Reading Fudge's Book Again

[KwaiQ]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

I found a ancient copy of Clarence Larkin's Dispensational truth from a thrift shop, I'm reading it.
It's a long book ,with alot of charts.

Go to BTC... you'll find a link to a pdf of CWotC there Brother.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Brother Elpey, I agree with you but the scripture I use is Psalm 100:5 For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations. If the truth of the new birth is Acts 2:38 and the Oneness of God is the correct view of the Godhead, then there has been someone preaching that truth throughout the generations from the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 until today.

BTW, there is nothing new under the sun and that includes the message of salvation which you preach. I don't believe those who say that message has only been around since 1916!

Great points Mizpeh!

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Adino

This is simply not true. I grew up under the late Rev. Marvin M. Arnold. There was no one who had a greater passion to prove what you just offered to be true. He failed to find even a single witness, prior to preachers of the 20th century, who taught the water and spirit interpretation of the new birth as it is taught today in Oneness Pentecostalism.

Haywood, Ewart and others knew they were preaching something brand new and readily admitted this in their writings. In fact, Haywood's "progressive light doctrine" and Urshan's "kingdom of heaven vs kingdom of God" teaching were were developed to support the "newly revealed" position on salvation.

Please give us the proof of your statement. Thanks.

I cited historical accounts of oneness monarchians throughout history in a thread in Deep Waters called "Ancient Monarchians in History"... There is at least in a nutshell evidence as to the existence of oneness theology all throughout history.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Light, since there is no evidence to support the idea that OP existed throughout history, the burden of proof is on you to make your case. And believe me, most people here would be inclined to accept any evidence presented.

It's just that most have bought into your understanding of Matthew 16:18 at one time or another, thinking that the evidence would be forthcoming. Needless to say, we were badly disappointed. Of course there are some who still hold on to the hope that the evidence will suddenly turn up. A careful investigation of history however, reveals that this hope is only imagined. And that, even though they were terrible persecutions and destruction of records, nothing resembling our OP practice of the faith existed from the late Apostolic era until it began to develop in the late 1800's in North America.

We've all had to rethink our understanding of Matthew 16:18 or, as many have sadly done, abandon the faith altogether. I would encourage you to have confidence in the Bible, but to be flexible when it comes to the traditions of men.

Pelathais, is there extrabiblical evidence that supports the Nation of Israel literally walking across the Red Sea on dry ground? The only real evidence one needs to believe the bible, is the bible! Now having said that, Thomas Weisser and Bro. William Chalfants works on the history of Christian Monarchinanism are very informative as to the existence of Jesus name oneness churches throughout history!

[Steve Epley]

The Reformation doctrine is the same as the light doctrine. In other words the church went into darkness and God began to restore the church through the reformers until more light was revealed. While I have no doubt God was dealing with men like Luther and others in his youth but somewhere he failed to follow God then his light became darkness.

[Steve Epley]

I noticed TB is quoted quite often in the book were y'all friends?

[Scott Hutchinson]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

The Reformation doctrine is the same as the light doctrine. In other words the church went into darkness and God began to restore the church through the reformers until more light was revealed. While I have no doubt God was dealing with men like Luther and others in his youth but somewhere he failed to follow God then his light became darkness.

That's the same as the seven church age doctrine, I think.

[SDG]

I see some parallels between the progressive light doctrine and the Mormon doctrine of apostasy and restoration.

Mormons believe that the early Christian church fell away from Christ's original organization (the apostasy) and that that church was restored through Joseph Smith in the 1800's (the restoration).

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Are you suggesting that French Calvinists believed like today's OPs ... NOT.

We do find references to gifts of the Spirit such as healing, speaking with tongues, prophecy, etc here and there throughout the history of "the visible church." Also, we may find references to people who disputed the doctrine of the Trinity. And we find some who insisted on baptism for believers only and some who taught immersion for baptism. But, in my opinion, to use these references as proof that "there have always been oneness pentecostals throughout the centuries from AD 30 until 1914 who practiced and preached Acts 2:38 as taught by some in the UPC today" is a stretch.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

Pelathais, is there extrabiblical evidence that supports the Nation of Israel literally walking across the Red Sea on dry ground? The only real evidence one needs to believe the bible, is the bible! Now having said that, Thomas Weisser and Bro. William Chalfants works on the history of Christian Monarchinanism are very informative as to the existence of Jesus name oneness churches throughout history!

Hi B.D.

I agree that the Bible does speak for itself. However, all attempts to show a continuous existence of a Oneness/Jesus Name movement throughout all of church history has failed everytime. Could it be that what the Bible is speaking about in Matthew 16 and the Psalms cited by Mizpeh is something different than the angle we want to take?

As just one example, both Chalfant and Weisser identified the Albigensians (or Cathari) as "Oneness/Jesus Name" groups just because they denied the Trinity. However, as I stated before, the Cathari were dualists. They practiced a Christianized form of Zoroastrism. They believed that the "Jehovah" of Genesis was evil! The web site www.gnosis.org has some texts from the Cathari themselves. Try to imagine reading some of these rituals in a Oneness church! I don't intend to promote Gnosticism so my link to their sources will be sparce. But you can check them out for yourself.

It hurts to see dishonesty coming from Apostolics. And dishonesty is what it really comes down to. When I first came across Weisser's book and then Chalfant's I really hoped that they had something. Reading their books however proved to be a big disappointment. Watching Chalfant in person as he tried to defend his writings was even more painful.

There is really no need for us to try and prove this "continuous existence" time-line anyway. It's a red herring issue.

As you yourself put it, "The only real evidence one needs to believe the bible, is the bible!" Let's stand or fall on something that is certain; not upon something that has been proven to be false. Bernard's treatments of the development of the doctrine of the Trinity are good places to start a study of this issue. He avoids many of the old mistakes that we used to make, like saying that "the Trinity was invented at the Council of Nicea..."