Has Jon Suber embraced the One Step Doctrine?

[tv1a]

You know that isn't going to happen with the eat your own mentality.

Originally Posted by Rhoni

Any well-seasoned Pastor knows that when you take a new church you have to give the church time to adjust to you before making any changes. Let him have the privacy he needs to shape a ministry there without all the judgements and questions. Pray for the Pastor and his congregation but leave this off of the public forum.

Thank you.

[MissBrattified]

I like the "We Believe" statement. Is there something specific in it that you object to, WearyPilgrim?

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

TR,

You might think so but this has been visited and revisited and I think we need to think on whatsoever things are true, holy, of a good report, if there be any virtue, if there be any praise...think on these things.

In Jesus name.

Just because people might have questions about where he stands, that doesn't mean they are being negative, or trying to tear him down.

Originally Posted by 1399

I think it is a fair question when you (or your website) makes statements to make people wonder where you stand.

The burden of clarity rests with the speaker, not the listener (or reader in this case).

I agree.
Suber is one of the most well known figures in Oneness Pentecost. If he did, for whatever reason, shift his position, its something that's obviously going to make people take notice.. and understandably so.

As for me, I'll just say reading his Articles of Faith on his website,it reads more like what you'd see from a 1-stepper church than a 3-stepper church. The man can describe his doctrinal positions however he chooses... but if he is indeed still 3-stepper, it's not worded in such a way that would clearly show that he is. Simple fact is, as long as his website is worded the way it is, it's going to make people wonder what side of the fence he is on.

[Sam]

Their summary of beliefs looks like good old Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness to me:

We Believe:

…in one God, revealed as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Duet. 6:4, II Cor. 13:14, John 1:1).

…that our Lord Jesus Christ was the only begotten of the Father, and is truly God and truly man. He was born of the virgin Mary, lived a sinless life, died a vicarious and atoning death for the sins of the world, resurrected bodily for our justification, and now reigns in glory until all things be put under his feet (I Tim 3:16).

…in the absolute inspiration of the Holy Scriptures in their original autographs given by the Holy Spirit as He moved upon holy men of old. Furthermore, we believe that the Holy Bible accepted as Canon by the early Christian Church to be the only written Word of God (2 Pet 1:21).

…that man was made in the image of God and is by the reason of “the Fall” alienated from his creator. Apart from God’s grace he has no ability to attain relationship with God (Psa. 8, Eph. 2:8-9).

…in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who died on the cross in our place, as the supreme sacrifice for sin, was buried in a tomb, but rose again the third day and reigns in glory interceding for us (I John 2:1).

...that justification is by grace through faith in the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:21-24).

…all believers should be buried with Christ Jesus in the waters of baptism (Acts 2:38, Rom. 6:3-5, Matt. 28:19).

…that the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues as the Spirit of God gives the utterance is an endowment of power given to the believer for sanctification and evangelism (Acts 1:8, 2:1-4, 19:1-2).

…that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit are active in the church today (I Cor. 12:4-7).

…in the Five-Fold Ministry of Prophets, Apostles, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers, for the perfecting of the saints to do the work of God (Eph. 4:11-16).

…that the believer called by the name of Christ should depart from iniquity, allowing the Holy Spirit to conform us to the image of Christ (2 Tim 2:19, Rom. 8:29).

…in the literal second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and triumph of God’s Kingdom over Satan (Acts l:9-11, Daniel 12:2; Revelation 22:1-7).

[nahkoe]

Originally Posted by tv1a

The burden of proof should lie with the person who has so much time on their hands they have to look for controversies. That is why church websites should remove their doctrinal statements from their websites. Nobody but the insiders care what your doctrinal statement is. Can't recollect one person being saved because of a doctrinal statement. Can't recall a testimony of a person who was scrolling through a web site and read the doctrinal statement and said, "Yup, That's the church I want to attend."

I *always* read the doctrinal statement when I'm looking for a new church...

Wait, that makes it sound like I look for a new church often. lol When I first walked into church, I'd looked at the website the night before and that was the first page I went to. After I left that church, I read websites looking for a church. There were a lot that I eliminated due to what the doctrinal statement said.

[tv1a]

I was booted off a conservative forum once because I refused to play their word games. I said I believed he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. I said I beleived that acts 2:38 was the culmination of the salvation experience. The borg wanted me to word it exactly the way they said it, but I wouldn't play their pithy little game. There is more than one way to word a doctrinal statement.

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Just because people might have questions about where he stands, that doesn't mean they are being negative, or trying to tear him down.

I agree.
Suber is one of the most well known figures in Oneness Pentecost. If he did, for whatever reason, shift his position, its something that's obviously going to make people take notice.. and understandably so.

As for me, I'll just say reading his Articles of Faith on his website,it reads more like what you'd see from a 1-stepper church than a 3-stepper church. The man can describe his doctrinal positions however he chooses... but if he is indeed still 3-stepper, it's not worded in such a way that would clearly show that he is. Simple fact is, as long as his website is worded the way it is, it's going to make people wonder what side of the fence he is on.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by tv1a

The burden of proof should lie with the person who has so much time on their hands they have to look for controversies. That is why church websites should remove their doctrinal statements from their websites. Nobody but the insiders care what your doctrinal statement is. Can't recollect one person being saved because of a doctrinal statement. Can't recall a testimony of a person who was scrolling through a web site and read the doctrinal statement and said, "Yup, That's the church I want to attend."

If by continuing to post, I'm not respecting this Pastor and his new church, that's not my intention.

Please delete my post and "ding" me if I am out of line.

Church websites should not remove their doctrinal statements. There are folks, like me, who have hunted for a church to attend, found one online that I thought was Pentecostal only to find out they were Church of Christ.

It happens. If that church had been clearer about it's doctrinal statements and their affiliation, then I would not have wasted my gas.

If there is someone spending their time trying to find and instigate controversies, then they are wrong.

Clarity is the responsibility of the author.

[tv1a]

The website shouldn't be geared for church hoppers or out town visitors. A website should be geared to reaching the unsaved. The unsaved aren't going to give a flip what your doctrine is. If they feel the love of Jesus though the website, they will eat glass if they want what you have.

Originally Posted by nahkoe

I *always* read the doctrinal statement when I'm looking for a new church...

Wait, that makes it sound like I look for a new church often. lol When I first walked into church, I'd looked at the website the night before and that was the first page I went to. After I left that church, I read websites looking for a church. There were a lot that I eliminated due to what the doctrinal statement said.

[Sam]

The basic fundamental doctrine of this organization shall be the Bible standard of full salvation, which is repentance, baptism in water by immersion in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the initial sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit gives utterance.

We shall endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come into the unity of the faith, at the same time admonishing all the brethren that they shall not contend for their different views to the disunity of the body.

[Sarah]

Originally Posted by tv1a

The burden of proof should lie with the person who has so much time on their hands they have to look for controversies. That is why church websites should remove their doctrinal statements from their websites. Nobody but the insiders care what your doctrinal statement is. Can't recollect one person being saved because of a doctrinal statement. Can't recall a testimony of a person who was scrolling through a web site and read the doctrinal statement and said, "Yup, That's the church I want to attend."

No, but I just might be scrolling through a website and say that's one I want to stay clear of!