The Difference Between the PCI of the Merger and the Current Counterfeits

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by philjones

Not in my experience!

Mine neither.

Originally Posted by Esther

Are you talking about folks that have changed their stand on Acts 2:38 or standards or are you including both???

Why is it that everything is about standards to some folks? Never did understand that. Where did you see this good brother mention standards before this point?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Ronzo

I think you should come up with a new award, Dan.

Perhaps a grumpy old man award... with the face of Donald Rumsfeld or something...

CS is the second recipient of THE KOOLAID MAN award ... DW ... took it yesterday ...

[NLYP]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

I have to chuckle when I see these modern backsliders calling themselves adherents of the "PCI" doctrine.

They don't have any more in common with the old PCI men than modern liberal democrats do with the architects of the New Deal. They both claim a connection with a heritage they have absolutely nothing in common with, and simply want to trade on a name that is respected.

The men of the PCI were mostly men who had come out of denominations that were trinitarian, and had received a revelation of Truth.

They preached their revelation with such passion and fervor that no one would have known by their preaching that they differed from the PAJC men, for the most part.

This was because they had made a move toward Truth and revelation.

They loved this New Birth, Oneness Message.

This new breed are a totally different kettle of fish.

They are moving away from Truth.

They are embarassed to be associated with strong doctrinal men. They would rather identify with those proclaiming an easy-believism message than with the Apostolic church.

So when you try and get them to discuss the doctrine of salvation, they spout clouds of obfuscatory smoke about how it is Jesus who saves, and it is a journey, and blah blah blah.

Nothing solid.

And they call themselves adherents of the "PCI Doctrine."

Well, the men of the old PCI would probably be ashamed to claim them, because they came out from long and deeply rooted belief systems and sold out to preach this Jesus Name message. It cost them something to be able to say "I'm one of them," as the old song says.

Most of these slack-jawed compromisers could preach all day, and if you ran their message through a centrifuge, you couldn't distill half an ounce of good doctrine, nor figure out how to be saved.

PCI?

Yep.

Pathetic Compromising Ingrates.

Now, if that isn't clear enough, let me know and I will try and dial it down a little better for you.

Love ya Johnny...But you off on this one.
My Grandfathers Pastor and Menotr W.M. Greer who was the first DS of Tennessee and died in 1999 as honorary DS of TN...went to his grave believeing the "saved at repentance" PCI doctrine.
I hardly think that Greer was in the ministry for over 75 years and still "walking towards truth".
The PCI men were accepted in our movement at the merger as MEN of like precious faith...not men that needed to come more clearly into the light.

Originally Posted by NLYP

Love ya Johnny...But you off on this one.
My Grandfathers Pastor and Menotr W.M. Greer who was the first DS of Tennessee and died in 1999 as honorary DS of TN...went to his grave believeing the "saved at repentance" PCI doctrine.
I hardly think that Greer was in the ministry for over 75 years and still "walking towards truth".
The PCI men were accepted in our movement at the merger as MEN of like precious faith...not men that needed to come more clearly into the light.

Love ya DANNY,

but you and all the rest are totally missing the point of CS post. Perhaps it is too dumbed down or perhaps it is not dumbed down enough. CS is not denying that there were definite differences, often indistinguishable because of how they preached the message, between the PCI and PAJC men. He is saying that the modern PCI men are not of the same persuasion as the old PCI men because the modern PCI yo-yos De-emphasize what was Heavily Emphasized by the old PCI hands!

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by NLYP

Love ya Johnny...But you off on this one.
My Grandfathers Pastor and Menotr W.M. Greer who was the first DS of Tennessee and died in 1999 as honorary DS of TN...went to his grave believeing the "saved at repentance" PCI doctrine.
I hardly think that Greer was in the ministry for over 75 years and still "walking towards truth".
The PCI men were accepted in our movement at the merger as MEN of like precious faith...not men that needed to come more clearly into the light.

You missed the point Dan.

I said or at least tried to say that their embracing of Acts 2:38 was a move toward truth on their part.

They came to that position from a background of some other doctrine.

I did not mean that they were continually noving; I meant that they had moved forward and not backward the way these guys today are doing.

The difference is in their direction, and what they are focused on.

Does that clear it up for you?

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by philjones

Love ya DANNY,

but you and all the rest are totally missing the point of CS post. Perhaps it is too dumbed down or perhaps it is not dumbed down enough. CS is not denying that there were definite differences, often indistinguishable because of how they preached the message, between the PCI and PAJC men. He is saying that the modern PCI men are not of the same persuasion as the old PCI men because the modern PCI yo-yos De-emphasize what was Heavily Emphasized by the old PCI hands!

Thank you, brother Jones.

I don't see why this is so hard to grasp for our esteemed compadres.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

You missed the point Dan.

I said or at least tried to say that their embracing of Acts 2:38 was a move toward truth on their part.

They came to that position from a background of some other doctrine.

I did not mean that they were continually noving; I meant that they had moved forward and not backward the way these guys today are doing.

The difference is in their direction, and what they are focused on.

Does that clear it up for you?

It's backwards if it doesnt fit YOUR mold ???

Originally Posted by philjones

Perhaps it is too dumbed down or perhaps it is not dumbed down enough.

Thanks Phil.... right back at ya.

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

It's backwards if it doesnt fit YOUR mold ???

You make some of the wimpiest replies!

I guess my question would have to be the one Johnny James likes to ask those he perceives as being in reverse...

"Were you wrong then or are you wrong now?" You can't be right both times!