STARTLING! LARRY BOOKER'S Latest Message!!!(wait til you see this!!!) - Page 60

revrandy · #**591** 11-20-2007, 08:30 AM

Last I checked America was still a free country with people who make the choices they want to...

I am tired of the blame game...I say let's just get on with the work of God and let the chips fall where they may...

God will be the final judge in the end...

StillStanding · #**592** 11-20-2007, 08:59 AM

I think Prax hit the nail on the head in an earlier post on this thread.

The issue is not Res #4, it's all about intolerance!

#**593** 11-20-2007, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianoman

I think Prax hit the nail on the head in an earlier post on this thread.

The issue is not Res #4, it's all about intolerance!

One must remember that one man's tolerance is another man's compromise. To be tolerant of some things is not acceptable to a man who feels he would be compromising his convictions. You certainly would not want to label a man as intolerant in light of his own strong convictions, would you?

rgcraig · #**594** 11-20-2007, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keith4him

Up until now I have pretty much stayed out of this current fray, I had a weird dream (for another thread) that scared me so I am staying low key.

But passing the resolution wasn't the issue, but what they believed about passing the resolution is the issue. If it wasn't Resolution 4 it would be something else, because these brethren have chosen a certain outlook, philosophy that determines their reaction to these isssues. Now that is the real battle, not the resolution.

As preachers we are always telling people that our battle is not against flesh and blood but against spirits. How about these guys actually follow through and pick the right enemy and right battle.

And by the way my brother is not my enemy.

I think this post pretty well sums it up!

StillStanding · #**595** 11-20-2007, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philjones

One must remember that one man's tolerance is another man's compromise. To be tolerant of some things is not acceptable to a man who feels he would be compromising his convictions. You certainly would not want to label a man as intolerant in light of his own strong convictions, would you?

The thing I'm scratching my head about is nobody has to compromise their beliefs! They can continue to preach their convictions harder than ever!

Aren't we all "compromising" then when we fellowship those who hold a different level of convictions? Do any two preachers hold the exact same convictions?

pelathais · #**596** 11-20-2007, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mizpeh

So this is Pelathais' deep, dark secret!

Can't be much of a secret of mine if I linked to the original. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...6&postcount=26

Monkeyman came up with something way funnier so I just let it drop.

Neck · #**597** 11-20-2007, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by triumphant1

I have found LB to be very kind...and a man strong to his convitions as well.

I found the snake handler church pastor we visited in Kentucky by accident in the 1970's to be very kind and strong in his convictions.

Many men have convictions as a sole means to measure the loyalty of 'their" followers...

The convictions do not bring them closer to Christ nor their church closer to Christ.

They would do better on their knee's and spend more time in Fasting.

What needs to be addressed is the gulf between the convictions within the confines of the Organization.

Many churches in the same town shun each other for not following thier brand of "Snake oil".

The foundation of faith in Christ is on the "Rock" not the cloak...

pelathais · #**598** 11-20-2007, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thad

Did you Hear about Larry Booker's Latest controversial message???????

here are bits and pieces (quotes) taken from it.

give your opinion, good or bad so that we can discuss it.

Booker told his church this past sunday night about how the tv vote went - said the organization took a turn towards destruction. He also said he was suprised at how many ministers nationwide are not happy.

Booker went on to say that the day of the vote was such an emotional day of sadness just like when JFK was shot and when the towers were hit on 9/11. He got the same feeling when the vote passed as on 9/11.

It is interesting to note that the original vote against tv took place in Tulsa in 1955 - maybe that's why they picked Tulsa as the place to form the new organization - to make a statement?

Also, Tommy Craft went to see Ken Phillips before the vote and apparently Wanda Phillips pleaded with Tommy Craft saying "don't let the movement (upc) go the way we did in regards to television. TV will steal everything from you"

crying and screaming Booker said in his message "me and and many other good men refuse to go that route - we will stand for holiness"

gave an example of how the PAW lost its standards and holiness.

said he would still fellowship his close (ulta-con) friends that stay in the upc

If he really said these things you've got to question his ... uhm ... you've got to question this.

If the Tampa vote represented "destruction" to the fellowship, why is he surprised "at how many ministers nationwide are not happy?" Sounds like double-pleading. He is joining disparate thoughts together and trying desperately to make them flow into one conclusion. If the vote was "destruction for the UPC, then more people than just Larry B. and his circle ought to be concerned.

I don't know Wanda Phillips, but does she (or anyone?) really think Tommy Craft has the ability to overturn the Tampa vote. LB paints her like a frightened, even hysterical woman who is seeking to undermine her own husband's ministry.

These guys laugh about "evangelistically speaking" and making jokes when one of their own exaggerates something beyond all recognition. I wonder about their Gospel message (the Evangel) when it needs to have so much distortion, half truths and outright fabrications to promote it. The Gospel of Jesus Christ needed none of those things.

pelathais · #**599** 11-20-2007, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keith4him

Up until now I have pretty much stayed out of this current fray, I had a weird dream (for another thread) that scared me so I am staying low key.

But passing the resolution wasn't the issue, but what they believed about passing the resolution is the issue. If it wasn't Resolution 4 it would be something else, because these brethren have chosen a certain outlook, philosophy that determines their reaction to these isssues. Now that is the real battle, not the resolution.

As preachers we are always telling people that our battle is not against flesh and blood but against spirits. How about these guys actually follow through and pick the right enemy and right battle.

And by the way my brother is not my enemy.

Right on, Keith4Him! Well said.

Scott Hutchinson · #**600** 11-20-2007, 10:02 AM

All I know is that God's Kingdom is a everlasting Kingdom,and the gates of hell shall not prevail agains't the church,and God knows those that are truly His.
Orgs and Fellowships are not the Kingdom of God,and the Kingdom of God can't be split or divided by men.
Things that man puts in place won't last,but when God does something it can't be pulled down.