WPF in talks with Philippines UPC - Page 14

Sister Alvear · #**131** 02-07-2008, 09:02 AM

If the wwf is NOT starting churches and organizations THEY SHOULD work though leadership that is on the field whether it be American or National but not go around giving preachers money...I can tell you right now it WILL DIVIDE...if division is what they want that is the way they will work, if it is furthering the cause of CHRIST no matter who gets the glory they will work through leadership.

Jekyll · #**132** 02-12-2008, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW Pastor

There is nothing funny about sowing discord in a foreign field, where the nationals have been taught to trust and love American preachers. Mixed signals from America could hinder the influence of all American missionaries in that land.

I must say, it is abunantly clear that you have no idea of what you are talking about when it comes to missions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

You make it sound like you think it's a good thing that they can "go into foreign countrys with the big guns and forcibly take mission fields over." I would be ashamed to show myself to the brothers overseas if I was even tempted to think that I was there to "take over."

I am sure to be taking notes from AFF about what missions means.

Pel, do you have a hobby making bread ties? You sure know how to twist words around. Not quite as good as alice but on the right track.

Sister Alvear · #**133** 02-12-2008, 10:28 PM

We should pray for our brothers and sisters in that distant land...missionary work is hard enough without confusion from the homefront..

pelathais · #**134** 02-12-2008, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jekyll

I am sure to be taking notes from AFF about what missions means.

Pel, do you have a hobby making bread ties? You sure know how to twist words around. Not quite as good as alice but on the right track.

hmmm... you said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jekyll

It is so funny the amount of double talk about the WPF...their numbers are downplayed but they are able to go into foreign countrys with the big guns and forcibly take mission fields over...

But, don't mind that 90% of what any one here says about the WPF is second, third, and mostly fourth hand information. Carry on with the double talk.

... to which I said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

You make it sound like you think it's a good thing that they can "go into foreign countrys with the big guns and forcibly take mission fields over." I would be ashamed to show myself to the brothers overseas if I was even tempted to think that I was there to "take over."

I responded to your hyperbole ironically - no "twisting" at all.

Do you really feel that the reports of the WwPF work in the Philippines is "double talk?" That's what some folks said when it was "rumored" that they were starting a new org. Then the new org just sort of "pops up out of no where."

Why do you support these guys? I figured you to be ornerier than that.

NW Pastor · #**135** 02-13-2008, 09:02 AM

[QUOTE=Jekyll;388388]I am sure to be taking notes from AFF about what missions means. [QUOTE]

Apparently. I have learned that ignorance and arrogance often accompany one another.

Jekyll · #**136** 02-13-2008, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

hmmm... you said:

... to which I said:

I responded to your hyperbole ironically - no "twisting" at all.

Do you really feel that the reports of the WwPF work in the Philippines is "double talk?" That's what some folks said when it was "rumored" that they were starting a new org. Then the new org just sort of "pops up out of no where."

Why do you support these guys? I figured you to be ornerier than that.

Oh, Pel, wake up. I never said it was good that anyone goes into missions fields and takes anything over. This is an accusation of WPF by the anti-WPF. Read my post more clearly. I was contrasting how WPF has only a few members (as stated by some here) but yet they have enough power to rip missions fields away from the UPC. Nice try, though.

I would like to know, what is wrong with someone starting a new organization? By the way, did anyone in leadership ever deny that this was taking place?

NW, if you would like to PM me your real name, a phone number, or some way of legitimate correspondence, I would gladly give you a chance to educate me in missions work. Do you really think a forum is a place to be learning the truth about ANYTHING??? If so, this casts doubt about your ability to separate fact from sensationalism.

NW Pastor · #**137** 02-13-2008, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jekyll

Oh, Pel, wake up. I never said it was good that anyone goes into missions fields and takes anything over. This is an accusation of WPF by the anti-WPF. Read my post more clearly. I was contrasting how WPF has only a few members (as stated by some here) but yet they have enough power to rip missions fields away from the UPC. Nice try, though.

I would like to know, what is wrong with someone starting a new organization? By the way, did anyone in leadership ever deny that this was taking place?

NW, if you would like to PM me your real name, a phone number, or some way of legitimate correspondence, I would gladly give you a chance to educate me in missions work. Do you really think a forum is a place to be learning the truth about ANYTHING??? If so, this casts doubt about your ability to separate fact from sensationalism.

It's true, this forum produces much fluff and nonsense. Can I interpret your post to assert that you have not been a deseminator of the truth in past postings? Or is it just OTHERS that cannot be telling the truth. A curious thing to say, regardless.

I am sure you are a good Christian and a fine soul. We would most likely agree on many theological positions. Though we differ on the methodolgy of the WPF, I wish you well.

NLYP · #**138** 02-13-2008, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

If the wwf is NOT starting churches and organizations THEY SHOULD work though leadership that is on the field whether it be American or National but not go around giving preachers money...I can tell you right now it WILL DIVIDE...if division is what they want that is the way they will work, if it is furthering the cause of CHRIST no matter who gets the glory they will work through leadership.

WWF!!!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLL
Sis...love your heart....coming from you...THAT was priceless....

you mean wpf....

wwf is the world wrestling federation....

Come to think of it.....you may be on to something.

Apprehended · #**139** 02-13-2008, 04:38 PM

My question is this:

Why would WPF be in talks with Philippines UPC? What on earth FOR?

Does WPF consider the UPC in the Philippines to be LOST? If they do, are they going to be rebaptizing them, if so, in WHOSE name?

Or could the purpose of the talks with the Philippines UPC be, as I suspect it to be, the unscrouplous intent to siphon off some of the constiuents of the UPC? Are they really THAT unethical and low class?

But, if they honestly believe that those Philippines UPC constiuents are lost and are on their way to hell, then I understand that. I doubt that motive. I suspect an unholy, unscrouplous, unethical motive.

Am I mistaken?

pelathais · #**140** 02-13-2008, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jekyll

Oh, Pel, wake up. I never said it was good that anyone goes into missions fields and takes anything over. This is an accusation of WPF by the anti-WPF. Read my post more clearly. I was contrasting how WPF has only a few members (as stated by some here) but yet they have enough power to rip missions fields away from the UPC. Nice try, though.

Your "contrasting" is what I called "hyperbole." I understood you clearly. You just fail to persude me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jekyll

I would like to know, what is wrong with someone starting a new organization? By the way, did anyone in leadership ever deny that this was taking place?

About the closest thing to that that I heard was Steadfast's telling of a conversation with a "coordinator" and a UPC official last fall. He quoted the WwPF coordinator as saying things that led Steadfast to conclude that the was no new organization in the works.

Now, it could be that Steady just "heard what he wanted to hear," or that he misunderstood something, or missed a part of the conversation, or any number of well intentioned things could have been miscommunicated. But we were told on this forum that there was no new org in the making, at least at that point in time.