UPC Pastor Convicted of Slander in Pulpit!

[Falla39]

Every once in a while, it might be wise to brush up on the Word of
God, concerning a matter, before the fact!

James 3
1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

2 For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.

3 Behold, we put bits in the horses' mouths, that they may obey us; and we turn about their whole body.

4 Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.

5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how
great a matter a little fire kindleth!

6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell

7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind:

8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.

9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.

10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.

11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?

12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.

13 Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.

14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.

15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.

16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.

17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.

18 And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.

Who is blameless in this case!
Should the pastor, after his sermon, NOT made the remarks
about this ex-wife! In my honest opinion, he should have
NOT said anything about her.

And I don't know if this has been mentioned, but what
about the person who told the ex-wife what had been said.
What was the motive for telling her. And who told her!
How did the ex-wife find out what was said.

Yes, 5 Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!

6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.

[Hoovie]

I would not want to be identified with any church that believed wearing a bikini was "fornication". That's just plain weird and frightening to me.

I have seen similar logic used to prohibit the "sin" of drinking soda pop (because it leads to stronger stuff).

It's amazing that I have to say this, but, as a conservative Pentecostal I would NOT think my wife was committing fornication if she chose to wear a bikini at the pool.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

I would not want to be identified with any church that believed wearing a bikini was "fornication". That's just plain weird and frightening to me.

I have seen similar logic used to prohibit the "sin" of drinking soda pop (because it leads to stronger stuff).

It's amazing that I have to say this, but, as a conservative Pentecostal I would NOT think my wife was committing fornication if she chose to wear a bikini at the pool.

Liberal!!!

You are on a slippery slope pal.

[Sweet Pea]

Originally Posted by Charnock

The idea that a marriage can survive when each partner exposes themselves to members of the opposite sex, at will, is new to me. You are totally disregarding his feelings.

I thought that interaction was to be saved for the marriage bed. Silly me. I'm such a prude.

Charnock..... GET A GRIP !!!!!! I'm pretty conservative and I would never wear a bikini in front of anyone except my husband.......

HOWEVER, I have to respond to your repeated remarks regarding this being a reason for divorce

Marriages CAN and DO survive infidelity ! I personally know of at least two - one of them lasting "till death do us part" (well over 25 years after the fact and it wasn't a one-night fling) .... Marriages can become stronger and yes, this person told me that TRUST WAS RESTORED !!!!!!

Like Bratti said.... have you never read the book of Hosea ?

Do you not believe that God is the healer of ALL diseases - even emotional hurts and ailments ????

It takes a REAL commitment to one another and to God to make it happen, but it can ! MY GOD IS BIG ENOUGH !!!!!!!!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

I would not want to be identified with any church that believed wearing a bikini was "fornication". That's just plain weird and frightening to me.

I have seen similar logic used to prohibit the "sin" of drinking soda pop (because it leads to stronger stuff).

It's amazing that I have to say this, but, as a conservative Pentecostal I would NOT think my wife was committing fornication if she chose to wear a bikini at the pool.

Would you wonder at her frame of mind? Where was her heart?

I think the church is viewing that as "intent" because they take a more conservative stand on dress. JMO.

If a man can "look" at a woman and commit adultery (Matthew 5:28), it shows "intent" without actually touching the woman.

According to Adam Clark - - Adultery - Μοιχεια· Illicit connection with a married person. This word is wanting in this place in the best MSS., versions, and fathers; the next term often comprehending both.
Fornication - Πορνεια· Illicit connection between single or unmarried persons; yet often signifying adultery also.

It says "often" signifying adultery. That means that it is not "always" signifying adultery.

He goes on to say that fornication is an illicit connection, that being defined as "contrary to accepted morality".

Illicit means: contrary to accepted morality (especially sexual morality) or convention. Convention meaning something regarded as a normative example.

[Hoovie]

I have read what you have been posting PO, I just wanted to say that I disagree - even though we too are a Pentecostal family that dresses conservatively.

I am sure some bikini wearers do have intention to seduce and/or commit fornication, however this might be true about non bikini wearers...

When this is made such a huge deal - even using it as justification for divorce, it speaks more about the intent of those making the big deal than the intent of the wearer.

-IMO

[Sweet Pea]

P.O. - Girl, you and I agree on a lot of things, but ..... I think on this one, you need to step back just a bit.

Yes, it is possible and entirely probable that all was not right in the heart of this lady in the bikini. However, we don't have all the information as to the relationship between all the parties involved (bikini lady, her husband, mutual friend and mutual friend's husband). My husband would be aghast if he saw me at a pool in a bikini and there were men (or a man) there! Not sure he would accuse me of adultery, but he for sure wouldn't like it.

You're right ........... all parties involved (pastor, divorced wife and divorced husband) didn't handle things properly.

HOWEVER, I think that if you stop and REALLY think about it, you will understand the point that most people on here have been trying to make.....

You've been around Pentecost long enough to know that some people's "convictions" change when it is their child or grandchild involved. Most likely (not fact, but an assumption on most everyone's part), is that this pastor made a huge mistake by trying to reconcile his previous "convictions" and teachings regarding divorce and remarriage to justify his daughter's involvement with a divorced man. I've seen it happen more than once....

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Sweet Pea

Charnock..... GET A GRIP !!!!!! I'm pretty conservative and I would never wear a bikini in front of anyone except my husband.......

HOWEVER, I have to respond to your repeated remarks regarding this being a reason for divorce

Marriages CAN and DO survive infidelity ! I personally know of at least two - one of them lasting "till death do us part" (well over 25 years after the fact and it wasn't a one-night fling) .... Marriages can become stronger and yes, this person told me that TRUST WAS RESTORED !!!!!!

Like Bratti said.... have you never read the book of Hosea ?

Do you not believe that God is the healer of ALL diseases - even emotional hurts and ailments ????

It takes a REAL commitment to one another and to God to make it happen, but it can ! MY GOD IS BIG ENOUGH !!!!!!!!

I personally think this newfound Fogartyite theology being espoused by Charnock is exactly what the movement has been on course for ... another much needed spiritual enema of Westbergian proportion.

I say bring on the age of Holiness Jihadism in the name of Apostolic Identity.

Uncut hair summons angels.
Dress codes. austerity and plain-facedness enable power before the throne.
Tight dresses, knee high skirts and bathing wear are fornication and adultery and grounds for divorce.

It shows the desperation of a flat lining dogma when the bible is tossed in lieu of RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM.

What a difference 100 years make ... Bishop Lawson left the PAW decades ago simply because they uttered the word divorce ....
now leaders within the movement are looking for "get out jail free" cards at any turn while ripping the flock to shreds with bomb-strapped preachers.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

I have read what you have been posting PO, I just wanted to say that I disagree - even though we too are a Pentecostal family that dresses conservatively.

I am sure some bikini wearers do have intention to seduce and/or commit fornication, however this might be true about non bikini wearers...

When this is made such a huge deal - even using it as justification for divorce, it speaks more about the intent of those making the big deal than the intent of the wearer.

-IMO

I think the pastor views an Apostolic in that way. I'm not sure he would extend that to a secular society. I know that I wouldn't, but I would wonder, as I've said, at an Apostolic woman dressing that way.

There are a few things that bother me about this. One, the bikini poolside thing. Two, the comments at the end of the posted news article made by a women, who seemed very sincere in her post, regarding Angela as "unhappy". Three, the lawyers comments “We do not believe that the verdict is supported by the law or the facts, and in particular the law concerning the separation of church and state. We are considering with our client the various post-trial and appeal options that are available and think that further comment at this point would not be appropriate.”

If you want me to believe, solely, that the pastor did all of this to justify his daughter marrying the ex-husband, I'm not sure that I am willing to believe that was the whole issue. I am willing to say it could have been part of it, but there is evidence that some things were not right in other areas.

I am also aware that I am posting, largely, on an anti-UPC forum. That is going to, naturally, make me want to press all the other glaring issues.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by DAII

I personally think this newfound Fogartyite theology being espoused by Charnock is exactly what the movement has been on course for ... another much needed spiritual enema of Westbergian proportion.

I say bring on the age of Holiness Jihadism in the name of Apostolic Identity.

Uncut hair summons angels.
Dress codes. austerity and plain-facedness enable power before the throne.
Tight dresses, knee high skirts and bathing wear are fornication and adultery and grounds for divorce.

It shows the desperation of a flat lining dogma when the bible is tossed in lieu of RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM.

What a difference 100 years make ... Bishop Lawson left the PAW decades ago simply because they uttered the word divorce ....
now leaders within the movement are looking for "get out jail free" cards at any turn while ripping the flock to shreds with bomb-strapped preachers.

Why the broadbrush?