Back with some new perspective

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Except the individual members rarely act as a group. They are insulated both as individuals and as members of autonomous subgroups AKA "churches".

Generally yes, I think we can say "Some members in XYZ have been known to have a tendency to..."

I guess I was looking more at when doctrines themselves produce certain outcomes. Let's look at the Mormons as an example since that would not probably have much bias from either one of us since neither of us is Mormon, nor has a stake in Mormonism.

Mormonism teaches polygamy is not only fine, but from my understanding, fundamental Mormonism teaches that polygamy is essential for salvation. Keep in mind the word fundamental.

Mormonism has a number of branches to it. The mainstream Mormon church as I see it, is more like "Mormon-lite". They teach the Mormon faith, and, how exactly they get around the fundamental teaching of polygamy, I am not quite sure, but I understand that some of their latter day prophets lifted the requirement.

So, the more conservative churches practice polygamy as a central tenet and they break away from the mainstream Mormon church for not "being true" to the Mormon faith.

The reason I bring this up is to show that doctrines have outcomes. In the Apostolic faith, since polygamy is not a tenet or doctrine, we have no arguments over it. In the Mormon faith, they swing from one extreme to the other. The bottom line is that in the more extreme Mormon churches, the doctrine of polygamy takes on a life of it's own, in scary ways. This does not mean that the individual Mormons that practice this are "bad". However, people looking in from the outside may point to the polygamist doctrines and the other doctrines the Mormon faith has and show how it weaves a tapestry that should be avoided.

In the same way, all groups doctrines and beliefs weave tapestries. This doesn't say anything about the individuals that are a part of those groups.

However, when someone rejects the tapestry, those inside the group can become offended, because it is their tapestry. There is a difference between criticizing the tapestry and criticizing the individual that has that tapestry as a part of their life.

Some people are always chasing the tapestry, thinking if they only find the perfect tapestry, they will be whole. Or they constantly defend their own imperfect tapestry. All tapestries are imperfect. We should all strive to change our own personal tapestries and make them as whole as possible.

So, I am not talking about individuals at all. I am talking about doctrines and the outcomes they produce, the tapestries that they weave.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I think this is a pendulum that swings between "liberal" and "conservative" and all of us should hope to find the middle ground, and not be too far to the left or the right.

Most of the time when one leaves a group that is "liberal" and moves to the "conservative side", or a "conservative" moves to the "liberal" side, the swing is wide and high, and can take out anyone in between, but as time passes, the pendulum begins to find its middle ground, and thereby one can find peace.

Yes, I agree.

[ILG]

I have the sense that I may have lost some people on my long post there.

To sum up, I think that when standards are taught as salvational, it brings about some very negative outcomes. When they are taught as applications of scriptural principles, a life choice, and nobody has a heart attack and worries too much when a girl puts on a pair of pants because they know it is their beliefs and not a heaven/hell doctrine, the ramifications of living a life with standards may have some benefit.

The reason I left the OP movement was because I believe there are more in the movement that practice these beliefs as heaven/hell rather than lifestyle choices of applications of scriptural principles so there is therefore a toxin in the movement that is larger than the benefit that standards bring. What individuals in the movement practice, I don't judge. But I strongly am opposed to these principles taught as salvational.

[Roxanne Murphy]

Hello Harmony, yes we do live in the same "neighborhood". You are very aware of the attitude towards those who leave the 'ark of safety', the UPC. It has been rough sometimes hearing the things that have been said about our church by some that I very much respected and believed to be godly people. Our church is in a big metro area in the midst of several UPC churches. So it is interesting to run into folks we know from those other churches. The reaction is varied, to be sure. They are mostly surprised to discover that I don't look any different than I did before we 'backslid', unless I happen to be wearing capris/culottes that day. I am not a person to change things for change sake. I can still go to any UPC church and look like I am a member.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by tv1a

It didn't take long for the legalists apologists to circle the wagon. Not every legalist is a self righteous Bible thumping closed minded bigot. They just sit quietly as a church mouse when the 99% self righteous people attack the others. Their silence shows their support of that behavior. If you hang with pigs, be prepared to smell like the pigs.

This accusation works both ways.

It doesn't take long for the Trinitarian apologists to circle the wagon. Not every Trinitarian is a self righteous Bible thumping closed minded bigot. They just sit quietly as a church mouse when the 99% self righteous people attack the others. Their silence shows their support of that behavior. If you hang with pigs, be prepared to smell like the pigs.

[navygoat1998]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

This accusation works both ways.

It doesn't take long for the Trinitarian apologists to circle the wagon. Not every Trinitarian is a self righteous Bible thumping closed minded bigot. They just sit quietly as a church mouse when the 99% self righteous people attack the others. Their silence shows their support of that behavior. If you hang with pigs, be prepared to smell like the pigs.

There are Trinitarian legalist.

[houston]

This is simple, really.

Why study to find BIBLICAL answers for educated people? (Notice that I left out "well.")



THIS IS NOT TEACHING AGAINST MAKEUP.
2 Kings 9:30 And when Jehu was come to Jezreel, Jezebel heard of it; and she painted her face, and tired her head, and looked out at a window.

Context, context. Context is hard to get passed educated people. Heck, I was 15 and knew better.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by houston

This is simple, really.

Why study to find BIBLICAL answers for educated people? (Notice that I left out "well.")



THIS IS NOT TEACHING AGAINST MAKEUP.
2 Kings 9:30 And when Jehu was come to Jezreel, Jezebel heard of it; and she painted her face, and tired her head, and looked out at a window.

Context, context. Context is hard to get passed educated people. Heck, I was 15 and knew better.

God doesn't want us to look out windows.

[tv1a]

Accusation doesn't work both ways. More oneness based ministers are speaking in trinitarian churches than ever. TF Tenney has ministered in more charismatic churches. Global Network affiliated ministers have shared the stage with prominent trinitarians at major conference events. Trinitarian preachers do not get the same consideration in oneness circles because they are considered heretics. For every John McArthur, Hank Hanagraaf, there hundreds of trinitarians who believe oneness people are saved. For every TF Tenney, there are hundreds of oneness people who believe trinitarians are lost.

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

This accusation works both ways.

It doesn't take long for the Trinitarian apologists to circle the wagon. Not every Trinitarian is a self righteous Bible thumping closed minded bigot. They just sit quietly as a church mouse when the 99% self righteous people attack the others. Their silence shows their support of that behavior. If you hang with pigs, be prepared to smell like the pigs.

[tv1a]

The individual responds to how they were taught.

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Except the individual members rarely act as a group. They are insulated both as individuals and as members of autonomous subgroups AKA "churches".

Generally yes, I think we can say "Some members in XYZ have been known to have a tendency to..."