Well, COGOP leaders: where do we stand?

A free-wheeling forum for discussion of Christian issues.

Moderators: Pastor Gary, The J2 Mod Squad

User avatar
jason
Needs a LIFE
Posts: 121
Joined: May 25th, 2003, 6:36 pm
Location: USA,Alabama

Postby jason » September 15th, 2012, 5:21 pm

without an idealistic theocracy, "Biblical-morals" shouldn't be legislated - we are prone to failure.


I'm a little confused. Are you saying that "Biblical-morals" should or should not be legislated?

Also, I don't have a dog in this fight but the term "idealistic theocracy" makes me very uncomfortable. Many of the people who settled and then founded our country came here fleeing religious intolerance and persecution. The idea of one group of people imposing the "truth" on everyone in the country is completely contrary to the principles on which our nation was founded.

The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees your right to worship as you see fit. However, it also provides that same right to those with whom you may disagree: atheists, Mormons, buddhists, Episcopalians, et al. You may not like them and they may not like you but the Constitution applies to all equally and without respect. This is one of the many things that makes this country unique, beautiful and powerful.
We are now... no longer the Knights Who Say 'Ni'. We are now the Knights Who Say 'Ecky- ecky- ecky- ecky- pikang- zoop- boing- goodem- zoo- owli- zhiv'.

User avatar
Mat
Ranking in the posts...
Ranking in the posts...
Posts: 313
Joined: March 29th, 2005, 10:09 am
Location: USA,SouthCarolina
Contact:

Re: pro-life means more than anti-abortion...

Postby Mat » September 16th, 2012, 10:10 am

RamboPreacher wrote:I am pro-life, and not just anti-abortion.

further, I can not support a government representative that is not only pro-choice, but is anti-pro-life.

further, I do realize that we live in a very fallen world that it is groaning... and that this topic is sometimes not one of post-premarital sex, contraceptive - and there are always variables. and I do NOT condemn those women who have been through this ordeal and have repented, or those seeking help, etc.

I think a big challenge for me is that without an idealistic theocracy, "Biblical-morals" shouldn't be legislated - we are prone to failure. The challenge is that the issue is ALREADY legislated in a reversal perspective of a Biblical Paradigm. and as long as that is there, and needs dealt with, all other issues are moot - for me - as far as a political agenda is concerned. whether it be foreign aid, oil, money/economics, health insurance, "mandated charity" - or anything else. these other issues are just not that important to me as long as it is legal and tax-dollar sported (and even directed) to obtain abortions, and abortive contraceptives.

I have said it.


I thought the subject was same-sex marriage and the COGOP leadership making a statement, for or against. I remember the debate on abortion at the assembly. Some wanted the church to "advise" against abortion because they thought our pastors would start turning women out who had one with out any attempt to minister to them. The liberals in the church have always held pastors as a group in contempt. So I guess the COGOP teaches that abortion is a sin and I think we teach that illegal immigration is OK, but don't know how we feel about same-sex marriage becoming legal, but we do say same-sex marriage is a sin, but we use to say that about divorce, so I'm not sure. We at one time said being a member of the Masons was a sin, but not sure now, however many of us will vote for a Mormon. Alas, where to make a "stand"?

Mat

User avatar
Mat
Ranking in the posts...
Ranking in the posts...
Posts: 313
Joined: March 29th, 2005, 10:09 am
Location: USA,SouthCarolina
Contact:

Well Pastor Gary ...

Postby Mat » September 19th, 2012, 7:24 am

Well Pastor Gary, I don't think this subject is going to be addressed with any "new" statements and I take this as more of a structural reality of the denomination then any change to the COGOP position on same-sex marriage. I would ask the question, which Pentecostal denomination will be the first to accept same-sex marriage? There has always been an "under current" of the LGBT community in Pentecostal circles, including the COGOP, and it is not beyond reason to anticipate a more rapid acceptance of that community into the "fabric" of pentecostal culture (it's a new vision or a fresh annointing or it just feels right). After all, it has been high profile independent Pentecostal ministers that have led the charge to inclusion. I'm not saying this with any "smiley faces" or for the purpose of throwing verbal "grenades". I believe this to be true and have encountered the presence and influence of the community in the ministry. I feel it is more then just some members on the "down-low", rather there is an on going attempt to influnance churches and denominations.

Mat

User avatar
Pastor Bill
---=== J2 ===---
Posts: 5168
Joined: February 3rd, 2003, 10:04 am
Location: USA,Kentucky
Contact:

Postby Pastor Bill » September 20th, 2012, 3:14 am

I believe there is already a "Gay Friendly" Pentecostal denomination, I don't remember the name of it, and it's a smaller group that most haven't heard of, but it's out there.

Honstely we already have a statement on marriage, it addresses same-sex marriage and divorce as not the will of God, but does allow for forgiveness of divorce (and I see nothing that would exclude forgiveness for past homosexual sin in our teachings either) but it does recognize God's Perfect Will is Marriage as one man, one woman for life.
"Why would God allow Hitler his chapter in history? Why would God send a whale to swallow Jonah or turn a woman into a pillar of salt? Surely there were other ways. But I'll leave the particular methods of God to God."
-Spoken by David Abraham, Showdown by Ted Dekker

User avatar
rev rick
Ranking in the posts...
Ranking in the posts...
Posts: 317
Joined: June 1st, 2005, 3:20 am
Location: Yazoo City ,Mississippi

gay church

Postby rev rick » September 20th, 2012, 3:53 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolit ... ity_Church. This link goes to a group in Ca. also look up the founder He was COGOP at one time.
IN CHRIST MERCY and GRACE
Rev Rick in the Zoo

~~~~~~\} Sword of the Spirit
@##### ]:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
~~~~~~/]Use it Daily!

User avatar
Mat
Ranking in the posts...
Ranking in the posts...
Posts: 313
Joined: March 29th, 2005, 10:09 am
Location: USA,SouthCarolina
Contact:

Re: gay church

Postby Mat » September 20th, 2012, 5:37 am

rev rick wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Community_Church. This link goes to a group in Ca. also look up the founder He was COGOP at one time.


As I remember, he was the pastor Santa Ana COGOP when District Overseer E.J. Bais got "wind" of his sexuality. Bias stopped by the parsonage late one night and knocked on the door. Pastor and boyfriend answered in bathrobes. E. J. Bais was a great church planter in the southern cal area and was willing to stand for the good of the church. We need a need for more E.J. Bais today. It is the "down-lows" who are doing the damage.

Mat

User avatar
dolfan
Established Member
Posts: 8016
Joined: March 17th, 2004, 1:25 pm
Location: USA,Alabama
Contact:

Postby dolfan » September 20th, 2012, 7:18 am

Pastor Bill wrote:I believe there is already a "Gay Friendly" Pentecostal denomination, I don't remember the name of it, and it's a smaller group that most haven't heard of, but it's out there.

Honstely we already have a statement on marriage, it addresses same-sex marriage and divorce as not the will of God, but does allow for forgiveness of divorce (and I see nothing that would exclude forgiveness for past homosexual sin in our teachings either) but it does recognize God's Perfect Will is Marriage as one man, one woman for life.


Mark me as one of those who's unsure about the usefulness and benefit of "statements" on every hot topic. The Bible is the Christian "statement" because it is God's statement. He said God created male and female in His image, that a man leaves his parents and cleaves to his wife (a woman), and that what God has joined, people are not to split with their own rules/laws/excuses, and that adultery is a sin in the heart, mind and body, and that fornication is as well.

How does that not also cover same-sex sexuality? How can that not mean that homosexual relationships are off the mark and are, therefore, sinful? Yesterday at lunch, I read some stuff a Church of God pastor in Cleveland wrote online from a symposium at Harvard or Princeton last year about pentecostalism and homosexuality. Like everybody else these days, it seems, all he wants to do is "have a conversation" and gain "understanding" about one another's "faith tradition". I cut my lunch short from it. Disgusted me, although he was very careful to state that he viewed homosexuality as a sin.

I may be as crazy as a football bat, but I don't see the apostle Paul blogging in his epistles about angst and the subtleties of culture and how that would cause him to tiptoe around the truth and then dance hard on the edges of non-core issues. I don't see him writing to the churches to have conversations. What I do see is be instant in season and out of season -- to be ready with the gospel no matter what the culture or the times may present. What the world needs is Christians who live the gospel with the purity of heart and life that Jesus commands, with the dedication to disciple-making that He states is necessary for His mission on earth to happen. What the church does not need is more "conversations" with the world to understand its own gripes about the church with an eye toward the church getting a grip about the world. We are preparing to handle the Word of Truth, not the world. We don't need a grip on the ways of the world. We need to hold fast to that form of faith and doctrine that the apostles delivered to us. Now, if that sounds hard-core, so be it. I'm not on a soap box. But, we are so easily beset by the world's questions about ourselves simply because we either don't know what it is we're supposed to know biblically, or we aren't doing what it is we're commanded to do biblically. I don't need a conversation with a homosexual activist group or some LGBT so-called "pentecostal church" to tell me what they need. They need to crucify themselves and live unto Christ is what they need, and if they don't do that, then there is a certainty of judgment that awaits them. What I need to do is LOVE THEM, even if they don't like my kind of lovin', with the love of Jesus. Jesus did not go around forming focus groups and creating pools of advocacy for points of view. He did and does lead people to be like Himself, to do what He said and what He did as shown to us in the Bible. And, to obey and seek the Holy Spirit of God by moment-to-moment dying to our own selves and all we want to do, have and be.

If I've lost my mind, somebody tell me. Do we need a statement? Do we really need to craft a call to arms on this? Are we not already equipped? Are we not already called? Sent? Well-put for words? Because, seems to me the Bible pretty well covers it.

Unless, that is, the goal is to make a statement for the purpose of making a statement. Unless there is some goal not central to the church's mission and calling here. I'm blind to the need for a statement. Someone tell me.
Human government bears the same relation to hell as the church bears to heaven. (David Lipscomb, On Civil Government, 72).

User avatar
Pastor Bill
---=== J2 ===---
Posts: 5168
Joined: February 3rd, 2003, 10:04 am
Location: USA,Kentucky
Contact:

Postby Pastor Bill » September 20th, 2012, 11:20 am

Wait Dolfan, please don't take my statement as promoting or accepting.

Like you I don't feel the denomination needs a "Statement" about everything, but if there is confusion about a topic or where we stand, then yes go ahead.

I was only pointing out that since people were asking for a statement from the church, technically we have one, and it states that God's plan for marriage is one man, one woman, for life.

Yes there is allowance for forgiveness of past sins, and while it recognizes divorce as sin, it recognizes the forgiveness and "moving on" from that sin which does allow for remarriage.

This also means there is forgiveness for homosexual sin, and moving on from there, that does NOT mean to continue in sin.
"Why would God allow Hitler his chapter in history? Why would God send a whale to swallow Jonah or turn a woman into a pillar of salt? Surely there were other ways. But I'll leave the particular methods of God to God."

-Spoken by David Abraham, Showdown by Ted Dekker

User avatar
dolfan
Established Member
Posts: 8016
Joined: March 17th, 2004, 1:25 pm
Location: USA,Alabama
Contact:

Postby dolfan » September 20th, 2012, 4:42 pm

Pastor Bill wrote:Wait Dolfan, please don't take my statement as promoting or accepting.

Like you I don't feel the denomination needs a "Statement" about everything, but if there is confusion about a topic or where we stand, then yes go ahead.

I was only pointing out that since people were asking for a statement from the church, technically we have one, and it states that God's plan for marriage is one man, one woman, for life.

Yes there is allowance for forgiveness of past sins, and while it recognizes divorce as sin, it recognizes the forgiveness and "moving on" from that sin which does allow for remarriage.

This also means there is forgiveness for homosexual sin, and moving on from there, that does NOT mean to continue in sin.


Hey, Bill .... My bad. I used your post in agreement, not disagreement, with you. :lol:
Human government bears the same relation to hell as the church bears to heaven. (David Lipscomb, On Civil Government, 72).

User avatar
Mat
Ranking in the posts...
Ranking in the posts...
Posts: 313
Joined: March 29th, 2005, 10:09 am
Location: USA,SouthCarolina
Contact:

Sounds like ...

Postby Mat » September 21st, 2012, 7:34 am

[quote="dolfan
How does that not also cover same-sex sexuality? How can that not mean that homosexual relationships are off the mark and are, therefore, sinful? Yesterday at lunch, I read some stuff a Church of God pastor in Cleveland wrote online from a symposium at Harvard or Princeton last year about pentecostalism and homosexuality. Like everybody else these days, it seems, all he wants to do is "have a conversation" and gain "understanding" about one another's "faith tradition". I cut my lunch short from it. Disgusted me, although he was very careful to state that he viewed homosexuality as a sin. [/quote]

Dolfan,

Sounds like the generation of relevant, culturally in tune, none threading or judgmental Christianity that focus on experience over scripture now dominant in the “enlightened” and “cool” ministry of today. As they reject the "generational bondage" of the past "faith tradition" so they may have a sincere and heartfelt "conversation" of what really matters in church - which is the love that accepts of people as they are without nessesity for transformation, unless of course you want to be transformed, then the gospel can be a good "tool" to use.

Oh, and everybody gets a trophy for just showing up to the class!

Mat

PS "Ye shall know my disciples by their blog."

one love
Woohoo!
Posts: 3082
Joined: October 23rd, 2007, 12:48 pm
Location: USA,Virginia

Postby one love » September 28th, 2012, 12:02 am

Dolfan,

I read that quickly as I dont have much time. I agree with a lot of what you said.

However PG asked where do we stand, I never got any kind of sentiment that it was to be a COGOP membership issue??

I am not COGOP by membership but long heritage:)

I will say take out the "church part" Use scriptural texts that address this and think on the consequences of these positions. I can't vote (if I am someone who will vote) that promotes murder, especially as harsh as partial birth abortion)

I also can't vote for a party or person that is bent on forcing same sex marriage down our throats as a "civil rights issue"
I seem to be the only one that sees the danger in that ideology and it disturbs me. That tramples the constitution...

Bare with me here.. for one to call it a "civil rights issue" is insulting to the black community. Proof rest right here in NC where the black community strongly supports obama yet when they tried to block NC law from being written into the constitution so activist judge couldnt infringe our rights as other states. The black community back lashed HARD against this, they were the largest voting block ( percentage wise). Never heard them refered to as racist or as being promoters of hate. WHY?

1. Nobody in the democratic party will reconize this.
2. They know it is insulting to equate the two as such

If it was passed and under the umbrella of "civil rights" What happens when a organization such as COGOP states "we will not marry any gay couple"? Well simply ask yourself what would happen right now if COGOP made the statement " we will not marry any black people"

We sould be focused on the Fathers Business but if you vote, vote your conscience. I cant help vote more babies to their death nor vote for gay marriage to be shoved down our throats. It does violate my constitutional rights.

I believe in equal rights for Gay people but not by the means of marriage a God instituted covenant.


Return to “Jude 2 General Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Login  •  Register