*** Newsflash: D Bernard Speaks Out on TV Debate and Upcoming GC***

[SDG]

As he did last year prior to GC, Supt.. David Bernard has addressed the ministers of the South Texas District about his views on the TV debate.

DISCUSSION OF ADVERTISING ON TELEVISION
By David K. Bernard, 9/19/07

As you know, a resolution has been presented to the 2007 General Conference to allow advertising on television. My purpose in writing is to provide information and to help us think together about this subject in a balanced, reasoned way while avoiding demagoguery, antagonism, and divisiveness.

Background. Some historical and theological background is helpful in discussing this matter. Here is the relevant timeline:

• 1945: Formation of the United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI).
• 1954: As television became prevalent in American society, the UPCI amended its Articles of Faith to add a statement disapproving of TV ownership because of the many evils that it portrays. (See 2007 UPCI Manual, p. 35.)
• 1955: The UPCI amended the ministerial “Obligations and Rules” in its Constitution to specify that ministers cannot own televisions. (See Manual, p. 53, par. 31.)
• 1975: The UPCI added a statement to its Constitution recommending that ministers not advertise or minister on TV.
• 1977: By amendment to the Constitution, the ministerial rule against advertising or ministering on TV was made mandatory. (See Manual, p. 53, par. 31.)
• 1977: The General Board further explained the UPCI’s disapproval of television in a position paper on holiness. (See Manual, p. 165. For a detailed discussion, including scriptural principles and information from social research, see my books In Search of Holiness, 1981, 2nd ed. 2006, and Practical Holiness: A Second Look, 1985.)
• 1986: The UPCI added a ministerial rule to its Constitution to regulate the use of video. (See Manual, pp. 53-54, par. 32.)
• 1988: In view of the continuing development of entertainment and media technology, the UPCI adopted a position paper on technology. (See Manual, p. 172.) The paper recognizes that as technology changes, the UPCI must respond. It states, in part:

Since worldliness is often communicated throughout society by the media, the United Pentecostal Church International has expressed its concern that Christians may be influenced by the media to compromise biblical holiness. It has officially dealt with technology in three ways: (1) allowed its use without voicing caution or disapproval (telephone, automobile, microwave, central heating, printing press, photography, computer, etc.); (2) accepted its use with warning and restrictions (radio, video); and (3) rejected its use as being unsuitable for Christians or for their homes (movie theater, television).

The United Pentecostal Church International recognizes that technology is not evil in itself, but it feels that it must reject any use of technology that favorably displays a lifestyle of worldliness and ungodliness. Moreover, since technology continues to accelerate in our times, the United Pentecostal Church International and Christians must evaluate each new use of technology, especially media technology, in the light of biblical holiness.
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.

In 2006, the General Conference considered a resolution to allow advertising on television. The resolution was referred to a committee composed equally of proponents and opponents, which presented its findings in the Forward. A new resolution has been presented for this year to allow the use of “television for advertising.” However, it would also delete the current statement that no minister can “advertise or minister” on TV. If the desire is to allow advertising only, the resolution would need to be amended to make clear that ministry on TV is still prohibited.
Guiding Principles. Here are some guidelines and considerations to help us approach this subject in a principled way.

1. Motives. We must not be motivated by spiritual compromise, legalism, or politics, and we should not presume that other ministers have wrong motives. Scripture tells us not to judge another believer’s heart. Robert’s Rules of Order instructs us not to attack motives but to discuss the merits of the issue.

2. Ministerial Rule. This resolution does not advocate a change of the Articles of Faith or our position on holiness. It is a proposal to change a ministerial rule adopted 30 years ago. We may disapprove of the resolution or express strong reservations about it, but we should not question the integrity, loyalty, holiness, or Apostolic identity of those who state an opinion on this ministerial rule.

3. Symbolism. We must maintain our holiness lifestyle, and therefore we should carefully consider and discuss any possible negative impact of the resolution. It would be a mistake, however, to make the resolution a symbol of larger issues, such as our holiness identity. There are strong advocates and practitioners of holiness on both sides. There are legitimate concerns and arguments on both sides. I don’t propose to discuss them, as they were adequately covered in the Forward. As a practical matter, if we do make this issue highly symbolic, then the vote could indeed cause great division as people act or react based on the symbolism they perceive. If we refuse to make this vote symbolic, then we can limit the damage that could otherwise be caused, and either way the decision goes, we can deal with it simply as a ministerial rule.

4. Fundamental Doctrine. In our deliberations, we must remain committed to the Fundamental Doctrine of the UPCI, which states:

The basic and fundamental doctrine of this organization shall be the Bible standard of full salvation, which is repentance, baptism in water by immersion in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the initial sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit gives utterance.

We shall endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come into the unity of the faith, at the same time admonishing all brethren that they shall not contend for their different views to the disunity of the body.

Scripture is our supreme authority, and our Fundamental Doctrine is based on Scripture. The first paragraph expresses the teaching of Acts 2:38, and the second paragraph quotes from Ephesians 4:3, 13. As an organization, we have agreed to unite and cooperate on the basis of our Articles of Faith and especially our Fundamental Doctrine. Our Fundamental Doctrine takes precedence over any ministerial rule.

Thus, any change to a ministerial rule must still conform to the Fundamental Doctrine. Any debate over such a change and any reaction to a proposed or actual change must still be in harmony with the Fundamental Doctrine.

Among other things, this means we must have a strong commitment to unity despite our differences, as stated in the second paragraph of the Fundamental Doctrine. It is inconsistent with our Fundamental Doctrine to threaten to leave the UPCI if the rule is not changed or if it is changed. If we want to maintain our Apostolic identity and if we want to promote Apostolic revival based on our identity, we must have greater loyalty to our Fundamental Doctrine than to a present or proposed ministerial rule.

The early church “continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship,” and as a result, “the Lord added daily to the church such as should be saved” (Acts 2:42, 47). We must emphasis both doctrine and unity, without sacrificing either. This is the path to genuine revival and growth.

[SDG]

Continued ...

5. Technological and Societal Change. What is the real issue that is driving this resolution? In my opinion, it is not a desire to compromise our identity, but it is the reality of technological development and societal change. In light of the emergence of the Internet and local cable television and the dramatically new uses of television/video technology in our society, we are being forced to do what our position paper says we should: “Christians must evaluate each new use of technology, especially media technology, in the light of biblical holiness.”

Whether we pass this resolution or not, changes will continue to occur in the way our members perceive and use media technology. We will continue to face this type of question due to the innovation, proliferation, morphing, and merger of various media technologies including television, the Internet, computers, DVDs, MP3 players, cell phones, cable, wireless networks, and YouTube. The very definition and connotation of the words television and movies are changing. Thus, regardless of what we do with this resolution, we will continue to face new situations, and we will have to give relevant guidance to the people that we lead. We are being forced to enunciate scriptural principles more clearly and rely upon them more heavily, because no rules are adequate to cover all contingencies and developments.

My concern is that if we focus our energies exclusively on debating one rule devised to deal with one issue in 1977, we might “win” that battle but be unprepared for the many issues that face us in 2007 and that will face us in 2017, should the Lord tarry. I hope we can establish a new paradigm of how to discuss issues of this nature, build consensus, and make wise decisions. I also hope we can continue to be relevant and effective in responding to technological and cultural developments.

I want to uphold our Apostolic holiness identity. In order to do so, we must go beyond rules and establish principles to guide our conduct. We must teach our people to rely upon the Word of God and the power of the Holy Spirit and to pursue holiness regardless of technological developments, societal changes, and cultural choices.

Let’s pray that God will help our fellowship to deal with these issues appropriately and make good decisions in this matter. Let’s also pray that God will help us to simultaneously maintain holiness of life, apostolic unity, and effective outreach.

[Nahum]

2. Ministerial Rule. This resolution does not advocate a change of the Articles of Faith or our position on holiness. It is a proposal to change a ministerial rule adopted 30 years ago. We may disapprove of the resolution or express strong reservations about it, but we should not question the integrity, loyalty, holiness, or Apostolic identity of those who state an opinion on this ministerial rule.

This goes against everything many conservatives have been telling us about the AOF. It seems Bernard separates the tv issue from the AOF.

[Nahum]

In 2006, the General Conference considered a resolution to allow advertising on television. The resolution was referred to a committee composed equally of proponents and opponents, which presented its findings in the Forward. A new resolution has been presented for this year to allow the use of “television for advertising.” However, it would also delete the current statement that no minister can “advertise or minister” on TV. If the desire is to allow advertising only, the resolution would need to be amended to make clear that ministry on TV is still prohibited.

This resolution will be ammended, No question.

[SDG]

Bernard undoubtedly is voting for this resolution if it is amended.

[Nahum]

Whether we pass this resolution or not, changes will continue to occur in the way our members perceive and use media technology. We will continue to face this type of question due to the innovation, proliferation, morphing, and merger of various media technologies including television, the Internet, computers, DVDs, MP3 players, cell phones, cable, wireless networks, and YouTube. The very definition and connotation of the words television and movies are changing. Thus, regardless of what we do with this resolution, we will continue to face new situations, and we will have to give relevant guidance to the people that we lead. We are being forced to enunciate scriptural principles more clearly and rely upon them more heavily, because no rules are adequate to cover all contingencies and developments.

I can't believe he wrote those words!!!!!!!!!!!

[SDG]

I can't believe he wrote those words!!!!!!!!!!!

Is he saying the manual is not Holy Writ???

[aliveinhim]

Is he saying the manual is not Holy Writ???

Of course he is. A monkey with idiot disease would understand that.

[Brett Prince]

This goes against everything many conservatives have been telling us about the AOF. It seems Bernard separates the tv issue from the AOF.

True. However, many conservatives and moderates, like myself, have not stated it was an AoF thing, but, rather, that the end results very well could lead to a change of, or ignoring of, the AoF.

Bro. Bernard is a very wise leader, and I think his addressing of this, at this time, and in this way, shows that. I am glad to know that, whatever the outcome, we will still have men of his caliber amongst us.

[Brett Prince]

I can't believe he wrote those words!!!!!!!!!!!

I can, because he is dead on. We cannot, today, possibly foresee every possible twist and turn ahead. We as a movement have GOT to begin to preach, teach, and live from principle, not particular hotbutton issues. If we do not, it will destroy us as a movement.

[Nahum]

True. However, many conservatives and moderates, like myself, have not stated it was an AoF thing, but, rather, that the end results very well could lead to a change of, or ignoring of, the AoF.

Bro. Bernard is a very wise leader, and I think his addressing of this, at this time, and in this way, shows that. I am glad to know that, whatever the outcome, we will still have men of his caliber amongst us.

Brett, I believe Bernard is providing a "middle ground", a "center." Quite fascinating to see the new middle defined as "advertising is okay, but not ministry."

[Nahum]

I can, because he is dead on. We cannot, today, possibly foresee every possible twist and turn ahead. We as a movement have GOT to begin to preach, teach, and live from principle, not particular hot button issues. If we do not, it will destroy us as a movement.

But Brett, the rest of us get body slammed for saying the same thing. Why is it right just because Bernard now says it?

[Brett Prince]

Brett, I believe Bernard is providing a "middle ground", a "center." Quite fascinating to see the new middle defined as "advertising is okay, but not ministry."

You could be right. I think the new middle, though, is that the UPCI should advertise as a function of HQ, and not from local churches.

I personally could accept that. I could also accept ministry from our best speakers, with programming as a function of HQ, and not the local church.

By "accept," I mean that if I were at GC, I could vote for that myself.

[Nahum]

You could be right. I think the new middle, though, is that the UPCI should advertise as a function of HQ, and not from local churches.

I personally could accept that. I could also accept ministry from our best speakers, with programming as a function of HQ, and not the local church.

By "accept," I mean that if I were at GC, I could vote for that myself.

Why?

Our media dept. struggles to be relevant with internet and radio. Why should a guy in an office far away choose how our churches are marketed? BTW, that is not meant as a slam.

[aliveinhim]

You could be right. I think the new middle, though, is that the UPCI should advertise as a function of HQ, and not from local churches.

I personally could accept that. I could also accept ministry from our best speakers, with programming as a function of HQ, and not the local church.

By "accept," I mean that if I were at GC, I could vote for that myself.

I would also prefer to see this. However, I am a true conservative and believe in state rights. This works the same with the church. Socialism is never right, not even in the church.

[CC1]

Why?

Our media dept. struggles to be relevant with internet and radio. Why should a guy in an office far away choose how our churches are marketed? BTW, that is not meant as a slam.

I agree. I find it fascinating that some think commercials devised by HQ are the answer and advertising should be limited to that. It makes no sense to me.

To implement something like that is the ultimate in control. It is essentially saying that local churches are not smart enough, creative enough, etc to handle their own advertising.

This would be like saying churches can only use tracts produced by WAF.

[pelathais]

We are being forced to enunciate scriptural principles more clearly and rely upon them more heavily, because no rules are adequate to cover all contingencies and developments.

I can't believe he wrote those words!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not sure I follow your "I can't believe..." I suspect you may be using hyperbole and irony with that statement.

In any event, Bernard's right. Backing up a bit and taking the whole sentence and not just the part that is bolded: he is articulating a very good point. We are increasingly "being forced" to use scripture to support our teachings. Each time we fail to back something up with the Word of God we loose credibility.

By enunciating "scriptural principles more clearly and rely[ing] upon them more heavily" we are leaning upon a more certain foundation than the "rules" that we invent for transitory "contingencies and developments."

And, I like the way he says, "but we should not question the integrity, loyalty, holiness, or Apostolic identity of those who state an opinion on this ministerial rule." Too many of our debates get caught up in a lot of name calling and groundless accusations. Kudos to D.B. on this article.

[Nahum]

I'm not sure I follow your "I can't believe..." I suspect you may be using hyperbole and irony with that statement.

In any event, Bernard's right. Backing up a bit and taking the whole sentence and not just the part that is bolded: he is articulating a very good point. We are increasingly "being forced" to use scripture to support our teachings. Each time we fail to back something up with the Word of God we loose credibility.




Your assessment is fairly accurate pelathais.

[Hoovie]

I agree. I find it fascinating that some think commercials devised by HQ are the answer and advertising should be limited to that. It makes no sense to me.

To implement something like that is the ultimate in control. It is essentially saying that local churches are not smart enough, creative enough, etc to handle their own advertising.

This would be like saying churches can only use tracts produced by WAF.

While I agree with you CC1, I also think I understand why some who would have reservations allowing all TV programing may agree to something offically produced from HQ. TBN and MOST charismatic TV programing is yucky. I would favor some restrictions and HQ oversight to nip any "seed faith" or "health/wealth" teaching in the bud.

[Steve Epley]

Well I for one am not shocked.

[stmatthew]

DB has went Liberal. We will be reading next that he is joining the NCO.























:D j/k

[Hoovie]

Well I for one am not shocked.

At what? He clearly is not advocating any position on the vote it'self.

[ChTatum]

Well I for one am not shocked.

And I, for one, do not care.:killinme

[Dantheman1]

Brett, I believe Bernard is providing a "middle ground", a "center." Quite fascinating to see the new middle defined as "advertising is okay, but not ministry."

Does that mean they can have 30 minute long infomercials? It's all about keeping the "unity" of the organization? I can't stop laughing......:killinme

[Dantheman1]

Thank you DA for sharing with us the update. Though I attend a UPC here in LA,( in the year I've been attending there, I've done a lot of evaluating going on as to the amount of judgment, self and otherwise being constantly applied, and our church is one of the more "liberal"). I can't find an Apostolic congregation in the metro area who teaches truth of the Word.( signs of the times) I still cannot relate to the control the organization holds on individual congregations! This despite the autonomy of the pastors. What is it going to take to wake up the leadership of an organization that operates out from the spirit of fear. Are we not empowered with the Holy Spirit? It certainly makes us evaluate what kind of Christians our preachers create through their dogmatic teachings. Thanks for the memories......

[Brett Prince]

Why?

Our media dept. struggles to be relevant with internet and radio. Why should a guy in an office far away choose how our churches are marketed? BTW, that is not meant as a slam.

Three reasons:

1) Equal representation. Everybody gets a piece of the pie. If ads are put out nationally, each individual town can get their set up to be seen in their market. Many of the smaller guys that can't afford tv could compete with the bigger guys for public awareness.

2) The feeling that they don't have to compete with the local "big church" choir, big-name preachers that come through, etc...but instead, they will have quality programming, and some of our best will be there to represent all of "us" so to speak.

3) The sense that there will be more control over what goes on, and there won't be as much to worry about...it can be handled at the next GC if they see problems.

Bro, I didn't take it as a slam in any way. I think your question and concern are legitimate. I just think you have guys out there with a lot of fear of what can happen, and they trust the change in this manner better than they do to just open up the deal to just those that can afford it because they already have the bigger church.

Truth is, if everybody got on the bandwagon with this idea, this would be a step towards what those on the other side of the aisle want--and would likely lead to just to everything you are asking for--but in a more pallatable step. People accept change slowly, and in smaller bites. It might help a guy like me to accept the change better, I'll tell you that.

[StillStanding]

Three reasons:

1) Equal representation. Everybody gets a piece of the pie. If ads are put out nationally, each individual town can get their set up to be seen in their market. Many of the smaller guys that can't afford tv could compete with the bigger guys for public awareness.

2) The feeling that they don't have to compete with the local "big church" choir, big-name preachers that come through, etc...but instead, they will have quality programming, and some of our best will be there to represent all of "us" so to speak.

3) The sense that there will be more control over what goes on, and there won't be as much to worry about...it can be handled at the next GC if they see problems.

Bro, I didn't take it as a slam in any way. I think your question and concern are legitimate. I just think you have guys out there with a lot of fear of what can happen, and they trust the change in this manner better than they do to just open up the deal to just those that can afford it because they already have the bigger church.

Truth is, if everybody got on the bandwagon with this idea, this would be a step towards what those on the other side of the aisle want--and would likely lead to just to everything you are asking for--but in a more pallatable step. People accept change slowly, and in smaller bites. It might help a guy like me to accept the change better, I'll tell you that.

So it's all about competition and envy!!!!!!! :eek:

[redeemedcynic84]

Three reasons:

1) Equal representation. Everybody gets a piece of the pie. If ads are put out nationally, each individual town can get their set up to be seen in their market. Many of the smaller guys that can't afford tv could compete with the bigger guys for public awareness.

2) The feeling that they don't have to compete with the local "big church" choir, big-name preachers that come through, etc...but instead, they will have quality programming, and some of our best will be there to represent all of "us" so to speak.

3) The sense that there will be more control over what goes on, and there won't be as much to worry about...it can be handled at the next GC if they see problems.

Bro, I didn't take it as a slam in any way. I think your question and concern are legitimate. I just think you have guys out there with a lot of fear of what can happen, and they trust the change in this manner better than they do to just open up the deal to just those that can afford it because they already have the bigger church.

Truth is, if everybody got on the bandwagon with this idea, this would be a step towards what those on the other side of the aisle want--and would likely lead to just to everything you are asking for--but in a more pallatable step. People accept change slowly, and in smaller bites. It might help a guy like me to accept the change better, I'll tell you that.

you know the easiest way to do this???

To have both national and local programs and ads...

See, I would venture to say that some of the larger churches in the orgs could probably put on a better "show" than the entire org (not for monetary reasons, but because its easier to get that kind of group in sync and together for something like this than it is a group spread over the whole country)...

so you have national shows and ads, and you also allow the local churches to do thier own thing if they can and have the desire/ability to do so...

I don't see why a national show done by the org is somehow better than each church doing thier own thing, though... I mean, other than the fact more money can be put into it (and thus its possible there is more quality, although that isn't garunteed), what's the difference?

[StillStanding]

I can see the value of a professionally done ad to be played locally by a local assembly. However, I don't understand why a church that has the talent to make a quality broadcast, can't be free to do so! This doesn't make sense to me, as it is a another method of control!

[Tyrel Sackett]

DB has went Liberal. We will be reading next that he is joining the NCO.


Went???

[Strongminded]

HERE IS THE SLAM DUNK!!!!!!

2. Ministerial Rule. This resolution does not advocate a change of the Articles of Faith or our position on holiness. It is a proposal to change a ministerial rule adopted 30 years ago. We may disapprove of the resolution or express strong reservations about it, but we should not question the integrity, loyalty, holiness, or Apostolic identity of those who state an opinion on this ministerial rule.


He is separating holiness and rules...

BRAVO!

[Strongminded]

If we want to maintain our Apostolic identity and if we want to promote Apostolic revival based on our identity, we must have greater loyalty to our Fundamental Doctrine than to a present or proposed ministerial rule.

AWESOME!!!!!!

[Strongminded]

Continued ...

5. Technological and Societal Change. What is the real issue that is driving this resolution? In my opinion, it is not a desire to compromise our identity, but it is the reality of technological development and societal change. In light of the emergence of the Internet and local cable television and the dramatically new uses of television/video technology in our society, we are being forced to do what our position paper says we should: “Christians must evaluate each new use of technology, especially media technology, in the light of biblical holiness.”

Whether we pass this resolution or not, changes will continue to occur in the way our members perceive and use media technology. We will continue to face this type of question due to the innovation, proliferation, morphing, and merger of various media technologies including television, the Internet, computers, DVDs, MP3 players, cell phones, cable, wireless networks, and YouTube. The very definition and connotation of the words television and movies are changing. Thus, regardless of what we do with this resolution, we will continue to face new situations, and we will have to give relevant guidance to the people that we lead. We are being forced to enunciate scriptural principles more clearly and rely upon them more heavily, because no rules are adequate to cover all contingencies and developments.

My concern is that if we focus our energies exclusively on debating one rule devised to deal with one issue in 1977, we might “win” that battle but be unprepared for the many issues that face us in 2007 and that will face us in 2017, should the Lord tarry. I hope we can establish a new paradigm of how to discuss issues of this nature, build consensus, and make wise decisions. I also hope we can continue to be relevant and effective in responding to technological and cultural developments.

I want to uphold our Apostolic holiness identity. In order to do so, we must go beyond rules and establish principles to guide our conduct. We must teach our people to rely upon the Word of God and the power of the Holy Spirit and to pursue holiness regardless of technological developments, societal changes, and cultural choices.

Let’s pray that God will help our fellowship to deal with these issues appropriately and make good decisions in this matter. Let’s also pray that God will help us to simultaneously maintain holiness of life, apostolic unity, and effective outreach.

FANTASTIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ANYBODY who does not think so has a personal agenda and not the lost at heart!
Period.

[Strongminded]

Of course he is. A monkey with idiot disease would understand that.

MUUUUUUUWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[deltaguitar]

Three reasons:

1) Equal representation. Everybody gets a piece of the pie. If ads are put out nationally, each individual town can get their set up to be seen in their market. Many of the smaller guys that can't afford tv could compete with the bigger guys for public awareness.

2) The feeling that they don't have to compete with the local "big church" choir, big-name preachers that come through, etc...but instead, they will have quality programming, and some of our best will be there to represent all of "us" so to speak.

3) The sense that there will be more control over what goes on, and there won't be as much to worry about...it can be handled at the next GC if they see problems.



Equal representation? Competition? Control? It is this kind of thinking that makes me breath with relief that we no longer have to deal with this fear.

Why are we so scared that our neighboring church down the road might have success? Are we not all trying to grow the kingdom of God?

Local television time is not expensive! It has been proven many times here. Get a camera and some good bible studies or fireside chat type format.

You don't have to have a huge church with awesome music and great production. Thousands have been won to Christ with a simple home bible study.

If I was a home missions pastor I would be begging for the use of TV.

:saycheese

[tbpew]

If we want to maintain our Apostolic identity and if we want to promote Apostolic revival based on our identity, we must have greater loyalty to our Fundamental Doctrine than to a present or proposed ministerial rule.

AWESOME!!!!!!

worthy of my rarely used "bumping" perogative.
SM, keep it coming.

[CC1]

BTW - To further buttress the position that old time Pentecostals had better get a new paradigm (like spiritual maturity and personal accountibility) for handling things besides outright bans there was further proof yesterday that technologies continue to merge making a TV ban meaningless.

NBC television network announced yesterday that many of their prime time television shows will be available free at their website for viewing or downloading to PDA's, computers, etc for one week after their broadcast airing.

That means any UPC person with a computer can "watch TV" just as if they had a TV with cable or satellite.

[chaotic_resolve]

NBC television network announced yesterday that many of their prime time television shows will be available free at their website for viewing or downloading to PDA's, computers, etc for one week after their broadcast airing.

That means any UPC person with a computer can "watch TV" just as if they had a TV with cable or satellite.
This is well over a year old. The networks have been offering streaming content for certain shows for a while now. NBC seems to be a bit late as ABC, CBS and others have had this out for well over a year now.

Also, iTunes has had the ability to download movies and select tv shows to ipods for a while also.

My new Sprint phone (muziq by LG) has live television that is incredible in the fact that previous phones have had video content available, but it was really scrambled and didn't match up the video/audio. This new phone has matches up perfectly and is as clear as if i was watching via cable or dish.

I was watching FoxNews live the other day. Also the NFL network channel. There's a lot of other channels available, for an additional fee. (Spike, ABC, Cartoon Network, ESPN, Comedy, Mtv, etc)

I'm not surprised in what DB wrote. He's smart enough to know that the UPC doesn't have much, if any, Biblical legs to stand on in regards to technology - specifically television. And he understands the hypocrisy he'd be in if he spoke against television and left the internet untouched.

As for HQ creating, editing, controlling commercials - while that will probably be the only way it will pass . . . it's going to flop.

#1. If a cookie-cut commercial by HQ is playing along-side a local church commercial --- I'm thinking most will choose the local church that features local events, ministries, etc. I, for one, wouldn't visit a church that broadcast a cookie-cut commercial. I would want to know what the church is about, what local ministries it provides, etc.

#2. Prior experience with SFC radio spots were a joke. Seriously - they were terrible. The script, the quality, it was just a terrible project.

#3. Unless the UPC comes upon a large grant given to finance this project and offer the commercials free of charge, if PPH gets their mitts on it, it will be a low-quality, yet overpriced mess that most won't be able to afford and many wouldn't want to pay for.

#4. HQ has enough control of churches . . . back to #1 - they should leave local churches to advertise local content, etc.

JMO

[StillStanding]

I predict that the resolution will be ammended as advertising only, so that it can be studied as to the effect it it will have on the organization. If the response is a positive one, then they will re-consider allowing TV programs.

[SDG]

I predict that the resolution will be ammended as advertising only, so that it can be studied as to the effect it it will have on the organization. If the response is a positive one, then they will re-consider allowing TV programs.

http://library.thinkquest.org/CR0210200/ancient_greece/horse2.jpg

[Old Paths]

:banghead

[Truly Blessed]

Thank God for a voice of reason among all the divisive competing voices that don't have the clarity that DB has on this issue. As often happens the "issue" seems to have become something other than what the resolution was intended to address.

[Strongminded]

:banghead

Hence the way an UC reacts to reason......
Interpretation - "Why didnt I think of that"?

LOLOLOL

[hometown guy]

I'm not surprised in what DB wrote. He's smart enough to know that the UPC doesn't have much, if any, Biblical legs to stand on in regards to technology - specifically television. And he understands the hypocrisy he'd be in if he spoke against television and left the internet untouched.



JMO

the upc does have legs to stand on regarding t.v.
95% of t.v. goes against the word of God.(i will not dig throgh a trash can for a slice of cake).even are world today teaches that t.v. is not good for you.the reason why most of you will not say its wrong is because your flesh likes it and you dont have the backbone to kick it out of your house.

[hometown guy]

I'm not surprised in what DB wrote. He's smart enough to know that the UPC doesn't have much, if any, Biblical legs to stand on in regards to technology - specifically television. And he understands the hypocrisy he'd be in if he spoke against television and left the internet untouched.





JMO

and in regards to the internet,there is blocks and filters that will not even let you get in bad areas on the webb.and if its in someone heart they will find ways around it.we cant preach agaist everything but we will preach against sin.if the upci allows advertising on the t.v., may GOD help us!

[StillStanding]

and in regards to the internet,there is blocks and filters that will not even let you get in bad areas on the webb.and if its in someone heart they will find ways around it.we cant preach agaist everything but we will preach against sin.if the upci allows advertising on the t.v., may GOD help us!

The sky is falling! The sky is falling! :bliss

[philjones]

Equal representation? Competition? Control? It is this kind of thinking that makes me breath with relief that we no longer have to deal with this fear.

Why are we so scared that our neighboring church down the road might have success? Are we not all trying to grow the kingdom of God?

Local television time is not expensive! It has been proven many times here. Get a camera and some good bible studies or fireside chat type format.

You don't have to have a huge church with awesome music and great production. Thousands have been won to Christ with a simple home bible study.

If I was a home missions pastor I would be begging for the use of TV.

:saycheese

DG,

You have obviously never lived in Louisiana where there are SO many churches that when you see one of those yellow "church" traffic signs you EXPECT to see a Oneness Apostolic Church that is being identified by the sign.

There is so much church hopping goes on in LA that it is a legitimate concern that would only be exacerbated by local programming.

I have no dog in the fight and no pony in the show so I will continue to reserve my opinions on "the issue". I just wanted to bring out that it is a problem when you have so many churches so close and their latest revival is usually someone else's recently lost members. :D

[chosenbyone]

the upc does have legs to stand on regarding t.v.
95% of t.v. goes against the word of God.(i will not dig through a trash can for a slice of cake).even are world today teaches that t.v. is not good for you.the reason why most of you will not say its wrong is because your flesh likes it and you dont have the backbone to kick it out of your house.

I had just mentioned on another thread earlier how I tend to avoid controversy, but since I already stepped into that arena over on that thread, I decided to add my opinion on your aforementioned paragraph.

First let me share a little story with you. When I was a child, my cousin and I would sneak over to his grandmother's house to watch television, since like many conservatives there wasn't one in our household. That same cousin, who holds two master's degrees, never seemed to be able to find the balance needed to live in this world as a Christian once he had the liberty to make such decisions on his own.

That seemed to be the case with countless others when once they were given the options to have such devices in their homes, they didn't know how to incorporate them into their lives without causing some level of harm to their spiritual walk. We need to be able to teach our children moderation on so many things and the use of technological devices should be included in those discussions.

I do have a television in my home with a satellite connection, so that if I chose to watch a documentary, news or an airing special program of interest, I have the means to do so. I felt your comment about us Apostolic Christians who have televisions in our homes because we lacked the backbone to kick it out of our homes was really crossing the lines of civility. I do not or have I ever LOVED television.

It hasn't impacted my spiritual walk or my enjoyment of reading. I have remained an avid reader and I don't see that changing just because I have an additional electronic device sitting in the other room. I would agree with you that most of the programming on television is garbage; however, the Spirit of God controls the remote in my home and no one else.

Many blessings to you...

[CC1]

DG,

You have obviously never lived in Louisiana where there are SO many churches that when you see one of those yellow "church" traffic signs you EXPECT to see a Oneness Apostolic Church that is being identified by the sign.

There is so much church hopping goes on in LA that it is a legitimate concern that would only be exacerbated by local programming.

I have no dog in the fight and no pony in the show so I will continue to reserve my opinions on "the issue". I just wanted to bring out that it is a problem when you have so many churches so close and their latest revival is usually someone else's recently lost members. :D

If someone "hops" churches due to another churches TV advertising or program that is just sad. If you arrange your life or your religion around immaturity and stupidity like that you are never going to get beyond the baby stage.

[CC1]

DG,

You have obviously never lived in Louisiana where there are SO many churches that when you see one of those yellow "church" traffic signs you EXPECT to see a Oneness Apostolic Church that is being identified by the sign.

:D

Phil,

LOL!!! I know exactly what you mean. After living in La. I now feel funny riding my motorcycle around rural TN because there are almost no UPC churches or other Oneness churches in all of the little spots in the road. Here those churches are all Church of Christ. There must be a Church of Christ every 200 yards in TN.

I make it a point to look for Oneness churches and rarely find them here. In La. you can blink and by the time your eye opens again there is another one!

[freeatlast]

and in regards to the internet,there is blocks and filters that will not even let you get in bad areas on the webb.and if its in someone heart they will find ways around it.we cant preach agaist everything but we will preach against sin.if the upci allows advertising on the t.v., may GOD help us!

You seem like an inteligent person, so I'll assume you allready know that TV has an on and off button. Another neat feature on the remote is the ability to change the channel. Then ther is the mute button too.

as for blocks and filters the the web offers. TV's have the same feature to block content you don't want your kids to be ale to see.

Since you are posting here i'll assume you have internet in yor home.

How, oh please tell me how, you folks are able not to go to ABC or NBC dot com and watch any thing they offer. You can do that on you puter there bud.

Your argument that you control what you see on the NET vs. what I see on TV is so full of holes...I get embarrassed for you conservatives when I hear it brought up again.

It is just so stoopid !!:roseglasses

[Brett Prince]

You seem like an inteligent person, so I'll assume you allready know that TV has an on and off button. Another neat feature on the remote is the ability to change the channel. Then ther is the mute button too.

as for blocks and filters the the web offers. TV's have the same feature to block content you don't want your kids to be ale to see.

Since you are posting here i'll assume you have internet in yor home.

How, oh please tell me how, you folks are able not to go to ABC or NBC dot com and watch any thing they offer. You can do that on you puter there bud.

Your argument that you control what you see on the NET vs. what I see on TV is so full of holes...I get embarrassed for you conservatives when I hear it brought up again.

It is just so stoopid !!:roseglasses

Thus goes the merry-go-round.

[chaotic_resolve]

the upc does have legs to stand on regarding t.v.
95% of t.v. goes against the word of God.(i will not dig throgh a trash can for a slice of cake).even are world today teaches that t.v. is not good for you.the reason why most of you will not say its wrong is because your flesh likes it and you dont have the backbone to kick it out of your house.
Welcome, newbie. 95% of tv goes against the word of God? Nice statistic . . . what are the numbers based on? :hmmm

You want to talk about tv, but leave yourself open in regards to the internet, radio, magazines and just about anything else modern.

I seem to remember there being something in the Bible about gluttony, but that hasn't stopped ministers from chowing down at the buffet.

Tip for newbies, before you make a statement like, "the reason why most of you will not say its wrong is because your flesh likes it and you dont have the backbone to kick it out of your house," you should probably be sure we actually have a tv in our home.

I don't, therefore your point is moot. Just because I think the UPC should allow the freedom of choice in advertising doesn't mean I own a television.

and in regards to the internet,there is blocks and filters that will not even let you get in bad areas on the webb.and if its in someone heart they will find ways around it.we cant preach agaist everything but we will preach against sin.if the upci allows advertising on the t.v., may GOD help us!
I believe someone beat me to the point. There's a thing called parental controls on the tvs. Every tv has the ability to block channels based on ratings or content. And as was also mentioned, there's the on/off button or the channel arrows that allow for one to not have to watch anything offensive.

[pelathais]

the upc does have legs to stand on regarding t.v.
95% of t.v. goes against the word of God.(i will not dig throgh a trash can for a slice of cake).even are world today teaches that t.v. is not good for you.the reason why most of you will not say its wrong is because your flesh likes it and you dont have the backbone to kick it out of your house.
I think your judgment is skewed on this one htg. You may in fact be "projecting." You see, simply because you lack the ability to exercise self control doesn't mean that others do as well. It may be that you simply fear you lack the ability - in any case, you are projecting your own weakness and fear upon those around you. It's a simple case of your own ego overwhelming your discernment.

The fact of the matter is, most educated people see television as a potential problem in their homes, but also as a useful tool; kind of like the sledge hammer out in the garage. If used properly the sledge hammer is handy for a lot of tasks around the home; repairing the fence, setting stakes in the garden, etc. If used improperly the sledge hammer could in fact destroy your home. So do we throw out the sledge hammer?

Just because you don't have the strength to keep yourself from pecking away at your own foundation doesn't mean that others who are educated and trained in handling these issues can't be trusted with the tools in question.

Basically, I see people like you as being like those kids that play with tools that they don't know how to use. They end up with smashed thumbs, missing fingers and holes and cracks in the foundations of their homes. The "lesson" they learn is not to be skillful and expert in the use of tools, but instead they learn to be fearful and afraid. When they (you) see another kid pick up a hammer they (you) immediately launch into some horror story about how you lost a finger tip.

Without tools the house will fall into disrepair. Improperly using those tools will result in people being maimed and skittish of the work that needs to be done. Education and training is what we need; not projections of your own weaknesses upon those around you.

[crakjak]

I think your judgment is skewed on this one htg. You may in fact be "projecting." You see, simply because you lack the ability to exercise self control doesn't mean that others do as well. It may be that you simply fear you lack the ability - in any case, you are projecting your own weakness and fear upon those around you. It's a simple case of your own ego overwhelming your discernment.

The fact of the matter is, most educated people see television as a potential problem in their homes, but also as a useful tool; kind of like the sledge hammer out in the garage. If used properly the sledge hammer is handy for a lot of tasks around the home; repairing the fence, setting stakes in the garden, etc. If used improperly the sledge hammer could in fact destroy your home. So do we throw out the sledge hammer?

Just because you don't have the strength to keep yourself from pecking away at your own foundation doesn't mean that others who are educated and trained in handling these issues can't be trusted with the tools in question.

Basically, I see people like you as being like those kids that play with tools that they don't know how to use. They end up with smashed thumbs, missing fingers and holes and cracks in the foundations of their homes. The "lesson" they learn is not to be skillful and expert in the use of tools, but instead they learn to be fearful and afraid. When they (you) see another kid pick up a hammer they (you) immediately launch into some horror story about how you lost a finger tip.

Without tools the house will fall into disrepair. Improperly using those tools will result in people being maimed and skittish of the work that needs to be done. Education and training is what we need; not projections of your own weaknesses upon those around you.

Very well said, Pelathais. "... and above all get understanding...", if we equip ourselves and our children they are not easily deceived.

Fear hinders so many from becoming all they can become, and is even distrustful of the power of the Spirit of God, to make them overcomers.

[chosenbyone]

I think your judgment is skewed on this one htg. You may in fact be "projecting." You see, simply because you lack the ability to exercise self control doesn't mean that others do as well. It may be that you simply fear you lack the ability - in any case, you are projecting your own weakness and fear upon those around you. It's a simple case of your own ego overwhelming your discernment.

The fact of the matter is, most educated people see television as a potential problem in their homes, but also as a useful tool; kind of like the sledge hammer out in the garage. If used properly the sledge hammer is handy for a lot of tasks around the home; repairing the fence, setting stakes in the garden, etc. If used improperly the sledge hammer could in fact destroy your home. So do we throw out the sledge hammer?

Just because you don't have the strength to keep yourself from pecking away at your own foundation doesn't mean that others who are educated and trained in handling these issues can't be trusted with the tools in question.

Basically, I see people like you as being like those kids that play with tools that they don't know how to use. They end up with smashed thumbs, missing fingers and holes and cracks in the foundations of their homes. The "lesson" they learn is not to be skillful and expert in the use of tools, but instead they learn to be fearful and afraid. When they (you) see another kid pick up a hammer they (you) immediately launch into some horror story about how you lost a finger tip.

Without tools the house will fall into disrepair. Improperly using those tools will result in people being maimed and skittish of the work that needs to be done. Education and training is what we need; not projections of your own weaknesses upon those around you.

Your post above was by far the best response to the opinions of the more conservative members of our movement regarding the TV issue than I have read to date.

Excellent.

[RevBuddy]

We UPCers must be afraid of our own shadow!!! Bro. Bernard is clearly attempting to influence those who will listen to his old, blow-dried argument AGAIN...

...we're so concerned of the BOGIEMAN that we can't get out of our own way spiritually and evangelistically...

...we're still focused on THINGS...not SOULS...

...let's see what we can condemn today...technology...opposing opinions...brethren...all with the excuse of holiness...

...can we get any further away from true holiness...I fear our leaders don't have a clue...

...God forbid, they get a glimpse of the real world with real people and real needs and real dispair...no, just harp and harp and harp...

...Shakespeare was right, "much ado about nothing."

[Strongminded]

the upc does have legs to stand on regarding t.v.
95% of t.v. goes against the word of God.(i will not dig throgh a trash can for a slice of cake).even are world today teaches that t.v. is not good for you.the reason why most of you will not say its wrong is because your flesh likes it and you dont have the backbone to kick it out of your house.

DO you know how much trash you had to dig through to enjoy this internet???

Enjoy your cake.

[SDG]

We UPCers must be afraid of our own shadow!!! Bro. Bernard is clearly attempting to influence those who will listen to his old, blow-dried argument AGAIN...

...we're so concerned of the BOGIEMAN that we can't get out of our own way spiritually and evangelistically...

...we're still focused on THINGS...not SOULS...

...let's see what we can condemn today...technology...opposing opinions...brethren...all with the excuse of holiness...

...can we get any further away from true holiness...I fear our leaders don't have a clue...

...God forbid, they get a glimpse of the real world with real people and real needs and real dispair...no, just harp and harp and harp...

...Shakespeare was right, "much ado about nothing."

Souls? What's that?

[freeatlast]

DO you know how much trash you had to dig through to enjoy this internet???

Enjoy your cake.

Elvis (and HTG) have left the building.

[hometown guy]

DO you know how much trash you had to dig through to enjoy this internet???

Enjoy your cake.nope guess not i didnt have to go to anything i didnt click on.

[hometown guy]

You seem like an inteligent person, so I'll assume you allready know that TV has an on and off button. Another neat feature on the remote is the ability to change the channel. Then ther is the mute button too.

as for blocks and filters the the web offers. TV's have the same feature to block content you don't want your kids to be ale to see.

Since you are posting here i'll assume you have internet in yor home.

How, oh please tell me how, you folks are able not to go to ABC or NBC dot com and watch any thing they offer. You can do that on you puter there bud.

Your argument that you control what you see on the NET vs. what I see on TV is so full of holes...I get embarrassed for you conservatives when I hear it brought up again.

It is just so stoopid !!:roseglasses
thats the thing we stay away from abc and nbc.i do agree that the internet is very dangerous too. but if you look at some of these filters and blocks you would be amazed you cant even see pictures that people post on this forum.
my wife is a school teacher and does thing on the computer.i use it to study, and once in a while go to this fourm,and listen to some preaching messages.AND WHAT DO USE THE T.V. FOR.do you see the BIG diferece now.

[copyman59]

If these issues aren't addressed and are always viewed as " middle ground ", we'll spin our wheels in the mud of lethargy while our movement carps about evils affecting the church! Bro. Bernard should be commended for his insight!

[RevBuddy]

Dan:

S - Someone, anyone in need of encouragement, hope and purpose
O - One-on-one evangelism
U - Unselfish, unrestrained, unlimited faith in His Spirit & Word
L - Love without judgment or self-righteousness...agape-like
S - The Savior's great commandment

:tiphat

[Steve Epley]

Christ Church is a mega church WITHOUT television advertising how is that?????
Think if he had only had television.:hypercoffee

[CC1]

Christ Church is a mega church WITHOUT television advertising how is that?????
Think if he had only had television.:hypercoffee

Probably 10,000 instead of 4,000
:killinme

[Steve Epley]

Probably 10,000 instead of 4,000
:killinme

Building a new church means money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:poloroid

[RevDWW]

the upc does have legs to stand on regarding t.v.
95% of t.v. goes against the word of God.(i will not dig throgh a trash can for a slice of cake).even are world today teaches that t.v. is not good for you.the reason why most of you will not say its wrong is because your flesh likes it and you dont have the backbone to kick it out of your house.

No cake from the trash, but I would imagine you'd eat a carrot out of the garden.

[RevDWW]

and in regards to the internet,there is blocks and filters that will not even let you get in bad areas on the webb.and if its in someone heart they will find ways around it.we cant preach agaist everything but we will preach against sin.if the upci allows advertising on the t.v., may GOD help us!

T.V. or no may God helps us all!

[CC1]

Building a new church means money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:poloroid

Most likely all of the little old gullible ladies on Social Security retirement who gave millions to Robert Tilton, Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart are dead now and a whole new generation awaits to be gently seperated from their meager income.

I know SM works at that on telethons from time to time but I am betting there is always room for some charismatic personality to rake in the dough.

All you have to do is promise people physical blessings and prosperity if they give to your ministry. This slot machine gospel seems to go over very well even though it is perversion of the true Gospel.

However in the case of Robert (Bob) Tilton he was so over the top that I don't feel sorry for anybody stupid enough to send him money. LOL!!

[H2H]

Most likely all of the little old gullible ladies on Social Security retirement who gave millions to Robert Tilton, Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart are dead now and a whole new generation awaits to be gently seperated from their meager income.

I know SM works at that on telethons from time to time but I am betting there is always room for some charismatic personality to rake in the dough.

All you have to do is promise people physical blessings and prosperity if they give to your ministry. This slot machine gospel seems to go over very well even though it is perversion of the true Gospel.

However in the case of Robert (Box) Tilton he was so over the top that I don't feel sorry for anybody stupid enough to send him money. LOL!!


This is the way it is with most false ways - they are detroyed buy the lies they believe.

[chosenbyone]

This is the way it is with most false ways - they are detroyed buy the lies they believe.

True. But let's not forget that the spirit that promoted those false ways are still on this earth today. Even someone like Tilton who has totally made a mockery of God has come back on the scene in the last few years. He could be seen in many markets on BET late at night and the report I read was he was raking in millions of dollars from those so desperate that they would give money to a charlatan just to have hope. CC1 was correct when he wrote that the majority of those that give to such ministries were the ones that were elderly and on fixed incomes. Very, very sad...

[Brett Prince]

Interestingly enough, a charismatic church in Forth Worth that runs 10,000 refuses to do tv. It is not from a moral/holiness issue, but a ministry philosophy. They decided to take the money they would use for tv and invest in more full-time staff pastors. I understand they have 74. They are growing by leaps and bounds and have not been around long.

[Pastor Keith]

Interestingly enough, a charismatic church in Forth Worth that runs 10,000 refuses to do tv. It is not from a moral/holiness issue, but a ministry philosophy. They decided to take the money they would use for tv and invest in more full-time staff pastors. I understand they have 74. They are growing by leaps and bounds and have not been around long.

Brett,

I don't think that TV or TV advertising will solve all of the UPCI outreach growth issues, nothing beats connecting to a live person and developing authentic relationships that lead to discipleship and Koneia, but for pete's sake at least give people the luxury and freedom to choose the option.

After studying and teaching this last week on Romans 14 I come away with a new understanding and appreciation for handling disputable matters.

Those who want liberty stop despising the weaker brethren who live by more rules and regulations, and those who are have lesser liberties and are offended easily, stop judging those that have more liberty.

[redeemedcynic84]

Interestingly enough, a charismatic church in Forth Worth that runs 10,000 refuses to do tv. It is not from a moral/holiness issue, but a ministry philosophy. They decided to take the money they would use for tv and invest in more full-time staff pastors. I understand they have 74. They are growing by leaps and bounds and have not been around long.

74 full-time staff pastors??

I have to say props to whoever the head pastor of that church is for being willing to share his pulpit with 73 other men...

[StillStanding]

Interestingly enough, a charismatic church in Forth Worth that runs 10,000 refuses to do tv. It is not from a moral/holiness issue, but a ministry philosophy. They decided to take the money they would use for tv and invest in more full-time staff pastors. I understand they have 74. They are growing by leaps and bounds and have not been around long.
I think this is great! Really! :)

Just remember that this decision was a local assembly CHOICE, and was not forced on them by a controlling organization!

[CC1]

Interestingly enough, a charismatic church in Forth Worth that runs 10,000 refuses to do tv. It is not from a moral/holiness issue, but a ministry philosophy. They decided to take the money they would use for tv and invest in more full-time staff pastors. I understand they have 74. They are growing by leaps and bounds and have not been around long.

I don't know anybody who thinks TV advertising or programs are THE answer. It is just a very important tool in the arsenal of reaching people for Christ.

[Raven]

Brett,

I don't think that TV or TV advertising will solve all of the UPCI outreach growth issues, nothing beats connecting to a live person and developing authentic relationships that lead to discipleship and Koneia, but for pete's sake at least give people the luxury and freedom to choose the option.

After studying and teaching this last week on Romans 14 I come away with a new understanding and appreciation for handling disputable matters.

Those who want liberty stop despising the weaker brethren who live by more rules and regulations, and those who are have lesser liberties and are offended easily, stop judging those that have more liberty.
Good words Keith!
Raven

[hometown guy]

I think this is great! Really! :)

Just remember that this decision was a local assembly CHOICE, and was not forced on them by a controlling organization!

remember they joined this controlling organization with those rules.

[Strongminded]

nope guess not i didnt have to go to anything i didnt click on.

And you dont have to go to a channel you dont turn to.

[B_Kendrick]

And yet why set a playboy, which I have HEARD... ahem... not read, has some very good articles in it that are clean in front of you. Hmmm... why dont we just TURN to certain pages instead of flipping through the whole magazine! Hey good idea, where do I describe!?!?! :doh Ahem.. anywayz... well I guess thats a good way to start it off!

I just was reading this, and figured I'd throw in my comments! Not to bash anybody or anything, but just thought i'd hmmm... Run my mouth!?! =D But one thing that came to mind while reading this thread is what about the future generations!?!? Yeah, YOU may be able to control what you watch, and YOU may be able to resist the garbage, and YOU may be able to determne whats right and wrong... but what about your kids!?!? If every generation let down just a little bit, where would we be, or even the UPCI be, in three generations!? We've set a standard not to have a television because we have drawn a line. There ARE some good things on television, I must admit, yet whats the purpose of it? Entertainment? Self enjoymnt? OR JUST A WASTE OF TIME!?!?!? The average American spends close to three hours a day watching television.. AHEM!!! I also have researchable and valid proof for that! Now do any of you have that kind of time in a day to do that? Well if you do, please forgive me for saying so but, GET A LIFE!!! =D And I smile when I say that! Now there is the argument that its family time! Lol, sorry to shoot this down, but ever heard of talking around a living room? Playing board games together? Our family used to go for a walk every night. And I'm closing, lol, our favorite three words.. But one last thing, if you were to sit in front of a TV, or even your kids, and your mind is constantly entertainment, how much do you expect in a church service? It so much harder for a congregation to push through the veil of our flesh due to the mentality of entertain me, entertain me!!! And not only that, but how much is our knowledge increasing by WATCHING something? Our imagination is NOT being used therefore our brain knowledge does not expand! Ask any college professor, or doctors, or research EXPERTS and they'll tell you that TV is not goood for you anyways! Thats also in aarticle I'm going to hafta to look up! But anyways... I'm done! I just thought I'd thorw this out there! And this is just about watching TV alone, not about advertising on Tv, and thats going to hafta come later cuz I gota JAM!! I'm OUT!!!

[redeemedcynic84]

And yet why set a playboy, which I have HEARD... ahem... not read, has some very good articles in it that are clean in front of you. Hmmm... why dont we just TURN to certain pages instead of flipping through the whole magazine! Hey good idea, where do I describe!?!?! :doh Ahem.. anywayz... well I guess thats a good way to start it off!

the articles aren't anything you can't get in more PG or PG-13 rated men's magazines...

but, see, that's the thing here... The Internet is the one with porn a click away... If you have tv, even the high-end cable, you will only get nudity if you pay for premium channels (HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, ppv, or porn channels)... Even the most comprehensive cable package, without premium channels/services, has absolutely no nudity in it... Yes, there is a lot of inuendo, but it is nothing like Playboy, which is why your comparison doesn't work...

A better comparison is "Should I cancel my subscription to Sports Illustrated because once a year they make a swimsuit issue that you don't even have to get if you don't want it??"...

[bishoph]

the articles aren't anything you can't get in more PG or PG-13 rated men's magazines...

but, see, that's the thing here... The Internet is the one with porn a click away... If you have tv, even the high-end cable, you will only get nudity if you pay for premium channels (HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, ppv, or porn channels)... Even the most comprehensive cable package, without premium channels/services, has absolutely no nudity in it... Yes, there is a lot of inuendo, but it is nothing like Playboy, which is why your comparison doesn't work...

A better comparison is "Should I cancel my subscription to Sports Illustrated because once a year they make a swimsuit issue that you don't even have to get if you don't want it??"...

I'm not sure what planet you're on, but here in America nudity, sex, violence, homosexuality, drugs and many other ungodly things are able to be seen on basic cable channels. You must remember that many of the TV-14/PG13 shows that are seen now would have been R rated and some even X rated just a few years ago.

[deltaguitar]

I'm not sure what planet you're on, but here in America nudity, sex, violence, homosexuality, drugs and many other ungodly things are able to be seen on basic cable channels. You must remember that many of the TV-14/PG13 shows that are seen now would have been R rated and some even X rated just a few years ago.

:koolaid:sshhh

[StillStanding]

:koolaid:sshhh
Just as you may install blockers for some websites, you can install blockers for certain TV ratings. You can set it to only allow PG rated TV shows if you wish!

YOU determine what kind of content is allowed in your household!

[DividedThigh]

Just as you may install blockers for some websites, you can install blockers for certain TV ratings. You can set it to only allow PG rated TV shows if you wish!

YOU determine what kind of content is allowed in your household!

amen bro, that is a fact, i even have a nanny on my computer, that wont:hypercoffee allow even pharses that sound bad, to it, lol, dt

[HangingOut]

I doubt many would argue any points you made. The issue that is proving out is, you can't legislate this on a national or international level anymore.
There is diversification of thought as to the use and control of internet, video, cell/internet, etc. It is senseless and obscure to leave TV out of all that. Thus the reason for DB to address principles as an important ingredient.



And yet why set a playboy, which I have HEARD... ahem... not read, has some very good articles in it that are clean in front of you. Hmmm... why dont we just TURN to certain pages instead of flipping through the whole magazine! Hey good idea, where do I describe!?!?! :doh Ahem.. anywayz... well I guess thats a good way to start it off!

I just was reading this, and figured I'd throw in my comments! Not to bash anybody or anything, but just thought i'd hmmm... Run my mouth!?! =D But one thing that came to mind while reading this thread is what about the future generations!?!? Yeah, YOU may be able to control what you watch, and YOU may be able to resist the garbage, and YOU may be able to determne whats right and wrong... but what about your kids!?!? If every generation let down just a little bit, where would we be, or even the UPCI be, in three generations!? We've set a standard not to have a television because we have drawn a line. There ARE some good things on television, I must admit, yet whats the purpose of it? Entertainment? Self enjoymnt? OR JUST A WASTE OF TIME!?!?!? The average American spends close to three hours a day watching television.. AHEM!!! I also have researchable and valid proof for that! Now do any of you have that kind of time in a day to do that? Well if you do, please forgive me for saying so but, GET A LIFE!!! =D And I smile when I say that! Now there is the argument that its family time! Lol, sorry to shoot this down, but ever heard of talking around a living room? Playing board games together? Our family used to go for a walk every night. And I'm closing, lol, our favorite three words.. But one last thing, if you were to sit in front of a TV, or even your kids, and your mind is constantly entertainment, how much do you expect in a church service? It so much harder for a congregation to push through the veil of our flesh due to the mentality of entertain me, entertain me!!! And not only that, but how much is our knowledge increasing by WATCHING something? Our imagination is NOT being used therefore our brain knowledge does not expand! Ask any college professor, or doctors, or research EXPERTS and they'll tell you that TV is not goood for you anyways! Thats also in aarticle I'm going to hafta to look up! But anyways... I'm done! I just thought I'd thorw this out there! And this is just about watching TV alone, not about advertising on Tv, and thats going to hafta come later cuz I gota JAM!! I'm OUT!!!

[B_Kendrick]

Just as you may install blockers for some websites, you can install blockers for certain TV ratings. You can set it to only allow PG rated TV shows if you wish!

YOU determine what kind of content is allowed in your household!

Yet what is the internet used for in your home? We have internet obviously, and it is mainly used for a tool. Of course we have sites like this, which I do enjoy, and church websites, but like I said, a TV is for pure entertainment. I havnt ever heard of somebody watching TV to learn something or look up something. Its kinda funny that the Discovery channel seem to be the most popular channel! :shifty Is that why you have a TV? Just for the discovery channel? I doubt it. And like it was mentioned, the ratings have been getting lower. What was X rated is now R rated, and what was R rated is now PG and PG13. So what good does that do???

[hometown guy]

A better comparison is "Should I cancel my subscription to Sports Illustrated because once a year they make a swimsuit issue that you don't even have to get if you don't want it??"...

YES. that was easy.

[Starbucks]

When do they vote on the resolutions?

[SDG]

When do they vote on the resolutions?

The business meeting will begin on Thursday ... if history is an indicator ... the TV Resolution will not be voted on until Friday.

[James Griffin]

The business meeting will begin on Thursday ... if history is an indicator ... the TV Resolution will not be voted on until Friday.

Unless there is a repeat of last year

[SDG]

Unless there is a repeat of last year

There will be a decision made.