|
Tab Menu 1
| The D.A.'s Office The views expressed in this forum are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of AFF or the Admin of AFF. |
 |
|
10-05-2007, 07:46 AM
|
 |
Philippians 4
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jackson, TN
Posts: 750
|
|
I have a question....
What if the tables were turned?
What if it were a bunch of Libs pulling their churchs out?
Would that put them on the blacklist?
(OK 3 questions  )
Most of you would expect him to be honorable enough to withdraw... No?
|
10-05-2007, 07:50 AM
|
 |
Still Figuring It Out.
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,858
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
2007 Manual Page 159
Position Papers/Ministerial Code of Ethics
ends with...
"Having accepted a pastorate, I will not use my influence to alienate the church or any portion thereof from the fellowship or support of the United Pentecostal Church International. If my convictions change, I will be honorable enough to withdraw."
Questions:
Will ministers withdrawing abide by the code of ethics they ascribed to in the manual when they affirmed their membership with the fellowship?
Will they simply withdraw w/o using their influence to alienate their church which may be UPCI affiliated? Will they not use their influence to alienate the fellowship or support of the UPCI?
Have not their convictions changed in regards to abiding to the current bylaws of the UPCI ... and so the honorable thing is to withdraw without trying to bring others w/ them?
Will their integrity be questioned ???... do they not also fall under question ethically if they break this code of ethics? ... which can seemingly then be adjudicated under resolution 3?
|
You see... This is another reason why I could never be licensed through the UPC.
Who on earth could agree to this?
Your convictions change... which means that you have seen something to be true that you once had not seen as true... so you are signing a document that says you will walk away and leave the flock untaught for the sake of the assembly remaining within the UPCI.
Man... I just couldn't agree to something like that.
|
10-05-2007, 08:39 AM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven
"If my convictions change, I will be honorable enough to withdraw."
Something for all to ponder Dan. Especially for those who are adamant about abiding by the rules! Good eye there Dan.
Raven
|
Surely you both are intelligent enough to realize that we are not ignorant enough to swallow this line of reasoning... pointed and twisted to attack... for I can assure the convictions of the men who are being targeted by this vitriolic attempt at condemnation have not changed. They are standing where they have always stood...
I just find it sad that this kind of garbage is bandied about as though it actually had substance!
|
10-05-2007, 08:54 AM
|
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 467
|
|
Point #1. If the UPC passed a "resolution" saying that homosexuality was an accepted alternate lifestyle would men that used their "influence" to get their church to disaffiliate be unethical?
Point #2. The viewing and usage of TV has ALWAYS been seen by APOSTOLICS as a sinful deal. Even an abomination.
"...I will walk within my house with a perfect heart. I will set no WICKED thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me." Psalm 101:2c-3
Point #3. For OP's to go on TV, especially on TBN, the are joining UNBELIEVERS, be not unequally yoked togethere with unbelievers, therefore they are participating in SIN. The ONLY way a OP could go on TBN and not be "yoked" with the Triniteee's is for them to go on there and proclaim that their is Only ONE WAY and that Jesus is that WAY and that there is Only ONE GOD and that Jesus is that God and that there is Only ONE Baptism and that ONE Baptism is two part both Water and Spirit (Water in JESUS NAME; Spirit initially evidenced by speaking in other tongues).
|
10-05-2007, 09:15 AM
|
|
Guest
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: H-Town, Texas
Posts: 18,009
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by philjones
Surely you both are intelligent enough to realize that we are not ignorant enough to swallow this line of reasoning... pointed and twisted to attack... for I can assure the convictions of the men who are being targeted by this vitriolic attempt at condemnation have not changed. They are standing where they have always stood...
I just find it sad that this kind of garbage is bandied about as though it actually had substance!
|
Sheesh ... PJ ... talk about a conspiracy theory.
The question is will the law abiders abide by their laws? Will they do the honorable thing?
|
10-05-2007, 09:17 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8,102
|
|
|
Daniel has a point.
I find it humorously ironic that the same men who slam those who disagree with small portions of the AOF, and yet sign the AS, are now defending men who are, in fact, lying.
Let's summarize, shall we?
1. They agreed that they would not disaffiliate their church because of personal views.
2. Some currently are doing the exact thing they promised they wouldn't.
I find that highly dishonorable.
|
10-05-2007, 09:18 AM
|
|
Philippians 4
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jackson, TN
Posts: 750
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcie
I have a question....
What if the tables were turned?
What if it were a bunch of Libs pulling their churchs out?
Would that put them on the blacklist?
(OK 3 questions )
Most of you would expect him to be honorable enough to withdraw... No? |
Does anyone want to answer my ?'s ?
|
10-05-2007, 09:20 AM
|
|
Guest
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: H-Town, Texas
Posts: 18,009
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Poster
Daniel has a point.
I find it humorously ironic that the same men who slam those who disagree with small portions of the AOF, and yet sign the AS, are now defending men who are, in fact, lying.
Let's summarize, shall we?
1. They agreed that they would not disaffiliate their church because of personal views.
2. Some currently are doing the exact thing they promised they wouldn't.
I find that highly dishonorable.
|
They were perhaps in breach of this code of ethics when they were convincing other fellow ministers not to support, or boycott, SFC over their disdain for this year's NAYC.
I will not use my influence to alienate the church or any portion thereof from the fellowship or support of the United Pentecostal Church International.
|
10-05-2007, 09:23 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8,102
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
They were perhaps in breach of this code of ethics when they were convincing other fellow ministers not to support, or boycott, SFC over their disdain for this year's NAYC.
I will not use my influence to alienate the church or any portion thereof from the fellowship or support of the United Pentecostal Church International.
|
Another excellent point Daniel!
Who was it that said "live by the sword, die by the sword?"
Truly sad situation.
|
10-05-2007, 09:23 AM
|
|
Philippians 4
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jackson, TN
Posts: 750
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
They were perhaps in breach of this code of ethics when they were convincing other fellow ministers not to support, or boycott, SFC over their disdain for this year's NAYC.
I will not use my influence to alienate the church or any portion thereof from the fellowship or support of the United Pentecostal Church International.
|
OUCH!!!!
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:43 PM.
| |
Don' Take Your Organs to Heaven!
Linear Mode
