KH believes the Light Doctrine??

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

hmmmm... and I still say the majority of the 20+ million Oneness Pentecostals in the world today do not view Oneness Pentecostals as God's Only Chosen Christians. The narrow exclusivism is a minority view not only among Christians but among Oneness Pentecostals themselves.

You may be right. I guess I am in the minority. But I do not look at it as exclusivism, but simple obedience to scripture.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Sam

I think we are looking at what we call "The Light Doctrine" a couple of different ways.

1. Some Apostolics believe that a person is justified/saved/regenerated at faith and repentance prior to water and/or Spirit baptism. On this forum we usually designate these folks as "one-steppers." When the UPC was formed in 1945 there were "one-steppers" in that new organization and there still are. This is a valid doctrinal viewpoint among Oneness Apostolic Pentecostals. Since one-steppers believe that a person is born again at faith and repentance, anyone (regardless of church affiliation) who has made this personal commitment to Jesus is saved and part of the body of Christ. Some folks refer to this as "The Light Doctrine."

2. Others, such as S.G. Norris, G.T. Haywood, and F.E. Curts believed strongly that a person was not saved or born again until he/she had repented, been water baptized in Jesus' Name, and had received the Holy Ghost Baptism. There are many ministers who believe this way. They believe that a person is not a child of God, not in the Body of Christ, and not rapture ready unless they have experienced all of those three steps. They will not, however, categorically say that all those who have not completed those three steps will go to Hell. They believe that God will judge everyone by how well they lived up to all the light they had and if they did walk in whatever light they had, they would receive eternal life at the Great White Throne Judgment of Revelation 20:11-15 and Matthew 25:31-46.

Maybe we need a new name for this. The "Loophole Doctrine"??

[ChristopherHall]

On a personal level....

I think we need to allow the final judgment of a soul to rest in God's hands alone. I believe we all can agree that the full Apostolic salvation as taught in the NT includes repentance, water baptism in Jesus name, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost. Our goal should be to teach and preach the full message as taught by the Apostles. Those who have not shared that full experience have had an experience with God...however it isn't complete. Allow God alone to be that soul's judge. We can continue to admonish that all believers press forward to experience the full NT experience.

On an organizational level....

Anyone belonging to an Apostolic organization should teach, preach, and uphold the full NT experience and Apostolic teaching. That is indeed what makes us...Apostolic.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

On a personal level....

I think we need to allow the final judgment of a soul to rest in God's hands alone. I believe we all can agree that the full Apostolic salvation as taught in the NT includes repentance, water baptism in Jesus name, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost. Our goal should be to teach and preach the full message as taught by the Apostles. Those who have not shared that full experience have had an experience with God...however it isn't complete. Allow God alone to be that soul's judge. We can continue to admonish that all believers press forward to experience the full NT experience.

On an organizational level....

Anyone belonging to an Apostolic organization should teach, preach, and uphold the full NT experience and Apostolic teaching. That is indeed what makes us...Apostolic.

While this sounds all nice, the issue is that God has already spoken what his judgment is. Those that do not receive the Gospel and obey Acts 2:38 will not be saved. This is the Word of God, and not my judgment.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

While this sounds all nice, the issue is that God has already spoken what his judgment is. Those that do not receive the Gospel and obey Acts 2:38 will not be saved. This is the Word of God, and not my judgment.

I have to agree w/ the spirit of your post ... either it is or isn't ...

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I have to agree w/ the spirit of your post ... either it is or isn't ...

Yeah... Either it is or it is'nt - true enough.

But what is wrong with an up-front confession that our understanding of scripture including the mechanics of our salvation through Jesus Christ, is less than perfect and likely flawed?

THEREFORE we do not discount other Christians as unwanted stepchildren, but embrace them as brethren we strongly disagree with.

To me it is not a question of who has perfect doctrine.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Yeah... Either it is or it is'nt - true enough.

But what is wrong with an up-front confession that our understanding of scripture including the mechanics of our salvation through Jesus Christ, is less than perfect and likely flawed?

THEREFORE we do not discount other Christians as unwanted stepchildren, but embrace them as brethren we strongly disagree with.

To me it is not a question of who has perfect doctrine.

To someone that believes that the application of Acts 2:38 for salvation is a must, this is not an option. If I did not believe that Acts 2:38 was mandatory, then it would be possible to be like Howard Goss, and say that "the Baptist brothers will be in heaven too".

I think my whole issue in this continues to be.....

-Not that folks believe a "one step doctrine",

-But that folks that claim to believe that Acts 2:38 is the only way can support a leader that does not.

To me this is just inconsistent. I don't know why it bothers me so much. Almost as much as a UPCI preacher watching garbage on tv when his bylaws tell him no.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

To someone that believes that the application of Acts 2:38 for salvation is a must, this is not an option. If I did not believe that Acts 2:38 was mandatory, then it would be possible to be like Howard Goss, and say that "the Baptist brothers will be in heaven too".

I think my whole issue in this continues to be.....

-Not that folks believe a "one step doctrine",

-But that folks that claim to believe that Acts 2:38 is the only way can support a leader that does not.

To me this is just inconsistent. I don't know why it bothers me so much. Almost as much as a UPCI preacher watching garbage on tv when his bylaws tell him no.

But brother, I dare say you give others latitude on scriptural interpretation of other topics, whether prophesy or wine for communion etc. Why do you deny this same leniency concerning Christian initiation?

I do realize the gravity of the subject, but perhaps, then it is even more incumbent that we tread softly...

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

But brother, I dare say you give others latitude on scriptural interpretation of other topics, whether prophesy or wine for communion etc. Why do you deny this same leniency concerning Christian initiation?

I do realize the gravity of the subject, but perhaps, then it is even more incumbent that we tread softly...

Because I see this as plainly laid out in scripture. And it has to do with whether someone makes the city or not.

I do believe there is room within the Church for variableness. But I do not believe there is room for variableness on how one gets into the Church.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Because I see this as plainly laid out in scripture. And it has to do with whether someone makes the city or not.
I do believe there is room within the Church for variableness. But I do not believe there is room for variableness on how one gets into the Church.

And because it is of such serious nature, we are also at great risk should we judge them falsely, or wrongfully.