John 3: The Difference between PCI and PAJC on New Birth

[SDG]

In a previous post, a poster has claimed that at the time of the merger both the PCI and PAJC had similar views on the New Birth ...and that many have strayed from this commonly held belief.

I know the vary views on Acts 2:38 have been discussed ad nauseum ... but clearly there seems to be a distinction between how both view the meaning of being born again as taught by Jesus in John 3.

Here are some questions I have:

1. What is your interpretation of John 3?
2. What does being born again really mean?
3. What was the New Birth view of early PCIers and PAJCers?
4. How did early Oneness pioneers interpret John 3 pre the merger?
5. When Jesus speaks of the Kingdom of God ... is he speaking of the present, future, both? Must a distinction be made between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven?
6. If we interpret it differently are we part of the same Apostolic movement?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

In a previous post, a poster has claimed that at the time of the merger both the PCI and PAJC had similar views on the New Birth ...and that many have strayed from this commonly held belief.

I know the vary views on Acts 2:38 have been discussed ad nauseum ... but clearly there seems to be a distinction between how both view the meaning of being born again as taught by Jesus in John 3.

Here are some questions I have:

1. What is your interpretation of John 3?
2. What does being born again really mean?
3. What was the New Birth view of early PCIers and PAJCers?
4. How did early Oneness pioneers interpret John 3 pre the merger?
5. When Jesus speaks of the Kingdom of God ... is he speaking of the present, future, both? Must a distinction be made between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven?
6. If we interpret it differently are we part of the same Apostolic movement?

ANY TAKERS???

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

ANY TAKERS???

I'll give it a try.
This is from an email I sent out to someone several months ago. I think I have also posted it on another forum.

Born Again?
In John chapter 3 Jesus said that a person needs to be born again in order to see the Kingdom of God. He was asked how a person could be born when he was old and if it was possible for a person to enter his mother's womb and be reborn or born again. Then Jesus said that unless a person was born of water and of the Spirit he could not enter into the Kingdom of God. The term born again is also called "borned again" by some. Others refer to the experience as "regeneration" or as the "second birth" or as being "reborn," "born anew" or "born from above."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Born of water means different things to different folks.

1 Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Orthodox, some other denominations including some Oneness Pentecostals and Church of Christ folks, believe that born of water means water baptism.

2 Some teach that born of water is a reference to the Word. Scriptures used are Eph 5:26, John 15:3, 1 Peter 1:23, James 1:18, Luke 8:11. This is what I was taught when I was going to a Baptist Church. I think some Oneness Pentecostals also believe this.

3 Some teach that the water spoken of in John 3:5 is a reference to the Holy Spirit and would quote the verse as saying, "unless a person is born of water, even the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" or "unless a person is born of water which is the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

4 Some teach that the water in John 3:5 is a reference to the first birth when we commonly say that a woman's "water" breaks and that this is reiterated in verse 6. Two births are seen here. The first birth is called the birth of water and affects the flesh part of a person. The second birth is called the birth of Spirit and affects the spirit part of us. This is also taught by some Oneness Pentecostals.

Over the years I have heard all of the above taught.
I don't know how many or what percentage of UPC folks believe one of the four different teachings listed above.

I think we've covered this subject before and some condemned and/or ridiculed anything different from their personal opinion and others just agreed to disagree without being disagreeable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In John chapter 3 Jesus speaks of an experience called being born again or being born from above or regeneration. There are some differences of opinion as to how much of verses 1-21 are the words of Jesus and how much is commentary by the Apostle John. Some think verses 16-21 are commentary by John. In my Spirit Filled Life Bible they are in red so I will assume that some think they are the words of Jesus and will address them as such here.

Yes, the emphasis in John 3 is on being born again and verses 1-21 cover the subject in the discourse of Jesus.
In verse 3, Jesus said that a person must be born again to see/experience the kingdom (kingship) of God.
Verse 4 Nicodemus asks how this could be, how can someone who has already been born be born again? Can he enter his mother's womb and be born anew?
Verse 5 Jesus answers him and shows him there are two births, the first is of water and the second is of Spirit. Unless a person is born of water (first birth) and of the Spirit (second birth) he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Verse 6 Jesus reiterates, that which is born of the flesh is flesh (the first birth, the water birth is only for the flesh part of us) but the second birth is for the spirit part of us, our spirit is born anew by God's Spirit.
Verse 7, Jesus says don't be amazed that I said it takes a second birth.
Verse 8, Jesus compares the second birth, a birth of the human spirit by the Holy Spirit to the working of the wind. The wind is invisible, however you can see its affect and you can hear it as it moves through the trees. Some see this as a picture of speaking with tongues. Others don't read that much into it but just see it as seeing and hearing the wind's affect as an example of how God's Spirit can affect people and that effect can be seen in their lives and heard in the way they talk.
Verse 9 Nicodemus asks how this can be
Verse 10 Jesus reminds him that he is a teacher in Israel. He should be aware of the Scriptures speaking of a radical change by the Spirit of God. Examples of this would be Saul receiving another heart or being turned into another man when the Spirit came upon him (1 Sam. chapter 10). Another example would be the prophecy of Ezekiel about God giving people a new heart and placing His Spirit within them to cause them to walk in His ways (Ezek 36:24-28). Another example would be how the first born was rejected and the blessing went to the second born in the case of Cain and Abel, Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Manasseh and Ephraim. By the way, when Joseph brought his sons to be blessed he positioned them so that when Jacob reached out his hands, the right hand would touch Manasseh the first born and his left hand would touch Ephraim. Jacob "crossed his hands" so that his right hand was placed upon the second born and his left hand was placed upon the first born. When Joseph tried to correct this by moving Jacob's hands, Jacob let him know that he (Jacob) wanted it that way. The second birth was given superiority over the first birth by the cross (crossing of hands).
Verse 11 Jesus assured Nicodemus that He and His disciples knew what they were talking about. They had already seen people born again. It was not some future experience at some future date. It was already happening and they knew about it and had seen it.
Verse 12 Jesus reiterated that this new birth experience was already happening on the earth and He and His disciples were personally acquainted with folks who had been born again.
Verse 13 Jesus reveals that even though He is standing there with Nocodemus as the Son of man He was the One Who had come down from Heaven and was also in Heaven as the God of Heaven.
Verse 14, Jesus compares Himself to the brazen serpent of Numbers 21:4-9. There those who were dying of the serpent's bite only had to look at the brazen serpent on the pole and they received life. This was a type of Christ becoming sin for us on the cross and if we look to Him by faith we receive His life. This is a further explanation that the new birth happens by faith, just looking to Jesus by faith.
Verse 15 Jesus says that all those who believe in Him will not perish but have eternal life just like people passed from death to life by looking at the brass serpent.
Verse 16 is the famous John 3:16 Scripture that says that those who believe in Jesus will not perish eternally, but they already have eternal life.
Verse 17 Jesus says that He didn't come to condemn but to give life
Verse 18 contrasts those who are spiritually dead with those who are spiritually alive or born again. Those who believe in Jesus are alive because they have been born again. Those who do not believe in Jesus are dead because they have not been born into God's family.
Verse 19 speaks of Jesus coming to enlighten humankind.
Verses 20-21 again contrast those who practice evil and do not come to the light with those who do truth and come to the light.

Yes, John 3:1-21 talks about being born again or born anew or born from above. It could be translated any of those ways. Jesus also tells us how that new birth happens. It happens when one believes in Jesus. That's all it takes --believing in Jesus. That is also how the Apostle John describes it in 1 John 5:1 where he says that if a person believes that Jesus is the Messiah/Christ, then that person is born again and part of the family of God. Jesus repeats a couple of times that salvation/regeneration happens by faith. Jesus tells Nicodemus that they (He and His disciples) already knew and had seen some who had been born again back at that time before the crucifixion.

[SDG]

Sam any historic info on how old-time PCIers , and those pre-dating the merger viewed John 3 and the New Birth????

[SDG]

I think there is a direct correlation between (Ezekiel 36:24-28) and John 3

It reads:

For I will take you from among the nations,
gather you out of all countries
and bring you into your own Land

Then I will sprinkle clean WATER on you,
and you shall be clean;
I will cleanse you from all your filthiness
and from all your idols.

I will give you a new heart
and put a new SPIRIT within you;
I will take he heart of stone out of your flesh
and give you a heart of FLESH.

I will put My SPIRIT within you
and cause you to walk in My statutes,
and you will keep My judgements and do them.

Then you shall dwell in the Land that I gave to you fathers;
you shall be my people,
and I will be your God.

WHAT SAY YE???

[SDG]

In re-reading TF's book ... it's apparent that at least some of the old Canadian PCIers viewed that New Birth happened prior to water baptism and Holy Ghost baptism ...

Here is one quoted from CH Yadon ....

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Sam any historic info on how old-time PCIers , and those pre-dating the merger viewed John 3 and the New Birth????

No, I can't think of anything that I have available to quote from right now from old timers at the time of the merger.

A couple of "maybes."

First:
Years ago I had a copy of Bro. Samuel McClain's book titled "A Student's Handbook of Church History." I think that was the title. He taught for a while at PBI (Pentecostal Bible Institute) in Tupelo, Mississippi (a school which was reported to be of PCI leaning). I THINK I remember reading in there somewhere where he referred of one of the Reformers (Wesley or Luther maybe) as having a born again experience. I don't remember seeing that in the currently distributed copy. I may be wrong and my memory may be faulty or maybe the UPC has "sanitized" it so it now reads more like the currently accepted PC (Politically Correct) party line.

Second:
This is an account of Andrew Urshan’s conversion. I have a book titled “The Life of Andrew Bar David Urshan” which came from the Pentecostal Publishing House. Inside the cover it says that the first printing was circa 1918 and then reprinted in 1998. I also have several old magazines called “The Witness of God” which were published by Andrew Urshan. The first is dated January, 1946 and the last is dated December, 1946. The story in the magazine is pretty much the same as in the book but the date of the conversion is given as 1901 in the magazine but both 1899 and 1900 in the book. Also the location of Urmiah is spelled a couple of different ways in the book. Andrew Urshan was born in either 1884 or 1897 and died in 1967.

Below is the account from the book.

On a windy night in March, in the year 1900 in Urumia City, Persia, when sitting with about 200 lads in the American Presbyterian Mission College, singing the blessed hymn, “Oh happy day that fixed my choice,” the Spirit of God seized me with great conviction and caused me to stoop and think and to as myself the question, “Am I really happy because Jesus has washed away my sins?” I was reproved and had to confess myself a hypocrite, and that broke my heart, and I instantly broke into tears as my sins were pictured before my eyes. Then I cried unto God for forgiveness and deliverance in Jesus’ name and the Lord heard me. I put my trust in the promises, “Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved,” and “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved;” and, the Spirit witnessed to my spirit that I had been born again and had been made a new creature in Christ Jesus.

With a new and tender heart and broken spirit, and with tears of repentance and joy, I sang the rest of the hymn not a hypocrite this time, but a truly happy, blood bought, blood washed child of the King. Oh, that wonderful night! that beautiful spot! that mourning bench in that school! And oh, that sweet effect of the gracious, crucified Saviour and risen Lord! Never will it be forgotten. It is still burning now as a clear blaze of the glory of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.

from pages 31 and 32, from chapter VI titled “My Conversion”

That's about all I can think of right now.

[SDG]

Andrew Urshan, Oneness pioneer, on the New Birth:

Andrew David Urshan (1884-1967) conscientiously wrestled with the same issue. In his book Apostolic Faith Doctrine of the New Birth,[lxxiv] he included a set of questions at the end addressing the same basic issue with which Haywood wrestled.

He presents the questions and then follows them with these answers:

Q. What is the position of those who have believed in Christ but have never been immersed in Jesus name, and have not received the Holy Ghost with the sign of tongues?

A. These belong to the kingdom of heaven; these are the good seed in that kingdom; these can go on and be born of water and of the Spirit to enter the kingdom of God. Nicodemus and Cornelius once were of that type of men, also the Ephesians that Paul baptized. See Acts 19:1-16.

Q. Would these folks be lost if they had not gone on to the water and Spirit birth?

A. No, for when they continued to walk in the light they had, they consequently entered into the deeper and higher divine experiences. 1 John 1:4-7. Also John 8:31-36.[lxxv]

Q. Can one be called a child of God before he is born of the Spirit?

A. Yes, just as a baby is a child of the parents before birth when conceived, likewise those who have a real conversion or conception of the word in their life. Of these it is said, ‘Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His son into your heart, crying, Abba Father.’ This is the Holy Ghost language. See Gal. 4:6,7.[lxxvii]

Urshan appears to be making an attempt to explain his position by saying the levels of salvation are like the physical birth process. That is, one who has not followed Acts 2:38 but has had “a real conversion” is saved just as a child, conceived in the mother’s womb, is still a child. But, the child still needs to be born. Those who are saved by faith prior to the “revelation” of the Acts 2:38 message are children of God only if they go on to accept the Oneness Acts 2:38 message. If the childbirth analogy holds true, those who do not go on to follow the Acts 2:38 steps will be still-born. But, are they the true “Spirit born” children at all?

Q. The folks that believe on Christ’s name and repent but are not baptized by water and the Spirit, where do they stand?

A. They stand on the same ground that the saints of the Old Testament stood; they were saved by faith not receiving the promise of the Spirit. They are not the real Spirit born children of God and adopted children. See Heb. 11:30, and 1 Sam. 12:20-22, etc.[lxxviii]

This answer by Urshan confounds his answer given to the previous question above. Here he states that those in the Church Age who have not followed the Oneness interpretation of Acts 2:38 are saved like the Old Testament believers. But, then he states they are not, “real Spirit born children.” This view has people being saved without being the “real Spirit born children of God.” This is because he cannot harmonize his understanding of Acts 2:38 with the concept of salvation in the Old Testament. The Bible indicates that the Old Testament believers are saved by faith in the promise of the Savior to come (Gen. 15:6; Rom. 4:18-25). Those who believe after Christ’s coming are saved by faith that looks back to the work of Christ.

The thing that complicates this issue is that those who believe after Christ’s incarnation are baptized with the Spirit after his Ascension. This is a problematic reality for many Bible readers. They don’t see the Book of Acts as a transitional record - reporting how the Old Testament believers were incorporated into the New Testament Church. They interpret certain occurrences in Acts as universal obligations or privileges for all future Christians. The problem is cleared up when it is explained that those on the Day of Pentecost, in the upper room, were Old Testament believers. They needed to be baptized with the Spirit after believing, because they could not be so baptized with the Spirit until after Christ’s Ascension.

What is remarkable about Urshan’s statements is that he claims that those NOT born of the Spirit could still, 1) have a “real conversion”; 2) be a real “conception of the word”; 3) be a “child of God”; 4) belong to the “kingdom of heaven”; and 5) be “saved through faith.” Yet, those not born of the Spirit are like Old Testament saint. They are “saved by faith not receiving the promise of the Spirit.” Because of this, they are not “real Spirit born children of God and adopted children.” The contradictory statements in these few quotes illustrates the conflicted nature of the UPCI interpretation of Acts 2:38 with orthodox Christian teaching.

Urshan further remarks:

Q. Can one be saved and not be born again?

A. The word “saved” conveys a greater meaning than generally known. It implies deliverance from sin and also God Himself coming into our life. See Isa. 12:1. Yes, some can be delivered from hell though not being born of God, just like the Old Testament saints were saved through faith though not being born again. The thief on the cross may represent this class of saved ones who had not knowledge of the doctrine of the full salvation neither had a chance to perform it, his recognition of Christ and faith in Him saved him.[lxxx]
__________________

[Steve Epley]

Bishop Haywood died in 29 and he taught the new birth of water and spirit.
Thus it was a settled doctrine in the PAW the oldest Oneness organization.
Bishop R. C. Lawson taught the new birth of water and spirit he started his group in the 20's.
Bishop S. C. Johnson taught the new birth of water & spirit he started in the early 30's.
Mark Lawson founder of The Church of Jesus Christ taught the new birth of water and spirit they started in the early 20's.
Bishop Hancock founded the Pentecostal Churches of the Apostolic Faith in the 30's he taught water & spirit.
The Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ taught water & spirit was the new birth. Witherspoon first included this in the fundamental doctrine at the merger which was rejected.
Many of the PCI brethren taught the new birth of water & spirit such as David Gray, A. T. Morgan and others.

[SDG]

The central figure in Oneness theology was G. T. Haywood. He wrestled with the state of those who did not follow the New Birth doctrine held by many Oneness Pentecostals. He resolved the conflict in his mind by utilizing the "walking in all the light" model:

"The one question that is so often asked is, ‘are all those people who thought they were born of the Spirit, and were not, lost?' No, not by any means. They shall be given eternal life in the resurrection if they walked in all the light that was given them while they lived. God is a just Judge, and there is not unrighteousness in Him. But those who refuse to walk in the light shall be overtaken with darkness. (John 13:35, 36; see also John 15:22-24)." [G. T. Haywood, The Birth of the Spirit in the Days of the Apostles, (Indianapolis, IN: Christ Temple Book Store, n. d.), p. 12.]

The second figure in the development of Oneness teaching was A. D. Urshan. He used the same logic as Haywood to resolve the same issue:

Q. Would these folks be lost if they had not gone on to the water and Spirit birth?
A. No, for when they continued to walk in the light they had, they consequently entered into the deeper and higher divine experiences. 1 John 1:4-7. Also John 8:31-36. [Evangelist Andrew D. Urshan, Apostolic Faith Doctrine of the New Birth, (Cochrane, WI, self-published, 1941), p. 13.]