Quote:
Originally Posted by philjones
Pel,
Did not some of these whom you identify as forebears actually modify their positions on this matter in their lifetimes? Did not many of them become exclusivistic about baptism in Jesus Name and speaking in tongues? Perhaps they were growing in grace and knowledge as they came to a fuller understanding of God's plan for salvation?
I am asking these questions because I have read that some of these pioneers or forebears did indeed migrate from the position you have described to the one others are castigated for presenting as their heritage.
|
A.D. Urshan does not seem to have moved from his position on the issue. Nor did Frank Ewart, G.T. Haywood, John Dearing, Howard Goss, and many others. In fact, later in life Urshan, Dearing and Goss would all be criticized for not going along with the changes.
I'm not aware of anyone in that first generation who did change. I may be missing someone, in fact I probably am. But I don't find anywhere that someone in the first generation changed on this.
I also can't really find any time when the change was made. It's just be gradualism. John Dearing's writing weren't removed from the required reading for UPC ministers until the late 1980's, and his writings weren't completely removed from the Pentecostal Publishing House until some time in the 1990's.
The fact that some one like John Dearing who had been so influential to our movement has been "erased" so effectively is almost Stalinist. Even allegations about Parham's morals don't disqualify him from our histories because he's the one who "discovered" the "evidenced by speaking in other tongues" doctrine.
We'll do battle for the reputation of Parham (despite his Trintarianism and other beliefs) because his contribution was crucial. John Dearing? Well, he was just some Apostolic fellow who founded the PCI and we don't really want to talk about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind
Again, I knew a man, a pioneer, who thought those that worship 2 idols are not going to be included in the Bride. I agree with this belief.
|
I know that by "pioneer" we're using something of a specialized meaning, and I don't intend to short shrift many, many great men and women. But if you know someone from that first generation of the 20th century who changed their position to become "exclusivistic" then that would be helpful in answering Phil's question, and I would be very interested in the details as well.
And BTW, a mere technicality no doubt, but I don't know of any Bible believing Christian who would endorse the worship of "2 idols," or any idols at all for that matter. If you mean Trinitarians and are saying that they aren't going to be "included in the Bride;" S. G. Norris taught that, but even he didn't send them off to hell. He just had two states into which Christians could be saved. If you could puzzle out the Trinity (or thought you could) then you were "saved" but just not a part of the Bride of Christ. The Bride were those who recieved the revelation of the Mighty God in Christ, and experienced the full package of
Acts 2:38, according to Norris.
I think all Christians would agree with what you and that dear pioneer have said.
Threaded Mode
