The Fallout Continues - Page 3

mizpeh · #21 10-07-2007, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

Sister, it is very widespread, far more than most thought it would be.

This was quite a thing...for the first time, the UPC totally reversed a stand on separation.

This has caused a LOT of men to lose trust in the organization. It isn'tonly the issue--it is the willingness of the majority to remove a landmark. When you've done it once, it's easier to do it again.

CS, is this really the first time for a major upheaval in the org? Why was there not a mistrust in the org with the AS, even among conservatives? The AS was a HUGE reversal of the original intent of the formation of the org which included two bodies, PCI and PAJC. The AS caused one set of believers to be left out in the cold. Why did any liberals stay in the org after the signing of the AS as their trust was betrayed? Maybe they stayed hoping to make it a better org in the long run. Are all the cons are packing up ship so quickly. Hopefully some will stay and have their voices continued to be heard.

This resolution is not condoning general TV viewing but it is allowing the UPC to air their version of Christianity to the lost who watch TV. Does the UPC AOF forbid TV? Disapproval is not the same as forbid.

So who is betraying who? The TV resolution does not go against the AOF.

Hoovie · #22 10-07-2007, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I agree, but do feel a lot of those are taking precautionary measures to insure their local flock will not be found out in the cold. It is all supposition on our part at present. I think time will tell the tale of the toll this "yes" vote will cost. I believe the org is forever changed because of it. And I still think it was the best thing that could happen in the long run, as it frees men to follow their convictions, and move forward instead of always being in gridlock with the opposing side.

On this I agree.

Sister Alvear · #23 10-07-2007, 03:45 PM

I heard some missionaries were getting out...just hearsay though...I am afraid many souls will be destroyed...I am praying for God to guide each person the way they should go...He does know what is best for all of us.
I have never belonged but I feel for those that are hurt.

stmatthew · #24 10-07-2007, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mizpeh

CS, is this really the first time for a major upheaval in the org? Why was there not a mistrust in the org with the AS, even among conservatives? The AS was a HUGE reversal of the original intent of the formation of the org which included two bodies, PCI and PAJC. The AS caused one set of believers to be left out in the cold. Why did any liberals stay in the org after the signing of the AS as their trust was betrayed? Maybe they stayed hoping to make it a better org in the long run. Are all the cons are packing up ship so quickly. Hopefully some will stay and have their voices continued to be heard.

This resolution is not condoning general TV viewing but it is allowing the UPC to air their version of Christianity to the lost who watch TV. Does the UPC AOF forbid TV? Disapproval is not the same as forbid.

So who is betraying who? The TV resolution does not go against the AOF.

I think the issue is that the org has always been a holiness org, and the AS upheld this. What has happened now is that something that many holiness minded folks see as a door of worldly influence, has been "officially" opened, officially being the key word.. While no one is foolish enough to believe that many had tv in their homes, the official stance being changed now changes, in many eye's, the direction of the org as far as holiness goes.

Barb · #25 10-07-2007, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

Sister, it is very widespread, far more than most thought it would be.

This was quite a thing...for the first time, the UPC totally reversed a stand on separation.

This has caused a LOT of men to lose trust in the organization. It isn't only the issue--it is the willingness of the majority to remove a landmark. When you've done it once, it's easier to do it again.

Thank you for your response, CS, and the sincerity with which it was posted.

I feel your heart, Elder C, and am praying for y'all...

mizpeh · #26 10-07-2007, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I think the issue is that the org has always been a holiness org, and the AS upheld this. What has happened now is that something that many holiness minded folks see as a door of worldly influence, has been "officially" opened, officially being the key word.. While no one is foolish enough to believe that many had tv in their homes, the official stance being changed now changes, in many eye's, the direction of the org as far as holiness goes.

Matt,

From what I understand the AS upholds the Aof. The Aof doesn't condemn having a TV in a members home. It strongly disapproves of it but doesn't condemn it as a sin. I would say resolution 4 is the UPC being CONSISTENT with its Aof.

http://www.spiritualabuse.org/issues...on/yearly.html
http://www.spiritualabuse.org/aof.html

I tried looking for the Aof and the AS on the official web site of the UPC and couldn't find them there.

Praxeas · #27 10-07-2007, 04:46 PM

Maybe the absolute "No TV at all, no possessing, no advertisement, no watching ever...even things that are not sin" was wrong to begin with.

We should take a stand against all ungodliness, even the stuff that is on the Internet, and not instead just legislate not using or owning the medium such as computers or TVs

Mosby48 · #28 10-07-2007, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I would be interested in knowing the actual numbers as to how many churches are disaffiliating. Is it really that many, as CB has alluded to in the first post??

My question is "What does being affiliated mean"? What restrictions does this place on the Church? I know the Churches listed in the manual with an asterick by their name are affiliated, but I can't find out what effect this has on a pastor who does or does not pull out.

Praxeas · #29 10-07-2007, 04:48 PM

BTW I do recall there was a big "exodus" (or should I say rumor of one, though some did end up leaving) of UPCs and UPC ministers and even missionaries over the A/S issue too....many of those people felt betrayed and forced into a corner of which they could not in their conscious agree to a Roman Catholic like oath or creedal agreement that we NEVER had before.

stmatthew · #30 10-07-2007, 04:48 PM

The articles does condemn tv as an instrument of worldliness that could lead to spiritual deprivation. Thus while they do not mandate it as a law, it is completely disapproved of. With the acceptance of tv as a viable means of outreach, very few would argue that it opens the door to eventually strike tv from the manual completely, thus what many feel is a fatal blow to holiness itself. Thus the direction of the UPCI and its holiness stand within the articles of faith HAS changed.

I think if you will look at it from the view of a conservative, you will see that it is viewed as the beginning of the end for holiness within the org.

Quote:

We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and Godly living, such as theaters, dances, mixed bathing, women cutting their hair, make-up, any apparel that immodestly exposes the body, all worldly sports and amusements, and unwholesome radio programs and music. Furthermore, because of the display of all these evils on television, we disapprove of any of our people having television sets in their homes. We admonish all of our people to refrain from any of these practices in the interest of spiritual progress and the soon coming of the Lord for His church.