Bernard continues his rewrite of UPC history

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by pelathais

It was a complex cultural war as well. The anti-slavery issue was an important tool for the new Republican Party to use to rally their "base" - though it was also an important economic issue for their predecessors (the Whigs) especially in the border states and Mid-South.

Does DKB dare tell the next General Conference that those who are promoting a one step oneness theology want to "put y'all back in chains!" ?

[Hoovie]

Somewhere I missed that these topics were so intertwined! LOL

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Somewhere I missed that these topics were so intertwined! LOL

[AreYouReady?]

Elder Epley mentioned it.

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Max Cosme

He has documentation coming from his book, History of Christian Doctrine Volume 3.

Ellis Scism, who served as
superintendent of the Northwestern District of the PCI at the time
of the merger and who was elected to the same position for the
UPC immediately after the merger, stated, “A minority in the PCI
did not believe that water baptism or a tongues experience was
essential to salvation.” Ellis Scism with Stanley Scism, Northwest
Passage: The Early Years of Ellis Scism (Hazelwood, MO: Word
Aflame Press, 1994), 227.

Scism would not have called this group a “minority” unless it was clearly less than one-half of the PCI, and thus probably no more than one-third or one-fourth. His district was a major area of concentration for this minority. - page 372

This is hearsay, at BEST! I mentioned this on FB, but why doesn't Bernard source Loren Yadon. I think his hearsay is as valid as Stanley Scism's.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Ahhh...so you are using it for the guy in some jungle that has never heard the Gospel at all?

I did not say I am. Only acknowledging that many do in various denominations. That is an easier thing to accept, I think.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by pelathais

i think that's always been the case, hoovemeister. I'm thinking of s.g. Norris's views on the matter - views that have been propagated greatly by his student lee stoneking over the past few decades.

The move to become "harder" on doctrine seems to have been more politically motivated; and here i'm thinking of t.f. Tenney's famous interjaculation questioning whether the upc fm department was baptizing in jesus' name and the surrounding uproar. That move really kicked tft's career into high gear.

Though, as has been argued for years on these pages, the vast, vast majority of op's have been and probably always will be "one steppers" at heart - to deny that plain fact will get you appointed to positions of honor and help fill your speaking calendar.

It's a puzzling part of the op culture - and almost certainly has parallels in other subcultures as well - if not the entire human race.

Even steve-a-rino (he of hat fame) has admitted that he can't judge the destinies of human souls. Dkb and others of his mindset appear to want to ignore this fact (that they employ practical variants of the "light doctrine") and hammer out sterner creeds demanding that all dance the "three step" or perish.

he's alive!!

[UnTraditional]

OK, I think that we all need to take a step back from the keyboard and take a deep breath. Most of you on here are not even UPC. I am not UPC. My question is, why in the world do you care? I mean, you are not part of a UPC church or a minister in that organization. Why do you insist on downing the organization right and left? You left, those of you who did. Good. Now, go on with your life. Many post as if their venting will change something. It will not.

Did DKB rewrite UPC history? Don't know and really don't care. Truthfully, I am sick of people who leave something hammering it as if they were still in there. Folks, let it go. It's over. Regardless of whether you agree with their standards or not, the truth of the matter is this, that for all the whining and complaining about things, a bunch of disgruntled people will make not one bit of difference. Be holy as He is holy, cry a river, build a bridge, get over it, and if you have to, burn your own bridge. Our time here is too short to be fussing over something none of us have a part of.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Sabby

This is hearsay, at BEST! I mentioned this on FB, but why doesn't Bernard source Loren Yadon. I think his hearsay is as valid as Stanley Scism's.

I seriously doubt that Scism's dad believe the necessity of the new birth message?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Well, that's harsher than I would say it, but I do believe he has a vested interest in preserving and promoting a systematic "three step" theology.

A unified voice is usually stronger voice, and if you have written extensively on the matter and are spearheading an organization, and their newly formed graduate school, it makes sense that one hopes divergent views are given minimal credibility.

Perhaps that is why a mutual friend of ours found himself out on his ear, once they no longer needed his credentials. He told me personally he explained to DKB before he was hired he held the PCI one step view. Was to his thinking at the time well received, maybe not so much.