View Full Version : What Happened to RE McAllister's Church: Is it still Oneness???
Most familiar with the history of Oneness History know that R.E. McAllister's sermon on Jesus name baptism at a camp meeting in Arroyo Seco,CA in 1913 was one of the sparks that initiated the Oneness movement of the 20th century.
In doing some research I came across a church he pastored in Canada, Bethel Pentecostal in Ottawa. Their history reflects their association w/ the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada and McAllister .... However their statement of faith is interesting.
I will post their statement of beliefs ... and the church's history.
Maybe someone can fill me in on the evolution of this church and the PAOC.
Bethel's Statement of Beliefs
http://www.bethel.ca/ourChurch/ourMission.cfm
...the Holy Scriptures to be the divinely inbreathed, infallible, inerrant and authoritative Word of God. ...that there is one God, eternally existent in the Persons of the Holy Trinity.
...in the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus Christ, His deity, His sinless humanity and perfect life, the eternal all-sufficiency of His atoning death, His bodily resurrection, His ascension to the Father's right hand, and His personal coming again at His second advent.
...that justification is a judicial act of God on the believer's behalf solely on the merits of Christ, and that regeneration by the power of the Holy Spirit is absolutely essential for personal salvation.
...in holy living, the present day reality of the baptism in the Holy Spirit according to Acts 2:4, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the Lord's supernatural healing of the human body.
...in Christ's Lordship of the Church, the observance of the ordinances of Christian baptism by immersion for believers and the Lord's supper. ...in the eternal blessedness of the redeemed in heaven and the eternal doom of the unregenerate in the lake of fire.
Bethel's Church History
http://www.bethel.ca/ourChurch/history.cfm
For over ninety fruitful years in the nation's capital , Ottawa, here is how it all began:
The first Pentecostal services in Ottawa were conducted in the fall of 1908, when a number of cottage prayer meetings were held. However, no permanent work was established.
In February and March of 1911, a number of full-gospel ministers and workers gathered in Ottawa to hold a convention. The services were held in Queen's Hall, at the corner of Bank and Somerset streets. Large crowds gathered for these services, many attending from the surrounding Ottawa Valley. The Pentecostal message was new and it attracted wide interest. Mighty miracles of divine healing, which accompanied these services, had a great influence on the surrounding area. Following the convention, Rev. R.E. McAlister remained in the city to shepherd the new flock. A smaller hall was obtained and regular services were held.
In June 1912, a revival campaign was held in the Howick Pavilion, on the exhibition grounds. The guest speaker was Rev. Daniel Awrey, from the United States. Other early pioneers of the Pentecostal movement were also present.
In the fall of 1912, Rev. R.E. McAllister resigned from the pastorate and was followed by Rev. J.L. Hart, who ministered until 1913. Rev. Charles Baker then took charge of the assembly. The services were held at 312-314 Lisgar Street. Rev. A.M. Otto, who had been publishing a gospel paper, became an active worker with Rev. Baker.
In 1915, Rev. Baker left Ottawa, and Rev. R.E. McAlister returned to minister for a brief period, until Rev. George A. Chambers was called to be the permanent pastor.
Rev. Chambers felt led to call a convention. A large hall in the centre of the city was obtained. Special speakers were Rev. A.H. Argue and the noted Persian evangelist, Andrew Urshan. A great revival broke out, stirring many of the surrounding churches. The congregation was forced to vacate the hall on Lisgar Street so they secured an upstairs hall over the Fern theatre at 411 Bank Street for their regular services.
Because of the phenomenal growth of the Pentecostal movement across the country, it became evident that some form of organization was necessary. It was decided to organize a co-operative fellowship, and to obtain a charter from the Canadian government, recognizing the Pentecostal work and authorizing its ministers to perform marriage ceremonies. In the fall of 1917, the Pentecostal ministers of eastern Canada met in Montreal and named the new corporation "The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. (P.A.O.C.)". Charter members were W.L. Draffin, R.E. Sternall, Harvey McAlister, C.E. Baker, H. Goss, R.E. McAlister, and George Chambers. In 1919, the federal parliament granted The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (P.A.O.C.) a charter and they became an incorporated body.
In 1919, Rev. George Chambers resigned the Ottawa pastorate and Rev. Harvey McAlister served as interim pastor until Rev. R.E. McAlister returned to assume the pastorate in the fall of that year.
Since R.E. McAlister was appointed General Secretary Treasurer of the new organization, with Rev. George Chambers as General Superintendent, the first national office of the P.A.O.C. was situated in Ottawa.
It was decided that the official voice of the P.A.O.C. should be Canadian Pentecostal Testimony (later renamed The Pentecostal Testimony). Rev. R.E. McAlister was named editor of the paper. Thus, in December, 1920, in a second-story mission hall, over a movie theatre, in the national capital, on a table made from a storm door and wooden boxes, the first issue of The Pentecostal Testimony rolled off the press. The magazine was published bimonthly for many years before becoming a monthly publication.
The February, 1921, edition of the Testimony, a folded single sheet, contained these interesting reports: A real revival seems to be on in the Ottawa assembly. Evangelist Walter McAlister is with us. Souls are being saved, people receiving the baptism in the Spirit, also young people's meetings are being held Friday evenings and Sunday School on Sunday afternoons. A second item appears as follows: Ottawa assembly making steady progress. Attendance at Sunday School 126.
In January 1921, Mrs. R.E. McAlister passed away. Shortly after this bereavement, Rev. McAlister resigned and Rev. William Pocock came to pastor the assembly until 1923, when Rev. A.S. McCready assumed the pastorate.
continued here (http://www.bethel.ca/ourChurch/history.cfm)
I love history, Daniel...this is an interesting subject...
Barb ....
I'm just a bit confused ... Oneness Historians have placed RE in the Oneness camp ... he along w/ Howard Goss and McAllister were founding charter members of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada in 1919....
Yet today ... the statement of beliefs of a church McAllister pastored and the PAOC ... indicate doctrine that seems in direct contradiction of the Oneness movement here in America. It is undoubtedly Trinitarian.
The PAOC's Statement of Fundamental & Essential Truths (http://www.paoc.org/pdf/StmtofFaith%20doc.pdf)
reads as follows:
II. THE GODHEAD
The Godhead exists eternally in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. These three are one God, having the same nature
and attributes and are worthy of the same homage, confidence, and obedience.6
V. SALVATION
Salvation has been provided for all men through the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross.6 It is the only perfect redemption and
substitutionary atonement for all the sins of the world, both original and actual. His atoning work has been proven by His resurrection
from the dead.7 Those who repent and believe in Christ are born again of the Holy Spirit and receive eternal life.8 Furthermore, in the
atonement, divine healing was provided for all believers.9
2. REPENTANCE AND FAITH
Man can be born again only through faith in Christ. Repentance, a vital part of believing, is a complete change of mind wrought by the
Holy Spirit,10 turning a person to God from sin.
3. REGENERATION
Regeneration is a creative work of the Holy Spirit by which man is born again and receives spiritual life.11
4. JUSTIFICATION
Justification is a judicial act of God by which the sinner is declared righteous solely on the basis of his acceptance of Christ as Saviour.12
THE LOCAL CHURCH
A. Purpose
The local church is a body of believers in Christ who have joined together to function as a part of the universal church.2 The local church
is ordained by God and provides a context in which believers corporately worship God,3 observe the ordinances of the church, are
instructed in the faith and are equipped for the evangelization of the world.4
(a) The Lord's Supper
The Lord's Supper is a symbol, memorial and proclamation of the suffering and death of our Lord Jesus Christ. This ordinance of
communion is to be participated in by believers until Christ's return.5
(b) Water Baptism
Water baptism signifies the believer's identification with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection and is practised by immersion.6
-----------------------
Was the PAOC ever truly Oneness ... did it de-evolve? Did McCallister and Goss form this org w/ Trinitarians?
When did this "apostasy" happen and how?
RE McAllister obviously taught Jesus name baptism but was he really a W&S guy?
Can someone fill in the blanks here?
Okay ... have some answers. Looks like the PAOC, early on, was a brief experiment in Oneness and Trinitarian preachers trying to co-exist ... but it looks like the AOG got involved and the Trinitarians in the PAOC won out ...
Wiki:
Later in 1919, pentecostals in Saskatchewan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatchewan) and Alberta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta), who were not part of any broader organization, were invited to join the Assemblies of God (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assemblies_of_God), the PAOC's American counterpart. In 1920 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920) the decision was made for the PAOC itself to join the Assemblies of God. In doing so, the PAOC had to repudiate the doctrine of Oneness Pentecostalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneness_Pentecostalism) which had previously been held, and adopt the AG's Trinitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitarian) position. This brought most of Canada's pentecostals into the AG fold, but also resulted in the splitting away of the Apostolic Church of Pentecost (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apostolic_Church_of_Pentecost&action=edit) in 1921 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1921).
In 1925 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1925), the PAOC asked to be released from the Assemblies of God over differences in missionary vision. This was granted, and was an amiable parting, and the two groups have worked together informally ever since.
Jack Shephard
09-30-2007, 11:00 AM
I would be interested in knowing this too. It seems as if the oneness and the trinitarians have been fellowshipping alot longer than then people woud have us believe.
So ... in 1921 ... RE McAllister's wife dies ... Robert resigns the church.
Meanwhile there appears to be turmoil between Oneness and Trinitarians in the PAOC ... the org he helped found.
Rev. William Pocock came to pastor the assembly until 1923, when Rev. A.S. McCready assumed the pastorate. One may assume these men were Trinitarians and hence taking Bethel down the Trinitarian path.
Did McAllister join up w/ the Apostolic Church of Pentecost when the Oneness guys left the PAOC?
I'll be back.
I would be interested in knowing this too. It seems as if the oneness and the trinitarians have been fellowshipping alot longer than then people woud have us believe.
Okay this is what I've gathered so far:
In the fall of 1917, the Pentecostal ministers of eastern Canada met in Montreal and named the new corporation "The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. (P.A.O.C.)". Charter members were W.L. Draffin, R.E. Sternall, Harvey McAlister, C.E. Baker, H. Goss, R.E. McAlister, and George Chambers. In 1919, the federal parliament granted The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (P.A.O.C.) a charter and they became an incorporated body.
I am also surmising that not all of these men on the charter were Oneness ... McAllister? and Goss were.
The PAOC was officially chartered on May 17 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_17), 1919 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1919), and the intent was to join the PAOW ... Haywood's Pentecostal Assemblies of the World [Oneness]. Ultimately the effort was never made to join the PAOW, and briefly the PAOC remained an independent organization with no formal U.S. ties. Until it briefly joined the umbrella of AOG from 1921 to 1925.
I am also surmising from the wiki article that Trinitarian pastors in the new PAOC were not very sold out on fellowshipping w/ other Canadian Oneness Pentecostals and began talks w/ the AOG.
Hence ....
Later in 1919, pentecostals in Saskatchewan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatchewan) and Alberta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta), who were not part of any broader organization, were invited to join the Assemblies of God (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assemblies_of_God), the PAOC's American counterpart. In 1920 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920) the decision was made for the PAOC itself to join the Assemblies of God. In doing so, the PAOC had to repudiate the doctrine of Oneness Pentecostalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneness_Pentecostalism) which had previously been held, and adopt the AG's Trinitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitarian) position. This brought most of Canada's pentecostals into the AG fold, but also resulted in the splitting away of the Apostolic Church of Pentecost (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apostolic_Church_of_Pentecost&action=edit) in 1921 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1921).Meanwhile, in 1921, RE McAllister who was pastoring Bethel Pentecostal at the time resigns his church because his wife dies ... also his decision to resign Bethel might be affected at seeing his PAOC in talks with merging with the AOG.
I am also assuming he and possibly Goss help found the Canadian Apostolic Church of Pentecost ... although not sure.
man ... it would be interesting to read the statement of beliefs ... if any ... of the PAOC when it was a Trinitarian/Oneness org [1917-1921]
Steve Epley
09-30-2007, 11:49 AM
Dan I think McAllister rejoined the PAOC? Not the ACOP. He went back into the Trinity camp.
It would appear to me that McAllister was good friends w/ George A Chambers, also a founding member of the PAOC ... Chambers also pastored the Bethel Church in Ottawa.
In 1915, Rev. Baker left Ottawa, and Rev. R.E. McAlister returned to minister for a brief period, until Rev. George A. Chambers was called to be the permanent pastor.
Rev. Chambers felt led to call a convention. A large hall in the centre of the city was obtained. Special speakers were Rev. A.H. Argue and the noted Persian evangelist, Andrew Urshan. A great revival broke out, stirring many of the surrounding churches. The congregation was forced to vacate the hall on Lisgar Street so they secured an upstairs hall over the Fern theatre at 411 Bank Street for their regular services.
Because of the phenomenal growth of the Pentecostal movement across the country, it became evident that some form of organization was necessary.
Interestingly it is Chambers that has Andrew Urshan, Oneness, preaching the revival that stirred the Pentecostal revival circa 1915.
It's also fairly obvious the McAllister's friend and co-founder, Chambers was a Trinitarian as he stays and serves in the post 1921 Trinitarian PAOC.
"
At the beginning, the denomination was divided into two districts for all of Canada—Eastern and Western. From the minutes of September 10, 1929 of the conference held at Evangel Temple, Toronto, we learn that Rev. G. A. Chambers was named General Chairman.
On August 26, 1932 the following resolution was presented and passed:
"Whereas our Eastern District Conference, composed of Ontario and Quebec, has become so large that it is difficult to handle the delegates in one Conference, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THIS TERRITORY BE DIVIDED INTO TWO CONFERENCES, THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID CONFERENCES BE DETERMINED BY THE GENERAL CONFERENCE."
It would appear that Rev. W. L. Draffin served as the Superintendent of Western Ontario District from 1929 until 1933. On September 5, 1933 the Western Ontario District Conference was held at Central Tabernacle in Hamilton, Ontario. At this time Rev. J. H. Blair was elected Superintendent, a position he held for more than 33 years."
http://www.wod.paoc.org/History.aspx (http://www.wod.paoc.org/History.aspx)
This would also mean the another co-founding member of the PAOC, W.L. Draffin, was Trinitarian.
Dan I think McAllister rejoined the PAOC? Not the ACOP. He went back into the Trinity camp.
I would like to find some evidence of this ... it would be interesting to see that the man, McAllister, who sparked the revelations of Ewart, Cook and Haywood .. with his famous Jesus name baptism sermon in Arroyo Seco... dabbled w/ the Oneness movement but ultimately stayed Trinitarian.
I know Bell ... the first AOG chairman ... was baptized in Jesus name but stayed w/ the Trinnies.
What was Goss thinking when he helped found the PAOC if he was already squarely in the Oneness camp?
Did McAllister remain "Oneness" ... was he ever truly "Oneness" ... we're talking about the man who as some UPCI/Oneness historians assert helped begin the birth pangs of the Oneness movement ... when Haywood, Cook and Ewart heard him preach his Jesus name baptism message at the camp meeting in Arroyo Seco.
This is one historical account about his vital role in the Oneness movement:
"The message of Oneness was first delivered to the Pentecostals that fateful day on 1913 in a camp meeting in Arroyo Seco, California, where hundreds of preachers were attending. The truth of the Oneness of God was given accompanied by the new revelation of baptism in the name of Jesus. Evangelist R.E. McAlister was selected to preach on the subject of water baptism. He began with the accepted baptismal message and spoke on the different modes of baptism, mentioning trine immersion by which the candidate was immersed three times face forward.
He summed it up by “they justify their method, by saying that baptism is in the likeness of Christ's death, and make a point from scripture that Christ bowed his head when he died.” that to them, it was necessary to baptize once for each person in the Godhead (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). He concluded his message abruptly by saying that the Scriptural answer to this was that the Apostles invariably baptized all their converts once in the name of Jesus Christ. He ended by stating the words Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were never used by the early church in Christian baptism . McAlister introduced in 1913 a “new thing,” a Jesus name baptismal formula-- that had no mention of the Father and the Holy Spirit. McAlister was taken aside at the time and told not to preach the this new theory about the “baptismal formula.”
However, many hearing McAllister speak received the new revelation of the name Jesus. Three important men attended and were influenced by this new revelation, these were Frank Ewart, G.T.Haywood, Glenn Cook."
http://www.letusreason.org/Onenes21.htm
Jack Shephard
09-30-2007, 12:58 PM
I was on another forum and there is a person that id from Canada and is in a oneness org that is kinda like Global. They are made up of trinnies and onnies. Maybe he was into something like that after all?
RunningOnFaith
09-30-2007, 01:03 PM
Maybe this will help. Christianity without the cross (p. 61)
"R.E. McAlister, the man who had fired the shot heard around the world at Arroyo Seco, defected. He formally renounced the Oneness doctrine in 1919. Thereafter, he became one of the greatt Canadian champions of Orthodox Trinitarianism among Pentecostals in Canada as well as a propagator of the "finnished work of Calvary" Doctrine.
Goss, Oneness, indeed had no issues fellowshipping w/ the PAOC .. he was a founding charter member and apparently continued w/ an org that became increasingly Trinitarian after 1921.
These are from the lecture notes from James Craig, a PAOC historian:
" ·Goss was a key figure in the lower Midwest and the early AG. He also worked in Canada for a time in the early days and attended several early PAOC conferences
-----------------
Source:
Current Approaches to Pentecostal Historiography
James D. Craig
These notes are for use in the History of Pentecostalism online course [GE2201] taught at Master's College and Seminary.
Download document: Current Approaches.rtf (http://www.paoc.org/administration/archives/search/documents/Current%20Approaches.rtf)
Maybe this will help. Christianity without the cross (p. 61)
"R.E. McAlister, the man who had fired the shot heard around the world at Arroyo Seco, defected. He formally renounced the Oneness doctrine in 1919. Thereafter, he became one of the greatt Canadian champions of Orthodox Trinitarianism among Pentecostals in Canada as well as a propagator of the "finnished work of Calvary" Doctrine .
Thank you ROF ... it helps immensely. Fudge you are good.
Still some questions persist ...
since McAllister defected in 1919 from the Oneness camp ... did this help make the other charter members turn on Goss who was also a charter member of PAOC?
It's obvious there were some Oneness-leaning churches in the PAOC in it's early conception ... since the condition for them to join up w/ the AOG was to repudiate Oneness doctrine.
Why do Goss and McAllister join this experiment? Was it just to organize Pentecostals in Canada?
Did they think there could be a co-existence of Oneness/Trinitarians so early in the schism?
When does Goss break his ties w/ the PAOC? I'd imagine it was in 1921.
Does McAllister's former church, Bethel, still baptize in Jesus name? Did they ever?
Lastly, why do so many Oneness historians conveniently revise/sanitize their own history?
I'll give an example of the last item in a moment.
J-Roc
09-30-2007, 01:40 PM
Eagerly listening....awaiting answer to last item.
J-Roc
09-30-2007, 01:41 PM
Dan, only if you find it in your heart....can you use bold type only to stress a point and not the entire text....my eyes seriously burn from reading these boards and I get headaches....please help ease the pain....many thanks in advance.
J-Roc
09-30-2007, 01:43 PM
The phrase under my name is not a joke:
"His word burns in my heart like a fire...Fire Fall Down" :hypercoffee
J-Roc
09-30-2007, 01:45 PM
Dan...that's why when we team pastor...you'll be in charge of the Records Dept or Research & Development... rofl
Steve Epley
09-30-2007, 02:02 PM
Dan I cannot site resources but I am sure I read that he did not insist on baptizing in Jesus Name. He and Booth-Clifford& Hall I think all found themselves back in the Trinity fold? But I could be mistaken.
stmatthew
09-30-2007, 02:32 PM
Dan,
From the little I have read, the Oneness believers were not trying to defect from the AOG, and were not pressing for it to be a Oneness org. They were willing to co-exist. It was the AOG that made the new issue an issue.
Having said that, I have no doubt that McAllister and Goss would be able to join hands with trinitarians, as they held a PCI type faith. To them, the trinitarians were just as saved as the Oneness Jesus name folks were.
Lastly, why do so many Oneness historians conveniently revise/sanitize their own history?
I'll give an example of the last item in a moment.
Eagerly listening....awaiting answer to last item.
Dan I cannot site resources but I am sure I read that he did not insist on baptizing in Jesus Name. He and Booth-Clifford& Hall I think all found themselves back in the Trinity fold? But I could be mistaken.
You were right Elder .... Our friend Fudge also confirms his "return" to the Trinity camp.
The question is if he really ever Oneness ... if he never INSISTED on Jesus name baptism ... as you say.
But if you read the works of some Oneness historians one would think he did and was somehow a leader of the Oneness movement. One could even walk away thinking he remained Oneness.
This is David Bernard in his book, The New Birth.
Beginning in 1913, the doctrines of baptism in Jesus' name and the Oneness of God began to sweep across the North American Pentecostal movement under the leadership of Frank Ewart, R. E. McAlister, Glenn Cook, and othersIf one reads Adam Dennis article " The Sound of Freedom (http://www.upci.org/historical/histnews/articles/2002Fall/soundoffreedom.htm)" in the UPCI online historical archives it reads:
"During a baptismal service, in which R. E. McAlister preached, he mentioned that in the Book of Acts and the Epistles water baptism was always done in the name of Jesus Christ rather than in the traditional baptism formula of repeating the words in Matthew 28:19. This, of course, created a stir in the camp. People began to discuss the subject and to study the Scriptures themselves. Even after the camp was over, men continued to study the Word of God for the true scriptural formula to use in water baptism.
One such study group consisted of Frank J. Ewart, R. E. McAlister, Glenn Cook, and Garfield T. Haywood. They gathered in Los Angeles, where Ewart was pastor, and studied the Scriptures daily. Finally they became convinced of the scriptural teaching of water baptism in the saving power of the name, Jesus Christ, and they soon embraced the absolute deity of Jesus Christ; that “in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily."
Which is it ... ???
Did REM just teach that Jesus name baptism was the method used by the apostles ... but had no problems w/ the Trinitarian formula being used?
did he help lead the Pentecostal movement towards Oneness, like Bernard asserts? His phraseology seems misleading.
Did he "embrace the absolute deity of Jesus Christ" like Dennis claims? Are there Trinitarians who don't in the grand scheme of things?
and now Elder Epley adds the new wrinkle ... that McAllister never really insisted on Jesus Name baptism only.
Dan,
From the little I have read, the Oneness believers were not trying to defect from the AOG, and were not pressing for it to be a Oneness org. They were willing to co-exist. It was the AOG that made the new issue an issue.
Having said that, I have no doubt that McAllister and Goss would be able to join hands with trinitarians, as they held a PCI type faith. To them, the trinitarians were just as saved as the Oneness Jesus name folks were.
If this indeed our heritage ... that the early pioneers desired fellowship and co-existence ... Why will you not fellowship w/ them today?
PCI type faith aside ...
Even leaders like Haywood, Urshan, Haney and others that were W&S ... were adherents of "light" doctrine... and fellowshipped w/ Trinitarians.
Are you living up to your heritage?
stmatthew
09-30-2007, 03:55 PM
If this indeed our heritage ... that the early pioneers desired fellowship and co-existence ... Why will you not fellowship w/ them today?
PCI type faith aside ...
Even leaders like Haywood, Urshan, Haney and others that were W&S ... were adherents of "light" doctrine... and fellowshipped w/ Trinitarians.
Are you living up to your heritage?
I am not trying to live up to my heritage. I am trying to live for God to the best of my ability with the understanding I have of Gods word.
Now as far as being friends with trinitarians, I have no problem there. I am not of the persuasion that trinitarians serve "another God". I just simply believe their doctrine is wrong, and does not bring one to salvation.
So Dan, Would you go and worship and fellowship with folks you do not believe to be saved?? Would you sit under the ministry of a preacher you do not believe is saved, and does not lead his hearers to salvation? and lastly, but most importantly, would you take your children and have them sit under such a minister?
Steve Epley
09-30-2007, 07:08 PM
You were right Elder .... Our friend Fudge also confirms his "return" to the Trinity camp.
The question is if he really ever Oneness ... if he never INSISTED on Jesus name baptism ... as you say.
But if you read the works of some Oneness historians one would think he did and was somehow a leader of the Oneness movement. One could even walk away thinking he remained Oneness.
This is David Bernard in his book, The New Birth.
If one reads Adam Dennis article " The Sound of Freedom (http://www.upci.org/historical/histnews/articles/2002Fall/soundoffreedom.htm)" in the UPCI online historical archives it reads:
Which is it ... ???
Did REM just teach that Jesus name baptism was the method used by the apostles ... but had no problems w/ the Trinitarian formula being used?
did he help lead the Pentecostal movement towards Oneness, like Bernard asserts? His phraseology seems misleading.
Did he "embrace the absolute deity of Jesus Christ" like Dennis claims? Are there Trinitarians who don't in the grand scheme of things?
and now Elder Epley adds the new wrinkle ... that McAllister never really insisted on Jesus Name baptism only.
I think Matt hit it right. I think McAllister thought the correct baptism was to be done in Jesus Name but did not think baptizing in the Trinity would cause someone to be lost. And I don't remember reading anything that said he taught the Oneness? He was PCI minded and NOT a strong PCI mindset at that. But I think the 3 I named all went back into the Trinity movement. And Matt made another vaild point the brethren were threw out of the AG and did not want to leave. Most had recieved the HG among each other and were comrades the AG threw them out by penning a creed.
This is chapter 13, pages 94-95 in The Phenomenon of Pentecost by Frank Ewart copyrighted 1947 by Herald Publishing House and chapter 10 in the PDF version released on cd by the PPH. I have had the paperback book, The Phenomenon of Pentecost since June 19, 1958 and it has pretty well fallen apart. I have had the cd for about 3 or 4 years.
How the Message Came to Canada
Since it would appear to be the objective of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada to wage battle at this time, openly, against the “Jesus Only” people (so-called) in Canada through the columns of its official organ against certain tenets of faith sponsored by the Apostolic Church of Pentecost of Canada, the writer feels the burden and cause of Christ for progressive truth of many years’ standing at heart, referring to Canadian soil. It seems proper and consistent under the present growing misunderstanding that there should be a proper setting forth of all the major facts, that those whom it may concern may be in a position to intelligently judge as to who is who and what is what, so far as “New Issue” in Canada is concerned, and to know who is the shoot and who is the offshoot.
The writer makes no apology for his claims to know certain major facts in the movement’s history in Canada relative to doctrine and also organization, being in it from its inception in Winnipeg in April 1907 and being the promoter of the first organization under Dominion
charter. He is quite familiar with all the truth and the issues pro and con of a progressive character. The writer is therefore in a position to make certain declarations. He also feels that under the present distress of misunderstanding, occasioned by what he terms inconsistencies in the church that should not be named, and having suffered many things in silence, now there should be a proper setting forth of such facts as will aid the uninformed
inquirer to a better understanding in view of the present attack. It is the purpose of the defense to set forth in this epistle some historical facts referring to basic principles of the
Pentecostal movement in Canada, including the remote beginning, with the first message on water baptism in the exclusive rite of Jesus’ name and its first usage in western
Canada, by whom, when, and where, as follows.
“At the eighth annual Pentecostal Convention held in Western Canada in the City of Winnipeg, November 1913, the first message on the exclusive rite of water baptism in Jesus’ name was delivered by the guest speaker for that occasion, namely Pastor R. E. McAlister of eastern Canada. In those days it was not considered a breach of ministerial courtesy for a guest speaker to advance some new truth. The movement of those days
had just undergone a revolutionary process by a new message called ‘The Finished Work of Calvary,’ and it was therefore at that time in a receptive attitude toreceive further revealed truth should it come. Too, the young movement was still unorganized, which naturally would facilitate any such possibility. However, the guest speaker did not hesitate to deliver his revolutionary message pending a baptismal service. Imagine such a thing as that happening today! All would be consumed and obscured in a dustcloud.
“At any rate, the guest speaker very ably analyzed the New Testament Scriptures, proving very emphatically in every instance that the apostles of Jesus baptized by single
immersion in the exclusive rite of Jesus’ name. The writer was asked to do the baptizing at the conclusion of the said service. Nothing was said to him as to what formula he should use, since a new one had appeared. Having listened to the oration and knowing the new message was based on the simple Scriptures ‘in his name’ although the writer heretofore had not followed this exclusive rite in this new and scriptural way), he took the same liberty in which the new message was delivered and baptized thirty candidates in the name of Jesus Christ. This was the remote beginning of the said ‘New Issue’ in Canada. No objections were raised by anyone present.
“During the years 1914-1915 by the illumination of Scriptures, the new message had resolved itself into the fullness of God in Christ (II Corinthians 5:19; I Thessalonians 5:18; I Timothy 3:16). This teaching developed in the city of Los Angeles, California.
“It might be stated that up till this time the message on water baptism was merely based on records only, without any illumination as to why the apostles so baptized. But in the fullness of time when further illumination on the Scriptures came, proving the absolute fullnessof God in Christ (Colossians 2:9-10), then it was clearly understood why the apostles of Jesus used that exclusive rite. Out of this development of the truth came the action of rebaptizing in this exclusive rite in the city of Los Angeles. Hundreds of thousands were obedient among the ministry and laity, with the result that as early as the latter part of June 1915, this new advance message was sweeping Canada and practically all Christendom.”
—Frank Small
Editor, Living Waters
This is chapter 14 from The Phenomenon of Pentecost by Frank J. Ewart, copyrighted 1947 by Herald Publishing House but is chapter 11 with the title Revival in Canada on the cd distributed by the PPH.
Revival in Canada
by L.C. Hall
Beginning in Toronto, Canada, the 14th of November, and continuing one month, it was our joy, with Elder George A. Chambers of Berlin, Ontario, Canada, to open this campaign in a large vacant church.
Our first audience numbered about a dozen. Before the meetings closed they had increased to six hundred. Having gone through our own invitation we did not ask or expect the cooperation of other missions or workers. The enemy was busy, by pen and voice, warning the people to stay away. “Heretics” and kindred epithets flew through the air and mails. Warnings and entreaties proved futile, for the people wanted to know about the one true God revealed in Jesus Christ our Savior. Soon the light began to break. God’s blessing and power fell upon the message. As many began to see the light, they desired baptism in the only name given under heaven among men, whereby we must be saved. (See Acts 4:12.) There was no baptistry in the church, but hearing of a transportable one gotten up through the ingenious mind of Elder R. E. McAlister of Ottawa, Ontario, we sent for it. It can be folded or put into a trunk. Eighty-four were baptized in His name, including eight or ten preachers. Among them was Elder T. H. Gilbert, in charge of one of the missions in Toronto.
Our meeting was in the neighborhood of three large universities. Many attended from these, and some of the theologians were baptized in His name, afterwards receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit according to the scriptural pattern. Reports from Toronto since the meeting closed are that God is still blessing and great numbers are obeying and receiving the Holy Ghost.
Our next meeting was at Parry Sound, a beautiful little city on the shores of the Georgian Bay. Elder Alexander was in charge. He, his wife, and about all of his assembly saw the truth and were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.
We arrived at Ottawa in time to attend the closing of Brother R. E. McAlister’s convention, conducted by Elder G. T. Haywood of Indianapolis, Indiana. He left for Kinburn with Brother Charles E. Baker to hold a convention. We continued the meeting for one week. About 112 were baptized in Ottawa in the only name given, during this great campaign. Brother Haywood was in Kinburn about ten days, and we continued through the week. I believe that fifty-six were baptized in the only name.
Our next meeting was in Berlin, Ontario, with Elder Chambers in his own mission. It had been our privilege open up that part of Canada to this wonderful message. The message was attended with revival fires. Hundreds obeyed the gospel and were baptized in the name that is above every name. A great number were healed and born into the kingdom of God while in the baptismal waters.
The fight is on, the battle is real, victory is sure in Jesus’ name.
—Evangelist L. C. Hall
Reprinted from Living Waters
This is chapter 16 from Bro. F.J. Ewart’s book, The Phenomenon of Pentecost copyrighted 1947 by the Herald Publishing House. It is chapter 12 on the cd distributed by the PPH
The Great Winipeg Revival
One of the greatest Pentecostal revivals in modern times was that which God gave Pastor Frank Small in the city of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. The writer was with Pastor Small when he opened up his first mission. The only building that we both could accept was an old Jewish synagogue. The floor was crumbling in, and the entire building needed renovating. When we gained admission, our first impressions were very unfavorable. However, the power of God fell on us simultaneously and witnessed that this old, forsaken building was God’s choice. The tent meeting on the Red River outside the city of Winnipeg was yet in full swing. It had been wonderfully owned and confirmed by the Lord, but when Pastor Small entered his new work in the city by opening up that renovated Jewish synagogue, a veritable Pentecostal effusion was poured out and lasted for years without a break.
The writer went back to Los Angeles, California, and month after month the reports of this astounding revival appeared in the paper called Meat in Due Season, and the readers of this paper read them with delight and amazement in all parts of Christendom.
It was disclosed that this great revival was a definite answer to earnest prayer which Pastor Small and his faithful few had been engaged in day after day and night after night for months. The avenues of approach to the mission in the synagogue were blocked with crowds, until the doors were closed and hundreds of disappointed people turned away. The most remarkable characteristic of these meetings was that they were more kindred to the revivals described in the Acts of the Apostles than anything else in the religious modern world.
As in the beginning in Los Angeles, God set His signal stamp on baptism in the name of Jesus by healing and baptizing believers in the water. No one without the baptism in the Holy Spirit was expected to leave the baptismal font without receiving the Spirit, and very few did. Incurable diseases that had baffled physicians and the prayers of the saints for years were healed in the act of being baptized into the name above every other name.
When the writer saw people being healed under his hands while being baptized in the name of Jesus when he did not even pray for their healing, he went to the Lord about it, and God showed him that all blessing was centered in the name of God and His Word.
Besides the candidates being healed and filled with the Holy Spirit in the water, all kinds of special miracles were wrought in the name of Jesus. The glory of God would descend upon the pastor and candidate, and they would become lost to themselves. The candidates after being baptized would rise to a level of a foot above the bottom and stand there with uplifted hands and heavenly faces praising God. These things gave a supernatural feature
to the Winnipeg revival that signally stamped it as of divine origin and made people confess that God was in the place.
No building obtainable would hold the crowds that flocked to these meetings night after night, week after week, month after month, and year after year. The Winnipeg Theatre was rented, and we were told that people could be seen getting off the streetcars as early as six o’clock in order to obtain a seat for the evening meetings. Pastor Small adopted the policy of baptizing the candidates into the name of Jesus without telling them why, at first. But he soon discovered that the miracles that happened in the water made people inquire after the power at the back of it all. He would then inform them that it was because they did everything in the name of Jesus, which is the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; the only name given under heaven among men whereby we must be saved; the name that is above every name that is named; the name in which every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is the Lord of the universe to the glory of God the Father. Amen. Multitudes will rise up on the day of judgment and call Pastor Small blessed!
Steve Epley
09-30-2007, 09:51 PM
Elder Small was the founder of the ACOP. He continued in preaching the Acts 2:38 message I am nearly sure Hall did not.
BoredOutOfMyMind
09-30-2007, 11:17 PM
I am not trying to live up to my heritage. I am trying to live for God to the best of my ability with the understanding I have of Gods word.
Now as far as being friends with trinitarians, I have no problem there. I am not of the persuasion that trinitarians serve "another God". I just simply believe their doctrine is wrong, and does not bring one to salvation.
So Dan, Would you go and worship and fellowship with folks you do not believe to be saved?? Would you sit under the ministry of a preacher you do not believe is saved, and does not lead his hearers to salvation? and lastly, but most importantly, would you take your children and have them sit under such a minister?
Bumped for Daniel to answer the last paragraph. there were 3 questions here.
You answered none.
Michael The Disciple
10-01-2007, 07:52 AM
Other modern Trinitarians like James L. Beall and Hobart Freeman baptized in Jesus name. They would ONLY baptize in it. However to them it was not salvational.
Bumped for Daniel to answer the last paragraph. there were 3 questions here.
You answered none.
Would you go and worship and fellowship with folks you do not believe to be saved?? Would you sit under the ministry of a preacher you do not believe is saved, and does not lead his hearers to salvation?
My dearest BOOM,
Surely these questions are rhetorical.
Question #1 - Would you go and worship and fellowship with folks you do not believe to be saved??
All of us, con and lib should be sitting and worshipping in church w/ unsaved people ... or the church isn't doing it's job ... it's preaching to the choir.
It is God who does the saving ... so the second part of the question is somewhat suspect ... however I fellowship w/ those who believe in One God ... believe Jesus is the Son of God and have placed their faith in Jesus Christ and obey his commandments.
1 John 3 helps know if we and others belong to the truth.
19This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence 20whenever our hearts condemn us. For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.
21Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22and receive from him anything we ask, because we obey his commands and do what pleases him. 23And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24Those who obey his commands live in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.
Question # 2 - Would you sit under the ministry of a preacher you do not believe is saved, and does not lead his hearers to salvation?
Whether the minister is a Ultracon or a Flaming Liberal ... If he is living in sin ... usurping God's authority and not preaching a bible-based salvational doctrine I'd find another place to congregate.
Can I fellowship w/ misguided PAJCers?
... sure. I love them and pray for their illumination.
Now back to the heart of the issue ... my questions to Matt were pertaining to whether or not he is true to his heritage.
I say this because as a person raised in the Oneness Apostolic movement I know the emphasis put on the idea of Heritage ... it is a value of the culture. It is harped on from pulpits ... the theme of conferences ... and is a centerpoint of a lot of the literature I've read since my childhood.
History is presented as to scaffold this value of Heritage and used to validate the existence and truths held by many. I remember A Mangun stepping before those at BOTT 2007 ... making his famous/infamous remarks in support of television advertising ... and as part of his presentation he sought to use photos of his dad ... and persuaded the crowd that he was still TRUE TO HIS HERITAGE.
The heritage badge is especially proudly worn by the Ultracon zealots who use snippets of skewed history to validate their heritage and make themselves victims of the schism of the early Pentecostal movement called the "New Issue". Oneness Apostolic compromisers and charismatics are belittled as not being true or embarrassed of their heritage.
What is bothersome and disingenous is that those who glorify and reify their heritage ... play the victim and state they have ALL TRUTH ....fail to realize that in their zeal to revise history books AND present the truth... they are the one's not true to the heritage ... history truly reveals.
The truth is ... that the early Oneness pioneer GIANTS like Haywood, Urshan, Goss, Clyde Haney ... and most others never considered Trinitarians as lost ... fellowshipped with them regularly ... preached in their events and had them preach in their own.
This is in sharp contrast several generations later ... of a radicalized element within our Oneness ranks that through propaganda and lack of scholarship have whitewashed our history and true heritage while disfellowshipping even their own without abandon.
Is truth limited to repeating the mantra of Acts 2:38 ... presenting soteriological and Christological views? Are we not to be truthful in all things?
Those who drumbeat heritage are nominally Apostolics ...
Sam, thank you for the articles found in Ewart's book I will comment on them a little later.
As for the articles from Hall and Small .... in the excerpts provided by Sam from Ewart's book .... [posts 26-28]
My thoughts:
clearly McAlister's message of Jesus Name baptism made in roads even among Trinitarians in Canada, circa 1913-15. Both articles affirm this ...
Small obviously is writing after the PAOC repudiated Oneness doctrine in 1921 ... and feels he must set the record straight ... as to those that were baptized in Jesus name .... and who preached it first especially because of antagonistic articles against the Oneness movement by the PAOC in their official organ.
Since it would appear to be the objective of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada to wage battle at this time, openly, against the “Jesus Only” people (so-called) in Canada through the columns of its official organ against certain tenets of faith sponsored by the Apostolic Church of Pentecost of Canada, the writer feels the burden and cause of Christ for progressive truth of many years’ standing at heart, referring to Canadian soil. It seems proper and consistent under the present growing misunderstanding that there should be a proper setting forth of all the major facts, that those whom it may concern may be in a position to intelligently judge as to who is who and what is what, so far as “New Issue” in Canada is concerned, and to know who is the shoot and who is the offshoot.
I do question his purpose for writing ... of which he asserts that the ""proper setting forth of all the major facts, that those whom it may concern may be in a position to intelligently judge as to who is who and what is what, so far as “New Issue” in Canada is concerned, and to know who is the shoot and who is the offshoot."
He is trying to rewrite history by making it look that somehow all of the Trintarian Pentecostals were an offshoot of the Oneness movement taking steam in Canada ... while facts indicate that Trinitarian and Oneness were preaching, fellowshipping and co-existing under the PAOC. This is more of the revisionist propaganda that makes many of us question the scholarship and bias of many Oneness writers.
Hall, in his article reveals ,to us that he, a Tritarian, and other Trinitarians like Chambers fellowshipped and had revivals w/ Oneness believers like Haywood with the emphasis being on the Pentecostal experience.
What I feel is lacking is an objective account of this co-existence especially the dynamics of the Trinitarian/Oneness fellowship with the PAOC from 1917 to 1921 ... with its charter members like McAllister, Goss, Chambers, Baker having diverse beliefs on the Godhead and even the proper baptismal formula.
Birdie
10-01-2007, 10:23 AM
Ill check with McAllister's sister some day this week and she what she has to say about the issue. I will be in that part of the country later this week.
Ill check with McAllister's sister some day this week and she what she has to say about the issue. I will be in that part of the country later this week.
Birdie,
It would be fascinating to speak to her about some of the early beginnings of the PAOC as it pertains to the fellowship of Oneness and Trinitarian adherents after the AOG schism.
I am seriously considering writing a book about this ...
Please ask her about the nature of McAlister's and Goss' relationship ... were they close friends?
Perhaps Birdie ... she would be willing to be interviewed more formally?
Birdie
10-01-2007, 10:34 AM
Birdie,
It would be fascinating to speak to her about some of the early beginnings of the PAOC.
I am seriously considering writing a book about this ...
Please ask her about the nature of McAlister's and Goss' relationship ... were the close friends.
Perhaps Birdie ... she would be willing to be interviewed more formally?
I will check it out for you. She is in her 90's so not sure what she remembers. Will talk with other family members as well.
I will check it out for you. She is in her 90's so not sure what she remembers. Will talk with other family members as well.
Thank you ... PM incoming.
As a sidenote: Small like most early Apostolics believed in progressive light ... they didn't believe in the "Remnant History" taught today by many in our Oneness ranks.
This is evident in the following quotes from his article:
“During the years 1914-1915 by the illumination of Scriptures, the new message had resolved itself into the fullness of God in Christ (II Corinthians 5:19 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=2+Corinthians+5%3A19); I Thessalonians 5:18 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Thessalonians+5%3A18); I Timothy 3:16 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Timothy+3%3A16)). This teaching developed in the city of Los Angeles, California.
“It might be stated that up till this time the message on water baptism was merely based on records only, without any illumination as to why the apostles so baptized. But in the fullness of time when further illumination on the Scriptures came, proving the absolute fullnessof God in Christ (Colossians 2:9-10 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Colossians+2%3A9-10)), then it was clearly understood why the apostles of Jesus used that exclusive rite. Out of this development of the truth came the action of rebaptizing in this exclusive rite in the city of Los Angeles. Hundreds of thousands were obedient among the ministry and laity, with the result that as early as the latter part of June 1915, this new advance message was sweeping Canada and practically all Christendom.”
Elder Small was the founder of the ACOP. He continued in preaching the Acts 2:38 message I am nearly sure Hall did not.
You seem to be on target ... Fudge makes reference to Hall not being in the Oneness camp... although if you read his article in the Ewart book that Sam posted it appears he was for Jesus Name baptism?
If you read the history of the Bethel Church in Ottawa ...
Hall ... following the footsteps of McAlister and Chambers ... also got his hand at pastoring the Bethel Church in Ottawa from 1925-1928.
In 1925, the first church property was purchased, at the corner of Lyon and McLaren streets. Rev. McCready resigned the pastorate and was succeeded by Rev. L.C. Hall, who served until 1928. He was succeeded by Rev. J.D. Saunders.
http://www.bethel.ca/ourChurch/history.cfm
-------------------------------------------------------------
Also of importance in this discussion is the following:
Since R.E. McAlister was appointed General Secretary Treasurer of the new organization, with Rev. George Chambers as General Superintendent,the first national office of the P.A.O.C. was situated in Ottawa.
It also appears REM was quite the organizer and thinker ... Evidence of this would be his appointment as Secretary/Treasurer .... His in-depth studies of Jesus name baptism ... and this quote from Hall ...
There was no baptistry in the church, but hearing of a transportable one gotten up through the ingenious mind of Elder R. E. McAlister of Ottawa, Ontario, we sent for it. It can be folded or put into a trunk. Eighty-four were baptized in His name, including eight or ten preachers. Among them was Elder T. H. Gilbert, in charge of one of the missions in Toronto.
mfblume
10-01-2007, 01:06 PM
I know that one of the Oneness revivals that occurred with McAlister was in Winnipeg, Canada, and that church is now pastored by a "dyed in the wool" trinitarian, according to that pastor's own words. Zion Apostolic.
Some more history about the beginnings of the PAOC:
Organized and Chartered
The early Canadian Pentecostals found themselves in controversy over creating any kind of organization. Mr. and Mrs. Hebden of the Toronto mission outreach stated "most emphatically... we have no connection whatever with any general organization of the Pentecostal people in Canada," and went on to make it clear that to them all organization was a snare of Satan. It was primarily fear of a loss of the revival to man-made structures and power that caused such opposition. But as growth occurred it became clear that for the best administration of funds, for the protection of assemblies from false teachers and doctrine, and for the full coordination of efforts to evangelize, at least some sort of minimal organization was required.
An attempt in the East in 1909 failed. In 1918 a decision was made to form a national entity but to join it with an American body, the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World. Contact was never made and so nothing materialized.
** Note: The Canadian Pentecostal church pondered going w/ a Oneness organization ... the PAW in 1918.
Our historic day is May 17, 1919. The government of Canada issued a Charter incorporating The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. Seven charter members stand as our founding fathers, namely: R. E. McAlister, Frank Small, G. A. Chambers, Harvey McAlister, Arthur Miles Pattison, R. E. Sternall, and William Draffin.
*** Notice ... Howard Goss' name does not appear on this list although other PAOC source state him as a founding member. Small a Oneness Apostolic does appear on this list... Small admits to being a promoter ... or Promotions Director of the PAOC .... in the Small article [post 26].
The first chairman was George A. Chambers. On November 25, 1919, the first General Assembly was convened in Kitchener, Ontario.
For a few years, the new organization had an uncertain future. Pentecostals in the Canadian Prairies joined the Assemblies of God of the USA, becoming the Western Canadian District Council of that organization. In 1920 the PAOC meeting in Montreal voted to join the Assemblies of God as a District Council. During 1925 that union was dissolved and The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada became a truly Canadian entity.
http://npachurch.com/PAOCHistory.html
I know that one of the Oneness revivals that occurred with McAlister was in Winnipeg, Canada, and that church is now pastored by a "dyed in the wool" trinitarian, according to that pastor's own words. Zion Apostolic.
Fact is Trinitarian and Oneness Canadian Pentecostals apparently worked together to bring the Pentecostal revival under the PAOC.
It's founding members had diverse views on the Godhead and baptismal formula. McAllister it appears to me was never firmly in the Oneness camp although he believed and practiced Jesus name baptism. He help found the PAOC and never left it.
Then PAOC mission, early on, seemed to be simply: Church planting
http://npachurch.com/PAOCHistory.html
One historical account reads:
Our charter of 1919 states three very significant purposes for which we exist: "to conduct a place or places of worship; to organize and conduct schools of religious instruction; to carry on home and foreign missionary work for the spread of the gospel." We began with the vision to reach the lost.
This vision was continually cast in every means of communication. The first issue of the Pentecostal Testimony in December 1920, contained a letter by the Secretary-Treasurer, R. E. McAlister, in which he spoke of the "opening up of new Assemblies", and further stated, "Pastors and Assemblies ought to take this phase of the work to heart and lift an offering at least once a year for this very important work.
Only as we extend the home work are we in a position to care for the Foreign Missionary enterprise, and we have demonstrated in the past that a hundred dollars spent wisely in the opening up of Home Missions under ordinary conditions will result in a hundred per cent increase to the Foreign work within a year. Every Home Mission opened in turn becomes a factor in the Foreign Missionary enterprise." This statement was followed by a listing of the current churches within the Fellowship. There were 27.
Nothing in the original charter seems to indicate a slant towards a Christogical view.
Steve Epley
10-01-2007, 03:02 PM
Hall for a season preached both baptism in Jesus Name & the Oneness and even wrote Oneness songs but went back into the Trinity.
Hall for a season preached both baptism in Jesus Name & the Oneness and even wrote Oneness songs but went back into the Trinity.
Early on, during the New Issue ... there seemed to be a lot of confusion and uncertainty as to the loyalties of some of the prominent Pentecostal leaders as it pertains to their views of the Godhead ...
I recently read in Fudge's that even Andrew Urshan at first said he was not w/ those in the New Issue camp ... then of course retracted his statement. I will try to find exact quote ... It might even have been a footnote in CWTC.
Bernard does not go as far as claiming that many Trinitarians were Oneness but does list some Trinitarians who were baptized in Jesus name in his book "The New Birth" ... chapter 10. L.C. Hall is listed among the prominent Pentecostal Oneness/Trinitarian Jesus name baptizees.
Many prominent leaders in the early Pentecostal movement were baptized in Jesus' name, including: A. H. Argue, Frank Bartleman (Azusa Street participant and historian), E. N. Bell (one of two organizers of the Assemblies of God and its first General Chairman), William Booth-Clibborn, Glenn Cook, A. G. Garr, Frank Ewart (early associate of William Durham and prominent revivalist), Howard Goss (one of two organizers of the Assemblies of God and one of its executive presbyters), L. C. Hall, G. T. Haywood (prominent black leader), B. F. Lawrence, Harry van Loon, R. E. McAlister (prominent evangelist), Aimee Semple McPherson, D. C. O. Opperman (an executive presbyter in the Assemblies of God), and H. G. Rodgers.
Steve Epley
10-01-2007, 03:33 PM
Early in during the New Issue ... there seemed to be a lot of confusion and uncertainty as to the loyalties of prominent leaders ... I recently read in Fudge's that even Andrew Urshan at first said he was not w/ those in the New Issue camp ... I will try to find exact quote ... It might even have been a footnote in CWTC.
Bernard does not go as far as claiming that many Trinitarians were Oneness but does list some Trinitarians who were baptized in Jesus name in his book "The New Birth" ... chapter 10. L.C. Hall is listed among the prominent Pentecostal Oneness/Trinitarian Jesus name baptizees.
He was a prominent Oneness leader at one time but I am NEARLY certain he pastored a Canadian AG church after that. He defected.
Bernard, in The New Birth, also asserts that most of the leadership of the original Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada were baptized in Jesus name.
This however does not mean they held a PAJC view or were Oneness for that matter.
All but one of the Assemblies of God preachers in Louisiana accepted Jesus Name baptism as did almost all the early Canadian Pentecostal leaders, including the founders of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. [165] (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pentecostal/New-Foot.htm#b165) However, in 1919 the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada renounced Oneness, accepted trinitarianism, and affiliated with the Assemblies of God. [166] (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pentecostal/New-Foot.htm#b166)
He was a prominent Oneness leader at one time but I am NEARLY certain he pastored a Canadian AG church after that. He defected.
He [Hall] did pastor the Bethel PAOC church from 1925-1928 which had once been pastored by Chambers and McAlister. By 1925, the PAOC had dissolved it's union w/ the AG ... and was its own national identity. Perhaps the AG started its own churches in Canada and he pastored one after 1928?
Steve Epley
10-01-2007, 03:37 PM
Bernard, in The New Birth, also asserts that most of the leadership of the original Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada were baptized in Jesus name.
This however does not mean they held a PAJC view or were Oneness for that matter.
In Eastern Canada most were PCI minded I don't know about the West however Small would have fit into that group also.
In Eastern Canada most were PCI minded I don't know about the West however Small would have fit into that group also.
So Small was PCI? I guess then he had very little issue at first ... along w/ Goss to form the PAOC w/ other Trinitarians?
Steve Epley
10-01-2007, 03:46 PM
So Small was PCI? I guess then he had very little issue at first ... along w/ Goss to form the PAOC w/ other Trinitarians?
No he had his own group but their teaching was about the same as PCI pertaining to baptism & HGB.`
No he had his own group but their teaching was about the same as PCI pertaining to baptism & HGB.`
By PCI ... I meant in belief ... not in org affiliation ...
I know Small helped form the ACOP after the Oneness guys left the PAOC in 1921. My point is that he was a founding member of the PAOC along w/ Goss...
The PAOC acknowledges Small as a founding member when they started to form circa 1918.
Our historic day is May 17, 1919. The government of Canada issued a Charter incorporating The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. Seven charter members stand as our founding fathers, namely: R. E. McAlister, Frank Small, G. A. Chambers, Harvey McAlister, Arthur Miles Pattison, R. E. Sternall, and William Draffin.Small, Oneness, was their "promoter" ... or Promotions Director? of a mixed Oneness/Trinitarian org ....
He writes in the article that Sam posted:
The writer makes no apology for his claims to know certain major facts in the movement’s history in Canada relative to doctrine and also organization, being in it from its inception in Winnipeg in April 1907 and being the promoter of the first organization under Dominion charter.
The question is whether men like McAlister, Hall, and even E.N. ever were "in the Oneness camp" ....
Steve Epley
10-02-2007, 08:06 AM
The question is whether men like McAlister, Hall, and even E.N. ever were "in the Oneness camp" ....
Hall was in the Oneness camp I don't really know about the others. His songs were definitely Oneness in nature.
Bump.
Some interesting notes for TJJJ and Sam on Canadian Pentecostal History
crakjak
02-03-2009, 05:32 PM
I think Matt hit it right. I think McAllister thought the correct baptism was to be done in Jesus Name but did not think baptizing in the Trinity would cause someone to be lost. And I don't remember reading anything that said he taught the Oneness? He was PCI minded and NOT a strong PCI mindset at that. But I think the 3 I named all went back into the Trinity movement. And Matt made another vaild point the brethren were threw out of the AG and did not want to leave. Most had recieved the HG among each other and were comrades the AG threw them out by penning a creed.
Isn't this what men always do? Forget trusting God, just throw 'em out, 1916, 1977,1992,2007? Same ole thing sounds like.
...
I recently read in Fudge's that even Andrew Urshan at first said he was not w/ those in the New Issue camp ... then of course retracted his statement. I will try to find exact quote ... It might even have been a footnote in CWTC.
....
It's footnote 107 on page 61
pelathais
02-03-2009, 06:28 PM
It's footnote 107 on page 61
Dude, you are good! They must call you "Butter" because you're on a roll!
commonsense
02-03-2009, 07:53 PM
My dearest BOOM,
Surely these questions are rhetorical.
Question #1 - Would you go and worship and fellowship with folks you do not believe to be saved??
All of us, con and lib should be sitting and worshipping in church w/ unsaved people ... or the church isn't doing it's job ... it's preaching to the choir.
It is God who does the saving ... so the second part of the question is somewhat suspect ... however I fellowship w/ those who believe in One God ... believe Jesus is the Son of God and have placed their faith in Jesus Christ and obey his commandments.
1 John 3 helps know if we and others belong to the truth.
19This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence 20whenever our hearts condemn us. For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.
21Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22and receive from him anything we ask, because we obey his commands and do what pleases him. 23And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24Those who obey his commands live in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.
Question # 2 - Would you sit under the ministry of a preacher you do not believe is saved, and does not lead his hearers to salvation?
Whether the minister is a Ultracon or a Flaming Liberal ... If he is living in sin ... usurping God's authority and not preaching a bible-based salvational doctrine I'd find another place to congregate.
Can I fellowship w/ misguided PAJCers?
... sure. I love them and pray for their illumination.
Now back to the heart of the issue ... my questions to Matt were pertaining to whether or not he is true to his heritage.
I say this because as a person raised in the Oneness Apostolic movement I know the emphasis put on the idea of Heritage ... it is a value of the culture. It is harped on from pulpits ... the theme of conferences ... and is a centerpoint of a lot of the literature I've read since my childhood.
History is presented as to scaffold this value of Heritage and used to validate the existence and truths held by many. I remember A Mangun stepping before those at BOTT 2007 ... making his famous/infamous remarks in support of television advertising ... and as part of his presentation he sought to use photos of his dad ... and persuaded the crowd that he was still TRUE TO HIS HERITAGE.
The heritage badge is especially proudly worn by the Ultracon zealots who use snippets of skewed history to validate their heritage and make themselves victims of the schism of the early Pentecostal movement called the "New Issue". Oneness Apostolic compromisers and charismatics are belittled as not being true or embarrassed of their heritage.
What is bothersome and disingenous is that those who glorify and reify their heritage ... play the victim and state they have ALL TRUTH ....fail to realize that in their zeal to revise history books AND present the truth... they are the one's not true to the heritage ... history truly reveals.
The truth is ... that the early Oneness pioneer GIANTS like Haywood, Urshan, Goss, Clyde Haney ... and most others never considered Trinitarians as lost ... fellowshipped with them regularly ... preached in their events and had them preach in their own.
This is in sharp contrast several generations later ... of a radicalized element within our Oneness ranks that through propaganda and lack of scholarship have whitewashed our history and true heritage while disfellowshipping even their own without abandon.
Is truth limited to repeating the mantra of Acts 2:38 ... presenting soteriological and Christological views? Are we not to be truthful in all things?
Those who drumbeat heritage are nominally Apostolics ...
Somehow, I missed this thread last year. Good information Dan.
I agree with the rewriting of history. My parents have both gone on to glory, but they lived the Apostolic message once it was shown them. Dad in 1929 in MN; mom in 1934 in WI. So they had both served God many years before the infamous merger in 1945.
Therefore when I was born a few yrs later, they were strong in the faith.
Many of the things I hear today were never taught at our house. It was a total One God, baptism in Jesus name, baptism of the HG belief. No wavering, no exceptions.
But at the same time we were not given the everyone else is doomed teaching. My dad was totally against the AOG and the trinity. My mother had a Catholic background and so we were given an anti catholic bias...
It's a bit odd, but while I knew we had the TRUTH, we were not taught that the rest went straight to Hell, do not pass go.
We were permitted to attend the neighborhood VBS every summer and could visit other churches with girlfriends. My parents were secure in their beliefs and did not forbid us from fellowshipping others.
The us 4 and no more mentality did not exist!
Aquila
02-03-2009, 09:19 PM
I don't know if this will be related to the subject or not. But after reading this thread I had to just mention some of my thoughts.
Some see Oneness Pentecostalism as though it is an entirely different religion than Trinitarianism. I don't. I believe that the church was dead in religion and tradition (including the trinity doctrine) and God sent a Holy Ghost revival to his church. As the Holy Ghost began to be poured out on many Trinitarians, the Spirit led those who were sensitive into all truth and there was a revival of the Oneness truth. Holy Ghost filled brethren, some still holding to tradition (the Trinity) and others embracing Oneness maintained fellowship until things got political. For the traditionalists to maintain control there was a sweeping move to relegate Oneness brethren to being in doctrinal error. This caused deep division within the body and so those who had embraced the Oneness truth were disfellowshipped. Being believers without a home small groups began associating with each other to insure some measure of ministerial oversight and provide credentials. From here any number of the alphabet soup organizations were born. Today the largest and most successful organization of Oneness Pentecostals is the United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI). While most Apostolics see Oneness believers as an entirely separate religion from Trinitarian Christianity, I see us as the REVIVAL many of the Reformers could only dream of and many old time Trinitarians longingly prayed for.
Instead of praying for God to send US a revival so that we might reach the world... I believe we need to wake up and realize that we ARE the revival that God has sent to reach the world.
I don't see the Trinity as another God, I see it as a flawed tradition whereby men attempted to define the God we worship.
Hoovie
02-03-2009, 09:48 PM
Somehow, I missed this thread last year. Good information Dan.
I agree with the rewriting of history. My parents have both gone on to glory, but they lived the Apostolic message once it was shown them. Dad in 1929 in MN; mom in 1934 in WI. So they had both served God many years before the infamous merger in 1945.
Therefore when I was born a few yrs later, they were strong in the faith.
Many of the things I hear today were never taught at our house. It was a total One God, baptism in Jesus name, baptism of the HG belief. No wavering, no exceptions.
But at the same time we were not given the everyone else is doomed teaching. My dad was totally against the AOG and the trinity. My mother had a Catholic background and so we were given an anti catholic bias...
It's a bit odd, but while I knew we had the TRUTH, we were not taught that the rest went straight to Hell, do not pass go.
We were permitted to attend the neighborhood VBS every summer and could visit other churches with girlfriends. My parents were secure in their beliefs and did not forbid us from fellowshipping others.
The us 4 and no more mentality did not exist!
Common, I can say this is how we (our family) are today in practice.
Hoovie
02-03-2009, 09:50 PM
I don't know if this will be related to the subject or not. But after reading this thread I had to just mention some of my thoughts.
Some see Oneness Pentecostalism as though it is an entirely different religion than Trinitarianism. I don't. I believe that the church was dead in religion and tradition (including the trinity doctrine) and God sent a Holy Ghost revival to his church. As the Holy Ghost began to be poured out on many Trinitarians, the Spirit led those who were sensitive into all truth and there was a revival of the Oneness truth. Holy Ghost filled brethren, some still holding to tradition (the Trinity) and others embracing Oneness maintained fellowship until things got political. For the traditionalists to maintain control there was a sweeping move to relegate Oneness brethren to being in doctrinal error. This caused deep division within the body and so those who had embraced the Oneness truth were disfellowshipped. Being believers without a home small groups began associating with each other to insure some measure of ministerial oversight and provide credentials. From here any number of the alphabet soup organizations were born. Today the largest and most successful organization of Oneness Pentecostals is the United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI). While most Apostolics see Oneness believers as an entirely separate religion from Trinitarian Christianity, I see us as the REVIVAL many of the Reformers could only dream of and many old time Trinitarians longingly prayed for.
Instead of praying for God to send US a revival so that we might reach the world... I believe we need to wake up and realize that we ARE the revival that God has sent to reach the world.
I don't see the Trinity as another God, I see it as a flawed tradition whereby men attempted to define the God we worship.
Good post.
...
I don't see the Trinity as another God, I see it as a flawed tradition whereby men attempted to define the God we worship.
In my opinion the various shades of teachings we call "Jesus Only" or "Oneness" or "the Mighty God in Christ" and the various shades of teachings called "Trinity" are all faulty, frail, limited, and very human attempts to define, comprehend, and explain an infinite God.
There is no single Oneness teaching and no single Trinity teaching. That's pretty obvious from the discussions on this board. I've read some of the stuff here and leave with my head spinning. Surely God doesn't expect us to be able to pronounce and understand all those terms and to follow all those convoluted arguments and explanations.
In my opinion, if we believe:
1. "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"
and
2. This one God came to us in the person of His Son and lives in us as the Holy Spirit
then we are OK whether we call ourselves Trinity or Oneness
Is this trinity or oneness?
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.