
10-01-2007, 11:57 PM
|
 |
ultra con (at least here)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Woodlands, Texas
Posts: 1,962
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobDylan
I think "conservative" and "control" are nearly synonomous in that to conserve means to keep in control the amount of change that is experienced by a population (that's my TIC definition). The problem is that this "change" that conservatives try to keep under "control" may be bad chabge, or it may be good change... but either way they are opposed to change, in methods, in paradigm, etc.... even the "good" change.
What if we threw out the last 100 years history of the apostolic movement in America, and all of a sudden, someone in the middle of Chicago began to receive revelation about oneness, Jesus Name Baptism, and Holy Ghost and tongues... and in a similar manner to Parham, he prayed and received the Holy Ghost on Jan 1, 2001.... in his searching for further leading of the Spirit, would the Spirit reject the use of television as a means to advertise this truth? My point is that this whole argument against the use of television is based on a paradigm of apostolic pentecost that is based in a 1950's mentality. I do believe the Chicago pastor would conclude that it is best not to make TV a primary means of entertainment, and may even encourage people to not have it in their homes, but this position may not preclude harnassing it's real effectiveness in advertising his meeting times, and influencing interest in his community about what is going on in the church he has established.
|
You really need to change your avatar, You are far too articulate for Dylan
|