Good heavens! Even the present GS doesn't believe that every person not baptized in Jesus name or speaks in tongues will be lost eternally so to think that there aren't still a great many men who believe similarly would be missing the mark I think.

I know that there are so many who say A, B, C, and D are necessary to be saved but then when you got down to brass tacks they won't say that everyone who doesn't do ABC and D will be eternally lost so to think that there aren't still a great many men who believe similarly in the UPC would be missing the mark.

I don't think that many are even aware of this contradiction, and I also think that many of the "younger" men as they study Scripture and mature and start to think for themselves will come up with a doctrinal view not unlike the one we hold. My personal opinion.

But in the meantime everyone says they believe ABC and D. :)

I find this extremely hard to believe. If this were the case, the entire basis of our (UPC) fellowship would be a sham. You and Daniel can proclaim Apostolic heritage all you want, but the truth is your doctrine is a watered down - little bit-better-that-Baptist-view.

It's ridiculous to assert that a large percentage of UPC churches and ministers believe this junk. It's simply untrue.

That is a very bold assertion. Do you have something in writing from Bishop Haney that supports your claim that he does not believe what our AOF proclaims?

PeePee,

I don't agree with everything Felicity says on this subject but it is a documented fact that the first UPC GS, Goss, beleived that his AOG and other "brothers and sisters" were going to be in heaven.

Others have posted quotes of his from books or sermons. I don't have them at hand but if any of those folks are reading this please post them again.

I agree with you Cee Cee, but that is not what is being stated here. What is being stated is that there are currently a large percentage of UPC ministers/churches with that view. The implied notion is that we are 50/50 on this stuff. I categorically reject that bunk.

I think it is dangerous to imply that Kenneth Haney holds a PCI view. Is there documentation to prove that assertion? If not, it should be retracted. That could really damage him.

How is my doctrine different than yours? Please explain.

Very simple. I believe the word states that salvation is brought only through repentance, baptism in the Name of Jesus, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost.

You believe one is saved at repentance. Everything else is added unnecessary extra blessings.

Pastor P......

I know of what I speak. I'm not a novice. I was born into this when you were still only a thought in the mind of God. I've traveled east to west, north to south and have talked to hundreds of men and women - pastors, missionaries, evangelists, and WEC officials and leaders and shakers in the movement. Things are shared when the guard is down and people are fellowshipping around a table that aren't when public position must be taken (and they must, I understand that).

Whether you agree with me is immaterial really although I appreciate your perspective and chiming in here. I don't think putdowns are necessary though.

Wrong - partly at least. I believe that a person is regenerated at the point of believing and repentance. Baptism is not an option.

The Holy Ghost is promised to those who repent and are baptized.

Speaking of which..... There is no doubt this has long been an area needing clarification. How many do you think would sign on for a resolution that "clarfies" the AOF position??

"Whereas there have been questions as to what constitutes "Full Salvation" and whereas there have been questions as to when and where justification occurrs in the new believer, be it resolved that the membership of this organization wholeheartedly believes eternal damnation is the future of all "christians" not experiencing the New Birth as we have defined and interpreted Acts 2:38 in it's entirety."