French, Tulsa, Light Doctrine

[Brett Prince]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

First Tulsa
I am NOT one of those that believe division is always wrong. I very much think God may be right in the middle of doing a wonderful move among Oneness Pentecostals - in spite of many opinions to the contrary.

Talmage French
A brilliant mind, a wonderful testimony and great teacher, French has produced the best documented writing on Oneness Pentecostals world-wide. About ten - twelve years ago I was at the St Louis Symposium where he answered questions regarding his reseach.

Light Doctrine
One of the questions was regarding the position held of many included in his book "Our God Is One", and whether they saw and understood soteriology the same way as the UPC did.

I remember him saying something like...

"It is true that some of these likely hold to what has been referred to as "Light Doctrine" as did some early Oneness Pentecostals and even I do myself, but the particulars were not among the criteria for inclusion in the book. I simply documented those who believe the impartation of Holy Spirit is accompanied with tongues, and who involk the Name of Jesus at baptism."
(the above is not a direct quote but as I remember it! If wrong I will gladly retract!)

Now here is my question.

Since Tamlage French has signed on as the WPF Educational Director, what does this mean concerning reports that the new org wants to crack down on, not just TV tolerance, but also tolerance and acceptance of non Oneness Pentecostal Christians?

I am starting to think BOTH organizations are moving in the right direction... fugetabout TV - we have bigger fish to fry.

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.

[Aquila]

Bro. French is a good man. I have no issue with him or his beliefs because if he believes something I can trust he has a thoughtout and prayer filled reason to. Also, it will be sad if he leaves the ranks of the UPCI. I pray our brothers are only forming a fellowship.

[Hoovie]

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.

Wow! alot to respond to...

1. I honor the man, and his words had a refreshing impact on me that day and further raised his stature in my eyes.

2. I believe what I said to be 100% accurate and the disclaimer was only because I do not have the tapes to get exact wording.

3. I do not believe I am misrepresenting him if he stands by his position from that time. People do change views so I cannot say if he believes in a "Light" doctrine today, nor to what extent he embraced such at that time. The term has meant different things to different people.

4. I am not personal friends with brother French, and feel no need to call him given this was a taped public forum and not heresay.

5. I will go further... I recall him speaking briefly, in response to a direct question about the "Light" doctrine" about first being Trinitarian Pentecostal prior to becoming Oneness and he responded when more light was shown.

[LadyChocolate]

someone help me out here... what is this light doctrine... in a nutshell please, my brain can't handle a disortation! LOL

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Bro. French is a good man. I have no issue with him or his beliefs because if he believes something I can trust he has a thoughtout and prayer filled reason to. Also, it will be sad if he leaves the ranks of the UPCI. I pray our brothers are only forming a fellowship.

Amen and Amen.

I considered not posting this thread - not because I doubted what I heard but because of possible reprisal against Bro French from those less tolerant than he.

But then... it would be the intolerant with the axe to grind. Lord knows I have nothing vested in this.

I too hope being a part of WPF does not mean leaving the UPC.

[LadyChocolate]

Originally Posted by LadyChocolate

someone help me out here... what is this light doctrine... in a nutshell please, my brain can't handle a disortation! LOL

[rgcraig]

Maybe this will help:

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...1&postcount=20

Originally Posted by bishoph

The "light" also referred to as the "lessor light" doctrine does not just apply to those pre Azusa, it applies to everyone post day of Pentecost.

It simply states that all who are "believers" are accepted by God in what ever light they have received, (but they must walk in all of the light they have received) an that while they are in the "lessor light" it should lead them to the full light of Acts 2:38.

If this doctrine is correct then we have no reason to evangelize our world with the "full" light. We might as well join hands with our trinitarian "brethren" and win the world to whatever light they will accept, because in essence we will all get the same reward anyhow.

[LadyChocolate]

thanks you! i had an idea but wasn't sure!

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by LadyChocolate

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".

[Hoovie]

Many have held that the "Bride of Christ" was something “separate and special."

Howard Goss the first UPC General Superintendent believed in the "light" doctrine, and stated "I have not and do not teach that a person will go to hell if he has not been baptized with the Holy Spirit"

W T Witherspoon assistant General Superintendent of the UPC wrote "they that have not been taught concerning the Bible New Birth but have thoroughly repented and lived what they know of the Christian life will be on the right hand at the white throned Judgment..." and will be "Delegated to the Kingdom prepared from the foundation of the world".

G T Haywood Taught there were "levels of status in the Kingdom of God".

S G Norris taught the Holy, Righteous, and Wicked" the "Righteous" were to inhabit the new earth.

Ralph Reynolds made a distinction between those who were "begotten" and those who were "born again."

Frank Ewart wrote about parting with his dear friend when the Oneness camp left the AG. "But despite all these things our love for each other survived, and this divine love will be renewed in glory where we will all see eye to eye and doctrinal differences will never again intrude."