Bernard continues his rewrite of UPC history

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

At one point Lutheranism was a new issue, Calvinism, Wesleyanism, ana-baptists, evangelicalism etc etc

Originally Posted by Praxeas

ROFL..it's true until you prove it false?

Classic Logical fallacy. The burden of proof is on whoever made the assertion

Which church belief system? Roman Orthodox? Greek Orthodox? Russian Orthodox? Calvinism? Lutheranism? Wesleyism?

Which one of those is that church that existed throughout history? Because they don't all agree with each other either

Speaking of classic fallacies, you missed the point. The point is not which belief system is oldest, or which one is correct, the issue is history.

And on top of that it was another poster who asserted a continued line of apostolic faith so it IS on them to prove their statement.

The theology of the UPC is unique to the 20th century, never before that point can you find their unique teaching. (And don't claim the book of Acts or the Apostles because it only begs the question).

So take your ADD pills and try to keep up.

[Michael The Disciple]

The theology of the UPC is unique to the 20th century, never before that point can you find their unique teaching. (And don't claim the book of Acts or the Apostles because it only begs the question).

No book of Acts? Well you can have all those "historical" groups you want. I follow Yeshua. The Church he started is revealed in Acts and the epistles. Everything else is false.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

No book of Acts? Well you can have all those "historical" groups you want. I follow Yeshua. The Church he started is revealed in Acts and the epistles. Everything else is false.

You must not be able to read.

You have your opinion of Acts others have theirs, but the truth is you cannot point to another group, outside of how you interpret Acts, that hold your views. Therefore, the whole world went to Hell for 1900 years.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

You must not be able to read.

You have your opinion of Acts others have theirs, but the truth is you cannot point to another group, outside of how you interpret Acts, that hold your views. Therefore, the whole world went to Hell for 1900 years.

Yes I can read. Rather bold of you to say no group ever existed that believes what I believe.

Where you there in every country in the world during every century for 2000 years? Any house Churches that existed or just even single believers here and there. You must be very old.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Yes I can read. Rather bold of you to say no group ever existed that believes what I believe.

Where you there in every country in the world during every century for 2000 years? Any house Churches that existed or just even single believers here and there. You must be very old.

Go ahead point one out...waiting...

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Charnock

You are assigning motives that don't exist. I am not laughing.

And yes, I don't care which label is used, anyone that believes Jesus is the Messiah is "born of God."

Read 1 John 5.

Charnock, one can hardly make a determination of salvation by 1 John 5. The whole book must be considered. In the above quote you were replying that Jw's, Mormons, Branch Dividians, Armstrongites, etc, could be saved ("I don't care which label is used"), some of whom do not meet the theological/christological requirements of 1 John.

Also I don't think there is any doubt that there have been Christians throughout history who affirmed both the oneness of God (while not using that 20th century term to define themselves) and who baptized invoking the name of Jesus. Those are the 2 doctrines that Mike The Disciple pointed out, and that was a legitimate point.

However Untraditional's assertion of an unbroken chain of "Full package" oneness, baptising in JN, tongues as initial evidence, and standards affirming groups are either completely absent or silent from history as we know it, until the 20th century pentecostals.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Go ahead point one out...waiting...

You are the one worried about history not me. Whats written in the Bible is good enough for me. Everything else must be judged against it. I would not be moved from that if there really wasn't one.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Charnock, one can hardly make a determination of salvation by 1 John 5. The whole book must be considered. In the above quote you were replying that Jw's, Mormons, Branch Dividians, Armstrongites, etc, could be saved ("I don't care which label is used"), some of whom do not meet the theological/christological requirements of 1 John.

Also I don't think there is any doubt that there have been Christians throughout history who affirmed both the oneness of God (while not using that 20th century term to define themselves) and who baptized invoking the name of Jesus. Those are the 2 doctrines that Mike The Disciple pointed out, and that was a legitimate point.

However Untraditional's assertion of an unbroken chain of "Full package" oneness, baptising in JN, tongues as initial evidence, and standards affirming groups are either completely absent or silent from history as we know it, until the 20th century pentecostals.

So show us these groups...

[Max Cosme]

Originally Posted by Charnock

Chalfant and Weisser hold up obscure sects of Christians that practiced one of the elements as proof that there has been continuity. Yet they conveniently omit other doctrinal "errors" of these sects.

For instance, some Quakers baptized in the name of Jesus. Great. Trouble is, they were also hard and fast Trinitarians who never spoke in tongues.

This need to revise history is troubling. It's dishonest and reveals the origins of false doctrine in the OP movement.

Which Quakers baptized in Jesus name?!?!?! Much less baptized????

Some Quakers, like Penn, denied the Trinity, albeit, they did not express the type of modalism we see today. Weiser, Arnold and Chalfant jumped on this, trying to suggest they were in line with Oneness Pentecostals.

Fox, Penn and Barclay, leaders of this movement expressed a belief in a spiritual baptism and a spiritual Eucharist. They also believed in universal reconciliation.

A guiding principle of Quakerism is that all mankind has been given some form of light.

http://www.qhpress.org/texts/barclay/apology/index.html

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

So show us these groups...

Which groups? Groups that affirmed "oneness" and baptism in Jesus Name or "full package"? I can't produce a full package group, nor do I know of anyone who can legitimately produce one, as for groups affirming the twofold doctrine of oneness and water baptism in JN, its well known that the primative church didn't believe in the trinity and baptized invoking the name of Jesus. This is common knowledge, affirmed by church historians, biblical and secular encyclapedias.