KH believes the Light Doctrine??

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by keith4him

Funny thing Matt, KH is not a liberal the church he pastored won souls, was spiritual minded, gave to word missions had a vision and everyone there experienced Acts 2:38.

Hate to break it to you but many who lead the UPCI had this mindset, Urshan most likely because of his father, Goss, Vouga, not sure about Chambers, it ridiculous to think that all who have come before were Acts 2:38 all or nothing people.

In the time that I knew him Stanley Chambers proved to be surprising. In a ministerial ethics session he introduced and led a discussion involving a "hypothetical" sister who, though a new convert and a single mom, was required to wear coveralls to work. As her "pastor," Brother Chambers asked, "what do you tell her?" After the session I heard a few "conservative" types backbiting against SC for being a "compromiser."

Not the same as the One Step/Three Step dichotomy, but I found that a lot of our leaders were really not so "hard" as they were reputed to be. I think Felicity's "when the rubber hits the road" statement covers most if not all of our 'greats.'

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Raven

I would be interested in a comment from the Hoover House about Stanley Chambers take on the "light doctrine", if he had one. He was their Grandfather.
Raven

Raven, about all I can say is that Stanley Chambers was a kind man. I had never known him to be judgemental toward other Christians but he did love the Acts 2:38 message.

Not sure you will find many statements defining his thoughts in this regard.

Steve Hoover

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Felicity

I think that many people, when you get right down to where the rubber meets the road, actually do hold to some form of the light doctrine but they don't realize they do, and they don't really understand what it is that they're unwittingly confessing to believing.

I've been saying for years now that there is a much higher percentage of UPC preachers who say they believe one thing ..... who in reality really don't .... than what most would admit to.

I still believe it. I also still believe that the spirit of the merger still exists in the hearts of many.

It's one thing to say that Acts 2:38 is the only plan of salvation and that's what it takes to be saved, but then start asking the hard questions and you hear a "lighter" view.

What about those trinitarians?

What about grammy and grampy who loved and lived for God and were devoted to the cause of Christ but never spoke in tongues?

What about Bill who is a beautiful Christian, speaks in tongues, is known all over town for his exemplary life and testimony but never baptized in the name of Jesus?

Every single person since the birth of the church who hasn't spoken in tongues will burn in hell for eternity?

Well?

This post deserves to be bumped!

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

This post deserves to be bumped!

You are right, sorry I overlooked it, good post Felicity.

[stmatthew]

My great Grandfather (Paimper) and Grandmother (Maimer) were Holy Ghost filled, speaking in tongues, old time holiness, Church of God folk.

I can remember Paimper dying. He died speaking in tongues. I can remember Maimer dying a little latter.

In later years in talking to my mother, she told me that they both came to the Apostolic church we and my grandparents attended, and really liked it. She was re-baptized in Jesus name, he didn't see a need to be. I expect to see her when I reach heavens gates. But I do not expect to see him.

I am almost speechless that others would preach the PAJC view that Acts 2:38 was the only scriptural way to be saved, and then privately hold that someone could be saved other than by fully obeying Acts 2:38. It floors me when I read these kind of threads. If I thought for any second someone might even have a chance to be saved other than by complete obedience to Acts 2:38, I would never again say it is the only way, as I would feel like I was lying.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

My great Grandfather (Paimper) and Grandmother (Maimer) were Holy Ghost filled, speaking in tongues, old time holiness, Church of God folk.

I can remember Paimper dying. He died speaking in tongues. I can remember Maimer dying a little latter.

In later years in talking to my mother, she told me that they both came to the Apostolic church we and my grandparents attended, and really liked it. She was re-baptized in Jesus name, he didn't see a need to be. I expect to see her when I reach heavens gates. But I do not expect to see him.

I am almost speechless that others would preach that Acts 2:38 was the only scriptural way to be saved, and then privately hold that someone could be saved other than by fully obeying Acts 2:38. It floors me when I read these kind of threads. If I thought for any second someone might even have a chance to be saved other than by complete obedience to Acts 2:38, I would never again say it is the only way, as I would feel like I was lying.

Matt, I am sorry you feel the way you do.

Please know and rest in the perfection of the sinless sacrifice made on the cross - it is enough. If our eternal destiny rests in our exact re-enactment of the cross - I promise you we too fall short.

Blessings, Steve Hoover

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

My great Grandfather (Paimper) and Grandmother (Maimer) were Holy Ghost filled, speaking in tongues, old time holiness, Church of God folk.

I can remember Paimper dying. He died speaking in tongues. I can remember Maimer dying a little latter.

In later years in talking to my mother, she told me that they both came to the Apostolic church we and my grandparents attended, and really liked it. She was re-baptized in Jesus name, he didn't see a need to be. I expect to see her when I reach heavens gates. But I do not expect to see him.

I am almost speechless that others would preach the PAJC view that Acts 2:38 was the only scriptural way to be saved, and then privately hold that someone could be saved other than by fully obeying Acts 2:38. It floors me when I read these kind of threads. If I thought for any second someone might even have a chance to be saved other than by complete obedience to Acts 2:38, I would never again say it is the only way, as I would feel like I was lying.

Maybe I need to be clear, KH and others don't judge people who haven't seen or followed the full plan of salvation, and they validate what they do have and leave the judgement with God.


I think this will be the last post dealing with my old Pastor, I didn't think this would turn into a indictment session on a man's belief system when I mentioned the orginal post on Haney history.

If people have questions about what KH believe they can ask him theirselves. This all of sudden has become most uncomfortable.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by keith4him

Maybe I need to be clear, KH and others don't judge people who haven't seen or followed the full plan of salvation, and they validate what they do have and leave the judgement with God.


I think this will be the last post dealing with my old Pastor, I didn't think this would turn into a indictment session on a man's belief system when I mentioned the orginal post on Haney history.

If people have questions about what KH believe they can ask him theirselves. This all of sudden has become most uncomfortable.

Keith,

I apologize for this becoming uncomfortable for you. I really am not meaning this to be a bash KH. I had 1 primary thought in creating this thread. I wanted to hear from the PACJ men that were UPC as to their thought on the man that is in the drivers seat of the org believing the light doctrine. So far only Papa has come on, and he just denied that it was so.

The thread evolved into some stating that most all believe the light doctrine to some degree. I simply gave answer.

Again, I am sorry this has upset you. I DO think it is a good discussion though.

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Keith,

I apologize for this becoming uncomfortable for you. I really am not meaning this to be a bash KH. I had 1 primary thought in creating this thread. I wanted to hear from the PACJ men that were UPC as to their thought on the man that is in the drivers seat of the org believing the light doctrine. So far only Papa has come on, and he just denied that it was so.

The thread evolved into some stating that most all believe the light doctrine to some degree. I simply gave answer.

Again, I am sorry this has upset you. I DO think it is a good discussion though.

Matt,

There were a number of PAJC men who didnt or still don't believe it to be a all or nothing equation. But I guess they can speak for themselves.

Also KH most likely embraces the Friends of the Bridegroom belief that his father taught, I don't think he would define it as light.

[chosenbyone]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

My great Grandfather (Paimper) and Grandmother (Maimer) were Holy Ghost filled, speaking in tongues, old time holiness, Church of God folk.

I can remember Paimper dying. He died speaking in tongues. I can remember Maimer dying a little latter.

In later years in talking to my mother, she told me that they both came to the Apostolic church we and my grandparents attended, and really liked it. She was re-baptized in Jesus name, he didn't see a need to be. I expect to see her when I reach heavens gates. But I do not expect to see him.

I am almost speechless that others would preach the PAJC view that Acts 2:38 was the only scriptural way to be saved, and then privately hold that someone could be saved other than by fully obeying Acts 2:38. It floors me when I read these kind of threads. If I thought for any second someone might even have a chance to be saved other than by complete obedience to Acts 2:38, I would never again say it is the only way, as I would feel like I was lying.

It was obvious that your grandfather was FULL of the Holy Ghost while he spoke in tongues during death, yet you believed he wasn't qualified to enter into the kingdom of God. That has to be the most confusing post regarding someone's salvation that I have ever read.

My grandfather would have given any Apostolic a run for their money when it came to standards and he walked in the Spirit daily. He too died on his death bed speaking in tongues and was a Church of God minister who never was baptized in Jesus' name. The experience I had while being by his bedside during that time led me to question how God would send him to hell the second he drew his last breath while the anointing of God was flowing through him.

I never really understood the "light" doctrine until recently because of what has been posted here on AFF. I would have to admit that the "light" doctrine made much more sense to me knowing that God loved all his children and his desire was that we all have eternal life with him.

How can one be sent to hell while speaking in tongues? I just don't get it!