Chester Wright's Letter to the UPC!!!!!

[Thad]

HEre is Chester WRight's Letter to the UPC about the direction it's going and the TV Issue!








http://www.apostoliciron.com/content.html




Tell me what you think.

Also, I couldn't post the actual letter - If anyone can do it, please do so.



your replies - thanks

[Rev Dooley]

I've already read that mess.
Not worth the webspace IMO.
NI

[Thad]

I've already read that mess.
Not worth the webspace IMO.
NI

why are you calling it a mess ?

that's a little unfair

[Pressing-On]

I think I just got licensed. I opened the pdf.!!!

:preach

:D

[Praxeas]

I think this is a repeat. It was a good letter though

[Steve Epley]

This was NOT for church members but ministers only.

[CC1]

Since Chuck does not want us peons reading his website can someone with a "pulpit" ministry give us a Cliff Notes version of what he says.

[Pressing-On]

Since Chuck does not want us peons reading his website can someone with a "pulpit" ministry give us a Cliff Notes version of what he says.

Just click it! If he really didn't want you to read it he would have set up a password.

Do it!!!! pdf! pdf!!

[Rev Dooley]

why are you calling it a mess ?

that's a little unfairI call it that because his position IMO is very misled and his thinking is severely misguided.
Again, this is IMO.
NI

[CC1]

Is he for or against the TV resolution?

Who is Chester Wright?

[Hoovie]

It's a good read.

[Hoovie]

Is he for or against the TV resolution?

Who is Chester Wright?

He is not so much for or against TV as he is for UNITY.

[Thad]

Is he for or against the TV resolution?

Who is Chester Wright?


he pastor's in Maryland. I believe he was against the booklet that was sent out ???

[Thad]

It's a good read.




why did you think ?

[Praxeas]

Anapolis. Visited once. Good church.

[Thad]

Anapolis. Visited once. Good church.



Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

[Hoovie]

why did you think ?

Because it is silly to think there are major consequences to others if a sister church advertises on TV or not.

If one church wishes to, and another does not - who cares? Some react as if something was being forced upon them.....


IMHO

[Praxeas]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
You ever meet a beholder?
http://www.daimi.au.dk/%7Etrier/wp-content/uploads/beholder.jpg

[Thad]

no that's the beauty you saw ! hehehe

[Praxeas]

Don't get married brother....that is what the wife will look like every morning :ursofunny

[Hesetmefree238]

I believe it is a good article. As he said, if the resolution is passed it is not going to make anyone preach or advertise on television that does not want to.

[Scott Hutchinson]

I couldn't get it to open up.

[Rev Dooley]

Because it is silly to think there are major consequences to others if a sister church advertises on TV or not.

If one church wishes to, and another does not - who cares? Some react as if something was being forced upon them.....


IMHOThe problem is that if Resolution 6 passes, then the issue IS indeed being forced on those who oppose it since they will not be forced to comply by headquarters, but by members from other churches who will likely pressure members of churches who are against the measure.
This will not likely be direct, but it will certainly be there.
Further, it will open a pandora's box of issues such as what is truly godly. Those who are for it already ask that question. It has caused great division.
Finally, UPCI has always stood against it. To change that stance would mean an admission that they were wrong for all of those years. I think that would be a travesty.

If those who want this to happen truly want it, then why are they calling us divisive who are opposed? We didn't bring it up or try to push it. They did. The division has come from their camp.

It would have been more godly on their part to have removed themselves for the sake of unity (which would have been a godly response) instead of fomenting the rebellion that is amongst the ranks.
JMO
NI

[CC1]

The problem is that if Resolution 6 passes, then the issue IS indeed being forced on those who oppose it since they will not be forced to comply by headquarters, but by members from other churches who will likely pressure members of churches who are against the measure.
This will not likely be direct, but it will certainly be there.
Further, it will open a pandora's box of issues such as what is truly godly. Those who are for it already ask that question. It has caused great division.
Finally, UPCI has always stood against it. To change that stance would mean an admission that they were wrong for all of those years. I think that would be a travesty.

If those who want this to happen truly want it, then why are they calling us divisive who are opposed? We didn't bring it up or try to push it. They did. The division has come from their camp.

It would have been more godly on their part to have removed themselves for the sake of unity (which would have been a godly response) instead of fomenting the rebellion that is amongst the ranks.
JMO
NI


The sentance I highlighted is one of the main problems with old time Pentecost. They can never admit anything they have ever done or any stance they have ever taken was wrong or the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

[Rev Dooley]

The sentance I highlighted is one of the main problems with old time Pentecost. They can never admit anything they have ever done or any stance they have ever taken was wrong or the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.I understand where you are coming from, but may I add something here?
To say that something always preached against is now okay is to say that you are now a hypocrite. Certainly not a viable stance.
Also, IMO it is still something that doesn't belong in the home.
Consider:
III VIOLENCE
Number of murders seen on TV by the time an average child finishes elementary school: 8,000 (!)
Number of violent acts seen on TV by age 18: 200,000 (!)
Percentage of Americans who believe TV violence helps precipitate real life mayhem: 79
There are a number of other stats that show the detrimental effect of tv.
If we are to set no wicked thing before our eyes, how can we condone tv?

It displays:
nudity
murder
homosexuality
promiscuity
alcoholism
drug addiction
This list could be astronomically larger.

NI

[rrford]

The sentance I highlighted is one of the main problems with old time Pentecost. They can never admit anything they have ever done or any stance they have ever taken was wrong or the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

In some cases I would agree. But at times changing a stance is not necessarily the same saying "We were wrong." Sometimes it is simply stating that things have changed and so are we.

[Thad]

I understand where you are coming from, but may I add something here?
To say that something always preached against is now okay is to say that you are now a hypocrite. Certainly not a viable stance.
Also, IMO it is still something that doesn't belong in the home.
Consider:
III VIOLENCE
Number of murders seen on TV by the time an average child finishes elementary school: 8,000 (!)
Number of violent acts seen on TV by age 18: 200,000 (!)
Percentage of Americans who believe TV violence helps precipitate real life mayhem: 79
There are a number of other stats that show the detrimental effect of tv.
If we are to set no wicked thing before our eyes, how can we condone tv?

It displays:
nudity
murder
homosexuality
promiscuity
alcoholism
drug addiction
This list could be astronomically larger.

NI


that's all true. no one should argue against that but what about the internet and the problem related to porn and child molestation???
are you equally alarmed about that ?

[Praxeas]

I understand where you are coming from, but may I add something here?
To say that something always preached against is now okay is to say that you are now a hypocrite. Certainly not a viable stance.
Also, IMO it is still something that doesn't belong in the home.
Consider:
III VIOLENCE
Number of murders seen on TV by the time an average child finishes elementary school: 8,000 (!)
Number of violent acts seen on TV by age 18: 200,000 (!)
Percentage of Americans who believe TV violence helps precipitate real life mayhem: 79
There are a number of other stats that show the detrimental effect of tv.
If we are to set no wicked thing before our eyes, how can we condone tv?

It displays:
nudity
murder
homosexuality
promiscuity
alcoholism
drug addiction
This list could be astronomically larger.

NI
All things you can find on the internet for free, including porn, child porn, adult males pretending to be a teen friend to your young daughter, how to make bombs, beheadings by Islamic Terrorists....and more, much more

[Rev Dooley]

that's all true. no one should argue against that but what about the internet and the problem related to porn and child molestation???
are you equally alarmed about that ?There is a whole lot of difference between the two.
For me to go to a porn site, I have to decide to do it. It doesn't happen by accident.
For someone to view something digusting on tv, one need only channel surf and they will see it regardless of whether they intend to or not.
This argument is so worn and thin that it really doesn't have much merit since the two mediums are vastly different.
Also, there are such things called internet filters to protect the accidental viewing of porn. Not available on tv as I recall.
NI

[Praxeas]

There is a whole lot of difference between the two.
For me to go to a porn site, I have to decide to do it. It doesn't happen by accident.
For someone to view something digusting on tv, one need only channel surf and they will see it regardless of whether they intend to or not.
This argument is so worn and thin that it really doesn't have much merit since the two mediums are vastly different.
Also, there are such things called internet filters to protect the accidental viewing of porn. Not available on tv as I recall.
NI
Uh, for me to go to a channel that displays the stuff you talked about, I have to decide to do it.

On the other hand knowing all that stuff is freely there can be a huge temptation for the average man, let alone teen and even women nowadays.

Filters can be thwarted. At home you can decide NOT to order channels that get porn at all

[Scott Hutchinson]

I'm not Upci but I do appreciate NI and his opinion.

[Praxeas]

Nye!

[Thad]

There is a whole lot of difference between the two.
For me to go to a porn site, I have to decide to do it. It doesn't happen by accident.
For someone to view something digusting on tv, one need only channel surf and they will see it regardless of whether they intend to or not.
This argument is so worn and thin that it really doesn't have much merit since the two mediums are vastly different.
Also, there are such things called internet filters to protect the accidental viewing of porn. Not available on tv as I recall.
NI


I agree that TV has had an extremely harmful effect on our youth and the morals of our country. however, for you to deny that there is a MAJOR rise in the area of porn in our church is totally niave. i can't name any marriages that have ended in divorice because of a TV but because of the internet ?? quite a few!

[rrford]

There is a whole lot of difference between the two.
For me to go to a porn site, I have to decide to do it. It doesn't happen by accident.
For someone to view something digusting on tv, one need only channel surf and they will see it regardless of whether they intend to or not.
This argument is so worn and thin that it really doesn't have much merit since the two mediums are vastly different.
Also, there are such things called internet filters to protect the accidental viewing of porn. Not available on tv as I recall.
NI

Sure it is. The problem is that many folks just accpet the argument that there are no such filter capabilites available. Further, when the two technologies totally merge I have a feeling the same filtering the internet now has will alos apply to the integrated media.

[rrford]

I agree that TV has had an extremely harmful effect on our youth and the morals of our country. however, for you to deny that there is a MAJOR rise in the area of porn in our church is totally niave. i can't name any marriages that have ended in divorice because of a TV but because of the internet ?? quite a few!

Thad, this argument is based upon a "specific" case of divorce and not the rise of divorce overall. Statistics have proven that divroce rates began to rise with the advent of television. (Think soap opera.)

Divorce rates in America were climbing long before the invention of the internet.

[Thad]

Thad, this argument is based upon a "specific" case of divorce and not the rise of divorce overall. Statistics have proven that divroce rates began to rise with the advent of television. (Think soap opera.)

Divorce rates in America were climbing long before the invention of the internet.


i think you know what i mean. more men now have access to porn. women have access to chat rooms.

[Rev Dooley]

I agree that TV has had an extremely harmful effect on our youth and the morals of our country. however, for you to deny that there is a MAJOR rise in the area of porn in our church is totally niave. i can't name any marriages that have ended in divorice because of a TV but because of the internet ?? quite a few!Just curious: where did I say that in my post? I can't seem to find it.
I do agree that this has become a much larger issue than in times past. I do agree that the venue of choiceis internet.
That does not take away from the fact that tv is detrimental to the health of a home.
The increase in violent crimes in America can be linked to the increase of viewed violence on tv.
One stat that I saw stated that more women are brutalized during SuperBowl sunday than any other time of the year. That is horrifying to say the least.
And some here think it is okay to watch this?
NI

[rrford]

i think you know what i mean. more men now have access to porn. women have access to chat rooms.

I totally agree. Just wanted to point out that divorce can also be attributed to TV influence. As well as a rise in violent crimes, etc.

[Hoovie]

While TV viewing can be attributed to some of the overall decline and desensitization of morality, I see that the internet can easily make the actual contact between two lustful people. This fact maks the internet a more direct rather than indirect (TV) contributor to marital decay.

[rrford]

While TV viewing can be attributed to some of the overall decline and desensitization of morality, I see that the internet can easily make the actual contact between two lustful people. This fact maks the internet a more direct rather than indirect (TV) contributor to marital decay.

Agreed.

[Rev Dooley]

While TV viewing can be attributed to some of the overall decline and desensitization of morality, I see that the internet can easily make the actual contact between two lustful people. This fact maks the internet a more direct rather than indirect (TV) contributor to marital decay.Regarding moral decay I would say that tv has contributed to most of it not just some.
I do agree that the interent can make contact between two people much easier. Stories abound on this.
Again, the balance to this is that I WILL set no wicked thing before my eyes. The choice is made regardless of the medium used.
NI

[Hoovie]

Regarding moral decay I would say that tv has contributed to most of it not just some.
I do agree that the interent can make contact between two people much easier. Stories abound on this.
Again, the balance to this is that I WILL set no wicked thing before my eyes. The choice is made regardless of the medium used.
NI

I confess I can't quite follow you here. If someone were to have a few religious networks, Fox News, C-span, Weather Channel, and your favorite cooking shows, would it still be a "Wicked Thing"?

There is technology available to have and do just what I mention above. IT IS all about choices we make regardless of the medium used - but I think that destroys your arguement.

Either way - my life is too busy as is, and unless I am convinced I am missing something benefical that can't be otherwise obtained I'll continue to resist becoming a couch potato.:tvhappy

[The Kid]

While TV viewing can be attributed to some of the overall decline and desensitization of morality, I see that the internet can easily make the actual contact between two lustful people. This fact maks the internet a more direct rather than indirect (TV) contributor to marital decay.

This forum can be a contributor to marital decay...

[CC1]

In some cases I would agree. But at times changing a stance is not necessarily the same saying "We were wrong." Sometimes it is simply stating that things have changed and so are we.

Your point is a very imortant one that I should have made in my original post. The very premise that to change ones stance is saying you were wrong is flawed as you point out here.

[Rico]

There is a whole lot of difference between the two.
For me to go to a porn site, I have to decide to do it. It doesn't happen by accident.
For someone to view something digusting on tv, one need only channel surf and they will see it regardless of whether they intend to or not.
This argument is so worn and thin that it really doesn't have much merit since the two mediums are vastly different.
Also, there are such things called internet filters to protect the accidental viewing of porn. Not available on tv as I recall.
NI

Really? Do a search on the word "kitten" and tell me what you find.

[Hoovie]

This forum can be a contributor to marital decay...

Yup. And magazines. There goeth the Pentecostal Herald.

[Hoovie]

Your point is a very imortant one that I should have made in my original post. The very premise that to change ones stance is saying you were wrong is flawed as you point out here.

Actually it can often be a mark of maturity.

[The Kid]

Regarding moral decay I would say that tv has contributed to most of it not just some.
I do agree that the interent can make contact between two people much easier. Stories abound on this.
Again, the balance to this is that I WILL set no wicked thing before my eyes. The choice is made regardless of the medium used.
NI

Funny thing, after all the TV debate, no one has mentioned how easy it has become to bring movies into our homes. Probably the most common statement among UPCers is, "I can't wait till that comes out on DVD!" :slaphappy

This whole debate is laughable to me especially when it is politicized and common sense is found to be so low on the totem pole.

[CC1]

Actually it can often be a mark of maturity.

Many in old time Pentecost have created their own house of cards by emphasizing a laundry list of do's and don'ts so much that people forget those are men's applications of scriptural principles and are apt to change as circumstances do.

When peoples faith is bound up in the legalism the powers that be fear channging any of the legalism or traditions because it could open the door to questioning more of the extra biblical injunctions.

[Truthseeker]

Really? Do a search on the word "kitten" and tell me what you find.

This what I found:

http://www.cutelittlekittens.com/

[The Kid]

Your point is a very imortant one that I should have made in my original post. The very premise that to change ones stance is saying you were wrong is flawed as you point out here.

I was thinking the exact same thing when I read that other post.

CC1, I have a friend in Nashville tonight, she said she bought tix for $167 rt. Can you believe that, its got me thinkin I need a two day vacation that includes a church service and a 6 hr cup of joe... :D

[Truthseeker]

Funny thing, after all the TV debate, no one has mentioned how easy it has become to bring movies into our homes. Probably the most common statement among UPCers is, "I can't wait till that comes out on DVD!" :slaphappy

This whole debate is laughable to me especially when it is politicized and common sense is found to be so low on the totem pole.


If one is going to go rent hollywood movies, they might as well get reg TV.

[CC1]

Funny thing, after all the TV debate, no one has mentioned how easy it has become to bring movies into our homes. Probably the most common statement among UPCers is, "I can't wait till that comes out on DVD!" :slaphappy

This whole debate is laughable to me especially when it is politicized and common sense is found to be so low on the totem pole.

My wife was recently visiting some UPC folks out of town overnight and when I called to see what they were doing they were watching CSI on the computer!!!!

[The Kid]

If one is going to go rent hollywood movies, they might as well get reg TV.

I agree and have both. The total amount of time I watch either is about 5 hours per week, and only after the sun goes down because my projector doesn't work very well during the day. Thank goodness most of the Bronco games were at night this past year. :D

[Truthseeker]

I agree and have both. The total amount of time I watch either is about 5 hours per week, and only after the sun goes down because my projector doesn't work very well during the day. Thank goodness most of the Bronco games were at night this past year. :D

You watch R arted movies?

I've heard of folks watching movies with nudity scenes and all.

May God save us all

[Praxeas]

You ever meet a beholder?
http://www.daimi.au.dk/%7Etrier/wp-content/uploads/beholder.jpg
Here she is again, in case you missed her the first time :-)

[CC1]

I was thinking the exact same thing when I read that other post.

CC1, I have a friend in Nashville tonight, she said she bought tix for $167 rt. Can you believe that, its got me thinkin I need a two day vacation that includes a church service and a 6 hr cup of joe... :D

I think you are thinking right!!!! I would love to have you come spend a weekend with us.

[The Kid]

You watch R arted movies?

I've heard of folks watching movies with nudity scenes and all.

May God save us all

I suppose, action movies with a good story line. I hate sci-fi, horror and gore.

Besides, I have to watch movies nowadays that are either chick flicks or those appropriate for a 6 year old with a precious spirit. That means we watch Movies like Cars, Cheaper by the Dozen II, Ant Bully, The Incredibles...and all those mushy kissy movies with no nudity...unless of course it is Jack Nicholson. :D

I rented the Sopranos one time, couldn't get through the first episode.

[Rico]

You watch R arted movies?

I've heard of folks watching movies with nudity scenes and all.

May God save us all


If you're over 17 then there's nothing wrong with watching an R rated movie. The Passion was an R rated movie.

[Praxeas]

If you're over 17 then there's nothing wrong with watching an R rated movie. The Passion was an R rated movie.
Why "if you are over 17 there's nothing wrong with watching an R rated movie"?

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Here she is again, in case you missed her the first time :-)


Prax, was that your Mother-in-law canditate?

Remember the girls grow up to look like Mom.....

[crakjak]

There is a whole lot of difference between the two.
For me to go to a porn site, I have to decide to do it. It doesn't happen by accident.
For someone to view something digusting on tv, one need only channel surf and they will see it regardless of whether they intend to or not.
This argument is so worn and thin that it really doesn't have much merit since the two mediums are vastly different.
Also, there are such things called internet filters to protect the accidental viewing of porn. Not available on tv as I recall.
NI

You are way behind NI, TV has just as much protection as the internet. Further TV is not nearly as dangerous as the internet, unless one has cable channels. You can tailor your TV with parental controls to suite your liberality or the lack there of.

[Ron]

TV didn't bring "Moral Decay" it is just a "Mirror" that reflects "Society" as it is!

No, I am not saying TV is right, but Society as a whole has gotten so corrupt it is hard to tell the difference with TV & Society as a whole!

JMHO

[Praxeas]

TV didn't bring "Moral Decay" it is just a "Mirror" that reflects "Society" as it is!

No, I am not saying TV is right, but Society as a whole has gotten so corrupt it is hard to tell the difference with TV & Society as a whole!

JMHO
I think they are both concurrent. TV did add to the moral decay just as much as it reflects it

[crakjak]

My wife was recently visiting some UPC folks out of town overnight and when I called to see what they were doing they were watching CSI on the computer!!!!

If a person's relationship with Jesus Christ does not create in them a separation from this world's culture, then all the "standards" that can be written in a book will not separate them from the culture.

As I have said before preach the Word, teach folks to develop deep and intimate relationship with the Lord. Otherwise, folks will walk in the flesh and will miss the life available thru the life of Christ. If this forum would focus on the root sources of righteousness rather than this ridiculous and shallow fussing about all the possible sin one could fall into.....?

Chester Wright's letter actually does highlight the current weakness in the UPC, and it is not the TV advertising issue. The UPC is so diverse (divided)that it lacks any unifying focus. The division on "standards" is actually tearing it apart.

[Ron]

I think they are both concurrent. TV did add to the moral decay just as much as it reflects it

Maybe it just allowed it to be shared so freely?:tvhappy OOOPS!:uhoh

[Praxeas]

Maybe it just allowed it to be shared so freely?:tvhappy OOOPS!:uhoh
It did actually and sadly repeating something over and over and over is how people learn things, including behaviors....they see certain stuff on TV over and over and over and it can have an influence on them

[Ron]

It did actually and sadly repeating something over and over and over is how people learn things, including behaviors....they see certain stuff on TV over and over and over and it can have an influence on them

True. One thing that shocks a generation doesn't faze the next one.

[HappyPastor2]

The problem is that if Resolution 6 passes, then the issue IS indeed being forced on those who oppose it since they will not be forced to comply by headquarters, but by members from other churches who will likely pressure members of churches who are against the measure.
This will not likely be direct, but it will certainly be there.
Further, it will open a pandora's box of issues such as what is truly godly. Those who are for it already ask that question. It has caused great division.
Finally, UPCI has always stood against it. To change that stance would mean an admission that they were wrong for all of those years. I think that would be a travesty.

If those who want this to happen truly want it, then why are they calling us divisive who are opposed? We didn't bring it up or try to push it. They did. The division has come from their camp.

It would have been more godly on their part to have removed themselves for the sake of unity (which would have been a godly response) instead of fomenting the rebellion that is amongst the ranks.
JMO
NI

Exactly. Those wanting this resolution are pushing it over and over in opposition to an organizational stance that is ALMOST as old as the organization itself. Bringing it up continually IS devisive. I am in agreement with Chester Wright about the prevailing attitudes on both sides of the issue; most brethren are caustic on both sides of the issue.

I feel that the writers of the small book that came out (Larry Booker, Peter Connell, Nate Wilson, and Kenny Godair) exhibited a Chirstian spirit regarding their views and that Chester Wright also exhibited that same spirit.

[HappyPastor2]

that's all true. no one should argue against that but what about the internet and the problem related to porn and child molestation???
are you equally alarmed about that ?

Seems that most folks that bring up Internet in this way are not so much saying that we should not use Internet - as they use it for a means of somehow trying to justify the use of television. Hmm...

[HappyPastor2]

Really? Do a search on the word "kitten" and tell me what you find.

Hey "Preacher Hater" What do you find when you search "kitten?" Better learn to love a preacher - that's how you'll be saved.

[Thad]

Seems that most folks that bring up Internet in this way are not so much saying that we should not use Internet - as they use it for a means of somehow trying to justify the use of television. Hmm...


I see that too and i don't understand why. no one can seem to get thru.
many believe(as I do) that the internet is the pathway into the anti christ system. So, certainly it is a LOT more dangerous. I agree with those who are preaching to get rid of the internet AND TV

[HappyPastor2]

TV didn't bring "Moral Decay" it is just a "Mirror" that reflects "Society" as it is!

No, I am not saying TV is right, but Society as a whole has gotten so corrupt it is hard to tell the difference with TV & Society as a whole!

JMHO

TV has clearly contributed to the moral decay. It is not just a mirror. There are enough studies on this to choke a hippo. TV producers are motivated by ratings to produce something more shocking, raw and provoking than the other guy. The widespread use of television in our society has synergistically increased ungodliness in our society. To not see that is to be willfully ignorant or blind.

[chaotic_resolve]

I've already read that mess.
Not worth the webspace IMO.
NI

I call it that because his position IMO is very misled and his thinking is severely misguided.
Again, this is IMO.
NI

Of course, NI would be complimenting the website and CM would be a hero of the faith if he had written against television. But since NI doesn't like what CM wrote, NI bashes the article and the minister. Nice.

Better learn to love a preacher - that's how you'll be saved.
Yah, not so much. Where do you get the idea that preachers are what save you?

Are you misinterpreting scripture: "...foolishness of preaching men would be saved?" Because it's speaking of an act - preaching . . . not a person.

The Grace, Mercy and Love of God is what's going to save me . . . not a preacher.

[Rico]

Better learn to love a preacher - that's how you'll be saved.

Sounds good, but you don't have even one scripture that says I have to love a preacher to make heaven.

[Rico]

TV has clearly contributed to the moral decay. It is not just a mirror. There are enough studies on this to choke a hippo. TV producers are motivated by ratings to produce something more shocking, raw and provoking than the other guy. The widespread use of television in our society has synergistically increased ungodliness in our society. To not see that is to be willfully ignorant or blind.

You guys are hilarious. You act as if the world was a wonderful place to live in before television was invented and all the world's evils can be attributed to tv programs. Life is much better today, even with tv, than it ever was in centuries gone by.

[tbpew]

IMO, a fellowship of member-ministers are wrestling with the implicit reality that, despite a strict expectation that their fellowship does not denominate from any kind of hierarchical structure of men, does in fact do so (albeit inadvertently) by means of the mandated code of non-participation with a media venue established within a membership manual.

The force or agency of divisiveness is not the TV issue, it is the imposition of a rule of conduct denominated from a higher up (the manual) that seems less and less appropriate by more and more member-ministers.

Don’t tell me what I can or can not do!
Do not assert any RULE over me that God has not appointed!

Seems to me that even in a member-minister, non-denominational, fellowship organization, will always have a "men RULING over men" as a divisive issue.

[South of I 90]

I see that too and i don't understand why. no one can seem to get thru.
many believe(as I do) that the internet is the pathway into the anti christ system. So, certainly it is a LOT more dangerous. I agree with those who are preaching to get rid of the internet AND TV

Are you serious?

[South of I 90]

Besides, I have to watch movies nowadays that are either chick flicks or those appropriate for a 6 year old with a precious spirit. That means we watch Movies like Cars, Cheaper by the Dozen II, Ant Bully, The Incredibles...and all those mushy kissy movies with no nudity...unless of course it is Jack Nicholson. :D


Have you seen "The Departed"??

[Twisp]

I see that too and i don't understand why. no one can seem to get thru.
many believe(as I do) that the internet is the pathway into the anti christ system. So, certainly it is a LOT more dangerous. I agree with those who are preaching to get rid of the internet AND TV
I thought the UPCI's mantra/mission statement was to witness in any way possible.

[chaotic_resolve]

I thought the UPCI's mantra/mission statement was to witness in any way possible.

Well, we ~say~ it . . . but we don't really ~mean~ it. And that's not supposed to be too well known. Supposed to be on the DL. :thad

[OGIA]

I thought the UPCI's mantra/mission statement was to witness in any way possible.

Well, we ~say~ it . . . but we don't really ~mean~ it. And that's not supposed to be too well known. Supposed to be on the DL. :thadI've never read "any way possible" in the mission statement. *shrugs*

[chaotic_resolve]

Hmmm. . . just looked at the UPCI.org website - there's no mission statement even posted on there. We've got the Doctrine and Standards posted, but no mission statement.

[Nina]

Exactly. Those wanting this resolution are pushing it over and over in opposition to an organizational stance that is ALMOST as old as the organization itself. Bringing it up continually IS devisive. I am in agreement with Chester Wright about the prevailing attitudes on both sides of the issue; most brethren are caustic on both sides of the issue.

I feel that the writers of the small book that came out (Larry Booker, Peter Connell, Nate Wilson, and Kenny Godair) exhibited a Chirstian spirit regarding their views and that Chester Wright also exhibited that same spirit.


Bro,

Did You read his (Wright's) other article, "Can God Bless a Divided Body?"

Respectfully,
Nina

[Thad]

Are you serious?



my point is, at least they are consistant. To only preach that TV is evil but then have internet makes no sense.

[South of I 90]

my point is, at least they are consistant. To only preach that TV is evil but then have internet makes no sense.

There's no doubt that both of these mediums have major evil elements to them. But in your earlier post you said "I agree with those who are preaching to get rid of the internet AND TV".

Are you willing to do this??

[tbpew]

Thad, SofI-90 has asked twice, are you willing to answer?

There's no doubt that both of these mediums have major evil elements to them. But in your earlier post you said "I agree with those who are preaching to get rid of the internet AND TV".

Are you [Thad] willing to do this??

To that question, I ask you....
Do you really think this issue is about T.V.?
or
Is it a larger issue involving individual member-ministers seeking greater self-determination pertaining to life's choices in general, and specifically, the usage of various media?

[Thad]

Tbpew, you missed my point and after reading the way i worded it I can see how that came about. what i meant is that I see more consistancy in the ones who are preaching against both then just the one

[tbpew]

Tbpew, you missed my point and after reading the way i worded it I can see how that came about. what i meant is that I see more consistancy in the ones who are preaching against both then just the one
thank you for replying, I did read what your last post said. It seemed that it could have embraced BOTH things; your agreement with their consistency AND your agreement that BOTH should be taught as something to be prohibited.

I am left to assume that you are PRO online activity and CON TV activity (and consistency will just have to sit on the sidelines ;)).

So Thad, in your opinion, is this recent (15 years) chronic strife and contention really about TV? Do you think it could be just the poster-child for member-minister's seeking more latitudes (liberties) to self-determination?

[Michlow]

I forwarded the link to my Pastor, telling him that if there was any doubt about my rebellious nature, the fact that I disregarded all the admonishions not to read the article if you were not in the ministry should be very telling.

He replied that he had already read the article, and my rebellious nature was never in doubt :D

[South of I 90]

Tbpew, you missed my point and after reading the way i worded it I can see how that came about. what i meant is that I see more consistancy in the ones who are preaching against both then just the one


...........and I agree with you on this.

[Thad]

thank you for replying, I did read what your last post said. It seemed that it could have embraced BOTH things; your agreement with their consistency AND your agreement that BOTH should be taught as something to be prohibited.

I am left to assume that you are PRO online activity and CON TV activity (and consistency will just have to sit on the sidelines ;)).

So Thad, in your opinion, is this recent (15 years) chronic strife and contention really about TV? Do you think it could be just the poster-child for member-minister's seeking more latitudes (liberties) to self-determination?


Years ago you could tell people not to have a TV in their home and people would abide. Now, i think that technology has out flanked everybody.
saints can download TV programs onto their Ipods

[tbpew]

Years ago you could tell people not to have a TV in their home and people would abide. Now, i think that technology has out flanked everybody.
saints can download TV programs onto their Ipods

Certainly technology convergence will do its part to move this issue down the road of irrelevance in principle, but all the more opportunistic to raise the charge of "hypocrite!".

OK, Thad, I will stop asking. Apparently for you, this issue really is all about TV.

For me, I see it as just the current flash point in an organization of men that has many voices who have found value and purpose in "defining their differences" in a very public way.

[Rev Dooley]

Of course, NI would be complimenting the website and CM would be a hero of the faith if he had written against television. But since NI doesn't like what CM wrote, NI bashes the article and the minister. Nice.


Yah, not so much. Where do you get the idea that preachers are what save you?

Are you misinterpreting scripture: "...foolishness of preaching men would be saved?" Because it's speaking of an act - preaching . . . not a person.

The Grace, Mercy and Love of God is what's going to save me . . . not a preacher.While I disagreed strongly with the article, it is encumbent upon you to prove your false accusation that I bashed Bro Wright.
I certainly did no such thing.
NI

[J-Roc]

Also, I couldn't post the actual letter - If anyone can do it, please do so.




Per your request, here it is....see attachment.

[Rico]

Per your request, here it is....see attachment.

JRoc, where did you get that pic of the camp? I've wanted one like that and can't seem to find it anywhere. It would make an excellent background for my desktop. :)

[J-Roc]

JRoc, where did you get that pic of the camp? I've wanted one like that and can't seem to find it anywhere. It would make an excellent background for my desktop. :)


Here you go, Rico....now you can set it as your wallpaper...


http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u6/Mstrshalom/Tabernacle.jpg



http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u6/Mstrshalom/Tabernacle.jpg

[Praxeas]

Years ago you could tell people not to have a TV in their home and people would abide. Now, i think that technology has out flanked everybody.
saints can download TV programs onto their Ipods
Years ago I knew saints that had TVs in the bedrooms so nobody from church would see it when they came over. Or they hid them in the closet.

[Rico]

Here you go, Rico....now you can set it as your wallpaper...


http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u6/Mstrshalom/Tabernacle.jpg



http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u6/Mstrshalom/Tabernacle.jpg


Sweet! Thanks. :D

[Praxeas]

Here you go, Rico....now you can set it as your wallpaper...


http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u6/Mstrshalom/Tabernacle.jpg



http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u6/Mstrshalom/Tabernacle.jpg
That's awesome....did you do that or get it from someplace?

[Trouvere]

Did anyone read any of Brother Wrights other articles? The one about his conversion experience is great.I love what he said about Brother Marvin Cole.He paid him the highest compliment.

[chaotic_resolve]

I've already read that mess.
Not worth the webspace IMO.
NI

I call it that because his position IMO is very misled and his thinking is severely misguided.
Again, this is IMO.
NI

While I disagreed strongly with the article, it is encumbent upon you to prove your false accusation that I bashed Bro Wright.
I certainly did no such thing.
NI

You called his writings a "mess," something "not worth the webspace." You stated his position is "very misled" and his thinking is "severely misguided."

Perhaps bash is a little strong, but you still slapped him around a little.

By the way . . . did you even read the articles? Not saying you didn't, but your first response made it seem as though you didn't look at them.

[jshorts]

One prominient district official in our area has been heard to say if we lose standards we lose our identity as an organization. The mission statement The whole gospel to the whole world has been replaced with man-made standards and no television.

Hmmm. . . just looked at the UPCI.org website - there's no mission statement even posted on there. We've got the Doctrine and Standards posted, but no mission statement.

[philjones]

One prominient district official in our area has been heard to say if we lose standards we lose our identity as an organization. The mission statement The whole gospel to the whole world has been replaced with man-made standards and no television.

You and Coop often sound like twin brothers! :) Or a broken record! ;) Or Both!:hypercoffee

[J-Roc]

That's awesome....did you do that or get it from someplace?


No, I didn't do it....I googled it from Google Images.

[Steve Epley]

You and Coop often sound like twin brothers! :) Or a broken record! ;) Or Both!:hypercoffee

That is true.:donuts

[chaotic_resolve]

One prominient district official in our area has been heard to say if we lose standards we lose our identity as an organization. The mission statement The whole gospel to the whole world has been replaced with man-made standards and no television.

You and Coop often sound like twin brothers! :) Or a broken record! ;) Or Both!:hypercoffee

That is true.:donuts

To PJ and SE - What did JS say that isn't true? Can either of you give any substance to an argument against what he stated, other than just a verbal put-down?

JS gave a statement from another, "if we lose standards, we lose our identity as an organization." And, "the mission statement . . . has been replaced with man-made standards and no television."

Again, other than just elementary put-downs, what can either of you give as an argument against that?

Have not our dress standards become our identity?

Our identity isn't being Oneness or preaching the doctrine of salvation - there's other organizations like that around.

What do most forums debate? Even UPC licensed ministers-only forums debate this and not all can agree.

Dress Standards.

It's become what we speak of most, what we debate most, what we preach most, what controls us, what influences our likes or dislikes of people.

Am I wrong here?

Give me a substantive argument.

Why is there no mission statement on the UPCI.org website? You find only a liturgy on doctrine and standards - no mission.

[JTULLOCK]

To PJ and SE - What did JS say that isn't true? Can either of you give any substance to an argument against what he stated, other than just a verbal put-down?

JS gave a statement from another, "if we lose standards, we lose our identity as an organization." And, "the mission statement . . . has been replaced with man-made standards and no television."

Again, other than just elementary put-downs, what can either of you give as an argument against that?

Have not our dress standards become our identity?

Our identity isn't being Oneness or preaching the doctrine of salvation - there's other organizations like that around.

What do most forums debate? Even UPC licensed ministers-only forums debate this and not all can agree.

Dress Standards.

It's become what we speak of most, what we debate most, what we preach most, what controls us, what influences our likes or dislikes of people.

Am I wrong here?

Give me a substantive argument.

Why is there no mission statement on the UPCI.org website? You find only a liturgy on doctrine and standards - no mission.

Great post! keep it up N-

[Nahum]

To PJ and SE - What did JS say that isn't true? Can either of you give any substance to an argument against what he stated, other than just a verbal put-down?

JS gave a statement from another, "if we lose standards, we lose our identity as an organization." And, "the mission statement . . . has been replaced with man-made standards and no television."

Again, other than just elementary put-downs, what can either of you give as an argument against that?

Have not our dress standards become our identity?

Our identity isn't being Oneness or preaching the doctrine of salvation - there's other organizations like that around.

What do most forums debate? Even UPC licensed ministers-only forums debate this and not all can agree.

Dress Standards.

It's become what we speak of most, what we debate most, what we preach most, what controls us, what influences our likes or dislikes of people.

Am I wrong here?

Give me a substantive argument.

Why is there no mission statement on the UPCI.org website? You find only a liturgy on doctrine and standards - no mission.

I have enjoyed the show for the last couple of days. :coffee2

I think you have made some valid points about some prominent posters. What is telling is that these men who have tvs in their homes (because of their wives of course LOL) want to position themselves as the guardians of all that is holy and pure in the world. They then point out that the UPC is going to H E double hockey sticks in a handbasket for thinking about advertising on television.

These guys don't even live what they want everyone else to adhere to. They just wanna harp about the "good ole days". They just enjoy the thrill of their supposed moral superiority.

I'm going back under the bridge now. :coffee2

[OGIA]

I'm going back under the bridge now. :coffee2:wave

[Rev Dooley]

You called his writings a "mess," something "not worth the webspace." You stated his position is "very misled" and his thinking is "severely misguided."

Perhaps bash is a little strong, but you still slapped him around a little.

By the way . . . did you even read the articles? Not saying you didn't, but your first response made it seem as though you didn't look at them.

Again, I did not bash the man. You cannot see that in my posts. I did oppose his "postition", my own words that YOU quoted.
I did state that his "thinking" is misled. Again, that is not him, but a thought process.
Your comments are inaccurate regarding my posting.
In reply: yes, I have read the article. I read it shortly after it was posted which was some time back.
NI

[HappyPastor2]

Sounds good, but you don't have even one scripture that says I have to love a preacher to make heaven.

1 John 4:20-21 KJV
(20) If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?
(21) And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.


You're the one that used the term "preacher hater."

[HappyPastor2]

Of course, NI would be complimenting the website and CM would be a hero of the faith if he had written against television. But since NI doesn't like what CM wrote, NI bashes the article and the minister. Nice.


Yah, not so much. Where do you get the idea that preachers are what save you?

Are you misinterpreting scripture: "...foolishness of preaching men would be saved?" Because it's speaking of an act - preaching . . . not a person.

The Grace, Mercy and Love of God is what's going to save me . . . not a preacher.

Romans 10:13-15 KJV
(13) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
(14) How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
(15) And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

[HappyPastor2]

You guys are hilarious. You act as if the world was a wonderful place to live in before television was invented and all the world's evils can be attributed to tv programs. Life is much better today, even with tv, than it ever was in centuries gone by.

I am hilarious - and you are delusional.

[chaotic_resolve]

Romans 10:13-15 KJV
(13) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
(14) How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
(15) And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

And your point is? If you're trying to connect verse 13 to verse 14 and say that preachers are indeed what saves you, then you're mistaken. Read 15. If you want to believe that a ~man~ can save you, which I don't because only God can save - but whatever, then it's really actually the people who ~sent~ the preacher, not the preacher.

:thumbsup

[chaotic_resolve]

I've never read "any way possible" in the mission statement. *shrugs*

Article 1 of the General Constitution in the UPCI Manual states (and I quote)
"The purpose of the United Pentecostal Church International is to carry the whole gospel to the whole world by the whole church; to establish an effective organized effort; to encourage the opening and establishing of new works; to evangelize the world by every means possible; and to produce and maintain a clean ministry and fellowship."

Again I ask the question . . .

Why is the General Assembly of the UPCI even debating television? Why is HQ getting involved?? It should be left up to each local assembly - not dictated upon everyone by HQ!

If this resolution does not pass, someone needs to offer a new resolution demanding that HQ strip that sentence from Article 1, because obviously it's just empty rhetoric not meant to be taken literally or seriously.

[chaotic_resolve]

*bump*

[Rico]

1 John 4:20-21 KJV
(20) If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?
(21) And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.


You're the one that used the term "preacher hater."

I was given the label because I don't trust preachers. Don't you read?

[Rico]

I am hilarious - and you are delusional.

Really? So life was better back before electricity was discovered, before automobiles were invented, before air conditioning was invented, etc. etc.? If you think it was then you've lost your mind.

[Nahum]

HEre is Chester WRight's Letter to the UPC about the direction it's going and the TV Issue!








http://www.apostoliciron.com/content.html




Tell me what you think.

Also, I couldn't post the actual letter - If anyone can do it, please do so.



your replies - thanks

Funny, Chester Wright, pro TV, now the hero of The Borg.

:snapout

[rgcraig]

Huh? This statement is on that website.

"PLEASE DO NOT OPEN ANY ARCHIVED ARTICLE ON THIS WEBSITE UNLESS YOU ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE PULPIT MINISTRY. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT FOR CHURCH MEMBERS!"

[Michael Phelps]

Huh? This statement is on that website.

"PLEASE DO NOT OPEN ANY ARCHIVED ARTICLE ON THIS WEBSITE UNLESS YOU ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE PULPIT MINISTRY. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT FOR CHURCH MEMBERS!"

Lol, wow!

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain................."

[Baron1710]

Huh? This statement is on that website.

"PLEASE DO NOT OPEN ANY ARCHIVED ARTICLE ON THIS WEBSITE UNLESS YOU ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE PULPIT MINISTRY. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT FOR CHURCH MEMBERS!"

Stupid, stupid saints you cannot possible understand the nature of what we speak of you are unqualified and unfit for such a task. Reminds me of the Bibles chained to the pulpit.

[DividedThigh]

how silly and some people wonder why some are running from there ministries of misery, dt

[Elizabeth]

Huh? This statement is on that website.

"PLEASE DO NOT OPEN ANY ARCHIVED ARTICLE ON THIS WEBSITE UNLESS YOU ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE PULPIT MINISTRY. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT FOR CHURCH MEMBERS!"

Kind of reminds me of when my parents would tell me not to touch something then, I would only want to touch it all the more!

[1Corinth2v4]

To bad you folks have nothing better to do!

[Mr. Steinway]

To bad you folks have nothing better to do!
We're in the same boat as you! :tease

[Sister Alvear]

row, row, row your boat gently down the stream...lol..

[Jermyn Davidson]

Funny, Chester Wright, pro TV, now the hero of The Borg.

:snapout


How is this Pastor "the hero of The Borg?" I think you're thinking about someone else.