View Full Version : District Puts WPF on Notice
What I get out of the letter is if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, eats like a duck, it probably is a duck. The upci makes a great case why upci affiliated ministeres should not license with the wpf...
http://www.wvupci.org/news/2008-03-05_Superintendent's-Communiqué.asp
bishoph
03-08-2008, 06:36 PM
This must be a cut and paste reply that the GB approved for the districts, as this is a carbon copy of what DB sent out to his district as well. I do know however, that while they give permission in this communique to fellowship WPF events, some districts have called pastors forbidding them to do so, which I feel is not only inappropriate but on the sly when considering this "official" statement. JMO
Good point. However in places like Kansas and California, I understand why districts would take the extra step.
This must be a cut and paste reply that the GB approved for the districts, as this is a carbon copy of what DB sent out to his district as well. I do know however, that while they give permission in this communique to fellowship WPF events, some districts have called pastors forbidding them to do so, which I feel is not only inappropriate but on the sly when considering this "official" statement. JMO
bishoph
03-08-2008, 06:42 PM
Why Kansas? It is my understanding that while quite a few may have left the UPCI, most if not all of them are just going GIB for now.
For example purposes only.
Why Kansas? It is my understanding that while quite a few may have left the UPCI, most if not all of them are just going GIB for now.
It has begun ... it only will get worse.
Kings Kid
03-08-2008, 08:17 PM
It will get a whole lot worse before it gets better. Couldn't we just set up a wrestling match between them.
scotty
03-08-2008, 08:26 PM
It's not going to get worse , there will be those that will leave, but not enough to effect the UPC. It is sad, but not note worthy really..as we have seen from the letters and district meetings it is being handled ethicly and with grace. Let them go, the fruits will reveal the tree...
Dan'D
03-10-2008, 12:22 AM
Look like there trying to get there house in order
The part that struck me was the last 3 paragraphs under
General Board Ruling
February 26, 2008
What I get out of the letter is if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, eats like a duck, it probably is a duck. The upci makes a great case why upci affiliated ministeres should not license with the wpf...
http://www.wvupci.org/news/2008-03-05_Superintendent's-Communiqué.asp
It is imperative that we not only proclaim separation, but that it be taught so as to give this generation reason for the basic fundamentals as stated in the Articles of Faith.
The General Youth Department presented plans for Youth Congress 2009, outlining ideas that will incorporate this goal. In an attempt to realize the curbing of some problems and concerns, the General Youth Division will develop platform guidelines for both Youth Congress and Bible Quizzing.
Please know that there was a great spirit of unity and commitment to maintain our Apostolic identity while at the same time going forward with a strong passion for Global Impact.
Dan'D
Look like there trying to get there house in order
The part that struck me was the last 3 paragraphs under
General Board Ruling
February 26, 2008
It is imperative that we not only proclaim separation, but that it be taught so as to give this generation reason for the basic fundamentals as stated in the Articles of Faith.
The General Youth Department presented plans for Youth Congress 2009, outlining ideas that will incorporate this goal. In an attempt to realize the curbing of some problems and concerns, the General Youth Division will develop platform guidelines for both Youth Congress and Bible Quizzing.
Please know that there was a great spirit of unity and commitment to maintain our Apostolic identity while at the same time going forward with a strong passion for Global Impact.
Dan'D
This reinforces my theory I put forth when the TV resolution passed that for at least the short term the UPC would swing hard right in over compensation to try and assure all (including themselves) that the TV resolution did not signal a change in the legalism.
I saw this same sort of thing when KH was first elected GS. Everybody considered him a liberal so in his first couple of message he made sure to prove his "street cred" by coming out strong against makeup on women and other old time Oneness Pentecostal hobby horses.
Sister Alvear
03-10-2008, 08:29 AM
We all need to pray for fresh baptisms of love...
Kings Kid
03-10-2008, 05:34 PM
Why hasn't other districts put the WPF on notice.
bishoph
03-10-2008, 05:53 PM
Why hasn't other districts put the WPF on notice.
The GB left it up to the respective districts to "enforce" the ruling as they deemed necessary. More notifications will be forthcoming I am sure, however, some districts will not say much as it is not a big deal. JMHO
Kings Kid
03-10-2008, 06:01 PM
I'm wondering how much of an effect that it will have on California .
bishoph
03-10-2008, 06:33 PM
I'm wondering how much of an effect that it will have on California .
It depends on who you ask! Some say it will have little impact. Others, (of which I tend to agree) think it will have a measured (one which can be felt in the short term but will be overcome long term) effect. IMO how the two CA districts handle/enforce the recent GB ruling will greatly determine the overall effect. While the UPCI GB has stated that those who have left to join the WPF are not to be "placed under question" and are acceptable for fellowship, the WD IMO has displayed a more "hardline" approach, and this will alienate/embitter people on both sides of the issue.
SOUNWORTHY
03-10-2008, 06:37 PM
It's not going to get worse , there will be those that will leave, but not enough to effect the UPC. It is sad, but not note worthy really..as we have seen from the letters and district meetings it is being handled ethicly and with grace. Let them go, the fruits will reveal the tree...
The last word from Hazelwood (that's today) only about 200 have dropped out of UPCI, that's not an earth shattering number out of approx.9248 ministers listed in the directory. There has been a big rush of ministers getting their renewals in so they won't be dropped. That means there are still about 9,000 faithful left and growing all the time. UPCI may have it's problems but it's still the best there is.
Kings Kid
03-10-2008, 06:42 PM
To be honest with you I don't think it will have much of an affect in Ca. So, far I think theres only one church in our section that has went WPF.
bishoph
03-10-2008, 06:42 PM
The last word from Hazelwood (that's today) only about 200 have dropped out of UPCI, that's not an earth shattering number out of approx.9248 ministers listed in the directory. There has been a big rush of ministers getting their renewals in so they won't be dropped. That means there are still about 9,000 faithful left and growing all the time. UPCI may have it's problems but it's still the best there is.
If I can ask.......was this "word" officially released or is this your inside source? Just curious!
bishoph
03-10-2008, 06:44 PM
To be honest with you I don't think it will have much of an affect in Ca. So, far I think theres only one church in our section that has went WPF.
There are some sections/areas that will be effected more such as Northern CA.
Kings Kid
03-10-2008, 06:50 PM
I attend church in Northern California I can see it affected the smaller sections. I believe that with the district split it may affect Northern California since it the sections are smaller.
oletime
03-10-2008, 08:08 PM
the reason for kansas could be in this quote from the speaker at the upci ministers retreat in this state . quote we lost half of our district but our giving has increased seems once we get rid of the disgruntleds things improve unquote ,whistling through the graveyard?
the reason for kansas could be in this quote from the speaker at the upci ministers retreat in this state . quote we lost half of our district but our giving has increased seems once we get rid of the disgruntleds things improve unquote ,whistling through the graveyard?
Kansas lost a lot of their UPC pastors in the ultra con desertion awhile back and now it looks like they are losing even more either to the WWPF or GIB.
I guess the last UPC pastor there will just have to turn the lights out.
Sounds like Kansas would be a good district to move to if one had aspirations to be a district official. They are going to end up with so few pastors every one of them will hold some district position!
The apostolic identity as I understand scripture has nothing to do with a clothesline. The apostolic identity is Holy Ghost power. We have made apostolic identity something we wear as opposed to something we should be. It's a joke, and unscriptural to cling onto a legalistic unscriptural mandate for an identity.
Look like there trying to get there house in order
The part that struck me was the last 3 paragraphs under
General Board Ruling
February 26, 2008
It is imperative that we not only proclaim separation, but that it be taught so as to give this generation reason for the basic fundamentals as stated in the Articles of Faith.
The General Youth Department presented plans for Youth Congress 2009, outlining ideas that will incorporate this goal. In an attempt to realize the curbing of some problems and concerns, the General Youth Division will develop platform guidelines for both Youth Congress and Bible Quizzing.
Please know that there was a great spirit of unity and commitment to maintain our Apostolic identity while at the same time going forward with a strong passion for Global Impact.
Dan'D
scotty
03-11-2008, 05:09 AM
The apostolic identity as I understand scripture has nothing to do with a clothesline. The apostolic identity is Holy Ghost power. We have made apostolic identity something we wear as opposed to something we should be. It's a joke, and unscriptural to cling onto a legalistic unscriptural mandate for an identity.
whose "we"....you got a mouse in your pocket brother??
Some of us UPC don't identify with what we wear, but we wear it anyway.
"Don't get me wrong, I believe Holiness standards are good,
But Hell don't care about your standards.
The devil don't tremble because of the way you dress"
--Pastor Mike Mitchell, Brooklyn NY. UPC
Pressing-On
03-11-2008, 05:38 AM
whose "we"....you got a mouse in your pocket brother??
Some of us UPC don't identify with what we wear, but we wear it anyway.
"Don't get me wrong, I believe Holiness standards are good,
But Hell don't care about your standards.
The devil don't tremble because of the way you dress"
--Pastor Mike Mitchell, Brooklyn NY. UPC
Preach it, Scotty!
SOUNWORTHY
03-11-2008, 08:06 AM
If I can ask.......was this "word" officially released or is this your inside source? Just curious!
Came directly from one of the people at Headquarters. Not an official release.
whose "we"....you got a mouse in your pocket brother??
Some of us UPC don't identify with what we wear, but we wear it anyway.
"Don't get me wrong, I believe Holiness standards are good,
But Hell don't care about your standards.
The devil don't tremble because of the way you dress"
--Pastor Mike Mitchell, Brooklyn NY. UPC
I love brother Mitchell ... Great preacher and friend.
He ain't hung up on clotheslines.
The last word from Hazelwood (that's today) only about 200 have dropped out of UPCI, that's not an earth shattering number out of approx.9248 ministers listed in the directory. There has been a big rush of ministers getting their renewals in so they won't be dropped. That means there are still about 9,000 faithful left and growing all the time. UPCI may have it's problems but it's still the best there is.
Brother Worthy ... a decade ago there were about 8700-8800 mininsters ... that's a net gain only about 300 ministers in 10 years!! Best there is ????
Why is there such great turnaround ... where is the monumental growth that's talked about?
scotty
03-11-2008, 08:38 AM
I love brother Mitchell ... Great preacher and friend.
He ain't hung up on clotheslines.
He preach at a confrence in Bossier City, LA. this weekend....awesome service.
He preach at a confrence in Bossier City, LA. this weekend....awesome service.
What a great smile ... He can sing too!!!
Has a great building there in Brooklyn.
Kings Kid
03-11-2008, 06:20 PM
whose "we"....you got a mouse in your pocket brother??
Some of us UPC don't identify with what we wear, but we wear it anyway.
"Don't get me wrong, I believe Holiness standards are good,
But Hell don't care about your standards.
The devil don't tremble because of the way you dress"
--Pastor Mike Mitchell, Brooklyn NY. UPC
I agree. Sometimes I wonder if they care more about standards or saving a person.
Theophil
03-11-2008, 08:32 PM
I agree. Sometimes I wonder if they care more about standards or saving a person.
One of the problems is that some people think standards=salvation. Their plan of salvation is Acts 2:38 + dozens of other things.
What else could be meant by apostolic identity in that statement? Sure can't be signs and wonders. Well maybe the wonders bit, but for the wrong reasons. Unless the organization is willing to make an universal dress code, it is a waste of time to put money into a subjective viewpoint. Thousands of dollars wll be spent to teach "apostolic identity". A misplaced priority.
whose "we"....you got a mouse in your pocket brother??
Some of us UPC don't identify with what we wear, but we wear it anyway.
"Don't get me wrong, I believe Holiness standards are good,
But Hell don't care about your standards.
The devil don't tremble because of the way you dress"
--Pastor Mike Mitchell, Brooklyn NY. UPC
Kings Kid
03-11-2008, 09:31 PM
One of the problems is that some people think standards=salvation. Their plan of salvation is Acts 2:38 + dozens of other things.
That is so true some of the old timers do equate them with salvation. But also the standards have become a tradtion with in the church.
scotty
03-12-2008, 05:14 AM
What else could be meant by apostolic identity in that statement? Sure can't be signs and wonders. Well maybe the wonders bit, but for the wrong reasons. Unless the organization is willing to make an universal dress code, it is a waste of time to put money into a subjective viewpoint. Thousands of dollars wll be spent to teach "apostolic identity". A misplaced priority.
Don't see this where I am, in Arkansas District we sure are not spending money to teach "apostolic identity"...never heard of such...we spend money to throw barbq's in the nieghborhoods, hold basketball tournaments for the city kids, etc.etc. I personally adhere to standards but it is through conviction, nobody taught me.
If your church is spending money to teach people how to dress let me know, I will make sure you go on our prayer list.
Last time I checked it didn't cost any money for UPC and the like to teach "Apostolic Identity".
Most preachers preach and teach the clothesline legalism with great gusto each and every time they take the pulpit (well almost).
Even those that don't preach / teach the clothesline adnaseum allude to it in just about every sermon to reinforce the times they do preach / teach on it.
LadyChocolate
03-12-2008, 08:35 AM
I have never heard of it taking $$ to teach "Apostolic Identity"
...and where I come from, I always thought the apostolic identity was more in line with the oneness of God and Jesus Name baptism..... not standards.....
scotty
03-12-2008, 08:35 AM
Last time I checked it didn't cost any money for UPC and the like to teach "Apostolic Identity".
Most preachers preach and teach the clothesline legalism with great gusto each and every time they take the pulpit (well almost).
Even those that don't preach / teach the clothesline adnaseum allude to it in just about every sermon to reinforce the times they do preach / teach on it.
Money or not , if your church is preaching this let me know and we will pray they lean more towards our UPC's..
A_PoMo
03-12-2008, 08:36 AM
Last time I checked it didn't cost any money for UPC and the like to teach "Apostolic Identity".
Most preachers preach and teach the clothesline legalism with great gusto each and every time they take the pulpit (well almost).
Even those that don't preach / teach the clothesline adnaseum allude to it in just about every sermon to reinforce the times they do preach / teach on it.
Amen!
scotty
03-12-2008, 08:36 AM
I have never heard of it taking $$ to teach "Apostolic Identity"
...and where I come from, I always thought the apostolic identity was more in line with the oneness of God and Jesus Name baptism..... not standards.....
Well then , you must not be UPC...(according to this group)
dizzyde
03-12-2008, 11:22 AM
Last time I checked it didn't cost any money for UPC and the like to teach "Apostolic Identity".
Most preachers preach and teach the clothesline legalism with great gusto each and every time they take the pulpit (well almost).
Even those that don't preach / teach the clothesline adnaseum allude to it in just about every sermon to reinforce the times they do preach / teach on it.
Again with the broad brush CC1, you haven't been everywhere and heard everyone. There are some out there who don't do this.
scotty
03-12-2008, 11:36 AM
Again with the broad brush CC1, you haven't been everywhere and heard everyone. There are some out there who don't do this.
When I joined this forum I started out thinking this was just ignorance of the facts,
Now I know, its just out right dislike. They dislike standards, they dislike people who believe in them. They want everyone to believe that God Himself has shown them that standards are unnecesary, and I do believe them. I believe God convicts each one differently. But it cant be the other way around with them. The Holy Ghost can't convict me and my wife to adhere to certain standards. Thats not God , thats just the way we were taught.
ok , maybe it is just ignorance of the facts
dizzyde
03-12-2008, 11:58 AM
When I joined this forum I started out thinking this was just ignorance of the facts,
Now I know, its just out right dislike. They dislike standards, they dislike people who believe in them. They want everyone to believe that God Himself has shown them that standards are unnecesary, and I do believe them. I believe God convicts each one differently. But it cant be the other way around with them. The Holy Ghost can't convict me and my wife to adhere to certain standards. Thats not God , thats just the way we were taught.
ok , maybe it is just ignorance of the facts
Well, Scotty, I am not quite as militant about it as you are, I don't think it has a lot to do with dislike on the most part, I think most people are speaking from their personal experience.
My problem is that I just hate the broad brushing on any subject, from any perspective. To use words like 'all", and "every", and "them", I think these are counterproductive to any intelligent argument as a general rule.
I will not deny that ANYTHING does not go on in a specific place or setting, but when even common practices are used to substantiate a broad generalization, this is the definition of ignorance, IMHO.
These are the same thought processes that are used to justify any prejudice, and are not wise, IMHO.
scotty
03-12-2008, 12:02 PM
Well, Scotty, I am not quite as militant about it as you are, .
ouch :depressed
The directive is to teach "apostolic identity". There is going to be $$$ spent on materials. Someone has to buy power before the throne. If not, it is a waste of time.
Don't see this where I am, in Arkansas District we sure are not spending money to teach "apostolic identity"...never heard of such...we spend money to throw barbq's in the nieghborhoods, hold basketball tournaments for the city kids, etc.etc. I personally adhere to standards but it is through conviction, nobody taught me.
If your church is spending money to teach people how to dress let me know, I will make sure you go on our prayer list.
dizzyde
03-12-2008, 04:18 PM
The directive is to teach "apostolic identity". There is going to be $$$ spent on materials. Someone has to buy power before the throne. If not, it is a waste of time.
Were are you getting this information from? I can assure you that my church will spend no money on any such literature or material. And I don't know of any church that would, including churches that do adhere to a "clothesline" doctrine. There is simply no need to spend any money on this topic. All of the bases are already covered, so to speak. I think you are very mistaken on this.
Monkeyman
03-12-2008, 08:17 PM
The directive is to teach "apostolic identity". There is going to be $$$ spent on materials. Someone has to buy power before the throne. If not, it is a waste of time.Please explain this post....
This quote came directly from the link I provided
Also, there was considerable discussion with a very strong consensus that the United Pentecostal Church uphold its position as relates to Holiness and Separation from the world. It was the expression of the General Board that this be communicated by a letter from our General Superintendent, Bro. Kenneth Haney, to the UPCI fellowship, as well as the venues of General Conference, Global Impact, District Conference representatives, and District Boards of each district. It is imperative that we not only proclaim separation, but that it be taught so as to give this generation reason for the basic fundamentals as stated in the Articles of Faith.
The General Youth Department presented plans for Youth Congress 2009, outlining ideas that will incorporate this goal. In an attempt to realize the curbing of some problems and concerns, the General Youth Division will develop platform guidelines for both Youth Congress and Bible Quizzing.
Please know that there was a great spirit of unity and commitment to maintain our Apostolic identity while at the same time going forward with a strong passion for Global Impact.
Even a caveman knows what's going on. It's a waste of time to misrepresent apostolic identity.
Please explain this post....
Again with the broad brush CC1, you haven't been everywhere and heard everyone. There are some out there who don't do this.
No one has heard "everyone everywhere". However some of us have had enough exposure through time and events to make these statements with a degree of certainty.
If one cannot draw conclusions from extensive experience because one has not experienced "everyone everywhere" then no one can come to a conclusion about anything.
Your thesis is the same old tired one that people use when they pull the race or gender card in politics. A white man is not supposed to be able to represent a black man or undestand his plight because he is not black or represent a woman because he is a male. Hogwash.
I was born UPC and have either been in it or around it the last 48 years. I have probably heard more UPC sermons and been in more UPC churches than just about anyone outside of full time ministry.
I listen to many sermons every year from UPC churches and conferences that I can't attend in person by listening to CD's or online.
Almost 100% of the time a UPC preacher cannot make it through an entire sermon without alluding to standards / seperation.
Of course there are exceptions as there is in just about anything and I said as much.
I can however make a general statement that I believe applies to almost all of the preaching that goes on in the UPC. I made that statement and stand by it.
When I joined this forum I started out thinking this was just ignorance of the facts,
Now I know, its just out right dislike. They dislike standards, they dislike people who believe in them. They want everyone to believe that God Himself has shown them that standards are unnecesary, and I do believe them. I believe God convicts each one differently. But it cant be the other way around with them. The Holy Ghost can't convict me and my wife to adhere to certain standards. Thats not God , thats just the way we were taught.
ok , maybe it is just ignorance of the facts
Scotty,
I have come to the conclusion that there are those that rather than hear any constructive criticism would rather heap accusations on the criticizer since that is so much easier to handle that the criticism.
This demonizing of anybody who questions any of your sacred cows is a tactic that has been used in old time Oneness Pentecost for a very long time. Unfortunetey for you it does not work near as often anymore.
When I was growing up to question any of the extra biblicasl or unbiblical rules was labeled "rebellion" and of course we all know "rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft" so there ya go - you were evil if you questioned anything!
I particularly loved it when you accuse others of painting with a broad brush then start your post by saing that you "KNOW" people like me "downright dislike standards, dislike people who believe in them". As many of my conservative friends both on AFF and otherwise can atest what you have said is patently not true. However I am sure it made you feel better to accuse me of not liking people who keep standards. Can we start playing the violen now? Poor lil ole you being disliked by the big ole mean liberal. Wah, wah, wah!! What a crock. I guess the best defense is a good offense eh? Try to denigrate the person who is disagreeing with you? Well I think you have clearly shown yourself with this post.
Well, Scotty, I am not quite as militant about it as you are, I don't think it has a lot to do with dislike on the most part, I think most people are speaking from their personal experience.
My problem is that I just hate the broad brushing on any subject, from any perspective. To use words like 'all", and "every", and "them", I think these are counterproductive to any intelligent argument as a general rule.
I will not deny that ANYTHING does not go on in a specific place or setting, but when even common practices are used to substantiate a broad generalization, this is the definition of ignorance, IMHO.
These are the same thought processes that are used to justify any prejudice, and are not wise, IMHO.
Of course you realize that Scotty wasn't "broad brushing" at all when he said that we not only dislike standards but the people that keep them. LOL!!!!!
dizzyde
03-12-2008, 11:04 PM
Of course you realize that Scotty wasn't "broad brushing" at all when he said that we not only dislike standards but the people that keep them. LOL!!!!!
Of course, I was hoping that he caught that as well. One can only hope...
I really try to stay away from these discussions, the back and forth over what does and does not go on is so far from what the majority if my experience has been. I just sometimes get irritated because when people say "it" goes on everywhere, and I know for a fact that what they are saying does not go on at my church, well, you know. :runhills
dizzyde,
I am glad you are here at AFF contributing and I am also glad you attend a church and have a pastor where the legalism is not the focus.
No comments about the section I posted about the directive the youth dept has to teach the upci definition of apostolic identity? See the post six back.
Scotty,
In response to your diatribe, only a fool would not believe in holiness standards, likewise only a fool would believe their definition of holiness standards are exclusive.
Brother Price
03-13-2008, 03:47 AM
When I joined this forum I started out thinking this was just ignorance of the facts,
Now I know, its just out right dislike. They dislike standards, they dislike people who believe in them. They want everyone to believe that God Himself has shown them that standards are unnecesary, and I do believe them. I believe God convicts each one differently. But it cant be the other way around with them. The Holy Ghost can't convict me and my wife to adhere to certain standards. Thats not God , thats just the way we were taught.
ok , maybe it is just ignorance of the facts
Well, praise God for Him giving you those conviction. I see that you almost equate them with being a salvation issue, though, and that is what I stand against.
I do not dislike standards. I have some personal standards. But, what I detest are those who dare kick God off of the throne and make themselves judges over His people based on clothes and hair.
But, to broadbrush people as you have is religious hatred and heard heartedness. It is a sign of religion replacing relationship, and no one should be as that.
:runhills
scotty
03-13-2008, 06:07 AM
Scotty,
I have come to the conclusion that there are those that rather than hear any constructive criticism would rather heap accusations on the criticizer since that is so much easier to handle that the criticism.
This demonizing of anybody who questions any of your sacred cows is a tactic that has been used in old time Oneness Pentecost for a very long time. Unfortunetey for you it does not work near as often anymore.
When I was growing up to question any of the extra biblicasl or unbiblical rules was labeled "rebellion" and of course we all know "rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft" so there ya go - you were evil if you questioned anything!
I particularly loved it when you accuse others of painting with a broad brush then start your post by saing that you "KNOW" people like me "downright dislike standards, dislike people who believe in them".
ahh, so you caught that, good , it was TIC to return the "broad brush" back to you to see if you took it the same as you are dishing it out. Obviously you take it as well as I do.
As many of my conservative friends both on AFF and otherwise can atest what you have said is patently not true. However I am sure it made you feel better to accuse me of not liking people who keep standards. Can we start playing the violen now? Poor lil ole you being disliked by the big ole mean liberal. Wah, wah, wah!! What a crock. I guess the best defense is a good offense eh? Try to denigrate the person who is disagreeing with you? Well I think you have clearly shown yourself with this post.
No sir , but I will show myself with this one.
First off, you and your conservative friends can not attest that what I have said is untrue, there are simply too many post and threads on this forum that say otherwise. Is the violin and wah song and dance all you have? You can't give constructive criticizm unless you are involved in the construction, otherwise your criticizm is hardly constructive. That is just simply common sense.
Here is what I see. There are some who have found a "revelation" that in their view the UPC is wrong. Some have had their feelings hurt. Well as you say , wah , wah, wah. Thats life. Get over it. Why sit on here and bring down an entire org. of mostly good people with your insults because you may have gotten your feelings hurt by a few UC's that hardly represent the org. Thats the real problem isn't it, THE ORG, THE UPCI, THE MOTHERSHIP, "drink the kool-aid"(that one is funny to me, i like it). A governing body. Period. "nobody gonna tell me what to do". You right , it is the same ole song and dance.
So have you been to any churches here in the Arkansas district? In your 48 years of UPC travels in search of knowledge, what all states did you go to? Are you still traveling around and visiting UPC? Or did all your wealth of info come from 10 or 20 years ago and we are just assuming it's still the same.
There is a crowd here that believe as you do, that crowd is split. One part bashes UPC (and thats what it is, don't sugar coat it as being some all mighty, conviction from God, intellectual, deemed from exprience criticizm...that looks alot different than what has been posted) the other part simply disagrees in discussion, like me. You didn't like it when I turned the tables and painted you with a broad brush, but I'm crying when I complain that you do it. Typical.
You state that "almost 100% of the time"...talking out the side of your mouth? Is that a double negative or a double positive?
Your almost right 100% of the time?
Look at the post above, Bro. Price. has even injected his opinion to my own words. Lets quote:
"Well, praise God for Him giving you those conviction. I see that you almost equate them with being a salvation issue, though"-Bro. Price
Is that almost 100% of the time? Yet with that mere "almost" you go on to convict me of taking Gods throne?! I would be ROFL but this is too serious. This is how much some of you (dare I say the word) "hate" UPC. You will go the extra mile to turn someones words into an eviction of God. And last but not least, Bro. Price states:
"But, to broadbrush people as you have is religious hatred and heard heartedness. It is a sign of religion replacing relationship, and no one should be as that."
Easy there Bro. Price, CC1 will not like that. Lets see, what was it CC1 said about broad brushing?? oh yeah, lets quote:
"I can however make a general statement that I believe applies to almost all of the preaching that goes on in the UPC. I made that statement and stand by it."--CC1
(there is some more of that "almost all"/ all = 100%)
So I guess that means CC1 has religious hatred and hard heartedness.
In the meantime , tv1a says:
"In response to your diatribe, only a fool would not believe in holiness standards, likewise only a fool would believe their definition of holiness standards are exclusive."
And I said this where? Lets quote me:
"They want everyone to believe that God Himself has shown them that standards are unnecesary, and I do believe them. I believe God convicts each one differently."
Doesn't sound all exclusive to me. because its not. I gave all these examples above to show you , using your own words, how you are thinking. You hate UPC and what little you have seen in UPC so bad, that you apply what you have seen to my (or any other upcer) words just because we are UPC. And you do so (as shown above) with obvious disregard for what was actually posted.
If all of you want to criticize me for my beliefs, fine. But don't slam me and the UPC using your own made up version of how you translate someones words. While all the while hating the very thing that you are saying and doing to us.
dizzyde,
You did not hope in vain, now you see what my point was with the "broad brush". It is irriating to me as well, and hypocritical.
My true argument here brothers and sisters, is for respect. I have shown that I respect the beliefs of those who are different from mine. Why is it so hard for others to respect our beliefs.
I no longer pray for unity, this forum has shown me the near impossibilities of that, but I do at least pray for understanding. I pray for people to have the courage to understand others instead of underscore them.
Love you all, God bless
[B][FONT=Georgia][SIZE=3][COLOR=blue][I]My true argument here brothers and sisters, is for respect. I have shown that I respect the beliefs of those who are different from mine. Why is it so hard for others to respect our beliefs.
Scotty,Scotty, Scotty,....ah but here is the rub. Apparently you equate any discussion about why varoius elements of extra biblical legalism are wrong with a lack of respect for your beliefs.
If you take the time to reread the part of your post I quoted above can you not see where you are in essence falling prey to the political correctness of the world by trying to paint philosophical / theological discussions that might call into question your sacred cows as a lack of "respect"?
I have conservatvie and ultra con friends whom I respect greatly in many ways. Some of them have great intellect and other wonderful attributes. That does not mean I don't think they are dead wrong and mislead on issues like legalism and seperation. Just as I know that while some of them respect me and my intellect they think I am as wrong as wrong can be and probably splitting the pit concerning my views of the same.
Your skin is way too thin if these discussions are offending you. Should I emal Bro. Atkinson that we have another prime canidate for the Good News Cafe? There you will find a very constricted place of discussion where you won't have to worry about what you consider a lack of respect or any questioning of old time Pentecostal sacred cows for that matter.
scotty
03-13-2008, 08:30 AM
Scotty,Scotty, Scotty,....ah but here is the rub. Apparently you equate any discussion about why varoius elements of extra biblical legalism are wrong with a lack of respect for your beliefs.
Of my whole thread, you address one line?!?...hmm must mean I was pretty dead on with the rest of it huh?
But in light to the above are you saying that you can not carry on a discussion without being respectful?
If you take the time to reread the part of your post I quoted above can you not see where you are in essence falling prey to the political correctness of the world by trying to paint philosophical / theological discussions that might call into question your sacred cows as a lack of "respect"?
Gee, I can't talk with all of those big words all push together in a collegic way, but the jest of it is this. Respect is what it is. It is realizing that because one may disagree with another does not give one the right to insult or degrade the other, especially when refering to ones personal salvation and relationship to God.
I have conservatvie and ultra con friends whom I respect greatly in many ways. Some of them have great intellect and other wonderful attributes. That does not mean I don't think they are dead wrong and mislead on issues like legalism and seperation. Just as I know that while some of them respect me and my intellect they think I am as wrong as wrong can be and probably splitting the pit concerning my views of the same.
Your skin is way too thin if these discussions are offending you.
Your joking right? You still don't get it? It's not the discussions, its the arrogant undertone of "we are Godly and you are not".
Should I emal Bro. Atkinson that we have another prime canidate for the Good News Cafe? There you will find a very constricted place of discussion where you won't have to worry about what you consider a lack of respect or any questioning of old time Pentecostal sacred cows for that matter.
You complained that someone labeled you as "rebellious" yet you insult my convictions as "sacred cows". These are not our beliefs, these are convictions we feel in the Holy Ghost. Yet you as Admin somehow feel you have the Godly right of judgment to say that our relationship with God is flawed. What gives you the almighty right to be that judge?
.
This explains the lack of understanding or even trying to understand.
scotty
03-13-2008, 08:40 AM
Here is another post from one who believes as you.
"I can also remember going water skiing with a boat load guys (no gals allowed) and we wore blue jeans and long sleeve shirts.
Then one day I'm sure I heard God say, snap out of it stupid...you are embarassing me."
Amazing huh? Why not just say, "I don't beleive I have to adhere to that anymore" Then my thought would be , hey if that is what God convicted him of then that is between him and God.
What if I said this in reverse. I don't know , something like:
"I used to not shave, had long hair, wore shorts, and went to the beach with women till one day God said to me, " Hey stupid , you are embarassing me"
Man I bet backlash would be 5 pages long, and I'm pretty sure you would lead it off.
My responses are short and address only a little of your posts because I am at work! I am trying to do due diligence to my job but respond to some of your very lengthy posts as I can.
You are completely predictable though as I see in your last post you used the old tactic of declaring that anything you post I don't respond to must be correct then. Good grief. Trying to discuss things with you is like trying to debate a Junior High school know it all.
I enjoy reparte' but will not continue to discuss with you if you are going to just resort to this kind of nonsense.
Talking about respect how about respect enough (not to mention common sense and maturity) to not make asinine statements like anything I don't respond to I must be conceding youare right.
Did it ever cross your mind that perhaps not everyone responds to every point of every post you make because your posts are long and many of the points are not worth responding to? This statement is disrespectful and not one I would normally make but your idiotic theory that someone not responding to every point in your posts deserves the truth as disrespecful as that may be (and we all know how much you hate disrespect).
A_PoMo
03-13-2008, 08:44 AM
sounds kinda like a good ol' stalemate to me. I understand Scotty's POV and he makes some good points here and there but on balance if we were to take a vote i'd vote for cc1.
scotty
03-13-2008, 08:50 AM
My responses are short and address only a little of your posts because I am at work! I am trying to do due diligence to my job but respond to some of your very lengthy posts as I can.
You are completely predictable though as I see in your last post you used the old tactic of declaring that anything you post I don't respond to must be correct then. Good grief. Trying to discuss things with you is like trying to debate a Junior High school know it all.
I enjoy reparte' but will not continue to discuss with you if you are going to just resort to this kind of nonsense.
Talking about respect how about respect enough (not to mention common sense and maturity) to not make asinine statements like anything I don't respond to I must be conceding youare right.
Did it ever cross your mind that perhaps not everyone responds to every point of every post you make because your posts are long and many of the points are not worth responding to? This statement is disrespectful and not one I would normally make but your idiotic theory that someone not responding to every point in your posts deserves the truth as disrespecful as that may be (and we all know how much you hate disrespect).
*sigh*
what ever you say
scotty
03-13-2008, 08:57 AM
sounds kinda like a good ol' stalemate to me. I understand Scotty's POV and he makes some good points here and there but on balance if we were to take a vote i'd vote for cc1.
At least you see the points in question.
I don't want a vote, I don't think it should have to be voted on.
Why can't the body of Christ simply understand that God may convict some differently than He convicts others without judging ones relationship with God as being false?
"It's just skin tone, thats all. Same flesh, same bone, same soul, just a different color." -- Herman Thomas, Arkadelphia High School. speech on racism.
Here is another post from one who believes as you.
"I can also remember going water skiing with a boat load guys (no gals allowed) and we wore blue jeans and long sleeve shirts.
Then one day I'm sure I heard God say, snap out of it stupid...you are embarassing me."
Amazing huh? Why not just say, "I don't beleive I have to adhere to that anymore" Then my thought would be , hey if that is what God convicted him of then that is between him and God.
What if I said this in reverse. I don't know , something like:
"I used to not shave, had long hair, wore shorts, and went to the beach with women till one day God said to me, " Hey stupid , you are embarassing me"
Man I bet backlash would be 5 pages long, and I'm pretty sure you would lead it off.
I don't have a problem at all with a conservative going on about how wonderful their corporate legalism and extra biblical standards are. They have their point of view and are perfectly in their rights to express any ephiphonies of the evils of cut hair, makeup, short sleeves, etc as they see fit.
I also reserve the right to think that women riding horses, water slides, snow skiing, and jet skiiing in skirts is ridiculous and does not bring one iota of "glory to God" but rather brings undo ridicule upon the church.
I very well remember those joyus youth get togethers at the ice skaing rink where our young ladies had skirts on the outside of insulated coveralls. Good grief.
scotty
03-13-2008, 09:10 AM
I don't have a problem at all with a conservative going on about how wonderful their corporate legalism and extra biblical standards are. They have their point of view and are perfectly in their rights to express any ephiphonies of the evils of cut hair, makeup, short sleeves, etc as they see fit.
I also reserve the right to think that women riding horses, water slides, snow skiing, and jet skiiing in skirts is ridiculous and does not bring one iota of "glory to God" but rather brings undo ridicule upon the church.
I very well remember those joyus youth get togethers at the ice skaing rink where our young ladies had skirts on the outside of insulated coveralls. Good grief.
Well , then I am done.
I will pray for you brother, I don't how you can be so condeming and truly believe you are in tune with God...your insults are a joke and show you for who you are, I don't know who that is but they are not very Christ like.
Good day to you
Good day to you also! It looks like here in TN we are going to have that odd great day that has sprung up about once every couple of months this winter. It is supposed to be 74 and sunny today so I am going to work like the dickens and try to get enough work done to shut down early and take my motorcycle out for a nice ride about 3 pm!!! It has been about two or three weeks since our last nice day I got to ride.
Pressing-On
03-13-2008, 09:53 AM
Scotty,
I have come to the conclusion that there are those that rather than hear any constructive criticism would rather heap accusations on the criticizer since that is so much easier to handle that the criticism.
I don't have a problem at all with a conservative going on about how wonderful their corporate legalism and extra biblical standards are. They have their point of view and are perfectly in their rights to express any ephiphonies of the evils of cut hair, makeup, short sleeves, etc as they see fit.
I also reserve the right to think that women riding horses, water slides, snow skiing, and jet skiiing in skirts is ridiculous and does not bring one iota of "glory to God" but rather brings undo ridicule upon the church.
Was that your example of "constructive criticism", 'cause I wuz just wonderin'? :D
Was that your example of "constructive criticism", 'cause I wuz just wonderin'? :D
Absolutely Pressing-Onry!!!!
This thin skin when it comes to discussing the merits, logic, biblical basis of old time Pentecostal sacred cows has to stop.
As you know I try to be diplomatic and not offesnsive 97.3% of the time. However that other 2.7% of the time is an important part of the discussion and my posting.
I am not going to be intimidated by someone who gets their itty bitty little feelings hurt if someone says some old time Pentecostal standard is foolish to them and does not make sense.
Scotty tried to act like us mean ole liberals are just crucifying all those sweet standards keeping old time Pentecostals when that is just not true (and we all know what things that are untrue are).
I can respect people who keep things I consider silly but it doesn't mean I have to respect that standard they keep. It is their choice and I don't try to nag people constantly and try to convert them when I see them doing it. I will however discuss what I think about it and the merits of it on AFF. If someone doesn't want their sacred cows openly discussed they should not come here.
If Scotty wants to post observations from the ultra con or conservative side that would be akin to the ones liberals make here I am all for it. Here are a few I envision;
"I just came from the mall and was apalled at all of the sexy elbows I saw! Oh the shame of all of those heatherns causing each other to lust. Not to mention the knees on those women!!!!!"
or
" It is the craziest thing in the world for some lib Pentecostal woman to think God can see her through that mask of her makeup or would bless her with a sleeveless dress on".
:reaction
Very interesting discussion ... HILARIOUS IF YOU ASK ME ...
Jehoram
03-13-2008, 11:14 AM
Absolutely Pressing-Onry!!!!
This thin skin when it comes to discussing the merits, logic, biblical basis of old time Pentecostal sacred cows has to stop.
As you know I try to be diplomatic and not offesnsive 97.3% of the time. However that other 2.7% of the time is an important part of the discussion and my posting.
I am not going to be intimidated by someone who gets their itty bitty little feelings hurt if someone says some old time Pentecostal standard is foolish to them and does not make sense.
Scotty tried to act like us mean ole liberals are just crucifying all those sweet standards keeping old time Pentecostals when that is just not true (and we all know what things that are untrue are).
I can respect people who keep things I consider silly but it doesn't mean I have to respect that standard they keep. It is their choice and I don't try to nag people constantly and try to convert them when I see them doing it. I will however discuss what I think about it and the merits of it on AFF. If someone doesn't want their sacred cows openly discussed they should not come here.
If Scotty wants to post observations from the ultra con or conservative side that would be akin to the ones liberals make here I am all for it. Here are a few I envision;
"I just came from the mall and was apalled at all of the sexy elbows I saw! Oh the shame of all of those heatherns causing each other to lust. Not to mention the knees on those women!!!!!"
or
" It is the craziest thing in the world for some lib Pentecostal woman to think God can see her through that mask of her makeup or would bless her with a sleeveless dress on".
:reaction
You're just bitter!:tissue
:ursofunny
Very interesting discussion ... HILARIOUS IF YOU ASK ME ...
You have no say since you wear short sleeves and probably go to movies.
You're just bitter!:tissue
:ursofunny
LOO!!! Shhhh. Now you have gone and ruined it for Scotty. He had not yet pulled out that old faithful arrow from his quiver.
Pressing-On
03-13-2008, 11:41 AM
Absolutely Pressing-Onry!!!!
This thin skin when it comes to discussing the merits, logic, biblical basis of old time Pentecostal sacred cows has to stop.
As you know I try to be diplomatic and not offesnsive 97.3% of the time. However that other 2.7% of the time is an important part of the discussion and my posting.
I am not going to be intimidated by someone who gets their itty bitty little feelings hurt if someone says some old time Pentecostal standard is foolish to them and does not make sense.
Scotty tried to act like us mean ole liberals are just crucifying all those sweet standards keeping old time Pentecostals when that is just not true (and we all know what things that are untrue are).
I can respect people who keep things I consider silly but it doesn't mean I have to respect that standard they keep. It is their choice and I don't try to nag people constantly and try to convert them when I see them doing it. I will however discuss what I think about it and the merits of it on AFF. If someone doesn't want their sacred cows openly discussed they should not come here.
If Scotty wants to post observations from the ultra con or conservative side that would be akin to the ones liberals make here I am all for it. Here are a few I envision;
"I just came from the mall and was apalled at all of the sexy elbows I saw! Oh the shame of all of those heatherns causing each other to lust. Not to mention the knees on those women!!!!!"
or
" It is the craziest thing in the world for some lib Pentecostal woman to think God can see her through that mask of her makeup or would bless her with a sleeveless dress on".
:reaction
Your percentage is a little high, I'm thinkin' ;) I'd personally put it way under 50%.
Anyhoo, I have an opinion that I will share. I feel that any Owner, Admin or Moderator that approaches this subject in the manner that you have is setting a precedent for this Forum to become a "Spiritual Abuse" forum with no serious or balanced dialogue between the conversant views.
Now, if I have, somehow, broken a Board rule of criticizing a said Owner, Admin or Moderator, then you are free to ban me. It would not hurt my feelings.
I will post this and then dump my PM's. I have some things to take care of this afternoon and I might come back and find me gone. :D
scotty
03-13-2008, 12:06 PM
LOO!!! Shhhh. Now you have gone and ruined it for Scotty. He had not yet pulled out that old faithful arrow from his quiver.
Your not bitter,
your just wrong
I realize that don't matter to you in your own little CC world you live in
but your wrong,
scotty
03-13-2008, 12:16 PM
Your percentage is a little high, I'm thinkin' ;) I'd personally put it way under 50%.
Anyhoo, I have an opinion that I will share. I feel that any Owner, Admin or Moderator that approaches this subject in the manner that you have is setting a precedent for this Forum to become a "Spiritual Abuse" forum with no serious or balanced dialogue between the conversant views.
Now, if I have, somehow, broken a Board rule of criticizing a said Owner, Admin or Moderator, then you are free to ban me. It would not hurt my feelings.
I will post this and then dump my PM's. I have some things to take care of this afternoon and I might come back and find me gone. :D
Please don't go there, they will really have a ball with that.
Don't you know, its not spiritual, you don't have convictions
You are the way you are because you have been douped by Haney.
You are incapable of walking with the Lord by yourself thus you have to drink the kool aid...
you have been suckered,
Your stupid
Your percentage is a little high, I'm thinkin' ;) I'd personally put it way under 50%.
Anyhoo, I have an opinion that I will share. I feel that any Owner, Admin or Moderator that approaches this subject in the manner that you have is setting a precedent for this Forum to become a "Spiritual Abuse" forum with no serious or balanced dialogue between the conversant views.
Now, if I have, somehow, broken a Board rule of criticizing a said Owner, Admin or Moderator, then you are free to ban me. It would not hurt my feelings.
I will post this and then dump my PM's. I have some things to take care of this afternoon and I might come back and find me gone. :D
Your post is exactly why I turned down any suggestion of being an admin in the past. I felt like this would happen. Sooner or later someone would want to tie in my belief system to my admin duties and suggest I cant do them fairly.
Pressing, you have known me on the forum for a along time. Do you really believe I cannot fairly admin from my perspective? I would ask you to show me a single instance where I have done anything as an admin that was less than fair and impartial.
I am disappointed that you are considering leaving because I am an admin. I could understand if I had actually done anything in tha capacity that would have been wrong or biased.
I guess only conservatives have the capacity to serve fairly as an admin?
Please don't go there, they will really have a ball with that.
Don't you know, its not spiritual, you don't have convictions
You are the way you are because you have been douped by Haney.
You are incapable of walking with the Lord by yourself thus you have to drink the kool aid...
you have been suckered,
Your stupid
Of course much like conservatives do when they point to Tammy Faye Bakker and Jan Crouch when discussing makeup you have gone way over the top with your remarks.
The problem with discussing standards is that if you come down on the side against the corporate extra biblical legalism and point out how silly some are then instantly people like you take that and run with it to insulting conclusions like you just expressed but have not been expressed by most here.
If the admin can't opine as a poster then .... let's pack it up folks. Opining has never been the issue ... censorship has.
Jehoram
03-13-2008, 12:59 PM
You're all just bitter.
Bitter I tell ya!!!!!
Jermyn Davidson
03-13-2008, 12:59 PM
EVERYONE. Please stop tossing hate grenades or I will ENGAGE YOU ALL WITH MY M249 SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon)!!!
(in the spirit of meekness of course....)http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4FZUjEd2NM
You're all just bitter.
Bitter I tell ya!!!!!
It's that Taco Bell food!!!:bliss
It's that Taco Bell food!!!:bliss
That was overtly racist. I just know it was. :laffatu
Jehoram
03-13-2008, 01:02 PM
That was overtly racist. I just know it was. :laffatu
And from an admin?!
How sad.:reaction
I fear the TRUTH POLICE more than I fear good ol' CC1.
http://respiracreative.com/cops.jpg
That was overtly racist. I just know it was. :laffatu
LOL!!! That never entered my mind.
Speaking of racist it has been funny watching Geraldine Ferrarro being a victim of her parties own political correctness. She tried to point out Obama's lack of experience with just two years in the Senate and now has been painted a racist after 30 years of promoting lib causes!
scotty
03-13-2008, 01:35 PM
Of course much like conservatives do when they point to Tammy Faye Bakker and Jan Crouch when discussing makeup you have gone way over the top with your remarks.
The problem with discussing standards is that if you come down on the side against the corporate extra biblical legalism and point out how silly some are then instantly people like you take that and run with it to insulting conclusions like you just expressed but have not been expressed by most here.
Now I know you either joking or biased,
this forum is full of just those expressions
Pressing-On
03-14-2008, 06:16 AM
Your post is exactly why I turned down any suggestion of being an admin in the past. I felt like this would happen. Sooner or later someone would want to tie in my belief system to my admin duties and suggest I cant do them fairly.
Pressing, you have known me on the forum for a along time. Do you really believe I cannot fairly admin from my perspective? I would ask you to show me a single instance where I have done anything as an admin that was less than fair and impartial.
I am disappointed that you are considering leaving because I am an admin. I could understand if I had actually done anything in tha capacity that would have been wrong or biased.
I guess only conservatives have the capacity to serve fairly as an admin?
CC1,
I never said that I considering leaving because you are Admin. (lol) What I said was, "Now, if I have, somehow, broken a Board rule by criticizing a said Owner, Admin or Moderator, then you are free to ban me. It would not hurt my feelings."
Do I think you can Administer fairly from your perspective? I'm not sure you do on the standards issue, since you asked. There is a difference in laying out your opinion and making it ALWAYS come across as taunting, critical and condescending. That is my impression of your words when you speak about the things you don't like about the UPC.
I haven't seen Renda ever do these things. She shares her opinion and tries to see both sides of the issue, for each person individually. I can respect that. I know she doesn't agree with said, "standards", but she doesn't use her words to make the ones carrying that said "standard" as ignorant.
As to your question on the Conservatives having the capacity to serve fairly - I don't think either side is more favored. I believe we should be compelled to state our opinions on any issue without ridiculing the other.
My best friend, who attends church with me, worships with me, is also used in the gifts and does not keep standards. She respects me and I respect her. We don't argue about these things. We both realize that we must EACH make a decision for how we feel we need to present ourselves to God. How we feel it is best for us. How we feel we are being lead. It should be that way for everyone on this Forum.
scotty
03-14-2008, 06:54 AM
CC1,
I never said that I considering leaving because you are Admin. (lol) What I said was, "Now, if I have, somehow, broken a Board rule by criticizing a said Owner, Admin or Moderator, then you are free to ban me. It would not hurt my feelings."
Do I think you can Administer fairly from your perspective? I'm not sure you do on the standards issue, since you asked. There is a difference in laying out your opinion and making it ALWAYS come across as taunting, critical and condescending. That is my impression of your words when you speak about the things you don't like about the UPC.
I haven't seen Renda ever do these things. She shares her opinion and tries to see both sides of the issue, for each person individually. I can respect that. I know she doesn't agree with said, "standards", but she doesn't use her words to make the ones carrying that said "standard" as ignorant.
As to your question on the Conservatives having the capacity to serve fairly - I don't think either side is more favored. I believe we should be compelled to state our opinions on any issue without ridiculing the other.
My best friend, who attends church with me, worships with me, is also used in the gifts and does not keep standards. She respects me and I respect her. We don't argue about these things. We both realize that we must EACH make a decision for how we feel we need to present ourselves to God. How we feel it is best for us. How we feel we are being lead. It should be that way for everyone on this Forum.
Good post. But it is not this way. Your spiritual convictions that may be derived from your relationship with God are being slammed on here as not being of God at all but you have been brainwashed by the mean evil mothership.
Truth is, especially in Arkansas district and some north Louisiana churches I have been to, UPC is not stressing the standards. I don't care what letters from above you post on here, our preachers preach what they feel of God to preach. Lately that has been dicipleship, evanglism, get out and bring the lost to church, if He wants them to shave or not He will tell them.
With the exception of some UPC churches and the WPF I think the days of craming standards down ones throat are over,
Some just can't let go of the past. I believe if the UPC repealed its AoF and the standards, most on here (instead of being happy) would then slam them for being hypocrits all this time.
Seems like it is just the nature of things here.
Pressing-On
03-14-2008, 07:00 AM
Good post. But it is not this way. Your spiritual convictions that may be derived from your relationship with God are being slammed on here as not being of God at all but you have been brainwashed by the mean evil mothership.
Truth is, especially in Arkansas district and some north Louisiana churches I have been to, UPC is not stressing the standards. I don't care what letters from above you post on here, our preachers preach what they feel of God to preach. Lately that has been dicipleship, evanglism, get out and bring the lost to church, if He wants them to shave or not He will tell them.
With the exception of some UPC churches and the WPF I think the days of craming standards down ones throat are over,
Some just can't let go of the past. I believe if the UPC repealed its AoF and the standards, most on here (instead of being happy) would then slam them for being hypocrits all this time.
Seems like it is just the nature of things here.
Scotty,
You are right - it is not something being slammed down the throat any longer.
God will have a church. He is building His church. Much has changed since I've come this way 22 years ago. I would prefer the church to evolve into what God want us to be, what He expects us to be. Each person must follow their heart. We need to respect each person's decision for him/herself.
AmazingGrace
03-14-2008, 08:03 AM
Scotty,
You are right - it is not something being slammed down the throat any longer.
God will have a church. He is building His church. Much has changed since I've come this way 22 years ago. I would prefer the church to evolve into what God want us to be, what He expects us to be. Each person must follow their heart. We need to respect each person's decision for him/herself.
Exactly right! It is wrong for someone who does not believe in standards any longer to condemn and or criticize someone who still holds them....
CC1,
I never said that I considering leaving because you are Admin. (lol) What I said was, "Now, if I have, somehow, broken a Board rule by criticizing a said Owner, Admin or Moderator, then you are free to ban me. It would not hurt my feelings."
Do I think you can Administer fairly from your perspective? I'm not sure you do on the standards issue, since you asked. There is a difference in laying out your opinion and making it ALWAYS come across as taunting, critical and condescending. That is my impression of your words when you speak about the things you don't like about the UPC.
I haven't seen Renda ever do these things. She shares her opinion and tries to see both sides of the issue, for each person individually. I can respect that. I know she doesn't agree with said, "standards", but she doesn't use her words to make the ones carrying that said "standard" as ignorant.
As to your question on the Conservatives having the capacity to serve fairly - I don't think either side is more favored. I believe we should be compelled to state our opinions on any issue without ridiculing the other.
My best friend, who attends church with me, worships with me, is also used in the gifts and does not keep standards. She respects me and I respect her. We don't argue about these things. We both realize that we must EACH make a decision for how we feel we need to present ourselves to God. How we feel it is best for us. How we feel we are being lead. It should be that way for everyone on this Forum.
Pressing- Onry,
I am glad I misread your post and you were not referring to leaving. Howeve I am still at a loss to understand why you question if I can admin fairly because I have strong views and post them.
It sounds to me like you are saying that anyone who discusses standards in a way you don't approve of can't fairly admin.
I have been very surprised and disappointed that this is your opinion but it is what it is. The first time you have evidence that I have not carried out my admin duties in a fair and responsible way I will step down. Other than that I am not going to be run off because someone is offended at my views.
Despite our differences of opinion I always felt there was a lot of mutual respect between us but obviously things have beeen eating at your craw for some time and you have decided to unload on me and in a manner I think is unfair.
It is one thing to dislike my posts, etc but an entire other thing to question my integrity as an admin. I don't mean this from a rules standpoint either I mean from the standpoint of how long you have been with me on these forums and the many times I have attempted to be a peacemaker when things got rough.
I had a feeling this would happen though. That all of those, conservatives included, who always talked about how good of an admin I would be would turn on me if it ever actually happened. Prophecy fulfilled.
scotty
03-14-2008, 10:38 AM
Pressing- Onry,
I am glad I misread your post and you were not referring to leaving. Howeve I am still at a loss to understand why you question if I can admin fairly because I have strong views and post them.
It sounds to me like you are saying that anyone who discusses standards in a way you don't approve of can't fairly admin.
I have been very surprised and disappointed that this is your opinion but it is what it is. The first time you have evidence that I have not carried out my admin duties in a fair and responsible way I will step down. Other than that I am not going to be run off because someone is offended at my views.
Despite our differences of opinion I always felt there was a lot of mutual respect between us but obviously things have beeen eating at your craw for some time and you have decided to unload on me and in a manner I think is unfair.
It is one thing to dislike my posts, etc but an entire other thing to question my integrity as an admin. I don't mean this from a rules standpoint either I mean from the standpoint of how long you have been with me on these forums and the many times I have attempted to be a peacemaker when things got rough.
I had a feeling this would happen though. That all of those, conservatives included, who always talked about how good of an admin I would be would turn on me if it ever actually happened. Prophecy fulfilled.
I must say to see this side of you has given me a new found respect for you.
Brother, it is not your different views it is the way some wish to charactorize our views. You can disagree and discuss without telling someone that what they believe is "stupid" "an embarrasment to God", "a sacred cow", etc.etc.
I just left a thread that you started asking "Where have all the cons gone"
On that thread Bro. Coonskinner said it perfectly
I am finding that I am weary of spending signifigant portions of time seeing things unspeakably dear to me mocked and scoffed at.
and I have noticed that he still is not here.
As I have said, it is not the views I am at odds with, we can discuss opinions and beliefs, but there is no need to insult someone or their beliefs. We should all be above that, admin or not.
Felicity
03-14-2008, 11:48 AM
CC1......
I haven't been posting for a while but I came out of "reader" mode to encourage you a bit for what it's worth so here goes:
Admins have always enjoyed the privilege of stating their opinions on whatever topic came up for discussion. There's no rule against that far as I know. MOW, for example who is also an admin, would be considered "liberal" on the lib to con scale but he posts and expresses his viewpoints which certainly don't fit with the conservative viewpoint.
Here's one who hasn't turned on you. I always felt you'd be a good admin. Still feel that way regardless of the fact we wouldn't agree on everything, but it's hard to find 2 people who do. In fact I've always felt you'd make a great ambassador. LOL. :thumbsup
You've been consistent in your views and opinions and have shared them consistently since the beginning of the time I've been posting with you on FCF. You've not changed at all.
Consistently Consistent One <-----> CC1. See? :D
If you make a decision whether or not to admin a forum based on whether someone disagrees with you or not you won't last long so don't take it all too much to heart, bro.
Pressing-On
03-14-2008, 12:11 PM
Pressing- Onry,
CCUno,
I'm speaking to you as a man and not Admin in this post.
I am glad I misread your post and you were not referring to leaving. Howeve I am still at a loss to understand why you question if I can admin fairly because I have strong views and post them.
Okay, you didn't get it.
It sounds to me like you are saying that anyone who discusses standards in a way you don't approve of can't fairly admin.
That is not what I was saying.
I have been very surprised and disappointed that this is your opinion but it is what it is. The first time you have evidence that I have not carried out my admin duties in a fair and responsible way I will step down. Other than that I am not going to be run off because someone is offended at my views.
I am not trying to run you off. (lol) I haven't been offended. I just was more angry than anything. (lol)
Despite our differences of opinion I always felt there was a lot of mutual respect between us but obviously things have beeen eating at your craw for some time and you have decided to unload on me and in a manner I think is unfair.
I respect you, CC1. I love you like I do everyone else I've been posting with for so long. How could I not love you? Let me count the ways...... (lol)
YES, things have been eating my craw since the first time you talked about the stringy haired women on AFF. I would forgive you and then you would do it again and I had to start all over again. (lol)
What I would do is picture walking into Southside and eating sausage (you) and pork steaks (me) and then I thought - I could like him, I'm sure. (lol)
It is one thing to dislike my posts, etc but an entire other thing to question my integrity as an admin. I don't mean this from a rules standpoint either I mean from the standpoint of how long you have been with me on these forums and the many times I have attempted to be a peacemaker when things got rough.
Integrity goes a lot deeper, IMO, than posting words of your opinion. I can't say that I questioned your integrity, just your choice of words. It's like you weren't really thinking that there are some women that don't want to cut their hair, dye their hair, could care less about jewelry and don't like to wear pants, so some of the standards are a non-issue.
Some of us have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt and threw it away. There are some of us that those things DO NOT work for us anymore. We don't like feeling pressured to pick those things up again. Things that felt like chains of acceptance to the world around our neck. You may not understand that. I've lived on both sides of the fence for the same amount of time in my life. I don't want the side I came from.
When I see our women praying, crying and seeking God with all their hearts - you make me angry when you call them - stringy haired women.
I don't have words enough to convey how I feel. It's too large. Now, I will agree with you that stupid things have been said and stupid things have been enforced, but I've seen stupid things in other denominations.
When I left the Catholic Church I attended the Baptist Church. The singles program just needed some liquor and then we would be in a bar. They got together played Elvis and other secular music. Me coming from a bar found that a little strange. I thought you left such music behind. Music that effected you in certain ways. Perhaps it was just me and something God didn't want for me. There are things I can't do or I will go backward. I could elaborate on that, but I won't. A dog returning to it's vomit.
I had a feeling this would happen though. That all of those, conservatives included, who always talked about how good of an admin I would be would turn on me if it ever actually happened. Prophecy fulfilled.
CC1, you are a great person. For the most part I like you. I'm just saying it isn't right of anyone to rag the appearance of the women. You mentioned once that they had no natural beauty and needed some enhancement. How is that your right, as a man, to pressure women in that way? We have enough pressure without men making us feel that we can't be accepted unless we do some "work".
It's like running through a chorus line to see who is accepted. How does that make a woman feel? I say find who pleases you and leave the others alone. God will find someone to love each and every women. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
If God led me to this organization when I cried out that I needed Him, why are you asking me to leave? I can't leave. I have to follow Him wherever He goes and wherever He takes me. He hasn't opened another door in 22 years, I kinda took that as a hint.
Don't think I haven't gone through a time of testing. I certainly have, but I looked around and met people who didn't have anything better to offer me. I looked around and didn't see another path that was stronger and so I decided to stay where I was. I think that's how many in the UPC view things. If you have something better, give it to me. Many don't see it in their locality, IMO.
I do see some mistakes. One would be Deut 22:5, which has nothing to do with pants. "wear" in that passage is a very strong definition and has been overlooked as a basic meaning. It is not basic and is never used again in the entire OT. I attribute that to not sufficient study.
When I was a new convert the Lord showed me strongly how important it was that I would study on my own. The first thing he showed me was "touch not thine anointed". He showed me that it meant every saint of God.
Like the Catholic Church I have seen the same teaching - follow the leader and don't question. I've me pastor's wives who would say, "Well, I don't know, you'll have to ask my husband." I was astonished by that. I have seen some things changing and I attribute that to God building His church. He isn't going to leave a hungry heart in the dark.
Anyway, again, I think you are a great person, with great wit, good stories. I've just been angry at you from time to time as an Apostolic woman. I usually forgive you, though. :D
Does any of this make any sense to you?
Felicity
03-14-2008, 12:28 PM
There are stringy-haired apostolic women. I saw some at the mall last week and was thinking .... "Goodness! They could help themselves a little at least by fixing their hair"..... and then I thought .... "perhaps they don't know how".
And the fact is ..... there are stringy haired women in general. Looking bad doesn't belong only to apostolic women. You know that if you get out much.
Truth is, there are beautiful apostolic women who are stylish and take care of themselves just as there are those who are outside of the apostolic church who are and do.
That's pretty consistent from what I've seen. :)
Michael Phelps
03-14-2008, 12:35 PM
Scotty,
You are right - it is not something being slammed down the throat any longer.
God will have a church. He is building His church. Much has changed since I've come this way 22 years ago. I would prefer the church to evolve into what God want us to be, what He expects us to be. Each person must follow their heart. We need to respect each person's decision for him/herself.
And this post should sum it up..........I've read thru the entire thread, and I've been in places where CC1's perception has been reality, and I've been in places where it was far from the true situation. I absolutely do NOT agree with CC's assertion that it's nearly 100% of UPC pastors who harp on standards, sorry CC. However, I do agree that it happens more than it should.
And, I totally understand Scotty's point, and I believe that Scotty has said numerous times that God deals with each person individually, and he respects that, and I respect Scotty for feeling that way.
Bottom line - not all liberals are liberated, and not all conservatives are bound. Many people follow standards because they truly beleive them, and many people have left "standards" because God has truly liberated them.
In the mix, you have conservatives who are conservative but don't know why, and you have liberals who are bitter at the UPC.
Bottom line folks, PO said it, we must all respect each other and pray for each other, and stop with the broad brushing!
dizzyde
03-14-2008, 12:39 PM
And this post should sum it up..........I've read thru the entire thread, and I've been in places where CC1's perception has been reality, and I've been in places where it was far from the true situation. I absolutely do NOT agree with CC's assertion that it's nearly 100% of UPC pastors who harp on standards, sorry CC. However, I do agree that it happens more than it should.
And, I totally understand Scotty's point, and I believe that Scotty has said numerous times that God deals with each person individually, and he respects that, and I respect Scotty for feeling that way.
Bottom line - not all liberals are liberated, and not all conservatives are bound. Many people follow standards because they truly beleive them, and many people have left "standards" because God has truly liberated them.
In the mix, you have conservatives who are conservative but don't know why, and you have liberals who are bitter at the UPC.
Bottom line folks, PO said it, we must all respect each other and pray for each other, and stop with the broad brushing!
And there you have it, the voice of reason. :highfive :bouquet
This is what I was trying to say earlier on, but didn't convey nearly as well as you sir.
Pressing- Onry,
I am glad I misread your post and you were not referring to leaving. Howeve I am still at a loss to understand why you question if I can admin fairly because I have strong views and post them.
It sounds to me like you are saying that anyone who discusses standards in a way you don't approve of can't fairly admin.
I have been very surprised and disappointed that this is your opinion but it is what it is. The first time you have evidence that I have not carried out my admin duties in a fair and responsible way I will step down. Other than that I am not going to be run off because someone is offended at my views.
Despite our differences of opinion I always felt there was a lot of mutual respect between us but obviously things have beeen eating at your craw for some time and you have decided to unload on me and in a manner I think is unfair.
It is one thing to dislike my posts, etc but an entire other thing to question my integrity as an admin. I don't mean this from a rules standpoint either I mean from the standpoint of how long you have been with me on these forums and the many times I have attempted to be a peacemaker when things got rough.
I had a feeling this would happen though. That all of those, conservatives included, who always talked about how good of an admin I would be would turn on me if it ever actually happened. Prophecy fulfilled.
CC1, you wanna know what your problem is? You actually think that you can insult people's beliefs, belittle their convictions, and still stay friends with them.
Pressing-On
03-14-2008, 12:56 PM
And this post should sum it up..........I've read thru the entire thread, and I've been in places where CC1's perception has been reality, and I've been in places where it was far from the true situation. I absolutely do NOT agree with CC's assertion that it's nearly 100% of UPC pastors who harp on standards, sorry CC. However, I do agree that it happens more than it should.
And, I totally understand Scotty's point, and I believe that Scotty has said numerous times that God deals with each person individually, and he respects that, and I respect Scotty for feeling that way.
Bottom line - not all liberals are liberated, and not all conservatives are bound. Many people follow standards because they truly believe them, and many people have left "standards" because God has truly liberated them.
In the mix, you have conservatives who are conservative but don't know why, and you have liberals who are bitter at the UPC.
Bottom line folks, PO said it, we must all respect each other and pray for each other, and stop with the broad brushing!
Thank you, Michael. Somehow I knew you could put it in the best words. All of what you said is very good, the highlighted is the best.
Oh, and I corrected your spelling of "believe", just 'cause it's fun to catch you making a typo. :D
Michael Phelps
03-14-2008, 01:04 PM
Thank you, Michael. Somehow I knew you could put it in the best words. All of what you said is very good, the highlighted is the best.
Oh, and I corrected your spelling of "believe", just 'cause it's fun to catch you making a typo. :D
Lol, that's just to illustrate my fallability and identify with the little people!
Just kidding, lol.
It's no secret on this forum that I am of a more liberal mindset, but as I've stated many times, I have no horror stories of the UPC, I have no bad experiences directly related to the UPC.
There are many good, honest, and godly people who are living by standards that I personally do not live by, but I do not question their motives.
And, there are many who have left the standards that I believe are good, honest and godly people, as well.
As I said, in ANY group you have good apples and bad apples, and in my experience the ratios are no different between the groups.
Pressing-On
03-14-2008, 01:07 PM
Lol, that's just to illustrate my fallability and identify with the little people!
Just kidding, lol.
It's no secret on this forum that I am of a more liberal mindset, but as I've stated many times, I have no horror stories of the UPC, I have no bad experiences directly related to the UPC.
There are many good, honest, and godly people who are living by standards that I personally do not live by, but I do not question their motives.
And, there are many who have left the standards that I believe are good, honest and godly people, as well.
As I said, in ANY group you have good apples and bad apples, and in my experience the ratios are no different between the groups.
Well, you know I have to keep you humble. I know it's hard for you. lol
Your last line is exactly right! Amen!
Have a good week-end. I'm out!
Pressing-On
03-14-2008, 01:08 PM
CC1, you wanna know what your problem is? You actually think that you can insult people's beliefs, belittle their convictions, and still stay friends with them.
Woof! :ursofunny
CCUno,
I'm speaking to you as a man and not Admin in this post.
Okay, you didn't get it.
That is not what I was saying.
I am not trying to run you off. (lol) I haven't been offended. I just was more angry than anything. (lol)
I respect you, CC1. I love you like I do everyone else I've been posting with for so long. How could I not love you? Let me count the ways...... (lol)
YES, things have been eating my craw since the first time you talked about the stringy haired women on AFF. I would forgive you and then you would do it again and I had to start all over again. (lol)
What I would do is picture walking into Southside and eating sausage (you) and pork steaks (me) and then I thought - I could like him, I'm sure. (lol)
Integrity goes a lot deeper, IMO, than posting words of your opinion. I can't say that I questioned your integrity, just your choice of words. It's like you weren't really thinking that there are some women that don't want to cut their hair, dye their hair, could care less about jewelry and don't like to wear pants, so some of the standards are a non-issue.
Some of us have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt and threw it away. There are some of us that those things DO NOT work for us anymore. We don't like feeling pressured to pick those things up again. Things that felt like chains of acceptance to the world around our neck. You may not understand that. I've lived on both sides of the fence for the same amount of time in my life. I don't want the side I came from.
When I see our women praying, crying and seeking God with all their hearts - you make me angry when you call them - stringy haired women.
I don't have words enough to convey how I feel. It's too large. Now, I will agree with you that stupid things have been said and stupid things have been enforced, but I've seen stupid things in other denominations.
When I left the Catholic Church I attended the Baptist Church. The singles program just needed some liquor and then we would be in a bar. They got together played Elvis and other secular music. Me coming from a bar found that a little strange. I thought you left such music behind. Music that effected you in certain ways. Perhaps it was just me and something God didn't want for me. There are things I can't do or I will go backward. I could elaborate on that, but I won't. A dog returning to it's vomit.
CC1, you are a great person. For the most part I like you. I'm just saying it isn't right of anyone to rag the appearance of the women. You mentioned once that they had no natural beauty and needed some enhancement. How is that your right, as a man, to pressure women in that way? We have enough pressure without men making us feel that we can't be accepted unless we do some "work".
It's like running through a chorus line to see who is accepted. How does that make a woman feel? I say find who pleases you and leave the others alone. God will find someone to love each and every women. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
If God led me to this organization when I cried out that I needed Him, why are you asking me to leave? I can't leave. I have to follow Him wherever He goes and wherever He takes me. He hasn't opened another door in 22 years, I kinda took that as a hint.
Don't think I haven't gone through a time of testing. I certainly have, but I looked around and met people who didn't have anything better to offer me. I looked around and didn't see another path that was stronger and so I decided to stay where I was. I think that's how many in the UPC view things. If you have something better, give it to me. Many don't see it in their locality, IMO.
I do see some mistakes. One would be Deut 22:5, which has nothing to do with pants. "wear" in that passage is a very strong definition and has been overlooked as a basic meaning. It is not basic and is never used again in the entire OT. I attribute that to not sufficient study.
When I was a new convert the Lord showed me strongly how important it was that I would study on my own. The first thing he showed me was "touch not thine anointed". He showed me that it meant every saint of God.
Like the Catholic Church I have seen the same teaching - follow the leader and don't question. I've me pastor's wives who would say, "Well, I don't know, you'll have to ask my husband." I was astonished by that. I have seen some things changing and I attribute that to God building His church. He isn't going to leave a hungry heart in the dark.
Anyway, again, I think you are a great person, with great wit, good stories. I've just been angry at you from time to time as an Apostolic woman. I usually forgive you, though. :D
Does any of this make any sense to you?
Pressing,
Thank you for this post. I understand better where you are coming from but I must say that you have changed, in your mind, what I have said and made it far worse. You posted things I have talked about in the past as absolutes in your post I am quoting above. Like I have said ALL Pentecostal women are ugly and need makeup. We both know that is absolutely not how I have stated things. I have said that the majority of women are not blessed with naturally clear complexions, lips with color, etc and that makup applied properly enhances their appearance (and also furthers the seperation of the sexas by the way - something OP's are supposed to be for).
I have no doubt that there are some stringy haried Pentecostal women that are some of the sweetest women on the planet and godly women as well. That does not mean they don't have stringy hair that does not look good when I see it at Wal Mart. Sorry. That is just a fact. If I post that I see no glory for God in that it is what I believe. It doesn't make these women less godly, less sweet, etc. I have friends and relatives who look like that and I love them dearly.
In your frustration with me you have also personaized my discussions to the point you apparently believe I am trying to personally persuade each and every old time Pentecostal woman to change her standards.
I don't go around "witnessing" to Pentecostal women that they should change in my every day life. This is a DISCUSSION FORUM and this is where I discuss these things.
I have been around hundreds of Pentecostal folks, at least half of them women, and NEVER said one word to them about their hair, dress, or any other standards they choose to keep.
Apparently when you read what I believe is the truth about these subjects you extend that to picture me with some sort of personal vendetta to change all Pentecostal women I come in contact with. Just not true.
Do I hope some people who have come to the same conclusions I have about what the biblical truth and principles are regarding these things read my posts and find inspirtation in them? Of course! Just as I am sure every conservative contending for bundage does.
Don't make it personal!!!!
I am pleased that you still love me because you are one of my favorite posters and the fact that you are so angry with me has distressed me greatly. I can't apologize for what I have posted and written because I meant every word of it but I am sorry that it has made you think less of me and that you think I am not representing my positons well.
I apologize for the rambling nature of this post but it has been a very long day. Maybe I can come back later when I am refreshed with some of the good brisket my wife is cooking and edit it so that it makes sense!
God Bless You Pressing On
CC1......
I haven't been posting for a while but I came out of "reader" mode to encourage you a bit for what it's worth so here goes:
Admins have always enjoyed the privilege of stating their opinions on whatever topic came up for discussion. There's no rule against that far as I know. MOW, for example who is also an admin, would be considered "liberal" on the lib to con scale but he posts and expresses his viewpoints which certainly don't fit with the conservative viewpoint.
Here's one who hasn't turned on you. I always felt you'd be a good admin. Still feel that way regardless of the fact we wouldn't agree on everything, but it's hard to find 2 people who do. In fact I've always felt you'd make a great ambassador. LOL. :thumbsup
You've been consistent in your views and opinions and have shared them consistently since the beginning of the time I've been posting with you on FCF. You've not changed at all.
Consistently Consistent One <-----> CC1. See? :D
If you make a decision whether or not to admin a forum based on whether someone disagrees with you or not you won't last long so don't take it all too much to heart, bro.
Felicity,
Thank you. It doesn't bother me when Newbies like Scotty get their...er....undies all twisted up at my posts but it is a whole other story when it is a long time fellow poster who has been around a long time, long enough to have seen the totality of my posting.
I know some things I post upset traditional old time Pentecostals greatly but I have tried to be emphatic without impuning people. Apparently that is impossible as some people take general observations very personally when they are not intended that way.
rgcraig
03-14-2008, 07:43 PM
I believe PO has misunderstood your sense of humor at times too.
I believe PO has misunderstood your sense of humor at times too.
Yup. I have to believe so. Still surprises me though as long as we have been posting together on AFF and it's predecessor's.
She is one of my favorites though that I look for when I login.
Sarah
03-14-2008, 09:36 PM
I believe PO has misunderstood your sense of humor at times too.
This could be the whole problem.
CC1's humor reminds me so much of Jim Yohe's. Sometimes I could strangle him, but I always end up laughing. lol
And I still think you will be a fair admin, CC1.
Hoovie
03-14-2008, 10:35 PM
Last time I checked it didn't cost any money for UPC and the like to teach "Apostolic Identity".
Most preachers preach and teach the clothesline legalism with great gusto each and every time they take the pulpit (well almost).
Even those that don't preach / teach the clothesline adnaseum allude to it in just about every sermon to reinforce the times they do preach / teach on it.
CC1, this post again demonstrates how long you have been gone... I would say there are very very few who would harp on such every sermon.
commonsense
03-14-2008, 11:01 PM
CC1, this post again demonstrates how long you have been gone... I would say there are very very few who would harp on such every sermon.
Not in my city or fair state, but I do know of a UPC church that is trying to achieve this. Nearly every service involves legalism of some sort. Thankfully these are in the minority!
Hoovie
03-14-2008, 11:32 PM
Not in my city or fair state, but I do know of a UPC church that is trying to achieve this. Nearly every service involves legalism of some sort. Thankfully these are in the minority!
oh, granted - there are a few such - but the point is they are marginalized and not mainstream.
Pressing-On
03-15-2008, 06:50 AM
Pressing,
Thank you for this post. I understand better where you are coming from but I must say that you have changed, in your mind, what I have said and made it far worse. You posted things I have talked about in the past as absolutes in your post I am quoting above. Like I have said ALL Pentecostal women are ugly and need makeup. We both know that is absolutely not how I have stated things. I have said that the majority of women are not blessed with naturally clear complexions, lips with color, etc and that makup applied properly enhances their appearance (and also furthers the seperation of the sexas by the way - something OP's are supposed to be for).
I have no doubt that there are some stringy haried Pentecostal women that are some of the sweetest women on the planet and godly women as well. That does not mean they don't have stringy hair that does not look good when I see it at Wal Mart. Sorry. That is just a fact. If I post that I see no glory for God in that it is what I believe. It doesn't make these women less godly, less sweet, etc. I have friends and relatives who look like that and I love them dearly.
In your frustration with me you have also personaized my discussions to the point you apparently believe I am trying to personally persuade each and every old time Pentecostal woman to change her standards.
I don't go around "witnessing" to Pentecostal women that they should change in my every day life. This is a DISCUSSION FORUM and this is where I discuss these things.
I have been around hundreds of Pentecostal folks, at least half of them women, and NEVER said one word to them about their hair, dress, or any other standards they choose to keep.
Apparently when you read what I believe is the truth about these subjects you extend that to picture me with some sort of personal vendetta to change all Pentecostal women I come in contact with. Just not true.
Do I hope some people who have come to the same conclusions I have about what the biblical truth and principles are regarding these things read my posts and find inspirtation in them? Of course! Just as I am sure every conservative contending for bundage does.
Don't make it personal!!!!
I am pleased that you still love me because you are one of my favorite posters and the fact that you are so angry with me has distressed me greatly. I can't apologize for what I have posted and written because I meant every word of it but I am sorry that it has made you think less of me and that you think I am not representing my positons well.
I apologize for the rambling nature of this post but it has been a very long day. Maybe I can come back later when I am refreshed with some of the good brisket my wife is cooking and edit it so that it makes sense!
God Bless You Pressing On
WOW, I may have misunderstood you all these years?!!! Is that why people get divorced?!!! ;)
Thank you for your post. Maybe I should have talked with you back on AFF. :killinme
Okay, :tissue:tissue I'll read your future posts with more objectivity. I can only try. :friend
Pressing-On
03-15-2008, 06:52 AM
I believe PO has misunderstood your sense of humor at times too.
:swoon
CC1, this post again demonstrates how long you have been gone... I would say there are very very few who would harp on such every sermon.
Stephen,
When you have as many relatives and friends still UPC as I do you are not "gone".
When you hear in person or CD, or DVD, or webcast the many sermons I hear each year you are not "gone".
I do believe there are more churches that don't hear the clothesline from the pulpit every sermon as much as you used to now but please note what I said was that even when the clothesline is not preached it is alluded to usually in just about every sermon.
Have you not listened to sermons from all of the major confernces the last few years? I believe you will have a hard time finding one that does not at some point veer off into standards / seperation at some point.
I am not saying every UPC preacher is in the pulpit pounding it and screaming about women with pants on going to hell. Perhaps that is what you think I am thinking.
I will tell you that what I have not personally been exposed to is this supposedly growing segment of UPC churches and pastors where the legalism is not emphasized to the point that many church members do not adhere to them and they are reservd for those who wish to actively participate in platform ministrry, teaching, etc. In other words churches wtih 1st class and 2nd class saints. LOL!!! I guess that is at least a step in the right direction.
I think you guys hear the standards / seperation so much in sermons that you don't realize how much it is there as you just filter it out and remember the other aspects of the sermons. I bet if you go back and listen to sermons from major UPC conferences over the last few years you will be hard pressed to find one that does not incorporate the "hold the fort" message in it.
There is even an entire "Hold The Fort" conference hosted by my friend Pastor Mooney.
WOW, I may have misunderstood you all these years?!!! Is that why people get divorced?!!! ;)
Thank you for your post. Maybe I should have talked with you back on AFF. :killinme
Okay, :tissue:tissue I'll read your future posts with more objectivity. I can only try. :friend
:friend:party
Hoovie
03-15-2008, 12:40 PM
Stephen,
When you have as many relatives and friends still UPC as I do you are not "gone".
When you hear in person or CD, or DVD, or webcast the many sermons I hear each year you are not "gone".
I do believe there are more churches that don't hear the clothesline from the pulpit every sermon as much as you used to now but please note what I said was that even when the clothesline is not preached it is alluded to usually in just about every sermon.
Have you not listened to sermons from all of the major confernces the last few years? I believe you will have a hard time finding one that does not at some point veer off into standards / seperation at some point.
I am not saying every UPC preacher is in the pulpit pounding it and screaming about women with pants on going to hell. Perhaps that is what you think I am thinking.
I will tell you that what I have not personally been exposed to is this supposedly growing segment of UPC churches and pastors where the legalism is not emphasized to the point that many church members do not adhere to them and they are reservd for those who wish to actively participate in platform ministrry, teaching, etc. In other words churches wtih 1st class and 2nd class saints. LOL!!! I guess that is at least a step in the right direction.
I think you guys hear the standards / seperation so much in sermons that you don't realize how much it is there as you just filter it out and remember the other aspects of the sermons. I bet if you go back and listen to sermons from major UPC conferences over the last few years you will be hard pressed to find one that does not incorporate the "hold the fort" message in it.
There is even an entire "Hold The Fort" conference hosted by my friend Pastor Mooney.
Perhaps I am the one insulated ... or am just engaging in wishful thinking?:ursofunny
I will admit
I go to very few major conferences - and listen to even fewer online but I would venture to say clothesline preaching at larger events is intended more to placate the few than influence change for the many - it is commonly agreed the local pastors handles such as he sees fit.
Personally I think there are other aspects of Pentecostalism that are more offensive to visitors than obique references made clothes.
Personally I think there are other aspects of Pentecostalism that are more offensive to visitors than obique references made clothes.
Don't think you are going to get away with slipping in this potentially explosive sentance and it not be noticed!
Splain yourself.
Hoovie
03-15-2008, 02:25 PM
Don't think you are going to get away with slipping in this potentially explosive sentance and it not be noticed!
Splain yourself.
OK then!
I refer to the Holy Moderate Moorings text... (one we should be using more - I might add) :)
I SUBMIT 9, 10, 14, AND 15
Do you agree?
1. Moderation is simply the truth - the left and the right are looking our way
2 Expository Preaching is desired over one word study preaching
3 Seeking Medical Attention is not indicative of Faithlessness
4 Christian intellect is compatible with the Holy Spirit
5 It is impossible to evaluate one's Spiritual condition from outer appearances
6 Moderation should be practiced in all things
7 Dress standards beyond basic modesty are important secondary issues
8 Development of personal convictions and restraint are crucial to the Christian lifestyle
9 We should forsake damnation of Christian Churches who have reached conclusions different than our own.
10 Fervent preaching is desired without a mandatory crowd response
11 Fervent worship is desirable without manipulation from the pulpit or organ
12 There is Oneness of the body, for Clergy and Laity
13 Accountability of all offerings and tithe are required
14 Freedom of individual members includes holding views other than those commonly held by church leadership
15 Fear is contrary to Christian living and should never be extolled from the pulpit
16 Family is a primary institution and is as sacred as the church itself
Pragmatist
03-15-2008, 03:36 PM
Stephen,
When you have as many relatives and friends still UPC as I do you are not "gone".
When you hear in person or CD, or DVD, or webcast the many sermons I hear each year you are not "gone".
I do believe there are more churches that don't hear the clothesline from the pulpit every sermon as much as you used to now but please note what I said was that even when the clothesline is not preached it is alluded to usually in just about every sermon.
Have you not listened to sermons from all of the major confernces the last few years? I believe you will have a hard time finding one that does not at some point veer off into standards / seperation at some point.
I am not saying every UPC preacher is in the pulpit pounding it and screaming about women with pants on going to hell. Perhaps that is what you think I am thinking.
I will tell you that what I have not personally been exposed to is this supposedly growing segment of UPC churches and pastors where the legalism is not emphasized to the point that many church members do not adhere to them and they are reservd for those who wish to actively participate in platform ministrry, teaching, etc. In other words churches wtih 1st class and 2nd class saints. LOL!!! I guess that is at least a step in the right direction.
I think you guys hear the standards / seperation so much in sermons that you don't realize how much it is there as you just filter it out and remember the other aspects of the sermons. I bet if you go back and listen to sermons from major UPC conferences over the last few years you will be hard pressed to find one that does not incorporate the "hold the fort" message in it.
There is even an entire "Hold The Fort" conference hosted by my friend Pastor Mooney.
I would have to agree with Stephen. I think you might hear it more at conferences/camp meetings then at your local church.
I've attended a UPC church for 2 1/2 years, and I honestly don't know what my pastor believes in regard to standards. The only thing he's stated from the pulpit was something about women cutting their hair when they backslide. He does occasionally make reference to separation issues, but certainly not every sermon.
Mr. Steinway
03-15-2008, 04:06 PM
Of couse, I must side with CC1! :D
Mrs. Pianoman and I decided to visit the Tennessee District Campmeeting a couple of years ago when it was in Nashville. We picked a certain night that fit into our schedule. As luck would have it, Mrs. Pianoman was the only woman that I noticed that had short cut hair. (To her shoulders) There were probably others there with cut hair, but they had it fixed up in a Pentecostal style.
Well....sure enough, the night speaker got off on women cutting their hair! Mrs. Pianoman felt like the whole church was staring at her! :D
At a camp meeting, isn't this like preaching to the choir? Of course, he had everyone on their feet rejoicing which was probably his intent!
Pragmatist
03-15-2008, 04:37 PM
Of couse, I must side with CC1! :D
Mrs. Pianoman and I decided to visit the Tennessee District Campmeeting a couple of years ago when it was in Nashville. We picked a certain night that fit into our schedule. As luck would have it, Mrs. Pianoman was the only woman that I noticed that had short cut hair. (To her shoulders) There were probably others there with cut hair, but they had it fixed up in a Pentecostal style.
Well....sure enough, the night speaker got off on women cutting their hair! Mrs. Pianoman felt like the whole church was staring at her! :D
At a camp meeting, isn't this like preaching to the choir? Of course, he had everyone on their feet rejoicing which was probably his intent!
Well, I did include camp meetings. I have no idea why speakers feel the need to pontificate on standards at such gatherings. Maybe, because it's the only chance they get these days. :)
I'm still in the upci, and my district is considered liberal. CC1 you are dead on. There are elements of clothelines in every conference.
Stephen,
When you have as many relatives and friends still UPC as I do you are not "gone".
When you hear in person or CD, or DVD, or webcast the many sermons I hear each year you are not "gone".
I do believe there are more churches that don't hear the clothesline from the pulpit every sermon as much as you used to now but please note what I said was that even when the clothesline is not preached it is alluded to usually in just about every sermon.
Have you not listened to sermons from all of the major confernces the last few years? I believe you will have a hard time finding one that does not at some point veer off into standards / seperation at some point.
I am not saying every UPC preacher is in the pulpit pounding it and screaming about women with pants on going to hell. Perhaps that is what you think I am thinking.
I will tell you that what I have not personally been exposed to is this supposedly growing segment of UPC churches and pastors where the legalism is not emphasized to the point that many church members do not adhere to them and they are reservd for those who wish to actively participate in platform ministrry, teaching, etc. In other words churches wtih 1st class and 2nd class saints. LOL!!! I guess that is at least a step in the right direction.
I think you guys hear the standards / seperation so much in sermons that you don't realize how much it is there as you just filter it out and remember the other aspects of the sermons. I bet if you go back and listen to sermons from major UPC conferences over the last few years you will be hard pressed to find one that does not incorporate the "hold the fort" message in it.
There is even an entire "Hold The Fort" conference hosted by my friend Pastor Mooney.
Brother Price
03-15-2008, 07:32 PM
Of couse, I must side with CC1! :D
Mrs. Pianoman and I decided to visit the Tennessee District Campmeeting a couple of years ago when it was in Nashville. We picked a certain night that fit into our schedule. As luck would have it, Mrs. Pianoman was the only woman that I noticed that had short cut hair. (To her shoulders) There were probably others there with cut hair, but they had it fixed up in a Pentecostal style.
Well....sure enough, the night speaker got off on women cutting their hair! Mrs. Pianoman felt like the whole church was staring at her! :D
At a camp meeting, isn't this like preaching to the choir? Of course, he had everyone on their feet rejoicing which was probably his intent!
This is so sad to hear.
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
{Romans 8:1}
Felicity
03-15-2008, 08:12 PM
Felicity,
Thank you. It doesn't bother me when Newbies like Scotty get their...er....undies all twisted up at my posts but it is a whole other story when it is a long time fellow poster who has been around a long time, long enough to have seen the totality of my posting.
I know some things I post upset traditional old time Pentecostals greatly but I have tried to be emphatic without impuning people. Apparently that is impossible as some people take general observations very personally when they are not intended that way.Understood.
I've always found you to be appreciative of your roots, true to your convictions .... an intelligent, fair poster .... and have never found you to be mean-spirited.
I wish you the best with your Admin duties. May God grant you much wisdom and patience. ;) :) and hopefully you can maintain your sense of humour. It would be a terrible shame to see that lost. :)
Jekyll
03-15-2008, 10:25 PM
And this post should sum it up..........I've read thru the entire thread, and I've been in places where CC1's perception has been reality, and I've been in places where it was far from the true situation. I absolutely do NOT agree with CC's assertion that it's nearly 100% of UPC pastors who harp on standards, sorry CC. However, I do agree that it happens more than it should.
And, I totally understand Scotty's point, and I believe that Scotty has said numerous times that God deals with each person individually, and he respects that, and I respect Scotty for feeling that way.
Bottom line - not all liberals are liberated, and not all conservatives are bound. Many people follow standards because they truly beleive them, and many people have left "standards" because God has truly liberated them.
In the mix, you have conservatives who are conservative but don't know why, and you have liberals who are bitter at the UPC.
Bottom line folks, PO said it, we must all respect each other and pray for each other, and stop with the broad brushing!
This is not a bottom line. People have left "standards" because God has truly liberated them??? This reveals your tilted slant in a post masquerading as balanced. And you call for a stop to the broad brushing - hogwash.
This place sure has gotten smug in the past month or so. Better watch out, it might become the bitter exUPC version of GNC where the UPC is hypocritical if they do and hypocritical if they don't, and where anything more conserviative is, well, unspeakable heresy from the hot place. Whose backs are you going to get tired of slapping then?
RandyWayne
03-15-2008, 10:34 PM
This is not a bottom line. People have left "standards" because God has truly liberated them??? This reveals your tilted slant in a post masquerading as balanced. And you call for a stop to the broad brushing - hogwash.
This place sure has gotten smug in the past month or so. Better watch out, it might become the bitter exUPC version of GNC where the UPC is hypocritical if they do and hypocritical if they don't, and where anything more conserviative is, well, unspeakable heresy from the hot place. Whose backs are you going to get tired of slapping then?
It stings doesn't it? :)
Jekyll
03-16-2008, 01:44 AM
It stings doesn't it? :)
This is laughable. What stings? I hope you aren't giving this site more credence than it deserves.
This makes me laugh. Really :ursofunny
:bored
Perfect example of the persecution complex.
What I took from Phelps' quote was the standards people left were man-made standards. Jekyll turns the phrase around to suggest people are against personal convictions. Personal issues are not the issue. The corporate mentality is still predominately dress codes and hair. Again has anyone other than myself attempted to explain what apostolic identity is referred to in this opening post?
Rod Parsley has a better grasp of Apostolic identity than 98% of the upci churches.
This is not a bottom line. People have left "standards" because God has truly liberated them??? This reveals your tilted slant in a post masquerading as balanced. And you call for a stop to the broad brushing - hogwash.
This place sure has gotten smug in the past month or so. Better watch out, it might become the bitter exUPC version of GNC where the UPC is hypocritical if they do and hypocritical if they don't, and where anything more conserviative is, well, unspeakable heresy from the hot place. Whose backs are you going to get tired of slapping then?
Jekyll
03-16-2008, 08:59 AM
Perfect example of the persecution complex.
What I took from Phelps' quote was the standards people left were man-made standards. Jekyll turns the phrase around to suggest people are against personal convictions. Personal issues are not the issue. The corporate mentality is still predominately dress codes and hair. Again has anyone other than myself attempted to explain what apostolic identity is referred to in this opening post?
Rod Parsley has a better grasp of Apostolic identity than 98% of the upci churches.
Who's being persecuted? Who said anything about personal convictions?
TV, your efforts to destroy conservative beliefs are nothing new, you have a daily diatribe decrying the very essence of standards that are believed by a church yet you become holier than thou when people don't buy your circular argument. You are as transparent as glass to those who have credibility and ethics. No matter how you spin it you are against any kind of boundary preached over a pulpit. In fact, you display a persecution complex very well. You try to minimize standards as a way of dress or state of uncut hair. If you think this is all that a standard intails, you are quite ignorant. But I don't think you believe that. It's just easier to discount convictions here. Of course, it's easy to preach to the choir in the middle of the mob.
I don't expect you to change what you believe, just don't expose the two sides of your mouth so blatantly, it ruins your credibility.
A_PoMo
03-16-2008, 09:18 AM
Not to totally change the subject, but I don't get the whole platform standard idea. You either believe it or you don't. Why would you go half way?
Not to totally change the subject, but I don't get the whole platform standard idea. You either believe it or you don't. Why would you go half way?
I find these new type UPC churches fascinating. Like you I am at a bit of a loss to understand why "leadership" roles in the church are held to one "standard" while saints who are not going to have a "platform" ministry, teach, etc are accepted without adhering to it.
I guess it is a step in the right direction and possibly an "interim" step by some pastors who don't really hold to the corporate legalism anymore but don't really know what to do about it as they don't want something many saints Christian life has been built around to be pulled out from under them. This could be a slow method of change.
I am othres stance is that they are just being open to the Holy Spirit bringing regular saints to a better understanding of why they need to adopt the dress code / "standard" required of people on the platform and in ministry. That they are not excluding people based on voluntarily adopting the legalism but just not putting them in positions of leadership.
I find these new type UPC churches fascinating. Like you I am at a bit of a loss to understand why "leadership" roles in the church are held to one "standard" while saints who are not going to have a "platform" ministry, teach, etc are accepted without adhering to it.
I guess it is a step in the right direction and possibly an "interim" step by some pastors who don't really hold to the corporate legalism anymore but don't really know what to do about it as they don't want something many saints Christian life has been built around to be pulled out from under them. This could be a slow method of change.
I am othres stance is that they are just being open to the Holy Spirit bringing regular saints to a better understanding of why they need to adopt the dress code / "standard" required of people on the platform and in ministry. That they are not excluding people based on voluntarily adopting the legalism but just not putting them in positions of leadership.
It's not just the UPCI...I first encountered this is the COOLJC a few years ago.
I didn't understand then and I don't now...
Hoovie
03-16-2008, 02:43 PM
I totally understand it. It is Biblical to have high standards for those in leadership.
Standards of behavior, and dress are common for leadership in most groups.
For example, last year the Southern Baptist Convention issued a statement forbiding teaching and practice of "speaking in tongues" for leadership. Naturally, there are many within the Baptist org. that speak in tongues - and no one will root them out.
Dress code is also not reserved for Apostolic leadership. Many require formal suits and tie and some even demand a clerical collar and other litergical vestments.
Many things can be prefered without them automatically being salvific or essential.
IMO... this is all good.
I read a similar diatribe by Phil Jones. I'll repeat to you what I posted in response to his ignorant. By the way he coward his way out of the discussion when I posted irrefutable facts. I would be ever so humble if I was only a small part of the reason he doesn't post much around aff because his attacks against me were personal, and unwarranted.
Now to respond to your bovine excrement. I biblically distinguish between conservativism and legalism. Legalism has infiltrated conservatism so deeply no one can hear the cry of real conservatives... Legalists put more emphasis on subjective matters and expect everyone else to think the same way. Legalism is a rules based religion based on finding loopholes. Conservatives are consistent in principle.
I have on more than one occassion defended conservatives against unwarranted attacks. Unfortunately many of those unwarranted attacks came at the hands of legalists, those the conservative would consider brother in arms. There are those who frequent this forum who can attest to that fact.
Before you get your fruit of the looms all bunched up about my so called attack against standards, I suggest you find the thread I started which states my core principles. If you want to keep your misconception of my views after reading the first few posts where I mention my core principles, than you are worse off than I thought. Just to let you know there has not one legalist, nor one conservative who had any issue with my core principles. Some have commented to me I was more conservative than they thought. Not a bad compliment for a guy who doesn't get his thrills off labels.
Your problems is common among people with legalistic leanings. There is an inability to distinguish between discussing personal convictions with a discussion of unbiblical mandates.
I'm all for Biblical boundaries. The idea that the corporate apostolic identity is wrapped around unbiblical standards should be cause for alarm.
If one wants to talk about circular argument, why not discuss how internet is okay, yet television is the tool of Satan. Legalism if full of circular logic. I give too much credit to legalism by using the word logic in the same sentence.
I have no problem with conservatism because I understand conservatism. I get along great with conservatives, liberals and moderates, oh my. (tribute to wizzard of oz). Legalism however is destructive and has no place in the Body of Christ. Legalism is a cancer that obviously when left unchecked ends up as bad as witchcraft (Galatians 3:1). The body of Christ should treat legalism the same way it treats a group of wiccans.
Again I invite you to do some research. My core beleifs are out there. I'll make the same challenge to you as I did to Phil Jones and others, find one flaw in those principles. So far just like the self righteouss individuals who wanted to stone the woman caught in adultery, every one of them had to drops their rocks and go back into their little caves.
Who's being persecuted? Who said anything about personal convictions?
TV, your efforts to destroy conservative beliefs are nothing new, you have a daily diatribe decrying the very essence of standards that are believed by a church yet you become holier than thou when people don't buy your circular argument. You are as transparent as glass to those who have credibility and ethics. No matter how you spin it you are against any kind of boundary preached over a pulpit. In fact, you display a persecution complex very well. You try to minimize standards as a way of dress or state of uncut hair. If you think this is all that a standard intails, you are quite ignorant. But I don't think you believe that. It's just easier to discount convictions here. Of course, it's easy to preach to the choir in the middle of the mob.
I don't expect you to change what you believe, just don't expose the two sides of your mouth so blatantly, it ruins your credibility.
A good reason to get rid of those hideous choir robes...
Not to totally change the subject, but I don't get the whole platform standard idea. You either believe it or you don't. Why would you go half way?
Fiyahstarter
03-16-2008, 09:48 PM
I'm all for Biblical boundaries. The idea that the corporate apostolic identity is wrapped around unbiblical standards should be cause for alarm.
If one wants to talk about circular argument, why not discuss how internet is okay, yet television is the tool of Satan. Legalism if full of circular logic. I give too much credit to legalism by using the word logic in the same sentence.
I have no problem with conservatism because I understand conservatism. I get along great with conservatives, liberals and moderates, oh my. (tribute to wizard of oz). Legalism however is destructive and has no place in the Body of Christ. Legalism is a cancer that obviously when left unchecked ends up as bad as witchcraft (Galatians 3:1). The body of Christ should treat legalism the same way it treats a group of wiccans.
Again I invite you to do some research. My core beleifs are out there. I'll make the same challenge to you as I did to Phil Jones and others, find one flaw in those principles. So far just like the self righteouss individuals who wanted to stone the woman caught in adultery, every one of them had to drops their rocks and go back into their little caves.
Phenomenal Post! Right on target.
And for the record, let me state this upfront: I neither LOVE nor HATE UPC. I've been in it 10 years, and love some things about it, and hate other things. I have no generational loyalty or ANY loyalty for that matter to the "organization"... I am quite indifferent to it, actually. But I do love the APOSTOLIC message and Jesus Christ. And I do love my pastor, who is NOT a clothesline preacher.
I have been to several women's conferences, some of which were very POWERFUL. However, I have to admit, I walked out on Ruth Reider's Holiness Session at one conference, it was so sickening. (And yes, there always was at least one session at each conference telling us womenfolk how to dress if we are to be approved by "The Church" (UPC in their book) and to be approved by the other saints.) And yes, they covered the uncut hair doctrine and the no-pants-on-women thing. And yes, you are not fully approved nor accepted if you don't agree with their standards.
NOW... several posts back (I can't remember the poster), someone stated they were tired of being constantly criticized because they still ADHERED to the standards. Well I have to say, in my 10 years of UPC, I have been CONSTANTLY looked down on by many in the UPC because I did not "fall in" and obey "The Standards" ... so all I can say is, I KNOW HOW YOU FEEL, Buddy. Not so fun when the shoe is on the other foot, is it?
Whole Hearted
03-17-2008, 07:57 AM
Not to totally change the subject, but I don't get the whole platform standard idea. You either believe it or you don't. Why would you go half way?
I agree, if it is wrong on the platform it is wrong in the pew.
The only difference being maybe that those on the platform be a little dresser Than others. You know men in ties and dress shirts, ladies in hose kind of thing.
So if one is a church member they should also live godly and dress godly not just the platform staff.
Sinner are welcome anyway we can get them here.
Michael Phelps
03-17-2008, 08:03 AM
This is not a bottom line. People have left "standards" because God has truly liberated them??? This reveals your tilted slant in a post masquerading as balanced. And you call for a stop to the broad brushing - hogwash.
This place sure has gotten smug in the past month or so. Better watch out, it might become the bitter exUPC version of GNC where the UPC is hypocritical if they do and hypocritical if they don't, and where anything more conserviative is, well, unspeakable heresy from the hot place. Whose backs are you going to get tired of slapping then?
Sorry, my friend, this post merely reveals your twisted slant that anyone who leaves standards is backslidden.
Simply not so.
I suppose if this place is so smug, maybe you should find another forum that is more conducive to your "broad brush" ideas that anyone who doesn't believe it the way you do is lost.
A good reason to get rid of those hideous choir robes...
Disagree...choir robes cause those in misic ministry to look the same, thus taking the congregation's attention away from who is wearing what, to what they are presenting in ministry.
II Chronicles 5:12 states in the KJV that the singers and musicians were "arrayed in white..." In other words, they were uniform...they all looked the same. JMHO
Jermyn Davidson
03-17-2008, 09:10 AM
Choir robes are too hot! When you want to praise the Lord with your voice and a dance, you lose your breath real easy and sweat a whole lot. So then afterwards, you go and hang your sweaty robe in a robe closet with other sweaty robes where it will hang until next Sunday night. EEEWWW!
Then, what about the poor Christian that wants to praise the Lord and then as they start, they trip over their robe? Not only that, they are expensive to maintain and I think they are flashy and take away from the ministering that could be happening when people sing.
I don't even like the idea of "uniforms" in a church, but it's not a big deal. Just not my preference.
Choir robes are too hot! When you want to praise the Lord with your voice and a dance, you lose your breath real easy and sweat a whole lot. So then afterwards, you go and hang your sweaty robe in a robe closet with other sweaty robes where it will hang until next Sunday night. EEEWWW!
Then, what about the poor Christian that wants to praise the Lord and then as they start, they trip over their robe? Not only that, they are expensive to maintain and I think they are flashy and take away from the ministering that could be happening when people sing.
I don't even like the idea of "uniforms" in a church, but it's not a big deal. Just not my preference.
Robes don't have to be flashy and are not nearly as distracting as what some wear in the choir stand...JMHO...
Whole Hearted
03-17-2008, 09:30 AM
Choir robes also cover a multitude of sins.
Choir robes also cover a multitude of sins.
Huh?!
Michael Phelps
03-17-2008, 09:49 AM
Disagree...choir robes cause those in misic ministry to look the same, thus taking the congregation's attention away from who is wearing what, to what they are presenting in ministry.
II Chronicles 5:12 states in the KJV that the singers and musicians were "arrayed in white..." In other words, they were uniform...they all looked the same. JMHO
How do you feel about preachers wearing robes? I know of a UPC pastor who wore one when he preached, a pretty flashy one, at that.
How do you feel about preachers wearing robes? I know of a UPC pastor who wore one when he preached, a pretty flashy one, at that.
You have to understand that though raised UPCI, I was nearly 24 years in the COOLJC, and preaching robes was a common thing.
My personal opinion is that anything that distracts from ministry is not good. So a flashy robe on a preacher...no...
However, I see nothing wrong with a preacher wearing a robe, if that were his choice.
How do you feel about preachers wearing robes? I know of a UPC pastor who wore one when he preached, a pretty flashy one, at that.
You didn't ask me, but, if a preacher wants to wear a robe while preaching then I don't see anything wrong with it. Jesus wore a robe when He preached! :D
Michael Phelps
03-17-2008, 10:18 AM
You have to understand that though raised UPCI, I was nearly 24 years in the COOLJC, and preaching robes was a common thing.
My personal opinion is that anything that distracts from ministry is not good. So a flashy robe on a preacher...no...
However, I see nothing wrong with a preacher wearing a robe, if that were his choice.
Thanks for the response, I really didn't know what to think of it at first, since it was something that I wasn't used to - but I could find no good reason NOT to, other than - as you say - IF it detracts from the message.
scotty
03-17-2008, 10:59 AM
I have been to several women's conferences, some of which were very POWERFUL. However, I have to admit, I walked out on Ruth Reider's Holiness Session at one conference, it was so sickening. (And yes, there always was at least one session at each conference telling us womenfolk how to dress if we are to be approved by "The Church" (UPC in their book) and to be approved by the other saints.) And yes, they covered the uncut hair doctrine and the no-pants-on-women thing. And yes, you are not fully approved nor accepted if you don't agree with their standards.
NOW... several posts back (I can't remember the poster), someone stated they were tired of being constantly criticized because they still ADHERED to the standards. Well I have to say, in my 10 years of UPC, I have been CONSTANTLY looked down on by many in the UPC because I did not "fall in" and obey "The Standards" ... so all I can say is, I KNOW HOW YOU FEEL, Buddy. Not so fun when the shoe is on the other foot, is it?
But you just said that your preacher was not a clothesline preacher so why are you looked down on?...the conferences? then don't go. Simple answer huh. Is there not a church that has everything the UPC has without the standards? If so why would any of you bother with UPC? What is it about UPC that keeps them coming despite hating the standards?
lilanastasia
03-17-2008, 11:39 AM
Not to totally change the subject, but I don't get the whole platform standard idea. You either believe it or you don't. Why would you go half way?
I think the proper term should be platform "RULES", you think?
If the church teaches a specific standard, then that standard should be respected at all times - not just when you're on the platform...correct?
Our church has platform "rules" - pantyhose, hair "up", men in white shirts, no slits...stuff like that - but they certainly aren't "standards" - or something that we would consider a heaven/hell issue.
Jermyn Davidson
03-17-2008, 11:50 AM
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/picture.php?albumid=37&pictureid=236
I must have laughed for about 5 mins straight on this picture.
I can answer the above question: I learned how to pray at the most legalistic UPCI church I have ever attended! I learned how to pray, experienced God in such a powerful way, used of God there like no where else before or since, to date-- all while going to a church where the Pastor from the pulpit spoke specifically against men wearing facial hair. He told them to find another church to attend if they wanted to keep their mustache. This was done while a man who had been a backslider had returned to Christ, though he was never a member of this church. He and his wife never came back while I was stationed there. When I left that duty station, I was glad to leave that church.
scotty
03-17-2008, 11:58 AM
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/picture.php?albumid=37&pictureid=236
I must have laughed for about 5 mins straight on this picture.
.
Stupid isn't it ?
You can't stop watching it..
Fiyahstarter
03-17-2008, 01:19 PM
But you just said that your preacher was not a clothesline preacher so why are you looked down on?...the conferences? then don't go. Simple answer huh. Is there not a church that has everything the UPC has without the standards? If so why would any of you bother with UPC? What is it about UPC that keeps them coming despite hating the standards?
My pastor is NOT a clothesline preacher. Neither does my pastor nor my first lady look down on me. The "looking down" comes from SOME (not all... not even most... just some) in the church that take it upon themselves to judge people.
As I said, there are some things I love about UPC, other things I hate. The things I LOVE are of GOD. The things I hate are of man. I have enough goose sense to separate the two.
Obviously, there is more that I love about my church than hate, else'n I'd take your advice and just get out (and why do I get the impression that is what you would like me to do???) I'm sure if I had started out at one of the more conservative UPC churches, I WOULD HAVE "gotten out" a long time ago!!
You do seem to be very touchy on the subject of standards. I have a question for you. Can you accept me if I don't adhere to your holiness standards?
Here's my thing. I promise not to make fun of the way you dress if you promise not to make fun of the way I dress. 'K?
Here's my thing. I promise not to make fun of the way you dress if you promise not to make fun of the way I dress. 'K?
If only it were that simple...............................
I think the proper term should be platform "RULES", you think?
If the church teaches a specific standard, then that standard should be respected at all times - not just when you're on the platform...correct?
Our church has platform "rules" - pantyhose, hair "up", men in white shirts, no slits...stuff like that - but they certainly aren't "standards" - or something that we would consider a heaven/hell issue.
Yes, now I can understand rules as you stated them...don't agree with all of them, but understand 'rules'.
Fiyahstarter
03-17-2008, 02:50 PM
Choir robes also cover a multitude of sins.
If you mean as in the Sin of Overindulgence of the Twinkies, I agree. LOL!
If you mean as in the Sin of Overindulgence of the Twinkies, I agree. LOL!
Hold on there!!! Ain't nuttin in da Bible bout eatin twinkies!!!! You leave them alone and out of this discussion!!!! :D
Whole Hearted
03-17-2008, 03:02 PM
If you mean as in the Sin of Overindulgence of the Twinkies, I agree. LOL!
No I mean immodest dress.
Hold on there!!! Ain't nuttin in da Bible bout eatin twinkies!!!! You leave them alone and out of this discussion!!!! :D
Oh Rico...they're meddlin now...!! :killinme
Oh Rico...they're meddlin now...!! :killinme
For real!! Talk about startin WW3!!! Hmph!! hehehehehehe!
Fiyahstarter
03-17-2008, 03:07 PM
Come on, guys. Lighten up!!! (I mean that literally!!! hahaha!)
Come on, guys. Lighten up!!! (I mean that literally!!! hahaha!)
Hehehehehe. You just crossed the line is all. We will forgive you this time, BUT IT'S THE ONLY CHANCE YOU'LL GET!!!! :D
Jehoram
03-17-2008, 03:18 PM
What a difference a line can make.
scotty
03-17-2008, 03:47 PM
My pastor is NOT a clothesline preacher. Neither does my pastor nor my first lady look down on me. The "looking down" comes from SOME (not all... not even most... just some) in the church that take it upon themselves to judge people.
As I said, there are some things I love about UPC, other things I hate. The things I LOVE are of GOD. The things I hate are of man. I have enough goose sense to separate the two.
Obviously, there is more that I love about my church than hate, else'n I'd take your advice and just get out (and why do I get the impression that is what you would like me to do???)
Not at all sister, not at all
I'm sure if I had started out at one of the more conservative UPC churches, I WOULD HAVE "gotten out" a long time ago!!
You do seem to be very touchy on the subject of standards. I have a question for you. Can you accept me if I don't adhere to your holiness standards?
Yes ma'am I can
Here's my thing. I promise not to make fun of the way you dress if you promise not to make fun of the way I dress. 'K?
Not touchy on the subject itself , just touchy about people who judge it,
Your last line sums up the way I feel.
Like I have said, My pastor teaches that how you live for God is between you and God. Our job is to get people in the church, God will do the rest.
Fiyahstarter
03-17-2008, 08:25 PM
Not touchy on the subject itself , just touchy about people who judge it,
Your last line sums up the way I feel.
Like I have said, My pastor teaches that how you live for God is between you and God. Our job is to get people in the church, God will do the rest.
Praise God! I do believe we can work together for the good!! And I appreciate your dialogue with me!
Just don't get all touchy when God does something different than you expected. God isn't going to put everyone in long sleeves long skirts, and long hair.
Not touchy on the subject itself , just touchy about people who judge it,
Your last line sums up the way I feel.
Like I have said, My pastor teaches that how you live for God is between you and God. Our job is to get people in the church, God will do the rest.
Jermyn Davidson
03-18-2008, 08:51 AM
Just don't get all touchy when God does something different than you expected. God isn't going to put everyone in long sleeves long skirts, and long hair.
Yeah, I don't feel God moving me in that direction in our relationship.http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon11.gif
Just don't get all touchy when God does something different than you expected. God isn't going to put everyone in long sleeves long skirts, and long hair.
For some the sleeves and skirts might be debatable but they believe that long uncut hair on women is an absolute. That is how they believe the scripture reads so in their paradigm God is not going to go against his word and condone something different.
scotty
03-18-2008, 11:10 AM
Just don't get all touchy when God does something different than you expected. God isn't going to put everyone in long sleeves long skirts, and long hair.
Does it say anywhere in my post that I believe that way?!?!?!
*sigh*
I don't know what I have to say or how I have to say it to get it through everyones head.
Its like you can't be a member of UPC and NOT cram standards down people throat or expect them to adhere.
I am starting to wonder if maybe the brainwash, kool-aid drinking is really on the other side of the court. Ya'll have been douped into thinking all this negativity about UPC.
Not all Democrats are queers, lesbians, baby killers, anti-christians, etc. But we associated democrats with the radical aspects of the parties. The radical aspect of the upci is still in control. The "Apostolic Identity" as defined by upci is unscriptural. A broad brush is acceptable to use when over 90% of one's group has those thoughts.
Does it say anywhere in my post that I believe that way?!?!?!
*sigh*
I don't know what I have to say or how I have to say it to get it through everyones head.
Its like you can't be a member of UPC and NOT cram standards down people throat or expect them to adhere.
I am starting to wonder if maybe the brainwash, kool-aid drinking is really on the other side of the court. Ya'll have been douped into thinking all this negativity about UPC.
scotty
03-18-2008, 11:23 AM
For some the sleeves and skirts might be debatable but they believe that long uncut hair on women is an absolute. That is how they believe the scripture reads so in their paradigm God is not going to go against his word and condone something different.
Who is "they"?
Who are you talking to?
Who's paradigm?
My UPC church has one with facial hair that runs the sound booth.:tattle
We have a lady that wears a little foundation and color, and some hair color who sits on the platform and signs for our deaf members.:faint
I am afraid to judge, but the credibility of some that I read on here is waning. Seems I see just as many on here saying these things are not true of UPC as there are saying UPC is guilty of them.
Are both right?
scotty
03-18-2008, 11:27 AM
Not all Democrats are queers, lesbians, baby killers, anti-christians, etc. But we associated democrats with the radical aspects of the parties. The radical aspect of the upci is still in control. The "Apostolic Identity" as defined by upci is unscriptural. A broad brush is acceptable to use when over 90% of one's group has those thoughts.
:bored
So where does the 90% come from,
Got a break down of that figure ? :nah
triumphant1
03-18-2008, 01:39 PM
Who is "they"?
Who are you talking to?
Who's paradigm?
My UPC church has one with facial hair that runs the sound booth.:tattle
We have a lady that wears a little foundation and color, and some hair color who sits on the platform and signs for our deaf members.:faint
I am afraid to judge, but the credibility of some that I read on here is waning. Seems I see just as many on here saying these things are not true of UPC as there are saying UPC is guilty of them.
Are both right?
I have refrained from commenting on this matter but feel I should perhaps offer a perspective from one who was very much a part of the UPC both through evangelizing for almost 9 years full time to pastoring for 8 more....
Your perspective seems to show that you have not widely travelled the UPC...because if you had you'd surely know that the issue of "standard emphasis" varies widely from district to district--and sometimes even from section to section in a district.
The church you describe attending would find it hard pressed to be used on any level in some districts...truly, a man being used with facial hair and a lady on the platform with dyed hair and make-up would constitute an issue of little or no fellowship...you would also find these topics being mentioned AT EVERY district event including youth camps, men's and ladies retreats, and camp meeting....I know this because I lived it. Even at sectional youth rallies remarks were made that were obviously critical of certain ways of operating youth ministry....and you know they are talking about you when you are the only church that is doing it that way...
Ultimately...our church was removed from the section meeting schedule all together--without my knowledge beforehand and although we had the biggest facilities to accommodate the meeting--while still both affiliated with the UPC and pastored by a UPC ordained minister....
At my last district men's meeting a local UPC peer went on a standard rampage--basically describing our church--with the heading, "I want to preach to the preachers for a moment". I was the only preacher in the room that his words applied to, and the men from our church were the only men not standing in rabid "amening"....
Would this be the case in some of the districts I preached in? Absolutely not. My church would have been considered moderate conservative (at the time) in those districts...
Would this have been the case in some of the other districts I used to preach in? Absolutely yes---my church would have been considered "backslide" in those...and would have been a target for pulpit "standards" preaching...
Sorry for the long explanation...but two more things: The fact of the matter is that there are plenty of UPC churches that DON'T constantly harp on the standard issues... but it still remains that in some parts of the country you are not considered "preaching" until you've covered the "apostolic identity" standards...
Second thing: I have been told that when we made the decision to move away from the dress and stuff issues, the amount of "standards" preaching rose in the area--especially in churches that I used to preach in or was "known" in...pastors started harping on things from the pulpit that they hadn't harped on in years...There were family members in my church that received phone calls after said pastors called special "Holiness meetings" to reinforce what they practiced--and even called me by name as being in error...
In closing--I am trying to say that how much these things are mentioned depends on the area--and on the particular circumstance--surrounding the churches in question. And I can attest to the fact that there are UPC churches in my area that harp on it constantly and will "disfellowship" other UPC (and non-upc) churches and people who do not practice it to the letter--to the point of actually dividing families for the sake of their definition of holiness...while at the same time there are some who don't...so, "Yes"...both can be right...(FMPOV)...
scotty
03-18-2008, 03:40 PM
I have refrained from commenting on this matter but feel I should perhaps offer a perspective from one who was very much a part of the UPC both through evangelizing for almost 9 years full time to pastoring for 8 more....
Your perspective seems to show that you have not widely travelled the UPC...because if you had you'd surely know that the issue of "standard emphasis" varies widely from district to district--and sometimes even from section to section in a district.
Arkansas district and North Louisiana to be exact. You made my point, they do very, so why paint the whole org. as being bad. Why the hate is my question I guess. BTW. Been UPC for about 27 years now, not a preacher ( but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night)
The church you describe attending would find it hard pressed to be used on any level in some districts...truly, a man being used with facial hair and a lady on the platform with dyed hair and make-up would constitute an issue of little or no fellowship...you would also find these topics being mentioned AT EVERY district event including youth camps, men's and ladies retreats, and camp meeting....I know this because I lived it. Even at sectional youth rallies remarks were made that were obviously critical of certain ways of operating youth ministry....and you know they are talking about you when you are the only church that is doing it that way...
Hate that for you.
Ultimately...our church was removed from the section meeting schedule all together--without my knowledge beforehand and although we had the biggest facilities to accommodate the meeting--while still both affiliated with the UPC and pastored by a UPC ordained minister....
Ignorant isn't it?
At my last district men's meeting a local UPC peer went on a standard rampage--basically describing our church--with the heading, "I want to preach to the preachers for a moment". I was the only preacher in the room that his words applied to, and the men from our church were the only men not standing in rabid "amening"....
Would this be the case in some of the districts I preached in? Absolutely not. My church would have been considered moderate conservative (at the time) in those districts...
This is what has really changed.
Would this have been the case in some of the other districts I used to preach in? Absolutely yes---my church would have been considered "backslide" in those...and would have been a target for pulpit "standards" preaching...
Sorry for the long explanation...but two more things: The fact of the matter is that there are plenty of UPC churches that DON'T constantly harp on the standard issues... but it still remains that in some parts of the country you are not considered "preaching" until you've covered the "apostolic identity" standards...
Hate that too, but you know, they can come around to the rest of us or they can go WPF
Second thing: I have been told that when we made the decision to move away from the dress and stuff issues, the amount of "standards" preaching rose in the area--especially in churches that I used to preach in or was "known" in...pastors started harping on things from the pulpit that they hadn't harped on in years...There were family members in my church that received phone calls after said pastors called special "Holiness meetings" to reinforce what they practiced--and even called me by name as being in error...
This is sad, good for you for keeping the spirit
In closing--I am trying to say that how much these things are mentioned depends on the area--and on the particular circumstance--surrounding the churches in question. And I can attest to the fact that there are UPC churches in my area that harp on it constantly and will "disfellowship" other UPC (and non-upc) churches and people who do not practice it to the letter--to the point of actually dividing families for the sake of their definition of holiness...while at the same time there are some who don't...so, "Yes"...both can be right...(FMPOV)...
I have to admit that there a few around us that are standards preachers, here is the thing though (not saying its like this everywhere) they are barely making it. Little churches that have more pews than people, and there preacher could preach the walls down and no one else in the district would pay a whole lot of attention.
I know we can both be right, it was said in sarcasm..:bliss
Who is "they"?
Who are you talking to?
Who's paradigm?
My UPC church has one with facial hair that runs the sound booth.:tattle
We have a lady that wears a little foundation and color, and some hair color who sits on the platform and signs for our deaf members.:faint
I am afraid to judge, but the credibility of some that I read on here is waning. Seems I see just as many on here saying these things are not true of UPC as there are saying UPC is guilty of them.
Are both right?
You do read English I trust? If you will read again my post you quoted it had nothing to do with facial hair on men or makeup on women.
I simply was responding to TV1's post about everybody accepting everybody to say that while some "standards" are debatable in some peoples minds others are not as they believe they are a biblical directive. Specifically I listed women cutting their hair.
I was not criticizing anybody in this post just making an observation that a Pentecostal who believes the Bible clearly teaches against a woman cutting her hair is NEVER going to accept it.
scotty
03-18-2008, 06:59 PM
You do read English I trust?
Hey, sarcasm!!! Thought that was my department.:gaga
If you will read again my post you quoted it had nothing to do with facial hair on men or makeup on women.
I simply was responding to TV1's post about everybody accepting everybody to say that while some "standards" are debatable in some peoples minds others are not as they believe they are a biblical directive. Specifically I listed women cutting their hair.
I was not criticizing anybody in this post just making an observation that a Pentecostal who believes the Bible clearly teaches against a woman cutting her hair is NEVER going to accept it.
For the most part your right on this,
there are exceptions though, my favorite exception to list is ME
I was as you say for about the first 15 years of my UPC life, however I have accepted that it is not all inclusive.
You know what a lot of people on here are really gonna hate?!?!
It was a UPC church that changed my understanding.
Thats why I say, before ones on here continue trying to shoot the "mothership" down for going the wrong way, they might take a minute to make sure it is still going that way.
Just a thought
triumphant1
03-18-2008, 07:44 PM
I have to admit that there a few around us that are standards preachers, here is the thing though (not saying its like this everywhere) they are barely making it. Little churches that have more pews than people, and there preacher could preach the walls down and no one else in the district would pay a whole lot of attention.
I know we can both be right, it was said in sarcasm..:bliss
I don't think it is hate...I think it is opposing opinions and negative perceptions. Let me preface my further remarks by saying that as for me I do not hate the UPC..nor do I hate the district which I was once a pastor in. So if you read any hate speech in my posts you are reading way too much into them.
As far as how this discussion has gone I'd say, "Hate?" No. "Negative experience that creates a negative perception?" IMO...yes. If all you know is a very conservative UPC district/section that always harped on standards, then you'd naturally have a perception that the whole org is that way... If all you know is a very tolerant (or liberal) district/section that preached a whole lot of grace and never really touched the dress and hair issues, then you'd have a perception that the whole org is like that...
If the UPC you experienced was mean to you--whether in a local church or in a district/section--because you didn't adhere to the doctrines, then you'd leave believing that the whole org is mean...
To be quite honest, I know several who were treated very harshly by the UPC representatives (both officials and pastors) in their lives over standards...and it taints the whole movement in their eyes...and as long as these dress and hair issues are put out front in district and national events, nothing can change that perception.
But on the same token, I know of people who were mistreated in a dentist's chair, and they will not go to a dentist to this day....they think all dentist are bad...and we both know that this is not the case either.
To be honest again, I was in the UPC for the first 36 years of my life, I had good and bad happen to me at the hands of the UPC representatives in my life. I do not have a jaded perception of the org as a whole because the good balances the bad...therefore I know, I was mistreated by some...but I was loved by others...so the whole org isn't bad after all...just some of its representatives in my life...
Pressing-On
03-19-2008, 05:40 AM
To be honest again, I was in the UPC for the first 36 years of my life, I had good and bad happen to me at the hands of the UPC representatives in my life. I do not have a jaded perception of the org as a whole because the good balances the bad...therefore I know, I was mistreated by some...but I was loved by others...so the whole org isn't bad after all...just some of its representatives in my life...
T1,
I always know when you post you will keep a good attitude about everything. I respect you for that!!!!!
Pressing-On
03-19-2008, 05:55 AM
For some the sleeves and skirts might be debatable but they believe that long uncut hair on women is an absolute. That is how they believe the scripture reads so in their paradigm God is not going to go against his word and condone something different.
CC1,
This is very true. There are people I know that cut their hair and are still uncomfortable about doing that. It's a hard passage.
I believe that I Cor 11 is going over some cultural issues, but the principles taught are still something we can grasp.
In the same chapter the Corinthian church is being corrected on how they have been conducting themselves during the Lord's supper. It seems they have taken some practices from the pagans. A cultural issue, yet the principle is "do this in remembrance of me".
Same with the hair, "For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither, was the man created for the woman; but the woman of the man" is the principle.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.