A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library
A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library
A History of Christian Doctrine It is evident that the author and publisher wish to portray Oneness Pentecostals as cultists and false religionists. The booklet is one of the newest in a series by various authors entitled Zondervan Guide to Cults and Religious Movements. On the cover, the most prominent word in this series title is Cults. The introductory booklet to the series is Unmasking the Cults. The last booklet in the series summarizes all the movements studied, and its title is Truth and Error: Comparative Charts of Cults and Christianity. The other twelve titles in the series are Jehovah’s Witnesses; Masonic Lodge; Mormonism; New Age Movement; Satanism; Unification Church; Mind Sciences; Astrology and Psychic Phenomena; Buddhism, Taoism and Other Far Eastern Religions; Goddess Worship, Witchcraft and Neo-Paganism; Hinduism, TM and Hare Krishna; and Unitarian Universalism. Classifying Oneness Pentecostals with these groups implies a spiritual similarity and a common satanic origin. At the least, it seems that the author and publisher discredit all Oneness Pentecostal experiences with God. But how can they venture to make such a judgment with no indication that they have ever attended Oneness Pentecostal worship services or interacted significantly with Oneness Pentecostals on a personal level? How can they seemingly denigrate all faith, repentance, reception of the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts, and spiritual fruit among Oneness Pentecostals while apparently accepting the same manifestations among Trinitarian Pentecostals? Have they no concern that they could be ascribing works of the Holy Spirit to Satan, something Jesus warned strongly against in Matthew 12:22-32? In this connection, it is noteworthy that many Oneness Pentecostals first believed on the Lord, repented, or received the Holy Spirit in trinitarian churches and then continued serving the Lord in Oneness churches. The author’s willingness to excoriate Oneness Pentecostals for their doctrine of God is particularly surprising in light of views expressed in his book God in Three Persons: 335 348
Appendix D Monarchianism is represented today by the United (“Jesus Only”) Pentecostals. . . . As the differences between modalism and pure trinitarianism are rather minute, it is not surprising that a great number of Christians in mainline denominations, including Roman Catholicism, hold a modalistic conception of the Trinity, at least unconsciously. According to this passage, the Oneness doctrine is a relatively insignificant deviation from “pure trinitarianism” and amounts to nothing more than “a modalistic conception of the Trinity.” Why then it is sufficient to make someone a cultist? Is the author now willing to extend this blanket condemnation to the “great number of Christians in mainline denominations” who hold essentially the same view? Serious Factual Errors The booklet begins with historical background and statistics. Here we find many egregious errors, such as these examples from pages 8 and 9: • Claim: There have been two “recent schisms” in the United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI). First, in 1986 a “3,000-member” church left. Response: The church in question had about one-fifth this number at the time, and there was no schism. • Claim: In 1993 “over 200 pastors” left the UPCI rather than “pledge conformity with the UPCI’s ‘Holiness Standard.’” The booklet repeats a 1993 prediction that “800 ministers would leave the denomination soon” and comments, “It is not yet disclosed how many defected.” Response: In the spring of 1993, the UPCI reported that 50 pastors withdrew by missing the final deadline to sign an annual reaffirmation of two sections of the UPCI’s Articles of Faith entitled “Fundamental Doctrine” and “Holiness.” A total of 120 ministers did not sign the affirmation, representing 1.6 percent of the total of 349
- Page 298 and 299: A History of Christian Doctrine and
- Page 300 and 301: A History of Christian Doctrine Bre
- Page 302 and 303: A History of Christian Doctrine Wit
- Page 304 and 305: A History of Christian Doctrine sho
- Page 306 and 307: A History of Christian Doctrine God
- Page 308 and 309: A History of Christian Doctrine hav
- Page 310 and 311: A History of Christian Doctrine off
- Page 312 and 313: A History of Christian Doctrine ind
- Page 314 and 315: A History of Christian Doctrine of
- Page 316 and 317: A History of Christian Doctrine sav
- Page 318 and 319: A History of Christian Doctrine of
- Page 320 and 321: A History of Christian Doctrine Sta
- Page 322 and 323: A History of Christian Doctrine (ex
- Page 324 and 325: A History of Christian Doctrine Of
- Page 326 and 327: A History of Christian Doctrine Pen
- Page 328 and 329: A History of Christian Doctrine the
- Page 331: Appendixes
- Page 334 and 335: A History of Christian Doctrine Sec
- Page 336 and 337: A History of Christian Doctrine act
- Page 338 and 339: A History of Christian Doctrine but
- Page 340 and 341: Appendix C Answering the Charge of
- Page 342 and 343: A History of Christian Doctrine 3.
- Page 344 and 345: A History of Christian Doctrine 5.
- Page 346 and 347: A History of Christian Doctrine dai
- Page 350 and 351: A History of Christian Doctrine 350
- Page 352 and 353: A History of Christian Doctrine Him
- Page 354 and 355: A History of Christian Doctrine in
- Page 356 and 357: A History of Christian Doctrine Lor
- Page 358 and 359: Appendix E Major U.S. Pentecostal O
- Page 360 and 361: A History of Christian Doctrine Nam
- Page 362 and 363: Notes Chapter 1. The Pentecostal Mo
- Page 364 and 365: A History of Christian Doctrine MA,
- Page 366 and 367: A History of Christian Doctrine 57G
- Page 368 and 369: A History of Christian Doctrine App
- Page 370 and 371: A History of Christian Doctrine Apr
- Page 372 and 373: A History of Christian Doctrine 127
- Page 374 and 375: A History of Christian Doctrine 149
- Page 376 and 377: A History of Christian Doctrine Com
- Page 378 and 379: A History of Christian Doctrine 204
- Page 380 and 381: A History of Christian Doctrine (Sp
- Page 382 and 383: A History of Christian Doctrine Agr
- Page 384 and 385: A History of Christian Doctrine 296
- Page 386 and 387: A History of Christian Doctrine 327
- Page 388 and 389: A History of Christian Doctrine Sou
- Page 390 and 391: A History of Christian Doctrine Apo
- Page 392 and 393: A History of Christian Doctrine MO:
- Page 394 and 395: A History of Christian Doctrine Bib
- Page 396 and 397: A History of Christian Doctrine Gov
A <strong>History</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Christian</strong> <strong>Doctrine</strong><br />
It is evident that the author and publisher wish to portray<br />
Oneness Pentecostals as cultists and false religionists. The booklet<br />
is one <strong>of</strong> the newest in a series by various authors entitled<br />
Zondervan Guide to Cults and Religious Movements. On the<br />
cover, the most prominent word in this series title is Cults. The<br />
introductory booklet to the series is Unmasking the Cults. The<br />
last booklet in the series summarizes all the movements studied,<br />
and its title is Truth and Error: Comparative Charts <strong>of</strong> Cults<br />
and <strong>Christian</strong>ity. The other twelve titles in the series are<br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses; Masonic Lodge; Mormonism; New Age<br />
Movement; Satanism; Unification Church; Mind Sciences;<br />
Astrology and Psychic Phenomena; Buddhism, Taoism and<br />
Other Far Eastern Religions; Goddess Worship, Witchcraft<br />
and Neo-Paganism; Hinduism, TM and Hare Krishna; and<br />
Unitarian Universalism.<br />
Classifying Oneness Pentecostals with these groups implies<br />
a spiritual similarity and a common satanic origin. At the least,<br />
it seems that the author and publisher discredit all Oneness<br />
Pentecostal experiences with God. But how can they venture to<br />
make such a judgment with no indication that they have ever<br />
attended Oneness Pentecostal worship services or interacted<br />
significantly with Oneness Pentecostals on a personal level?<br />
How can they seemingly denigrate all faith, repentance,<br />
reception <strong>of</strong> the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts, and spiritual fruit<br />
among Oneness Pentecostals while apparently accepting the<br />
same manifestations among Trinitarian Pentecostals? Have they<br />
no concern that they could be ascribing works <strong>of</strong> the Holy Spirit<br />
to Satan, something Jesus warned strongly against in Matthew<br />
12:22-32? In this connection, it is noteworthy that many<br />
Oneness Pentecostals first believed on the Lord, repented, or<br />
received the Holy Spirit in trinitarian churches and then continued<br />
serving the Lord in Oneness churches.<br />
The author’s willingness to excoriate Oneness Pentecostals<br />
for their doctrine <strong>of</strong> God is particularly surprising in light <strong>of</strong><br />
views expressed in his book God in Three Persons: 335<br />
348