The UPC is a dying movement!

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Even though the word "church" is in the title of the organization, can we all agree that the UPCI is not the "church" in the Biblical sense of the word?

Can we agree that whatever noble ideals and aspirations the people within the organization have, and whatever unction from God that exists on their lives, it is them, and not the organization, that is the church?

This being the case, when that Last Trump sounds, it will not be the UPCI that finds itself face to face with the Lord in the air, but rather, the saints of God who are the church who will meet Jesus.

As such, being a man-made organization, with many laws and regulations of man governing it, one being those laws and regulations that govern tax exemption status, for example, wouldn't it behoove us all to desire that the people within the organization step up and out of all that is man-made around them, that is surrounding them, and yes, even sometimes suffocating them, and get free, so they can be all that God wants them to be, without man-made limitations?

And if this be so, wouldn't the demise of the UPCI be right and just before God, so His people can be liberated from something God Himself did not create and had no part in causing?

I mean, don't we all believe that the only "organization" God cares about is the Body of Christ?

If yes, then all man-made organizational efforts are obsolete (and perhaps go against God in their establishing).

If no, then by what means or merit can we, through the lens of Scripture declare that God is involved in and cares about the UPCI, or any other ecclesiastical organization, for that matter?

[shazeep]

What's the end result of Armageddon? Is anything man-made going to survive?

it is not near as painful now as it will be then, guys

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by shazeep

What's the end result of Armageddon? Is anything man-made going to survive?

it is not near as painful now as it will be then, guys

My dear shazeep, does anyone other than me pay even the slightest attention to what you have to say?

[YounginHope]

lol. I bet more than a few. Will they admit it? Doubt it. He definetly doesn't fit the "cookie cutter" OP model. I have greatly benefited from his posts on here.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

My dear shazeep, does anyone other than me pay even the slightest attention to what you have to say?

Actually there are a couple of us.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by shazeep

"Thank You, God, that i am like the rest of men"cool!
i say that too, but i guess it depends upon who is doing the defining there, too. we...adopt these terms for ourselves, maybe without realizing they are really adopted for defining ourselves to everyone else. the Apostles were sent out with no other flag but "Good News."

I am only using this post to spring board the thought I had as I was reading the last two pages of post.

But Shazeep's last statement "the Apostles were sent out with no other flag but "Good News" actually goes with the thought I want to post. Having read many of the books on the outpouring in the early 1900's. One thing was clear, God was pouring his spirit out to people of various movements. There was little if any organization for several years. There were meeting places where people heard about and came to receive the HG. It was not until people began to define the process of salvation that groups began to divide up and form groups.

The greatest split came over the doctrine of Jesus name baptism. But if memory serves me right it was almost 15 years before that issue arose. The point is in the beginning it was most like the early church, not when doctrinal issues began to arise. One of the most prominent leaders Frank Ewert warned of forming parties or organizations. And as soon as they did began to form organizations the great out pouring came to a screeching halt, from what it had started out as.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

My dear shazeep, does anyone other than me pay even the slightest attention to what you have to say?

I have paid the "slightest attention"!

[shazeep]

nothing wrong with that imo. Go with what produces fruit

Originally Posted by votivesoul

My dear shazeep, does anyone other than me pay even the slightest attention to what you have to say?

well, the numbers don't lie, VS. i post for people convicted that Scripture is real, but are determined to find Grace and escape Law. The 65 million that have left established congregations, to seek God. So you mean "anyone else who posts on this site," when naturally i only expect silence from them, if i am doing it right.

i am talking to people who are not offended by meat, while talking to people who think Paul was talking about food, when we know that everything created by God is good, and nothing should be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving

so iow, i don't pay the slightest attention to those cues that you suggest, appearances iow, and i don't think you should either. And lest i be misunderstood, i don't think any of the people i swordfight with should either. I do not know, in the sense that people crave [I/know[/I], because there is nothing to know, which is plainly stated in Scripture.

2 men will be in a field, and one will be taken, and the other left; and people want to know which one they are going to be. That is all i care about, VS.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Actually there are a couple of us.

and these are only the, what, 10% or something of clicks on any one post, other members, even though a member poster has multiple clicks usually, if they are engaged, so maybe they comprise 50% of the total clicks. The 4 of us do not need to talk because we obviously are in agreement, just like people everywhere want to be in agreement. For my part, that does not mean i am right about everything--or for that matter anything,--or that i am not in agreement with other people here; you are just the ones who happened to post.

i have wondered if any illumination could be gained from, say, us, discussing some aspect of the kingdom, but like you, i don't like to offend people unnecessarily, and i guess "hijacking a thread" is a thing, even if i can't see it, so me being me, i often avoid giving a perspective if you are engaged, and seeking agreement, with someone else here. i used to do that, but saw that i was offending, so now i try to avoid that, even if i encourage others to do it to me, because it is great as far as i am concerned. So tag me or something maybe if you want my perspective, i guess. Like...the CNN thread, for instance; i never would have posted in there if i wasn't asked.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I am only using this post to spring board the thought I had as I was reading the last two pages of post.

But Shazeep's last statement "the Apostles were sent out with no other flag but "Good News" actually goes with the thought I want to post. Having read many of the books on the outpouring in the early 1900's. One thing was clear, God was pouring his spirit out to people of various movements. There was little if any organization for several years. There were meeting places where people heard about and came to receive the HG. It was not until people began to define the process of salvation that groups began to divide up and form groups.

The greatest split came over the doctrine of Jesus name baptism. But if memory serves me right it was almost 15 years before that issue arose. The point is in the beginning it was most like the early church, not when doctrinal issues began to arise. One of the most prominent leaders Frank Ewert warned of forming parties or organizations. And as soon as they did began to form organizations the great out pouring came to a screeching halt, from what it had started out as.

nice. well, not nice, but the natural premise of like-minded people, who really aren't as like minded as they would like to think. Right? How can two walk together, unless they be in agreement? which of course we take to mean "agreeing on beliefs," when that is not what is meant; as evidenced by those who say they are "in agreement," yet feel compelled to seek differences, rather than agreement!