The Truth About The PCI!

[SDG]

Originally Posted by keith4him

I will in the next few days try and post the pre-merger PAJC manual, most will be surprised to see the tone and spirit that was displayed in their articles of Faith. If I can get Jeanie to break out the scanner and start doing it maybe today.

Keith

Looking forward to this ... Keith.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by OneAccord

Does anyone know the exact year this was published? (or at least an approximate date). And. could it be possible to post the entire booket? Interesting reading!

I echo this sentiment ... it would be interesting to read the constitution in it's entirety.

[SDG]

From Christianity Without the Cross, Thomas Fudge, page 148

“ … one factor acknowledged by all that the PCI was by far better organized of the two merging bodies. Therefore, it made sense not only to adopt certain doctrinal positions but also much of their polity and discipline as well. On the article, ‘pertaining to repentance and conversion’, 3 of the 4 statements therein can be traced to the PCI. The statement on ‘water baptism’ is also PCI in origin. On the “baptism of the Holy Spirit”, all 9 statements in these articles are derived from the PCI. Three of four statements likewise come from the PCI, with the fourth statement previously alluded added in 1954. All of this means that of the 18 statements in these [original] articles, 16 are PCI in origin, one from the PAJC, and one was added after the merger.”

Footnote: David Bernard has done his denomination a great service by tracing out the origin and development of the “Articles of Faith”. While I do not always agree with the conclusions he draws, his work on this aspect of Oneness Pentecostal history is to be commended. See his Understanding the Articles of Faith, 26-39. In the terms of the entire Articles of Faith it can be shown that 75% of the statements come from the PCI. Of the 73 separate identical clauses the breakdown of origins is – PCI: 55, PAJC:5, New/Other: 13. It is worth pointing out that many of the clausal statements are effectively citations of the Biblical texts and are not to be understood as 20th century theological statements.

[OneAccord]

I suspect, since this was written in the early days of the Pentecostal Movement, that the "gulf" between the two groups wasn't as wide then as it is now. WE have to bear in mind that the rift between the AOG and the Oneness brethren was fairly recent. These are brethren who had preached, prayed and labored together since the very inception of the 20th Century Pentecostal Movement. The rift broke fellowship, separated brethren, divided churches. There wasn't the great "differentation" (if thats a word) between the two groups as there is now. Perhaps the words "Trinity" and "triune" were employed as an attempt to "woo" some to join the PCI. While Oneness people of today find the the terms in question abhorrent and would not employ their use to describe their views, in the early days of modern Pentecostalism this was, no doubt, acceptable. In fact, the explanation of the Oneness view today is not that much different.. we just refrain from using words like Trinity and Triune, replacing it with the more Biblically correct phrase, "three manifestations of One God". In affect, the words we use, or refrain from using, distance us from our trinitarian counterparts.

[OneAccord]

It'd be great to see more of that "tone and spirit" shown today. The very fact that, in the beginning of the preamble, the people at Topeka are referred to as "Christians" speaks of the remarkable "tone and spirit" displayed then and the lack thereof today as displayed by some. Enjoyed the reading... makes me want to stand and yell, "Back to Pentecost!"

Originally Posted by keith4him

I will in the next few days try and post the pre-merger PAJC manual, most will be surprised to see the tone and spirit that was displayed in their articles of Faith. If I can get Jeanie to break out the scanner and start doing it maybe today.

Keith

[SDG]

Originally Posted by OneAccord

It'd be great to see more of that "tone and spirit" shown today. The very fact that, in the beginning of the preamble, the people at Topeka are referred to as "Christians" speaks of the remarkable "tone and spirit" displayed then and the lack thereof today as displayed by some. Enjoyed the reading... makes me want to stand and yell, "Back to Pentecost!"

Back to Pentecost??? Don't you mean Back to Ecumenicalism?

[OneAccord]

No.... Back to Pentecost!

[QUOTE=Daniel Alicea;289628]

Originally Posted by OneAccord

It'd be great to see more of that "tone and spirit" shown today. The very fact that, in the beginning of the preamble, the people at Topeka are referred to as "Christians" speaks of the remarkable "tone and spirit" displayed then and the lack thereof today as displayed by some. Enjoyed the reading... makes me want to stand and yell, "Back to Pentecost!"[/quote]

Back to Pentecost??? Don't you mean Back to Ecumenicalism?

[Steve Epley]

A. Urshan used the term tri-unity in his book on the Godhead. I think they were attempting to convert their Trinity comrades thus modifying the meaning of the term instead of the terms themselves.

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

A. Urshan used the term tri-unity in his book on the Godhead. I think they were attempting to convert their Trinity comrades thus modifying the meaning of the term instead of the terms themselves.

He also used the term the three in one God, which to me is not problematic.

[Pastor Keith]

Will post the PAJC asap, Jeanie's Laptop crashed when she was scanning it.