Apostolic Friends Forum
Page 16 of 21 « First 6789101112131415 16 1718192021
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)
-   WPF News (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=46)
-   -   Tulsa Report Day 2 (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=11829)

George 01-28-2008 05:13 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind (Post 371628)
Another ozone filled negative post.

Are you hitting up the fruit that is too warm, George?
For the life of me, I have no idea why I deserve your wrath. I thought I was having a friendly conversation with Steadfast. I have no animosity towards anyone. Are you entering conversations too late without understanding their entire text and direction?

Steadfast 01-28-2008 05:22 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover (Post 371582)
Steady, I understand the desire to lift a higher standard and also know TV has been a Hot Topic - especially in some districts.

Pardon me if this has been asked before, but please answer me these questions.

1. These who are inclined to withdraw fellowship over TV viewing, do they watch television clips on the internet?

2. If they don't watch TBN, FOX, ABC or CNN online, do they watch anything on You Tube that had previously been aired on TV? Where is the line of demarkation?

3. We are told that phone/commuter/television will continue to merge, both in hardware and services.

How will these brethren handle this?

How will they police the violators and is it really possible to have true enforcement?


Just to be clear -With very little exception, I am NOT a TV watcher. I am very interested in your answers, because it appears to be conundrum for not only the UPCI but for ALL who have/had a stance against television.


Thank You in advance, Steve Hoover
Bro. Hoover,

I surely cannot be expected to speak for the whole of the conservative minded brethren. Without a doubt it would be a foolish thing to think that the Tulsa movement is going to be a 'cure all' for every spiritual woe known unto mankind. There WILL be divisions even among those 'conservative' minded men somewhere down the road over various issues.

One thing I DO know is that technology will mandate that they each have to come to some kind of conclusion in their own hearts about how they are going to preach / teach when it pertains to Hollywood.

Thankfully I was dealt with strongly by the Lord 4 years ago to start taking the emphasis off the 'object' and start preaching character to my precious people. The day will come that every computer has TV as a part of the 'package' and we're NOT going to get rid of our computers now because they are too intricately intertwined in our society.

What will work in those times? Character and NOTHING else. Do I still preach what I've always preached? Sure. But I don't preach against a plastic box full of circuitry... I preach that every man should have character and enough Godly integrity that you shouldn't want to pour sin into your mind.

How do they 'police' it? We really can't 'police' it now as people are free to live as they wish. Thankfully, I've lived al life in front of my people that they, in turn, respect my opinions in matters that have spiritual consequences.

Hoovie 01-28-2008 05:30 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371650)
Bro. Hoover,

I surely cannot be expected to speak for the whole of the conservative minded brethren. Without a doubt it would be a foolish thing to think that the Tulsa movement is going to be a 'cure all' for every spiritual woe known unto mankind. There WILL be divisions even among those 'conservative' minded men somewhere down the road over various issues.

One thing I DO know is that technology will mandate that they each have to come to some kind of conclusion in their own hearts about how they are going to preach / teach when it pertains to Hollywood.

Thankfully I was dealt with strongly by the Lord 4 years ago to start taking the emphasis off the 'object' and start preaching character to my precious people. The day will come that every computer has TV as a part of the 'package' and we're NOT going to get rid of our computers now because they are too intricately intertwined in our society.

What will work in those times? Character and NOTHING else. Do I still preach what I've always preached? Sure. But I don't preach against a plastic box full of circuitry... I preach that every man should have character and enough Godly integrity that you shouldn't want to pour sin into your mind.

How do they 'police' it? We really can't 'police' it now as people are free to live as they wish. Thankfully, I've lived al life in front of my people that they, in turn, respect my opinions in matters that have spiritual consequences.
WOW! Bro., This is not what I would expect from you and those sympathetic to the Tulsa meeting. Is this not the position of AM and those who are often slammed by the "anti-TV" crowd.

I agree with your answer but, I am afraid it is getting more and more confusing as to exactly what the beef is.

Blessings, SH

IAintMovin 01-28-2008 05:35 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 (Post 371588)
Wow, I didn't even know you had gotten married!:toofunny
ROFL..........now that IS funny.........(not the getting married part, but that the wifey had was not speaking......)

Steadfast 01-28-2008 05:40 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apprehended (Post 371586)
Thanks for your response.

I certainly agree that they have a constitutional right.

Whatever happened to the principle of submission? Or whatever happend to the principle of "obey them that have the rule over you." Whatever happened to the idea of humility when everything does not go "MY" way?

If there are powers that are ordained of God, as all of these bretheren teach, what is so objectionable to submitting to that power? If we are going to CONTEND for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints, before whom are we going to contend...the world? No. We must contend for THAT faith before all of whom is departing from that faith.

Jude 4 makes that plain..."For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness..." Little good it does for preachers to preach to preachers who all preach the same thing, unless of course they are just trying to see who can strut the most and outdo each other.

Your prayer that God bless the Tulsa crowd is mine as well. Hopefully, the Lord will lead them to believe and to accept the doctrine of submission, humility and unity, even when everything does not go their way.

Again, thanks for your response.
If I were utilize the wholesale 'anything that pulls away isn't submissive' reasoning then I would venture to say that Paul wouldn't have made that break from Christian killer to New Testament writer. He broke away from the religous system he no longer could walk in agreement with.

What about others who have walked away from religious systems they could no longer agree with? Was Martin Luther lacking 'submission' to the Roman Catholic Church a bad thing?

While NOBODY believes in spiritual submission than I do I also realize that there are times that the Bible actually CONDONES certain parting of ways. Remember that whole "can two walk together except they agree" and the "house divided against itself" stuff?

I'm sorry... I'm submitted to the extreme to the spiritual authroities in my world. However, my submission is to a REAL Pastor and Elders who aren't afraid to tell me the truth. While I may respect them to the uttermost... I've never feigned a lot of deep spiritual submission to a system of elected officials who don't even know my name. To do so would eliminate the 'autonomy' of the local Church.

The United Pentecostal Church is a great organization. The greatest on the face of the Earth when it comes to promoting this precious truth. I guess that is what confuses me the most... if some of you weren't ripping on the Tulsa crew you would be ripping on the UPC. How is it now that we have so many fierce 'protectors'?

The clear conscience that I have today is a result of the fact that I'm not against EITHER group. In fact, while some of you are seeing me as a 'protector' of the Tulsa crowd, the truth is that I'm protectecting the right of both to do what they feel is right!

Apprehended 01-28-2008 05:44 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felicity (Post 371632)
This would make a great quote. :thumbsup
Thank you, dear lady, thank you indeed. Coming from you, it is a great compliment.

Steadfast 01-28-2008 05:48 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 (Post 371590)
Steadfast,

If I were a cynical man I would think you are positioning yourself to preach meetings for the Tulsaites!!!

I could be wrong but I seem to remember you giving much less weight to this meeting before 1,000 of your conservative brethern showed up for it. I could be wrong. According to my wife I have been wrong before. A lot.
CC1, 'hast thou been so long with me and yet not know me'? If I wanted to have been in Tulsa I would have been there front and center! I'm NOT looking for another place to preach as I can't keep up with my present schedule right now.

You are, thankfully, totally wrong about the 'weight' of my opinions on this matter as I've always said that the Tulsa crew had a right to do what they felt was right in their hearts. I have no beef with either side and, with God's graciousness, am in a position to be respected it seems on both sides of that coin.

I have preached for or with most all of the '6' and have a good report among those brethren. I also preach for a lot of officials as well and love those brethren equally as much. Surely the Bible is right when it tells us the value of a 'good name' being more important than 'great riches'.

For example, I'm preaching for one of the 'coordinators' and then less than a month later preaching for their District Superintendent. I'm not here with an axe to grind... just a prinicple of integrity to protect.

CC1 01-28-2008 05:52 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Yesterday I was reminded once more of just how fast technology is merging. My new Dell desktop has Windows Vista Premium with "Media Center" installed.

I have used the media center to play some DVd's a little but nothing else. Yesterday for the first time I paid attention to the selections that pop up in addition to "play DVD". One was "Internet TV" it was marked "beta" so I guess it is in the testing stage.

When I clicked there it brought up a row of programs I could select at no charge (just have to watch commercials like on broadcast tv).

Among the choices were news programs and other reality programming but also there was the entire first season of Arrested Development, a network sitcom. I was in a rush and didn't look any further but this is further evidence that anyone with a fairly new computer and broadband connection is going to have pretty much the same programming available as if they owned a TV.

Perhaps the solution is for the conservative brethern to head this off at the pass by restricting internet use to dial up service? Could be a resolution for the next WWPF meeting!

CC1 01-28-2008 05:56 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371702)
CC1, 'hast thou been so long with me and yet not know me'? If I wanted to have been in Tulsa I would have been there front and center! I'm NOT looking for another place to preach as I can't keep up with my present schedule right now.

You are, thankfully, totally wrong about the 'weight' of my opinions on this matter as I've always said that the Tulsa crew had a right to do what they felt was right in their hearts. I have no beef with either side and, with God's graciousness, am in a position to be respected it seems on both sides of that coin.

I have preached for or with most all of the '6' and have a good report among those brethren. I also preach for a lot of officials as well and love those brethren equally as much. Surely the Bible is right when it tells us the value of a 'good name' being more important than 'great riches'.

For example, I'm preaching for one of the 'coordinators' and then less than a month later preaching for their District Superintendent. I'm not here with an axe to grind... just a prinicple of integrity to protect.
It should be interesting for folks like you over the next year or two. It will be interesting to see if there are no problems with you preaching for both UPC and WWPF pastors and meetings. I know theoretically there should not be but many times reality intrudes.

Steadfast 01-28-2008 05:59 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by George (Post 371603)
Yet, as you very well know, they are a large enough group to sway votes at gen. conf. but they didn't stay in the fight. They could have controlled the direction.
Because we have held these men in such high esteem, it is beyond our finite minds to believe they have been less than ethical. Nearly everyone of the executive committee lost district or regional positions by very narrow margins. This leads the general population to believe they desire position so much they will form their own organization to guarantee their status. We are once again back at square one struggling to believe it could possibly be eogs as the driving force. Even so, there isn't anything wrong with desiring position.....unless you lose your ethics in so doing.
George, I'm sorry but I'll never be convinced that 'losing postitions' was the deciding factor in their involvement in Tulsa. Again, I've preached for most of them and can tell you - firsthand - that some of them even turned down positions... some several times.

Hoovie 01-28-2008 06:01 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 (Post 371711)
Yesterday I was reminded once more of just how fast technology is merging. My new Dell desktop has Windows Vista Premium with "Media Center" installed.

I have used the media center to play some DVd's a little but nothing else. Yesterday for the first time I paid attention to the selections that pop up in addition to "play DVD". One was "Internet TV" it was marked "beta" so I guess it is in the testing stage.

When I clicked there it brought up a row of programs I could select at no charge (just have to watch commercials like on broadcast tv).

Among the choices were news programs and other reality programming but also there was the entire first season of Arrested Development, a network sitcom. I was in a rush and didn't look any further but this is further evidence that anyone with a fairly new computer and broadband connection is going to have pretty much the same programming available as if they owned a TV.

Perhaps the solution is for the conservative brethern to head this off at the pass by restricting internet use to dial up service? Could be a resolution for the next WWPF meeting!
Thats really the heart of the matter. This can't be solved by prohibitions.

There is an Old Order Mennonite Church in Canada that has allowed laptops... this same group forbids electricity, and automobiles. They can often be seen traveling down the road in their buggy, using the laptop... and no, I'm not kidding!

embonpoint 01-28-2008 06:02 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by George (Post 371549)

Steadfast - It could be argued standards are not the big issue either. California is largely affected by WPF and you would have to agree even the "liberal" churches of California still look conservative by comparision to some other districts.
Perhaps the impact on California is due to men there having already seen from afar where the path some are following has led other districts. As they see what appears to be an all too familiar pattern emerging they are looking for alternatives. Just a possibility.

George 01-28-2008 06:06 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371725)
George, I'm sorry but I'll never be convinced that 'losing postitions' was the deciding factor in their involvement in Tulsa. Again, I've preached for most of them and can tell you - firsthand - that some of them even turned down positions... some several times.
I respect your opinion. It seems the whole situation is a convoluted mess. I wholeheartedly support them building their own organization but have thought some of their methods were somewhat unethical. My greatest concern is repercussions on both sides.

Steadfast 01-28-2008 06:11 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover (Post 371666)
WOW! Bro., This is not what I would expect from you and those sympathetic to the Tulsa meeting. Is this not the position of AM and those who are often slammed by the "anti-TV" crowd.

I agree with your answer but, I am afraid it is getting more and more confusing as to exactly what the beef is.

Blessings, SH
This, my friend, is exactly where I think a huge part of the breakdown is. 90% of all those I know and associate with from the more conservative crowd feel exactly like I feel about it. There are, however, that other small number of people that think sitting in a restaurant with a screen on the wall means 'Go to Hell. Do Not Pass Go. Do Not collect $200'.

It's the nature of people to surmise the worst... sometimes to our own hurt.

George 01-28-2008 06:14 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by embonpoint (Post 371732)
Perhaps the impact on California is due to men there having already seen from afar where the path some are following has led other districts. As they see what appears to be an all too familiar pattern emerging they are looking for alternatives. Just a possibility.
I seriously doubt that to be a possibility. The districts that have so many "liberals" (I hate the terms lib/con but use them for purpose of identity) have always been. There haven't been any over-night changes. There are many churches east of the western region labeled liberal where you will find on their platforms women wearing pants, jewelry, make-up, men with long hair/facial hair, etc. In the most liberal California churches, it is doubtful you would find women wearing pants, painted red fingernails, cut and dyed hair on the platform. For the 50+ years I have been around UPC, this has always been the case.

Weary Pilgrim 01-28-2008 06:14 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371725)
George, I'm sorry but I'll never be convinced that 'losing postitions' was the deciding factor in their involvement in Tulsa. Again, I've preached for most of them and can tell you - firsthand - that some of them even turned down positions... some several times.

NW just lost the position of Western District Supt.

The questions remains as to whether he would have joined up with WPF if

the outcome was different.What if resolution 4 had passed while he was

DS?


.

pelathais 01-28-2008 06:14 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371152)
Pelathais and Associates,

In this vast forum world there people of every kind and opinion. Opinions are great things that help form our personalities.

I have opinions. You have opinions. However, when those opinions impugn the character of another man it goes beyond to boundaries of good taste and into the realms of defamation.

It's obvious that your 'opinion' is that you don't agree with me. I'm a big boy on a faceless forum so that doesn't bother me. It would appear from past posts... as well as this one... that you don't much like me. Again, the richtor scale on my concern didn't register too much shaking in my frail heart over it.

However, to openly call me a liar is something that I don't intend to tolerate quietly. I frankly have no idea what you're talking about when you say something about UPC homosexuals shacking up without backsliding... however, to fabricate something like that did give you a great opportunity to smear Bro. TLC. Obviously, to call someone a liar is bad but to totally fabricate a lie to attack another good man? You, sir / ma'am, show well your character for what it is... and, honestly, it's not a good showing.

The closest I came to talking about 'UPC homosexuals shacking up without backsliding' was when someone questioned the validity of the convictions these men who are leaving might have. I spoke (listen carefully now, Pelathais, because details are important) about the dilemma I've faced in finding fellowship in just any Church.

One of the examples I spoke of was when I had a young person leave and shack up with her boyfriend and they were used in Church... even on the platform... just like nothing was wrong. This was stated in my prior post:


Where do you get 'homosexual' or 'UPC' out of that? Are you so bereft of literal arguments that you have to make things up to prove a point?

Thus to call me a liar either makes you (a) a horribly inaccurate mindreader (b) a miserably failed expert at 'reading between the lines' or (c) someone who doesn't mind twisting the words of others to attack a person (TLC) an organization (UPC) or a sincere conviction.

To be called a liar by someone with those credentials... well... it's almost an honor.
I did not call you a "liar" my friend. Your "shacking up" post was questioned earlier by another and when you responded, you did not address the issue. It does not take a "reading between the lines" to draw the inference that I drew. I merely took your post at face value. If there were "complexities" between the lines then you should have either provided details or resisted the urge to smear the UPC.

Steadfast said:
It would appear from past posts... as well as this one... that you don't much like me. Again, the richtor scale on my concern didn't register too much shaking in my frail heart over it.

You seem to have an unreasonably thin skin when it comes to our online friendship, but I'm glad that your heart is good and not subject to Richter scale shakings. I am genuinely saddened to hear that you think that I "don't much like" you. Quite the opposite is the case. You are my brother and not only am I commanded to love you, but I can honestly say that I do - admitedly in that hazy sort of online friendship kind of way, but I think even in person I could call you both a "friend" and a "brother."

Added to that is the fact that you have not read enough of my posts to even discern my gender which leaves me feeling that you are simply jumping to conclusions. I trust that the "sir/madam" was not an insult. My public profile is available but I obviously haven't even registered enough on your radar for you to take a look. No biggie. It just leaves me wondering how you think you could have read my heart.

No harm, no foul.

I still question the heterosexual shacking up anecdote and the alcohol consumption that you described. Are there perhaps more complexities that might even exonerate those that you attack?

CC1 01-28-2008 06:14 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover (Post 371730)
Thats really the heart of the matter. This can't be solved by prohibitions.

There is an Old Order Mennonite Church in Canada that has allowed laptops... this same group forbids electricity, and automobiles. They can often be seen traveling down the road in their buggy, using the laptop... and no, I'm not kidding!
How do they recharge the batteries with no electricity?

I can just picture some Mennonite guy working up a sweat cranking a hand generator to recharge his laptop. LOL

George 01-28-2008 06:18 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 (Post 371749)
How do they recharge the batteries with no electricity?

I can just picture some Mennonite guy working up a sweat cranking a hand generator to recharge his laptop. LOL
Maybe solar panels. LOL That might explain why they are outside on the buggy trying to catch light.

IAintMovin 01-28-2008 06:19 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 (Post 371749)
How do they recharge the batteries with no electricity?

I can just picture some Mennonite guy working up a sweat cranking a hand generator to recharge his laptop. LOL
LOL.........well what did you think little Benjamin was doing back there by the plug in the barn while father argued with you over the price of the cow??........

Where we lived in Oklahoma some of those guys had tractors that would do 60 mph......with a little trailer behind em where the wifey and chillin rode.......

CC1 01-28-2008 06:22 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IAintMovin (Post 371759)
LOL.........well what did you think little Benjamin was doing back there by the plug in the barn while father argued with you over the price of the cow??........

Where we lived in Oklahoma some of those guys had tractors that would do 60 mph......with a little trailer behind em where the wifey and chillin rode.......
Did he have a Dale Earnhardts car number discreetly posted somewhere on that tractor?

Hoovie 01-28-2008 06:23 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 (Post 371749)
How do they recharge the batteries with no electricity?

I can just picture some Mennonite guy working up a sweat cranking a hand generator to recharge his laptop. LOL
Gas powered generators are allowed! Get with the times DUDE!

embonpoint 01-28-2008 06:23 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by George (Post 371746)
I seriously doubt that to be a possibility. The districts that have so many "liberals" (I hate the terms lib/con but use them for purpose of identity) have always been. There haven't been any over-night changes. There are many churches east of the western region labeled liberal where you will find on their platforms women wearing pants, jewelry, make-up, men with long hair/facial hair, etc. In the most liberal California churches, it is doubtful you would find women wearing pants, painted red fingernails, cut and dyed hair on the platform. For the 50+ years I have been around UPC, this has always been the case.
My point is not how quickly changes have occured but that they have happened. I have seen and experienced it.

My point is that the path to those changes however quickly they have happened is not a mystery but is a familiar route.

RevBuddy 01-28-2008 06:24 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371650)
Bro. Hoover,

I surely cannot be expected to speak for the whole of the conservative minded brethren. Without a doubt it would be a foolish thing to think that the Tulsa movement is going to be a 'cure all' for every spiritual woe known unto mankind. There WILL be divisions even among those 'conservative' minded men somewhere down the road over various issues.

One thing I DO know is that technology will mandate that they each have to come to some kind of conclusion in their own hearts about how they are going to preach / teach when it pertains to Hollywood.

Thankfully I was dealt with strongly by the Lord 4 years ago to start taking the emphasis off the 'object' and start preaching character to my precious people. The day will come that every computer has TV as a part of the 'package' and we're NOT going to get rid of our computers now because they are too intricately intertwined in our society.

What will work in those times? Character and NOTHING else. Do I still preach what I've always preached? Sure. But I don't preach against a plastic box full of circuitry... I preach that every man should have character and enough Godly integrity that you shouldn't want to pour sin into your mind.

How do they 'police' it? We really can't 'police' it now as people are free to live as they wish. Thankfully, I've lived al life in front of my people that they, in turn, respect my opinions in matters that have spiritual consequences.
Way to go, Steadfast...some how, unexpectedly, we agree...I love it.

Steadfast 01-28-2008 06:28 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pelathais (Post 371748)
I did not call you a "liar" my friend. Your "shacking up" post was questioned earlier by another and when you responded, you did not address the issue. It does not take a "reading between the lines" to draw the inference that I drew. I merely took your post at face value. If there were "complexities" between the lines then you should have either provided details or resisted the urge to smear the UPC.

Steadfast said:
It would appear from past posts... as well as this one... that you don't much like me. Again, the richtor scale on my concern didn't register too much shaking in my frail heart over it.

You seem to have an unreasonably thin skin when it comes to our online friendship, but I'm glad that your heart is good and not subject to Richter scale shakings. I am genuinely saddened to hear that you think that I "don't much like" you. Quite the opposite is the case. You are my brother and not only am I commanded to love you, but I can honestly say that I do - admitedly in that hazy sort of online friendship kind of way, but I think even in person I could call you both a "friend" and a "brother."

Added to that is the fact that you have not read enough of my posts to even discern my gender which leaves me feeling that you are simply jumping to conclusions. I trust that the "sir/madam" was not an insult. My public profile is available but I obviously haven't even registered enough on your radar for you to take a look. No biggie. It just leaves me wondering how you think you could have read my heart.

No harm, no foul.
Just a few points to put the ball back in your court here.

* I didn't see where anybody questioned me about a gay shacking up situation... and, thus, didn't reply to it.

* You seem to think that I smeared the UPC... how? I have NEVER, in all my years of forum posting, taken a shot at the UPC for anything.

* Think skinned? No, just somewhat offended that you would come on a forum and say, "That stuff Steadfast said happened? DIDN'T HAPPEN!" That, by implication, is saying that I lied. You seem a little 'thin skinned' that I didn't look up your profile to address you (there are some incredibly brilliant women who post on here, by the way) but you seem to imply your a man.

"Hey, folks... Pelathais implies he's a man. HE'S NOT!!! Total fabrication! Didn't happen!" Yep, just what I thought. You would think I called you a liar, too.

But, as you say, I'll accept that 'no blood; no foul' defense. However, I would like for you to find that ONE single, solitary instance when I EVER 'smeared' the UPC... on AFF, NFCF, WS or CAF. That search should take you quite a while so I'll go on and finish life while I wait.

Steadfast 01-28-2008 06:30 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevBuddy (Post 371767)
Way to go, Steadfast...some how, unexpectedly, we agree...I love it.
I do my best. :happydance

Hoovie 01-28-2008 06:30 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IAintMovin (Post 371759)
LOL.........well what did you think little Benjamin was doing back there by the plug in the barn while father argued with you over the price of the cow??........

Where we lived in Oklahoma some of those guys had tractors that would do 60 mph......with a little trailer behind em where the wifey and chillin rode.......
Oh, it's a bit funny alright! The situation you decribe is exactly why most who allow tractors now also require STEEL WHEELS on them.**


**Just FYI, the rule is "A gas powered vehicle can only be used if the wheels have steel touching the ground - but no rubber! This complexity has already been circumvented... Simply fabricate a smooth steel rim with no cleats, then place rubber blocks between the axle and the outer rim! It's a bit noisey, but an awesome ride!

Hoovie 01-28-2008 06:43 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371773)
Just a few points to put the ball back in your court here.

* I didn't see where anybody questioned me about a gay shacking up situation... and, thus, didn't reply to it.

.
REV, I will own up to being the first who mistakingly thought you were implying homosexuality. This part threw me for a loop I guess.

You wrote:
"Yet, I've seen young people walk out of my Church to shack up with young men in other so called 'Apostolic' Churches... without ever 'backsliding'!"

and I responded with


Rev., "I'll set aside the implication that the "other" churches in the UPC condone and promote homosexuality... "


Sorry I wrongly thought you meant shacking up with other young men, but nevertheless to imply one is condoning "shacking up" is a serious charge.


BTW I love you and Pel BOTH!

Steadfast 01-28-2008 06:49 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover (Post 371798)
REV, I will own up to being the first who mistakingly thought you were implying homosexuality. This part threw me for a loop I guess.

"Yet, I've seen young people walk out of my Church to shack up with young men in other so called 'Apostolic' Churches... without ever 'backsliding'!"

and I responded with


Rev., I'll set aside the implication that the "other" churches in the UPC condone and promote homosexuality...

Sorry I wrongly thought you meant shacking up with other young men, but nevertheless to imply one is condoning "shacking up" is a serious charge.


BTW I love you and Pel BOTH!
Ironically, I never implied it was a man at all... OR that it was UPC. Even so, I appreciate you bringing some clarification to it.

P.S.: The story is, unfortunately, very true.

Hoovie 01-28-2008 06:51 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371806)
Ironically, I never implied it was a man at all... OR that it was UPC. Even so, I appreciate you bringing some clarification to it.

P.S.: The story is, unfortunately, very true.
You are right, and I apologize.

Nahum 01-28-2008 06:54 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coonskinner (Post 370752)
Maple Leaf said what I was going to say.

This statement seemed especially poignant:

"A few of you seem to enjoy dissecting fictional hearts!"

If there was half as much real discernment in our movement in real life as there is virtual discernment on the internet, the devil would have a bad day.
Yes, and that folksy little adage works both ways.

Hoovie 01-28-2008 06:58 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Poster (Post 371814)
Yes, and that folksy little adage works both ways.
That's what I like about PP,:happydance you never know where he will land, nor from what direction he cometh!

Nahum 01-28-2008 07:04 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371282)
RevBuddy,

Your points generally have some merit. I've no problem with legitimate points. I have a problem with personal attacks.

And, as for my font, I've been around here a LONG time in these forums. My font has always been just as it is now.

I kind of like it. It makes it easier to see if someone is replying to a post.

As to you points? I can see how some think it's that way but, in all honesty, I just don't see it that way. I think that, at least with 95% of the people who are going to find their fellowship with the Tulsa crew, they just got tired of seeing issues that were valuable to them diminished further and further.

That was, before I was called a liar, my original point; I think that some are just tired of seeing the things they value compromised in front of their people. The television aspect was, in my gut honest opinion, just the 'final straw' that broke the camels back for most of them.
Steadfast, at the risk of banning I am going to address this again.

You were the one (back in October) who assured us that a new org wasn't in the works. When many, many posters affirmed otherwise - you body-slammed them and said their opinion was akin to wild speculation (paraphrase).

So Friend, I have some respect for you, but your credibility has taken a hit here.

Could it be that your bias clouded your judgement?

Again, I was banned over that whole conversation (a first for me), but I still feel just as strongly as I did back then that these men fully intended to do what they are doing now.

How else can you explain Kevin Prince as the only anti-tv speaker on the floor of GC this year.

LB was silent.
JG was silent.
NW was silent.

If this issue was so important, why the silence?

The answer is clear.

They already had a plan.

pelathais 01-28-2008 07:08 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371773)
Just a few points to put the ball back in your court here.

* I didn't see where anybody questioned me about a gay shacking up situation... and, thus, didn't reply to it.
Your post was questioned here and here - and questioned rather gently, I think, given the inflamatory nature of your accusations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371773)
* You seem to think that I smeared the UPC... how? I have NEVER, in all my years of forum posting, taken a shot at the UPC for anything.
You said:
Quote:
Friends... I can attest to the fact that some issues are almost pushing some of these brethren into these actions. Let me tell you how I see it from my perspective.
"These brethren" are the men forming a new org. and leaving the UPC. You opened your post with this statement, thus setting the context for the "issues" that you go on to describe. That context is the UPC and "issues" that are "almost pushing" men out.

This is the context that you created for your post. It is a context very narrowly aimed at the United Pentecostal Church.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371773)
* Think skinned? No, just somewhat offended that you would come on a forum and say, "That stuff Steadfast said happened? DIDN'T HAPPEN!" That, by implication, is saying that I lied.
Well, here is progress. We've gone from me "calling you a liar" to an implication. But what about other motives that you may have had in saying what you did. It is most likely that deceit never entered your heart. However, when you saw (the "Tulsa 6") having their motives questioned you sought for some sort of defense for these men. That defense was the accusations you made in your post which was aimed directly at the UPC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371773)
You seem a little 'thin skinned' that I didn't look up your profile to address you (there are some incredibly brilliant women who post on here, by the way) but you seem to imply your a man.

"Hey, folks... Pelathais implies he's a man. HE'S NOT!!! Total fabrication! Didn't happen!" Yep, just what I thought. You would think I called you a liar, too.
Your confusion reigns here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371773)
But, as you say, I'll accept that 'no blood; no foul' defense. However, I would like for you to find that ONE single, solitary instance when I EVER 'smeared' the UPC... on AFF, NFCF, WS or CAF. That search should take you quite a while so I'll go on and finish life while I wait.
I said "No harm; no foul." If we were contesting to the blood then I would be truly concerned. And, I said that in your defense. And the "one solitary instance" is posted above. I did not need to search for it because it is what we've been talking about all along.

You sought to justify the actions of the WPF men by bringing up the "shacking up without backsliding" anecdote and social drinking. You brought these "issues" up in the context of men being "almost pushed" out of the UPC.

When called on it, you responded by clarifying that it was a heterosexual "shacking up" with the "young men" (but the 'men' remains plural thus giving the inference of homosexual activity). You also now appear to say that this was not a discussion of the UPC?

The ball is back in your court.

Apprehended 01-28-2008 07:12 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371689)
If I were utilize the wholesale 'anything that pulls away isn't submissive' reasoning then I would venture to say that Paul wouldn't have made that break from Christian killer to New Testament writer. He broke away from the religous system he no longer could walk in agreement with.

What about others who have walked away from religious systems they could no longer agree with? Was Martin Luther lacking 'submission' to the Roman Catholic Church a bad thing?

While NOBODY believes in spiritual submission than I do I also realize that there are times that the Bible actually CONDONES certain parting of ways. Remember that whole "can two walk together except they agree" and the "house divided against itself" stuff?

I'm sorry... I'm submitted to the extreme to the spiritual authroities in my world. However, my submission is to a REAL Pastor and Elders who aren't afraid to tell me the truth. While I may respect them to the uttermost... I've never feigned a lot of deep spiritual submission to a system of elected officials who don't even know my name. To do so would eliminate the 'autonomy' of the local Church.

The United Pentecostal Church is a great organization. The greatest on the face of the Earth when it comes to promoting this precious truth. I guess that is what confuses me the most... if some of you weren't ripping on the Tulsa crew you would be ripping on the UPC. How is it now that we have so many fierce 'protectors'?

The clear conscience that I have today is a result of the fact that I'm not against EITHER group. In fact, while some of you are seeing me as a 'protector' of the Tulsa crowd, the truth is that I'm protectecting the right of both to do what they feel is right!
Bro. Steadfast,

I am convinced that you are sincere and that your heart is pure in this regard.

But, it never ceases to amaze me how it is that men justify what they do. It seems that men are able to justify almost anything.

I might point out that while Paul was a Pharisee that he had not received the heavenly vision nor had he been obdient to call on the house of Simon the Tanner who instructed him to arise and be baptized, calling on the name of the Lord.

Had there been an issue so great as this among the Tulsaites, certainly I would not only commend them but I would also be among them too.

The great strides toward the light that the reformers took which caused them to be cast out of their ranks as in the case of John Wesley and others. They were not willing to be rebellious.

It is impossible for me to see the need of so great devastation brought on by their actions over such a small, almost insignificant thing, none of which needed to affect them in the least way.

But, I remember the scriptures when they speak of every man's ways are justified in their own eyes. Yet, none of their ways are justified from my point of view since this will have the needless effect of inflicting great damage on the cause of God, world-wide.

Hoovie 01-28-2008 07:13 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Poster (Post 371826)
Steadfast, at the risk of banning I am going to address this again.

You were the one (back in October) who assured us that a new org wasn't in the works. When many, many posters affirmed otherwise - you body-slammed them and said their opinion was akin to wild speculation (paraphrase).

So Friend, I have some respect for you, but your credibility has taken a hit here.

Could it be that your bias clouded your judgement?

Again, I was banned over that whole conversation (a first for me), but I still feel just as strongly as I did back then that these men fully intended to do what they are doing now.

How else can you explain Kevin Prince as the only anti-tv speaker on the floor of GC this year.

LB was silent.
JG was silent.
NW was silent.

If this issue was so important, why the silence?

The answer is clear.

They already had a plan.

It does sound like you already know the answer. Of course it depends on how one defines "fully intended" right?

Nahum 01-28-2008 07:13 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Amazing that even with a huge body of undeniable evidence that affirms that the WWPF solicited current UPC ministers, we still are hearing what men of "integrity" these men are.


Tell me, what happens if a young lay minister (licensed with the UPC) joins the WWPF aginst his pastor's wishes?

pelathais 01-28-2008 07:16 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 371806)
Ironically, I never implied it was a man at all... OR that it was UPC. Even so, I appreciate you bringing some clarification to it.

P.S.: The story is, unfortunately, very true.
A UPC Pastor is using a young woman on his platform with the full knowledge that she is "shacking up with young men"? Is that the case?

Steadfast 01-28-2008 07:20 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Poster (Post 371826)
Steadfast, at the risk of banning I am going to address this again.

You were the one (back in October) who assured us that a new org wasn't in the works. When many, many posters affirmed otherwise - you body-slammed them and said their opinion was akin to wild speculation (paraphrase).

So Friend, I have some respect for you, but your credibility has taken a hit here.

Could it be that your bias clouded your judgement?

Again, I was banned over that whole conversation (a first for me), but I still feel just as strongly as I did back then that these men fully intended to do what they are doing now.

How else can you explain Kevin Prince as the only anti-tv speaker on the floor of GC this year.

LB was silent.
JG was silent.
NW was silent.

If this issue was so important, why the silence?

The answer is clear.

They already had a plan.
PP, I can only speak those things which I 'see and hear' and what I was told -from the coordinator himself - is that it wouldn't be an 'organization' as such was EXACTLY what I was told by the individual. His precise words, beyond that, were that "What we're doing is NOTHING that will mandate turning in your license with the UPC. We're forming a network of fellowship between conservative minded men."

I'm not so sure that they are defining it as an organization, a network or a fellowship.

As for Bro. Prince being the speaker against the resolution? It was he who was the representative of the anti-TV advertising crowd and, as such, the one designated to speak and asked for from the floor.

Outside of that there wasn't much conversation on either side and a quick call for the question. That no more means this was a premeditated genesis of a new organization than the fact that you didn't speak FOR it was a premeditated act by yourself to start an organization of your own.

And, as for my credibility? I make myself of no reputation and my life is before enough people that it's an open book. For what it's worth, I think enough people on AFF know me and respect me that I'm not in any danger of being excommunicated anytime soon.

:toofunny

No, PP, if my unwillingness to devour either side of this equation is wrong then, well, I'm guilty as sin. If, however, I'm right in not devouring my brothers... well... it would appear a lot of others are in serious trouble.

For the record, I'll take my chances right where I am.
:happydance

Apprehended 01-28-2008 07:21 PM
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Poster (Post 371835)
Amazing that even with a huge body of undeniable evidence that affirms that the WWPF solicited current UPC ministers, we still are hearing what men of "integrity" these men are.


Tell me, what happens if a young lay minister (licensed with the UPC) joins the WWPF aginst his pastor's wishes?
Certainly, by some logic it could not be a case of rebellion or non submissivness. There comes a time (God only knows when) that what some might call rebellion is no longer rebellion but just plain following the will of God and that what they formerly taught to be authority ordained of God...is NO LONGER authority ordained of God.

I'm fully persuaded that the whole bunch are a cow pen full of rebels. God knows how to separate them. Ask Korah.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:49 PM.
Page 16 of 21 « First 6789101112131415 16 1718192021
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.