The Affirmation Statement Comes Full Circle

[mizpeh]

I thought those against TV preached against watching TV which is not the same as advertising on TV.

And if you can watch a webcast of General Conference on the Internet what is wrong with watching a commercial or church service by a local UPC on TV?

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind

Ok, was it a mandate for TV, or a mandate for advertising?

Everyone kept stating the latter, you equate it with the former.

and they wonder why men now want to leave.....

This organization now has an official stance that embraces television ads and ministry IN IT'S By-LAWS!!!!!

If you disagree with that stance, yet sign the AS, are you lying?

[mfblume]

I have never seen such concentration and discussion on man-made organizations and rules in a forum ever. There is more CONCERN and talk over such things than scriptures lately. Wow. What a week this has been for the forum. This is what many have criticized denominations for.

I think we need to step back and look at ourselves every now and then. Perhaps its the focus on rules and man-made organizations that is a true sign of disparagement, rather than whether or not it was right to okay the TV deal. This brings BOTH SIDES into the fray, and not just one.

My thoughts, anyway.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Sure it does.

If a man signs that he believes and will teach the AOF, how can he preach against ads or ministry on tv?

It's the exact same principle.

I don't see that at all - - like we've said you aren't ORDERED to use TV, so you can still preach against it.

There are others things in the AOF that preachers don't enforce, so I really don't see the problem.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

When did the by-LAWS replace the AOF as the standard for the entire UPC? Why even have a set of by-LAWS

I am not UPC. Maybe someone else can explain the difference in the AOF and the General Constitution.

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I have never seen such concentration and discussion on man-made organizations and rules in a forum ever. There is more CONCERN and talk over such things than scriptures lately. Wow. What a week this has been for the forum. This is what many have criticized denominations for.

I think we need to step back and look at ourselves every now and then. Perhaps its the focus on rules and man-,made organizations that is a true sign of disparagement, rather than whether or not it was right to okay the TV deal. Thkis brings BOTH SIDES into the fray, and not just one.

My thoughts, anyway.

How is the church plant going?

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

This organization now has an official stance that embraces television ads and ministry IN IT'S By-LAWS!!!!!

If you disagree with that stance, yet sign the AS, are you lying?

Did the resolution specifically say this, or is this the "loophole version"?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by keith4him

How is the church plant going?

Awesomely! Had a new family call and the power of God hit their home as we visited them and prayed. WOW.

Seeing deliverance in people's lives, and miraculous confirmations of God's will in it all.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I am not UPC. Maybe someone else can explain the difference in the AOF and the General Constitution.

No Matt, you have said that tv was part of the AOF in the past. You have said theat men who had a tv lacked integrity. I agree.

You said that because they lived contrary to what they signed on to preach and practice. Now the UPC has changed. We embrace tv ads and ministry. By signing the AS men will be saying they agree with it.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Did the resolution specifically say this, or is this the "loophole version"?

We removed the prohibition completely.