The problem with the UPCI

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

And can nothing good come of all this?

We now have more Oneness Pentecostal organizations on the scene. We now have people looking at the purpose of organizations (not as many as I would hope, but it is there...)

All the people were in one place, and God wanted them to move on and out, so he caused a scandal and a rift and they moved on and out, and the rest is history (speaking of Babel).

All the church was in Jerusalem. God wanted them to move on and out. So He allowed persecution to get them off their butts and get with it.

Perhaps God doesn't want one 'monolithic mothership' among Oneness Pentecostals.

How many Baptist orgs are there? tons. And are not Baptist churches ubiquitous across the land?

Just wondering out loud here.

The Oneness organizations are not growing larger with souls. Instead they are simply getting smaller as they divide.

Having more and smaller Oneness Organizations is not success

As One organization (the UPCI) we did not circle the wagons in Missouri. We were planting churches across the nation and sending missionaries out to the world.

The comparison to a church stuck in Jerusalem is really off

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The Oneness organizations are not growing larger with souls. Instead they are simply getting smaller as they divide.

Having more and smaller Oneness Organizations is not success

As One organization (the UPCI) we did not circle the wagons in Missouri. We were planting churches across the nation and sending missionaries out to the world.

The comparison to a church stuck in Jerusalem is really off

In other words, we're repeating the history of the holiness movement in the late 19th century.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

In other words, we're repeating the history of the holiness movement in the late 19th century.

I wouldn't know.

However can anyone answer why the 1 steppers were content to be a part of this organization and not force the 3 steppers to change but not vice versa?

Even pastors who did not believe Standards were a heaven or hell issue were content to be organized and keep doing the standards bit before that "fateful resolution" tried to force people to hand their brains over to something they could not

[BeenThinkin]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Back to the DeQincy Story!

When Pastor Bennet died, the church was rocked. As soon as he passed, people started lining up to his heir as he had none. Well all the sudden this lady steps forward with the will and says she is his wife. LOL.

Total train wreck. No one saw it comeing (except my grandfather who was already dead).

Let me tell you that it was pure pandimonium. and the church was already filled with factions and after that it just got worse.

They couldnt come to any kind of agreement on who the next pastor would be.

Papa George wen there as interum to handle the transition. Ive already talked about his gentlness and kindness. But there was iron in the man too!

After several preachers were tried out, they would vote and the vote would be split. one side would find out what the other was doing, and they would vote against that side.

Papa George got tired of it. He brought in David Hennigan and then when he called the vote, he told them the vote would be held the morning after an all night prayer meeting. He gave them the time to be at the church the night before, and he told them the doors would be locked at a certain point. Anyone not in the building when the doors were locked would not vote! LOL

He also walked around the prayer meeting and made sure everyone was praying. Ive heard (cannot verify) that he also threatend those that were there but not praying that they wouldnt be allowed to vote!

Pastor Hennigan won the election with a BIG majority. He went on to be a fanstastic pastor and the church was greatly blessed.

I preached for Elder Bennett after his health started failing. Can see him now slowly going to the platform with his head shaking slightly, from side to side. He was a great man and an honorable man! And in earlier days, when questioned by the board about the lady, he informed them there was nothing immoral going on! Of course not, he was right, he was married to her.

Great memories.

Been Thinkin

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I wouldn't know.

However can anyone answer why the 1 steppers were content to be a part of this organization and not force the 3 steppers to change but not vice versa?

Is it really all that simple?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Is it really all that simple?

It was at the merger...what changed?
Attitudes?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

It was at the merger...what changed?
Attitudes?

No, I mean is the reality really as simple as 'the 1 steppers were content and happy and didn't require the others to change but the 3 steppers were the opposite'?

I think i mentioned in the original post about 'family dynasties'. I've noticed among OPs the same family connections keep popping up in regard to various issues... which makes me think maybe there is more to the schisms than just doctrinal issues.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

No, I mean is the reality really as simple as 'the 1 steppers were content and happy and didn't require the others to change but the 3 steppers were the opposite'?

I think i mentioned in the original post about 'family dynasties'. I've noticed among OPs the same family connections keep popping up in regard to various issues... which makes me think maybe there is more to the schisms than just doctrinal issues.

Yes it is that simple. What names pop up with regards to trying to force the entire organization to change to one way or the other or be forced out? Are they One steppers or three?

And if there is more to the schism than just doctrine, doesn't that fit in with what I said about attitudes?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yes it is that simple. What names pop up with regards to trying to force the entire organization to change to one way or the other or be forced out? Are they One steppers or three?

And if there is more to the schism than just doctrine, doesn't that fit in with what I said about attitudes?

I admit I don't know all the details (it's got kind of a soap opera feel to me, honestly). I do see some serious doctrinal differences amongst those who are members of the UPC, and many have left due to those differences as well as 'which way the winds seem to be blowing' in Hazelwood.

However, I don't think it's all reducible to '2 steppers = bad, 1 steppers good' in regards to 'attitudes'.

I do notice that '1 stepper doctrine' is not as 'divisive' in regards to the rest of christendom... maybe that plays a part? Or maybe there are people who came into the UPC from other denominational backgrounds and brought some baggage with them?

I dunno.

I do know however that I haven't seen any kind of a 'history of the movement' that wasn't rife with bias, at least not since 'Phenomenon of Pentecost' at least... Fudge's bias is too blatant.

Maybe Ferd and Epley (and you?) and some of the others can put together a basic timeline of who, what, when, where, and why (as they see it) so folks can get a 'big picture' view of things.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I admit I don't know all the details (it's got kind of a soap opera feel to me, honestly). I do see some serious doctrinal differences amongst those who are members of the UPC, and many have left due to those differences as well as 'which way the winds seem to be blowing' in Hazelwood.

However, I don't think it's all reducible to '2 steppers = bad, 1 steppers good' in regards to 'attitudes'.

I do notice that '1 stepper doctrine' is not as 'divisive' in regards to the rest of christendom... maybe that plays a part? Or maybe there are people who came into the UPC from other denominational backgrounds and brought some baggage with them?

I dunno.

I do know however that I haven't seen any kind of a 'history of the movement' that wasn't rife with bias, at least not since 'Phenomenon of Pentecost' at least... Fudge's bias is too blatant.

Maybe Ferd and Epley (and you?) and some of the others can put together a basic timeline of who, what, when, where, and why (as they see it) so folks can get a 'big picture' view of things.

But there was a time when folks weren't leaving, at least not noticeably.

What changed?