French, Tulsa, Light Doctrine

[Fiyahstarter]

I believe we all have an inborn, inherent knowledge of right from wrong. If that is the only rightness (light) a person ever knows, and they are tragically killed in an accident... do they go to hell?

What about children? And babies? Are they hellbound without ever having knowledge of Acts 2:38?

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Brett Prince

MY QUESTION IS...

IS THIS GOSSIP, HEARSAY, THE FIGMENT OF YOUR IMAGINATION--OR ARE YOU WILLING TO PICK UP THE PHONE, CALL THE MAN, AND ASK HIM JUST WHERE HE STANDS RATHER THAN DRAGGING HIS GOOD NAME OUT IN FRONT OF OTHERS AND POSSIBLY MISREPRESENTING HIM?

EVEN IF THIS IS WHAT HE DID BELIEVE, IT MAY NOT FAIRLY REPRESENT HIS PRESENT POSITION!

FURTHERMORE, IF YOU HAVE ANY RESPECT AT ALL FOR ANYTHING THAT IS RIGHT OR HOLY, YOU WOULDN'T RELY UPON WHAT YOU THINK YOU HEARD HIM SAY. YOU WOULD NOT DISHONOR A MAN'S MINISTRY BY CALLING HIM INTO QUESTION BEFORE OTHERS FOR SOMETHING YOU MAY AGREE WITH, BUT IS OBVIOUSLY AT ODDS WITH THOSE WITH WHOM HE IS IN FELLOWSHIP AND COULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT HIS REPUTATION!

THIS IS UNSEEMLY.

Admin, the caps are there because I AM shouting. I mean you no disrespect, and if the nature of my post violates forum rules I will honor any ban or whatever decision you make, but I will NOT sit down when a good man is being done this way. Not while I have access and not while I have breath. This is wrong.

I submit that this whole thread should be deleted.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

There are many versions, or at least there have been in the past.

Basicly, If one adheres to a "Light" doctrine, they believe some Christians (of perhaps even non-Christians) are walking in the Light they know, and will be spared everlasting torment IN SPITE of the fact that they have not "obeyed" Acts 2:38 in the same way as Oneness Pentecostals have.

By this definition, I suppose I could say I also believe in a "Light Doctrine".

Amen!!!!

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Fiyahstarter

I believe we all have an inborn, inherent knowledge of right from wrong. If that is the only rightness (light) a person ever knows, and they are tragically killed in an accident... do they go to hell?

What about children? And babies? Are they hellbound without ever having knowledge of Acts 2:38?

And of course this is all pertinent to the question.

Do we rest in the the wisdom and the knowledge of God and His work on the cross, or do we have a performance-based qualifier in our exact re-enactment of the cross?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Brett Prince

MY QUESTION IS...

IS THIS GOSSIP, HEARSAY, THE FIGMENT OF YOUR IMAGINATION--OR ARE YOU WILLING TO PICK UP THE PHONE, CALL THE MAN, AND ASK HIM JUST WHERE HE STANDS RATHER THAN DRAGGING HIS GOOD NAME OUT IN FRONT OF OTHERS AND POSSIBLY MISREPRESENTING HIM?

EVEN IF THIS IS WHAT HE DID BELIEVE, IT MAY NOT FAIRLY REPRESENT HIS PRESENT POSITION!

FURTHERMORE, IF YOU HAVE ANY RESPECT AT ALL FOR ANYTHING THAT IS RIGHT OR HOLY, YOU WOULDN'T RELY UPON WHAT YOU THINK YOU HEARD HIM SAY. YOU WOULD NOT DISHONOR A MAN'S MINISTRY BY CALLING HIM INTO QUESTION BEFORE OTHERS FOR SOMETHING YOU MAY AGREE WITH, BUT IS OBVIOUSLY AT ODDS WITH THOSE WITH WHOM HE IS IN FELLOWSHIP AND COULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT HIS REPUTATION!

THIS IS UNSEEMLY.

Admin, the caps are there because I AM shouting. I mean you no disrespect, and if the nature of my post violates forum rules I will honor any ban or whatever decision you make, but I will NOT sit down when a good man is being done this way. Not while I have access and not while I have breath. This is wrong.

I submit that this whole thread should be deleted.

How is saying "I heard this guy say he believed the 'Light Doctrine' 10 or 12 years ago," unseemly and dishonorable?

And how could such a statement on an Internet bulletin board possibly affect a minister's reputation negatively or otherwise?

From the tone of your post I could conclude that:

1. You hate the "Light Doctrine" and those who hold to it.
2. You believe most everything you read on the Internet.

Lighten up, Bro! FWIW, I was at the same meeting that SH describes. The original post is not a big deal, one way or the other, but it does point out the complexities of the rift that we are discussing.

The "Tulsa group" doesn't really appear to be a doctrinal monolith. There are men on that list with a variety of view points on issues that the Internet boards love to debate endlessly. I think that's an important consideration. Frankly, before this whole thing came up I never would have said NW was an "ultracon" or lumped him in with some of the other men who have been pushing this "Summit." He's no "lib," but he's never struck me as "UC" either. He's really a pretty good guy.

And so, TF comes up. He never struck me before as being particularlly "UC" either.

There are complexities here, and discussing them helps to break us all out of the "either/or" mindset.