Another SPLIT from the UPCI???

[Maple Leaf]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Who condemned him? I just said that his church, for the most part, doesn't follow standards. Some still do. I have a good friend that attends and she still follows the outward dress.

To me, saying that a man has a UPCI license and doesn't teach the "standards" mandated in the manual condemns him. I'm glad that you don't, and appreciate the complimentary remarks that you have made about him.

[tv1a]

Your point is irrelevant since years ago the original upci charter was tossed out the window. The original upci charter had nothing to do with subjective clotheslines. The unity clause was ignored by the hardliners.

I've never been told how the clothes nazis expect to enforce teaching and preaching the clothesline doctrine. It it were required to preach, one would figure a minimal number of times per year would suffice. How much witchcraft does one have to preach from the pulpit?

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

But, what if you, as a pastor, sign an oath to practice, preach and teach that you wholeheartedly disapprove of consuming Sushi withour Wassabi?

Would you not look a little goofy if you allowed a visiting psalmist to consume Sushi without Wassabi on your platform?

[Ron]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Your point is irrelevant since years ago the original upci charter was tossed out the window. The original upci charter had nothing to do with subjective clotheslines. The unity clause was ignored by the hardliners.

I've never been told how the clothes nazis expect to enforce teaching and preaching the clothesline doctrine. It it were required to preach, one would figure a minimal number of times per year would suffice. How much witchcraft does one have to preach from the pulpit?

TV1A your views on standards are well known, but this borders on Blasphemy!
I would hope that you would retract it!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

To me, saying that a man has a UPCI license and doesn't teach the "standards" mandated in the manual condemns him. I'm glad that you don't, and appreciate the complimentary remarks that you have made about him.

I understand that people DO have personal convictions. Some even, absolutely, have some of the same ones that the organization believes in. But, many in my circle do not believe pushing them on other people is Biblical to qualify them in the Body of Christ.

I'm not going to belabor this point, but we discuss this pants vs. dress thing. There are some women that are convicted of wearing pants and to say that ALL can wear them is not true for some women. I don't think we should be taking a strong stand either way!

It is still true, as I have experienced this when I was in sales - I was received on a much better level and with more agreeability when I was wearing a dress.

So to push the pants issue - it's not going to work for me.

Brother Johnson has so much depth that it leaves no doubt that any sincere person would find the place God wants them.

[tv1a]

The manual standards are not heaven and hell issues. Sometimes for change to occur, one must make extreme changes. All things are lawful, but not all things expedient. Remember that? If Rosa Parks used the same mentality as you propose, I'd would be getting the front seat of the bus today. Instead she broke the law. Was condemned by many for "sitting" down for her rights. We are a better country today because Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat.

There is a lot of garbage in the upci manual. The manual isn't even a shell of the founding father's intentions. Sometimes in order to make change, one has to make the change and challenge the status quo. Integrity isn't compromised. It is one way of challenging inconsistent and unbiblical mandates.

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

To me, saying that a man has a UPCI license and doesn't teach the "standards" mandated in the manual condemns him. I'm glad that you don't, and appreciate the complimentary remarks that you have made about him.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Ron

TV1A your views on standards are well known, but this borders on Blasphemy!
I would hope that you would retract it!

Blasphemy is a pretty strong word.
He may have been referring to the "magic hair" doctrine which some preachers compare favorably to witch craft.

As far as the original charter being tossed out the window, what began as an agreement to fellowship based on mutual respect became a hostile takeover by what might be considered "the lunatic fringe."

[Ron]

Originally Posted by Sam

Blasphemy is a pretty strong word.
He may have been referring to the "magic hair" doctrine which some preachers compare favorably to witch craft.

As far as the original charter being tossed out the window, what began as an agreement to fellowship based on mutual respect became a hostile takeover by what might be considered "the lunatic fringe."

Yes Sam it is & so is Witchcraft!

[Maple Leaf]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Your point is irrelevant since years ago the original upci charter was tossed out the window. The original upci charter had nothing to do with subjective clotheslines. The unity clause was ignored by the hardliners.

I've never been told how the clothes nazis expect to enforce teaching and preaching the clothesline doctrine. It it were required to preach, one would figure a minimal number of times per year would suffice. How much witchcraft does one have to preach from the pulpit?

When the conversation sinks to this level, I'm out.

I will refrain from commenting on this post to avoid offending idiots and morons by association.

[tv1a]

Take it up with the Apostle Paul. Galatians 3:1 summarizes the garbage that fills a good chunk of the upci manual, especially the wardrobe doctrine.

My position on standards is modesty, gender separation, and not drawing unecessary attention to oneself. All three principles are Biblical based. There has not been one conservative who has challenged the principles. The women in my family follows these principles. The men in my family follows these principles. Got a problem with my view? Tell me where I am wrong.

Meanwhile It is arrogance to define one's salvation by the article of clothing between the waist and the thigh.

The fact a subjective dress code plays an integral part of an organization's identity shows how far off people are. Paul identifies that spirit as a spirit of withcraft. Can't help what the Word says.

Originally Posted by Ron

TV1A your views on standards are well known, but this borders on Blasphemy!
I would hope that you would retract it!

[Ron]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Take it up with the Apostle Paul. Galatians 3:1 summarizes the garbage that fills a good chunk of the upci manual, especially the wardrobe doctrine.

My position on standards is modesty, gender separation, and not drawing unecessary attention to oneself. All three principles are Biblical based. There has not been one conservative who has challenged the principles. The women in my family follows these principles. The men in my family follows these principles. Got a problem with my view? Tell me where I am wrong.

Meanwhile It is arrogance to define one's salvation by the article of clothing between the waist and the thigh.

The fact a subjective dress code plays an integral part of an organization's identity shows how far off people are. Paul identifies that spirit as a spirit of withcraft. Can't help what the Word says.

I do not agree with you & further, I find discussing things with you to be as productive as talking to a brick wall!

And you ain't no Apostle Paul!