|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Emergency Flights |
|
Contentious Doctrines To use
our English language’s similar-sounding words, it is contemptuous to have
contentious doctrines! That is, while
certain topics are certainly in the Bible, some of them have become wrongly
interpreted by well-meaning born-again Christians, and sadly, their misinterpretations
have become taken as true, though the misinterpretations are just false. The following and their links are OHMS’s official position statements on the doctrinal topics they
discuss. They are Biblically accurate
positions and interpretations, though not necessarily culturally convenient
or church-approved. Truth transcends opinion, tradition, and even respected church
leaders’ positions. OHMS respectfully requests that you
compare what we hold as True with Scripture alone. “Tongues” This one is pretty easy to explain. I have actually seen a pamphlet published
by a “pentecostal”, though born-again, Christian church denomination. It said that, to “speak in tongues”, you
simply were to make your mouth utter whatever came to or through it, and
voilà! you were (apparently magically) speaking in tongues! This is utter nonsense and totally not
Biblical at all. If “Tongues” is a
gift from God (First Corinthians Speaking in “Tongues” in the New Testament book of Acts (2:3,4,11;
10:46; 19:6; and the prophecy in Mark 16:17; and in First Corinthians 12:10,28,30;
14:6,18,21-23,39) can be interpreted by Scripture itself (see Revelation 7:9;
10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 17:15) as nothing more than languages that are known and spoken by humans present at the time
of their speaking. I had a
particularly persistent pentecostal man approach me as I was reading my Bible
while eating at a restaurant. After
finding that we were both brothers in the Lord Jesus Christ, he asked me, “Since
coming to Christ, do you speak in tongues?”
I replied, “Yes, I speak French.”
While that makes the point of this discussion, so readers know the “rest
of the story”, here’s how this fellow followed my apparently unsatisfying
reply. “Have you healed anyone?” “Well, I prayed, and I’ve seen people
healed faster than if I hadn’t prayed.”
Still not sure if I, a young whipper-snapper of a Christian, really
was sanctified, what came next was almost predictable: “Well have you raised the dead?!!” “No sir,” I replied, “I have not raised the
dead, that’s God’s job.” “Then YOU
need to be ‘baptized in the Spirit’!!” after which he prayed for me and left. This is the kind of
persistent insistence many who follow the wrong notions of pentecostalism have
toward their flocks and fellow believers.
Sad, but true. Fortunately, not
everyone from pentecostally-leaning churches are as “holy” as my odd brother
in the story above! But this brings up
two points of serious Bible doctrine, “sanctification” and the legitimate
doctrine of the “baptism of the Holy Spirit”.
These topics follow, so continue reading! “Baptism”, or is it even an English word? Right off, let’s look at the Greek and the
English: Look at the Greek and English letters carefully. They even look alike! You see?
If you remember the math term “p”
(usually pronounced like “pie”), this is the Greek letter for “p” (because “p” is actually pronounced “pee” in Greek). Our English word is not really an English word. It’s a Greek word dragged into English,
letter by letter. This is called a transliteration, not a translation. The litters,
er, letters, were swapped from one language to another. This Greek word has been only
transliterated into most languages’ Bibles, rather than to translate its
meaning into the foreign languages of non-Greeks. So what would a Greek understand by their word, “baptize”? This is the main question that should be
asked. But first, just why
was “baptize” not translated into English with the rest of the Bible? Answer: because of FEAR. The practice of pedobaptism (infant
baptism) was so strongly held by the powerful, early Roman Catholic church
and Anglican church in Britain, that when the translators for England’s Bible-loving
King James went to work doing translating, they were too afraid to fight
tradition than to do the right thing and give us the English meaning of this
Greek word. Shame on them, and shame
on the modern English translators, too, for not fixing this age-old problem! What would have happened if these translators, or for that
matter, Martin Luther or John Calvin, both of whom also sabotaged Truth by
not translating “baptizw” into its meaning? Simply put, the heresy (false doctrine) of
infant baptism and the false “modes” of “sprinkling” and “pouring” would have
been stopped, as they all should have been. So, again, the question is, “What would a Greek do in response
to the concept of “baptizma” (baptism)? He or she would have been totally submerged
under enough water to cover them
completely. The best English one-word
translation is “immerse”, and that is the word I use exclusively for the notion
of “baptism”, because I know that most people don’t speak Greek! OHMS
encourages you to use “Immersion” (noun)
and “Immerse” (verb), from now on. The background of these Greek words are from the ancient Greek laundromat
and clothing manufacturers. To get
something clean, you don’t sprinkle
water on it, that’s nonsense! Nor do
you pour water on a shirt to get it
clean, you dunk the whole, sweaty shirt into water deep enough to submerge
the whole thing! Washing something
involved washing it completely, or why bother?! This same illustration fits to the
Spiritual cleansing the soul being saved gets. The other usage of “baptizw”, meaning “to immerse” was how you change a white woolen shirt
into a blue woolen shirt: you submerge the whole shirt into a vat of colored
water. This dyeing process intended to
change the color of the whole garment, not just a sleeve! So the “mode” is ONLY complete immersion,
the complete submersion “under” the water or “into”, not just “in”,
water. The Greek preposition “eiV”
rather than “en” (“into”, rather than “in”) is consistently used with the
concept of baptism, er, immersion.
Call it “in-mersion” if it will help, but please call it right from
now onward! OHMS not only holds
as true the discussion above, but we also encourage you to act according to
the meaning of “immersion”. For some
who may have only been “baptized” as babies, or even adults who have been
merely “sprinkled” or “poured upon” in some incorrect, or perhaps even false,
religious ritual, you may need to be immersed Biblically as a believer, which
presupposes that you are a believer.
(See our CoreDoctrines.htm
on becoming saved.) For some of you,
it may mean teaching or believing this doctrine correctly for the first
time. And for others, please do as God
leads you, even if that means standing up for Truth in your current church,
come what may, or switching to a solid Bible-thumping church. (If you do leave, leave with leadership
knowing exactly why, and for sound biblical reasons, and let your friends
know, hopefully so that they, too, will come to the Truth, come what may.) We must distinguish between infant baptism, adult baptism, and believer
(or believer’s) immersion. Obviously OHMS holds to the latter of these
three as solely Biblical. Here we’re
talking about the reason for Biblical
immersion. Immersion is an act of obedience, as a sign of belief in and
commitment to Jesus as Lord and Christ.
In Scripture, it is always public (see Luke 3:3), and, though not
required for salvation like some Christian denominations incorrectly believe,
a testimonial to the salvation event that was already accomplished. This is permanently made clear in Acts 8:35-39. It was only
upon proper belief that Biblical
believer’s immersion was to be implemented. The significance of the Biblical immersion of only souls who
truly believe for sound, accurate, Biblically reason is to signify to
onlookers the immersee’s life-commitment to Jesus the Christ, their
Lord. The symbolism is that of death
and resurrection, showing forth Jesus, the One Who was crucified, died, and
was buried (immersed, as it were, into the ground), and Who rose again from
the dead! The symbolism is that of our
own (figurative, but spiritual) dying, being buried (by someone else), and
being raised back to life (again, by someone else, since we do not have the power of
self-resurrection). It is a
testimonial both of what Jesus did to secure our salvation and of our union
with Him in His death, burial, and resurrection. (See Galatians 2:20.) Is the doctrine of “baptism” (immersion) confusing? No, not if we understand from the start
that it only can mean immersion. Then
the various “immersions” found in the Bible of God make more sense. Various?
Yes. There are five immersions
distinct from each other, but related, too.
Ask the questions: Who immerses? Upon Whom is it implemented? Unto what purpose is immersion
performed? And into what is the
recipient immersed? Here is a
rudimentary chart with those answers: Who does the dunking? Who
gets dunked? Why? Into? Of these five immersions, only one completed the salvation act
itself, and it involves the cleansing of repentant belief unto salvation by
faith alone. This is also the only
private immersion, where all others were public. The Holy Spirit immerses the soul who is
about to believe into Jesus Christ.
This, like the laundry concept of immersion, washes the soul
completely, accomplishing a permanent change, like the dying of a shirt. To push this illustration just a bit, a
crimson-sin-stained soul is made white, as snow. No dye or bleach could do that! Think of immersion #4 as a bottle in the ocean. Once the rotten cork gets pulled out of the
way, the one “in Christ” (in the ocean) can finally get filled up with the Holy
Spirit. Granted, with salvation comes
the fullness of God, leaving no un-given gift or blessing. The so-called “second blessing” that
pentecostal brethren often cite is nothing more (or less) than pulling
seaweed out of the already-uncorked bottle, so as to let in that fullness of
the Spirit. This is a continuous
process, whereas salvation is and can be only accomplished once in the life
of a repentant, believing soul. Sanctification Jesus
/CoordinatingDoctrines/
Connected, Concentric, etc. “Age of Accountability” Jesus
/CoordinatingDoctrines/
Connected, Concentric, etc. Salvation Continuity/ContinuingDoctrines / ConcatenateDoctrines / |
|
|
|
|
|
|
