My Name is on www.wedeclare.org

[EA]

I think I killed this thread.

Sorry, folks.

[rgcraig]

Ah, it's just a lull - it's not dead.

[MissBrattified]

So here's my question:

If someone more liberal started a website similar to "wedeclare" with a declaration of doctrine for ministers to read and sign, and it didn't include the same (or all) of the items found in the manual--would that not be seen as divisive by conservative ministers, would they not denounce the liberals for trying to supercede the manual? Would they call them hypocrites for signing the affirmation statement, and then stating elsewhere that they only agree with a portion of what the manual contains?

This mud can be slung both ways.

Did the authors of "wedeclare.org" get the approval of Bro. Haney before they created the site? Just curious.

[Tina]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

So here's my question:

If someone more liberal started a website similar to "wedeclare" with a declaration of doctrine for ministers to read and sign, and it didn't include the same (or all) of the items found in the manual--would that not be seen as divisive by conservative ministers, would they not denounce the liberals for trying to supercede the manual? Would they call them hypocrites for signing the affirmation statement, and then stating elsewhere that they only agree with a portion of what the manual contains?

This mud can be slung both ways.

Did the authors of "wedeclare.org" get the approval of Bro. Haney before they created the site? Just curious.

You have such a delicate way of wording things.

I would love to have this ability.

Guess that makes me envious, huh?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

So here's my question:

If someone more liberal started a website similar to "wedeclare" with a declaration of doctrine for ministers to read and sign, and it didn't include the same (or all) of the items found in the manual--would that not be seen as divisive by conservative ministers, would they not denounce the liberals for trying to supercede the manual? Would they call them hypocrites for signing the affirmation statement, and then stating elsewhere that they only agree with a portion of what the manual contains?

This mud can be slung both ways.

Did the authors of "wedeclare.org" get the approval of Bro. Haney before they created the site? Just curious.

Great question since they DID use the UPCI logo - - makes it appear to be sanctioned by WEC.

[MrMasterMind]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Great question since they DID use the UPCI logo - - makes it appear to be sanctioned by WEC.

Very subtle difference, the "logo" is under links and is actually a hotbutton/link to connect to the UPCI.

It may appear to some to be an endorsement but actually is merely a link.

An endorsement would be signatures by a majority of the general board which appear to be conspicuously absent.

Furthermore, many are instead of the opinion of the organizers, "mark them which cause division among you."

[RevDWW]

Here's, I think, what defines the WeDeclare idenity of the UPCI:

• Acts2:38..
• No cut Hair on women short hair on men
• No pants on women, no skirts or dresses on men.
• The rest seems negotiable, within reason

[harleypreacher]

4. Deuteronomy 22:5, when the principle of this passage is properly applied, women should wear dresses and men should wear pants. (edited 9/28/09 WeDeclare.org)

[yisraelm]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

Yis I am not upc and I do not wear a ring so try another one...alot of people do not wear rings because of the job they perform or certain equipment they work around.

I'm not UPC either... and?

[yisraelm]

Originally Posted by harleypreacher

4. Deuteronomy 22:5, when the principle of this passage is properly applied, women should wear dresses and men should wear pants. (edited 9/28/09 WeDeclare.org)

Is the man on the harley you???