JP Don't Forget

[Esther]

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin

It has been said that time proves all things, and I, for one, believe it's true.

In hindsight, over the past two years, I can see that a lot of damage can occur through online interaction. I admit that I have no idea why caused this particular thread, but it appears to be a general angst concerning www.justpreachers.com. It appears that some of us are upset that men who comprise that forum have a negative opinion of AFF and what goes on here. It appears that some of us are upset at the things they say about AFF.

Truth is, we are hurt by what has been said. It bothers us. But (and I say this with as much love as I can muster) it does not bother us enough to consider our own actions. It does not bother us enough to consider that they may actually be justified in their feelings. No, we would rather paint them as ultraconservative meanies who leave because they are too intellectually challenged here to stay. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Look, no one like their beliefs trashed. NO ONE. But that is what happens, and it happens often throughout all of the Pentecostal forums. We engage in a funky sort of verbal nuclear combat - just so we can say that we won the war.

Many of us realize the power AFF weilds. This is not some outdated periodical people use to decorate their coffee table. This is the most powerful media in all of Oneness Pentecostalism. That is why what is posted here actually matters.

So having a difference of opinion is now considered trashed?

I have seen many debates without trashing either side. But because someone does not agree with my stand I don't consider their opinion trash, so why should they consider mine as trash?

I don't see the ultracons as meanies either. I want to see their thoughts as much as anyone else's.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esther

So having a difference of opinion is now considered trashed?

I have seen many debates without trashing either side. But because someone does not agree with my stand I don't consider their opinion trash, so why should they consider mine as trash?

I don't see the ultracons as meanies either. I want to see their thoughts as much as anyone else's.

Esther,
I think when someone reads any portion of scripture and stands on what they believe it means - we can't keep pushing and pushing and pushing them as though you want to back them in a corner so that they will admit they are in error. That's what appears to happen many times. Both ways, to be fair.

For instance:

I Tim. 2:9-10 "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works."

Some read this passage as no wearing of jewelry and others as moderation - I think we should respect each person's view and stop badgering them, calling them a cult, putting out heresy, etc. It just doesn't make for the type of conversation that we all so desire.

When we go there - it's trashing and belittling other's beliefs. Bad form, IMO.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Esther

So having a difference of opinion is now considered trashed?

I have seen many debates without trashing either side. But because someone does not agree with my stand I don't consider their opinion trash, so why should they consider mine as trash?

I don't see the ultracons as meanies either. I want to see their thoughts as much as anyone else's.

Esther, this is the way I feel.

Questioning - challenging isn't trashing. I've been told point blankly that I'm not saved - - I know where I stand with God and I didn't feel they were trashing me. That's just someone opinion.

Ed there was no angst in this thread.................it was just a reminder.

I received a call and said so, are the two forums at war? I answered, no way. I don't have a problem with jp - - it serves it purpose. I understand ministers needing their own place to vent, etc. without the public eye watching. However, that was part of my reminder - - it's more public than they think. Somebody tells somebody that tells someone else.

[rgcraig]

Maple Leaf thanks for your post!

[ILG]

Only if someone degrades my character and makes false accusations about my motives do I feel trashed.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Questioning - challenging isn't trashing. I've been told point blankly that I'm not saved - - I know where I stand with God and I didn't feel they were trashing me. That's just someone opinion.

There are ways in the questioning and challenging that has most certainly been trashing - from both sides of any issue. We've had enough threads closed to prove that.

It's been said that we respect those that stand for what they believe. Did you not respect him for standing for what he believed when he said you were lost? I would expect nothing less.

How he said it would be my issue - not what he believed.

Is there a nice way to say a group is a cult, preaching heresy, false doctrine?

[Ron]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Esther, this is the way I feel.

Questioning - challenging isn't trashing. I've been told point blankly that I'm not saved - - I know where I stand with God and I didn't feel they were trashing me. That's just someone opinion.

Ed there was no angst in this thread.................it was just a reminder.

I received a call and said so, are the two forums at war? I answered, no way. I don't have a problem with jp - - it serves it purpose. I understand ministers needing their own place to vent, etc. without the public eye watching. However, that was part of my reminder - - it's more public than they think. Somebody tells somebody that tells someone else.

That is sad right there, but that is another discussion.
Questioning isn't the problem unless it is constant & there has been a number of people who have felt that beliefs were trashed.
Maybe not all of it was that way but where there is smoke there must be.....?

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

Jim Yohe was in the vanguard of a new era of open communication among Oneness Pentecostals. The reality for all of us is that the world in which we live and serve God has been dramatically altered by the Internet, for the better and for the worse.

As Silent Service as said, Jim wanted a place for open discussion; in that respect Jim was a leader in dragging Oneness people into the Internet era. FCF was the first forum that I participated in, and had the privilege of posting with Jim Yohe there, but FCF wasn’t Jim’s first forum. My understanding was that Jim Yohe had started FCF because of the lack of opportunity for open discussion on other forums (I think that he held the “ban record” before he became Mr. FCF.)

In that respect, AFF is the forum that Jim Yohe began. Jim Yohe set out to challenge the status quo, to challenge preachers and saints alike to discuss, debate, and defend their views. I think that he had a passion to see the movement he loved move into the post modern era, and to provide a viable faith for the countless Jesus Name people that were and are struggling with traditions that don’t do well under Scriptural scrutiny.

Having said that, I think that FCF was not a sustainable experiment, due to several factors: one being that it challenged traditions that are much loved but that lack strong Scriptural foundations; and another being that it challenged preachers to meet questioners on equal footing without the weight of the pulpit or position. In the beginning, because it was new, people from every part of the spectrum of Oneness Pentecost joined the conversation with gusto, confident that they would convince others of their view of correct doctrine.

Although my saying so will probably be dismissed as merely partisan rhetoric, the traditional positions, particularly concerning standards, have not fared well in forum discussions. The lines of reasoning and theological grounds for many of the standards that Jim Yohe set out to challenge have not been successful in convincing questioners. This has caused many who hold to the traditional positions to withdraw from open discussion, believing that the end result of open conversation is to see people depart from standards.

It has somehow become popular to claim offence as a reason for withdrawing from this forum. In reality, neither side of the lib/con divide has any right to claim the high moral ground in terms of attitude and posting style, and the claim of “offence” as a reason for leaving looks like a smokescreen to those left behind. There is undeniable peer pressure among the more conservative brethren not to post here, and those who have posted have felt compelled to justify their being here to their peers.

In conclusion (Don’t you hate long posts? I rarely read them), the conservatives are doing their cause and the seekers who show up here a disservice by withdrawing into their closed forums. I feel, as did Jim Yohe, that it is important that there be a strong Acts 2:38 voice on the Internet. Young people in this day look to the Internet as one of their primary sources of information, and, when they ask questions, their first response is to click for answers. If the Acts 2:38 message is only proclaimed behind impenetrable barriers young people will be the first to miss the message. The reality of this day is that many people, and they’re not all young, are questioning standards, and they are going to show up here with their questions. If the conservatives withdraw from the conversation, the only answers that the questioners are going to find are going to be liberal opinions.

This forum, and the twenty first century, may not be a comfortable place for conservatives, but an important part of the battle for the heart and mind of this generation is going to be fought on the bandwidth battlefield. I would appeal to the conservative brethren not to abandon the battleground.

(Please excuse any typos and the garbled syntax. This post is too long for me to proofread without being put to sleep through the monotonous cadence of my own laboured and belaboured sentences.)

I stand in awe of your brain.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by ILG

Only if someone degrades my character and makes false accusations about my motives do I feel trashed.

There's the barometer, ILG!

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Esther,
I think when someone reads any portion of scripture and stands on what they believe it means - we can't keep pushing and pushing and pushing them as though you want to back them in a corner so that they will admit they are in error. That's what appears to happen many times. Both ways, to be fair.

For instance:

I Tim. 2:9-10 "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works."

Some read this passage as no wearing of jewelry and others as moderation - I think we should respect each person's view and stop badgering them, calling them a cult, putting out heresy, etc. It just doesn't make for the type of conversation that we all so desire.

When we go there - it's trashing and belittling other's beliefs. Bad form, IMO.

I sure wish Rhoni hadn't posted that! LOL!!!!

Just for the flip side though PO, that same conversation gets old when someone suggests because you don't see anything wrong with that you are backslidden.

There just needs to be mutual respect.