Are the Godairs leaving? - Page 3

ILuvFPC · #21 11-27-2007, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChicagoPastor

you people????????????

Reread the thread amigo, the Elder DID NOT say it was the main focus of the meeting....but Tulsa WILL BE DISCUSSED. That's all he said....

let me rephrase what you said to "us people"

YOU, my friend, are the one putting a spin on what Elder Epley said.

I quote:

"...at his present time they are meeting in Branson having a meeting about Tulsa"

When I made the statement about putting spin on things i wasn't referring specifically to elder epley more to those who are over dramatizing the whole ordeal...

Steve Epley · #22 11-27-2007, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILuvFPC

Elder Epley with all due respect i must clarify.. The branson meeting which is being hosted by Bro Joel Holmes and Bro Larry Booker was planned well in advance of the upc general conference and includes many ministers and pastors not associated with the upc... so it is not a meeting about the results of the upc res 4 or the goings on to take place in tulsa.. not that this topic will not come up or be discussed at the branson meeting...

I know it was not planned but that is the agenda now.

ILuvFPC · #23 11-27-2007, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I know it was not planned but that is the agenda now.

Hmmm.... i know it wasn't the agenda to begin w/ but u are "in the know" sounds like so i stand corrected...

RevBuddy · #24 11-27-2007, 09:22 PM

There is no spin here. We are simply observing their behavior. And this is not speculation; it is clear these men and their followers remain active members of the UPCI and are actively planning to do harm to it.

My problem with them is not their leaving. It is their method of leaving. If you have principles you wish to stand on...do so. Resign from fellowship, etc. It's hard to defend this method of leaving...without leaving. Believe me, I am not saying these folks don't have a right to withdraw from fellowship. Of course, they do. But to plan your exit in front of the whole fellowship and encourage others to join you in doing so...all the while continuing to remain "members in good standing..." I mean, can't you at least see the ethical conflict? At least physicians have taken an oath "to do no harm."

Steve Epley · #25 11-27-2007, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILuvFPC

Hmmm.... i know it wasn't the agenda to begin w/ but u are "in the know" sounds like so i stand corrected...

This was NOT the original agenda however events have changed the scope NOT saying Bishop Holmes is involved in this at all. I do not believe he would be interested in any organizational formation but these men are his friends.

Kutless · #26 11-28-2007, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CC1

Eureka, lose the Mennonite seriousness!!!! They were joking. PeePee may not be thrilled with the UPC right now but for none of the reasons the Tulsaites are meeting.

CC1 You don't miss a beat do you.

PP is a closet UC

TRIPLE E · #27 11-28-2007, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thinking

Does their leaving and forming a group that is more closely aligned with their own beliefs indicate they are unprincipled? Does the fact that they would make this group known to others indicate a lack of morality, ethics or honor?

NO but using the UPCI manual to mail out invitations to the Tulsa Meeting to all UPCI ministers ,a meeting which I am sure is not sanctioned by the UPCI does seem to show some lack when it comes to be ethical! JMHO

TRIPLE E · #28 11-28-2007, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RevBuddy

My problem with them is not their leaving. It is their method of leaving. If you have principles you wish to stand on...do so. Resign from fellowship, etc. It's hard to defend this method of leaving...without leaving. Believe me, I am not saying these folks don't have a right to withdraw from fellowship. Of course, they do. But to plan your exit in front of the whole fellowship and encourage others to join you in doing so...all the while continuing to remain "members in good standing..." I mean, can't you at least see the ethical conflict? At least physicians have taken an oath "to do no harm."

You are soooooooooo right RevBuddy!