UPC, ALJC, PAW, etc.

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by hometown guy

You sure could. I’ve talked to people that have got caught up in spirits that they thought they would have never done the things they did. But you are looking at thing in the natural and doing it that way you will never understand the spiritual things.

Could you elaborate a bit more on that last sentence?

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by Antipas

Honestly, I've only seen a pastor rebuke openly like this over playing cards. lol

Apparently some new family really enjoyed card games and had a cook out and invited some church saints. They all played cards, and the church saints really enjoyed it and they began playing with other saints. Before you knew it... the whole congregation was Straight Flush, and the pastor had to call the Devil's bluff. lol

Haha! That’s awesome!

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by n david

I believe if a person desires to be a member of a church, they should accept and practice the teachings of that church. If a Pastor preaches against beards and the man wants to grow a beard, then he should either submit to the personal preference of the Pastor or find another church.

I was attending a UPC church who's Pastor told me he had no scripture against beards, but wouldn't allow a man with a beard to be used on the platform. I didn't argue, I didn't rebel. I simply went to another church which doesn't have the same outdated preference.

This seems reasonable. It's unfortunate that some people, though, might not have another Pentecostal church to go to. A friend of mine lived in a place where the nearest church to the one he went to was 60 miles. He was stuck with a pastor who preached his own convictions as apostolic truth, the violation of which proved you were in rebellion. It was unpleasant.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by Antipas

I think the internet has some part in this. People can now look things up more easily.

Indeed. Also, there has been a general undermining of authority in our culture.

For example, many can discover that the first church of Scripture never really condemned beards, and that many many saints feel the standard is outdated and a bit stuffy, or worse if preached as a heaven or hell issue.

I remember when I got in church and started learning about the holiness standards. The anti-beard stance struck me as odd since, well, Jesus had one, but I was deeply puzzled when someone tried to explain starting with, "Well, the hippies . . . " I was 18 and had no memory of the hippies, and asked, "But wasn't that like 20 or 25 years ago??" Seemed like ancient history then. :-)

Many of the standards when I first heard them taught seemed to not have the strongest scriptural foundation. But I was so happy with my experience and respected the people I was going to church with because they were so committed, especially compared to the other Christians I knew, I figured there had to be something to the standards and so conformed.

[hometown guy]

Originally Posted by Costeon

Indeed. Also, there has been a general undermining of authority in our culture.



I remember when I got in church and started learning about the holiness standards. The anti-beard stance struck me as odd since, well, Jesus had one, but I was deeply puzzled when someone tried to explain starting with, "Well, the hippies . . . " I was 18 and had no memory of the hippies, and asked, "But wasn't that like 20 or 25 years ago??" Seemed like ancient history then. :-)

Many of the standards when I first heard them taught seemed to not have the strongest scriptural foundation. But I was so happy with my experience and respected the people I was going to church with because they were so committed, especially compared to the other Christians I knew, I figured there had to be something to the standards and so conformed.

Sounds pretty interesting that first coming to church you had so much knowledge that what was being taught had no scriptural foundation.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Ehud

“If only I had received the unsolicited advice of complete strangers with no firsthand knowledge of any situation facing my saints, things would have turned out for the better,” said no pastor ever.

No, many a pastor had made the exact statement. Everyone has had a turn at the wheel. Hence the reason why so many brothers only preach tried and true brethren. If you give a reference then you come under "lay no hands on any man suddenly" situation. Because you are accountable for Brother So N So watermelon dropping. Had a brother come and preach and while everyone is in the altar he wanted to know when we were going to eat. I gave him 20 bucks and told him to beat it. Know them that labor among you. Simple. But having someone lob a huge dud over the pulpit? It has happened to everyone. Even your best friends can make mistakes. But that is the beauty of having a church FAMILY. They watch you, they look to see how you react to the "visiting minister" You know what I'm talking about, you hear something odd, you look straight at the pastor. A visiting evangelist or missionary only gets a week, or one night? The pastor has 365 days to straighten out a bent road.

Originally Posted by Ehud

Don’t we as saints have to bear some responsibility in all of this?

Huge responsibility. But only those who are going in the same direction of the elders. Not busy bodies, or troublemakers looking to bring on a munity.

Originally Posted by Ehud

Didn’t Paul admonish the Corinthian church to not even eat with those who claimed to be brothers but were openly doing X, Y, and Z? If a sin is truly as blatant as is being proposed, the pastor shouldn’t have any need to blast it from the pulpit because the whole congregation should have already made it clear that stuff isn’t tolerated.

But still no body wants anyone to have a gang mentality. The ministry is working on and with everyone in the church family. Brother and Sister Goober might want to come down on MeeMaw because she has gone to see the Avengers marathon. But they need to move with the Holy Ghost, not the Holy Toast. Going to a diner and having a group tell you that they don't like Brother Tom Bombadil, because he is still dipping. Well, he doesn't dip when he is at church, no spitting around the property? Well, one brother pipes up and tells that Old Brother Tom does it at work. So what! The guy is obviously TRYING. So, pray for the brother, because he really needs the prayer, and you all sure need the practice.

Originally Posted by Ehud

But we probably aren’t talking about REAL sin, now are we? No, we have pew-sitters that want the pastor to enforce personal preferences, and visiting ministers who will “take care of those things” for the pastor before leaving town, never to return, leaving a mess for the pastor to clean up.

I think I cover this above, but real sin? No, they just have issues on the things they see on the surface. Real sin lurks in the inner shadows of the mind. Who we are in the dark is where we really are judged as Christians. Behind closed doors, within the time where no one can see us. Being a Christian really counts when we are on our rear end, and everything is burning down around us. When those we thought were our friends are now skinning us alive. When all have forsaken us, and are now sinking their knives, fangs, and claws in our back. That is the time to let the Holy Ghost move, and allow Jesus to put more weight on the bar for a deadlift. That's when cleaning up a mess, or putting out a fire is doable. The brothers and sisters who really know their pastor, and his desire for them, don't sweat the small stuff. They abide, and they grow taller with Jesus and the elders.

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by n david

1) It is outdated. Most Pastors point to the hippy movement from over 50 years ago.

2) There are salvific beliefs which shouldn't be compromised, and then there is the beard prohibition. If I want to be involved in ministry of a church and I want to grow a beard, I will choose a church where I can do both. As long as the important, salvific beliefs are not compromised. That is not a sin nor is it wrong.

You say outdated, but to whom is it outdated? Surely not to the pastors and saints that came out of the 60s that identified their own beards with rebellion. How is that outdated? So here comes beards, skinny jeans, cap sleeves, mini skirts, diamond rings etc.where do you draw the line? Some of those things are not found in scriptures.

[hometown guy]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

You say outdated, but to whom is it outdated? Surely not to the pastors and saints that came out of the 60s that identified their own beards with rebellion. How is that outdated? So here comes beards, skinny jeans, cap sleeves, mini skirts, diamond rings etc.where do you draw the line? Some of those things are not found in scriptures.

Marlboro reds, tank tops, Mohawks ect...

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by hometown guy

Marlboro reds, tank tops, Mohawks ect...

I dont get it. Some would leave a church and go find the one that.fits their fantsy so they can have a beard. No matter the relationship between the church and the family or the pastor. No loyalty, no pastoral authority, no submission.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

I dont get it. Some would leave a church and go find the one that.fits their fantsy so they can have a beard. No matter the relationship between the church and the family or the pastor. No loyalty, no pastoral authority, no submission.

Its the Internet.