Answer to charges that Names were used without consent

[stmatthew]

One question was asked specifically if any men were added to the General Council list without consent. Bro. Crawford Coon very thoroughly explained how that a few months back, the six men that are in the Executive Council thought and discussed every name on that list before calling them or putting them on a list. When it came time to call these men for their approval, they divided up the names among the six of them to call and request their support and to be in the General Council. Every man in consideration was called upon; and every man considered accepted. Bro. Coon then said that three of four men of that number (much later, and after the list was already in print) called and asked that, because of various reasons including sickness, and church problems, that their names might be removed from that list.
When they heard the accusations made about the men’s names being on the list without their permission, the six got together again trying to figure out if one of the names could have possibly been mistakenly overlooked, or what else may have happened to cause this accusation. They thoroughly examined their list, and each man confirmed each name they had called and that their permission to be added to the list had been specifically given. Every name was accounted for. So, like I thought, these were simply false accusations.


http://apostolicsummit.blogspot.com/2008/01/alot-of-q.html

[stmatthew]

Are you quoting another post, or are those your words?

Sorry for the confusion (I fixed it). I'm quoting the Apostolic Summit Blog. The link to the blog is below the quote.

[The Dean]

I heard the identical same thing, StMatt. They were open about it and had nothing to hide - said that EVERY name on that list had been contacted and agreed. A few later changed their mind for one reason of the other and they were changed.

They said they heard 'rumors' coming out of different mediums (like forums) that there were names there without their permission and regathered and covered the list again. NONE.

In fact, they made quite a joke about the forum activity and openly discussed some of the rumors. They said at one point that NW said, "But what do I know, I'm only here because I couldn't get a position" to the roaring laughter of the crowd.

Those are good men. Proven men. You may not agree with their present actions but they have proven their 'metal' in days gone by.

God bless them all.

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Awwww come on. You spoiled all the hype with Truth and Facts.

:shhh

[The Dean]

Awwww come on. You spoiled all the hype with Truth and Facts.

:shhh

Facts aren't high on the list of priorities for some. 'Preciseness' isn't quite as important when you're on the wrecking crew as it is if your trying to build something right.

[PastorD]

Brother Haney, precisely stated that men had contacted him that DID NOT want their name on the list. I suppose he is not a good or proven man and his 'metal' is worthless. Someone somewhere Telleth not the truth.

[The Dean]

Brother Haney, precisely stated that men had contacted him that DID NOT want their name on the list. I suppose he is not a good or pr oven man and his 'metal' is worthless. Someone somewhere Teller not the truth.
Perhaps the breakdown is not in either Bishop Haney or the Elders of Tulsa. I do know that they took specific time to address this accusation there today and all were in agreement that these men had been contacted.

It was not just 'one man's' responsibility but all of the coordinators made the calls and it was verified by all on that list. Again, a few changed their minds later. It was addressed openly and before all there with questions and answers being allowed at the time. Lying men don't do that kind of thing.

Somehow you may have confused my compliment on the conduct of the 'Tulsa' crew as a slam against Bishop Haney. Nothing could be further from the truth.

These forums - and the irresponsible suppositions that get hurled around on them - go far to fuel many accusations that aren't true. I have great admiration for those associated with Tulsa. By virtue of the fact that I'm still in the UPC it goes without saying that I feel the same for our leadership.

Again I say, God bless them all.

[Todd]

Brother Haney, precisely stated that men had contacted him that DID NOT want their name on the list. I suppose he is not a good or pr oven man and his 'metal' is worthless. Someone somewhere Teller not the truth.

WOW!!! Before we jump straight to the 'you say he is worthless, and someone is lying' please consider that there is a possibility that all may be truthful. If some originally said OK to inclusion on the list then withdrew, the time element comes into play, when did the 7 talk to them? and when did Rev. Haney speak to them? It seems a little harsh and assuming to jump WWAAYY to an extreme like this.:tantrum

[connielori]

Perhaps the breakdown is not in either Bishop Haney or the Elders of Tulsa. I do know that they took specific time to address this accusation there today and all were in agreement that these men had been contacted.

It was not just 'one man's' responsibility but all of the coordinators made the calls and it was verified by all on that list. Again, a few changed their minds later. It was addressed openly and before all there with questions and answers being allowed at the time. Lying men don't do that kind of thing.

Somehow you may have confused my compliment on the conduct of the 'Tulsa' crew as a slam against Bishop Haney. Nothing could be further from the truth.

These forums - and the irresponsible suppositions that get hurled around on them - go far to fuel many accusations that aren't true. I have great admiration for those associated with Tulsa. By virtue of the fact that I'm still in the UPC it goes without saying that I feel the same for our leadership.

Again I say, God bless them all.



I don't know you 'The Dean', however, by your fruits tonight,...I KNOW YOU!
Thank you!

[PastorD]

Perhaps the breakdown is not in either Bishop Haney or the Elders of Tulsa. I do know that they took specific time to address this accusation there today and all were in agreement that these men had been contacted.

It was not just 'one man's' responsibility but all of the coordinators made the calls and it was verified by all on that list. Again, a few changed their minds later. It was addressed openly and before all there with questions and answers being allowed at the time. Lying men don't do that kind of thing.

Somehow you may have confused my compliment on the conduct of the 'Tulsa' crew as a slam against Bishop Haney. Nothing could be further from the truth.

These forums - and the irresponsible suppositions that get hurled around on them - go far to fuel many accusations that aren't true. I have great admiration for those associated with Tulsa. By virtue of the fact that I'm still in the UPC it goes without saying that I feel the same for our leadership.

Again I say, God bless them all.



Dean...no confusion. I don't think you are slamming the Bishop. I just think it is silly ( not to be taken personal ) to think that the 'Tulsa Crew' are not capable of being a bit political themselves. Sorry, but the history is there.

Did Bishop Haney not say that men had contacted him? Those were his words not the accusation of a forum.

Again, someone somewhere . . .well, anyway.

[PastorD]

WOW!!! Before we jump straight to the 'you say he is worthless, and someone is lying' please consider that there is a possibility that all may be truthful. If some originally said OK to inclusion on the list then withdrew, the time element comes into play, when did the 7 talk to them? and when did Rev. Haney speak to them? It seems a little harsh and assuming to jump WWAAYY to an extreme like this.:tantrum

Todd....being that this is your 1st post (congratulations), you have a lot of catching up to do in reading past posts and threads. The Dean knows who I am and knows what I am saying. No extreme's....I was just using his words to describe the other side of the coin.

:hug4

[NW Pastor]

http://apostolicsummit.blogspot.com/2008/01/alot-of-q.html

I have nothing against the WPF organizers, but I know for a fact there were men on the list that did not give their consent to publish their names as such. To serve on an elders council is not the same as having your name published as the leaders of an organization who's stated goals are to provide a preferred (different) alternative to the UPC.

Men who have spent a lifetime building ministerial reputations should have a say in whether or not they get published in an explosive mailout to thousands of ministers across the UPC.

Again, political double speak.

[bishoph]

I have nothing against the WPF organizers, but I know for a fact there were men on the list that did not give their consent to publish their names as such. To serve on an elders council is not the same as having your name published as the leaders of an organization who's stated goals are to provide a preferred (different) alternative to the UPC.

Men who have spent a lifetime building ministerial reputations should have a say in whether or not they get published in an explosive mailout to thousands of ministers across the UPC.

Again, political double speak.

Unless you are one of those 3 men..............it was very evident that all of the men had been contacted and had initially agreed to serve as part of the General Council, but later changed their minds, after the list was printed and after the names were made accessible by someone who accessed their website while it was under construction prior to it's official launch.

[NW Pastor]

Only three? Where they going to again check with said 3 at the time of the much ballyhood "official launch"? Apparently someone did not clearly indicate to these men what it actually meant to be a member of the General Council, or they would have not protested to see their names in print.

What if the site were not supposedly been "hacked"? These men would have been included in the great mailout apparently without their knowledge that such a thing was happening. Good thing they were given a heads up.

[NW Pastor]

Unless you are one of those 3 men..............it was very evident that all of the men had been contacted and had initially agreed to serve as part of the General Council, but later changed their minds, after the list was printed and after the names were made accessible by someone who accessed their website while it was under construction prior to it's official launch.

You seem to be very close to this situation. Do you know of any Elders or Committee members who did not make the trip to Tulsa?

[Draw4Tacos]

If they cant be honest in their intent, or ethical in their approach, how can you believe the words that these men who have formed the WPF say?

Using the UPCI mailing list to invite the entire ministerial body to a "Pre-Conceived, Foregone Conclusion, Apostolic Summit" so you can lure them away from the UPCI is not in any way ethical. Furthermore, one must consider that the "Tulsa Six" are for the most part intelligent men who have served the UPCI in some official capacity at one time or another. Whether or not they studied the UPCI bylaws before deciding to cherry pick from it's membership roster is irrelevant, other than to say that these men most definitely knew beforehand that the UPCI does not allow memberships in organizations such as the one they are forming. In other words, they knew beforehand that all who join them must choose between them or the UPCI, yet they do not overtly state this fact. Rather, they seem to imply that the onus is on the UPCI to offer reciprocity, despite the longstanding prohibition of such associations.

If history has taught us anything – both in the Church and in the secular world – it has taught us that just because someone can move an audience with great oratory does not mean that the positions they espouse are right.

[Hoovie]

“Will the WPF allow men who are not members of the organization to preach at WPF meetings?” and “Will the WPF endorse meetings sponsored by men who are not members of WPF?”, to which Bro. Booker answered basically that if they believe the Apostolic message and Acts 2:38 and the doctrine, then yes, we will allow them to speak at our meetings, even if they are not WPF. And, we will support meetings which are sponsored by men who are not WPF, if they believe the same message.

It is inspiring to know that they are open to attending UPCI North American Youth Congress and having A M preach for them.

[Felicity]

So who are we to believe?

[Dora]

I just wonder why the WPF guys are considered to be so TRUTHFUL and that they are the ones who are presenting the "FACTS." Do ya think that Bishop Haney and Bro. Mallory and Bro. Bernard are all liars? They obviously have heard firsthand from ministers who had their names added to the WPF list without their permission.

Perhaps these guys didn't expect the WPF to post the list prematurely.

It's just very interesting to see how certain people's loyalties are being revealed. AMAZING. Folks who previously professed unerring allegiance to the UPCI are now ardently defending the actions of the WPF.

If you think they are such great guys, go on and join up. What doth hinder???

I'm sure the fact that NW was defeated in the CA district vote for DS is no big deal. Has nothing to do with his decision to form his own organization. Is he one of the top dogs in the new org? There really can't be any significant correlation there...no way.

So are we questioning the truthfulness of the ministers who stated that they didn't want their names to be included on the list. If the WPF is stating that no ministers names were included on the list who did not give permission for their names to be used, then that makes the "no permission granted Ministers" liars.

It's all over the place. The WPF is whitewashing their actions, presenting this action as if RES.4 was the main issue when it is a known fact, especially in the Western District that these guys have been disgruntled and nit-picking and back biting of their fellow Pentecostal Brethren to the point of questioning their salvation and whether or not their saints are saved.

I'm sorry, but promoting disunity between families and fellow Christians is just WRONG! The Holy Ghost is a UNIFYING FORCE. It is NOT a force used to place a wedge between friendships and families.

Any org that promotes this kind of separation, raises a HUGE red flag to me - KOOL-AID DRINKERS is what comes to mind. Separate yourselves to the point where nobody else is heaven bound. Separate yourselves because you are on a higher holiness plain than your family members or fellow Pentecostal friends. Hogwash!

The future will prove the true motives and agenda of this new org.

[RevBuddy]

If we take the rationalizations from the Tulsa Apologists, then these men should be elevated to sainthood...without further thought...they are, in the Apologists' opinion, without fault, without any spot or blemish...they are the ultimate Apostles of today, leading the way to an apostolic utopian fellowsh.., er, organization that will reestablish the values, mores and truths, heretofor...ignored by the unwashed...

But, I fear, the truth lies somewhere short of the Apologists' assessment...it certainly does for the rest of us...po' folks...all us with the human frailties and foibles...

:TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO:

[Coonskinner]

If we take the rationalizations from the Tulsa Apologists, then these men should be elevated to sainthood...without further thought...they are, in the Apologists' opinion, without fault, without any spot or blemish...they are the ultimate Apostles of today, leading the way to an apostolic utopian fellowsh.., er, organization that will reestablish the values, mores and truths, heretofor...ignored by the unwashed...

But, I fear, the truth lies somewhere short of the Apologists' assessment...it certainly does for the rest of us...po' folks...all us with the human frailties and foibles...

:TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO:

Sainthood?

Without blemish?

A grossly distorted and hyperbolic mischaracterization of the views of a few that just object to the summary crucifixion of good men without a real reason.

[RevBuddy]

Sainthood?

Without blemish?

A grossly distorted and hyperbolic mischaracterization of the views of a few that just object to the summary crucifixion of good men without a real reason.

There you go again...now the comparison is made to the sufferings of Jesus Christ...boy, you go for it, CS!!!

:TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO:

[Coonskinner]

There you go again...now the comparison is made to the sufferings of Jesus Christ...boy, you go for it, CS!!!

:TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO:

Wrong again.

No mention of Christ.

Crucifixion is a broad term and happened to a lot of folks besides Him.

Rev, can you spare us the hyperbole and grandiose melodramatics?

[RevBuddy]

NO...

Only when you spare us the eternal, I mean, infernal apologies for the sainted ones...

:TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO: :TulsaNO:

[Apprehended]

Just how much credibility would anyone give to a statement made by a gang of malcontents? For the sake of balance and practicality, I suspect very little.

There is an old, wisdom filled saying that goes something like this, "Consider the source." Yes, just "consider the source" sounds like good advice to me.

[OP_Carl]

I just wonder why the WPF guys are considered to be so TRUTHFUL and that they are the ones who are presenting the "FACTS." Do ya think that Bishop Haney and Bro. Mallory and Bro. Bernard are all liars? They obviously have heard firsthand from ministers who had their names added to the WPF list without their permission.

Perhaps these guys didn't expect the WPF to post the list prematurely.

It's just very interesting to see how certain people's loyalties are being revealed. AMAZING. Folks who previously professed unerring allegiance to the UPCI are now ardently defending the actions of the WPF.

If you think they are such great guys, go on and join up. What doth hinder???

I'm sure the fact that NW was defeated in the CA district vote for DS is no big deal. Has nothing to do with his decision to form his own organization. Is he one of the top dogs in the new org? There really can't be any significant correlation there...no way.

So are we questioning the truthfulness of the ministers who stated that they didn't want their names to be included on the list. If the WPF is stating that no ministers names were included on the list who did not give permission for their names to be used, then that makes the "no permission granted Ministers" liars.

It's all over the place. The WPF is whitewashing their actions, presenting this action as if RES.4 was the main issue when it is a known fact, especially in the Western District that these guys have been disgruntled and nit-picking and back biting of their fellow Pentecostal Brethren to the point of questioning their salvation and whether or not their saints are saved.

I'm sorry, but promoting disunity between families and fellow Christians is just WRONG! The Holy Ghost is a UNIFYING FORCE. It is NOT a force used to place a wedge between friendships and families.

Any org that promotes this kind of separation, raises a HUGE red flag to me - KOOL-AID DRINKERS is what comes to mind. Separate yourselves to the point where nobody else is heaven bound. Separate yourselves because you are on a higher holiness plain than your family members or fellow Pentecostal friends. Hogwash!

The future will prove the true motives and agenda of this new org.

What flaky reasoning! My goodness, rather than upset with the WPF leadership, you should be laughing at their blatant duplicity and overjoyed that those lying fascist pigs are gone!

It's no big trick to have observed selective enforcement of the UPC rules lo these past 25 years. The UPC has become mired in bureaucratic inertia, and has allowed men to creep in and set it adrift. Some men said, 'if it drifts past X, I'm jumping off.' Leadership shrugged and grunted. Lots of people say lots of things they don't really men. Why, it's a preaching technique known as hyperbole.

Now these guys do what they said they would do and everybody is freaking out, and trying so hard to find inconsistincies and ethical qualms to amplify.

A year ago you were looking for the same kind of dirt on the UPC. Count me unimpressed.

[stmatthew]

I just wonder why the WPF guys are considered to be so TRUTHFUL and that they are the ones who are presenting the "FACTS." Do ya think that Bishop Haney and Bro. Mallory and Bro. Bernard are all liars? They obviously have heard firsthand from ministers who had their names added to the WPF list without their permission.

Perhaps these guys didn't expect the WPF to post the list prematurely.

It's just very interesting to see how certain people's loyalties are being revealed. AMAZING. Folks who previously professed unerring allegiance to the UPCI are now ardently defending the actions of the WPF.

If you think they are such great guys, go on and join up. What doth hinder???

I'm sure the fact that NW was defeated in the CA district vote for DS is no big deal. Has nothing to do with his decision to form his own organization. Is he one of the top dogs in the new org? There really can't be any significant correlation there...no way.

So are we questioning the truthfulness of the ministers who stated that they didn't want their names to be included on the list. If the WPF is stating that no ministers names were included on the list who did not give permission for their names to be used, then that makes the "no permission granted Ministers" liars.

It's all over the place. The WPF is whitewashing their actions, presenting this action as if RES.4 was the main issue when it is a known fact, especially in the Western District that these guys have been disgruntled and nit-picking and back biting of their fellow Pentecostal Brethren to the point of questioning their salvation and whether or not their saints are saved.

I'm sorry, but promoting disunity between families and fellow Christians is just WRONG! The Holy Ghost is a UNIFYING FORCE. It is NOT a force used to place a wedge between friendships and families.

Any org that promotes this kind of separation, raises a HUGE red flag to me - KOOL-AID DRINKERS is what comes to mind. Separate yourselves to the point where nobody else is heaven bound. Separate yourselves because you are on a higher holiness plain than your family members or fellow Pentecostal friends. Hogwash!

The future will prove the true motives and agenda of this new org.

Let me state that Bro Bernard was given info on CAF, and then still posted falsities in his letter. He evidently did not understand what he was told, or already had his mind made up as to what he believed.

I am not going back to find the instance, but when I initially read the letter, I remembered the discourse on CAF between he and others.

[Dora]

So, your conclusion is that Bro. Bernard is a liar.

This is just great.

[stmatthew]

So, your conclusion is that Bro. Bernard is a liar.

This is just great.

No, my conclusion is that Bro Bernard never grasped what was being said to him. This was either due to the person posting to him not being clear, or his already having a preconceived view of everything. Either way, he drew some incorrect conclusions. The same thing that seems to be happening on many levels.

[Dora]

No, my conclusion is that Bro Bernard never grasped what was being said to him. This was either due to the person posting to him not being clear, or his already having a preconceived view of everything. Either way, he drew some incorrect conclusions. The same thing that seems to be happening on many levels.

Do you know this for certain? No disrespect to you, but I find this hard to believe. David Bernard is a BRAIN and very astute in his judgments. I would think long and hard before ascribing this type of irresponsible behavior to him.

Whatever...this whole deal just blows my mind.

While I think it's great that the ultracons have finally taken their marbles and started their own game, it saddens and disturbs me that so many have jumped on their bandwagon.

Gonna leave it alone from here on out.

[PastorD]

No, my conclusion is that Bro Bernard never grasped what was being said to him. This was either due to the person posting to him not being clear, or his already having a preconceived view of everything. Either way, he drew some incorrect conclusions. The same thing that seems to be happening on many levels.

Hmm....so DKB drew "incorrect conclusions?" It isn't possible that the person he was talking to actually said one thing to him and the opposite to someone else?

If we are talking about the conversation I read from CAF..... There is a poster on AFF who heard the man say it with his OWN ears just a few days before Tulsa. Yet, he did the opposite.

[Pastor G]

Hmm....so DKB drew "incorrect conclusions?" It isn't possible that the person he was talking to actually said one thing to him and the opposite to someone else?

If we are talking about the conversation I read from CAF..... There is a poster on AFF who heard the man say it with his OWN ears just a few days before Tulsa. Yet, he did the opposite.

Surely not!!

[Dora]

Seems that the word "falsities" was deleted....

[PocatelloApostolic]

I find it amazingly hard to believe that so many "BRAINS" would be so willing to speak out on that which they don't know and/or care to know! As to the invitations sent out - I have recieved countless invitations to UPC meetings when they know very well that I'm not in the UPC and never will be! Yet I would not accuse them of trying to get me to join their club! I must say this though - If every time I went to their meetings, I could feel the presence of God like I did at Tulsa, I might go more often!! I just keep getting blinded by the disco lights and choked up the smoke machines!

[pelathais]

Let me state that Bro Bernard was given info on CAF, and then still posted falsities in his letter. He evidently did not understand what he was told, or already had his mind made up as to what he believed.

I am not going back to find the instance, but when I initially read the letter, I remembered the discourse on CAF between he and others.
What specifically was a "falsity" in DKB's letter?

[Nograj]

I have nothing against the WPF organizers, but I know for a fact there were men on the list that did not give their consent to publish their names as such. To serve on an elders council is not the same as having your name published as the leaders of an organization who's stated goals are to provide a preferred (different) alternative to the UPC.

Men who have spent a lifetime building ministerial reputations should have a say in whether or not they get published in an explosive mailout to thousands of ministers across the UPC.

Again, political double speak.

Please forgive me, I know this is like two pages back, however I would like to know the names of all the men whom you know for a fact did not give consent to be on the WPF General Council.

[Pastor G]

I find it amazingly hard to believe that so many "BRAINS" would be so willing to speak out on that which they don't know and/or care to know! As to the invitations sent out - I have recieved countless invitations to UPC meetings when they know very well that I'm not in the UPC and never will be! Yet I would not accuse them of trying to get me to join their club! I must say this though - If every time I went to their meetings, I could feel the presence of God like I did at Tulsa, I might go more often!! I just keep getting blinded by the disco lights and choked up the smoke machines!


So you went to a upc meeting with a disco light and a smoke machine?

[Thumper]

Please forgive me, I know this is like two pages back, however I would like to know the names of all the men whom you know for a fact did not give consent to be on the WPF General Council.

Don't hold your breathe. I have been asking this question on another forum for a while now and all I get is either silence or "Oh I gues I was mistaken"

Listed below are all the names of people used without consent.




































































































































































































I told you not to hold your breathe

[Monkeyman]

I find it amazingly hard to believe that so many "BRAINS" would be so willing to speak out on that which they don't know and/or care to know! As to the invitations sent out - I have recieved countless invitations to UPC meetings when they know very well that I'm not in the UPC and never will be! Yet I would not accuse them of trying to get me to join their club! I must say this though - If every time I went to their meetings, I could feel the presence of God like I did at Tulsa, I might go more often!! I just keep getting blinded by the disco lights and choked up the smoke machines!Todays smoke machines are now hazers and do not choke ANYONE as they have new chemicals. They are completely hypo-allergenic so either you were near an old machine or your being dramatic, hmmmm?????
And, your brush arbor gives me hives...

[Mrs. LPW]

I find it amazingly hard to believe that so many "BRAINS" would be so willing to speak out on that which they don't know and/or care to know! As to the invitations sent out - I have recieved countless invitations to UPC meetings when they know very well that I'm not in the UPC and never will be! Yet I would not accuse them of trying to get me to join their club! I must say this though - If every time I went to their meetings, I could feel the presence of God like I did at Tulsa, I might go more often!! I just keep getting blinded by the disco lights and choked up the smoke machines!

I must have missed that part at our district events :toofunny

[Bullwinkle]

No, my conclusion is that Bro Bernard never grasped what was being said to him. This was either due to the person posting to him not being clear, or his already having a preconceived view of everything. Either way, he drew some incorrect conclusions. The same thing that seems to be happening on many levels.

You don't suppose that he may have had some information from outside of the forum world?
Not everyone gets their information from the CAFeteria.

[Thumper]

Please forgive me, I know this is like two pages back, however I would like to know the names of all the men whom you know for a fact did not give consent to be on the WPF General Council.

Don't hold your breathe. I have been asking this question on another forum for a while now and all I get is either silence or "Oh I gues I was mistaken"

Listed below are all the names of people used without consent.




































































































































































































I told you not to hold your breathe

I hope you are not still holding your breathe nograj

[Nograj]

*turning blue*

[Thumper]

Don't hold your breathe. I have been asking this question on another forum for a while now and all I get is either silence or "Oh I gues I was mistaken"

Listed below are all the names of people used without consent.




































































































































































































I told you not to hold your breathe

*turning blue*

Everybody seems to know somebody who knew somebody whose name was used without consent. Unfortunately, nobody seems to be able to come with an actual name that can be verified or denied.

LOL

[Nograj]

i guess we shut this topic down.lol

[Thumper]

i guess we shut this topic down.lol


It is all so pitiful isn't it Brother. :)

[SecretWarrior]

For one...I heard John Shoemake for one......


While he was listed.....Shoemake didn't even go to Tulsa....

[Steve Epley]

For one...I heard John Shoemake for one......


While he was listed.....Shoemake didn't even go to Tulsa....

I heard-I think????????????????????? And this is proof? All this rukus and not a proven name on the list yet?

Before I get shot I did not go to Tulsa I am not going to join they are NOT conservative enough for me.

[AGAPE]

I heard-I think????????????????????? And this is proof? All this rukus and not a proven name on the list yet?

Before I get shot I did not go to Tulsa I am not going to join they are NOT conservative enough for me.

:stirpot

[stmatthew]

I heard-I think????????????????????? And this is proof? All this rukus and not a proven name on the list yet?

Before I get shot I did not go to Tulsa I am not going to join they are NOT conservative enough for me.

This is kinda funny. :toofunny


I think Tulsa is in between the UPCI and the AMF in its conservativism.

[Steve Epley]

This is kinda funny. :toofunny


I think Tulsa is in between the UPCI and the AMF in its conservativism.

True they are good men and I do not blame them for their concern and they have the right to do what they are doing but it is not my cup of tea. I wish them the best.

[pastorswife]

This is kinda funny. :toofunny


I think Tulsa is in between the UPCI and the AMF in its conservativism.


What's it take to mean that you are conservative?

[NW Pastor]

I find it amazingly hard to believe that so many "BRAINS" would be so willing to speak out on that which they don't know and/or care to know! As to the invitations sent out - I have recieved countless invitations to UPC meetings when they know very well that I'm not in the UPC and never will be! Yet I would not accuse them of trying to get me to join their club! I must say this though - If every time I went to their meetings, I could feel the presence of God like I did at Tulsa, I might go more often!! I just keep getting blinded by the disco lights and choked up the smoke machines!

What's wrong with smoke?

Unless of course it's the smoke that obscures intentions, such as mantra of Tulsa supporters who say, "the WPF is not an organization but a fellowship."

By the way, how do you know those at Tulsa have not used smoke, disco lights, or BOTH (horrors)!

[stmatthew]

What's it take to mean that you are conservative?

Not sure what your question is here.


From my perspective, I am simply stating that the WPF is supposedly more concervative than the UPC, but it is no AMF.

[Thumper]

Don't hold your breathe. I have been asking this question on another forum for a while now and all I get is either silence or "Oh I gues I was mistaken"

Listed below are all the names of people used without consent.




I told you not to hold your breathe

still waiting

[stmatthew]

Seems that the word "falsities" was deleted....


I never took it out, and it is back now.

[stmatthew]

Hmm....so DKB drew "incorrect conclusions?" It isn't possible that the person he was talking to actually said one thing to him and the opposite to someone else?

If we are talking about the conversation I read from CAF..... There is a poster on AFF who heard the man say it with his OWN ears just a few days before Tulsa. Yet, he did the opposite.

Yes, I was speaking about the CAF conversation. I don't have the time to go back and review it all right now. Maybe you can PM me what you are talking about so I can get the full scoop.

I will state very plainly that I do not believe Bro Bernard was lying. I just felt in reading the conversation that his letter painted a picture different than what the conversation about the situation was implied to him.