The Primary Concern

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> Mike Reed wrote:

 
>  Of  the seven "arguments" you presented not one time do you reveal
> the
> context (by that I mean the statements of yours Bro. Clifton is
> responding to)
> of those "arguments." In essence, you have not only sidestepped Bro.
> Clifton's
> statements, but initiated a new attack on Bro. Clifton, Sister Yohnk,
> and
> myself.

Brother Reed, in these arguments I am merely illustrating that Brother
Clifton, you, and Sis Lynne are not interacting with the content of my
posts but misrepresenting the content to support the agenda of your
theological system.  The context of this post was the logical
inconsistency of you three in responding to my posts.


>  By the way, please do not give credit to Bro. Clifton for "argument"
> #6 for
> he is quoting me asking you a question of you. 

Brother Clifton was supportive of your statement Brother Reed.  

> 
>  Bro. Starcher writes:

>  Brother Clifton knows that Apostolics considered themselves
> Christians in another way before they became Apostolics and that many
> Apostolics today have no difficulty in acknowledging the Christian
> faith
> of those outside the Apostolic movement


> Brother Reed

>  Either you are excluding me, and almost everyone I know as Apostolic,
> or you
> are telling an untruth by saying, "Apostolics considered themselves
> Christians
> in another way before they became Apostolics."  Why do you do this?
> Who are
> you trying to convince?

Brother Reed, please read this statement.  It makes a historical
reference to the first Apostolics,  You are not included here!  It says
many, NOT ALL, Apostolics receive others as Christians.  You are not
included here! Please, please, please, read what is written and do not
interject meanings into my statements which are not there!

> 
>  Bro. Starcher writes:
>  Throughout this dialogue Brother Clifton's primary concern is not
> with
> The Apostles' Doctrine, it
> is not having individuals baptized in Jesus name, not having
> individuals
> filled with the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues, not having people
> receive the revelation of the fullness of God in Christ.  His primary
> concern is not evangelism, converting individuals to Jesus Christ the
> Apostolic way.  His primary concern is not discipleship, teaching
> individuals how to serve Jesus Christ.  His primary concern is
> defending
> his theological system, which I have identified with Fundamentalism.
> This is also true of my dialogues with Brother Reed and Sis Lynne.

> Brother Reed:

>  I cannot speak for Bro. Clifton or Sister Yohnk in this matter
> (although I do
> have my opinions) but as for me, unless you soften your words in the
> above
> paragraph to something along the lines of "it seems to me" or "in my
> opinion"
> or "it is my feeling," I am going to have to call you a liar. My
> primary
> concern *is* the Apostle's Doctrine, *is* having people baptized in
> the name
> of Jesus, it *is* seeing people filled with the Holy Ghost, it *is*
> having
> people receive the revelation of the Mighty God in Christ. My
> doctrine, (that
> you call a theological system) encompasses these precepts.

Brother Reed, I have to be honest.  I am getting really frustrated with
your misrepresentations of my posts.  This is what I wrote about you,
Sis Lynne, and Brother Clifton:


What were my intentions in penning these words?  I do believe that
Brother Reed, Brother Clifton, and Sis Lynne are concerned about having
individuals baptized in baptized in Jesus name, about having individuals
filled with the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues, about having people
receive the revelation of the fullness of God in Christ, about
evangelism, converting individuals to Jesus Christ the Apostolic way,
about discipleship, teaching individuals how to serve Jesus Christ. But
I think there is a concern which takes precedence over all of these
above concerns.  This concern is primary.  It is not enough to be
Apostolic in all of the above ways.  One must also have the correct
theological system.  Then, and only then, is one truly Apostolic. 

I affirm that you are concerned about the distinctives which make us
Apostolics.  However, and this is the point you should be addressing, I
believe these concerns are secondary to the integrity of your
theological system.  Let's quote the last sentence from the above
paragraph again: 

>My doctrine, (that you call a theological system) encompasses these >precepts.

I agree with this statement.  I do not deny that you are Apostolic.  But
your theological system does much more than encompass Apostolic
distinctives, it controls them.  This series of dialogues is a very good
illustration of this control.  You, Brother Clifton, and Sis Lynne have
chosen to vilify me as a heretic and apostate because  I do not agree
with your theological system, even though you know that I embrace The
Apostles' Doctrine and ardently present and defend the Apostolic faith.
It is only reasonable to conclude that your primary concern is a
theological system and not the Apostolic faith.


> Brother Reed:

>  It is my perception that you are arrogant. For months you have told
> the list
> what I believe (you think), and now you are "declaring" to the list
> what all
> Apostolics believe (you think). Why can't you just tell us what you
> believe
> Bro. Starcher? I don't mind you stating your opinion. I don't mind you
> stating
> your opinion of my opinion. But please, stop stating *my* opinion, let
> me do
> that!  Because so far you are wrong.

Once again Brother Reed, why don't you read my posts before responding?

This is what I have written:

Brother Reed, the Apostolic Declaration for the Third Millennium will
appear on The Apostolic Pentecostal Journal Web site.  This Web site
states openly  that it is presenting the Apostolic faith
from a moderate perspective.  I do not and cannot speak for
conservatives or liberals.

Brother Reed, in order for us to have a responsible dialogue you have to
read my posts and interact with their content, not your preconceptions.

As I end this response to your post I am very hurt.  You have chosen to
call me a liar and to portray me as arrogant.  Brother Reed, I am merely
trying to present the Apostolic faith from a moderate perspective.  I
know that you do not desire the moderate Apostolic identity to be
presented, much less become established.  But this is the task I feel
that God has called me to.  I am very disappointed that rather than
interacting constructively with my posts you have chosen to question my
motives and character.  Let me make my motives perfectly clear.  I only
desire to serve Jesus Christ in the ministry to which he has called me.
It would be much easier to isolate myself from the Apostolic movement
and retreat into academia.  This I cannot do for the faith I possess is
the faith of 1000's of Apostolics throughout the world and needs to be
expressed.  In this task I have to be intellectually honest.  This means
that I will offer criticism of all Apostolics, not just conservatives.

Brother Reed, I have enjoyed our little dialogues and value you as a
Brother in Christ.  But it seems that our interaction is headed down the
wrong path.  I need to devote myself to a positive presentation of the
Apostolic faith.  I need to move on!  Please reread the posts which I
have made on higher-fire.  I will be making a whole lot of new posts on
www.apostolicpentecostal.com beginning June 1, 1999.  I hope that God
through the Holy Spirit will illuminate the truth of these posts to you.

My God richly bless your life and ministry Brother Reed!

Steve