Tulsa Report Day 2

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by CC1

Yesterday I was reminded once more of just how fast technology is merging. My new Dell desktop has Windows Vista Premium with "Media Center" installed.

I have used the media center to play some DVd's a little but nothing else. Yesterday for the first time I paid attention to the selections that pop up in addition to "play DVD". One was "Internet TV" it was marked "beta" so I guess it is in the testing stage.

When I clicked there it brought up a row of programs I could select at no charge (just have to watch commercials like on broadcast tv).

Among the choices were news programs and other reality programming but also there was the entire first season of Arrested Development, a network sitcom. I was in a rush and didn't look any further but this is further evidence that anyone with a fairly new computer and broadband connection is going to have pretty much the same programming available as if they owned a TV.

Perhaps the solution is for the conservative brethern to head this off at the pass by restricting internet use to dial up service? Could be a resolution for the next WWPF meeting!

Thats really the heart of the matter. This can't be solved by prohibitions.

There is an Old Order Mennonite Church in Canada that has allowed laptops... this same group forbids electricity, and automobiles. They can often be seen traveling down the road in their buggy, using the laptop... and no, I'm not kidding!

[embonpoint]

Originally Posted by George

Steadfast - It could be argued standards are not the big issue either. California is largely affected by WPF and you would have to agree even the "liberal" churches of California still look conservative by comparision to some other districts.

Perhaps the impact on California is due to men there having already seen from afar where the path some are following has led other districts. As they see what appears to be an all too familiar pattern emerging they are looking for alternatives. Just a possibility.

[George]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

George, I'm sorry but I'll never be convinced that 'losing postitions' was the deciding factor in their involvement in Tulsa. Again, I've preached for most of them and can tell you - firsthand - that some of them even turned down positions... some several times.

I respect your opinion. It seems the whole situation is a convoluted mess. I wholeheartedly support them building their own organization but have thought some of their methods were somewhat unethical. My greatest concern is repercussions on both sides.

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

WOW! Bro., This is not what I would expect from you and those sympathetic to the Tulsa meeting. Is this not the position of AM and those who are often slammed by the "anti-TV" crowd.

I agree with your answer but, I am afraid it is getting more and more confusing as to exactly what the beef is.

Blessings, SH

This, my friend, is exactly where I think a huge part of the breakdown is. 90% of all those I know and associate with from the more conservative crowd feel exactly like I feel about it. There are, however, that other small number of people that think sitting in a restaurant with a screen on the wall means 'Go to Hell. Do Not Pass Go. Do Not collect $200'.

It's the nature of people to surmise the worst... sometimes to our own hurt.

[George]

Originally Posted by embonpoint

Perhaps the impact on California is due to men there having already seen from afar where the path some are following has led other districts. As they see what appears to be an all too familiar pattern emerging they are looking for alternatives. Just a possibility.

I seriously doubt that to be a possibility. The districts that have so many "liberals" (I hate the terms lib/con but use them for purpose of identity) have always been. There haven't been any over-night changes. There are many churches east of the western region labeled liberal where you will find on their platforms women wearing pants, jewelry, make-up, men with long hair/facial hair, etc. In the most liberal California churches, it is doubtful you would find women wearing pants, painted red fingernails, cut and dyed hair on the platform. For the 50+ years I have been around UPC, this has always been the case.

[Weary Pilgrim]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

George, I'm sorry but I'll never be convinced that 'losing postitions' was the deciding factor in their involvement in Tulsa. Again, I've preached for most of them and can tell you - firsthand - that some of them even turned down positions... some several times.

NW just lost the position of Western District Supt.

The questions remains as to whether he would have joined up with WPF if

the outcome was different.What if resolution 4 had passed while he was

DS?


.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

Pelathais and Associates,

In this vast forum world there people of every kind and opinion. Opinions are great things that help form our personalities.

I have opinions. You have opinions. However, when those opinions impugn the character of another man it goes beyond to boundaries of good taste and into the realms of defamation.

It's obvious that your 'opinion' is that you don't agree with me. I'm a big boy on a faceless forum so that doesn't bother me. It would appear from past posts... as well as this one... that you don't much like me. Again, the richtor scale on my concern didn't register too much shaking in my frail heart over it.

However, to openly call me a liar is something that I don't intend to tolerate quietly. I frankly have no idea what you're talking about when you say something about UPC homosexuals shacking up without backsliding... however, to fabricate something like that did give you a great opportunity to smear Bro. TLC. Obviously, to call someone a liar is bad but to totally fabricate a lie to attack another good man? You, sir / ma'am, show well your character for what it is... and, honestly, it's not a good showing.

The closest I came to talking about 'UPC homosexuals shacking up without backsliding' was when someone questioned the validity of the convictions these men who are leaving might have. I spoke (listen carefully now, Pelathais, because details are important) about the dilemma I've faced in finding fellowship in just any Church.

One of the examples I spoke of was when I had a young person leave and shack up with her boyfriend and they were used in Church... even on the platform... just like nothing was wrong. This was stated in my prior post:


Where do you get 'homosexual' or 'UPC' out of that? Are you so bereft of literal arguments that you have to make things up to prove a point?

Thus to call me a liar either makes you (a) a horribly inaccurate mindreader (b) a miserably failed expert at 'reading between the lines' or (c) someone who doesn't mind twisting the words of others to attack a person (TLC) an organization (UPC) or a sincere conviction.

To be called a liar by someone with those credentials... well... it's almost an honor.

I did not call you a "liar" my friend. Your "shacking up" post was questioned earlier by another and when you responded, you did not address the issue. It does not take a "reading between the lines" to draw the inference that I drew. I merely took your post at face value. If there were "complexities" between the lines then you should have either provided details or resisted the urge to smear the UPC.

Steadfast said:
It would appear from past posts... as well as this one... that you don't much like me. Again, the richtor scale on my concern didn't register too much shaking in my frail heart over it.

You seem to have an unreasonably thin skin when it comes to our online friendship, but I'm glad that your heart is good and not subject to Richter scale shakings. I am genuinely saddened to hear that you think that I "don't much like" you. Quite the opposite is the case. You are my brother and not only am I commanded to love you, but I can honestly say that I do - admitedly in that hazy sort of online friendship kind of way, but I think even in person I could call you both a "friend" and a "brother."

Added to that is the fact that you have not read enough of my posts to even discern my gender which leaves me feeling that you are simply jumping to conclusions. I trust that the "sir/madam" was not an insult. My public profile is available but I obviously haven't even registered enough on your radar for you to take a look. No biggie. It just leaves me wondering how you think you could have read my heart.

No harm, no foul.

I still question the heterosexual shacking up anecdote and the alcohol consumption that you described. Are there perhaps more complexities that might even exonerate those that you attack?

[CC1]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Thats really the heart of the matter. This can't be solved by prohibitions.

There is an Old Order Mennonite Church in Canada that has allowed laptops... this same group forbids electricity, and automobiles. They can often be seen traveling down the road in their buggy, using the laptop... and no, I'm not kidding!

How do they recharge the batteries with no electricity?

I can just picture some Mennonite guy working up a sweat cranking a hand generator to recharge his laptop. LOL

[George]

Originally Posted by CC1

How do they recharge the batteries with no electricity?

I can just picture some Mennonite guy working up a sweat cranking a hand generator to recharge his laptop. LOL

Maybe solar panels. LOL That might explain why they are outside on the buggy trying to catch light.

[IAintMovin]

Originally Posted by CC1

How do they recharge the batteries with no electricity?

I can just picture some Mennonite guy working up a sweat cranking a hand generator to recharge his laptop. LOL

LOL.........well what did you think little Benjamin was doing back there by the plug in the barn while father argued with you over the price of the cow??........

Where we lived in Oklahoma some of those guys had tractors that would do 60 mph......with a little trailer behind em where the wifey and chillin rode.......