We Must Rethink A Few Things

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

If you will recall how the Apostolic movement (as we know it) pulled out of the AOG in 1915 (if I recall the date) it was not over a mundane resolution that did not affect anyone's salvation as does the codified doctrine of Trinity.

The Oneness (New Issue) men that walked out of the Conference in Arkansas did not walk out until it was seen that there was ABSOLUTELY no way to further work within the structure after the doctrine of the Trinity was firmly ensconced within its creed. Even then, some still tried.

They had been preaching the Oneness message within the AOG for many months, far and wide, drawing converts to the message until at last, there was not more possible way to work within the AOG.

Their exit was a godly, gentlemanly, friendly and humble way that the gang of Tulsaites would do well to imitate. Even after their exit, they continued their efforts to reach out to their Trinitarian "bretheren" with love for decades afterwards.

And some of you talk about us Pentecostals revising history! My good friend you obviously need to go back and take Pentecostal History 101 again. When the Oneness brethren left the AOG it was NOT a friendly exit.

Lets look at some comparisons:

The AOG officially voted, making the doctrine of the trinity the official stand of the organization, thus forcing all of its members to align themselves with said doctrine if not by actual belief, certainly by affiliation.

The UPCI officially voted to allow TV advertising and broadcasting making it the official stand of the organization, thus forcing all of its members to align themselves with said stand if not by actual belief, certainly by affiliation.

The OP's (1915) took a stand for oneness doctrine and against trinitarian heresy.

The WPF has taken a stand for Doctrines of Holiness/Sanctification/Separation and against compromise

The Op's left and formed several groups each of which preached; Oneness theology, repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, and the in-filling of the Holy Ghost. They also taught Holiness/Sanctification/Separation.

The Leadership of the WPF left to form a new group whose purpose is to perpetuate the preaching of Oneness theology, repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, and the in-filling of the Holy Ghost, while maintaining a strong stand on Holiness/Sanctification/Separation.

When the OP's departed the AOG, they vehemently tried to persuade other brethren to join them, and were persecuted for doing so, and charged with being not only unethical, and power hungry, but heretical as well.

The WPF leaders and those who are following them have been accused of being unethical, power hungry, and in some cases heretical because of their Separation doctrine. (And they have not "vehemently" tried to get others to follow, they simply sent out invitations.)

The OP's exit was, as you termed it, "godly, gentlemanly, friendly and humble" exit........on their part. But it was not viewed as such from the other side. They were accused of bringing division to the "Body of Christ," and while they attempted to reach out to the "brethren" they were scandalized and cut off by those who did not agree with them doctrinally.

The WPF has in some manner, as you stated, repeated history. They have taken a stand for biblically held doctrinal beliefs, they have departed, and formed another group, they have been accused of bringing division to the "Body of Christ," and while they have consistently stated their love for and willingness to work with their "brethren," they are being scandalized by those who do not agree with them.

Respectfully Submitted

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by bishoph

And some of you talk about us Pentecostals revising history! My good friend you obviously need to go back and take Pentecostal History 101 again. When the Oneness brethren left the AOG it was NOT a friendly exit.

Lets look at some comparisons:

The AOG officially voted, making the doctrine of the trinity the official stand of the organization, thus forcing all of its members to align themselves with said doctrine if not by actual belief, certainly by affiliation.

The UPCI officially voted to allow TV advertising and broadcasting making it the official stand of the organization, thus forcing all of its members to align themselves with said stand if not by actual belief, certainly by affiliation.

The OP's (1915) took a stand for oneness doctrine and against trinitarian heresy.

The WPF has taken a stand for Doctrines of Holiness/Sanctification/Separation and against compromise

The Op's left and formed several groups each of which preached; Oneness theology, repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, and the in-filling of the Holy Ghost. They also taught Holiness/Sanctification/Separation.

The Leadership of the WPF left to form a new group whose purpose is to perpetuate the preaching of Oneness theology, repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, and the in-filling of the Holy Ghost, while maintaining a strong stand on Holiness/Sanctification/Separation.

When the OP's departed the AOG, they vehemently tried to persuade other brethren to join them, and were persecuted for doing so, and charged with being not only unethical, and power hungry, but heretical as well.

The WPF leaders and those who are following them have been accused of being unethical, power hungry, and in some cases heretical because of their Separation doctrine. (And they have not "vehemently" tried to get others to follow, they simply sent out invitations.)

The OP's exit was, as you termed it, "godly, gentlemanly, friendly and humble" exit........on their part. But it was not viewed as such from the other side. They were accused of bringing division to the "Body of Christ," and while they attempted to reach out to the "brethren" they were scandalized and cut off by those who did not agree with them doctrinally.

The WPF has in some manner, as you stated, repeated history. They have taken a stand for biblically held doctrinal beliefs, they have departed, and formed another group, they have been accused of bringing division to the "Body of Christ," and while they have consistently stated their love for and willingness to work with their "brethren," they are being scandalized by those who do not agree with them.

Respectfully Submitted

I don't understand how a secondary issue (non-salvational) is appropriate to leave the UPC over. I do realize that some will take issue with my 'secondary issue" distinction.

[Apprehended]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by bishoph

And some of you talk about us Pentecostals revising history! My good friend you obviously need to go back and take Pentecostal History 101 again. When the Oneness brethren left the AOG it was NOT a friendly exit.

This is amazing, but not surprising.

Certainly I really enjoy pentecostal history and don't mind taking a refresher, even if it is Pentecostal History 101. Meanwhile, you not only need a refresher, you need the course, for the first time.

By the most part, it was a friendly exit. There were a couple of unpleasant events, notwithstanding. One such incident occured after Stanley Frodsham, D.W. Kerr, A.C. Collins and a few others forumatled their creed including the doctrine of the Trinity to stem the tide of of the New Issue...which almost swallowed up the AOG that was not based on doctrine at the time, except for the Holy Ghost baptism and the Finished Work of Calvary as espoused by William Durham, then deceased, from Chicago.

One unpleasant incident took place in St. Louis, either in 1915 or 1916, I forget which was when one of the Trinity proponents, T.K. Leonard if I recall, strongly opposed the Oneness bretheren attempt to neutralize the Trinity statement. Recalling G.T. Haywood's paper "Voice in the Wilderness," he referred to Haywood and associates' doctrine as hay, wood and stubble all of whom have a voice in the wilderness.

Brother Haywood was so angered by the statement that he stood up for a retort, but a brother sitting next to him pulled him back down to his seat tugging on his coat tail.

Yes, there was a few ugly incidents as this. But just like I said, the exit was with gentlemen kindness, brotherly love, humility and godliness. In fact, the Oneness bretheren sought ways to stay in the AOG,

When the Trinity creed was adopted in that meeting, the Oneness brethren retired to the vestibule to plan their next move with the sounds of the old Trinity Doxology ringing in their ears from the auditorium.

Many Oneness preachers continued preaching for the AOG for decades to come, including Howard Goss who was honored in the church he (AOG) started in Hot Springs right up until he died.

So, I would suggest that you study the Pentecostal History for yourself. You will see a much different picture than you currently have.

Lets look at some comparisons:

The AOG officially voted, making the doctrine of the trinity the official stand of the organization, thus forcing all of its members to align themselves with said doctrine if not by actual belief, certainly by affiliation.

Trinity vs Oneness is a salvation issue.

The UPCI officially voted to allow TV advertising and broadcasting making it the official stand of the organization, thus forcing all of its members to align themselves with said stand if not by actual belief, certainly by affiliation.

Which affilation is not a salvation issue. No one is forced to advertise on t.v. Trinity vs. Oneness IS a salvation issue.

The OP's (1915) took a stand for oneness doctrine and against trinitarian heresy.

Thank God!

The WPF has taken a stand for Doctrines of Holiness/Sanctification/Separation and against compromise

That's silly. There was no resolution proposed or passed that called upon any of you to compromise.

The Op's left and formed several groups each of which preached; Oneness theology, repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, and the in-filling of the Holy Ghost. They also taught Holiness/Sanctification/Separation.

Good.

The Leadership of the WPF left to form a new group whose purpose is to perpetuate the preaching of Oneness theology, repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, and the in-filling of the Holy Ghost, while maintaining a strong stand on Holiness/Sanctification/Separation.

Are you telling me that the Word of God is so impotent that a new denomination must be started in order to take a strong stand on these matters? That is outrageously silly.

When the OP's departed the AOG, they vehemently tried to persuade other brethren to join them, and were persecuted for doing so, and charged with being not only unethical, and power hungry, but heretical as well.

A charge???

Only a charge?

Well, let me cry a river of tears over a CHARGE.

Why don't these poor lil ol' persecuted men just grow up and not take an offense of a stupid charge?

The WPF leaders and those who are following them have been accused of being unethical, power hungry, and in some cases heretical because of their Separation doctrine. (And they have not "vehemently" tried to get others to follow, they simply sent out invitations.)

Accused? Is it true? If not, forget it. If so, then repent. Seems simple enough to me.

The OP's exit was, as you termed it, "godly, gentlemanly, friendly and humble" exit........on their part. But it was not viewed as such from the other side. They were accused of bringing division to the "Body of Christ," and while they attempted to reach out to the "brethren" they were scandalized and cut off by those who did not agree with them doctrinally.

Bringing division is the way I see it. If there was no division, why did they make such a showmanship grand exit?

The WPF has in some manner, as you stated, repeated history. They have taken a stand for biblically held doctrinal beliefs, they have departed, and formed another group, they have been accused of bringing division to the "Body of Christ," and while they have consistently stated their love for and willingness to work with their "brethren," they are being scandalized by those who do not agree with them.

Respectfully Submitted

And so...

They got their little feelings hurt over a charge, got offended and saw that their only option is to SPLIT, being unable to uphold the blood stained banner among others who do not split a hair the exact same way as they would like for it to be split.

So, let's just amputate the body of Christ. Shall we begin with the head?

[Apprehended]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

I don't understand how a secondary issue (non-salvational) is appropriate to leave the UPC over. I do realize that some will take issue with my 'secondary issue" distinction.

Amen, R.D.

That's the way I see it too.

Now concerning your "secondary issue," we might need to open a thread on that subject...

I don't know if I can hold my own with you. You seem to be very bright. But, at least we can

[Apprehended]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

I also want to point out that the SPIRIT involved in a SPLIT is as ugly, bloody, murderous, and as ungodly as anything can be. I've seen too many church splits to not KNOW what I am talking about.

This Tulsa gang that chooses to walk this road may well do so but they must KNOW that the SPIRIT of the the SPLIT will also walk with them, RIGHT INTO THEIR OWN CHURCHES.

Many of these men are DESTINED to wring their hands while walking the floor at night as they watch with horror as their own churches split, while unable to control it or do anything about it. While they are wringing their hands lamenting the SPLIT happening in their own church, let them then REMEMBER that it is the SPIRIT of the split that they had close FELLOWSHIP with from the beginning.

The core of the spirit of the SPLIT IS MURDER. According to Jude, it is the WAY OF CAIN.

So, who wants to talk about HOLINESS?

I just thought that this was worth repeating even though I do not see anyone willing to say "amen," or to say, "you're nuts" either. I might even agree with the "you're nuts" part if they said it in a nice way.

But nuts or not nuts, what I said above, will come to pass because I know the spirit behind this terrible travesty. That's why I thought the post was worth repeating.

[TalkLady]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

When the sin of politics enter into the org, it ceases to be divine. The bible speaks that we are to be subject one to another. I believe that means that those that are close to us should be the ones we subject ourselves to and be accountable to. They are the ones that know us in our private and personal life, and can be more objective in speaking words of restoration and reconciliation, and at times words of rebuke and correction to us when we need it. A DS that may only know your name will not be a good person to be holding you accountable.


I could also add to the above that there are times that the System is defective, as it is in TN, and accountability becomes subjective to who you know.

GREAT POST, STMATTHEW. You hit the nail on the head!!!

[TalkLady]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

The funny thing is, the only spirit I have seen coming from the Tulsa deal IS one of men that simply feel they must follow their convictions and separate, because to do otherwise could ........ the future generation. The Ugly Spirit seems, for the most part, to be coming from those that venomously judge them to hell for following those convictions.

ANOTHER GREAT POST...I may not agree with everything about the "Tulsa Group" but I agree with this post.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

The funny thing is, the only spirit I have seen coming from the Tulsa deal IS one of men that simply feel they must follow their convictions and separate, because to do otherwise could ........ the future generation. The Ugly Spirit seems, for the most part, to be coming from those that venomously judge them to hell for following those convictions.

The many steps of questionable ethics taken by the "Tulsa men" in announcing and organizing is very problematic. And I'm being charitable when I say "questionable ethics." Some may say that "the end justifies the means," and that has been the rallying cry of those who have spent the last 50 years trying to drag the UPC in their own direction.

Now, for the first time, the UPC stood against those who were forcing their changes upon the rest of the organization and "the other side" has thrown their hands in the air and cried "No Fair!"

As far as "The Ugly Spirit" is concerned... well, deleted those examples because they are very ugly and I've mentioned it before. As so many others have said, those who already made up their minds (as you appear to have) won't be swayed by the facts.

And my attempts to prove my argument will probably only result in you banning yourself, and I would miss the sound of your voice. So, as they say, "Carry on."

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

I just thought that this was worth repeating even though I do not see anyone willing to say "amen," or to say, "you're nuts" either. I might even agree with the "you're nuts" part if they said it in a nice way.

But nuts or not nuts, what I said above, will come to pass because I know the spirit behind this terrible travesty. That's why I thought the post was worth repeating.

Proverbs 11:29 "He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart."

[Todd]

[QUOTE=Apprehended;374216]

This is amazing, but not surprising.

Certainly I really enjoy pentecostal history and don't mind taking a refresher, even if it is Pentecostal History 101. Meanwhile, you not only need a refresher, you need the course, for the first time.

By the most part, it was a friendly exit. There were a couple of unpleasant events, notwithstanding. One such incident occured after Stanley Frodsham, D.W. Kerr, A.C. Collins and a few others forumatled their creed including the doctrine of the Trinity to stem the tide of of the New Issue...which almost swallowed up the AOG that was not based on doctrine at the time, except for the Holy Ghost baptism and the Finished Work of Calvary as espoused by William Durham, then deceased, from Chicago.

One unpleasant incident took place in St. Louis, either in 1915 or 1916, I forget which was when one of the Trinity proponents, T.K. Leonard if I recall, strongly opposed the Oneness bretheren attempt to neutralize the Trinity statement. Recalling G.T. Haywood's paper "Voice in the Wilderness," he referred to Haywood and associates' doctrine as hay, wood and stubble all of whom have a voice in the wilderness.

Brother Haywood was so angered by the statement that he stood up for a retort, but a brother sitting next to him pulled him back down to his seat tugging on his coat tail.

Yes, there was a few ugly incidents as this. But just like I said, the exit was with gentlemen kindness, brotherly love, humility and godliness. In fact, the Oneness bretheren sought ways to stay in the AOG,

When the Trinity creed was adopted in that meeting, the Oneness brethren retired to the vestibule to plan their next move with the sounds of the old Trinity Doxology ringing in their ears from the auditorium.

Many Oneness preachers continued preaching for the AOG for decades to come, including Howard Goss who was honored in the church he (AOG) started in Hot Springs right up until he died.

So, I would suggest that you study the Pentecostal History for yourself. You will see a much different picture than you currently have.



Trinity vs Oneness is a salvation issue.



Which affilation is not a salvation issue. No one is forced to advertise on t.v. Trinity vs. Oneness IS a salvation issue.



Thank God!



That's silly. There was no resolution proposed or passed that called upon any of you to compromise.



Good.



Are you telling me that the Word of God is so impotent that a new denomination must be started in order to take a strong stand on these matters? That is outrageously silly.



A charge???

Only a charge?

Well, let me cry a river of tears over a CHARGE.

Why don't these poor lil ol' persecuted men just grow up and not take an offense of a stupid charge?



Accused? Is it true? If not, forget it. If so, then repent. Seems simple enough to me.



Bringing division is the way I see it. If there was no division, why did they make such a showmanship grand exit?



And so...

They got their little feelings hurt over a charge, got offended and saw that their only option is to SPLIT, being unable to uphold the blood stained banner among others who do not split a hair the exact same way as they would like for it to be split.

So, let's just amputate the body of Christ. Shall we begin with the head?

Your spirit is really starting to show right there toward the end.

God. please save us all!!