View allAll Photos Tagged Scripture
St Mary, Grundisburgh, Suffolk
Grundisburgh, pronounced gruns--br'r, is the largest of the pretty villages along and around the Fynn Valley to the north-east of Ipswich, with a lovely village green, a couple of shops and a decent pub. It's always a pleasure to visit, especially as the church is both interesting and open every day.
Back in 2004, I'd written: I arrived in Grundisburgh after a frustrating week. I had spent one whole morning, with the permission of the Ministry of Defence, documenting the four churches marooned inside the Norfolk battle training area; these are not accessible to the public, so I was careful to photograph everything I could for posterity, including many of the gravestones in the churchyards. I'd spent further hours formatting the photos, setting the pages up with thumbnails and text, and now the Ministry of Defence had decided that it couldn't easily give me permission to publish them, because it would create too much interest in a sensitive area.
So it was with some relief that I came to Grundisburgh, knowing that this welcoming church is open every day, is full of fascination, and is in an interesting village. And they won't stop me writing about it.
I was here on May Day 2004, and at 10am the village green was already the scene of frantic activity. Grundisburgh has one of the prettiest village greens in east Suffolk; a small triangle with the church on one side, the former school and an old-fashioned shop on another, and pretty cottages along the main road on the third. Two sides of the green are bordered by the infant River Finn, and there is even a ford. The imposing art deco war memorial stands in front of the church, and people were setting up stalls for the May Day fair. Soon, the sound of English country dancing music was blaring out, and there was the smell of coal smoke from a small traction engine. It was very atmospheric.
The tower of St Mary overlooked all this. It is a curious tower, to say the least. Suffolk has several other 18th century brick towers, but the pretty red-brick ones at Cowlinge and Layham, for example, do not seem quite so startling, and the white brick tower at Redgrave is elegant and stately. Perhaps it is simply that they are not so severe and bulky; St Mary's looks like nothing quite so much as a municipal water tower. This isn't necessarily a bad thing; Victorian restorer Edward Hakewill wished it in hell, but I was pleased that it existed somewhere, if only here.
Like many church towers in the Ipswich area, St Mary's is offset in the south-west corner; built in 1732, it replaced a medieval one in the same position. Robert Thinge paid for the work, and the tower was specifically designed for bell-ringing, as at Drinkstone 40 years earlier. Grundisburgh's ring of twelve bells is very highly thought of.
Thinge's memorial plaque has been restored, and sits above the south doorway. About halfway up this side is a wide window which gives light to the bellringing chamber. Beneath it is a 19th century clock to remind us that Tempus Fugit, but I love the intricately marked sundial below it, particularly because it tells us, in Suffolk dialect, that Life pass like a shadow - in Suffolk speech, the third person of a verb is often not conjugated separately.
Beyond the tower, a typically lovely late medieval church stretches away. The short 14th century south aisle is neat, crenellated and begargoyled. At its eastern end is the chantry chapel of Thomas Wale, built on the eve of the Reformation in 1527, and already demonstrating how an emphasis on secular power was in the ascendant. The dedicatory inscription below the battlements asks us to pray for his soul and that of his wife, but the reliefs show Wale's merchant mark, and the shield of the Salt Merchants' Company, of which he was a member.
The high, beautiful clerestory is from half a century earlier, and flushwork monograms punctuate the windows; they include the badge of St Edmund, what are believed to be the monograms of Thomas and Anne Tudenham who paid for the work, and letters spelling out AVE MARIA.
As usual with a south-western tower, you enter beneath the bells. At the time the tower was rebuilt, the church was decorated with the heavy-handed quotes from scripture that you still find nearby at Hemingstone. They've all gone here, except the one beside the 14th century south doorway which demands that we should keep the Sabbath and reverence the sanctuary.
You step through into light. This is one of the benefits of a tower on the south side of the church; the large west window can flood the nave with light. Directly opposite is one of the most striking St Christopher paintings in East Anglia; it was not uncovered until the 1950s, and so has not undergone the dubious benefits of a Victorian restoration. The Saint's red coat is rich and splendid, and the water he steps through abounds with life; three fish leap over two courting eels, while five more fish kiss beyond. There is even a mermaid. Buildings stand on either bank, and the fecundity is so infectious that leaved branches are sprouting from the top of the Saint's pilgrim staff. As at Creeting St Peter, there are scroll inscriptions.
Interestingly, the 15th century clerestory cuts through the head of Christ, adding more fuel to my theory that many wall paintings were actually whitewashed during a kind of proto-Reformation in the 1400s. At this time, orthodox Catholic doctrine was being asserted by influential families on behalf of the Church in the face of the superstitions and private devotions of the common people. Hence, the erection of bigger and bolder roodscreens, the installation of seven sacrament fonts, and bench ends that depict the sacraments, virtues and vices. Ironically, it was these same influential families who would be championing protestantism a century later, as the secular power within the strong nation state that they had secured eclipsed the cultural reach of the Catholic Church. Perhaps without the magic it no longer gripped their imaginations.
The St Christopher is spectacular, but there are two other wall paintings here that are of even greater interest and significance. One appears to be the eastern end of a frieze, and is located above the entrance of the roodloft stair doorway in the north wall. It appears to show a man with a nimbus halo being presented by a man with a sword to what seems to be a seated figure. It may show Christ being taken before the Jewish high priest, and thus be part of a passion sequence; it could also conceivably be part of a Saint's martyrdom. Its position is interesting for several reasons. Firstly, it is unlikely to be the final frame in a story, so being at the east end of the north wall it would be at the midpoint of a sequence stretching either clockwise or anti-clockwise around the building.
Secondly, it is in a 13th century style, but has been punched through by a late 14th century roodloft stairway entrance. What does this suggest? The painting dates from the great artistic flowering which would be cruelly dashed by the Black Death of 1348, when about half the population of East Anglia died. The doorway is cooller, more rational than it would have been half a century earlier. Was this the start of the proto-Reformation I suggested earlier? And why was it built here? Perhaps it happened at the time the south aisle was built.
The final wall painting is the most significant of all. It is on the southern side of the chancel sanctuary, which you may think is a very unusual place to find a wall painting, and you'd be right. It was actually found under the St Christopher, part of which was carefully lifted off and the painting beneath removed. It was then reset here.
It is a tiny fragment of a larger painting which the guidebooks suggest shows St Margaret, the wing of a dragon behind her, a legend on a scroll. But it is actually much more interesting than that. At Melbourne in Derbyshire there is a larger painting which shows a group of women, one of them wimpled like the woman here, sitting and chatting. Above them, a devil is sitting and listening, and writing down what they are saying, presumably so that it can later be used in evidence against them. It is known as the warning against gossip, and this is almost certainly what we have a fragment of here. Why did anyone ever think it was St Margaret? Perhaps they mistook the wimple for a helmet.
St Mary was one of many Suffolk churches restored by Edward Hakewill, who actually lived nearby. He let it off remarkably lightly, although it should be said in the church's defence that he did die during the restoration here. Otherwise, the planned north aisle would have been built, and we would have lost all the wall paintings for ever. Before he moved on to better things, he replaced all the seats - those in the nave and aisle are typically workaday, but the big choir stalls in the chancels are good, and retain medieval bench ends (although not the figures, which are his replacements). Thank goodness he didn't touch the rest of the woodwork, because this church contains what is generally felt to be the best of the smaller double-hammerbeam nave roofs in the county, as well as a beautiful rood screen and parclose screen, side by side. All three have been restored since Hakewill's time; the green man in the crocketting to the left of the entrance arch of the rood screen seems as fresh as if he emerged from the woods yesterday. There are sacred monograms on the panels of the parclose, and it is worth pointing out that this screen is 150 years older than the chapel beyond it, so there must have been something there before. Look up, and you can see the wooden angel corbel of the aisle and the stone shield-bearer corbel of the chapel, a century and a half apart, squatting side-by-side.
Look up further at the nave roof, and you can tell which are the replacement heads and wings on the roof angels because the 19th century oak has not faded to the colour of its 15th century predecessors. There are more than sixty angels, on the lower and upper hammerbeams, and actually under the spine of the roof itself. How glorious they must have looked in the 15th century when, full of colour, they hovered together above the people of Grundisburgh. What a vision of heaven that must have been. For centuries they sat in silence, headless and wingless, as part of the puritan project to turn the English into a serious people. Now at last they have taken flight again.
Stepping through to the chancel, you'll see that the medieval crossbeams are still in place, and the pretty pipe-organ has been sandwiched into the Wale chantry. After the high drama of the roof and screens, and the sobering effect of Hakewill's choir stalls, the sanctuary seems very middle-brow for such an interesting church; but Isobel Clover's super altar frontals distract from the insipid east window. There are some interesting memorials here.
All the church's brasses have been moved to the end of the south arcade. This is a controversial practice, because although it allows them to be seen and protects them from being walked on, it leaves them defenceless in a fire (floor-mounted brasses don't melt). The figures here have been lost, presumably to collectors, but the inscriptions survive, and are mounted one above the other.
The top two are for families that we have met elsewhere on our travels, and it is fascinating to see them together because they are two of Suffolk's most famous recusant families - that is, those who refused to renounce the old faith at the time of the Reformation.
This failure to conform to Anglicanism cost the Sulyards of Haughley Park at Wetherden their estate, but the Mannocks soldiered on at Gifford Hall at Stoke by Nayland, maintaining a Catholic priest throughout the penal years and providing one of Suffolk's first Catholic chapels at Withermarsh Green when Catholicism was at last decriminalised.
On the two brasses here, we catch up with the families some two generations after the Reformation; the connection between them is that Anne Manocke (1610) was the mother-in-law of Thomas Suleyard (1612). The Sulyards were particularly loathed by the puritans, and William Dowsing seems to have taken a peculiar pleasure in mindlessly defacing the Sulyard memorial at Wetherden. The third brass dates from a century earlier, and is for Thomas and Marjorie Awall.
The big name of the parish in the 18th and 19th century was Blois, and their ledger stones pave the chancel, their monuments line the wall. One of the ledger stones gives the date as January 1692/3, a reminder of the time when the new year began on the first quarter day, March 25th. In pre-Reformation times this had been the Feast of the Annunciation, but until well into the 18th century it remained the day that financial transactions were marked from, and even now the financial year begins at the start of April, twelve days being lost when England adopted the Julian calendar.
On the wall, there are three large Blois monuments to Martha (1645), William (1658) and Charles (1738). Martha's is the best, the kneelers at the bottom full of puritan piety, all with their own characters as if drawn from the life. William's is more sober, but Charles's is positively baroque. William is an interesting character. He was a staunch puritan, and a member of the Suffolk committee for the prosecution of scandalous ministers under the Earl of Manchester. These were the puritan thought police who persecuted theological liberals, sometimes hounding them to their deaths. This might suggest that Grundisburgh was a puritan parish, and perhaps it was by the time he'd finished; but in fact at the start of the Commonwealth period he was responsible for the ejection of Edward Barton, the Rector here. Barton was charged with being an absentee minister, only visiting his parish once or twice a year, which doesn't seem unreasonable, although he was also charged with having 'an infirme body & noe audible voice'. Liberal priests were usually charged with drunkenness and consorting with prostitutes, of which there seem to have been a good number in 17th century Suffolk, but perhaps Blois felt he had all the evidence he needed here, or Barton was simply genuinely lazy.
Elsewhere in the church are a wooden plaque to Robert Gurdon, killed in the desert in WWII, and a fascinating memorial at the west end of the south aisle to Henry Freeland, who died aged 20 on HMS Royal George near Sweden in 1854. We are told that He died suddenly, but not unprepared, and that it was in the morning of April 25th, off the island of Muskon Where, in the parish churchyard, his remains now lie interred.
Interestingly, I visited here the week of the 150th anniversary of Henry Freeland's death, and apparently the Swedes had made a big thing out of it; there had been a commemorative service on Muskon, and the Rector of Grundisburgh had written something for the memorial programme. The massing of the western European fleets off of Sweden during the Crimean War was the single biggest ever assemblage of warships seen in the Baltic, and Freeland's death became a symbol of the interdependence of England and Sweden. He died of an asthma attack, by the way, just like his father, the Rector of neighbouring Hasketon.
Looking back towards the west, a vast flag with three stylised lions hangs above the font. This is a Garter banner, and formerly hung at Windsor above the seat of Knight of the Garter Baron Cranworth. It now hangs here as his memorial. As part of the restoration, Hakewill reset the scattering of medieval glass in the chancel windows in the 19th century fashion. Virtually all of it is purely decorative, but there are two roundels of flowers, one of which appears to be a Yorkist rose. It may be that the other is also heraldic - could it be an iris? There are also several panels of blue folds, which were probably clothing.
One detail that intrigues me, and I don't know the answer to; in the Wale chantry, there are two corbels, one above the other; about a metre and a half separates them. Any ideas?
Grundisburgh is so close to Ipswich that many of the people who live here must be commuters, but it has retained a self-sufficient air, and this is not merely the result of County Council planning policies. The setting of St Mary gives the place a heart - this is a proper village, not just a parish, and as such is a community, with a fine if idiosyncratic building as its touchstone. As I stood watching the villagers wandering around the busy May Day fair, I thought of the ghostly abandoned villages of the Norfolk battle zone, once equally full of life, and thought that the people of Grundisburgh were more fortunate than they knew.
Every worshiper I had seen in Jokhang Temple has a scripture on his/her hand. As he/she starts reading from the sutra, he/she will start spinning the scripture.
Everyone of them was extremely concentrated that he/she wasn't paying attention to the surrounding. That is something he/she has to do before entering Jokhang Temple. This area was assigned for local worshipers.
For tourists, they are directed into different areas to enter Jokhang Temple so that these devote worshipers will not be disturbed.
Location: Jokhang Temple, China (Lhasa)
This English manuscript was made in the nineteenth-century, using an extremely fine parchment. It contains the fifty-third chapter of the Book of Isaiah, in English translation. The small book is comprised of eight folios written and decorated on the rectos, leaving the versos blank. Script and decoration suggest that the book was conceived to imitate the style of fourteenth or fifteenth century French illumination. The creators Eleanor Taylor and James Slie signed the book in the title page, and declared their intended revival of this tradition. Each folio is embellished with border decoration showing narratives of Christ's life, as well as zoomorphic and foliate motifs in a palette of blue, red, and gold leaf. The contemporary binding is painted with with a coat of arms penned with the motto "GANG WARILY." Although the manuscript has traditionally been considered to be of English origin, the armorial shield points to a Scottish use.
To explore fully digitized manuscripts with a virtual page-turning application, please visit Walters Ex Libris.
Oneness Pentecostalism (doctrine)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
It has been suggested that Oneness vs Trinity be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)
This list of basic Oneness Pentecostal doctrine is an overview. These doctrines are UPCI specific, and can be interpreted more conservatively or liberally with respect to individual and church specific views. These doctrines are accompanied by references to most, but not all, scriptures officially used by Oneness Pentecostal churches in defense of their doctrines. [1]
Oneness Pentecostal theology is essentially rooted in the following fundamentalist beliefs:
* God exists and is perfect.
* The Holy Bible is the inspired Word of God.
* The absolute inerrancy of the Holy Bible (not necessarily including any or all translations).
* Sola Scriptura (Scripture interprets Scripture), which also leads to the following assertions by Oneness Pentecostalism in framing its theology:
o The Bible is the final authority on all doctrine.
o Doctrine and Theology must take the entire Bible into consideration, using Scripture to interpret other Scripture.
o Any apparent contradictions between Scriptures is a result of faulty interpretation of one or both Scriptures.
o Any doctrine, theology, or person that contradicts the Bible is in error.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 God
o 1.1 Father, Son, and Holy Ghost
o 1.2 The Deity of Jesus Christ
o 1.3 The Name of Jesus (Emmanuel, God with us as Savior)
* 2 Salvation
o 2.1 Salvation Is through Faith
o 2.2 Obeying (Applying) the Gospel
o 2.3 Repentance
o 2.4 Water Baptism
o 2.5 The Baptism of the Holy Ghost
* 3 References
[edit] God
Oneness Doctrine Churches hold to a conservative monotheistic view of God and stress Jesus Christ as the self revelation of God in the New Testament, who was known as Jehovah in the Old Testament. The Christian Monotheist Oneness doctrine rejects all concepts of a duality, trinity, pantheon, or other doctrines they see as representing multiple personalities of God. It rejects all concepts of Jesus Christ as anything different than being both fully God and fully man. This rejection includes views that would place the Son as only part of God, views that the Son is only a high priest and not God, or that the Son was not fully human. It declares that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God. Oneness also rejects the view that any person can "obtain" the status of God either by works or by grace, maintaining that Jesus Christ did not "obtain" His status, but rather that he is God manifested in the flesh (1st Timothy 3:16).
Oneness specifically maintains:
God is One
God is absolutely and indivisibly One. [2]
God is an Invisible Spirit
God is not made of a physical body, but is an invisible spirit that can only be seen in Theophanies (eg. the burning bush) that God creates or manifests or as the incarnate Jesus Christ. [3]
[edit] Father, Son, and Holy Ghost
The Father
The title of God in Parental Relationship [4]
The Son of God
The only begotten Son of God and the One God incarnate in man. The title "Son" refers to both the man and the deity of Jesus Christ with specific emphasis on the man, but never God or the man only. [5]
The Holy Spirit
The title of God in activity as Spirit. [6]
The Father Is the Holy Ghost
Oneness maintains that the titles Father and Holy Ghost refer to the same being. [7]
[edit] The Deity of Jesus Christ
Jesus is God Incarnate
Oneness maintains that Jesus is fully God. [8]
From the Beginning of His Human Life
Oneness maintains that Jesus is fully man, and had birth, death, and resurrection. Oneness denies doctrines that state that the Son was eternally begotten, maintaining that the man was begotten on a specific day.[9]
The Divine Nature of Jesus Is the Father
Oneness maintains that the deity of Jesus is the Father. [10]
The Divine Nature of Jesus Is the Holy Spirit
Oneness maintains that the deity of Jesus is the Holy Ghost. [11]
Jesus is LORD (the LORD in the KJV)
Oneness maintains that LORD and Jesus refer to the same God who is also known as the Jehovah to "some" modern day Christians. [12]. Some believe Jehovah to be a false guess name with "hovah" in Hebrew meaning ruin or destruction, hence Je-hovah meaning God of ruin or destruction [13]
[edit] The Name of Jesus (Emmanuel, God with us as Savior)
Supreme Revelation of God in the New Testament
Oneness maintains that God revealed Himself as Jesus Christ. [14]
The Saving Name
Oneness Pentecostal theology is based primarily on "the saving Name" of Jesus Christ and recognition of Jesus as the revealed, supreme, and One True Name of God. [15]
[edit] Salvation
Oneness Pentecostal doctrine and theology maintains that salvation comes by a specific set of commands and requirements in the New Testament. It maintains that each set of requirements, as summarized by faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, water baptism by immersion in the name of Jesus Christ, and the gift of the Holy Ghost baptism, are all necessary for salvation. Each that is deemed a requirement, or necessary, is noted by their doctrine with Scripture that maintains that each was commanded for salvation and/or explained that the lack of them would result in not having salvation. Individual church interpretation can impact how these are carried out. Most Oneness Pentecostal churches maintain that the use of Jesus, Lord Jesus, Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ of Nazareth all refer to the same name, and reference the variety used in the Book of Acts. This allows room in their doctrine for personal preference of the specific utterance of the name of Jesus Christ, though officially the full name "Jesus Christ" is advocated.
Universal Need for Salvation
Oneness Pentecostals believe that all men are sinners and lost without salvation. [16]
The Atoning Work of Jesus Christ
Oneness Pentecostals maintain that the man Christ Jesus made atonement, or payment, for the sins of all people. [17]
Salvation Is by Grace
Oneness Pentecostal theology holds that salvation is impossible to obtain without God's grace. [18]
[edit] Salvation Is through Faith
Only Through Faith in Jesus Christ
Faith must be in Jesus Christ. This theology holds that there is no salvation in faith in any name, god, being, or work other than Jesus Christ. This contradicts liberal interpretations of scripture that salvation was given automatically by the atonement of Jesus Christ. Oneness Pentecostals maintain that those without faith in Jesus Christ have not received salvation. That salvation is a gift and must be received. [19]
Saving Faith Includes Obedience
Oneness Pentecostals maintain that true faith is followed by obedience and a willingness to do the Will of God.[20]
Examples of Insufficient, Mental Faith
Oneness Pentecostals reject that salvation is obtainable by what they refer to as "mental faith". Mental faith is best described as faith that has no accompanying actions other than the barest definition of believing. Mental faith is often characterized by Oneness Pentecostals as faith without any life changing repentance or obedience. This doctrine is often used to refute groups who practice salvation by the "Sinner's Prayer". Oneness Pentecostals have no issue with the "Sinner's Prayer" itself, but would dispute that it alone is sufficient saving faith. They often argue that upon questioning, a significant portion of the US population might say they believe in Jesus Christ, but that "belief" and "faith" are not necessarily synonymous, pointing out in James 2:19 that even "the devils also believe, and tremble". [21]
Saving Faith Includes the Acts 2:38 Experience
Oneness Pentecostals affirm a position that "true faith" includes acts of faith and obedience to faith. They specifically point out Acts 2:38 which says, "Then 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." They maintain that if a person has true faith, they will act on it.[22]
[edit] Obeying (Applying) the Gospel
New Testament Teaching
To obtain salvation, a person must meet the requirements set forth in the New Testament. [23]
Old Testament Typology (Blood, Water, Fire or Oil)
The requirements set forth in the New Testament are based on the teachings of the Old Testament, and that the New Testament teachings fulfill the teachings of the Old Testament. [24]
[edit] Repentance
Necessity of Repentance
Oneness Pentecostals maintain that salvation is not possible without repentance. [25]
Elements of Repentance
Oneness Pentecostals define repentance generally as confession and forsaking of sin. Confession is the admittance of sin and asking of forgiveness. Forsaking of sin is the conscious decision to abstain from sinning again.[26]
[edit] Water Baptism
Significance and Necessity
The majority of Oneness Pentecostals believe that baptism is absolutely essential to salvation. A small minority believe that baptism is symbolic in nature.(Reference Global Network of Christian Ministries) [27]
For Repentant Believers
Oneness Pentecostals believe that one must have faith and repent before being baptized. This would contradict a view that salvation could come through a baptism by force.[28]
The Baptismal Mode - Immersion in Water
Oneness Pentecostal theology maintains the literal definition of baptism, being full immersion in water. They often point out that other methods have either no biblical basis, or are based inexact Old Testament rituals, and that their mode is the only one described in the New Testament. This view contradicts the use of any other substance other than water for baptism. This view contradicts any reduced amount of water in baptism, such as sprinkling or head-only immersion. [29]
The Baptismal Formula - In the Name of Jesus
Oneness Pentecostal theology in the use of "the name of Jesus" as the baptismal formula is universal among its believers by definition of Oneness Pentecostalism. [30]
The One Name in Matthew 28:19
Many Oneness Pentecostals recognize "the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" in Matthew 28:19 as being that of Lord Jesus Christ. Oneness itself is often explained (in simplistic terms) as the recognition of the three titles as the singular name of Lord Jesus Christ (Father=Lord, Son=Jesus, and Holy Ghost=Christ). Some Oneness reject the triune Lord Jesus Christ representing the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost and baptize in the name of Jesus Christ only. These are called "Jesus Only". They note that in their own 20th century history, the baptismal name recognition and Oneness theology go hand in hand. Similarly, they note a universal use in the Book of Acts, and with the support of other historical texts of the time, maintain that proof of Oneness theology by the early Christian church was widespread and universal among the leading members. Also of note is that by their doctrinal basis that no Scripture contradicts, that Matthew 28:19, and all of the Acts accounts, including Acts 2:38, must be in full agreement with each other. They state that the only two explanations would be that the Apostles all disobeyed the command in Matthew 28:19 or that they correctly interpreted and fulfilled it, when they used the name Lord Jesus Christ. [31]
[edit] The Baptism of the Holy Ghost
Promise and Command
Pentecostals maintain that the baptism of the Holy Ghost is both a free gift and is commanded to be accepted. The Holy Ghost is explained by Pentecostal doctrine as the Spirit of God (also known as the Spirit of Christ) dwelling within a person. It is further explained as the power of God to edify (build up) the person, help them abstain from sin, and to anoint them with power to exercise the gifts of the Spirit for edification of the church in the Will of God. This differs from the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ, in that the incarnation is explained as "the fullness of the Godhead" in the body of Jesus Christ inseparably linking the deity and man, that is Jesus. Believers, according to this doctrine, can only receive a portion of the Spirit and are not permanently bonded with God as Jesus is. This doctrine explained most simply, it is God dwelling within an individual, communing with the individual, and working through that individual. Oneness doctrine maintains the Holy Ghost is the title of God in action, so they also maintain that the Holy Ghost in an individual is God in action in and through that individual. [32]
An Experience for the Church Founded on Pentecost
Pentecostals, both Oneness and Trinitarian, maintain that the Holy Ghost experience marks the formation of the Christian Church. [33]
Significance and Necessity
Pentecostal churches maintain that the Holy Ghost is necessary for salvation, and that he carries with him power for the believer to accomplish the Will of God. [34]
Speaking in Tongues Is the Initial Sign
The majority of Oneness Pentecostals maintain that the initial sign of the Holy Ghost is speaking in tongues. They recognize that reception of the Holy Ghost was evidenced, when documented in the New Testament, by the minimal requirement of speaking in tongues. They also recognize a biblical basis that the gift of tongues is a sign to unbelievers of the power of the Holy Ghost and is actively to be prayed for and practiced, especially in prayer. [35]
[edit] References
1. ^ A shortened version compiled from “An Overview of Basic Doctrines”, an overview compiled the book ‘’A Handbook of Basic Doctrines’’ by David K. Bernard. Also included are excerpts, as marked, from “Essential Doctrines of the Bible.” “Essential Doctrines of the Bible” and “An Overview of Basic Doctrines”, Thompson Chain-Reference Study Bible, Word Aflame Press, 1999, 1-12, 13-25, respectively
2. ^ Deuteronomy 6:4, Isaiah 37:16, 42:8, 43:10-11, 44:6, 8, 24, 45:5-6, 14, 18, 21-22, 46:5, 9, 48:11-12, Zechariah 14:9, Malachi 2:10, Mark 12:29, John 17:3, Romans 3:30, Galatians 3:20, I Timothy 2:5, James 2:19, Revelation 4:2
3. ^ Exodus 33:20, Luke 24:39, John 1:18, 4:24, Colossians 1:15, I Timothy 6:15-16, Hebrews 12:9, I John 4:12
4. ^ Deuteronomy 32:6, Malachi 2:10, Psalm 89:26, Isaiah 63:16, 64:8, Jeremiah 31:9, Romans 8:14-19, Galatians 1:1-4, Ephesians 4:6, Hebrews 12:9
5. ^ Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, Matthew 1:18-23, Mark 13:32, Luke 1:35, John 14:10-11, 28, Acts 13:33, Romans 5:10, Galatians 4:4, Colossians 1:13-15, Hebrews 1:1-9
6. ^ Genesis 1:2, Ephesians 4:4, 6, Leviticus 11:44, John 4:24, Acts 5:3, 4, 9, I Corinthians 12:11, I Peter 1:16, II Peter 1:21
7. ^ Matthew 1:18, 20, Isaiah 40:13, Joel 2:27-28, Luke 1:35, Romans 8:15-16, Compare Matthew 10:20 and Mark 13:11, Compare John 14:17 and 14:23, Compare John 14:26 and II Corinthians 1:3-4, Compare I Corinthians 3:16-17 and 6:19, Compare Ephesians 1:17-20 and Romans 8:11, Compare I Timothy 6:13 and Romans 8:11, Compare II Timothy 3:16 and II Peter 1:21 Compare I Peter 1:2 and Jude 1
8. ^ Isaiah 9:6, 11:1, 10, 40:9, John 1:1, 14, Colossians 2:9-10, Micah 5:2, Matthew 1:23, John 1:1-18, John 20:28, II Corinthians 5:19, Ephesians 5:5, Colossians 1:15, 19, I Timothy 3:16, Titus 2:13, Hebrews 1:1-3, I John 5:20, Jude 4, 25, Revelation 1:7-18, 22:3-4, Compare Exodus 20:1-5 and Luke 24:52, Compare Deuteronomy 33:27 and Revelation 1:8, 18, Compare Psalm 139:7-13 and Matthew 18:20, 28:20, Compare Isaiah 35:3-6 and Matthew 11:2-6, Compare Isaiah 43:25 and Mark 2:5-12, Compare Malachi 3:6 and Hebrews 13:8, Compare I John 1:5 and John 1:4-9, Compare Revelation 19:6 and Colossians 1:16-18
9. ^ Galatians 4:4, Micah 5:2, Matthew 1:23, 2:11, Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, Luke 1:35, 2:38, Hebrews 1:6
10. ^ Isaiah 9:6, 63:16, John 8:19-27, 10:30, 10:38, 12:45, 14:8-11, Revelation 21:6-7, Colossians 2:9, I John 3:1-5, Compare John 2:19-21 and Acts 2:24, Compare John 6:40 and I Corinthians 6:14, Compare John 6:44 and John 12:32, Compare John 14:14 and John 16:23, Compare John 16:7 and John 14:26, Compare Ephesians 5:26 and Jude 1
11. ^ John 14:16-18, 16:7, Acts 16:6-7 (NIV), II Corinthians 3:17, Galatians 4:6, Ephesians 3:16-17, Philippians 1:19, Compare Matthew 28:20 and John 14:16, Compare Luke 21:15 and Mark 13:11, Compare John 2:19-21 and Romans 8:9-11, Compare Ephesians 5:26 and I Peter 1:2, Compare Colossians 1:27 and Acts 2:4, 38
12. ^ Jeremiah 23:5-6, 33:15-16, John 8:58, Acts 9:5, Isaiah 40:10, 53:1-2, Zechariah 11:3, 12, 12:1, 10, 14:3-5, Compare Genesis 17:1 and Revelation 1:8, 18, Compare Exodus 3:14 and John 8:56-59, Compare Psalm 27:1 and Acts 4:10-12, Compare Psalm 136:3 and Revelation 19:16, Compare Isaiah 33:22 and Acts 10:42, Compare Isaiah 40:3 and Matthew 3:3, Compare Isaiah 40:5 and I Corinthians 2:8 and Isaiah 42:8, 48:11, Compare Isaiah 45:21 and Acts 7:52, Compare Isaiah 45:23 and Philippians 2:10
13. ^ Strongs #1943
14. ^ Zecharaiah 14:9, John 14:13-14, Colossians 3:17, Isaiah 52:6, Acts 3:6, 16, 4:7-12 17-18, 30, Philippians 2:9-11, James 5:14
15. ^ Matthew 1:21, Acts 3:16, 4:12, 10:43, 15:14-17, 22:16, Romans 10:13, I John 2:12
16. ^ Romans 3:9-12, 23, 5:12, 19, 6:23, Psalm 53:1-3, 130:3, Ecclesiastes 7:20, Jeremiah 17:9, Galatians 3:22, Ephesians 2:1-3, I John 1:8-10
17. ^ Isaiah 53:5-6, Matthew 20:28, 26:28, Romans 3:24-25, 5:8-11, John 1:29, I Corinthians 15:1-4, II Corinthians 5:14-21, Ephesians 2:13-19, Colossians 1:19-22, 2,:13-15, I Timothy 2:5, 6, Hebrews 2:9, 9:22, 28, 10:4, 10-20, Revelation 5:8-10
18. ^ Ephesians 2:4-10, Titus 2:11-12, 3:4-7, Romans 3:24, 6:1-2, 15, 23, I corinthians 15:10, II Corinthians 12:9, Galatians 5:4, Philippians 2:13, Hebrews 12:15, I Peter 5:5, 10
19. ^ John 3:16, 8:24, 20:31, Acts 13:38-39, 16:31, Hebrews 11:6, Romans 1:16-17, 3:21-31, 10:8-11, Galatians 2:16, Ephesians 2:8
20. ^ Romans 1:5, 6:17, 10:16, 16:26, Hebrews 5:9, 11:6-10, 11:28, John 8:30-32, Acts 6:7, James 1:21-25, I Peter 1:21-23, I John 2:3-6, 5:1-8, Compare Romans 4:3 and Genesis 15:6, 22:16-18, 26:5, Compare Romans 10:6-10 and Deuteronomy 30:10-14 and Luke 6:46
21. ^ John 2:23-25, 12:42-43, James 2:14-19, Acts 8:12-23
22. ^ Mark 1:15, 16:16, Acts 2:38, 41, 8:36-39, 11:15, 17, 19:1-6, Galatians 3:14, Ephesians 1:13
23. ^ John 3:5, Acts 1:4-8, 2:38, 8:15-17, 9:17-18, 10:43-48, 16:30-34, 19:1-6, 22:16, Titus 3:5, Matthew 3:11, Luke 24:46-49, Romans 6:1-7, I Corinthians 6:11, 15:1-4, Hebrews 6:1-2, 10:15-23, I John 5:8-10
24. ^ I Corinthians 10:1-2, Exodus 12:13, 14:19-31, 19:10-11, 29:1-7, Leviticus 14:1-20, Numbers 19:1-10, 31:1-18, I Kings 18:33-39, Hebrews 9:18-20, Compare Exodus 40:6-7 and Hebrews 9:1-9, Compare Matthew 3:11 and Acts 2:3-4, Compare John 14:16-17, 26 and I John 2:20, 27, I Peter 3:20-21 and II Peter 3:5-7
25. ^ Luke 3:3-9, 13:1-5, Acts 2:38, 3:19, 17:30, 26:18, 20, Ezekiel 18:30-32, Matthew 3:1-11, Mark 1:15, Hebrews 6:1, II Peter 3:9
26. ^ Psalm 51:17, Proverbs 28:13, Matthew 5:23-24, Mark 1:4-5, Luke 3:7-9, 19:8, Acts 26:18, 20, II Corinthians 7:10
27. ^ Mark 16:16, John 3:5, Acts 2:38, 10:48, 22:16, Galatians 3:27, Numbers 19:1-5, 9, Romans 6:3-4, I Corinthians 6:11, Colossians 2:11-13, Titus 3:5, I Peter 3:20-21, I John 5:6, 8
28. ^ Luke 3:7-8, Acts 2:38, 41, 8:12, 36-37, 10:47-48, 16:14-15, 18:8, 19:5, Matthew 3:6-8, Mark 1:5, 16:16
29. ^ Matthew 3:16, John 3:23, Romans 6:4, Mark 1:5, 9-10, Acts 8:36-39, Colossians 2:12
30. ^ Acts 2:38, 8:12, 16, 10:48, 15:17, 19:3-5, 22:16, I Corinthians 1:13, Galatians 3:27, Philippians 3:27, Colossians 2:9-10, 3:17, James 2:7
31. ^ Matthew 1:21, 28:18-20, Luke 24:47, Isaiah 52:6, Zechariah 14:9, John 5:43, 14:26, Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:3-5, Colossians 3:17, Revelation 22:3-4
32. ^ Matthew 3:11, Acts 1:4-8, 2:38-39, Joel 2:28-29, Mark 15:17-18, Luke 11:13, 24:49, John 3:5, 7:38-39, 14:16-18, 20:22, 16:7, 13
33. ^ Matthew 16:18, John 7:39, 16:17, Acts 1:4-8, 2:1-4, 19:1-6, Hebrews 8:6-13, 9:15-17, 11:39-40, I Peter 10-12
34. ^ John 3:1-8, Acts 1:4-8, 2:1-4, 2:37-39, 3:19, 8:15-17, 9:17, 10:44-47, 11:15-18, 19:1-6, Romans 8:1-16, 23-27, 14:17, I Corinthians 6:11, 12:3, Ephesians 1:13-14, Titus 3:5, I John 3:24
35. ^ Acts 2:1-4, 33, 8:6-8, 12-20, 10:44-46, 11:15, 19:6, Isaiah 28:11-12, Mark 16:17, John 3:8, Romans 8:16, I Corinthians 14:18, 21-22