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

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

modern backsliders calling themselves adherents of the "PCI" doctrine.

Guess I'm wondering exactly who you are referring to here? Don't need names -- just an idea of who these modern backsliders might be.

In the UPC? Out of the UPC? Others?

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by Ronzo

I think I need to change my tagline again to 'pathetic backslider'

Personally, I thought "slack-jawed compromiser" was a more picturesque term.

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

Personally, I thought "slack-jawed compromiser" was a more picturesque term.

Will do...


Thanks, Your Royal Legalismship.

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Guess I'm wondering exactly who you are referring to here? Don't need names -- just an idea of who these modern backsliders might be.

In the UPC? Out of the UPC? Others?

I am talking about people who once believed the New Birth message and have gone backward.

You were always taught the PCI doctrine, so your position represents no departure or movement backward.

Furthermore, the men who preached to you were of the old fashioned variety who preached Acts 2:38 strong and straight.

Big difference between your doctrinal heritage and these johnnie-come- latelies.

[Whole Hearted]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

He was wrong, unless those baptists got baptized in Jesus Name and filled with the Holy Ghost.

Preach on Brother. Anyone not born of the water and spirit are lost.

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

I NEVER said all conservatives were this way. I said there is an element in our movement that is this way. And whlie I said last night that I didn't feel it was intentional - I have heard of many super dee duper fruitcakes who masquerade as conservatives that claim to love back-door revivals. What is that, if not spiritual abortion and murder?

Lets get real here! I believe the basic tenants of our doctrine in a huge way.
But I don't drink the Kool-Aid some would like me to. To equate my statements as an abandonment of core doctrine is a huge distortion of the truth.

As for the new breed of the PCI, I am not connected to it, don't understand it, and have never one time identified myself with it.

My question is this: Which is worse, ignoring basic doctrinal tenants, or continually adding new junk and equating it with the gospel?

Brother,

If you will notice, I did not say ALL conservatives either. I was just pointing out to Pianoman that the characterization had been made from folks on the other side of an argument from some conservative men.

I have never indicated you had departed from the core doctrine. I was drawing a parallel in the name calling arena and I was not stating that you had a part in this current discussion at all.

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by Ronzo

Will do...


Thanks, Your Royal Legalismship.

Now Ronbo,

Please let the record show that I never specifically tagged you with this term.

Do you believe anybody can be saved without baptism in Jesus Name and the infilling of the holy Ghost?

I think you used to be a strong advocate of the New Birth.

As far as I know, your pastor Rex Johnson has always preached it that way.

Have you changed your mind?

[Ferd]

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.

Dan, the point here isnt what they believed from a doctrinal view. We know and agree on what they believed.

The point is what they preached and the results of that preaching. Clearly Grear and Goss and Yadon and the others preached a message that the average layman would not know the difference between them and men like Brother Kilgore. They believed a person was saved when they repented but they preached Acts 2:38 with all their might.

The argument here is that these guys that read Fudges book and got "revalation" are preaching the same thing that the charismatics are preaching and who cares about the rest.

I can tell you for fact and Phil Jones will back this up, there is a church in DeRidder where the pastor has said they will baptize however you like. it isnt an issue and that isnt the old PCI view. period.

I no longer go to CLC.

He is not my pastor any longer.



My stance fits perfectly with what you call backlider, so label me as you wish. I really couldn't care less.

[Whole Hearted]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

The PCI men baptized 1,000's in Jesus Name, they preached Acts 2:38 as fervently as PAJC men did. They were NOT ashamed to be identified with the Jesus Name Pentecostal Movement. These johnie-come-lately folks want to be identified with anything but the Jesus Name Pentecostal movement. They have more in common with the Charismatic and Trinitarian movement. They did not teach Oneness in PRIVATE classes or baptism on the sly. They were unashamably Oneness and stressed baptism in Jesus Name. Were they correct on the necessity of baptism(FOR remission of sins) no. But they fervently preached and baptized in Jesus Name they were not ashamed.

Amen Brother

Preach on