UPC doctrinal contradiction

[Praxeas]

http://www.upci.org/about.asp
The UPCI holds a fundamental view of the Bible: "The Bible is the only God-given authority which man possesses; therefore all doctrine, faith, hope, and all instructions for the church must be based upon and harmonize with the Bible" (Manual of the United Pentecostal Church, 19). The Bible is the Word of God, and therefore inerrant and infallible. The UPCI rejects all extrabiblical revelations and writings, and views church creeds and articles of faith only as the thinking of men.

The UPCI holds that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works. Faith in Jesus is the means by which a person is justified. At the same time, a sinner must believe the gospel; he is commanded to repent of his sinful life, to be baptized in water in the name of Jesus Christ, and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38; 4:12; 8:12-17; 10:43-48; 19:1-6). Thus the various aspects of faith and obedience work together in God's grace to reconcile us to God.

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Which backs up my contention that no oneness person can truly say your lost if you haven't spoken in tonuges, because their own literature shows that at the very latest point forgiveness of sins happens at water baptism.

I believe it happens earlier than that, namely at the time of genuine faith/repentance.

Strangely in DKB book "The Message of Romans" he teaches that one is justified by faith, but of course he insterts a note at the end of the dialouge that the DEFINITION of saving faith=repentance, water baptism in JN, and HG with evidence of other tongues. Strange, when I read Romans 4, I never got that.

yes... and faith is contextual. Justification is "concerning a matter" just because one is just toward one thing doesn't mean he is in other areas.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

Bernard is right and the other I have no idea... LOL!

So a person is forgiven of sins (remitted) by and at baptism not before like the UPCI Articles of Faith say?

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Pel, also notice the heading Repentance and Conversion has been changed... you must have an old copy.

Repentance no longer "converts" you...

depends on what is viewed as repentance.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

depends on what is viewed as repentance.

Well true, but I was saying that a change was made in the AOF.

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

So a person is forgiven of sins (remitted) by and at baptism not before like the UPCI Articles of Faith say?

what is the position of the person? Unbeliever or covenant individual. To repent is to turn and take upon the yoke of Christ to the message delivered. You are not circumised from this body of sin until Baptism. In baptism by faith we are brought unto newness/covenant life. I am no UPCI though I know many in it etc... WHo knows what messing people have done with it. To me you can't hold both positions as a article of faith. THat's crazy!

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Well true, but I was saying that a change was made in the AOF.

ok... I will have to ask some people I know what has happened. I usually don't pay attention but inconsistency drives me nuts.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

ok... I will have to ask some people I know what has happened. I usually don't pay attention but inconsistency drives me nuts.

I DO know what happened. The change was made in the early nineties because many see conversion to consist of the three steps, no longer associated with only repentance.

I heard D. Segraves say he was fully intending to be there and argue to keep the wording, but was delayed and came in just after the vote. He deeply regretted not being able to give a defense for the language - especially since no one else did so in his absence, and the change was made with little resistance.

[OilCityCajun]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

...It bothers me that a woman can have uncut hair, do the whole ball of wax Holiness Standards as far as looks and yet be committing fornication and nobody know. But take a woman that just got sick of her split ends and trims it and all of a sudden she is a sinner.

How can anyone commit fornication without at least 1 other person knowing?

Seriously, though. All of a sudden? I think not. People contemplate rebellion long before they act out on it. It just suddenly became obvious, as the fornication also will, eventually. This bothers me too. It's just that some sins are more obvious than others. For example, a cheating husband can "shout the victory" for years, but it only takes one whiff of cigarette smoke for one to be labelled a hypocrite. Neither is more nor less a sinner than the other, just some sins are more notice-able. The fact of the matter is, if the pastor preaches against trimmed hair, then disobedience is as the sin of witchcraft. If the pastor doesnt preach it, no one else has the authority to "call them out" on it because no one else will be held responsible for that person's soul.

Originally Posted by pelathais

If this is so, why do most people who go through all three steps fall away? Why is sin so prevalent in "holiness" churches? Why are the rates of marital infidelity, teen pregnancy and divorce identical for those who have done the "Three Step" as they are for the general population of unregenerate sinners?

Simple. Some who receive the power choose not to use it. And since the Spirit of God will not stay where sin is, when one doesnt use it, they lose it.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

...Luke 24:47 says, "And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."

Why then the apparent distinction by Christ, Himself, between repentance and remission, as well as between swept and garnished? Are we going to now hear the often applied and rarely accurate "Kai defense"?

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

yes... and faith is contextual. Justification is "concerning a matter" just because one is just toward one thing doesn't mean he is in other areas.

Here are some quotes from DKB's book on Romans:

"It [the current passge in study 3:21-5:1] states the central doctrine of the epistle—justification by faith—and develops some important logical consequences of that doctrine. After discussing this passage we will insert a note on saving faith, because a proper understanding of faith is essential to understanding the doctrine of justification by faith." p.87

Basically hes going to give commentary on the passgage at face value for about 30 pages, then at the conclusion he is going to redefine "faith" so that it equals repentance, water baptsim in JN, and baptixm of HG with evidence of tongues.

more to come