Having been raised under church historian, Marvin Arnold, I took great interest in the doctrinal offerings of early Oneness Pentecostal ministers such as G.T. Haywood. Many years ago, Haywood's words...
"Very few will agree with us on this subject at the first, but if they will lay aside the doctrine of men, and for a moment remove their thoughts from the abnormal state of the present day Christianity, they will find no trouble in grasping the truth AS IT IS NOW REVEALED to many of the children of God in these closing days of the Gospel dispensation."
.... raised a red flag in my mind in regard to the soteriological position of my youth.
Frank Ewart, another "Pioneer of Oneness Pentecostalism" echoed Haywood's sentiments when he said...
"He [God] first gave the true light to a few, and then signally expressed His approval by a startling revival through the instrumentality OF THE NEW TEACHING."
I simply like to point out how those who first gave us the water and spirit new birth teaching openly considered their innovative doctrinal position on the new birth as NEW and without historic precedent. Also, when we can clearly see mistaken interpretations which helped lead Haywood to his doctrinal conclusions the soundness of his new birth legacy is brought into question by the objective thinker.
It 'edifies' me to know I can help spark deeper consideration into the matter of sound doctrine for ...."It would be a shame for us to have less brothers and sisters than God has sons and daughters."
Threaded Mode
