Apostolic but not Oneness?

[Patrick Harris]

I'm a minister, Pentecostal, fully believing everything we need to know about what the church needs to return to can be found in The Acts of the Apostles.
My wife and I have been attending an UPCI church for the past year because I truly believe that is where God has placed us. We both love and support our church and our Pastor 100%.
The difference is that we are not Oneness, I've read Dr. Bernard books and I can no longer say with certainty that I follow the path of being Trinitarian, but have not crossed that bridge to Oneness.
However, today I just listened to Dr. Bernard's message titled "Restoring the Apostolic Church" and there was not one thing in that message I didn't fully support or agree with.
The question is this: Can you be considered Apostolic, in your faith, without being Oneness?

[Rudy]

IMO I don't see how.

[Jito463]

Since the term Apostolic means one who practices the teachings of the apostles - and being one who believes the apostles did not teach a trinity, but one true God as all Jewish people believe - I would have to say no. Pentecostal perhaps, but not Apostolic.

Perhaps a few titles you can look into, would be

Ancient Champions of Oneness - William B. Chalfant
Oneness and Trinity: a.d. 100-300 - David Bernard
The Trinitarian Controversy in the Fourth Century - David Bernard
A Handbook of Basic Doctrines - David Bernard
(I love this one personally, as it's nothing but scripture references, no exposition)

Then there's the 'History of Christian Doctrine' volumes 1-3, also by David Bernard (what can I say, he writes a lot of books, so it's not uncommon I'd reference him a lot). Volume 1 is predominantly about the old church, post-Apostolic. Volume 2 covers the ground between, leading up to current times. Volume 3 is about modern day, starting around the beginning of the 20th century and the revival of the Pentecostal movement that began in the book of Acts.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Jito463

Since the term Apostolic means one who practices the teachings of the apostles - and being one who believes the apostles did not teach a trinity, but one true God as all Jewish people believe - I would have to say no. Pentecostal perhaps, but not Apostolic.

Perhaps a few titles you can look into, would be

Ancient Champions of Oneness - William B. Chalfant
Oneness and Trinity: a.d. 100-300 - David Bernard
The Trinitarian Controversy in the Fourth Century - David Bernard
A Handbook of Basic Doctrines - David Bernard
(I love this one personally, as it's nothing but scripture references, no exposition)

Then there's the 'History of Christian Doctrine' volumes 1-3, also by David Bernard (what can I say, he writes a lot of books, so it's not uncommon I'd reference him a lot). Volume 1 is predominantly about the old church, post-Apostolic. Volume 2 covers the ground between, leading up to current times. Volume 3 is about modern day, starting around the beginning of the 20th century and the revival of the Pentecostal movement that began in the book of Acts.

I agree

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Jito463

Since the term Apostolic means one who practices the teachings of the apostles - and being one who believes the apostles did not teach a trinity, but one true God as all Jewish people believe - I would have to say no. Pentecostal perhaps, but not Apostolic.

"Pentecostal perhaps"? What is the difference between the doctrines of Apostolic and Pentecostal, besides the name on their door? Both believe in repentance; in water baptism in the NAME of Jesus; and receiving the Holy Spirit, and letting the Holy Spirit take control of our tongues.

Let me say this: no one can deny any of the elements in the Gospel and in all truthfulness call themselves Apostolic or Pentecostal!

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Jito463

Since the term Apostolic means one who practices the teachings of the apostles - and being one who believes the apostles did not teach a trinity, but one true God as all Jewish people believe - I would have to say no. Pentecostal perhaps, but not Apostolic.
Perhaps a few titles you can look into, would be
Ancient Champions of Oneness - William B. Chalfant
Oneness and Trinity: a.d. 100-300 - David Bernard
The Trinitarian Controversy in the Fourth Century - David Bernard
A Handbook of Basic Doctrines - David Bernard
(I love this one personally, as it's nothing but scripture references, no exposition)
Then there's the 'History of Christian Doctrine' volumes 1-3, also by David Bernard (what can I say, he writes a lot of books, so it's not uncommon I'd reference him a lot). Volume 1 is predominantly about the old church, post-Apostolic. Volume 2 covers the ground between, leading up to current times. Volume 3 is about modern day, starting around the beginning of the 20th century and the revival of the Pentecostal movement that began in the book of Acts.

Excuse me. Do you believe that apostolics and pentecostals ARE NOT the same? Which of the two, do you suppose (this is a trick question), does not believe that the Lord Jesus died on the cross; or that he was not buried; or that he was not resurrected from the dead, but remained in the tomb? Or I'll ask the same question a different way (it's still a trick question): which of the two do not agree with what happened on that Day of Pentecost: souls repented; they were baptized in the NAME of Jesus for the remission of sins; received the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Anyone that can cite a scripture showing where there is any difference needs to go back to "GOSPEL 101!

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Excuse me. Do you believe that apostolics and pentecostals ARE NOT the same? Which of the two, do you suppose (this is a trick question), does not believe that the Lord Jesus died on the cross; or that he was not buried; or that he was not resurrected from the dead, but remained in the tomb? Or I'll ask the same question a different way (it's still a trick question): which of the two do not agree with what happened on that Day of Pentecost: souls repented; they were baptized in the NAME of Jesus for the remission of sins; received the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Anyone that can cite a scripture showing where there is any difference needs to go back to "GOSPEL 101!

Well, you must not have been around the crowd who calls themselves "apostolic". This is generally the group of people who have higher standards than the regular pentecostal crowd. I grew up "apostolic" and I know what it means to say you are apostolic, and not "pentecostal". LOL... it is simply a way of separating yourself from the United Pentecostal Church, by the group of people who believe their standards of holiness are better than the UPC's are.

This past weekend at Thanksgiving, we were with some family who had invited friends over. This friend was a minister. While this man was chatting with my husband he told him he was "apostolic" and NOT PENTECOSTAL quite emphatically. It seems that mentality is still alive and well. We left the "apostolic" group two decades ago, and not much has changed, it seems.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Well, you must not have been around the crowd who calls themselves "apostolic". This is generally the group of people who have higher standards than the regular pentecostal crowd. I grew up "apostolic" and I know what it means to say you are apostolic, and not "pentecostal". LOL... it is simply a way of separating yourself from the United Pentecostal Church, by the group of people who believe their standards of holiness are better than the UPC's are.
This past weekend at Thanksgiving, we were with some family who had invited friends over. This friend was a minister. While this man was chatting with my husband he told him he was "apostolic" and NOT PENTECOSTAL quite emphatically. It seems that mentality is still alive and well. We left the "apostolic" group two decades ago, and not much has changed, it seems.

Beloved, let me say that the gospel that both denominations preach is identical; I agree with it, and I do not defer to either denomination. I have refused to call myself by any denomination: I would ask, rather, that anyone who asks just listen, and they decide what they want to call me. Apostolics have called me Pentecostal, and Pentecostals have called me Apostolic.

I believe the apostle's words: that "...Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day, according to the scriptures...". I believe that is the gospel that saves, and it agrees with the words of the Lord Jesus in Mk. 16:16; and with the words of the Apostle Peter in Acts 2:37-40, on the Day of Pentecost.

I will also go on a limb and say this: Anyone who denies the gospel I have stated has not received the fullness of the gospel that saves.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Patrick Harris

I'm a minister, Pentecostal, fully believing everything we need to know about what the church needs to return to can be found in The Acts of the Apostles.
My wife and I have been attending an UPCI church for the past year because I truly believe that is where God has placed us. We both love and support our church and our Pastor 100%.
The difference is that we are not Oneness, I've read Dr. Bernard books and I can no longer say with certainty that I follow the path of being Trinitarian, but have not crossed that bridge to Oneness.
However, today I just listened to Dr. Bernard's message titled "Restoring the Apostolic Church" and there was not one thing in that message I didn't fully support or agree with.
The question is this: Can you be considered Apostolic, in your faith, without being Oneness?

That is a very unanswerable question simply because it all depends on how one defines Apostolic

On a side note. I recommend reading other sources besides bernards books

start with www.onenesspentecostal.com

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

That is a very unanswerable question simply because it all depends on how one defines Apostolic

On a side note. I recommend reading other sources besides bernards books

start with www.onenesspentecostal.com

Thanks for that link, Praxeas. I'm always up for finding more sources to read. I'll check it out later when I have some more time. As an aside, I forgot another good book (albeit a short one, and not without some flaws). 'Is Jesus in the Godhead or is the Godhead in Jesus' by Gordon Magee. I think there's even a free PDF version of it available online, but I could be mistaken. I'll have to look for it again.