Greetings!
hmmm ... I just read through this thread from a decade back, and I was surprised that I have never posted directly, although Homestead Heritage occasionally came up in some auxiliary threads on other topics, like the Jehovah and yahweh discussions. Back in those years a decade back I was rather quiet because of ongoing communication with Homestead Heritage, including doctrinal back and forth with elders amidst some visiting fellowship times. And by 2009 I had recently defended them in what can be called the
Factnet wars. And there was an intense visit at the Fair over Thanksgiving in 2009.
And maybe later I will discuss the early years, and the vision and direction, much of which bore fruit over the years in terms of community and crafts, with the hope of being the Christian city on the hill.
The 70s were truly amazing, and that led into Colorado and the early 80s, where the doctrines were essentially sound. For now, let me add a few thoughts that I hope will be especially appropriate in this forum. The first post I really noted was about water baptism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeekingOne
You can't get baptized in Homestead Heritage unless you also pledge that you will never leave the church.
|
This baptism doctrine, making the water baptism closely connected to submission to the ministry, developed around 1990, and had its own quirks in development. Since I was fully involved with
the fellership from late 76 (New Jersey) to 85 (Colorado, and some had moved to Texas) I learned about these baptism change from friends who left at various times. Ironically, even though I visited them a few times in the 1990s, these types of changes were hush-hush, so I learned them through the grapevine.
As an aside, my first contacts were around 74, maybe 75, when they were down in NYC on 14th Street.
Interestingly, in the early 1980s in Colorado they had added an
Acts 8:37:
Acts 8:37 (AV)
And Philip said,
If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.
And he answered and said,
I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
type of public confession of faith at the time of water baptism, that should be a sincere and clear and solid public testimony, not just some repetition of words.
1Timothy 6:12 (AV)
Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life,
whereunto thou art also called,
and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.
This has always seemed scripturally spot-on. I even remember one water baptism being dismissed, as the gentleman simply could not come forth speaking a profession of faith, even with an encouraging sense from the brothers and sisters. While there was a heaviness, it definitely had a sense of being in the proper patterns of God.
=======================
Certain elements changed later.
And, despite their general secrecy, you can also find one very questionable part (and this is putting it nicely, other words come to mind) of their baptism doctrine today online. Go to the url for the full public SOF.
Quote:
Homestead Heritage - What we Believe (emphasis added)
https://www.homesteadheritage.com/beliefs/
—We believe in believer’s baptism (immersion) as a pledge of the old nature into the sacrificial death of Jesus as well as into the lordship of Jesus and that therefore takes place in the name of Jesus.11
11 1 Pet. 3:21; Rom. 6:3-5; Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:46-48; 19:1-5.
|
In law, a pledge, dear friends, is something of value, (think earnest money and down payment) and for the Christian believer the old nature has no value at all. The sin nature cannot be a pledge for anything, nor can it make a pledge. (Two definitions of the word, although the sense is worded like the first, the legal idea of putting aside something of value.)
They do a bit of what I call
version smorgasbording, trying to find a version that fits their
doctrines du jour, so instead of the true pure Bible verse:
1 Peter 3:21 (AV)
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us
(not the putting away of the filth of the flesh,
but the answer of a good conscience toward God,)
by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Where the answer of a good conscience is our repentance and faith response to God's calling (
Hebrews 6:1-2), which had been a part of the foundational teaching in the 1970s, at times using material like the Apostles's Doctrine material of S. R. Hanby.
Hebrews 6:1-2 (AV)
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ,
let us go on unto perfection;
not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works,
and of faith toward God,
Of the doctrine of baptisms,
and of laying on of hands,
and of resurrection of the dead,
and of eternal judgment.
allowing that the answer may imply, in the full New Testament teaching, profession of faith and entrance into covenant.
Homestead Heritage would prefer to rummage through corruption versions and come up with the word
pledge from a weaker text. So here they might go to the NIV. (Notice the paucity of information, simply putting in a verse number.) Yet, even with that error, there is no way to make that into "a pledge of the old nature".
And this could not have been an oversight on their part. For one, they go over such public writing time and time and time again internally (often their writing feels like circles within circles). And this strange fire doctrinal element was pointed out publicly about three years back.
(Note, btw, that they do not even hint at remission of sins in this public statement, although they do include the main Acts verses that are historically connected with the apostolic water baptism doctrines of the name of Jesus and remission of sins.)
My understanding and experiences is that Homestead Heritage does do watch internet discussions closely, although only with carefully vetted individuals doing the watching. Most of the members (we did not have membership in my years, now they have various levels of membership and lots of paperwork) do not have internet access. This is simply an observation, not a criticism, but one effect is to shield them from doctrinal discussions that might be embarrassing, like this pledge or the yahweh and yahshua intrusions, or their shifting sand Bible version positions.
There is more to say about their water baptism, and other posts, and other doctrinal changes, however, I believe this doozy of "a pledge of the old nature" needs careful note. And this forum should be especially qualified to give solid feedback.
There is an even greater concern about their water baptism doctrinal changes.
Steven