The problem with the UPCI

[Esaias]

On the Yadon thread, I found this post -

Originally Posted by Baron1710

I have been gone from the UPC since shortly after the fallout from this sermon so I have no desire to tear down the organization. I do find it sad that so many of us were forced out by he hardliners when we would have been happy to stay but for the attitude that we must all believe the same on every passage and every issue.

The UPC was formed by a merger of two groups, the PCI and the PAJC. Both groups were Oneness, both were Pentecostal, and both believed in the necessity of baptism in the name of Jesus. They differed however in how they understood water baptism and Spirit baptism as relating to the new birth mentioned in John 3:5. The PAJC believed John 3:5 was referring to water baptism and spirit baptism, and thus the two baptisms were equated with regeneration and the new birth (and thus were essentials, without which a person would not be saved). The PCI, although believing in the necesity of both baptisms, did not make the same connection to the new birth that the PAJC did. As a result, the merger involved a compromise, a statement of faith asserting justification equated with repentance, and 'full salvation' as including water baptism in Jesus name and the Pentecostal experience.

Over time, the differences between the two beliefs grew until today.

Now, repeating the quote -

Originally Posted by Baron1710

I have been gone from the UPC since shortly after the fallout from this sermon so I have no desire to tear down the organization. I do find it sad that so many of us were forced out by he hardliners when we would have been happy to stay but for the attitude that we must all believe the same on every passage and every issue.

The PCI-style members have complained often that they are being 'forced out' by 'hardliners' (ie, the PAJC-style believers). What is interesting is it seems as if the PAJC-style believers are greater in number than the PCI-style believers. So I ask my first question:

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

Now, the Affirmation statement had to do with what?

I (ministers name), do hereby declare that I believe and embrace the fundamental Doctrine as stated in

the Articles of faith as set forth in the Manual of the United Pentecostal Church International.

I also believe and embrace the holiness standards of the United Pentecostal Church International as set

forth in said articles of Faith, and I pledge to practice, preach, and teach the same.


_____________________________________

Signature


____________________________________

Date

Yet this has created a humongous uproar in the UPCI, so much that the result has been dissension, dissimulation, schism, defections, etc etc etc.

I see nothing in the Affirmation Statement that would exclude any PCI-type member, nor any PAJC-type member. So why the hubbub?

Apparently, many PCI-types have felt the Affirmation Statement was somehow directed against them.

Also, many felt the Statement was directed against those ministers who had tv's, and/or who did not teach against having tv's or watching tv.

And of course there were some who felt that the need for the Affirmation Statement (especially every two years) was a clear signal the org was grasping at straws and having 'control issues'. Much like when an employer begins minute surveillance of employees, they feel the boss doesn't trust them, so why work there?

So there are several groups vying for control - the PCI and the PAJC groups, the pro-tv and the anti-tv group, and the pro-AS and the anti-AS group.

(I suspect, but cannot prove, that much of this also comes down to various family 'dynasties' inside the org vying for control... but that's another topic.)

So what is the real problem with the UPCI?

Again, the quote -

Originally Posted by Baron1710

I have been gone from the UPC since shortly after the fallout from this sermon so I have no desire to tear down the organization. I do find it sad that so many of us were forced out by he hardliners when we would have been happy to stay but for the attitude that we must all believe the same on every passage and every issue.

Notice the bolded part (bolded by me in all instances).

Baron, and obviously many others, believe that 'the attitude we must all believe the same thing on every passage and every issue' is a bad thing, destructive to unity, and rather unchristian.

But consider:

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. (1 cor 1:10)


There are quite a few people who do not seem to think that the apostle's admonition is something to be worked towards, let alone something to be attained. And, because people are people and often enough will not change their minds about what they preach and believe, the quest for apostolic doctrinal unity will necessarily produce separation.

The Bible teaches we should be united in doctrine, faith, and practice, preaching and teaching. Not everyone will agree. Therefore, any attempt - ANY attempt - to bring about such unity must necessarily bring division.

The UPCI was formed out of a compromise merger between two groups who were not perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement, speaking the same thing. It was a noble attempt at unity, for sure, but doomed to failure from the beginning.

So this brings me to my second question:

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

[Originalist]

I read this thread right after listening to the below message concerning the civil war within the UPCI.

He gets side tracked on abortion for a moment, but it is still worth the listen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbE1dhHrZCo

[Esaias]

BTW, I was not speaking directly to the situation that developed with brother Yadon. I do not know him and don't know what all went on with that, and besides there's another thread on that anyway.

I am simply asking:

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

And,

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Esaias

BTW, I was not speaking directly to the situation that developed with brother Yadon. I do not know him and don't know what all went on with that, and besides there's another thread on that anyway.

I am simply asking:

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

And,

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

Can someone link me to the Yadon thread? I'd be interested to know what went on.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Can someone link me to the Yadon thread? I'd be interested to know what went on.

Where have you been, man?????!!!



http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ad.php?t=44517

[houston]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

The more vocal crowd does not a majority make.

Many are closet PCI. They do not vocalize it because the hardliners will cut them to pieces and feed them to wolves.

*laughs*

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Where have you been, man?????!!!



http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ad.php?t=44517

Forgive me, but somehow i totally missed this thread until now. DUH!!! A friend from the Seminary sent me the message and asked me to listen to it.

[kclee4jc]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The UPCI was formed out of a compromise merger between two groups who were not perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement, speaking the same thing. It was a noble attempt at unity, for sure, but doomed to failure from the beginning.

my thoughts exactly!

[Esaias]

If I recall correctly Alexander Campbell was a Baptist minister. He developed a soteriology regarding baptism that would be rejected by Baptists. Thus, the 'Campbellites' had to separate from the Baptists. Now suppose instead the Baptists and Campbellites 'joined together'. They certainly could agree on many things, including the importance of baptism, and even that baptism is a necessary commandment of the Lord that is to be obeyed. But their union would never last, because the Campbellites believed baptism is the event in which remission of sins is received, and further that one being baptised must believe they are being baptised IN ORDER TO receive remission of sins. Baptists of course hold to a different view, that baptism is the public testimony that one HAS RECEIVED ALREADY the remission of their sins.

The two could never continue in unity. In fact they didn't. The Campbellites separated and today they are known as the Churches of Christ, the Disciples of Christ, and the Christian Churches (names of their non-denominational denominations).

The union of the PCI and the PAJC has lasted longer than the Campbellites and the Baptists (much longer, in fact), even though the differences are parallel between the two groups of movements.

Perhaps it would be better for the UPCI be united on matters of doctrine, not on matters of organizational or missional purpose.

And I'm stil linterested in hearing a response to my question:

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

On the Yadon thread, I found this post -




The UPC was formed by a merger of two groups, the PCI and the PAJC. Both groups were Oneness, both were Pentecostal, and both believed in the necessity of baptism in the name of Jesus. They differed however in how they understood water baptism and Spirit baptism as relating to the new birth mentioned in John 3:5. The PAJC believed John 3:5 was referring to water baptism and spirit baptism, and thus the two baptisms were equated with regeneration and the new birth (and thus were essentials, without which a person would not be saved). The PCI, although believing in the necesity of both baptisms, did not make the same connection to the new birth that the PAJC did. As a result, the merger involved a compromise, a statement of faith asserting justification equated with repentance, and 'full salvation' as including water baptism in Jesus name and the Pentecostal experience.

Over time, the differences between the two beliefs grew until today.

Now, repeating the quote -



The PCI-style members have complained often that they are being 'forced out' by 'hardliners' (ie, the PAJC-style believers). What is interesting is it seems as if the PAJC-style believers are greater in number than the PCI-style believers. So I ask my first question:

Doesn't this indicate the PAJC part has had the greater impact and greater success evangelistically? Does it not indicate the PCI part to be dwindling in influence and therefore importance within the organization? (I do not mean importance in the larger scheme of things, but I mean within the organization itself.)

Now, the Affirmation statement had to do with what?



Yet this has created a humongous uproar in the UPCI, so much that the result has been dissension, dissimulation, schism, defections, etc etc etc.

I see nothing in the Affirmation Statement that would exclude any PCI-type member, nor any PAJC-type member. So why the hubbub?

Apparently, many PCI-types have felt the Affirmation Statement was somehow directed against them.

Also, many felt the Statement was directed against those ministers who had tv's, and/or who did not teach against having tv's or watching tv.

And of course there were some who felt that the need for the Affirmation Statement (especially every two years) was a clear signal the org was grasping at straws and having 'control issues'. Much like when an employer begins minute surveillance of employees, they feel the boss doesn't trust them, so why work there?

So there are several groups vying for control - the PCI and the PAJC groups, the pro-tv and the anti-tv group, and the pro-AS and the anti-AS group.

(I suspect, but cannot prove, that much of this also comes down to various family 'dynasties' inside the org vying for control... but that's another topic.)

So what is the real problem with the UPCI?

Again, the quote -



Notice the bolded part (bolded by me in all instances).

Baron, and obviously many others, believe that 'the attitude we must all believe the same thing on every passage and every issue' is a bad thing, destructive to unity, and rather unchristian.

But consider:

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. (1 cor 1:10)


There are quite a few people who do not seem to think that the apostle's admonition is something to be worked towards, let alone something to be attained. And, because people are people and often enough will not change their minds about what they preach and believe, the quest for apostolic doctrinal unity will necessarily produce separation.

The Bible teaches we should be united in doctrine, faith, and practice, preaching and teaching. Not everyone will agree. Therefore, any attempt - ANY attempt - to bring about such unity must necessarily bring division.

The UPCI was formed out of a compromise merger between two groups who were not perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement, speaking the same thing. It was a noble attempt at unity, for sure, but doomed to failure from the beginning.

So this brings me to my second question:

Should Christians pursue doctrinal, Biblical unity? Or should we be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator, and base our unity on that? (Keeping in mind the injunction of Ephesians 4:1-13 to keep the unity of the Spirit until we come into the unity of the faith.)

Great thread and post, Esaias!

As to your question - NO, we should not be content to find the lowest common (acceptable) denominator and base our unity on that!

We should follow and obey the Word - "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." (1 cor 1:10)

Aside from simply loving people because we have compassion, I don't buy into the notion of singing Kumbya with every wind of doctrine.

You are exactly spot on when you say - the quest for apostolic doctrinal unity will necessarily produce separation.