The Grace to leave and be gone...

[Tim Rutledge]

God bless the UPCI and Br. Haney and...
God bless the WPF and Br. J. Godair!

Both organizations need prayer and Gods guidance.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

Lately I have noticed lots of comments on the UPCI. What I say here is not that I am for or against those that left for I do NOT even belong.
However when we leave something that served us why not leave in grace and just go on...Close that chapter....Let them go on and you go on...Why vomit on the table where you once ate?
Everybody in leadership has had those people who couldn´t stay out of your house and as long as you were feeding them you were heaven sent...but the day the table was empty they were gone...and telling how evil you (organization) were.
I know a former missionary that left Brazil many years ago and the people would write this missionary, try to contact this missionary but the former missionary said to me, "Janice, If I contact the people in the end I will cause confusion. I love the people ENOUGH not to contact them"
I was young back then and thought that was strange for she had raised up a work from nothing...it in reality was her work but due to circumstances she felt to leave.
Now many years have passed and I can look back and I see seh did the right thing. She did not keep a stir and an unrest...she just gracefully walked out.

I was so young back then I really thought she ought to keep contact. After all they were her babies so to speak...she had not come in and worked in someone else´s work and taken advantage of anyone. They were the product of her labor.
Today that work still goes on...today I know if she would have kept in contact there would have been unrest until today...She was godly enough to make the right decision.
That is how I feel about people leaving any group...it is fine to leave but have enough grace to LEAVE...
In reality this person in my eyes was done wrong but the souls involved meant more to her than her personal feelings...a rare thing in the world today.

...and this is to no certain person or group...just my thoughts...

Sis. A,

Although this might be ideal in a perfect world, the world is far from perfect. Things are not that easy, black and white, cut and dried. Often, the ministry and church members speak badly of those who left just as those who have left speak badly of the church. Both sides have their issues. However, those who leave are usually used to having kept their mouths shut for years while listening to the church say bad things about the people outside and in. When a person leaves, they are often exercising a right they feel they have been denied for a long time. I say let them speak. The church might learn something if it takes the time to listen. Often, if I speak (write) about any negative experience, whether I am venting or just speaking about facts, ministry will bring up issues like you have, how they have been hurt in the ministry by laity but they don't talk about it. Well, fact is, they do. But ministry also has a reason not to....more of a reason than those who left, because the people that hurt them are basically subordinates. Being hurt by church members is not the same as being hurt by ministry. I know because I have experienced both. Ministry is expected to take the high road. They also get paid to take the high road, theoretically.

At any rate, ministry should stop trying to get people to quit talking and begin listening. They just might learn something.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

No.

Sister Alvear, those who talk bitterly, do so, IMO, because they don't have a clear conscience. Beam and splinter.

These men of God were talking about one another before there was any "split", and many of them continue their bad behavior, and unless and until they allow God to change their hearts and help them bite their tongues, the affliction will continue to fester. This separation could have been done correctly, it could have been done amicably, but it wasn't. The people who were for it headed it up like they were the great crusaders leading the charge against evil men--but that was just the story they told themselves to soothe their consciences, because it was patently unethical, the way it was handled, and they know it. And the men they were crusading against were/are their brothers in arms--not *the enemy.*

Secondly, a soft answer turns away wrath, and those who were AGAINST the dissenters could have responded differently--but they didn't. They could have responded respectfully, but for the most part--they haven't.

When I see a man talk viciously about his brother, I think he is trying to divert attention from his own short comings. Kind of like the men who brought the adulterous woman to Jesus..."Look what SHE did." No, look at who YOU are!

The kingdom of God deserved better than this--from both sides. Men have behaved badly, and so far their pride (collectively speaking) has prevented most (if not all) of them from confessing it.

Those are just my observations from the nosebleed section.

Oh. Apparently this topic is about certain circumstances. Beats me.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by Light

Some how Br. if one speaks out against false doctrine you are declared bitter and that you have a vendetta. I know you were not referring to me but this is what one is confronted with when they speak out. The UPCI is not my enemy. I have many friends and relatives that still go to or belong as ministers. When I confront them with only those that obey acts 2:38 completely and believe that it is necessary will be in heaven. I am told you shouldn't judge.
As I watched a small portion of Kennith Haney's message last night I heard him say that those in the UPCI should be strong on doctrine. I wonder, which doctrine was he talking about? Acts 2:38, friends of the bride, saved at repentance and last but not least the light doctrine? All of these doctrine are believed and taught one way or another in the UPCI.
I know there are some churches that still believe the 3 step message. We are judged by the company we keep.

Believe me I am not bitter I have nothing to be bitter about. I left over truth not some problem. I love the truth and as long as I have breath I will speak out against false doctrine.

Perhaps this post wasn't meant in your direction?
I too believe in Repentance, Water Baptism in Jesus name & the Infilling of the Holy Ghost is nessecary for Salvation.
I am still in a UPCI Church.

Go back and read the first post.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by ILG

Sis. A,

Although this might be ideal in a perfect world, the world is far from perfect. Things are not that easy, black and white, cut and dried. Often, the ministry and church members speak badly of those who left just as those who have left speak badly of the church. Both sides have their issues. However, those who leave are usually used to having kept their mouths shut for years while listening to the church say bad things about the people outside and in. When a person leaves, they are often exercising a right they feel they have been denied for a long time. I say let them speak. The church might learn something if it takes the time to listen. Often, if I speak (write) about any negative experience, whether I am venting or just speaking about facts, ministry will bring up issues like you have, how they have been hurt in the ministry by laity but they don't talk about it. Well, fact is, they do. But ministry also has a reason not to....more of a reason than those who left, because the people that hurt them are basically subordinates. Being hurt by church members is not the same as being hurt by ministry. I know because I have experienced both. Ministry is expected to take the high road. They also get paid to take the high road, theoretically.

At any rate, ministry should stop trying to get people to quit talking and begin listening. They just might learn something.

ILG, whether you have been legitimately hurt or not, the Bible says "FORGIVE!"

Once that forgiveness has been asked for our not, we should drop it.
Do we have concerns?
Yes, but we need do be careful that our writings do not reflect the bitterness we feel.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Ron

ILG, whether you have been legitimately hurt or not, the Bible says "FORGIVE!"

Once that forgiveness has been asked for our not, we should drop it.
Do we have concerns?
Yes, but we need do be careful that our writings do not reflect the bitterness we feel.

I agree with that. Apparently there are writings here that are being referred to that I don't know about. I am not speaking for or against anything that may or may not be written here. But there have been times when I have personally written things about the UPC and meant nothing but to share, but before it was over I was very angry at the attacks on my character by supposed people of God. I am sure I have said things that I shouldn't. But the thing is that pointing fingers and blaming sides really isn't the answer. Listening to each other is. That is often easier said than done.

[ILG]

Is the WPF a completely separate organization now? (Behind the times.....)

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by ILG

I agree with that. Apparently there are writings here that are being referred to that I don't know about. I am not speaking for or against anything that may or may not be written here. But there have been times when I have personally written things about the UPC and meant nothing but to share, but before it was over I was very angry at the attacks on my character by supposed people of God. I am sure I have said things that I shouldn't. But the thing is that pointing fingers and blaming sides really isn't the answer. Listening to each other is. That is often easier said than done.

ILG, I don't think there's anything wrong with *venting* as long as it can be done appropriately without returning evil for evil. Nor is there anything bad necessarily with addressing issues within one organization or another.

When I read Sister Alvear's first post, I immediately thought of the WPF/UPCI split, even though she didn't say that specifically. I don't know if she intended the discussion to be that narrow or not, so don't limit yourself on my account. That's just what has been on my mind lately, so that's where I went. Honestly, the discussions that take place on the AFF are MILD compared to what I've heard in more than a few fellowship halls among ministers--about other ministers.

As far as ex-upcers here on the forum--I think it's fair to assume that if you question a minister or church within an organization, unless you make a distinction between the church as a whole and the specific circumstance, you can expect folks to defend the organization as a whole. I think that's what sets people on edge the most--when the allusions are too generic or broad, and some of us get caught in the net of accusation or anger or angst who don't belong there.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by ILG

I agree with that. Apparently there are writings here that are being referred to that I don't know about. I am not speaking for or against anything that may or may not be written here. But there have been times when I have personally written things about the UPC and meant nothing but to share, but before it was over I was very angry at the attacks on my character by supposed people of God. I am sure I have said things that I shouldn't. But the thing is that pointing fingers and blaming sides really isn't the answer. Listening to each other is. That is often easier said than done.

I got no problem with that.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

ILG, I don't think there's anything wrong with *venting* as long as it can be done appropriately without returning evil for evil. Nor is there anything bad necessarily with addressing issues within one organization or another.

When I read Sister Alvear's first post, I immediately thought of the WPF/UPCI split, even though she didn't say that specifically. I don't know if she intended the discussion to be that narrow or not, so don't limit yourself on my account. That's just what has been on my mind lately, so that's where I went. Honestly, the discussions that take place on the AFF are MILD compared to what I've heard in more than a few fellowship halls among ministers--about other ministers.

As far as ex-upcers here on the forum--I think it's fair to assume that if you question a minister or church within an organization, unless you make a distinction between the church as a whole and the specific circumstance, you can expect folks to defend the organization as a whole. I think that's what sets people on edge the most--when the allusions are too generic or broad, and some of us get caught in the net of accusation or anger or angst who don't belong there.

That is interesting, when I read the first post, I thought of something different.
It is interesting that we can read a post and get a different take on it than others.

That isn't necessarily wrong, it just just different takes on the same post.