The problem with the UPCI

[Esaias]

On the Yadon thread, I found this post -

I have been gone from the UPC since shortly after the fallout from this sermon so I have no desire to tear down the organization. I do find it sad that so many of us were forced out by he hardliners when we would have been happy to stay but for the attitude that we must all believe the same on every passage and every issue.


The UPC was formed by a merger of two groups, the PCI and the PAJC. Both groups were Oneness, both were Pentecostal, and both believed in the necessity of baptism in the name of Jesus. They differed however in how they understood water baptism and Spirit baptism as relating to the new birth mentioned in John 3:5. The PAJC believed John 3:5 was referring to water baptism and spirit baptism, and thus the two baptisms were equated with regeneration and the new birth (and thus were essentials, without which a person would not be saved). The PCI, although believing in the necesity of both baptisms, did not make the same connection to the new birth that the PAJC did. As a result, the merger involved a compromise, a statement of faith asserting justification equated with repentance, and 'full salvation' as including water baptism in Jesus name and the Pentecostal experience.

Over time, the differences between the two beliefs grew until today.

Now, repeating the quote -

I have been gone from the UPC since shortly after the fallout from this sermon so I have no desire to tear down the organization. I do find it sad that so many of us were forced out by he hardliners when we would have been happy to stay but for the attitude that we must all believe the same on every passage and every issue.

The PCI-style members have complained often that they are being 'forced out' by 'hardliners' (ie, the PAJC-style believers). What is interesting is it seems as if the PAJC-style believers are greater in number than the PCI-style believers. So I ask my first question:

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

Now, the Affirmation statement had to do with what?

I (ministers name), do hereby declare that I believe and embrace the fundamental Doctrine as stated in

the Articles of faith as set forth in the Manual of the United Pentecostal Church International.

I also believe and embrace the holiness standards of the United Pentecostal Church International as set

forth in said articles of Faith, and I pledge to practice, preach, and teach the same.


_____________________________________

Signature


____________________________________

Date

Yet this has created a humongous uproar in the UPCI, so much that the result has been dissension, dissimulation, schism, defections, etc etc etc.

I see nothing in the Affirmation Statement that would exclude any PCI-type member, nor any PAJC-type member. So why the hubbub?

Apparently, many PCI-types have felt the Affirmation Statement was somehow directed against them.

Also, many felt the Statement was directed against those ministers who had tv's, and/or who did not teach against having tv's or watching tv.

And of course there were some who felt that the need for the Affirmation Statement (especially every two years) was a clear signal the org was grasping at straws and having 'control issues'. Much like when an employer begins minute surveillance of employees, they feel the boss doesn't trust them, so why work there?

So there are several groups vying for control - the PCI and the PAJC groups, the pro-tv and the anti-tv group, and the pro-AS and the anti-AS group.

(I suspect, but cannot prove, that much of this also comes down to various family 'dynasties' inside the org vying for control... but that's another topic.)

So what is the real problem with the UPCI?

Again, the quote -

I have been gone from the UPC since shortly after the fallout from this sermon so I have no desire to tear down the organization. I do find it sad that so many of us were forced out by he hardliners when we would have been happy to stay but for the attitude that we must all believe the same on every passage and every issue.

Notice the bolded part (bolded by me in all instances).

Baron, and obviously many others, believe that 'the attitude we must all believe the same thing on every passage and every issue' is a bad thing, destructive to unity, and rather unchristian.

But consider:

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. (1 cor 1:10)


There are quite a few people who do not seem to think that the apostle's admonition is something to be worked towards, let alone something to be attained. And, because people are people and often enough will not change their minds about what they preach and believe, the quest for apostolic doctrinal unity will necessarily produce separation.

The Bible teaches we should be united in doctrine, faith, and practice, preaching and teaching. Not everyone will agree. Therefore, any attempt - ANY attempt - to bring about such unity must necessarily bring division.

The UPCI was formed out of a compromise merger between two groups who were not perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement, speaking the same thing. It was a noble attempt at unity, for sure, but doomed to failure from the beginning.

So this brings me to my second question:

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

[Originalist]

I read this thread right after listening to the below message concerning the civil war within the UPCI.

He gets side tracked on abortion for a moment, but it is still worth the listen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbE1dhHrZCo

[Esaias]

BTW, I was not speaking directly to the situation that developed with brother Yadon. I do not know him and don't know what all went on with that, and besides there's another thread on that anyway.

I am simply asking:

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

And,

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

[Originalist]

BTW, I was not speaking directly to the situation that developed with brother Yadon. I do not know him and don't know what all went on with that, and besides there's another thread on that anyway.

I am simply asking:

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

And,

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

Can someone link me to the Yadon thread? I'd be interested to know what went on.

[Esaias]

Can someone link me to the Yadon thread? I'd be interested to know what went on.

Where have you been, man?????!!!

:smack

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=44517

[houston]

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)


The more vocal crowd does not a majority make.

Many are closet PCI. They do not vocalize it because the hardliners will cut them to pieces and feed them to wolves.

*laughs*

[Originalist]

Where have you been, man?????!!!

:smack

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=44517

Forgive me, but somehow i totally missed this thread until now. DUH!!! A friend from the Seminary sent me the message and asked me to listen to it.

[kclee4jc]

The UPCI was formed out of a compromise merger between two groups who were not perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement, speaking the same thing. It was a noble attempt at unity, for sure, but doomed to failure from the beginning.



my thoughts exactly!

[Esaias]

If I recall correctly Alexander Campbell was a Baptist minister. He developed a soteriology regarding baptism that would be rejected by Baptists. Thus, the 'Campbellites' had to separate from the Baptists. Now suppose instead the Baptists and Campbellites 'joined together'. They certainly could agree on many things, including the importance of baptism, and even that baptism is a necessary commandment of the Lord that is to be obeyed. But their union would never last, because the Campbellites believed baptism is the event in which remission of sins is received, and further that one being baptised must believe they are being baptised IN ORDER TO receive remission of sins. Baptists of course hold to a different view, that baptism is the public testimony that one HAS RECEIVED ALREADY the remission of their sins.

The two could never continue in unity. In fact they didn't. The Campbellites separated and today they are known as the Churches of Christ, the Disciples of Christ, and the Christian Churches (names of their non-denominational denominations).

The union of the PCI and the PAJC has lasted longer than the Campbellites and the Baptists (much longer, in fact), even though the differences are parallel between the two groups of movements.

Perhaps it would be better for the UPCI be united on matters of doctrine, not on matters of organizational or missional purpose.

And I'm stil linterested in hearing a response to my question:

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

[Pressing-On]

On the Yadon thread, I found this post -




The UPC was formed by a merger of two groups, the PCI and the PAJC. Both groups were Oneness, both were Pentecostal, and both believed in the necessity of baptism in the name of Jesus. They differed however in how they understood water baptism and Spirit baptism as relating to the new birth mentioned in John 3:5. The PAJC believed John 3:5 was referring to water baptism and spirit baptism, and thus the two baptisms were equated with regeneration and the new birth (and thus were essentials, without which a person would not be saved). The PCI, although believing in the necesity of both baptisms, did not make the same connection to the new birth that the PAJC did. As a result, the merger involved a compromise, a statement of faith asserting justification equated with repentance, and 'full salvation' as including water baptism in Jesus name and the Pentecostal experience.

Over time, the differences between the two beliefs grew until today.

Now, repeating the quote -



The PCI-style members have complained often that they are being 'forced out' by 'hardliners' (ie, the PAJC-style believers). What is interesting is it seems as if the PAJC-style believers are greater in number than the PCI-style believers. So I ask my first question:

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

Now, the Affirmation statement had to do with what?



Yet this has created a humongous uproar in the UPCI, so much that the result has been dissension, dissimulation, schism, defections, etc etc etc.

I see nothing in the Affirmation Statement that would exclude any PCI-type member, nor any PAJC-type member. So why the hubbub?

Apparently, many PCI-types have felt the Affirmation Statement was somehow directed against them.

Also, many felt the Statement was directed against those ministers who had tv's, and/or who did not teach against having tv's or watching tv.

And of course there were some who felt that the need for the Affirmation Statement (especially every two years) was a clear signal the org was grasping at straws and having 'control issues'. Much like when an employer begins minute surveillance of employees, they feel the boss doesn't trust them, so why work there?

So there are several groups vying for control - the PCI and the PAJC groups, the pro-tv and the anti-tv group, and the pro-AS and the anti-AS group.

(I suspect, but cannot prove, that much of this also comes down to various family 'dynasties' inside the org vying for control... but that's another topic.)

So what is the real problem with the UPCI?

Again, the quote -



Notice the bolded part (bolded by me in all instances).

Baron, and obviously many others, believe that 'the attitude we must all believe the same thing on every passage and every issue' is a bad thing, destructive to unity, and rather unchristian.

But consider:

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. (1 cor 1:10)


There are quite a few people who do not seem to think that the apostle's admonition is something to be worked towards, let alone something to be attained. And, because people are people and often enough will not change their minds about what they preach and believe, the quest for apostolic doctrinal unity will necessarily produce separation.

The Bible teaches we should be united in doctrine, faith, and practice, preaching and teaching. Not everyone will agree. Therefore, any attempt - ANY attempt - to bring about such unity must necessarily bring division.

The UPCI was formed out of a compromise merger between two groups who were not perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement, speaking the same thing. It was a noble attempt at unity, for sure, but doomed to failure from the beginning.

So this brings me to my second question:

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)
Great thread and post, Esaias! :yourock

As to your question - NO, we should not be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator and base our unity on that!

We should follow and obey the Word - "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." (1 cor 1:10)

Aside from simply loving people because we have compassion, I don't buy into the notion of singing Kumbya with every wind of doctrine.

You are exactly spot on when you say - the quest for apostolic doctrinal unity will necessarily produce separation.

[Ferd]

Esaias, you are right in a great amount of what you are saying here, but we have let a bit of a fallacy creep into the nuance.

First of all, the PAJC as you state was made up by a group that was almost all Water/Spirit in doctrine.

However, to suggest the PCI was of the other view (that being New Birth was at repentance and that Baptism in Jesus Name and HG infilling follow New Birth) is not exactly correct.

Yes there was a strong thread in the PCI of that belief. However, that was not monolitic. I am not even sure you could say it was a big majority.

I come from an old PCI church in Louisiana. A. T. Morgan, George Glass Sr. T. F. Tenney all came out of this church, as did a large number of other preachers. Those men were all Water/Spirit in doctrine.

I would also point out that the version of what we call "PCI" doctrine that is taught today is vastly different from what was taught back then.

Those men taught that saved people will be baptized and filled with the HG. The Neo-PCI crowd preaches saved at repentance and they arent much worried about the rest.... some of my friends who have walked down that path send folk off to a side room to pray so as not to disturb everyone elses quiet reflection.

The guys that were around back then, that I have talked to will tell you that if you were a person sitting in a pew you wouldnt really know the difference between what the the so-called PCI guys and the so called PAJC guys preached. it was only when one was talking about the theological underpinnings that you find the difference.

[Pressing-On]

Esaias, you are right in a great amount of what you are saying here, but we have let a bit of a fallacy creep into the nuance.

First of all, the PAJC as you state was made up by a group that was almost all Water/Spirit in doctrine.

However, to suggest the PCI was of the other view (that being New Birth was at repentance and that Baptism in Jesus Name and HG infilling follow New Birth) is not exactly correct.

Yes there was a strong thread in the PCI of that belief. However, that was not monolitic. I am not even sure you could say it was a big majority.

I come from an old PCI church in Louisiana. A. T. Morgan, George Glass Sr. T. F. Tenney all came out of this church, as did a large number of other preachers. Those men were all Water/Spirit in doctrine.

I would also point out that the version of what we call "PCI" doctrine that is taught today is vastly different from what was taught back then.

Those men taught that saved people will be baptized and filled with the HG. The Neo-PCI crowd preaches saved at repentance and they arent much worried about the rest.... some of my friends who have walked down that path send folk off to a side room to pray so as not to disturb everyone elses quiet reflection.

The guys that were around back then, that I have talked to will tell you that if you were a person sitting in a pew you wouldnt really know the difference between what the the so-called PCI guys and the so called PAJC guys preached. It was only when one was talking about the theological underpinnings that you find the difference.

That, IMO, is where the division begins and ends. It was always really there.

[Ferd]

That, IMO, is where the division begins and ends. It was always really there.

it was absolutly there. Goss and some other early leaders were certainly not water/spirit in doctrine. But they did work to find common ground.


Its sad to see what has happened. I personally would rather the PCI guys still preach that saved folk get baptized right and speak in tongues and still be part of us.

but here we are.... I do see retrenching within the UPCI and I do believe that there is a real effort to bring things back to center. I am hoping the guys in charge get the time they need to do that very thing.

[Esaias]

Esaias, you are right in a great amount of what you are saying here, but we have let a bit of a fallacy creep into the nuance.

First of all, the PAJC as you state was made up by a group that was almost all Water/Spirit in doctrine.

However, to suggest the PCI was of the other view (that being New Birth was at repentance and that Baptism in Jesus Name and HG infilling follow New Birth) is not exactly correct.

Yes there was a strong thread in the PCI of that belief. However, that was not monolitic. I am not even sure you could say it was a big majority.

I come from an old PCI church in Louisiana. A. T. Morgan, George Glass Sr. T. F. Tenney all came out of this church, as did a large number of other preachers. Those men were all Water/Spirit in doctrine.

Ah, now that is something I did not know (or else I had forgotten it). thanks for the information.

I would also point out that the version of what we call "PCI" doctrine that is taught today is vastly different from what was taught back then.

Those men taught that saved people will be baptized and filled with the HG.

Yes, that is what I was getting at in saying the PCI taught the 'necessity' of baptism and the Holy Ghost. Similar to how a lot of Baptists teach the 'necessity' of baptism, almost so you'd think they believe as we do, yet only in theological discussion regarding John 3:5 and Acts 2:38 would the differences become apparent.

The Neo-PCI crowd preaches saved at repentance and they arent much worried about the rest.

I have seen that, unfortunately. I wouldn't call them 'neo-PCI', though, I'd say they were Oneness Pentecostal 'evangelicals'.



The guys that were around back then, that I have talked to will tell you that if you were a person sitting in a pew you wouldnt really know the difference between what the the so-called PCI guys and the so called PAJC guys preached.

I have heard that before. Interestingly, I never knew about any alternative views regarding this issue in the UPC until I came to FCF.

I do however remember years ago hearing my former pastor (who was still in the UPC) preaching and mentioning about 'getting saved at an altar of repentance' or something to that effect. I was like 'wha....?'

[Timmy]

"The" problem? :heeheehee

[BeenThinkin]

Esaias, you are right in a great amount of what you are saying here, but we have let a bit of a fallacy creep into the nuance.

First of all, the PAJC as you state was made up by a group that was almost all Water/Spirit in doctrine.

However, to suggest the PCI was of the other view (that being New Birth was at repentance and that Baptism in Jesus Name and HG infilling follow New Birth) is not exactly correct.

Yes there was a strong thread in the PCI of that belief. However, that was not monolitic. I am not even sure you could say it was a big majority.

I come from an old PCI church in Louisiana. A. T. Morgan, George Glass Sr. T. F. Tenney all came out of this church, as did a large number of other preachers. Those men were all Water/Spirit in doctrine.

I would also point out that the version of what we call "PCI" doctrine that is taught today is vastly different from what was taught back then.

Those men taught that saved people will be baptized and filled with the HG. The Neo-PCI crowd preaches saved at repentance and they arent much worried about the rest.... some of my friends who have walked down that path send folk off to a side room to pray so as not to disturb everyone elses quiet reflection.

The guys that were around back then, that I have talked to will tell you that if you were a person sitting in a pew you wouldnt really know the difference between what the the so-called PCI guys and the so called PAJC guys preached. it was only when one was talking about the theological underpinnings that you find the difference.


A neighboring Pastor, Bro. H. L. Bennett, believed salvation at repentance, but didn't make it an issue with his brethern. He believed as some of the Tennessee brethern. ...... Of course, he believed in marriage, too, but didn't let his brethern know how much he believed in it. He was secretly married several years and no one knew it or found out until his death! Oh well that's another subject. :happydance

Been Thinkin

[Ferd]

A neighboring Pastor, Bro. H. L. Bennett, believed salvation at repentance, but didn't make it an issue with his brethern. He believed as some of the Tennessee brethern. ...... Of course, he believed in marriage, too, but didn't let his brethern know how much he believed in it. He was secretly married several years and no one knew it or found out until his death! Oh well that's another subject. :happydance

Been Thinkin

LOL! Well I can tell you for sure that my grandfather knew he was "cavorting with that woman". My grandmother being a member of Brother Bennetts church refused to accept her alcoholic husbands rantings on the subject.

Turns out my grandfather was right! LOL. however the "cavorting" was all legal. (and if memory serves he wasnt secretly married for several years, it was more like FOURTY! LOL!


you bring up an intesting point about this particular church. I cannot verifiy that HLB was "pci" in doctrine. However I can verify that my mother went to that church as a child. My grandparents lived in DeQuincy when my mother was very young. My Grandmother was always of the water spirit belief and my mother never knew any difference. (my great grandmother was an early pentecostal preacher from the time when Pentecost first came to Southwest La. )

My grandmother was connected to the Manguns from their days in South Texas before they went to Alexandria. I think we can all agree the Manguns were/are Water/Spirit.

So while I will accept your view of Brother Bennet, this goes to further prove that there was far less difference between the bretheren in the early days than came to be the case later. Primarily because there was little the saints could understand as a difference when they heard the various preachers preach on the subject of salvation.

[Pressing-On]

Primarily because there was little the saints could understand as a difference when they heard the various preachers preach on the subject of salvation.
I wasn't in church during this period of time. Well, being you can't count attending the Catholic Church as "in" church. LOL!

In light of what you stated earlier, "It was only when one was talking about the theological underpinnings that you find the difference", can you give an example of how they preached so close that you couldn't understand the difference without bringing in their individual views?

I've heard Bro. Epley say the same, no tellable difference. Being there is a difference now, I've always wanted to know exactly what each said or would say that sounded so close while holding two views?

[renee819]

Great thread and post, Esaias! :yourock

As to your question - NO, we should not be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator and base our unity on that!

We should follow and obey the Word - "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." (1 cor 1:10)

Aside from simply loving people because we have compassion, I don't buy into the notion of singing Kumbya with every wind of doctrine.

You are exactly spot on when you say - the quest for apostolic doctrinal unity will necessarily produce separation.

I agree. When we start compromising to get along, sometimes, sooner or later one side has to give in, or they will separate. Which I imagine that both sides thought that they would win the other over to their side. That isn't togetherness, that is manipulation. They should not have joined to start with.

Doctrine can not be compromised. It is very clear, that people are baptized in Jesus name for the remission of sins. Ananias told Paul, "To wash your sins away."

[LOVE JESUS]

Forgive me, but somehow i totally missed this thread until now. DUH!!! A friend from the Seminary sent me the message and asked me to listen to it.

Brother, I don't know what it is either.

[Praxeas]

The ever dividing church. If everyone believed every Christian has to agree on every doctrine, the church would be in such disarray and impotence...people would be focusing so much on how we disagree, dividing and reforming how can we evangelize the lost?

In fact that may be why OPs really have such little impact on this world

[Ferd]

I wasn't in church during this period of time. Well, being you can't count attending the Catholic Church as "in" church. LOL!

In light of what you stated earlier, "It was only when one was talking about the theological underpinnings that you find the difference", can you give an example of how they preached so close that you couldn't understand the difference without bringing in their individual views?

I've heard Bro. Epley say the same, no tellable difference. Being there is a difference now, I've always wanted to know exactly what each said or would say that sounded so close while holding two views?

Pressing, my view comes from conversations Ive had with some of those who were there. Ive named some of those names already.

The best example I can give you is my own mothers life. She was raised first in the DeQuincy church discussed here. Brother Bennett was according to the accounts given, PCI in doctrine. Mom moved as a teenager to DeRidder and went to the church that had been PCI in organization but was "PAJC" in doctrine.

She never knew the difference between the two and always thought you needed to have the HG and be baptized to be saved.

my grandmother (my mom's, mom) was a backslidden daughter of a pentecostal preacher lady who came back to God under the Manguns when GAM was in South Texas. GA was PAJC in doctrine. She moved to DeQincy La., lived next to the old staunch PAJC church but went to the PCI doctrine church until she moved to DeRidder.


If you can follow my back and forth timeline, you can see that my own family has been connected to both PAJC and PCI doctrine preachers without really knowing which was what?

There is a story from Papa George Glass who was certainly PAJC in doctrine, and PCI in affiliation that he was once cornered for being soft on doctrine. This because of his affiliation. He also pastored an old line PCI/PCI church in Tenn. (RENDA has some connection there). His reply was "brother I didnt know anyone would WANT to go to heaven without the Holy Ghost".


(I can litterly hear his voice in my head.... I certainly heard him say that many many times from the pulpit).

I think that incapsulates the attitude of most of those men who were working together but held various understandings of what salvation was.

[Ferd]

Lets also piont to Oneness doctrine and baptism in Jesus Name.

we have to remember that all of these men both PCI and PAJC suffered for parting ways with the Trinitarians. they were either the men who were kicked out of the AOG or were the spiritual sons of those who were. They themselves paid a high price for the belief.

They preached Oneness. They preached baptism in Jesus Name. Did all of them believe you werent saved unless you were baptized? of course not. But they preached it fervently.

[Pressing-On]

Pressing, my view comes from conversations Ive had with some of those who were there. Ive named some of those names already.

The best example I can give you is my own mothers life. She was raised first in the DeQuincy church discussed here. Brother Bennett was according to the accounts given, PCI in doctrine. Mom moved as a teenager to DeRidder and went to the church that had been PCI in organization but was "PAJC" in doctrine.

She never knew the difference between the two and always thought you needed to have the HG and be baptized to be saved.

my grandmother (my mom's, mom) was a backslidden daughter of a pentecostal preacher lady who came back to God under the Manguns when GAM was in South Texas. GA was PAJC in doctrine. She moved to DeQincy La., lived next to the old staunch PAJC church but went to the PCI doctrine church until she moved to DeRidder.


If you can follow my back and forth timeline, you can see that my own family has been connected to both PAJC and PCI doctrine preachers without really knowing which was what?

There is a story from Papa George Glass who was certainly PAJC in doctrine, and PCI in affiliation that he was once cornered for being soft on doctrine. This because of his affiliation. He also pastored an old line PCI/PCI church in Tenn. (RENDA has some connection there). His reply was "brother I didnt know anyone would WANT to go to heaven without the Holy Ghost".


(I can litterly hear his voice in my head.... I certainly heard him say that many many times from the pulpit).

I think that incapsulates the attitude of most of those men who were working together but held various understandings of what salvation was.
Thanks, Ferd. That explains things perfectly. I think. LOL! Is he saying he didn't think you could make it to heaven without the Holy Ghost and thought everyone believed that was well?

[KWSS1976]

The AOG church I attend baptises in Jesus Name my wife about fell out of the pew when she heard the preacher say that, seeing how we came out of oneness Apostolic,and she thought they were the only ones to baptise in "Jesus name"...To me it does not matter what you say during Baptism, but it sure suprised her..

[Esaias]

The ever dividing church. If everyone believed every Christian has to agree on every doctrine, the church would be in such disarray and impotence...people would be focusing so much on how we disagree, dividing and reforming how can we evangelize the lost?

In fact that may be why OPs really have such little impact on this world

Name one group in Christendom that has 'such MAJOR impact on the world' and I GUARANTEE you they have doctrines they will not compromise.

The modernist, liberalized, 'neo-evangelical' movement among Protestants doesn't count though since all they've done is make the standard of unity a simple confession that 'Jesus is Lord' thus swelling their ranks statistically.

The Reformers, Covenanters, and Lutherans were FAR more adamant about doctrinal unity and doctrinal purity than ANY OP group I've seen (except maybe for Reckhart's bunch) and I doubt anyone could claim they had 'such little impact on the world'.

Same with the Anabaptists. Same with the Waldensians.

Same with the catholics for that matter.

The problem is the UPC was born out of compromise, and that attitude of compromise - go along to get along, despite serious doctrinal differences - is what is causing 'lack of impact', imo.

[BeenThinkin]

Pressing, my view comes from conversations Ive had with some of those who were there. Ive named some of those names already.

The best example I can give you is my own mothers life. She was raised first in the DeQuincy church discussed here. Brother Bennett was according to the accounts given, PCI in doctrine. Mom moved as a teenager to DeRidder and went to the church that had been PCI in organization but was "PAJC" in doctrine.

She never knew the difference between the two and always thought you needed to have the HG and be baptized to be saved.

my grandmother (my mom's, mom) was a backslidden daughter of a pentecostal preacher lady who came back to God under the Manguns when GAM was in South Texas. GA was PAJC in doctrine. She moved to DeQincy La., lived next to the old staunch PAJC church but went to the PCI doctrine church until she moved to DeRidder.


If you can follow my back and forth timeline, you can see that my own family has been connected to both PAJC and PCI doctrine preachers without really knowing which was what?

There is a story from Papa George Glass who was certainly PAJC in doctrine, and PCI in affiliation that he was once cornered for being soft on doctrine. This because of his affiliation. He also pastored an old line PCI/PCI church in Tenn. (RENDA has some connection there). His reply was "brother I didnt know anyone would WANT to go to heaven without the Holy Ghost".


(I can litterly hear his voice in my head.... I certainly heard him say that many many times from the pulpit).

I think that incapsulates the attitude of most of those men who were working together but held various understandings of what salvation was.


Papa George was one of the kindest and most caring ministers that I knew in Louisiana. If a lot of the folks that get their "panties all in a wad" on AFF had the same spirit as Papa George, why you wouldn't recognize AFF.

Just my opinion!!!
Been Thinkin

[houston]

Papa George was one of the kindest and most caring ministers that I knew in Louisiana. If a lot of the folks that get their "panties all in a wad" on AFF had the same spirit as Papa George, why you wouldn't recognize AFF.

Just my opinion!!!
Been Thinkin

Would you visit a forum where everything was rainbows and butterflies?

[scotty]

Would you visit a forum where everything was rainbows and butterflies?

Sure. Why not?

After all, your striving to spend your eternity in just such a place.

[Praxeas]

The AOG church I attend baptises in Jesus Name my wife about fell out of the pew when she heard the preacher say that, seeing how we came out of oneness Apostolic,and she thought they were the only ones to baptise in "Jesus name"...To me it does not matter what you say during Baptism, but it sure suprised her..
That is not an AOG doctrine. Its a church practice. I knew someone that was baptized and raised AOG and he was given the choice of how to be baptized in either way

[Praxeas]

No the problem is we divide and reform and isolate. That is why we are so anemic.

We divide over small issues and greater issues. We divide because one group attempts to force everyone else to agree or leave

[StillStanding]

No the problem is we divide and reform and isolate. That is why we are so anemic.

We divide over small issues and greater issues. We divide because one group attempts to force everyone else to agree or leave

This is why some have said the UPCI should change it's name to the Divided Pentecostal Church, Inc. It's got a LONG history of dividing, then dividing again!

[tv1a]

Anyone who tries to defend the UPCI current status is not a connesuier of truth.

[tv1a]

The mascot should be an earthworm.

This is why some have said the UPCI should change it's name to the Divided Pentecostal Church, Inc. It's got a LONG history of dividing, then dividing again!

[Praxeas]

This is why some have said the UPCI should change it's name to the Divided Pentecostal Church, Inc. It's got a LONG history of dividing, then dividing again!
That ironically began with a unity.

People forget its an organization. We organized for evangelism and fellowship.

What it says is evangelism isnt important, circling the wagos is, and they cant fellowship over differences.

Dont forget both groups were Oneness, Jesus name baptism and tongues as evidence..

[tv1a]

The UPCI was growing rather well until some people got a burr in their saddles.

Name one group in Christendom that has 'such MAJOR impact on the world' and I GUARANTEE you they have doctrines they will not compromise.

The modernist, liberalized, 'neo-evangelical' movement among Protestants doesn't count though since all they've done is make the standard of unity a simple confession that 'Jesus is Lord' thus swelling their ranks statistically.

The Reformers, Covenanters, and Lutherans were FAR more adamant about doctrinal unity and doctrinal purity than ANY OP group I've seen (except maybe for Reckhart's bunch) and I doubt anyone could claim they had 'such little impact on the world'.

Same with the Anabaptists. Same with the Waldensians.

Same with the catholics for that matter.

The problem is the UPC was born out of compromise, and that attitude of compromise - go along to get along, despite serious doctrinal differences - is what is causing 'lack of impact', imo.

[Praxeas]

When the Oneness brethren were "removed" from the AOG I have heard both Oneness and Trinity preachers preached each others churches.

BTW in the AOG you can find some ministers who will baptize in Jesus name and nobody is being forced to change or leave...

[Praxeas]

The UPCI was growing rather well until some people got a burr in their saddles.
Agreed but lets also not forget that there are two groups exoding now, the very conservative who failed to force their continuing agenda on the rest and the very liberal who cant agree with how conservative the org is

[Originalist]

Agreed but lets also not forget that there are two groups exoding now, the very conservative who failed to force their continuing agenda on the rest and the very liberal who cant agree with how conservative the org is


It is ironic that our most recent split was due to a group who wanted to keep the ban on advertising on TV. They actually split over that. My pastor at the time voted against lifting the ban and was not happy that it was indeed lifted. But he was outraged when these men actually left the organization over this.

[Praxeas]

It is ironic that our most recent spit was due to a group who wanted to keep the ban on advertising on TV. They actually split over that. My pastor at the time voted against lifting the ban and was not happy that it was indeed lifted. But he was outraged when these men actually left the organization over this.
Right. These men didn't have to advertize on TV, allow TV to be "ok" in their church or have one themselves yet the disfellowshipped over it.

It really has more to do with being in control

[Esaias]

So Prax... what is the 'line'? What is the basis for unity? Or, what should the basis for unity be, rather?

If you're Oneness, you baptise people in Jesus name, and you believe in tongues as initial evidence of Holy Ghost baptism... the rest is all non-essential?

"Gay apostolics', anyone? Full preterism? Hyper dispensationalism (Jews have their own plan of salvation, a la John Hagee)? Name it and Claim it? Shouldn't really matter what you teach or believe as to the meaning of 'born again' or 'regeneration'? What about entire sanctification? Antinomianism? Theonomy? Universalism? Supralapsarian predestination? Double predestination? KJV-only? Pre-mid-post trib? No trib? Pastor Tribble? (WHAT??? Did I say that? lol)

Is it really just finding a few things as the lowest common denominator, and the rest is ultimately irrelevent?

And what about Paul? What about the Bible when it says we should all speak the same thing and be of the same mind? We should at least be moving towards that, right? Or is that 'divisive'? Or should we all just speak the same thing in regards to a few 'essentials' (who decides what that is?) and just be silent about everything else?

Inquiring minds want to know...

[renee819]

So Prax... what is the 'line'? What is the basis for unity? Or, what should the basis for unity be, rather?

If you're Oneness, you baptise people in Jesus name, and you believe in tongues as initial evidence of Holy Ghost baptism... the rest is all non-essential?

"Gay apostolics', anyone? Full preterism? Hyper dispensationalism (Jews have their own plan of salvation, a la John Hagee)? Name it and Claim it? Shouldn't really matter what you teach or believe as to the meaning of 'born again' or 'regeneration'? What about entire sanctification? Antinomianism? Theonomy? Universalism? Supralapsarian predestination? Double predestination? KJV-only? Pre-mid-post trib? No trib? Pastor Tribble? (WHAT??? Did I say that? lol)

Is it really just finding a few things as the lowest common denominator, and the rest is ultimately irrelevent?

And what about Paul? What about the Bible when it says we should all speak the same thing and be of the same mind? We should at least be moving towards that, right? Or is that 'divisive'? Or should we all just speak the same thing in regards to a few 'essentials' (who decides what that is?) and just be silent about everything else?

Inquiring minds want to know...

Yes, Inquiring minds want to know. And a few of those beliefs I would have to look up. And looking at the list, I don't think that Jesus, Peter or Paul would allow any of that. If that is what they want to believe, we can't stop them, but they should not be allowed to teach those things in any Bible believing church.

People should fellowship with likeminded people.

[Praxeas]

So Prax... what is the 'line'? What is the basis for unity? Or, what should the basis for unity be, rather?

If you're Oneness, you baptise people in Jesus name, and you believe in tongues as initial evidence of Holy Ghost baptism... the rest is all non-essential?

"Gay apostolics', anyone? Full preterism? Hyper dispensationalism (Jews have their own plan of salvation, a la John Hagee)? Name it and Claim it? Shouldn't really matter what you teach or believe as to the meaning of 'born again' or 'regeneration'? What about entire sanctification? Antinomianism? Theonomy? Universalism? Supralapsarian predestination? Double predestination? KJV-only? Pre-mid-post trib? No trib? Pastor Tribble? (WHAT??? Did I say that? lol)

Is it really just finding a few things as the lowest common denominator, and the rest is ultimately irrelevent?

And what about Paul? What about the Bible when it says we should all speak the same thing and be of the same mind? We should at least be moving towards that, right? Or is that 'divisive'? Or should we all just speak the same thing in regards to a few 'essentials' (who decides what that is?) and just be silent about everything else?

Inquiring minds want to know...
Unity to organize an organization? I'd say what it was at the merger

Or are you speaking of a line we draw to snub others?

[Ferd]

The UPCI has gone thru a pretty difficult streatch but seriously it is not all doom and gloom.

The guys that were in charge during the worst of it are dead and gone. As some others have pointed out, the hard liners have left or are leaving. The rebelrousers started a wrestling federation to beat people up in and the liberals are/have left as well.

What is left is an organization that is smaller for sure but in some ways more moderate.

What is really odd to me is that all this talk has come up right now before this particular GC in which the UPCI HAS ON THE TABLE A MOTION TO REMOVE ANY REFERENCE TO TELEVISION FROM THE MANUAL!

serously people, we are talking about how awful the UPCI is today...how conservative it is...TODAY.... right when the org is making moves to moderate?


its almost like the guys who have been "claiming" they want change really are just trying to sabatoge. What do they really want? implosion?

[Ferd]

Papa George was one of the kindest and most caring ministers that I knew in Louisiana. If a lot of the folks that get their "panties all in a wad" on AFF had the same spirit as Papa George, why you wouldn't recognize AFF.

Just my opinion!!!
Been Thinkin

Papa George was a prince. Such a gentle spirit. When his home church decided to honor him, we had a big service to honor him and install him as Pastor Emeritis. (sp)

When the service started, he was nowhere to be found! They went looking for him and when they found him he was hiding and he told them he wasnt worthy of that and that they just needed to not worry about him!

He came to our house many times and would tuck me in bed as a small kid and say my prayers with me. Precious memories.

Way back when he pastored in DeRidder, a lady started coming to church. Her husband was a hard man. One sunday evening before church, the man came to the church and threatend to beat Papa George up. Papa George went out behind the church with the man who expected a fight.

Papa George just stood there and the man asked him what he was doing? Papa George told him, "im just waiting on you. If you feel you need to beat me up go ahead I wont stop you. I will pray for you".

The man started crying and never tried to stop his wife from attending. He eventually started coming with her and became a member of the church.

[Ferd]

Thanks, Ferd. That explains things perfectly. I think. LOL! Is he saying he didn't think you could make it to heaven without the Holy Ghost and thought everyone believed that was well?

Pressing, that was his way. He believed in the spirit of the merger. He believed, preached and taught young ministers that you needed to be filled with the HG and baptized in Jesus name TO BE SAVED.

but he also understood the fellowship. He said what he said because it was a statement that everyone of the era could agree with. it was the "common ground". It was what they all preached and in the end, as was his way he defused the situation with a kind word.

[scotty]

The UPCI has gone thru a pretty difficult streatch but seriously it is not all doom and gloom.

The guys that were in charge during the worst of it are dead and gone. As some others have pointed out, the hard liners have left or are leaving. The rebelrousers started a wrestling federation to beat people up in and the liberals are/have left as well.

What is left is an organization that is smaller for sure but in some ways more moderate.

What is really odd to me is that all this talk has come up right now before this particular GC in which the UPCI HAS ON THE TABLE A MOTION TO REMOVE ANY REFERENCE TO TELEVISION FROM THE MANUAL!

serously people, we are talking about how awful the UPCI is today...how conservative it is...TODAY.... right when the org is making moves to moderate?


its almost like the guys who have been "claiming" they want change really are just trying to sabatoge. What do they really want? implosion?

Yes! They want it gone, extinct, cease to exist. The bitter have been hurt so bad by the "Mother Ship" that the only reconciliation for them is for the organization to die on the vine.

I remember a thread a year or so ago on here where this was being discussed and someone was railing against the UPC for all these rules and I brought up the same point you did, things are changing. Then I laid out the question, what if all the things your against are repealed, would you go back? Would the org be ok for you then? .. I got a, NO.

There is so much discontent in some that it darkens any spiritual light they could hope to shine. They will become as the UPC is to them, irrelevant.

[Ferd]

Papa George was one of the kindest and most caring ministers that I knew in Louisiana. If a lot of the folks that get their "panties all in a wad" on AFF had the same spirit as Papa George, why you wouldn't recognize AFF.

Just my opinion!!!
Been Thinkin

Back to the DeQincy Story!

When Pastor Bennet died, the church was rocked. As soon as he passed, people started lining up to his heir as he had none. Well all the sudden this lady steps forward with the will and says she is his wife. LOL.

Total train wreck. No one saw it comeing (except my grandfather who was already dead).

Let me tell you that it was pure pandimonium. and the church was already filled with factions and after that it just got worse.

They couldnt come to any kind of agreement on who the next pastor would be.

Papa George wen there as interum to handle the transition. Ive already talked about his gentlness and kindness. But there was iron in the man too!

After several preachers were tried out, they would vote and the vote would be split. one side would find out what the other was doing, and they would vote against that side.

Papa George got tired of it. He brought in David Hennigan and then when he called the vote, he told them the vote would be held the morning after an all night prayer meeting. He gave them the time to be at the church the night before, and he told them the doors would be locked at a certain point. Anyone not in the building when the doors were locked would not vote! LOL

He also walked around the prayer meeting and made sure everyone was praying. Ive heard (cannot verify) that he also threatend those that were there but not praying that they wouldnt be allowed to vote!

Pastor Hennigan won the election with a BIG majority. He went on to be a fanstastic pastor and the church was greatly blessed.

[Ferd]

Papa George was one of the kindest and most caring ministers that I knew in Louisiana. If a lot of the folks that get their "panties all in a wad" on AFF had the same spirit as Papa George, why you wouldn't recognize AFF.

Just my opinion!!!
Been Thinkin

Yes! They want it gone, extinct, cease to exist. The bitter have been hurt so bad by the "Mother Ship" that the only reconciliation for them is for the organization to die on the vine.

I remember a thread a year or so ago on here where this was being discussed and someone was railing against the UPC for all these rules and I brought up the same point you did, things are changing. Then I laid out the question, what if all the things your against are repealed, would you go back? Would the org be ok for you then? .. I got a, NO.

There is so much discontent in some that it darkens any spiritual light they could hope to shine. They will become as the UPC is to them, irrelevant.



Scotty, sadly I agree with you 100%. I get that some folks got hurt. I’m talking about the preachers here…. Talking about saints that got abused by absurdly controlling so-called-men-of-god is another thing all together.
But those that really did get hurt and who were really good men, went on to build and create. It’s just weird that you have this other group, who have done very little building and a whole lot of being bitter who are still trying to tear down.

[kclee4jc]

Bro Marlor speaks very highly of George Glass. I know I saw a message by him the other day on either Apostolic Vault or Apostolic Classics. I'll have to try to listen to it.

[Esaias]

Unity to organize an organization? I'd say what it was at the merger

Or are you speaking of a line we draw to snub others?

Prax, you know I am not asking 'how can we find an opportunity to snub others?'

[bishoph]

Many left because they did not want the UPCI to control them. They wanted freedom from the organizations rules....etc. The irony is that even though they left.....the organization still controls them.....they are driven by their disdain for the machine and the mechanics who maintain it......it controls their thoughts, actions, and direction......let it go and move on.....if not the very thing you are trying to destroy will destroy you.

In the end, when you are dead, will they be able to say you accomplished great things for the cause of Christ, or will they say he/she sure spent a lot of time hashing/rehashing the org they used to be in.

[Esaias]

Just want to make it clear - this is not a 'bash the UPC' thread. I do believe there was a problem, that has persisted today, and is the root of the 'issues' that keep coming up - and that is the basis for unity allowed serious doctrinal differences. Looking at the merger, I cannot help but wonder how they didn't see this coming?

[Jermyn Davidson]

Just want to make it clear - this is not a 'bash the UPC' thread. I do believe there was a problem, that has persisted today, and is the root of the 'issues' that keep coming up - and that is the basis for unity allowed serious doctrinal differences. Looking at the merger, I cannot help but wonder how they didn't see this coming?

They didn't see this coming because they never thought the day would come when a bunch Jesus-Name Pentecostals would choose to devour each other instead of choosing to love and encourage each other.

There wasn't a "growing doctrinal difference" between the two camps. There was a growing desire to no longer be united and people have been using all sorts of religious excuses to justify their sinful attitudes towards people that for YEARS were considered to be their brothers and sisters in the Lord.

[Esaias]

They didn't see this coming because they never thought the day would come when a bunch Jesus-Name Pentecostals would choose to devour each other instead of choosing to love and encourage each other.

There wasn't a "growing doctrinal difference" between the two camps. There was a growing desire to no longer be united and people have been using all sorts of religious excuses to justify their sinful attitudes towards people that for YEARS were considered to be their brothers and sisters in the Lord.

You say there wasn't a 'growing doctrinal difference between the two camps' but I can see it plain as day. AFF is in fact a sort of microcosm of that schism.

If two groups differ on the nature and mechanisms of salvation, how can they stay in unity for long?

On the other hand, I do find it interesting that people who suppoedly are willing to 'agree to disagree' on the subject of salvation are willing to to split over the subject of television.

[Ferd]

Bro Marlor speaks very highly of George Glass. I know I saw a message by him the other day on either Apostolic Vault or Apostolic Classics. I'll have to try to listen to it.

I dont care which one it was, you will be blessed.

but if you can find "He has exaulted his WORD above his NAME", you and everyone owes it to themselves to listen to that one.

it is truely amazing and in light of the current discussion, one that we certainly ought to be trying to live up to.

[kclee4jc]

I dont care which one it was, you will be blessed.

but if you can find "He has exaulted his WORD above his NAME", you and everyone owes it to themselves to listen to that one.

it is truely amazing and in light of the current discussion, one that we certainly ought to be trying to live up to.

do you know where i could find it at?

[Ferd]

do you know where i could find it at?

I think i saw it on line some place some years ago but I wouldnt have a clue where to find it.


I do know it was a GC sermon so the org should have a copy? it was from some time in the last 70s if memory serves.

[kclee4jc]

here is a list of messages by him but don't see that particular one
http://www.apostolicarchives.com/catalog/item/6030331/5884004.htm

[Ferd]

do you know where i could find it at?

found it!

http://www.goodpreaching.com/


go to audio preaching, look under the list by name. the sermon is there.

[kclee4jc]

here it is "Word Magnified Above the Name"

listening now..

[kclee4jc]

http://www.apostolicpodcast.com/sermons/ByName/GeorgeGlass/

[kclee4jc]

haha..found twice

[Ferd]

fantastic!

[returnman]

It is ironic that our most recent split was due to a group who wanted to keep the ban on advertising on TV. They actually split over that. My pastor at the time voted against lifting the ban and was not happy that it was indeed lifted. But he was outraged when these men actually left the organization over this.

Even our own Elder Epley stated it was sour grapes to pull out over it after enduring other issues throughout the years.

[Ferd]

They didn't see this coming because they never thought the day would come when a bunch Jesus-Name Pentecostals would choose to devour each other instead of choosing to love and encourage each other.

There wasn't a "growing doctrinal difference" between the two camps. There was a growing desire to no longer be united and people have been using all sorts of religious excuses to justify their sinful attitudes towards people that for YEARS were considered to be their brothers and sisters in the Lord.

You say there wasn't a 'growing doctrinal difference between the two camps' but I can see it plain as day. AFF is in fact a sort of microcosm of that schism.

If two groups differ on the nature and mechanisms of salvation, how can they stay in unity for long?

On the other hand, I do find it interesting that people who suppoedly are willing to 'agree to disagree' on the subject of salvation are willing to to split over the subject of television.

There is no question that there were growing differences. But it wasn’t simply two different beliefs about salvation. It was a wide range of things from television, dress standards etc to salvation etc.

Remember that this didn’t happen in a vacuum. All of this happened within the context of the wider culture.
Some guys like Westberg were reactionaries. They stood against every single thing that came down from the culture.
Others were more willing to see themselves as people who had to work within the culture
And still others were moved by the culture to the point that they really didn’t separate from it.

By the time Westberg decided he needed to do something that divide was getting wider but it wasn’t what it is now for sure. Personally I think he realized he was at the end of his life and he wanted to do something to push things his direction after he died.

I also think it was about as wrong-headed a thing as anyone could have come up with, because in the end it forced men to choose sides in a way that was in some ways against their own interests. It caused a deepening and a widening of the doctrinal differences that while already there.

[Ferd]

Even our own Elder Epley stated it was sour grapes to pull out over it after enduring other issues throughout the years.

It is my humble opinion that the split caused by the 1992 fiasco was the worst day for the UPCI....and the split caused by the lifting the ban on advertisement on TV was the best possible thing that could happen to the UPCI at the time it happened....

[Jermyn Davidson]

You say there wasn't a 'growing doctrinal difference between the two camps' but I can see it plain as day. AFF is in fact a sort of microcosm of that schism.

If two groups differ on the nature and mechanisms of salvation, how can they stay in unity for long?

On the other hand, I do find it interesting that people who suppoedly are willing to 'agree to disagree' on the subject of salvation are willing to to split over the subject of television.

The doctrinal difference you refer to was part of the original agreement from the very beginning.

So no, major doctrinal differences didn't grow-- they were highlighted, emphasized, and made to be a dividing point by people who forgot the spirit behind the merger that formed their great organization.

They became sinful, unloving, and hopefully they have found repentance over their nastiness and the pain they caused their brothers and sisters in the Lord.

Millstones any one?

[Ferd]

Esaias, the unifying factor was the name of Jesus and what that meant to the men in both the PCI and the PAJC. Oneness doctrine mattered deeply to them all.

It seperated them from everyone else.


I don’t mean this as a dig in any way shape or form, but for those that left, it seems to me that Oneness no longer holds that preeminent place.

[Esaias]

And can nothing good come of all this?

We now have more Oneness Pentecostal organizations on the scene. We now have people looking at the purpose of organizations (not as many as I would hope, but it is there...)

All the people were in one place, and God wanted them to move on and out, so he caused a scandal and a rift and they moved on and out, and the rest is history (speaking of Babel).

All the church was in Jerusalem. God wanted them to move on and out. So He allowed persecution to get them off their butts and get with it.

Perhaps God doesn't want one 'monolithic mothership' among Oneness Pentecostals.

How many Baptist orgs are there? tons. And are not Baptist churches ubiquitous across the land?

Just wondering out loud here.

[Pressing-On]

And can nothing good come of all this?

We now have more Oneness Pentecostal organizations on the scene. We now have people looking at the purpose of organizations (not as many as I would hope, but it is there...)

All the people were in one place, and God wanted them to move on and out, so he caused a scandal and a rift and they moved on and out, and the rest is history (speaking of Babel).

All the church was in Jerusalem. God wanted them to move on and out. So He allowed persecution to get them off their butts and get with it.

Perhaps God doesn't want one 'monolithic mothership' among Oneness Pentecostals.

How many Baptist orgs are there? tons. And are not Baptist churches ubiquitous across the land?

Just wondering out loud here.

It's interesting that you can become a member of any Baptist Church and not know any of the members in the various churches across the city. That is never true in Pentecost. :heeheehee

[Sarah]

Back to the DeQincy Story!

When Pastor Bennet died, the church was rocked. As soon as he passed, people started lining up to his heir as he had none. Well all the sudden this lady steps forward with the will and says she is his wife. LOL.

Total train wreck. No one saw it comeing (except my grandfather who was already dead).

Let me tell you that it was pure pandimonium. and the church was already filled with factions and after that it just got worse.

They couldnt come to any kind of agreement on who the next pastor would be.

Papa George wen there as interum to handle the transition. Ive already talked about his gentlness and kindness. But there was iron in the man too!

After several preachers were tried out, they would vote and the vote would be split. one side would find out what the other was doing, and they would vote against that side.

Papa George got tired of it. He brought in David Hennigan and then when he called the vote, he told them the vote would be held the morning after an all night prayer meeting. He gave them the time to be at the church the night before, and he told them the doors would be locked at a certain point. Anyone not in the building when the doors were locked would not vote! LOL

He also walked around the prayer meeting and made sure everyone was praying. Ive heard (cannot verify) that he also threatend those that were there but not praying that they wouldnt be allowed to vote!

Pastor Hennigan won the election with a BIG majority. He went on to be a fanstastic pastor and the church was greatly blessed.

I remember that happening when Bro Bennett died, Ferd. Did anybody ever learn why he wanted his marriage to be kept secret?

[Pressing-On]

I dont care which one it was, you will be blessed.

but if you can find "He has exaulted his WORD above his NAME", you and everyone owes it to themselves to listen to that one.

it is truely amazing and in light of the current discussion, one that we certainly ought to be trying to live up to.

Hey! I remember hearing this message. Someone must have loaned me the tape. I'll have to listen to it again.

[Ferd]

I remember that happening when Bro Bennett died, Ferd. Did anybody ever learn why he wanted his marriage to be kept secret?

The woman he married had previously been married. if memory serves she had at least one child by a previous husband.

Divorce in those days was far more of an issue.

[Praxeas]

The UPCI has gone thru a pretty difficult streatch but seriously it is not all doom and gloom.

The guys that were in charge during the worst of it are dead and gone. As some others have pointed out, the hard liners have left or are leaving. The rebelrousers started a wrestling federation to beat people up in and the liberals are/have left as well.

What is left is an organization that is smaller for sure but in some ways more moderate.

What is really odd to me is that all this talk has come up right now before this particular GC in which the UPCI HAS ON THE TABLE A MOTION TO REMOVE ANY REFERENCE TO TELEVISION FROM THE MANUAL!

serously people, we are talking about how awful the UPCI is today...how conservative it is...TODAY.... right when the org is making moves to moderate?


its almost like the guys who have been "claiming" they want change really are just trying to sabatoge. What do they really want? implosion?
Yes it is becoming moderate. Sadly though for many it's still too conservative

[Ferd]

Yes it is becoming moderate. Sadly though for many it's still too conservative

yea well there are crazy people running around the USA that claim Barak Obama is a Neo-Con...

im not overly concerned with what the wild eyed lovers of this world think Prax.

[Praxeas]

Prax, you know I am not asking 'how can we find an opportunity to snub others?'
The fact is there are two different issues that went on in the UPC and one of them was in fact about snubbing others for any slight divergence in doctrine.

I witness it here where a former UPC in a neighboring city would never fellowship with us when the were UPC. Their pastor regularly throttled our church and pastor to his congregation.

We preached the whole 3 stepper ball of wax with standards. That did not matter as the pastor still found something he did not like about us and my pastor.

Yet 2 groups met and agreed to form an organization despite 1 group being 3 step and the other 1. They agreed NOT to contend for their differences.

[Praxeas]

Many left because they did not want the UPCI to control them. They wanted freedom from the organizations rules....etc. The irony is that even though they left.....the organization still controls them.....they are driven by their disdain for the machine and the mechanics who maintain it......it controls their thoughts, actions, and direction......let it go and move on.....if not the very thing you are trying to destroy will destroy you.

In the end, when you are dead, will they be able to say you accomplished great things for the cause of Christ, or will they say he/she sure spent a lot of time hashing/rehashing the org they used to be in.
Hmm, which ones? Many that left and became independent have more rules than an Islamic nation under Sharia law

[Praxeas]

They didn't see this coming because they never thought the day would come when a bunch Jesus-Name Pentecostals would choose to devour each other instead of choosing to love and encourage each other.

There wasn't a "growing doctrinal difference" between the two camps. There was a growing desire to no longer be united and people have been using all sorts of religious excuses to justify their sinful attitudes towards people that for YEARS were considered to be their brothers and sisters in the Lord.
See that's the point. They CHOOSE to divide and reform, divide and reform. Argue about doctrinal differences. Force other churches to confirm to THEIR standard...that is why the OP movement is anemic. They lost site of why we organized and focused instead of why we shouldn't

[Praxeas]

You say there wasn't a 'growing doctrinal difference between the two camps' but I can see it plain as day. AFF is in fact a sort of microcosm of that schism.

If two groups differ on the nature and mechanisms of salvation, how can they stay in unity for long?

On the other hand, I do find it interesting that people who suppoedly are willing to 'agree to disagree' on the subject of salvation are willing to to split over the subject of television.
the root of both systems is faith.

However one emphasizes obedience in order to become saved, to the Acts 2:38/tongues teaching and the other BECAUSE we are saved and saved people are obedient. It's a nuance but both believed in the same message but just not when and how salvation occurs

The fact is the 1 steppers for a long time had no problem with others not agreeing with them. They did not try to change the rest of the orgs through political take overs. The disagreement came from the 3 steppers.

[Praxeas]

And can nothing good come of all this?

We now have more Oneness Pentecostal organizations on the scene. We now have people looking at the purpose of organizations (not as many as I would hope, but it is there...)

All the people were in one place, and God wanted them to move on and out, so he caused a scandal and a rift and they moved on and out, and the rest is history (speaking of Babel).

All the church was in Jerusalem. God wanted them to move on and out. So He allowed persecution to get them off their butts and get with it.

Perhaps God doesn't want one 'monolithic mothership' among Oneness Pentecostals.

How many Baptist orgs are there? tons. And are not Baptist churches ubiquitous across the land?

Just wondering out loud here.
The Oneness organizations are not growing larger with souls. Instead they are simply getting smaller as they divide.

Having more and smaller Oneness Organizations is not success

As One organization (the UPCI) we did not circle the wagons in Missouri. We were planting churches across the nation and sending missionaries out to the world.

The comparison to a church stuck in Jerusalem is really off

[Esaias]

The Oneness organizations are not growing larger with souls. Instead they are simply getting smaller as they divide.

Having more and smaller Oneness Organizations is not success

As One organization (the UPCI) we did not circle the wagons in Missouri. We were planting churches across the nation and sending missionaries out to the world.

The comparison to a church stuck in Jerusalem is really off

In other words, we're repeating the history of the holiness movement in the late 19th century.

[Praxeas]

In other words, we're repeating the history of the holiness movement in the late 19th century.
I wouldn't know.

However can anyone answer why the 1 steppers were content to be a part of this organization and not force the 3 steppers to change but not vice versa?

Even pastors who did not believe Standards were a heaven or hell issue were content to be organized and keep doing the standards bit before that "fateful resolution" tried to force people to hand their brains over to something they could not

[BeenThinkin]

Back to the DeQincy Story!

When Pastor Bennet died, the church was rocked. As soon as he passed, people started lining up to his heir as he had none. Well all the sudden this lady steps forward with the will and says she is his wife. LOL.

Total train wreck. No one saw it comeing (except my grandfather who was already dead).

Let me tell you that it was pure pandimonium. and the church was already filled with factions and after that it just got worse.

They couldnt come to any kind of agreement on who the next pastor would be.

Papa George wen there as interum to handle the transition. Ive already talked about his gentlness and kindness. But there was iron in the man too!

After several preachers were tried out, they would vote and the vote would be split. one side would find out what the other was doing, and they would vote against that side.

Papa George got tired of it. He brought in David Hennigan and then when he called the vote, he told them the vote would be held the morning after an all night prayer meeting. He gave them the time to be at the church the night before, and he told them the doors would be locked at a certain point. Anyone not in the building when the doors were locked would not vote! LOL

He also walked around the prayer meeting and made sure everyone was praying. Ive heard (cannot verify) that he also threatend those that were there but not praying that they wouldnt be allowed to vote!

Pastor Hennigan won the election with a BIG majority. He went on to be a fanstastic pastor and the church was greatly blessed.


I preached for Elder Bennett after his health started failing. Can see him now slowly going to the platform with his head shaking slightly, from side to side. He was a great man and an honorable man! And in earlier days, when questioned by the board about the lady, he informed them there was nothing immoral going on! Of course not, he was right, he was married to her.:happydance

Great memories.

Been Thinkin

[Esaias]

I wouldn't know.

However can anyone answer why the 1 steppers were content to be a part of this organization and not force the 3 steppers to change but not vice versa?



Is it really all that simple?

[Praxeas]

Is it really all that simple?
It was at the merger...what changed?
Attitudes?

[Esaias]

It was at the merger...what changed?
Attitudes?

No, I mean is the reality really as simple as 'the 1 steppers were content and happy and didn't require the others to change but the 3 steppers were the opposite'?

I think i mentioned in the original post about 'family dynasties'. I've noticed among OPs the same family connections keep popping up in regard to various issues... which makes me think maybe there is more to the schisms than just doctrinal issues.

[Praxeas]

No, I mean is the reality really as simple as 'the 1 steppers were content and happy and didn't require the others to change but the 3 steppers were the opposite'?

I think i mentioned in the original post about 'family dynasties'. I've noticed among OPs the same family connections keep popping up in regard to various issues... which makes me think maybe there is more to the schisms than just doctrinal issues.
Yes it is that simple. What names pop up with regards to trying to force the entire organization to change to one way or the other or be forced out? Are they One steppers or three?

And if there is more to the schism than just doctrine, doesn't that fit in with what I said about attitudes?

[Esaias]

Yes it is that simple. What names pop up with regards to trying to force the entire organization to change to one way or the other or be forced out? Are they One steppers or three?

And if there is more to the schism than just doctrine, doesn't that fit in with what I said about attitudes?

I admit I don't know all the details (it's got kind of a soap opera feel to me, honestly). I do see some serious doctrinal differences amongst those who are members of the UPC, and many have left due to those differences as well as 'which way the winds seem to be blowing' in Hazelwood.

However, I don't think it's all reducible to '2 steppers = bad, 1 steppers good' in regards to 'attitudes'.

I do notice that '1 stepper doctrine' is not as 'divisive' in regards to the rest of christendom... maybe that plays a part? Or maybe there are people who came into the UPC from other denominational backgrounds and brought some baggage with them?

I dunno.

I do know however that I haven't seen any kind of a 'history of the movement' that wasn't rife with bias, at least not since 'Phenomenon of Pentecost' at least... Fudge's bias is too blatant.

Maybe Ferd and Epley (and you?) and some of the others can put together a basic timeline of who, what, when, where, and why (as they see it) so folks can get a 'big picture' view of things.

[Praxeas]

I admit I don't know all the details (it's got kind of a soap opera feel to me, honestly). I do see some serious doctrinal differences amongst those who are members of the UPC, and many have left due to those differences as well as 'which way the winds seem to be blowing' in Hazelwood.

However, I don't think it's all reducible to '2 steppers = bad, 1 steppers good' in regards to 'attitudes'.

I do notice that '1 stepper doctrine' is not as 'divisive' in regards to the rest of christendom... maybe that plays a part? Or maybe there are people who came into the UPC from other denominational backgrounds and brought some baggage with them?

I dunno.

I do know however that I haven't seen any kind of a 'history of the movement' that wasn't rife with bias, at least not since 'Phenomenon of Pentecost' at least... Fudge's bias is too blatant.

Maybe Ferd and Epley (and you?) and some of the others can put together a basic timeline of who, what, when, where, and why (as they see it) so folks can get a 'big picture' view of things.
But there was a time when folks weren't leaving, at least not noticeably.

What changed?

[Esaias]

But there was a time when folks weren't leaving, at least not noticeably.

What changed?

Who's leaving? And who is in charge?

Obviously, the one's leaving don't like the one's in charge, I would guess...

[Praxeas]

Who's leaving? And who is in charge?

Obviously, the one's leaving don't like the one's in charge, I would guess...
Many were forced to leave after the "Loyalty Oath" and the direction to change the organization both in official bylaws/statements and the demographics (putting pressure on people to change or leave)

[bishoph]

Many were forced to leave after the "Loyalty Oath" and the direction to change the organization both in official bylaws/statements and the demographics (putting pressure on people to change or leave)

I understand the argument that people were "forced to leave" because of the AS.....I cannot agree however. When people signed their applications they covenanted themselves to abide by the governing document (the manual) of the organization. They knew what they were agreeing to believe, teach, and practice. All the AS did was make them accountable for what they had already covenanted to do.

I have stated many times that I actually had great respect for the men (even if I disagreed with their beliefs) who said I cannot sign a lie nor violate my conscious. However, the reality is that they (and all of those who continue to sign knowing they do NOT believe) were lying anyway. They signed an application stating that they agreed with the doctrine of the UPCI when in reality either they did not....or they at some point changed. Are some of those men good men.......absolutely.....but one should not preach truth and live a lie.

[Ferd]

Lets not forget this conversation is happening while we watch. The new leadership make course corrections.

And let's also remember the guys in charge back then are now on the other side of the grave.

[FlamingZword]

I understand the argument that people were "forced to leave" because of the AS.....I cannot agree however. When people signed their applications they covenanted themselves to abide by the governing document (the manual) of the organization. They knew what they were agreeing to believe, teach, and practice. All the AS did was make them accountable for what they had already covenanted to do.

I have stated many times that I actually had great respect for the men (even if I disagreed with their beliefs) who said I cannot sign a lie nor violate my conscious. However, the reality is that they (and all of those who continue to sign knowing they do NOT believe) were lying anyway. They signed an application stating that they agreed with the doctrine of the UPCI when in reality either they did not....or they at some point changed. Are some of those men good men.......absolutely.....but one should not preach truth and live a lie.

Many signed out of fear because they feared to lose their church.
Their livelihood depended on their ministry.

Others did not want to leave the church, so even though they did not agree they signed because they wanted to stay, not because they believe in the AS.

I believe that it is time for ALL (Yes I mean ALL, Whether they believe it or not) ministers to simply refuse to sign the AS and simply send in their yearly renewal fees. If enough ministers simply refuse to sign, this will force a change.

[Ferd]

Many signed out of fear because they feared to lose their church.
Their livelihood depended on their ministry.

Others did not want to leave the church, so even though they did not agree they signed because they wanted to stay, not because they believe in the AS.

I believe that it is time for ALL (Yes I mean ALL, Whether they believe it or not) ministers to simply refuse to sign the AS and simply send in their yearly renewal fees. If enough ministers simply refuse to sign, this will force a change.

if you will just be a bit patient, you will see things change in a positive way. Or you can keep on being all worried about it and well.... thing are still going to go in one direction or another.


I know a lot of guys who sign and attach a letter that clarifies what they are saying with their signature. LOL. I like that.

[Hoovie]

if you will just be a bit patient, you will see things change in a positive way. Or you can keep on being all worried about it and well.... thing are still going to go in one direction or another.


I know a lot of guys who sign and attach a letter that clarifies what they are saying with their signature. LOL. I like that.

Agreed.

[navygoat1998]

The only problem I can see with the UPCI, is I left :heeheehee

[Hoovie]

I wouldn't know.

However can anyone answer why the 1 steppers were content to be a part of this organization and not force the 3 steppers to change but not vice versa?

Even pastors who did not believe Standards were a heaven or hell issue were content to be organized and keep doing the standards bit before that "fateful resolution" tried to force people to hand their brains over to something they could not

Because most 1 Steppers like myself are considerably more tolerant than a true 3 stepper...

While many 1 steppers believe Baptism In Jesus' Name and Speaking in Tongues are important doctrines (even though not salvific) they are tolerant of those believers who disagree with them (both three steppers and Baptists) and expect to see them in heaven.

[Blubayou]

Excellent discussion, like AFF of old.

[Ferd]

The only problem I can see with the UPCI, is I left :heeheehee

I will take u back my navy buddy!

[Praxeas]

The UPC will never get back to a positive growth as long as they allow that magic hair crud to grow. They need to cut it off now :heeheehee

[Ferd]

The UPC will never get back to a positive growth as long as they allow that magic hair crud to grow. They need to cut it off now :heeheehee

Well I can tell you that trash is NOT preached in my little corner of the UPCI

[Originalist]

Well I can tell you that trash is NOT preached in my little corner of the UPCI

It's time to speak up. Nobody in leadership will do it because there seems to be this attitude that pastors and celebrities cannot be corrected, unless of course they are fellowshipping with Trinitarians.

[Pressing-On]

Because most 1 Steppers like myself are considerably more tolerant than a true 3 stepper...

While many 1 steppers believe Baptism In Jesus' Name and Speaking in Tongues are important doctrines (even though not salvific) they are tolerant of those believers who disagree with them (both three steppers and Baptists) and expect to see them in heaven.

Why wouldn't you be tolerant when you don't view it as salvific? It's no sweat off your back. :heeheehee

And, BTW, Ephesians says that He sealed us with that Holy Spirit of "promise" which is the "earnest/security" of our "inheritance/heirship". Without it, you are not an heir. So how is that not salvific?

How do you reconcile Romans 8, when it says if you "have not" the Spirit of Christ, you are none/not of His? That sounds pretty serious toward our salvation.

[Hoovie]

Why wouldn't you be tolerant when you don't view it as salvific? It's no sweat off your back. :heeheehee

I was just answering the question.:highfive Not claiming higher moral ground... cause I'm tolerant like that. :)

[Pressing-On]

I was just answering the question.:highfive Not claiming higher moral ground... cause I'm tolerant like that. :)

:toofunny

[Hoovie]

PO, perhaps we need to review the "High Church" and "Liturgical Worship" threads... for a double barrel of good ole fashion tolerance!?

[Pressing-On]

PO, perhaps we need to review the "High Church" and "Liturgical Worship" threads... for a double barrel of good ole fashion tolerance!?

Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, wore it, sold it in a garage sale. :heeheehee

[houston]

Why wouldn't you be tolerant when you don't view it as salvific? It's no sweat off your back. :heeheehee And, BTW, Ephesians says that He sealed us with that Holy Spirit of "promise" which is the "earnest/security" of our "inheritance/heirship". Without it, you are not an heir. So how is that not salvific? How do you reconcile Romans 8, when it says if you "have not" the Spirit of Christ, you are none/not of His? That sounds pretty serious toward our salvation.initial evidence... You equate being spirit filled with tongues. No tongues, no spirit per your doctrine. One steppers believe that people are saved by/at faith. God gives the spirit to those that believe.

[Hoovie]

Why wouldn't you be tolerant when you don't view it as salvific? It's no sweat off your back. :heeheehee

And, BTW, Ephesians says that He sealed us with that Holy Spirit of "promise" which is the "earnest/security" of our "inheritance/heirship". Without it, you are not an heir. So how is that not salvific?

How do you reconcile Romans 8, when it says if you "have not" the Spirit of Christ, you are none/not of His? That sounds pretty serious toward our salvation.

I see you edited after I responded. Houston pretty much answered it.

The majority of Christians, and even the majority of Pentecostals who speak in tongues, believe the Holy Spirit (at least in degree) comes when one believes in Jesus and is born again. The test of sonship is not tongues... those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

[Pressing-On]

initial evidence... You equate being spirit filled with tongues. No tongues, no spirit per your doctrine. One steppers believe that people are saved by/at faith. God gives the spirit to those that believe.

I see you edited after I responded. Houston pretty much answered it.

The majority of Christians, and even the majority of Pentecostals who speak in tongues, believe the Holy Spirit (at least in degree) comes when one believes in Jesus and is born again. The test of sonship is not tongues... those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

Yea, I remember when I used to be a Baptist. :heeheehee

[Esaias]

Excellent discussion, like AFF of old.

That's cause it's all us old-timers!

:happydance

[kclee4jc]

initial evidence... You equate being spirit filled with tongues. No tongues, no spirit per your doctrine. One steppers believe that people are saved by/at faith. God gives the spirit to those that believe.

God gives the "spirit of Christ" spoken of in Romans 8 at faith/salvation. This is the "work of regeneration by the Spirit". At this point you don't have the "Holy Ghost" because they are two distinct spirits. Then you go on to receive the "Baptism of the Holy Ghost" which comes with the evidence of speaking in tongues.

This is how it was explained to me by a AG person the other day. I used to believe subsequence but I never did believe that the "spirit of Christ" and the "Holy Ghost" were two distinct spirits.

[Aquila]

You know what I think???

Here's the problem with the UPCI... people won't leave them alone.

People have a right to live by their convictions, no matter how outlandish or unbiblical that those convictions might seem. People have a right to set standards for private associations... no matter how outlandish those standards of fellowship might seem. As a private organization they have the right to govern their body as they wish.

So... if you don't feel at home in the UPCI... maybe it isn't for you. Maybe God is calling you elsewhere. Don't become bitter, don't try to make radical waves on the illusive hopes that things might change overnight. Just find another house of worship. You have the right to live according to your beliefs and convictions too. And who knows... maybe God's best for you is waiting... waiting to be received once you let go. Be true to yourself. Live the life you desire to live deep in your heart. Besides... it will come out eventually anyway. Why waste another day that you'll never get back fuming over something YOU can change for yourself?

If the UPCI is a good fit for you, that's cool too. Stay true to what you believe deep in your heart. I can respect that. And I value many people within the UPCI... even thought I'm not a big fan of the organization.

[scotty]

Yea, I remember when I used to be a Baptist. :heeheehee

Or AOG.

Or as my mother calls them, "glorified Baptist". :heeheehee

[n david]

You know what I think???

Here's the problem with the UPCI... people won't leave them alone.

People have a right to live by their convictions, no matter how outlandish or unbiblical that those convictions might seem. People have a right to set standards for private associations... no matter how outlandish those standards of fellowship might seem. As a private organization they have the right to govern their body as they wish.

So... if you don't feel at home in the UPCI... maybe it isn't for you. Maybe God is calling you elsewhere. Don't become bitter, don't try to make radical waves on the illusive hopes that things might change overnight. Just find another house of worship. You have the right to live according to your beliefs and convictions too. And who knows... maybe God's best for you is waiting... waiting to be received once you let go. Be true to yourself. Live the life you desire to live deep in your heart. Besides... it will come out eventually anyway. Why waste another day that you'll never get back fuming over something YOU can change for yourself?

If the UPCI is a good fit for you, that's cool too. Stay true to what you believe deep in your heart. I can respect that. And I value many people within the UPCI... even thought I'm not a big fan of the organization.
Thank you! :thumbsup

[Pressing-On]

God gives the "spirit of Christ" spoken of in Romans 8 at faith/salvation. This is the "work of regeneration by the Spirit". At this point you don't have the "Holy Ghost" because they are two distinct spirits. Then you go on to receive the "Baptism of the Holy Ghost" which comes with the evidence of speaking in tongues.

This is how it was explained to me by a AG person the other day. I used to believe subsequence but I never did believe that the "spirit of Christ" and the "Holy Ghost" were two distinct spirits.

This is what my husband was taught growing up. His grandfather was a COG preacher. He later rejected the teaching seeing the fallacy in it.

We totally agree with your last statement. :thumbsup

[Pressing-On]

Or AOG.

Or as my mother calls them, "glorified Baptist". :heeheehee

:toofunny :toofunny

[Pressing-On]

You know what I think???

Here's the problem with the UPCI... people won't leave them alone.

People have a right to live by their convictions, no matter how outlandish or unbiblical that those convictions might seem. People have a right to set standards for private associations... no matter how outlandish those standards of fellowship might seem. As a private organization they have the right to govern their body as they wish.

So... if you don't feel at home in the UPCI... maybe it isn't for you. Maybe God is calling you elsewhere. Don't become bitter, don't try to make radical waves on the illusive hopes that things might change overnight. Just find another house of worship. You have the right to live according to your beliefs and convictions too. And who knows... maybe God's best for you is waiting... waiting to be received once you let go. Be true to yourself. Live the life you desire to live deep in your heart. Besides... it will come out eventually anyway. Why waste another day that you'll never get back fuming over something YOU can change for yourself?

If the UPCI is a good fit for you, that's cool too. Stay true to what you believe deep in your heart. I can respect that. And I value many people within the UPCI... even though I'm not a big fan of the organization.

:thumbsup :thumbsup

[kclee4jc]

Or AOG.

Or as my mother calls them, "glorified Baptist". :heeheehee

basically yes

[houston]

basically yeswhy a baptist?

[Pressing-On]

initial evidence... You equate being spirit filled with tongues. No tongues, no spirit per your doctrine. One steppers believe that people are saved by/at faith. God gives the spirit to those that believe.

why a baptist?

The bold is Baptist, and at that point you have received His Spirit. Of course, no evidence or biblical prove for that.

[scotty]

The bold is Baptist, and at that point you have received His Spirit. Of course, no evidence or biblical prove for that.

I said the prayer back when I was 11. Something hit me during service, made tears come to my eyes. To this day I know God moved on me in that little baptist church. Went to the front, the preacher stuck a mic to my mouth and said "repeat after me" and poof, I was saved!!!!

Never felt it again, until 3 years later I went to a pentecost church with a friend. Haven't looked back.

[KWSS1976]

See, thats the issue I have PO as you stated below I bolded everyone wants to run to the evidence, what about the snake handling evidence in the bible and picking one up..I dont see that being done in the majority of the Churches unless your in the Mountians..

The bold is Baptist, and at that point you have received His Spirit. Of course, no evidence or biblical prove for that.

[houston]

After the Lord drew me (repentance) I had this great hunger for the word of God and prayer. That looks like evidence to me.

[Pressing-On]

See, thats the issue I have PO as you stated below I bolded everyone wants to run to the evidence, what about the snake handling evidence in the bible and picking one up..I dont see that being done in the majority of the Churches unless your in the Mountians..

The bold is Baptist, and at that point you have received His Spirit. Of course, no evidence or biblical prove for that.
The Greek for a serpent includes, figuratively, an artful or cunning person and can include Satan. If that is taken out of context by some, it can be shown that the interpretation is simply wrong headed.

[Hoovie]

Yea, I remember when I used to be a Baptist. :heeheehee

Right... Or UPC for that matter. Historical documents show us that a sizable percentage of the UPC - even ministers, did not exactly expect heaven to be a reunion of Oneness Pentecostal tongue speakers. I agree with the first General Superintendent of the United Pentecostal Church in this matter.

[Pressing-On]

I said the prayer back when I was 11. Something hit me during service, made tears come to my eyes. To this day I know God moved on me in that little baptist church. Went to the front, the preacher stuck a mic to my mouth and said "repeat after me" and poof, I was saved!!!!

Never felt it again, until 3 years later I went to a pentecost church with a friend. Haven't looked back.

Same here. I have been at a couple of Baptist altars, tears, but still feeling empty until I came into Pentecost.

My BIL, a Baptist, told me you knew you had the Spirit when you felt joy. Okay, I felt joy taking a tequila shot when I was a bartender. I KNEW I was not saved. :heeheehee

[Pressing-On]

Right... Or UPC for that matter. Historical documents show us that a sizable percentage of the UPC - even ministers, did not exactly expect heaven to be a reunion of Oneness Pentecostal tongue speakers. I agree with the first General Superintendent of the United Pentecostal Church in this matter.

I agree with the Bible. I am following Peter and Paul (Acts 10:46; Acts 19:6) Hang men and their personal views... Just sayin'....:heeheehee

[Esaias]

Same here. I have been at a couple of Baptist altars, tears, but still feeling empty until I came into Pentecost.

My BIL, a Baptist, told me you knew you had the Spirit when you felt joy. Okay, I felt joy taking a tequila shot when I was a bartender. I KNEW I was not saved. :heeheehee

I got the Holy Ghost in a little Baptist church. The preacher thought something was wrong with me, thought I was on drugs or having a freak out.

lol

[KWSS1976]

Well PO since we are going all "Greek",In Greek the word Tongues whats the definition?

[Hoovie]

Same here. I have been at a couple of Baptist altars, tears, but still feeling empty until I came into Pentecost.

My BIL, a Baptist, told me you knew you had the Spirit when you felt joy. Okay, I felt joy taking a tequila shot when I was a bartender. I KNEW I was not saved. :heeheehee

I am sure all of our experiences have some impact on our beliefs.

I was born again as an Old Order Mennonite - laying in bed listening to a Tape from Because of the Times.... I felt the Holy Spirit come into my heart and cried repenting of my sins. The presence of the Holy a Spirit was overwhelming, and I turned off the tape player to see whether it was literally coming out of the speaker. It did not stop, and it dawned on me that this was not "a feeling" but literally Jesus coming to me! I did speak in tongues the following year.

[Pressing-On]

I am sure all of our experiences have some impact on our beliefs.

I was born again as an Old Order Mennonite - laying in bed listening to a Tape from Because of the Times.... I felt the Holy Spirit come into my heart and cried repenting of my sins. The presence of the Holy a Spirit was overwhelming, and I turned off the tape player to see whether it was literally coming out of the speaker. It did not stop, and it dawned on me that this was not "a feeling" but literally Jesus coming to me! I did speak in tongues the following year.

I agree - all of our experiences have some impact on our beliefs.

I can look back and see God's hand in my life before I fully gave my life to Him - showing His intense love for me.

It is just that I have noticed, since FCF, that there are those who do and have spoken in tongues who continue saying it is not the evidence, and that is just really weird. I can't decipher that in my little pea brain. :heeheehee

[Pressing-On]

Well PO since we are going all "Greek",In Greek the word Tongues whats the definition?
It is a language.

[Pressing-On]

I got the Holy Ghost in a little Baptist church. The preacher thought something was wrong with me, thought I was on drugs or having a freak out.

lol

LOL! You are reminding me of another BIL who clapped during a Baptist service and afterward, the pastor told him they don't do that in his congregation. :heeheehee

[KWSS1976]

I will go with Tongues being the evidence, what I dont go with is the misuse of it in the Church setting.

[Sarah]

I got the Holy Ghost in a little Baptist church. The preacher thought something was wrong with me, thought I was on drugs or having a freak out.

lol

lol. I would be interested in hearing all about this, Esaias!

[Pressing-On]

I will go with Tongues being the evidence, what I dont go with is the misuse of it in the Church setting.

Sometimes that can happen when people become more emotional than spiritual. However, we have to be careful not to crush someone making them afraid of a move of God. Although, I've known a few, very few, who would not listen to instruction. They want their emotion.

[Pressing-On]

lol. I would be interested in hearing all about this, Esaias!

I know, right? Had to have freaked out more than the preacher. :heeheehee

[Esaias]

LOL! You are reminding me of another BIL who clapped during a Baptist service and afterward, the pastor told him they don't do that in his congregation. :heeheehee

Oh I got one better than that. My brother was a Campbellite, in a 'Christian church'. He died unfortunately, and we attended his memorial service at his church.

They sang Amazing Grace. I stood up and raised my hands (singing along with everyone else) and was grabbed IMMEDIATELY by an usher from behind who drug me towards the door and told me 'we don't do that here'. I said 'at my own brother's funeral service? Are you kidding?'

They didn't care, so out I had to go. I wasn't even speaking in tongues, just stood up with my hands raised.

:foottap

[Pressing-On]

Oh I got one better than that. My brother was a Campbellite, in a 'Christian church'. He died unfortunately, and we attended his memorial service at his church.

They sang Amazing Grace. I stood up and raised my hands (singing along with everyone else) and was grabbed IMMEDIATELY by an usher from behind who drug me towards the door and told me 'we don't do that here'. I said 'at my own brother's funeral service? Are you kidding?'

They didn't care, so out I had to go. I wasn't even speaking in tongues, just stood up with my hands raised.

:foottap
:toofunny

Get into people's pocketbooks, political and religious views and it is ON. :heeheehee

[Hoovie]

That's weird stuff ESA, the Baptists I know are very open to demonstrative worship including clapping or raising hands

[Esaias]

That's weird stuff ESA, the Baptists I know are very open to demonstrative worship including clapping or raising hands

Baptists?

I got the Holy Ghost in a Baptist church and the preacher thought I was seriously troubled. I wasn't 'clapping or raising hands' I was speaking in tongues, crying, and shaking all over to where I could hardly stand up.

The funeral incident was at a Campbellite church. They used instruments, and one time I visited with my brother they had a 'lady man of God' singing and 'preaching' and she was telling everyone they need to get more lively, lol. I guess they never brought her back for a return visit.

[Hoovie]

I agree - all of our experiences have some impact on our beliefs.

I can look back and see God's hand in my life before I fully gave my life to Him - showing His intense love for me.

It is just that I have noticed, since FCF, that there are those who do and have spoken in tongues who continue saying it is not the evidence, and that is just really weird. I can't decipher that in my little pea brain. :heeheehee

Two possible thoughts/beliefs there...

1. I think most who speak in tongues do believe its evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism

2. Some believe the scripture is not clear that Tongues are the ONLY sign of the baptism of the Holy Ghost...

Both of the above One Stepper views acknowledge the working of the Holy Spirit (and Jesus coming into our hearts) outside of tongues and/or Spirt Baptism.

[Pressing-On]

Two possible thoughts/beliefs there...

1. I think most who speak in tongues do believe its evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism

2. Some believe the scripture is not clear that Tongues are the ONLY sign of the baptism of the Holy Ghost...

Both of the above One Stepper views acknowledge the working of the Holy Spirit (and Jesus coming into our hearts) outside of tongues and/or Spirit Baptism.
Yes, I know that. It is a Baptist view.

As to the No. 2 choice - The phenomenal goings on in the Book of Acts - how does someone miss that? Having been largely a Catholic and briefly a Baptist, my mind can't wrap itself around that kind of thinking. When I try, that empty feeling I had sits there demanding an answer for the emptiness once again.

[scotty]

Yes, I know that. It is a Baptist view.

As to the No. 2 choice - The phenomenal goings on in the Book of Acts - how does someone miss that? Having been largely a Catholic and briefly a Baptist, my mind can't wrap itself around that kind of thinking. When I try, that empty feeling I had sits there demanding an answer for the emptiness once again.

They miss this.

Acts10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?


How did they KNOW they had recieved the Holy Ghost? FOR THEY HEARD THEM SPEAK WITH TONGUES.

But because the bible doesn't explicitly say that every single time the Holy Ghost was recieved then that makes it up for questioning.

[Pressing-On]

They miss this.

Acts10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?


How did they KNOW they had received the Holy Ghost? FOR THEY HEARD THEM SPEAK WITH TONGUES.

But because the bible doesn't explicitly say that every single time the Holy Ghost was received then that makes it up for questioning.

:yourock

[Esaias]

Yes, I know that. It is a Baptist view.

As to the No. 2 choice - The phenomenal goings on in the Book of Acts - how does someone miss that? Having been largely a Catholic and briefly a Baptist, my mind can't wrap itself around that kind of thinking. When I try, that empty feeling I had sits there demanding an answer for the emptiness once again.

There were some early Pentecostals who maintained that 'prophesying' could also qualify as initial evidence. I think William Seymour himself may have been one?

[Hoovie]

I am not sure that it's missed Scotty... That they spoke in tongues as on them at the beginning is not in dispute. But as you note - it's not always the case, and nowhere in scripture is it stated that tongues are an exclusive sign, or that ALL speak in tongues...

[Pressing-On]

There were some early Pentecostals who maintained that 'prophesying' could also qualify as initial evidence. I think William Seymour himself may have been one?

I believe some here also hold that view. My view is that it is apparent the "gifts" were immediately in operation as they "spoke in tongues and prophesied." It's like saying, "I got up in my saddle and rode my horse."

[KWSS1976]

Well let me ask ya'll this, why did the signs end at the book of Acts?

[Pressing-On]

I am not sure that it's missed Scotty... That they spoke in tongues as on them at the beginning is not in dispute. But as you note - it's not always the case, and nowhere in scripture is it stated that tongues are an exclusive sign, or that ALL speak in tongues...

I think that it is always implied. Simply because Jesus was the first to bring it up, i.e., the Holy Ghost, the promise -Acts 1:4-8.

He identifies the Holy Ghost in those verses - what they do and wait for, and proof comes on the day of Pentecost as they tarried.

Therefore, any reference to the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit can only be identified as tongues. It is not necessary to repeat that over and over.

We certainly don't do that in church every time we speak of the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit.

[Esaias]

Well let me ask ya'll this, why did the signs end at the book of Acts?

Did they?

[Esaias]

I think that it is always implied. Simply because Jesus was the first to bring it up, i.e., the Holy Ghost, the promise -Acts 1:4-8.

He identifies the Holy Ghost in those verses - what they do and wait for, and proof comes on the day of Pentecost as they tarried.

Therefore, any reference to the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit can only be identified as tongues. It is not necessary to repeat that over and over.

We certainly don't do that in church every time we speak of the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit.

Furthermore, Peter stated the initial evidence doctrine in Acts 2:16-18. He identified the 'filled with the Holy Ghost ... speak with tongues' (this) with 'pour out my spirit ... they shall prophesy' (that).

Case closed as far as I am concerned. Of course, as always, others disagree.

:icecream

[Pressing-On]

Well let me ask ya'll this, why did the signs end at the book of Acts?

The infilling narrative? The Epistles are written to the churches who had already been filled:

Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints:

I Corinthians 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth,

I Corinthians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth,

Galatians 1:2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:

Ephesians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

Philippians 1:1 Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi,

Colossians 1:2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse:

I Thessalonians 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians

II Thessalonians 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians

[Pressing-On]

Furthermore, Peter stated the initial evidence doctrine in Acts 2:16-18. He identified the 'filled with the Holy Ghost ... speak with tongues' (this) with 'pour out my spirit ... they shall prophesy' (that).

Case closed as far as I am concerned. Of course, as always, others disagree.

:icecream

Yes, as a result of the outpouring/being filled, they would then prophesy.

Case closed for me as well. :thumbsup

[KWSS1976]

PO, I am one that does not buy the whole, all the Churches after Acts were saved cause if you put the Bible in chronological order alot of those books come before Acts, including Romans and Corithians..

[houston]

There were some early Pentecostals who maintained that 'prophesying' could also qualify as initial evidence. I think William Seymour himself may have been one?That is the evidence in the OT.

[Esaias]

PO, I am one that does not buy the whole, all the Churches after Acts were saved cause if you put the Bible in chronological order alot of those books come before Acts, including Romans and Corithians..

:shocked:

[Ferd]

Well let me ask ya'll this, why did the signs end at the book of Acts?

which ones?

My mom was healed in the early 1980s of sevear back pain. She had previously had surgery that included a metal rod being placed in her back. 4 years later, that rod was coming loose.

My dad and I (really just dad as I was small) carried her into church that day.
There was a missionary (Brother Miller who was a missionary to the british isles for many years) was there that day. Mom was mad. She told God "I got out of bed to come watch a slide show?!?!?"

At the end of service, she was helped to the alter where she continued to berate God for the missionary being there and her desperate for healing.

Brother Miller came by, laid hands on her and prayed a simple prayer and all the sudden mom said it was like someone pourd warm butter over her. She stood up with no pain, jumped up and down with no pain, ran around the church with no pain and went home to never have a single issue with that part of her back ever again.

to this day she does house work that had been impossible for her to do for nearly a decade before she was healed.



I have a friend who was given a death sentance by his doctor. he lost 80 pounds in 6 months. We prayed for him. He felt better right at that moment.

he went back to the Dr the next week. over the course of the next 2 weeks he had tests run. The desiese was gone. He gained his weight back in 3 months and 10 years later is doing fantastic.



Now if you are talking about signs that point to th Appian Way, your going to have to ask some Roman why they took the old ones down. But if you are talking about "signs following" well then.... Ive seen them with my own eyes.


Ive told the story about DDBenincasa calling me in the middle of the night, the night my baby came within a handfull of heartbeats of death. He prayed for my baby when all I could do was lay in a fetal position and sob.

My baby started Kindergarden this year.... 6 weeks after heart surgery....surgery the Dr. told us for 5 years was going to result in my baby having to have a pace maker.... my baby doesnt have a pacemaker, nor does he have to take medicine any longer. His heart beats perfectly all on its on for the first time in his life...

yea, some here may deny the signs but Ive LIVED THEM.

[kclee4jc]

PO, I am one that does not buy the whole, all the Churches after Acts were saved cause if you put the Bible in chronological order alot of those books come before Acts, including Romans and Corithians..


now that there is just sad..

[Esaias]

which ones?

My mom was healed in the early 1980s of sevear back pain. She had previously had surgery that included a metal rod being placed in her back. 4 years later, that rod was coming loose.

My dad and I (really just dad as I was small) carried her into church that day.
There was a missionary (Brother Miller who was a missionary to the british isles for many years) was there that day. Mom was mad. She told God "I got out of bed to come watch a slide show?!?!?"

At the end of service, she was helped to the alter where she continued to berate God for the missionary being there and her desperate for healing.

Brother Miller came by, laid hands on her and prayed a simple prayer and all the sudden mom said it was like someone pourd warm butter over her. She stood up with no pain, jumped up and down with no pain, ran around the church with no pain and went home to never have a single issue with that part of her back ever again.

to this day she does house work that had been impossible for her to do for nearly a decade before she was healed.



I have a friend who was given a death sentance by his doctor. he lost 80 pounds in 6 months. We prayed for him. He felt better right at that moment.

he went back to the Dr the next week. over the course of the next 2 weeks he had tests run. The desiese was gone. He gained his weight back in 3 months and 10 years later is doing fantastic.



Now if you are talking about signs that point to th Appian Way, your going to have to ask some Roman why they took the old ones down. But if you are talking about "signs following" well then.... Ive seen them with my own eyes.


Ive told the story about DDBenincasa calling me in the middle of the night, the night my baby came within a handfull of heartbeats of death. He prayed for my baby when all I could do was lay in a fetal position and sob.

My baby started Kindergarden this year.... 6 weeks after heart surgery....surgery the Dr. told us for 5 years was going to result in my baby having to have a pace maker.... my baby doesnt have a pacemaker, nor does he have to take medicine any longer. His heart beats perfectly all on its on for the first time in his life...

yea, some here may deny the signs but Ive LIVED THEM.

:thumbsup

[Ferd]

LOL! You are reminding me of another BIL who clapped during a Baptist service and afterward, the pastor told him they don't do that in his congregation. :heeheehee

When my mom and dad married, dad was baptist... he got fixed up a few years later.... became one of the best Apostolic teachers you could ever here...

before he figured out up from down, my mom and dad had two kids... (my older sisters). Dad got a wild hair one sunday and decided to take them to church with him at First Baptist.

LOL> the girls were raised in a penetecostal church...

During the course of the service the preacher said "lets pray" everyone bowed their heads but my oldest sister who at the time was barely 4 stood up, raised her ands and said quite loudly "OH DEEZUS! OH DOD!" realizing no one was praying she turned to dad and said (again quite loudly) "PRAY DADDY PRAY! NOBODY IS PRAYING! PRAY DADDY PRAY"

LOL.

After service some of dads friends told him, he was fine to come to church but he needed to "send them 'postolic kids back accross the railroad tracks to that pentecostal church"...

Dad ended up going with the girls back accross the tracks and the rest as they say is history!

[Pressing-On]

PO, I am one that does not buy the whole, all the Churches after Acts were saved cause if you put the Bible in chronological order alot of those books come before Acts, including Romans and Corinthians...

LOL! That's funny.

English 101 - "When you read a letter, begin with the salutation. It determines who the writer is addressing."

The chronological order doesn't make a difference. It's like a no-brainer. :heeheehee

[Sarah]

When my mom and dad married, dad was baptist... he got fixed up a few years later.... became one of the best Apostolic teachers you could ever here...

before he figured out up from down, my mom and dad had two kids... (my older sisters). Dad got a wild hair one sunday and decided to take them to church with him at First Baptist.

LOL> the girls were raised in a penetecostal church...

During the course of the service the preacher said "lets pray" everyone bowed their heads but my oldest sister who at the time was barely 4 stood up, raised her ands and said quite loudly "OH DEEZUS! OH DOD!" realizing no one was praying she turned to dad and said (again quite loudly) "PRAY DADDY PRAY! NOBODY IS PRAYING! PRAY DADDY PRAY"

LOL.

After service some of dads friends told him, he was fine to come to church but he needed to "send them 'postolic kids back accross the railroad tracks to that pentecostal church"...

Dad ended up going with the girls back accross the tracks and the rest as they say is history!

I love it, Ferd!!

[Pressing-On]

When my mom and dad married, dad was baptist... he got fixed up a few years later.... became one of the best Apostolic teachers you could ever here...

before he figured out up from down, my mom and dad had two kids... (my older sisters). Dad got a wild hair one sunday and decided to take them to church with him at First Baptist.

LOL> the girls were raised in a penetecostal church...

During the course of the service the preacher said "lets pray" everyone bowed their heads but my oldest sister who at the time was barely 4 stood up, raised her ands and said quite loudly "OH DEEZUS! OH DOD!" realizing no one was praying she turned to dad and said (again quite loudly) "PRAY DADDY PRAY! NOBODY IS PRAYING! PRAY DADDY PRAY"

LOL.

After service some of dads friends told him, he was fine to come to church but he needed to "send them 'postolic kids back across the railroad tracks to that pentecostal church"...

Dad ended up going with the girls back across the tracks and the rest as they say is history!
:toofunny :toofunny

:thumbsup

[MarieA27]

When my mom and dad married, dad was baptist... he got fixed up a few years later.... became one of the best Apostolic teachers you could ever here...

before he figured out up from down, my mom and dad had two kids... (my older sisters). Dad got a wild hair one sunday and decided to take them to church with him at First Baptist.

LOL> the girls were raised in a penetecostal church...

During the course of the service the preacher said "lets pray" everyone bowed their heads but my oldest sister who at the time was barely 4 stood up, raised her ands and said quite loudly "OH DEEZUS! OH DOD!" realizing no one was praying she turned to dad and said (again quite loudly) "PRAY DADDY PRAY! NOBODY IS PRAYING! PRAY DADDY PRAY"

LOL.

After service some of dads friends told him, he was fine to come to church but he needed to "send them 'postolic kids back accross the railroad tracks to that pentecostal church"...

Dad ended up going with the girls back accross the tracks and the rest as they say is history!

:heeheehee Lol!! That is so cute.

[Pressing-On]

which ones?

My mom was healed in the early 1980s of severe back pain. She had previously had surgery that included a metal rod being placed in her back. 4 years later, that rod was coming loose.

My dad and I (really just dad as I was small) carried her into church that day.
There was a missionary (Brother Miller who was a missionary to the British isles for many years) was there that day. Mom was mad. She told God "I got out of bed to come watch a slide show?!?!?"

At the end of service, she was helped to the alter where she continued to berate God for the missionary being there and her desperate for healing.

Brother Miller came by, laid hands on her and prayed a simple prayer and all the sudden mom said it was like someone poured warm butter over her. She stood up with no pain, jumped up and down with no pain, ran around the church with no pain and went home to never have a single issue with that part of her back ever again.

to this day she does house work that had been impossible for her to do for nearly a decade before she was healed.



I have a friend who was given a death sentence by his doctor. he lost 80 pounds in 6 months. We prayed for him. He felt better right at that moment.

he went back to the Dr the next week. over the course of the next 2 weeks he had tests run. The disease was gone. He gained his weight back in 3 months and 10 years later is doing fantastic.



Now if you are talking about signs that point to the Appian Way, your going to have to ask some Roman why they took the old ones down. But if you are talking about "signs following" well then.... Ive seen them with my own eyes.


Ive told the story about DDBenincasa calling me in the middle of the night, the night my baby came within a handful of heartbeats of death. He prayed for my baby when all I could do was lay in a fetal position and sob.

My baby started Kindergarten this year.... 6 weeks after heart surgery....surgery the Dr. told us for 5 years was going to result in my baby having to have a pace maker.... my baby doesn't have a pacemaker, nor does he have to take medicine any longer. His heart beats perfectly all on its on for the first time in his life...

yea, some here may deny the signs but Ive LIVED THEM.

Awesome!!!!!

MY FIL had cancer in one of his knees. He didn't attend church, but went with my MIL one Sunday - Church of God. God healed him that day. He has passed on of old age and a heart that stopped, but he knew that God had healed him that day - never recurring. Some years later, the church men were threatening to beat him up over something, I forgot what it was about, and he never went back. Hahahahahahahahahahaha!

I remember being in church a couple of years. Went home for Christmas. My brother was very ill, laying on the bed in his room. He was supposed to be somewhere, but was too sick to get up. I asked him if he would mind if I prayed for him. A very short prayer - no big display. I went back into the living room and about 5 or 10 minutes later, he came into the room and said he was perfectly fine.

[kclee4jc]

LOL! That's funny.

English 101 - "When you read a letter, begin with the salutation. It determines who the writer is addressing."

The chronological order doesn't make a difference. It's like a no-brainer. :heeheehee

cracks me up

[kclee4jc]

LOL! That's funny.

English 101 - "When you read a letter, begin with the salutation. It determines who the writer is addressing."

The chronological order doesn't make a difference. It's like a no-brainer. :heeheehee

cracks me up :heeheehee

[navygoat1998]

Or AOG.

Or as my mother calls them, "glorified Baptist". :heeheehee

Yep that is true because in our glorified Baptist church last Sunday the Holy Ghost fell and the service was as Pentecostal as any service you guys and have been in. :smack

[Praxeas]

Epistles are written to believers..
1Cor proves signs still happened

[Jason B]

it was absolutly there. Goss and some other early leaders were certainly not water/spirit in doctrine. But they did work to find common ground.

Its sad to see what has happened. I personally would rather the PCI guys still preach that saved folk get baptized right and speak in tongues and still be part of us.

but here we are.... I do see retrenching within the UPCI and I do believe that there is a real effort to bring things back to center. I am hoping the guys in charge get the time they need to do that very thing.

A move to center would be interesting......

[Jermyn Davidson]

A move to center would be interesting......

A move to the center of what-- the earth? Isn't it pretty hot there?

[Praxeas]

A move to the center of what-- the earth? Isn't it pretty hot there?
No, they got pretty flowers that eat you and dinosaurs n stuff :smack

[Jermyn Davidson]

No, they got pretty flowers that eat you and dinosaurs n stuff :smack

Oh my bad!
I guess I got the movies I watched on my monitor a few years ago confused.

[KWSS1976]

Navygoat, we all know the Holyghost only falls in the oneness Pentecostal Churches, come on man thought you knew better then that..That holyghost that fell in your service was not real and the tongues were not real, just as my "Ex Oneness Apostolic/Pentecostal Preacher" told me when we told him we are going to a AG church...yup I really wanted to flip the table over at that point when he said that...

[Pressing-On]

Navygoat, we all know the Holyghost only falls in the oneness Pentecostal Churches, come on man thought you knew better then that..That holyghost that fell in your service was not real and the tongues were not real, just as my "Ex Oneness Apostolic/Pentecostal Preacher" told me when we told him we are going to a AG church...yup I really wanted to flip the table over at that point when he said that...

I don't believe people are thinking what you have written. We happen to know people who are AOG and they do not have Navygoat's story. When I homeschooled, we had some AOG people in our group. They certainly weren't having anything going on like Navygoat shared.

And I have always thought it was a ridiculous thing to say that someone doesn't have the "real Holy Ghost". When real faith is met, God will arrive. It doesn't mean everything is believed correctly, but the Comforter leads us and guides us into all truth - that also includes UPCI people as well.

[KWSS1976]

Well Me and Navygoats AOG churches are on the same page, all our services are like Navygoat described, we even have a few Pentecostals going that still hold the dress standards.. And as far PO not believing what I had written it is true, but I don't think all Pastors think like that.

[navygoat1998]

I don't believe people are thinking what you have written. We happen to know people who are AOG and they do not have Navygoat's story. When I homeschooled, we had some AOG people in our group. They certainly weren't having anything going on like Navygoat shared.

And I have always thought it was a ridiculous thing to say that someone doesn't have the "real Holy Ghost". When real faith is met, God will arrive. It doesn't mean everything is believed correctly, but the Comforter leads us and guides us into all truth - that also includes UPCI people as well.

Its true. When we first moved here a friend of my wife told her about this AG that she walked into a few years ago on a Sunday night and this lady said that everybody was swinging from the chandeliers and out of control, well she was Baptized in the Holy Ghost years ago and she still turned around a left. I don't understand that.

We were looking for a church and we went to a service and after we left I told my wife they need to erase the word Pentecostal from the name.

We go to an AG church that is just that very Pentecostal. I am blessed because all the AG churches we have been part of are very Spirit filled and very Pentecostal, but they are not all like that and it makes me sad.

[houston]

AG has a variety.

Ranging from Fakewood type churches to on fire pentecostal churches.

[navygoat1998]

AG has a variety.

Ranging from Fakewood type churches to on fire pentecostal churches.

:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

Hate to tell you folks this but the UPC could care less what y'all think.:thumbsup
Y'all enjoy your miserable lives.:happydance

[KWSS1976]

Who's miserable Steve..I am perfectly happy what about the rest here????

[RandyWayne]

Hate to tell you folks this but the UPC could care less what y'all think.:thumbsup
Y'all enjoy your miserable lives.:happydance

Wellllllll, my life isn't exactly miserable.

And I could care less about the UPC, or its history.

And I am sure the UPC could care less that I could care less.

And I could are LESS that the UPC could care less about me carrying less.

[Steve Epley]

Wellllllll, my life isn't exactly miserable.

And I could care less about the UPC, or its history.

And I am sure the UPC could care less that I could care less.

And I could are LESS that the UPC could care less about me carrying less.

See. Everyone is happy. :happydance:icecream

[KWSS1976]

This should make everyone feel better...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pWVlHdHQhs

[navygoat1998]

Hate to tell you folks this but the UPC could care less what y'all think.:thumbsup
Y'all enjoy your miserable lives.:happydance

Elder this sounds like a win win situation to me. :laffatu

[Renee29]

So anyone know what happened to Loren Yadon? Where is he now?

[Rose]

So anyone know what happened to Loren Yadon? Where is he now?

http://newlife-boise.org/

[Pressing-On]

Hate to tell you folks this but the UPC could care less what y'all think.:thumbsup
Y'all enjoy your miserable lives.:happydance

:toofunny :toofunny :toofunny

[renee819]

Hate to tell you folks this but the UPC could care less what y'all think.:thumbsup
Y'all enjoy your miserable lives.:happydance

And that is the problem. They couldn't care less!

There are many of us that are truly burdened for the Church.

[FlamingZword]

Hate to tell you folks this but the UPC could care less what y'all think.:thumbsup
Y'all enjoy your miserable lives.:happydance

How sad.
no wonder they are in decline.

As long as a person has Jesus Christ no life is miserable.

[Praxeas]

Hate to tell you folks this but the UPC could care less what y'all think.:thumbsup
Y'all enjoy your miserable lives.:happydance
Could or Couldn't?

[CC1]

Could or Couldn't?

LOL!!! That is one of my wife's pet peeves. She actually corrected our pastor for saying "could care less" about a year ago. He has a degree in English also!

[Timmy]

LOL!!! That is one of my wife's pet peeves. She actually corrected our pastor for saying "could care less" about a year ago. He has a degree in English also!

In this case, perhaps the Elder was correct. Maybe the UPC could care less. If they tried hard enough. :heeheehee

[Steve Epley]

LOL!!! That is one of my wife's pet peeves. She actually corrected our pastor for saying "could care less" about a year ago. He has a degree in English also!

I repent but I am a Ky boy.

[RandyWayne]

LOL!!! That is one of my wife's pet peeves. She actually corrected our pastor for saying "could care less" about a year ago. He has a degree in English also!

My favorite saying at my last job "There ain't no way I ain't gonna do that no more!".

[Pressing-On]

LOL!!! That is one of my wife's pet peeves. She actually corrected our pastor for saying "could care less" about a year ago. He has a degree in English also!

I could care less means that you care to some degree. I think, in many instances, even though some say that they "couldn't care less", they actually "could care less", although, they won't readily admit to it. It is only a private thought.

[CC1]

I repent but I am a Ky boy.

LOL!! I can't remember how I have said the expression through the years but I think I may have actually said it correctly. Now spelling is another matter.......

[Evang.Benincasa]

No the problem is we divide and reform and isolate. That is why we are so anemic.

We divide over small issues and greater issues. We divide because one group attempts to force everyone else to agree or leave

Sounds like every ecumenical council since the start of 325 A.D.

Also Islam has it schisms. Buddhism, and a plethora in hinduism.

Judaism is made up of schisms. Because the Judaism of the Bible cease to exist in 70 A.D.. Therefore it had to be modified to become a religion that no longer needed to be centrally located around its temple. Also needed to get around the need of genealogies and lineages. Becoming more like its Christian counterparts.

The UPCI also goes through the same changes as the other religions. Would be interesting to see how it will look in 100 years from now?

[diakonos]

initial evidence... You equate being spirit filled with tongues. No tongues, no spirit per your doctrine. One steppers believe that people are saved by/at faith. God gives the spirit to those that believe.

Man, how things can change in 10 years.

[diakonos]

I got the Holy Ghost in a little Baptist church. The preacher thought something was wrong with me, thought I was on drugs or having a freak out.

lol

Can you retell this agan? Thanks!