left upci yr ago and still messed up

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by J4Truth

It may not be the official theme of this particular thread but are we not talking about how those that hold to the "standards" mistreat and abuse others because they don't hold to the same? And unless you feel that the attitude that they have is justified and could, and should be used against someone that is lacking in any other area? Essentially I'm asking are you saying that how they treat others that don't hold to the same standards is acceptable attitude to have as a christian and the only thing wrong with there behavior is that they have such an attitude over standards?

I'm not sure I understand your question, but let me try and answer, and let me know if I didn't answer it satisfactorily......

There are two things that become wrong when we're dealing with the attitudes of those on both sides of the standards fence.

The attitude of those who DO hold to a standard and criticize and condemn those who don't hold that standard and identify them as backsliders, heretics, reprobates, et al - 100% wrong.

The attitude of those who do NOT hold a standard, and criticize those who do hold the standard, and classify them as hypocrites, self-righteous Pharisees, held in bondage, etc - 100% wrong.

If you feel in your heart that God is directing you to follow certain standards, then do it! But, don't criticize those who don't.......if you feel that you are free from those things, then enjoy your freedom! But, don't criticize those who still maintain those things......

This thread was about someone leaving the UPC. Yes, a portion of the thread turned into the way they and others have been treated by those who stayed, and the behavior mentioned is wrong, in my opinion. If the thread was about the other side of the coin, my premise would be the same.

[hometown guy]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

No...I never noticed that.

For every "I left the UPC because"...there are a dozen more "I stayed in the UPC because" or "I joined the UPC because"...

I have found there are many UPCs, apparently, where this stuff happens. I found there are many other UPCs, apparently, where this stuff does not happen.

For me, it's not a UPC issues, unless you left over organizational politics on a national level or you just disagree with UPC doctrines. For me it's a church to church/Pastor to pastor issue

I agree 100%

[AreYouReady?]

Praxeas,

You are correct. I should not lump all UPCs in the entire world in there. This is not my overall intention. I know that there are UPCs out there who are not harsh on people who do not adhere to holiness standards. They are just not in my area.

My entire world at this time exists in this one backward area. For me it's a church to church/Pastor to pastor issue would better explain what happened to me.

Those who attend a church that does not strictly uphold holiness standards would have a hard time understanding my position.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

Praxeas,

You are correct. I should not lump all UPCs in the entire world in there. This is not my overall intention. I know that there are UPCs out there who are not harsh on people who do not adhere to holiness standards. They are just not in my area.

My entire world at this time exists in this one backward area. For me it's a church to church/Pastor to pastor issue would better explain what happened to me.

Well let me say there are UPCs out there that still have the standards without the attitudes. Those attitudes are not related to standards. Standards are just a tool they use. If it was not standards it would be something else.

The church I attend is considered moderate, though some rather call us liberals. Standards are not something constantly harped on and pounded into the people.

In fact I've rarely heard them mentioned in teaching for such a long time, I can't remember the last time I have. But we still have women that don't cut their hair etc etc etc

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Well let me say there are UPCs out there that still have the standards without the attitudes. Those attitudes are not related to standards. Standards are just a tool they use. If it was not standards it would be something else.

Yes. Agreed. The acceptance bar is raised to something else.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The church I attend is considered moderate, though some rather call us liberals. Standards are not something constantly harped on and pounded into the people.

In fact I've rarely heard them mentioned in teaching for such a long time, I can't remember the last time I have. But we still have women that don't cut their hair etc etc etc

I'll have to take something back. There is one UPC church here that have somewhat let go of the standards, but only because the pastor's daughters have cut their hair and started wearing makeup. It was wrong until they did it.

I'm glad you attend a moderate church. I'm sure that there are places in the larger cities with more moderate churches. I wish that I did not have to travel for 1-2 hours to attend such a church. With the rising gas prices, it would be very hard to travel like this every week.

[Michael Phelps]

Standards are just what the word implies, on a couple of different levels:

1. something considered by an authority or by general consent as a basis of comparison; an approved model.

2. an object that is regarded as the usual or most common size or form of its kind: We stock the deluxe models as well as the standards.

3. a rule or principle that is used as a basis for judgment: They tried to establish standards for a new philosophical approach.

4. an average or normal requirement, quality, quantity, level, grade, etc.: His work this week hasn't been up to his usual standard.

5. standards, those morals, ethics, habits, etc., established by authority, custom, or an individual as acceptable: He tried to live up to his father's standards.

Standards were established, purportedly, on Biblical guidelines to help people live "holy". This is definition #5.

However, they have migrated in many places more to a yardstick to measure someone's "holiness" by, thus definition #3.

Here's the deal, in my humble opionion - if you are fulfilling certain standards because your parents, elders, etc. handed them down to you, I'm ok with that. As long as you understand that they are traditions, and you're doing your best to further the tradition.

If you are living a life that reflects certain standards because God dealt with you personally on those things, I respect that, and no one can argue that point with you.

But, if you are living by a certain standard because you think it makes you "holier" than those who don't, and you are using your standards and the lack thereof on the part of others as a yardstick of their sin and your holiness - then we have an issue.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

Yes. Agreed. The acceptance bar is raised to something else.



I'll have to take something back. There is one UPC church here that have somewhat let go of the standards, but only because the pastor's daughters have cut their hair and started wearing makeup. It was wrong until they did it.

I'm glad you attend a moderate church. I'm sure that there are places in the larger cities with more moderate churches. I wish that I did not have to travel for 1-2 hours to attend such a church. With the rising gas prices, it would be very hard to travel like this every week.

So Cal district is probably mostly moderate UPCs

[Amanah]

AYR, why dont you watch Sunday AM services here until you find a church

http://www.fpcpalmbay.com/new/LiveWebcast.html

[AreYouReady?]

...Phelps, you do have a way with words.

[Praxeas]

Personally I think it's silly to call them Holiness Standards

For starters that term is not in the bible and it's a double standard to come from a group that partially rejects the trinity for using non-biblical language

Holiness is a condition of the heart and should MOSTLY be outwardly displayed by how we act and treat others