I don't believe it's gone.

No ... elder this has nothing to do with my view or interpretation.

The way that the Fundamental Doctrine article is written in the AOF is poorly written and does not reflect the views of most ... if not all the fellowhip. Yet, ministers affirm to it when signing the AS.

Dan Seagraves has pointed out this misconstruction found in it:

The Fundamental Doctrine reads, "The basic and fundamental doctrine of this organization shall be the Bible standard of full salvation, which is repentance, baptism in water by immersion in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. ..:'4

The grammatical construction of the Fundamental Doctrine would indicate that the remission of sins is effected by the water baptism alone, rather than by repentance and water baptism coupled together, since repentance and water baptism are not joined by the conjunction "and" but. are instead separated by a comma.

This alone, I believe puts the entire fellowship in contradiction w/ the AS...perhaps invalidating it .... and this would probably hold true in a legal proceeding.

Not to disparage Elder Becton but the church he pastored was a PCI church and believed like Gurley & Greer & Benson. I do not know if he ever changed them?? They were not changed when I left Tn. about 13 years ago? CC1 speak up.

Nor do I .... I have reason to believe that there are a handful of UC's with PCI doctrine on this forum and/or holders of light doctrine.

Excuse me?????????????? Me thinks you know you are caught by the seat of the britches. IF you acknowledge that 'for the remmission' of sins means UNTO in the fundamental doctrine then by that same conclusion it was mean the same in Acts 3:38. There is NOT ONE Pentecostal preacher that believes sins are remitted for anyone who has NOT repented and YOU know that. This is pure foolishness. That is why Bro. Greer signed it changed nothing for him he like you believed like the Baptist so it changed nothing. BECAUSE the wording is the same. But YOU see the dilema YOU are in. And so does everyone else. God bless your little pea picking heart.:heeheehee

Well look even at the leadership of this board. You have a mix represented and they're even working together (for the most part). Amazing eh? And UCs and liberals are fellowshipping together here under leadership that represents a variety of doctrinal persuasions.


Seriously though, it's kind of a microcosm of the UPC as I knew it. :)

I didn't say it was gone. I said "with very few exceptions". Canada may still have some UPC folks of that persuasion in some numbers but as far as Mississippi and Tennessee go the PAJC view folks dominate here. There may be one or two of the PCI view but not many. The ones that were here are either dead or like my pastor no longer UPC. I think the same holds true for the Northwest where the Yadon's were once a force in the UPC and held the PCI view.

If it is / was of the PCI view it is closely held and the emphasis on water & spirit baptism is so strong it would be indistinguishable from a PAJC one in a practical sense. Much like a church pastored by someone who believes in the progressive light doctrine. Their preaching would still be strong Acts2:38.

I have to take the Elder Becton at his word if he says he does not hold that view. I also would think his son Ron would not since he is a product after the merger of mainstream UPC and probably reflects the mainstream view.

And that's what I've been screaming all along...the UPCI was merged under the understanding that there were differences that could be built on...and it worked!!

Speaking to some of my young preacher friends they believe that there are quite a few young preachers that hold the PCI position , hold a light doctrine view, or the hybrid Seagravian view that justification happens at repentance ... while remission happens at baptism ...