I think you can preach the Bible and even principles without adding a list of extra rules. You can preach against sin straight from the Bible. Adultery, fornication, stealing, killing, gossip, etc. That's very plain and straight-forward, clearly explained in scripture. New converts need to hear these things, and they're biblical.
Then there are principles.... don't glory in evil-doers, for example. That principle can apply to the things you listen to, the things you watch, the places you go. A pastor doesn't need to say - "Don't listen to country music!" He can say - "Don't listen to music that glorifies sin." That's a principle, it's good teaching, it's works across the board, and it's not extra-biblical. I turn on the country station sometimes, because there are a lot of country songs these days that glorify true love, marriage, etc. If a song comes on that glorifies adultery, I either switch stations, or turn the volume down. The principle works for me. Entire genres of music don't have to be outlawed, just use the principle.
That's why there's such a battle over television in the UPC right now. They outlawed the whole box. But everyone knows that everything that shows up on the screen isn't evil. Or even movies. There are plenty of movies which have good messages, and aren't evil. When I attended a super-conservative church, I couldn't watch Pride and Prejudice, or Andy Griffith. Andy Griffith has great moral value, and P&P is a work of art. But they were broad-brush condemned, because anything moving on a screen was considered sin.
Do you see what I'm saying? I have no problem with absolute sin being preached against (adultery, stealing, etc.) or with principles being taught. We just hit a stump when we start laying down concrete rules.
Because preachers have preached against t.v. and movies, saints felt like they were sinning if they watched Andy Griffith, so they thought - well, if I've sinned anyway, it doesn't matter what I watch, so they'd go on to watch junk (usually in hotel rooms ). Once you understand that Andy Griffith is NOT A SIN, then you start being careful about what you watch, because if you're not sinning, why start? Does that make sense?
I just think "rules" are counter-productive. Real sin, and principles. That's what the Bible teaches us, and I think preachers should stick with the Bible's model. And that model works for new babes in Christ, as well as mature saints.
Having genuine friends in both camps and being a longtime Apostolic minister and professional interpreter of the law (attorney) gives me an uncommon perspective on WeDeclare.
Although I am somewhat suspect of the motives of the original post, and personally agree with Rodney Shaw there are no emergents within the UPCI, I too agree there is much good in this declaration. Unfortunately there is also one fatal flaw.
First the good. The first three items are foundational, if you don’t believe and follow them you have no business being in an organization such as the UPCI. And the conclusion that Apostolic Distinctives should be left in the hands of the local ministry is wonderful. This is one of the unheralded but main attractions many men had for the WPF, Decentralization of the organization and empowering the local pastor.
They also have joined the 21st century by no longer fighting technology. The former Luddite position has done irreparable harm to the movement’s credibility in times past. This is a giant leap forward toward a moderate and reasonable position and as has pointed out should be applauded.
But, as mentioned the document does have a fatal flaw making in internally inconsistent.
The stated position in items four and five take one mitzvah of the 613 in the Old Testament and one hermetically illegitimate understanding of a single passage in a pastoral epistle and elevate them to a position far above what they were ever intended to be.
Nevertheless, regardless of how they are interpreted there can only be two approaches, they are either Apostolic Distinctives or they are Salvific and therefore in and of themselves necessary to avoid hell.
I believe the first view to the majority view within the UPCI and as such they should honor their own declaration and leave it to the auspices of the local pastor. But for the few who actually believe them to be salvific you do violence to your own Item three for they are nowhere mentioned in either John 3 or Acts 2.
It is the epitome of salvation by works. To place women wearing pants or trimming split ends on par with repentance, being buried in His Holy Name, and filled with His Holy Spirit is blasphemy pure and simple. It cheapens the blood of Calvary, the suffering of the Cross, violates the very core understanding of Grace.
This is its fatal flaw. If you believe in salvation by works you don’t have New Testament salvation. If you believe them to be Apostolic Distinctives then leave their enforcement to the local pastor.
Last edited by James Griffin; 09-25-2009 at 10:12 AM.
Having genuine friends in both camps and being a longtime Apostolic minister and professional interpreter of the law (attorney) gives me an uncommon perspective on WeDeclare.
Although I am somewhat suspect of the motives of the original post, and personally agree with Rodney Shaw there are no emergents within the UPCI, I too agree there is much good in this declaration. Unfortunately there is also one fatal flaw.
First the good. The first three items are foundational, if you don’t believe and follow them you have no business being in an organization such as the UPCI. And the conclusion that Apostolic Distinctives should be left in the hands of the local ministry is wonderful. This is one of the unheralded but main attractions many men had for the WPF, Decentralization of the organization and empowering the local pastor.
They also have joined the 21st century by no longer fighting technology. The former Luddite position has done irreparable harm to the movement’s credibility in times past. This is a giant leap forward toward a moderate and reasonable position and as has pointed out should be applauded.
But, as mentioned the document does have a fatal flaw making in internally inconsistent.
The stated position in items four and five take one mitzvah of the 613 in the Old Testament and one single hermetically illegitimate understanding of a passage in a pastoral epistle and elevate them to a position far above what they were ever intended to be.
Nevertheless, regardless of how they are interpreted there can only be two approaches, they are either Apostolic Distinctives or they are Salvific and therefore in and of themselves necessary to avoid hell.
I believe the first view to the majority view within the UPCI and as such they should honor their own declaration and leave it to the auspices of the local pastor. But for the few who actually believe them to be salvific you do violence to your own Item three for they are nowhere mentioned in either John 3 or Acts 2.
It is the epitome of salvation by works. To place women wearing pants or trimming split ends on par with the repentance, being buried in His Holy Name, and filled with His Holy Spirit is blasphemy pure and simple. It cheapens the blood of Calvary, the suffering of the Cross, violates the very core understanding of Grace.
This is its fatal flaw. If you believe in salvation by works you don’t have New Testament salvation. If you believe them to be Apostolic Distinctives then leave their enforcement to the local pastor.
Thank you counsellor, love your clear thinking and this post that points the serious flaws in theolgy of this group.
I am so glad that I can say I use to smoke, I use to drink way to much, But I am just as glad to be able to say that I use to believe the malarky of the legalistic imposers of these miscontrived ideas of what constitutes salvation.
__________________
God has lavished his love upon me.
Um...you never take a baby gate down as long as there are still babies in the house do you?
So, are your "gates" in place just for the "babies" in your church, but the more mature Christians are free to "step over" them? Wear whatever they want, go to movies, etc.?
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Having genuine friends in both camps and being a longtime Apostolic minister and professional interpreter of the law (attorney) gives me an uncommon perspective on WeDeclare.
Although I am somewhat suspect of the motives of the original post, and personally agree with Rodney Shaw there are no emergents within the UPCI, I too agree there is much good in this declaration. Unfortunately there is also one fatal flaw.
First the good. The first three items are foundational, if you don’t believe and follow them you have no business being in an organization such as the UPCI. And the conclusion that Apostolic Distinctives should be left in the hands of the local ministry is wonderful. This is one of the unheralded but main attractions many men had for the WPF, Decentralization of the organization and empowering the local pastor.
They also have joined the 21st century by no longer fighting technology. The former Luddite position has done irreparable harm to the movement’s credibility in times past. This is a giant leap forward toward a moderate and reasonable position and as has pointed out should be applauded.
But, as mentioned the document does have a fatal flaw making in internally inconsistent.
The stated position in items four and five take one mitzvah of the 613 in the Old Testament and one hermetically illegitimate understanding of a single passage in a pastoral epistle and elevate them to a position far above what they were ever intended to be.
Nevertheless, regardless of how they are interpreted there can only be two approaches, they are either Apostolic Distinctives or they are Salvific and therefore in and of themselves necessary to avoid hell.
I believe the first view to the majority view within the UPCI and as such they should honor their own declaration and leave it to the auspices of the local pastor. But for the few who actually believe them to be salvific you do violence to your own Item three for they are nowhere mentioned in either John 3 or Acts 2.
It is the epitome of salvation by works. To place women wearing pants or trimming split ends on par with repentance, being buried in His Holy Name, and filled with His Holy Spirit is blasphemy pure and simple. It cheapens the blood of Calvary, the suffering of the Cross, violates the very core understanding of Grace.
This is its fatal flaw. If you believe in salvation by works you don’t have New Testament salvation. If you believe them to be Apostolic Distinctives then leave their enforcement to the local pastor.
Good post JG.
My wife and I are conservative. She does not wear make-up or slacks ect. . No alcohol at our house, I don't wear shorts, girl's hair is uncut, no earrings, bikinis on the beach, no "TV" etc.
HOWEVER, I totally agree with this:
"To place women wearing pants or trimming split ends on par with repentance, being buried in His Holy Name, and filled with His Holy Spirit is blasphemy pure and simple. It cheapens the blood of Calvary, the suffering of the Cross, violates the very core understanding of Grace."
__________________ "It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity." Dave Barry 2005
I am a firm believer in the Old Paths
Articles on such subjects as "The New Birth," will be accepted, whether they teach that the new birth takes place before baptism in water and Spirit, or that the new birth consists of baptism of water and Spirit. - THE PENTECOSTAL HERALD Dec. 1945
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves
Having genuine friends in both camps and being a longtime Apostolic minister and professional interpreter of the law (attorney) gives me an uncommon perspective on WeDeclare.
Although I am somewhat suspect of the motives of the original post, and personally agree with Rodney Shaw there are no emergents within the UPCI, I too agree there is much good in this declaration. Unfortunately there is also one fatal flaw.
First the good. The first three items are foundational, if you don’t believe and follow them you have no business being in an organization such as the UPCI. And the conclusion that Apostolic Distinctives should be left in the hands of the local ministry is wonderful. This is one of the unheralded but main attractions many men had for the WPF, Decentralization of the organization and empowering the local pastor.
They also have joined the 21st century by no longer fighting technology. The former Luddite position has done irreparable harm to the movement’s credibility in times past. This is a giant leap forward toward a moderate and reasonable position and as has pointed out should be applauded.
But, as mentioned the document does have a fatal flaw making in internally inconsistent.
The stated position in items four and five take one mitzvah of the 613 in the Old Testament and one hermetically illegitimate understanding of a single passage in a pastoral epistle and elevate them to a position far above what they were ever intended to be.
Nevertheless, regardless of how they are interpreted there can only be two approaches, they are either Apostolic Distinctives or they are Salvific and therefore in and of themselves necessary to avoid hell.
I believe the first view to the majority view within the UPCI and as such they should honor their own declaration and leave it to the auspices of the local pastor. But for the few who actually believe them to be salvific you do violence to your own Item three for they are nowhere mentioned in either John 3 or Acts 2.
It is the epitome of salvation by works. To place women wearing pants or trimming split ends on par with repentance, being buried in His Holy Name, and filled with His Holy Spirit is blasphemy pure and simple. It cheapens the blood of Calvary, the suffering of the Cross, violates the very core understanding of Grace.
This is its fatal flaw. If you believe in salvation by works you don’t have New Testament salvation. If you believe them to be Apostolic Distinctives then leave their enforcement to the local pastor.
Good to see you JG. I always like your posts and your perspectives. I think the point that Rodney Shaw makes is a great point that needs to be understood. There needs to be a clear understanding of what the emergent movement is. There is a great difference between what many in Apostolic circles refer to as emergent and the actual emergent movement (the Doug Paggitt ilk).
Lumping them into one lump is counterproductive and confusing in my opinion. The real emergent church does not believe in almost any Christian ideas.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois