The Difference between PCI, PAJC and the New Heritage False Claiming Posers

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by timlan2057

I'm not interested in arguing doctrine.

But historically - AND concerning the historical whitewash of the UPC's history ramrodded by Bernard and Hall - Dan is correct here.

The entire panorama of UPC history can be summed up in a conversation between L. H. Hardwick and J. T. Pugh after a coference sermon by a radical hardliner pounding the pulpit over "tongues or hell", "uncut hair on women or hell", etc. etc.

Pugh could not understand Hardwick's less-than-hysterical-enthusiasm over the sermon and said in a rather bewildered tone to him: "But it is our heritage!"

Hardwick replied: "It's YOUR heritage. MY brethren did not believe it."

And like it or not, Hardwick, Gurley, Goss, Yadon, Stairs etc. were there at the beginning and had just as much or more to do with the foundation and establishment of the United Pentecostal Church as did their more radical counterparts - the whitewash job by Bernard and Hall notwithstanding.

I regret that NFCF sank beneath the waves if only because I put forth what I feel is a quite valid theory that the doctrine of "completely uncut hair on women or hell" was initially pushed by Murray E. Burr in the 1950s and was virtually unheard of before then.

And turnabout at times is fair play.

C. H. Yadon was a man's man. His Christianity was in stark contrast to this "southern good ole boy gentleman's club" type that I grew sick of my final years in the pentecostal ministry and manifests itself in this "pack mentality" that gets played out on message boards like this.

He was a founding member of the United Pentecostal Church; spending 48 of his 67 years in the ministry with a UPC fellowship card in his pocket.

He built churches and districts. He was the patriarch of what was arguably the most prominent family in the United Pentecostal Church as far as ministers of achievement, perhaps rivalled only by the the name "Glass."

He lived by the tenets of the merger, that men would not contend for their personal views to the disunity of the body.

And in 1992, around the time of his 85th birthday and around the time his companion of 65 years passed away, he was thrown out of the United Pentecostal Church like a piece of old trash.

Yeah, yeah ... some will say he could have stayed.

Nathaniel Urshan even asked him after the "Affirmation Statement" business meeting: "You're going to stay with us, aren't you Brother Charley?"

C. H. Yadon was a man of principle.

He didn't look for loopholes.

My take on what just happened in Tampa.

Big deal.

So the UPC decides to climb into the 20th century when we're in the 21st. It just heightens the comedy that, as a 50 year old man, this organization is still arguing over what they argued over in Indianapolis when I was a 19 year old senior in Bible college.

But back to Yadon, who was a mentor of mine:

He of course would never have sought revenge.

In fact, here was his reaction to the aftermath of the "Westburg Resolution":



And - again despite the attempted whitewash: what he told Thomas Fudge was this: "What they are telling you what we believed is NOT what we believed."

Anyway, my "spirit" is not as good as Yadon's.

The fact that 15 years after the Westburg resolution, that some of these same radicals who forced men like Yadon out are now being forced out of the United Pentecostal Church:

From that I personally take a bit of satisfaction.

Well Tim if your chess has improved as much as your articulation the last 31 years you may finally stand a chance. Look me up sometime would love to reconnect.

Well spoken.

[tv1a]

Timlan, is there a book about the Bro. Yadon? I'd like to know more about him. Any suggestions?

Originally Posted by timlan2057

I'm not interested in arguing doctrine.

But historically - AND concerning the historical whitewash of the UPC's history ramrodded by Bernard and Hall - Dan is correct here.

The entire panorama of UPC history can be summed up in a conversation between L. H. Hardwick and J. T. Pugh after a coference sermon by a radical hardliner pounding the pulpit over "tongues or hell", "uncut hair on women or hell", etc. etc.

Pugh could not understand Hardwick's less-than-hysterical-enthusiasm over the sermon and said in a rather bewildered tone to him: "But it is our heritage!"

Hardwick replied: "It's YOUR heritage. MY brethren did not believe it."

And like it or not, Hardwick, Gurley, Goss, Yadon, Stairs etc. were there at the beginning and had just as much or more to do with the foundation and establishment of the United Pentecostal Church as did their more radical counterparts - the whitewash job by Bernard and Hall notwithstanding.

I regret that NFCF sank beneath the waves if only because I put forth what I feel is a quite valid theory that the doctrine of "completely uncut hair on women or hell" was initially pushed by Murray E. Burr in the 1950s and was virtually unheard of before then.

And turnabout at times is fair play.

C. H. Yadon was a man's man. His Christianity was in stark contrast to this "southern good ole boy gentleman's club" type that I grew sick of my final years in the pentecostal ministry and manifests itself in this "pack mentality" that gets played out on message boards like this.

He was a founding member of the United Pentecostal Church; spending 48 of his 67 years in the ministry with a UPC fellowship card in his pocket.

He built churches and districts. He was the patriarch of what was arguably the most prominent family in the United Pentecostal Church as far as ministers of achievement, perhaps rivalled only by the the name "Glass."

He lived by the tenets of the merger, that men would not contend for their personal views to the disunity of the body.

And in 1992, around the time of his 85th birthday and around the time his companion of 65 years passed away, he was thrown out of the United Pentecostal Church like a piece of old trash.

Yeah, yeah ... some will say he could have stayed.

Nathaniel Urshan even asked him after the "Affirmation Statement" business meeting: "You're going to stay with us, aren't you Brother Charley?"

C. H. Yadon was a man of principle.

He didn't look for loopholes.

My take on what just happened in Tampa.

Big deal.

So the UPC decides to climb into the 20th century when we're in the 21st. It just heightens the comedy that, as a 50 year old man, this organization is still arguing over what they argued over in Indianapolis when I was a 19 year old senior in Bible college.

But back to Yadon, who was a mentor of mine:

He of course would never have sought revenge.

In fact, here was his reaction to the aftermath of the "Westburg Resolution":



And - again despite the attempted whitewash: what he told Thomas Fudge was this: "What they are telling you what we believed is NOT what we believed."

Anyway, my "spirit" is not as good as Yadon's.

The fact that 15 years after the Westburg resolution, that some of these same radicals who forced men like Yadon out are now being forced out of the United Pentecostal Church:

From that I personally take a bit of satisfaction.

[timlan2057]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Timlan, is there a book about the Bro. Yadon? I'd like to know more about him. Any suggestions?

The only book I'm aware of that would give good insight into C. H. Yadon the man and his principles would be Fudge's "Christianity Without The Cross." The book gives some very insightful anecdotes about the Yadon family, principally Charles Haskell.

Yadon's sister, Grace Wiens, wrote a biography of their parents, Frank and Hattie Yadon, published by Word Aflame Press in 1977.

I seriously doubt this book is still in print or available.

Here is an interesting blurb about the book I found on the internet.

The Yadons were originally from Oklahoma and then migrated to the Pacific Northwest.

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb....phy/yadon.html

[Sam]

This was posted on another forum earlier this evening(Wednesday).
It is about the same thing we are talking about here.
I have the author's permission to post it on this forum.
-------------------
In your opinion, the light doctrine and the doctrine that one is saved at repentance are false doctrines.

There may be different ideas as to what the "light doctrine" is. The simplest explanation is that if a person walks in all the light he has, he will not wind up in the lake of fire. According to Bishop G.T. Haywood (an esteemed leader and teacher in Oneness Pentecost) and according to S.G. Norris (a UPC official for years and a man who taught many OP ministers and teachers) a person who had not obeyed Acts 2:38 but who had served God to the best of his understanding will be judged at the second resurrection or Great White Throne Judgment of Rev. 20:11-15, Matthew 25:31-46, Daniel 12:1-3 and will spend eternity on the new earth of 2 Peter 3:13. Bro. F.E. Curts, who was Dist. Supt. of the Ohio Dist of the UPC for several years and was considered an esteemed Bible teacher among OP's taught basically the same thing except he taught that those folks would go to Heaven instead of the new earth. So, the "light doctrine" as I have defined it here is very prevalent among OP ministers and teachers.

As far as salvation/regeneration at repentance, that was the original teaching of Oneness Pentecostals. Those folks were saved and knew they were saved before they ever heard about and experienced the Holy Ghost Baptism and certainly before they ever started baptizing in Jesus' Name. The idea that a person was not really saved until repentance plus water baptism plus Spirit baptism was a later teaching based upon the Roman Catholic and Campbellite teachings of baptismal regeneration.

When the UPC was formed in 1945 there were ministers in the new organization that believed in salvation/regeneration at repentance and others that believed it took repentance plus water baptism plus Spirit baptism to be saved/born again. We now call those folks "one-steppers" and "three-steppers." The first General Superintendent, the first Sunday School Director, the first Foreign Missions Director, and some General Board Members and Presbyters were "one-steppers."

So to now say in 2007 that the "light doctrine" and the "one-step salvation doctrine" are false doctrines is to deny our Apostolic Pentecostal heritage and denigrate our Godly pioneers and teachers, missionaries, leaders, and ministers who have faithfully served us throughout the years.

[James Griffin]

Tim, is your PM working?

[Raven]

Originally Posted by timlan2057

The only book I'm aware of that would give good insight into C. H. Yadon the man and his principles would be Fudge's "Christianity Without The Cross." The book gives some very insightful anecdotes about the Yadon family, principally Charles Haskell.

Yadon's sister, Grace Wiens, wrote a biography of their parents, Frank and Hattie Yadon, published by Word Aflame Press in 1977.

I seriously doubt this book is still in print or available.

Here is an interesting blurb about the book I found on the internet.

The Yadons were originally from Oklahoma and then migrated to the Pacific Northwest.

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb....phy/yadon.html

With a concerted effort on our part we might be able to persuade Loren or Steve Yadon to write down their history in a book. I would be extremely interested. I'll do my part to twist some arms. It is already evident that if this isn't done this history will be lost and the revisers of history will gain.

Raven

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman

Dan, I want to apologize for being hard on you. My attitude was not in really good taste towards you, and I feel like a heel. Even though I do not agree with you on most things, I admire your determination and zeal for what you believe to be correct. It is my opinion that you are the most outspoken person on this forum and that is not necessarily a bad thing. You aggravate me more than anyone else, hopefully I'll learn to be a bit more objective. You've got spunk and spirit, admirable qualities indeed. Please forgive me Dan. Good night and God bless.

The truth hurts Br Eatsman: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

[Nahum]

Timlan, my bottom line is that I don't give a flyin' fajita about what constitutes PCI or PAJC doctrine. Call me an ungrateful whelp - I don't care.

I only know what I personally believe, that's all.

I have no allegiance to some mystical band of brothers from 60 years ago.

However, I can see where some angst is merited, especially in the area of mandated extra-biblical holiness standards.

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Timlan, my bottom line is that I don't give a flyin' fajita about what constitutes PCI or PAJC doctrine. Call me an ungrateful whelp - I don't care.

I only know what I personally believe, that's all.

I have no allegiance to some mystical band of brothers from 60 years ago.

However, I can see where some angst is merited, especially in the area of mandated extra-biblical holiness standards.

Without weighing doctrinally, to be fair I believe you have made statements implying that Dan et al were trying to move from their roots. They are remaining true.

Therefore perhaps an agreement. Instead of playing who is holding heritage hostage perhaps the discussion could stay centered on scriptural application?

[FRINGE_NUTTER]

The Church began on the Day of Pentecost and with Acts 2:38 not with UPCI or any pre-UPCI organizations. That is where my heritage began. Men and organizations are from the world. Jesus Christ, the Apostles, and the Bible - that is where I got my heritage. (imho)