The Pro's and Con's of the Apostolic Church - Page 3

Nahum · #21 07-16-2008, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

Pastor P and others...

I think these questions beg to be asked. Do the Pro's out weigh the Con's? Do they balance each other out or does a bad Con out weight a good Pro?

What do you all think?

As for me I think that Con's far out weigh the Pro's. I am not saying there are more Con's which there could be, but I think that anything negative does greater damage to our name and our movement than the Pro's help push us forward. JMO

Wow, that's a lot of ground to cover.

In a nutshell, I don't think I, as a pastor, should be concerned about anything other than solid doctrinal teaching, Spirit-filled worship, and an incessant attempt to gather souls into God's kingdom.

I think the key word is balance.

Jack Shephard · #22 07-16-2008, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferd

Pro
History.
However you cut it, you cant get where you are going unless you know where you've been.

the Apostolic church has a fantastic history that has given us something special in all the world.

Con
History.
What was it Satchel Page said? Don't look back, something might be gaining on you!

Its a good bit of advice. At times we tend to desire our history to be our present and our future. It is impossible. It also turns us from being productive and forward thinking to insular and insecure.

IMHO Apostolics are neck deep in a paradigm shift. We are no longer a movement but we are not yet a real denomination.... but we are headed there.

What we better be able to do, is make that transition without losing our identity and our doctrine.

I think that the doctrine has become the identity in this movement. It seems to me that there has been a monument built out of a movement. A movement is just that a moving thing. I think that you are right on with part of your post that there is the desire to see the past be made present. I don't think it can happen like it is desired. The world is different and the movement is different. The God is doing great works in the world and I am affraid that we might become like Lots wife a dead pillar of salt cause we got caught looking back. I am also affraid that the spirit might pass us by cause it seems that God is moving in a way that He never has or at least it hasn't been noticed before. Again new things are happening and if the movement don't get on board with God we might be left behind. The ship might just be getting ready to sail and we might miss it.

Ferd · #23 07-16-2008, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

I think that the doctrine has become the identity in this movement. It seems to me that there has been a monument built out of a movement. A movement is just that a moving thing. I think that you are right on with part of your post that there is the desire to see the past be made present. I don't think it can happen like it is desired. The world is different and the movement is different. The God is doing great works in the world and I am affraid that we might become like Lots wife a dead pillar of salt cause we got caught looking back. I am also affraid that the spirit might pass us by cause it seems that God is moving in a way that He never has or at least it hasn't been noticed before. Again new things are happening and if the movement don't get on board with God we might be left behind. The ship might just be getting ready to sail and we might miss it.

JT, the doctrine cannot change regardless of the times. How we approach other issues however had better be in play.

as much as some of us seek to make the past our present, others want wholesale abandomnet of our history. As much as the first is wrong, the second is just as wrong if not far worse.

There will never be a day when I think Apostolics out to change the doctrines that made us what we are. THAT his herasy of the highest order.

StillStanding · #24 07-16-2008, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Pro:

I believe we interpret the Bible's core doctrines very well. We place proper emphasis on salvation and discipleship. Our services truly are "Spirit-filled."

Con:

We balk at taking away from the Word, but we are the world's worst at adding to it. We are not community-service oriented. We are kingdom builders, but not God's kingdom. We find new and unique ways of keeping people out instead of being the gatherers God called us to be.

Very good post!

PRO:

1. Exuberant praise and worship
2. Good music (for the most part!)
3. As a general rule, they seem to take their religion seriously.
4. Spirit filled and spirit led services
5. Correctly baptize and understand godhead (for the most part)

CON:
1. Following "standards" cause them to stick out and seem cultist to non-Apostolics.
2. Seem to be judgmental of others.
3. Seem to be cliquish and not mix well with the outsiders.
4. Sometimes will try to stir emotions by yelling or screaming, and call it "anointing"
5. Tendency to believe they are more spiritual and on a higher plane than anyone else.

Jack Shephard · #25 07-16-2008, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferd

JT, the doctrine cannot change regardless of the times. How we approach other issues however had better be in play.

as much as some of us seek to make the past our present, others want wholesale abandomnet of our history. As much as the first is wrong, the second is just as wrong if not far worse.

There will never be a day when I think Apostolics out to change the doctrines that made us what we are. THAT his herasy of the highest order.

I was not talking about changing doctrine at all. I am talking about changing order within the movement and methods that are out dated. I do not think for a minute that it would ever benefit the movement to drop doctrine. It would help to drop the teachings that we add to the Bible that we could do. Many of those have been made doctrine when they are not doctrine but tradtions. The point I was trying to make and seems that I did not convey is that this movement needs to become a fellowship again and less of an organization or business. That is what I was meaning. Sorry for confusion.

Jack Shephard · #26 07-16-2008, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Wow, that's a lot of ground to cover.

In a nutshell, I don't think I, as a pastor, should be concerned about anything other than solid doctrinal teaching, Spirit-filled worship, and an incessant attempt to gather souls into God's kingdom.
I think the key word is balance.

Would you do this at the expense of creating weak men and women that have no real knowledge of how to treat one another once they are married and such? There are many in our churches that grew up in abusive homes and such that have no good example how to treat the opposite sex and raise kids and handle money. The church should not only exist to 'reach the lost' ONLY. Cause if all we do is try to reach newbies and not teach and build firm foundations under the ones we have AND reach the lost the back door will become a ton wider than the front, IMO.

Nahum · #27 07-16-2008, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

Would you do this at the expense of creating weak men and women that have no real knowledge of how to treat one another once they are married and such? There are many in our churches that grew up in abusive homes and such that have no good example how to treat the opposite sex and raise kids and handle money. The church should not only exist to 'reach the lost' ONLY. Cause if all we do is try to reach newbies and not teach and build firm foundations under the ones we have AND reach the lost the back door will become a ton wider than the front, IMO.

Maybe you misunderstood me?

The issues you mentioned would definitely fall under the category of solid doctrinal teaching.