View Full Version : <<<BREAKING>>> Over 200 Preachers reported to be leaving UPC!
*** STUNNING NEWS****
I was informed just now that it's estimated that over 200 preachers are leaving plus some really Great churches ! ! !
was all this worth it ??
couldn't we have waited for technology to change on its own because it is
LaGirl
09-28-2007, 02:34 PM
from what state?????
Steadfast
09-28-2007, 02:35 PM
*** STUNNING NEWS****
I was informed just now that it's estimated that over 200 preachers are leaving plus some really Great churches ! ! !
was all this worth it ??
couldn't we have waited for technology to change on its own because it is
In three years this would have been all a moot point. This would have settled istelf.
Starbucks
09-28-2007, 02:36 PM
*** STUNNING NEWS****
I was informed just now that it's estimated that over 200 preachers are leaving plus some really Great churches ! ! !
was all this worth it ??
couldn't we have waited for technology to change on its own because it is
Stunning? I don't think so. Both sides knew this would happen and we all knew that the exodus would start before GC was over.
HangingOut
09-28-2007, 02:36 PM
probably true, but mere speculation.
from what state?????
In three years this would have been all a moot point. This would have settled istelf.
that's what i was thinking
as i said the other day Stedfast, they are now making 30in computer screens. I saw them the other day at costco. what for?? we all know that soon TV will be NO more and computers and TV will merge-- THEN WHAT???
Fireside
09-28-2007, 02:38 PM
Some may have sense enough to realize what they have done.
Others won't.
It is impossible to calculate the long term impact on a fellowship when you subtract the voice and influence of men like Booker, Godair, Morton, Wilson,and others.
Their absence will manifest in ways that aren't even conceivable now.
IBCrazier2
09-28-2007, 02:38 PM
Is any of the elected officials leaving, and if they do will there be a special election to fill them or just appoinments
Some may have sense enough to realize what they have done.
Others won't.
It is impossible to calculate the long term impact on a fellowship when you subtract the voice and influence of men like Booker, Godair, Morton, Wilson,and others.
Their absence will manifest in ways that aren't even conceivable now.
and all those that look up to their leadership and will follow suit!!!!!!!
Steadfast
09-28-2007, 02:40 PM
Some may have sense enough to realize what they have done.
Others won't.
It is impossible to calculate the long term impact on a fellowship when you subtract the voice and influence of men like Booker, Godair, Morton, Wilson,and others.
Their absence will manifest in ways that aren't even conceivable now.
I spoke to some of those very men, even last night when you were with me. Neither of them said they were leaving.
However, I also know that - even if they don't leave - some will pull even further away from the core of the organization... and that is dangerous. We all NEED extremes to keep our own lives balanced.
But steadfast, some preachers out here even announced over their puplits that they was leaving- a few are on that list
I spoke to some of those very men, even last night when you were with me. Neither of them said they were leaving.
However, I also know that - even if they don't leave - some will pull even further away from the core of the organization... and that is dangerous. We all NEED extremes to keep our own lives balanced.
Elder, Bishop W has been mentioned today in several threads. As my former pastor, I know his stand on TV...IYO, what will he really do in view of today's vote?!
pentecostisalive
09-28-2007, 02:44 PM
It any of the men mentioned do leave, it will have big implications. Many people look to these men for leadership and will follow. These are men that have revival churches, growth, but also believe in Holiness, and many people will follow that type of leadership.
I do think that another organization will eventually be formed, possibly with one of these men as the leaders.
"How can two walk together except they be agreed?"
revrandy
09-28-2007, 02:45 PM
Some may have sense enough to realize what they have done.
Others won't.
It is impossible to calculate the long term impact on a fellowship when you subtract the voice and influence of men like Booker, Godair, Morton, Wilson,and others.
Their absence will manifest in ways that aren't even conceivable now.
Are these the men who have left??
Fireside
09-28-2007, 02:47 PM
I spoke to some of those very men, even last night when you were with me. Neither of them said they were leaving.
However, I also know that - even if they don't leave - some will pull even further away from the core of the organization... and that is dangerous. We all NEED extremes to keep our own lives balanced.
I don't know that they will be leaving, but if they do, it will be a sad day for the UPC.
Fireside
09-28-2007, 02:47 PM
Are these the men who have left??
I don'tknow, but I hope not.
rgcraig
09-28-2007, 02:49 PM
I spoke to some of those very men, even last night when you were with me. Neither of them said they were leaving.
However, I also know that - even if they don't leave - some will pull even further away from the core of the organization... and that is dangerous. We all NEED extremes to keep our own lives balanced.
If they leave you won't have the balance.
BoredOutOfMyMind
09-28-2007, 02:50 PM
But stedfat, some preachers out here even announced over their puplits that they was leaving- a few are on that list
Two questions-
Were you there in person to hear this?
Do you have a tape of them saying this?
:chirp
Two questions-
Were you there in person to hear this?
Do you have a tape of them saying this?
:chirp
no not in person but friends or friends who have family
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 02:52 PM
"No one would deny any denomination has an absolute right to delineate its standards, and seek to uphold them within their organization. However, to deny fellowship with believers over such matters smacks of elitism at best, and is pharisaical legalism at worst."
When the article was written I realized the existence of the advertising on TV debate, and that some had threatened to withdraw fellowship over it. But, with the passing of Res #3 it turns out the article was more on point than even I realized.
It is hoped and prayed that Men of God can work around their differences and labor together. Remembering that it is ALL ABOUT HIM. Should they feel the need to realign themselves with those of similar standards so be it, but to refuse trans-denominational fellowship over such things??
Pastor Keith
09-28-2007, 02:55 PM
In three years this would have been all a moot point. This would have settled istelf.
You seem to have the heartbeat on the Org. do you think this to be true that this many will leave?
RevDWW
09-28-2007, 03:11 PM
I spoke to some of those very men, even last night when you were with me. Neither of them said they were leaving.
However, I also know that - even if they don't leave - some will pull even further away from the core of the organization... and that is dangerous. We all NEED extremes to keep our own lives balanced.
I was just thinking this same thing.
If the UCs leave then the Cs become the UCs, the Mods become the Cs, the Libs become the Mods and he ULs become the Libs.
Balance is GOOD. If I read the Old Testament rightly, God was concerned over having just balances, weights, and measure............
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 03:16 PM
I was just thinking this same thing.
If the UCs leave then the Cs become the UCs, the Mods become the Cs, the Libs become the Mods and he ULs become the Libs.
Balance is GOOD. If I read the Old Testament rightly, God was concerned over having just balances, weights, and measure............
How true!! Creativity is often a by-product of diversity.
Strongminded
09-28-2007, 03:18 PM
In three years this would have been all a moot point. This would have settled istelf.
So let me get this straight....in three years it will be a moot point.
When it is a moot point it will be ok?
Bro. That makes no sense...
Esther
09-28-2007, 03:18 PM
I spoke to some of those very men, even last night when you were with me. Neither of them said they were leaving.
However, I also know that - even if they don't leave - some will pull even further away from the core of the organization... and that is dangerous. We all NEED extremes to keep our own lives balanced.
MY thoughts as well.
I sure wished NLYP was here to comment on all of this !
he is really missing out at such a pivatol time. i hope he lives to regret this !
tbpew
09-28-2007, 03:22 PM
A TV resolution will be used as cover for what has long been settled in their hearts.
RevDWW
09-28-2007, 03:23 PM
MY thoughts as well.
Sis, Yes I go to POA. Why do you ask?
LaVonne
09-28-2007, 03:24 PM
I sure wished NLYP was here to comment on all of this !
he is really missing out at such a pivatol time. i hope he lives to regret this !
hahahahahahahaha
Mr. Steinway
09-28-2007, 03:24 PM
A TV resolution will be used as cover for what has long been settled in their hearts.
The loss of power and influence stings! :)
rgcraig
09-28-2007, 03:26 PM
I sure wished NLYP was here to comment on all of this !
he is really missing out at such a pivatol time. i hope he lives to regret this !
What makes you think he's not?
Is anybody saying, "Don't let the door hit ya" ????
A TV resolution will be used as cover for what has long been settled in their hearts.
and what in your mind is that ? the world?
I'm not being sarcastic . i'm really wondering if that's what you meant
Strongminded
09-28-2007, 03:29 PM
Some may have sense enough to realize what they have done.
Others won't.
It is impossible to calculate the long term impact on a fellowship when you subtract the voice and influence of men like Booker, Godair, Morton, Wilson,and others.
Their absence will manifest in ways that aren't even conceivable now.
Do you ever say things like the voice of, Mangun, Tenney, Williams, Arnold..
Believe it or not....you come accross one sided...
Mark it down...Godair and Wilson wont leave..
Booker and Morton....:hypercoffee
Another story...
rgcraig
09-28-2007, 03:29 PM
I spoke to some of those very men, even last night when you were with me. Neither of them said they were leaving.
However, I also know that - even if they don't leave - some will pull even further away from the core of the organization... and that is dangerous. We all NEED extremes to keep our own lives balanced.
When the org merged there were extremes. It looks like to me that many are not wanting the extremes, but all to be alike. That would be a sudden death!
Is anybody saying, "Don't let the door hit ya" ????
Dora really that was a little insensitive. i was just kidding around when i started the "by by kansas" thread and really caught grief for it not realizing that there's a lot of soberness and grief right now
Do you ever say things like the voice of, Mangun, Tenney, Williams, Arnold..
Believe it or not....you come accross one sided...
Mark it down...Godair and Wilson wont leave..
Booker and Morton....:hypercoffee
Another story...
I've heard that 2 of these names are starting their own fellowships
tbpew
09-28-2007, 03:31 PM
and what in your mind is that ? the world?
I'm not being sarcastic . i'm really wondering if that's what you meant
thad, you have me completely corn-fused with that one.
What I believe has long be settled in their hearts was "I do not find myself iin what I see when I look across this organization"
dude, consider meds.
Strongminded
09-28-2007, 03:31 PM
But steadfast, some preachers out here even announced over their puplits that they was leaving- a few are on that list
:killinme:killinme:sos:sos
For the love of all that is Holy......Please put an "s" in there before you get killed!
thad, you have me completely corn-fused with that one.
What I believe has long be settled in their hearts was "I do not find myself iin what I see when I look across this organization"
dude, consider meds.
wow you sure are cold !
Fireside
09-28-2007, 03:32 PM
Do you ever say things like the voice of, Mangun, Tenney, Williams, Arnold..
Believe it or not....you come accross one sided...
Mark it down...Godair and Wilson wont leave..
Booker and Morton....:hypercoffee
Another story...
I would be grieving if they were on the verge of moving on, but they are not.
This is why their names haven't been mentioned.
:killinme:killinme:sos:sos
For the love of all that is Holy......Please put an "s" in there before you get killed!
someone rigged that one Sm i am not taking the blame for that typo!
you prob. put them up to it
Strongminded
09-28-2007, 03:33 PM
It any of the men mentioned do leave, it will have big implications. Many people look to these men for leadership and will follow. These are men that have revival churches, growth, but also believe in Holiness, and many people will follow that type of leadership.
I do think that another organization will eventually be formed, possibly with one of these men as the leaders.
"How can two walk together except they be agreed?"
I hate it when that is interjected!
If that were true there would be no UPCI!
TV was just a tine splinter of all we dont agree on.
HeavenlyOne
09-28-2007, 03:33 PM
I guess I'm confused as to what the big deal is. I mean, I have a TV, but there are more issues I deal with on the internet.
I just don't see what the big deal is, especially since there are several churches who already post services on the internet.
Maybe it's because I'm not licensed........
tbpew
09-28-2007, 03:33 PM
I've heard that 2 of these names are starting their own fellowships
all a new breed of GIB's need is a viable fellowship network....too bad NCO has such a weird name.
tbpew
09-28-2007, 03:35 PM
wow you sure are cold !
you can have a very chilling effect on people.
all a new breed of GIB's need is a viable fellowship network....too bad NCO has such a weird name.
Bro James ??? are you reading this ???
you can have a very chilling effect on people.
uh?? you can't be serious
tbpew
09-28-2007, 03:37 PM
[/B]
I hate it when that is interjected!
If that were true there would be no UPCI!
TV was just a tine splinter of all we dont agree on.
yeah, hip, hip hooray, preach it bro, amen
(if I could I'd run up and tap you on the back a few times while waving my white hanky)
Strongminded
09-28-2007, 03:40 PM
all a new breed of GIB's need is a viable fellowship network....too bad NCO has such a weird name.
I dont care for NCO's name either...
Too close to New World Order...which is AntiChrist!
Esther
09-28-2007, 03:43 PM
I dont care for NCO's name either...
Too close to New World Order...which is AntiChrist!
My thoughts as well. ;)
LaGirl
09-28-2007, 03:45 PM
tell me again...what does NCO stand for??
LaVonne
09-28-2007, 03:48 PM
tell me again...what does NCO stand for??
New Church Order
And I don't care for the name either!
I dont care for NCO's name either...
Too close to New World Order...which is AntiChrist!
Will James Griffin now take the stand please :hypercoffee
LaGirl
09-28-2007, 03:49 PM
New Church Order
And I don't care for the name either!
i dont either!
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 03:56 PM
Bro James ??? are you reading this ???
I didn't pick it.:sshhh
But what better to fight a New World Order than a New Church Order?
Article NCO vs NWO link (sorry no its not a wrestling match)
http://www.newchurchorder.com/content/view/63/39/
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 03:57 PM
Will James Griffin now take the stand please :hypercoffee
Step out the room for a few minutes to pick up a kid from school......
I didn't pick it.:sshhh
But what better to fight a New World Order than a New Church Order?
Article NCO vs NWO link (sorry no its not a wrestling match)
http://www.newchurchorder.com/content/view/63/39/
check out the article by JAMES GRIFFIN
from the CEO of NCO :killinme
tbpew
09-28-2007, 04:00 PM
NCO and the associated imagery may provide a little boost out of the gate but I do not think it will survive time.
I am not casting stones, just sharing my take. It [the name] is almost too clever for its own good.
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 04:01 PM
from the CEO of NCO :killinme
CEO? I'm so far down the ladder I don't even know the secret handshake
:killinme:killinme:killinme
check out the article by JAMES GRIFFIN
from the CEO of NCO :killinme
Be kind to Elder Griffin ... Thadster.
tbpew
09-28-2007, 04:04 PM
Be kind to Elder Griffin ... Thadster.
dan-o,
are players in NCO circles quick to apply titles ahead of their given names?
just curious and thought to ask a guy familiar with the Church of Champs.
Be kind to Elder Griffin ... Thadster.
we're cool !
and for that matter I want everyone to know that Dan and I are back on good terms . after several weeks of a deep freeze, things are thawing out.
dan-o,
are players in NCO circles quick to apply titles ahead of their given names?
just curious and thought to ask a guy familiar with the Church of Champs.
Not as quick as those w/ slithery forked tongues.
tbpew
09-28-2007, 04:05 PM
we're cool !
and for that matter I want everyone to know that Dan and I are back on good terms . after several weeks of a deep freeze, things are thawing out.
...and when you hear, peace, peace, then cometh......
:hypercoffee
tbpew
09-28-2007, 04:07 PM
Not as quick as those w/ slithery forked tongues.
thanks, I always appreciate your non-answer answers.
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 04:07 PM
dan-o,
are players in NCO circles quick to apply titles ahead of their given names?
just curious and thought to ask a guy familiar with the Church of Champs.
Interesting question. KP has never been asked to be called Bishop, people who follow him do that. JS has never been asked to be called prophet. And I am sure the only reason DAN called me elder is because I am older than dirt.
thanks, I always appreciate your non-answer answers.
What are you hissing about?
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 04:08 PM
we're cool !
and for that matter I want everyone to know that Dan and I are back on good terms . after several weeks of a deep freeze, things are thawing out.
Glad you boys can now, er greet each other with a holy kiss. Isn't that a Bible commandment we no longer follow.....
Scott Hutchinson
09-28-2007, 04:11 PM
Glad you boys can now, er greet each other with a holy kiss. Isn't that a Bible commandment we no longer follow.....
A handshake will do.Of course I'm not wearing a tunic either.
crakjak
09-28-2007, 04:13 PM
How true!! Creativity is often a by-product of diversity.
That being true, maybe God has a truly new thing to do, and just maybe it was not possible with the extreme extremes. Can two walk together without agreement, no there must be at least enough agreement to tolerate each other and to treat as brothers in Christ. When the extremes exclude brotherhood, then they cannot walk together. So, if some must go, all must understand that they are not leaving the Body, just the org.
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 04:15 PM
So to those confused by the difference between New Church Order and New World Order did the article help delineate for you????
http://www.newchurchorder.com/content/view/63/39/
crakjak
09-28-2007, 04:19 PM
In three years this would have been all a moot point. This would have settled istelf.
How do you explain that being possible, doesn't the divide go deeper than the issue on the table today?
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 04:22 PM
That being true, maybe God has a truly new thing to do, and just maybe it was not possible with the extreme extremes. Can two walk together without agreement, no there must be at least enough agreement to tolerate each other and to treat as brothers in Christ. When the extremes exclude brotherhood, then they cannot walk together. So, if some must go, all must understand that they are not leaving the Body, just the org.
How little true agape if one cannot tolerate a fellow Apostolic believer to the point of "disfellowship"??? And does not that in the end equate the Org with the Body??
dizzyde
09-28-2007, 04:26 PM
How little true agape if one cannot tolerate a fellow Apostolic believer to the point of "disfellowship"???
Just for clarification, I have often wondered, where does that word come from, in a Biblical sense? I've heard it used in reference to churches "disfellowshipping" each other, or doing so to saints, and I really don't know where this concept originated. Is it from the Bible? I'm not trying to start anything, just an honest question.
crakjak
09-28-2007, 04:27 PM
How little true agape if one cannot tolerate a fellow Apostolic believer to the point of "disfellowship"??? And does not that in the end equate the Org with the Body??
That is very true, but has not this "disfellowship" already been a reality with some UC's disassociating with district functions?
My tolerance and embracing of brothers and sisters in Christ crosses most orgainzational lines, this whole issue is very, very ridiculous in my view.
stmatthew
09-28-2007, 04:33 PM
But steadfast, some preachers out here even announced over their puplits that they was leaving- a few are on that list
:killinme:killinme:sos:sos
For the love of all that is Holy......Please put an "s" in there before you get killed!
I fixed it for him.....but I am still trying to figure out what "PUPLITS" are.
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 04:36 PM
Just for clarification, I have often wondered, where does that word come from, in a Biblical sense? I've heard it used in reference to churches "disfellowshipping" each other, or doing so to saints, and I really don't know where this concept originated. Is it from the Bible? I'm not trying to start anything, just an honest question.
I believe an example could be 1 Cor 5, it was under Paul's directive for a man having relations "with his father's wife". I believe in 2 Cor. he repented and was allowed back in (but will need to look that one up).
Can we agree that is a totally different type issue than whether to advertise on TV or trim split ends? Paul in a different Epistle went so far as to point out the very same act can be sin to one person and not another. Am I the only one who feels that love, tolerance, kindness, gentleness, meekness and the like are somewhat being pushed out of the equation on some of these stances???
dizzyde
09-28-2007, 04:43 PM
I believe an example could be 1 Cor 5, it was under Paul's directive for a man having relations "with his father's wife". I believe in 2 Cor. he repented and was allowed back in (but will need to look that one up).
Can we agree that is a totally different type issue than whether to advertise on TV or trim split ends? Paul in a different Epistle went so far as to point out the very same act can be sin to one person and not another. Am I the only one who feels that love, tolerance, kindness, gentleness, meekness and the like are somewhat being pushed out of the equation on some of these stances???
I can totally agree with that!
bishoph
09-28-2007, 04:53 PM
How do you explain that being possible, doesn't the divide go deeper than the issue on the table today?
I for one feel that the issue is much deeper, and way more critical. I feel it is a doctrinal issue (I am not referring to TV either) On on side of the aisle you have the "PCI, Light/Lessor Light, Friends of the Bridegroom, liberal, Pro TV" crowd. And on the other side you have the "PAJC, 3 step, Anti TV, conservative crowd. (There are exceptions on both sides)
Eventually this will divide, not over TV, standards, etc but rather over doctrine. JMHO
Mr. Steinway
09-28-2007, 04:55 PM
I for one feel that the issue is much deeper, and way more critical. I feel it is a doctrinal issue (I am not referring to TV either) On on side of the aisle you have the "PCI, Light/Lessor Light, Friends of the Bridegroom, liberal, Pro TV" crowd. And on the other side you have the "PAJC, 3 step, conservative crowd.
Eventually this will divide, not over TV, standards, etc but rather over doctrine. JMHO
Give me a break!!! :rolleyes:
bishoph
09-28-2007, 05:01 PM
would you like that in metallic or ceramic or with a life time warranty for just $19.99 :killinme (brake lol)
Steadfast
09-28-2007, 05:03 PM
How do you explain that being possible, doesn't the divide go deeper than the issue on the table today?
I for one feel that the issue is much deeper, and way more critical. I feel it is a doctrinal issue (I am not referring to TV either) On on side of the aisle you have the "PCI, Light/Lessor Light, Friends of the Bridegroom, liberal, Pro TV" crowd. And on the other side you have the "PAJC, 3 step, conservative crowd."
Eventually this will divide, not over TV, standards, etc but rather over doctrine. JMHO
Here is where we might find the heart of the matter. To answer crakjak, there is no issue that divided us this deeply as TV. However, I also agree with bishoph on one major point... and it ties those two posts together. The next most divisive thing is the doctrinal differences.
I think what will eventually be the next HUGE mistake the organization makes will be when some of the ones going on television have to back up on doctrine to stay on programming (can you say 'TBN' and it's contractual agreement pertaining to oneness). When some of these who go on television (some will do it right... some will show their true colors in time) start compromising the message for a 'pray & say' or 'confess and digress' doctrine that will be more politically acceptable there WILL be a huge blowup over the 'saved at repentance' vs. 'Acts 2:38' message.
Now THAT will be the 'Mother of all divisions'. TV will help push this to that point.
Yes, I sincerely believe that will happen.
Nahum
09-28-2007, 05:04 PM
Here is where we might find the heart of the matter. To answer crakjak, there is no issue that divided us this deeply as TV. However, I also agree with bishoph on one major point... and it ties those two posts together. The next most divisive thing is the doctrinal differences.
I think what will eventually be the next HUGE mistake the organization makes will be when some of the ones going on television have to back up on doctrine to stay on programming (can you say 'TBN' and it's contractual agreement pertaining to oneness). When some of these who go on television (some will do it right... some will show their true colors in time) start compromising the message for a 'pray & say' or 'confess and digress' doctrine that will be more politically acceptable there WILL be a huge blowup over the 'saved at repentance' vs. 'Acts 2:38' message.
Now THAT will be the 'Mother of all divisions'. TV will help push this to that point.
Yes, I sincerely believe that will happen.
This is my fear as well.
Esther
09-28-2007, 05:04 PM
Here is where we might find the heart of the matter. To answer crakjak, there is no issue that divided us this deeply as TV. However, I also agree with bishoph on one major point... and it ties those two posts together. The next most divisive thing is the doctrinal differences.
I think what will eventually be the next HUGE mistake the organization makes will be when some of the ones going on television have to back up on doctrine to stay on programming (can you say 'TBN' and it's contractual agreement pertaining to oneness). When some of these who go on television (some will do it right... some will show their true colors in time) start compromising the message for a 'pray & say' or 'confess and digress' doctrine that will be more politically acceptable there WILL be a huge blowup over the 'saved at repentance' vs. 'Acts 2:38' message.
Now THAT will be the 'Mother of all divisions'. TV will help push this to that point.
Yes, I sincerely believe that will happen.
I sincerely hope not.
I believe those that have the capacity to go on TV now would NOT to that. As to those following later, perhaps.
Newman
09-28-2007, 05:07 PM
*** STUNNING NEWS****
I was informed just now that it's estimated that over 200 preachers are leaving plus some really Great churches ! ! !
was all this worth it ??
Fantastic!! When Ma Bell broke up years ago; growth EXPLODED for many of the baby Bell stocks with new names that contributed to major innovation in the phone industry; which contributed to major innovation in the world markets which is spoken of in the best seller "The World is Flat."
And so it is! New opportunities for each group to explore for a new day! :driving
Steadfast
09-28-2007, 05:09 PM
This is my fear as well.
We stand in agreement then. Up to this point we have coexisted as it was not 'flaunted' in the face of what they call 'three steppers'. What may well happen to SOME (NOTE: I said 'some' and not 'all') with this new TV development will be a blatant disregard for doctrine (for various reasons like popularity, ratings, contracts) and it will explode huge.
Again, yes... I really believe it will happen in time now.
stmatthew
09-28-2007, 05:11 PM
I sincerely hope not.
I believe those that have the capacity to go on TV now would NOT to that. As to those following later, perhaps.
The fact is that someone who believes the "light doctrine", or the "friend of the bride doctrine", or who is PCI in belief, would have no problem going on TV and stating their agreement with the trinitarians being saved.
crakjak
09-28-2007, 05:12 PM
Here is where we might find the heart of the matter. To answer crakjak, there is no issue that divided us this deeply as TV. However, I also agree with bishoph on one major point... and it ties those two posts together. The next most divisive thing is the doctrinal differences.
I think what will eventually be the next HUGE mistake the organization makes will be when some of the ones going on television have to back up on doctrine to stay on programming (can you say 'TBN' and it's contractual agreement pertaining to oneness). When some of these who go on television (some will do it right... some will show their true colors in time) start compromising the message for a 'pray & say' or 'confess and digress' doctrine that will be more politically acceptable there WILL be a huge blowup over the 'saved at repentance' vs. 'Acts 2:38' message.
Now THAT will be the 'Mother of all divisions'. TV will help push this to that point.
Yes, I sincerely believe that will happen.
And that was exactly what I was alluding to, I can see some churches having televised services reaching their city and area. But why would they want to go on national and international TV? One the most distasteful parts of "Christian TV" for me is the promotion of individuals. This freedom carries responsibility and I hope the UPC can mature into it and set a standard of Christian broadcasting that will glorify God. Very little at the national and international seems to do that in my opinion. BTW some local stuff is disgraceful as well. So the question is how deep is the love for those that do not know Jesus Christ? Or will the limelight be too intoxicating to resist?
This is my fear as well.
really?? as liberal as you are? as much as you was for it ??
Sandra
09-28-2007, 05:15 PM
Fantastic!! When Ma Bell broke up years ago; growth EXPLODED for many of the baby Bell stocks with new names that contributed to major innovation in the phone industry; which contributed to major innovation in the world markets which is spoken of in the best seller "The World is Flat."
And so it is! New opportunities for each group to explore for a new day! :driving
great post, I agree.
Scott Hutchinson
09-28-2007, 05:15 PM
The articles of faith haven't changed on doctrine,so if somebody who was UPCI and went on tv,and preached easy believism couldn't get they get the boot ?
Fantastic!! When Ma Bell broke up years ago; growth EXPLODED for many of the baby Bell stocks with new names that contributed to major innovation in the phone industry; which contributed to major innovation in the world markets which is spoken of in the best seller "The World is Flat."
And so it is! New opportunities for each group to explore for a new day! :driving
Fantastic????? oMG!
NEWMAN thinks it's fantastic that 200 preachers may be leaving
Theresa
09-28-2007, 05:30 PM
so, help me out here, I'm on my cell phon and getting major cramp in my thumb.....I cannot read all this thread. SO, someody tell me, was there a mass exodous? If so, who left
RevDWW
09-28-2007, 05:30 PM
The Lord allowed the Jerusalem church to be "stirred up" and the world had revival. :hanky
Here is where we might find the heart of the matter. To answer crakjak, there is no issue that divided us this deeply as TV. However, I also agree with bishoph on one major point... and it ties those two posts together. The next most divisive thing is the doctrinal differences.
I think what will eventually be the next HUGE mistake the organization makes will be when some of the ones going on television have to back up on doctrine to stay on programming (can you say 'TBN' and it's contractual agreement pertaining to oneness). When some of these who go on television (some will do it right... some will show their true colors in time) start compromising the message for a 'pray & say' or 'confess and digress' doctrine that will be more politically acceptable there WILL be a huge blowup over the 'saved at repentance' vs. 'Acts 2:38' message.
Now THAT will be the 'Mother of all divisions'. TV will help push this to that point.
Yes, I sincerely believe that will happen.
a certain Prophecy teacher was on Daystar and never mentioned ACTS238
but then again, is it ever mentioned in his seminars or magazines? im not sure that's why im asking
Pastor Keith
09-28-2007, 06:10 PM
The fact is that someone who believes the "light doctrine", or the "friend of the bride doctrine", or who is PCI in belief, would have no problem going on TV and stating their agreement with the trinitarians being saved.
Matt,
I have first hand knowledge of KH telling and correcting the likes of Mark Hanby and others who have gone that way, and KH telling them that they (Hanby, Munsey) don't believe anything and that their lack of sound doctrine is wrong.
I don't know why you are fixiated on this, maybe because your history isn't UPC but this is an old issue and many in the old days of the Organization believed that God was ultimately the judge and not put someone in hell just because they haven't received the whole package.
I think what will eventually be the next HUGE mistake the organization makes will be when some of the ones going on television have to back up on doctrine to stay on programming (can you say 'TBN' and it's contractual agreement pertaining to oneness). When some of these who go on television (some will do it right... some will show their true colors in time) start compromising the message for a 'pray & say' or 'confess and digress' doctrine that will be more politically acceptable there WILL be a huge blowup over the 'saved at repentance' vs. 'Acts 2:38' message.
Now THAT will be the 'Mother of all divisions'. TV will help push this to that point.
Yes, I sincerely believe that will happen. [/COLOR][/SIZE]
Some won't see what they are doing as a compromise at all because they believe people are saved at repentance in the first place.
I think the question is, if the cons do leave, how liberal will the rest become?
Dora really that was a little insensitive. i was just kidding around when i started the "by by kansas" thread and really caught grief for it not realizing that there's a lot of soberness and grief right now
I was just wondering if anyone was expressing that sentiment at GC.
Lose 200 preachers who want to keep their lights under a candle? A possible church the stature of Promiseland? Good trade.
Fantastic????? oMG!
NEWMAN thinks it's fantastic that 200 preachers may be leaving
The fatal flaw in your argument is you are assuming everyone who desires to produce a telveision program wants to be on TBN or any other religious network. The facts bear out there are few national programs compared to regional, even local status. There is no doctrinal statement to sign for local network television or cable access stations.
In Columbus OH there are DOZENS of religious preachers on telvision every week. I have seen only TWO with programs on a national scale. I'm sure that statistic can be backed up in other major cities across the United States.
We stand in agreement then. Up to this point we have coexisted as it was not 'flaunted' in the face of what they call 'three steppers'. What may well happen to SOME (NOTE: I said 'some' and not 'all') with this new TV development will be a blatant disregard for doctrine (for various reasons like popularity, ratings, contracts) and it will explode huge.
Again, yes... I really believe it will happen in time now.
Newman
09-28-2007, 07:51 PM
Fantastic????? oMG!
NEWMAN thinks it's fantastic that 200 preachers may be leaving
Hey Thad! They are not leaving the faith. They are merely free to concentrate on the main thing now instead of fighting politics in an organization that wasn't working for them the way they wanted it to.
I hope and pray they flourish. Those that need the kind of structure they provide can get it. In the mean time, those of a more liberal persuasion can put some of their ideas into practice. And we shall see.
The Jerusalem Church and the Antioch Church ministered to two very different groups of people; and so it shall be. God is good. :cool:
The Carthage Apostolic Church (ALJC) pastored by Bro. Joe David Sizemore had a tv broadcast for a few years some time back. I don't remember how long it was on tv or just what years they were. I was not going there at the time. I don't know if they had any new people come in through the program or not.
Nothing was compromised. They taped services and then edited them down to run in an hour or half hour (don't remember) on local cable. They would include the sermon and maybe a song or two. I watched several programs. When Bro. Baxter taught there for three nights they later showed at least one of his messages. It was his message on the one world church and he made a very strong point that he could not be in it because he believed in baptism in Jesus' name and the world church used the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost formula.
Back quite a few years ago they had a short radio program on a local station. They used music recorded from the services or records (anybody remember phonograph records). I preached on it only one time and used the text "Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed?" Again, I don't know if they had any new people that they could say came in because of the radio broadcast.
stmatthew
09-28-2007, 09:46 PM
Matt,
I have first hand knowledge of KH telling and correcting the likes of Mark Hanby and others who have gone that way, and KH telling them that they (Hanby, Munsey) don't believe anything and that their lack of sound doctrine is wrong.
I don't know why you are fixiated on this, maybe because your history isn't UPC but this is an old issue and many in the old days of the Organization believed that God was ultimately the judge and not put someone in hell just because they haven't received the whole package.
Keith,
My post was NOT concerning KH. Sorry but if Goss could look Carl Ballestero in the eye and tell him that the Baptists were his brothers, and would be in heaven with him, then MOST PCI types and those of that persuasion CAN mingle with trinitarians and accept them as "brothers", saved, yet needing more light to come into the "full gospel message" we call "truth".
According to scriptural precedence, a person can be considered brother before completing the new birth... Saul of Tarsus was called a brother before he his toes hit the water or uttered a syllable in tongues. Epley call EB a brother in one breath and in another says EB believes a ''Damnable Heresy". It happens all the time. It a question of what we excuse and what we don't.
Keith,
My post was NOT concerning KH. Sorry but if Goss could look Carl Ballestero in the eye and tell him that the Baptists were his brothers, and would be in heaven with him, then MOST PCI types and those of that persuasion CAN mingle with trinitarians and accept them as "brothers", saved, yet needing more light to come into the "full gospel message" we call "truth".
stmatthew
09-28-2007, 10:16 PM
According to scriptural precedence, a person can be considered brother before completing the new birth... Saul of Tarsus was called a brother before he his toes hit the water or uttered a syllable in tongues. Epley call EB a brother in one breath and in another says EB believes a ''Damnable Heresy". It happens all the time. It a question of what we excuse and what we don't.
It is a possibility that Ananias was calling Paul "Brother" through nationality, and not because he was "born again". But this is a rabbit trail that I am not going down. Keith simply thought I was rehashing an earlier discussion, and was fixated on KH, but I did not even have him in my thoughts when I wrote the post.
The same Greek word is used to describe Paul status in the kingdom of God is the same Greek word for brother for Titus, a gentile in II Corinthians 2:13.
It is a possibility that Ananias was calling Paul "Brother" through nationality, and not because he was "born again". But this is a rabbit trail that I am not going down. Keith simply thought I was rehashing an earlier discussion, and was fixated on KH, but I did not even have him in my thoughts when I wrote the post.
stmatthew
09-28-2007, 10:41 PM
It is also the same word used when Paul states to "Greet the brethren", and also the same word when Paul states:
Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
It is an interchangeable word and could and does mean either throughout scripture. Honestly, it is not enough to make a doctrine out of. But now you got me going down the bunny trail.
Praxeas
09-28-2007, 10:46 PM
Stunning? I don't think so. Both sides knew this would happen and we all knew that the exodus would start before GC was over.
Here in the WD there was an exodus with or without any tv resolution/revolution. They are all disgruntled because it was obvious control of the minds of the UPC constituents was being lost imo
Praxeas
09-28-2007, 10:47 PM
that's what i was thinking
as i said the other day Stedfast, they are now making 30in computer screens. I saw them the other day at costco. what for?? we all know that soon TV will be NO more and computers and TV will merge-- THEN WHAT???
Actually PC screens have been growing larger for years based in cost and technology. People who game care. People who work with graphics care. People who watch movies on the PC care and people who are just computerphiles care. With or without TV over the PC it would still happen
Praxeas
09-28-2007, 10:52 PM
It any of the men mentioned do leave, it will have big implications. Many people look to these men for leadership and will follow. These are men that have revival churches, growth, but also believe in Holiness, and many people will follow that type of leadership.
I do think that another organization will eventually be formed, possibly with one of these men as the leaders.
"How can two walk together except they be agreed?"
When has the entire UPC EVER been in 100% agreement with each other over 100% of everything?
why include "not contending for our differences to the disunity of the body" if they were all always in full 100% agreement on everything?
Praxeas
09-28-2007, 10:53 PM
If they leave you won't have the balance.
Maybe that is why THEY want to leave. They don't like the balance. They can see that the UCs no longer control the UPC and that bothers them?
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 10:53 PM
Actually PC screens have been growing larger for years based in cost and technology. People who game care. People who work with graphics care. People who watch movies on the PC care and people who are just computerphiles care. With or without TV over the PC it would still happen
True I think the issue of TV in this vein is that TV as we know it will disappear in a matter of years anyway. Cost effective large HD monitor hanging from the wall. TV shows broadcast over the internet. The technologies will merge.
Praxeas
09-28-2007, 10:54 PM
So let me get this straight....in three years it will be a moot point.
When it is a moot point it will be ok?
Bro. That makes no sense...
I think maybe he meant Mute? Ahhh....already Bro Steadfast is reaching for the remote :killinme
Just kidding
Praxeas
09-28-2007, 10:55 PM
True I think the issue of TV in this vein is that TV as we know it will disappear in a matter of years anyway. Cost effective large HD monitor hanging from the wall. TV shows broadcast over the internet. The technologies will merge.
Right. I mean TV mostly comes over the cable now for most people and they get their internet the same way often. DSL is getting faster and FIOS is already widely available.
Good point Here is the passage in context. Bold emphasis mine.
Acts 9:10-19
10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
11 And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,
12 And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.
13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
19 And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.
KJV
Paul recounts the story of his conversion in Acts 22:13. The same word Annanias used for brother was the same word Paul said in his during his recollection.was the same wordbrother/brethern is used in his narritve.
It is also the same word used when Paul states to "Greet the brethren", and also the same word when Paul states:
Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
It is an interchangeable word and could and does mean either throughout scripture. Honestly, it is not enough to make a doctrine out of. But now you got me going down the bunny trail.
Evang.Benincasa
09-28-2007, 11:04 PM
I for one feel that the issue is much deeper, and way more critical. I feel it is a doctrinal issue (I am not referring to TV either) On on side of the aisle you have the "PCI, Light/Lessor Light, Friends of the Bridegroom, liberal, Pro TV" crowd. And on the other side you have the "PAJC, 3 step, Anti TV, conservative crowd. (There are exceptions on both sides)
Eventually this will divide, not over TV, standards, etc but rather over doctrine. JMHO
This above was a quote that will end up as prophecy. I do believe that passing resolution #4 was the bullet to the brain, and we have not seen anything yet. First it will start with advertising and then it will spread until it turns the United Pentecostal Church International into a commercialized perfectly polished name brand parked on the shelf of mainstream religion.
I really wish this didn't happen. I really love all you Brothers and I hope everything turns out all right.
In Jesus name
Brother Benincasa
www.OnTimeJournal.com
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 11:11 PM
This above was a quote that will end up as prophecy. I do believe that passing resolution #4 was the bullet to the brain, and we have not seen anything yet. First it will start with advertising and then it will spread until it turns the United Pentecostal Church International into a commercialized perfectly polished name brand parked on the shelf of mainstream religion.
I really wish this didn't happen. I really love all you Brothers and I hope everything turns out all right.
In Jesus name
Brother Benincasa
www.OnTimeJournal.com
Dear Brother,
I can fully understand your concern and pain. I do however seem to have a tad more faith in the ministers of the UPC than that.
BoredOutOfMyMind
09-28-2007, 11:14 PM
Dear Brother,
I can fully understand your concern and pain. I do however seem to have a tad more faith in the ministers of the UPC than that.
Some of us want to believe you.
It did not work for the AOG or the PAW. Members of both have expressed dismay that they ever let this Genie out of it's bottle...
:tvhappy
James Griffin
09-28-2007, 11:14 PM
Praxeas,
Going to have to quit reading your posts. Every time I see your avatar I have an urge to grab a Krispy Kreme.
IBCrazier2
09-28-2007, 11:24 PM
I really really hate to see 200 preachers leave, ................ but to look at the numbers 200 is a very small percentage of upc ministers.
We desperately need both sides of the fence, but look at the numbers.
I wanted to finish my thought. If the word brother was meant in a natural sense, do you think Paul would have mentioned the phrase Brother Paul in his testimony in Acts 22:13?
Acts 22:12-13
12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,
13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.
KJV
The Bible makes a strong case for calling a man brother BEFORE baptism and/or before the Holy Ghost.
Good point Here is the passage in context.
Acts 9:10-18
10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
11 And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,
12 And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.
13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
KJV
Paul recounts the story of his conversion in Acts 22:13. The same word Annanias used for brother was the same word Paul said in his during his recollection.was the same wordbrother/brethern is used in his narritve.
Evang.Benincasa
09-29-2007, 12:00 AM
Dear Brother,
I can fully understand your concern and pain. I do however seem to have a tad more faith in the ministers of the UPC than that.
Brother please, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Faith in the ministers of the UPCI? Brother there is some awesome men in the organization but today some Brothers are going back home to remorsefully ponder their future. You all may be talking about 200 leaving today but who knows what will happen.
If anyone thinks this is a good thing I can't even imagine where you all have been for the past years. I have been hearing preachers talk about the TV issue for years and what they would do if it ever came down to having to leave over it. Well, the talk is all over and now the match has been struck.
I hope that this blaze doesn’t burn out of control.
Brother D. D. Benincasa
www.OnTimeJournal.com
In an ironic twist of fate those pondering their futures were the same ones wanting to hang on to the past. You bring up a good question. Will the 2002-2003 exodus be more than the exodus after the AS resolution?
Brother please, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Faith in the ministers of the UPCI? Brother there is some awesome men in the organization but today some Brothers are going back home to remorsefully ponder their future. You all may be talking about 200 leaving today but who knows what will happen.
If anyone thinks this is a good thing I can't even imagine where you all have been for the past years. I have been hearing preachers talk about the TV issue for years and what they would do if it ever came down to having to leave over it. Well, the talk is all over and now the match has been struck.
I hope that this blaze doesn’t burn out of control.
Brother D. D. Benincasa
www.OnTimeJournal.com (http://www.OnTimeJournal.com)
chaotic_resolve
09-29-2007, 12:14 AM
I remember when the abominable AS was passed. There was talk of hundreds of ministers leaving back then. In reality it was much less than that.
This is more of the same . . . just from the other side.
I find it sad and humorous at the same time, that because of allowing the choice for television evangelism, we've suddenly opened pandora's box and the UPC is now going to hell in a handbasket.
Do I see chicken little in the forum today? I think so. "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
All this doom and gloom does nothing for the ministry nor for the body of believers that make up the UPC. It's funny, before the television vote, the conservatives thought the UPC was the best thing on God's green earth; and now they're talking about it as though it's going to hell. Strange. Dumb.
In other developments, I haven't verified and am not sure the trustworthiness of the source . . . my Pastor received a call from someone who told him Booker had indeed reserved another hall or conference center in Tampa Bay. Whether or not he's left and taken a disgruntled lot with him, I don't know.
I trust my Pastor's word, but not so much the person who spoke to him.
Can anyone else - specifically any ministers who are at GC now - verify whether this is true or false?
I'd hope it's not true . . . especially since so many conservatives, including some mentioned here, spoke so harshly against the ministers who left after the AS was passed.
James Griffin
09-29-2007, 12:16 AM
Brother please, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Faith in the ministers of the UPCI? Brother there is some awesome men in the organization but today some Brothers are going back home to remorsefully ponder their future. You all may be talking about 200 leaving today but who knows what will happen.
If anyone thinks this is a good thing I can't even imagine where you all have been for the past years. I have been hearing preachers talk about the TV issue for years and what they would do if it ever came down to having to leave over it. Well, the talk is all over and now the match has been struck.
I hope that this blaze doesn’t burn out of control.
Brother D. D. Benincasa
www.OnTimeJournal.com
It would truly be sad in any of these fine men left. It does beg the question of agape love that they cannot overcome this and still fellowship with their brethren. And from the way some of them speak, if they were in the majority they would gladly excommunicate any would disagreed with them.
I am still hoping and praying that regardless of denominational affiliation that Apostolic brothers can unite in what is truly important.
Elizabeth
09-29-2007, 12:17 AM
Praxeas,
Going to have to quit reading your posts. Every time I see your avatar I have an urge to grab a Krispy Kreme.
I have thought that myself :donuts
I remember when the abominable AS was passed. There was talk of hundreds of ministers leaving back then. In reality it was much less than that.
This is more of the same . . . just from the other side.
I find it sad and humorous at the same time, that because of allowing the choice for television evangelism, we've suddenly opened pandora's box and the UPC is now going to hell in a handbasket.
Do I see chicken little in the forum today? I think so. "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
All this doom and gloom does nothing for the ministry nor for the body of believers that make up the UPC. It's funny, before the television vote, the conservatives thought the UPC was the best thing on God's green earth; and now they're talking about it as though it's going to hell. Strange. Dumb.
In other developments, I haven't verified and am not sure the trustworthiness of the source . . . my Pastor received a call from someone who told him Booker had indeed reserved another hall or conference center in Tampa Bay. Whether or not he's left and taken a disgruntled lot with him, I don't know.
I trust my Pastor's word, but not so much the person who spoke to him.
Can anyone else - specifically any ministers who are at GC now - verify whether this is true or false?
I'd hope it's not true . . . especially since so many conservatives, including some mentioned here, spoke so harshly against the ministers who left after the AS was passed.
when it was all said and done there was about 400 preachers. that was even reported on CNN. the news of that split even went National as far as news outlets are concerned .
400 hardly made a dent as far as sheer numbers but IMO, as far as fellowship, it's never been the same since. the west suffered tremendously
chaotic_resolve
09-29-2007, 12:20 AM
when it was all said and done there was about 400 preachers. that was even reported on CNN. the news of that split even went National as far as news outlets are concerned .
Didn't WEC and JL Hall or Bernard go on record to say those numbers weren't accurate? I thought I remembered in a response to JLG's Charisma article ("The Other Pentecostals") someone gave some other data that showed the numbers being less than what was first thought.
Evang.Benincasa
09-29-2007, 12:33 AM
It would truly be sad in any of these fine men left. It does beg the question of agape love that they cannot overcome this and still fellowship with their brethren. And from the way some of them speak, if they were in the majority they would gladly excommunicate any would disagreed with them.
I am still hoping and praying that regardless of denominational affiliation that Apostolic brothers can unite in what is truly important.
Amen.
slave4him
09-29-2007, 06:23 AM
Dear Brother,
I can fully understand your concern and pain. I do however seem to have a tad more faith in the ministers of the UPC than that.
There are many whom had faith in T.D. Jakes also but it has had an effect on his doctrine.
slave4him
09-29-2007, 06:26 AM
I really really hate to see 200 preachers leave, ................ but to look at the numbers 200 is a very small percentage of upc ministers.
We desperately need both sides of the fence, but look at the numbers.
If 200 is true it will have a huge effect. Because men whom look up to these men will follow suit and 200 could easily double triple or worse.
Fireside
09-29-2007, 06:31 AM
It's not just numbers. It is influence.
When you lose the caliber of men that we will lose over this, and their voices and influence among us, the long termimpact on the organization will be impossible to predict.
We are losing anchors that have kept us from drifting as an organization too far.
Those who wanted this badly enough to continue bringing it back over and over again finally wore down the opposition.
This was a crass abuse of the elctoral process.
slave4him
09-29-2007, 06:35 AM
Anyone here from Texas district. I know there were several UC's there that I thought might pull out. What about Nate Wilsons church in California. I keep hearing 200 but does anyone know who they are.
redeemedcynic84
09-29-2007, 06:57 AM
It's not just numbers. It is influence.
When you lose the caliber of men that we will lose over this, and their voices and influence among us, the long termimpact on the organization will be impossible to predict.
We are losing anchors that have kept us from drifting as an organization too far.
Those who wanted this badly enough to continue bringing it back over and over again finally wore down the opposition.
This was a crass abuse of the elctoral process.
but isn't someone with the "take my ball and go home" mentality just going to leave eventually anyways?
It is truely sad to lose the ministers that we might lose as an organization... but lets face it, it was only a matter of time before they were going to leave if they are going to leave over something as silly as advertising on television...
This split happened years ago, it just didn't physically happen until now...
slave4him
09-29-2007, 07:03 AM
but isn't someone with the "take my ball and go home" mentality just going to leave eventually anyways?
It is truely sad to lose the ministers that we might lose as an organization... but lets face it, it was only a matter of time before they were going to leave if they are going to leave over something as silly as advertising on television...
This split happened years ago, it just didn't physically happen until now...
I disagree with this assertion. Some of the men that we are talking about feel that the ball they helped make has been taken away from them. These men have not been threatning to leave until an issue that is very important to them has been made. If they leave I don't think it is because they want to or because they belive in disunity. Its because they feel that the Upci doesn't hold their values anymore. I believe men like booker and morton want to stay but they feel that would be compromising on there convictions.
Anyone here from Texas district. I know there were several UC's there that I thought might pull out. What about Nate Wilsons church in California. I keep hearing 200 but does anyone know who they are.
I have been trying to contact some close friends in the Rock Church, but have been unable to at this time...
It's not just numbers. It is influence.
When you lose the caliber of men that we will lose over this, and their voices and influence among us, the long term impact on the organization will be impossible to predict.
We are losing anchors that have kept us from drifting as an organization too far.
Those who wanted this badly enough to continue bringing it back over and over again finally wore down the opposition.
This was a crass abuse of the electoral process.
My brother pastors in IL and was uanble to attend GC this year...
In discussing this last night, he thinks that it is too early to tell if men and churches will pull out...I don't know.
As for those names which have been mentioned as probably leaving from the West Coast, I do personally know that Bishop W has been saying he was going to leave the org since he was 25 years old and my pastor.
However, as he is SO strongly against television, this may be the issue that pushes his hand...I don't know.
I am prayerful...
redeemedcynic84
09-29-2007, 08:17 AM
I disagree with this assertion. Some of the men that we are talking about feel that the ball they helped make has been taken away from them. These men have not been threatning to leave until an issue that is very important to them has been made. If they leave I don't think it is because they want to or because they belive in disunity. Its because they feel that the Upci doesn't hold their values anymore. I believe men like booker and morton want to stay but they feel that would be compromising on there convictions.
Yes, but lets look at the Biblical example of this...
James thought the Law must be followed and converted all the people in the Jersusalem church (Jew or Gentile) to Judaism... He had them circumcised and they followed all the Jewish costums...
Paul preached that the law didn't have to be followed, that it was fulfilled and there was freedom in Christ...
These two sides are COMPLETELY opposed to eachother, moreso than we are on something as lame as "can we advertise on tv or not?"... I mean this was actually SALVATIONAL TEACHINGS!! James taught you MUST BE CIRCUMCISED PHYSICALLY to be a Christian, Paul did not...
and did they fellowship? Yes. Were there issues? Of course. But those issues never made them break fellowship... EVER...
Compare that to our petty stupid differences... "HE IS ON TV!!" "HIS WOMEN WEAR PANTS!!" "THEY PLAY ROCK MUSIC!!!"
Give me a break... This has nothing to do with "thier ball getting taken away from them" and everything to do with the simple fact that almost EVERYONE has the attitude of "anyone who doesn't think exactly like me is not as full of the Holy Ghost as I am" and that is the wrong attitude to have...
redeemedcynic84
09-29-2007, 08:23 AM
part of unity is coming together with people who are not exactly like you...
I mean... unity is defined as "a condition of harmony", "the quality or state of being made one", "a totality of related parts, an entity that is a complex or systematic whole"...
The Bible tells us that we are the body of Christ and none is any less important than another... some are eyes, some are ears, some are toes, some are livers or hearts or intestines or whatever else...
But we are all to be unified, even though we are all different... There is no part that is not important or necessary...
But we in Pentecostalism... We don't like that... We don't want DIFFERENT, we want a complete homogeneous group... We don't want a mixture, we don't want different...
We don't want ears and eyes and noses and teeth, and feet, and hands... We say we do, but look at what happens. Some feel TV is ok to use as a tool to reach people, others don't like it, so we split...
Some feel women should only wear skirts, others disagree, so what do we do? We split...
This is not suppose to be everyone is the same, this is suppose to be everyone is thier own unique creation in Christ... Nowhere in the Bible does it ever say that we are to be carbon copies of eachother... If anything, it tells us the opposite of that...
But we can't see that...
(and yes, this annoys me enough that I needed to rant about it twice within 5 minutes of eachother lol)
stmatthew
09-29-2007, 04:16 PM
I disagree with this assertion. Some of the men that we are talking about feel that the ball they helped make has been taken away from them. These men have not been threatning to leave until an issue that is very important to them has been made. If they leave I don't think it is because they want to or because they belive in disunity. Its because they feel that the Upci doesn't hold their values anymore. I believe men like booker and morton want to stay but they feel that would be compromising on there convictions.
I believe this here really states the issues correctly.
I believe that most conservatives see tv as a step away from holiness. Why?? Because they feel that tv promotes a worldly mindset. This was the reason to keep it out of homes in the 1st place. and I for one have seen the results play out as true. I am sorry, but homes that do not have tv tend to be homes where more prayer and bible study takes place. They are homes where there is a greater peace. I am not saying that to be a blanket statement, because you can do away with tv and still be worldly in your mind. But having had, and not had, a tv in my home, I can tell you that not having one makes for a better home life.
Evang.Benincasa
09-29-2007, 04:24 PM
I believe this here really states the issues correctly.
I believe that most conservatives see tv as a step away from holiness. Why?? Because they feel that tv promotes a worldly mindset. This was the reason to keep it out of homes in the 1st place. and I for one have seen the results play out as true. I am sorry, but homes that do not have tv tend to be homes where more prayer and bible study takes place. They are homes where there is a greater peace. I am not saying that to be a blanket statement, because you can do away with tv and still be worldly in your mind. But having had, and not had, a tv in my home, I can tell you that not having one makes for a better home life.
Brother Matthew the above is beautiful.
In Jesus name
Brother Benincasa
www.OnTimeJournhal.com
rgcraig
09-29-2007, 04:28 PM
I believe this here really states the issues correctly.
I believe that most conservatives see tv as a step away from holiness. Why?? Because they feel that tv promotes a worldly mindset. This was the reason to keep it out of homes in the 1st place. and I for one have seen the results play out as true. I am sorry, but homes that do not have tv tend to be homes where more prayer and bible study takes place. They are homes where there is a greater peace. I am not saying that to be a blanket statement, because you can do away with tv and still be worldly in your mind. But having had, and not had, a tv in my home, I can tell you that not having one makes for a better home life.
This is where I'm still confused. Res. 4 isn't about allowing TV's in the homes and it's no secret that many, many UPC's folks already have TV's in their homes, so why now? Why leave now just because they passed that you can advertise on TV.
If it's a step away from holiness - why haven't some already left because not everyone believes wearing rings is wrong or that showing your elbow is wrong.
Or it's stated not to go to worldly admusements and lord knows most UPC folks go to Disneyworld. Why doesn't this cause the great divide?
Why now?
triumphant1
09-29-2007, 04:39 PM
This is where I'm still confused. Res. 4 isn't about allowing TV's in the homes and it's no secret that many, many UPC's folks already have TV's in their homes, so why now? Why leave now just because they passed that you can advertise on TV.
If it's a step away from holiness - why haven't some already left because not everyone believes wearing rings is wrong or that showing your elbow is wrong.
Or it's stated not to go to worldly admusements and lord knows most UPC folks go to Disneyworld. Why doesn't this cause the great divide?
Why now?
I have wondered the same thing and can only guess that the cons feel since TV advertising is allowed it now becomes impossible to enforce the no TV stand...
In other words...you are going to try to convince your people that the church can run an ad on a tv but they can't own one to watch it....thereby making the no tv stand a neutered issue...
So they seem to feel that this is worse that simply allowing advertising...it is a complete course change for the movement now embracing tv in its entirety and not just allowing commercials...
Is this an overreation? I think it is at the moment...they should just hide and watch because I believe the TV allowance will make no tangible difference at all...
stmatthew
09-29-2007, 04:43 PM
This is where I'm still confused. Res. 4 isn't about allowing TV's in the homes and it's no secret that many, many UPC's folks already have TV's in their homes, so why now? Why leave now just because they passed that you can advertise on TV.
If it's a step away from holiness - why haven't some already left because not everyone believes wearing rings is wrong or that showing your elbow is wrong.
Or it's stated not to go to worldly admusements and lord knows most UPC folks go to Disneyworld. Why doesn't this cause the great divide?
Why now?
I really think that many feel the door has just been opened, and the future will see tv struck from the manual entirely. I think that as long as it was held by the org, then the cons could continue to stay. No one was follish enough to believe it was enforced. But now principle and integrity is going to make many of them HAVE to leave. They cannot with good conscience support a system that specifically goes against a standard they believe to be "right".
stmatthew
09-29-2007, 04:45 PM
I have wondered the same thing and can only guess that the cons feel since TV advertising is allowed it now becomes impossible to enforce the no TV stand...
In other words...you are going to try to convince your people that the church can run an ad on a tv but they can't own one to watch it....thereby making the no tv stand a neutered issue...
So they seem to feel that this is worse that simply allowing advertising...it is a complete course change for the movement now embracing tv in its entirety and not just allowing commercials...
Is this an overreation? I think it is at the moment...they should just hide and watch because I believe the TV allowance will make no tangible difference at all...
I think the passing of the resolution makes the UPC seem a very inconsistent org. They can now advertise on the devil box, but it is a sin to own one.
Kansas Preacher
09-29-2007, 04:46 PM
I spoke to some of those very men, even last night when you were with me. Neither of them said they were leaving.
However, I also know that - even if they don't leave - some will pull even further away from the core of the organization... and that is dangerous. We all NEED extremes to keep our own lives balanced.
Steadfast,
I consider you a friend. I admire you. However, which of the four men mentioned do you consider to be an "extremist?" I am shocked by this comment.
(Perhaps this has been dealt with. I haven't yet read the entire thread. This just caught my eye and I was astonished.) I don't see Booker, Godair, Wilson, OR Morton as "EXTREMES." Maybe I'm extreme, too.
:angelsad
triumphant1
09-29-2007, 04:55 PM
I think the passing of the resolution makes the UPC seem a very inconsistent org. They can now advertise on the devil box, but it is a sin to own one.
Add it to the list of inconsistancies like........no to TV but yes to the internet....
I'm thinking that with the many dire circumstance that the Lord is rescuing people from these days like drug addiction, broken home lives, sexual abuse, physical abuse, etc. -- what on EARTH is this group of Christian men and women thinking expending so much passion and putting the unity of a fellowship in jeopardy by haggling over something that, in the scheme of things, isn't really worth all this bickering back and forth.
People walking out of meetings in a huff, grown men behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way - it's ridiculous! People taking their marbles and going home to pout..good grief! What's wrong with this picture???
The TV thing is a ridiculous issue. This rule that preachers are not to have televisions in their home is a CROCK. Pardon me, but I've just lost patience with this garbage.
Preachers across the fellowship have found loopholes in this policy, I.E. buying DVD's of their favorite TV series and watching it on their DVD player, watching TV in hotel rooms, listening to TV programs on XM radio, etc. It's just STUPID!
Technology is NOT the problem! The vehicle is NOT problem!
When will it be stated that the use of technology should be tempered by Christian values? When will this be added to the Manual??? Maybe it's already in there, but people are just missing it???
Rescue the Perishing!!! Use TV, Radio, the Internet, the Newspaper, Music, Books, Door-to-Door Witnessing, Home Bible Studies, Sky Writing! If it works! Use it!!! By all means save some...
rgcraig
09-29-2007, 05:05 PM
I'm thinking that with the many dire circumstance that the Lord is rescuing people from these days like drug addiction, broken home lives, sexual abuse, physical abuse, etc. -- what on EARTH is this group of Christian men and women thinking expending so much passion and putting the unity of a fellowship in jeopardy by haggling over something that, in the scheme of things, isn't really worth all this bickering back and forth.
People walking out of meetings in a huff, grown men behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way - it's ridiculous! People taking their marbles and going home to pout..good grief! What's wrong with this picture???
The TV thing is a ridiculous issue. This rule that preachers are not to have televisions in their home is a CROCK. Pardon me, but I've just lost patience with this garbage.
Preacher across the fellowship have found loopholes in this policy, I.E. buying DVD's of their favorite TV series and watching it on their DVD player, watching TV in hotel rooms, listening to TV programs on XM radio, etc. It's just STUPID!
Technology is NOT the problem! The vehicle is NOT problem!
When will it be stated that the use of technology should be tempered by Christian values? When will this be added to the Manual??? Maybe it's already in there, but people are just missing it???
Rescue the Perishing!!! Use TV, Radio, the Internet, the Newspaper, Music, Books, Door-to-Door Witnessing, Home Bible Studies, Sky Writing! If it works! Use it!!! By all means save some...
Preach it sista!
I agree 100%!
mizpeh
09-29-2007, 05:05 PM
I really think that many feel the door has just been opened, and the future will see tv struck from the manual entirely. I think that as long as it was held by the org, then the cons could continue to stay. No one was follish enough to believe it was enforced. But now principle and integrity is going to make many of them HAVE to leave. They cannot with good conscience support a system that specifically goes against a standard they believe to be "right".
But Matt, they can and will still preach against the evils of TV. My pastor has preached to get rid of your TV if you cannot control what you watch as a side of his main topic for the last two Sundays in a row and he has a TV. He teaches moderation and Holy Ghost conviction which allows the saint to follow the guidance of the Spirit. Some folks can have a TV and only watch the news and a few TBN programs. I haven't watched my TV for months now because I've lost interest. When I go into my patients rooms, I'll occasionally watch the news or a sports show if that's what they are watching for a couple of minutes without feeling convicted.
You have to admit that liberals and some moderates have been supporting a system that goes against their beliefs for a long time now because they love the men of God in the UPC. And the passing of this resolution is a couple of drops in the bucket to what they would be happy seeing.
We all agree holiness is a requirement for seeing the Lord but our lines of demarcation are different. But is holiness what caused us to be born into the body of Christ? If not, then I suggest we, as members of his body, should strive to be tolerant of each other and seek the welfare of the body until we all come in the unity of the faith.
dizzyde
09-29-2007, 05:05 PM
I'm thinking that with the many dire circumstance that the Lord is rescuing people from these days like drug addiction, broken home lives, sexual abuse, physical abuse, etc. -- what on EARTH is this group of Christian men and women thinking expending so much passion and putting the unity of a fellowship in jeopardy by haggling over something that, in the scheme of things, isn't really worth all this bickering back and forth.
People walking out of meetings in a huff, grown men behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way - it's ridiculous! People taking their marbles and going home to pout..good grief! What's wrong with this picture???
The TV thing is a ridiculous issue. This rule that preachers are not to have televisions in their home is a CROCK. Pardon me, but I've just lost patience with this garbage.
Preachers across the fellowship have found loopholes in this policy, I.E. buying DVD's of their favorite TV series and watching it on their DVD player, watching TV in hotel rooms, listening to TV programs on XM radio, etc. It's just STUPID!
Technology is NOT the problem! The vehicle is NOT problem!
When will it be stated that the use of technology should be tempered by Christian values? When will this be added to the Manual??? Maybe it's already in there, but people are just missing it???
Rescue the Perishing!!! Use TV, Radio, the Internet, the Newspaper, Music, Books, Door-to-Door Witnessing, Home Bible Studies, Sky Writing! If it works! Use it!!! By all means save some...
THANK YOU!!!!!
Kansas Preacher
09-29-2007, 06:38 PM
People walking out of meetings in a huff, grown men behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way - it's ridiculous! People taking their marbles and going home to pout..good grief! What's wrong with this picture???
Dora,
Please don't keep promoting these false notions. This did NOT happen. I saw NO ONE "walk out in a huff." Even those of us who plan to leave are NOT leaving angrily. We are heartbroken. Your references to these things just promotes the attitude of gossip that has been prevailing over the last few days.
Which is worse -- to leave because you have genuine convictions which you feel are being violated, or to gossip about men who do that, accusing them of "behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way"?
triumphant1
09-29-2007, 06:44 PM
Dora,
Please don't keep promoting these false notions. This did NOT happen. I saw NO ONE "walk out in a huff." Even those of us who plan to leave are NOT leaving angrily. We are heartbroken. Your references to these things just promotes the attitude of gossip that has been prevailing over the last few days.
Which is worse -- to leave because you have genuine convictions which you feel are being violated, or to gossip about men who do that, accusing them of "behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way"?
KP has said repeatedly that there was no storming out, no angry faces, no bad attitudes...I believe him and this should be put to rest!!!!
Kansas Preacher
09-29-2007, 06:56 PM
KP has said repeatedly that there was no storming out, no angry faces, no bad attitudes...I believe him and this should be put to rest!!!!
Thank you, T1. I am SO frustrated with this rumor. If there is a conservative on the face of this planet, I believe I -- and the men with whom I associate most -- qualify. We were NOT angry. We were NOT acting childish.
The only "childish" thing I'm doing is crying. (Literally, by the way -- I have tears in my eyes as I type.) This has been a HEARTRENDING ordeal for us.
triumphant1
09-29-2007, 06:59 PM
Thank you, T1. I am SO frustrated with this rumor. If there is a conservative on the face of this planet, I believe I -- and the men with whom I associate most -- qualify. We were NOT angry. We were NOT acting childish.
The only "childish" thing I'm doing is crying. (Literally, by the way -- I have tears in my eyes as I type.) This has been a HEARTRENDING ordeal for us.
I believe you.
Rhoni
09-29-2007, 07:24 PM
I'm thinking that with the many dire circumstance that the Lord is rescuing people from these days like drug addiction, broken home lives, sexual abuse, physical abuse, etc. -- what on EARTH is this group of Christian men and women thinking expending so much passion and putting the unity of a fellowship in jeopardy by haggling over something that, in the scheme of things, isn't really worth all this bickering back and forth.
People walking out of meetings in a huff, grown men behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way - it's ridiculous! People taking their marbles and going home to pout..good grief! What's wrong with this picture???
The TV thing is a ridiculous issue. This rule that preachers are not to have televisions in their home is a CROCK. Pardon me, but I've just lost patience with this garbage.
Preachers across the fellowship have found loopholes in this policy, I.E. buying DVD's of their favorite TV series and watching it on their DVD player, watching TV in hotel rooms, listening to TV programs on XM radio, etc. It's just STUPID!
Technology is NOT the problem! The vehicle is NOT problem!
When will it be stated that the use of technology should be tempered by Christian values? When will this be added to the Manual??? Maybe it's already in there, but people are just missing it???
Rescue the Perishing!!! Use TV, Radio, the Internet, the Newspaper, Music, Books, Door-to-Door Witnessing, Home Bible Studies, Sky Writing! If it works! Use it!!! By all means save some...
Dora,
I believe all this because I have seen it happen in many a UPCI business meeting. There are lost souls waiting to be harvested and we are stuck in 50+ years of T.V. issues. Sad. Truly sad.
Good Post.
Rhoni
I'm thinking that with the many dire circumstance that the Lord is rescuing people from these days like drug addiction, broken home lives, sexual abuse, physical abuse, etc. -- what on EARTH is this group of Christian men and women thinking expending so much passion and putting the unity of a fellowship in jeopardy by haggling over something that, in the scheme of things, isn't really worth all this bickering back and forth.
People walking out of meetings in a huff, grown men behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way - it's ridiculous! People taking their marbles and going home to pout..good grief! What's wrong with this picture???
The TV thing is a ridiculous issue. This rule that preachers are not to have televisions in their home is a CROCK. Pardon me, but I've just lost patience with this garbage.
Preachers across the fellowship have found loopholes in this policy, I.E. buying DVD's of their favorite TV series and watching it on their DVD player, watching TV in hotel rooms, listening to TV programs on XM radio, etc. It's just STUPID!
Technology is NOT the problem! The vehicle is NOT problem!
When will it be stated that the use of technology should be tempered by Christian values? When will this be added to the Manual??? Maybe it's already in there, but people are just missing it???
Rescue the Perishing!!! Use TV, Radio, the Internet, the Newspaper, Music, Books, Door-to-Door Witnessing, Home Bible Studies, Sky Writing! If it works! Use it!!! By all means save some...
I love that!! that is so cute! :killinme:killinme:killinme:killinme
give her a break KP she's just a girl
Steadfast
09-29-2007, 08:17 PM
Steadfast,
I consider you a friend. I admire you. However, which of the four men mentioned do you consider to be an "extremist?" I am shocked by this comment.
(Perhaps this has been dealt with. I haven't yet read the entire thread. This just caught my eye and I was astonished.) I don't see Booker, Godair, Wilson, OR Morton as "EXTREMES." Maybe I'm extreme, too.
:angelsad
Bro. KP,
In response to your post I can only say that I don't think you - or any of the other men mentioned - are 'extreme'. In fact, I find it a category that I would hope I stand in. However, even conservatives - like you and I - need men on both sides of us to help us retain our own spiritual balance.
Steadfast
09-29-2007, 08:21 PM
People walking out of meetings in a huff, grown men behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way - it's ridiculous! People taking their marbles and going home to pout..good grief! What's wrong with this picture???
Dora,
I believe all this because I have seen it happen in many a UPCI business meeting. There are lost souls waiting to be harvested and we are stuck in 50+ years of T.V. issues. Sad. Truly sad.
Good Post.
Rhoni
I have to weigh in on this one and tell everyone that anyone who would say this happened during these business meetings is a liar of the first degree. It simply didn't happen. My youngest son and Coonskinner sat towards the back and I was on the fourth row. NOTHING of this nature remotely happened.
Obviously you have gotten incorrect information. Perhaps you should call them back and tell them about that 'all liars shall have their part' in that lake of fire stuff.
It didn't happen. Not even a hint of demonstration of any kind.
Scott Hutchinson
09-29-2007, 08:23 PM
Let me say this when folks like KP say they are heart broken, I find no humor in this ,or nothing to gloat over not in the least.
IAintMovin
09-29-2007, 08:23 PM
People walking out of meetings in a huff, grown men behaving like a 2 year old who didn't get his way - it's ridiculous! People taking their marbles and going home to pout..good grief! What's wrong with this picture???
I have to weigh in on this one and tell everyone that anyone who would say this happened during these business meetings is a liar of the first degree. It simply didn't happen. My youngest son and Coonskinner sat towards the back and I was on the fourth row. NOTHING of this nature remotely happened.
Obviously you have gotten incorrect information. Perhaps you should call them back and tell them about that 'all liars shall have their part' in that lake of fire stuff.
It didn't happen. Not even a hint of demonstration of any kind.
I sat on the other side of the meeting room from you and I can say that not one person moved, except to be moved in prayer....it amazes me that people who were not even there "think" they know more than those of us who were..... I am greived at all the false information that is being spread on this forum in the last few days.... it seems to have reached a new high.......this is truly sad........
Nahum
09-29-2007, 08:25 PM
I agree, there was no visible upset.
**** PARANOIA *******
I thought I was the only one ummm....
Kansas Preacher
09-29-2007, 08:33 PM
Bro. KP,
In response to your post I can only say that I don't think you - or any of the other men mentioned - are 'extreme'. In fact, I find it a category that I would hope I stand in. However, even conservatives - like you and I - need men on both sides of us to help us retain our own spiritual balance.
Thank you for the clarification. That helps.
Kansas Preacher
09-29-2007, 08:34 PM
I sat on the other side of the meeting room from you and I can say that not one person moved, except to be moved in prayer....it amazes me that people who were not even there "think" they know more than those of us who were..... I am greived at all the false information that is being spread on this forum in the last few days.... it seems to have reached a new high.......this is truly sad........
Have you seen the post where CAF got called "vomit"? That was definitely a new LOW.
In three years this would have been all a moot point. This would have settled istelf.
Explain what you meant by this post. It can be taken several ways.
Nahum
09-29-2007, 09:16 PM
If it would have been moot in three years, what's the big deal now?
Is it a pride issue?
James Griffin
09-29-2007, 10:50 PM
I think the passing of the resolution makes the UPC seem a very inconsistent org. They can now advertise on the devil box, but it is a sin to own one.
you mean like this?
http://geocities.com/tulsadavid2006/upctv.gif
James Griffin
09-29-2007, 10:54 PM
Explain what you meant by this post. It can be taken several ways.
I believe the feeling is that within three years that TV and the internet will be intertwined with a free standing monitor and be de facto the same.
Its a technology issue.
I believe the feeling is that within three years that TV and the internet will be intertwined with a free standing monitor and be de facto the same.
Its a technology issue.
True ultra cons will just ban cell phones and computers to keep TV out of the home.
I heard one pretty much preach that the night I went to this years AMC conference in Nashville. The preacher's church only has one person in it with internet access and it is because of the man's job. Even then the pastor has made the man put a filter on that will only allow him to access the two or three websites he has to access for his job.
This same Pastor also does not allow anyone under the age of 18 in his church to have a cell phone.
I was astounded that people would allow a man to have that much control over their lives. Then people wonder why old time Pentecost is viewed as cultic.
James Griffin
09-29-2007, 11:03 PM
True ultra cons will just ban cell phones and computers to keep TV out of the home.
I heard one pretty much preach that the night I went to this years AMC conference in Nashville. The preacher's church only has one person in it with internet access and it is because of the man's job. Even then the pastor has made the man put a filter on that will only allow him to access the two or three websites he has to access for his job.
This same Pastor also does not allow anyone under the age of 18 in his church to have a cell phone.
I was astounded that people would allow a man to have that much control over their lives. Then people wonder why old time Pentecost is viewed as cultic.
cell phone will have streaming video within a couple years without filters, articles predict a zero to $6 billion a year industry on porn video by cell phone.
BoredOutOfMyMind
09-29-2007, 11:05 PM
I heard one pretty much preach that the night I went to this years AMC conference in Nashville.
I feared you were never coming back here after all that strong preaching.
I heard someone else state they did not have skin left!
well i'm glad this has been the very thing that has Brought Tim back to the forum
Thanks to brother James
James, he use to be a regular poster here ( a great one too!)but quit.
however, he is officially back !!!
James Griffin
09-29-2007, 11:08 PM
well i'm glad this has been the very thing that has Brought Tim back to the forum
Thanks to brother James
James, he use to be a regular poster here ( a great one too!)but quit.
however, he is officially back !!!
Actually Tim and I are leaving to start our own forum, you heard it from Thad first!!!!
Actually Tim and I are leaving to start our own forum, you heard it from Thad first!!!!
can I join ???????????????????????? please?????
redeemedcynic84
09-30-2007, 12:37 AM
True ultra cons will just ban cell phones and computers to keep TV out of the home.
I heard one pretty much preach that the night I went to this years AMC conference in Nashville. The preacher's church only has one person in it with internet access and it is because of the man's job. Even then the pastor has made the man put a filter on that will only allow him to access the two or three websites he has to access for his job.
This same Pastor also does not allow anyone under the age of 18 in his church to have a cell phone.
I was astounded that people would allow a man to have that much control over their lives. Then people wonder why old time Pentecost is viewed as cultic.
you have got to be kidding me...
Why doesn't the organization step in when people do things like this??? I mean, really, if they're members of an org, isn't part of the advantage of not being non-denominational that crazies can't do things like that to thier congregations???
you have got to be kidding me...
Why doesn't the organization step in when people do things like this??? I mean, really, if they're members of an org, isn't part of the advantage of not being non-denominational that crazies can't do things like that to thier congregations???
at a camp here in CA. this summer, they preached against text messaging and sending photos .
in fact, they confiscated all the cell phones for the whole week and didn't allow them at all
slave4him
09-30-2007, 05:55 AM
Yes, but lets look at the Biblical example of this...
James thought the Law must be followed and converted all the people in the Jersusalem church (Jew or Gentile) to Judaism... He had them circumcised and they followed all the Jewish costums...
Paul preached that the law didn't have to be followed, that it was fulfilled and there was freedom in Christ...
These two sides are COMPLETELY opposed to eachother, moreso than we are on something as lame as "can we advertise on tv or not?"... I mean this was actually SALVATIONAL TEACHINGS!! James taught you MUST BE CIRCUMCISED PHYSICALLY to be a Christian, Paul did not...
and did they fellowship? Yes. Were there issues? Of course. But those issues never made them break fellowship... EVER...
Compare that to our petty stupid differences... "HE IS ON TV!!" "HIS WOMEN WEAR PANTS!!" "THEY PLAY ROCK MUSIC!!!"
Give me a break... This has nothing to do with "thier ball getting taken away from them" and everything to do with the simple fact that almost EVERYONE has the attitude of "anyone who doesn't think exactly like me is not as full of the Holy Ghost as I am" and that is the wrong attitude to have...
Yes but Paul told Timothy to be circumsized to not offend the brethren. I agree that there are some that are just leagalistic minded. But there are many that have been named on here that are not. They really feel that the TV issue is a slippery slope and don't want to be apart of an org. that allows it.
slave4him
09-30-2007, 06:03 AM
I'm thinking that with the many dire circumstance that the Lord is rescuing people from these days like drug addiction, broken home lives, sexual abuse, physical abuse, etc. -- what on EARTH is this group of Christian men and women thinking expending so much passion and putting the unity of a fellowship in jeopardy by haggling over something that, in the scheme of things, isn't really worth all this bickering back and forth.
That is the whole problem that many of these men have with TV. It promotes those things that God is wanting to deliver people from.
Sister Alvear
09-30-2007, 06:20 AM
If you have the REAL thing you simply are going to do what is right. That is the same for internet that is far more dangerous than a TV...I have the net and have even been tempted to go somewhere that would not please the one I love the most.
I alway tell you dear ones God tempts no one...
Newman
09-30-2007, 06:23 AM
Yes but Paul told Timothy to be circumsized to not offend the brethren. I agree that there are some that are just leagalistic minded. But there are many that have been named on here that are not. They really feel that the TV issue is a slippery slope and don't want to be apart of an org. that allows it.
Yes, but Timothy's lack of circumcission was a distraction to the Jews he was ministering to at the time.
There is a big difference in conforming one's life so that one can minister to a particular group of people and being told you must conform to particular standards because a group one isn't ministering to says so.
It is the difference between Paul saying I become all things as much as morally possible to win the lost (1 Corinthians 9:19-21) and yet also saying don't let others put you in bondage (book of Galatians) and calling extra-biblical teachings the doctrine of devils (1 Timothy 4:1-3). :cool:
If you have the REAL thing you simply are going to do what is right. That is the same for internet that is far more dangerous than a TV...I have the net and have even been tempted to go somewhere that would not please the one I love the most.
I alway tell you dear ones God tempts no one...
Therein lies the key...doing what is right.
I find it interesting that folks are willing to trust the Holy Ghost to guide me re where to go online, and believe that descretion will keep me.
YET when it comes to television, their confidence is gone and I am as loose as a goose in discerning right from wrong.
Makes NO sense whatsoever!!
redeemedcynic84
09-30-2007, 06:58 AM
at a camp here in CA. this summer, they preached against text messaging and sending photos .
in fact, they confiscated all the cell phones for the whole week and didn't allow them at all
I could see that...
but it would be more of a "get away from your constant texting for a week!!" thing than a "never ever ever use them!!" thing...
:shrug:
I think taking away all cell phones during camp sounds like a good idea...
redeemedcynic84
09-30-2007, 07:01 AM
Yes but Paul told Timothy to be circumsized to not offend the brethren. I agree that there are some that are just leagalistic minded. But there are many that have been named on here that are not. They really feel that the TV issue is a slippery slope and don't want to be apart of an org. that allows it.
For one, yeah, we should respect the views of our brethren... but at what point does that hinder my walk?? (note: this is, I think, why Paul said the stronger brethren are the ones without teh rules, because it is HARD to not do things because the person standing next to you disagrees with it even though you think its ok and not get an attitude about it)... Plus, Paul was telling Timothy how to minister to Jews that Timothy was preaching to at that time, he might not even have been referring to Jewish Christians even, but possibly non-Chrisitan Jews...
You have to draw a line at some point, though... eventually it does turn into legalism... I mean, notice how Paul told Timothy to appease those brothers, but Paul still actively preached AGAINST what those brothers were saying/doing/teaching...
redeemedcynic84
09-30-2007, 07:03 AM
That is the whole problem that many of these men have with TV. It promotes those things that God is wanting to deliver people from.
please show me one instance on television where sexual abuse is promoted... Physical abuse, too...
please show me one place on tv where drug addiction is promoted... (note: yes, sometimes use of some things might be promoted, but addiction? Nope... and there is a difference (albeit mostly a semantic one))
bishoph
09-30-2007, 10:26 AM
please show me one instance on television where sexual abuse is promoted... Physical abuse, too...
please show me one place on tv where drug addiction is promoted... (note: yes, sometimes use of some things might be promoted, but addiction? Nope... and there is a difference (albeit mostly a semantic one))
Brother RC you amaze me sometimes with your arguments! All it takes is one hit of cocaine and many are addicts. All drug addicts in fact started with just "one" hit, including alcohol and cigarets. And while I am on my way out the door right now, I will gladly come back later and address the sexual/physical abuse issue you raised, because you are definitely wrong on those points.
BoredOutOfMyMind
09-30-2007, 10:35 AM
please show me one instance on television where sexual abuse is promoted... Physical abuse, too...
please show me one place on tv where drug addiction is promoted... (note: yes, sometimes use of some things might be promoted, but addiction? Nope... and there is a difference (albeit mostly a semantic one))
You apparently need to sit in the front of the bus, those fumes are affecting your mind. This question has to be one of the dumbest I have read in a long time.
:sos
Steve Epley
09-30-2007, 11:35 AM
The preacher CC1 made reference to is not in any organization. He has built a church from zero to about 200 folks from drug heads and folks deep in sin NOT move-ins from across town. Has a beautiful facility and supports missions heavily. He and I do not necessarily agree on this subject but as those on this forum has stated the dangers of the internet he has tried to limit that intrusion in his church.
redeemedcynic84
09-30-2007, 12:43 PM
Brother RC you amaze me sometimes with your arguments! All it takes is one hit of cocaine and many are addicts. All drug addicts in fact started with just "one" hit, including alcohol and cigarets. And while I am on my way out the door right now, I will gladly come back later and address the sexual/physical abuse issue you raised, because you are definitely wrong on those points.
lol, yes, there are some who take one hit and are addicts...
but there are just as many who take a hit and it barely affects them... overstating the danger of drugs is just as dangerous to our kids as understating the dangers of drugs (or pretending they don't exist)...
and I'd love to hear these examples of promotion of physical/sexual abuse...
The preacher CC1 made reference to is not in any organization. He has built a church from zero to about 200 folks from drug heads and folks deep in sin NOT move-ins from across town. Has a beautiful facility and supports missions heavily. He and I do not necessarily agree on this subject but as those on this forum has stated the dangers of the internet he has tried to limit that intrusion in his church.
Glad I read to the end of the thread before responding as I see that you addressed the point that the AMC preacher I was speaking of is not UPC.
While I do not agree with the man's applications and conclusions I really enjoyed the first 45 minutes of his two hour sermon and all of his singing! He has a great singing voice.
Kansas Preacher
09-30-2007, 01:36 PM
Glad I read to the end of the thread before responding as I see that you addressed the point that the AMC preacher I was speaking of is not UPC.
While I do not agree with the man's applications and conclusions I really enjoyed the first 45 minutes of his two hour sermon and all of his singing! He has a great singing voice.
He is also one of the finest Christian gentlemen you'll ever hope to meet. I have known him for close to 25 years now. He has done a tremendous job (with God's help, of course) of building a revival church.
Larry Booker once said of him, "He would not only die for this message, I'm afraid he'd KILL for it, as well!" It was tongue-in-cheek, of course, but it helps explain a little about his demeanor. He is passionate about his love for God, for the members of the church he pastors, for the lost AND for his hatred of sin and worldliness.
As I said, he's a great guy.
FRINGE_NUTTER
09-30-2007, 01:38 PM
He is also one of the finest Christian gentlemen you'll ever hope to meet. I have known him for close to 25 years now. He has done a tremendous job (with God's help, of course) of building a revival church.
Larry Booker once said of him, "He would not only die for this message, I'm afraid he'd KILL for it, as well!" It was tongue-in-cheek, of course, but it helps explain a little about his demeanor. He is passionate about his love for God, for the members of the church he pastors, for the lost AND for his hatred of sin and worldliness.
As I said, he's a great guy.
SOMEONE send me a PM and tell me who this preacher is. I won't reveal the name publicly or privately here.
Steve Epley
09-30-2007, 01:50 PM
SOMEONE send me a PM and tell me who this preacher is. I won't reveal the name publicly or privately here.
Danny Perdew of Greeley, Co.
HeavenlyOne
09-30-2007, 02:02 PM
Yes, but Timothy's lack of circumcission was a distraction to the Jews he was ministering to at the time.
There is a big difference in conforming one's life so that one can minister to a particular group of people and being told you must conform to particular standards because a group one isn't ministering to says so.
It is the difference between Paul saying I become all things as much as morally possible to win the lost (1 Corinthians 9:19-21) and yet also saying don't let others put you in bondage (book of Galatians) and calling extra-biblical teachings the doctrine of devils (1 Timothy 4:1-3). :cool:
I thought this was worthy of bumping.
chaotic_resolve
09-30-2007, 02:37 PM
This was a crass abuse of the elctoral process.
Yes, the AS passage was quite the crass abuse . . .
crakjak
09-30-2007, 02:51 PM
I think the passing of the resolution makes the UPC seem a very inconsistent org. They can now advertise on the devil box, but it is a sin to own one.
Truth is that TV is pervasive within the UPC so the inconsistence is to act like it is an uncontrollable evil when the major of the membership have TV in their homes. IMO
Further, we are called to live Godly in this present world. Therefore, having a TV for the believer carries the responsibility to do so and still live Godly. Does it make it harder to do so? Not any harder than it is "to be angry and sin not". True relationship with Jesus provides the resources to be "dead to sin."
If sin is nutured in the heart, the heart will find a way to feed that sin. So, teaching should be to mature the pew not to control.
crakjak
09-30-2007, 08:50 PM
Truth is that TV is pervasive within the UPC so the inconsistence is to act like it is an uncontrollable evil when the major of the membership have TV in their homes. IMO
Further, we are called to live Godly in this present world. Therefore, having a TV for the believer carries the responsibility to do so and still live Godly. Does it make it harder to do so? Not any harder than it is "to be angry and sin not". True relationship with Jesus provides the resources to be "dead to sin."
If sin is nutured in the heart, the heart will find a way to feed that sin. So, teaching should be to mature the pew not to control.
bump
redeemedcynic84
10-01-2007, 04:31 AM
lol, yes, there are some who take one hit and are addicts...
but there are just as many who take a hit and it barely affects them... overstating the danger of drugs is just as dangerous to our kids as understating the dangers of drugs (or pretending they don't exist)...
and I'd love to hear these examples of promotion of physical/sexual abuse...
bump...
I'd still love to hear where these examples of physical/sexual abuse being promoted on television are...
Fireside
10-01-2007, 06:00 AM
Yes, the AS passage was quite the crass abuse . . .
Not of the electoral process.
They didn't have to keep bringing it back over and over again to wear the brethren down and finally get it passed like the pro-tv people did.
Not of the electoral process.
They didn't have to keep bringing it back over and over again to wear the brethren down and finally get it passed like the pro-tv people did.
If it had failed the first year you don't think they wouldn't have proposed it again in the future?????
They had an agenda to clean out the libs and they would have kept working until they passed it.
chaotic_resolve
10-01-2007, 01:59 PM
Not of the electoral process.
They didn't have to keep bringing it back over and over again to wear the brethren down and finally get it passed like the pro-tv people did.
If it had failed the first year you don't think they wouldn't have proposed it again in the future?????
They had an agenda to clean out the libs and they would have kept working until they passed it.
My thoughts exactly. Had the AS not passed then, it would have been brought up at the next 20 GC's until passage.
Just because it passed the first time does not mean it wasn't a heavy-handed abuse of the process or a resolution that's caused as much heartache and pain as the current television resolution.
Are these guys really leaving the UPC??? Or just causing a ruckus???
Kutless
10-01-2007, 03:02 PM
Are these guys really leaving the UPC??? Or just causing a ruckus???I would say this is a serious RUMOR.....please.
Kansas Preacher
10-01-2007, 03:43 PM
Some of us are REALLY leaving.
Esther
10-01-2007, 03:49 PM
Some of us are REALLY leaving.
But WHY?
No one is making you be on TV?
I just don't get it! :(
It is not like you agree 100% with everything else unless you are a major exception to the rule. So why now?
UltraCon
10-01-2007, 04:07 PM
Many people here have laid out exactly why this RES was the line that we would not cross. It is crazy to keep saying it again and again but this is as far as i'm willing to go with the UPC. I made my mind up long before this year that if the UPC ever introduced TV into the org then I would NOT stay in. I can't speak for anybody else but I know I WILL leave. I will not talk bad about the UPC becuase I have several friends that i've talked to today that are staying but there are several that have also decided to leave. You may think this is just talk but i'm gone.
Kansas Preacher
10-01-2007, 04:14 PM
But WHY?
No one is making you be on TV?
I just don't get it! :(
It is not like you agree 100% with everything else unless you are a major exception to the rule. So why now?
Esther,
I have explained this until I am (quite frankly) tired of explaining it. I don't mean to sound rude. That's really not my intention. I have just gone through this in great detail on at least two other threads already. Perhaps you could look for the "Bye, bye, Kansas Preacher" thread or the "Dear Kansas Preacher" thread and find my response.
I don't think my emotions can handle a continual explanation to everyone who asks. I'm really sorry if this comes across as anything other than a simple explanation. I hope you understand.
B_Kendrick
10-02-2007, 12:10 AM
But WHY?
No one is making you be on TV?
I just don't get it! :(
It is not like you agree 100% with everything else unless you are a major exception to the rule. So why now?
Why ride a sinking ship to the bottom of the ocean?! =D Just curious! Why not bail out while you have a chance?!?
Thadisdaman
10-02-2007, 12:22 AM
Mark my words the UPCI is going to be stronger than ever. TV is not a heaven or hell issue. THe problem is some preachers have preached that it is, it is not. C'mon people are dying everyday of aids, going hell in a handbasket and we are worried that someone is going to advertise on TV. Geesh, I think God is in heaven sometimes crying over our stupidity. It is either HEaven or HELL not weather or not you advertise on TV.
Let these people go, they have not been with us for years anyway.
AtlantaBishop
10-02-2007, 12:52 AM
Loose them and let them go!
Bryan
10-02-2007, 12:59 AM
Mark my words the UPCI is going to be stronger than ever. TV is not a heaven or hell issue. THe problem is some preachers have preached that it is, it is not. C'mon people are dying everyday of aids, going hell in a handbasket and we are worried that someone is going to advertise on TV. Geesh, I think God is in heaven sometimes crying over our stupidity. It is either HEaven or HELL not weather or not you advertise on TV.
Let these people go, they have not been with us for years anyway.
All they wanted was the organization to remain the same. There is nothing wrong with that. Many have invested their lives in the UPC. The org is that, an org. Things can be amended. There is also nothing wrong with that. People come and go. No big deal.
workn mom
11-21-2007, 03:57 PM
Is this because of the T.V. issue?
Praxeas
11-21-2007, 03:59 PM
Why ride a sinking ship to the bottom of the ocean?! =D Just curious! Why not bail out while you have a chance?!?
That's such a lame analogy, it doesn't even work, but it assumes the UPC is going down without support of your claim
LaGirl
11-21-2007, 04:02 PM
Mark my words the UPCI is going to be stronger than ever. TV is not a heaven or hell issue. THe problem is some preachers have preached that it is, it is not. C'mon people are dying everyday of aids, going hell in a handbasket and we are worried that someone is going to advertise on TV. Geesh, I think God is in heaven sometimes crying over our stupidity. It is either HEaven or HELL not weather or not you advertise on TV.
Let these people go, they have not been with us for years anyway.
:clap:clap:clap: rooting:rooting: iagree
Theophil
11-21-2007, 04:58 PM
Many people here have laid out exactly why this RES was the line that we would not cross. It is crazy to keep saying it again and again but this is as far as i'm willing to go with the UPC. I made my mind up long before this year that if the UPC ever introduced TV into the org then I would NOT stay in. I can't speak for anybody else but I know I WILL leave. I will not talk bad about the UPC becuase I have several friends that i've talked to today that are staying but there are several that have also decided to leave. You may think this is just talk but i'm gone.
Have you turned in your card yet? If not, what are you waiting for?
Thadisdaman
11-21-2007, 05:03 PM
Amen, Amen and AMen
Theophil
11-21-2007, 05:07 PM
Have you turned in your card yet? If not, what are you waiting for?
Hellooo...Anybody home?
*** STUNNING NEWS****
I was informed just now that it's estimated that over 200 preachers are leaving plus some really Great churches ! ! !
was all this worth it ??
couldn't we have waited for technology to change on its own because it is
The real question is how many have left in the past 20 years without a vote on TV.
TRIPLE E
11-21-2007, 06:10 PM
I'm just hoping the budget fees don't go up because of the numbers leaving!
vrblackwell
11-21-2007, 07:24 PM
As of today only 13 cards have been turned in.
The Dean
11-21-2007, 07:46 PM
As of today only 13 cards have been turned in.
I think that number will jump somewhat dramatically after the first of the year with those not paying their dues. However, when its all said and done I still don't think there will be a huge number going.
And, in the end, many will stay with the UPC and simply fellowship with a more conservative network most likely established among those gathering in Tulsa.
Felicity
11-21-2007, 08:00 PM
I think that number will jump somewhat dramatically after the first of the year with those not paying their dues. However, when its all said and done I still don't think there will be a huge number going.
And, in the end, many will stay with the UPC and simply fellowship with a more conservative network most likely established among those gathering in Tulsa.An encouraging word! :thumbsup
rgcraig
11-21-2007, 08:20 PM
I think that number will jump somewhat dramatically after the first of the year with those not paying their dues. However, when its all said and done I still don't think there will be a huge number going.
And, in the end, many will stay with the UPC and simply fellowship with a more conservative network most likely established among those gathering in Tulsa.
Do you still feel that the ones meeting in Tulsa won't be pulling out of UPC?
And, if they do pull out of UPC, then how can those that stay with UPC fellowship with them, wasn't that the other resolution that was passed in Tampa?
The Dean
11-21-2007, 08:38 PM
Do you still feel that the ones meeting in Tulsa won't be pulling out of UPC?
And, if they do pull out of UPC, then how can those that stay with UPC fellowship with them, wasn't that the other resolution that was passed in Tampa?
Those who have spoken directly with the organizers of this meeting have said that what they are doing will not affect whether a man stays in the UPC or leaves the UPC. It has been accused of being many things but they seem to intend to organize a foundation of fellowship among conservative brethren.
The catch is that many ex-UPC and other more conservative groups seem to think this is a 'here comes the conservatives / there goes the UPC' type meeting. Unless the organizers who are talking are going to allow the 'extremes' to take over there is no intention of it being that kind of meeting at all. But, in every crowd, there will be the chance someone will try.
Most of those who they claim have left haven't. Some will; most won't. I do know that men of the caliber of Floyd Odom, Crawford Coon and others aren't approaching this meeting with a 'we'll show them' type mentality.
Integrity is a great barrier against certain attitudes.
As for their ability to fellowship, there is no restriction unless they are removed under 'question' (immorality, false doctrine, etc.). The ones who are leaving that I'm aware of have said they simply aren't going to pay their dues resulting in their being dropped without 'question'.
It shouldn't affect their ability to fellowship at all.
rgcraig
11-21-2007, 08:44 PM
Those who have spoken directly with the organizers of this meeting have said that what they are doing will not affect whether a man stays in the UPC or leaves the UPC. It has been accused of being many things but they seem to intend to organize a foundation of fellowship among conservative brethren.
The catch is that many ex-UPC and other more conservative groups seem to think this is a 'here comes the conservatives / there goes the UPC' type meeting. Unless the organizers who are talking are going to allow the 'extremes' to take over there is no intention of it being that kind of meeting at all. But, in every crowd, there will be the chance someone will try.
Most of those who they claim have left haven't. Some will; most won't. I do know that men of the caliber of Floyd Odom, Crawford Coon and others aren't approaching this meeting with a 'we'll show them' type mentality.
Integrity is a great barrier against certain attitudes.
As for their ability to fellowship, there is no restriction unless they are removed under 'question' (immorality, false doctrine, etc.). The ones who are leaving that I'm aware of have said they simply aren't going to pay their dues resulting in their being dropped without 'question'.
It shouldn't affect their ability to fellowship at all.Thanks for the clarification.
I guess we'll all know as it all unfolds.
The Dean
11-21-2007, 08:45 PM
Thanks for the clarification.
I guess we'll all know as it all unfolds.
Who knows; we may all be surprised!
:noidea
rgcraig
11-21-2007, 08:52 PM
Who knows; we may all be surprised!
:noidea
I think we can count on that.
Kansas Preacher
11-21-2007, 09:29 PM
As of today only 13 cards have been turned in.
Brother Blackwell,
I am not accusing you of being misleading, but that is a misleading statement. I personally know more than 13 men who have gotten out of the UPC since General Conference as a result of the passage of Resolution 4. Although it may be true that only 13 cards "have been turned in," the fact is MANY more than that have already allowed their dues to lapse, and many more will be doing so at the end of the year.
I'm not sure who is responsible for circulating the "13" number, but I honestly believe it is an attempt at "damage control." I want to know how many have gotten out -- NOT how many have "turned in their cards." Do you have idea about the REAL number?
ChTatum
11-21-2007, 09:48 PM
Who knows; we may all be surprised!
:noidea
I won't be surprised.
I don't care.
Soap operas can be seen on the medium that is damning (TV) and on the medium that isn't (internet).
I don't watch on either.
vrblackwell
11-21-2007, 09:55 PM
Brother Blackwell,
I am not accusing you of being misleading, but that is a misleading statement. I personally know more than 13 men who have gotten out of the UPC since General Conference as a result of the passage of Resolution 4. Although it may be true that only 13 cards "have been turned in," the fact is MANY more than that have already allowed their dues to lapse, and many more will be doing so at the end of the year.
I'm not sure who is responsible for circulating the "13" number, but I honestly believe it is an attempt at "damage control." I want to know how many have gotten out -- NOT how many have "turned in their cards." Do you have idea about the REAL number?
I mistyped the number. The correct number is 16 that have turned their cards in. I don't think anyone will really know how many leave over this until February. I do think it will be at least 200 or more.
Kansas Preacher
11-21-2007, 10:02 PM
I mistyped the number. The correct number is 16 that have turned their cards in. I don't think anyone will really know how many leave over this until February. I do think it will be at least 200 or more.
I think you may be missing my point. Someone at Headquarters is quoting the low number (whether it's 13 or 16), based on how many have "turned their cards in." That may be a true number, but I personally know MANY more people who have gotten out of the UPC since conference. The reason it's more than 16 is that there is a difference between "turning your card in" and allowing your dues to lapse. They are not telling us how many did not pay their dues after GC. I promise you it is FAR beyond the "16" they are saying. As I said, I personally know MANY more than 16 who have ALREADY gotten out.
By the way, I believe it will be more than 1,000 when it's all said and done.
LaVonne
11-21-2007, 10:15 PM
I think you may be missing my point. Someone at Headquarters is quoting the low number (whether it's 13 or 16), based on how many have "turned their cards in." That may be a true number, but I personally know MANY more people who have gotten out of the UPC since conference. The reason it's more than 16 is that there is a difference between "turning your card in" and allowing your dues to lapse. They are not telling us how many did not pay their dues after GC. I promise you it is FAR beyond the "16" they are saying. As I said, I personally know MANY more than 16 who have ALREADY gotten out.
By the way, I believe it will be more than 1,000 when it's all said and done.
Sounds to me like VRB is stating fact...I'm sure he's well aware of your point as everyone else is.
AmazingGrace
11-21-2007, 10:16 PM
Sounds to me like VRB is stating fact...I'm sure he's well aware of your point as everyone else is.
I think he just wanted to make sure make sure make sure....
LaVonne
11-21-2007, 10:17 PM
I think he just wanted to make sure make sure make sure....
I guess so...
Felicity
11-21-2007, 10:17 PM
I think you may be missing my point. Someone at Headquarters is quoting the low number (whether it's 13 or 16), based on how many have "turned their cards in." That may be a true number, but I personally know MANY more people who have gotten out of the UPC since conference. The reason it's more than 16 is that there is a difference between "turning your card in" and allowing your dues to lapse. They are not telling us how many did not pay their dues after GC. I promise you it is FAR beyond the "16" they are saying. As I said, I personally know MANY more than 16 who have ALREADY gotten out.
By the way, I believe it will be more than 1,000 when it's all said and done.When will it all be said and done?
AmazingGrace
11-21-2007, 10:18 PM
When will it all be said and done?
I was wondering that too LOL... is he thinking 10 yrs from now or.. Feb... I am interested in immediate (as in by Feb) numbers...
Felicity
11-21-2007, 10:23 PM
I think you may be missing my point. Someone at Headquarters is quoting the low number (whether it's 13 or 16), based on how many have "turned their cards in." That may be a true number, but I personally know MANY more people who have gotten out of the UPC since conference. The reason it's more than 16 is that there is a difference between "turning your card in" and allowing your dues to lapse. They are not telling us how many did not pay their dues after GC. I promise you it is FAR beyond the "16" they are saying. As I said, I personally know MANY more than 16 who have ALREADY gotten out.
By the way, I believe it will be more than 1,000 when it's all said and done.By the way KP I do hope for more than one reason (all of which I believe are good reasonable ones) that what you predict doesn't take place but I have no control over that of course and truly cannot understand the dynamics of all this.
I also don't much care for your av, sir. :) Who is wielding that hammer?
I think this is a whole sorry business to be honest.
Kansas Preacher
11-21-2007, 10:24 PM
Brother Blackwell,
I am not accusing you of being misleading, but that is a misleading statement.
I think you may be missing my point. Someone at Headquarters is quoting the low number (whether it's 13 or 16), based on how many have "turned their cards in." That may be a true number, but I personally know MANY more people who have gotten out of the UPC since conference. The reason it's more than 16 is that there is a difference between "turning your card in" and allowing your dues to lapse. They are not telling us how many did not pay their dues after GC. I promise you it is FAR beyond the "16" they are saying. As I said, I personally know MANY more than 16 who have ALREADY gotten out.
By the way, I believe it will be more than 1,000 when it's all said and done.
Sounds to me like VRB is stating fact...I'm sure he's well aware of your point as everyone else is.
I think he just wanted to make sure make sure make sure....
Again, I'm not accusing VRB of being misleading. However, SOMEONE ELSE at HQ is certainly guilty of that. They are giving out a number when they KNOW FULL WELL that it is NOT an accurate picture. Although only 16 may have "turned in their license," MANY more than that HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN OUT, and they know that. I am asking how many have allowed their dues to lapse since General Conference. Being "careful" has nothing to do with it. I'm just asking for the truth. Why doesn't anyone want to tell us how many have gotten out BESIDES those who "turned in their cards"?
I will state again that I personally know of MANY more than just 16 who are no longer in the UPC. To continue to state that number is not being "careful," it's being misleading. I know that's strong, but it's the way I feel.
Felicity
11-21-2007, 10:25 PM
I'm not surprised that all the numbers aren't being reported. This happened with the exodus that took place back in '97 as well.
Of course they try to minimize the damage and negative fallout. That goes with the territory.
Kansas Preacher
11-21-2007, 10:28 PM
By the way KP I do hope for more than one reason (all of which I believe are good reasonable ones) that what you predict doesn't take place but I have no control over that of course and truly cannot understand the dynamics of all this.
I also don't much care for your av, sir. :) Who is wielding that hammer?
I think this is a whole sorry business to be honest.
I'm not sure what it is about my avatar that you don't care for. To me, it is simply a symbol. Written on the hammer is "Resolution 4." When it hit the UPC, it separated the "U" (United") from the "PC" (Pentecostal Church). From the best I can tell, that's exactly what took place.
I, too, think it is a "whole sorry business." I'm certainly not gloating over it, nor am I happy that it has happened.
LaVonne
11-21-2007, 10:29 PM
Again, I'm not accusing VRB of being misleading. However, SOMEONE ELSE at HQ is certainly guilty of that. They are giving out a number when they KNOW FULL WELL that it is NOT an accurate picture. Although only 16 may have "turned in their license," MANY more than that HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN OUT, and they know that. I am asking how many have allowed their dues to lapse since General Conference. Being "careful" has nothing to do with it. I'm just asking for the truth. Why doesn't anyone want to tell us how many have gotten out BESIDES those who "turned in their cards"?
I will state again that I personally know of MANY more than just 16 who are no longer in the UPC. To continue to state that number is not being "careful," it's being misleading. I know that's strong, but it's the way I feel.
Do you actually know that? That's a bold statement to say that someone at HQ is lying. Maybe, just maybe they are trying to be careful on reporting numbers until they know for a fact, like turning in a card, before they report someone else has left.
LaVonne
11-21-2007, 10:30 PM
I'm not sure what it is about my avatar that you don't care for. To me, it is simply a symbol. Written on the hammer is "Resolution 4." When it hit the UPC, it separated the "U" (United") from the "PC" (Pentecostal Church). From the best I can tell, that's exactly what took place.
I, too, think it is a "whole sorry business." I'm certainly not gloating over it, nor am I happy that it has happened.
No, it's not separating the "United", but separating the traditional Pentecostals from the Apostolic Pentecostals.
Felicity
11-21-2007, 10:35 PM
I'm not sure what it is about my avatar that you don't care for. To me, it is simply a symbol. Written on the hammer is "Resolution 4." When it hit the UPC, it separated the "U" (United") from the "PC" (Pentecostal Church). From the best I can tell, that's exactly what took place.
I, too, think it is a "whole sorry business." I'm certainly not gloating over it, nor am I happy that it has happened.Well, I'm glad you feel that way. It's hard to see a good thing ruined.
I'm sorry. I didn't see what was written on the hammer.
I still find some of this hard to believe -- that the passing of this resolution by a small majority -- could engender this kind of result. I certainly had no idea in the world that something like what you're predicting could happen.
I guess I'm just not cognizant of all the forces that are and have been at work for awhile now .... and I don't think that this one single resolution is responsible for the huge ripping/tearing effect that is/could be taking place.
Kansas Preacher
11-21-2007, 10:35 PM
Do you actually know that? That's a bold statement to say that someone at HQ is lying. Maybe, just maybe they are trying to be careful on reporting numbers until they know for a fact, like turning in a card, before they report someone else has left.
They know how many did not pay their dues. This is not a matter of "being careful." They have the figures in front of them. I'm not asking how many MIGHT get out. It is a plain and simple fact that I personally know several men who did not pay their dues at the end of September. They did not "turn their card in," so they are not being counted in the "16" that is being reported. Why do you think they don't know how many have already gotten out? Of course they know!
By the way, I did not say they "lied." I said they were being "misleading." Although the end result is the same, there is, in some minds, enough difference to justify the latter. Thus, when they say "16 turned in their cards," they are being factually correct. They have just chosen to NOT report ANOTHER NUMBER which THEY ALREADY HAVE -- those who did not pay their dues after General Conference. To simply report one and not the other IS, in fact, MISLEADING. There is no way around that. They want to convey that is only a handful of men, when the REAL truth is MANY MORE did not pay their dues than those (like myself) who literally "turned their cards in."
Once again I ask, HOW MANY DID NOT PAY THEIR DUES after General Conference? This is a number Headquarters knows, but they will not tell us! WHY? (Hint: It's not about being "careful!" What is there to be "careful" of when they ALREADY have the number in front of them?)
I'm not sure what it is about my avatar that you don't care for. To me, it is simply a symbol. Written on the hammer is "Resolution 4." When it hit the UPC, it separated the "U" (United") from the "PC" (Pentecostal Church). From the best I can tell, that's exactly what took place.
I, too, think it is a "whole sorry business." I'm certainly not gloating over it, nor am I happy that it has happened.
Surely you would agree that Res 4 was only the proverbial straw. This has been coming for a long time.
When will it all be said and done?
When all is said and done,
more is said than done.
Kansas Preacher
11-21-2007, 10:41 PM
Well, I'm glad you feel that way. It's hard to see a good thing ruined.
I'm sorry. I didn't see what was written on the hammer.
I still find some of this hard to believe -- that the passing of this resolution by a small majority -- could engender this kind of result. I certainly had no idea in the world that something like what you're predicting could happen.
I guess I'm just not cognizant of all the forces that are and have been at work for awhile now .... and I don't think that this one single resolution is responsible for this huge ripping/tearing effect.
Technically, you are, of course, correct. This "one single resolution" is NOT the ONLY thing responsible. However, it truly WAS the "straw that broke the camel's back." As has been stated on this forum more than once, this is the first time the UPC has reversed itself on an issue many men perceive to be a holiness standard. (I'm not interested in arguing that viewpoint, I'm just trying to explain.) The conservatives have put up with a lot. However, once the organization was seen to be taking a step AWAY from its historic stand, it was more than a decision -- it was a reversal in direction. That's why this one resolution actually brought about the separation.
Again, I'm not happy it came to this. I spent the entire day after the vote in tears -- literally! My whole Christian existence has been within the confines of the United Pentecostal Church. I did not want it to come to this but, alas, it did.
Thus, the avatar I designed was my way of showing that my heart was broken over the thing that ultimately brought the dividing of this organization. I hope you understand it a bit more.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.