"Super Duper" Christians - Cultists, Charismatics and Non-Denominational Christians
I am not neutral about "super duper Christians" and their attempts to exalt themselves above other Christians.
Let me give you a definition and some examples of "super duper Christians"
"Super duper" Christians are those who think they are better than other believers, or more spiritual, due to some quality or knowledge that they have. They think God loves them a little more, or speaks closer to them, than other people.
Cults are the most flagrant, arrogant "super duper" Christians. In fact most of them think that no other Christians exist except them.
As an Armstrongite, I was the ultimate "super duper" Christian. Armstrongites consider themselves to be the the only true Christians, because supposedly their doctrine is totally in line with the Bible, especially with regards to observing the Sabbath, festivals and clean meat laws. Never mind that they are blasphemers who claim they will be God in the resurrection.
Cult members are the obvious examples. There are many others who concede other Christians are saved but put themselves on a higher pedestal.
One individual in the chat room constantly mentions that he is a "spirit-and-water baptized", "speaking in tongues" "born again" genuine believer.
I don't know if younger Christians are aware of this, but it's a common charismatic teaching that God saves some people, but because of their ignorance in requesting it, he does not give them the "second baptism" by the Spirit where he empowers them for service. So, these people think there is one group of anemic Christians who never received this empowerment, and a group of "super duper Christians" who have received it. They will refer to themselves as "spirit-filled" and implicitly claim that others are not.
I received the Holy Spirit when I believed (Ephesians 1:13), and not just a trickle of Him
This guy's statements are wrong on multiple levels.
One, he is promoting himself as the "real thing" and making an implicit accusation that others are not.
Two, he seems to buy into the Pentecostal/charismatic idea that there are two separate baptisms; one by water, indicating a belief in baptismal regeneration, and another separate event where the believer became especially empowered by God. Water baptism doesn't cause regeneration anyways; God regenerates the person who places his faith in Christ and repents of his sinful orientation.
Three, he points to speaking in tongues as his proof of salvation and a genuine conversion.
The scarier thing is that some of these types are trying to teach and evangelize seekers. This person is often one of the first that attempts to engage seekers in the chat room. His weird theologies go beyond this, into the realm of trying to get them to say the "sinner's prayer" and then declaring them immediately to be saved, with absolutely no mention of repentance.
A second example is a Oneness Pentecostal who claims that he has the "full gospel" because he believes in Oneness theology and speaks in tongues.
He mentions how other Christians don't have the "full gospel" because they don't share his convictions regarding speaking in tongues and Oneness theology. Again, he thinks he's a teacher, and attempts to lead others into private Bible studies with his bad theology.
Other super-duper Christians are those who claim that they do miracles like healing the sick and raising the dead. Oh, they may give Christ some credit, but they definitely want the spotlight on them.
To be honest, if they attach themselves to an alleged miracle, I discount them instantaneously.
If someone tells me that God healed someone due to corporate prayer in their church, I consider that person's claim, but I don't think God shares the glory for healings to individuals. In part, that's why I think James 5 says to go to the ELDERS of the church (note the plural form) for prayer for healing...so no one man gets the glory. Anyways, I view alleged healings and raisings from the dead as being another attempt to claim super-duper Christian status before men.
A third, but less obvious, example, are non-denominational people. I don't belong to a denomination, and the church I attend is non-denominational but belongs to an association.
The big contention with non-denominational people is that others are following people, but not Christ, because of denominational labels. Non-denominational believers claim to only follow Christ. However, it's obvious that many of them hold beliefs that extend outside of the limitations of what Christ taught, and they hold a specific group of beliefs themselves (which include being disgusted with denominations). They become their own little denomination while abhorring the title.
Additionally, it seems like their situation is covered by these verses:
I Corinthians 1:10 I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. 16(I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
So, it seems to me like one of the factions in Corinth claimed that they were the true Christ-followers because they were not associated with the name of a man. They may have been the most self righteous ones of the lot. And, they would be non-denominational today if they still existed
I see the same sort of behavior with Christians who claim they are "biblicists" whereas if someone agrees with a theology that refers to the name of a man, they are not "biblicists" even if the theology reflects Biblical teaching.
A fourth group that I will mention are Sabbath/festival/clean meat law observers. Not all of them can be identified with claiming to be the "super-duper Christians" (I have Messianic Jewish friends who are observers but make no such claims) but many can be identified with this behavior.
MANY in this group claim that the Sabbath is THE sign of a true believer. They base this on their reading of Exodus 16 which indicates the Sabbath was a "test commandment" for ancient Israel and in some cases Colossians 2:16-17. I held this belief as an Armstrongite and considered all non-observers to be unsaved.
I think these verses also exhibit the behavior I'm describing:
I Corinthians 11: 18 - 19 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.
I'm not positive on the wording of this verse, but I think the verse indicates that part of the fleshly nature that causes factions seeks to demonstrate to others who is actually the "real thing"...in other words an explicit accusation that others are not, and that they are the "super duper" Christians. I may be wrong on my view of these verses but I don't think I am. I am totally convinced that part of the fleshly nature is to continue asserting that one is the "real deal" and that others are not. Check out Galatians 5:17-ff in this regard.
Anyways I am tired of super-duper Christians making boastful claims. You really can't prove your super-duper Christian status online anyways. I don't know how you behave with your family and with others, and how much sacrificial love you have for others. It would be interesting to talk to your physical and church family to see how real your claims are.
See my profile for other beliefs or behaviors I am not neutral about.
I am not neutral about "super duper Christians" and their attempts to exalt themselves above other Christians.
Let me give you a definition and some examples of "super duper Christians"
"Super duper" Christians are those who think they are better than other believers, or more spiritual, due to some quality or knowledge that they have. They think God loves them a little more, or speaks closer to them, than other people.
Cults are the most flagrant, arrogant "super duper" Christians. In fact most of them think that no other Christians exist except them.
As an Armstrongite, I was the ultimate "super duper" Christian. Armstrongites consider themselves to be the the only true Christians, because supposedly their doctrine is totally in line with the Bible, especially with regards to observing the Sabbath, festivals and clean meat laws. Never mind that they are blasphemers who claim they will be God in the resurrection.
Cult members are the obvious examples. There are many others who concede other Christians are saved but put themselves on a higher pedestal.
One individual in the chat room constantly mentions that he is a "spirit-and-water baptized", "speaking in tongues" "born again" genuine believer.
I don't know if younger Christians are aware of this, but it's a common charismatic teaching that God saves some people, but because of their ignorance in requesting it, he does not give them the "second baptism" by the Spirit where he empowers them for service. So, these people think there is one group of anemic Christians who never received this empowerment, and a group of "super duper Christians" who have received it. They will refer to themselves as "spirit-filled" and implicitly claim that others are not.
I received the Holy Spirit when I believed (Ephesians 1:13), and not just a trickle of Him
This guy's statements are wrong on multiple levels.
One, he is promoting himself as the "real thing" and making an implicit accusation that others are not.
Two, he seems to buy into the Pentecostal/charismatic idea that there are two separate baptisms; one by water, indicating a belief in baptismal regeneration, and another separate event where the believer became especially empowered by God. Water baptism doesn't cause regeneration anyways; God regenerates the person who places his faith in Christ and repents of his sinful orientation.
Three, he points to speaking in tongues as his proof of salvation and a genuine conversion.
The scarier thing is that some of these types are trying to teach and evangelize seekers. This person is often one of the first that attempts to engage seekers in the chat room. His weird theologies go beyond this, into the realm of trying to get them to say the "sinner's prayer" and then declaring them immediately to be saved, with absolutely no mention of repentance.
A second example is a Oneness Pentecostal who claims that he has the "full gospel" because he believes in Oneness theology and speaks in tongues.
He mentions how other Christians don't have the "full gospel" because they don't share his convictions regarding speaking in tongues and Oneness theology. Again, he thinks he's a teacher, and attempts to lead others into private Bible studies with his bad theology.
Other super-duper Christians are those who claim that they do miracles like healing the sick and raising the dead. Oh, they may give Christ some credit, but they definitely want the spotlight on them.
To be honest, if they attach themselves to an alleged miracle, I discount them instantaneously.
If someone tells me that God healed someone due to corporate prayer in their church, I consider that person's claim, but I don't think God shares the glory for healings to individuals. In part, that's why I think James 5 says to go to the ELDERS of the church (note the plural form) for prayer for healing...so no one man gets the glory. Anyways, I view alleged healings and raisings from the dead as being another attempt to claim super-duper Christian status before men.
A third, but less obvious, example, are non-denominational people. I don't belong to a denomination, and the church I attend is non-denominational but belongs to an association.
The big contention with non-denominational people is that others are following people, but not Christ, because of denominational labels. Non-denominational believers claim to only follow Christ. However, it's obvious that many of them hold beliefs that extend outside of the limitations of what Christ taught, and they hold a specific group of beliefs themselves (which include being disgusted with denominations). They become their own little denomination while abhorring the title.
Additionally, it seems like their situation is covered by these verses:
I Corinthians 1:10 I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. 16(I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
So, it seems to me like one of the factions in Corinth claimed that they were the true Christ-followers because they were not associated with the name of a man. They may have been the most self righteous ones of the lot. And, they would be non-denominational today if they still existed
I see the same sort of behavior with Christians who claim they are "biblicists" whereas if someone agrees with a theology that refers to the name of a man, they are not "biblicists" even if the theology reflects Biblical teaching.
A fourth group that I will mention are Sabbath/festival/clean meat law observers. Not all of them can be identified with claiming to be the "super-duper Christians" (I have Messianic Jewish friends who are observers but make no such claims) but many can be identified with this behavior.
MANY in this group claim that the Sabbath is THE sign of a true believer. They base this on their reading of Exodus 16 which indicates the Sabbath was a "test commandment" for ancient Israel and in some cases Colossians 2:16-17. I held this belief as an Armstrongite and considered all non-observers to be unsaved.
I think these verses also exhibit the behavior I'm describing:
I Corinthians 11: 18 - 19 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.
I'm not positive on the wording of this verse, but I think the verse indicates that part of the fleshly nature that causes factions seeks to demonstrate to others who is actually the "real thing"...in other words an explicit accusation that others are not, and that they are the "super duper" Christians. I may be wrong on my view of these verses but I don't think I am. I am totally convinced that part of the fleshly nature is to continue asserting that one is the "real deal" and that others are not. Check out Galatians 5:17-ff in this regard.
Anyways I am tired of super-duper Christians making boastful claims. You really can't prove your super-duper Christian status online anyways. I don't know how you behave with your family and with others, and how much sacrificial love you have for others. It would be interesting to talk to your physical and church family to see how real your claims are.
See my profile for other beliefs or behaviors I am not neutral about.
