Tongues and Biblical Truth

[TheLayman]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The Pentecostal movement has always been divided on the question of whether the baptism with the Spirit (initially evidenced by speaking in tongues) is "essential for salvation". This division was in place before the Arroyo Seco camp meeting in 1913 which is when most (trinitarian) historians date the advent of "Oneness Pentecostalism".

When the UPC was formed from a merger of several Oneness Pentecostal denominations, that division still existed. Thus, there have been two streams within the UPC and its offshoots: those who believe the Pentecostal baptism is essential, and those who believe it is merely preferable. Among trinitarian Pentecostals, the latter group has been the majority, whereas among Oneness Pentecostals the former group has generally been the majority.

When I was young the friend who led me to Christ went to an AOG seminary and became a pastor. I identified most closely with the AOG but would not/could not become a member because I believed their initial evidence doctrine was wrong. That was early 70's. Then much later, must have been late 90's early 2000's on an internet discussion board somewhere (you know...off the topic but everyone seemed much kinder on discussion boards back then...sorry, that just struck me so I shared ) I was on an AOG discussion board and this issue was being discussed and it seemed that the leadership might be starting to move away from this "absolute." And I'm not arguing with you about it, I think Oneness still have loose ties to the AOG and I would think you would know better than I. But I did just check since you said this to see if it had indeed changed (or to find out if I was wrong to begin with but that would have been sad since that is the reason I did not become an AOG member). Anyway, on The AOG webpage in the belief section they have what they call 16 non-negotiable fundamental truths. Number 8 The Initial Physical Evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit which is: "The baptism of believers in the Holy Spirit is witnessed by the initial physical sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit of God gives them utterance." So it appears that they have not changed it since I was a teenager (although I thought they had relaxed it).

Anyway, see what happens when I violate my rule "assume nothing." I have had discussions in years past on CARM and read other discussions and had no idea that Oneness wasn't at least as dogmatic about it as the AOG. What you and Originalist have shared with me was never once mentioned in any of those discussions.

Originally Posted by Essaias

Here on AFF the two views are usually referred to as the PAJC view and the PCI view, respectively (named after Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ, and Pentecostal Church Incorporated, the two main groups who merged to form the UPC). Unfortunately, even those shorthand designations are misnomers, because both denominations (PAJC and PCI) had members in both theological camps.

So now I'm curious. I can see how those who believe it is non-negotiable could attend a church where they do not hold the initial evidence doctrine, but I don't see how someone who doesn't hold the initial evidence doctrine could attend a Oneness church that holds the AOG non-negotiable view I posted. So when you speak of these two groups within the two groups, do they basically have different churches? How does that work? (And now I think I see that the difference of opinion I saw in the Billy Graham thread may have had a different starting point than I thought it did, certainly had I known this I think I would have viewed it differently).

Thanks Esaias (and Originalist), that was quite interesting. I know Sam was great at this historical stuff, I wish he was still here to offer his expertise.

TheLayman