Ministerial Ethics, Dropping Out and TV: Did You Forget You Agreed to This?

[meBNme]

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman

Because this rule doesn't apply to those that think its okay to bail for a single standard. To them, it's not a matter of ethics, but holiness. LOL! Come on Dan.

What if that one single issue was abortion? would it still not be big enough to bail? Would YOU bail over that one issue?
To some, Tv is almost as big as abortion. (not me, mind you, but I'm not here to judge ones convictions about TV and abortion.)

[SDG]

Originally Posted by meBNme

What if that one single issue was abortion? would it still not be big enough to bail? Would YOU bail over that one issue?
To some, Tv is almost as big as abortion. (not me, mind you, but I'm not here to judge ones convictions about TV and abortion.)

TV equated to abortion ...

[SDG]

Making commitments and affirmations have now become subjective to the con crowd. When it was once their bully pulpit.

[meBNme]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

I posted this on Caston's thread, but I'll repost it here, since it seems apropos:

Having a license or not having a license, even having one and then turning it in has nothing to do with keeping the unity of the faith.

Sometimes you have a change in direction in your life, such as I did a couple of years ago, and staying in the man-made organization that you joined just isn't the proper thing to do anymore.

Remember, God is a God of constant change and growth.........Elijah was fed by ravens while sipping from one of the only streams of water in the land at the time..........but, there was a time when the stream dried up, and the birds stopped delivering food, and it was time for a change. If he would have been stubborn, and stayed because that's the way "things always have been", not only would he have died, but he never would have met the widow who baked him a cake, and purchased sustenance for herself and her family. So, sometimes refusal to change doesn't bring blessing, it brings demise.

The difference is - is this a God driven change, or am I just sulking because things didn't go my way?

I agree with the message, but what about this; What if the pastor is not "just sulking because things didn't go their way"? What if the issue is a very important breach of what is right and wrong to them? what if, according to their convictions (convictions the ORG once shared, but changed.) the change crosses the line of what is right and wrong? Are we then going to attack their convictions?
Would you like it if someone attacked YOUR convictions and called YOU unethical because you didn't go along with the crowd?

Honestly, I disagree with leaving the org over this issue. BUT I also respect the men who decided that it is something that violates what they feel is right, and decide to stand for their convictions, and not just follow the crowd, and give in to the pressure.

But what I am seeing here, is continuous attacks on their character because they wont go along with everyone else, and they decide to form their own org.

To all those who appose them, What if you found yourself in a similar position? What if you found your org had made a change that your convictions would not allow you to go along with? What if everyone started pounding you, questioning your character, ethics, commitment, Christianity, and holiness because you decided to stand for what you believe?
How would you react? then why on earth are some of you doing the same to others in that position?

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by meBNme

I agree with the message, but what about this; What if the pastor is not "just sulking because things didn't go their way"? What if the issue is a very important breach of what is right and wrong to them? what if, according to their convictions (convictions the ORG once shared, but changed.) the change crosses the line of what is right and wrong? Are we then going to attack their convictions?
Would you like it if someone attacked YOUR convictions and called YOU unethical because you didn't go along with the crowd?

Honestly, I disagree with leaving the org over this issue. BUT I also respect the men who decided that it is something that violates what they feel is right, and decide to stand for their convictions, and not just follow the crowd, and give in to the pressure.

But what I am seeing here, is continuous attacks on their character because they wont go along with everyone else, and they decide to form their own org.

To all those who appose them, What if you found yourself in a similar position? What if you found your org had made a change that your convictions would not allow you to go along with? What if everyone started pounding you, questioning your character, ethics, commitment, Christianity, and holiness because you decided to stand for what you believe?
How would you react? then why on earth are some of you doing the same to others in that position?

Plain, simple and to the point. GREAT post. It's also a great example of dialogue without drama.

(He's a newbie but I'm liking this one more and more!)

[Coonskinner]

I agree too.

Good post.

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

I posted this on Caston's thread, but I'll repost it here, since it seems apropos:

Having a license or not having a license, even having one and then turning it in has nothing to do with keeping the unity of the faith.

Sometimes you have a change in direction in your life, such as I did a couple of years ago, and staying in the man-made organization that you joined just isn't the proper thing to do anymore.

Remember, God is a God of constant change and growth.........Elijah was fed by ravens while sipping from one of the only streams of water in the land at the time..........but, there was a time when the stream dried up, and the birds stopped delivering food, and it was time for a change. If he would have been stubborn, and stayed because that's the way "things always have been", not only would he have died, but he never would have met the widow who baked him a cake, and purchased sustenance for herself and her family. So, sometimes refusal to change doesn't bring blessing, it brings demise.

The difference is - is this a God driven change, or am I just sulking because things didn't go my way?

By the way, I thought this - the post that meBNme responded to - was a great post as well.

The question at the end is one that all of the men 'staying or leaving' need to ask themselves. I hope most have.

[meBNme]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I have no issue w/ anyone leaving ... I've left ...

Leave/withdraw honorably ...

Call whomever you please ....

but you're advocating recruiting???

I question your claim of "recruiting".
I'm not saying you are wrong, please understand.
I just need clarification.
Are they simply inviting others to meetings? And if so, how is that recruiting?
Just because there is a meeting does not mean they are trying to convince others to leave. They very well may simply be discussing what should be done. Should another org be formed for those who already are considering leaving or should everyone remain and try to overturn the decision?
Until we know what is actually happening in those meetings, it is irresponsible to condemn them. I am seeing a lot of "he said, she said" on here, rumors and speculation. And people are all out attacking others because of the rumors and speculation. That is absolutely insane, and it is not of God.

If there are those who are genuinely trying to persuade others to leave the org while currently holding membership, then yes, that is wrong. But I'm pretty certain that there is far less of that going on that what is being portrayed by all the speculation and rumors.

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by meBNme

I question your claim of "recruiting".
I'm not saying you are wrong, please understand.
I just need clarification.
Are they simply inviting others to meetings? And if so, how is that recruiting?
Just because there is a meeting does not mean they are trying to convince others to leave. They very well may simply be discussing what should be done. Should another org be formed for those who already are considering leaving or should everyone remain and try to overturn the decision?
Until we know what is actually happening in those meetings, it is irresponsible to condemn them. I am seeing a lot of "he said, she said" on here, rumors and speculation. And people are all out attacking others because of the rumors and speculation. That is absolutely insane, and it is not of God.

If there are those who are genuinely trying to persuade others to leave the org while currently holding membership, then yes, that is wrong. But I'm pretty certain that there is far less of that going on that what is being portrayed by all the speculation and rumors.

What some fail to realize is that, most likely, the vast majority of those who go to Tulsa will remain in the UPC and network with the conservative element represented in Tulsa.

The network they are trying to put together does not require or expect one to get out of the UPC. Asking a friend to network with those most aligned with his beliefs is NOT asking someone to leave the UPC.

[meBNme]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

TV equated to abortion ...

Oh quit being silly.

Ive read your posts. You have enough sense to realize I am not claiming the two are on the same level. You are also smart enough to know I was just making an example and chose to use abortion and TV to make that example.

Sometimes using an extreme just makes a point a little easier to see. You know this.

So quit