I believe it was Nathaniel Urshan who said, in reference to the AG "We're really not as different as most people think." I watched a Oneness vs Trinity debate once between DKB and some Baptist guy. When DKB was finished making his case, the Baptist got up and said "I agree with 90% of what he said."
When it comes to baptism, the AG never really condemned the Jesus Name formula. if you'll look at the 1916 AG resolution
here, on page 6, left side, it says "RESOLVED, that since the words in Matth. 28:19 and the words in
Acts 2:38 were both inspired of God, we hereby disapprove of contending for the one to the exclusion of or against the other, because confusion and a party spirit are sure to follow such unscriptural conduct. This council therefore recommends that all our preachers include in their formula used in connection with the act of baptism the words used by Jesus in Matth. 28:19."
There you see that they did not condemn the Jesus' Name formula. They even disapproved arguing about it.
In the 4square Declaration of Faith Study Guide, found
here, page 44, it says "while the Foursquare Church is Trinitarian and recommends the use of the Trinitarian formula, we would certainly not forbid the use of the formula, "in the name of Jesus," as long as it does not represent a polemic against a Trinitarian understanding."
(All of the above is just food for thought.)
I would like to see Oneness organizations accept F,S & HG baptism in addition to Jesus' name.
It's true that there is backbiting on both sides, and we need to get over that.
Threaded Mode
