Ouestion for those staying in the UPC

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

That is the underlying reason. I could NEVER hold license with a group that teaches men could be saved without obeying Acts 2:38 in this dispensation. And many in the UPC was raised the same and were ignorant concerning the toleration of the other view that is just a fact. This is NOT 1948 and most of those men are dead and the emphasis is not the same. If it reverts the defection will be even more. However I guess an organization of some type will already be in place to recieve them?

I realize this isn't 1948. Many things have changed through the years - even since the time I was born a few years forward of '48.

I don't have to preach (or believe either for that matter) that every person who hasn't spoken in tongues will spend eternity in hell to preach that the baptism of the Spirit is vital, essential and necessary for all believers. To me, the important thing is that we place the same emphasis on doctrine the apostles did.

I believe we do just that.

[Straightline]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I highly respect TB for his honesty and integrity but no I am sorry I could not belong to a group that allowed preacher to preach one could be saved without obeying Acts 2:38. Evidently the UPC is returning to the 'merger agreement' days which many will not be able to tolerate.

UPC: The organization founded on a compromise.



BTW Elder Epley (though you know this!): Not all PCI taught saved w/out Acts 2:38. My ancestor was PCI, as were many in that district, but held to the Acts 2:38 or Hell message. David Bernard put out an article 5 years ago stating that only about 30% of the PCI at the time of the merger were "saved at repentance" preachers (A very vocal group, many being in leadership). Someday I will lay my hands on that article and post it here.

The shot heard 'round the world went in a
Straightline

[Rhymis]

Originally Posted by Straightline

Straightline -- I want a list of ALL your straightline quotes .... and I mean soon - you got that straight?

please PM me or else.........

[LadyRev]

Originally Posted by Felicity

So then guess this means that if I come you go.

No.

I would leave the org because of my beliefs regarding salvation.

However, I wouldn't treat those with a different view as if they have leprosy...

You trying to get me in trouble or what? I think I'll just shut up before I dig myself into a proverbial HOLE.

(I knew I shouldn't have answered this question...)

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by LadyRev

No.

I would leave the org because of my beliefs regarding salvation.

However, I wouldn't treat those with a different view as if they have leprosy...

You trying to get me in trouble or what? I think I'll just shut up before I dig myself into a proverbial HOLE.

(I knew I shouldn't have answered this question...)

ROFLOL!

[Raven]

Originally Posted by crakjak

I am sad that the UPC took the PAJC path rather than the PCI path, by doing so it has hindered it's growth and purpose in the earth. Men tend to always error to the side of control and dictatorship rather than freedom and individual faith in God.

Amen, Crakjak.

Raven

[Raven]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

You have to be saved to identify with Christ and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, which is given to the SONS of God as an inheritance. I have yet to find a sinner who wanted to be baptized or received the gift of the Holy Ghost. There´s a reason for that!

I like your answer TB. There is a lot of misunderstanding about why God gives the gift of the Holy Ghost!

Raven

[Raven]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

Can you explain to me how someone obeys receiving a gift from someone? The issue is not whether someone believes one should repent and be baptized, but why they should do so. As for the baptism of the Holy Ghost, it´s a gift of spiritual empowerment given to those who walk in obedience to the Word of God not a requirement to enter into a relationship with God. We get that by grace through faith. If the PAJCers would get their theology straightened out it would resolve many of the problems in the UPCI.

Amen again! Lack of true spiritual understanding and revelation is at the root of misguided doctrines and division within the body. I for one want to declare that I'm not doing away with the baptism of the Holy Ghost but I think there is a great misunderstanding of what Pentecost was all about. "The children of the promise are counted for the seed."!!!

Raven

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

That is the underlying reason. I could NEVER hold license with a group that teaches men could be saved without obeying Acts 2:38 in this dispensation. And many in the UPC was raised the same and were ignorant concerning the toleration of the other view that is just a fact. This is NOT 1948 and most of those men are dead and the emphasis is not the same. If it reverts the defection will be even more. However I guess an organization of some type will already be in place to recieve them?

The only reason that the PAJC became the overriding view is simply because the PAJC men began to immediately violate the merger agreement as soon as it was signed. You may believe that that was the honorable thing to do, I however disagree, and believe they were dishonest in their intentions, or at the very least their children certainly were. If they did not really believe the PCI view was acceptable, why come to agreement with the gentlemen involved? The PAJC became a very powerful overriding force within the UPC, there was dishonesty in the historical record, this drove the PCI men underground. This literally made the PCI men second class, due to "weak on the message."

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Felicity I think that is very true and is at the root of this issue NOT television advertizing. I think the cons are reading the tea leaves and a step backwards to them is about to occur. I could be entirely wrong but many were upset about the 'bridge building' meeting and comments made there.

How sad that there are those who view a return to to our roots to be negative. This really reinforces my perception that the "conservatives" were never conservative at all. They were introducing innovations and new teachings.

The primary thrust of most of their writings was the invention of new histories; both for the 20th Century Apostolic movement and the invention of myths about historic Christianity as well.

It's very telling that one of their foremost "historians" has now had to branch out into obvious historical fiction to tell his story.