Are there any conservative PCI believers out there?

[Scott Hutchinson]

Hold the phone as there are three steppers who are considered liberal.

[Felicity]

I just get tired of it.

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by Felicity

No, sir. You are not the enemy. The enemy is hypocrisy, division and prejudice which is the fruit that this kind of thinking and questioning produces.

I guess I don't find it hypoctrical or prejudiced at all to ask the question CB asked. In fact, as I stated already, I had never even thought of the question until I read the thread. Having read it, though, it does seem like a valid question.

If I were PCI I think I would be very quick to give examples of why PCI does NOT = low standards. I know among the early contemporaries (as Scott mentioned) there seemed to be very little difference in dress standards. It does appear to have changed somewhat.

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by The Dean

I think it's a given that PAJC does NOT always = good standards.

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

Hold the phone as there are three steppers who are considered liberal.

I beat you to the punch, Scott, so I obviously agree with you. And, in the same manner, if you flip that around I would find it hard to believe that there aren't some PCI brethren out there with a strong outward standard as well.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Liberal three steppers.
http://placeofpraise.org

[StillStanding]

Originally Posted by The Dean

I guess I don't find it hypoctrical or prejudiced at all to ask the question CB asked. In fact, as I stated already, I had never even thought of the question until I read the thread. Having read it, though, it does seem like a valid question.

If I were PCI I think I would be very quick to give examples of why PCI does NOT = low standards. I know among the early contemporaries (as Scott mentioned) there seemed to be very little difference in dress standards. It does appear to have changed somewhat.

Originally Posted by Pianoman

Since those of PCI belief have been kicked out of the UPCI, they are no longer under the old guard standards police. Since they no longer are required to hold certain "standards" to retain fellowship or for political reasons, they are now free to preach and teach their godly conscience!

To answer your questions as to why, I included my previous post. Also keep in mind that most "standards" were handed down from the previous generation, so PCI type churches that were not previously associated with the UPCI will naturally not dictate these "standards".

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by The Dean

I guess I don't find it hypoctrical or prejudiced at all to ask the question CB asked. In fact, as I stated already, I had never even thought of the question until I read the thread. Having read it, though, it does seem like a valid question.

If I were PCI I think I would be very quick to give examples of why PCI does NOT = low standards. I know among the early contemporaries (as Scott mentioned) there seemed to be very little difference in dress standards. It does appear to have changed somewhat.

I can give you names of many people who are PCI who hold stronger standards and are more consistent than many PAJCers.

But what would those names mean to you? Would it be appropriate to do so? To name names of people publicly who might not appreciate it?

What was the purpose of the question Bro. Dean, sir?

I am telling you that there are absolutely many PCIers who believe exactly the same way I do who would be lumped into the PAJC category because of fellowship or organizational affiliation.

So we give the answer to the question - YES! - and all we get is more question i.e. why is nobody answering the question?

What is the purpose of this thread? Oh yes! I know! To prove that conservative minded PCIers exist.

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by The Dean

I beat you to the punch, Scott, so I obviously agree with you. And, in the same manner, if you flip that around I would find it hard to believe that there aren't some PCI brethren out there with a strong outward standard as well.

So you accept that? Even without names? Amazing!

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by Felicity

I can give you names of many people who are PCI who hold stronger standards and are more consistent than many PAJCers.

But what would those names mean to you? Would it be appropriate to do so? To name names of people publicly who might not appreciate it?

What was the purpose of the question Bro. Dean, sir?

I am telling you that there are absolutely many PCIers who believe exactly the same way I do who would be lumped into the PAJC category because of fellowship or organizational affiliation.

So we give the answer to the question - YES! - and all we get is more question i.e. why is nobody answering the question?

What is the purpose of this thread? Oh yes! I know! To prove that conservative minded PCIers exist.

I have known some conservative (standard wise)PCI-ers myself, but I agree what is the point in naming names.

I think CB was trying to stir up a "heated" discussion?(not sure)

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by Felicity

So you accept that? Even without names? Amazing!

Technically, yes. I never said that I didn't. That was evidently your assumption working overtime. I just don't know of any personally who are of the PCI persuasion that preach a strong outward standard. It would seem common to me that I wouldn't know them as I'm not of that persuasion myself and, because of that, not around much fellowship with them.

Your questions;

1. The purpose of the question? I suspect to get an answer about the subject.
2. The purpose of the thread? You'll have to ask the author and I'm not the author.
3. Would it be appropriate to name names of those who are PCI with good standards? If I was PCI I would hope someone could say, "They preach a good standard" so, in my opinion, I would suspect yes. Why wouldn't it be?