Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin
My pastor invited me to a leadership meeting with a few other pastors in Michigan. Bro. Bernard was there. He opened with a summary of how he wants to lead the UPC and opened it up to a Q&A. I asked him about the merger, Fudge's book was discussed briefly, but from what I remember (I don't think it was recorded) but Bernard said that the majority of the PCI also believed in Acts 2:38 new birth for salvation, while the minority believed in "grace alone", (or salvation comes at repentance, then you get baptized and get the Holy Ghost, hence the first Pentecostal Herald article)
Beards were discussed also. Bernard doesn't have an issue with beards, he doesn't preach for them or against them.
I asked him about "accountability" regarding preachers in the UPC (Which was one of his highlights during his opening as why one should join the UPC). My example was a popular UPC evangelist misquoting multiple sources supporting a teaching, and not doing it just once on accident, but over and over again. He suggested reaching out to this preacher and conducting a round table to discuss this. He also said that if the teachings were continued, less and less people would invite said evangelist and it would eventually die out and take care of itself.
We spend about 30 minutes on beards, and about 5 minutes on preachers in the UPC not being held accountable. |
Justin, (I was at that Q & A session). I don't know of DKB caught it, but I don't think the guy who was asking about facial hair was asking about facial hair, but rather it was about something else.
Facial hair is a "safe" zone in such discussion. However, the sermon the questionnaire was referring to where the preacher said "facial hair was wrong" was most likely (though I could be corrected) a reference to Scott Graham's "follow the stones" message back at Michigan District's Family Camp. ANd I don't actually think facial hair was ever mentioned in that message (though again, I could be reading way too much into things). But a lot of other issues were discussed during that message by Graham (there was even a post by someone about that message not too long ago).
Naturally, Bernard took the question too literally, but at the very least, if you remember how the question about facial hair was asked, it revolved around the biblical accuracy being in favor FOR facial hair as opposed to the bible being against facial hair (Bernard agreed with this point), and how it is ironic that in spite of the bible being more FOR facial hair, he would not be allowed to teach as so in conferences/camps, but yet any preacher can get up and preach against facial hair, and be applauded for it.
Naturally, I don't think it's too much of a leap to substitute any other issue in for facial hair in regards to that question. I was dismayed too about how your question got brushed aside, and facial hair was the focal point of the whole thing
The person who asked was one of the more popular pastors in our state/movement, so I do think he did have things riding on the lines in asking the question and thus may also explain it's neutrality.
Threaded Mode
