daughter as I relate to my mother. God (who is the Spirit) relates to us (humans) in a way which we can understand... thus manifesting Himself in different ways throughout the Bible. Does that make sense ??? hmm I hope so hehe

[arron (arron)]

the man in n.c. that i was referring too, is till on the internet. he tells you that if you are sincere in the jesus only beleif you can write and he will tell you where his church is. that is cultic to me. when anyone is shut out that is cultic. what do you think.

[arron (arron)]

jason stone... where are you are you on here and going by a different name? did you move away? of course if you moved away how could you answer. where are you.

[arron (arron)]

on may 28 jason stone wrote that the early church was killed off and then conttinued on thru the catholic church. which is a lie for if it had ever ceased to exist it would not have been GOD church. it has never ceased to exist period. the pentecostal way has always been held to . it may have been underground so to speak but it has never ceased to exist.

[arron (arron)]

the man in n,c, is till spouting off the abomnible doctrien of batising in the NAME OF JESUS for salvation. he is a liar. he speaks of people as trash and other things that a christian minister should not do he also has a beard, which is alright, if he doesnt get ot saying it is what every one else is to do he has only a few, his wife two daughters and a son or maybe two sons. he has about three more. i feel sorry for them. you can look him up on the internet.... rev steve winters. is his name

[absolute_real_truth (absolute_real_truth)]

<font color="0000ff">Steve Winters does not represent Jesus Only churches. He is a wannabe Apostolic preacher, comepletely rejected by the multitude of men who lead this movement. He has threatened people in many ways, including myself, who came against his filthy language and mean ways. I am a licensed minister with one of the most mainline Apostolic organizations in the world. Please do not allow this man's evil rhetoric to represent us. He is a wicked man, and is disfellowshipped from the Jesus Only movement by those who know him.</font>

[arron]

thank GOD for someone who knows this goofy man. he has a long beread down to his waist and tells people they are hell bound. i wrote to his email and before i could get in touch with him i had to say if i was JESUS only or not. so i just told him i was intereste. he told me on the internet that THE BLOOD did not save. it was the water and he told me if i ever wrote again he would have me arrested for harrasment, internet.
he said i was a false scumbag and other things. he does not take THE LORDS NAME in vain as far as i know but he come close to it for he uses all other kinds of "by words" to call people

[called]

arron
please check this out ok
http://www.lightbearer.org/archives/2004/04/the_authentic_m.html
God Bless you
Johnny

[turtle]

lakishajenkins , You know the more I study I still disagree with the passages I listed. Now where is your biblical proof of manifestation. of the three GodHead. And can you prove they are literally one in the since of like you are a mother, wife and so on?

[arron]

what i cant understand is why the upc says there is only ONE and that is JESUS. then the say they have the baptisum of THE HOLY GHOST if there is only ONE why do they seperate them in the baptisum of THE HOLY GHOST nad why want they say that they are saved by water instead of THE BLOOD?
it is not water that saves but THE BLOOD OF JESUS, BY FAITH IN THAT BLOOD. it is not obediance either by being baptised for if it was the theif would not be saved as JESUS TOLD him . also there are others who get saved who have never got a chance to be baptised and they get saved and are made ready for heaven right then.

[arron]

can some one answer the above question?

[lillephricaunsaint13]

Jesus is the Holy Ghost he lives inside of us. And the thief was unable to be baptiseed in Jesus name before he died and Jesus knew this and he saved him. If you do not get the chance the he doesn't hold it against you.

[arron]

JESUS IS NOT THE HOLY GHOST. THE HOLY GHOST IS THE THIRD PERSON IN THE TRINITY. JESUS IS THE ONLY ONE COME IN THE FLESH TO DIE FOR US. JEHOVAH GOD HIS FATHER GAVE HIM TO BE THE PAYMENT FOR OUR SINS AND TO REDEEM US FROM SIN. THE HOLY GHOST ABODE ON JESUS AND THE HOLY GHOST WAS SENT FROM GOD (THE FATHER ) AND JESUS (THE SON) TO US AND HE LIVES IN AND WITH US TODAY,

[revburr]

hello Rhino, here in Anaheim California, tongue talking Catholics fill the convention center every year, 10,000+. there is a huge pentecostal movement within the Catholic Church. My wife's best friend, her mother recently receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit....with the evidence of speaking in tongues at a Catholic Home Bible Study group. The power of God reaches over denominational boundries.

[revburr]

arron, in all your knowledge of all things called biblical, what do you do with 1 Peter 3:21, "Baptism now saves you." and Romans chapter 6?

[arron]

the ark was what was in the thought of the passege. the water lifted the ark above the flood. it was the ark that did the work by the use of the water. when we have been bpatised IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY GHOST we are baptised correctly. the only ones who would be condemned are those who refuse baptisum at all for the reject the sayings of CHRIST agianst themselves.

[friendly_follower]

Let's see; solid biblical reference, and adherence to the matter at hand, I do believe you just made a productive post. Whether productivity be subjective or not, your post was productive in this case toward disintegrating a lie. I commend you.

[foreverapostolic]

You have to know who the Father, and the Son is to be baptised in His name. You may be a father and a son but you can't get your mail without a name.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Good morning, M(r)(s). foreverapostolic. Who is the daddy of Jesus?

[arron]

i will answer the question just asked ... the FATHER OF JESUS IS GOD THE FATHER. JESUS was adopted into the family of judah as joseph became his eartly father, GOD HIMSELF BEING JESUS'S HEAVENLY FATHER

[foreverapostolic]

Good Evening, in reply to the-apostolic-truth-ministriers too. John 1-1 and John 1-14. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (14) And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. You have to have an open heart and know the Bible was written by men of God inspired by the Holy Ghost to understand the His Word. Just reading to argue is not what the Bible is for. Prov. 14-12 and Prov 16-25 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. Ephesians 4:4-6 There is one body, and one spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; (5) One Lord, one faith, one baptism (6) One God and Father of all who is above all, and through all, and in you all. The way is straight and narrow, and few is going to enter, because the devil deceives and the path is wide and to hell. (Name of the Father): John 5:43 KJV ( Jesus Words) I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. (Name of Sonhttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif Matthew 1:21 KJV And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS; for he shall save his people from their sins. (Name of the Holy Ghosthttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif John 14:26 KJV (Jesus words) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 3:3-6) I am 63 years old, been married to the same husband almost 45 years, have 3 daughters 3 son-in -laws (8) grandchildren and 2 great-great. They all attend an Apostolic Church, not by force, but by choice, received the Holy Ghost and been baptised in Jesus Name except for the youngest ones. One son-in-law is our pastor, a licensed minister of the Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ. The two oldest girls have been married 22 years to the same husband and the youngest 17 years to the same husband. I was brought up very strict and my parents were married almost 69 years when dad passed away, and I have one brother that married when I was 21/2 and he has been married to the same wife 61 years this past May. It does not prophet a man anything if he gains the whole world and loses his soul. I am thankful that I had the Old Time Apostolic experience where Church was the most important thing and people were happy and not in such a wild rush all the time. I was young, but those were the good old days, because convience has taken a lot out of church today. I am not going to argue on the scriptures, because I have experienced the Holy Ghost, been baptised in Jesus name and the devils in hell could not change what I know and believe. We are not a cult, because we can live and do what we want to do, go and come when we want to, but once you really, truly experience the plan of salvation you will know it and no-one has to tell you. You don't want to do the things of the world and dress like the world, but you can still be clean, dress modest and be happy. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/talker.gif

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come M(r)(s). foreverapostolic:

Would you kindly take the time and directly address my question? Who, exactly, is the daddy of Jesus Christ?

By the by, the questions will get tougher as we go along.

[foreverapostolic]

Okay the-apostolic-truth-ministries Did you read all the scriptures above. The very first ones tells you, In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. Who was made flesh and dwelt among us? Also John 10:30, are you can start at verse 29. Also Matthew 28:18-20 (19) says Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son , and of the Holy Ghost. (Father, Son and Holy Ghost is singular) so you have to know Jesus to know His name. Even Thomas, had to put his hand in Jesus side to feel the scars and see His nail scared hands before he would believe that He had risen, after the other decipiles had seen Jesus. When, Thomas did He said Jesus, My Lord and My God. When we see Jesus we want have a chance to find out all the questions and answers. What faith are you?

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come M(r)(s). foreverapostolic, why the problem answering a simple question?

[foreverapostolic]

the_apostolic_truth_ministries -I see you can't read scriptures and understand them, and you can't tell me what faith you are so there is no need do continue. You either believe or don't so here is another scripture I Corinthians 14:37-38 (37) If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. (38) But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. I don't think you are ignorant and neither am I, but since you don't believe like I do, it will take the spirit of God to move you and show you. There is a lot more scriptures, but they are in the Bible and you don't understand the ones I sent so there is no need to keep on.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come, M(r)(s). foreverapostolic, why the problem answering a simple question? Perhaps, I can help you and anyone else willing to listen. David Bernard, writing in his 1956 "Oneness Theology," concluded that IF oneness theolgy is correct, Jesus Christ is his own daddy. Now, pray tell, why are you ashame to preach your religion's lunacies?

ps. By the by, I said the question will get tougher as we go along. Well guess what? IF your religion's filtholgy is correct, why was it not discovered until nearly two thousand years after the church was founded (1956)?

[foreverapostolic]

the _apostolic_truth_ministries, I guess you know who Jesus Christ is. Well I see you have been reading "The Oneness of God" by David K. Bernard, JD (1956) Were not ashame to preach the TRUTH, when it is founded on the Bible. Now, who does your Theology teach, is the Father? Our releigion is not called (filtholgy). It was not discovered in (1956), I guess that was the copyright date. I still beleive that Jesus is God manifest in flesh, that all the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Him, and that we are complete in Him (Colossians 2:9-10). The church was not founded in (1956)? Where have you been or maybe your not that old. You have really missed the boat, the Church started in Acts 1st Chapter. Just think of the experience of the Joy of the Lord you are missing out on, trying to prove were not right; but sorry (Mr ?) you came to late to change me because I have already experienced the infilling of the Holy Ghost, been baptised in Jesus name, and I wouldn't change that for all the world has to offer. You can sit and try to change the Bible if you want too, but it has already been written, from Genesis to Revelations. You know it is sad, that you are cruel enough to write the PS. part on your Post Monday, June 11,2007-9:08pm

[arron]

tatm.. is an unbeleiver he believes that parts of the bible are not so and he always talks about the book of act not supporting tongues but he never says anything about the book of corinthians where it speaks in detail about the GIFT of tongues, he is a liar who cant be trusted at all as far as GODS WORD is concerned. he uses other writtings and he has been hurt by some one in the pentecostal movements and he has taken it out on all of them. he does not u derstand that there are good people in all churches as far as his church he dosnt have a denom. he doesnt go i highly doubt to church any where

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Hello again, M(r)(s). foreverapostolic:

Let us look at your comments.

Quoting: “Our religion is not called (filtholgy). It was not discovered in (1956), I guess that was the copyright date.”
End quote.

You are partially correct. In 1906, the homosexual Charles Fox Parham invented white pentecostalism (the Assembly of God). In 1919, Frank Ewart demanded that all pentecostals be re-baptized in jesusnameonly at the General Assembly of the Assembly of God. The AoG refused to re-baptize anyone. Mr. Ewart took his one hundred member congregation down the road and founded the ‘Trinitarian’ movement known as jesusnameonly pentecostalism. In 1956, David Bernard invented “Oneness” pentecostalism. Your religion is in no way related to Christianity. Nor is your church found in the Bible.

Quoting: “The church was not founded in (1956)? Where have you been or maybe your not that old. You have really missed the boat, the Church started in Acts 1st Chapter.”
End quote.

As can be see from above, you are deceived. I suggest you read your religion’s own history books, as I have.

Quoting: “You can sit and try to change the Bible if you want too, but it has already been written, from Genesis to Revelations.”
End quote.

To begin with, please read a Bible before making a fool of yourself. There is no book of Revelations. It is the book of Revelation. How did I know that? Unlike yourself, I have no fear of reading God’s (w)Holy Inspired Inerrant Word for the Ages. Change the Bible? Pray tell why? It clearly supports my contentions and falsifies your. In fact, I have never met a single Christian who sees your religion as anything but a cult.

Quoting: “You know it is sad, that you are cruel enough to write the PS. part on your Post Monday, June 11,2007-9:08pm “
End quote.

You are absolutely right! The truth cuts like a two-edged sword.

Quoting: “Just think of the experience of the Joy of the Lord you are missing out on, trying to prove were not right; but sorry (Mr ?) you came to late to change me because I have already experienced the infilling of the Holy Ghost, been baptised in Jesus name, and I wouldn't change that for all the world has to offer.”
End quote.

The followers of Jim Jones and David Koresh said the same thing. You should do a quick study on ‘millstones’.

References:
1. Apostolic Faith Newspapers, Charles Fox Parham, editor.
2. Apostolic Faith Newspapers, William Seymour, Editor.
3. Dake’s Bible, pentecostalism’s Bible, Finis Jenning Dake.
4. Who is who in pentecostalism.
5. Azusa Revival.
6. Notes, General Assembly of the Assembly of God, 1919.
7. Various Histories provided by pentecostalism.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Mr. Arron:

Thank you dearly for the character reference.

[arron]

well that is your character so you should know

[foreverapostolic]

the_apostolic_truth_ministries. Thank God I have been set free and I don't belong to the Assembly of God, they are Trinity. David Bernard was not heard of in the area my grandparents and mother and dad received the Holy Ghost and the United Pentecoatal Orginazation was started in 1946? and the Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ Orginazation before that. We do not beleive in Homosexuals and our Church was not invented by one. You don't invent something that was Founded by the Word of God. We are not Cults, Not Assembly of God, Church of God, are of any Trinity Pentecostal Orgination. So what you read has nothing to do with our church. I didn't belong to Jim Jones, or David Koresh, and I can't help what they may have said. I am not classified with them I don't drink poision, or handled serpents and posion doctorin does not effect by hertiage or you either. As for as the two edge sword, it didn't cut me, it just lets me know you can't take what the Bible says because the Word does Cut, not words by false prophets, and you try to go to other sources to get answers, but there is none out there except the Bible. I'm sorry you must have denied the Bible so much that you don't know what a Christian is, and if your Christian friends think we are Cults, I guess they will go to Hell beliving that. Who invented you?

[foreverapostolic]

Arron, thanks for the Post, I know "TATM" just thinks he knows everything, but if he didn't have quotes and publishings from others, do you think he would have anything to lean on. I know he knows I spelled Revelation and added an s on it and he jumped on that. What faith are you? You know sometimes people have so much book knowledge, they don't even use common sense anymore.

[arron]

he has nothing to lean on he is mad at the pentecostal world i have proven him wrong several times on here nad he just want answer for a while till he thinks i have forgotten it. he said amie mchpherson had been married fiv time and divorced five time that was a lie he said the assembblies believed in onenes that was a lie the assemblies of GOD re trintiterian just a few of the things i have proven him wrong in he also goes by different names he is so hung up on the homo issue that it makes me wonder. i do know he was hurt by some one in the pentecostal faith and that is one reason he HATES US so.

[arron]

also how can he call himself apostolic when he doesnt even believe in THE THINGS OF GOD he doesnt believe in the book of mark or i or second peter, i highly doubt that he believes in revalation book according to one of his posts. he is one of the dreamers he is a wannabe professer who doesnt know what he professes

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come, Mr. Arron:

You cannot even type, how could you possibly prove someone wrong (other than in your imagination)?

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

M(r)(s). foreverapostolic:

I find it amusing that I know more about your religion than you do. Yet you are the one who fell sucker to it. Yes, your religion was invented by a homosexual in 1906, and not in the book of Acts. We can go even further and say a child-molesting homosexual according to your own religion's history books. It is ashame your preacher is not man enough to tell you the truth.

[arron]

my preacher is man enough to tell any one the word of GOD especially an unbeliever like you i might not can type i fully admit that but i do read and STUDY GODS WORD THE BIBLE nd dont rely on "mu head" knowledge you are one stupid whatever

[foreverapostolic]

the _apostolic_truth_ministries: I find it amusing that that you think my religion was invented by a homosexual in 1906, and not the Book of Acts. And you said you could go further and say a child-molesting homosexual according to my own religion's history book. If you have a book you skipped a page or something, just like you do the Bible and Acts 2:37-39. It sure is ashame your preacher is not man enough to tell you if you don't obey the Bible and Acts 2:38 you want make it to heaven. I am not a man, but I am woman enough to tell you if you don't repent and receive the Holy Ghost and get baptised in the Name of Jesus you will not make it. You could not even post the correct information about Charles Fox Parham. I am not ashamed of what it says because Christians have always been lied on or talked about. The rest of the information on Charles Fox Parham: In 1907, Parham encountered some legal difficulties that did terrible harm to his reputation. He was arrested in Texas for alledged sexual(misconduct) involving young boys. However, charges were dropped as no one came forward to testify. Today, it is generally regarded that the charges were without merit and most likely resulted from a conspiratorial campaign to discredit him initiated by anti-Pentecostal religious leaders. Nevertheless, the accusation was enough to do substantial damage, and he subsequently lost much of his credibility with the neo-Pentecostal movement. You want people to believe you really know every thing, but you just get part of it and wasn't going to tell anyone the charges were dropped. He has been dead since 1929, but still hasn't been forgiven even after the charges was dropped. We are not Pentecostal-Charismatic. We are Apostolic, sometimes called Pentecostal, but not Trinity. We have to forgive to be forgiven and I am sorry but you haven't changed me any. Infact I think you have made me stronger in what I belive. I couldn't go to bed and sleep if I said the things about people and the Bible like you do. I would be afraid Jesus would come back and I would be left behind. Jesus has already been crucified so you don't have to do it again. I want to go to heaven and I hope you do too. Hell, will be an awful place to spend eternity, and that is forever and ever. One of our son-in laws is our pastor now and his dad the senior pastor. He preaches the Truth, but He didn't have to tell me, I already knew the plan of salvation before he came into the family.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Mrs. foreverapostolic:

hehehehehehehehhahahhahahahahaha!!!!!!! I have to admit, I am impressed (but not really). It is painfully obvious you have read neither the Bible, nor the history of your religion. Had you bothered to read either, you would be the one laughing.

I read the same facetious article as yourself. Unfortunately, I knew enough about history to scream 'uncle'. Have you ever heard of Women's Sufferage? No, it has nothing to do with child birth. It is the right to vote. Do you have any idea when that right was granted? Ever hear of Fanny Crosby? You should study her life. She was a blind song writer who wrote more than ten-thousand hymns. Now guess where she was in 1906? Ever hear of Billy Sunday? Got any idea what he was doing in 1906? Do you know any thing about child labor laws?

You see, you have fallen sucker to your religion once again. Sodomy was not against the law in 1906. In Fact, prostitution was available every in the U.S. Orphanages were used as slave labor camps by farmers. The list goes on and on, my dear. If there were no fire, why do you think your religion is blowing so much smoke?

By the by you, like Mr. Arron, are factually-challenged. I did tell both sides of the story. I, personally, contacted your religion to get the real answer. The first response I received was the one you gave. The second response was that Parham did not found pentecostalism. According to that report, Parham founded the Oneness Movement. As we both know, Parham died in the twenties and the Oneness Movement was invented by David Bernard in 1956. I gave both sides of the story under the title "The Origins of pentecostal tongues"
(http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/30639.html?1178977124)

So where does the truth lie? In Parham's own newspaper. He admits to being booted from William Seymour's pulpit (in California, not Texas) for sodomy with little boys. Now the real question is, who am I going to believe? You? Your religion? or The horse's own mouth?

Invite your preacher (son-in-law, in-law, outlaw or whatever) to come discuss your manmade salvic plan. I, like thousands of others, can easy disprove the garbology known as Baptism (Acts 2:38) = Regeneration (Acts 3:19).

In fact, I set up a new message board recently at the request of Mr. Arron. I will be glad to give you, your pastor or any Oneness Preacher access to the board.

[foreverapostolic]

the _Apostolic_truth_ministries, I don't know why you are so hung up with David Bernard inventing the Oneness Movement in 1956. I know that is a lie, because my family was part of it before 1956 and a lot of ministers. Why don't you contact the United Pentecostal or the Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ and see where we really started from. I think you are ignorant to the Word of God and you dwell on trying to make people think you are very smart. It don't make any difference how many songs someone writes and what happened years ago, you better be concerned about the end-time. I wouldn't have my son-in-law to waste his time on you are any Oneness Preacher, they would think you are demon possessed. Now I really do too. Remember, HELL IS REAL, IT WAS PREPARED FOR THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS. You know I don't care who you believe, maybe God does need to send a donkey to talk you. You don't need to worry about the 1900's, you need to worry about (self). Those people are gone and in the hands of a just God, and waiting for Judgement Day. I can't save them or send them to hell. If you didn't have garbage to read you would probably be the most miserable person alive. I want be Posting anything to you again, because I don't mess with demonic spirits

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Mrs. foreverapostolic:

Quoting: "If you didn't have garbage to read you . . . ."
End quote.

You are absolutely right about reading garbage, though I prefer to call it garbology. Anyone who has read the filthology of your religion knows it is garbology. You are right. I did read your religion's filtholgy. That is how I know your religion is a cult.

Allow me to prove it. What would you say to a religion that:
1. Teaches Oneness of God?
2. Teaches Baptism (Acts 2:38) = Regeneration (Acts 3:19) as God's perfect plan of salvation?
3. Teaches "baptism in the Holy Ghost with evidence of speaking in tongues."?
4. Teaches "faith healing" and "laying on of hands"?

Would you say it sounds just like your religion?

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

hehehhehehehehehe!!!!!

Welcome to Mormonism 101!

[arron]

forever apostolic ... the movement was not started in 1956 it was before then. i have never been apostolic and never will be i am triniterian. i beleive in receiving THE HOLY GHOST WITH THE EVIDENCE OF TONGUES WHICH i have received. ive been saved for a long time i was saved in the baptist church and when i saw the light of pentecostal i went over to that. i defend my faith

[donotfear]

Me too...I crossed over in 1999. I was a "closet pentacostal" for years in the Baptist Church. There's a lot of 'em out there!

[truth_child]

if we beleive the hosres own mouth (yours ) we would be belivening a lie for that is what you do any one can lie to get out of what is being said and you do plenty of that

[truth_child]

well tatm be good and beheave your self remember THE LORD IS listening to what you say and seeing what you do

[truth_child]

well every one seems to ave quit writting where you all at.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Mr. Arron, is there any chance someone other than yourself might get in the last word?

[truth_child]

well here you chance wwrite what you want i will listen even if i dont believe it
there are those who if they come in and say it is raining outside i would have to go out and just get drenched before i would believe them

[truth_child]

will some one who is oneness on here please expalin how you get just one when the bible clearly teaches there are three in the trinity. please explain THE BAPTISIM OF JESUS where ALL THREE WERE PRESENT

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Omnipresent

[truth_child]

JESUS IS EVERYWHERE SO ALSO IS THE FATHER, AND THE SON, AS THEY ARE THREE PERSONS IN ONE THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD AND WE WORSHIP HIM IN THREE PERSONS NOT TITLES OR NAMES. i worship GOD THE FATHER THROUGH JESUS CHRIST BY AND THROUGH THE HOLY GHOST WHO LIVES INSIDE of me. JESUS IS SEATED AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER, AND THE HOLY GHOST IS HERE ON EARTH DWELLING IN THE BELIVERS. PRAISE GOD FOR THAT

[truth_child]

tatm you dont beleive anything that the bible teaches. i was talking to people who are belivers IN JESUS AS SAVIOR

[truth_child]

please every one back on topic. the JESUS only churches are not a part of the pentecostal movement that originally started in the begining ( in acts) they beleive that there is only JESUS nad that THE FATHER AND THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST are offices and not THREE PERSONS IN ONE GOD.

[truth_child]

yes we believe in tongues as a gift from THE HOLY GHOST but not for salvation one is saved first by beliveing on and in THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AS SAVIOR. AFTER THAT one can and may receive THE BAPTISIM if they desire HIM and they they receive tongues but not the gift of tongues for that is given after onE is baptised IN THE HOLY GHOST

[bear]

Truth_Child,

the modern Pentecotal movement started in 1906 after the Azusa Street revival. The move of the HS in Acts does not in any way reflect this movement today.
__________________________________________________ ____________

TATM,

Omnipresence can not be a foundation for three individuals. Could you explain this from your understanding.

[truth_child]

the pentecostal movment started on the day of pentecost, not in 1906. the pentecostal movement is the right way for the teachings of the bible
there is only ONE GOD IN THREE PERSONS, NOT OFFICES , NOT GODS THEY ARE THREE IN UNITY

[bear]

The Pentecostal movement of today can not be found in history before 1906 and the Azusa Street revival. I challenge you to provide documentation.

Please do not say the scriptures, for they show a true movement of God, not what we see today.

[truth_child]

we find instance of tongues throughout history im talking about real tongues and not gibberish as some put it. many times people have been baptised WITH THE HOLY GHOST ever since the day of pentecost . you praove that they have not

[truth_child]

the apostolic chuch located in n.c. is a very agressive church the pastor wears a long brede hanging down to his belt and his children and wife and about four others are the only ones who are showm attending as they have a very small place. he calls every one liars and hypocrites and trash and other things that border on cursing. he has sued several for harassment and different things . it is a nery cultic church