Are there any conservative PCI believers out there?

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

One thing is certain. CB doesn't hold to these "strong" standards or he wouldn't be working for and promoting those who don't.

This should be good.

[Felicity]

Bro. Dean.......

I truly hope I didn't offend you today. I certainly never meant to. I wasn't in a great frame of mind this morning as I said earlier. Some of us are dealing with real life here on the front lines where the going is tough and the battle is tougher. Then you read some of "this" and it's like it just seems so trivial.

But.......... but.......... but........ ... God knows where we're at and He sent a ministering spirit today. An "angel" who spoke the Word of God and confirmed His will, plan and purpose. And other "encouragers/ministering spirits" as well. And that has given me renewed confidence that in spite of the battles we're fighting here in real life He's very much in control and as long as I know that -- as long as I know that I'm in the center of His will then I know I'm safe in the midst of the storm and that He will make that way of escape promised in Scripture.

Our God is amazing! Totally amazing! And I never cease nor do I ever want to cease being totally amazed at the favour and blessing He has heaped on me!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by The Dean

67 posts and not one person said "I know Bro. *** is PCI and has a strong standard."

Maybe I beat around the bush myself in Post 39 - but I was refraining from naming names.

I know several former PCI "One Steppers" who are also very strong on the "conservative" standards. One man that I know very well, I suspect to be so strong just because of his PCI roots. It's as if he thinks he has something to prove; which is sad.

I remember sitting in a young ministers training session where the speaker was the first UPCI G.S. from the old PAJC. To this day he is probably the most conservative GS the UPC has ever had. He gave a hypothetical situation on standards to get the discussion started. After the meeting several "conservatives" literally reviled the former GS for being a "compromiser."

From my observation, there is a strong sentiment within the Apostolic movement that declares that no man is conservative enough. People try to puff up their own credentials by tearing down others, and the theme most often used is that the target is a "compromiser."

From that list that was posted- I can personally tell you that no Assistant GS or GS of the UPCI of the last 30 years has ever held dogmatically to those standards as a heaven or hell issue for their saints. And I say, God bless them for it.

If anyone would like to name names - I'd be happy to rehearse conversations, sermons and teaching sessions where I've heard these men state just the opposite to what people seem to think we're supposed to believe.

The fact of the matter is, even the leaders among the "3 Steppers" don't preach what the "everybody else is going to hell..." crowd claims to believe. And they pay the price for their "compromising" every day with the backbiting and self important gossip from fringe and radical strangers.

Personally, I've never worn a ring of any kind in my life. But that has nothing to do with standards. I just don't like the taste of metal in my mouth. Maybe I'm hypersensitive to it, but I can't stand a bunch of do-bobs and bandangles on my person. It has nothing to do with anyone else's salvation. It's just that kind of stuff makes me itch and feel self conscience.

Since the inception of the cell phone I don't even wear a watch any more. But I remember buying a watch at Kmart many years ago for $1 - Blue Light Special. A "brother" saw my shiny new watch and criticized me for it. He said "the preachers in Kansas won't let you wear a gold watch..." (he was from Kansas).

A $1 watch that was advertised as "disposable" - and that's too extravagant for some people! And to be fair- the preachers in Kansas to whom he referred couldn't have cared less about my $1 watch. He was just following that old pattern of tearing someone down in order to puff himself up.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by The Dean

Seriously? I thought it was a legitimate question once I read the thread. Does PCI = low standards? I think it's a given that PAJC does NOT always = good standards.

My opinion is that there are no 'measurements' here at all. At least if what I'm reading is correct. I think he's asking if the PCI = low standards is a fact or not. I can see someone wanting some solid examples that its not really that way.

But, then again, maybe I'm reading it wrong.

Low standards???? I have found many folks that don't hold the outward apparel standards, have "higher standards" of heart than some of the ''high standard" PAJC's that I have and do know. So in my opinion the whole question is ridiculous and totally irrelevant.

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by The Dean

Okay. I clarified myself and evidently it wasn't enough. My concept of holiness is totally unknown by you but, hey, I'll let you think you're the authority on my walk with God if it makes you feel better.

There. You have my permission. Think as you wish.

Now. Don't you feel envigorated!

(No, I'm not without words at this point. So much could be said but I really see so little need to say it.)

I am sorry to have offended you, but it really stirs up a righteous indignation within me when I see folks define the standards of the Christian life by man made outward criteria that even they can't agree upon, and use this to judge everyone else's relationship with God.

You could have two people standing side by side. They both may have all the fruits of a Spirit filled life, but if one of them doesn't meet some outward standard that someone decided is necessary in order to be "holy", then that person is immediately judged as not being in a right relationship with God, or at least not as holy as the other person. And this is based solely on appearance!

I believe this attitude represents spiritual immaturity and a lack of understanding of the nature of God and our relationship with Him. The reason Peter teaches that a woman's beauty should not come from outward adornment, but the inner self is because he intended that we focus on that inward beauty and value it as God does. Instead I find many Pentecostals place very little value on the inward beauty of a person. Most women, in particular, are made to feel their value is directly related to their outward conformity to man made standards. That is sad!

[SDG]

Originally Posted by The Dean

Technically, yes. I never said that I didn't. That was evidently your assumption working overtime. I just don't know of any personally who are of the PCI persuasion that preach a strong outward standard. It would seem common to me that I wouldn't know them as I'm not of that persuasion myself and, because of that, not around much fellowship with them.

Your questions;

1. The purpose of the question? I suspect to get an answer about the subject.
2. The purpose of the thread? You'll have to ask the author and I'm not the author.
3. Would it be appropriate to name names of those who are PCI with good standards? If I was PCI I would hope someone could say, "They preach a good standard" so, in my opinion, I would suspect yes. Why wouldn't it be?

Does anyone not believe that if these PCIers are UPCI they might not want to be named? People have been excommunicated for much less.

Again ... most PCIers that hold to conservative values would not hold these things as salvational ... or even a "badge of honor". They would simply see their standard as a conviction and evidence of God living through them.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

I am sorry to have offended you, but it really stirs up a righteous indignation within me when I see folks define the standards of the Christian life by man made outward criteria that even they can't agree upon, and use this to judge everyone else's relationship with God.

You could have two people standing side by side. They both may have all the fruits of a Spirit filled life, but if one of them doesn't meet some outward standard that someone decided is necessary in order to be "holy", then that person is immediately judged as not being in a right relationship with God, or at least not as holy as the other person. And this is based solely on appearance!

I believe this attitude represents spiritual immaturity and a lack of understanding of the nature of God and our relationship with Him. The reason Peter teaches that a woman's beauty should not come from outward adornment, but the inner self is because he intended that we focus on that inward beauty and value it as God does. Instead I find many Pentecostals place very little value on the inward beauty of a person. Most women, in particular, are made to feel their value is directly related to their outward conformity to man made standards. That is sad!

Shhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!! Keep talking like this and you can kiss the mother and child reunion goodbye!!!! (Paul Simon 1972).

Very good words TB.

I recently listened to a sermon by a UPC pastor online. I tried to figure out a way to post an anonymous link to it here so a thread could listen to it and discuss it. I don't think anyone would recognize his voice or figure out who it is as he is not a big name preacher.

The sermon was bout the "beauty of holiness" with of course holiness meaning standards. What was amazing to me was the lack of consistent logic. On the one hand the major anecodote the preacher used in his sermon was a funny one about him and his wife eating out at a restaurant and when the waiter came to take their order she told him she wanted the "hard lemonade" to drink. He said the waiter looked surprised and asked the wife if she was sure that was what she wanted. She assured him she did indeed want it. The waiter was still very doubtful and at some point came back and just asked her right out "you do realize that drink has alcohol in it?" to which of course she was horrified and replied that she did not.

The preacher used this story as a reason why "holiness" (standards) was important because it was how his wife looked that caused that waiter to think she really did not want an alcoholic drink.

The funny thing was that in the next breath the preacher totally undid his reasoning by laughing and stating that if he had ordered the hard lemonade the waiter would have brought it without a second thought.

That was true and spoke volumes about his logic regarding the role of standards. Apparently they are there to help women and keep them in line but men for the most part are on their own!

[RandyWayne]

That was true and spoke volumes about his logic regarding the role of standards. Apparently they are there to help women and keep them in line but men for the most part are on their own!
Reply With Quote

This has been my contention for years. That more often than not it is about nothing more then control. Just look at how 'most' standards deal with women combined with an ongoing fascination in the UPC (and other orgs) with the role of women and how much authority they 'really have'.

[Truly Blessed]

IMHO, until they can come up with some way that the men can be identified as "different" from the world, the men in the Pentecostal movement who believe their holiness standards are necessary for the women in their church to be identified as Apostolics, should be silent. They should at least be embarrassed that they do such a lousy job of representing the Apostolic movement. One solution would be to put together a group of women in their churches and give them the assignment of coming up with ways in which the men could present themselves in public and immediately be identified as "holy".

[seguidordejesus]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

IMHO, until they can come up with some way that the men can be identified as "different" from the world, the men in the Pentecostal movement who believe their holiness standards are necessary for the women in their church to be identified as Apostolics, should be silent. They should at least be embarrassed that they do such a lousy job of representing the Apostolic movement. One solution would be to put together a group of women in their churches and give them the assignment of coming up with ways in which the men could present themselves in public and immediately be identified as "holy".

LOL no, I wouldn't want to have to deal with that....no telling what they'd come up with!