UPC/Apostolic the same thing?

[p0LkFliedLice]

?

 

[Ramon96]

There are no straight answer. I have met a person from the UPC who calls her Church "Apostolic" or the "Pentecostal Apostolic Church". However, many Protestant Churches do call themselves "Apostolic" (or add the word to there Church name] and they are not part of the UPC, and it does not mean they are true Apostolic Churches or that they have Apostolic Succession [because they do not]. It seems those who are part the UPC calls there Church "The Pentecostal Apostolic Church" or something along those lines.

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

I.C.XC,
Ramon

 

[RestoreTheRiver]

Most Christians (I wish I could say all) desire to base their faith solidly on scripture, and so, would describe their beliefs as "apostolic." The UPC--like other penticostals--rightly emphasizes that the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and signs and wonders, were very much a part of the NT church.

However, when we move from this particular emphasis to an examination of overall faith and practice, the claim of the UPC to be "apostolic" does not hold up. The reason is that they depart from the "faith once and for all delivered" to the church.

Since sincere persons disagree as to what scripture says, we must turn to what the earliest christians believed and taught, in addition to our own reading of the scriptures. When we do so, we find a living, consistent Faith, that is to be found far more faithfully in the Apostolic Churches than it is in the UPC.

So, no, the Apostolic Churches and the UPC are not the same.

Michael

 

[Christopher1020]

Ramon, I love the Justin Martyr quote. I absolutely love it. Many Protestant Charismatic groups describe themselves as apostolic because they feel they are returning the Church to its Apostolic roots. hence the term. I preached some for some pentecostal churches for awhile. It was actually research about the Holy Ghost that got me started down the Old Catholic road.

 

[Albion]

There are two main meanings to the word "Apostolic" as the churches use it.

1. Continuing the Apostles' faith and practices.
2. Continuing to be governed as the Apostles were.

Both are open to the question, "How do we know for sure what that was?"

Nevertheless, the Pentecostal Churches, UPC included, often present themselves as "Apostolic" because they preach and value the gifts of the Spirit, especially speaking in tongues, which these churches say the Apostles did, judging by certain NT verses, and which the mainline Christian churches do not do. IOW, they are like the Apostles in this important (to Pentecostals) regard whereas the other churches have departed from the way of the Apostles.

The other denominational bloc that makes much of being "Apostolic" is the one that consists of churches (Catholic, Eastern, Anglican, Old Catholic, for example) that have maintained "Apostolic Succession," the idea that certain clergy were appointed to lead and they passed that down through the ages by a deliberate act of laying on of hands, a practice that amounts to bishops making new bishops to succeed them in office. IOW, this alleged characteristic of the Apostles is of prime importance to these churches, whereas the other group places its emphasis upon receiving the gifts in the way that the Apostles allegedly did.

 

[Ramon96]

Ramon, I love the Justin Martyr quote. I absolutely love it. Many Protestant Charismatic groups describe themselves as apostolic because they feel they are returning the Church to its Apostolic roots. hence the term. I preached some for some pentecostal churches for awhile. It was actually research about the Holy Ghost that got me started down the Old Catholic road.

Thanks!

I love this quote from Saint Justin Martyr as well. Saint Ignatius of Antioch [AD 110] wrote something along the same lines [Epistle to Smyrnaeans,7,1] and did all the Church Fathers. It shows that the Early Christians did not regard the Divine Eucharist [Holy Communion] as simply "symbolic" as do Protestants today.

 

[Albion]

Thanks!

I love this quote from Saint Justin Martyr as well. Saint Ignatius of Antioch [AD 110] wrote something along the same lines [Epistle to Smyrnaeans,7,1] and did all the Church Fathers. It shows that the Early Christians did not regard the Divine Eucharist [Holy Communion] as simply "symbolic" as do Protestants today.

Just a quick clarification...It's difficult to count heads in a matter like this, but probably about half of the world's Protestants do not consider the Eucharist to be simply symbolic.

 

[Voice_of _reason]

Thanks!

I love this quote from Saint Justin Martyr as well. Saint Ignatius of Antioch [AD 110] wrote something along the same lines [Epistle to Smyrnaeans,7,1] and did all the Church Fathers. It shows that the Early Christians did not regard the Divine Eucharist [Holy Communion] as simply "symbolic" as do Protestants today.

Amen. Didnt Ignatius refer to those who do not believe the Lord is present in the Eucharist as heretics?

 

[Voice_of _reason]

Just a quick clarification...It's difficult to count heads in a matter like this, but probably about half of the world's Protestants do not consider the Eucharist to be simply symbolic.

A overhwelmngining majority of the Prots that I know think it is just a symbol.

Churches on our side that believe in Real Presence:

-Lutherans
-Anglicans
-Methodist
-Presbyterian

I think the rest of them consider it a symbol. I also think that a majority of Prot Churches think this. Just curious, do you have data to back this claim up? I do not ask this confrontationally, I would really like to see whatever evidence you have.

God bless.

 

[Albion]

A overhwelmngining majority of the Prots that I know think it is just a symbol.

That could well be, but I was speaking of the situation with Protestants generally or worldwide.

Churches on our side that believe in Real Presence:

-Lutherans
-Anglicans
-Methodist
-Presbyterian

And they're all Protestant, which demonstrates my point. (I'm not sure that the Methodists should be put in the Real Presence category, though, although individual Methodists do accept the teaching.)

I think the rest of them consider it a symbol.

Well, sure, but you've just listed Protestant churches which accept Real Presence...and they constitute a majority of Protestants worldwide or close to it. That's all I was saying.

Just curious, do you have data to back this claim up? I do not ask this confrontationally, I would really like to see whatever evidence you have.

Any directory of churches, even the World Almanac, should do. It would be correct to say that the majority of Protestant churches think the Eucharist only a symbol because there is such a proliferation of Baptist bodies and churches of that sort, but if it is said (as was the case here) that "Protestants" believe that it's only a symbol, that's another thing. There are over 100 million Anglicans alone plus similar numbers of Lutherans and Presbyterians/Reformed.

 

[Voice_of _reason]

That could well be, but I was speaking of the situation with Protestants generally or worldwide.



And they're all Protestant, which demonstrates my point. (I'm not sure that the Methodists should be put in the Real Presence category, though, although individual Methodists do accept the teaching.)



Well, sure, but you've just listed Protestant churches which accept Real Presence...and they constitute a majority of Protestants worldwide or close to it. That's all I was saying.



Any directory of churches, even the World Almanac, should do. It would be correct to say that the majority of Protestant churches think the Eucharist only a symbol because there is such a proliferation of Baptist bodies and churches of that sort, but if it is said (as was the case here) that "Protestants" believe that it's only a symbol, that's another thing. There are over 100 million Anglicans alone plus similar numbers of Lutherans and Presbyterians/Reformed.

If I were a betting man I would bet that a good percentage of the Methodists and Presbysterians do not know what their Church teaches in regards to Real Presence. It's stressed a lot in the Anglican and Lutheran Churches though....but not as much as the RCC does, of course.

I need to get that almanac. I was always under the impression that on the Protestant side, denoms like the Baptists were the majority. As a Anglo with some beliefs that are considered "Catholic" I am the odd ball in a family full of Calvinists/ baptist/Non Denom.

 

[Ramon96]

Amen. Didnt Ignatius refer to those who do not believe the Lord is present in the Eucharist as heretics?

Yes he did! In fact, the only group in the Early Church who rejected the belief that the Divine Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ [1 Cor 10:16; 11:18-34] was the Gnostic! It is shame that a lot of Protestants today do not believe Scriptures and the testimony of the entire Early Church [1st-10 Centuries].

Just a quick clarification...It's difficult to count heads in a matter like this, but probably about half of the world's Protestants do not consider the Eucharist to be simply symbolic.

Yes, I know many Protestants do believe the Divine Eucharist is the Body and Blood, of course the interpretation of it will vary from Lutherans to Presbyterian, etc, but they all agree that it is not just "symbolic". I worded my post wrong. Sorry about this. Also, not every Anglicans believe in the Real Presence. Both Baptists and Pentecostals are the fastest growing Christians Bodies, and a lot of other Protestants Churches do believe that it is only symbolic. I was always under the impression that both Baptist and Penetcostals make up the majority of Protestants. The Assemblies of God alone has about 57 million adherents. But I will research this further.


O Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

I.C.X.C,
Ramon

 

[Christopher1020]

I was raised in a predominantly Baptist/ pentecostal area and never even knew that the Real Presence was a belief until I was gong to teach a Sunday School class on communion. I read John chapter 6 and got convicted on the issue. Later working in a pentecostal Church a study on the Holy Ghost brought me even further into the Catholic Church. The thing is that most of the Churches I have gone to almost never even have a communion service. Most of the churches I call protestant, maybe evangelical is a better term, have communion only once in several years. I love them all but I have to say that I feel lucky to now be able to meet Christ so personally in the Eucharist.

 

[Ramon96]

I was raised in a predominantly Baptist/ pentecostal area and never even knew that the Real Presence was a belief until I was gong to teach a Sunday School class on communion. I read John chapter 6 and got convicted on the issue. Later working in a pentecostal Church a study on the Holy Ghost brought me even further into the Catholic Church. The thing is that most of the Churches I have gone to almost never even have a communion service. Most of the churches I call protestant, maybe evangelical is a better term, have communion only once in several years. I love them all but I have to say that I feel lucky to now be able to meet Christ so personally in the Eucharist.

Yes, some do not even do it period! I have a Pentecostal Church [a independent Pentecostal Church] around my area who do not partake of the Divine Eucharist. Pentecostal Churches [Assemblies of God, Church of God, etc] generally do it once a year. I can see why they would do it once a year, considering they do not believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Divine Eucharist. The Pentecostals rejection to the Real Presence and the infrequent partaking of the Holy Mysterious is what lead me to the Eastern Orthodox Church.

O Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

In IC.XC,
Ramon

 

[Christopher1020]

i might have gone towards the EO if the nearest parish wasn't two hours away! It was actually researching them that I discovered the Old Catholic Church.

 

[SkyCloud]

hi.