Interesting Article from a Conservative Apostolic

[Ron]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Ron, let's not kid ourselves, it's always been us vs. them on this forum. Most of the time we live in relative peace, until a "stepper" thread makes us pledge our allegiances.

But, for some reason, you've chosen to go after Daniel on this thread, when this thread is not about Daniel, at all. It's about men in the UPCI tearing down a man who is trying to uphold his definition of "holiness" as the UPCI sees it. Plain and simple.

Fair comment & duly noted.

I guess I get tired of Daniel's negativity & disdain for OP, UPC, & anything that is "against" what "he" believes is truth.

I also feel that such comments seek to divide us instead of uniting us.

I am not blind, I see a lot of things that could be improved, but I see it in all Organizations, not just UPC.

I want to try and be something positive for the Kingdom.

One more thing, I worked with a fellow one time who was so aginst the powers that be, that he would protest, sometimes, violently.

I asked him why he does that & he told me something I will never forget,
he said, "we are Anarchists & we are right, we will do whatever is necessary to right these wrongs--including violence!"

Sound familiar?

With that I will try and bow out before my lid blows.

I think I hear a cup of coffee with my name on it.

Bless you all tonight!

Yes you to Dan & that beutiful finance of yours.

You are blessed!

[Mrs. LPW]

Originally Posted by dizzyde

But why choose a moment to go after him, when Dan didn't start the thread, and all he did was comment on it like everyone else has. I don't get it.

OH... maybe the previous 15 threads posted by DA, about so-on and such-and-such and so-in-so drove him over the edge. I don't know. But I can understand his annoyance.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Come on Bro, get real.

Aren't you trying to navigate the discussion away from the real issue?

Stop fighting mirages and post something rlevant to the initial post, please.

Actually, I think the so-called real issue has been discussed. I honestly thought there was some rule against posting things from closed Forums. As of yet no one has answered that question directly. They have only said it was on a blog. But to my pea-brain way of thinking if that blog quoted directly from that Forum and it is posted here...

Oh, never mind. 2+2 now equals 5. Say it again, 2+2=5. Say it again, 2+2 =4! No dummie! 5!!

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

The blog included excerpts of a conversation held on a closed forum.

ok.

I think the whole it-was-on-a-forum/it-was-on-a-blog thing is a distraction anyway.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Mrs. LPW

What is more relevant than saying 'we're no better than they are if we hash and rehash and gossip and snit instead of pray for the people who are messed up?' Because that's basically what he was trying to say.

I said it too, in a different way again.

Miss B said it best. What is wrong with us???

I think that is the wrong question.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by rrford

I sincerely hope that is not the justification if AFF has rules against posting things from closed Forums.

As I understand it, AFF's rule is against posting the content from other forums - closed or not. And this just makes sense. There's a huge gray area when it comes to copyright and ownership of posts and other content.

Forums will all do better if that "gray area" is left gray and not mangled with a bunch of unneeded court rulings. The way to respect that is to respect the content of other sites.

It has nothing to do with hindering the free flow of information and ideas. It's all about content management.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Ron

Fair comment & duly noted.

I guess I get tired of Daniel's negativity & disdain for OP, UPC, & anything that is "against" what "he" believes is truth.

I also feel that such comments seek to divide us instead of uniting us.

I am not blind, I see a lot of things that could be improved, but I see it in all Organizations, not just UPC.

I want to try and be something positive for the Kingdom.

One more thing, I worked with a fellow one time who was so aginst the powers that be, that he would protest, sometimes, violently.

I asked him why he does that & he told me something I will never forget,
he said, "we are Anarchists & we are right, we will do whatever is necessary to right these wrongs--including violence!"

Sound familiar?

With that I will try and bow out before my lid blows.

I think I hear a cup of coffee with my name on it.

Bless you all tonight!

Yes you to Dan & that beutiful finance of yours.

You are blessed!

Good decision.

[Mrs. LPW]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

I think that is the wrong question.

It is???

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by rrford

Actually, and I am just surmising here, I would dare say the majority of them never even heard the message.

Well, if they didn't, that makes their comments TWICE as offensive.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

1. This was posted on a blog on something we like to call the WORLD WIDE web. That makes it fodder for public consumption whether we like it or not.

2. Ron, your attitude really reeks on this thread. I cannot believe you would defend such nonsense. It makes me very angry that they would attack Scott in this manner. Scott is a man of integrity, and their words were cruel, cutting and downright vitriolic.

3. If the posters who wrote the junk about Sherri and Eddie really feel they are backslidden, why don't they pray for them instead of using their supposed backslidden state as a weapon against Scott. As if he is in any way responsible for the choices his siblings make?

I am not defending anyone, while I personally do not know Bro Scott Graham I have great respect for him.

If you drew that reference, I am sorry.

As for my attitude, well, maybe you are right, I will go and ask God to straighten it out.