[tv1a]

Originally Posted by OGIA

Excellent thought, CS!!

And that is exactly what too many "Apostolics" do today-- they let the criticism of the world (which we know is mostly born out of ignorance and/or rebellion) bring into question if "we" are really right about this separation thing.
[QUOTE]tv1a: It has nothing to do with fear of criticism. The Bible says we would be persecuted for His Name's Sake. The separation comes with a relationship with Jesus which many substitue with a clothesline doctrine.[/QUOTE]

Just because some educated, religious woman doesn't understand what Apostolic means, personally and scripturally, and just because she has come up with a definition based (most likely) on her refusal to ever adhere to such separation doesn't mean we are wrong. Ya' ever think SHE is wrong?

[QUOTE]tv1a: Post after post after post shows anyone and their mother has a "biblical" definition of apostolic. Give the Gieco cavemen some time and they could come with a definition of apostolic. How can she be wrong in her definition of apostolic when there isn't a biblical or universal definition anyone can agree on? She is just as right in her definition of apostolic as you are. Did you ever think the light you thought you were shining wasn't coming from the bulb you thought it would was? [/QUOTE]

Disclaimer: I'm referring strictly to outward standards, as this is what the lady focused on. She is inwardly still not holy, so why would I (we) expect her to have anything but a skewed perception of what Apostolic is?[QUOTE] tv1a: The lady only focuses on what she sees. If she saw a little more God and a little less legalism she may have had a different conclusion.
The more I read this thread and others like this, the more I see the skewered definition of apostolic comes from the inside. [/QUOTE]

...