Yeah that is an extreme - but not outside reality. I would think there needs to be platform rules of some sort.
Platform rules, sure, but the question was asked if he'd allow a woman in a tank top to be on the platform, as if that was the point being made by CC1. My grandma is Methodist, and of the times I've visited there (which is about twice a year), I have yet to see anyone on their platform dressed immodestly by even my standards. MOST people know how to dress when it comes to church. If there is an issue, it's about as extreme as suggesting that if someone doesn't have 'standards', they must allow women in tank tops on their platforms! LOL!
I think platform rules are a good thing, regardless what the church believes about standards, if any.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
I agree with Mr. Maple Leaf in his general reading of Urshan's letter . Although Urshan seems to be pointing to having to accept the Holiness Article at face value the wording is very muddy and clearly states that the Westberg Resolution doesn't provide for enforcement. Whether signed in good faith or not, a signature will not be contested or challenged.
Quote:
There is no provision for contesting a sign statement.
The resolution does not allow officials to impose private interpretations of holiness standards. The only person who interprets the statement is the minister himself. If he honestly embraces the principles described in the two sections of the Articles of Faith, then he can and should sign the statement. No one can challenge his signature on the basis of personal interpretations and applications.
The Affirmation Statement only tells a minister to affirm two of the 23 articles of Faith. However, the Westberg Resolution as a whole seems to point to the Articles of Faith as whole being "affirmable".
It reads:
Quote:
Whereas Jesus warned us concerning the last days saying that "many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many" (Matthew 24:11) and "false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect" (Mark 13:22), and
Whereas the apostle Paul likewise warned the church saying, "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils [subversive doctrines inspired by devils-NEB]" (I Timothy 4:1) and that "grievous wolves [shall] enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things [perversions of truth-TCNT] to draw away disciples after them; (Acts 20:29-30), and
Whereas we are seeing these things being fulfilled before our eyes with false doctrines and seductive spirits rampant throughout the earth, and some even within our fellowship being led astray by them, and
Whereas we are commanded, "in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us [who despises the teachings we gave you-PHILLIPS]" (II Thessalonians 3:6) and to "mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them [disassociate yourselves from-TCNT]" (Romans 16:17), and
Whereas the Fundamental Doctrine and the Articles of Faith of our organization are scriptural teachings, and
Whereas it is our pledge to wholeheartedly teach and preach our standards of holiness, which we all agreed to abide by when we applied for membership in the United Pentecostal Church International, and
Whereas we are forbidden to speak or write in opposition to any of the Articles of Faith (General Constitution, Article VII, Section 7, paragraph 16), and
Whereas some have endeavored to retain their current fellowship card while departing from the faith as outlined in our Articles of Faith and have even threatened to go to law to sue the United Pentecostal Church International if they are dealt with by their district board,
Therefore be it resolved that the following statement be sent to each minister to be signed before his or her fellowship card for the following year is mailed from World Evangelism Center.
(Your signature attests only to the following statement.)
Statement of Affirmation – 2008
I do hereby declare that I believe and embrace the Fundamental Doctrine as stated in the Articles of Faith as set forth in the Manual of the United Pentecostal Church International. I also believe and embrace the holiness standards of the United Pentecostal Church International as set forth in said Articles of Faith, and I pledge to practice, preach, and teach the same.
As HarleyPreacher has stated a preacher is not obligated to preach against jewelry or pants. He can also preach that salvation happens at repentance since the Fundamental Doctrine and other articles to not spell out the New Birth.
In signing the affirmation statement, ministers also affirm to actively preach and teach their disapproval of televisions in the homes of their people. They also affirm not contend about views open to interpretation like pants, jewelry, and salvation. But, the recent committee appointed by the General Superintendent has done just this. In the end, many of the men and women that sign this document are made to be liars.
Some have argued that by contending for a particular view, Westberg, was contending against the binding validity of the unity statement.
Last edited by Kim Komando; 06-23-2009 at 11:41 AM.
If you sign the Affirmation Statement and then write a cover letter that contradicts what you have signed, Which one is a lie?
What's worse the liar or the system that turns a blind eye to it (see the Urshan letter) or promotes it then turns around and singles out and contends against those not in the majority view having they themselves attested not to do so to the disunity of the body?
From BeforeYouSignIt.com
Quote:
Further mixed messages include the admission by a former General Secretary, Cleveland M. Becton, in a 1999 interview, that a number of ministers have signed the affirmation statement with qualifying statements of their own or with cover letters. He also admitted that many of these protestations have been generally accepted while some returned and ministers dropped from the rolls.
While some have reported that their district elders have told them to sign even if the individual minister does not affirm the statement in it’s entirety.
Integrity seems to be a two-edged sword.
Last edited by Kim Komando; 06-23-2009 at 12:11 PM.
If this is the truth, then I see no problem with it. My only question is: why couldn't these men discuss this at General Conference where ALL ministers could get involved?
I suppose the truth of the matter is out there somewhere.
__________________
People who are always looking for fault,can find it easily all they have to do,is look into their mirror.
There they can find plenty of fault.
Linear Mode
