*d-day: September 28th, 2007 - Conservatives Will Take The Hill*

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Charlie Brown

So much for integrity in the ministry. This, to me, speaks of rebellion. A preacher wants his saints to line up with his "platform standards" but will "do what he wants", disregarding the rest of the constituency.

I have come to peace with most of this, and with the men who use words like integrity, hypocrisy and so on when discussing the AS, AOF, and the enforcement of such documents. There are several things you need to know CB.

1. I do not have a tv.
2. I do not have an ad on tv.
3. If I want to advertise I will and I will not feel any guilt or lack of integrity over it.
4. I really don't think the org wants to play enforcer more than what they currently are.


When enforcement of the manual includes ALL of its standards I may change my mind, but right now it seems as most everyone I know is violating at least one of the unholy, frowned-upon, disapproved of activities.

[DividedThigh]

Originally Posted by Malvaro

you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, as I am mine....

As a poster, I agree and disagree with many topics I see fit, regardless of who posts it.... I might agree with people some topics, I may not regarding others....

anything that may have taken place in the past is not a cloud you'll be able to hang over my head.... if you ever have a problem with my posting or anyone else's for that matter.... just click the "Report Post" button and several AFF staffers will review it....

keep your chin up.... it'll be alright....

this is exactly what i am talking about, you dont know me, i could care less, you can do whateve you want, but i want you to never address me again, you dont listen, i asked you very nicely to leave me alone, i have good reasons honor that, my chin is fine, it is in Jesus hands, dt

[ChTatum]

I don't care, as I already am a "reject".

[DividedThigh]

Originally Posted by ChTatum

I don't care, as I already am a "reject".

i like you chtatum,dt

[SDG]

Originally Posted by ChTatum

I don't care, as I already am a "reject".

You are far from being a reject CHT ...

to me you are one of the coolest ministers on this forum ... I'd go to your church any day ....

Chin up .. you too DT.

[HangingOut]

I think you are on to something on this. My opinion is that many who have left and will continue to do so is over doctrine, but rarely ever mentioned. Once out of the org, they implement what they believe keeping most guessing at to wether or not they changed. How many would leave over something like the legalization of TV anyway? It is two and threefold.

Originally Posted by Barb

I have neither insider info or stake, as far as licensing and all goes, but I do have an opinion...

In my inner beings I feel a shift coming...wouldn't necessarily call it a 'split', but I do feel a change, and it won't be over television.

It will be over doctrine...

[chaotic_resolve]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Disclaimer: This is just my opinion, and I have no insider information.

On September 28th, 2007, resolution four will go down in flames. Conservatives will win the battle in convincing fashion and tighten their hold on the org.

In the days leading up to this vote, and those immediately following, stories of lib/mod defections will become commonplace. They see the handwriting on the wall.

Again, this is just my opinion.

I'm feeling the same way, unfortunately. I have several premier UPC churches that I can see leaving the organization if not allowed the choice to place ads on television.

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

The conservative base is much more energized.

I HAD felt that there was no way a true split would occur. I am not so sure any longer. Fissures are developing.

I've always thought a split not only would occur, but should occur. By having one fringe group leave, it keeps an organization somewhat united.

You've got the moderates and libs who have been upset since the AS of 1992. They've been pushed down long enough with rules and regulations, now they want the choice to place ads on television . . . that's all they're asking for - the free choice to be able to place ads on tv. They're not asking for HQ to publish and mandate ads for every church. It's about a simple choice.

On the other side, you've got the conservatives and UC's who are dead-set against any free-choice in the matter. They'd rather add more rules and regulations to the manual in order to force the libs and moderates to be more conservative or UC. They hate choice and don't want any part of it. Free choice for them is equal to sin.

Either way, one side is going to lose . . . and if the loser of this resolution really feels strongly either for/against it, they'll most likely leave the organization.

[DividedThigh]

Originally Posted by chaotic_resolve

I'm feeling the same way, unfortunately. I have several premier UPC churches that I can see leaving the organization if not allowed the choice to place ads on television.


I've always thought a split not only would occur, but should occur. By having one fringe group leave, it keeps an organization somewhat united.

You've got the moderates and libs who have been upset since the AS of 1992. They've been pushed down long enough with rules and regulations, now they want the choice to place ads on television . . . that's all they're asking for - the free choice to be able to place ads on tv. They're not asking for HQ to publish and mandate ads for every church. It's about a simple choice.

On the other side, you've got the conservatives and UC's who are dead-set against any free-choice in the matter. They'd rather add more rules and regulations to the manual in order to force the libs and moderates to be more conservative or UC. They hate choice and don't want any part of it. Free choice for them is equal to sin.

Either way, one side is going to lose . . . and if the loser of this resolution really feels strongly either for/against it, they'll most likely leave the organization.

good post, amen brother, dt

[Charlie Brown]

Originally Posted by chaotic_resolve

I'm feeling the same way, unfortunately. I have several premier UPC churches that I can see leaving the organization if not allowed the choice to place ads on television.


I've always thought a split not only would occur, but should occur. By having one fringe group leave, it keeps an organization somewhat united.

You've got the moderates and libs who have been upset since the AS of 1992. They've been pushed down long enough with rules and regulations, now they want the choice to place ads on television . . . that's all they're asking for - the free choice to be able to place ads on tv. They're not asking for HQ to publish and mandate ads for every church. It's about a simple choice.

On the other side, you've got the conservatives and UC's who are dead-set against any free-choice in the matter. They'd rather add more rules and regulations to the manual in order to force the libs and moderates to be more conservative or UC. They hate choice and don't want any part of it. Free choice for them is equal to sin.

Either way, one side is going to lose . . . and if the loser of this resolution really feels strongly either for/against it, they'll most likely leave the organization.

Originally Posted by DividedThigh

good post, amen brother, dt

What a skewed view you have. It is all the conservatives fault ain't it??

And advertising is not ALL they are asking for. Remember that the 2004 resolution asked for advertising and programming to be utilized (advertising, tv shows, etc.). This was defeated. It was brought back up again in 2006 for "advertisement only" and was tabled.

It is obvious to see that the liberal mindset is to get something passed that opens a door. At that point all is fair in love and war. We have already had several here state they would do what they wanted to do regardless of what is passed. Why not get on out of the UPC where one can fellowship with likeminded folks that are for the tv.

[StillStanding]

I hope I'm wrong, but this vote could set the UPCI back another generation!