~1944 PAJC Manual-Articles of Faith~ - Page 5

nahkoe · #41 12-25-2007, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berkeley

Oh,my bad. Well, I wouldn't want to flirt with a gal that doesn't wear socks.

berkeley · #42 12-25-2007, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nahkoe

Sam · #43 12-25-2007, 10:09 PM

The ban on wearing socks was for women.
Women were expected to wear long cotton stockings.
Later nylon hose replaced cotton stockings.
Some preached that the hose had to have seams.

commonsense · #44 12-25-2007, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam

The ban on wearing socks was for women.
Women were expected to wear long cotton stockings.
Later nylon hose replaced cotton stockings.
Some preached that the hose had to have seams.

Tis true. I think the socks refers to anklets and the idea was that a woman should not have bare legs.

Since I've seen many ladies in sandals and bare legs in UPC churches in the last few years we have evidence of todays' scandalous attire.

commonsense · #45 12-25-2007, 11:15 PM

This little 3"x5" green booklet was always in my dad's desk drawer.
I would read it and be amazed at the don'ts even as a child.........
This was not taught at our local assembly. Not sure where my dad got it.

pelathais · #46 12-26-2007, 10:35 AM

Keith, many, many thanks for posting this ( and thanks to commonsense too!).

Is there more to that PAJC manual than just the AoF? Don't want to be a bother... but what else ya got? LOL!

#47 12-27-2007, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keith4him

Anyone see article VI to be a member of the organization you only have to have one of the baptisms.

Keith,

It is interesting that they stated it the way they did.

Taking the statement in context, referring to page 5, I believe THEY were clear on their intent and that the intent was to license those who were in compliance with stated salvific doctrines on page 5. Now, some 63 or 64 years later, WE are probably not nearly so clear on their intent.

I DO know that there were preachers, CA Nelson being a case in point, who had the revelation of the mighty God in Christ, had been baptized in Jesus Name, but had not received the gift of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues who were actively preaching meetings and then seeking the Holy Ghost in their own altar calls. At its inception, this may have been their intent in the wording.

Of course, if that is the case, then a tongue talking titles baptized individual could have qualified for license and a Jesus name baptized non-tongue talking individual could have qualified for license.

It is a very interesting bit of history and I thank you for posting it and Jeanie for her efforts in scanning it.

I would love to have a copy of the entire manual and would gladly pay you for the photocopying and postage to get it to me.