View Full Version : I am very sad and have been most of the day...
It's not Keith's fault, but ever since I read his thread this morning the sadness has grown.
Who is right and who is wrong in this issue?!
Is leaving the answer or is staying the better thing to do?!
I just do not understand it...
Will an exodus/split incite growth or demise?!
Who can say for certainty that they have the words which will bring healing?!
Would anyone hear and heed if they did?!
I don't know...
Can we ever go about with business as usual again?!
RevDWW
10-02-2007, 06:37 PM
It's not Keith's fault, but ever since I read his thread this morning the sadness has grown.
Who is right and who is wrong in this issue?!
Is leaving the answer or is staying the better thing to do?!
I just do not understand it...
Will an exodus/split incite growth or demise?!
Who can say for certainty that they have the words which will bring healing?!
Would anyone hear and heed if they did?!
I don't know...
Can we ever go about with business as usual again?!
Just remember Joseph's words to his brothers "But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive."
Praxeas
10-02-2007, 06:45 PM
What I find facinating is that at the beginning there were many different denominations all praying together. They did not fight, but they also did not all agree doctrinally. Contrary to popular opinion amoung many UCs....the movement was not always all Holiness people (standards). There were many differences, yet they did not feel to fight until the new issue so called. And even then, just afterwards, Trinitarians and OPs still fellowshipped one another and preached for one another until the divide became too large that they could not stand one another. I see this is just a repeat of the same trend. I see that even after some UCs leave, it will continue. Pentecost was originally billed as something that was unifying for us all including race....but we see that was just a pipe dreamm after all...or was it?
Sherri
10-02-2007, 08:33 PM
Barb, when all the guys left in 1992 and immediately afterwards, people felt the same way. But the UPC is a strong organization and it survived. It will feel the pain again, but it will go on I'm sure. There is a strong middle-of-the-road core.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 08:41 PM
The middle has moved this time.
When the AS came, nothing as far as standards changed. It asked men to affirm regularly what they affirmed when they applied for license. I'm not its bigest fan, but it did not do what the resolution that passed last week did.
That resolution, for the first time in our history, removed a distinctive that identified us as a separate people.
That is chilling.
Sherri
10-02-2007, 08:43 PM
The middle has moved this time.
When the AS came, nothing as far as standards changed. It asked men to affirm regularly what they affirmed when they applied for license. I'm not its bigest fan, but it did not do what the resolution that passed last week did.
That resolution, for the first time in our history, removed a distinctive that identified us as a separate people.
That is chilling.
You're probably right. I've been so far removed from it that I don't have a feel for it anymore. But I do think it will survive.
Pastor Keith
10-02-2007, 08:50 PM
It's not Keith's fault, but ever since I read his thread this morning the sadness has grown.
Who is right and who is wrong in this issue?!
Is leaving the answer or is staying the better thing to do?!
I just do not understand it...
Will an exodus/split incite growth or demise?!
Who can say for certainty that they have the words which will bring healing?!
Would anyone hear and heed if they did?!
I don't know...
Can we ever go about with business as usual again?!
What did I do now? Remember there has been no real confirmation, but all indication is that many will be leaving.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 08:53 PM
The middle has moved this time.
When the AS came, nothing as far as standards changed. It asked men to affirm regularly what they affirmed when they applied for license. I'm not its bigest fan, but it did not do what the resolution that passed last week did.
That resolution, for the first time in our history, removed a distinctive that identified us as a separate people.
That is chilling.
Considering that many, dare I say most, Apostolics have TV in their homes, exactly how did it separate us, and in what way were we seen differently than the ALJC folks?
Mosby48
10-02-2007, 08:55 PM
The middle has moved this time.
When the AS came, nothing as far as standards changed. It asked men to affirm regularly what they affirmed when they applied for license. I'm not its bigest fan, but it did not do what the resolution that passed last week did.
That resolution, for the first time in our history, removed a distinctive that identified us as a separate people.
That is chilling.
I agree with Coonskinner. I'm not even sure there is a middle on these issues. It seems everyone is hard set for or against their own personal stand on resolution #4, that there is no room for common sense or tolerance. Resolution #3 has so much room for abuse it is scary. I've never seen very many people resist the temptation to use controlling power when given it. All of this opens a door that will never be shut.
UltraCon
10-02-2007, 08:56 PM
With cons getting out the balance will shift to the left. I think the UPC will survive but it will have a different look than it had before Friday. The end is NOT coming as some may think. There will be guys that will replace me and my friends when we leave so i'm not convinced that there will be a drastic change in the numbers.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 08:59 PM
Considering that many, dare I say most, Apostolics have TV in their homes, exactly how did it separate us, and in what way were we seen differently than the ALJC folks?
HO,
The distinctive was this: we refuse to go on tv with our people, our worship, and our message, because we believe the medium to be unworthy and ineffective.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:04 PM
HO,
The distinctive was this: we refuse to go on tv with our people, our worship, and our message, because we believe the medium to be unworthy and ineffective.
I'm having problems understanding where the identification part comes in, that's all. I don't understand how not going on TV identified us as a separate people, especially when we consider that the same was done with radio at one time.
HO,
The distinctive was this: we refuse to go on tv with our people, our worship, and our message, because we believe the medium to be unworthy and ineffective.
How can a medium be "unworthy"? To me this is the entire problem with the ultra con view.
You guys try to humanize technology. Television is nothing more than a means of communication like books, radio, billboards, telephone, etc.
If your gripe is that the majority of the programming is not good then lay that blame at the feet of Christians as they have conceded the medium to the "prince of the air" for the most part.
I find no logic in considering technology evil or "unworthy". It is a conduit and putting the Gospel message in that conduit for some to see and hear that may not any other way is good.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:07 PM
I'm having problems understanding where the identification part comes in, that's all. I don't understand how not going on TV identified us as a separate people, especially when we consider that the same was done with radio at one time.
It was one thing that set us apart, not THE thing.
We were probably the only Pentecostal organization, trinity or oneness, that took that kind of stand.
It was a reflection of our rejection of Hollywood.
(I am finding it very sad to have to speak of this in past tense)
:(
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:08 PM
How can a medium be "unworthy"? To me this is the entire problem with the ultra con view.
You guys try to humanize technology. Television is nothing more than a means of communication like books, radio, billboards, telephone, etc.
If your gripe is that the majority of the programming is not good then lay that blame at the feet of Christians as they have conceded the medium to the "prince of the air" for the most part.
I find no logic in considering technology evil or "unworthy". It is a conduit and putting the Gospel message in that conduit for some to see and hear that may not any other way is good.
The content on the medium is expressly controlled by a group of the most ungodly people you could dredge up anywhere--producers.
Sherri
10-02-2007, 09:11 PM
The content on the medium is expressly controlled by a group of the most ungodly people you could dredge up anywhere--producers.
I guess I just think it makes sense to take 30-60 minutes and redeem it for the Lord. At least people would be getting a bit of God instead of the regular filth.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:15 PM
It was one thing that set us apart, not THE thing.
We were probably the only Pentecostal organization, trinity or oneness, that took that kind of stand.
It was a reflection of our rejection of Hollywood.
(I am finding it very sad to have to speak of this in past tense)
:(
I hear you and can understand where you are coming from, but I find it hard to believe that it's something one considers that sets us apart, especially since 'monitors' have been allowed in pastor and preacher homes for years now, and in order to watch anything, one would have to be in the video store.
That stand made sense when I was a kid, but it hasn't been the case since....oh, at least the last 15 years, from where I am from anyway.
And the separation you speak of existed only among the different Apostolic orgs, because the 'sinner folk' really don't have a clue in that regard. And perhaps that's what you meant anyway.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:19 PM
I hear you and can understand where you are coming from, but I find it hard to believe that it's something one considers that sets us apart, especially since 'monitors' have been allowed in pastor and preacher homes for years now, and in order to watch anything, one would have to be in the video store.
That stand made sense when I was a kid, but it hasn't been the case since....oh, at least the last 15 years, from where I am from anyway.
And the separation you speak of existed only among the different Apostolic orgs, because the 'sinner folk' really don't have a clue in that regard. And perhaps that's what you meant anyway.
HO,
You keep missing the point.
I know very well that tv's have been in peoples' homes for years.
But we did not minister on television. That is what changed.
We were probably the only tongue talking group of any size that observed this line of separation.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:19 PM
CS, you didn't address the radio issue I brought up. We once taught against it, but have been preaching on it for years now. It's now thought of as no big deal, even though years ago it was seen in the same light that TV is (or was) now.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:21 PM
CS, you didn't address the radio issue I brought up. We once taught against it, but have been preaching on it for years now. It's now thought of as no big deal, even though years ago it was seen in the same light that TV is (or was) now.
We never took an official stance as a movement against radio like we did tv.
that is the difference.
There were some men who preached against it, but it was never a collective agreement endorsed and ratified by the body of voting ministers.
Mosby48
10-02-2007, 09:22 PM
How can a medium be "unworthy"? To me this is the entire problem with the ultra con view.
You guys try to humanize technology. Television is nothing more than a means of communication like books, radio, billboards, telephone, etc.
If your gripe is that the majority of the programming is not good then lay that blame at the feet of Christians as they have conceded the medium to the "prince of the air" for the most part.
I find no logic in considering technology evil or "unworthy". It is a conduit and putting the Gospel message in that conduit for some to see and hear that may not any other way is good.
I don't think we are "humanizing" the technology of TV. How do you advertise on something that most will agree has few redeeming attributes? We would be advertising on a medium is unwholesome and mostly unfit to watch. I agree that is partly because the religious right has condemned programs and then watched them that much of the filth is broadcast.
When you consider that the majority of Americans innately distrust and ignore TV ministers, I don't have much hope for saving vast numbers of souls. I feel more of our children will be lost to the teaching on TV than we will ever save. Using your logic, we should go and witness in bars and topless clubs.
The content on the medium is expressly controlled by a group of the most ungodly people you could dredge up anywhere--producers.
And you willingly concede that to them without offering any positive alternative to what they provide.
As I have said ad naseum Tv is not a cure all answer for evangelism but to deny that it can reach people who will otherwise never hear the gospel is inexcusable.
There are large urban areas where the only concept of Christianity is the RC church and other old dead mainline denominations that don't even hold scripture as infallible any more. It would be nice for these folks to at least have the opportunity to be exposed to the gospel while channel surfing.
Sherri
10-02-2007, 09:23 PM
We never took an official stance as a movement against radio like we did tv.
that is the difference.
There were some men who preached against it, but it was never a collective agreement endorsed and ratified by the body of voting ministers.
My Grandma Kloepper told me that radio was a big "no-no" back in the day when it first came out. Maybe it was just an understood rule, but not official.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:23 PM
HO,
You keep missing the point.
I know very well that tv's have been in peoples' homes for years.
But we did not minister on television. That is what changed.
We were probably the only tongue talking group of any size that observed this line of separation.
Ok, gotcha on the point.....LOL!
I'm still puzzled why you consider it a line of separation, as if without this line, we are just 'average' or something.
Don't you think the old timers thought the same thing when we allowed preaching on radio, the wearing of red and open-toed shoes, and such like?
Yet today, we think nothing of those issues.
And honestly, if TV advertising didn't work, the Methodists, LDS, Baptists, and other groups wouldn't be wasting their money after all these years.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:24 PM
We never took an official stance as a movement against radio like we did tv.
that is the difference.
There were some men who preached against it, but it was never a collective agreement endorsed and ratified by the body of voting ministers.
Was it because the org was so new at the time? Perhaps because the manual wasn't seen in the same light it is today?
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:27 PM
And you willingly concede that to them without offering any positive alternative to what they provide.
As I have said ad naseum Tv is not a cure all answer for evangelism but to deny that it can reach people who will otherwise never hear the gospel is inexcusable.
There are large urban areas where the only concept of Christianity is the RC church and other old dead mainline denominations that don't even hold scripture as infallible any more. It would be nice for these folks to at least have the opportunity to be exposed to the gospel while channel surfing.
If we were ever going to do it, it should have been before the televangelists totally ruined all credibility for tv ministry.
Furthermore, I don't think tv is a very effective medium for communicating the Gospel.
There is a pretty good slug of research to suggest that tv ministry redistributes converts, but doesn't make many.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:28 PM
Was it because the org was so new at the time? Perhaps because the manual wasn't seen in the same light it is today?
I doubt if there was ever a majority preaching against radio.
Bottom line, it was never a stance taken officially by the org.
We crossed a line we have never before crossed last Friday.
Sherri
10-02-2007, 09:29 PM
If we were ever going to do it, it should have been before the televangelists totally ruined all credibility for tv ministry.
Furthermore, I don't think tv is a very effective medium for communicating the Gospel.
There is a pretty good slug of research to suggest that tv ministry redistributes converts, but doesn't make many.
Maybe with the big time evangelists, but not so with local programming. We have seen LOTS of new converts because of our TV show.
I don't think we are "humanizing" the technology of TV. How do you advertise on something that most will agree has few redeeming attributes? .
Because the bible says to go out into the highways and byways and compel them to come in!
The people that are watching the programming you don't approve of are the very people you want to reach.
The logic is just amazing. I am glad I am not going to have to sit at the white throne judgement and explain why I didn't utilize every means to communicate the Gospel. That I would not use one because I didn't approve of the other things being communicated on it.
Why don't you boycott printed Bibles since Playboy magazines are also printed on presses and sold in stores as reading material? The logic is the same.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:36 PM
If we were ever going to do it, it should have been before the televangelists totally ruined all credibility for tv ministry.
Furthermore, I don't think tv is a very effective medium for communicating the Gospel.
There is a pretty good slug of research to suggest that tv ministry redistributes converts, but doesn't make many.
That bolded part I totally agree with.
As for how effective it will be....well.....how much is the price of one soul?
Keep in mind that we aren't replacing what we know works with TV, just adding to what's already being done.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:39 PM
That bolded part I totally agree with.
As for how effective it will be....well.....how much is the price of one soul?
Keep in mind that we aren't replacing what we know works with TV, just adding to what's already being done.
Well, now we will see in a few years who was right--the elders, or the young guys that want the liberty to try this thing out.
I say it will change the UPC, and over a period of time, she will no longer be recognizable.
In my area, that kind of thing will be a long time coming, I believe...
But not so far away in some places
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:39 PM
I doubt if there was ever a majority preaching against radio.
Bottom line, it was never a stance taken officially by the org.
We crossed a line we have never before crossed last Friday.
Hope you don't see my posts as argument, because that's not my intention. I'm trying to understand this better, not being a minister nor been around them much (except for LR).
Do you see an honest difference in internet broadcasting and TV? I mean, assuming they will be doing the same thing on TV they are doing on internet.
Well, now we will see in a few years who was right--the elders, or the young guys that want the liberty to try this thing out.
I say it will change the UPC, and over a period of time, she will no longer be recognizable.
In my area, that kind of thing will be a long time coming, I believe...
But not so far away in some places
From your lips to the ears of God............
The UPC is "looking our way"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:45 PM
Hope you don't see my posts as argument, because that's not my intention. I'm trying to understand this better, not being a minister nor been around them much (except for LR).
Do you see an honest difference in internet broadcasting and TV? I mean, assuming they will be doing the same thing on TV they are doing on internet.
No, I don't see all that much difference, although the argument can be made intelligently about the difference between the two media. I don't care to go into it--too much typing, and the mockers come out in force when you do that.
The thing that bugs me as much as anything is that, like i said: for the first time, we revered a position that we have taken on separation from the world.
That is signifigant in a holiness-minded organization.
Once you cross that line, it is easier to do it next time.
It isn't just the decision; it's what the decision symbolizes.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:45 PM
Well, now we will see in a few years who was right--the elders, or the young guys that want the liberty to try this thing out.
I say it will change the UPC, and over a period of time, she will no longer be recognizable.
In my area, that kind of thing will be a long time coming, I believe...
But not so far away in some places
CS, are you honestly suggesting that this is the beginning of a 'slippery slope' that will happen? If so, I'm not following your logic, considering that other Apostolic orgs have been doing the TV thing for years and remain steadfast.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:46 PM
From your lips to the ears of God............
The UPC is "looking our way"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We agree that the seeds of change gave been sown.
Coonskinner
10-02-2007, 09:47 PM
CS, are you honestly suggesting that this is the beginning of a 'slippery slope' that will happen? If so, I'm not following your logic, considering that other Apostolic orgs have been doing the TV thing for years and remain steadfast.
We reversed a position that we have long held on a separation issue, right or wrong.
That is what starts the slippery slope--not just the fact that it is tv.
HeavenlyOne
10-02-2007, 09:55 PM
No, I don't see all that much difference, although the argument can be made intelligently about the difference between the two media. I don't care to go into it--too much typing, and the mockers come out in force when you do that.
The thing that bugs me as much as anything is that, like i said: for the first time, we revered a position that we have taken on separation from the world.
That is signifigant in a holiness-minded organization.
Once you cross that line, it is easier to do it next time.
It isn't just the decision; it's what the decision symbolizes.
Thanks for the info. I understand you better now. I'd like to say more but I also don't want the mockers coming around and turning this into something other than what we have here.
It's not Keith's fault, but ever since I read his thread this morning the sadness has grown.
Who is right and who is wrong in this issue?!
Is leaving the answer or is staying the better thing to do?!
I just do not understand it...
Will an exodus/split incite growth or demise?!
Who can say for certainty that they have the words which will bring healing?!
Would anyone hear and heed if they did?!
I don't know...
Can we ever go about with business as usual again?!
understand the Organization UPC has been a swinging door for 30 years..
crakjak
10-02-2007, 11:01 PM
understand the Organization UPC has been a swinging door for 30 years..
One of the main test of the character of an organization is: do the youth grow up and stay close? I don't know the UPC's record in this area, but it seems to be weak?
Anyone one know the % of second generation UPC that remain UPC?
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 12:16 AM
The middle has moved this time.
When the AS came, nothing as far as standards changed. It asked men to affirm regularly what they affirmed when they applied for license. I'm not its bigest fan, but it did not do what the resolution that passed last week did.
That resolution, for the first time in our history, removed a distinctive that identified us as a separate people.
That is chilling.
I disagree. If advertisements on TV means we are no longer identified as a separate people, then we've been an unholy generation for years by advertising on the Net and other mediums. Once again this is one of those unfounded assertions that we are all expected to accept as being true without any evidence or discussion.
Oh to be sure having our stance that owning a TV is a sin has made us distinctive, but then again blowing one's self up with sticks of dynamite to kill others has made Muslims distinctive from the rest of us too. That does not prove a thing.
What did Jesus say that all would know they were His disciples? The Love they had for one another. In acts they were known as they that have turned the world upside down...
Personally I don't want to be known for our organizational rules...in fact Im a little ashamed that we need rules and resolutions just to make us distinctive. I want to be known by the Love we have for one another, the Unity, our fervent desire to win the lost, mighty healings and miracles, our worship and devotion to God especially.
A bus full of South Korean Church folks went to Afghanistan...nothing was said about their rules or stance on TV. But you know what made them distinctive? They had the guts to load up a bus full and head into that terrorist filled nation. They were kidnapped and ill-treated and some were killed for being there while we are all arguing. Sad....truly sad...now THAT is what is chilling. If it's all about ID and distinctiveness...why not go all the way and go Amish? Take a stand against the Internet and Radio.
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 12:19 AM
Well, now we will see in a few years who was right--the elders, or the young guys that want the liberty to try this thing out.
I say it will change the UPC, and over a period of time, she will no longer be recognizable.
In my area, that kind of thing will be a long time coming, I believe...
But not so far away in some places
See...it's all about the org. You don't need an ORG to make you different from the world. You need Jesus. We can make a resolution that reads "Be it resolved that we will win a million souls by 2008" and that is not going to make it happen. You just can't legislate revival through organizational rules.
mizpeh
10-03-2007, 12:22 AM
Great post, Prax.
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 12:22 AM
Im sorry, but God help us if we need to legislate through resolutions and rules Distinctiveness and identity....does that mean we had none before the UPC existed or before rules were tacked on?
No wonder we have yet to hit that big harvest everyone keeps saying we are gonna have....
If we were ever going to do it, it should have been before the televangelists totally ruined all credibility for tv ministry.
Furthermore, I don't think tv is a very effective medium for communicating the Gospel.
There is a pretty good slug of research to suggest that tv ministry redistributes converts, but doesn't make many.
Brother, let me give you an example. You are looking at a wall made up of black tiles. Let's say that there are a total of 100 tiles. 99 of these tiles are black and one tile is white. Which tile do you think would be noticed the most? It would be the white tile correct? Granted, televangelists, tbn, and suchlike have cheapened the Gospel. They're the black tiles. The UPC now has the opportunity to be the white tile. Y'all finally have the opportunity to offer something different than the same old prosperity message, the same old scandals over this or that, the same old same old people have grown accustomed to from tv preaching. I know my analogy isn't a good one, but think about it for a moment. Y'all finally have the chance to be that white tile on a wall full of black tiles.
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 12:28 AM
Great post, Prax.
Thank you :-)
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 12:29 AM
Brother, let me give you an example. If you are looking at a wall made up of black tiles. Let's say that there are a total of 100 tiles. 99 of these tiles are black and one tile is white. Which tile do you think would be noticed the most? It would be the white tile correct? Granted, televangelists, tbn, and suchlike have cheapened the Gospel. They're the black tiles. The UPC now has the opportunity to be the white tile. Y'all finally have the opportunity to offer something different than the same old prosperity message, the same old scandals over this or that, the same old same old people have grown accustomed to from tv preaching. I know my analogy isn't a good one, but think about it for a moment. Y'all finally have the chance to be that white tile on a wall full of black tiles.
Pretty good analogy actually
What did I do now? Remember there has been no real confirmation, but all indication is that many will be leaving.
Sir, my sense of sadness has nothing to do with you...I just read where KP has decided to not let the dues lapse, but is turning in HIS card tomorrow...oops, I guess this is tomorrow already.
BoredOutOfMyMind
10-03-2007, 01:14 AM
Sir, my sense of sadness has nothing to do with you...I just read where KP has decided to not let the dues lapse, but is turning in HIS card tomorrow...oops, I guess this is tomorrow already.
Barb, by next June it is estimated that a minimum of 10% will leave over this issue.
:telephone
Coonskinner
10-03-2007, 05:10 AM
I disagree. If advertisements on TV means we are no longer identified as a separate people, then we've been an unholy generation for years by advertising on the Net and other mediums. Once again this is one of those unfounded assertions that we are all expected to accept as being true without any evidence or discussion.
Oh to be sure having our stance that owning a TV is a sin has made us distinctive, but then again blowing one's self up with sticks of dynamite to kill others has made Muslims distinctive from the rest of us too. That does not prove a thing.
What did Jesus say that all would know they were His disciples? The Love they had for one another. In acts they were known as they that have turned the world upside down...
Personally I don't want to be known for our organizational rules...in fact Im a little ashamed that we need rules and resolutions just to make us distinctive. I want to be known by the Love we have for one another, the Unity, our fervent desire to win the lost, mighty healings and miracles, our worship and devotion to God especially.
A bus full of South Korean Church folks went to Afghanistan...nothing was said about their rules or stance on TV. But you know what made them distinctive? They had the guts to load up a bus full and head into that terrorist filled nation. They were kidnapped and ill-treated and some were killed for being there while we are all arguing. Sad....truly sad...now THAT is what is chilling. If it's all about ID and distinctiveness...why not go all the way and go Amish? Take a stand against the Internet and Radio.
Either you aren't reading my posts, or you are deliberately responding to a distorted version of what I said.
Idid not say were separate solely because we didn't televise.
I said it was one of the things that separated us--a distinctive, if you will. I have not indicated in a single post that I think that fact made us holy.
It isn't "all about ID and distinctiveness."
But there are more logicalfallacies here than I intend to bother with.
Coonskinner
10-03-2007, 05:21 AM
See...it's all about the org. You don't need an ORG to make you different from the world. You need Jesus. We can make a resolution that reads "Be it resolved that we will win a million souls by 2008" and that is not going to make it happen. You just can't legislate revival through organizational rules.
Prax, there you go again. I am not nearly as tied to the UPC as a lot of folks are.
But the resolution we are talking about deals with the organization.
We aren't talking about whether I as an individual and different from the world; we are speaking of changes in the organization I fellowship. But again, you know that. I've seen you point out these same little debate tactics in others' posts when they pull them on you.
Where on earth did you get that line about trying to legislate revival through rules???
Earth to Prax?
I never said that, and don't think that. This is getting silly.
Isimply made the observation that, in my opinion, we took a step as an organization that has moved us in a more worldy direction, and may have put us on that proverbial slippery slope. Never before have we removed one of our distinctives by a vote of the ministerial body.
Now Prax, just to clarify, let me add this disclaimer:
That is an observation about the UPC as an organization, not the Kingdom of God, not any individual,not any specific local church, and not about me.
That doesn't mean that we all used to be holy by virtue of a line in the manual, and now we are not.
That doesn't mean that I think the sky is falling, that that Elvis is really alive, or that the Dallas Cowboys aren't known as "America's Team," or whatever other strange and unrelated idea that you might be tempted to set up as a strawman and knock down when I neither said nor hinted at it.
Itjust means that I think the resolution was a bad idea for an organization that I happen to belong to.
Got it?
Coonskinner
10-03-2007, 05:24 AM
Im sorry, but God help us if we need to legislate through resolutions and rules Distinctiveness and identity....does that mean we had none before the UPC existed or before rules were tacked on?
No wonder we have yet to hit that big harvest everyone keeps saying we are gonna have....
I don't know why I bother, but you missed again.
I don't need any organization to make me holy, separate, or distinct. Organizations are man made and have no power to do that.
We are talking about the UPC, Prax, not the Kingdom of God in the Earth, not the totalit of the Bride of Christ, and not you or me as an individual.
Try and keep from getting them confused for the sake of good communication, if such is even possible around here anymore.
I'm beginning to wonder.
Coonskinner
10-03-2007, 05:26 AM
Brother, let me give you an example. You are looking at a wall made up of black tiles. Let's say that there are a total of 100 tiles. 99 of these tiles are black and one tile is white. Which tile do you think would be noticed the most? It would be the white tile correct? Granted, televangelists, tbn, and suchlike have cheapened the Gospel. They're the black tiles. The UPC now has the opportunity to be the white tile. Y'all finally have the opportunity to offer something different than the same old prosperity message, the same old scandals over this or that, the same old same old people have grown accustomed to from tv preaching. I know my analogy isn't a good one, but think about it for a moment. Y'all finally have the chance to be that white tile on a wall full of black tiles.
Would that it were that simple, Rico.
I hope for the sake of those who try it and those who view it that you are right.
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 07:36 PM
I don't know why I bother, but you missed again.
I don't need any organization to make me holy, separate, or distinct. Organizations are man made and have no power to do that.
We are talking about the UPC, Prax, not the Kingdom of God in the Earth, not the totalit of the Bride of Christ, and not you or me as an individual.
Try and keep from getting them confused for the sake of good communication, if such is even possible around here anymore.
I'm beginning to wonder.
We are talking and have been about the UPC (an organization) and the RULES one of which was recently changed which you claimed was a distinction that identified us being seprate.
Why does an organization of men even NEED to be distinct and identified from others by the rules they have and NOT rather by the people that are IN that org by what I laid out earlier? That's even worse and goes to the point of the Org becoming what it was never meant to be
Yes we are talking about the UPC. I knew that and that was what solicited my response. So maybe it's you that just does not get it... and is getting them confused.
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 07:55 PM
The middle has moved this time.
When the AS came, nothing as far as standards changed. It asked men to affirm regularly what they affirmed when they applied for license. I'm not its bigest fan, but it did not do what the resolution that passed last week did.
That resolution, for the first time in our history, removed a distinctive that identified us as a separate people.
That is chilling.
It was one thing that set us apart, not THE thing.
We were probably the only Pentecostal organization, trinity or oneness, that took that kind of stand.
It was a reflection of our rejection of Hollywood.
(I am finding it very sad to have to speak of this in past tense)
:(
Well, now we will see in a few years who was right--the elders, or the young guys that want the liberty to try this thing out.
I say it will change the UPC, and over a period of time, she will no longer be recognizable.
In my area, that kind of thing will be a long time coming, I believe...
But not so far away in some places
CS....I knew what you posted. My comments were directed at exactly what you posted. As an Org...the UPC, I don't see why we need something the others don't have to distinguish us. What good does it do?
Second you DO keep saying "we" and "us" and I said MYSELF I don't want things things to distinguish me or identify me or separate me...I want what the bible says about being Christians to do it.
And I repeat my assertion I would that when OTHERS talk about us and how we as an ORG are different that it was NOT about our rules and regulations. But how we as a people love one another are truely in UNITY (like the U says in UPC), worship Him with all our hearts, are zealous for lost souls and experience the healing overcoming power of God in us and through us. We don't need organizational rules to do that. In fact that is the part the bothers me the most and the part you actually wanted.
Men for years have been trying to shape and mold this org....we have focused too much on building an Org. This Org should have been about us uniting to spread Jesus Christ crucified, faith, repentance, One God, Acts 2:38 etc etc to this lost world. But intead this Org became a means of making other members conform to rules and regulations and pride that these rules Identified and distinguished us as man made organization from others.
Yes my reply is still the same after reading your protest CS. Sorry if that bothers you
I don't know why I bother, but you missed again.
I don't need any organization to make me holy, separate, or distinct. Organizations are man made and have no power to do that.
We are talking about the UPC, Prax, not the Kingdom of God in the Earth, not the totalit of the Bride of Christ, and not you or me as an individual.
Try and keep from getting them confused for the sake of good communication, if such is even possible around here anymore.
I'm beginning to wonder.
You are perfectly welcome then to just reply to my responses CS.
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 08:02 PM
Where on earth did you get that line about trying to legislate revival through rules???
It was an example of what a rule can or can't do. I never said we tried to do that....that went over your head didn't it?
Earth to Prax?
I never said that, and don't think that. This is getting silly.
I agree. This is silly. Maybe you should quit while you are behind?
Isimply made the observation that, in my opinion, we took a step as an organization that has moved us in a more worldy direction, and may have put us on that proverbial slippery slope. Never before have we removed one of our distinctives by a vote of the ministerial body.
I understood what you said, my response still applies
Now Prax, just to clarify, let me add this disclaimer:
That is an observation about the UPC as an organization, not the Kingdom of God, not any individual,not any specific local church, and not about me.
That doesn't mean that we all used to be holy by virtue of a line in the manual, and now we are not.
That doesn't mean that I think the sky is falling, that that Elvis is really alive, or that the Dallas Cowboys aren't known as "America's Team," or whatever other strange and unrelated idea that you might be tempted to set up as a strawman and knock down when I neither said nor hinted at it.
Itjust means that I think the resolution was a bad idea for an organization that I happen to belong to.
Got it?
I don't think our ORG needs those rules, particularly when you agree the ORG is not the church. The ORG does not then need to be distinguished. The truth is those rules are made for each and every individual church, licensed ministers and church members. Not the distinction I think we need as I stated before. We are so focused on rules, rules, rules for our beloved Org that I think we have really lost site. We fight over the org. We divide over the org.
It's one thing to make a statement of direction or a statement about the current culture or climate. It's another to legislate binding rules on everyone....That's my opinion. Like it or not. Disagree or not. Get steaming mad or not. That is and has been my view.
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 08:25 PM
BTW...everyone knows what a Paradigm is? Trinitarians have a creed that demands you believe in the Trinity. We would say they were wrong to begin with and need to change.
Maybe this "identifying distinction" was unnecessary or ill conceived, if not totally wrong. We threw the baby out with the bath water with a blanket rule about NO TV and we have grown to accept it over the years. But was it the best move? If the Internet existed back then would they have moved to ban it completely too?
Prax, there you go again. I am not nearly as tied to the UPC as a lot of folks are.
But the resolution we are talking about deals with the organization.
We aren't talking about whether I as an individual and different from the world; we are speaking of changes in the organization I fellowship. But again, you know that. I've seen you point out these same little debate tactics in others' posts when they pull them on you.
Where on earth did you get that line about trying to legislate revival through rules???
Earth to Prax?
I never said that, and don't think that. This is getting silly.
Isimply made the observation that, in my opinion, we took a step as an organization that has moved us in a more worldy direction, and may have put us on that proverbial slippery slope. Never before have we removed one of our distinctives by a vote of the ministerial body.
Now Prax, just to clarify, let me add this disclaimer:
That is an observation about the UPC as an organization, not the Kingdom of God, not any individual,not any specific local church, and not about me.
That doesn't mean that we all used to be holy by virtue of a line in the manual, and now we are not.
That doesn't mean that I think the sky is falling, that that Elvis is really alive, or that the Dallas Cowboys aren't known as "America's Team," or whatever other strange and unrelated idea that you might be tempted to set up as a strawman and knock down when I neither said nor hinted at it.
Itjust means that I think the resolution was a bad idea for an organization that I happen to belong to.
Got it?
CS, I understand completely what you are saying and put it more clearly than I could, alas, I tend to believe that others who believe differently have their mind made up & set in concrete & of course think that they are 100% right.
You hit the nail on the head.
Jodiah91
10-04-2007, 05:31 AM
Considering that many, dare I say most, Apostolics have TV in their homes, exactly how did it separate us, and in what way were we seen differently than the ALJC folks?
I agree. . . .
The important thing is now the conservatives can concentrate on each other!
Cause heaven knows each one thinks they are the only TRULY "holy" ones. I can just see the future as they no longer have UPC meetings with "worlldly music", "worldly video screens", etc, etc to gripe about.
In their new fellowships they will have to settle for fussing with each other over sleeve length, open toed shoes, colored shirts, playing golf, wearing red, and other essential "holiness" questions like that. Oh, and lets not forget whether or not you can have the internet in your home or saints in your church under the age of 18 should be allowed cell phones!
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.