Tragedy of War RECOVERED! LISTEN!

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

Even there are things I don't agree with,we should be honest with the past. Lying is wrong,and people who cover things up aren't walking in Holiness. I'm not in a org. but we should be honest in things that happened yrs.ago.

I agree totally! The problem is that (as I see it) there is revisionism on both sides of the aisle. The same crowd that shout from the mountaintops that we should maintain the spirit of the merger and we should allow for diversity in the body and unite on what we have in common while minimizing our differences.....are the ones who are the most vocal to rail against standards and ANY doctrinal view different than their own. If they really desired the "spirit of the merger" they would keep their dissenting views to themselves and allow everyone to believe what they feel is right. But they are no different than the ones they charge with being divisive. They have become judgmental and mean spirited against those that they charge with the same. They claim freedom.....but they are bound by the bitterness and hatred for the doctrine/group they have come out of.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

I agree totally! The problem is that (as I see it) there is revisionism on both sides of the aisle. The same crowd that shout from the mountaintops that we should maintain the spirit of the merger and we should allow for diversity in the body and unite on what we have in common while minimizing our differences.....are the ones who are the most vocal to rail against standards and ANY doctrinal view different than their own. If they really desired the "spirit of the merger" they would keep their dissenting views to themselves and allow everyone to believe what they feel is right. But they are no different than the ones they charge with being divisive. They have become judgmental and mean spirited against those that they charge with the same. They claim freedom.....but they are bound by the bitterness and hatred for the doctrine/group they have come out of.

PCI view as the most vocal is laughable. You have described the Water/Spirit folks pretty well. I could, though I won't, quote names of well known ministers still actively involved in the UPC, one teaches at UGST. That assured me, when I was thinking of leaving the UPC, that just because those who hold the more liberal view are not vocal they were out there in numbers. They would express their views in private but wouldn't dare in public because of the response from those that are hard line. It was the loud mouth no mercy types that actively set about telling tales and spreading rumors demanding the resignation of LY while never once talking to him personally.

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

PCI view as the most vocal is laughable. You have described the Water/Spirit folks pretty well. I could, though I won't, quote names of well known ministers still actively involved in the UPC, one teaches at UGST. That assured me, when I was thinking of leaving the UPC, that just because those who hold the more liberal view are not vocal they were out there in numbers. They would express their views in private but wouldn't dare in public because of the response from those that are hard line. It was the loud mouth no mercy types that actively set about telling tales and spreading rumors demanding the resignation of LY while never once talking to him personally.

You missed the point of what I was saying.....I did not say PCI was the most vocal, I am not speaking of those still currently "in" the organization, I am referring to those who have left and a few within who will at every chance tear down and try to completely annul anyone's belief in standards, and other doctrinal issues. Just read through this forum, and any time the subject comes up there are plenty of people who will do everything they can to encourage people to walk away from standards, and "manmade" rules, and any other doctrinal variance that they see different. Why not leave them alone and let them serve God as they see it or have been taught? If it doesn't matter and we'll all go to heaven anyway.....why do you and others feel the need to enlighten others that they don't need to believe whatever they have been taught or come to understand on their own?

This is the point that I am making.......you say that the hardliners are the culprits.....I tend to agree.....I believe in being conservative but not caustic.....I do not believe we have to be mean and hateful to stand for what we believe.....and have lived my life to this point trying to have honest dialogue with people of opposing views without condemning them. But what you and many others charge the "hardliners" of doing....is being done from the other side of the aisle as well. Two wrongs do not make a right.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

You missed the point of what I was saying.....I did not say PCI was the most vocal, I am not speaking of those still currently "in" the organization, I am referring to those who have left and a few within who will at every chance tear down and try to completely annul anyone's belief in standards, and other doctrinal issues. Just read through this forum, and any time the subject comes up there are plenty of people who will do everything they can to encourage people to walk away from standards, and "manmade" rules, and any other doctrinal variance that they see different. Why not leave them alone and let them serve God as they see it or have been taught? If it doesn't matter and we'll all go to heaven anyway.....why do you and others feel the need to enlighten others that they don't need to believe whatever they have been taught or come to understand on their own?

This is the point that I am making.......you say that the hardliners are the culprits.....I tend to agree.....I believe in being conservative but not caustic.....I do not believe we have to be mean and hateful to stand for what we believe.....and have lived my life to this point trying to have honest dialogue with people of opposing views without condemning them. But what you and many others charge the "hardliners" of doing....is being done from the other side of the aisle as well. Two wrongs do not make a right.

Why not leave them alone to serve God as they have been taught, you say.

Hmmm. So now it comes back to the point where some pastor somewhere taught it and it must be respected for all times as a solid Biblical mandate. One of the things LY encouraged in the sermon was open dialogue and reexamination of passages that we may have misinterpreted. To put this in context five faculty members were at, or near the end of, their studies at Western Theological. This had to cause them as a group and individuals to reexamine things.

The hard liners could not allow for such a thing to happen. Open dialogue and reexamine what I have taught, it will show I am not perfect and correct on everything. This we cannot allow.

[OldPathsII]

One can like or dislike the sermon, that's up to one's tastes and/or opinions. But the history is established and can't be re-written. You can worship the ground Kenneth Haney walked on if you like, but he fired Loren Yadon in a political move, pure and simple. You wanna debate the points of the sermon? Break a leg. You wanna argue over whether or not it was a political firing? Go talk to a fence post because it has an IQ you can relate to.

Loren's wife was KFH's personal secretary.

Results:

Loren Yadon.....ministry and life destroyed.

Kenneth Haney.....General Superintendent.

And I liked Kenneth Haney and have no ax to grind with him. Wanna hear someone brag on someone? I'll talk about K. Haney. But it is what it is.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by bishoph

I agree totally! The problem is that (as I see it) there is revisionism on both sides of the aisle. The same crowd that shout from the mountaintops that we should maintain the spirit of the merger and we should allow for diversity in the body and unite on what we have in common while minimizing our differences.....are the ones who are the most vocal to rail against standards and ANY doctrinal view different than their own. If they really desired the "spirit of the merger" they would keep their dissenting views to themselves and allow everyone to believe what they feel is right. But they are no different than the ones they charge with being divisive. They have become judgmental and mean spirited against those that they charge with the same. They claim freedom.....but they are bound by the bitterness and hatred for the doctrine/group they have come out of.

I am not UPCI so what happened or happens there does not affect me, however it does show me that both sides have issues.

Apparently some in the UPCI would like to rewrite history, and that is totally dishonest, unbecoming of a Christian at all.

on the other hand some who left the UPCI were either forced out or left on their own and apparently are still bitter over the whole issue.

I see plenty of fault in both sides with neither side willing to be humble and repent of their attitude.

The UPCI has or had two wings the liberal side and the conservative side, it seems that eventually the conservative side won the upper hand and decided to purge the organization of those who would not agree with them; for that they created the Affirmative statement (A horrible idiotic idea) that strained and eventually split the organization. If the continual hemorrhage of the UPCI keeps up eventually the UPCI itself might die out; will the last person leaving the UPCI headquarters please turn off the lights.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Originally Posted by bishoph

I agree totally! The problem is that (as I see it) there is revisionism on both sides of the aisle. The same crowd that shout from the mountaintops that we should maintain the spirit of the merger and we should allow for diversity in the body and unite on what we have in common while minimizing our differences.....are the ones who are the most vocal to rail against standards and ANY doctrinal view different than their own. If they really desired the "spirit of the merger" they would keep their dissenting views to themselves and allow everyone to believe what they feel is right. But they are no different than the ones they charge with being divisive. They have become judgmental and mean spirited against those that they charge with the same. They claim freedom.....but they are bound by the bitterness and hatred for the doctrine/group they have come out of.

I can agree with you in premise.

[tv1a]

Anyone really believe the absurd notions revisionism happened on both sides? There was a major rewrite of UPCI history in the 1990's spearheaded by men including the current UPCI pope. The Westburg Resolution is a document that could have come from the Third Reich. The spirit of unity was violated by hardliners insisting on rules and regulations over God's Word.

The only thing uniting the two groups was immersion in Jesus name. You cannot
They didn't let wardrobe and jewelry stand in the way of unity.

The facts do not support revisionist history on both sides.

Originally Posted by bishoph

I agree totally! The problem is that (as I see it) there is revisionism on both sides of the aisle. The same crowd that shout from the mountaintops that we should maintain the spirit of the merger and we should allow for diversity in the body and unite on what we have in common while minimizing our differences.....are the ones who are the most vocal to rail against standards and ANY doctrinal view different than their own. If they really desired the "spirit of the merger" they would keep their dissenting views to themselves and allow everyone to believe what they feel is right. But they are no different than the ones they charge with being divisive. They have become judgmental and mean spirited against those that they charge with the same. They claim freedom.....but they are bound by the bitterness and hatred for the doctrine/group they have come out of.