Another SPLIT from the UPCI???

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

...
Have we entered a world where words have no meaning and a signed pledge is a matter to snicker over?

When it comes to the Affirmation Statement,
the answer to that question would be "yes"



The AS is viewed as
a joke,
a departure from reality,
out of touch,
the opinion of a few neanderthals,
a pain in the posterior but something to put up with and not take seriously,
something that has to be returned to HQ periodically with some sort of signature to maintain your license/credentials/union affiliation,
etc.

It's like the "blue laws" on our books.
They're still there but nobody pays any attention to them.

[Maple Leaf]

Originally Posted by Sam

When it comes to the Affirmation Statement,
the answer to that question would be "yes"



The AS is viewed as
a joke,
a departure from reality,
out of touch,
the opinion of a few neanderthals,
a pain in the posterior but something to put up with and not take seriously,
something that has to be returned to HQ periodically with some sort of signature to maintain your license/credentials/union affiliation,
etc.

It's like the "blue laws" on our books.
They're still there but nobody pays any attention to them.

The Affirmation Statement was endorsed and retained by a majority vote of the General Conference, and not just by "a few neanderthals."

You may view it as a joke, but I can assure you that the congregations it split and the minister's it disfellowshipped don't.

GraceAmazing said it earlier: "It's a matter of integrity."

I'm surprised, given your vintage, that you view the matter of a signature and a man's word so flippantly.

It's hardly a "blue law" that nobody pays any attention to; if you fail to sign it, you lose your credentials, and potentially your livelihood.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

The Affirmation Statement was endorsed and retained by a majority vote of the General Conference, and not just by "a few neanderthals."

You may view it as a joke, but I can assure you that the congregations it split and the minister's it disfellowshipped don't.

GraceAmazing said it earlier: "It's a matter of integrity."

I'm surprised, given your vintage, that you view the matter of a signature and a man's word so flippantly.

It's hardly a "blue law" that nobody pays any attention to; if you fail to sign it, you lose your credentials, and potentially your livelihood.

And that is exactly why so many signed it and don't believe or uphold it.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

The Affirmation Statement was endorsed and retained by a majority vote of the General Conference, and not just by "a few neanderthals."

You may view it as a joke, but I can assure you that the congregations it split and the minister's it disfellowshipped don't.

GraceAmazing said it earlier: "It's a matter of integrity."

I'm surprised, given your vintage, that you view the matter of a signature and a man's word so flippantly.

It's hardly a "blue law" that nobody pays any attention to; if you fail to sign it, you lose your credentials, and potentially your livelihood.

The AS passed by "questionable" procedure and because of a lie by a high ranking official.

The original (1945) statement on holiness in the Articles of Faith would have been fine but it was amended in 1954 to include opinions of a militant minority.

It is my opinion that the proposal, adoption, and subsequent blood-letting and upheaval of the Affirmation Statement is pretty well described in Proverbs 6:16-19.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a licensed or ordained minister in the UPC (Under Privileged Children) organization so my opinion is not important.

[Maple Leaf]

Originally Posted by Sam

The AS passed by "questionable" procedure and because of a lie by a high ranking official.

The original (1945) statement on holiness in the Articles of Faith would have been fine but it was amended in 1954 to include opinions of a militant minority.

It is my opinion that the proposal, adoption, and subsequent blood-letting and upheaval of the Affirmation Statement is pretty well described in Proverbs 6:16-19.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a licensed or ordained minister in the UPC (Under Privileged Children) organization so my opinion is not important.

I take umbrage with the accusation that a high ranking official lied to facilitate the passing of the resolution that implemented the Affirmation Statement.

I was personally in a meeting where that godly brother apologized for the impression his words gave. He may have expressed himself poorly on the General Conference floor, but I reject the assertion that he lied.

Whether or not the procedure was questionable is a moot point. There has been ample time and opportunity to rescind the Affirmation Resolution, and the will of the body has been to retain it.

[oletime]

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

I take umbrage with the accusation that a high ranking official lied to facilitate the passing of the resolution that implemented the Affirmation Statement.

I was personally in a meeting where that godly brother apologized for the impression his words gave. He may have expressed himself poorly on the General Conference floor, but I reject the assertion that he lied.

Whether or not the procedure was questionable is a moot point. There has been ample time and opportunity to rescind the Affirmation Resolution, and the will of the body has been to retain it.

there have been other questionable tactics also like the time my son on law was at one of the gcs when the tv issue was voted down and then after a bunch of people got up and left because that was the issue they showed up to take a stand on then their was an attempt to bring it back to the floor for another vote after many opponets left dirty politics i believe its called

[EA]

Originally Posted by oletime

there have been other questionable tactics also like the time my son on law was at one of the gcs when the tv issue was voted down and then after a bunch of people got up and left because that was the issue they showed up to take a stand on then their was an attempt to bring it back to the floor for another vote after many opponets left dirty politics i believe its called

I was on the floor of that conference, and I have an entirely different opinion.

If people were stupid enough to get up and leave after the TV vote, they deserved whatever happened. Plus, a lot of those guys who left early had been bused in from all over the country. Many of them weren't even qualified to vote.

Besides being rude, leaving in the middle of a business meeting shows a complete lack of concern about important organizational issues.