Tragedy of War RECOVERED! LISTEN!

[endtimer]

Good post. Good message. Ive been around UPC ministers and churches for 30+ years and this would be my first time hearing this message. An old message but I would contend that it is timeless as it addresses an issue that seems to recycle and gain new life every so often. Thank you for posting. Still relevant in my opinion.

[Scott Hutchinson]

I'm listening to it now. It needs to be heard.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

That may be a principal of law.....but it is a flawed principle. If anyone is willing to believe that KH/OH or anyone for that matter, would have stood up and objected to what was being said in the middle of a sermon being preached with a conference crowd present, I have some ocean front property in Montana for sale. (Besides that we all know of situations where people have NOT spoken up or come forward and their refusal to do so did not mean that the event did/did not happen.)

It really doesn't matter in the bigger scheme of things.....as I said earlier, the movement was developing and anyone who would deny that is willfully ignorant. Regardless of whether she (OH) was in church at the time or not, at some point the movement as a whole...black/white, UPC/PAW/ALJC/COOLJ....Nearly all oneness organizations, developed a more restrictive doctrine of separation/sanctification from the world and a water/spirit view of salvation.

Your being ridiculous. The point wasn't that they should stand up in the conference, no one would expect that. The point is they never objected after the Sermon. Both have passed from this life never having protested his assertion. Unheard of if in fact it were untrue.

The only thing flawed is your own inability to accept anything outside of your narrow view as true.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Even there are things I don't agree with,we should be honest with the past. Lying is wrong,and people who cover things up aren't walking in Holiness. I'm not in a org. but we should be honest in things that happened yrs.ago.

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Your being ridiculous. The point wasn't that they should stand up in the conference, no one would expect that. The point is they never objected after the Sermon. Both have passed from this life never having protested his assertion. Unheard of if in fact it were untrue.

The only thing flawed is your own inability to accept anything outside of your narrow view as true.

You can't make either assumption, you couldn't possibly know if either of them ever objected or disagreed with the assertion made unless you personally asked them or were privy to their conversation on the subject, and you don't know me at all, so you don't know what I accept or don't.

Using your logic, the fact that Bro. Yaden was fired and his career finished (the OP's statement in post 1) could be evidence that they did not agree with his statements. To say that KH coward down to political pressure would indicate that he was a man who would not stand for the principles he believed.....a charge I think unworthy of such a great man.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

You can't make either assumption, you couldn't possibly know if either of them ever objected or disagreed with the assertion made unless you personally asked them or were privy to their conversation on the subject, and you don't know me at all, so you don't know what I accept or don't.

Using your logic, the fact that Bro. Yaden was fired and his career finished (the OP's statement in post 1) could be evidence that they did not agree with his statements. To say that KH coward down to political pressure would indicate that he was a man who would not stand for the principles he believed.....a charge I think unworthy of such a great man.

The same great man who walked up to LY after the sermon and told him it was one of the best he had heard in 40 years? The one that promised to protect him when reports began to circulate that some where offended? The one who sent someone else to ask for his resignation? Is that the great man you speak of?

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

Even there are things I don't agree with,we should be honest with the past. Lying is wrong,and people who cover things up aren't walking in Holiness. I'm not in a org. but we should be honest in things that happened yrs.ago.

I agree totally! The problem is that (as I see it) there is revisionism on both sides of the aisle. The same crowd that shout from the mountaintops that we should maintain the spirit of the merger and we should allow for diversity in the body and unite on what we have in common while minimizing our differences.....are the ones who are the most vocal to rail against standards and ANY doctrinal view different than their own. If they really desired the "spirit of the merger" they would keep their dissenting views to themselves and allow everyone to believe what they feel is right. But they are no different than the ones they charge with being divisive. They have become judgmental and mean spirited against those that they charge with the same. They claim freedom.....but they are bound by the bitterness and hatred for the doctrine/group they have come out of.

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

The same great man who walked up to LY after the sermon and told him it was one of the best he had heard in 40 years? The one that promised to protect him when reports began to circulate that some where offended? The one who sent someone else to ask for his resignation? Is that the great man you speak of?

So now, you would try to impugn the man you previously used to support your view. Further, you speak of these things as though you were personally there......if that is the case then you certainly can say what you saw/heard.....otherwise (unless you have been told it by one or more of those directly involved) it is hearsay, and you, more than most, know the legal veracity of that.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

I agree totally! The problem is that (as I see it) there is revisionism on both sides of the aisle. The same crowd that shout from the mountaintops that we should maintain the spirit of the merger and we should allow for diversity in the body and unite on what we have in common while minimizing our differences.....are the ones who are the most vocal to rail against standards and ANY doctrinal view different than their own. If they really desired the "spirit of the merger" they would keep their dissenting views to themselves and allow everyone to believe what they feel is right. But they are no different than the ones they charge with being divisive. They have become judgmental and mean spirited against those that they charge with the same. They claim freedom.....but they are bound by the bitterness and hatred for the doctrine/group they have come out of.

PCI view as the most vocal is laughable. You have described the Water/Spirit folks pretty well. I could, though I won't, quote names of well known ministers still actively involved in the UPC, one teaches at UGST. That assured me, when I was thinking of leaving the UPC, that just because those who hold the more liberal view are not vocal they were out there in numbers. They would express their views in private but wouldn't dare in public because of the response from those that are hard line. It was the loud mouth no mercy types that actively set about telling tales and spreading rumors demanding the resignation of LY while never once talking to him personally.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

So now, you would try to impugn the man you previously used to support your view. Further, you speak of these things as though you were personally there......if that is the case then you certainly can say what you saw/heard.....otherwise (unless you have been told it by one or more of those directly involved) it is hearsay, and you, more than most, know the legal veracity of that.

First, you have no idea what hearsay is. You have no idea what the exceptions to hearsay are. I was a student at CLC when the event occurred and have spoken directly to those involved, so I do have a pretty good idea of what happened. I also know one of those who worked actively to get rid of LY, he was my pastor, a man I greatly admired at one time. I was shocked at his view that students asking questions was a threat.