Reading Fudge's Book Again

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Felicity

It's interesting that I read the book through the first time never thinking about motive or agenda. But then after that point was made over and over and drilled into my head a million times and I went back and reviewed parts of the book then I could see that there might have been some bias.

Regardless, the book is valuable! Very! I don't know if a book recording the OP movement could be written without some sort of bias on the part of the author but regardless I wish there were more written and hope there will be.

One thing about the book that impressed me was that what we call the "One-step" plan of salvation was (and still is in my opinion) a valid belief among those who call themselves Oneness Pentecostal or Apostolic. Many (we really don't know the actual number) ministers, preachers, and teachers (including officials of the UPC) believed and taught that a person is saved/justified/born again prior to water baptism and Spirit baptism. This was also taught in some UPC Bible Schools and was a valid viewpoint to be expressed in the Pentecostal Herald. Not all Apostolics are "three-steppers." Some are "one-steppers."

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Sam

One thing about the book that impressed me was that what we call the "One-step" plan of salvation was (and still is in my opinion) a valid belief among those who call themselves Oneness Pentecostal or Apostolic. Many (we really don't know the actual number) ministers, preachers, and teachers (including officials of the UPC) believed and taught that a person is saved/justified/born again prior to water baptism and Spirit baptism. This was also taught in some UPC Bible Schools and was a valid viewpoint to be expressed in the Pentecostal Herald. Not all Apostolics are "three-steppers." Some are "one-steppers."

And some "out-of-steppers!"

[Sam]

I think the only folks I've heard use the terms "three-stepper" and "one-stepper" were folks on these forums. To your knowledge, have those terms ever been in general use among Apostolics?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

And some "out-of-steppers!"

Now, Elder, I think there are or have been some folks you thought highly of who were what we would call "one-steppers." Would you care to name some of them?

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Sam

I think the only folks I've heard use the terms "three-stepper" and "one-stepper" were folks on these forums. To your knowledge, have those terms ever been in general use among Apostolics?

NOPE I have never heard that. I did see in a tract once three-steps. I didn't believe it then and don't now. I believe there are 3 ingredients to the NT salvation NOT step per se.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Barb,

What is the name of the book by Bro Arnold? I'd like to read it.

Apostolic History Outline by Bro. Marvin Arnold...not sure if they are still available at this site, by they used to have them on the ALJC website.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Sam

I think the only folks I've heard use the terms "three-stepper" and "one-stepper" were folks on these forums. To your knowledge, have those terms ever been in general use among Apostolics?

Not that I ever heard of...

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Sam

Now, Elder, I think there are or have been some folks you thought highly of who were what we would call "one-steppers." Would you care to name some of them?

Bump for Bro. Epley

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Sam

Bump for Bro. Epley

Sam in the country I was raised there were PCI roots however a great number of folks did believe a person was saved at repentance and that baptism did not remit sin and the Holy Ghost was extra power but not essential. I fussed with them as a boy then fought them as a young preacher.Everyone had a relative or friend that was saved without obeying the gospel I NEVER believed that. I just thought most of them were good folks but ignorant. Many were illiterate.

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Light

....There has NEVER been a time in history that there hasn't been a Acts 2:38 preacher preaching this wonderful 3 step message. From the day of Pentecost to this very day.

This is simply not true. I grew up under the late Rev. Marvin M. Arnold. There was no one who had a greater passion to prove what you just offered to be true. He failed to find even a single witness, prior to preachers of the 20th century, who taught the water and spirit interpretation of the new birth as it is taught today in Oneness Pentecostalism.

Haywood, Ewart and others knew they were preaching something brand new and readily admitted this in their writings. In fact, Haywood's "progressive light doctrine" and Urshan's "kingdom of heaven vs kingdom of God" teaching were were developed to support the "newly revealed" position on salvation.

Please give us the proof of your statement. Thanks.