**** Are the NCO and AWCF "raiding" the UPCI or providing a "safety net"? ****

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

To answer that one is to answer all the rest of your's that deal with Eschatology.

Care to elaborate ... Sensai?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Care to elaborate ... Sensai?

Would you care?

[chaotic_resolve]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Benny ... the attitude you read into Fudge's indictment of Hall is just that your opinion ... even if it's true ... he has a legitimate beef and right to say that the org did it's best not to be transparent with their historical documents.

Most of the facts are not disputed in this book ... even by Hall and Norris ... his conclusions based on the data are questioned , as stated by Crakjak.

I may have missed it . . . why was TF thrown out of the library? What was he finding that upset or scared Hall and the others to toss him out?

And why is this the first time I'm hearing about it???

If the facts aren't being disputed by Hall and Norris . . .what's the argument about? He's said to have a well-documented Bibliography, which could be said for any research book.

Is it just that EB doesn't agree with the conclusions that he attacks the credibility and character of TF? That's what I'm getting from EB's posts. No real substance other than he doesn't like the book.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

It very well looks as the other side is spitting nails on this issue. I was just pointing out that through one source one couldn’t make the proper decision as to a balanced view. The Fudge book is trying to make the attempt to define a movement. Now, how does that information line up with the facts contained in the past? One needs to do the proper research.

That research needs to be placed under the white-hot light of scrutiny.

I haven't read the book yet, so I'm not going to defend the book, but I will say that according to what I've read, TF received his information from a lot of different sources. It's not as though he interviewed one embittered, ex-UPC person and used their comments as the basis of his book.

I would agree that the book should be scrutinized; that the sources need be traced and not just accepted w/out question. In the same sense, I would hope EB places the same scrutiny on UPC-approved books and historical accounts written by UPC authors.

It goes both ways. However, I doubt EB places the same litmus test on UPC-authored and approved books as he does on other non-UPC-authored books.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Primary sources need to be examined to come up with the best overall picture. It's the ones who hate scrutiny are the ones who scream the loudest.

I still wonder why the UPC Library was closed to TF. Seems they didn't want the scrutiny of someone who wouldn't white-wash or gloss the history over to make it UPC-friendly.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I think it's ridiculous how people defend Fudge's book as if it were infallible?

Dumb. No one's even hinted this.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Search and study . . . that’s all I'm trying to say. Thomas Fudge had an axe to grind after Brother J.L. Hall, closed the garage door to the Hazelwood Library. I noticed that, and that is what I was saying.

Also if you have a writer who is offended he will present that within his writings. Did Thomas Fudge have an agenda, did he have one before he even started and it went to full bloom at he being asked to leave by Elder Hall?

Every writer has an agenda. If not, why write a book? Seriously . . . what moron would write a book without thinking it through to the books conclusion. Without knowing what the purpose, or agenda, of the book was?

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

In some districts it's required reading for new ministers to read "United We Stand" and "21st Century Pentecostals" both books outline the merger pretty well. I have also read articles in the Forward, and in the Pentecostal Herald speaking of the mergers.

I beg to differ with that my Brother, it's in the UPCI literature and there books from their Publishing House.

Any books from other sources other than the Forward, the Pentecostal Herald and PPH? I think most would agree that these sources would be decidedly biased in their opinions and views and would not be a good source of critical reasoning or examinations into the history of the UPC. I guarantee you most of what's put out by HQ is done so with a positive spin, if nothing more than to "keep unity."

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I am trying to explain that no one should take Fudge's book to be the total of truth. It sounds so silly that you say that my agenda is to discount when I keep compelling the people to seek out the truth through study. Or are you just answering my posts by just skimming them?

Unfortunately I've wasted about 30 minutes going over all the posts I've missed since last night . . . and I'll say again -

• No one is suggesting that TF's book is total truth or infallible;
• No one is even suggesting TF is right in his conclusions (re-read the posts - can't find it);
• EB continues to question and belittle TF's character and writings - with no substantive reason other than he doesn't like TF's conclusions; and
• EB seems to take what's written by UPC-friendly authors without the "white-hot light of scrutiny" he demands for non-UPC-friendly authors.

I'll be getting both books: "Christianity without the Cross," and "United We Stand," to look a little more into this.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

It seems that some of the ones most concerned about the "history" are those who have changed their doctrinal positions and somehow feel that they are validated by finding men in the past who believed the same.

This is not the case with those like Felicity who were always taught the "PCI" view.

Your doctrine is right or not right according to the Scriptures, not because Howard Goss agreed with you.

CS, I am most interested and have changed nothing...I hope I am not labeled with the "some" you mentioned...I trust you know me better than that.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

United We Stand Page 21, speaks of how the Assemblies of gods were getting upset how some of the Brothers were baptizing in Jesus Name. There was an unwritten mild statement that they would leave baptism modes up to the individual preacher, and that they shouldn't argue over the issue.

United We Stand, page 120 PCI stand on baptism is discussed.

United We Stand, page 121 UPC stand on baptism is discussed.

United We Stand, page 98, Howard Goss' stand on baptism.

These books are not hid from the constiuancy of the United Pentecostal Church International. CC1 read the book 30 years ago? Listen Brothers and Sisters the research is out there and the best place to learn about any group is within that group. Thomas Fudge didn't go to the Vatican to learn about us he went to attics, and sheds of One-God preachers, and the library of Hazelwood. I'm just saying that since the Fudge book came out everyone who had been shouting it's praises should of been looking deeper behind its words.

In Jesus Name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

EB,

My humble apologies. Obviously in the world of the UPC 3 pages must constitute an exhaustive examination and study of the PCI view and its history in the org. I should have realized that.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Dear Sister Barbara, It very well looks as the other side is spitting nails on this issue. I was just pointing out that through one source one couldn’t make the proper decision as to a balanced view. The Fudge book is trying to make the attempt to define a movement. Now, how does that information line up with the facts contained in the past? One needs to do the proper research.
That research needs to be placed under the white-hot light of scrutiny.

Primary sources need to be examined to come up with the best overall picture. It's the ones who hate scrutiny are the ones who scream the loudest.

I think it's ridiculous how people defend Fudge's book as if it were infallible?

Search and study Sister Barbara that’s all I'm trying to say. Thomas Fudge had an axe to grind after Brother J.L. Hall, closed the garage door to the Hazelwood Library. I noticed that, and that is what I was saying.

Also if you have a writer who is offended he will present that within his writings. Did Thomas Fudge have an agenda, did he have one before he even started and it went to full bloom at he being asked to leave by Elder Hall?

Time proves all things. I doubt any would worry that you would lose faith by reading the Fudge book, We have the testimony of Martyrs from the First Century church to the Anabaptists who wouldn’t lose faith for less of a reason. Books only help to make what we have stronger. If you have a Bible Faith then Sister Barbara you will shine as the firmament.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Fudge's book is by no means infallible, and no one is suggesting that it is. However, it is the first widely disseminated book that has given the PCI view any kind of visibility. And from the PCI view I believe it is a very reasonable and fair presentation. Having said all of that, the book is still Fudge's experience and research and his point of view, so to denigrate his work is completely unfair.

Further, it is understandable the Fudge was very unhappy that Hazelwood closed their doors to him. And it ridiculous for HQ to have done so, they would have been much better served to have graciously given him totally access.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by chaotic_resolve

I may have missed it . . . why was TF thrown out of the library? What was he finding that upset or scared Hall and the others to toss him out?

And why is this the first time I'm hearing about it???

If the facts aren't being disputed by Hall and Norris . . .what's the argument about? He's said to have a well-documented Bibliography, which could be said for any research book.

The reason that Bro. Hall was concerned or "scared" is because when folks know the truth they are more likely to question and dig things out for themselves, instead of just accepting the status quo. And just as this discussion reveals that is exactly what happens.

Can't let the natives know too much they may seek their own paths. JMHO:sshhh:sshhh

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by crakjak

Fudge's book is by no means infallible, and no one is suggesting that it is. However, it is the first widely disseminated book that has given the PCI view any kind of visibility. And from the PCI view I believe it is a very reasonable and fair presentation. Having said all of that, the book is still Fudge's experience and research and his point of view, so to denigrate his work is completely unfair.

Well ... I'll tell you how I felt about the availability of the book with the title that turns so many off. Possibly that was an error in judgmentl on the author's part although I understand why he chose the title. But I digress.

Ever since I started posting on these apostolic/UPC discussion forums I've been talking about my history, about the teaching I received, about doctrine and holiness standards according to my own personal experience and background. I've taken a lot of heat and there have been many who wouldn't believe what i was telling them. They wouldn't accept what I was saying.

When I told people that there are people who believe like I do within the UPC - many in fact - they would become very angry with me and I was hard pressed to understand why. Now I understand better.

It was a relief to me when finally a book was written with lots of research and interviews with many many men across the apostolic movement that actually gave credence to what I'd been saying for several years online.

Finally there was proof! And the authenticity of the things I was saying about my understanding of how things "were", my experiences, and my history was validated.

I was never cognizant of the terms PCI and PAJC when I was making posts (before CWTC was published) .... relating thoughts, opinions, experiences, etc. They were unknown terms to me then, so I had no way of defining my own background under a "label" of PCI. I just knew that my background, my experiences and the teaching and emphases in relation to doctrine, holiness and so on was real!

And it got mighty frustrating at times when people wouldn't believe me. Understandable -- now that I realize so many had a totally different background and experience in the UPC than I did -- but still difficult and I received so much persecution from those who didn't understand. Poor poor me.

Hehe. Just kidding.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by CC1

...
I graduated with a theology degree from a UPC Bible College and never heard one word about this.
...

What Bible College and when?

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Sam

What Bible College and when?

He graduated from JCM as did I.

The difference is that we were required to read "United We Stand" and were also taught about the PCI/PAJC in Church history II.