The "Light Doctrine"

[Bro Flame]

There is a doctrine spreading the church derived from a thought that people well only be judged by what they know of the Gospel. The generally consensus, as I see it, is that God will not judge people by the parts of the Bible that they do not have full understandings of.

On the surface, the thought of the Bible supporting a Light Doctrine does entice. I'm sure many of us would like to believe that our loved ones, who probably don't see all the Truths we do, will not be accountable for their fallible doctrines and teachings. None of us want to see anyone not make Heaven their home.

I've heard people bring forth the thought of the Light Doctrine on a few different occasions, even if they did not bring it up by name. I recall watching a video of a baptismal service on Facebook sometime ago where the pastors of a congregation baptized the converts "in the name of the Lord Jesus". While I was in agreement with their proper application of the name of Jesus during water baptism, I was a little tossed off at how the pastor's wife spoke to the congregation after (or perhaps before). Basically she said that baptizing in Jesus' name was "what they saw to be true," but that those that baptized in the titles were not necessarily wrong because they had not yet been enlightened. She also said that some of the best services they (as in her family, who were once a traveling musical ministry) were in were in churches where they baptized in the titles. If memory serves me correctly, she differentiated the two methods of baptism as "titles" and "Jesus' name". If could be wrong.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that this doctrine, like many fallible teachings cluttering our churches, is contradicting. At what point does the Light Doctrine end? If a child molester dies without knowing Jesus or the Word, does he die saved and therefore go the Heaven because he know not what the Bible taught? Many adhering to the Light Doctrine would be quick to condemn such a person to hell for never turning from their wickedness of harming small children.

Have any of you ever come across this?

[coksiw]

The way I see it is that We preach the truth and we practice it. It is not our duty to send people to heaven or hell. It is OK to not know something. It is typical of human to want to answer all questions and know everything, but in reality, and humbly, better to accept that some things belong entirely to the Lord.
If I were her, I would keep my mouth shut up regarding those that didn't and are gone, and keep encouraging people to be baptized in Jesus' Name.
Sometimes, it is OK to say "I don't know" or "I can't tell at this moment", and steer the conversation to what the Bible says for us, the living.

I came from an Assembly of God church, and I did receive the Holy Spirit there speaking in tongues, and I also saw other getting it, and walking in Holiness moved by the Spirit, even though it was taught from the pulpit much.
I have known also of cases of baptists Scholar receiving the Holy Spirit speaking in tongues and keeping it as a secret for years.

God deals with those that truly seek him. Sometimes the fear of being wrong when leaving some traditional interpretations and other traditions don't let them move forward, especially as they get older and more careful.

[Bro Flame]

Originally Posted by coksiw

The way I see it is that We preach the truth and we practice it. It is not our duty to send people to heaven or hell. It is OK to not know something. It is typical of human to want to answer all questions and know everything, but in reality, and humbly, better to accept that some things belong entirely to the Lord.
If I were her, I would keep my mouth shut up regarding those that didn't and are gone, and keep encouraging people to be baptized in Jesus' Name.
Sometimes, it is OK to say "I don't know" or "I can't tell at this moment", and steer the conversation to what the Bible says for us, the living.

I came from an Assembly of God church, and I did receive the Holy Spirit there speaking in tongues, and I also saw other getting it, and walking in Holiness moved by the Spirit, even though it was taught from the pulpit much.
I have known also of cases of baptists Scholar receiving the Holy Spirit speaking in tongues and keeping it as a secret for years.

God deals with those that truly seek him. Sometimes the fear of being wrong when leaving some traditional interpretations and other traditions don't let them move forward, especially as they get older and more careful.

Well, what this Sister was saying was that those baptizing in the titles, supposedly naively, would not be held accountable for their actions because they had not seen baptism in Jesus' name. If I were to get even more technical, she was saying that there are simply different interpretations of the Bible.

I know of a number of people that received the Holy Ghost, evidenced by speaking with other tongues, "on credit" while attending the Church of God or Assemblies of God churches. I've even known some dear Elders that were baptized with the Spirit while going to old-time Holiness Baptist churches. They all saw the revelation of Jesus, baptism in His name, and the sacred, set-aside lifestyle of holiness, however, and eventually left those churches for not preaching Biblical doctrine.

That's the issue. Some of the people receiving what is said to be the Holy Ghost in churches not preaching the Truth of the Gospel cannot possibly be receiving the real deal. The reason I say that is this: If they were receiving the genuine Spirit of God, which leads us into all truths, would they not receive Biblical essentials and therefore embrace them as the truths they've always been? I know of tongue-talking Church of God pastors that openly deny Oneness, Jesus' name baptism, any holiness in lifestyle or dress, but yet still speak in tongues praying for the people at the altar on Sunday. While I don't want to be a finger-pointer and question everyone's Holy Ghost, but it's hard for me to believe that these individuals have the same Spirit I have when they openly deny and teach against such Biblical fundamentals.

The Baptist movement as a whole has a difficult relationship with tongues. I know some of its denominations, namely the Full Gospel Baptists, the Holiness Baptists, and some Free Will Baptists, are generally opened to being baptized in the Spirit in the Biblical sense and the outpouring of the spiritual gifts operating in their services. The Southern Baptist organization revised their doctrinal statement a few years back to allow their denomination to support and send out evangelists and missionaries that have a "prayer language". There's the issue you run into with denominational churches and other so-called charismatics that relegate the Holy Ghost to a prayer language. Many of them do not even call it the Holy Ghost, but a prayer language. While one could argue that the tongues the Holy Ghost adds to our prayer life is a "prayer language", the vast doctrine surrounding most "prayer languages" is not necessarily Biblical. They almost entirely remove God and His Spirit from their view, which results in millions of people praying in stagnant gibberish that often seems quite obviously fleshly, if not rehearsed or taught.

In concluding my stay on my soapbox, I want to again clarify that I do believe people in denominational churches can receive the genuine Spirit of God. The issue is if they do not accept Biblical essentials. If they deny what the Bible says and what their Holy Ghost is trying to reveal to them, I do believe God will eventually leave them. That will leave them praying in a tongue that's no longer anointed or sent by God.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Holy Roller

There is a doctrine spreading the church derived from a thought that people well only be judged by what they know of the Gospel. The generally consensus, as I see it, is that God will not judge people by the parts of the Bible that they do not have full understandings of.

On the surface, the thought of the Bible supporting a Light Doctrine does entice. I'm sure many of us would like to believe that our loved ones, who probably don't see all the Truths we do, will not be accountable for their fallible doctrines and teachings. None of us want to see anyone not make Heaven their home.

I've heard people bring forth the thought of the Light Doctrine on a few different occasions, even if they did not bring it up by name. I recall watching a video of a baptismal service on Facebook sometime ago where the pastors of a congregation baptized the converts "in the name of the Lord Jesus". While I was in agreement with their proper application of the name of Jesus during water baptism, I was a little tossed off at how the pastor's wife spoke to the congregation after (or perhaps before). Basically she said that baptizing in Jesus' name was "what they saw to be true," but that those that baptized in the titles were not necessarily wrong because they had not yet been enlightened. She also said that some of the best services they (as in her family, who were once a traveling musical ministry) were in were in churches where they baptized in the titles. If memory serves me correctly, she differentiated the two methods of baptism as "titles" and "Jesus' name". If could be wrong.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that this doctrine, like many fallible teachings cluttering our churches, is contradicting. At what point does the Light Doctrine end? If a child molester dies without knowing Jesus or the Word, does he die saved and therefore go the Heaven because he know not what the Bible taught? Many adhering to the Light Doctrine would be quick to condemn such a person to hell for never turning from their wickedness of harming small children.

Have any of you ever come across this?

The light doctrine has been around for ages.
GT Haywood taught the light doctrine . Read his book “ The Life and Writings of G T Haywood” sold by UPCI.
Andrew Bar David Urshan the father of general superintendent of UPC didn’t believe you needed the Holy Ghost . He said if you needed it God would give it to you on the way up. UPC IS FULL people that believe the light doctrine.

[Bro Flame]

Originally Posted by Light

The light doctrine has been around for ages.
GT Haywood taught the light doctrine . Read his book “ The Life and Writings of G T Haywood” sold by UPCI.
Andrew Bar David Urshan the father of general superintendent of UPC didn’t believe you needed the Holy Ghost . He said if you needed it God would give it to you on the way up. UPC IS FULL people that believe the light doctrine.

I was not aware of any of that. I'm not UPC, so maybe that's why.

[consapente89]

But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost.

From Pentecost to the second coming, there is only one way into the Kingdom.

[Scott Pitta]

There is a book that provides a historical survey of the light doctrine on American Pentecostalism.

It is called Christianity Without the Cross. The author is Thomas Fudge.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Light

The light doctrine has been around for ages.
GT Haywood taught the light doctrine . Read his book “ The Life and Writings of G T Haywood” sold by UPCI.
Andrew Bar David Urshan the father of general superintendent of UPC didn’t believe you needed the Holy Ghost . He said if you needed it God would give it to you on the way up. UPC IS FULL people that believe the light doctrine.

I have never met anyone in the UPC who believes the light doctrine. I've attended two Bible schools, have lived in three states and attended countless camp meetings, conventions and conferences.

Not saying there aren't some in the UPC who do believe it. I just don't believe it's "full" of people who do. I believe it's mostly historical and from the early years of the UPC.

[consapente89]

Originally Posted by n david

I have never met anyone in the UPC who believes the light doctrine. I've attended two Bible schools, have lived in three states and attended countless camp meetings, conventions and conferences.

Not saying there aren't some in the UPC who do believe it. I just don't believe it's "full" of people who do. I believe it's mostly historical and from the early years of the UPC.

I've heard more "friend of the bride" teaching from some of the older UPCi folks. Our church was UPCi for years and both light doctrine and friend of the bride were preached in our church in years past. Thank God, we are now a solid water and Spirit church!

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Holy Roller

In concluding my stay on my soapbox, I want to again clarify that I do believe people in denominational churches can receive the genuine Spirit of God. The issue is if they do not accept Biblical essentials. If they deny what the Bible says and what their Holy Ghost is trying to reveal to them, I do believe God will eventually leave them. That will leave them praying in a tongue that's no longer anointed or sent by God.

That's my point too. In addition to that, sometimes reality is more complex that we think, and we oversimplify things.
I received the Holy Spirit in an Assembly of God church. It was an authentic experience. Nobody was praying for me and forcing me to speak tongues or nothing like that. After it, God began to use me in healings, including instant ones. I can tell that even though I had that experience, I felt a struggle to find the presence of God, however I sought him. Overtime, He guided me to Oneness and baptism in Jesus' name. It opened a new dimension of my worship. I began to feel God much closer and more often.
That being said, I don't judge some elders when they struggle to change the traditional way of interpreting stuff. Elders tend to be more afraid of changes. If I look at their fruit, I can say they are as righteous as a Oneness pentecostal. I don't know what the Lord does to those people when they die.

I just keep preaching and practicing the true, and challenging them with the truth as well, hoping to convert some .