Pentecostal Herald Articles

[Sam]

I've sent this out as an email and posted it on another forum:

Attached are a couple of pdf files.

One is the December 1945 issue of The Pentecostal Herald. That was the first issue after the formation of the United Pentecostal Church in 1945.
It has a few pages missing but that's the way I received it from the PPH in pdf format.

The other is pages 54-59 of the December 2009 issue, which is the latest issue.
Those pages contain Bro. Ken Haney's sermon which he delivered at the recent General Conference.
The sermon is titled "The Seven Locks of the Apostolic Church."
He takes the 7 locks of Samson, who judged/pastored Israel around 1064-1049 BC and compares them with "an essential component of our church today."


One thing I wanted to point out is the difference between how Bro. Haney talked about the new birth (lock number 2) and the way the subject was addressed in the 1945 magazine.
In 2009, Bro. Haney said that he preaches that water baptism is essential for salvation just like the Roman Catholic Church says it is and that viewpoint is presented as "an essential component" of the UPC.
In the 1945 issue, page 6 of the Herald but page 4 of the file, in the article "Our Paper, The Pentecostal Herald" Bro. Oscar Vouga says:
"Articles on such subjects as The
New Birth, will be accepted, whether
they teach that the new birth takes place
before baptism in water and Spirit, or
that the new birth consists of baptism
of water and Spirit....."

When the UPC was originally formed in 1945 two organizations merged.
One was the Pentecostal Church Incorporated (PCI) and the other was the Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ (PAJC).
Some thought the merger could never happen because of differences of belief on how a person is saved or born again.
The PCI doctrine was that a person is saved or born again by faith and then that salvation experience can be followed up by water and/or Spirit baptism.
This viewpoint accepts all those who have believed in Jesus Christ as Savior as brothers and sisters in the family of God whether they are ever baptized in water and in the Spirit or not.
The PAJC doctrine was that a person is not saved or born again until after repentance, water baptism and Spirit baptism.
This viewpoint does not accept anyone as a brother or sister until all three steps --repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism-- have been completed.
The PCI viewpoint reflected what was historically taught as Apostolic or Pentecostal doctrine from the time of the Holy Ghost out pouring in the late 1800's and early 1900's until the merger.
The PAJC viewpoint reflected a later Apostolic or Pentecostal doctrine which had been influenced by the Roman Catholics and Campbellites.
A two-sentence "Fundamental Doctrine" statement was adopted in 1945 which was ambiguous enough that both groups could agree to it and the merger was completed.
The second sentence of the Fundamental Doctrine statement required all members to "not contend for their different views to the disunity of the body."
Over the years those who held to the PCI viewpoint were marginalized, trivialized, demonized and ostracized until now it seems that the PAJC viewpoint is the prevailing public opinion of the UPC.
I use the term prevailing public opinion because I am sure there are many who hold to the PCI viewpoint but are hesitant to let it be known because of peer pressure by fellow ministers and members.

Note: there is only one pdf file attached to this post. I did send out two attachments by email and did attach both attachments in the other forum but the article in the December 2009 Herald is too large to attach here. The reference is to Bro. Haney's General Conference sermon which some of you have if you have the December Herald.

[U376977]

Sam, you write,
"The PAJC viewpoint reflected a later Apostolic or Pentecostal doctrine which had been influenced by the Roman Catholics and Campbellites."

How was it "influenced" by the RC and Campbellites? I'm sure you know the history, I don't so I'm just asking.

[pelathais]

I liked the jewelry ad on page 14.

[Kim Komando]

In Haney's remarks about the lock #2 he has the audacity to include Howard Goss as if he would have been in his amen corner as the GS contended on s view on the New Birth and as if this was the view Goss debated with trinitarians about.

The appeal to Goss on the topic of the New Birth is perhaps the most disingenous a ploy I have seen by a GS ever.

Yes, it is as close to lie as they come.

Elder Haney, Howard Goss did not share or contend for the New Birth view you call an "apostolic lock". That is an apostolic farce.

[Kim Komando]

While in 2009, the GS in the Herald appeals to the Catholic church on the essentiality of water baptism to be saved -

Howard Goss, first General Superintendent of the UPC, stated in an PH article that appeared on pages 6 and 10 of the June 1954 Pentecostal Herald:

The blood and power of the Lord Jesus is the only source of regeneration or the New Birth. Water baptism alone has no power to remit sins, else we could baptize infants as do the Catholics. The Roman Catholic teaches regeneration by water baptism, but it is not according to the Word of God. A candidate for baptism in water should be baptized BECAUSE THE BLOOD has cleansed, remitted, forgiven his sins, and not in order to get them remitted, as WATER ALONE CANNOT WASH AWAY SINS.

The old hymn goes: What can wash away my sins,Nothing but the Blood of Jesus.

[Nitehawk013]

You know...it could be that in the almost 65 years since the formation of the organization men actually learned a bit more and know that indeed you must be baptized to be saved. No offense to Goss and others from 65 years ago, but maybe they just didn't have it all figured out yet.

It's pretty clear the only people that have a problem with Haney's sermon are those who are of the anti-baptismal necessity crowd. You have to oppose it because you don't want it to be true.

[Kim Komando]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

You know...it could be that in the almost 65 years since the formation of the organization men actually learned a bit more and know that indeed you must be baptized to be saved. No offense to Goss and others from 65 years ago, but maybe they just didn't have it all figured out yet.

It's pretty clear the only people that have a problem with Haney's sermon are those who are of the anti-baptismal necessity crowd. You have to oppose it because you don't want it to be true.

The arrogance of your statement is a backhand to the spirit and agreement of the merger.

While some of the same group champion a fictional unbroken chain of Apostolic succession others/or even the same now offer a version of Apostolic Darwinism.

As the present day counterfeits erect a museum to Oneness Pentcostal memorializing its birth in the 20th century, it is fascinating to hear the Apostolic curators point to the Apostolic Pentecostal Cromagnons and Neanderthals like Goss, Gurley, Yadon, Greer and even AD Urshan, Haywood, and Ewart and say "our truth evolved from these primitive species".

Apostolic Arrogance.

[Nitehawk013]

What you call arrogance I call common sense.

You can't really genuinely believe that men 65 years ago, with limited resources and education, had it completely figured out and that ther eis nothing to learn today can you? Really?

People know more today and have things more figured out today in many many cases. To not believe or understand that you must hold residence under a rock.

[Justin]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

What you call arrogance I call common sense.

You can't really genuinely believe that men 65 years ago, with limited resources and education, had it completely figured out and that ther eis nothing to learn today can you? Really?

People know more today and have things more figured out today in many many cases. To not believe or understand that you must hold residence under a rock.

In my opinion, this is why people and ministers are leaving the UPCi due to it's man made traditions which have been taught as "old paths".

[missourimary]

Originally Posted by Brother David

I liked the jewelry ad on page 14.

I was a bit surprised and very amused at that and the attention given to Christmas themes in the first Herald.

I also enjoyed the articles on "Hard Preaching" and the half that exists of the "Backsliders" columns. Maybe the UPCI as a whole has learned some things over the years, but some Apostolics would do well to recommit to the simple statements made in the first issue of the Herald 63 years ago.