Are we Apostolic, per our own rules?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I chose "YES" because the majority of the members ARE Apostolic, according to the definition in the rules. Furthermore, the constant comments about how oneness doctrine is "now" constantly mocked and ridiculed is ludicrous, considering that these debates go all the way back to the FCF. As does having members who are non-Apostolic or unbelievers.

It's just a way for some people to pat themselves on the back for not hanging out with the "heathens", but in reality they used to be right here knee-deep in debate themselves and enjoying every minute of it.

There is NO convincing me that the exodus of at least some wasn't influenced by higher authorities and peer pressure. Sorry. I don't buy it. I've been around long enough to know that even subtle comments from one preacher to another can lead a man to fear his card being yanked or his backbone being questioned.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Yes, because you subscribe to a weird variation of it that is easy to mock.

And that variation as you call it that Jesus is God the Father WAS and always HAS been the definition and except on this forum nothing short of it would be acceptable among Oneness people.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I chose "YES" because the majority of the members ARE Apostolic, according to the definition in the rules. Furthermore, the constant comments about how oneness doctrine is "now" constantly mocked and ridiculed is ludicrous, considering that these debates go all the way back to the FCF. As does having members who are non-Apostolic or unbelievers.

It's just a way for some people to pat themselves on the back for not hanging out with the "heathens", but in reality they used to be right here knee-deep in debate themselves and enjoying every minute of it.

There is NO convincing me that the exodus of at least some wasn't influenced by higher authorities and peer pressure. Sorry. I don't buy it. I've been around long enough to know that even subtle comments from one preacher to another can lead a man to fear his card being yanked or his backbone being questioned.

[aegsm76]

I believe the exodus was due in part to the rules not being enforced. Particularly the rules that would have enforced civility.
Baron's post is a good example of this.
Even if he utterly believes what he wrote, a basic civility is lacking in his words.
But, as you say, that's my opinion.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

I believe the exodus was due in part to the rules not being enforced. Particularly the rules that would have enforced civility.
Baron's post is a good example of this.
Even if he utterly believes what he wrote, a basic civility is lacking in his words.
But, as you say, that's my opinion.

And those who stamped off, were they also civil??


** CRICKETS **

Should I start on the Epley, Benicasa, etc quotes now or later?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

I believe the exodus was due in part to the rules not being enforced. Particularly the rules that would have enforced civility.
Baron's post is a good example of this.
Even if he utterly believes what he wrote, a basic civility is lacking in his words.
But, as you say, that's my opinion.

Would you tell me what rule I violated?

Or where you just hear to complain about the rules not being what you wanted them to be?

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by Socialite

And those who stamped off, were they also civil??


** CRICKETS **

Should I start on the Epley, Benicasa, etc quotes now or later?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

And that variation as you call it that Jesus is God the Father WAS and always HAS been the definition and except on this forum nothing short of it would be acceptable among Oneness people.

Your wrong.

It can't be said more simple than that.

DKB won't say that, Segraves denies it, even good old Hoovie won't buy your explanation.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

And that variation as you call it that Jesus is God the Father WAS and always HAS been the definition and except on this forum nothing short of it would be acceptable among Oneness people.

That's a simple deduction?

Not even one single, solitary scripture to support that?

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Would you tell me what rule I violated?

Or where you just hear to complain about the rules not being what you wanted them to be?

There is One God. This one God reveals Himself as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)

From what I have seen of MTD's posts, this is what he believes.

If you are stating that this is easy to mock, then you are
going against the forum rule that states that doctrinal issues can be questioned but not mocked.