Differences of the two at the merger?

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Urshans - Nathaniel Sr. PAJC Youth Leader
Howard Goss - Founder of PCI (along with John Dearing).
Yadon (?) PCI
Stanley Chambers - General Sec. of PCI
AT Morgan - PCI
(Paul) Price (PAJC - at least that's what I remembered he said once, I have no documentation right now - away from Library).
Tenneys - PAJC

Tenny came from the same PCI church as AT Morgan and George Glass Sr.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Ferd

oddly enough nowhere in there does fudge inform the reader that he is the son of a UPCI minister who is now an Anglican.

anyone besides myself see that as a bit of a red flag?

(I have read most of the book in question.

Just to clarify - Thomas Fudge described himself as "Anglican." His father is not the "UPCI minister who is now an Anglican." I think that's what you meant.

Fudge Jr. was never a UPC minister. And he does mention his father and his father's relationship to the UPC in the book itself.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Tenny came from the same PCI church as AT Morgan and George Glass Sr.

Thanks. Rattling stuff off here too.

[Steve Epley]

What is NOT being said if you attended a Pentecostal meeting in those days and heard both PCI & PAJC preach you could not have told the difference both fervently preached Acts 2;38 and were baptizing every Trinitarian they had a chance to. Unlike their decendents.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Just to clarify - Thomas Fudge described himself as "Anglican." His father is not the "UPCI minister who is now an Anglican." I think that's what you meant.

Fudge Jr. was never a UPC minister. And he does mention his father and his father's relationship to the UPC in the book itself.

correct, i suppose my syntax should have been TF, never explains that he is the son of a UPCI minister and that TF has turned his back on the Apostolic faith and embraced the Anglican faith.... which he is (I believe) both an Anglican minister and an Anglican professor of divinity.

it seems to me those are important bits of information that one should know. They certainly cast a different light on the book. (which I have and have read most of it.)

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Thanks. Rattling stuff off here too.

Your welcome, its hard to keep all that stuff straight.


I suspect that a lot of people who have read Fudge would get that impression because of the incident he recounts where TFT takes someone to task for being soft on doctrine.


it is worth pointing out that TFT, from a PCI church took such a stance. It illistrates that not all PCI men were what we call PCI in doctrine.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

What is NOT being said if you attended a Pentecostal meeting in those days and heard both PCI & PAJC preach you could not have told the difference both fervently preached Acts 2;38 and were baptizing every Trinitarian they had a chance to. Unlike their decendents.

If that was the case why were John Dearing's "fervently preached Acts 2;38" writings surriptitiously censored from the UPC's required reading for all ministers?

Ever hear Stanley Chambers preach? I did many times. One time in particular I remember a bunch of guys from Texas sneering about it afterward and calling him a "compromiser."

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by pelathais

If that was the case why were John Dearing's "fervently preached Acts 2;38" writings surriptitiously censored from the UPC's required reading for all ministers?

Ever hear Stanley Chambers preach? I did many times. One time in particular I remember a bunch of guys from Texas sneering about it afterward and calling him a "compromiser."

some of those fellers dont even think they are saved. has nothing to do with doctrine.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Your welcome, its hard to keep all that stuff straight.


I suspect that a lot of people who have read Fudge would get that impression because of the incident he recounts where TFT takes someone to task for being soft on doctrine.


it is worth pointing out that TFT, from a PCI church took such a stance. It illistrates that not all PCI men were what we call PCI in doctrine.

My pastor was PCI/PAW in background, yet he was and still is one of the toughest on the "no compromise" line. No "pants" on women, no matter what, though later on he did go easy on the sisters in the military who had to wear scrubs and BDUs. But he literally threw guys out of the church who grew beards and tried to plead their case for it. Once a sister was almost sent home from a marriage retreat for wearing a pair of slacks around the resort center.

Sometimes the "converted" become even more zealous than those who did the "converting."

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by pelathais

My pastor was PCI/PAW in background, yet he was and still is one of the toughest on the "no compromise" line. No "pants" on women, no matter what, though later on he did go easy on the sisters in the military who had to wear scrubs and BDUs. But he literally threw guys out of the church who grew beards and tried to plead their case for it. Once a sister was almost sent home from a marriage retreat for wearing a pair of slacks around the resort center.

Sometimes the "converted" become even more zealous than those who did the "converting."

TFT certainly wouldnt fit that line bro. he was from a PCI church but that church, as far as i can tell, never had that PCI doctrine.

PS> I hate calling it "PCI doctrine" because it isnt accurate. the PCI had men of several different views.

I wish there was a good term like Water/Spirit to fit that Saved at repentance view.