Apostolic Friends Forum

Apostolic Friends Forum (http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)
-   The D.A.'s Office (http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=65)
-   -   DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity, (http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=28450)

DAII 01-29-2010 09:34 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Steinway (Post 871787)
Or.....the more you are hated, the more spiritual one must be! DA is truly more Apostolic than most of us! :ursofunny

Yep.

missourimary 01-29-2010 10:26 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII (Post 871601)
Sorry MM but bifurcation means the splitting of a main body into two parts ... that outlaws panties too ... maybe even gloves ... most definitely mittens and pantyhose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 871623)
Haven't some preached against pantyhose because they are bifurcated?

Well, really I was joking but I forgot my smiley!! :toofunny

Mittens are definitely outlawed, DA, but gloves only may be?

Sam, I have no idea about full hose, but we always had to wear the awful things when leaving the house so that there was no visible representation of "two hogs fightin' in a feedsack", as it was so gently put from the pulpit!! :heeheehee

:largehalo

freeatlast 01-29-2010 10:41 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by missourimary (Post 871827)
Well, really I was joking but I forgot my smiley!! :toofunny

Mittens are definitely outlawed, DA, but gloves only may be?

Sam, I have no idea about full hose, but we always had to wear the awful things when leaving the house so that there was no visible representation of "two hogs fightin' in a feedsack", as it was so gently put from the pulpit!! :heeheehee

:largehalo

MM, that quote was not refering to panty hose. Think higher up.

missourimary 01-29-2010 10:52 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
:smack *ahem* You only wish.... :heeheehee

Nope, there, by the body language associated and the comment about support hose and tight skirts that accompanied it, it was talking about lower. He would not have told us to wear support hose to fix the other issue! :toofunny

freeatlast 01-29-2010 10:54 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by missourimary (Post 871844)
:smack *ahem* You only wish.... :heeheehee

Nope, there, by the body language associated and the comment about support hose and tight skirts that accompanied it, it was talking about lower. He would not have told us to wear support hose to fix the other issue! :toofunny

LOL :ursofunny

Will McLeod 01-29-2010 10:56 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
@BrotherDavid:

I didn't ask you about John 14:6......I asked you about Acts 2:38.
Repentance
Baptism (IN JESUS NAME)
Holy Ghost (BY EVIDENCE OF SPEAKING IN OTHER TONGUES) as the Spirit gives utterance

?????

Sam 01-29-2010 11:37 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyWayne (Post 871777)
In fact, the more you are hated, the more right you must be!

Sounds like something the local JW's say.

pelathais 01-29-2010 12:21 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Will McLeod (Post 871847)
@BrotherDavid:

I didn't ask you about John 14:6......I asked you about Acts 2:38.
Repentance
Baptism (IN JESUS NAME)
Holy Ghost (BY EVIDENCE OF SPEAKING IN OTHER TONGUES) as the Spirit gives utterance

?????

Your posts are degenerating rapidly, Will.

In your childish rant you asked me about, and I quote you, "THE ONLY way to heaven???????"

My response was that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven. You appear to be dissatisfied with that response, but according to the Bible Jesus Christ is simply the only way to heaven. Period.

I gave you Scripture. You appear to be dissatisafied with the Word of God as well.

"Fear sam bith a loisgeas a mhàs, ‘s e fhèin a dh’fheumas suidhe air," Highlander. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ons/icon12.gif

DAII 01-29-2010 01:14 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 871873)
Your posts are degenerating rapidly, Will.

In your childish rant you asked me about, and I quote you, "THE ONLY way to heaven???????"

My response was that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven. You appear to be dissatisfied with that response, but according to the Bible Jesus Christ is simply the only way to heaven. Period.

I gave you Scripture. You appear to be dissatisafied with the Word of God as well.

"Fear sam bith a loisgeas a mhàs, ‘s e fhèin a dh’fheumas suidhe air," Highlander. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ons/icon12.gif

as the Mighty Pelathais prepares to quicken the neophyte ...

Please decapitate slowly ... the forum is slow.

Where did you learn, Gaelic, dude?

pelathais 01-29-2010 04:20 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII (Post 871895)
as the Mighty Pelathais prepares to quicken the neophyte ...

Please decapitate slowly ... the forum is slow.

Where did you learn, Gaelic, dude?

My grandmother's family was from Tralee, though I don't even approach anything like fluency. I know "my prayers" but have to use lexicons and other aids for everything else.

That saying can be translated something like: "He who burns his rear end has to also sit on it."

missourimary 01-29-2010 05:58 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
I can't read Gaelic, but translated, that quote is worth memorizing!!! :toofunny

BeenThinkin 01-29-2010 06:01 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 871952)
My grandmother's family was from Tralee, though I don't even approach anything like fluency. I know "my prayers" but have to use lexicons and other aids for everything else.

That saying can be translated something like: "He who burns his rear end has to also sit on it."


What makes me think that you cleaned up that translation some!!! :ursofunny:ursofunny

BeenThinkin

missourimary 01-29-2010 09:18 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Look, a bifurcated women's garment in the mid 1800s!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bathing_suit_1858.png

Sorry, off topic but way too funny.

pelathais 02-02-2010 05:40 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
2 Attachment(s)
There is an article that caught my attention in the Winter/Spring 2010 edition of CLC's magazine The Cross. It's a brief essay which I have posted as JPG images below.

In the article, the author compares the "Apostolic Brand" (without actually using that phrase) with the very successful Coca-Cola brand. You can read the article for yourself in less than a few quick minutes.

If you have a hard time reading the text from the pop ups here on AFF, right click the images and download them to your desktop (RIGHT CLICK -> SAVE AS...). You can then use whatever image viewing program you have locally to enlarge the images. I believe the resolutions are sufficient to be enlarged to just about any reasonable need.

RandyWayne 02-02-2010 05:56 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 873343)
There is an article that caught my attention in the Winter/Spring 2010 edition of CLC's magazine The Cross. It's a brief essay which I have posted as JPG images below.

In the article, the author compares the "Apostolic Brand" (without actually using that phrase) with the very successful Coca-Cola brand. You can read the article for yourself in less than a few quick minutes.

If you have a hard time reading the text from the pop ups here on AFF, right click the images and download them to your desktop (RIGHT CLICK -> SAVE AS...). You can then use whatever image viewing program you have locally to enlarge the images. I believe the resolutions are sufficient to be enlarged to just about any reasonable need.

Read it. While interesting, the premise of comparing Coke/New Coke to Apostolic holiness standards is blatantly false, or maybe it isn't so much false as it is TRUE, meaning it is nothing but a marketing gimmick. A brand that people are used to and lose all compass direction when it is taken away. Take 1950's fashions clothing fashions and stick with it ad infinitum. We now realize that when you remove ancient landmarks, aka, 1950's holiness fashions, we find that for many the emperor has no cloths since their entire faith is based on it. "How CAN I be saved if I cut my hair or own a television?" is the underlying thought of many. So yes, there would be a huge falling out of those who have no foundational base for their Christianity.

pelathais 02-02-2010 06:12 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
"Suddenly doctrinal truths are less important than being relevant."

This cliché complaint against "relevance" is ubiquitous among those promoting the "Apostolic Brand©." Given the overly vague and often differing definitions available for "relevance" the author's own overly vague charges appear to be some sort of secret code for an initiated elite and not for general reading.

Since the magazine was sent - unsolicited - to my home and addressed to one of my children I feel that it's important that I speak up.

Just what are you talking about, Eli? Give me some examples. You do understand that your own institution is often criticized for its "compromise" because its charter specifies that "Acts 2:38" not be taught as salvific, don't you? Or do you intend to stray from those old paths?

"Holiness has taken a backseat to acceptance."

Since I am often lumped into that group by your apparent peers - the "Guardians of Holiness" - I do take a certain umbrage to your tone.

I resigned from the UPC rather than participate in a cover up of another man's adultery. I was fired from my job and my family suffered greatly from that event. I took a stand for real holiness - and it was not "accepted" by your religious organization. I have only found "acceptance" among those you condemn for "compromise." Can you imagine how upside-down your world of "compromise" appears to me now?

I prefer real holiness to the games.

"Churches are now designed around a community model rather than the Book of Acts."

The church in the Book of Acts was a model of community! - See Acts 2:44, Acts 4:32 and Acts 6:1-3.

"... tepid preachers have watered down the message of righteousness..."

That can and does happen just about anywhere and at any time. However, where do you see such a trend among Oneness churches on this issue? You are beating your own straw man here.

"... pastors are refusing to proclaim the new birth according to Acts 2:38..."

This is Orwellian! Again, your own institution's charter states that "Acts 2:38" shall not be taught as salvational. Given the differing opinions on the matter, why can't you accept the differences as real and honest.

Instead you besmirch pastors who have an honest disagreement with you on this as "refusing" to line up with your opinion. Why don't you close this magazine for a moment and take a look at the cover?

Do you notice the name of the magazine? It is called "THE CROSS."

You do remember the Cross of Calvary, don't you Eli? Preach that (1 Corinthians 2:1-2).

Sam 02-02-2010 09:52 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyWayne (Post 873347)
Read it. While interesting, the premise of comparing Coke/New Coke to Apostolic holiness standards is blatantly false, or maybe it isn't so much false as it is TRUE, meaning it is nothing but a marketing gimmick. A brand that people are used to and lose all compass direction when it is taken away. Take 1950's fashions clothing fashions and stick with it ad infinitum. We now realize that when you remove ancient landmarks, aka, 1950's holiness fashions, we find that for many the emperor has no cloths since their entire faith is based on it. "How CAN I be saved if I cut my hair or own a television?" is the underlying thought of many. So yes, there would be a huge falling out of those who have no foundational base for their Christianity.

Let's all go back to the old landmarks when Coca Cola had cocaine in it.

DAII 02-02-2010 10:34 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 873353)
"Suddenly doctrinal truths are less important than being relevant."

This cliché complaint against "relevance" is ubiquitous among those promoting the "Apostolic Brand©." Given the overly vague and often differing definitions available for "relevance" the author's own overly vague charges appear to be some sort of secret code for an initiated elite and not for general reading.

Since the magazine was sent - unsolicited - to my home and addressed to one of my children I feel that it's important that I speak up.

Just what are you talking about, Eli? Give me some examples. You do understand that your own institution is often criticized for its "compromise" because its charter specifies that "Acts 2:38" not be taught as salvific, don't you? Or do you intend to stray from those old paths?

"Holiness has taken a backseat to acceptance."

Since I am often lumped into that group by your apparent peers - the "Guardians of Holiness" - I do take a certain umbrage to your tone.

I resigned from the UPC rather than participate in a cover up of another man's adultery. I was fired from my job and my family suffered greatly from that event. I took a stand for real holiness - and it was not "accepted" by your religious organization. I have only found "acceptance" among those you condemn for "compromise." Can you imagine how upside-down your world of "compromise" appears to me now?

I prefer real holiness to the games.

"Churches are now designed around a community model rather than the Book of Acts."

The church in the Book of Acts was a model of community! - See Acts 2:44, Acts 4:32 and Acts 6:1-3.

"... tepid preachers have watered down the message of righteousness..."

That can and does happen just about anywhere and at any time. However, where do you see such a trend among Oneness churches on this issue? You are beating your own straw man here.

"... pastors are refusing to proclaim the new birth according to Acts 2:38..."

This is Orwellian! Again, your own institution's charter states that "Acts 2:38" shall not be taught as salvational. Given the differing opinions on the matter, why can't you accept the differences as real and honest.

Instead you besmirch pastors who have an honest disagreement with you on this as "refusing" to line up with your opinion. Why don't you close this magazine for a moment and take a look at the cover?

Do you notice the name of the magazine? It is called "THE CROSS."

You do remember the Cross of Calvary, don't you Eli? Preach that (1 Corinthians 2:1-2).

Absolutely dumbfounded. The appeals to old paths is what got me ... Eli has bought the sanitized version of what our "fathers handed us" without regard the tolerance forged at the merger .... nor an inkling that its present Holiness article was not always the BRAND.

This is blatant contending towards a view to the disunity of the brethren as clearly spelled out in the Fundamental doctrine ... when he slams the peers in his fellowship for not proclaiming Acts 2:38 as the new birth ... there is NO SUCH rule. To the contrary ... divergence on the matter is what made the merger possible.

Eli has breached his affirmation statement ... I hope unwittingly.

Is this generation of Apostolic branders this clueless? Or lack the integrity and gumption to live up to the sacrifices made by men who were able to set aside differences for the cause of the Cross?

The Coca-Cola Apostolic branding ... is exactly what radicals are seeking to push ... uniformity over unity ... while seeking to disfellowship over fellowship.

This has the same flavor of Paul Mooney's campmeeting sermon in MS last summer and the WeDeclare political faction. The spirit of Westberg lives on.

I point Elder Lopez to Rodney Shaw's blogs that uncover the intellectual dishonesty of those in the movement who use the "emerging" label as the plague ....
http://rodneyshaw.wordpress.com/2009...oes-it-matter/

It's time we get start being ORIGINAL, Eli. Koolaid seems to be the order of the day.

Will McLeod 02-04-2010 11:01 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
@BrotherDavid:

Your attempt to degrade my question is most pathetic. Child like rant? (?)
I asked you a SIMPLE question. :) Do you believe ACTS 2:38?

But THANK YOU for answering my question with your "lack" of answering my question. I found it quiet amusing. Once again Thanks David. :hmmm

Will McLeod 02-04-2010 11:05 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Just curious Dan....Should GOD's "people" have an IDENTITY? Or... are you saying that it is absurd to have an IDENTITY?

MissBrattified 02-04-2010 11:30 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Will McLeod (Post 874020)
Just curious Dan....Should GOD's "people" have an IDENTITY? Or... are you saying that it is absurd to have an IDENTITY?

I don't know what DAN thinks, but this is what the Word says about an IDENTITY:

John 13:35 "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."

Right now the Apostolic church world is failing miserably at this litmus test--both conservative and liberal alike.

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Matthew 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Galatians 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Galatians 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

MissBrattified 02-04-2010 11:34 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
I John 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

I John 3:17 But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?

I John 3:18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.

I John 3:19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.

RandyWayne 02-04-2010 11:46 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified (Post 874028)
I don't know what DAN thinks, but this is what the Word says about an IDENTITY:

John 13:35 "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."
.....

I was going to type virtually the same thing.

MissBrattified 02-04-2010 11:51 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyWayne (Post 874033)
I was going to type virtually the same thing.

The entire time my Dad pastored, he preached on love the first Sunday of every month. I've heard these scriptures quoted so much, they're a part of me. He's commented many times that people were wrong for using the term "Sloppy Agape" because loving one another is the hardest thing of all.

I winced when I was listening to the LS sermon the other night when he mentioned "Sloppy Agape." There's nothing sloppy about the love of God, and it's easy to choose to preserve feelings of angst or even hatred against a brother instead of loving them in spite of our differences.

For that matter, that goes for people who disagree with LS as well. Disagree with the man, but love him anyway. He's still one of the "brethren."

RandyWayne 02-04-2010 12:05 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified (Post 874035)
The entire time my Dad pastored, he preached on love the first Sunday of every month. I've heard these scriptures quoted so much, they're a part of me. He's commented many times that people were wrong for using the term "Sloppy Agape" because loving one another is the hardest thing of all.

I winced when I was listening to the LS sermon the other night when he mentioned "Sloppy Agape." There's nothing sloppy about the love of God, and it's easy to choose to preserve feelings of angst or even hatred against a brother instead of loving them in spite of our differences.

For that matter, that goes for people who disagree with LS as well. Disagree with the man, but love him anyway. He's still one of the "brethren."

"Sloppy Agape" is probably used because it is a cute phrase -that rhymes.
And no, loving in the manner required by the two greatest commandments is NOT easy. Oh how I WISH that I could get rid of my TV, MAKE my wife wear a jean skirt and never her hair, and be saved! Instead I have to love my jerk of a neighbor..... Is it no wonder that strong standards preaching gets more amen's and loving your jerk of a neighbor is actually ridiculed with phrases like "Sloppy Agape"?

pelathais 02-04-2010 12:29 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Will McLeod (Post 871615)
I must say, I'm fairly tolerant and long suffering with people. I'm even amused by ignorance sometimes. But instead of offering something "factual"......maybe even "some" scripture to argue your points, feelings, doctrine or belief or "lack" thereof, you offer "CHILDISH, IMMATURE" remarks.

I have one question for YOU, friend. I dont ask many....I spend my time answering others.
(?)
Do YOU believe that repentance, baptism IN JESUS NAME, and the INFILLING of THE HOLY GHOST by EVIDENCE of "speaking in other tongues as THE SPIRIT gives utterance" is THE ONLY way to heaven???????

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 871667)
I'd have to say that I am stunned by your post, Will. Get over yourself. I posted that question just as I was walking out the door and my wife had reminded me about the stir fry, so I was kind of excited about that.

In response to your question, I believe that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven. See John 14:6. This is what the Bible clearly teaches.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will McLeod (Post 871847)
@BrotherDavid:

I didn't ask you about John 14:6......I asked you about Acts 2:38.
Repentance
Baptism (IN JESUS NAME)
Holy Ghost (BY EVIDENCE OF SPEAKING IN OTHER TONGUES) as the Spirit gives utterance

?????

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 871873)
Your posts are degenerating rapidly, Will.

In your childish rant you asked me about, and I quote you, "THE ONLY way to heaven???????"

My response was that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven. You appear to be dissatisfied with that response, but according to the Bible Jesus Christ is simply the only way to heaven. Period.

I gave you Scripture. You appear to be dissatisafied with the Word of God as well.

"Fear sam bith a loisgeas a mhàs, ‘s e fhèin a dh’fheumas suidhe air," Highlander. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ons/icon12.gif

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will McLeod (Post 874018)
@BrotherDavid:

Your attempt to degrade my question is most pathetic. Child like rant? (?)
I asked you a SIMPLE question. :) Do you believe ACTS 2:38?

But THANK YOU for answering my question with your "lack" of answering my question. I found it quiet amusing. Once again Thanks David. :hmmm

Grow up Will. You started out here with an excellent post. I made the mistake of complimenting you on your "mature understanding of language..." It was a mistake to even have engaged you. You've done nothing but post immature and silly rants ever since.

You have only just now asked me if I "believe Acts 2:38." My answer: Of course I do. Do you believe Acts 2:21? Your posts seem to indicate that you do not.

You asked me pointedly what I believed to be "the only way to heaven." I responded "Jesus Christ." Unwilling to accept "Jesus Christ" as "the only way to heaven" you have continued your rant.

Your's truly does appear to be a "Christianity Without the Cross." Why can't you accept Jesus Christ as your Savior? Until you do, all questions about what to do next don't even apply to your condition!

Acts 2:38 is simply "someone else's mail" until you come to terms with Acts 2:21.

You must believe that Jesus Christ is the Savior, then we'll talk about baptisms. Please Will, believe on the Lord and you shall be saved! (Romans 5:8).

You're not even a proper "Three Stepper" until you take that first step.

Will McLeod 02-04-2010 10:31 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 871557)
I would recommend NOT using the things you read on the walls of public bathrooms as any kind of guide for anything, especially if you're on the road a lot and visit truck stops.

I don't think I can come down too hard on either side of the "geber" debate over Deuteronomy 22:5; there's just not enough info to be very dogmatic here at all.

The "abomination" issue is relevant too. Mollusks, ocean and freshwater arthropods and many other creatures are all an "abomination forever" under the Law of Moses.

I'm cooking stir fried shrimp tomorrow. I will be wearing "pants" when I do so, but is it still an "abomination?"

Will?


@David: Once again, David...your attempt to abase me is pitiful. What was childish was this statement referenced above.

I'm not sure if you remembered your statement that lead to this conversation.
I find this most childish...indeed. It's "almost" funny that you would refer to someone as "childish" for asking a legitimate question about your doctrinal belief as it relates to salvation....but yet so blatantly OVERLOOKED such
a ludicrous post by a grown man. I'll ponder on this awhile. I've come to learn as of late that reality obviously doesn't exist in the realm of AFF.

But David, if I didnt show proper gratitude for your compliment of my knowledge of language........I Apologize. Thank You.

pelathais 02-04-2010 10:44 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Will McLeod (Post 874270)
@David: Once again, David...your attempt to abase me is pitiful. What was childish was this statement referenced above.

I'm not sure if you remembered your statement that lead to this conversation.
I find this most childish...indeed. It's "almost" funny that you would refer to someone as "childish" for asking a legitimate question about your doctrinal belief as it relates to salvation....but yet so blatantly OVERLOOKED such
a ludicrous post by a grown man. I'll ponder on this awhile. I've come to learn as of late that reality obviously doesn't exist in the realm of AFF.

But David, if I didnt show proper gratitude for your compliment of my knowledge of language........I Apologize. Thank You.

Okay, Will. Peace.

I still say that original post by you perhaps reflected one of the best understandings of the nuances and complexities of language that I've seen on AFF. I was really looking forward to your contributions.

I apologize for my absurdist "bathroom humor" which I see now was the root of our problem.

I do have something of an "absurdist" take on much of human affairs having found myself pushed into Absurdism for a period of time by my inability to get the Fundamentalism I was raised with to make any sense.

I have since rebounded from that epoch of my life, filled with the wonder of "meaningfulness" that I observe in the world around me. But as far as human affairs go... I still have trouble shaking the absurdist tendencies. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ons/icon11.gif

crakjak 02-05-2010 09:03 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII (Post 866616)
D. Wright do you agree with that the 3 greatest challenges facing the UPCI in North America is:

1. Maintain Apostolic Identity
2. Maintain Apostolic Unity
3. Get more exposure

??????

When did unity get the "apostolic" qualifier?

This is all inward looking, what can we do to look better to the world, the focus is completely wrong. But when that has been your trademark, "the look", it is hard to move to the simplicity of the "Almost Too Good To Be True News"!!!

For the most part when there has been exposure, there has been decrease not increase. Seeing LK on YouTube, I'd say that trend will continue. The focus on outward dress as the AI, is so the wrong focus. Jesus should be the focus, and let the membership find Jesus and be Jesus in the world and the dress code will not be any issue either inside the body or outside.

Pleasing one another in our appearance and religiosity, is just idolatry!!

Justin 02-05-2010 09:18 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by crakjak (Post 874343)
This is all inward looking, what can we do to look better to the world, the focus is completely wrong. But when that has been your trademark, "the look", it is hard to move to the simplicity of the "Almost Too Good To Be True News"!!!

For the most part when there has been exposure, there has been decrease not increase. Seeing LK on YouTube, I'd say that trend will continue. The focus on outward dress as the AI, is so the wrong focus. Jesus should be the focus, and let the membership find Jesus and be Jesus in the world and the dress code will not be any issue either inside the body or outside.

Pleasing one another in our appearance and religiosity, is just idolatry!!

Do you have any statistics to prove that?

DAII 02-05-2010 11:06 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin (Post 874348)
Do you have any statistics to prove that?

Measuring the exposure of any entity can be a tricky thing ... many factors ... numerical growth, number of visitors, marketing, etc ... A small entity can impact and have huge exposure as oppose to a large organization not effectively reaching the masses.

However, if we are to examine EXPOSURE to a core factor like the amount of churches that have sprung up in communities as preaching points throughout North America and worldwide ... the answer is Crakjak is probably wrong and right.

Here is some data that shows the numerical "growth" of the UPCI to about the late 1990's (source: spiritualabuse.org)

Quote:

Out of all the Oneness (also known as Apostolic) churches, the United Pentecostal Church is considered the largest.

In the organization's report on the growth statistics of the UPCI from 1945 through 1999, it is interesting that the UPCI compares its statistics with the Assembly of God. If the UPCI truly wants to compare growth, why not do so with other Apostolic churches? How does their growth compare to the PAW or ALJC? Below are some details of the report.

In 1945 the UPC had 521 churches and as of 1999 they had 3892.

From 1998 to 1999 they added 31 churches, which was an .8% growth.

(This is the net amount after subtracting the churches which closed or left the organization from the new ones which started.) This is certainly not an indicative of the 'enormous' growth some members claim. According to their records, on the average 147 new churches are added each year and 101 churches close or leave the UPCI. According to the official web site of the UPCI, they now have 3876 churches (down from 1999 figures), with an estimated constituency of 600,000. (These are all North America figures.)

In 1945 the UPC had 1838 ministers and as of 1999 they had 8372. From 1998to 1999 they added 153 ministers, which was a 1.86% growth. They had, as of 1999, 4480 more licensed ministers than they had churches.

In 1986 they gained 165 churches and lost 92; in 1987 they gained 175 and lost 97; in 1988 they gained 144 and lost 85; in 1989 they gained 172 and lost 111; in 1990 they gained 137 and lost 122; in 1991 they gained 147 and lost 91; in 1992 they gained 145 and lost 91; in 1993 they gained 136 and lost 177 (This was when the yearly affirmation took effect.); in 1994 they gained 146 and lost 98; in 1995 they gained 154 and lost 93; in 1996 they gained 130 and lost 78; and in 1997 they gained 123 and lost 78. From 1986 through 1997 the UPC did not average a net of more than 47 new churches per year in a 12 year period.

To bring it home, in 1982 New Jersey had 9 churches and in 1984 there were 11. That was an increase of one per year. In 2001 they had 20. So from 1982 to 2001, New Jersey added 11 churches, a growth rate of less than 1 per year. (This was taken from UPCI Church Directories.) It is evident the UPC ministry is growing at a much greater rate than their churches.
As of 2007 there are 4,358 churches ... adding 466 churches from 1999.

That is about 1 UPCI church for every 70,000 Americans.

If we were to compare global population of 6 billion people to the amount of UPCI churches world wide and here in America as of 2007 ... (32709churches) ... that is about 1 UPCI church per 2 million people on the planet.

One could argue this is incremental growth ...

but if we compare the percentage rates of the growth in population here in America and worldwide to the annual percentage rate of churches in the org since 1945 ... we no doubt would see a huge disparity in the negative column.

The question would be has the limited growth of churches kept up with population?

192281 02-05-2010 12:56 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Hello
I have been a lurker for about a year now and after reading this entire post I had to ask a question.

Did Will ever give an answer for this? I know he was saying the scriptures clearly state a woman should not wear pants and this was brought to his attention. I looked through the thread twice and I can't find a post from him explaining this.

Im only curious because I have recently found myself questioning many of the things I have been told and I realize most things I have done are out of tradition.

Thanks


Quote:

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace* (Post 871240)
No matter how you interpret these scriptures, you are left with this fact:

Men and women both wore robes during the time Deut. was written. For over 5,000 years of recorded human history, men and women both wore robes. Now, men and women both wear pants.

Nowhere in the Bible does it demand that men and women dress drastically different. Nowhere does it demand that they must be dressed completely different from the waist down.

There were slight differences in men and women's robes, there are slight differences in men and women's pants.

Women's pants is not a man's garment. I don't know a single man who would be caught dead in a pair of women's pants.

We have taken a cultural issue that was faced during the 1920s or thereabout, and forced Deut. to address that issue. It doesn't. Men had transitioned from robes to pants several hundred years before, now women were making that transition. It caused an uproar, because it was a transition, and transitions always cause an uproar. There is historical evidence that there was the same uproar when men transitioned from robes to pants. They were seen as immodest.

Men and women have worn the same general garment, with some distinctive differences, for most of human history. If you walk into Walmart, you can tell at a glance, without reading the signs, whether you're in the men's clothing department, or the women's. There is still an easily noticeable difference between men's and women's clothing.

I've bought jeans at a garage sale before, thinking they were boys. My sons would begin to put them on, and then whip them right back off, exclaiming - "These are girls' pants! I'm not wearing these!" The cut is different, the pockets are different, the button is different. It's a woman's garment, not a man's. Women's pants don't 'pertain to' a man. They pertain to a woman. That's why my sons won't wear them.


Justin 02-05-2010 01:12 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 192281 (Post 874473)
Hello
I have been a lurker for about a year now and after reading this entire post I had to ask a question.

Did Will ever give an answer for this? I know he was saying the scriptures clearly state a woman should not wear pants and this was brought to his attention. I looked through the thread twice and I can't find a post from him explaining this.

Im only curious because I have recently found myself questioning many of the things I have been told and I realize most things I have done are out of tradition.

Thanks

Good point! Thanks for bringing it up to the forefront.

Timmy 02-05-2010 01:24 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 192281 (Post 874473)
Hello
I have been a lurker for about a year now and after reading this entire post I had to ask a question.

Did Will ever give an answer for this? I know he was saying the scriptures clearly state a woman should not wear pants and this was brought to his attention. I looked through the thread twice and I can't find a post from him explaining this.

Im only curious because I have recently found myself questioning many of the things I have been told and I realize most things I have done are out of tradition.

Thanks

Will should consult the WWPF's Articles of Faith, for help.

Quote:

Pants, for example, scripturally and historically are equivalent to “girding up the loins like a man” (Job 38:3), something women did not do (Deuteronomy 22:5).

Sam 02-05-2010 01:43 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
The big thing is that under the law of Moses it clearly states, "Women shall not wear a bifurcated garment." You won't find that in the KJV, not even the Word Aflame issue of the KJV with their notes, but if you check out the original Hebrew as explained by the more erudite scholars, it's there clear and simple. It's just that we uneducated and unwashed can't find it in our KJV or even in the NIV (Non Inspired Version) or in the NKJV (Nacho KJV).

iceniez 02-05-2010 01:52 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874488)
The big thing is that under the law of Moses it clearly states, "Women shall not wear a bifurcated garment." You won't find that in the KJV, not even the Word Aflame issue of the KJV with their notes, but if you check out the original Hebrew as explained by the more erudite scholars, it's there clear and simple. It's just that we uneducated and unwashed can't find it in our KJV or even in the NIV (Non Inspired Version) or in the NKJV (Nacho KJV).

I have to ask............what does BIFURCATED GARMENT mean ?

Timmy 02-05-2010 01:56 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874492)
I have to ask............what does BIFURCATED GARMENT mean ?

Twice as many furcations as a monofurcated garment.

:D

rgcraig 02-05-2010 01:57 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874492)
I have to ask............what does BIFURCATED GARMENT mean ?

divided or pants

iceniez 02-05-2010 01:58 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 874494)
Twice as many furcations as a monofurcated garment.

:D

That clears it up:heeheehee

Timmy 02-05-2010 01:59 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 874494)
Twice as many furcations as a monofurcated garment.

:D

Well, I thought I was being funny, but turns out, that's exactly right!

fur·cate (fûrkt)
intr.v. fur·cat·ed, fur·cat·ing, fur·cates
To divide into branches; fork.
adj.
Divided into branches; forked.

(Bifurcated garments are pants! :thumbsup)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.