Apostolic Friends Forum - Tulsa Report Day 2

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)

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?

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!

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.

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.

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.

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

Re: Tulsa Report Day 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by IAintMovin (Post 371759)

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!

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!

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.

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.