Television Issue!

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Wow. You really don't have a clue what the difference is do you?

Disapprove
to have an unfavorable opinion; express disapproval (usually followed by of ).

Forbid
1.to command (a person) not to do something, have something, etc., or not to enter some place: to forbid him entry to the house.
2.to prohibit (something); make a rule or law against: to forbid the use of lipstick; to forbid smoking.

BTW I never claimed anything as "my religious system". I never once said I agreed with the UPC on everything it teaches or any other religious system. I am not a licensed minister of the UPCI. I never have been

They can't forbid me to do anything. Im not a member of the UPC. I attend a local UPC. There is no requirement for attendance that mandates not owning a TV

Now how am I a legalist?

Legalist don't look for loopholes.

I suggest you don't have a clue what the word means.

A Legalist is someone that seeks salvation by good works

Further more
strict adherence, or the principle of strict adherence, to law or prescription, especially to the letter rather than the spirit.

If that is the case then first of all the AOF "we disapprove" is not a law but an opinion and even if it were a law it seems there are many here that don't hold to the letter of that law but the spirit and are not legalists.

"We disapprove of OUR PEOPLE.....".

That's you, Prax!!


Thank you for your completely irrelevant definition. Here's one for you:

sa·tan·ic   
[suh-tan-ik, sey-] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
of Satan.
2.
characteristic of or befitting Satan; extremely wicked; devillike; diabolical.


That's what YOUR religious system calls your television.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

Not at ALL the same thing. The Congressman is agreeing to pass a bill, even if he doesn't agree with all of it.

And that is any different than the AS? I don't think it is.

The whole point of the Affirmation statement is: I Agree.

My mind is BLOWN AWAY by all of the preachers who sign that and don't abide by it. I'm sorry, but I don't have respect for anyone who does that.

If I sign that I AGREE with something, I'm going to AGREE with every single bit of it, or I'm not going to sign it. To do otherwise is lying.

Then I hope when you get a job, you agree with EVERY rule because you won't get a paycheck. I obeyed my teachers because I would get expelled, not because I agreed with them. When my sister tells us to take off our shoes when we come to her home, I think it's stupid, but I comply.

It's only complicated because people want it to be. We have been in change for some time now. I believe people sign it because they believe the plan of salvation and not because they believe everything else. So, who is going to jump ship over something like that? I'm not. Acts 2:38 is something God showed me. It's exactly how we preach it. Nothing else is as important to me.

And I was more traumatized by what the world demanded of me, than I have ever been by the church. I know that's not everyone's story, but it is mine.

[unitedpraise10]

Originally Posted by notofworks

That's fantastic!!! When it does, go have all the liberty you want and I'll cheer you on. Until then??? OBEY!!!

I will OBEY!!! my pastor and the bible sunny boy....not a manual!

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Do you believe and agree with every rule a place of employment puts on you? Do you agree with every rule someone has at their private home? Do you think that every person in any organization believes and agrees with everything their church teaches?

When I was a Catholic the women got tired of wearing the veil on their heads. They ended up relaxing the rule because people stopped cooperating. Same thing, IMO.

You want us to change, but you want us to also comply. Which do you really want?

I like your last question PO! I want to see change and I'm willing to be lenient in judging those who are for change. However, as long as they continue to look the other way then there won't be any real change except hypocrisy. So yes I will be lenient and won't be too harsh toward them for being for change, however at the same time I want to see those men who look the other way also be a voice for changing things so they don't have to look the other way. My only problem is I don't see them voicing any ,support for changing things only for looking the other way.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

So, a pastor's word trumps the manual? My understanding is that the pastor agrees with the manual, otherwise he wouldn't hold a license....

100% correct, Michael. I've walked a very hard, lonely road because I couldn't sign my name to something I didn't believe in....lost everything because I wouldn't sign it.

I'm sure there are areas of the manual that everyone disagrees with. But one is still required to walk in unity. No one is allowed to clearly disobey what is ordered, ESPECIALLY if they've sworn an oath not to.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by NotforSale

Later, Bro! Have a good night! I'm outta here, too!

Me too! It's only going to go down hill from here. LOL!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I like your last question PO! I want to see change and I'm willing to be lenient in judging those who are for change. However, as long as they continue to look the other way then there won't be any real change except hypocrisy. So yes I will be lenient and won't be too harsh toward them for looking the other way, however at the same time I want to see those men who look the other way also be a voice for changing things so they don't have to look the other way. My only problem is I don't see them voicing any concern for changing things only for looking the other way.

I don't think you actually know what people talk about in private, with our leadership, and we sure aren't going to tell a bunch of people here. IMO, it's an in-house issue. Same as my own personal household. It's no one's business no matter how much they say it is.

[unitedpraise10]

Originally Posted by notofworks

100% correct, Michael. I've walked a very hard, lonely road because I couldn't sign my name to something I didn't believe in....lost everything because I wouldn't sign it.

I'm sure there are areas of the manual that everyone disagrees with. But one is still required to walk in unity. No one is allowed to clearly disobey what is ordered, ESPECIALLY if they've sworn an oath not to.

Well, it's been happening for many years now then. I've never known a time without television, so all of this seems very weird to me.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I could probably attend a church where I didn't agree with every guideline. But if I was required to sign a paper stating that I agreed with every guideline, and I didn't agree..... nope. Not happening.

There you go. That's EXACTLY it. I had a General Official tell me on the phone when I explained why I couldn't sign the oath, "I suppose I wish I had the integrity to do what you're doing."

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by unitedpraise10

The words haven't changed, but the church has changed! BUDDY!

And in this I totally agree. It is not acceptable to live a lie, be a phony, and practice complete dishonesty. Yes, the church has changed.

BUDDY.