IS AFF Apostolic?

[aegsm76]

"Interesting that you've only posted 45 times since February 2007, and yet you make such a doom and gloom pronouncement.

What are you doing to make things better?"

MP - I do not think it is my responsibility to make things better, here. I also think that my posting will not change anyone's attitude or heart, that is on here.
I was merely reflecting on what path this forum has taken. As for myself, I have fellowshipped with such diverse points of view as Randy Hollis and Larry Booker, and count them both as my brothers in Christ.
I have attended churches that are now in the WPF and churches who have been spoken of as being ultra-liberal.
It does make my heart heavy when I see anyone who I hold in high esteem, ill-spoken of.
And, that is what I see happening here, more and more.
However, this is just an internet forum, and I treat it as such.
What tends to come out in these forums are people's true thoughts and feelings. That is what is interesting to me and has led to my current comments.
Now, I shall retire to my foxhole and go back to my role as a resident lurker.

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

"Interesting that you've only posted 45 times since February 2007, and yet you make such a doom and gloom pronouncement.

What are you doing to make things better?"

MP - I do not think it is my responsibility to make things better, here. I also think that my posting will not change anyone's attitude or heart, that is on here.
I was merely reflecting on what path this forum has taken. As for myself, I have fellowshipped with such diverse points of view as Randy Hollis and Larry Booker, and count them both as my brothers in Christ.
I have attended churches that are now in the WPF and churches who have been spoken of as being ultra-liberal.
It does make my heart heavy when I see anyone who I hold in high esteem, ill-spoken of.
And, that is what I see happening here, more and more.
However, this is just an internet forum, and I treat it as such.
What tends to come out in these forums are people's true thoughts and feelings. That is what is interesting to me and has led to my current comments.
Now, I shall retire to my foxhole and go back to my role as a resident lurker.

You are quite wrong my friend! It IS your responsibility to make it better. It is NOT the job of Admin to the police the thoughts of its members. We provide a place for the free flow of ideas and discussion. We do our best to make sure that untrue things are not spoken nor slanderous speech. However, this is a place of freedom and many folks do not like freedom of speech or ideas.

But to the majority, freedom is precisely why they are here. They are free to express their thoughts and ask questions without fear of repercussion. Freedom has its dangers to those who choose not to adhere to righteousness. When rules are broken, Admin intervenes. This is not a church nor is it an organization which needs policing.

If you can't handle freedom or can't handle those who love freedom, then you can always find a place where you will be controlled. AFF is NOT and never will be that place.

It just seems to me that some want the Owners/Admin to TAKE control and DO something. We ARE doing something....we are giving you the freedom to post, share, disagree etc. We suggest you use your freedom and allow others to use it as well.

VIVA freedom! It was for freedom that Christ died!

[aegsm76]

GAL 5:13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
PE1 2:16 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but
as the servants of God.
PE1 2:17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

The above verses detail my feelings about issues with the definition of "freedom", as related to the church. Some feel that freedom gives them the right to say anything and question anyone.
I believe that respectful dialogue is a far better way then accusations and belittling.
That is the basic way that this forum has changed from what it was previously.
When you have posters that are speaking ill and belittling others, consistently, it is a constant dripping that does me no good.
I did a quick review of a certain poster and of their last 25 posts, dating from 8/17, there are 23 of this type. I think this speaks more of an issue that this individual has, rather than who they are bashing.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

"Interesting that you've only posted 45 times since February 2007, and yet you make such a doom and gloom pronouncement.

What are you doing to make things better?"

MP - I do not think it is my responsibility to make things better, here. I also think that my posting will not change anyone's attitude or heart, that is on here.
I was merely reflecting on what path this forum has taken. As for myself, I have fellowshipped with such diverse points of view as Randy Hollis and Larry Booker, and count them both as my brothers in Christ.
I have attended churches that are now in the WPF and churches who have been spoken of as being ultra-liberal.
It does make my heart heavy when I see anyone who I hold in high esteem, ill-spoken of.
And, that is what I see happening here, more and more.
However, this is just an internet forum, and I treat it as such.
What tends to come out in these forums are people's true thoughts and feelings. That is what is interesting to me and has led to my current comments.
Now, I shall retire to my foxhole and go back to my role as a resident lurker.

Again, I must ask - who do you see being evil spoken of? I see no one speaking evil of other Apostolics, just expressing differences of opinions.

I see just as much being said against liberals and non-apostolics as I do ultra cons.

However, I do understand that perception is greater than reality, so I won't try and change your mind.

My question was merely directed to the fact that you seem to spend much more time reading and anguishing over the words of others than speaking your own and turning the tide.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

This forum grows further away from Apostolic, daily. As one who has been around since the Jim Yohe days, it grows increasingly irrelevant. This used to be a place of give and take discussion, but respect was given, no matter which label you had applied to you.
Now we find posters who will bash men who preach Acts 2:38 and have given their all for the saving of souls, because they deem them legalistic.
Yet, these same posters will not want to question other religious leaders, who do not preach Acts 2:38, because God might just be using them.

Sort of sad, isn't it.

It is sad to bash anyone, but just because someone preaches Acts 2:38 doesn't mean they have everything right... ie: magic hair doctrine.


It's also sad when a UPC preacher bashes another UPC preacher in a mass email.

[tv1a]

When the Bible says legalism is witchcraft who are we to play twinkle toes with that spirit? Legalists aren't the only ones who can play that game.

Originally Posted by aegsm76

GAL 5:13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
PE1 2:16 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but
as the servants of God.
PE1 2:17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

The above verses detail my feelings about issues with the definition of "freedom", as related to the church. Some feel that freedom gives them the right to say anything and question anyone.
I believe that respectful dialogue is a far better way then accusations and belittling.
That is the basic way that this forum has changed from what it was previously.
When you have posters that are speaking ill and belittling others, consistently, it is a constant dripping that does me no good.
I did a quick review of a certain poster and of their last 25 posts, dating from 8/17, there are 23 of this type. I think this speaks more of an issue that this individual has, rather than who they are bashing.

[tv1a]

I read a quote from a comedian (can't remember her name). She said she was raised pentecostal. She said she wasn't allowed to watch television or allowed to cut her hair. She said her family was one lightbulb away from being amish.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

It is sad to bash anyone, but just because someone preaches Acts 2:38 doesn't mean they have everything right... ie: magic hair doctrine.


It's also sad when a UPC preacher bashes another UPC preacher in a mass email.

[aegsm76]

TV, what is your definition of a legalist?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by tv1a

I read a quote from a comedian (can't remember her name). She said she was raised pentecostal. She said she wasn't allowed to watch television or allowed to cut her hair. She said her family was one lightbulb away from being amish.

And?

There are secular people who don't allow their children to watch TV or heavily control what their children watch for the same reasons that a Christian does. Who do you condemn the Christian or the secular person? My impression is that you might condemn the Christian and say they are being legalistic and that you might give the secular person a pass without a rebuke whatsoever and maybe even agree with them how TV is a time waster, TV condones bad morals, TV has too much violence, nudity, and bad language, etc etc.

If this girl wasn't taught why she was not to cut her hair and did not cut her hair to please her parents then it is inevitable that one day she will have to be convinced in her own mind whether or not this teaching is scriptural. I'm assuming her parents were doing what they thought was right in the sight of God. How would you approach folks like this to try and show them your understanding of the word of God?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

And?

There are secular people who don't allow their children to watch TV or heavily control what their children watch for the same reasons that a Christian does. Who do you condemn the Christian or the secular person? My impression is that you might condemn the Christian and say they are being legalistic and that you might give the secular person a pass without a rebuke whatsoever and maybe even agree with them how TV is a time waster, TV condones bad morals, TV has too much violence, nudity, and bad language, etc etc.

If this girl wasn't taught why she was not to cut her hair and did not cut her hair to please her parents then it is inevitable that one day she will have to be convinced in her own mind whether or not this teaching is scriptural. I'm assuming her parents were doing what they thought was right in the sight of God. How would you approach folks like this to try and show them your understanding of the word of God?

Excellent points. There are likely far more "secular" people who reject TV (not done explicitly for religious reasons) than Oneness Pentecostals. It's actually a pretty good sized movement.