Is there any way I can agree with both of these posts? I know... I know... a double-minded man is unstable in all his ways.
Seriously, though... An exclusive meeting with ONLY like-minded people is not, in my opinion, a very productive meeting. If you're just looking for a bunch of "Amen"'s and pats on the back, then that's exactly what you'll get. The scripture says that iron sharpens iron... there needs to be some grating against each other for that to happen, though.
If, on the other hand, the purpose was to write a manifesto for the purpose of presenting their disputes to a broader audience (read General Board) then that would be an exception to the statement above, in my opinion.
Again, I don't have a dog in this fight since I'm not UPCI, and have recently been railroaded and lied against by the political machinery of both UPCI and ALJC. But understanding how things work, and that the status quo for these orgs is to NOT hear debate or opposing views, I would understand the need to create a working group to form the manifesto and get all the ducks in row before presenting to the great and awesome powers that rule all of God's Kingdom. But out with it now... let's hear what you have to say... no more secrecy.
I agree with this. I just believe that sometimes we need to be sure we are balancing out and getting different perspectives when making major decisions or discussing serious matters. I'm not sure if this meeting in particular did or didn't include that, but in general, I've seen some pretty unbalanced things come out of a "bunch of like-minded people" carving a new path.
Now those of differing opinions would have to be open, honest, and earnest people in order to make any sort of progress. I'm sure that there are people like that on both sides of "the fence" in this situation.
__________________
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
Threaded Mode
