Ministers shouldn't be forced into a certain subject box where they can't preach certain things, even a word of rebuke.
However, I also agree that family conferences or campmeetings are no place for ministers to get on a soapbox and air dirty laundry.
IF PM's words were meant for the Detroit meeting, then I'm disappointed. Not only was he not present to know what was discussed, but to just blindly blast away with a shotgun at a campmeeting where the majority probably didn't even know there was a "secret meeting" is simply wrong.
Imagine being at the campmeeting, looking forward to hearing a message from God ... the UPC's already been split with the tv issue, and you may still be tender from that - possibly losing friends, etc ... and now the minister gets up and starts dropping bombs about some secret meeting and false prophets, etc.
Even better, imagine knowing about it, knowing that TFT and RJ were in attendence, then have PM come along to desparage these men who you've had a high opinion of in the past ... now what do you think? They've been labled false prophets ...
Bad judgement from PM, imo. It's one thing to speak against something you know of personally ... but to just shoot blind without knowing what was said/done there shows terrible judgement.
Just another reason I'm glad to be away from the UPC. Tired of officials and ministers using the pulpit as a louisville slugger against those they don't agree with.
I agree with you there, completely. Sin must always be preached against (true sin, not opinions ). Our society, including the Christian world, is getting much too tolerant of fornication, perversion, and not insisting that Christians live an honest and upright life. This must always be preached, and reproof will come into it when people begin living their lives in this way.
I think the 'itching ears' he refers to applies to people who no longer want to hear true sin preached against. "If my daughter wants to move in with her boyfriend, it's nobody's business." That type of attitude.
Again, I'm not sure if I should have responded in this particular thread; however, let me also say that I have a tremendous amount of respect for Bro. Mooney as well.
I'm just saying that I think we need to reexamine how we feel about preaching that we don't feel like is palatable. There are some pretty strong examples of things said in the Bible that may possibly rub people the wrong way.
We have Biblical examples of what the Apostles did when they felt false teachers came up among them. Paul singled them out by name.
1Timothy 1:18 – 20. This command I entrust to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you may fight the good fight, keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to their faith. Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered over to Satan, so that they may be taught not to blaspheme.
In Titus 1, the duties of an elder include:
He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
MP, I understand some of what's being said here. I was trying to discuss this in a broader sense than the specific example given here. I was not there, nor have I heard what all was said. Perhaps I should not have responded in this particular thread.
However, I do strongly feel that in a general sense, we do run the risk of forgetting what 2 Tim says the Bible was intended for in Chapter 3...and what it will be used for in Chapter 4.
I do not know that personal gripes and vendettas were preached. I never want to hear that at a campmeeting or anywhere else for that matter.
What I do have a problem with is the notion that we should be telling men of God what "type" of message to preach at a given place. I much rather men of God have the freedom to preach what God laid on their hearts and what was borne out of prayer and fasting and sudying. If it should correct and reprove me as opposed to making me feel good, there is certainly a chance that that may be what is needed. It certainly would not be unBiblical.
I should have specified a bit more, was trying to listen in on a conference call while I typed, lol.
I completely agree that any preaching against sin should always be unfettered at any gathering, whether a local assembly, or a corporate gathering.
My comments were directed toward the voicing of personal vendettas or disagreement with the direction the organization may or may not be going.
__________________ "Many people view their relationship with God like a "color by number" picture. It's easier to let someone else define the boundaries, tell them which blanks to fill in, and what color to use than it is for them to take a blank canvas and seek inspiration from the Source in order to paint their own masterpiece"
Mooney was well within in his bounds to say what he did and it wasn't overboard. This is all of our church, and if he thinks this is false doctrine, then he had every liberty to say what he did.
However, I would remind Mooney that some pretty honest and noble things have happened in secret, and that often times it's more appropriate for leaders to be able to communicate about something in secret, before slopping it openly in public. Keeps things above reproach.
As if the UPC isn't already fighting an uphill battle with their unorthodox doctrine they have to make things worse by consistently bashing each other.
The reason for the "secret" meeting should be obvious. The UPC does not allow open debate or discussion about their "identifying" doctrines. The young generation coming up has the Internet and every resource at their fingertips. Keeping folks ignorant just doesn't work anymore. The problem is that once you get people to start thinking for themselves God starts to control people's lives instead of the Priest.
I am Scott Phillips. I posted the message linked here on this page.
I can speak from a man under 40, Minister in the UPC, he spoke to the issues and mirrored my feelings precisely.
If you don't like the UPC, Acts 2:38, Holiness Lifestyle, just leave.
And if these cool brilliant talents boys who have one claim to fame and that being nepotism, why take a church who was built on this foundation... and STEAL IT because daddy don't have the guts to tell you no...
And go prove your method's on their merits, rather than piggy backing your doctrine and leading good people into darkness.
Mooney is a Good Man of God who is standing against this evil, dark, deceptive spirit of compromise.
The difference between Satans' Words to Eve and God's were three letters, one small word.....
NOT
And that little twist stole paradise and damned humanity to hell. Trying to use a philosophical approach to spiritual, biblical matters demonstrates the father of the doctrines born of such.
If your interested in my personal thought process, you can read my blog... I have been quite fervently dealing with these issues over the past few months.
The denigration of these men continues by their peers, in my opinion.
They insist to call a meeting, by invite only, (which is common place) "secret". Using scripture to malign it and cast aspersions to equate the word "secret" with darkness, lies, false doctrine, and inspired by the devil, etc.
Now the tact as we read from Rev. Phillips, and somewhat from PM, is to claim the this group did not achieve successes in their ministry on their own merits but on the coattails of their daddys.
Truth be told, many of these men who attended are first generation Pentecostals. Many of them started as home missionaries or have started their works from the ground up. While a handful, of course, have inherited churches from their family, just like many throughout the UPC.
The charge that they have stolen churches from their fathers to destroy them is an egregious one. I can think of one pastor that these "defenders of the faith" may be targeting with this type of rhetoric but the broad brushing is insincere, inaccurate and inflammatory.
What's the deal with calling his peers "cool, brilliant boys"?
Last edited by Kim Komando; 07-08-2009 at 08:33 AM.
I should have specified a bit more, was trying to listen in on a conference call while I typed, lol.
I completely agree that any preaching against sin should always be unfettered at any gathering, whether a local assembly, or a corporate gathering.
My comments were directed toward the voicing of personal vendettas or disagreement with the direction the organization may or may not be going.
If that direction is more specific, and has to do with meetings that he feels and senses (and God knows what else he knows about the meeting) are leading the church astray, why would he not say something. There was more in the NT about keeping doctrine, rebuking false doctrine, etc... than there was rebuking sinners or sin.
Mooney was well within in his bounds to say what he did and it wasn't overboard. This is all of our church, and if he thinks this is false doctrine, then he had every liberty to say what he did.
However, I would remind Mooney that some pretty honest and noble things have happened in secret, and that often times it's more appropriate for leaders to be able to communicate about something in secret, before slopping it openly in public. Keeps things above reproach.
Remember that Mooney is using this as a fear technique to keep the people of Mississippi scared of anything new. This is par for the course around here. By talking about secret meetings and possible false doctrine and snakes and whatnot you get all the little old ladies in Mississippi all fired up and headed back to their churches to enforce the doctrine on the young folks and make sure the pastor keeps the church in line.
I have a friend who is church of God (believe me the church of God has their own share of Pentecostal craziness going on) who went to one of the night services during the Mississippi youth camp and was completely horrified. From his descriptions they basically scared the little kids to death with talk of backsliding and sin and drugs and body tattoos and how one little sin could be all it takes to send you to hell (we are talking 8 year olds) till they all went screaming down to the altar to get the Holy Ghost. He said folks were everywhere praying with little kids trying to get them to speak in tongues and of course they were crying with all their heart because they wanted to be saved. I don't know if other state's youth camps are like this but I went to youth camp when I was a kid and it was about the same.
By slamming your own peers online on a public forum as being thieves, "cool brilliant boys", and alluding to them being motivated with an "evil, dark, deceptive, spirit of compromise" -
How do you reconcile this with your signature on the Affirmation Statement that you believe and embrace that you will "not contend for the different views to the disunity of the body.”
Do you stand by the Fundamental Doctrine's unity statement and your own affirmation? Is this not a matter of integrity for all sides?
Last edited by Kim Komando; 07-08-2009 at 09:16 AM.
). Our society, including the Christian world, is getting much too tolerant of fornication, perversion, and not insisting that Christians live an honest and upright life. This must always be preached, and reproof will come into it when people begin living their lives in this way.
Linear Mode
