xuadobiht

Welcome!

News: I've opened a Print Account. If you're interested, come check it out: xuadobiht.deviantart.com/store…

<a href="www.deviantart.com/print/44199…"th04.deviantart.com/fs35/150/p…" alt="Surprise in the Forest" />

It’s been weighing on me lately to address some doctrinal issues and odd fads that are prevalent in the Church today.  This goes out to my brothers and sisters in Christ for the sake of sound instruction.  I know this might step on a few toes, but it just has to be said.  Most of these issues are not regarding one’s personal relationship with God, but rather quirks in their interpretations of the Bible.  Some of them are a little more serious, and I think that those should be obvious.  What I want to do here is try to bring some of these ideas to light and offer some clarification from a Scriptural stand point so that these misplaced ideas can be addressed rationally.

So, here is a table of contents of the subject matter that I will be covering:

Part One:

I. Christianity: Relationship or Religion?
II. The Insecurities of Eternal Security
III. Purity in the Church
IV. Political Salvation
V. Pre, Post, or No Rapture?

Part Two:

VI. The Televangelist Reformation
VII. Making Sense out of Marriage
VIII. Does Satan Drink Beer?
IX. Baptism of the Holy Spirit
X. The King James Monopoly

I. Christianity: Relationship or Religion?

I’m sure we’ve all heard the statement by now: “Christianity isn’t a religion, it’s a relationship!”  As much as I appreciate what the movement is trying to do-putting Christianity into a more positive light in the modern world-I just don’t think that it’s an adequate statement.  Religion is a system of beliefs.  Christianity is a system of beliefs.  The idea should seem obvious.

  So what’s happened?  Well, the modern world has come to see the word “religion” as a four letter word (“rlgn”?).  The reason for that is that there has been a lot of evil done in the world of the sake of religion.  Therefore, religion has come to be redefined as a system of man-made ideas used to up-hold a man-made ideology.  Well, if that were the true definition of religion, then I would affirm that Christianity is not that.  But by rightful definition; yes, it is.
  I think that the Christian community should stop trying to make the doctrines of the Church into “modern-world appropriate” ideas.  Let’s face it, Christianity was not intended to look popular, or cool, or politically correct.  Let’s stop trying to confuse people with points of equivocation.

Here is a passage from James 1:27:

“ Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.”

We see that there is a pure form of religion.  It’s not about extremism or hatred, but about love for our fellow man.  But what we as Christians should be trying to disassociate ourselves with is the other kind of religion:

Collosians 2:20-23 “Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations; "Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle," which all concern things which perish with the using; according to the commandments and doctrines of men?  These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.”

So there is religion, and false religion.  I would say that we should endeavor to be on the side of right, but denying religion altogether is ultimately ineffectual and confusing.



II. The Insecurities of Eternal Security

This is a topic that has frustrated me for a long time.  There are factions in the Church (especially here in the southern states where I live) that hold the opinion that when you find Jesus, you’re just stuck with Him.

… Uh, no.

This is a hard topic to address because a lot of people take this doctrine very seriously.  They will cite this verse:

(Romans 8:39)  “nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

I agree.  But they aren’t reading that passage properly. Notice: “nor height nor depth, nor any other *created thing*”.  That’s important.  Nothing created can separate us from the Lord.  But the Lord is not created.  Would He separate us from Him?  

(John 15:1-6)  "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. {2} "Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit *He takes away*; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit. {3} "You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. {4} "Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me. {5} "I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. {6} "If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.”

Aw snap!  He would!

A phrase that I hear a lot is “Well, God wouldn’t take away your salvation.”  This phrase is misleading though.  It makes a terrible assumption about salvation: That we actually have it.  Take note:

(1 Thessalonians 5:8)  “But let us who are of the day be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet the *hope of salvation*.”

Why the “hope of salvation”?  Hope is for something that you don’t have, but anticipate.  Is that what salvation is?  Yep.  What does this phrase mean: Salvation by faith?

(1 Peter 1:5)  “who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.”

Does it mean that if we have faith we have salvation?  No.  Remember what faith is:

(Hebrews 11:1)  “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”

Faith is a present realization of something that has not been seen, realized, or even occurred.  Therefore, if our salvation is by faith, how can we have it now?  

What does this passage mean?

(1 Peter 1:9)  “receiving the *end of your faith*; the salvation of your souls.”

It means that faith ends (in death) with the salvation that it represents.  

So would God take away your salvation?  No.  But you don’t have it yet, so there is nothing to take.  

Now perhaps I should offer a sense of clarification here:  There is something to be said for salvation by faith.  It’s not necessarily a nothing that becomes a something, it’s something that must reach fulfillment.  You might think of it this way:  If you’re given a check for a million dollars you might say that you’re a millionaire, but in actuality you’re not.  You have a check, not the money.  The check is a promise of the money, but until you fulfill the purpose of the check it’s worthless paper.  So we, in like manner, we have salvation by faith, which brings salvation, but only when we have carried that faith to the end.  

Do not be deceived by this doctrine that offers false security.  It is not Biblically supportable, and it amounts to nothing but confusion among the Church in regards to evangelism.  There is this sort of leap to get people to pray a prayer and then a sigh of relief that another soul is saved.  Forget about learning, growing, walking in purity or any of that.  If someone just invited Jesus into their heart, then they’re safe, right?  This doctrine has to be done away with before it causes any more of this damage than it already has.



III. Purity in the Church

The Church of today is gradually loosing touch with the idea of Purity.  Today the Church of God (not the denomination necessarily) has come to be regarded as a social club that has been passed from one generation to the next.  People go to church, learn nothing, return to their homes, and continue their lives as if God were a TV show character.  This is great wickedness that so many would be hearers of the law and not doers of the law.  I have seen this situation so many times:

“My boyfriend/girlfriend and I are moving in together.  It’s no big deal, we’re practically married already!”

Except you’re not.  Why is this sort of thing so common among people who claim the grace of God?  This is fornication, and should be cast aside at all cost.  But there is more to this still:  Why is there filthy talk in the Church?  So many who claim the Gospel of Christ will use obscenities just like the rest of the world.  If we cannot learn to speak as is appropriate, then how will we, with our mouths, uphold the testimony of the cross of Christ?

So take note:

(Ephesians 5:3-5)  “But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; {4} neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. {5} For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.”

And the words of Christ Himself are also not to be ignored:

(Matthew 5:48)  "Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.”

That’s quite a high calling.  How then can we do that if we are willfully doing that which is wrong?

It seems odd to me that such a topic should need to even be addressed, but it is obviously not getting through to the Church.  But too many people have come to regard Jesus as their “homeboy” and they quickly forget that He is also the Lord of the universe.  He may be our friend, but that does not mean that He is not the Lord of Hosts, and He will look at sinners during the Judgment and tell many “I never knew you”.



IV. Political Salvation

There is a movement in the Church that has made me uneasy, and that movement is that of religious politics.  Now don’t get me wrong; I keep up with political stuff quite a bit, and I think it’s a fascinating topic, but way too many people get this mixed up with our Christian duty.  

Now maybe I should clarify that I am a politically disenchanted individual.  I think terms like “Republican” and “Democrat” are just two sides of one coin.  I don’t think they are different in practice.  And ultimately, neither of them represents the Church of the living God.  So don’t let anyone side track you into thinking that there is some kind of virtue in either party.  

(John 18:36)  Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here."

Let’s not get so wrapped up in the workings of this world.  Do your small part as a voter as you so choose, but don’t make some big deal about saying “Jesus would vote Republican!”  No kidding, I’ve actually heard ministers say, from behind the pulpit, that it is our Christian obligation to vote.  Because we call down the kingdom of God that way, right?  Don’t buy into that.

Now, I would like people to know that if you are politically apathetic like me, you don’t have to vote.  You are under no moral obligation.  If anyone tells you that by not voting that you decline your right to an opinion, tell them that your opinion is that the options do not represent your views.  There is no biblical or moral ground that would require you to vote.  If you do feel obligated to do so, then do so on the grounds of patriotic duty, not as duty to the Almighty.  If I sound like I am discouraging anyone from voting, I will say that, no I am not.  I am voting, and I hope there is a good vote turn out this election.  My only point is that this is an election, not a spiritual jihad.  Don’t get politics mixed up with the Great Commission.



V. Pre, Post, or No Rapture?

This one has been going on for a while now:  The Rapture.  First off, I would like to say that, yes Virginia, there is a Rapture.  People will argue against it by saying “The word ‘Rapture’ isn’t even in the Bible!”  

(1 Thessalonians 4:16-17)  For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. {17} Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.

Word or no word, the event is still there.  So when you meet these people that tell you there is no such thing as the Rapture, take it to the bank that they are not reading their Bibles enough.

Now, on the issue of Pre-Tribulation Rapture or Post-Tribulation Rapture, now we have some more to cover.

Well let me spoil the tension now:  The Rapture comes after the Tribulation.  That’s right, Tim Lahaye was wrong.  Why do I say all that?  Well, did you notice that passage I mentioned above?  Here’s the extended version:

(1 Thessalonians 4:15-18 & 5:1-4)  For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. {16} For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. {17} Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. {18} Therefore comfort one another with these words.  {1}But concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need that I should write to you. {2} For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. {3} For when they say, "Peace and safety!" then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. {4} But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief.

Now someone says “Yeah, this is talking about the ‘Day of the Lord’ (aka the Rapture), not the ‘Coming of the Lord’ (aka the Battle of Armageddon).  Those two things are different!”  Well let’s see if that is the case:

(Matthew 24:27-31) "For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. {28} "For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together. {29} "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. {30} "Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. {31} "And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

So, now we are talking about the Coming of the Lord, right?  But notice: the sequences: the sounding of the angels, then the gathering of the church.  And also notice that this passage in Matthew, which is clearly talking about the actual coming of Christ, where the same events are happening as in Thessalonians.  These passages are talking about the same event.

And notice that it is after this that we see this happening:

(Matthew 24:40-42)  "Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. {41} "Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. {42} "Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming.”

Basically, the Day of the Lord and the Coming of the Lord are the same thing.  One event.  Not two.  It’s called the Second Coming, and there is no need for a third.

Here’s another passage from Matthew 24:

(Matthew 24:15-17)  "Therefore *when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet,* standing in the holy place, then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.  Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house."

Wait, why would WE see the antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation if we’re supposed to be gone?  I’m misreading that, right?  No, look:

(2 Thessalonians 2:3)  Let no one deceive you by any means; for *that Day will not come* unless the falling away comes first, and *the man of sin is revealed*, the son of perdition,

So this passage is saying that the Day of the Lord will not come until the antichrist has been revealed which is a clear indication that the Church will in fact see the Great Tribulation.  

So how is there still doubt?  The only methods that churches have to argue against the Post Trib Rapture is circumstantial evidence that has little, if anything, to do with Scripture.  There is no sound defense for the Pre-Trib doctrine, and it goes against the doctrines plainly stated in the Bible.  The ways of the Lord have never been in the habit of preventing tribulation, and tribulation is even a promise to us by Christ Himself.  Why then, do the churches of today believe that they are not subject to such things?

My other articles:

Top Ten of Doctrinal Clarity (pt 2) xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
The Origin of Feces: The Dirt on Evolution xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Balance Principle xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Oh No! Not Politics! xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Rules of Engagement xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
My Philosophy on Art xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
I am More Open Minded than You xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
"Let's Discredit the Bible!" xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
"Christian Hate Speech?" xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Logic Anyone? xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Issues in Churches xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…

My humor:

How Ignorant People see Christians xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
President Miazaki?? xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
My Ears are Eggplants xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…


Links
www.indeathorlife.org My big brother’s site. He’s really good with Bible issues, and he has a lot to say about the misconceptions of Calvinism.

www.tektonics.org A little bit of tough love for the world.

www.answersingenesis.org Creationism website. A lot of people who don’t believe in God believe in "science" which is falsely so called. This is for you guys.

www.myspace.com/xuadobiht I have a Myspace page! All my party peoples in the place to be: Come on down and get hooked up on my happenin' friends list!

Welcome!

News: I've opened a Print Account. If you're interested, come check it out: xuadobiht.deviantart.com/store…



  It’s been weighing on me lately to address some doctrinal issues and odd fads that are prevalent in the Church today.  This goes out to my brothers and sisters in Christ for the sake of sound instruction.  I know this might step on a few toes, but it just has to be said.  Most of these issues are not regarding one’s personal relationship with God, but rather quirks in their interpretations of the Bible.  Some of them are a little more serious, and I think that those should be obvious.  What I want to do here is try to bring some of these ideas to light and offer some clarification from a Scriptural stand point so that these misplaced ideas can be addressed rationally.

So, here is a table of contents of the subject matter that I will be covering:

Part One:

I. Christianity: Relationship or Religion?
II. The Insecurities of Eternal Security
III. Purity in the Church
IV. Political Salvation
V. Pre, Post, or No Rapture?

Part Two:

VI. The Televangelist Reformation
VII. Making Sense out of Marriage
VIII. Does Satan Drink Beer?
IX. Baptism of the Holy Spirit
X. The King James Monopoly

VI. The Televangelist Reformation

This is an old topic that has gotten more and more out of hand as time has gone on.  The biggest churches and evangelists in the country seem to be the craziest.  Does anyone still believe that Benny Hinn is really a prophet?  Many of these people have doctrines that borderline cult mentality.  Now don’t get me wrong, there are some good folks that get video coverage.  Ravi Zacharias is a brilliant apologist, and I really like Dr. James Kennedy.  But I’d say that over half the people that get featured on TBN have some outright zany doctrines, and I would not spend too much of my time gathering ideas from the likes of these.  


If you watch these people you will notice lots of teachings that you will not find in your Bible.  Among these is the doctrine of ‘ Prosperity’.  “Yes, God wants to make you RICH!!!”  Yeah, because Jesus talked about making lots of money all the time.  Flush that nonsense.  If you see the preacher knocking people down, turn the channel.  If he’s selling holy water, you may just want to turn off your TV, and set it on fire just to be sure that they don’t come back.  The Televangelist movement is the most money-oriented, man-centered institutions since the US Congress.  


Question what you hear and find out if it really coincides with the Bible before you take it as Christian doctrine.  If someone makes prophecies that don’t come true, then mark them off as false prophets and pay their words no mind.  If someone makes blatantly erroneous statements about the faith, then steer away from their doctrines.  There’s not much to say beyond that.  Just be wary.  



VII. Making Sense of Marriage

I’ll make it known right now that as far as experience is concerned I am the least qualified person in the world to talk about this subject.  But qualification aside, I see a lot of problems that come up in the Church with regard to marriage.  First off:  They don’t last very long.  It bothers me to see the way that people will take a good thing and throw it away.  What does the scripture say about this?

(Matthew 19:7-8)  They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?" {8} He said to them, "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.

So the right remains for divorce to take place, so that should not be argued to be inherently evil.  But there are rules to follow:

(1 Corinthians 7:10-11)  “Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband. {11} But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife.”

And pay mind to this as well:

(Matthew 19:9)  "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery."

So, the Reader’s Digest summary: the wife has freedom to leave her husband.  The husband does not have the right to leave his wife except she is guilty of unfaithfulness.  The wife does not have the right to remarry while her husband still lives, while the husband does have the right to remarry if his wife has been unfaithful.  Ultimately, this is not a union to be taken lightly so think it through carefully.

Another issue that comes up quite a lot is the issue of spousal submission.  When the term “submission” is addressed the modern mind likes to replace the term with “oppression”.  Well first off, what does the Bible say?

(Ephesians 5:22-24)  “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. {23} For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. {24} Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.”

These statements should be nothing new or controversial to anyone who reads their Bibles, but I address them because many people ignore these passages on account of the modern views of equality.  

So why would this be important?  Well first off, a marriage with two people who have equal decision making power is not an equalized binary unit, it’s a two headed monster.  For fear of sounding like a chauvinistic Nazi on this topic, I will address the viewer to further reading on this subject by directing you to a blog written by my sister-in-law that I think will better summarize this area from a feminine perspective. womenstudyingthescriptures.wor…;

So allow me to conclude this topic with a final offering on how to help a marriage (or any relationship) prosper:  

(James 4:1-3)  “Where do wars and fights come from among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasure that war in your members? {2} You lust and do not have. You murder and covet and cannot obtain. You fight and war. Yet you do not have because you do not ask. {3} You ask and do not receive, because you ask amiss, that you may spend it on your pleasures.”

Too many times, people just want to make things work out their own way, and the result is strife.  Do you know how you ease tension?  Do something nice, and don’t expect anything from it.  Then do it again.  And again.  It may seem thankless, but if one party does not start the peace making process then neither of them will.  I don’t care if you are the man or the wife.  It’s no one’s job.  If it has to be done YOU do it (That’s right, YOU).  Were you wronged?  Forgive, and show your forgiveness through kindness.  You can’t afford to loose this person, so make an effort!



VIII. Does Satan Drink Beer?

I roughly covered this topic in my article on The Balance Principle, but I’ll specify my position on the topic here for the sake of clarity.

Before I get started, let me just say that I don’t make any commandments that everyone absolutely should drink alcohol.  I’m not barking orders here; I am just trying to argue that there is nothing scripturally wrong with drinking.

Now, I should start by clarifying that I live in the south.  About half the population here is Baptist (and the other half is “Football”, but there is quite a bit of overlap too).  The Baptist church makes a serious point of saying that alcohol is evil.  Not just excessive alcohol, ANY alcohol.   Well in light of scripture, this doctrine is purely legalism.  The scripture that is cited by the Baptists is:

(Proverbs 23:31)  “Do not look on the wine when it is red, When it sparkles in the cup, When it swirls around smoothly”

They don’t look at that verse in context though:

(Proverbs 23:29-33)  “Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has contentions? Who has complaints? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? {30} Those who linger long at the wine, Those who go in search of mixed wine. {31} Do not look on the wine when it is red, When it sparkles in the cup, When it swirls around smoothly; {32} At the last it bites like a serpent, And stings like a viper. {33} Your eyes will see strange things, And your heart will utter perverse things.”

The context makes it clear that the subject is a hyperbole of drunkenness.  Trust me, you don’t ‘see strange things’ after drinking one can of Red Dog.  I’ve tried.

Well how do the Baptists explain the changing of water into wine then?  I mean, if Jesus was going to make a “sinful substance” as His first miracle, it would not be too far fetched that he would come back to earth and start making crystal meth out of table salt.  Well, the most common way that Teetotalitarians (as my brother calls them) will play this down is by saying that the word that the Bible often uses for ‘wine’ simply means ‘grape juice’.  Well, did Jesus really turn water into Welch’s?

(John 2:10)  “And he said to him, "Every man at the beginning sets out the good wine, and when the guests have well drunk, then the inferior. You have kept the good wine until now!"”

Now this statement makes no sense if you are talking about grape juice.  Because, A. the word that is used when he is saying “the guests have well drunk” in the Greek implies some level of intoxication (“methuo” ).  B. The idea of saving the bad stuff for later is a phenomenon of alcohol consumption: after you’ve had some it dulls your taste a little, so you don’t mind if your next drink is inferior to the first.  Yes, Jesus made wine.

Now when this is addressed to a Fundamentalist Baptist, expect something funny to happen.  My dad did it once and told me the gory details:  The man’s response to him was “Well as far as alcohol goes, we feel that we have a higher calling than that.”  Sorry, but if you have a higher calling than Jesus, then you’re just a blatant legalist, and should definitely lighten up on the fried chicken.  Get your head on straight and read the word without your blinders on.  



IX. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit
Now this is another one that has been eating at me for a long time because people get the wrong idea of what the Bible means by this.  It has become a common belief in churches today that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is what happens when you get saved.  

Emphatically:  No.

Bear with me and let’s examine this topic:

(Acts 19:1-5)  “And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples {2} he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" So they said to him, "We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit." {3} And he said to them, "Into what then were you baptized?" So they said, "Into John's baptism." {4} Then Paul said, "John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus." {5} When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.”

Now catch this next part:

(Acts 19:6)  “And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.”

Did you catch that?  They believed first, but that wasn’t the Holy Spirit yet.  They were baptized, but that wasn’t the Holy Spirit yet.  Then you see that Paul laid hands on them and the Holy Spirit came upon them.  How did they know it came on them?  They spoke in tongues and prophesied.  Many Christians today don’t understand that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit manifests itself through the displaying of supernatural power.  That’s why it was said:

(Matthew 3:11)  "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit *and fire.*”

Again, let’s see elsewhere:

(Acts 10:44-48)  “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. {45} And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. {46} For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered, {47} "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" {48} And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.”

Now, these had not even been baptized with water, but the baptism of the Spirit came upon them all the same.  

So let’s evaluate:  Believing in Christ is the first step of the Christian life.  Then for those that have received the Lord, there comes the baptism of water. And we are meant to regard believing of Christ and the baptism of the Spirit as the same thing.  But in that context, this makes no sense.  Because you see, in one passage above, the baptism of the Spirit is before the baptism of water, and in the other it comes after.  Well that throws a wrench into the whole doctrine, doesn’t it?  And also notice that in both cases, the baptism of the Spirit causes the utterances of diverse tongues and prophecies.

Is the acceptance of Christ and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit the same thing?  No.  They are different events and should by no means be mixed up.

Many churches today not only disregard the speaking of tongues and prophecies, but actually regard attempts at such to be disorder among the congregation.  There should be order in the practice of the gifts of the Spirit, but hindering all such expression is absolutely wrong.



X. The King James Monopoly
For some reason or another, there are a surprising number of people that believe that the only true version of the Bible is the King James Version.  Some people get really batty about this topic too.  How serious is this?  Well, it depends on who you’re talking about.  There are a few different levels of KJV-onlyism:

1. The Recommender:  This guy will tell you that he thinks that KJV is the best translation, and recommends it to others.
2. The Fanatic:  This guy thinks that there was some deep, powerful, divine aspect to the KJV, and believes you to be an individual of lesser wisdom if you use another version.
3. The KJV Dictator:  This guy doesn’t just believe that the KJV is a higher version of the English Bible, but actually believes that the KJV is an upgrade of the original Greek and Hebrew.

It’s important to know who you’re dealing with when this topic comes up.  If you’re talking to the first one, then the topic can’t really get all that elevated.  Listen to what he has to say, and take his word as you will.  

In the case of the second, just be patient and let him yak.  Don’t bother reasoning with him, nothing is going to get through.  Just nod and tell him you’ll consider his words.  I had a very brief email discussion with a KJV-only man who fit into this area.  He’s a very smart man that I respect, but he just wasn’t going to grasp this.  I had mentioned to him that the English Bible changed the name of ‘Eve’ from her original Hebrew name ‘Chavvah’.  I asked why that was.  His response: He believes that the KJV Bible has the true names of the Biblical characters.  Sorry, that’s just reasoning against facts.  

In the third case:  Stay far, far away.  I mean it.  These people are crazy.  Have you ever read anything by Peter S. Ruckman?  Yeah, with him, you’re pretty much an apostate if you’ve ever so much as looked at a New American Standard.  These people are not evangelists, they are cult leaders that base their entire theology on wording.  Don’t even go there.

Now, I have nothing against KJV.  It’s dandy.  But I don’t see the point of putting so much emphasis on it.  Analyze this for a moment:  When you read an NIV, or whatever, do you understand the relevance of what is taking place?  Does the sacrifice of Christ become clear?  Is the power and mercy of God revealed?  Good!  That’s what you needed to get from it.  Now, if you want to do some in-depth research on a particular topic, you may want to have a few different versions available, and I would recommend a KJV among those.  But if anyone thinks that they will stand before God and have the Almighty demand an account for what version of the Bible they read, I really don’t think that’s going to be the case (unless maybe you’re talking about some cultic bible of some sort).



I hope that I have provided some new insight for my brothers and sisters out there.  I know that a lot of Christians have bought into some of these doctrines and ideas that I have refuted here, and I would really encourage you to get away from these concepts and test your personal beliefs with the Bible.  Think about your doctrines.  I don’t care who gave them to you; question them.  Gain wisdom, knowledge and understanding by reading the word of God with no denominational or cultural bias.

Lord bless

My other articles:

Balance Principle xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Oh No! Not Politics! xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Rules of Engagement xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
My Philosophy on Art xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
I am More Open Minded than You xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
"Let's Discredit the Bible!" xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
"Christian Hate Speech?" xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Logic Anyone? xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
Issues in Churches xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…

My humor:

How Ignorant People see Christians xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
President Miazaki?? xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…
My Ears are Eggplants xuadobiht.deviantart.com/journ…


Links
www.indeathorlife.org My big brother’s site. He’s really good with Bible issues, and he has a lot to say about the misconceptions of Calvinism.

www.tektonics.org A little bit of tough love for the world.

www.answersingenesis.org Creationism website. A lot of people who don’t believe in God believe in "science" which is falsely so called. This is for you guys.

www.myspace.com/xuadobiht I have a Myspace page! All my party peoples in the place to be: Come on down and get hooked up on my happenin' friends list!