[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Honestly, I have been thinking that most "apostolics" do not have any solid framework within which to learn scripture and determine doctrine and practice. The responses so far seem to bear that out.

What I mean is this: OPs have not defined any reasonable, systematic, consistent method for determine faith and practice. Instead, we are, as a movement, highly inconsistent in our approach to scripture and the faith. Inconsistent not only with one another, but with ourselves, even.

Thus we have the following results:

Practically no unity in faith except in literally one or two, maybe three beliefs.

No unity in regards to several important practices (including "standards").

Unity in large measure regarding certain practices, but no rational and scripturally consistent explanation for why it is so. (In other words, traditions we keep without really knowing or understanding where they come from or why we keep them.)

Lots of private conjecture being propagated as doctrine, as binding, as obligatory, as truth, without any solid scriptural basis and usually in opposition to all the other private conjectures floating around.

"Just trust me, I'm the pastor" attitudes.

A lack of united front against heresies. We don't really have a clear and consistent mechanism for even identifying heresies in our own midst, let alone "out there", much less presenting a consistent witness to the truth.

A general across the board inability to maintain a rational examination of doctrine and practice, due to everybody coming at it from a completely different, unharmonized paradigm, point of view, worldview, etc. In other words, we make communication almost impossible because nobody is starting on the same page. We have no common framework within which to discuss or debate, examine, prove, etc. One's refutation is unheeded because the other can't even recognize the argument, for example. People disagree with each other without really understanding how and why they disagree.

And so many different views, doctrines, opinions, everyone screaming to be heard and believed, nobody in agreement... why, isn't that called confusion? And God is not the author of confusion...

So I submit we ought to get crackin' and figure out a reasonable, biblical, and apostolic approach to scripture, that can be taught to others. If the approach or method is correct, then the results ought to be consistent... and consistency is sorely lacking these days.

All of this has been attempted, going back to Acts 15, then forward in time to 325 AD. In general, it doesn't work. It wouldn't matter what any council decides, there will always be those who reject the decisions of said council and go their own way.

Every year, various Oneness Apostolic orgs have a general conference, and positions papers are issued, reviewed, and adopted. This doesn't really affect much, apart from the licensed ministers. The average apostolic on the street just goes about his or her day as he or she always did.

I fear that any attempt to make such ideas as you suggest the law of apostolic land will eventually result in witch hunts and inquisitions, just as they did in the false church. The "affirmation statement", for example, did just that. As Robert Sabin explained in his letter against the idea, no one has the right to govern the believer's mind. To create councils and hand down official rulings causes division and uncertainty.