Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
According to Durham (writing in 1912) for at least four years previously there were people preaching the baptism with the Spirit was the new birth. These people, according to Durham, taught "unless you had the witness of tongues you had not yet been born again". It is clear those people were Pentecostal. This was in conjunction with people insisting on the Jesus name baptismal formula. The context of the whole article by Durham was dealing with what he perceived as errors among Pentecostals.
|
Some how I think you are missing my point. I am in agreement that there were probably those that taught a water and spirit birth. But they were not mainstream and only a small group in comparison to the larger out pouring at Azusa.
But the biggest argument I have is you trying to prove that the group Durham was speaking about, also taught a water and spirit birth. Based on the fact that they may or may not have baptized in the Jesus name formula. Many oneness Pentecostals taught baptism in Jesus name and infillment of the spirit evidence of speaking in tongues, yet did not teach a water and spirit birth. As I said UPCI was formed by the merger of both groups. While I may get the two groups mixed up, I believe it was the PCI that taught the oneness and baptism but that salvation was at conversion. The other group taught what you are calling the water and spirit birth of salvation. Yet these two groups agreed to join on the premise that the end result was the same.
Which I might add is brought out in "Christianity without the cross" by Fudge.