Has The UPCI Served It's Purpose.

[Whole Hearted]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

What kind of Holiness? Part of the problem as I see it is "Holiness" became synonymous with outward standards and not with a genuine change of heart. It becomes frustrating to people to be classified as Holy by outward appearances when we knew certain folks were just not as Holy as they appeared....full of lying, thieving, hypocrisy......

Outward Holiness would have so much more a profound meaning if we did not do that.

I don't disagree with you. I believe that it should all be preached, but I don't remember hearing much preaching about lying, cheating, hatred, envy, lust and so on either.

I believe that holiness is inward and outward.

[Neck]

Originally Posted by Garfield

Some would rather die fighting for truth than give in to the world.

If they die fighting it is because they are fighting only with each other.

To the rest of the Apostalic movement.

They are not longer a Heavy weight champ. It reminds me of Mike Tyson and Buster Douglas.

Tyson never regained his status and never looked the same.

Who was to blame. Tyson himself he just could not get over that folks and fighters found him no longer valid.

[Neck]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

maybe that is God's doing.....the church all huddled around Jerusalem until the persecution came. Then they spread out. I don't think churches were ever meant to be large mega churches. I always felt they were supposed to start new, smaller works....train a man as a pastor....send him to other side of town with some families to start a new work

That might have been right in 1969. With the mega churches today, we better have some examples of Oneness churches. The standard for success today is much higher than in 1969.

[Felicity]

The UPCI hasn't served it's purpose until the Gospel has been preached to every nation, every tribe and every tongue. The initial purpose of the UPCI was ........

"The Whole Gospel To The Whole World"

That hasn't been accomplished yet far as I know.

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I agree. I wonder though...what difference does it make if a person says you don't have to be baptised in jesus name to be saved but if you are disobedient to doing that then you probably aren't saved to begin with?

I mean...if a church is full of people that are baptized in Jesus name and filld with the Holy Ghost then what problem is it if that church does not teach baptism absolutely saves you?

This is pretty much where we come down on the issue at NLC.

I don't see a problem with that at all. After all they are obeying the word.

Which is more important, being obedient or having the "proper" understanding of any particular doctrine?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

This is pretty much where we come down on the issue at NLC.

I don't see a problem with that at all. After all they are obeying the word.

Which is more important, being obedient or having the "proper" understanding of any particular doctrine?

Yes and consider this....it always seems weird when the debate comes up over "baptism saves/does not save"...

I knew this guy that was ex-UPC who is now a Greek Orthodox....still speaks in tongues too. But he was saying this sort of stuff was always a western church thing and it was just foreign to them. And even though they insist baptism is essential for salvation they would never say someone is absolutely lost because they did not get baptized. They leave that up to the sovergnty of God....

But in the end....the issue I raise is this....never...not once EVER did ANYONE EVER in the entire bible question "Do I need to be baptized?"..."Why do I need to be baptized?"...."Is it essential Peter? Or can I hold off for a while till my family arrives".....

Never. They always obeyed immediately...no questions asked

[Neck]

Originally Posted by Felicity

The UPCI hasn't served it's purpose until the Gospel has been preached to every nation, every tribe and every tongue. The initial purpose of the UPCI was ........

"The Whole Gospel To The Whole World"

That hasn't been accomplished yet far as I know.

One way would be by TV...

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Neckstadt

One way would be by TV...

TV is a medium that is widely accessible in many parts of the world but certainly not all. Three problems come quickly to mind in regard to televangelism:

1. Most of the more remote areas of the world that haven't been touched yet by the Gospel don't even have Bibles written in their own language let alone television reception.

2. Language. Even if they did have access to television they wouldn't be able to understand what was being said because it wouldn't be in their own native tongues. I wonder if people understand that there are still many many vast parts of the planet where people speak languages very few people in the rest of the world understand.

3. Very slim possibility of follow-up even if people did turn their lives over to God as a result of televangelism

Jesus said, "Go!". That's still the best way!

[NLYP]

Originally Posted by The Dean

Smooth as silk so far. Can't find a troublemaker anywhere. Yet.

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by NLYP

Ah yes... let the games begin!















(Glad you are here, by the way!)