Mooney Guns for "Secret" Meeting in Detroit?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by DAII

The more I read some of Mooneys quotes from that campmeeting message I am thinking he plagiarized it from Westberg's notes and preamble to his infamous resolution.

There is a critical need for people like the one whose quotes you have read, to come to terms with the basic facts of the Merger Agreement of 1945.

Those who wandered and strayed from the agreement and have sought to change and revise it have done terrible, perhaps irreparable harm to the UPC. They have destroyed the lives and ministries of countless young ministers and quite a few older ministers.

They have created an innovation; a new mechanism for "salvation" that they propose to cross land and sea with to make "children" that are as spiritually empty as they are.

They have taken a very wonderful and a great gift that was handed to them without any cost on their part and turned the gift into a macabre distortion of Truth.

[CC1]

pelanthesaurus,

As I have said before I have no problem with the UPC evolving to codify the 3 step plan of salvation. I say that because if you really believe the 3 step plan you have no room to allow for the PCI view. The PCIers should have realized this from the get go, that their view was incompatible with the 3 step view.

It is also apparent that the PCI minority view was held by those who were much more pacifist in championing their views than the 3 step majority. The PCIers allowed themselves to be further marginalized and eventually excluded without publicly standing up and advocating for the tolerance initially expressed in the merger agreement. Of course that would have been in vain because as I said if you really believe the 3 step view by the very nature of that belief you cannot tolerate a view that allows for salvation another way.

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by CC1

pelanthesaurus,

As I have said before I have no problem with the UPC evolving to codify the 3 step plan of salvation. I say that because if you really believe the 3 step plan you have no room to allow for the PCI view. The PCIers should have realized this from the get go, that their view was incompatible with the 3 step view.

It is also apparent that the PCI minority view was held by those who were much more pacifist in their championing their views than the 3 step majority. The PCIers allowed themselves to be further marginalized and eventually excluded without publicly standing up and advocating for the tolerance initially expressed in the merger agreement. Of course that would have been in vain because as I said if you really believe the 3 step view by the very nature of that belief you cannot tolerate a view that allows for salvation another way.

True, so true.

[Praxeas]

I have a problem with it because it betrays the foundation of the UPC to begin with, much like someone rewriting the constitution of the US over the objections of a group of Americans to EXCLUDE those Americans from ever being an American

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by CC1

pelanthesaurus,

As I have said before I have no problem with the UPC evolving to codify the 3 step plan of salvation. I say that because if you really believe the 3 step plan you have no room to allow for the PCI view. The PCIers should have realized this from the get go, that their view was incompatible with the 3 step view.

It is also apparent that the PCI minority view was held by those who were much more pacifist in championing their views than the 3 step majority. The PCIers allowed themselves to be further marginalized and eventually excluded without publicly standing up and advocating for the tolerance initially expressed in the merger agreement. Of course that would have been in vain because as I said if you really believe the 3 step view by the very nature of that belief you cannot tolerate a view that allows for salvation another way.

"Three Step" view evolved and became much more dogmatic in time. Up to the beginning of the doctrine of tongues as initial evidence of Spirit baptism and consequently the only way to be saved. Those, like Seymour, who articulated the belief later in his ministry that tongues was the initial evidence of the Spirit, did not see others as unsaved. That has become more and more dogmatized along the way. Point being, it's likely that the 3-stepper doctrine at the merger was far different than the breed of tongues-demanders today. The Spirit went from being a gift for mission, to being a required passport to deserve salvation.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I have a problem with it because it betrays the foundation of the UPC to begin with, much like someone rewriting the constitution of the US over the objections of a group of Americans to EXCLUDE those Americans from ever being an American

But written or not, that's where it is.

I think many feel like it's time to just move along. You know, "divide," "split," etc.. Isn't that par for the course for the pentecostal/charismatic movement?

[DAII]

Is that the pulse you are getting Jeff? Are some speaking of a coordinated split?

Initially it seemed some were/are talking of leaving quietly in trickles or creating change from within.

One would figure networks like Global would benefit if they walked or is a new option being explored?

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

But written or not, that's where it is.

I think many feel like it's time to just move along. You know, "divide," "split," etc.. Isn't that par for the course for the pentecostal/charismatic movement?

[CC1]

I wish a lib Oneness org would develop. Global is a very loosely organized ministerial association that had it's origin in Oneness but now does not make that distinction.

It would be cool to see an org. that still retained the identity of Oneness Pentecostalism without the legalism.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by DAII

Is that the pulse you are getting Jeff? Are some speaking of a coordinated split?

Initially it seemed some were/are talking of leaving quietly in trickles or creating change from within.

One would figure networks like Global would benefit if they walked or is a new option being explored?

Whoa... wait a minute. I can't go that far

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by CC1

I wish a lib Oneness org would develop. Global is a very loosely organized ministerial association that had it's origin in Oneness but now does not make that distinction.

It would be cool to see an org. that still retained the identity of Oneness Pentecostalism without the legalism.

Sigh... what's wrong with the UPCI?

Folks do the "legalism issues" their own way anyway. I mean, why create a new org for such subtle differences as you suggest. Many leaving, have more differences than just some cover-up. It's a complete paradigm shift. Besides, there already are groups like PAW and others that are what you are referring to.