Salvation The Pentecostal Way 1

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Matthew Shaw wrote:

>I realise that our Oneness Pentecostal history represents a diversity of
>ideas concerning salvation.  Acts 2.38 has, however, become the full
>revelation of the New Birth experience, and, not to sound too creedal,
>it has been embraced universally in the United Pentecostal Church.

Certainly the view equating water and Spirit baptism with the new birth has
become the predominant position in the UPCI. But, has this "consensus"
really been attained through doctrinal "revelation"? Were this true, we
could rejoice that true "unity of the faith" had been brought about within
the organization.

Sadly, in far too many cases, it would seem uniformity was achieved with
disregard to the conclusion to the Fundamental Doctrine: "We shall endeavor
to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come into the unity of the
faith, at the same time admonishing all brethren that they shall not
contend for their different views to the disunity of the body."

While they have a wider application, these words were written, of course,
in direct reference to "different views" regarding the new birth.

Consider a couple of excerpts from an article on the new birth, written by
a UPC minister and published in 1971:

* "I would consider a PENTECOSTAL PREACHER that doesn't believe the Holy
Ghost is the 'New Birth' as 'The Blind Leading the Blind.' Woe to you BLIND
GUIDES...."

* "I can't comprehend anyone that would want to fellowship with we HOLY
GHOST, tongue talking, "Apostolic Doctrine" Folks, that doesn't believe the
message we preach about the new BIRTH. How come some of these fellows [are]
with us anyhow? I appreciate the fact that [our] SOLID PREACHERS in the
U.P.C. are bearing down on the message."

Ministers who proclaimed Acts 2:38, but did not regard it as the new birth
(in full accordance with the Fundamental Doctrine), were thus denigrated as
blind, weak preachers who should have no place in the UPC.

Does such mockery of other Apostolic brethren reflect an effort to "keep
the unity of the Spirit until we all come into the unity of the faith"? Is
it in accord with the admonition that brethren "shall not contend for their
different views to the disunity of the body" on this very issue?

Ontario's UPC history would make an interesting case study. While the
province's early Apostolics were all united in proclaiming the Pentecostal
experience of Acts 2:38, the view equating it with the new birth was
virtually absent. Later, having gained a foothold largely through the
influence of American preachers, the new teaching was promoted so
forcefully that, according to an Apostolic leader I interviewed, nearly
half of the original UPC ministers in Ontario left the organization between
1967 and 1977. Doctrinal uniformity was achieved, but at what cost?

Differing views on the salvational significance of Acts 2:38 are more than
just interesting footnotes in Apostolic history. They are a present-day
reality.

Looking beyond the UPCI to the broader Apostolic movement, we find not only
more moderate positions on salvation, but also more rigid positions.
Doctrinal consensus, even within a large organization such as the UPCI,
cannot necessarily be regarded as the authoritative voice of the Spirit.

For example, the world's largest organization espousing Oneness views is
apparently the True Jesus Church. This church teaches that water and Spirit
baptism are essential to salvation. (Water baptism must be performed
face-downward in "natural, living water," and the candidate must believe in
Christ as Savior and the True Jesus Church as His body.)

However, the TJC also believes that footwashing is essential to salvation,
and that through the sacrament of Communion one receives eternal life.
Should we also adopt these additional steps as "the full revelation" of the
initial salvation experience, considering they are "embraced universally"
in the world's largest Oneness organization?

In the earlier days of our movement, great men of God like Andrew Urshan
and Frank Small were able to work together in proclaiming the Apostolic
message. Though they held radically different views on the nature of the
new birth, they were united by their devotion to the Lord Jesus Christ,
their proclamation of Him as Almighty God, and their proclamation of the
vital Acts 2:38 experience.

It seems to me that Apostolic pioneers like Urshan, Small and G.T Haywood
had a greater vision of the harvest field, a greater understanding of the
need to labor together, than we will allow ourselves to embrace today.

Precise theological interpretations regarding the new birth and the
Apostolic experience encapsulated in Acts 2:38 are by no means unimportant.
But I believe they are secondary to the prime task at hand: leading others
to know Jesus Christ through faith and repentance, water baptism in His
name, and receiving His Spirit.

Cary Robison