STARTLING! LARRY BOOKER'S Latest Message!!!(wait til you see this!!!)

[George]

Originally Posted by 2020Vision

I'm saying the system has been used many times. They felt it would accomplish nothing but the inevitable, which is still to come. So they formed a new fellowship doing things the way they want to do it. What's wrong with that? Pressing charges would not have helped. Too many "dirty hands" on the issue.

And I'm saying there were men who are in the top 50 of the WPF who did a whole lot of complaining and NEVER used the system. It's quite obvious by your "dirty hands" comment you are a UPC hater and WPF lover so let's end this conversation. I've given my opinion, you have given yours, good-bye.

[Melody]

some officials are aware of violations and they choose to do what they will, many people sign affirmations and are allowed to vote in violation, it was brought forth at conference that those in violation of the affirmation shouldn't be allowed to vote and they were .... if it is in leadership what are you to do?

the issue isn't whether or not it is right or wrong to do, it is signing an affirmation stating you will uphold and then don't.

Reverend Booker is a man of God and while I disagree with the UPC leadership I'm not going to pointedly try to harm them.

[Melody]

Originally Posted by George

And I'm saying there were men who are in the top 50 of the WPF who did a whole lot of complaining and NEVER used the system. It's quite obvious by your "dirty hands" comment you are a UPC hater and WPF lover so let's end this conversation. I've given my opinion, you have given yours, good-bye.

and continue to give...........

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by Melody

some officials are aware of violations and they choose to do what they will, many people sign affirmations and are allowed to vote in violation, it was brought forth at conference that those in violation of the affirmation shouldn't be allowed to vote and they were .... if it is in leadership what are you to do?

the issue isn't whether or not it is right or wrong to do, it is signing an affirmation stating you will uphold and then don't.

Reverend Booker is a man of God and while I disagree with the UPC leadership I'm not going to pointedly try to harm them.

First, how would you determine whether preachers are in "violation of the affirmation statement"? Would you send UPC policemen to their homes to see if they had television, or even the evidence of television, such as cable jacks?

Would you see if you could somehow get their cable billing statements?

So, based on the fact that it's nearly impossible to tell if men are in "violation" of the affirmation statement, how would one know if a man in violation voted?

[tstew]

Originally Posted by Brother Price

By all means... let's just show how liberal this forum is, shall we. You know, I would leave this place once and for all, but I feel so sorry for all you backsliders on here who have rejected holiness, rejected the truth about the grace of God, and rejected the Lord Himself in doing so.

You know what. I have said I am leaving quite a few times. Maybe it is time for me to shake the dust and bid adieu to this home of charismatic liberal compromise who commits libel in calling itself 'Apostolic'. Maybe, I should just wlk away, and let the liberal have this corner of the Internet. I already had to ban the IP of one of your favorite heroes from my site, so maybe I should let this place go the way of FCF and NFCF, right down the tubes.

From an earlier post:

Originally Posted by Brother Price

I am not Daniel, but I would say that Bishop Haywood was a man when, he saw what was in the Bible about the correct mode of baptism, he obeyed it, and then brought his congregation into the same obedience. The fact remains that baptism is not salvational, because in order to do so would imply a man-made element outside the Cross to administer what the Cross gives biblically by faith.

?????...not quite the conservative Apostolic approach....but I could be misreading things. I cannot figure you out Bro. Price.

[2020Vision]

Originally Posted by George

And I'm saying there were men who are in the top 50 of the WPF who did a whole lot of complaining and NEVER used the system. It's quite obvious by your "dirty hands" comment you are a UPC hater and WPF lover so let's end this conversation. I've given my opinion, you have given yours, good-bye.

Wow, George! Touchy aren't we? "Dirty Hands" was in quotes because it wasn't literal, and was trying to convey a perspective. And it was "dirty", in terms of "everyone's doing it". UPC hater? Guess I hate myself. WPF lover? Not exactly. Either way, I didn't know it was a conversation-stopper to be a "UPC lover" or "UPC hater". There's plenty of both of these on the forum.

Hope your day is better than yesterday.

[2020Vision]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

First, how would you determine whether preachers are in "violation of the affirmation statement"? Would you send UPC policemen to their homes to see if they had television, or even the evidence of television, such as cable jacks?

Would you see if you could somehow get their cable billing statements?

So, based on the fact that it's nearly impossible to tell if men are in "violation" of the affirmation statement, how would one know if a man in violation voted?

Michael,
These things are widely known and hardly disputed. While one couldn't go name-by-name, it's certainly a gauge to know that many who were pushing TV, already had their favorite Prime Time programs themselves. That's their perrogative, but it's just explaining where these other men were coming from. Many are still in the UPC, and feel they can continue to influence that way. Other people (like WPF) voted with their feet this time, and for reasons that go beyond even television.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by 2020Vision

Michael,
These things are widely known and hardly disputed. While one couldn't go name-by-name, it's certainly a gauge to know that many who were pushing TV, already had their favorite Prime Time programs themselves. That's their perrogative, but it's just explaining where these other men were coming from. Many are still in the UPC, and feel they can continue to influence that way. Other people (like WPF) voted with their feet this time, and for reasons that go beyond even television.

And, I have no problem with them voting with their feet, it's their prerogative, just as it would be anyone else's.

However, I get a bit frustrated with comments like "corruption among leadership", "violation of the affirmation statement, and still voting", etc.

Obviously, the makers of such statements have specific people in mind, and my question is - how do you know these things for a fact?

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by 2020Vision

Michael,
These things are widely known and hardly disputed. While one couldn't go name-by-name, it's certainly a gauge to know that many who were pushing TV, already had their favorite Prime Time programs themselves. That's their perrogative, but it's just explaining where these other men were coming from. Many are still in the UPC, and feel they can continue to influence that way. Other people (like WPF) voted with their feet this time, and for reasons that go beyond even television.

The problem with these "widely known" "facts", is that a lot of the time, they aren't. My dad a few years back got word from a friend of his from another district, that someone (another preacher) had told him that he knew for a fact that my dad had television in his home because he had seen it for himself...

Problem with the scenario, my dad does not now, nor has he ever had TV. Now, he does have a TV set that is used to play videos, but it has no capability of receiving a TV signal. So, perhaps this man could have seen this and misinterpreted it.

Except... this man had NEVER been in my parents home. So, moral of the story, who knows how many people this "man of God" told his fiction to, that did not know my dad and have the courage to ask him to his face about it. Stands to reason that this story could have turned into a "widely known fact", and may well have as far as I know.

Oh, and BTW, my dad was in the anti-TV res. crowd.

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

And, I have no problem with them voting with their feet, it's their prerogative, just as it would be anyone else's.

However, I get a bit frustrated with comments like "corruption among leadership", "violation of the affirmation statement, and still voting", etc.

Obviously, the makers of such statements have specific people in mind, and my question is - how do you know these things for a fact?

Exactly.