01-28-2008, 03:37 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: Tulsa Report Day 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd
I really shouldnt but it here.... but....
Steadfast, my only issue with this line is, these same issues have been "the issues" since 1945.
the UPCI has had men going to meetings and seeing liberals in the camp from day one.
more than once, some group of men have left the UPCI because it was too liberal, yet the UPCI seems to still be filled with men who range from one side the other.
how come these guys just now got their gut full? i just dont get that.
|
Bro. Ferd,
There have been issues all along. I'll give you that. However, as one that has travelled extensively throughout our fellowship I have to tell you that there has been a HUGE paradigm shift in some Pentecostal Churches over the last 10 years or so. That has become more 'in your face' over the last several years and now it's almost unbelievable that some still call themselves Pentecostal.
I remember back 15 to 20 years ago that when you saw really short skirts, much makeup or extensive jewelry it was generally relegated to two or three Churches who just didn't make an issue of 'standards' and, perhaps, a handfull of new converts. I think it was accepted that some Churches were 'worldly' and they were the exception.
Now, however, there are some environments that I go to that makes you wonder how they went from the epitome of looking Apostolic to... well... what they have become. At the risk of this becoming a 'standards' thread I think the general attitude has now gone from accepting that 'they are the worldly minority' to realizing that certain environments are moving completely away from the distinctives that set us apart.
This brings me to another point. I'm guessing that you'll see MANY more people making the 'Tulsa' move from certain districts than from others. It will be predicated on some who are in districts that say, "I just can't keep supporting the direction they are going" while in other districts there won't be many who leave because, bottom line, they don't see the trend of moving away from those Pentecostal distinctives.
I can tell you, without a doubt, that if I were in certain districts that I've preached meetings in I would have been the first one in Tulsa. Thankfully, in my area the majority (NOT ALL) of our Churches pretty much still value those distinctives of separation.
NOW, as to the bigger question: Why is television advertising the straw that broke the camels back? I have to be honest... I'm just not sure. But I can tell you that after being licensed for 27 years that television has always been a 'hot button' topic. I'm granting the liberty to those who say they hate the dangers of Hollywood to believe them. I preach against it as well and, as far as I know, don't have one television in my Church. However, I personally think that within the organization there is another factor that plays into the equation.
Mark Hanby was THE preacher of his day. He was looked up to and revered by most everyone. When he tried to push television in years ago and was denied... he bailed out. I could be 1,000 miles off base but I've always thought that there was a little resentment over the fact that a 'star' among us left for a television program.
His program eventually failed and he seems to have made his share of miserable mistakes. Even so, I think that the movement, pretty much as a whole, was offended by the whole issue 'I'm a 'star' and I'm pushing television' - combined with the fact that he bailed out - that for years when television is mentioned it immediately found deep emotional opposition.
Again, I may be 1,000 miles off base with my suppositions but, at least I'm honest enough to say it is only a supposition.
|