Official Stance of UPC?

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by acerrak

we need churches like that here in america,

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

thanks for your input sam. Does christianity without the cross deal with this issue? I'm about to read it.

Yes.
I highly recommend Christianity Without the Cross. It is not an easy read but I think it's worthwhile. It helped me to see that I really am Apostolic. I believe that there is one God and His name is Jesus. I believe that water baptism should be done in Jesus' name. I believe in the Holy Ghost Baptism. But, like the folks known as Apostolic in the early part of the 20th century, I believe that a person is justified/saved/born again by faith prior to and separate from water baptism and/or Spirit Baptism. Those folks were all one-steppers back then. This three-step message that is now prominent in the UPC was a later development among Apostolics.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I am pretty sure Global network does as well as the Canadian ACOP.

From http://www.acop.ca/

Amongst statement of faith we read:

5. That forgiveness of sin and eternal life is freely offered to all by our Lord
Jesus Christ. Salvation of sinners is by grace through faith alone, in the
perfect all sufficient work of Christ, who died for our sins, was buried and
rose again the third day for our justification.

6. In Water Baptism of believers by immersion in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

7. In the Baptism with the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to salvation with the scriptural evidence; namely, speaking in tongues.

I am an ordained minister in two different groups.
One is called The Churches of Jesus Christ International usually just called The Church of Jesus Christ plus I am ordained in our local church which is called The Hamilton Dream Center. Although the statements above do not agree with the "official" statement of faith of both of those organizations, they do agree with what I believe.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I am pretty sure Global network does as well as the Canadian ACOP.

From http://www.acop.ca/

Amongst statement of faith we read:

5. That forgiveness of sin and eternal life is freely offered to all by our Lord
Jesus Christ. Salvation of sinners is by grace through faith alone, in the
perfect all sufficient work of Christ, who died for our sins, was buried and
rose again the third day for our justification.

6. In Water Baptism of believers by immersion in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

7. In the Baptism with the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to salvation with the scriptural evidence; namely, speaking in tongues.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by acerrak

we need churches like that here in america,

I so agree with your sentiments.

The ACOP view is the Biblical view.

[Lafon]

How can one find scriptural justification for the statement -

7. In the Baptism with the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to salvation with the scriptural evidence; namely, speaking in tongues

when the words of Romans 8:9 explicitly asserts (note: NOT "suggest, recommend, or if you want it") that -

"Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is NONE of his"?

I've never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I am certainly not the dullest either. If possession of the Spirit (i.e., baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gives the utterance) is not "part and parcel" of salvation, rather than an experience that is "subsequent to salvation," then the writer of Romans surely must have gotten it all wrong. I think not! If my understanding of Romans 8:9 is correct (& I believe it is), then surely the baptism of the Holy Ghost is NOT, nor can it be, a thing which is "subsequent to salvation!"

Sorry Sam, NO "thumps up" from me! Indeed, I give it just the opposite!

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Lafon

How can one find scriptural justification for the statement -



when the words of Romans 8:9 explicitly asserts (note: NOT "suggest, recommend, or if you want it") that -

"Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is NONE of his"?

I've never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I am certainly not the dullest either. If possession of the Spirit (i.e., baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gives the utterance) is not "part and parcel" of salvation, rather than an experience that is "subsequent to salvation," then the writer of Romans surely must have gotten it all wrong. I think not! If my understanding of Romans 8:9 is correct (& I believe it is), then surely the baptism of the Holy Ghost is NOT, nor can it be, a thing which is "subsequent to salvation!"

Sorry Sam, NO "thumps up" from me! Indeed, I give it just the opposite!

who said that tounges is the only evidence of recieving the Holy Spirit?
"There are many other evidences of the operation of the Spirit of God in a person's life, but it is a matter of time before they are manifest"

these our fruits of the Spirit and none of them mention tounges.

I agree tounges is (a) initial evidence but i never believed it was the only.

people forget we dont seek God, God seeks us, and even to be able to profess Jesus is Lord, would mean the Spirit is working in your life. thus Romans 10:9-10 &13 is very plain in meaning and understanding.

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Sam

The UPC does not have an "official stance" but what we call the three-step plan of salvation (repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism) is believed by many and is often presented as the "official stance." This three-step plan of salvation should not be confused with another three separate experiences preached by some.

When the Holy Spirit was poured out in the late 1800's and early 1900's, those who received the experience were Christians seeking something more from God. Some were from "holiness" type churches and some were not. Those from "holiness" churches already believed in a post-salvation experience called "sanctification" or "the second blessing" so to them the Holy Ghost Baptism was a separate and subsequent experience --a third experience. The would testify. "I'm saved, sanctified, and filled with the Holy Ghost."

In the early 1900's a preacher named Durham from Chicago preached a message all over the place called "The Finished Work of Calvary." He taught that sanctification or holiness was not a separate experience from salvation but that when we got saved we were made holy and set apart for the Lord and we are to grow in that holiness/sanctification for the rest of our lives. Those from the "holiness" groups that did not accept the finished work doctrine still maintained that sanctification is a separate work and today they are the Church of God (Cleveland, TN), other Church of God groups which split off the Cleveland, TN group, Pentecostal Holiness, and Church of God in Christ. Those that preached the finished work doctrine later organized into what is now the Assemblies of God.

Around 1913 another teaching became popular which was called the new issue. This teaching said that the early church baptized using the name of Jesus (with or without the titles Lord and Christ) instead of the traditional baptism which was being used in just about every church or denomination in the world. Some taught that the name of the Father is Lord; the name of the Son is Jesus; and the name of the Holy Ghost is Christ so they proposed a triune name for a triune God and baptized that way. Others taught that the single name Jesus is the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Many people were re-baptized using these various formulas but re-baptism was not considered salvational --just a step back into the first century teaching of the Apostles.

Later, some began to teach that water baptism in Jesus' name (with or without the titles Lord and Christ) was necessary for salvation. Some began to teach that water baptism was the birth of water spoken of in John 3:5.

When the UPC was formed in 1945, two organizations came together and merged. One group, the PCI (Pentecostal Church Inc) was predominantly made up of ministers who believed that a person was saved prior to water and Spirit baptism. The other group, the PAJC (Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ) was predominantly made up of ministers that believed a person was not saved until completing the three steps of repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism. So that the two groups could merge a "fundamental doctrine" statement was written up that was ambiguous enough that both groups could agree with.

Since 1945 those who believe in a three-step plan of salvation have pretty well pushed out the one-steppers (or intimidated them into silence) so now many in the UPC preach and teach that a person is not saved until they have completed the three steps of repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism.

Well summarized, Sam. The UPC began to make this difference an issue of fellowship, especially out in the Northwest in the mid-70s, early '80s. As far I can tell, there are no UPC "one steppers" left in Oregon. If anyone knows differently, let me know....

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Lafon

How can one find scriptural justification for the statement -



when the words of Romans 8:9 explicitly asserts (note: NOT "suggest, recommend, or if you want it") that -

"Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is NONE of his"?

I've never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I am certainly not the dullest either. If possession of the Spirit (i.e., baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gives the utterance) is not "part and parcel" of salvation, rather than an experience that is "subsequent to salvation," then the writer of Romans surely must have gotten it all wrong. I think not! If my understanding of Romans 8:9 is correct (& I believe it is), then surely the baptism of the Holy Ghost is NOT, nor can it be, a thing which is "subsequent to salvation!"

Sorry Sam, NO "thumps up" from me! Indeed, I give it just the opposite!

Brother, I understand where you are coming from. I (and many other Oneness or Apostolic Pentecostals) see no conflict with Romans 8:9 and a subsequent baptism in the Holy Spirit. We believe that at salvation Jesus comes in to dwell as the Holy Spirit so all believers do have the Spirit of Christ. Don't apologize or explain why the "thumbs down." You and other Apostolic Pentecostals believe that the baptism in the Holy Ghost is the birth of the Spirit and that He does not dwell in a person until the person is baptized in the Spirit. This is just a difference of opinion among us Oneness Pentecostals. We agreed to disagree in 1945 when the Affirmation Statement was written and became the fundamental doctrine of the UPC.

[Godsdrummer]

I am amazed how we can ignore basic context and messages of scripture to pull out what we want to teach. Jesus told the diciples that they would receive "power after the holy ghost came upon them". This after Jesus gave thme the spirit of the holy ghost already.
Joh 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit.

What was this if they had not received the spirit of God into their hearts? As with the promise of being "baptized in the holy spirit" which was the promise of the father which could not come until Christ had been taken from them.

Act 1:4 And having met with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to await the promise of the Father which you heard from Me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days from now.

There is a differance between the spirit of God that comes into our lives at conversion, then when we are baptized with his spirit receiving the promise of the father that brings power into our lives.

Hence we ignore the simplicity in our drive to prove our own agenda.

Let us look at Acts 2 closer than with the eyes of religious tradition.

Act 2:3 And tongues as of fire appeared to them, being distributed; and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The first 120 were given the promise of the father, the baptism of the holy ghost.

At the missunderstaning of the Jews that had come to Jerusalem to celibrate the passover and Pentecost, Peter began to quote from Joel. "This is that " within the first part of his message Peter states salvation comes to those that "call on the name of the Lord". He then goes on to condem those devout Jews, that it was thier hands that did crucify the Lord Jesus Christ the anionted one of God. When they understood the gravity of thier deeds they then ask Peter "what shall we do?" this being the most missed stated quote in the scripture other than John 3:5. Assuming that the question is how can we be saved? Or what must we do to be saved? neither of which is the quetion!!! The question is realizing what they have been accused of doing and understanding that they are in fact guilty of putting Christ on the cross. The question is how can we rectify our guilt. What can we do the make things right.

Now if your child disobeys you what is the first thing you want him/her to do? repent!!! Not just ask forgiveness but to refrain from doing that thing again. Peter give the same command, REPENT, Now haveing the promise that by the death of Christ our sins are forgiven, and understanding that in those days cerimonial washing was the out ward way men professed thier siding with one religious sect with another. Peter tells them to publicly profess thier commitment to Christ through water baptism, because Christ has forgiven their sins.

And then they too shall receive the Holy ghost, As this "promise of the father" was what it was all about.