Very Interesting From The Apostolic News

[Baron1710]

They guys over at AN deserve credit on this, when confronted with the facts they did the right thing. Whatever else they are they were at least honest enough to listen to the facts and make a responsible decision.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by DAII

Got to visit William Chalfant's new site ... http://www.williambchalfant.com/

His historical fiction novel on the Nephalim coming to earth during the building of Noah's Ark and trying to burn it down and the women in the family falling in love with the "fallen angel" is eerie ....

Yeah, that is some WEIRD stuff. "Book of Enoch" fantasy.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

They guys over at AN deserve credit on this, when confronted with the facts they did the right thing. Whatever else they are they were at least honest enough to listen to the facts and make a responsible decision.

[Justin]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I misunderstood Thinker's statements to refer to a "shut out" at NW's place on the Left Coast. AW in Michigan did the right thing in dropping his ties with Boora.

I am sort of intrigued in just how Boora's professed attachments to NW's Apostolic School of Theology might play out. The NW factions and the WPF are so eager for any sort of affirmation that they've done the "right thing" all along that they at least appear to be easy marks for a good con man - maybe even a mediocre con man.

It would be a real shame to see "Oneness" studies set even further back by more fraud. Marvin Arnold, Thomas Weisser and Bill Chalfant's books are still floating around and deceiving many. Chalfant seems to have repented of his "extrapolation of history" methodology and reverted to writing out-and-out fiction now (The Love Life of Sabelius, or whatever).

The Oneness movement as a whole needs to step up to the plate and deal with this subject honestly if we are ever to be taken seriously.

Do you have any proof of Arnold's Oneness history book being "corrupt"?

[Justin]

Originally Posted by DAII

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsa-sJfQ2lI

Dan,

You should write a 1-2 paragraph summary of the details surrounding the video on the "Description" of the youtube page. This way, people don't have to click to AFF link and read through thousands of posts to get the info, but could if they so choose to.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by DAII

You were present when he presented his "historical research" correct?

How did that go?

The symposium I mentioned had WC as a respondent to another paper, as I recall. He was then taking questions, standing at his seat at a table rather than the podium. He stood to respond to a number of questions. The general mood of the audience seemed to one of skepticism toward the claims that he had made in an earlier paper and also toward some statements that he had made then.

J.L. Hall was moderating the Q&A and asking some questions himself.

WC finally offered a plea about "how the RCC had destroyed so much" [of the writings of the alleged "Oneness" people] and how the RCC falsely accused "Oneness people" of being Arians, Dualists and etc. It was because of this alleged condition of the historical record that he maintained that he was free to "extrapolate" from the historical record and declare groups like the Manicheans and others were actually "Oneness."

The facts of the historical record are actually rather plain, given the fact that we are dealing with ancient history here. And, there was a tendency for some ancient writers to misrepresent the views of their antagonists (just like the modern forum world). Given all of that, there still has never been any example of a "20th Century Oneness Apostolic" in existence at any time from about 200 or 225 A.D. through about 1900 A.D.

None. No one. No evidence, nobody any where in that time period.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by pelathais

...
Personally, I am "Oneness" and I practice "Acts 2:38" in my own ecclesiology, but I recognize that this view has not been in practice continuously for the past 2,000 years.

Thank you for being honest with this.
Just curious, how do you reconcile this with how some preach that the church will not be prevailed against? Do you believe in an early and latter rain with a period of drought in between? or the idea that God's people were still God's people while they were in the wilderness or in captivity and did not keep the rituals? My personal opinion is that water baptism in Jesus' name is a truth but is not necessary for salvation so the church is still the church without it. Also, the Holy Ghost baptism and the gifts are empowerments from God and not necessary for salvation so the church is the church without them. In my opinion, justification/salvation/regeneration happens when one trusts in Jesus as Savior and there have always been some (they would make up the Church) who have trusted in Jesus. That's how I see the Church always existing.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by pelathais

The symposium I mentioned had WC as a respondent to another paper, as I recall. He was then taking questions, standing at his seat at a table rather than the podium. He stood to respond to a number of questions. The general mood of the audience seemed to one of skepticism toward the claims that he had made in an earlier paper and also toward some statements that he had made then.

J.L. Hall was moderating the Q&A and asking some questions himself.

WC finally offered a plea about "how the RCC had destroyed so much" [of the writings of the alleged "Oneness" people] and how the RCC falsely accused "Oneness people" of being Arians, Dualists and etc. It was because of this alleged condition of the historical record that he maintained that he was free to "extrapolate" from the historical record and declare groups like the Manicheans and others were actually "Oneness."

The facts of the historical record are actually rather plain, given the fact that we are dealing with ancient history here. And, there was a tendency for some ancient writers to misrepresent the views of their antagonists (just like the modern forum world). Given all of that, there still has never been any example of a "20th Century Oneness Apostolic" in existence at any time from about 200 or 225 A.D. through about 1900 A.D.

None. No one. No evidence, nobody any where in that time period.

I think Kal has the same problem ... he can try to prove baptism with the right formula being used ... but even his examples of Anglican paedobaptists baptizing primarily babies by sprinkling in the name of Christ (not Gee-zuz) falls considerably short of the "Apostolic" message.

[DAII]

I have read this other Kal Boora quote in his interview with Baumeister ...

Another well noted British scholar, the late Professor Arthur James Mason (1851-1928), former Vicar of All Hallows, Barking and Master of Pembroke College Cambridge, and Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity Cambridge University (for his bio see Who’s Who, 1905 fifty-seventh year issue p. 35) adds to the list of scholars and is in close proximity to the Anglo-Catholic view, that baptism in the name of Jesus only is a valid form of baptism as recognized by the Catholic Church.

A notation of this appears in his work published in 1893 A.D., entitled: The Relation of Confirmation To Baptism As Taught in Holy Scripture and The Fathers (2nd ed.) published by Longsmans, Green & Co., London (1893).

What the late British Cambridge University scholar and professor is informing us, is that, despite the stigma associated with the Jesus only baptismal formula, in that, it being termed by some as invalid despite scriptural evidence (Acts 2:38), the Catholic Church in Rome and the West in this era appeared to accept its candidates as correctly baptized, as noted by the preceding commentator. This view is brought out when discussing the issue of confirmation and baptism. Mason’s work notes quite distinctively that baptism in the name of Jesus is nevertheless sufficient to secure salvation. Thus, as Professor Mason notes (see p. 132 of the version published by Bibliolife, LLC):
“Baptism, though uncompleted by confirmation, is nevertheless sufficient to secure salvation… and this, even if the formula be … only the name of Jesus Christ.”

And have compared them with the greater context of Mason's thoughts about the Novation writings ... and I must say it is taken out of greater context with some quotes completely changed or non-existent.

This book by Mason can be viewed here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=skB...page&q&f=false

I will give specific examples and images of pages later this evening.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by DAII

I have read this other Kal Boora quote in his interview with Baumeister ...



And have compared them with the greater context of Mason's thoughts about the Novation writings ... and I must say it is taken out of greater context with some quotes completely changed or non-existent.

This book by Mason can be viewed here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=skB...page&q&f=false

I will give specific examples and images of pages later this evening.

Good old heretic hunters. What will you do to them after you round them up?