Official Stance of UPC?
 

Does anyone know the official stance of the upc concerning when salvation occurs? My understanding of the beliefs after the azuza outpouring in 1900 is that spirit baptism was a third work of grace with salvation by faith being the first work of grace and sanctification was the second work of Grace. Even though pentecostals never accepted the second work of grace and believed in the finished work doctrine. Can anyone explain how the 3 step salvation developed? Who was responsible? When did this change occur? Is there an apostolic organization that believes salvation at repentance?

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

can anyone explain why john 3:5, "born of the water" would not refer to water baptism?

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

people at asuza did not believe like the upci does today. they were not three steppers in the since.

i remember reading a article that contained a peice of newspaper quoting william seymore. He was addressing the gifts of the Spirit, and that he didnt want them to preach about the gifts of the Spirit First. Preach jesus get them saved.

i dont really want to read through the internet again to find it,

as for the doctrine itself when william Durham tried to preach it (finished work) he was barred from asuza by william seymore

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

is irrelevant to ones walk in Christ Jesus.

just sayin.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

The UPC does not have an "official stance" but what we call the three-step plan of salvation (repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism) is believed by many and is often presented as the "official stance." This three-step plan of salvation should not be confused with another three separate experiences preached by some.

When the Holy Spirit was poured out in the late 1800's and early 1900's, those who received the experience were Christians seeking something more from God. Some were from "holiness" type churches and some were not. Those from "holiness" churches already believed in a post-salvation experience called "sanctification" or "the second blessing" so to them the Holy Ghost Baptism was a separate and subsequent experience --a third experience. The would testify. "I'm saved, sanctified, and filled with the Holy Ghost."

In the early 1900's a preacher named Durham from Chicago preached a message all over the place called "The Finished Work of Calvary." He taught that sanctification or holiness was not a separate experience from salvation but that when we got saved we were made holy and set apart for the Lord and we are to grow in that holiness/sanctification for the rest of our lives. Those from the "holiness" groups that did not accept the finished work doctrine still maintained that sanctification is a separate work and today they are the Church of God (Cleveland, TN), other Church of God groups which split off the Cleveland, TN group, Pentecostal Holiness, and Church of God in Christ. Those that preached the finished work doctrine later organized into what is now the Assemblies of God.

Around 1913 another teaching became popular which was called the new issue. This teaching said that the early church baptized using the name of Jesus (with or without the titles Lord and Christ) instead of the traditional baptism which was being used in just about every church or denomination in the world. Some taught that the name of the Father is Lord; the name of the Son is Jesus; and the name of the Holy Ghost is Christ so they proposed a triune name for a triune God and baptized that way. Others taught that the single name Jesus is the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Many people were re-baptized using these various formulas but re-baptism was not considered salvational --just a step back into the first century teaching of the Apostles.

Later, some began to teach that water baptism in Jesus' name (with or without the titles Lord and Christ) was necessary for salvation. Some began to teach that water baptism was the birth of water spoken of in John 3:5.

When the UPC was formed in 1945, two organizations came together and merged. One group, the PCI (Pentecostal Church Inc) was predominantly made up of ministers who believed that a person was saved prior to water and Spirit baptism. The other group, the PAJC (Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ) was predominantly made up of ministers that believed a person was not saved until completing the three steps of repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism. So that the two groups could merge a "fundamental doctrine" statement was written up that was ambiguous enough that both groups could agree with.

Since 1945 those who believe in a three-step plan of salvation have pretty well pushed out the one-steppers (or intimidated them into silence) so now many in the UPC preach and teach that a person is not saved until they have completed the three steps of repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

The belief that John 3:5 is water baptism is a doctrine taught by the Roman Catholic Church and is even found in a note in the Douay Bible at that Scripture. Some Protestant Churches teach that also.

Bro. S.G. Norris was the founder of the Apostolic Bible Institute in St. Paul, MN and many UPC ministers and officials were trained in his school. He published a chart or tract showing the apostasy of the church and its return to truth. In this chart he taught that the "Christian" denomination restored the truth to the Church that water baptism was necessary for salvation. Today some of us call those people Church of Christ or Campbellites that teach that water baptism is the birth of water and necessary for salvation.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

I don't know of any Oneness organization that officially teaches that salvation happens prior to water baptism and Spirit baptism. There may be organizations that teach that but I personally am not acquainted with them.

How many ministers and Christians in the UPC, PAW, ALJC, CoJC, CoLJC, ETC believe salvation happens prior to and separate from water baptism and Spirit baptism? I personally have no idea. I think there are many who do but are afraid to admit it because of peer pressure or fear of being labeled a heretic or fear of losing political position.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

thanks for your input sam. Does christianity without the cross deal with this issue? I'm about to read it.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

I am pretty sure Global network does as well as the Canadian ACOP.

From http://www.acop.ca/

Amongst statement of faith we read:

5. That forgiveness of sin and eternal life is freely offered to all by our Lord
Jesus Christ. Salvation of sinners is by grace through faith alone, in the
perfect all sufficient work of Christ, who died for our sins, was buried and
rose again the third day for our justification.

6. In Water Baptism of believers by immersion in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

7. In the Baptism with the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to salvation with the scriptural evidence; namely, speaking in tongues.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

we need churches like that here in america,

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

:thumbsup

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Yes.
I highly recommend Christianity Without the Cross. It is not an easy read but I think it's worthwhile. It helped me to see that I really am Apostolic. I believe that there is one God and His name is Jesus. I believe that water baptism should be done in Jesus' name. I believe in the Holy Ghost Baptism. But, like the folks known as Apostolic in the early part of the 20th century, I believe that a person is justified/saved/born again by faith prior to and separate from water baptism and/or Spirit Baptism. Those folks were all one-steppers back then. This three-step message that is now prominent in the UPC was a later development among Apostolics.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

I am an ordained minister in two different groups.
One is called The Churches of Jesus Christ International usually just called The Church of Jesus Christ plus I am ordained in our local church which is called The Hamilton Dream Center. Although the statements above do not agree with the "official" statement of faith of both of those organizations, they do agree with what I believe.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

:thumbsup:thumbsup

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

I so agree with your sentiments.

The ACOP view is the Biblical view.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

How can one find scriptural justification for the statement -

when the words of Romans 8:9 explicitly asserts (note: NOT "suggest, recommend, or if you want it") that -

"Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is NONE of his"?

I've never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I am certainly not the dullest either. If possession of the Spirit (i.e., baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gives the utterance) is not "part and parcel" of salvation, rather than an experience that is "subsequent to salvation," then the writer of Romans surely must have gotten it all wrong. I think not! If my understanding of Romans 8:9 is correct (& I believe it is), then surely the baptism of the Holy Ghost is NOT, nor can it be, a thing which is "subsequent to salvation!"

Sorry Sam, NO "thumps up" from me! Indeed, I give it just the opposite! :thumbsdown:thumbsdown:thumbsdown

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

who said that tounges is the only evidence of recieving the Holy Spirit?
"There are many other evidences of the operation of the Spirit of God in a person's life, but it is a matter of time before they are manifest"

these our fruits of the Spirit and none of them mention tounges.

I agree tounges is (a) initial evidence but i never believed it was the only.

people forget we dont seek God, God seeks us, and even to be able to profess Jesus is Lord, would mean the Spirit is working in your life. thus Romans 10:9-10 &13 is very plain in meaning and understanding.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Well summarized, Sam. The UPC began to make this difference an issue of fellowship, especially out in the Northwest in the mid-70s, early '80s. As far I can tell, there are no UPC "one steppers" left in Oregon. If anyone knows differently, let me know....

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Brother, I understand where you are coming from. I (and many other Oneness or Apostolic Pentecostals) see no conflict with Romans 8:9 and a subsequent baptism in the Holy Spirit. We believe that at salvation Jesus comes in to dwell as the Holy Spirit so all believers do have the Spirit of Christ. Don't apologize or explain why the "thumbs down." You and other Apostolic Pentecostals believe that the baptism in the Holy Ghost is the birth of the Spirit and that He does not dwell in a person until the person is baptized in the Spirit. This is just a difference of opinion among us Oneness Pentecostals. We agreed to disagree in 1945 when the Affirmation Statement was written and became the fundamental doctrine of the UPC.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

I am amazed how we can ignore basic context and messages of scripture to pull out what we want to teach. Jesus told the diciples that they would receive "power after the holy ghost came upon them". This after Jesus gave thme the spirit of the holy ghost already.
Joh 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit.

What was this if they had not received the spirit of God into their hearts? As with the promise of being "baptized in the holy spirit" which was the promise of the father which could not come until Christ had been taken from them.

Act 1:4 And having met with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to await the promise of the Father which you heard from Me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days from now.

There is a differance between the spirit of God that comes into our lives at conversion, then when we are baptized with his spirit receiving the promise of the father that brings power into our lives.

Hence we ignore the simplicity in our drive to prove our own agenda.

Let us look at Acts 2 closer than with the eyes of religious tradition.

Act 2:3 And tongues as of fire appeared to them, being distributed; and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The first 120 were given the promise of the father, the baptism of the holy ghost.

At the missunderstaning of the Jews that had come to Jerusalem to celibrate the passover and Pentecost, Peter began to quote from Joel. "This is that " within the first part of his message Peter states salvation comes to those that "call on the name of the Lord". He then goes on to condem those devout Jews, that it was thier hands that did crucify the Lord Jesus Christ the anionted one of God. When they understood the gravity of thier deeds they then ask Peter "what shall we do?" this being the most missed stated quote in the scripture other than John 3:5. Assuming that the question is how can we be saved? Or what must we do to be saved? neither of which is the quetion!!! The question is realizing what they have been accused of doing and understanding that they are in fact guilty of putting Christ on the cross. The question is how can we rectify our guilt. What can we do the make things right.

Now if your child disobeys you what is the first thing you want him/her to do? repent!!! Not just ask forgiveness but to refrain from doing that thing again. Peter give the same command, REPENT, Now haveing the promise that by the death of Christ our sins are forgiven, and understanding that in those days cerimonial washing was the out ward way men professed thier siding with one religious sect with another. Peter tells them to publicly profess thier commitment to Christ through water baptism, because Christ has forgiven their sins.

And then they too shall receive the Holy ghost, As this "promise of the father" was what it was all about.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Dedicated,

One explanation as to why is found in the next verse that more fully explains the preceding verse. Or a parallelism.
John 3:5,
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
John..3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

The water simply refers to our natural birth. The Spirit birth is from above.

John..3:7
Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
John..3:8
The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Water baptism doctrine as a New Birth requirement is greatly misunderstood. It's up to you to come to your own conclusions, but jmo this prerequisite to salvation has hindered rather than helped revival, replacing the emphasis on cross and our burden bearer, Jesus Christ, and placing it upon "the ministry".

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

so are you saying we all should have tounges of fire set on top our heads as they did?
or the ability to go into a foriegn country and speak english and they will here me in there own native tounge?

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

water baptism is not replying to our natural birth even jesus was naturally born thru virgin mary and then was also water baptized by john why would jesus set us an example but not expect us to follow it, bottom line unless your born of the water and the spirit you cannot,cannot enter the kingdom of god pretty plain god bless

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

:thumbsup:thumbsup

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

So the question comes down to this. Is talking in tongues the evidence of the power of The Spirit?

If so, Paul emphatically addresses this issue in 2 Timothy 3:1-5. "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away."

It is a very slippery slope to say that Tongues is not required, for all instruction is REQUIRED biblically, or you are in rebellion to the Word.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

not its not, tounges isnt required for salvation, they are a gift of the Spirit, and paul also asked a rhetoric question in 1 corinthians.
Does all speak with tounges?
does all prophesy?

of course they dont, if they all did he would have stated other wise.

whats happened is a bad use of hermenuetics to try and proove a point, but i could do the same and use it and state not only do we have to speak in tounges we also must prophesy

so really there is no biblical point in the bible that a person must speak with tounges, what we have is a hand full of example were people did, but we also have a hand full of examples were they didnt.

so a doctrine was made off of that, and not considering that the word Charisma is the same word used to describe the free gift of God

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Say faith, you are free to believe this if you wish.
Jesus being born naturally proves my point all the more. He wouldn't have been the the son of man had he not been incarnate, born in a human body. The only people needing to be born again are human beings...
I agree it's plain, you must have the Spirit of God or you (or me or anybody else) are "none of His". It's a spiritual birth, of His spirit.

As far as the initial evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism is concerned, we should preach a hunger for the baptism of the Spirit. This baptism will result in a physical manifestation of tongues, prophesying, seeing visions, dreaming dreams, etc, all as promised by the O.T. prophet Joel.
These signs are as valid an outward manifestation as is speaking in tongues.

Determined Mind, (if you are reading this) I agree with Jim Ellis in recommending Christianity Without The Cross by Tom Fudge as a book to read.
It is, for this season in the "pentecostal" church, probably the most revealing but as to where oneness (particularly UPC) folk have gone off track.
It is thoroughly, nearly numbingly researched, but if you have been in Pentecost any amount of time, you will recognize many of the hundreds of preachers and ministers interviewed for the book listed in the index.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Jesus was born by the power of the Holy Spirit.
About 30 years later He submitted to mikveh/baptism/ritual (symbolic) cleansing and afterward received the anointing of God for His ministry. The Spirit did not enter Him at Jordan after water baptism. He was the Son of God since birth. He did not become the Son of God at Jordan. The Spirit had been within Him since birth. The Spirit came upon Him at Jordan to anoint Him for ministry.

We teach that same pattern.
1. birth of the Spirit
2. water baptism
3. Spirit empowerment
Three separate experiences.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Others would say that you are mixing evidence with gifts. The problem is, according to Acts 2:4, "they ALL spoke with other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance".

As you see, we have 2 historical records that contradict each other. One where Jesus said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" and one that saids they "all filled with the Holy Ghost as the Spirit gave them utterance."

So when we obviously look at it, one must say that historically, the first was only partial detail or information. Not that it is incorrect, but incomplete.

Who is to say that when Jesus said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" they were not all speaking in tongues then.

They Holy Ghost could not be given until Jesus had been glorified. In John 20:22 when know that Jesus had been crucified, and risen again. He had a Glorified Body. But we do not have a record of how the disciples responded when he said "Receive ye the Holy Ghost".

However, we do know that when God Breath on the 120 in the upper room, they did speak with other tongues.

So the proper way to look at it, Historical Grammatical.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

nope not mixing the greek word charisma is ephesians 2:8-9 charisma Gift.


im all about people getting the Holy ghost, i just do not agree with the tounge doctrine as the only evidence or proof of the spirit. that is not biblical.

do people speak with tounges yes. do they all ..... No Paul pointed this out.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Just an observation, I have been in Pentecost my whole life, I have seen those that went to the alter seeking the holyghost by speeking in tongues that never spoke in tongues, yet had more ofthe spirit of God in thier lives than many that spoke in tongues. Because of the tongues (as the only initial evidence) these were preach to hell until they spoke in tongues.

Now you tell me how this is to be, when the proof of the spirit in our lives is to be the fruit of the spirit not speaking in tongues, Galations 5. and James also tells us if we have the spirit of God we will show that spirit by the works we do.

One last thought when we preach and teach that one has not received to holy ghost untill they speak in tongues we put ourselves up as judge, Did not Jesus teach "judge not lest ye be judged?"

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

the tounge doctrine is terrible. People leave the church cause they continually went down to the alter to speak in tounges, but never did. and when they dont they feel like Why God? why? I thought if i repented and be baptized i would get your spirit and speak with tounges.

They walk away not feeling loved by God.

my former preacher talked about a man who had been in the upci for the majority of his life, how he defended the doctrine and loved God. but the preacher said that his friend in all these years has never spoken in tounges, and he feared for him, cause he was getting old in age. why would a man go to church and do so many works for God, yet because of doctrine would believe he is not saved, or not completed the plan of salvation.

because he has never spoken in tounges. Its terrible
the man has demonstrated with his works that he is a child of God by being fruitfull, but man made interpretation of doctrine states he isnt saved

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Drummer, good to see you here.
A couple of things re: not judging. We are to be circumspect in our lives. Not intemperant, etc. We are to "mark" them that cause division. This requires judgment, but not the kind you refer.
The Jews always sought literal signs for validation of what GOD was doing (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4; Jn 2:18; 6:30; 1 Cor 1:22).

The apostle Paul said that tongues was not a sign for the believer, but the UNBELIEVER, but we have completely turned that around in pentecost. It's not unbelievers praying with seekers at the altar looking for the sign of tongues...but believers!

It goes to show how far we have gone away from being Jesus seekers to sign seekers...and that we are as carnal as the Jews were in Jesus' day because of it.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

The only person that KNOWS if they have received the Holy Ghost baptism is the receiver. There are OTHER evidences in scripture of a person filled w/the Holy Ghost besides talking in tongues.
This is controversial, but needn't be. You shall KNOW them by their fruit, and we will be KNOWN as Jesus' disciples when we have love for each other. The insistence of the initial evidence doctrine has created division over fellowship, leading me to believe that even if it were true, the attitude behind its insistence can stink.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

well said

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

That's one of our problems in the Pentecostal group,
people who are known as "chronic seekers."
Because they do not speak with tongues we tell them that God is not in them, that they are not saved, that they are not born again, that they will miss the rapture, and that if they die without speaking with tongues they will wind up in hell. How many years were the disciples of Jesus saved, born again, and doing miracles before they spoke with tongues?

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

Yup Sam you be correct...lol There were no chronic seekers in the bible..and the bible clearly states in Acts 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

to me this means all will speak in Tongues cause thats the evidence that God has poured out his Spirit on you according to folks...

So what about those who have dyed and not spoke in tongues as the evidence of the outpouring of Gods Spirit...

O and what about the rapist and Murderers,Thieves..etc...etc...etc..

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

That prophecy did not mean every single person would get the Spirit (tongues or not). It meant all nationalities would experience something from a God who formerly only blessed Israel.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

OK, I believe that Jesus comes into a person's heart and the person is born of the Spirit at that moment. That experience that we call justification, or salvation, or conversion, or getting saved, or being born again happens by faith. That is my understanding of the Scriptures.

I believe that after salvation everyone should be baptized in water but that water baptism is a separate experience from salvation and if the person does not get baptized in or with water, the salvation experience is not forfeited. Water baptism followed salvation right away in the New Testament, like on the same day.

I believe there is an experience available to all Christians that we call the Holy Ghost Baptism (HGB) , or the Spirit coming upon a person, or the Spirit falling upon a person, or the Spirit being poured out on a person. It is my understanding that the came upon Christian in the New Testament as follows:
1. On the feast day of Pentecost on 120 disciples (about 1/4 of the early church) as they were assembled in the Temple (Acts 2:1-4) The record just states that while they were sitting they were filled with the Holy Ghost and began to speak with tongues.

2. On disciples in Samaria (about 40 miles from Jerusalem) in the winter of AD 31/32 some time after they were converted and baptized in water. The record states that the Holy Spirit fell upon them and that they received the Holy Ghost when hands were laid upon them.

3. Saul received the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands 3 days after his conversion on the road outside Damascus.

4. The Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius and other Gentiles while the Apostle Peter was preaching the Word. This was probably around AD 38. Later Peter referred to their experience as a baptism in the Holy Spirit.

5. Twenty-three years after Pentecost it is recorded that the Holy Spirit came upon disciples when hands were placed on them. This happened after they were converted and baptized in water.

Re: Official Stance of UPC?
 

I do not know of any of the preachers whom I have ever heard saying that speaking in tongues was the only sign of the Holy Ghost. I have heard them say that if you did not start to manifest fruit, you need to check yourself out with God. Bro. Westburg would preach a message Walking with a different spirit, in which he said that a person could be lost if they did refused walk with God. Others have stated, "You can sit on a church pew, speak in tongues, and be lost."

I agree that there is a problem with people being 'chronic seekers'. This is not the case in Scripture, and it should not be the case today. However, we do not know how many people sought for the Holy Ghost before receiving it in Acts. I believe that a possible place could be in Samaria. We also know that Paul taught for some months in cities. I doubt that human nature has much changed in the intervening centuries. Many things lead to chronic seeking including but not limited to: sin in the church, sin in the individuals heart, unbelief in the church, unbelief in the seeker, preconceptions, fear, or pride. Some of those who come seeking are nothing more than 'Simon the Sorcerer" in 21st century clothing.