Does AFF have a reporter at GC?

[Carpenter]

Just curious, I just read something on Facebook about a particular "oneness organization" sadly giving approval for all pastors/preachers/members to have televisions, aka "the one eyed debbil" in their homes...I would like to know what else is brewing among folks around those parts, how it is positioned if true, and other issues...

Is there a dedicated thread to GC news?

[MissBrattified]

Just curious, I just read something on Facebook about a particular "oneness organization" sadly giving approval for all pastors/preachers/members to have televisions, aka "the one eyed debbil" in their homes...I would like to know what else is brewing among folks around those parts, how it is positioned if true, and other issues...

Is there a dedicated thread to GC news?

We may have lost our insiders...or at least, those willing to post constant updates. :(

[Ferd]

LOL. I think our insiders all left the org!

But hey Carp! it is good to see you!

[Steve Epley]

I was there last night. I saw today the resolution passed. Don't know if any admendments were added or not? I was incorrect. Sorry.

[rgcraig]

Saw a couple of pics posted on FB



4270



4271

[n david]

Saw a couple of pics posted on FB

4270

4271

Wow, small room. My parents took me to GC every year from when I was born until before I moved out of the house at 18; I went the next couple years after that with friends. I remember when there were 16 to 20K at conference. Doesn't look like there could be more than 5 or 6 thousand in that pic.

[kclee4jc]

I was there last night. I saw today the resolution passed. Don't know if any admendments were added or not? I was incorrect. Sorry.

where did you see that at Bro. Epley? Thats unfortunate..

How was the service last night in your opinion? no need to answer in post if you don't want to.

[Real Realism]

I wonder how moving it to St. Louis has impacted the ability - or willingness - of people to travel. I wouldn't think it should, considering it's actually more central than some other locations like Lexington, Greensboro, etc. But you're right, it looks like a much smaller venue than in the past. We haven't gone for the last few years.

I'm interested to hear more about the resolution passing. Unfortunately my "inside person" had a medical emergency and had to cancel travel plans at the last minute. I find it a fascinating study on the shift in the UPCI toward consistency and logic in just a decade. Give it 25 more years and they might actually start recognizing other fallacies and inconsistency of other "outward" standards such as hair, pants, and jewelry.

[n david]

I wonder how moving it to St. Louis has impacted the ability - or willingness - of people to travel. I wouldn't think it should, considering it's actually more central than some other locations like Lexington, Greensboro, etc. But you're right, it looks like a much smaller venue than in the past. We haven't gone for the last few years.
I know St. Louis is where the HQ is, but I remember the GC there in 1986 and it was a terrible venue. Looked a lot like the picture, in fact. One would think St. Louis' central location would attract more people, but IMO TX would be a better choice. I remember the San Antonio GC years ago...it was packed out. I think the last GC I went to was the one here in PHX, AZ.

[Esaias]

I'm interested to hear more about the resolution passing. Unfortunately my "inside person" had a medical emergency and had to cancel travel plans at the last minute. I find it a fascinating study on the shift in the UPCI toward consistency and logic in just a decade. Give it 25 more years and they might actually start recognizing other fallacies and inconsistency of other "outward" standards such as hair, pants, and jewelry.

In other words, they'll be no different than the COG or AOG.

[rgcraig]

Wow, small room. My parents took me to GC every year from when I was born until before I moved out of the house at 18; I went the next couple years after that with friends. I remember when there were 16 to 20K at conference. Doesn't look like there could be more than 5 or 6 thousand in that pic.

Someone stated 4700-5000 capacity.

[Steve Epley]

Good service though sort I thought. But it was the first night. Downtown St. Louis has really cleaned up nicely. The hall was very nice I thought it was nicer than the Ky. Hall they were at. Easy to fly into.

[Esaias]

http://chrispaolini.com/2013/10/02/report-from-general-conference-10213/

"You can catch the live streaming of all the services at http://www.upcigc.com for a nominal fee."

lol

[Theophil]

Does anyone know whether the tv res. passed without being amended?

[n david]

@davidkbernard reelected General Superintendent of the @UPCIORG
.

[n david]

SOURCE LINK (http://www.upcigc.com/onsite-updates/tuesday)
From the UPCI GC website
...over 4,700 likeminded Apostolics...

[n david]

Had to laugh at the part in bold:

Opening night, as one might call it, started off in a manner that we all would expect. Stirring promotional videos echoed across the main auditorium as old friends exchanged smiles, handshakes, and abnormally long embraces.

SOURCE LINK (http://www.upcigc.com/onsite-updates/tuesday)

[Theophil]

Does anyone know whether the tv res. passed without being amended?

bump

[rgcraig]

Had to laugh at the part in bold:



SOURCE LINK (http://www.upcigc.com/onsite-updates/tuesday)

LOL - - that's funny!

[returnman]

Smaller crowd? smaller membership. Also, they charged 15.00 admission a service the last time I went in 2009.

[n david]

I don't know why they charge to live stream the services. Unless they're either bankrupt or just plain greedy.

I watched the AoG General Council recently for free. And it was an HD quality feed that was near-perfect on my 46" LED smart tv.

[rgcraig]

I don't know why they charge to live stream the services. Unless they're either bankrupt or just plain greedy.

I watched the AoG General Council recently for free. And it was an HD quality feed that was near-perfect on my 46" LED smart tv.

I think any minister that has paid dues for SURE shouldn't have to pay to view. Many have jobs that do not allow them to attend, so watching online is the next best thing.

[returnman]

I don't know why they charge to live stream the services. Unless they're either bankrupt or just plain greedy.

I watched the AoG General Council recently for free. And it was an HD quality feed that was near-perfect on my 46" LED smart tv.

Dollar signs, dollar signs. TV....you mention something here in the mid-south about a TV resolution and UPC folks sort of do the "deer in the headlight" look.
That is obvious....they done had em for years. lol.

[n david]

I think any minister that has paid dues for SURE shouldn't have to pay to view. Many have jobs that do not allow them to attend, so watching online is the next best thing.
I definitely agree.

Product: Low Quality 100kbps
Price: $ 25.00
Description: Low quality stream

Product: Medium Quality 500kbps
Price: $ 75.00
Description: Medium quality stream

Product: High Quality 1000kbps
Price: $ 150.00
Description: High quality stream
My father has been licensed with the UPC for 57 years. They're not able to go to GC, so they and another couple bought the medium quality stream for $75. It looks terrible full screen on their computer monitor.

[Esaias]

Those kinds of prices are outrageous for a video stream.

I mean, seriously?

What next, an 'Apostolic Christian Amusement Park'?

Wait...

[Esaias]

Somebody ought to film it with a hidden camera and just put it on youtube.

[Pressing-On]

Saw a couple of pics posted on FB

4270

4271

I would wonder if the person posting the picks on FB would want them posted here without permission. He may not want to be a part of AFF. Just sayin'...

[MissBrattified]

I would wonder if the person posting the picks on FB would want them posted here without permission. He may not want to be a part of AFF. Just sayin'...

The pics were public tweets, tagged with the searchable GC tag. I don't think they were intended to be private. The user probably has his Twitter account set up like mine: whatever I tweet is automatically shared with my Facebook friends simultaneously.

[navygoat1998]

I would wonder if the person posting the picks on FB would want them posted here without permission. He may not want to be a part of AFF. Just sayin'...

I wonder if UPC would want those pictures posted, showing how thin the ranks are. Maybe next year they can hold the GC at the local Red Roof Inn. :heeheehee

[n david]

The pics were public tweets, tagged with the searchable GC tag. I don't think they were intended to be private. The user probably has his Twitter account set up like mine: whatever I tweet is automatically shared with my Facebook friends simultaneously.
Correct. I have a saved hashtag in my Twitter app. Anything with #UPCIGC13 shows up.

[Pressing-On]

I wonder if UPC would want those pictures posted, showing how thin the ranks are. Maybe next year they can hold the GC at the local Red Roof Inn. :heeheehee

:heeheehee

[Pressing-On]

The pics were public tweets, tagged with the searchable GC tag. I don't think they were intended to be private. The user probably has his Twitter account set up like mine: whatever I tweet is automatically shared with my Facebook friends simultaneously.

Okay, so if people want to look at photos that are made "public", you can find them with the Twitter hasthtag

#UPCIG13 filter:images
#UPCIG13 filter:videos
#UPCIG13 filter:news

I am still not sure they would want the photos delivered here for viewing by an anti-UPC crowd. I don't expect they would realize it was being done. Just sayin'...

[Real Realism]

In other words, they'll be no different than the COG or AOG.

Except for Jesus Name baptism and stressing the importance of being filled with the Spirit with the evidence of speaking in other tongues...a bit more substantial than whether or not a man wants to wear pants that are cut off at the knee (e.g. shorts) or that go down to his shoes.

[Esaias]

Except for Jesus Name baptism and stressing the importance of being filled with the Spirit with the evidence of speaking in other tongues...a bit more substantial than whether or not a man wants to wear pants that are cut off at the knee (e.g. shorts) or that go down to his shoes.

Actually, what I was trying to say is that the AoG and the CoG have both abandoned in large measure many of their distinctives...and thus they are pretty much 'run of the mill' nowadays.

The UPCI is headed in the same direction. The 'standards' issue is just a symptom of bigger things.

[Esaias]

Okay, so if people want to look at photos that are made "public", you can find them with the Twitter hasthtag

#UPCIG13 filter:images
#UPCIG13 filter:videos
#UPCIG13 filter:news

I am still not sure they would want the photos delivered here for viewing by an anti-UPC crowd. I don't expect they would realize it was being done. Just sayin'...

If it goes anywhere on the net, it goes everywhere.

[Real Realism]

Actually, what I was trying to say is that the AoG and the CoG have both abandoned in large measure many of their distinctives...and thus they are pretty much 'run of the mill' nowadays.

The UPCI is headed in the same direction. The 'standards' issue is just a symptom of bigger things.

Perhaps. I think a more appropriate comparison would be saying that the UPCI is "going the way of" the PAW (rather than AG or COG). Jesus Name baptism and Holy Ghost infilling evidenced by speaking in tongues are two major distinguishing factors, IMO.

[navygoat1998]

Perhaps. I think a more appropriate comparison would be saying that the UPCI is "going the way of" the PAW (rather than AG or COG). Jesus Name baptism and Holy Ghost infilling evidenced by speaking in tongues are two major distinguishing factors, IMO.

I heard a whole lot of tongues last Sunday in our AG church, might even spoke a few myself :happydance

Saw kids getting the Holy Ghost and other being slain in the Spirit. One little girl asked her mommy what she was feeling and her mom told her God. The Holy Ghost was moving. :spit

[Jacob's Ladder]

I'm here at GC.

Here's a current photo of this afternoon's service.

They also passed resolution U4621 : Women can now wear female pants, provided they don't have a zipper in the front of the pants.














http://i41.tinypic.com/6yzjwx.jpg

[kclee4jc]

Perhaps. I think a more appropriate comparison would be saying that the UPCI is "going the way of" the PAW (rather than AG or COG). Jesus Name baptism and Holy Ghost infilling evidenced by speaking in tongues are two major distinguishing factors, IMO.

when the other distinctives begin disappearing..the bolded is not too far behind. PAW is prime example of that

[KWSS1976]

I heard a whole lot of tongues last Sunday in our AG church, might even spoke a few myself

Heck our AG even Baptises in Jesus Name..

[Originalist]

I wonder if UPC would want those pictures posted, showing how thin the ranks are. Maybe next year they can hold the GC at the local Red Roof Inn. :heeheehee

4700. Wow.

Is it the economy? They have had huge crowds in the past.

[KWSS1976]

HaHaHa...this #UPCIGC13 is awsome...lol

[MissBrattified]

Okay, so if people want to look at photos that are made "public", you can find them with the Twitter hasthtag

#UPCIG13 filter:images
#UPCIG13 filter:videos
#UPCIG13 filter:news

I am still not sure they would want the photos delivered here for viewing by an anti-UPC crowd. I don't expect they would realize it was being done. Just sayin'...

PO, we have had GC threads every year on the forums for as long as I have been here--complete with pictures and critiques. In fact, threads of the past which included more dramatic posters were far more critical and/or sensational than this one.

Do you use Twitter? Facebook is more flexible, as far as privacy goes. You can be a very private Facebooker, a public one, or somewhere in between. Twitter, on the other hand, is really a public venue. Everyone tweets, retweets, shares, tags, etc., and you don't get permission first. The tags make it a big, searchable database. You can have a close-fisted Twitter account, but it's really useless. People who tweet all the time are going to know that--and probably aren't going to care where their tweets end up.

E.g., I wouldn't worry about anyone's privacy being violated. However, you can always contact the original tweeter and apprise him of how his photos are being viewed by people who may or may not like his organization. (How that's different from anyone and everyone on Twitter being able to view, retweet and comment on those same pictures, I have no idea.)

[KWSS1976]

Historic tie vote 699-699 on amendment#2

[Real Realism]

I heard a whole lot of tongues last Sunday in our AG church, might even spoke a few myself :happydance

Saw kids getting the Holy Ghost and other being slain in the Spirit. One little girl asked her mommy what she was feeling and her mom told her God. The Holy Ghost was moving. :spit


Heck our AG even Baptises in Jesus Name..

I don't doubt! But - as this is the "official stance" of the org - the majority of AG churches baptize in the titles, and the "baptism of the Holy Ghost" with evidence of speaking in tongues, no matter how emphasized it is, is considered an experience "subsequent to salvation". Regardless, of who's right, wrong, or indifferent, the UPCI holding on to Jesus' name baptism and tongues-speaking Holy Ghost experience as both essential to salvation is certainly a distinguishing factor, even if "outward standards" are no longer emphasized across the board.

[kclee4jc]

4700. Wow.

Is it the economy? They have had huge crowds in the past.

Arkansas Campmeeting had approx 7000 in one of the services this year if i recall correctly.

[n david]

Again, I remember when GC was filling up basketball arenas with 16-18K or more.

[Pressing-On]

PO, we have had GC threads every year on the forums for as long as I have been here--complete with pictures and critiques. In fact, threads of the past which included more dramatic posters were far more critical and/or sensational than this one.

Do you use Twitter? Facebook is more flexible, as far as privacy goes. You can be a very private Facebooker, a public one, or somewhere in between. Twitter, on the other hand, is really a public venue. Everyone tweets, retweets, shares, tags, etc., and you don't get permission first. The tags make it a big, searchable database. You can have a close-fisted Twitter, but it's really useless. People who tweet all the time are going to know that--and probably aren't going to care where their tweets end up.

You can set your Tweets to private for friends only, just like FB. If you do that, your friends can't retweet your posts. I have several Twitter friends that are set to private.

I seriously doubt that very many people posting their UPCIGC tweets on Twitter or FB would be cool with them being posted here for "critique" and that is exactly what the purpose is - critique or criticism.

And maybe some don't care, but I wouldn't do that to anyone. I especially wouldn't do it if they were not privy to the fact. AFF isn't exactly the Kumbaya campfire circle for the UPCI. :heeheehee

[Real Realism]

In the past decade, Youth Congress has "stolen" a large portion of the audience that would have traveled to GC. YC is now the place to "see and be seen," and folks mainly want to go to GC when there are controversial resolutions up for vote and/or important offices that are turning over.

Though, considering the controversy of this TV vote, I'm surprised it wasn't more of a draw. Especially when you think back to the "TV advertising resolution" years ago. Maybe just indicative that most members really couldn't care less about TV bans anymore. Those who don't want TV won't get it. Those who do want TV already have it. And even many who are against it can't defend an across-the-board stance against it in light of how ludicrous is sounds to oppose TV alone in an age where we can all get the same content on our cell phones.

[MissBrattified]

You can set your Tweets to private for friends only, just like FB. If you do that, your friends can't retweet your posts. I have several Twitter friends that are set to private.

I seriously doubt that very many people posting their UPCIGC tweets on Twitter or FB would be cool with them being posted here for "critique" and that is exactly what the purpose is - critique or criticism.

And maybe some don't care, but I wouldn't do that to anyone. I especially wouldn't do it if they were not privy to the fact. AFF isn't exactly the Kumbaya campfire circle for the UPCI. :heeheehee

PO, your concern is noted, but the dynamic of Twitter is public. There are some who tweet privately, and it's kind of pointless. They should just post to their friends on Facebook.

You should have seen all the tweeting that was integrated into NAYC 2013. NONE of it was private. The kids tweeted and tagged and all their tweets were then scrolled on huge screens before service. They weren't personally contacted and asked if it was okay first. :) There was a #NAYCRumors hashtag that was trending well in advance of NAYC. Those were also shared freely on the big screen--because they were public posts and no one thought twice about it.

You do seem like a very private person, and I understand that--but there are actually a lot of people in our media-saturated culture who don't care if a million people see their tweets, posts, and then share or comment.

Also, it's unfair to project motive onto Renda, as to why she posted the pictures.

[MissBrattified]

In the past decade, Youth Congress has "stolen" a large portion of the audience that would have traveled to GC. YC is now the place to "see and be seen," and folks mainly want to go to GC when there are controversial resolutions up for vote and/or important offices that are turning over.

Though, considering the controversy of this TV vote, I'm surprised it wasn't more of a draw. Especially when you think back to the "TV advertising resolution" years ago. Maybe just indicative that most members really couldn't care less about TV bans anymore. Those who don't want TV won't get it. Those who do want TV already have it. And even many who are against it can't defend an across-the-board stance against it in light of how ludicrous is sounds to oppose TV alone in an age where we can all get the same content on our cell phones.

Easy to understand why. It's all the great church and music without the boring business. :) I'd guesstimate the most recent NAYC attendance at 18-19K. We were there, and I enjoyed it!

[rgcraig]

For the record, I do not know those people that posted pictures. Their tweets are floating all over FB where others have retweeted them and copied on FB.

I'm pretty sure they know they are going to be public.

And, they were not posted to critique or be critical as some have accused.

[KWSS1976]

Res # 2 passed

[KWSS1976]

can I post the tweet? Dont want to step on someones toes

[navygoat1998]

I don't doubt! But - as this is the "official stance" of the org - the majority of AG churches baptize in the titles, and the "baptism of the Holy Ghost" with evidence of speaking in tongues, no matter how emphasized it is, is considered an experience "subsequent to salvation". Regardless, of who's right, wrong, or indifferent, the UPCI holding on to Jesus' name baptism and tongues-speaking Holy Ghost experience as both essential to salvation is certainly a distinguishing factor, even if "outward standards" are no longer emphasized across the board.

Yep
I do know the differences, we left UPCI and the OP world 7 years ago and that is how we ended up in the AG.

[Pressing-On]

PO, your concern is noted, but the dynamic of Twitter is public. There are some who tweet privately, and it's kind of pointless. They should just post to their friends on Facebook.
I know some of the people, including myself, who no longer post on FB. FB is more a social media and Twitter is subject oriented. The subject I mostly engage in is politics. The largest majority I follow and who follow me do the same.

You should have seen all the tweeting that was integrated into NAYC 2013. NONE of it was private. The kids tweeted and tagged and all their tweets were then scrolled on huge screens before service. They weren't personally contacted and asked if it was okay first. :) There was a #NAYCRumors hashtag that was trending well in advance of NAYC. Those were also shared freely on the big screen--because they were public posts and no one thought twice about it.
Maybe some of them needed to be made aware that what they are doing isn't private. Sometimes they forget. And who would want to be part of #NAYCRumors?


You do seem like a very private person, and I understand that--but there are actually a lot of people in our media-saturated culture who don't care if a million people see their tweets, posts, and then share or comment.
It's funny you said this. I was at the nail salon and picked up a magazine quoting Scarlett Johansson saying that the didn't understand this need for "sharing" everything online. That was about the time I let my FB page go. I thought, I don't do that, so why am I here? LOL!

I remember a person following me when I first signed up at Twitter who posted that they had a "banana for breakfast". Okie, Dokie, Unfollow. Now that is a waste of time. I would prefer substance.

Also, it's unfair to project motive onto Renda, as to why she posted the pictures.
I didn't assign a motive to Renda. I simply pointed out an observation about sharing FB posts on AFF. I didn't say she did that for criticism. But criticism did follow concerning the size of the crowd. Now the conversation is about how small we are becoming. lol And we all know that is coming for anything posted here. It's just not something I do and I always wonder if people think about sharing things elsewhere when the other person doesn't know.

At the base of my argument, I have had someone here do that to me and I don't respect them for it at all. I suppose they didn't think I would eventually find out about it.

[KWSS1976]

15 members and 10 guest viewing this thread , this must be a really hot topic with the UPCI...

[Esaias]

So... what has happened? I hear DBK has been re-enthro... I mean, re-elected as General Superduper Head Honcho...

Somebody said 'resolution 2 passed'? What was that about?

And why are some people all a-flutter about people reposting internet twits? Er, I mean tweets?

[KWSS1976]

Esaias, you might not get an answer, everyone ran to Walmart to get a TV...lol

[rgcraig]

Esaias, you might not get an answer, everyone ran to Walmart to get a TV...lol

Lol! I doubt it.

[n david]

Esaias, you might not get an answer, everyone ran to Walmart to get a TV...lol
:toofunny

Actually, they just pulled theirs out of the closet, or brought it in from the garage.

[n david]

can I post the tweet? Dont want to step on someones toes
If you read the tweet and aren't following the person, it's public. You should be able to post the tweet without posting the name of the person who wrote it.

[Pressing-On]

Esaias, you might not get an answer, everyone ran to Walmart to get a TV...lol

Yea, those last 2 people who don't have one are going to keep Walmart really busy and profitable. :heeheehee

[KWSS1976]

Y'all are probley seeing this too if you are on twitter, but anyway someone said "Resolution 2 paases not a licence to purchace a television. It is an empowerment to choose a holy lifestyle above media..

[n david]

Y'all are probley seeing this too if you are on twitter, but anyway someone said "Resolution 2 paases not a licence to purchace a television. It is an empowerment to choose a holy lifestyle above media..
I saw that tweet.

Bunch & Breeze tweeted: "Apparentely, St. Louis, Michigan is NOT where General Conference is being held. Since we're here, we may as well hit the streets." :toofunny

There are a lot of RTs for: "Passage of Resolution 2 may lower your standard if you desire; it should RAISE your STANDARD if CONSCIENTIOUS."

[n david]

Historic tie vote 699-699 on amendment#2
I thought you were joking....I just read that tweet now.

That's kind of weird....699-699. I mean, if you flipped the nine's upside down it would be 666-666, which makes sense because TV is of the debbil!

[KWSS1976]

LOL

[KWSS1976]

Cant have TV'S but if the Ministers stop by the MRF Booth at GC they can have a chance to win a IPAD mini....lol

[Farfel]

Cant have TV'S but if the Ministers stop by the MRF Booth at GC they can have a chance to win a IPAD mini....lol

Doesn't the passing of resolution #2 mean that TVs are now allowed?

[KWSS1976]

Yes I was being funny...

[Real Realism]

I saw that tweet.

There are a lot of RTs for: "Passage of Resolution 2 may lower your standard if you desire; it should RAISE your STANDARD if CONSCIENTIOUS."

I saw that. lol Like the motivation for passing this resolution was for those who dislike TV and don't want to "not" own one because the org says not to...no, instead they don't want to own one for the sake of their own personal will power. I'm suuuure that was the majority of the votes driving this passage.

[rgcraig]

Resolution #1

Whereas, The General Board of the United Pentecostal Church International unanimously passed the following position paper during their meetings at the 2012 General Conference; and

Whereas, It is the expressed wish of the General Board in the interest of unity that the voting constituency of the United Pentecostal Church International consider adoption of the same; and

Whereas, Adopting this position paper would of necessity replace ones previously adopted by general conferences in session; and

Whereas, Replacing such position papers previously adopted by a general conference can be enacted only by another sitting general conference; therefore

Resolved, That the following position paper, “Media Technology,” which was previously approved by the General Board in 2012 be now approved by the 2013 General Conference and replace the two position papers, “Video,” adopted by the 1983 General Conference, and “Technology,” adopted by the 1988 General Conference.

Media Technology

Our elders took an important, principled and correct stand against the evils of television in 1954 when they adopted the fourth paragraph on holiness in our Articles of Faith in response to the invention of television and other changes in society. It follows that we need to enunciate the principles upon which our elders acted and apply them in light of technological changes and more complex choices today. Specifically traditional television is now merging with other technologies that we have accepted, such as computers, online media, satellite and cable deliveries, media players, smart phones, tablets, and game consoles.

Therefore we must give appropriate guidance to a new generation of believers with regard to all use of communications technology in language that is understandable and meaningful to them so we can continue to uphold our position on holiness of life and holiness in the use of all communications technology. In view of the symbolic nature of media for our movement, we must be careful not to signal any compromise of belief or lifestyle.

The United Pentecostal Church International, accepts only the Bible and the Holy Spirit as its guides to determine the correct standards of conduct in this world, and it recognizes the responsibility to apply biblical principles in a changing world. Neither the Bible nor the United Pentecostal Church International teaches that salvation can be earned by good works, but both contend that holiness in behavior results from a transforming experience of the Holy Ghost, and is therefore incumbent upon each Christian. The church has an obligation to establish standards of conduct when necessary, but it refuses to make rules for every aspect of daily living. Each Christian is responsible to God to maintain holiness in his or her life, for God alone is the judge, but the church is also responsible to teach biblical standards of holiness. Holiness as a spiritual experience and a way of life is not an option for a Christian but a biblical injunction (II Corinthians 7:1, Romans 12:1-2, John 17:14-16, I John 2:15-16, Ephesians 5:11).

It is very evident that spirituality and holiness are deeply entwined together. The Scriptures teach that carnality is enmity toward God. The use of media must therefore be carefully considered so that we do not take the beautiful truths of God unto areas that will contribute to the downfall of a child of God. The influence of sinful media programming is so grave and damaging to Christian-living, that conscience demands that it be battled in a principled way. The biblical safeguard against rapid cultural or technological change is to build upon timeless principles, Scripture elegantly solving the proper management of media technology with a single verse: “I will set no evil thing before mine eye…” Psalm 101:3. A consistent and principled position on media programming does not constitute a threat to our core stand on issues of separation from the world, but only strengthens our position by casting in principle the manner in which we are already solving this issue in practice.

Historic guidelines regarding television and video were written in light of the technology of the 1950s and 1980s, demonstrating a common desire for the homes of our families to be sanctuaries governed by Godly principles. In today's world, we apply these guidelines as follows. We recognize that similar content is available through mediums such as computers, online media, media players, tablets, smart phones, and game consoles. What we have traditionally called television is merging with other devices that we have accepted. Therefore in these cases and with all other communications technology, we teach responsible use that is strictly in accord with wholesome Christian principles. As new media appear in the marketplace, the Christian must not accept their usage without evaluation of their impact on his or her spiritual walk with God. We are to “walk circumspectly [looking around us], not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil” (Ephesians 5:15-16).

Resolution 1 replaces Video (Restrictions) Adopted by the General Conference in 1983 and
Technology Adopted by the General Conference in 1988.

[rgcraig]

Resolution #2

Whereas, Our elders took an important, principled, and correct stand against the evils of television in 1954 when they adopted the fourth paragraph on holiness in our Articles of Faith in response to the invention of television and other changes in society; and

Whereas, The need to enunciate the principles upon which our elders acted and apply them in light of technological changes and more complex choices today remains; and Whereas, Traditional television is now merging with other technologies that we have accepted, such as computers, online media, satellite and cable deliveries, media players, smart phones, tablets, and game consoles; and

Whereas, Some forms of video technology are obsolete but new forms have been invented and are continuing to be invented; and

Whereas, We must continue to uphold our position on holiness of life and holiness in the use of all communications technology; and

Whereas, In view of the symbolic nature of media for our movement, we must be careful not to signal any compromise of belief or lifestyle; therefore

Resolved, That Article VII, Section 7, Paragraphs 31 and 32 be replaced with the following as Paragraph 31, and all following paragraphs be renumbered appropriately:

Delete 31. No minister having a television in his or her home shall be permitted to hold license or credentials with the United Pentecostal Church International. This does not preclude the option to use television for advertising.

Delete 32. The use of video must strictly be limited to those areas in which motion picture cameras and projectors are traditionally permitted to be used: namely, in taking of pictures of families, friends, and church activities and the viewing of educational, religious, and inspirational films that are consistent with wholesome Christian principles. Furthermore, we strongly oppose the viewing of all worldly motion pictures and video films that are shown commercially in theatres and on television for entertainment purposes. All video receivers must be altered so that they are not able to receive television channels.

Add 31. The use of all media technology must strictly be limited to educational, religious, inspirational, and family content that is consistent with wholesome Christian principles. No minister shall use television or other media technology for the purpose of viewing worldly, carnal and unwholesome media; endeavouring to maintain a Godly atmosphere and influence in their lives.

Submitted by the General Board

Taking out the old paragraph 31 and 32 and placing with new paragraph 31

[Esaias]

Well there goes the neighborhood.

[houston]

No big deal. Those that wanted this to pass already own TV's.

[Esaias]

I was just kidding. I think the New Revised Standard(s) Version is an improvement over the older one, because it speaks to personal responsibility in maintaining holiness, rather than a simplistic 'don't watch tv' approach.

[Ferd]

No big deal. Those that wanted this to pass already own TV's.

Quite a few, I suspect. But I personally know Some men who wanted this to pass that absolutely have never owned a television. And Likely never will

[Hoovie]

Quite a few, I suspect. But I personally know Some men who wanted this to pass that absolutely have never owned a television. And Likely never will

Right. I am probably one of those - even if I didn't have a vote in the matter.

[Broseanrichard]

I went to my pastor about the tv thing before conference and he told me there are many people out there that follow after a church manual but for those that truly follow the spirit of holiness they don't need a rule book to live right GOD will guide them to what is right and wrong. He told me about the resolution and said this really just adds the tv ban to all media now for those that might try to find a loop hold in the manual but again told me those truly following the spirit of holiness don't need a manual of resolutions to live right

[rgcraig]

I went to my pastor about the tv thing before conference and he told me there are many people out there that follow after a church manual but for those that truly follow the spirit of holiness they don't need a rule book to live right GOD will guide them to what is right and wrong. He told me about the resolution and said this really just adds the tv ban to all media now for those that might try to find a loop hold in the manual but again told me those truly following the spirit of holiness don't need a manual of resolutions to live right

You can read the resolutions posted on the previous page for yourself.

[Broseanrichard]

i did and see nothing that says you may now buy a tv but it does say to control media across all mediums
"The use of all media technology must strictly be limited to educational, religious, inspirational, and family content that is consistent with wholesome Christian principles. No minister shall use television or other media technology for the purpose of viewing worldly, carnal and unwholesome media; endeavouring to maintain a Godly atmosphere and influence in their lives.

there is not a single thing on that list that a tv is needed for. some might justify home schooling videos but even then most modern home schoolers i know can do it all from a computer anyways

[canam]

i did and see nothing that says you may now buy a tv but it does say to control media across all mediums
"The use of all media technology must strictly be limited to educational, religious, inspirational, and family content that is consistent with wholesome Christian principles. No minister shall use television or other media technology for the purpose of viewing worldly, carnal and unwholesome media; endeavouring to maintain a Godly atmosphere and influence in their lives.

there is not a single thing on that list that a tv is needed for. some might justify home schooling videos but even then most modern home schoolers i know can do it all from a computer anyways

:thumbsup:thumbsup

[MissBrattified]

Ironically, a principled approach has the potential to eliminate more media from the home than a no-television rule ever could.

[Sweet Pea]

IMHO - all that happened by the approval of the new resolutions with the new wording.....

It made honest (?) people out of a lot of UPCI licensed ministers (even some General Board members and other upper echelon ministry).

:bolt

[MissBrattified]

IMHO - all that happened by the approval of the new resolutions with the new wording.....

It made honest (?) people out of a lot of UPCI licensed ministers (even some General Board members and other upper echelon ministry).

:bolt

I'm sure that is true for some. However, the majority of the ministers that I know have respected the rule in their own homes even if they disagreed with it and hoped it would change.

[Sweet Pea]

Miss B - I know what you are saying and I appreciate those who respect the AOF - even when they disagreed with it. However, I know of some in the very ranks that I mentioned. I have been saddened and disappointed by some ministry who chose to justify and make excuses.

[StillStanding]

What's next? A list of approved channels?

1. Fox News

[Real Realism]

StillStanding, that reminds me of a story: An acquaintance of mine went on a Facebook rant earlier this year about not knowing anything about the George Zimmerman/Treyvon Martin case, because they "didn't have TV". At the time it took all my will power not to ask the question of why reading a news website, a newspaper, or even listening to the radio wasn't an option to stay informed on current events.

With Fox News on the approved list, at least they'll get half the story! Instead if brig completely clueless...

[houston]

What's next? A list of approved channels? 1. Fox Newswell, definitely not TBN

[Broseanrichard]

sad to see so many fighting over this. I wonder when the last time was these people told some one about acts 2:38 or do they spend all there time writing rule books. i was at general conference in 06 or 07 i forget and heard the business meeting from the lobby of convention hall where they were fighting over the first tv vote and it was sad. my first year going to GC seen fighting etc. needless to say i have had no desire to go to another GC since

[seekerman]

Next thing you know women in the UPC will be trimming their hair and wearing rings!

Oh......wait.

[Carpenter]

If they would have added that...

No minister shall hold a license if they participate in the viewing of any worldly motion pictures and video films that are shown commercially in theatres and on television for entertainment purposes.

This would result in wholesale exodus of ministers under the age of 50 from the UPC... :heeheehee

[Carpenter]

Just reading the whole thing that Renda provided, to me just indicates the whole meely-mouthed approach to defining standards, and holinesss, and separation...it just confuses the whole issue.

What was once a standard is no longer a standard, besides it was just something someone took a stand against...so we called it a stand-ard. :D

[Esaias]

Just reading the whole thing that Renda provided, to me just indicates the whole meely-mouthed approach to defining standards, and holinesss, and separation...it just confuses the whole issue.

What was once a standard is no longer a standard, besides it was just something someone took a stand against...so we called it a stand-ard. :D

Was the original standard 'no tv period, but you may watch filth on the PC or the iPad?'

Or was the recent clarification/amendment not in keeping with the original intent of the original standard?

I think the second option is more accurate.

[Theophil]

Was the original standard 'no tv period, but you may watch filth on the PC or the iPad?'

Or was the recent clarification/amendment not in keeping with the original intent of the original standard?

I think the second option is more accurate.

I agree. I seem to have gotten the impression that no matter what position the UPCI takes they can't win. They change an outdated rule and are still criticized, mocked, and castigated for it. If they cease to exist, which isn't happening by the way, "they" will still be the subject of discussion.

[Steve Epley]

I am NOT UPC never been UPC never desired to be UPC and now I sure enough would not be UPC. So my stand has not changed. Still anti-television in 2013.:thumbsup

[Real Realism]

As much as I've poked fun at the resolutions, I'm pleased with it on many accounts. Yes, it "opens up the door" for those who had TV to now be "legal". But the onus - the challenge, actually - is now on the individual to seek God's will for all the content they consume: books, magazines, websites, Netflix, iTunes...yes, those who watched things "on tiny screens" inconsistent with Christian edification will now feel at liberty to watch those same things on "big screens" (unless they allow God to change their heart). And those who don't want a TV in their home are now able to feel at liberty, and empowered, for making a personal choice consistent with their principles.

I read an article on faith recently that asserted if you've never given God the opportunity to come through by answering a specific prayer - you are losing the opportunity to grow in faith. ie, "send me a financial blessing" is so generic, but "provide $200 so that I can attend this marriage retreat" is a prayer that if God meets that need, you will have no way to explain it except through God.

The same can be applied with a list of rules and regulations...when you feel obligated not to own a TV because it's mandated or expected of you, you're robbed of the opportunity to develop a truly intimate relationship with God, where he speaks guidance into your life through the leading of the Spirit.

[Broseanrichard]

I am NOT UPC never been UPC never desired to be UPC and now I sure enough would not be UPC. So my stand has not changed. Still anti-television in 2013.:thumbsup

:thumbsup I'm upc but anti TV all the way

[Broseanrichard]

The same can be applied with a list of rules and regulations...when you feel obligated not to own a TV because it's mandated or expected of you, you're robbed of the opportunity to develop a truly intimate relationship with God, where he speaks guidance into your life through the leading of the Spirit.

fully agree. I believe the reason so many youth fall away is because they don't have it in there heart they have it in a rule book from pastor or fill in the blank church organization

[Hoovie]

What IS TV? When I think of the primary way News, Pop Culture, Style, even Pornography is disseminated it's NOT TV that comes to mind...

Hmmm...

[canam]

This changes nothing imo those who have a tv will now feel better :) those who dont wont be running to get one ,if they wanted one they would have one. now the wpf can preach on this at all their churches on sunday and say we told ya so,then they will go home and watch their videos, news and sports, on the not so big screen that they already live stream their services on.pathetic ! My new pastor has mentioned tv once in the last year maybe, doesnt blast on hair or dress ,he preaches Gods love etc ,they come in get filled with his spirit ,baptized ,read the bible and realize what they want to do and all of a sudden they start letting their hair change and the dress changes, why ? because they wanted to, not because they were told to.My previous pastor was known to call young ladies out, because they had their hair down and curly.preached a sermon on the evils of Carmen type music one time, looking back i dont know why most of these kids stayed, well, at least they stayed until they could get married (another endless set of hoops to jump through, including counseling on the proper way to have sex, and month long no contact sessions,married with in one year of dating and on and on) then they blew out :). Before people even have a chance for God to show them a better way they are driven off by this type of preaching !

[canam]

What IS TV? When I think of the primary way News, Pop Culture, Style, even Pornography is disseminated it's NOT TV that comes to mind...

Hmmm...:thumbsup

[CC1]

My new pastor has mentioned tv once in the last year maybe, doesnt blast on hair or dress ,he preaches Gods love etc ,they come in get filled with his spirit ,baptized ,read the bible and realize what they want to do and all of a sudden they start letting their hair change and the dress changes, why ? because they wanted to, not because they were told to.

I would be willing to bet you that even though your new pastor is not a clothesline preacher from the pulpit that the new folks line up to the "standards" in your church because of modeling.

They see established church folks dressing and looking a certain way and want to emulate that.

There is a lot of subtle and not so subtle psychological conditioning going on in old time Pentecost. Both are effective in eliciting certain behaviors and thought patterns.

[CC1]

I am fascinated that this resolution was approved by the General Board and amazed that it passed.

I think the previous resolution regarding advertising and ministering on tv and this new one are the UPC finally facing the reality that their previous positions were illogical and indefensible.

If the UPCI continued to defend the indefensible they would see even more of a brain drain from ministers leaving the org. than they have already seen since the affirmation resolution.

On the positive side I am encouraged as I see a maturing in the approach. The historic UPC position on so called "holiness' has been hard and fast rules against things rather than principles layed out to live by with the practical application left up to pastors and saints.

[Hoovie]

Was the original standard 'no tv period, but you may watch filth on the PC or the iPad?'

Or was the recent clarification/amendment not in keeping with the original intent of the original standard?

I think the second option is more accurate.

Right. There never was a license to watch unwholesome content on any device. It is now "forbidden" (if one wishes to use the term) on ALL venues.

[RandyWayne]

Right. There never was a license to watch unwholesome content on any device. It is now "forbidden" (if one wishes to use the term) on ALL venues.

Funny how there has to be a rule against "forbidden" material. Granted, it is a good thing that TV is now recognized as only one of several media formats but still.

[kclee4jc]

I am NOT UPC never been UPC never desired to be UPC and now I sure enough would not be UPC. So my stand has not changed. Still anti-television in 2013.:thumbsup

amen!

[returnman]

The deleting of the old line items certainly allows the presence of the TV in the home without retribution which should be the case. I haven't been a OP member in 3 years and have limitations on what I watch or view on TV, computer, etc. cause I am a christian first.

[Real Realism]

So...the conservative spin for the passage of these resolutions is that it should "up your game" and keep you from consuming "unwholesome" content across any media. I can't imagine any of us who profess to be Christians (OP, 3P, 1 Step, 3 Step, etc.) disagree with that principle. Where we draw the line for ourselves individually differs, however.

That said - the UPCI certainly could have kept the "TV ban" in place while taking a very hard line against the consumption of videos, motion pictures, and other content on other devices. There's the "push vs. pull" of content argument against TV that they could have employed. They also could have kept in this line and made it applicable to all devices:

we strongly oppose the viewing of all worldly motion pictures and video films that are shown commercially in theatres and on television for entertainment purposes

Despite the rhetoric that is being spun for the sake of the conservative crowd - the UPCI could have kept the ban against TV or at the very least, kept a ban against "Hollywood produced" video. But they didn't. Why not?

[returnman]

So...the conservative spin for the passage of these resolutions is that it should "up your game" and keep you from consuming "unwholesome" content across any media. I can't imagine any of us who profess to be Christians (OP, 3P, 1 Step, 3 Step, etc.) disagree with that principle. Where we draw the line for ourselves individually differs, however.

That said - the UPCI certainly could have kept the "TV ban" in place while taking a very hard line against the consumption of videos, motion pictures, and other content on other devices. There's the "push vs. pull" of content argument against TV that they could have employed. They also could have kept in this line and made it applicable to all devices:



Despite the rhetoric that is being spun for the sake of the conservative crowd - the UPCI could have kept the ban against TV or at the very least, kept a ban against "Hollywood produced" video. But they didn't. Why not?

Maybe because they realize you can't legislate someones convictions. A stern warning against any ungodliness, written or preached, is what is in order not a law.

[Sister Alvear]

you know if the heart is not right all the rules in the world will not change people...I pray that my heart be always set on the things above..Next issue should be addressed is all the money spent on antiques while the world rushes on to eternity... guns, hobbies, and all kinds of things are ashes only in the light of eternity...( well now I should run for the jungle)

[Sister Alvear]

Love not the world neither the THINGS that are in the world....

[crakjak]

Resolution #1

Whereas, The General Board of the United Pentecostal Church International unanimously passed the following position paper during their meetings at the 2012 General Conference; and

Whereas, It is the expressed wish of the General Board in the interest of unity that the voting constituency of the United Pentecostal Church International consider adoption of the same; and

Whereas, Adopting this position paper would of necessity replace ones previously adopted by general conferences in session; and

Whereas, Replacing such position papers previously adopted by a general conference can be enacted only by another sitting general conference; therefore

Resolved, That the following position paper, “Media Technology,” which was previously approved by the General Board in 2012 be now approved by the 2013 General Conference and replace the two position papers, “Video,” adopted by the 1983 General Conference, and “Technology,” adopted by the 1988 General Conference.

Media Technology

Our elders took an important, principled and correct stand against the evils of television in 1954 when they adopted the fourth paragraph on holiness in our Articles of Faith in response to the invention of television and other changes in society. It follows that we need to enunciate the principles upon which our elders acted and apply them in light of technological changes and more complex choices today. Specifically traditional television is now merging with other technologies that we have accepted, such as computers, online media, satellite and cable deliveries, media players, smart phones, tablets, and game consoles.

Therefore we must give appropriate guidance to a new generation of believers with regard to all use of communications technology in language that is understandable and meaningful to them so we can continue to uphold our position on holiness of life and holiness in the use of all communications technology. In view of the symbolic nature of media for our movement, we must be careful not to signal any compromise of belief or lifestyle.

The United Pentecostal Church International, accepts only the Bible and the Holy Spirit as its guides to determine the correct standards of conduct in this world, and it recognizes the responsibility to apply biblical principles in a changing world. Neither the Bible nor the United Pentecostal Church International teaches that salvation can be earned by good works, but both contend that holiness in behavior results from a transforming experience of the Holy Ghost, and is therefore incumbent upon each Christian. The church has an obligation to establish standards of conduct when necessary, but it refuses to make rules for every aspect of daily living. Each Christian is responsible to God to maintain holiness in his or her life, for God alone is the judge, but the church is also responsible to teach biblical standards of holiness. Holiness as a spiritual experience and a way of life is not an option for a Christian but a biblical injunction (II Corinthians 7:1, Romans 12:1-2, John 17:14-16, I John 2:15-16, Ephesians 5:11).

It is very evident that spirituality and holiness are deeply entwined together. The Scriptures teach that carnality is enmity toward God. The use of media must therefore be carefully considered so that we do not take the beautiful truths of God unto areas that will contribute to the downfall of a child of God. The influence of sinful media programming is so grave and damaging to Christian-living, that conscience demands that it be battled in a principled way. The biblical safeguard against rapid cultural or technological change is to build upon timeless principles, Scripture elegantly solving the proper management of media technology with a single verse: “I will set no evil thing before mine eye…” Psalm 101:3. A consistent and principled position on media programming does not constitute a threat to our core stand on issues of separation from the world, but only strengthens our position by casting in principle the manner in which we are already solving this issue in practice.

Historic guidelines regarding television and video were written in light of the technology of the 1950s and 1980s, demonstrating a common desire for the homes of our families to be sanctuaries governed by Godly principles. In today's world, we apply these guidelines as follows. We recognize that similar content is available through mediums such as computers, online media, media players, tablets, smart phones, and game consoles. What we have traditionally called television is merging with other devices that we have accepted. Therefore in these cases and with all other communications technology, we teach responsible use that is strictly in accord with wholesome Christian principles. As new media appear in the marketplace, the Christian must not accept their usage without evaluation of their impact on his or her spiritual walk with God. We are to “walk circumspectly [looking around us], not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil” (Ephesians 5:15-16).

Resolution 1 replaces Video (Restrictions) Adopted by the General Conference in 1983 and
Technology Adopted by the General Conference in 1988.

Sounds like a principled stance, that even Bro. Steve, could understand.

[crakjak]

I am NOT UPC never been UPC never desired to be UPC and now I sure enough would not be UPC. So my stand has not changed. Still anti-television in 2013.:thumbsup

No pride either???

[Renee29]

So does this change their stance on going to the movies?

[Real Realism]

I was wondering the same thing, Renee, but I guess not since this portion of the AoF was unaltered by the resolutions:

We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living, such as theaters, dances, mixed bathing or swimming, women cutting their hair, make-up, any apparel that immodestly exposes the body, all worldly sports and amusements, and unwholesome radio programs and music.

I have always wondered why it's okay to go to a play. Those are conducted in a "theater" are they not? But I digress...

[RandyWayne]

I was wondering the same thing, Renee, but I guess not since this portion of the AoF was unaltered by the resolutions:



I have always wondered why it's okay to go to a play. Those are conducted in a "theater" are they not? But I digress...

I get the feeling that simply going to the theater has stopped being an issue quite some time ago in most of Pentecost. This sure wasn't the case during our stint in the org during the 80's though. In fact it was one of several classic "circular reasoning" arguments given to me about why "we" do things: We weren't allow to go see movies because they were shown in theaters (although the phrase most often used was "movie houses" since it sounds more heathen) and we weren't allowed in theaters because movies were shown there.

[n david]

So does this change their stance on going to the movies?
No

[Esaias]

you know if the heart is not right all the rules in the world will not change people...I pray that my heart be always set on the things above..Next issue should be addressed is all the money spent on antiques while the world rushes on to eternity... guns, hobbies, and all kinds of things are ashes only in the light of eternity...( well now I should run for the jungle)

While some people of a more enhanced financial persuasion make a hobby out of collecting guns, I view them in the exact same vein as tools. In fact, they are among the most important tools a man can have, for he is required by God to be a protector to his household.

I do however wonder about some of those in Pentecost whose houses are filled with unbelievable amounts of trinkets and knicknacks that serve no purpose other than to please the eye. I mean, how many doo-dads do you really need on your mantle or countertop?

lol

[Sister Alvear]

guns as a protection having a collection worth a million dollars is another story...

[canam]

We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living, such as theaters, dances, mixed bathing or swimming, women cutting their hair, make-up, any apparel that immodestly exposes the body, all worldly sports and amusements, and unwholesome radio programs and music. ..........................should say all worldly amusements except Branson/Silver Dollar City,but nooooo!!! thats deeeferent !

[Esaias]

We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living, such as theaters, dances, mixed bathing or swimming, women cutting their hair, make-up, any apparel that immodestly exposes the body, all worldly sports and amusements, and unwholesome radio programs and music. ..........................should say all worldly amusements except Branson/Silver Dollar City,but nooooo!!! thats deeeferent !

Would that include football and baseball?

I think the prohibition about theaters goes a long way back, back to the 1st and 2nd century in fact, where 'theaters' were primarily a place for 'plays' and which often included not only ungodly acting (men in drag even!) but also served as a 'social hub' or meeting place, where all sorts of horrible worldly things were going on.

The advent of cinema however has changed that quite a bit... people go to a movie and have very little or no interaction with the other patrons. They go in, they watch the movie, they leave.

The real theaters that are left are somewhat similar nowadays, putting on various plays or musicals of varied morality, but pretty much people show up, watch the play, and then leave.

The only theater presentation (of a play or musical) I can think of where the environment itself would provide objectionable moral content would be anywhere they're doing the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

'Adult theaters' of course are obviously not a place for a Christian to be, resolution or no.

But assuming the play or movie itself is not full of objectionable content, I don't see how 'the theater' is a den of iniquity and vice that must be avoided.

I went with my daughter to the local theater to see The Hobbit. Good movie (along with LOTR the ONLY modern 'classic' literature there is, imo). Lots of kids and 30-40 somethings. I didn't see anybody 'hook up' nor did I see anybody have any moral failures. In fact, nothing objectionable whatsoever except the proces of candy, popcorn, and cokes - and the utterly amateur application of butter to the popcorn. Everyody knows the popcorn has to be half melted in the container from being drenched with liquid butter. This is no time for 'austerity measures'!!

Of course, something may be said regarding the enjoyment of ANY 'motion picture' as being possibly detrimental to mental functioning in the long run, but that's a different issue than 'standards', imo.

Now as to whether spending God's money on such entertainments is wise, well...

[StillStanding]

Still pictures = good.
Moving pictures = bad.
A local theatre with live actors = good.
A local theatre with actors on Memorex = bad.
Listen to favorite team on radio = good.
Watch favorite team on TV = bad.
Rock station = bad.
Country station = good.

[Sarah]

I would be willing to bet you that even though your new pastor is not a clothesline preacher from the pulpit that the new folks line up to the "standards" in your church because of modeling.

They see established church folks dressing and looking a certain way and want to emulate that.

There is a lot of subtle and not so subtle psychological conditioning going on in old time Pentecost. Both are effective in eliciting certain behaviors and thought patterns.

Well, absolutely, CC1! And you think that's a bad thing? Doesn't the bible say the older women are to teach the younger ones, etc? What better way than by example?

[Esaias]

Still pictures = good.
Moving pictures = bad.
A local theatre with live actors = good.
A local theatre with actors on Memorex = bad.
Listen to favorite team on radio = good.
Watch favorite team on TV = bad.
Rock station = bad.
Country station = good.

And who actually teaches or believe that?

You've heard a preacher or pastor say to a congregation, or ever had a brother tell you 'Hey, watching the Rams on tv is a sin, but it's okay if you listen to the same game on the radio. Oh, and listening to rock stations is sinful and unchristian, which is why I only listen to honky tonk on the radio?

:chirp

[houston]

And who actually teaches or believe that? You've heard a preacher or pastor say to a congregation, or ever had a brother tell you 'Hey, watching the Rams on tv is a sin, but it's okay if you listen to the same game on the radio. Oh, and listening to rock stations is sinful and unchristian, which is why I only listen to honky tonk on the radio? :chirpyou really are on the outside of the circle

[Esaias]

you really are on the outside of the circle

I guess so.

The preachers I have known sound nothing like what so many here complain about.

I must be blessed.

[Broseanrichard]

i have my stand but will not disfellowship because someone only believer 99% of what i do. people breaking off because of tv is nonsense. there are upci churches near me that teach standards way above the manual with no issues so why do people think leaving over a few standard issues will solve anything.
I was tough that holiness no matter what the stand will make you stand out. my pastor said the bible lays out a minimum standard of living needed but no real cut off point on many issues. He said if a amish family ever came into our church he would not have them change a thing if they did not want to go modern. He said he would even put up a post for them to tie there horses to.

[Esaias]

So your pastor doesn't preach 'when you get the Holy Ghost you'll get the revelation on how you need to shave that facial hair off'?

[Broseanrichard]

So your pastor doesn't preach 'when you get the Holy Ghost you'll get the revelation on how you need to shave that facial hair off'?

when i came to the church i got convected and changed my life without ever knowing about holiness standards. i had to go to my pastor at the time to explain out why i was getting fill in the blank out of my life and what the bible had to say about it. others in my church have came to the Lord in the same manner. we do here stuff from time to time on dress code etc but for the must part it's done in a private manner. I know for a wile we gave out the 3 part series of books from the ladies division"covered by love,unmasked and the girl in the dress to all the young ladies coming in until we ran out and give a book by Bishop David Bernard to all visitors explaining our doctrine and the pentecostal experience. as for the facial hair thing, i'm to understand we don't believe in it but because a board member has always had it we will not speak it from the pulpit. we had a new members class and a ministry training class for all those involved in the church a few years back and facial hair was talked about then but it was said that one board member was fine for what ever reason

[Real Realism]

we had a new members class and a ministry training class for all those involved in the church a few years back and facial hair was talked about then but it was said that one board member was fine for what ever reason

:groan

[CC1]

Well, absolutely, CC1! And you think that's a bad thing? Doesn't the bible say the older women are to teach the younger ones, etc? What better way than by example?


If you are talking examples of honesty, love, fruit of the Spirit, moderation, and other biblical principles then you are 100% correct.

If you are talking about extra biblical legalism then no I do not believe that is a proper example to lead by.

[Barb]

If you are talking examples of honesty, love, fruit of the Spirit, moderation, and other biblical principles then you are 100% correct.

If you are talking about extra biblical legalism then no I do not believe that is a proper example to lead by.

I couldn't agree more about legalism, CC1...surprised?

Legalism on any level is just flat out wrong.

However, where you and I will disagree is on whether maintaining certain principles can be labeled legalism.

As 3rd gen Apostolic/Pentecostal, I can say with honesty that I have seen legalism, yet can equally say that I have never experienced it first hand. I choose to follow certain principles of hair and dress, not because someone is lording over me, but because it is my choice and conviction.

And I will say again, those who hold to these principles are not limited to the Apostolic ranks...

Just last night I was at a concert. A friend of my mother's was there...a young widow with 2 small children from Indiana. She is Assembly of God and 'looks' like me.

The group we went to see have the same principles as mom's friend and myself, yet they are Methodists.

We have all discussed this, and none of those mentioned above feel this is legalistic or not a proper example to set before the youth.

Is it not better to set a pattern of modesty in dress, rather than follow the lead of a so-called Pentecostal pastor's wife in this state, who told someone I know personally to make herself "available" by wearing shorter skirts and going to the club with an unsaved coworker?

I do not condemn those who do not follow the same principles as me, but I see NOTHING wrong with setting this example.

You and I have 'known' each other a long time, and I respect you, knowing we will not agree on this.

But as the world waxes worse and worse, with morals being almost nonexistent, I feel to lead on the side of caution.

[MissBrattified]

If you are talking examples of honesty, love, fruit of the Spirit, moderation, and other biblical principles then you are 100% correct.

If you are talking about extra biblical legalism then no I do not believe that is a proper example to lead by.

So if an older woman holds to certain convictions and lives accordingly, she is doing something wrong? What else is one supposed to do, other than live what they believe?

[Sasha]

I believe it's the idea that 'look as I look' tells others that you are a saved individual, and there are those who are taught such an idea as well. I have no problems with modesty, and we dress that way in my house and out of it. We have raised our kids to dress proper at all times and so far, they do, and three of them are now grown. Our boys don't go around without a shirt on and our girls don't show tummy skin and their shorts are not far above the knees. We have set the example for our children by dressing as we expect them to dress and it's worked for us.

OTOH, we don't tell them they are saved by dressing this way and we don't tell them they will split hell wide open if they don't.

[Barb]

So if an older woman holds to certain convictions and lives accordingly, she is doing something wrong? What else is one supposed to do, other than live what they believe?

:thumbsup

[Esaias]

So what all resolutions got passed at GC?

What news comes out of the grand convocation?

[n david]

So what all resolutions got passed at GC?

What news comes out of the grand convocation?
They had Bruce Howell bobbleheads.

I'm not kidding.

:slaphappy

[Jack Shephard]

They had Bruce Howell bobbleheads.

I'm not kidding.

:slaphappy

LOL

[n david]

https://fbcdn-photos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/1380254_665585100127792_1730560523_a.jpg

[RandyWayne]

https://fbcdn-photos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/1380254_665585100127792_1730560523_a.jpg

Reminds me of him (from Robocop).

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Djhn0DlDft8/T5b0Ohfuz_I/AAAAAAAAAOc/ECx5YWemwxY/s1600/clarencebodickerwithhissmugface.jpg