What did the oneness pentecostal pioneers believe?

[THX4GRACE]

Read an interesting book titled " Christianity Without The Cross" by Thomas Fudge. I found it very interesting that the author cited a number of our founding Oneness fathers as believing we were "born again" after repentance. He cited the late Howard A Goss, LH Hardwick, CH Yadon, Wynn Stairs, Earl Jacques, E.S McKeen, W.P Wickens, S.L. Wise, A.D Gurley, A.W Post among the early Oneness Pentecostals which believed that salvation came by grace and was instantanious at repentance. He went around the country and overseas to gather documentation. He spoke to the families of many of our founding fathers. Looks like we may have had the Acts 2:38 message from the beginning, but that it was interpreted, taught and preached with a different interpretation back then, at least by a number of our ministers.

Since our denomination came out of a combined diverse group of believers, it's very interesting to note that our early roots held to a sligntly different doctrine that what we hear preached in many oneness pentecostal churches today. Just found it very intersting.

[KWSS1976]

Yea if auzuza street would not have happened I would like to see how the pentecostal denomination would have turned out..as far as born again after repentance we just had a sunday school lesson on this and that was the title (saved at repentence) so go figure...

[THX4GRACE]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

Yea if auzuza street would not have happened I would like to see how the pentecostal denomination would have turned out..as far as born again after repentance we just had a sunday school lesson on this and that was the title (saved at repentence) so go figure...

True......but this book and it's contents amazed me....guess I never realized we had such a difference of opinion within our ranks. Seems the same difference was present even during the very early days....wonder what the Apostles really thought about the issue?

[KWSS1976]

I always go back to the theif on the cross how was he saved? Was it not by repentence??? He was the only one on the cross that accepted Jesus and did not mock him..I don't buy the old testament-new testament argument about the issue of his salvation cause he did not have a sacrafice to offer to roll his sins back as in the old testament...

[deltaguitar]

Originally Posted by THX4GRACE

Read an interesting book titled " Christianity Without The Cross" by Thomas Fudge. I found it very interesting that the author cited a number of our founding Oneness fathers as believing we were "born again" after repentance. He cited the late Howard A Goss, LH Hardwick, CH Yadon, Wynn Stairs, Earl Jacques, E.S McKeen, W.P Wickens, S.L. Wise, A.D Gurley, A.W Post among the early Oneness Pentecostals which believed that salvation came by grace and was instantanious at repentance. He went around the country and overseas to gather documentation. He spoke to the families of many of our founding fathers. Looks like we may have had the Acts 2:38 message from the beginning, but that it was interpreted, taught and preached with a different interpretation back then, at least by a number of our ministers.

Since our denomination came out of a combined diverse group of believers, it's very interesting to note that our early roots held to a sligntly different doctrine that what we hear preached in many oneness pentecostal churches today. Just found it very intersting.

Yeah, and if you want more info trace the founders of the Oneness movement back and the religions that they were a part of and you will find some very interesting ideas.

youtube has some great debates with the Church of Christ, United Pentecostals, and a lecture by a Dr. Morey concerning the beliefs and history of the "cults". If you really want to see something interesting go watch the UPC vs. Christianity debates. After that debate the man who represented the UPC, Robert Sabin, the head of ABI, changed his beliefs.

[THX4GRACE]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

Yeah, and if you want more info trace the founders of the Oneness movement back and the religions that they were a part of and you will find some very interesting ideas.

youtube has some great debates with the Church of Christ, United Pentecostals, and a lecture by a Dr. Morey concerning the beliefs and history of the "cults". If you really want to see something interesting go watch the UPC vs. Christianity debates. After that debate the man who represented the UPC, Robert Sabin, the head of ABI, changed his beliefs.

I saw those debates many years ago...if you mean the ones with Sabin, Urshan and John Ankerberg....pretty interesting...

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

Yeah, and if you want more info trace the founders of the Oneness movement back and the religions that they were a part of and you will find some very interesting ideas.

youtube has some great debates with the Church of Christ, United Pentecostals, and a lecture by a Dr. Morey concerning the beliefs and history of the "cults". If you really want to see something interesting go watch the UPC vs. Christianity debates. After that debate the man who represented the UPC, Robert Sabin, the head of ABI, changed his beliefs.

Robert Sabin changed his beliefs LONG after those debates and LONG after he was no longer head of ABI or a UPC member. Just a clarification

[noeticknight]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Robert Sabin changed his beliefs LONG after those debates and LONG after he was no longer head of ABI or a UPC member. Just a clarification

Concerning Bro. Sabin, why did he change his beliefs? What are his current doctrinal values? Thanks.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by noeticknight

Concerning Bro. Sabin, why did he change his beliefs? What are his current doctrinal values? Thanks.

I'm probably not the best to describe the beliefs of Robert Sabin, and I haven't spoken to him in about +15 years, but my general impression is that his beliefs haven't really changed all that much over the years.

He seemed to take to heart S.G. Norris' "equivocations" on the extreme Three Stepper program and even to have found some comfort in it. Norris ("The Bear") left the gates of heaven open for Trinitarians and for those who had not spoken in tongues nor been baptized in Jesus' name. For all of his denunciations of "greasy grace," The Bear seemed to have a fairly similar soteriology as those he railed against. Thomas Fudge says as much in his book as well.

Recently I was talking to one "old timer" who mentioned how that he remembered the new General Superintendent had, years ago, denounced my own "T.U.L.I.P." doctrines in a meeting where Sabin was also present.

I don't remember being "denounced" at all... and I've never held to Calvin's "Five Points," but the conversation was illuminating because it did provide a glimpse of how I was perceived by someone who didn't particularly care for me. He tended to see the give and take in terms of acrimony and animosity. I saw it as more of a collegial fellowship of "iron on iron." He also tended to exaggerate my position ("greasy grace") and sought to align the UPC leadership with his own motives, at least within his own mind. Self justification seems to have been his aim and if he could use DKB to belittle me, then his fantasies were more lush. DKB actually went out of his way to say some very kind words, and how my staunch Arminianism could be perceived as "T.U.L.I.P." style Five Point Calvinism is beyond me.

In that same meeting, Bob Sabin had spoken in terms that I've heard him speak of today (we were both UPC back then). He was and I believe is still a very ardent believer in Oneness theology and has developed what is perhaps the best and most sophisticated statements on Oneness Christology (he along with Talmadge French, though they each seem to give a different take on it).

Brother Sabin had perhaps subordinated some of his opinions in obedience to our leaders while in the UPC, we all did that. Once free from that self inflicted limitation he has been freer to discussion ideas. I suspect that some folks may play the mental gymnastics with Brother Sabin and others that my "old timer" friend had done with me.

Again, my take on Robert Sabin is certainly a bit dated unfortunately, but that's my take.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by THX4GRACE

Read an interesting book titled " Christianity Without The Cross" by Thomas Fudge. I found it very interesting that the author cited a number of our founding Oneness fathers as believing we were "born again" after repentance. He cited the late Howard A Goss, LH Hardwick, CH Yadon, Wynn Stairs, Earl Jacques, E.S McKeen, W.P Wickens, S.L. Wise, A.D Gurley, A.W Post among the early Oneness Pentecostals which believed that salvation came by grace and was instantanious at repentance. He went around the country and overseas to gather documentation. He spoke to the families of many of our founding fathers. Looks like we may have had the Acts 2:38 message from the beginning, but that it was interpreted, taught and preached with a different interpretation back then, at least by a number of our ministers.

Since our denomination came out of a combined diverse group of believers, it's very interesting to note that our early roots held to a sligntly different doctrine that what we hear preached in many oneness pentecostal churches today. Just found it very intersting.

From its inception there have been ministers in the UPC who taught salvation at repentance (and this would include anyone from any denomination who had repented in the family of God and Bride of Christ) and those who taught that a person was not really saved and not a child of God until he/she had repented, been water baptized in Jesus' name, and had been baptized in the Holy Spirit.

When the Holy Spirit was poured out in Kansas, Texas, California, and then the whole world in the late 1800's and early 1900's, this blessing was experienced by men and women who had been born again and committed their lives to God. The experience was not poured out on sinners. Those who received the Holy Ghost Baptism did not consider themselves any more saved after receiving the experience than they were before. Then a few years later when baptism in the name of Jesus became an issue, those who were baptized in that name did not consider themselves any more saved after their baptism than before their baptism. Over the years among Apostolic/Pentecostal people there developed a doctrine among some that water and Spirit baptism were the birth of water and Spirit spoken of in John 3:5 and that a person was not really saved or part of the New Testament Church or born into God's family and considered a brother or sister until after repentance plus water baptism plus Spirit baptism. That doctrine has grown and is very prevalent among those who are considered Apostolic or Oneness Pentecostals. The late Bro. Norris, who founded the Apostolic Bible Institute where hundreds of UPC ministers were trained has a chart showing where various doctrines in the UPC have come from. This can be found online at http://home.att.net/~jrd/Seven_Church_Ages.gif He shows that the idea of baptism remitting/forgiving/washing away sin came from the Christian or Campbellite church. That's why some refer to the idea that baptism is part of the plan of salvation as the "Campbellite Captivity" of the Apostolic Church.


Those who believe that a person is justified/saved/born again at repentance are called "one-steppers" on this forum. Those who believe a person is not justified/saved/born again until completing the three steps of repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism are called "three-steppers."

I happen to be among those who align with the older Apostolic/Pentecostal teaching that a person is justified/saved/born again at faith and repentance and that water and Spirit baptism are part of Christian experience apart from and subsequent to regeneration. I would be called a "one-stepper."

This has been discussed many times on this forum and has generated more heat than light. I am not posting this to start another argument but rather for information to a person who is new to this forum.