Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
I reread Christianity Without the Cross by Fudge. Something that I noticed the second time was the start of the Water & Spirit Doctrine.

On page 120.
It appears that this connection of the Oneness Pentecostal soteriological position with conversion can be traced to the Methodist scholar Adam Clark and his widely used Biblical commentary. In their eagerness to demonstrate the necessity of the ‘new issue’ idea of baptism in Jesus Name, men like G.T. Haywood, Frank J. Ewart and Andrew Urshan discovered a ‘new’ revelation in Adam Clark’s teachings. Clarke’s theological musings brought into related considerations the water and Spirit birth idea of John 3:5 with the water and Spirit baptism idea in Acts 2:38. Given the imperative sense of the words of Jesus that such birth was essential for entrance into the kingdom of God, Haywood and Ewart drew the conclusion that the elements of their message of salvation were absolutely necessary for salvation.

On page 121 under footnote 7
David Reed who assert that the roots of this idea can be traced principally to Haywood and Andrew Urshan.

On page 332.
There is some evidence to suggest that Ewart confided to friends his doubts even about the veracity of the new birth message he had once espoused.

So this is how we got the Water & Spirit Doctrine?

Does anybody have any evidence or suggestions to the contrary?

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

Well bless Go-awd! The Apostols preached John 3:5 as the new birth of water baptism in Jesus' name FOR the remission of sins, not forgiveness, the REMISSION of sins... AND the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues!!!

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

AND they used the KING JAMES BABEL...
NOT
one of those loosey goosey modern translations!

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

I posted this to try to find out about the history of when John 3 was attached with Acts 2:38.

This is no different than asking about the first time someone spoke in tongues in America or when did we start baptizing in Jesus name in the modern age.

This kind of stuff doesn't interest anyone?

No Pentecostal History Buffs?

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

You're not going to find many here that will agree that WS doctrine was invented by Adam Clark.

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

That sounds fishy. Protestants and Catholics came before Clark was born and many of them believe baptism is essential too (See Luther, Wesley etc)

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

A good friend of mine has a very long thread on this very subject. Click if you're interested... a lot of info being thrown around. Can be hard to follow.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ad.php?t=45061

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

Oh and I read that book too last year. Gave me a great respect for those of the PCI tradition who stood for what they believed although they were viewed as doctrinally weak and maybe even lost by some.

Re: Beginning Water & Spirit Doctrine
 

I never said Clark did. I posted information that claims that Oneness Pentecostal Pioneers came to conclusions after reading his biblical commentary. There is a big difference.

At this point I have made no claims on one side or the other. All I did was ask for people's opinion on the information I read in a book.