Tragedy of War RECOVERED! LISTEN!

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Maybe Fudge is coming from a hyper "Grace only" position I often hear today where if you believe ANYTHING other than "Faith in the finished work on the cross" (ie, repentance, baptism), you believe in salvation without the cross...which is factually not true (a strawman argument actually)

Every Christian believes what Jesus did on the cross was necessary and it does in fact get taught in Oneness churches

No. He only puts that stigma on the water and spirit crowd.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Originalist

I can attest that this statement simply is not true, though I am probably not a true believer in the "water/Spirit doctrine" as it is taught in the UPCI in that I do not believe that the reference to "water" in John 3:5 is speaking of water baptism.

However, I do affirm that baptism is a step towards the new birth and , in most cases, precedes the new birth. There are many verses that affirm this truth even without using John 3:5.

Care to explain the wording in bold?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Care to explain the wording in bold?

"I am probably not a true believer in the "water/Spirit doctrine" as it is taught in the UPCI in that I do not believe that the reference to "water" in John 3:5 is speaking of water baptism."

Read slowly.

[phareztamar]

Originally Posted by Originalist

I do not believe that the reference to "water" in John 3:5 is speaking of water baptism.

Submitted a post early on called "Born of water". It got yanked immediatly. Must have hit a nerve.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Care to explain the wording in bold?

In the next chapter, John 4, Jesus tells us what the water is, the Holy Spirit being placed within, springing up unto everlasting life.

Again, this view of John 3:5 does not negate other verses , such as Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38, which clearly teach that baptism is essential.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

No. He only puts that stigma on the water and spirit crowd.

That's actually my point. The Water and Spirit crowd DO in fact believe in what Jesus did on the cross, but perhaps because they also believe in baptism and receiving the Spirit with tongues Fudge is making the classic argument I hear often "So you don't believe in the cross" all because they believe baptism is essential.

[renee819]

Originally Posted by bishoph

This (the bolded) does not answer the question, to say she came out of Frank Ewart's church does not tell us if she was in his church at the time this picture was taken. Further, NOONE is attacking Olive Haney, I just don't want people trying to make a case for "the way they dressed back then" based on a picture that is not relevant (IF it was a pre-church picture)....IMO that would be like showing a picture of a 5' 6" 14yr old Trayvon Martin as the kid that was shot, when in reality he was 17 and 5' 11"......DKB and friends have been charged (in this thread) with rewriting our history, but those who would use a picture (if indeed it was not taken while she was saved) of OH to support their claims would be guilty of the same.

In the final analysis, one must be honest enough to see that yes there were two differing views of when salvation happened at the merger. (what many now refer to as one step or saved at repentance/three step or water spirit) The oneness movement was still a developing movement. All of those early adherents had come from various religious backgrounds which impacted their view on MANY areas of doctrine. As they settled into their new found doctrine it is reasonable that their beliefs would change over time. (No different than a Trinitarian pastor today who would convert.....his/her beliefs would change, even if minimally over time.)

The "till we all come into the unity of the faith" clause was clearly put in the original statement to appease brethren on both sides who felt that the opposing view needed to align themselves with the proper doctrinal view. IMO the merger should have never taken place. Salvation is a HUGE issue and one that I do not believe can be taken lightly. Even if we agree on so many points that we are nearly alike.....if we do not agree on what constitutes salvation there CANNOT be unity for long. To expect such, would require a compromise (on one side or the other) on the foundational doctrine of salvation.

If I truly believe water/spirit (three step) I cannot believe that the saved at repentance (One step) crowd is actually saved until they have also been baptized in Jesus name and received the gift of the Holy Ghost.

If I truly believe one is saved at repentance, I cannot long fellowship those who I believe are placing a burden on their followers that is not biblical. To do so would bring confusion (which it did.) For there to be enduring unity, both sides would have to come to the understanding that it really doesn't matter either way......not likely to happen IMO.

Good Spiritual as well as common sense.

[tv1a]

Grace and the cross with conditions are preached in UPCI pulpits.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I hear grace and the cross often

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Grace and the cross with conditions are preached in UPCI pulpits.

Yes, conditions like repentance and total surrender to the Lordship of Christ. How terrible!!

[Nitehawk013]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Grace and the cross with conditions are preached in UPCI pulpits.

Yeah, probably because their are conditons to salvation.

The crowd that seems to love Fudge and his nonsense are the same crowd that embrace the anythign goes, just believe (mental ascent) and you are saved idiocy in most cases.