Encouraged

[Hoovie]

Recently I had a discussion with a friend and Spiritual mentor. He is a leader and and UPCI ordained minister. For what it's worth, I would consider him a three stepper and a moderate.

In the conversation he had mentioned he was glad other (non UPC) OPs had been invited and some came to GC.

I responded that I too liked that and had witnessed something similar at a UGST symposium a few years ago. The ministers had met for a scheduled hour prior to greeting the larger group. They started praying together which led to footwashing and ended up going waaay over the schedule.

I told my friend I loved that but the efforts at reconciliation haven't went far enough. When he questioned, I replied, "I am not content to keep these unity efforts among OPs. We should have similar efforts to
understand AOG and Baptists and the greater Evangelical movement. I feel the UPC has tightened it's official stance, and few will say things like Goss who viewed many non-OPs as brethren.

My friend responded, "I don't know that has really changed, while I stand firm on Acts 2:38, I consider the fellow ministers in our community my brothers and call them that as well. Furthermore, I have said many of us will be surprised at who all will be in heaven!"

So, this is very encouraging to me!

[Hoovie]

I should add that I have had many similar conversations with other licensed ministers. However, it was especially comforting to hear that this minister, who serves in official capacity, was in favor of dialog and discussion with Non-OPs, and admitted that at least a fair portion of our differences are semantics. The minister I make reference to would NOT be known for being "soft on the doctrine" at all.

It's interesting and encouraging to me. Praise God!

[Cindy]

Amen.

[CC1]

Recently I had a discussion with a friend and Spiritual mentor. He is a leader and and UPCI ordained minister. For what it's worth, I would consider him a three stepper and a moderate.

In the conversation he had mentioned he was glad other (non UPC) OPs had been invited and some came to GC.

I responded that I too liked that and had witnessed something similar at a UGST symposium a few years ago. The ministers had met for a scheduled hour prior to greeting the larger group. They started praying together which led to footwashing and ended up going waaay over the schedule.

I told my friend I loved that but the efforts at reconciliation haven't went far enough. When he questioned, I replied, "I am not content to keep these unity efforts among OPs. We should have similar efforts to
understand AOG and Baptists and the greater Evangelical movement. I feel the UPC has tightened it's official stance, and few will say things like Goss who viewed many non-OPs as brethren.

My friend responded, "I don't know that has really changed, while I stand firm on Acts 2:38, I consider the fellow ministers as brothers and call them that as well. I have said many of us will be surprised at who all will be in heaven!"

So, this is very encouraging to me!

I would be curious to know exactly what he meant by the statement I bolded.
I think 3 steppers, by the very nature of their doctrine, don't see those with a different doctrine as "brothers". They really can't.

So I am curious as to what he means by; 1. "....while I stand firm on Acts 2:38" and 2. "I consider these fellow ministers as brothers".

Hoovie, I think you continue to delude yourself that the UPC has a broader view of christendom than they really do.

[Hoovie]

I would be curious to know exactly what he meant by the statement I bolded.
I think 3 steppers, by the very nature of their doctrine, don't see those with a different doctrine as "brothers". They really can't.

So I am curious as to what he means by; 1. "....while I stand firm on Acts 2:38" and 2. "I consider these fellow ministers as brohers".

Hoovie, I think you continue to delude yourself that the UPC has a broader view of christendom than they really do.

Well sure it would be interesting to know how it might be defended theologically. I would argue that view would lead to more of a "One Step" PCI mindset which would be a good thing. For that matter, it would also be interesting to know how former GS Goss would defend it in detail. What is clear though, is both Goss and my friend expect to likely see non OPs in heaven. I concur and am content to let the theological debate of when precisely Justification occurs take place another time.

Deluded? I just gave you one of many examples. I have many examples like the one I gave.

In spite of what is often herelded from pulpits, there are many one steppers and three steppers in the UPC that believe the body of Christ is composed of more than Oneness Pentecostals.

[Dedicated Mind]

if non ops are saved, should we evangelize them?

[Hoovie]

BTW interestingly enough, some embrace a "three step" initiation process and yet point to the initial faith for justification.

[Hoovie]

if non ops are saved, should we evangelize them?

Pretty much all churches seek to win others to their view on scripture. Whether or not evangelism is the correct term, I am sure OPs are no different in that regard.

[ILG]

Recently I had a discussion with a friend and Spiritual mentor. He is a leader and and UPCI ordained minister. For what it's worth, I would consider him a three stepper and a moderate.

In the conversation he had mentioned he was glad other (non UPC) OPs had been invited and some came to GC.

I responded that I too liked that and had witnessed something similar at a UGST symposium a few years ago. The ministers had met for a scheduled hour prior to greeting the larger group. They started praying together which led to footwashing and ended up going waaay over the schedule.

I told my friend I loved that but the efforts at reconciliation haven't went far enough. When he questioned, I replied, "I am not content to keep these unity efforts among OPs. We should have similar efforts to
understand AOG and Baptists and the greater Evangelical movement. I feel the UPC has tightened it's official stance, and few will say things like Goss who viewed many non-OPs as brethren.

My friend responded, "I don't know that has really changed, while I stand firm on Acts 2:38, I consider the fellow ministers in our community my brothers and call them that as well. Furthermore, I have said many of us will be surprised at who all will be in heaven!"

So, this is very encouraging to me!

I wish my original pastor had had thoughts like these. Everybody was lost, including the liberal UPC pastors that didn't uphold the standards.....meaning ONLY three steppers who were conservative were saved......and you know that scripture about the righteous SCARCELY being saved.....???

[Theophil]

Pretty much all churches seek to win others to their view on scripture. Whether or not evangelism is the correct term, I am sure OPs are no different in that regard.

That's the truth. BTW, I wonder what percentage of AoG, Baptists, etc., think OPs are lost because we don't believe in the trinity.

[Austin]

If you want to know how the Baptist Churches feel about pentecostals:? Ask me I've been through that fire..

But Hoovie! you are on the right track concerning the truth and understanding of our Lord Jesus. He said let your light shine. You know sometimes what we have when others see it they want it too. And you will be surprised how many people that are starving in main stream christianity for more than what they have.Also, there are also those who have not received a good understanding of the Bible. And I know that sounds strange but it is very true.
A person who I know that is a Lutheran and has been one for fifty years. Told me that his pastor told them that they did not have the right to baptise anyone. That he only had that right.
After I took about fifteen minutes at coffee with this guy and showed him the scriptures, he was astonished at what he read. He then went back to the Lutheran Church and told the elders and deacons and showed them where the scriptures supported baptism. and yes, I did show in Jesus name..
So you know a lot of people are where they are because someone has convinced them in what they believe. You will be atonished when on a one to one contact what people do actually believe verses how they present it.

[Charnock]

So, Hoovie is encouraged because what he believes doesn't really matter? Why be OP if you don't think the doctrine is important?

[ILG]

So, Hoovie is encouraged because what he believes doesn't really matter? Why be OP if you don't think the doctrine is important?

Because you're married into it???

I'm serious. That's no joking matter.

[Hoovie]

So, Hoovie is encouraged because what he believes doesn't really matter? Why be OP if you don't think the doctrine is important?

I am on a short break and posting from the phone...

Never did I imply what I believe doesn't matter. Quite the opposite actually. I am sorry if you feel all OPs should be elitist and sectarian. Personally I am sorry that any are.

Please, help me understand your perspective better. Do you feel all non OPs are lost?

[onefaith2]

What helped me see something of a chance is not secluding our doctrine to OP churches. According to Acts 22:16 it is possible for the person being baptized to call on the name of the Lord. Even if the preacher is saying F, S, and HG or f, S, HG, and Jesus like so many are doing now, the name of Jesus is being called upon! Secondly the HG is filling baptists, methodists, COG, AOG, and Op's not to mention charismatic Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc.

That does not mean we aren't preaching the salvation plan Jesus intended us to preach! That just means Jesus is moving in other churches, despite doctrinal differences, because he moves on faith, and the HG will lead all of us into more truth!

And the fact that righteousness is given to us by faith, that righteousness of repentance has always been recognized at least to a certain point, whether publicly or silently.

If we follow Acts 19, the acts 2:38 message is meant to build up, not tear down. Paul was interested if they had received the HG since they believed. He didn't know they weren't believers in Jesus. Most denominal people can fit into Acts 19, minus the part about not believing on Christ yet.

[Pressing-On]

I am on a short break and posting from the phone...

Never did I imply what I believe doesn't matter. Quite the opposite actually. I am sorry if you feel all OPs should be elitist and sectarian. Personally I am sorry that any are.

Please, help me understand your perspective better. Do you feel all non OPs are lost?

I think that many of us, especially those not raised OP, see that God is involved in lives all around us and all are on a journey, because we have been and are still on a journey with God.

I am reminded of how Jesus instructed the disciples regarding those that refused to follow with them:

"And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. (50) And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us." )Luke 9:49-50)

And how His disciples handled those that didn't quite have full understanding:

"And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly." (Acts 18:26)

"He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." (Acts 19:2)

While standing on what we believe is truth, we should never disparage another person's relationship on the journey. That would be like saying God is not involved in an individual's life, at any stage, and that is just not true.

[onefaith2]

I think that many of us, especially those not raised OP, see that God is involved in lives all around us and all are on a journey, because we have been and are still on a journey with God.

I am reminded of how Jesus instructed the disciples regarding those that refused to follow with them:

"And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. (50) And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us." )Luke 9:49-50)

And how His disciples handled those that didn't quite have full understanding:

"And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly." (Acts 18:26)

"He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." (Acts 19:2)

While standing on what we believe is truth, we should never disparage another person's relationship on the journey. That would be like saying God is not involved in an individual's life, at any stage, and that is just not true.

Another wisdom filled post!

[Austin]

I think that many of us, especially those not raised OP, see that God is involved in lives all around us and all are on a journey, because we have been and are still on a journey with God.

I am reminded of how Jesus instructed the disciples regarding those that refused to follow with them:

"And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. (50) And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us." )Luke 9:49-50)

And how His disciples handled those that didn't quite have full understanding:

"And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly." (Acts 18:26)

"He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." (Acts 19:2)

While standing on what we believe is truth, we should never disparage another person's relationship on the journey. That would be like saying God is not involved in an individual's life, at any stage, and that is just not true.

That hit the nail right on the head// Excellent reply and full of real truth.

[Charnock]

I am on a short break and posting from the phone...

Never did I imply what I believe doesn't matter. Quite the opposite actually. I am sorry if you feel all OPs should be elitist and sectarian. Personally I am sorry that any are.

Please, help me understand your perspective better. Do you feel all non OPs are lost?

If you believe people are saved without obeying Acts 2:38 then you are, in effect, admitting that classic Oneness Water/Spirit doctrine is not important.

I do not feel OP's are sectarian and elitists. They simply believe what they believe.

You, on the other hand, seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.

[Charnock]

Posted by Hoovie:

My friend responded, "I don't know that has really changed, while I stand firm on Acts 2:38, I consider the fellow ministers in our community my brothers and call them that as well. Furthermore, I have said many of us will be surprised at who all will be in heaven!"

How can you stand firm on Acts 2:38, yet believe that people who refuse to submit to baptism in the name of Jesus are okay, saved etc.?

Your position is very duplicitous. You either believe the doctrine, or you don't.

It sounds like you don't.

[onefaith2]

How can you stand firm on Acts 2:38, yet believe that people who refuse to submit to baptism in the name of Jesus are okay, saved etc.?

Your position is very duplicitous. You either believe the doctrine, or you don't.

It sounds like you don't.

Who has refused? Without being taught what being baptized in Jesus name is (preacher must pronounce the words over you) how is anyone guilty of refusing anything?

In their mind and faith they were baptized in Jesus name because they were baptized Christians. Its up to us to teach them how the original church baptized, not do God's job by condemning those which know not the apostolic truth.


Paul's treatment of believers in Acts 19 of whom he thought they were Christians should be the case for denominal believers. We should inquire if they have received the Spirit if they are a believer and perhaps go on to teaching about baptism. Paul never condemned them of what they had. He just inquired if they had more than belief.

[Hoovie]

Because you're married into it???

I'm serious. That's no joking matter.

I have yet to understand Charnocks quandary but yes, I am "married" into it in more ways than one... and thats not entirely a bad thing IMHO. If the reference is to my marriage to Kristin - you are right, I take my marriage far more seriously than any church squabbles.

Are there things that I would like to see changed? Absolutely. But I have no secret desire to be baptist or AOG etc. :spit

[Hoovie]

1Faith2 and PO, thank you for the input! I know God is working in other churches and fully believe we have no special rights to the gospel.

May God humble us all!

[ILG]

I have yet to understand Charnocks quandary but yes, I am "married" into it in more ways than one... and thats not a bad thing IMHO. Are there things that I would like to see changed? Absolutely. But I have no secret desire to be baptist or AOG etc. :spit

No, but I know you wish something else!

Off the subject, but I am reading Success Made Simple; An Inside Look at Why Amish Businesses Thrive by Erik Wesner. Thought you might be interested!

[Hoovie]

If you believe people are saved without obeying Acts 2:38 then you are, in effect, admitting that classic Oneness Water/Spirit doctrine is not important.

I do not feel OP's are sectarian and elitists. They simply believe what they believe.

You, on the other hand, seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Both sides of my mouth... what on earth? I have always been transparent and consistent on this question.

The classic Oneness/UPCI position in recorded in my signature. Are you trying to rewrite history?

Let me be clear.

People are saved by faith in Christ and his work on the cross. They then respond to their faith and obey Acts 2:38. The fact is there is some dispute over how we do that. I firmly believe in calling the name of Jesus at the moment of baptism and that speaking in tongues is a sign of the Spirit's indwelling. When others reach different conclusions or have not yet accepted Acts 2:38 in the same way that I have, I do not feel at liberty to question or belittle their faith in Christ. I honestly do not.

Brother, please show me where I am speaking out of both sides of my mouth.

[Hoovie]

How can you stand firm on Acts 2:38, yet believe that people who refuse to submit to baptism in the name of Jesus are okay, saved etc.?

Your position is very duplicitous. You either believe the doctrine, or you don't.

It sounds like you don't.

My previous post clearly states my position.

Please, would you reciprocate the same favor?

With all due respect, your recent posts have lead me to believe I really do not understand you position. And, I should add, if you don't feel at liberty to share here - that is OK too!

[CC1]

I wish my original pastor had had thoughts like these. Everybody was lost, including the liberal UPC pastors that didn't uphold the standards.....meaning ONLY three steppers who were conservative were saved......and you know that scripture about the righteous SCARCELY being saved.....???

my experience with the UPC involved a significant number of people who thought just like your pastor. I think it is the norm not the exception for a lot of UPC people to not only thing trinnies are going to hell but liberal UPC folks as well.

Obviously there are exceptions but they are just that.

[Hoovie]

No, but I know you wish something else!

I am not EXACTLY sure what that is... but hey i wish for a million bucks too! :) FWIW I believe I have a great marriage!


Off the subject, but I am reading Success Made Simple; An Inside Look at Why Amish Businesses Thrive by Erik Wesner. Thought you might be interested!

Kewl. Is he Ex Amish? Let me know if you think I should add it to my library.

[Hoovie]

my experience with the UPC involved a significant number of people who thought just like your pastor. I think it is the norm not the exception for a lot of UPC people to not only thing trinnies are going to hell but liberal UPC folks as well.

Obviously there are exceptions but they are just that.

Quite honestly, this does not even sound like a theological issue. It sounds like immaturity. How sad.

"Hell" is not a trump card we wave at others. Sounds like Gaddafi.

[notofworks]

If you believe people are saved without obeying Acts 2:38 then you are, in effect, admitting that classic Oneness Water/Spirit doctrine is not important.

I do not feel OP's are sectarian and elitists. They simply believe what they believe.

You, on the other hand, seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.



I agree, Charnock, on paragraphs one and three. Although your theology and mine doesn't match, we certainly see this the same way.

[ILG]

I am not EXACTLY sure what that is... but hey i wish for a million bucks too! :) FWIW I believe I have a great marriage!



Kewl. Is he Ex Amish? Let me know if you think I should add it to my library.

I don't think so. The jacket cover says he is an independent "expert" on the Amish.

Yah, I'll let you know how it turns out.

[Hoovie]

I don't think so. The jacket cover says he is an independent "expert" on the Amish.

Yah, I'll let you know how it turns out.


Frugality is the key word. Generally speaking, a dollar goes much further in the hands of an Amishman!

[OneAccord]

I'm encouraged too. I'm encouraged by the fact that the French have finally stepped up to the plate, rolled up their sleeves, and are leading the charge to bring down an enemy. I'm encoraged that we are hearing less and less about Irag and Aphganistan these days. Maybe, just maybe, by sticking together, our enemies are being driven into a corner.

I'm encouraged by the fact that God's people are beginning to realize that fighting one another will never defeat the enemy of our souls. I'm encouraged that, while swords aren't quite yet being made into plowshares, we are beginning to see signs that walls are crumbling. Olive branches are blooming, and there is yet hope for peace among those who share the name, "Pentecostal". The time for wounding may be ending. A day of healing may yet dawn on the horizon.

Well, I have that hope, and with that hope, I am encouraged.

[BeenThinkin]

I'm encouraged too. I'm encouraged by the fact that the French have finally stepped up to the plate, rolled up their sleeves, and are leading the charge to bring down an enemy. I'm encoraged that we are hearing less and less about Irag and Aphganistan these days. Maybe, just maybe, by sticking together, our enemies are being driven into a corner.

I'm encouraged by the fact that God's people are beginning to realize that fighting one another will never defeat the enemy of our souls. I'm encouraged that, while swords aren't quite yet being made into plowshares, we are beginning to see signs that walls are crumbling. Olive branches are blooming, and there is yet hope for peace among those who share the name, "Pentecostal". The time for wounding may be ending. A day of healing may yet dawn on the horizon.

Well, I have that hope, and with that hope, I am encouraged.


Well, I'm encouraged with your encouragement and the hope that you have! Thanks for the encouragement!

Been Thinkin

[Hoovie]

Very well said! Though others may carry the banner of discouragement... I will believe a good report and be encouraged in the Lord.


I'm encouraged too. I'm encouraged by the fact that the French have finally stepped up to the plate, rolled up their sleeves, and are leading the charge to bring down an enemy. I'm encoraged that we are hearing less and less about Irag and Aphganistan these days. Maybe, just maybe, by sticking together, our enemies are being driven into a corner.

I'm encouraged by the fact that God's people are beginning to realize that fighting one another will never defeat the enemy of our souls. I'm encouraged that, while swords aren't quite yet being made into plowshares, we are beginning to see signs that walls are crumbling. Olive branches are blooming, and there is yet hope for peace among those who share the name, "Pentecostal". The time for wounding may be ending. A day of healing may yet dawn on the horizon.

Well, I have that hope, and with that hope, I am encouraged.

[OneAccord]

Well, I'm encouraged with your encouragement and the hope that you have! Thanks for the encouragement!

Been Thinkin

Well, likewise, I am encouraged by your encouargement. I'm encouraged that Bro. Hoovie is encouraged. I find it encouraging to encouarge others. I'm encouraged, you're encouraged, may all of God's people be encouraged!

[berkeley]

I think some of you are on drugs!

[Hoovie]

Blessings! It does seem our unwillingness to open up to each other robs us from would be gems in the kingdom and in the word of God. If we can start with the premise that we all can learn it goes a long way.
Humility seems to be a lost virtue of sorts!
If you want to know how the Baptist Churches feel about pentecostals:? Ask me I've been through that fire..

But Hoovie! you are on the right track concerning the truth and understanding of our Lord Jesus. He said let your light shine. You know sometimes what we have when others see it they want it too. And you will be surprised how many people that are starving in main stream christianity for more than what they have.Also, there are also those who have not received a good understanding of the Bible. And I know that sounds strange but it is very true.
A person who I know that is a Lutheran and has been one for fifty years. Told me that his pastor told them that they did not have the right to baptise anyone. That he only had that right.
After I took about fifteen minutes at coffee with this guy and showed him the scriptures, he was astonished at what he read. He then went back to the Lutheran Church and told the elders and deacons and showed them where the scriptures supported baptism. and yes, I did show in Jesus name..
So you know a lot of people are where they are because someone has convinced them in what they believe. You will be atonished when on a one to one contact what people do actually believe verses how they present it.

[Charnock]

Recently I had a discussion with a friend and Spiritual mentor. He is a leader and and UPCI ordained minister. For what it's worth, I would consider him a three stepper and a moderate.

In the conversation he had mentioned he was glad other (non UPC) OPs had been invited and some came to GC.

I responded that I too liked that and had witnessed something similar at a UGST symposium a few years ago. The ministers had met for a scheduled hour prior to greeting the larger group. They started praying together which led to footwashing and ended up going waaay over the schedule.

I told my friend I loved that but the efforts at reconciliation haven't went far enough. When he questioned, I replied, "I am not content to keep these unity efforts among OPs. We should have similar efforts to
understand AOG and Baptists and the greater Evangelical movement. I feel the UPC has tightened it's official stance, and few will say things like Goss who viewed many non-OPs as brethren.

My friend responded, "I don't know that has really changed, while I stand firm on Acts 2:38, I consider the fellow ministers in our community my brothers and call them that as well. Furthermore, I have said many of us will be surprised at who all will be in heaven!"

So, this is very encouraging to me!

The concept presented is tolerance.

I simply do not see how you can be "encouraged" that OP's are watering down their doctrine, and accepting alternative routes to salvation, unless you do not believe OP doctrine matters.

Also, let's cut to the chase. No self-respecting Apostolic would receive alternatives with such tolerance.

I know OP Apostolic doctrine and you, dear sir, do not believe it.

[Hoovie]

The concept presented is tolerance.
Agreed
I simply do not see how you can be "encouraged" that OP's are watering down their doctrine, and accepting alternative routes to salvation, unless you do not believe OP doctrine matters.
I would suggest a third option exists, where Oneness Pentecostalism is not the only expression of faith in Christ. It does not require absence or watering down of the doctrine of Christ, but certainly brings with it a dose of long overdue humility.

Also, let's cut to the chase. No self-respecting Apostolic would receive alternatives with such tolerance.
I'm afraid this only serves as a reminder of what we should be shunning. When tolerance and self respect cannot co-exist the body truly does suffer. Unless we recognize our lack of tolerance in this most crucial thing, we are destined to experience the disrespect we deserve.

I know OP Apostolic doctrine and you, dear sir, do not believe it.
At least not the way you believe (or believed?) it I guess.

[Hoovie]

Both sides of my mouth... what on earth? I have always been transparent and consistent on this question.

The classic Oneness/UPCI position in recorded in my signature. Are you trying to rewrite history?

Let me be clear.

People are saved by faith in Christ and his work on the cross. They then respond to their faith and obey Acts 2:38. The fact is there is some dispute over how we do that. I firmly believe in calling the name of Jesus at the moment of baptism and that speaking in tongues is a sign of the Spirit's indwelling. When others reach different conclusions or have not yet accepted Acts 2:38 in the same way that I have, I do not feel at liberty to question or belittle their faith in Christ. I honestly do not.

Brother, please show me where I am speaking out of both sides of my mouth.


My previous post clearly states my position.

Please, would you reciprocate the same favor?

With all due respect, your recent posts have lead me to believe I really do not understand you position. And, I should add, if you don't feel at liberty to share here - that is OK too!

Bump! for Charn

[ILG]

Frugality is the key word. Generally speaking, a dollar goes much further in the hands of an Amishman!

Yes, I believe that.

BTW, I don't have doubts that your marriage is a good one!

[onefaith2]

At least not the way you believe (or believed?) it I guess.

The human frailty accepting that there is no other way possibly causes the mind to refuse to accept God will judge every man based on their walk or lack thereof. John 3:5 offers no solutions to the thief on the cross and the requirement was stated prior to this event. The fact that Jesus could pardon someone who's preacher said F, S, HG, and they called upon the name of Jesus is foreign to most apostolic people, due to the nature of our beliefs.

In short if many of us could believe Acts 2:38 and know that the application of acts 2:38 is different in our eyes then theirs, we could understand the point of view that God has to judge.

If we had more scripture showing that being baptized in Jesus name means the "preacher has to say the phrase for it to be valid" or something of that nature, we could be more narrow sighted as to how acts 2:38 has to be carried out.

Again folks, where the Bible is silent, we must be silent.

Preach acts 2:38 and how we believe the application of it and leave the rest to God! We will not water down the message because we don't know all the answers to all the questions that will be asked. Good post again Hoovie and I understand you are not watering down the message!

[commonsense]

The concept presented is tolerance.

I simply do not see how you can be "encouraged" that OP's are watering down their doctrine, and accepting alternative routes to salvation, unless you do not believe OP doctrine matters.

Also, let's cut to the chase. No self-respecting Apostolic would receive alternatives with such tolerance.

I know OP Apostolic doctrine and you, dear sir, do not believe it.

In the 50's my family was very much UPC; Acts 2:38, 3 steppers ----the whole 9 yards. We were taught we had the "truth"---but in spite of that I was not taught the intolerance I see.
Since I was a "kid" maybe my memory is faulty....I associate it with the teachings of the church but perhaps it was my parents who were tolerant.

I can't say...both are deceased.
Mom was raised Catholic and was introduced to Pentecost at age 14. Dad was Lutheran and his family was witnessed to when he was 14 or 15.

Their early experiences with the Apostolic Pentecostal message were well established before the 1945 merger. Maybe they were taught tolerance or it was their interpretation of same. :thumbsup