Have You Been to WWPF Lately?

[TCSQ]

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

Maybe you guys know Br. Rock better then I do. But what I've heard and seen personly, is good. I have some tapes of him. Just less tolerence for "sin" then others. Different brand preachers are for different brand folks.
Don't get me wrong though.. I do no where your coming from. I just particularly like that type of preaching. No Guesswork. God bless.
TR

Sorry Tim, Hope I didn't leave you with the wrong idea about my attitude toward preaching, its much different than that in this case. Suffice it to say that Bro Rock does not believe Brother Ron Garrett to be saved. You get the picture (Or at least as much of it as you want to know.)There are people in several states with their families actually destroyed and seperated by this guy. One of them being an ACI/AMF pastor less than thirty to forty miles from you. But definitely preach the full counsel of God and you will not be dissapointed.

[Tim Rutledge]

Originally Posted by TCSQ

Sorry Tim, Hope I didn't leave you with the wrong idea about my attitude toward preaching, its much different than that in this case. Suffice it to say that Bro Rock does not believe Brother Ron Garrett to be saved. You get the picture (Or at least as much of it as you want to know.)There are people in several states with their families actually destroyed and seperated by this guy. One of them being an ACI/AMF pastor less than thirty to forty miles from you. But definitely preach the full counsel of God and you will not be dissapointed.

Yeah.. I believe I know who your speaking of (SG).. I've only been in a few services with Br. Rock at Br. Cananess in Shelbyville IN. Well.. If he thinks Br. Garretts not saved, he's whacked. Nice to meet you. God bless.
TR

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

I and we were not offended. We just marked those that caused division. And kept going forward. Have any of you been to WPF Lately?

Marked them with what?

[jaxfam6]

Originally Posted by cneasttx

Marked them with what?

A big purple marker right in the middle of the forehead


DIVIDER

In some cases just a big D when the ink started running low

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by jaxfam6

A big purple marker right in the middle of the forehead


DIVIDER

In some cases just a big D when the ink started running low

Whatever, that just sounds strange to me.

[jaxfam6]

Originally Posted by cneasttx

Whatever, that just sounds strange to me.

what? marking them that cause division among you? that is a biblical teaching. nothing strange about it

I went to a church once were there was a man that was causing trouble and the pastor had talked with him one on one. Next it was with witnesses. Then with witnesses again. Then he called an adult meeting and and called him out in front of the congregation and told him exactly how it was. The man still came to church for a short time but no one would talk with him. He had lied and caused trouble and tried to get several different women to have an affair with him. He was causing division and once the ministry had dealt with it and talked with him one several occasion and he still kept it up they dealt with it by calling him out and telling everyone that what he was doing. He had adult children and a wife in that church. It may have been what saved those kids. Eventually he left the church and his wife. He is as messed up now as he was then but no longer in that church or group causing trouble because everyone who knows him knows what happened and will have nothing to do with him. I for one am glad he was 'marked' probably saved a few souls that night.

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by jaxfam6

what? marking them that cause division among you? that is a biblical teaching. nothing strange about it

I went to a church once were there was a man that was causing trouble and the pastor had talked with him one on one. Next it was with witnesses. Then with witnesses again. Then he called an adult meeting and and called him out in front of the congregation and told him exactly how it was. The man still came to church for a short time but no one would talk with him. He had lied and caused trouble and tried to get several different women to have an affair with him. He was causing division and once the ministry had dealt with it and talked with him one several occasion and he still kept it up they dealt with it by calling him out and telling everyone that what he was doing. He had adult children and a wife in that church. It may have been what saved those kids. Eventually he left the church and his wife. He is as messed up now as he was then but no longer in that church or group causing trouble because everyone who knows him knows what happened and will have nothing to do with him. I for one am glad he was 'marked' probably saved a few souls that night.

Who caused the division? This is not just about one person causing division, it's a group, so how are they marked really? Some think the WPF caused a division. Are they marked too?

[jaxfam6]

Originally Posted by cneasttx

Who caused the division? This is not just about one person causing division, it's a group, so how are they marked really? Some think the WPF caused a division. Are they marked too?

I'll get the purple marker if you hold them down while I write on the forheads.

=)

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Blaylock

Of course I am referring to non-UPCI Pastors and you knew that.

But this was just your opportunity to bash the UPCI again.

It amazes me that every time someone will bring up a Church that has been using TV for advertisement and programming all the CONS shut up or call them LIBS. But surprise, surprise it is working and they are winning and keeping souls.

People who wont use TV as a tool for evangelism are those who have their heads in the sand.

No one is overlooking rebellion........... constantly judge others ..... degenerate the Apostolic movement with that judgment of whose right and whose wrong .... NO THANKS!!!!!

Blaylock,

It seems we are touching a very sore spot for you. You state that you were speaking of non-UPCI churches who were using TV advertising/broadcasting, and that I knew that. I am not sure where you draw your conclusions, it was you who stated "Many churches have used TV as a mode of evangelism and are not Charismatic even before the res #4 vote." A reasonable man who would read that would deduct that you were referring to UPCI pastors/churches, why else would you mention the passing of "res #4."

"But this was just your opportunity to bash the UPCI again."

I would challenge you my good friend to show me even one post where I have ever bashed the UPCI. I have very deep roots in the UPCI, and while I am not currently a member, I have often said that it is probably the best/most effective oneness "organization" in existence today. (even though I do not agree with every thing it allows/does.)

The reality is, that I was pointing out those within the organization (this would apply to any organization BTW) who were violating the rules that they had covenanted to abide by and uphold. Now I can flip the script and say that you know full well there were men who owned, watched, advertised, and broadcast on TV, all the while signing the AS, and yet you don't want to call them "truce breakers?" Sorry friend, if my pointing out that some men are violating there own covenant, is bashing the organization, then pointing out a politician that is breaking the law is bashing America, and we all know that isn't the case.

Again, you make a very broad statement concerning cons shutting up or calling pastors/churches libs who use TV advertising. Go back through the threads and research, I have been very consistent. I have used statistics and research by non-Apostolics that show the ineffectiveness of TV advertising/broadcasting for churches, (I know if "one soul" is won it has been worth it, but could the resources have been used in a better way?) as well as the cost factors. (I know you can put it on cable for free or next to nothing, but it won't be the quality of a Jakes or Parsley, and that's what most pastors would like to do.) I have never made it a con vs lib issue, and in fact it appears you are labeling yourself.

Lastly to say that "People who wont use TV as a tool for evangelism are those who have their heads in the sand," is somewhat ludicrous. Let me make sure I understand what your saying, every pastor/church who will not run out and put an add on TV has their head in the sand? Surely that is not what you meant.

Why is it that every body wants to jump up and down over the few people that have come and been saved from a TV ad/broadcast, and they act like nothing else works in our day. If a church is not a soul winning church, and seeing souls being born into the kingdom on a regular basis, TV ads are not going to create any kind of lasting harvest. And statistically, those that do see some saved as a result will be few in number, because evangelism has always been and will always be most effective person to person.

[theoldpaths]

Originally Posted by tstew

Okay ...but be consistent. The stance that they have made in what they accept and what they shun is so illogical that I could not imagine having to explain it to any convert with three brain cells. The UPCI bylaws are not a valid enough defense to explain the hypocrisy of the stance to someone who knows nothing about them. The bylaws are not a substitute for the Bible believe it or not, so if you don't have scripture, you sure better have logic or you have nothing.
The problem with many people is that they are more concerned about the people they have and not the ones we are meant to be evangelizing (which is the manifest function of the church)...Sadly the lack of growth in many of those churches bear this out. They develop a "Hold the fort" mentality and not a "Take the hills" mentality.

The decision made by the UPC elders against owning a TV was made decades and decades ago. The decision was accompanied by tongues and interpretation. Has God blessed the organization since then? Yes he has, for decades and decades. The benefits of the Organization now came from the price that has been paid in the past for decades.

Did Jesus know that issues were going to come up in the church after he was gone in which MEN would have to discuss make decisions? Yes he did - read Matt 18. Did Jesus in the same passage say that whatever they - MEN - decided upon, that he would stand behind them and bind/loose them in heaven? Yes he did. Do we have a very practical example of that in Acts? Yes we do concerning circumcision of the Gentiles. Did the elders of the church come together and talk about it and make a decision in which afterwards they wrote that "it seemed good unto the Holy Ghost and unto us..."; indicating that somehow God showed by His Spirit in man that he backed up the decision? Yes they did.

Do you think the decision was made by a bunch of old country bumkins who didn't know what they were doing? Do you think that we are better than them because we are in the 21st century now?

Now concerning holiness and people one is witnessing to who are not yet saved, Jesus said this...

Joh 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

This means that people cannot bear certain things UNTIL AFTER they are converted. That is why you don't see any/much teaching of Jesus to HIS disciples concerning things He requires of His people about holiness. That is why you read about holiness stuff in the epistles - letters written to churches/people who were already saved. That is why you don't read about Jesus teaching about hair in the gospels.

With people who are lost, the most important thing is for them to first get saved, by hearing the preaching/teaching of the gospel - the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and how it shows that we can now be born again. You don't clean a fish before you catch it - you have to catch it first.

Then after they are saved, they grow in grace and knowledge and live a life of loving obedience to the one who first loved them. Usually a person who loves the Lord with everything doesn't have a problem doing the things that He wants them to. Because we are no longer our own, we have been bought with a price. Let the Pastor preach/teach the word and the principles based upon the word and let the Holy Ghost convict.

Holiness standards are based upon biblical principles such as:

- loving not the world neither the things that are in the world
- coming out from among them and being separate
- touch not the unclean thing
- friendship with the world is emnity with God
- present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy, and acceptable unto God which is your reasonable service
- being not conformed to this world, but being transformed
- not being brought under the power of any
- abstain from ALL appearance of evil
- not setting any wicked thing before our eyes
- be careful what you hear
- modesty in clothing
- not wearing gold or silver
- not partaking of the modern idols of the world; etc

Apostolic does NOT mean inward focus only with NO outward focus on evangelizing. Apostolic churches are all about evangelizing and winning the lost. My church has grown considerably since my Pastor took it over almost 30 years ago. I'm not aware of any 1 Apostolic church whose sole focus is only inwardly.

Incidentally, there is one well-known church in our city that has had great growth, but you know at what cost? They don't preach the apostle's doctrine. What good is growth if they compromise truth? What good is growth if they convince a whole city that they are saved when in fact they are not. They make them 2 fold more the child of hell because you have to first convince them that they are deceived and are still lost FIRST before you can get them to do anything to be REALLY saved.