Quote:
Originally Posted by jwharv
|
This article isn't that great. No knock on the man or the ministry, but the article isn't that great.
I'm not sure this is the article Epley read . . . since I read this one a long time ago. This was written shortly after TFT appeared on TBN and a few called for TFTs head on a platter.
The statements won't hold water. Something else troubling is that several times he elevates the Manual to the reverence of a bible.
Quote:
Had the decision gone the other way, it certainly would have been very divisive. Hard choices would have been forced on a large number of brethren. It is a serious matter, especially for those who have seen the negative side of apostolic televangelism.
|
What "hard choices" would be FORCED on a "large number" of people? The one's being FORCED right now are the one's who want to put ads on tv and don't! If Res. 4 passes no one is going to force anyone to place ads. This statement is false and unsupported by facts.
Quote:
When the image of a neighboring pastor—or one from a distant city—is splashed across the TV screens of the community (or world), he may or may not project a level of commitment to the apostolic message consistent with the UPCI Manual.
|
Uhm, how about being consistent with the BIBLE? Or have we elevated the Manual to the place of infallibility?
Again, this statement isn't supported by facts. You can already click on the internet and watch webcasts or go on youtube and watch tubecasts of other churches . . . indeed one's who may not project the Manual's holiness.
Quote:
A pastor can limit interaction with those assemblies and evangelists with whom he strongly disagrees now, but if they were on television, then theoretically they would have access to every family in his church where there is a television in the home.
|
Again, the internet has the LARGEST database of these same assemblies and evangelists . . . and it's available 24/7! Unlike television broadcasts that are only available on a certain day and at a certain time, the internet allows for archived content.
Just another statement that doesn't hold water.
Quote:
Pastors can point to this section of the Manual and say that their position is in line with the UPCI, and that this provision is the corporate will of the brethren. This has aided pastors in keeping TV out of many homes.
|
Again, the Manual is being elevated to the rank of the Bible. It's sad one has to point to the man-made Manual to keep tv out of homes, and not the written Word of God.
Quote:
Television personalities tend to become stars. Celebrities. Larger than life. Often such status is only in one’s head, but perception can be reality. The temptation is certainly there and it has motivated others to feel elevated above their brethren, on some spiritual pinnacle, or in some way to “think more highly of himself than he ought to think” (Romans 12:3).
|
This statement could apply to Conference speakers and Campmeeting speakers as well as televangelists. The problem is FLESH . . . not a certain method or medium. It's simple, age-old flesh. It's not restricted to televangelism, but is anywhere and everywhere there is flesh.
Quote:
While televangelism sounds exciting, cooler heads recognize the implications for the body of Christ and know that it has more potential for regress than for progress.
|
What kind of junk is that? Really. So the one's supporting televangelism are just a bunch of hot heads?
Quote:
History has revealed that the UPCI was indeed wise in saying NO to televangelism. It was a positive step. May wisdom from above yet prevail in all our future deliberations.
|
Actually history has revealed no such thing. Quite frankly, this stance against television and embracement of the internet has opened the organization up to well-deserved and correct criticism that it's being hypocritical and selective in its evangelism methods.
*sigh*
I've read better articles in the newspaper. JMO
***Note if my post offends you, cry me a river. I did not insult the man, I critiqued the article and have every God-given and blessed right to do so.