I just talked with "Thomas Fudge"

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Carpenter

I found/find it sooo interesting how people can make comments not having read his book. They have simply judged it by its cover.

I have read the book.
It is not an easy read.

A couple of things from the book that people do not like:

1. Not all Oneness Apostolic Pentecostals believe that a person who has not been baptized in Jesus' Name and/or has not spoken in tongues is lost. There have been ministers, pastors, teachers who have been and still part of the Oneness (UPC related) who believe and teach that justification/salvation/regeneration occurs when a person comes to Jesus in faith and repentance. We use the terms "one-steppers" and "three-steppers" in our discussions and both viewpoints are valid among Apostolic people.

2. Some folks among Oneness Pentecostals have placed so much emphasis on "proper" water baptism and on properly following the "rules/traditions" that a person's salvation hinges on what they do, how they live, and what they say instead of on who Jesus is and what He has done for us. We have become like the Galatians of whom Paul spoke in Gal 3:1-3. We started in the Spirit but are attempting to complete/perfect our salvation by carefully observing man-made rules, ordinances, traditions, and "standards." We are preaching a salvation based on what we know and what we do instead of being based on the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.

I do not mean for this to be harsh and condemning but stop and think what kind of a message we have conveyed to people over the years.

[Coonskinner]

I read his book. My opinion is pretty much in line with Ferd's.

I don't question the veracity of his history, for the most part. I do think there is a pretty strong dose of bias in some of his editorializing and anecdotes.

Really though, who should be surprised?

Apostates and backsliders generally make efforts to justify their actions. Most of them just aren't Anglican priests with PhD's.

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by Sam

I have read the book.
It is not an easy read.

A couple of things from the book that people do not like:

1. Not all Oneness Apostolic Pentecostals believe that a person who has not been baptized in Jesus' Name and/or has not spoken in tongues is lost. There have been ministers, pastors, teachers who have been and still part of the Oneness (UPC related) who believe and teach that justification/salvation/regeneration occurs when a person comes to Jesus in faith and repentance. We use the terms "one-steppers" and "three-steppers" in our discussions and both viewpoints are valid among Apostolic people.

2. Some folks among Oneness Pentecostals have placed so much emphasis on "proper" water baptism and on properly following the "rules/traditions" that a person's salvation hinges on what they do, how they live, and what they say instead of on who Jesus is and what He has done for us. We have become like the Galatians of whom Paul spoke in Gal 3:1-3. We started in the Spirit but are attempting to complete/perfect our salvation by carefully observing man-made rules, ordinances, traditions, and "standards." We are preaching a salvation based on what we know and what we do instead of being based on the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.

I do not mean for this to be harsh and condemning but stop and think what kind of a message we have conveyed to people over the years.

Could'nt agree more Sam.............good post

[Neck]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I'm getting ready to go out to a Christmas concert for my kid's band at school so I don't have much time now. But I did recieve my copy of Robert Mapes Anderson's Vision of the Disinherited the other day.

If anyone is interested I can post the material that Thomas Fudge was citing about Agnes Ozman's renunciation of her 1901 Holy Ghost experience. In her own word's she does say that she had renounced the experience, not just other people's accounts of her experience, but she renounced her own experience.

This will be a lengthy post. Not sure if it should go on this thread or one another. I'll be back after getting my ears blown out. LOL.

And thanks Nathan for your update on your converstation with TF (not Tenney). Before he comes on here, I'd hope that a few of us could grow up a little bit so we don't embarrass ourselves.

Your statement on Agnes Ozman is just how he shared it with me.

TF focused on the part of where Charles P stated she wrote in Tounges.

[Neck]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

There is an interesting chapter on what happened and what went down about the Affirmation Statement.

It begins at about page 200.

For sure.

There is also a web page that shows a letter from Robert Sabin and why he did not sign the AS.

Nov 1st, 1992

Please take the time to read this page:

http://www.spiritualabuse.org/issues...ion/sabin.html

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Neckstadt

I am sorry I meant to say David S Norris was there refuting his book. He went to Temple Univ. We did talk about Robert Sabin regarding another debate on the Oneness.

My apologies.

Nathan Eckstadt

I'd like to read about that discussion too if you can post it

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Neckstadt

For sure.

There is also a web page that shows a letter from Robert Sabin and why he did not sign the AS.

Nov 1st, 1992

Please take the time to read this page:

http://www.spiritualabuse.org/issues...ion/sabin.html

I think I have a copy on paper actually

[commonsense]

I own the Thomas Fudge book, but haven't read all of it. It certainly gives lots of the UPC history.

I think I read Bro Sabins letter before, but I read it again now. Regardless of ones opinion of Bro Sabin today, his insight in 1992 seems to have been accurate.
I can state that my father did not llike the AS and felt it caused a lot of harm to the church. (He'd been saved over 60 years and the church was his life).

[Neck]

Originally Posted by commonsense

I own the Thomas Fudge book, but haven't read all of it. It certainly gives lots of the UPC history.

I think I read Bro Sabins letter before, but I read it again now. Regardless of ones opinion of Bro Sabin today, his insight in 1992 seems to have been accurate.
I can state that my father did not llike the AS and felt it caused a lot of harm to the church. (He'd been saved over 60 years and the church was his life).

I know many very good men felt the same way. They may have even signed it.

[Felicity]

I appreciate the history that's been recorded.

The book was written with "bias". So what? Most are. That doesn't negate the facts.