Andrew Urshan denouncing the "new issue"

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by navygoat1998

Your early Fathers were not treated with much respect by your own brand.

my friend you havent been posting with us for very long.

some years ago these things were hotly debated. the 1992 Westburg amendment was a hot topic.

I called that the "Infernal document". It was wrong. It was a dark day for the organization.

There are a lot of guys like me in the UPCI that dont think Westburg was right. When we talk about "old paths' mine doesnt look anything like those guys.

I would also say that in large measure, modern PCIers dont look anything like those old timers either. so that knife cuts both ways.

[navygoat1998]

Originally Posted by Ferd

my friend you havent been posting with us for very long.

some years ago these things were hotly debated. the 1992 Westburg amendment was a hot topic.

I called that the "Infernal document". It was wrong. It was a dark day for the organization.

There are a lot of guys like me in the UPCI that dont think Westburg was right. When we talk about "old paths' mine doesnt look anything like those guys.

I would also say that in large measure, modern PCIers dont look anything like those old timers either. so that knife cuts both ways.

Your right Ferd I have not been posting here long and in fairness UPC is part of who you are.

Things look much different today in the UPC/PCI/AG than it did in 1945.

Would you say that the UPCI has blossomed into something better than what Brother Goss could have ever hoped for?

Would he even be allowed behind a pulpit???

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by navygoat1998

Your right Ferd I have not been posting here long and in fairness UPC is part of who you are.

Things look much different today in the UPC/PCI/AG than it did in 1945.

Would you say that the UPCI has blossomed into something better than what Brother Goss could have ever hoped for?

Would he even be allowed behind a pulpit???

That sir is a trick question.

I know/knew some of the men who were there at the merger. I also know what struggles those men had in holding the thing together against the wishes of some of the more ardent voices who wanted "purification"

Men like Murry Burr caused no small amount of discomfort. I got stories that I wont tell until some more people die...

There was always a fight to keep the organization together. in the end two things happened.

1. Some guys who were more liberal got really liberal
2. That gave a bit more clout to the hardliners like Westburg to say "see I told you so"

Then that second generation was being ushered out the door and needed some legacy. Preserving "the doctrine" became a rally point for them in 1992.

It would have broken Papa George Glasses heart and he was certainly a Water Spirit guy. (that is my herritiage)

THen curiously enough the hardliners werent happy and eventually they cut and ran and formed the World Wreslting Pentecostal Fellowship and left the mothership.

leaving the UPCI more moderate even if more Water/Spirit.

Things right now arent what Goss and Glass and all the others would want but I think it is moving in the direction that would please them.

Where it all ends, as far as I can tell, no one really knows.

[navygoat1998]

Originally Posted by Ferd

That sir is a trick question.

I know/knew some of the men who were there at the merger. I also know what struggles those men had in holding the thing together against the wishes of some of the more ardent voices who wanted "purification"

Men like Murry Burr caused no small amount of discomfort. I got stories that I wont tell until some more people die...

There was always a fight to keep the organization together. in the end two things happened.

1. Some guys who were more liberal got really liberal
2. That gave a bit more clout to the hardliners like Westburg to say "see I told you so"

Then that second generation was being ushered out the door and needed some legacy. Preserving "the doctrine" became a rally point for them in 1992.

It would have broken Papa George Glasses heart and he was certainly a Water Spirit guy. (that is my herritiage)

THen curiously enough the hardliners werent happy and eventually they cut and ran and formed the World Wreslting Pentecostal Fellowship and left the mothership.

leaving the UPCI more moderate even if more Water/Spirit.

Things right now arent what Goss and Glass and all the others would want but I think it is moving in the direction that would please them.

Where it all ends, as far as I can tell, no one really knows.

Thank you Ferd!

My background, my dad was an Independent Oneness and I went to church with him but never really cared much for (any) doctrine, so he let me go to the Church of God and got the Holy Ghost.

I joined the Navy and backslid, while I was in the Navy my dad went Charismatic and then he backslid.

Years ago he came back and went back into UPC and is on the team ( I am glad) and when I came back I went to the local UPC until we left 7 years ago for the AG.

So it was never was fully ingrained into, I guess for a better term I was weak on the message and was always a one-stepper. I would say that my wife was more of a 3-stepper than I was. She would always warn me about listening to non-oneness preaching.

I enjoy how in Pentecost, we are all related ,even if we don't claim each other, like the Baptist do in Hooters and the package store.

[Steve Epley]

You will be shocked but I tend to agree with most comments made here. I for one think the merger was a mistake in truth a compromise on the issue of the new birth that should have never been compromised. Many contemporary UPC thinkers believe the merger fulfilled the unity clause which resulted in the 92 resolution and in truth the majority it seems were in harmony over the new birth issue and it was time for a declarative statement? My personal testimony is the exact opposite I never would join the UPC primarily because of the unity clause. Being a firm believer in the necessity of the new birth I had no elasticity concerning the issue. No doubt their motives and efforts were noble Jesus said ' a house divided against itself will not stand.' And it time it didn't.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Farfel

Here is an article from the April 20, 1918 edition of the AG's "The Weekly Evangel" written by Andrew Urshan denouncing the "new issue."


CONFESSION OF FAITH
"So then faith comes by hearing, and
hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17.
It has been reported lately from this
city something that may create a wrong
impression that I am supporting the
advocators of the "new issue" so-called
in our great blessed revival meetings in
this city. This is absolutely not so, but
rather contrary. I personally believe
and stand on the blessed written word
of God concerning the great mystery of
godliness, not on the conclusions of men,
nor in their words of strife concerning
God-head teaching, therefore I prayerfully
and humbly confess that I believe
in one God, the Father, the Son and the
Holy Ghost. Matthew 28:19.
I believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of
the Father, who is the true God and the
eternal life. 1 John 5:20. 2 John 5.
I believe that there are three that bear
record in heaven the Father, the Word.
(Jesus Christ) and the Holy Ghost and
these three are one. 1 John 5:7.
I believe in the Spirit by which we
are all baptized into one body, whether
we be Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or
free and have been all made to drink
in one Spirit; yea one Lord, one faith,
one baptism, one God and Father of all,
who is above all, and in you all. 1 Cor. 12:13,
and Eph. 4:5-6.
I believe this adorable Three-One God
can be only approached and seen in and
through the person or face of Jesus
Christ. the son. 1 Timothy 6:16. Matthew 11:27.
John 1:18. John 14:7-11.
"For in Him dwelleth all the fullness of
the God-head bodily." Col. 2:9.
I believe in one most glorious eternal
incomprehensible and mysterious Being
of God; and that Jesus Christ the Son,
is the only true and full express image
of His glorious and bright Being. Heb. 1:3.
Col. 1:15-19.
I believe also and practice the emphatic
and definite commandment of
God through the lips of the great apostle
to the Gentiles who said, "and whatsoever
ye do in word or deed, do all in the
name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks
to God and the Father by Him." Col. 3:17. .
Now, "The grace of the Lord Jesus
Christ and the Love of God, and the communion
of the Holy Ghost be with you
all. Amen." 2 Cor. 3:14.
Brethren, "We having the same spirit
of faith, according as it is written, I believe,
and therefore I have spoken; we
also believe and therefore speak! 2 Cor. 4:13.
Dear saints pray for us.
Your brother, sincerely, believes in the truth and the whole truth, as it is in Christ Jesus.
ANDREW D. URSHAN,
"The Old Time Gospel Revival Campaign,"
LOS Angeles, Cal., 1041 South Broadway

Well, sounds like he agrees with them! Where is the problem with what he proposes??

[CC1]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

You will be shocked but I tend to agree with most comments made here. I for one think the merger was a mistake in truth a compromise on the issue of the new birth that should have never been compromised. Many contemporary UPC thinkers believe the merger fulfilled the unity clause which resulted in the 92 resolution and in truth the majority it seems were in harmony over the new birth issue and it was time for a declarative statement? My personal testimony is the exact opposite I never would join the UPC primarily because of the unity clause. Being a firm believer in the necessity of the new birth I had no elasticity concerning the issue. No doubt their motives and efforts were noble Jesus said ' a house divided against itself will not stand.' And it time it didn't.

I have stated before that I think the PCI folks should have seen the writing on the wall and started their own organization way back at the birth of the UPC. Because if you really believe the 3 step doctrine there is no room to allow for one steppers because the 3 step doctrine makes it clear that if you don't agree with it you are not saved. How could one stepper's expect people who didn't believe they were saved to call them brother?

I wonder if maybe enough of the three steppers believed in the "light doctrine" or some other doctrine allowing for exceptions to the 3 step salvation belief that they tolerated the other view but over time that changed.

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by CC1

I have stated before that I think the PCI folks should have seen the writing on the wall and started their own organization way back at the birth of the UPC. Because if you really believe the 3 step doctrine there is no room to allow for one steppers because the 3 step doctrine makes it clear that if you don't agree with it you are not saved. How could one stepper's expect people who didn't believe they were saved to call them brother?

I wonder if maybe enough of the three steppers believed in the "light doctrine" or some other doctrine allowing for exceptions to the 3 step salvation belief that they tolerated the other view but over time that changed.

In regards to the bold section: I don't think so as much as they felt the same as some do today when they say "they're looking our way." The "until we all come into the unity of the faith" clause was IMO a very clear statement that some (both sides could have felt it about the other) needed to grow or come to a point of belief/revelation/understanding not already attained. Some of the PAJC undoubtedly thought the PCI men needed to have the way of the Lord expounded to them more perfectly and quite possibly vice versa.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by bishoph

In regards to the bold section: I don't think so as much as they felt the same as some do today when they say "they're looking our way." The "until we all come into the unity of the faith" clause was IMO a very clear statement that some (both sides could have felt it about the other) needed to grow or come to a point of belief/revelation/understanding not already attained. Some of the PAJC undoubtedly thought the PCI men needed to have the way of the Lord expounded to them more perfectly and quite possibly vice versa.

Your theory is a plausible one but don't you think something as important as salvation itself would have made that improbable? If you are right then the 3 steppers of that day were certainly more tolerant and patient than those of today!

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by CC1

I have stated before that I think the PCI folks should have seen the writing on the wall and started their own organization way back at the birth of the UPC. Because if you really believe the 3 step doctrine there is no room to allow for one steppers because the 3 step doctrine makes it clear that if you don't agree with it you are not saved. How could one stepper's expect people who didn't believe they were saved to call them brother?

I wonder if maybe enough of the three steppers believed in the "light doctrine" or some other doctrine allowing for exceptions to the 3 step salvation belief that they tolerated the other view but over time that changed.

Dude they had their own org. it was called th PCI.
However at that time, within the PCI, there were men of both views living quite harmonously. So it can, and was done.