Ouestion for those staying in the UPC

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

If the UPC reverts back to the 'merger agreement' where two different plans of salvation are preached and believed would you stay? To clarify the PCI men preached Acts 2:38 so fervently most could not tell the difference but bring that position up to date where men would preach openly one could be saved without baptism in Jesus Name and the HGB would you stay?

Yes I would stay. The purpose of the Org was to unite us so we can be one in purpose and be stronger.

[Praxeas]

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.

So in other words the UPC is not even close to the organization it was started as. While one group is claiming to being a double crossed minority in fact there is another group that for many years has had that distinction?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yes I would stay. The purpose of the Org was to unite us so we can be one in purpose and be stronger.

What a novel idea!!

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Brother Epley, those Cons that dont like the idea of the UPCI having 2 doctrinal views, came to this some time in the last 30 years or so.

The fact is, the UPCI has always been (from day 1) an organization of men who preach Acts 2:38 but not a group of men who preach the Water Spirit doctrine (which I belive).

It was the ulta cons who wanted to force the PCI doctrine out of the UPCI that worked the change the UPCI.

I am for the UPCI being an organization of men (both PCI and W/S) who seek to share the Gospel and believe that Acts 2:38 is the proper response to the Gospel.

Any conservitive that can work within the framework that was created in 1948 is welcome too.

So I wonder...when the UPC first formed and these men put on a face of "unity" did they really know deep inside we could never be a United group with different views?

All this talk about "history" and tradition....We should really look at history. What it looks like is someone hijacked this org and now it's being rehijacked?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Ferd the difference today than 1948 with the original PCI men is they preached Acts 2:38 so fervently most did not know the difference their decendants do not. They BELIEVE what the PCI men believed but the preaching is NOT the same. Would you be comfortable with that??? A UPC in your town preaching a man can be saved without obeying Acts 2:38?

Do or did people get baptized in Jesus name and filled with the Spirit anyways in those churches?

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Do or did people get baptized in Jesus name and filled with the Spirit anyways in those churches?

So salvational doctrine is not an issue???

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

So salvational doctrine is not an issue???

Look at history again people. This Org was started based on the notion that we all believe in repentance, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ and that tongues is evidence of the baptism of the Spirit and Oneness. That was how it started. Order of importance was not a part of that framework. Where they all dishonest? What happened?

BTW I never said salvation doctrine is not an issue. I asked if people were still being baptized and getting the spirit in those churches

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by nwlife

Is there a PCI style organization today?

Yes, we're in one but I can tell you it's less than ideal and many of the points that have been made about today's PCIers being weak on the essentiality of Spirit baptism and other important aspects of doctrine are right on.

Sadly, it is so. And sadly, I have come to the conclusion that the proverbial "slippery slope" is also a reality.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Look at history again people. This Org was started based on the notion that we all believe in repentance, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ and that tongues is evidence of the baptism of the Spirit and Oneness. That was how it started. Order of importance was not a part of that framework. Where they all dishonest? What happened?

BTW I never said salvation doctrine is not an issue. I asked if people were still being baptized and getting the spirit in those churches

But the issue is that the men that made this agreement is dead, and importance on salvational doctrine has become an issue for many that do believe it takes all of Act 2:38 to be saved, unlike the PCI which states otherwise.

I believe this merger was doomed from the beginning because of principle itself. For me to accept someone that preaches the PCI doctrine as being right, I would have to do away with what I believe is a salvational absolute. Thus while I would not proclaim someone that holds a PCI view lost, I cannot join with them for principles sake.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

But the issue is that the men that made this agreement is dead, and importance on salvational doctrine has become an issue for many that do believe it takes all of Act 2:38 to be saved, unlike the PCI which states otherwise.

I believe this merger was doomed from the beginning because of principle itself. For me to accept someone that preaches the PCI doctrine as being right, I would have to do away with what I believe is a salvational absolute. Thus while I would not proclaim someone that holds a PCI view lost, I cannot join with them for principles sake.

If I were to find out today that my pastor was of the PCI persuasion, I'm not sure I would leave because he preaches and teaches like he's PAJC.