KH believes the Light Doctrine??

[CC1]

I am uncomfortable using second hand knowledge of someones doctrinal beliefs as a starting point of a discussion.

If there is some written, documented basis of a person believing the "light" doctrine then I would welcome that discussion.

I believe there are writings of Oneness Pentecostal pioneers that make it clear that they believed people not having been "saved" in the three step manner were going to make heaven. I think some of those writings would make for a good discussion of a documented premise.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by CC1

I am uncomfortable using second hand knowledge of someones doctrinal beliefs as a starting point of a discussion.

If there is some written, documented basis of a person believing the "light" doctrine then I would welcome that discussion.

I believe there are writings of Oneness Pentecostal pioneers that make it clear that they believed people not having been "saved" in the three step manner were going to make heaven. I think some of those writings would make for a good discussion of a documented premise.

CC, there are people here (Keith, Thad,and others) who have this inside info because of relationship and such.

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Maybe my understanding of the light doctrine is wrong, but I understand it to mean that No matter where someone is in their walk with God, as long as they have taken the first step, and are walking in what they know, then they are saved. A PCI person would shrug and say, "and....". But from a PAJC view, this would totally throw out the "3-step" doctrine to believe this. I do not believe a person can truly be a "3-stepper" and believe the light doctrine at the same time. It is a contradiction.

It was the term you used .... "pre-Acts 2:38 light doctrine" .... wasn't sure what you meant by it.

[Thad]

CC1 is entitled not to believe us but I'm telling you , it is a fact that he believed AND taught it AND i have heard it from one of his .... Close relatives who also believes it. we had a long talk on the bus going out of state on a tour once about this doctrine.

Dave, who is related will also vouch for this

[LaVonne]

Originally Posted by Thad

Yea, the folk before us that didn't get the full revelation from God back in previous times before azusa will not spend eternity in hell - I was told that God would not judge them for what was not revealed to them

I think that;s how they put it

Thanks!

[SDG]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Maybe my understanding of the light doctrine is wrong, but I understand it to mean that No matter where someone is in their walk with God, as long as they have taken the first step, and are walking in what they know, then they are saved. A PCI person would shrug and say, "and....". But from a PAJC view, this would totally throw out the "3-step" doctrine to believe this. I do not believe a person can truly be a "3-stepper" and believe the light doctrine at the same time. It is a contradiction.

Matt ... Kudos for stirring it up!!!

I agree w/ you .... it is a contradiction .... you can't have it both ways ... either it is or isn't the plan of salvation.

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Matt ... Kudos for stirring it up!!!

I agree w/ you .... it is a contradiction .... you can't have it both ways ... either it is or isn't the plan of salvation.

Why not? The only thing I can say for sure is that Acts 2:38 is the way given for us to be saved.

1. However, God is sovereign and can do what He wants. We have many, many examples in Scripture of God going outside of His spoken word and/or commandments.

2. I would also point out that Acts 2:38 doesn't say it is the only way, although we know that Jesus is the only way. If someone asks me how to get some place; I could tell them one way and there could still be other ways.

3. Which isn't to say that I would tell someone that there might be another way. I'm all for walking on the known path when it comes to salvation.

4. Yet, it is inconceivable to me that some of the finest people walking the earth; loving God and working diligently for the kingdom of God and even losing thier lives for the Gospel are going to be cast into hell.

So this 3 stepper says Acts 2:38 is the known way and I wouldn't want suggest trying a shortcut; but I sure hope to see alot of other folks there.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by CC1

I am uncomfortable using second hand knowledge of someones doctrinal beliefs as a starting point of a discussion.

If there is some written, documented basis of a person believing the "light" doctrine then I would welcome that discussion.

I believe there are writings of Oneness Pentecostal pioneers that make it clear that they believed people not having been "saved" in the three step manner were going to make heaven. I think some of those writings would make for a good discussion of a documented premise.

I'm testing the waters with an upload of a pdf document... and there it is!

John Dearing seems to take a different tack at this issue than the "light" and "lesser light" teachings. The attached PDF document is a scan from the Pentecostal Home Study Course, copyright PPH and etc. This was required reading for all UPC ministers up until the late 1980's. For background, Dearing (1880-1940) was one of the founders of the PCI.

The most important part is:

"We so often meet with the question, 'What are you going to do with the many faithful people who have lived for God and yet never experienced
the baptism of the Holy Ghost as in Acts 2:4?' Then we are glad for our text by which we can answer that God can call those things which be not as though they were. If God would count Abraham's faith for righteousness and call him the "father of many" while he was yet childless, is it not just like Him to do that for my old faithful grandmother? Yes, He can and does, thank God! I am not talking about all the professors that died before the outpouring of the Spirjt, but I am talking about those who really walked with God. When those precious souls surrendered their lives to the known will of God, they were made happy in the blessing He gave them and the blood gave them a clean slate, a perfect standing before God. Yet we have to admit that their state was far different from that of a Spirit-filled believer of today. Can we not believe that their standing was just as good as ours, that God through their faith would call the things that be not as though they were?

However, if those same people had lived on to see our day of increased
light and had desired to keep their standing, they too would have embraced Acts 2:4 and would soon have been rejoicing in a Spirit-filled
life. Thus their standing would have remained the same, but their state would have been greatly changed." (emphasis in original)

This is also remarkable for the insight that it gives to us in showing how the first generation of Pentecostals looked at themselves. They really felt that something remarkable had taken place in 1900 - something so dramatic that it affected the way in which God would judge man. They were drawing a line through history here. This is an important consideration for those who hold to the "continuous remnant" theory. The first generation of Pentecostals didn't know of any such "remnant" in their time.

Also, note how he states that those who were not Spirit-filled still had a "perfect standing" with God. That first generation was not just troubled about whether their Trinitarian "brethren" would be saved. They were troubled about their own family members, friends and fellow ministers. The severe judgment that is inherent in the "Three-Stepper" way was even more problematic for our spiritual pioneers.

I think that is why the "Three-Stepper" program had to wait a couple of generations before it could become dominant. This may also be the reason so many "Three-Steppers" are such historical revisionists. They desperately want the Anabaptists and Albigensians to be "Oneness Pentecostals" so that they don't have to send everyone to hell.

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Newman

Why not? The only thing I can say for sure is that Acts 2:38 is the way given for us to be saved.

1. However, God is sovereign and can do what He wants. We have many, many examples in Scripture of God going outside of His spoken word and/or commandments.

2. I would also point out that Acts 2:38 doesn't say it is the only way, although we know that Jesus is the only way. If someone asks me how to get some place; I could tell them one way and there could still be other ways.

3. Which isn't to say that I would tell someone that there might be another way. I'm all for walking on the known path when it comes to salvation.

4. Yet, it is inconceivable to me that some of the finest people walking the earth; loving God and working diligently for the kingdom of God and even losing thier lives for the Gospel are going to be cast into hell.

So this 3 stepper says Acts 2:38 is the known way and I wouldn't want suggest trying a shortcut; but I sure hope to see alot of other folks there.

Aha! Now that was an interesting post.

[Pastor Keith]

KH and others that taught me have always held taken from the articles of faith that there is something legitimate that happens to a sincere believer with authentic faith (less than full salvation) and the orginal founders of the UPCI embraced the idea that there is full salvation (ie Acts 2:38) and a salvation experience of something less than full.

This doesn't negate the fact of contending that people experience everything God has for them and that God will hold them accountable for knowledge not obeyed. Something KH and others taught me as well.

Fundamental Doctrine

The basic and fundamental doctrine of this organization shall be the Bible standard of full salvation, which is repentance, baptism in water by immersion in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the initial sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit gives utterance.

We shall endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit until we are all come into the unity of the faith, at the same time admonishing all brethren that they shall not contend for their different views to the disunity of the body.