More over-reacting to the "Light Doctrine"

[Originalist]

Ah yes. Here we go again.

In this month's IBC Perspectives' editorial section, massive alarm bells were going off over the so-called "Light Doctrine". This teaching supposedly states that God will judge all men by the light of the doctrinal understanding they held, and possibly not judge them for not understanding the "whole truth".

The IBC Perspective's editorial page had an emboldened disclaimer at the top of the page stressing that the views being espoused were those of the readers only. Yet, they did not have a single contributor representing an affirmation of the Light Doctrine. Some of the contributors were demanding that the UPCI add yet another part to the "ministerial affirmation" where ministers would have to affirm they do not believe anyone who has not embraced the UPCI understanding of the new birth will be saved. DUMB! DUMB ! DUMB!

Do these people have NOTHING better to do? Are we now becoming the thought police? Is it no longer enough that we teach what we feel the scriptures are saying and let God be the final judge on what constitutes "obeying Acts:28"? Do we still not realize how it is these knee-jerk reactions that turn people off to even hearing us out?

In the first place, nobody is saying that anyone will be saved outside of Jesus Christ and regeneration by his Spirit. So obviously, someone is feeling insecure because someone was not being "hard" enough.

I wonder what brought it on this time? Did Anthony Mangum allow a Trinitarian minister to testify at BOTT? SAY IT ISN'T SO !!!!

One reader admitted that the forefathers of the movement were more open and accepting of Trinitarians initially, but became firm in their stance over time. That is indeed true, all of it. However, becoming firm in their stand did not mean they consigned Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians to hell. Evidence shows they continued to fellowship with, preach for and embrace their former associates.

More and more I am glad I chose to let my license lapse.