" THE SEVENTEENTH {17th} QUESTION "

[Bishop1]

" THE SEVENTEENTH {17th} QUESTION
FOR UPCI MINISTERS "


The 17th Question Will Come Up Next Year

If

The Majority O K's The Posted 16 Questions

and

eliminates their stand against television - - -



I PREDICT THAT The 17th Question

WILL BE AS FOLLOWS ;



Attention All Qualified UPCI Voting Pastors And Fulltime Evangelists :


" Since we, as a majority,

have relinquished our stand on outward holiness
[as being outdated]

AND

having embraced television ,

television advertizing ,

and television programing

also ,

having allowed

the ownership of televisions

by

our ministers,

along with

the entire church membership

and

having thereby done so



" Do You Believe We Will Be

More Accepted,

Win More Converts,

Be Less Ostisized

IF

WE ELIMINATE ACTS 2:28 ?

{ THE NECCESSITY OF REPENTANCE,

JESUS NAME BAPTISM, And The

HOLY GHOST INFILLING }



{just Prophesing}

I Can't Help But Wonder If It Will Come To Pass ?

Bishop1

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Post your 40 points story again....

[chaotic_resolve]

Bishop1 - let's not over-exaggerate things. *grin* I mean, c'mon just because some people see a lot of advantages to advertising on television and want the opportunity to do so without HQ breathing down their necks doesn't mean they're going to be tossing Acts 2:38 or any other core beliefs out the door.

[SoCaliUPC]

I really think some use this as a "scare tactic" when they do the "NO on TV" debate.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by chaotic_resolve

Bishop1 - let's not over-exaggerate things. *grin* I mean, c'mon just because some people see a lot of advantages to advertising on television and want the opportunity to do so without HQ breathing down their necks doesn't mean they're going to be tossing Acts 2:38 or any other core beliefs out the door.

Amen.

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by chaotic_resolve

Bishop1 - let's not over-exaggerate things. *grin* I mean, c'mon just because some people see a lot of advantages to advertising on television and want the opportunity to do so without HQ breathing down their necks doesn't mean they're going to be tossing Acts 2:38 or any other core beliefs out the door.

Over exagerate....is quite the understatement,. It sounds like just more of the typical rhetoric and scare tactics, standards are founded upon.

[rgcraig]

Pendulum SWING!!!!
BIG TIME!

[mfblume]

And someone said they all don't talk only about Acts 2:38 and standards all the time.

Originally Posted by Bishop1

" Do You Believe We Will Be

More Accepted,

Win More Converts,

Be Less Ostisized

IF

WE ELIMINATE ACTS 2:28 ?

{ THE NECCESSITY OF REPENTANCE,

JESUS NAME BAPTISM, And The

HOLY GHOST INFILLING }



{just Prophesing}

I Can't Help But Wonder If It Will Come To Pass ?

Bishop1

Acts 2:28 doesn't say anything about what you reference above.

[StillStanding]

I predict the 17th question will be as follows (if the resolution fails):

Since we, as a majority, have made our stand on outward holiness being required for salvation

AND

having banned television, television advertizing, and television programing because of the evil content therein

AND

having banned the ownership of televisions by our ministers, along with
the entire church membership

AND

having thereby done so, "Do You Believe We Should Also Ban Internet Use So That We Could Become More Spiritual As An Organization? Would You Also Support Banning Internet Advertising and Programming Because of All The Evil Content Therein?"