Contract Question

[tbpew]

GL wrote:

IMO, the following (when taken within the context of your entire post) was disrespectful:

[*]posting with an angry smilie
[*]Choosing a username that would identify your church and thus, your pastor
[*]Leaving the initials of the pastor and senior pastor (bishop) within the text of the "contract"


I have no problem with the questions you asked, but a HUGE problem with the way it was asked. I'm guessing you didn't sign it, because the OP with your username violates the spirit of the agreement.

GL,
what do you see as the problem with this kind of MANdate, and its associated life conduct expectations, being public knowledge?

If prophesy should be open to examination, why should one man's idea of a required fidelity statement (such as this example) have its sponsor held secret.

Man-o-man, if the contract has validity CELEBRATE IT.

If the contract creeps people out...CELEBRATE the sound of their fleeing non-conforming footsteps.

If some guy says..."HERES the DEAL in MY CHURCH, ON MY PLATFORM", why should there be ANY RESERVATION to this being common knowledge among the brethren?

Help me out here GL, what is your basis for thinking there is a HUGE problem in the WAY its presentation gave occassion to be linked back to the MAN who developed it?