COGOP Members ONLY on this one!

[RaceRunner]

BillyNC:
Brother Varlack at the last GA spoke about change being like turning a 747 around.. it takes time.. its not a two seater plane that can be turned around on a dime.. If you misied that sermon.. I can arrange a download..
------------------------------



Can you arrange a download this week?

[Gerald Creasy]

Gerald, first whatever happened in the past really had no bearing on my post which was concerning what is presently taking place in the church. Evils done in the past to one side does not constitute wrongdoing by the other today. Really that's not even a sensible argument.

Sensible to whom?

How is it "Wrongdoing" to change the COGOP to the viewpoint you say yourself you hold?

It is obvious from the COGOPs divisive history and packs of Pharisees that NO MATTER HOW IT IS DONE it will be the WRONG WAY.

I really am beginning to seriously doubt all these Yahoos who come on here are not part of the COGOP, will not be part of the COGOP and blast the COGOP for THEIR PERCEPTIOn of how change is made.

JNSBRAY does not want the COGOP to have the same freedom that she herself enjoys because of all the old folks that have dedicated their lives to preachin it one way.

badnova dosent want the COGOP to change to his enlightened mindset because the motives may not be pure.

This is all Hogwallowing manure and I seriously doubt both of your stories.

Sensibility has played no part in either of them.

[Pastor Bill]

jnsbray,

OK, I want to try to understand you. Can you answer a couple of questions for me?

1. Do you feel that you are living in sin and unsaved due to your "double-marriage"?

2. If you feel that you are forgiven of your sins, and consider yourself saved, do you feel that others in your situation can be saved as well?

3. If you feel that God can forgive those in D&R?

4. Do you feel the CoGoP should teach truth, or tradition? Which is more important?

[Shellie]

jnsbray wrote:

I gave a few of my scriptures, now please tell me where a person can have more than one spouse... and not refering to "The Good Samaritan".

This is the second time you have made reference to the Good Samaritan and the woman at the well being the same thing.


Here was the first time:

I have yet to find scripture saying yes it is okay for me to have more than one husband/wife, and hold a membership in the church, and I need more than just the Good Samaritan (woman at the well scripture).

If you don't know the difference between the woman at the well and the Good Samaritan, how in the world can you understand the D/R scriptures? I don't mean to be a smart alec, but for someone to have grown up in the church and confuse the two boggles my mind. Both of these, the Good Samaritan and the woman at the well, are basic Sunday School lessons.

Yet, here you say:

Yes I was a member once, I was also a Sunday School Teacher, I was BTI leader in which that was dissolved. I was CPMA leader which was dissolved also. I was even assistant VLB director "DISSOLVED" as well'.

If you taught Sunday School and was a BTI leader, thinking that the Good Samaritan and the woman at the well are the same thing, no wonder we have a whole church generation in a mess.

[badNova]

How is it "Wrongdoing" to change the COGOP to the viewpoint you say yourself you hold?

Change in and of itself is not wrong as long as it is God-inspired and carried out in a humble, respectful, and Godly manner. It becomes wrong when it is propogated in a manner that does not reflect the nature of Christ.

It is obvious from the COGOPs divisive history and packs of Pharisees that NO MATTER HOW IT IS DONE it will be the WRONG WAY.

I do agree that there are those who, regardless of the spirit behind change, will take the opportunity to promote their own selfish agenda. However, there are those who are genuine and sincere in their stance who do not deserve to be treated with such disdain. In this situation I think that if those leaders who are propogating the change had from the beginning done so with a higher level of tact and a lower level of force that the situation for some of those involved would be more positive.

I think that there are many people involved in this situation who are good people and are very sincere in their stand who now feel alienated and abandoned by the church, not because they disagree with change but rather because the way that it has materialized.

badnova dosent want the COGOP to change to his enlightened mindset because the motives may not be pure.

Do motives not matter?

"All of a man's ways seem innocent to him, but motives are weighed by the Lord". Prov. 16:2 (NIV)

Obviously they matter to the Lord. If the motives are not pure they will reap negative results, just as pure motives will reap good ones. I think that it is a very sensible and important consideration.

This is all Hogwallowing manure and I seriously doubt both of your stories.

As for my "story" I do not know what you are alluding to so I have no response. As for the rest of your post I must admit that I am a little disappointed in myself for engaging in a dialogue with someone who for whatever reason feels the need to resort to name calling "Yahoos" and calls others opinions "Hogwallowing manure". This is the kind of childish drivel that I criticized in my original post.

I don't mind discussing this issue with you, however thus far your contribution to the discussion has been made up of pointless banter, childish insults and a weak attempt at tying past problems of the church to this present day controversy. I refuse to be drawn into a pubescent name calling contest.

[Pastor Gary]

Change in and of itself is not wrong as long as it is God-inspired and carried out in a humble, respectful, and Godly manner. It becomes wrong when it is propogated in a manner that does not reflect the nature of Christ... I do agree that there are those who, regardless of the spirit behind change, will take the opportunity to promote their own selfish agenda. However, there are those who are genuine and sincere in their stance who do not deserve to be treated with such disdain. In this situation I think that if those leaders who are propogating the change had from the beginning done so with a higher level of tact and a lower level of force that the situation for some of those involved would be more positive... I think that there are many people involved in this situation who are good people and are very sincere in their stand who now feel alienated and abandoned by the church, not because they disagree with change but rather because the way that it has materialized.

Consider if you will (said in his best Rod Serling voice) that what you have said is in part correct. The other side of the story is equally true, however. Resistance to change in and of itself is not wrong as long as it is God-inspired and carried out in a humble, respectful, and Godly manner. It hasn't always been, and thus the division.

SOME of those who are resistant to change have shown a pretty ugly spirit, too. I take it kind of personally, because there have been ugly accusations that "those men on the BDP COmmittee are wolves crept in unaware to destroy the Church!" One of those men is my Overseer, and is a member of my church. I know him well. I know his passion for Christ and his desire to see COGOP correct in doctrine. I have seen him spend weeks of 12-14 hour days in prayer and study agonizing over these issues, answering ugly e-mail and fielding angry phone calls.

The bad spirit is not on the side of change from where I sit.

As for leaders and tact; these issues were surpressed and tabled year after year, decade after decade out of respect for those resistant to change. They were handled with kid gloves and babied endlessly, to the point that those seeking change largely threw up their hands in despair and walked away from COGOP. Many of them now have large, active, blessed ministries impacting thousands for Christ. Those could have been COGOP ministries. At the last Assembly in Louisville, the BDP Report might have passed as written had the leaders truly led: MOST State and National Overseers and MOST International Office leaders want the changes made, yet they didn't stand with the committee and say from the podium, "We, the leaders of this Church feel that this report is right an the changes are the direction God would have us take." They didn't do it out of respect for (and some fear of) those who don't want anything to change.

So now, in exchange for all that graciousness that has been extended for decades, the most conservative among are still leaving, unable to accept the changes. SO --- we lost the 'liberals' during the decades we coddled to 'conservatives', and now that the tide has turned a little and the momentum is rising for change, we are losing the very conservatives they sought not to offend.

It is a classic lose-lose proposition. In '93 we lost some fine people to TCOG. This week we are no doubt also losing some fine, sincere people to ZACOG. And we'll lose more in '06 when we finally try to deal with our convoluted misunderstanding of D&R. And in the name of Unity of All Believers we continue to subdivide.

[deb]

BillyNC:
Brother Varlack at the last GA spoke about change being like turning a 747 around.. it takes time.. its not a two seater plane that can be turned around on a dime.. If you misied that sermon.. I can arrange a download..
------------------------------



Can you arrange a download this week?

You mean you can get these for free? I just ordered Brother Varlack's and Larry Duncan's sermons from the 2002 Assembly on line @ http://www22.ivenue.com/catapes/productCat50185.ctlg

I had always regretted not getting them and thought I had lost the site but I found it the other day so I ordered them. Can't wait to watch them again!

I checked under the 2004 tapes but Wade hasn't made it there yet. Maybe no news is good news?

Deb

[Gerald Creasy]

badnova dosent want the COGOP to change to his enlightened mindset because the motives may not be pure.

Do motives not matter?

"All of a man's ways seem innocent to him, but motives are weighed by the Lord". Prov. 16:2 (NIV)

Obviously they matter to the Lord. If the motives are not pure they will reap negative results, just as pure motives will reap good ones. I think that it is a very sensible and important consideration.

How can one move closer to a more Biblical view on a subject and have negative results??

If something is taught wrong it needs to be done away with, whether or not there is 100% union.

This is all Hogwallowing manure and I seriously doubt both of your stories.

As for my "story" I do not know what you are alluding to so I have no response. As for the rest of your post I must admit that I am a little disappointed in myself for engaging in a dialogue with someone who for whatever reason feels the need to resort to name calling "Yahoos" and calls others opinions "Hogwallowing manure". This is the kind of childish drivel that I criticized in my original post.

I'm beginning to see more of your character. A church can't make a decision you yourself have, because you know their secret motives.

Now even Jesus "O generation of vipers" and Paul "do count them [but] dung" are beneath your high standards.

Wake up to the real world.

[PastorMichael]

Shellie,
You should have warrings on some of your post. Especially the last one you made. It should read [b]WARNING: DO NOT READ THIS POST PAST 9:OO P.M. SIDE EFFECTS: HAS BEEN KNOWN TO CAUSE, IN SOME PEOPLE, SIDE SPLITTING, HYSTERICAL LAUGHTER THAT INHIBITS SLEEP. ([reference to good samaritan and woman at the well)

Pastor Michael

[badNova]

How can one move closer to a more Biblical view on a subject and have negative results??

Do you realize that through this reasoning that one could justify such horrific movements such as the Spanish Inquisitions or even the Crusades? Not a good argument, boss.

If something is taught wrong it needs to be done away with, whether or not there is 100% union.

I agree that if something is taught wrong that it should be addressed, however I still stand by my argument of doing it in the appropriate spirit.

I'm beginning to see more of your character. A church can't make a decision you yourself have, because you know their secret motives.

You don't know the first thing about my character and I never claimed to know any "secret motives" I only question them.

Now even Jesus "O generation of vipers" and Paul "do count them [but] dung" are beneath your high standards.

Well, honestly this is about as poor as it gets. You try and paint me as being in some way pompous when in fact this little statement shows exactly how you see yourself. Obviously you think that somehow you have the elevated right to hurl your fifth grade insults with your llittle bitty sling shot at any and everyone. So in essence your saying that you are on the level of Christ and the Apostle Paul and I am somehow classified in the same category as the Pharisees? Thus giving you the right to exhibit your elequent vocabulary of school yard put-downs. Oh I see. Your awfully haughty for a gatekeeper on an internet forum board.

Wake up to the real world.

[/quote]

You should take your own advice.

[Shellie]

Pastor Michael wrote:

Shellie,
You should have warrings on some of your post. Especially the last one you made. It should read [b]WARNING: DO NOT READ THIS POST PAST 9:OO P.M. SIDE EFFECTS: HAS BEEN KNOWN TO CAUSE, IN SOME PEOPLE, SIDE SPLITTING, HYSTERICAL LAUGHTER THAT INHIBITS SLEEP. ([reference to good samaritan and woman at the well)

Ya know, my teachers didn't find me so funny.

You know those little lines for comments on the report cards? Not an empty spot on mine.

[badNova]

Consider if you will (said in his best Rod Serling voice) that what you have said is in part correct. The other side of the story is equally true, however. Resistance to change in and of itself is not wrong as long as it is God-inspired and carried out in a humble, respectful, and Godly manner. It hasn't always been, and thus the division

.

I agree. No argument here.

SOME of those who are resistant to change have shown a pretty ugly spirit, too. I take it kind of personally, because there have been ugly accusations that "those men on the BDP COmmittee are wolves crept in unaware to destroy the Church!" One of those men is my Overseer, and is a member of my church. I know him well. I know his passion for Christ and his desire to see COGOP correct in doctrine. I have seen him spend weeks of 12-14 hour days in prayer and study agonizing over these issues, answering ugly e-mail and fielding angry phone calls.

I also agree with this. I know there are many people who are for change who are great men and women of God.

The bad spirit is not on the side of change from where I sit.

As for leaders and tact; these issues were surpressed and tabled year after year, decade after decade out of respect for those resistant to change. They were handled with kid gloves and babied endlessly, to the point that those seeking change largely threw up their hands in despair and walked away from COGOP. Many of them now have large, active, blessed ministries impacting thousands for Christ. Those could have been COGOP ministries. At the last Assembly in Louisville, the BDP Report might have passed as written had the leaders truly led: MOST State and National Overseers and MOST International Office leaders want the changes made, yet they didn't stand with the committee and say from the podium, "We, the leaders of this Church feel that this report is right an the changes are the direction God would have us take." They didn't do it out of respect for (and some fear of) those who don't want anything to change.

So now, in exchange for all that graciousness that has been extended for decades, the most conservative among are still leaving, unable to accept the changes. SO --- we lost the 'liberals' during the decades we coddled to 'conservatives', and now that the tide has turned a little and the momentum is rising for change, we are losing the very conservatives they sought not to offend.

I understand where you're coming from however having close friends on both sides of the issue who are heavily involved I am fully convinced that there are those on both sides who are acting in a manner that is not reflective of Christ. The biggest problem I have is the attitude in which many of the proponents for change have taken towards the group opposed. I find it deeply sad that this has happened and I take offense at those who stand behind their arrogant attitudes and demean and belittle those who are on the other side. I find it very telling that many are now responding to this situation by proclaiming "Good riddance". Let me tell you it's not pleasant sitting down to lunch with a young man who was in my youth group, with tears rolling off his face, whose family is caught in the middle of this thing (a pastor) and trying to come up with words to say that will answer questions like, " Do they not care?" "How can they turn their backs on us after my family has served the COGOP for thirty years, without even sitting down and trying to discuss this? (Not necessarily the whole issue of D and R but their specific situation) " So from where I sit it is alot more complex than just a bunch of traditional malcontents who are full of themselves, showing out. The character and spiritual depth of the young man I mentioned is beyond most anyone I know, including myself, and I find it highly agitating to hear the callous and judgmental remarks that have been directed at this group. I can only imagine how a very genuine, sincere, full of potential young man might feel if he were to be connected to the group fielding these remarks.

It is a classic lose-lose proposition. In '93 we lost some fine people to TCOG. This week we are no doubt also losing some fine, sincere people to ZACOG. And we'll lose more in '06 when we finally try to deal with our convoluted misunderstanding of D&R. And in the name of Unity of All Believers we continue to subdivide.

[/quote]

I absolutely agree with this statement. I find the whole mess disheartening at best. I don't claim to have all the answers but I still believe that if things were handled differently that the magnitude of our problems in the COGOP would not be so great. I really believe that soon we will start seeing churches go independent not because they agree or disagree with any particular teaching but rather because they are fed up with all the childish bickering and squabbling.

If you look at it though there are many, many denominations having similiar problems, maybe it's God's way of eliminating denominationalism. I don't know just a thought. I do appreciate your thoughtful and well-written post, which is kind of rare here.

[Gerald Creasy]

How can one move closer to a more Biblical view on a subject and have negative results??

Do you realize that through this reasoning that one could justify such horrific movements such as the Spanish Inquisitions or even the Crusades? Not a good argument, boss.

Really?

You view The Spanish inquisition as Moving Closer to a Biblical view on a subject?


You've established yourself well.


Explain to me How The Spanish Inquisition was Moving Closer to A Biblical View.

[Super Muslim]

The spanish inquisition is my favorite resturant. It sure does give me gas though.....

[Gerald Creasy]

The spanish inquisition is my favorite resturant. It sure does give me gas though.....

It was my favorite Monty Python skit.