WPF - Answers their critics

Originally Posted by Stephanas

If the letter writing district and general officials had done their duty and enforced the ministerial requirements spelled out in the UPCI manual, would there even be a Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship?

If the UPCI ministers who have chosen to have television in their homes had turned in their credentials instead of going to Tampa and overthrowing the restriction on television advertising, would there be a need for the Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship?

If a pastor wanted to have a youth group that conformed to the standards spelled out in the UPCI manual, would he want to send them to UPC events to play "Amazing Race" and celebrate Dora the Explorer, or would he send them to Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship events?

An interesting post with some valid arguments.

For the record, I'm friends with about 80% of the Tulsa group and preach for them on a regular basis. Additionally, I'm UPC and have been for over 25 years and, again, preach a lot of meetings on most every level of the organization.

That being said, I can tell you that...

(a) I don't know of any 'lies' being told by the key men though there was a lot of confusion pertaining to the 'names' on the 'list' found on their website. From what I have ascertained that was the result of those creating a website who randomly put some names on the 'list' and then gave out the website address for a few other's to see what they were trying to design... NOT a proclaimation that all these men were actually going to be in those positions.

However, as we all know, Pentecost has no problem with 'passing information' along with the gradual changing of stories from person to person on a familiar manner...

"Hey, look at this website design and tell me what you think."
"Hey, look at the website they are putting up."
"Hey, look at the names on this list and tell me what you think."
"Hey, look at this website, did you know Bro. """ is leaving the UPC!"
"Hey, look at Bro. """'s name on this website! Can you believe it! Wait till the 'boys' hear about this!"

We've all seen it before and will see it again. Not so much a 'lie' as a random picking of some names from various areas to fill in the 'details' that were going to be fine tuned later. At least that's what I was told by those who are involved.

(b) I love the UPC and appreciate all its efforts. I do think some cardinal things were 'overlooked' that, had they been taken care of, would have eliminated the need for this present situation.

The United Pentecostal Church has been good to me and I've poured my life into ministry and much of that into the UPC. Even so, I can identify with the concern of the group supposedly 'leaving'. While I think their departure may be a little premature I do respect the impeccible reputations of most of those organizing this.

I think it's sad.

I think it was unnecessary.

I think those who flippantly say 'good riddance' have no clue how God perceives His Kingdom.

I think the caliber of men we are losing (in most cases) is something that should concern the entire fellowship in a serious way.

NOTE: The two most dangerous things that can happen right now in this whole mix is...

1. The UPC to start trying to discredit these men or make light of the fact they are leaving. If this happens Tulsa will grow by 300% by their next meeting. The men involved are great men who are loved and respected by most everyone and, while some don't see a need to bail out of the UPC right now, they also see NO need in putting these men 'out of fellowship'. What an incredible mistake! THAT, in my opinion, would have a MUCH greater effect than just passing Resolution 4.

2. Those starting this new fellowship will make a desperately critical mistake if they allow their newfound fellowship to give platforms to some who have been viciously anti-UPC. Doing so will absolutely undermine the entire premise upon which their fellowship is supposedly built on. How futile would it be to build a fellowship on wanting to be surrounded with visible holiness and then invite in invisible unholiness? Giving a voice to some with the old 'The devil is my enemy and the UPC is his mother in law' spirits that are 'out there' would discredit everything they say they want to build.

I find it a shame that we would even be in this position as the Apostolic movement. What would be a greater shame is for both factions to lose credibility in the midst of it all by having a wrong spirit towards their brethren.

[Whole Hearted]

Originally Posted by Stephanas

If the letter writing district and general officials had done their duty and enforced the ministerial requirements spelled out in the UPCI manual, would there even be a Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship?

If the UPCI ministers who have chosen to have television in their homes had turned in their credentials instead of going to Tampa and overthrowing the restriction on television advertising, would there be a need for the Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship?

If a pastor wanted to have a youth group that conformed to the standards spelled out in the UPCI manual, would he want to send them to UPC events to play "Amazing Race" and celebrate Dora the Explorer, or would he send them to Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship events?

[AmazingGrace]

Ok Bro Steadfast... Question for you...

If number 1 does not happen... and number 2 does happen then what would be the scenario? Do you feel that disfellowshipping is then constituted? Or should they just have continued free reign? Just asking a serious question. This is all I want to know... I am no longer going to post on these threads considering I have some very close to me on both sides of the fence here and I dont want to say anything stupid that would hurt either... but I have been wanting to ask this for a long time.

Originally Posted by Dora

Ok. Somebody's fibbing just a teeny tad. Wonder who...

Things that make ya go hmmmmmmmmmm. The question answer thing was NOT very informative. I don't think the UPCI allows holding license with two different orgs. I guess they have other orgs in mind.

So no "aggressive" recruiting efforts were used...no names were listed without permission???

HMMMMMmmmmmMMMmmmmMMMMmmMMMmmmmm

Dora,

I don't think that there is actually a 'rule' that says you can't belong to any other fellowships, etc., in the manual. I think this common perception is from the question on every local UPC application that says something to the effect, "Are you willing to drop affiliation with other organizations to attain a license with the UPC".

That has to be on their because of such things as freemasonry and a score of half truth 'semi-costal' organizations. There are MANY - even among national officials - that belong to other organizations of various types.

[Barb]

Good word, Steadie...

[TrmptPraise]

Yes, Sted! Great post!

Thank your for your insight and (IMO) wisdom conveyed.

[Threads]

Originally Posted by Stephanas

"No minister having a television in his or her home shall be permitted to hold license or credentials with the United Pentecostal Church International."

Hmmmm. I know of one in California that has them in every room of his house and still preaches in the WD.

Originally Posted by AmazingGrace

Ok Bro Steadfast... Question for you...

If number 1 does not happen... and number 2 does happen then what would be the scenario? Do you feel that disfellowshipping is then constituted? Or should they just have continued free reign? Just asking a serious question. This is all I want to know... I am no longer going to post on these threads considering I have some very close to me on both sides of the fence here and I dont want to say anything stupid that would hurt either... but I have been wanting to ask this for a long time.

If I understand the question right you're saying, "What if the UPC keeps a right spirit and the break away group starts becoming a UPC bashing session... should they disfellowship them?"

If, and again I say IF, that happens I don't think the UPC will have much choice but to try to protect their interests somehow. I just know that if the UPC jumps prematurely and starts trying to discredit men who have been loved and honored among us it's going to create chaos.

The ONLY way to get around that is to give this whole thing time and IF the break away group becomes vicious it will speak volumes to those who sympathize with their situation. On the other hand, IF the UPC is perceived to be attacking them without cause (let's face it, these leaders have had a good spirit up to this point) it will bring sympathizers out of the woodwork and slingshot them right into the Tulsa group.

I have to be honest here: The VAST, VAST, VAST majority of the preachers that I talk to believe that the Tulsa group has a right to do what they are doing. Most just think it's a little premature because, technically, they haven't changed the rules on owning a television but simply said you can advertise on it.

To try, at least now, to take a stand against it would be the equivelent to that 'vast majority' of preachers as saying, "We made it uncomfortable for you in our organization but now we're going to persecute you for the convictions you want to hold on to."

Discomfort people can sometimes abide by.
Perceived persecution is seen in a whole dangerously different way.

[AmazingGrace]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

If I understand the question right you're saying, "What if the UPC keeps a right spirit and the break away group starts becoming a UPC bashing session... should they disfellowship them?"

If, and again I say IF, that happens I don't think the UPC will have much choice but to try to protect their interests somehow. I just know that if the UPC jumps prematurely and starts trying to discredit men who have been loved and honored among us it's going to create chaos.

The ONLY way to get around that is to give this whole thing time and IF the break away group becomes vicious it will speak volumes to those who sympathize with their situation. On the other hand, IF the UPC is perceived to be attacking them without cause (let's face it, these leaders have had a good spirit up to this point) it will bring sympathizers out of the woodwork and slingshot them right into the Tulsa group.

I have to be honest here: The VAST, VAST, VAST majority of the preachers that I talk to believe that the Tulsa group has a right to do what they are doing. Most just think it's a little premature because, technically, they haven't changed the rules on owning a television but simply said you can advertise on it.

To try, at least now, to take a stand against it would be the equivelent to that 'vast majority' of preachers as saying, "We made it uncomfortable for you in our organization but now we're going to persecute you for the convictions you want to hold on to."

Discomfort people can sometimes abide by.
Perceived persecution is seen in a whole dangerously different way.

Thank you and yes you did answer my question. I pray neither be the case but Thanks! I now bow out and just sitnwatch... Its soon and I pray it doesnt get nasty the closer it becomes. They have had a pretty good spirit so far and all we can do is pray it stays that way.... There are some things I do totally disagree with but then hey.. neither are we perfect.

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Originally Posted by Threads

Hmmmm. I know of one in California that has them in every room of his house and still preaches in the WD.

I know some who don't- point?