Letter From C.M. Becton Regarding Resolution 4

[PreacherV]

Just received this letter from via email from C. M. Becton....

Dear Friend:

Christian greetings!

Having been a part of the United Pentecostal Church for most of my life, I felt very compelled to write some of my feelings concerning our last General Conference. Of course the Spiritual aspect, in my opinion was superb. One of the best.
My longevity includes the fact the I have attended every General Conference since the merger conference of 1945. In fact I had my 17th birthday during the time of that conference. I felt the call to preach some months after that conference and have been in the ministry full time for about 62 years.
Having served as the General Secretary for 25 years, I am perhaps more involved with facts and figures. I realize that facts are sometimes uninteresting but please hear me out as I feel they are very important especially with the passing of Resolution Number 4.
I went through the Manual of the UPCI, a booklet that is one of the many duties of the General Secretary's office. This is what I found:

1. In both "The Articles of Faith" and the "Position Papers" there is a total of 265 words regarding our being against television. One of these states that "no minister having a television in his or her home shall be permitted to hold license of credentials with the UPCI."

2. Resolution number 4 that passed at the General Conference affects only 16 words.

3. If it were a fact that we are for television, before this could happen the General Conference would have to pass many resolutions to eliminate the remaining 249 words. (In my opinion this just isn't going to happen.)

With the above statistics how could it be thought that the UPCI is now approving or is going to approve television. Is there really any need for anyone to leave the UPCI with the thought that we are letting up on our Holiness Standards?

Please conscientiously consider the facts and prayerfully think of what action that you will take. It is so important in these the last days for there to be a "CHURCH" that is without spot or blemish for the Lord is soon to come.

With great concern, I am


Cleveland M. Becton

[SDG]

Just received this letter from via email from C. M. Becton....

Dear Friend:

Christian greetings!

Having been a part of the United Pentecostal Church for most of my life, I felt very compelled to write some of my feelings concerning our last General Conference. Of course the Spiritual aspect, in my opinion was superb. One of the best.
My longevity includes the fact the I have attended every General Conference since the merger conference of 1945. In fact I had my 17th birthday during the time of that conference. I felt the call to preach some months after that conference and have been in the ministry full time for about 62 years.
Having served as the General Secretary for 25 years, I am perhaps more involved with facts and figures. I realize that facts are sometimes uninteresting but please hear me out as I feel they are very important especially with the passing of Resolution Number 4.
I went through the Manual of the UPCI, a booklet that is one of the many duties of the General Secretary's office. This is what I found:

1. In both "The Articles of Faith" and the "Position Papers" there is a total of 265 words regarding our being against television. One of these states that "no minister having a television in his or her home shall be permitted to hold license of credentials with the UPCI."

2. Resolution number 4 that passed at the General Conference affects only 16 words.

3. If it were a fact that we are for television, before this could happen the General Conference would have to pass many resolutions to eliminate the remaining 249 words. (In my opinion this just isn't going to happen.)

With the above statistics how could it be thought that the UPCI is now approving or is going to approve television. Is there really any need for anyone to leave the UPCI with the thought that we are letting up on our Holiness Standards?

Please conscientiously consider the facts and prayerfully think of what action that you will take. It is so important in these the last days for there to be a "CHURCH" that is without spot or blemish for the Lord is soon to come.

With great concern, I am


Cleveland M. Becton

Sorry, CM but the numbers argument is soft and confusing for most folks ....

he should've just spoken from the heart.

[staysharp]

Sorry, CM but the numbers argument is soft and confusing for most folks ....

he should've just spoken from the heart.

This letter makes no sense. Its confusing and ambiguous. This makes me want to stay in the organization like looking at a moslem woman makes me want to be one of them.:bedtime

[SDG]

CMB is still great!!!!

[rgcraig]

HUH?

[TRFrance]

Ok. Someone please break this down for me.
What exactly is his point?

[rgcraig]

Ok. Someone please break this down for me.
What exactly is his point?

See post #5

[PreacherV]

In my opinion this just isn't going to happen.[/B])

I have the greatest respect for CMB, but I think he will eventually be proven wrong on this. I think this IS going to happen...eventually. However, if every word in reference to television were removed from the manual, this would not mean that we are FOR television...it would just allow each pastor to deal with the issue on the local level, which is what is happening anyway, regardless what the manual requires.

IMO, a lot of needless division could have been prevented if the statement regarding holiness in the Articles of Faith did not include a list of specifics.

Wouldn't this have been better? "We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living." (PERIOD-DELETE-DELETE-DELETE) "We admonish all of our people to refrain from unwholesome practices in the interest of spiritual progress and the soon coming of the Lord for His Church."

[Pastor G]

I have the greatest respect for CMB, but I think he will eventually be proven wrong on this. I think this IS going to happen...eventually. However, if every word in reference to television were removed from the manual, this would not mean that we are FOR television...it would just allow each pastor to deal with the issue on the local level, which is what is happening anyway, regardless what the manual requires.

IMO, a lot of needless division could have been prevented if the statement regarding holiness in the Articles of Faith did not include a list of specifics.

Wouldn't this have been better? "We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living." (PERIOD-DELETE-DELETE-DELETE) "We admonish all of our people to refrain from unwholesome practices in the interest of spiritual progress and the soon coming of the Lord for His Church."

If you put a resolution in stating that I will vote for it... good post..

[rgcraig]

I have the utmost respect for Bro. B too. I think perhaps his thoughts were clearer in his head than it reads on paper.

[rooted]

Dear Friend:

Christian greetings!

Having been a part of the United Pentecostal Church for most of my life, I felt very compelled to write some of my feelings concerning our last General Conference. Of course the Spiritual aspect, in my opinion was superb. One of the best.
My longevity includes the fact the I have attended every General Conference since the merger conference of 1945. In fact I had my 17th birthday during the time of that conference. I felt the call to preach some months after that conference and have been in the ministry full time for about 62 years.
Having served as the General Secretary for 25 years, I am perhaps more involved with facts and figures. I realize that facts are sometimes uninteresting but please hear me out as I feel they are very important especially with the passing of Resolution Number 4.
I went through the Manual of the UPCI, a booklet that is one of the many duties of the General Secretary's office. This is what I found:

1. In both "The Articles of Faith" and the "Position Papers" there is a total of 265 words regarding our being against television. One of these states that "no minister having a television in his or her home shall be permitted to hold license of credentials with the UPCI."

2. Resolution number 4 that passed at the General Conference affects only 16 words.

3. If it were a fact that we are for television, before this could happen the General Conference would have to pass many resolutions to eliminate the remaining 249 words. (In my opinion this just isn't going to happen.)

With the above statistics how could it be thought that the UPCI is now approving or is going to approve television. Is there really any need for anyone to leave the UPCI with the thought that we are letting up on our Holiness Standards?

Please conscientiously consider the facts and prayerfully think of what action that you will take. It is so important in these the last days for there to be a "CHURCH" that is without spot or blemish for the Lord is soon to come.

With great concern, I am


Cleveland M. Becton

[pelathais]

I have the greatest respect for CMB, but I think he will eventually be proven wrong on this. I think this IS going to happen...eventually. However, if every word in reference to television were removed from the manual, this would not mean that we are FOR television...it would just allow each pastor to deal with the issue on the local level, which is what is happening anyway, regardless what the manual requires.

IMO, a lot of needless division could have been prevented if the statement regarding holiness in the Articles of Faith did not include a list of specifics.

Wouldn't this have been better? "We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living." (PERIOD-DELETE-DELETE-DELETE) "We admonish all of our people to refrain from unwholesome practices in the interest of spiritual progress and the soon coming of the Lord for His Church."

:thumbsup You shoulda' wrote the book!

Keep it clean and simple. "Television" is increasingly becoming irrelevant as an issue. Kids are accessing things like pornography, which is far more dangerous than College Football with their cell phones and iPODS.

Porn on the iPOD is "okay" but a football game- "THAT'S WORLDLY!"

If we didn't have a bunch of nattering nannies undermining our fellowship all the time we could have addressed some of the more important principles and gone after people's hearts.

It's like WT Witherspoon said in 1945: "Much more could have been done" if not for "the division among the brethren."

[CC1]

I think someone who has been around since the merger in 1945 has a right to speak their mind.

[ManOfWord]

As long as people in the org continue to make TV the issue there will be problems. TV is NOT the issue. The issue is an issue of the heart. TV is not evil but the heart is desperately wicked, who can know it? What comes across the screen and what people choose to view is only a reflection of their hearts.

Once again, the cart is put before the oxen causing them to stumble shaking the cart and causing the "ark" to fall. Too many are reaching out to touch it to keep it from falling. Better be careful with that one.

The ark is the Lord's and He will protect it with any group He so chooses. If the org doesn't cease with its constant focus on outward things, the "ark" just might end up in someone else's camp. :D

[RevBuddy]

CMB is a wonderful man and minister...just not a great writer...

His message is coming in garbled...say again all after Dear Brethren!

[J-Roc]

CMB is a wonderful man and minister...just not a great writer...

His message is coming in garbled...say again all after Dear Brethren!


What's that stand for? Cash-Money-Brutha? :jolly

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

IMO, a lot of needless division could have been prevented if the statement regarding holiness in the Articles of Faith did not include a list of specifics.


Resolution #4 could have passed overwhelmingly had they defined "Advertising" also.

[PreacherV]

If you put a resolution in stating that I will vote for it... good post..

Pastor G, unfortunately we both know it would probably never get past the resolution committee!

I wasn't around when the ink first dried, but it seems to me that the prevailing view back in the day was that entertainment in and of itself is sin. The manual specifically bans "theaters"--not specifying whether movie or live stage performances. Fast-forward to present day and we find that Branson is now the Apostolic Entertainment Mecca because of its good, clean, old-fashioned family values with that good old harmless country and western style music we used to sing in church before the kids took over with their rebellious and abnoxiously repetitive praise music. Why, them good folks out at Silver Dollar City are still standing for the old-time holiness standards, what with wearin their long sleeves and ground-draggin dresses even on the hottest of summer days! (and isn't that saloon show the cutest thing!) And who could have foreseen the advent of IMAX with its educational, non-entertaining, and surely non-Hollywood-supporting "film strips"?

[PreacherV]

Resolution #4 could have passed overwhelmingly had they defined "Advertising" also.

An amendment was offered to that effect by MJ but failed.

[Pastor G]

Pastor G, unfortunately we both know it would probably never get past the resolution committee!

I wasn't around when the ink first dried, but it seems to me that the prevailing view back in the day was that entertainment in and of itself is sin. The manual specifically bans "theaters"--not specifying whether movie or live stage performances. Fast-forward to present day and we find that Branson is now the Apostolic Entertainment Mecca because of its good, clean, old-fashioned family values with that good old harmless country and western style music we used to sing in church before the kids took over with their rebellious and abnoxiously repetitive praise music. Why, them good folks out at Silver Dollar City are still standing for the old-time holiness standards, what with wearin their long sleeves and ground-draggin dresses even on the hottest of summer days! (and isn't that saloon show the cutest thing!) And who could have foreseen the advent of IMAX with its educational, non-entertaining, and surely non-Hollywood-supporting "film strips"?

And some people on here wonder why we just do our own thing and not worry about anyone eles...

[PastorD]

Pastor G, unfortunately we both know it would probably never get past the resolution committee!

I wasn't around when the ink first dried, but it seems to me that the prevailing view back in the day was that entertainment in and of itself is sin. The manual specifically bans "theaters"--not specifying whether movie or live stage performances. Fast-forward to present day and we find that Branson is now the Apostolic Entertainment Mecca because of its good, clean, old-fashioned family values with that good old harmless country and western style music we used to sing in church before the kids took over with their rebellious and abnoxiously repetitive praise music. Why, them good folks out at Silver Dollar City are still standing for the old-time holiness standards, what with wearin their long sleeves and ground-draggin dresses even on the hottest of summer days! (and isn't that saloon show the cutest thing!) And who could have foreseen the advent of IMAX with its educational, non-entertaining, and surely non-Hollywood-supporting "film strips"?


Aren't ya'll glad I invited V to join AFF! :christmaskiss

[pelathais]

Aren't ya'll glad I invited V to join AFF! :christmaskiss
Kudos! "D" and Welcome! "V" !

[TRFrance]

Since you can now get streaming video on some cell phones, does the anti-TV crowd have a position on that?

Just curious.


.

[Brother Price]

As long as people in the org continue to make TV the issue there will be problems. TV is NOT the issue. The issue is an issue of the heart. TV is not evil but the heart is desperately wicked, who can know it? What comes across the screen and what people choose to view is only a reflection of their hearts.

Once again, the cart is put before the oxen causing them to stumble shaking the cart and causing the "ark" to fall. Too many are reaching out to touch it to keep it from falling. Better be careful with that one.

The ark is the Lord's and He will protect it with any group He so chooses. If the org doesn't cease with its constant focus on outward things, the "ark" just might end up in someone else's camp. :D

Well spoken and worthy of POTD stature!

[Sister Alvear]

Well, most know I don't have a television and neither do I want one...but I have been around long enough to know most ok what they LIKE and if they don't like it...well it is a sin...I know some that go to Epcot but don't go to disney...They paid my way to Epcot and told me the evils of disney...I just smiled...after we got there on serveral rides and this and that I told them I remember when these things were over at Disney...of course that was 25 years ago or so...

Sin, my friend comes from the human heart...and not a long list of do and do nots...(yes, I do have my do and do not's) We must all have our guidlines, our convictions, what we feel is right...
Some don't go to 6 flags but go to Branson, go to Dollywood or whereever...

How about getting some PERSONAL convictions...

Since many of my friends are UC's I worry because I KNOW for a fact some preach one thing and live another and that is what bothers me...

Yes, we all could be wrong about any given thing but why try to destroy our blood washed brother and sister...I have had some say to me they are not our brothers and sisters...Well...my friend it is a small world and it could be those you try to destroy are the very ones that are praying for you...Let your words be few the writer told us...a fool talks to much...tells all he knows and in the end half of what he told is generally wrong...

Right now a person we bent over backwards to help, spent money to help and lots of things turned against us...and has said all kinds of untrue things...I have not said any bad thing about this person because when they wake up they will realize we were their best friends...even if people try to destroy you TIME will reveal the TRUTH...

Time will tell us what is the motive of all these things that are going on...if the motive is pure, clean and holy even if we do or do not agree we will at one point understand the motive...if the motive is as some say political or thos or that...it will also be revealed...

[rgcraig]

Once again, Sis. Alvear you cut through the chase and just tell it like it is plain and simple!

Amen Sistah!

[philjones]

Well, most know I don't have a television and neither do I want one...but I have been around long enough to know most ok what they LIKE and if they don't like it...well it is a sin...I know some that go to Epcot but don't go to disney...They paid my way to Epcot and told me the evils of disney...I just smiled...after we got there on serveral rides and this and that I told them I remember when these things were over at Disney...of course that was 25 years ago or so...

Sin, my friend comes from the human heart...and not a long list of do and do nots...(yes, I do have my do and do not's) We must all have our guidlines, our convictions, what we feel is right...
Some don't go to 6 flags but go to Branson, go to Dollywood or whereever...

How about getting some PERSONAL convictions...

Since many of my friends are UC's I worry because I KNOW for a fact some preach one thing and live another and that is what bothers me...

Yes, we all could be wrong about any given thing but why try to destroy our blood washed brother and sister...I have had some say to me they are not our brothers and sisters...Well...my friend it is a small world and it could be those you try to destroy are the very ones that are praying for you...Let your words be few the writer told us...a fool talks to much...tells all he knows and in the end half of what he told is generally wrong...

Right now a person we bent over backwards to help, spent money to help and lots of things turned against us...and has said all kinds of untrue things...I have not said any bad thing about this person because when they wake up they will realize we were their best friends...even if people try to destroy you TIME will reveal the TRUTH...

Time will tell us what is the motive of all these things that are going on...if the motive is pure, clean and holy even if we do or do not agree we will at one point understand the motive...if the motive is as some say political or thos or that...it will also be revealed...

Sis. Alvear,

My dad was a conservative but balanced man of God. He was known for saying that he could easily preach against mayonaisse and iced tea... he didn't like either one but it would certainly be harder if the subject were beef steak and mashed potatoes. :D

You are correct in the area of personal convictions. I have a very personal relationship with Jesus and He deals with me daily regarding areas of my life that are not pleasing to Him or areas where I could improve and thus remove obstacles that interupt the flow of communication between us. Why He has even had the audacity to ask me to sacrifice a few personal things, things that are in no way sin, for a season of self discipline and bringing the flesh into subjection to the Holy Ghost. NEVER ONCE has he told me that I needed to get into the pulpit and force the folks to whom I am ministering to mirror my sacrifice for a season or indefinitely.

Thanks for a solid post full of wisdom!:ty2

[Bro-Larry]

Weigh ta geau Phil !!!

Big-larry

[PreacherV]

Kudos! "D" and Welcome! "V" !

Thanks for the welcome. I've been hanging out on AFF for a while, but only started posting recently. :igotit

[PreacherV]

Since you can now get streaming video on some cell phones, does the anti-TV crowd have a position on that?

Just curious.


.

I am guessing the answer to that would be no. At GC this year we voted on several other resolutions besides Resolution 4. I noticed that a large contingency of voters voted against every single resolution that would change any of the wording in the manual, even on non-holiness issues. I noticed this because many of the votes were standing or voice votes. There are a lot of ministers who almost view the manual as a sacred or inspired document and feel changes to any of our previously articulated positions would be a grave betrayal of our forefathers.

The internet is okay only because our forefathers didn't address it.
Cell phones with streaming video....
IPods...
Satellite radio...

You see, our founders didn't have the foresight to reject all future technologies that would have the potential to assault holy minds. All these other things slid in because they didn't put us in a position that required going back on our previous commitments to "holiness". Never mind that everyone on the outside can see the blatant double-standard and don't buy the idea that our current positions are held on the basis of principle. The "fact" remains in the minds of many that TV is the one thing we cannot control. You can navigate the internet and still be holy, you can navigate the radio, your ipod...anything but television. It alone successfully resists all attempts to control it. You turn it off...it will turn itself back on! You change the channel to something "educational" and it will reset itself to the most depraved and perverted material available. TV is not a technology, it is a demon-possesed entity!

Sigh...My point is that I just think it would have been better to teach people principles instead of establishing blanket bans against this that and the other.
The Apostle Paul's approach to holiness was very simple: In essence, he stated that over here in Column A are the works of the flesh. And over here in Column B are the fruits of the Spirit. If you walk in the Spirit, you will not do the stuff that is in Column A.

[StillStanding]

I am guessing the answer to that would be no. At GC this year we voted on several other resolutions besides Resolution 4. I noticed that a large contingency of voters voted against every single resolution that would change any of the wording in the manual, even on non-holiness issues. I noticed this because many of the votes were standing or voice votes. There are a lot of ministers who almost view the manual as a sacred or inspired document and feel changes to any of our previously articulated positions would be a grave betrayal of our forefathers.

The internet is okay only because our forefathers didn't address it.
Cell phones with streaming video....
IPods...
Satellite radio...

You see, our founders didn't have the foresight to reject all future technologies that would have the potential to assault holy minds. All these other things slid in because they didn't put us in a position that required going back on our previous commitments to "holiness". Never mind that everyone on the outside can see the blatant double-standard and don't buy the idea that our current positions are held on the basis of principle. The "fact" remains in the minds of many that TV is the one thing we cannot control. You can navigate the internet and still be holy, you can navigate the radio, your ipod...anything but television. It alone successfully resists all attempts to control it. You turn it off...it will turn itself back on! You change the channel to something "educational" and it will reset itself to the most depraved and perverted material available. TV is not a technology, it is a demon-possesed entity!.

Sigh...My point is that I just think it would have been better to teach people principles instead of establishing blanket bans against this that and the other.
The Apostle Paul's approach to holiness was very simple: In essence, he stated that over here in Column A are the works of the flesh. And over here in Column B are the fruits of the Spirit. If you walk in the Spirit, you will not do the stuff that is in Column A.

Excellent post! :thumbsup

I like your comment that TV is the ONE thing that Apostolics can't seem to control! :) They can control the internet, the cellphone, and all other media, but there's something about that TV invention that just gets the best of us no matter how we try to control it! :toofunny

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Excellent post! :thumbsup

I like your comment that TV is the ONE thing that Apostolics can't seem to control! :) They can control the internet, the cellphone, and all other media, but there's something about that TV invention that just gets the best of us no matter how we try to control it! :toofunny

It is not a problem here.

I don't have one.

[TRFrance]

The internet is okay only because our forefathers didn't address it.
Cell phones with streaming video....
IPods...
Satellite radio...

You see, our founders didn't have the foresight to reject all future technologies that would have the potential to assault holy minds.

A fascinating point you bring up there. One must wonder... if the internet was invented in the early 1960's, what would the forefathers position on it be?

Makes you almost think they'd be anti-internet too, at least in the beginning.

But I think one thing that makes it hard for even the anti-TV crowd to be anti-internet is the fact that many people (including many saints of God) use the internet at work for business related purposes. The same cant be said about TV. So the internet is seen as more of a necessity in today's world, while the internet is still seen as optional.

Fact is, if the anti-TV folks wanted to, they could make a hard-hitting case for why the internet is just as "evil" as TV (or even worse) if they wanted to. But of course, they're not inclined to do that, especially the ones who have internet ministries/websites.

...Kind of a selective indignation, if you ask me.


.

[staysharp]

A fascinating point you bring up there. One must wonder... if the internet was invented in the early 1960's, what would the forefathers position on it be?

Makes you almost think they'd be anti-internet too, at least in the beginning.

But I think one thing that makes it hard for even the anti-TV crowd to be anti-internet is the fact that many people (including many saints of God) use the internet at work for business related purposes. The same cant be said about TV. So the internet is seen as more of a necessity in today's world, while the internet is still seen as optional.

Fact is, if the anti-TV folks wanted to, they could make a hard-hitting case for why the internet is just as "evil" as TV (or even worse) if they wanted to. But of course, they're not inclined to do that, especially the ones who have internet ministries/websites.

...Kind of a selective indignation, if you ask me.


.

Amen...just like selective amnesia, selective memory, selective teaching, selective scriptures, selective associations...and the list goes on and on and on...

[Felicity]

I love Bro. Becton. He has always been one of my favorite preachers.

I'd suggest at least giving careful consideration to the advice of these older, wiser, seasoned men of God who have been through life and have experience and wisdom to pass along.

[Sam]

...
IMO, a lot of needless division could have been prevented if the statement regarding holiness in the Articles of Faith did not include a list of specifics.

Wouldn't this have been better? "We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living." (PERIOD-DELETE-DELETE-DELETE) "We admonish all of our people to refrain from unwholesome practices in the interest of spiritual progress and the soon coming of the Lord for His Church."

Well, as I've said before, I am not UPC so this issue does not affect me, but I agree that it would have been better to have a statement like the one proposed above than to try to list specific "no-no's" since "worldly" activities, places, and styles vary from time to time and place to place.

How many preachers are still preaching against golf, red cars, bowling, radios, hair ribbons, curled hair, bare legs, fictional reading, etc? These have sorta fallen by the wayside.

[pelathais]

A fascinating point you bring up there. One must wonder... if the internet was invented in the early 1960's, what would the forefathers position on it be?

Makes you almost think they'd be anti-internet too, at least in the beginning.

But I think one thing that makes it hard for even the anti-TV crowd to be anti-internet is the fact that many people (including many saints of God) use the internet at work for business related purposes. The same cant be said about TV. So the internet is seen as more of a necessity in today's world, while the internet is still seen as optional.

Fact is, if the anti-TV folks wanted to, they could make a hard-hitting case for why the internet is just as "evil" as TV (or even worse) if they wanted to. But of course, they're not inclined to do that, especially the ones who have internet ministries/websites.

...Kind of a selective indignation, if you ask me.


.
I've felt the same thing about beards and facial hair. If the popularity of beards hadn't dwindled in the post WW1 years when a lot of the OP orgs were first getting established, our stands on beards and etc. would be much different today.

We seem to "lock" into a stand on an issue and then refuse to confess we might have been wrong or that times have changed and so the need for the original stand no longer makes any sense.

Such stubbornness would in fact be commendable if we limited our rule making to the core principles of holiness. But instead we need to "prove" our salvation and so there's always a steady stream of resolutions and ammendments decrying and outlawing every social fad.

At the end of the day we end up looking ridiculous and lacking in wisdom due to all of the frivilous and contradictory stands that we have taken.

[Sheltiedad]

I love Bro. Becton. He has always been one of my favorite preachers.

I'd suggest at least giving careful consideration to the advice of these older, wiser, seasoned men of God who have been through life and have experience and wisdom to pass along.

As long as we aren't talking about Gary Becton. :)

[philjones]

As long as we aren't talking about Gary Becton. :)

Careful now, Gary was in service with us (as a visitor) on a Sunday Morning in Moss Bluff a few months back. His sweet wife joined him for the evening service.

No need to cast a negative shadow a man that has no defense.

God is merciful and we should be too.

Merry Christmas.

[Sheltiedad]

Careful now, Gary was in service with us (as a visitor) on a Sunday Morning in Moss Bluff a few months back. His sweet wife joined him for the evening service.

No need to cast a negative shadow a man that has no defense.

God is merciful and we should be too.

Merry Christmas.

I just remember him standing in our front yard with Westberg... I could care less what he has done since then...

[ILG]

I just remember him standing in our front yard with Westberg... I could care less what he has done since then...

Sounds like he still has an apology to make?

[Sheltiedad]

Sounds like he still has an apology to make?

No, that was 20 years ago, just a vivid memory of some of my family's experience with UPC leadership...

[ILG]

No, that was 20 years ago, just a vivid memory of some of my family's experience with UPC leadership...

Well, I wasn't asking if you were waiting for an apology. Some people probably owe me one, but I am not waiting...

[philjones]

No, that was 20 years ago, just a vivid memory of some of my family's experience with UPC leadership...

Sheltie,

I do not consider Gary my friend, just an acquaintance. He is not easy to get close to and I am sure he has reasons for that. That said, I just don't like to see defenseless folks denigrated. I know you understand that and were just being honest (and a little humorous) based on your past experiences.:santathumb

[Sheltiedad]

Sheltie,

I do not consider Gary my friend, just an acquaintance. He is not easy to get close to and I am sure he has reasons for that. That said, I just don't like to see defenseless folks denigrated. I know you understand that and were just being honest (and a little humorous) based on your past experiences.:santathumb

I didn't even remember that there was a "scandal" until you reminded me, I just remember him being the "right-hand man" in KS in the 80's...

[PreacherV]

A fascinating point you bring up there. One must wonder... if the internet was invented in the early 1960's, what would the forefathers position on it be?

Makes you almost think they'd be anti-internet too, at least in the beginning.

But I think one thing that makes it hard for even the anti-TV crowd to be anti-internet is the fact that many people (including many saints of God) use the internet at work for business related purposes. The same cant be said about TV. So the internet is seen as more of a necessity in today's world, while the internet (I think you meant to say TV) is still seen as optional.

I agree that the internet is a necessity for many. Over the last 5 years, my business has become entirely dependent on having internet access. However, it probably won't be long now before TV and computer technologies merge completely. If, or perhaps I should say WHEN this happens, it will then be a necessity to own a "TV" in order to have the internet since it will all be housed in one unit. So then what? Does the anti-TV crowd finally let go of this non-issue issue? My prediction is they will keep preaching against the evils displayed on television, although they will not be able to forbid owning a Webevision or Telenet. OH, WAIT A MINUTE! THAT'S WHAT I'M ALREADY DOING! Anyhoo....when you see these things come to pass, they can look me up on AFF. I'll be here to welcome them to the reality of ministering to people in the 21st century.

[TRFrance]

I agree that the internet is a necessity for many. Over the last 5 years, my business has become entirely dependent on having internet access. However, it probably won't be long now before TV and computer technologies merge completely. If, or perhaps I should say WHEN this happens, it will then be a necessity to own a "TV" in order to have the internet since it will all be housed in one unit. So then what? Does the anti-TV crowd finally let go of this non-issue issue? My prediction is they will keep preaching against the evils displayed on television, although they will not be able to forbid owning a Webevision or Telenet. OH, WAIT A MINUTE! THAT'S WHAT I'M ALREADY DOING! Anyhoo....when you see these things come to pass, they can look me up on AFF. I'll be here to welcome them to the reality of ministering to people in the 21st century.

This is where it gets kinda dicey for the anti-TV folks...

Much of the stuff you see on TV you can see on the web also. So if TV is a sin, is Youtube.com a sin too? How about Godtube, or CNN.com, ESPN, or other sites where you can see TV content on your PC? ...or will they just eventually place these on a list of "banned/evil websites", because they show TV content?

(...just wondering aloud)

[pelathais]

No, that was 20 years ago, just a vivid memory of some of my family's experience with UPC leadership...
I'm sorry for that experience you went through Sheltiedad. I don't know the individual you mentioned but I think I've met the other. Both appear to be out of the UPC now, in at least one case for good.

I do see a recurring pattern where a "hard line" preacher in a leadership position drives others out of the UPC fellowship and then they later leave themselves. I'm left to wonder, if these guys didn't leave the UPC, in time there wouldn't be anybody else in the UPC fellowship besides a handful of foam at the mouth caustic individuals demanding the authority to "inspect" underwear at youth camp.

What would happen if the good people in the UPC were not afraid to stand up to these guys?

For one thing, there would be more good people in the UPC. Just my thoughts.

[Esther]

I understood his letter without a problem. I like concise and to the point. :)


I think some of you have made very good post as well. We need to focus on the heart and what we desire and WHY we desire that.

[PreacherV]

Originally Posted by PreacherV
I agree that the internet is a necessity for many. Over the last 5 years, my business has become entirely dependent on having internet access. However, it probably won't be long now before TV and computer technologies merge completely. If, or perhaps I should say WHEN this happens, it will then be a necessity to own a "TV" in order to have the internet since it will all be housed in one unit. So then what? Does the anti-TV crowd finally let go of this non-issue issue? My prediction is they will keep preaching against the evils displayed on television, although they will not be able to forbid owning a Webevision or Telenet. OH, WAIT A MINUTE! THAT'S WHAT I'M ALREADY DOING! Anyhoo....when you see these things come to pass, they can look me up on AFF. I'll be here to welcome them to the reality of ministering to people in the 21st century.

This is where it gets kinda dicey for the anti-TV folks...

Much of the stuff you see on TV you can see on the web also. So if TV is a sin, is Youtube.com a sin too? How about Godtube, or CNN.com, ESPN, or other sites where you can see TV content on your PC? ...or will they just eventually place these on a list of "banned/evil websites", because they show TV content?

(...just wondering aloud)

BUMP...

[Neck]

Originally Posted by PreacherV
I agree that the internet is a necessity for many. Over the last 5 years, my business has become entirely dependent on having internet access. However, it probably won't be long now before TV and computer technologies merge completely. If, or perhaps I should say WHEN this happens, it will then be a necessity to own a "TV" in order to have the internet since it will all be housed in one unit. So then what? Does the anti-TV crowd finally let go of this non-issue issue? My prediction is they will keep preaching against the evils displayed on television, although they will not be able to forbid owning a Webevision or Telenet. OH, WAIT A MINUTE! THAT'S WHAT I'M ALREADY DOING! Anyhoo....when you see these things come to pass, they can look me up on AFF. I'll be here to welcome them to the reality of ministering to people in the 21st century.



BUMP...
\
Great point. If you own a Cell phone today. You own a TV.

Nathan Eckstadt

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

\
Great point. If you own a Cell phone today. You own a TV.

Nathan Eckstadt

I don't choose to use TV on any device.

Thanks.


Verizon, formerly known as NYNEX predicted the end of landline phones in the 80's. They said it cost too much to service 2500 customers in winter storms and they would rather send one man to service 2500 at a cell site than crews to 2500 different homes. Last I knew they still have POTS and cell service.

Such is the rant of this argument silly. They predicted camera phones in the 60's having video conferencing would be commonplace. The age of the Jetsons is not quite here yet.

[RandyWayne]

I don't choose to use TV on any device.

Thanks.


Verizon, formerly known as NYNEX predicted the end of landline phones in the 80's. They said it cost too much to service 2500 customers in winter storms and they would rather send one man to service 2500 at a cell site than crews to 2500 different homes. Last I knew they still have POTS and cell service.

Such is the rant of this argument silly. They predicted camera phones in the 60's having video conferencing would be commonplace. The age of the Jetsons is not quite here yet.

This was long before digital anything. Video conferencing may never become common place, not because of technology limitations but simply because no one really wants it.

But we are at a point were video over cell phones and IP TV is common enough that it makes "television" a moot point. Or at least will within a few more short years.

[StillStanding]

It's the name, "TV" or "television", that is the problem! Call it "internet video", "cellphone video", or a "monitor" and you are OK.

ANYTHING BUT TV!!!!!! :D

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

This was long before digital anything. Video conferencing may never become common place, not because of technology limitations but simply because no one really wants it.

But we are at a point were video over cell phones and IP TV is common enough that it makes "television" a moot point. Or at least will within a few more short years.

In 1977 they campaigned this way to allow some Radio ads.

Ho-hum

[Neck]

I don't choose to use TV on any device.

Thanks.


Verizon, formerly known as NYNEX predicted the end of landline phones in the 80's. They said it cost too much to service 2500 customers in winter storms and they would rather send one man to service 2500 at a cell site than crews to 2500 different homes. Last I knew they still have POTS and cell service.

Such is the rant of this argument silly. They predicted camera phones in the 60's having video conferencing would be commonplace. The age of the Jetsons is not quite here yet.

I work in Telecom and have been in sales of Network for 10 years.

The Landline for home use and Fax machines.

As for new lines installed since 2003 are down 30%.

Folks are going cell phone for their main number.

WIth the idea of bringing in Cable or DSL.

Then why pay the 30 dollars for the phone line.

WIth convergence many of us will only have 1 phone.

It was announced by Nortel in 2008 second quarter.

Your cell will be able to enter your company campus, dial an access code an your cell phone will be an extesion off the PBX.


Technology is already in place to do all sorts of things it is FCC holding back the use of the technology.

The Federal Govt is nervous that these technologies will make calls impossible to track calls.

Already today a company in another country can set up a server in the US.

And place calls over the internet that look like they originate in the US.

Using VOIP technology.

Thus bypassing many US laws.

Countries like India will not allow such calls because they do not want to lose the revenue.

How much do we pay for Long Distance today. Zero.

If you own a cell phone or Computer you own a TV.

It they can transmit moving pictures they are TV's period...

You can also have a TV in your home and choose not to watch bad progamming.

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Neckstadt, I was at a company that did beta VOIP long distance dialing in the late 90's. It was perfect as dialing local numbers. The company saved thousands of $$ that year.

[Neck]

It's the name, "TV" or "television", that is the problem! Call it "internet video", "cellphone video", or a "monitor" and you are OK.

ANYTHING BUT TV!!!!!! :D

That is because CM Becton can count the number of times TV is in Articles of the UPC.

What is TV anymore?

It an IPOD with a file from an internet site....

[pelathais]

That is because CM Becton can count the number of times TV is in Articles of the UPC.

What is TV anymore?

It an IPOD with a file from an internet site....
Great question, Nathan.

When I push MENU, MENU on my cable box remote I get a Set Up screen with a lot of identifiers.

The very first number on my television screen is its IP address.

IP = Internet Protocol

Why does my television have an IP address if television is totally different from the Internet?

[PreacherV]

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind
[I]Such is the rant of this argument silly. They predicted camera phones in the 60's having video conferencing would be commonplace. The age of the Jetsons is not quite here yet.

Jesus ascended into the heavens more than 2000 years ago and said in essence "I'll be right back". He still hasn't come yet, but we know he IS coming back. What is silly is waiting to accept the inevitable until we have to look ridiculous doing it. I was one of the last to break down and finally get a CD player. They may sound a little better, but they're not nearly as durable as a cassette. And 8-tracks were practically indestructable. But when they quit making them, eventually everybody had to switch formats. Whether it is 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, whatever, they will eventually do away with the current option, charge you twice as much for the combo TV/Computer unit because you're getting "2 for the price of 1" and hey isn't that so much better than what you had before, they'll say. It won't matter that you really don't want the new technology. They'll just quit making those old jalopy model limited use personal computers and you will keep saying, "I am not getting a TV!" But eventually your old computer will give up the ghost and because of your infernal addiction to AFF, you will march yerself right into Wal-Mart and buy the dreaded combo. Of course you can hang a sign on it that announces in big bold letters, "THIS TV IS NOT USED FOR WATCHING TELEVISION! I ONLY USE IT TO WARN MY FRIENDS ON INTERNET FORUMS OF THE DANGERS OF LETTING DOWN ON THEIR STAND AGAINST TELEVISION!" But it will still be what it is. But you will not be any less holy than you were before you purchased it because you will still operate the thing according to your bible-based principles and convictions.

By the way, who are these Jetsons you speak of? I'm assuming they are a gospel singing group? What's the issue with them? Are they wanting to just advertise on TV or do a whole concert? hmmmmm?

If you own a cell phone or Computer you own a TV.

It they can transmit moving pictures they are TV's period...

You can also have a TV in your home and choose not to watch bad progamming.

My point exactly. I know I come across as pro-TV, but I'm really just pro-honest with ourselves. I do have a TV in my home. It doesn't get any channels because it's not hooked up to cable or even to the satellite dish that is still sitting on top of my house from the people who lived there before me. (just too busy trying to pastor while working full-time to get up there and take it down). I used to tell my kids not to call it a TV, but when I bought the newer model 10 years ago, they no longer made it with big knobs that I could cut off to "disable" it so that my good wouldn't be evil spoken of when people saw my "monitor". I'll never forget how shocked I was to find out that many saints with their unsightly makeshift monitors (TV's maimed by cutting off the channel knobs) were routing cable TV through their VCR even though casual passers by could clearly see the evil contraption had been successfully sterilized. We used to say, "Kids, we're going to watch a "family video", so pull up your "monitor" trays. But it just started sounding kind of stupid after a while. It is a TV, but I have exercised total control over it.

We are looking increasingly foolish as we try to fool ourselves into thinking that we are fooling everybody else into thinking that we are not a bunch of fools!

[Neck]

Great question, Nathan.

When I push MENU, MENU on my cable box remote I get a Set Up screen with a lot of identifiers.

The very first number on my television screen is its IP address.

IP = Internet Protocol

Why does my television have an IP address if television is totally different from the Internet?


Perfect response devices today. From Fax Machines, Onstar, Cable, Phones, Banking ATM, Website Servers, Your Home PC, Industrial Machines.

Every electronic device will at some point in the future have an IP address.

A so called TV is nothing more than an IP endpoint.

[Neck]

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind
[I]Such is the rant of this argument silly. They predicted camera phones in the 60's having video conferencing would be commonplace. The age of the Jetsons is not quite here yet.

Jesus ascended into the heavens more than 2000 years ago and said in essence "I'll be right back". He still hasn't come yet, but we know he IS coming back. What is silly is waiting to accept the inevitable until we have to look ridiculous doing it. I was one of the last to break down and finally get a CD player. They may sound a little better, but they're not nearly as durable as a cassette. And 8-tracks were practically indestructable. But when they quit making them, eventually everybody had to switch formats. Whether it is 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, whatever, they will eventually do away with the current option, charge you twice as much for the combo TV/Computer unit because you're getting "2 for the price of 1" and hey isn't that so much better than what you had before, they'll say. It won't matter that you really don't want the new technology. They'll just quit making those old jalopy model limited use personal computers and you will keep saying, "I am not getting a TV!" But eventually your old computer will give up the ghost and because of your infernal addiction to AFF, you will march yerself right into Wal-Mart and buy the dreaded combo. Of course you can hang a sign on it that announces in big bold letters, "THIS TV IS NOT USED FOR WATCHING TELEVISION! I ONLY USE IT TO WARN MY FRIENDS ON INTERNET FORUMS OF THE DANGERS OF LETTING DOWN ON THEIR STAND AGAINST TELEVISION!" But it will still be what it is. But you will not be any less holy than you were before you purchased it because you will still operate the thing according to your bible-based principles and convictions.

By the way, who are these Jetsons you speak of? I'm assuming they are a gospel singing group? What's the issue with them? Are they wanting to just advertise on TV or do a whole concert? hmmmmm?



My point exactly. I know I come across as pro-TV, but I'm really just pro-honest with ourselves. I do have a TV in my home. It doesn't get any channels because it's not hooked up to cable or even to the satellite dish that is still sitting on top of my house from the people who lived there before me. (just too busy trying to pastor while working full-time to get up there and take it down). I used to tell my kids not to call it a TV, but when I bought the newer model 10 years ago, they no longer made it with big knobs that I could cut off to "disable" it so that my good wouldn't be evil spoken of when people saw my "monitor". I'll never forget how shocked I was to find out that many saints with their unsightly makeshift monitors (TV's maimed by cutting off the channel knobs) were routing cable TV through their VCR even though casual passers by could clearly see the evil contraption had been successfully sterilized. We used to say, "Kids, we're going to watch a "family video", so pull up your "monitor" trays. But it just started sounding kind of stupid after a while. It is a TV, but I have exercised total control over it.

We are looking increasingly foolish as we try to fool ourselves into thinking that we are fooling everybody else into thinking that we are not a bunch of fools!


Very well spoken

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind
[I]Such is the rant of this argument silly. They predicted camera phones in the 60's having video conferencing would be commonplace. The age of the Jetsons is not quite here yet.

Jesus ascended into the heavens more than 2000 years ago and said in essence "I'll be right back". He still hasn't come yet, but we know he IS coming back. What is silly is waiting to accept the inevitable until we have to look ridiculous doing it. I was one of the last to break down and finally get a CD player. They may sound a little better, but they're not nearly as durable as a cassette. And 8-tracks were practically indestructable. But when they quit making them, eventually everybody had to switch formats. Whether it is 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, whatever, they will eventually do away with the current option, charge you twice as much for the combo TV/Computer unit because you're getting "2 for the price of 1" and hey isn't that so much better than what you had before, they'll say. It won't matter that you really don't want the new technology. They'll just quit making those old jalopy model limited use personal computers and you will keep saying, "I am not getting a TV!" But eventually your old computer will give up the ghost and because of your infernal addiction to AFF, you will march yerself right into Wal-Mart and buy the dreaded combo. Of course you can hang a sign on it that announces in big bold letters, "THIS TV IS NOT USED FOR WATCHING TELEVISION! I ONLY USE IT TO WARN MY FRIENDS ON INTERNET FORUMS OF THE DANGERS OF LETTING DOWN ON THEIR STAND AGAINST TELEVISION!" But it will still be what it is. But you will not be any less holy than you were before you purchased it because you will still operate the thing according to your bible-based principles and convictions.

By the way, who are these Jetsons you speak of? I'm assuming they are a gospel singing group? What's the issue with them? Are they wanting to just advertise on TV or do a whole concert? hmmmmm?



My point exactly. I know I come across as pro-TV, but I'm really just pro-honest with ourselves. I do have a TV in my home. It doesn't get any channels because it's not hooked up to cable or even to the satellite dish that is still sitting on top of my house from the people who lived there before me. (just too busy trying to pastor while working full-time to get up there and take it down). I used to tell my kids not to call it a TV, but when I bought the newer model 10 years ago, they no longer made it with big knobs that I could cut off to "disable" it so that my good wouldn't be evil spoken of when people saw my "monitor". I'll never forget how shocked I was to find out that many saints with their unsightly makeshift monitors (TV's maimed by cutting off the channel knobs) were routing cable TV through their VCR even though casual passers by could clearly see the evil contraption had been successfully sterilized. We used to say, "Kids, we're going to watch a "family video", so pull up your "monitor" trays. But it just started sounding kind of stupid after a while. It is a TV, but I have exercised total control over it.

We are looking increasingly foolish as we try to fool ourselves into thinking that we are fooling everybody else into thinking that we are not a bunch of fools!

WOW!!! Seldom have I seen such a outstanding combo of humor and absolute truth. I LOVED this post!!

What I do not understand is how people can continue to just hide their heads in the sand and pretend that it isn't happening. I cannot add anything to what you've said, you have said it all.

[Encryptus]

Perfect response devices today. From Fax Machines, Onstar, Cable, Phones, Banking ATM, Website Servers, Your Home PC, Industrial Machines.

Every electronic device will at some point in the future have an IP address.

A so called TV is nothing more than an IP endpoint.


Actually there has been discussion in some circles about humans receiving a individual permanent IP address at birth.

[RevDWW]

Actually there has been discussion in some circles about humans receiving a individual permanent IP address at birth.

Beware the beast and his mark! If you can't buy or sell without it, beware!

[Encryptus]

As of yet the discussion does not include implantation LOL.

Merely one IP address per person, instead of per device

[pelathais]

Jesus ascended into the heavens more than 2000 years ago and said in essence "I'll be right back". He still hasn't come yet, but we know he IS coming back. What is silly is waiting to accept the inevitable until we have to look ridiculous doing it. I was one of the last to break down and finally get a CD player. ...

They'll just quit making those old jalopy model limited use personal computers and you will keep saying, "I am not getting a TV!" But eventually your old computer will give up the ghost and because of your infernal addiction to AFF, you will march yerself right into Wal-Mart and buy the dreaded combo. Of course you can hang a sign on it that announces in big bold letters, "THIS TV IS NOT USED FOR WATCHING TELEVISION! I ONLY USE IT TO WARN MY FRIENDS ON INTERNET FORUMS OF THE DANGERS OF LETTING DOWN ON THEIR STAND AGAINST TELEVISION!" But it will still be what it is. But you will not be any less holy than you were before you purchased it because you will still operate the thing according to your bible-based principles and convictions. ...

We are looking increasingly foolish as we try to fool ourselves into thinking that we are fooling everybody else into thinking that we are not a bunch of fools!
Thanks PreacherV! :thumbsup

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc275/pelathais/windshield.gif

We can all see a whole lot more clearly now!

[pelathais]

As of yet the discussion does not include implantation LOL.

Merely one IP address per person, instead of per device
Why not? I could use a couple of extra sticks of RAM as well.

The "mark of the beast" of Revelation correlates to its antitype, the "mark of God" in Ezekiel Ezekiel 9. No one ever suggested that God implanted people in ancient Jerusalem with microchips, etc.

[Encryptus]

Why not? I could use a couple of extra sticks of RAM as well.

The "mark of the beast" of Revelation correlates to its antitype, the "mark of God" in Ezekiel Ezekiel 9. No one ever suggested that God implanted people in ancient Jerusalem with microchips, etc.

No doubt it could evolve into a "financial" use. :-)

But for now just imagine the advantage. Personal phone numbers, email etc, could be routed to unchanging IP address.

Yes technology has evolved in accordance with scripture, In Rev. the whole world would watch the two dead witnesses in the streets of Jerusalem, with the advent of streaming video to cell phones etc, that scripture can be taken in its literal sense instead of metaphorically.

[pelathais]

No doubt it could evolve into a "financial" use. :-)

But for now just imagine the advantage. Personal phone numbers, email etc, could be routed to unchanging IP address.

Yes technology has evolved in accordance with scripture, In Rev. the whole world would watch the two dead witnesses in the streets of Jerusalem, with the advent of streaming video to cell phones etc, that scripture can be taken in its literal sense instead of metaphorically.
Assuming that YOU didn't stay in one physical location, the lag in trying to do simple things like email would be terrible. Multiply that by 2 or 3 billion and the whole network fails.

The reasons given for the "single IP address" is because of the fears of what happens when IPv4 and IPv6 run out of addresses, not for tracking purposes. They want to economize on the numbers of assigned addresses. If it went to a "single IP address" system then that IP addy would be some virtual location like your employer or your ISP or your employer's ISP.

All of the devices that you mention would then be routed to that virtual location where you would log on from anywhere in the world. You would still need another unique identifier to tell us that you're in Taiwan this week. If you took your "private" IP to Taiwan (and 2 or 3 billion people were moving around as well) the routing table updates alone would crash the whole Internet.

[James Griffin]

Assuming that YOU didn't stay in one physical location, the lag in trying to do simple things like email would be terrible. Multiply that by 2 or 3 billion and the whole network fails.

The reasons given for the "single IP address" is because of the fears of what happens when IPv4 and IPv6 run out of addresses, not for tracking purposes. They want to economize on the numbers of assigned addresses. If it went to a "single IP address" system then that IP addy would be some virtual location like your employer or your ISP or your employer's ISP.

All of the devices that you mention would then be routed to that virtual location where you would log on from anywhere in the world. You would still need another unique identifier to tell us that you're in Taiwan this week. If you took your "private" IP to Taiwan (and 2 or 3 billion people were moving around as well) the routing table updates alone would crash the whole Internet.

Agreed the purpose is to limit the number of IP addresses 6-7 billion people vs Lord only knows how many individual devices.

Not sure routing to private IP would present that much of an insurmountable technological challenge. Just faster processors. :santathumb

[PreacherV]

WOW!!! Seldom have I seen such a outstanding combo of humor and absolute truth. I LOVED this post!!

What I do not understand is how people can continue to just hide their heads in the sand and pretend that it isn't happening. I cannot add anything to what you've said, you have said it all.

Dizzy, I have to call 'em like I see 'em. It's called stubbornness, which the bible states is no different than idolatry.

Here's a thought.....The only difference between a sandbox and a litter box is whether or not there's a cat in the neighborhood.

We can insist that the sandbox we have our heads buried in (anything that is not called TV) is different from that nasty old litter box (Hellivision). But a cat doesn't care what you call it. He will use them both for the same dirty purpose. So the question is not whether the medium you are using is holy, but rather what are YOU going to do with it.

If I get a minute, I'll come back and debunk the myth that filtering and blocking software sanctifies your PC. The truth is you can put a fence or enclosure around any sandbox to keep the kitties out of it.

[PreacherV]

Oops. Just realized my last post could be confused as a reply to the posts regarding individual IP addresses, the mark of the beast, etc. Here is the intended context, to eliminate any possible confusion.

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind
Such is the rant of this argument silly. They predicted camera phones in the 60's having video conferencing would be commonplace. The age of the Jetsons is not quite here yet.

Originally posted by DizzyDe:
Jesus ascended into the heavens more than 2000 years ago and said in essence "I'll be right back". He still hasn't come yet, but we know he IS coming back. What is silly is waiting to accept the inevitable until we have to look ridiculous doing it. I was one of the last to break down and finally get a CD player. They may sound a little better, but they're not nearly as durable as a cassette. And 8-tracks were practically indestructable. But when they quit making them, eventually everybody had to switch formats. Whether it is 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, whatever, they will eventually do away with the current option, charge you twice as much for the combo TV/Computer unit because you're getting "2 for the price of 1" and hey isn't that so much better than what you had before, they'll say. It won't matter that you really don't want the new technology. They'll just quit making those old jalopy model limited use personal computers and you will keep saying, "I am not getting a TV!" But eventually your old computer will give up the ghost and because of your infernal addiction to AFF, you will march yerself right into Wal-Mart and buy the dreaded combo. Of course you can hang a sign on it that announces in big bold letters, "THIS TV IS NOT USED FOR WATCHING TELEVISION! I ONLY USE IT TO WARN MY FRIENDS ON INTERNET FORUMS OF THE DANGERS OF LETTING DOWN ON THEIR STAND AGAINST TELEVISION!" But it will still be what it is. But you will not be any less holy than you were before you purchased it because you will still operate the thing according to your bible-based principles and convictions.

By the way, who are these Jetsons you speak of? I'm assuming they are a gospel singing group? What's the issue with them? Are they wanting to just advertise on TV or do a whole concert? hmmmmm?......



My point exactly. I know I come across as pro-TV, but I'm really just pro-honest with ourselves. I do have a TV in my home. It doesn't get any channels because it's not hooked up to cable or even to the satellite dish that is still sitting on top of my house from the people who lived there before me. (just too busy trying to pastor while working full-time to get up there and take it down). I used to tell my kids not to call it a TV, but when I bought the newer model 10 years ago, they no longer made it with big knobs that I could cut off to "disable" it so that my good wouldn't be evil spoken of when people saw my "monitor". I'll never forget how shocked I was to find out that many saints with their unsightly makeshift monitors (TV's maimed by cutting off the channel knobs) were routing cable TV through their VCR even though casual passers by could clearly see the evil contraption had been successfully sterilized. We used to say, "Kids, we're going to watch a "family video", so pull up your "monitor" trays. But it just started sounding kind of stupid after a while. It is a TV, but I have exercised total control over it.

We are looking increasingly foolish as we try to fool ourselves into thinking that we are fooling everybody else into thinking that we are not a bunch of fools!

Originally posted by DizzyDe:
WOW!!! Seldom have I seen such a outstanding combo of humor and absolute truth. I LOVED this post!!

What I do not understand is how people can continue to just hide their heads in the sand and pretend that it isn't happening. I cannot add anything to what you've said, you have said it all.

Dizzy, I have to call 'em like I see 'em. It's called stubbornness, which the bible states is no different than idolatry.

Here's a thought.....The only difference between a sandbox and a litter box is whether or not there's a cat in the neighborhood.

We can insist that the sandbox we have our heads buried in (anything that is not called TV) is different from that nasty old litter box (Hellivision). But a cat doesn't care what you call it. He will use them both for the same dirty purpose. So the question is not whether the medium you are using is holy, but rather what are YOU going to do with it.

If I get a minute, I'll come back and debunk the myth that filtering and blocking software sanctifies your PC. The truth is you can put a fence or enclosure around any sandbox to keep the kitties out of it.

[RandyWayne]

Jesus ascended into the heavens more than 2000 years ago and said in essence "I'll be right back". He still hasn't come yet, but we know he IS coming back. What is silly is waiting to accept the inevitable until we have to look ridiculous doing it. I was one of the last to break down and finally get a CD player. They may sound a little better, but they're not nearly as durable as a cassette. And 8-tracks were practically indestructable. But when they quit making them, eventually everybody had to switch formats.

CD's sound a "little" better then 8-Track? But not quite as durable? LOL
I barely remember 8-Track but one thing I DO remember about it was how often the tapes would be chewed up and spit out. Sure, the cases were built like tanks but due to the continues loop nature, they did not last long. And then that horrible horrible sound! ARGH. Also, I have CD's that look like a steel pad was applied to them yet they still play! (in the right player of course.)

[James Griffin]

CD's sound a "little" better then 8-Track? But not quite as durable? LOL
I barely remember 8-Track but one thing I DO remember about it was how often the tapes would be chewed up and spit out. Sure, the cases were built like tanks but due to the continues loop nature, they did not last long. And then that horrible horrible sound! ARGH. Also, I have CD's that look like a steel pad was applied to them yet they still play! (in the right player of course.)

Even cassettes for that matter, had one unwind in a player while listening to a Stoneking tape, never did get it all out.