Your perspective?

[one love]

one love,
If I may. When I first came to this board I ask a question in the Doctrine Forum that no one was able to answer. Now I pose that question to you because you have stated:

With that said belive we will all see eye to eye once again. So by that we do believe in the exclusive Bride of christ and all christians will be united together into that one fold.

The question is, what verse in the Bible states that any church will be the “Bride of Christ?”


Your brother in Christ,
TW

It has been a bad day in starting to prepare an answer for you I reread your question and I think I need you to explain it a little more.
Are you asking me to show that there will a bride of christ at all?
I thought you wanted me to show why I feel thre is an exclusive bride that all christians will come to. PLease explain, Thank you

[one love]

As an outsider, this whole idea of continuing the exclusive church as a SPLIT-OFF makes no sense to me. Isn't this Theocracy idea supposed to be God leading thru unanimity? Or at least a majority? If not, any handful of people can pull out at any time when they disagree with something and say "we are continuing on with the church, it's not a new group". In fact that's just what has happened to the very church that did that in the 90s! Now Nabors pulls his few and says "WE are continuing as the church!!" Whose to say which is right and which is wrong and based on WHAT? IF the EXCLUSIVE church doctrine is true, and its the group founded in 1886 that is the true church or 1907 or whatever, then it will always be THAT group that will continue to be the True Church whatever decision they make or whatever they vote in as a group becuase the gates of hell can not prevail against the church. If it subdivides 2, 3, 4 or 7 times, the little tiny group that leaves the main group that GOD Himself chose CANNOT be that same group! It is not the original group! The splinters are not and cannot be the original group. The COG made changes before there were ever splits and that did not make them no longer the original group. No changes can ever make it NOT be the original group. It still is what it is.

It is the same with the Roman Catholic Church! They believe they are the One True Church established by Jesus. There have been Archbishops like Lefevre that didn't like changes like the mass being no longer in latin. He and a handful of ultra conservative men pulled out and declared that they are now the real Catholic church and the rest is all apostate because it changed. That is just dumb! The original Roman Catholic Church will always be the Roman Catholic Church no matter how many start something new that is conservative like in years past, that still doesn't make them the Roman Catholic Church.

So, if the exclusive church thing were true, and the true group was one called "COG" and rediscovered 100 years ago in the mountains of TN, the real true group would have to be the COG elders because no one leader or group of pastors is the original group just because they say so and pull out. It has to be the whole group that is the real group and not some dissenters from the original church's assembly decisions, nominations, or actions.

The problem is, that people who hold to the Exclusive Church doctrine (TCOG and other "splinter groups") believe it is completely possible JUST AS you have described it to be immpossible. If my understanding is correct they believe that there will be a "remnant" who believe and are called out. So to say that its just a handfull of dissenters (or faithful, take your pick) to pull out and carry on the "true church" is falling in line with exactly how they believe God is working things out.

I personally think its kind of a slap in the face to every other believer in the world who gives there hearts and lives to the Living God throught he sacrifices of our Lord Jesus. Its not an insinuation, its an outright statement of fact that they believe they have "held to the truth and remained faithful". BY DEFAULT they are implying that anyone who is not yet in there groups have not yet come to the knowledge of the truth. And even worse, those who WERE part of what they call the "true church" has LEFT THEOCRACY and are now walking according to the flesh in derect OPPOSITION to the leading of the Holy Spirit! If that isnt a slap in the face then I dont know what is.

well then you dont know what a slap is period. How cant you understand that they did not want to go against biblical standards and were bothered. They did not just start a new church on there own It was done by God through his thoecratic principles. They had many meetings and sought God as to what to do. If the Lord would had them to stay they would have but by all leading of the holy ghost from 1987 until he called for a solemn assmebly it was done by prayer and fasting directed by the holy ghost. So we contiune to teach the bible as it is. That s not a slap for me to follow God with a clean conscience.
SO on the other hand you must be slapping me much harder by saying this and saying that im worng. HMMMMMM you did not think of that did you.
2 people one says he believes this, tho other says well that is a slap because I believe this way your wrong, well you just slapped him by your own analogy. There should be no anger toward us, do you know how mant other large organizations feel they are the true church.
Theocracy means unanimous when that is left there is a problem.
I hope you understand agree to disagree and get a grip on the anger issues. I love you Brother but I will not change what is bible for anyone, as I hope you would not. May God Bless you I appreciate the comment

[Pastor Gary]

2 people one says he believes this, tho other says well that is a slap because I believe this way your wrong...

Well, in all fairness, you'd have to say 200,000,000 people believe this, and a handful believe this other thing... and the handful says "all you others are wrong."

There should be no anger toward us, do you know how mant other large organizations feel they are the true church.

I, for one, am not angry at those who left! Their departure ushered in the changes that I had dreamed of for decades. I get angry at the deception and spiritual manipulation I see in some of the leaders of those groups, but the people? Nah... I have friends in one of the TCOG's or the other -- God only knows which one, because I can't keep up. (We split with the COGOP because we are THE Church; we split with Nabors group because, this time, we are the no-foolin', got it right for sure now, real Church... and on it goes with sub-divisions of sub-groups until it splits down to the molecular level and one person stands alone with a multi-modified banner in his hands screaming "NOW the TRUE Church is purified!!! I am the only remnant of the remnant that stood true to the Bible, so all of you multiplied millions of believers world-wide can come line up so I can give you the covenant, enroll you in BTI and start the INFLOW!!!!")

Theocracy means unanimous...

Uhhhhh, friend. I love you, buddy, but now you are just embarrassing yourself. I realize that when the dictionary defines words in inconvenient ways church groups just redefine the word, but THEOCRACY means "government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided." Not a syllable about unanimous in there... in fact, there's no suggestion that ANYBODY gets a vote except GOD in a pure Theocracy.

[one love]

Uhhhhh, friend. I love you, buddy, but now you are just embarrassing yourself. I realize that when the dictionary defines words in inconvenient ways church groups just redefine the word, but THEOCRACY means "government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided." Not a syllable about unanimous in there... in fact, there's no suggestion that ANYBODY gets a vote except GOD in a pure Theocracy.

I deleted this because im just going to do as I said and refrain form these topics and moe to others instead of creating strife

[pastorables]

Thank you for understanding. The one fold is the base of the answer. We believe that christ established his church, not different organizations.

Are there "old ways" COGOP churches still out there? Churches that still believe in the Flag, One Fold, "Rise Shine" and all those things?

Does it really matter? This is not meant facetiously, but with all sincerity.

Those things couldn't keep these all together.

www.thechurchofgod.org
www.thechurchofgodofnc.org
www.thechurchofgod.kk5.org
www.1fold.org
www.zionassemblychurchofgod.com
thechurchofgodcalledout (web site?)

The key to church unity is the true love of Christ and without it nothing else matters.

pa

see I told you, you all know so much about us

One love, with all due respect, I would like a reasonable answer to why only one of the above can be the "one true bride"? If I were a seeker looking for the "one church", how would I know which of the above is the correct one? They all seem to teach the same doctrine.

Blessings,
pa

[one love]

Im not going to engage in this right now. As I said again Im asked a question when I earnestly reply it will be said im being "preachy" then "kool aid" then "the great speckled bird" I mean it is really crazy. I know you did non of this but I will say this.

If you were in the church of God of prophecy and preached as we do and everyone esle that did as well. Even PG should be able to answer this easily if they really knew what they were preaching . Some stated they know more about what I believe then I do, which is hilarious if you are banking any truth to that. How would you have known not to go to the elders "cog" all the years they preached just as"cogop" this would give you the answer to the question you are asking me. SO show me the knowledge everyone has
Keep in mind I could leave TCOG today rent a building name in oneloveTCOGop and teach the same as we do now and it would not make me the church. Matter of fact I would not even be a member
Im kidding but serious at the same time. There has been 2 splits in his church 1923 and 1993. What did they have in common? These others what do they have in common? one would be they were turned out. Brother Carter does not claim to be a continuation or a reorganization. So you can eliminate 1fold.com

[pastorables]

Keep in mind I could leave TCOG today rent a building name in oneloveTCOGop and teach the same as we do now and it would not make me the church. Matter of fact I would not even be a member
Im kidding but serious at the same time. There has been 2 splits in his church 1923 and 1993. What did they have in common? These others what do they have in common? one would be they were turned out. Brother Carter does not claim to be a continuation or a reorganization. So you can eliminate 1fold.com

So, what makes the church considered "one true church" then? I thought you said the answer was doctrine? All of the splinter groups have basically the same doctrine and I could find other churches who have similar doctrines. I was visited by a preacher from a particular branch of baptist once that held to a very similar doctrine of church exclusiveness.

I am not trying to engage you or debate you. I am 4th generation CoG/CoGoP so I understand the basics of where you are coming from. What I do not understand is how you expect me to believe your version of TCOG is the "one true bride" when the other groups offer just as much validity to the same claim.

As for the 1fold (Carter) group, if not a continuation or reorganization, then just what is he claiming? He can't be a part of your group because you guys have a regional overseer over the same area. Is he just a regional overseer in rebellion then?

At any rate, if you are to ever teach me, or others like me, that your vision of the "church" is correct... you have to find a way to offer much more realistic and believable answers.

Sincerely,
pa

[one love]

Keep in mind I could leave TCOG today rent a building name in oneloveTCOGop and teach the same as we do now and it would not make me the church. Matter of fact I would not even be a member
Im kidding but serious at the same time. There has been 2 splits in his church 1923 and 1993. What did they have in common? These others what do they have in common? one would be they were turned out. Brother Carter does not claim to be a continuation or a reorganization. So you can eliminate 1fold.com

So, what makes the church considered "one true church" then? I thought you said the answer was doctrine? All of the splinter groups have basically the same doctrine and I could find other churches who have similar doctrines. I was visited by a preacher from a particular branch of baptist once that held to a very similar doctrine of church exclusiveness.

I am not trying to engage you or debate you. I am 4th generation CoG/CoGoP so I understand the basics of where you are coming from. What I do not understand is how you expect me to believe your version of TCOG is the "one true bride" when the other groups offer just as much validity to the same claim.

As for the 1fold (Carter) group, if not a continuation or reorganization, then just what is he claiming? He can't be a part of your group because you guys have a regional overseer over the same area. Is he just a regional overseer in rebellion then?

At any rate, if you are to ever teach me, or others like me, that your vision of the "church" is correct... you have to find a way to offer much more realistic and believable answers.

Sincerely,
pa

It is not about teaching you Brother. I hope I have not offended you in anyway. I will do this basically becasue I dont want another round of responses as before.
First Brother Carter and them are waiting on the LORD, praying and fasting for God to work this thing out. Will they reorganize, I dont think so but I cant say for sure. I am very close friends with them. Nabors caused an extreme amount of hurt and damge to many people including Brother Carter. He also took advantage of Brother Pruitt. He was turned out and even tried to bribe Brother smith to resign. When he did not they started there own thing. There is another group that was turned out and then started over.

Now with that said if you believed this at one time like I do now you should know the answer. I am not meaning to sound sarcastic at all.

Ok in 1923 by the adoption of the constitution it placed more trust on that paper then operating by theocracy. Brother A.J. was bothered and told this the following year. Im sure you knwo that story.
The Church is a divine instiution that christ set in order. Led by him. Yes doctrine is important and the parliamentary procedures in which the G.A. operate in are as well. Theocracy is just as important.
Im stopping here to not upset anyone but in a nut shell if TCOG is the continuation there has been no break in the theocratic process, the doctrine is intact. The only thing that has happened is evil men doing there agenda's that have went there own way. The started on ther own will. Im sure this will not suffice but im hoping you understand the point as I said I would rather not engage in these topics for a little while.
May The Lord Bless you

[RamboPreacher]

my perspective is that Paintball is Fun!...

oh and I agree with you PG, the anogy seems to be pretty good. except I think that the differentiation might be less pronounced than presented.

as an extended example, the fort-paradigm, there may be some that believe that THE fort is there to be defended, etc, but there may be some that believe that the fort is there for protection and others are allowed, and they prefer to have them wear the same uniform, and salute the same flag, but are flexible a bit with how the flag is saluted and how the uniform is buttoned up.

and the Army paradigm, might also have regiments that prefer to have everyone in lockstep and uniformed the same, but know that it will take a while to get to that point if ever, but is still something to be worked toward.

In other words, as mentioned the differentiation might be more gray; especially if trying to discuss the finer points of the battle plan on a text-only forum limited to subjectively presented text posts and a limited number of emoticons that have assumed meaning/feelings attached.

but hay, I have been known to be wrong in my opinions.

Hey Rambo, you would never get out of the "War Room" and on the field...

missed this earlier, sorry...
maybe. but then if you are familiar with physical warfare and using it as an analogy for spiritual warfare, you would know that the "war room" is much needed, and there may be some called to that kind of ministry. (I have been trained and have trained others in warfare and tactics, and realize that seeing the whole picture and the "war room" is a necessity in fighting and winning battles)

[Brian]

As an outsider, this whole idea of continuing the exclusive church as a SPLIT-OFF makes no sense to me. Isn't this Theocracy idea supposed to be God leading thru unanimity? Or at least a majority? If not, any handful of people can pull out at any time when they disagree with something and say "we are continuing on with the church, it's not a new group". In fact that's just what has happened to the very church that did that in the 90s! Now Nabors pulls his few and says "WE are continuing as the church!!" Whose to say which is right and which is wrong and based on WHAT? IF the EXCLUSIVE church doctrine is true, and its the group founded in 1886 that is the true church or 1907 or whatever, then it will always be THAT group that will continue to be the True Church whatever decision they make or whatever they vote in as a group becuase the gates of hell can not prevail against the church. If it subdivides 2, 3, 4 or 7 times, the little tiny group that leaves the main group that GOD Himself chose CANNOT be that same group! It is not the original group! The splinters are not and cannot be the original group. The COG made changes before there were ever splits and that did not make them no longer the original group. No changes can ever make it NOT be the original group. It still is what it is.

It is the same with the Roman Catholic Church! They believe they are the One True Church established by Jesus. There have been Archbishops like Lefevre that didn't like changes like the mass being no longer in latin. He and a handful of ultra conservative men pulled out and declared that they are now the real Catholic church and the rest is all apostate because it changed. That is just dumb! The original Roman Catholic Church will always be the Roman Catholic Church no matter how many start something new that is conservative like in years past, that still doesn't make them the Roman Catholic Church.

So, if the exclusive church thing were true, and the true group was one called "COG" and rediscovered 100 years ago in the mountains of TN, the real true group would have to be the COG elders because no one leader or group of pastors is the original group just because they say so and pull out. It has to be the whole group that is the real group and not some dissenters from the original church's assembly decisions, nominations, or actions.

The problem is, that people who hold to the Exclusive Church doctrine (TCOG and other "splinter groups") believe it is completely possible JUST AS you have described it to be immpossible. If my understanding is correct they believe that there will be a "remnant" who believe and are called out. So to say that its just a handfull of dissenters (or faithful, take your pick) to pull out and carry on the "true church" is falling in line with exactly how they believe God is working things out.

I personally think its kind of a slap in the face to every other believer in the world who gives there hearts and lives to the Living God throught he sacrifices of our Lord Jesus. Its not an insinuation, its an outright statement of fact that they believe they have "held to the truth and remained faithful". BY DEFAULT they are implying that anyone who is not yet in there groups have not yet come to the knowledge of the truth. And even worse, those who WERE part of what they call the "true church" has LEFT THEOCRACY and are now walking according to the flesh in derect OPPOSITION to the leading of the Holy Spirit! If that isnt a slap in the face then I dont know what is.

well then you dont know what a slap is period. How cant you understand that they did not want to go against biblical standards and were bothered. They did not just start a new church on there own It was done by God through his thoecratic principles. They had many meetings and sought God as to what to do. If the Lord would had them to stay they would have but by all leading of the holy ghost from 1987 until he called for a solemn assmebly it was done by prayer and fasting directed by the holy ghost. So we contiune to teach the bible as it is. That s not a slap for me to follow God with a clean conscience.
SO on the other hand you must be slapping me much harder by saying this and saying that im worng. HMMMMMM you did not think of that did you.
2 people one says he believes this, tho other says well that is a slap because I believe this way your wrong, well you just slapped him by your own analogy. There should be no anger toward us, do you know how mant other large organizations feel they are the true church.
Theocracy means unanimous when that is left there is a problem.
I hope you understand agree to disagree and get a grip on the anger issues. I love you Brother but I will not change what is bible for anyone, as I hope you would not. May God Bless you I appreciate the comment

First off let me say that I wasn't even posting to you. Second, I have no anger problem, just frustration at the idea that you and others like you call the leadership of the cogop "evil men".

In you post a few back you said " The only thing that has happened is evil men doing there agenda's that have went there own way."

That's a slap my friend, admit or not it makes no difference. A tree is known my its fruits. The fruits of TCOG are pride and hautiness and self righteousness to the exclusion of the rest of the church which Christ bought with His own Blood. It is He who adds the His church, thats the "period" my friend.

[one love]

As an outsider, this whole idea of continuing the exclusive church as a SPLIT-OFF makes no sense to me. Isn't this Theocracy idea supposed to be God leading thru unanimity? Or at least a majority? If not, any handful of people can pull out at any time when they disagree with something and say "we are continuing on with the church, it's not a new group". In fact that's just what has happened to the very church that did that in the 90s! Now Nabors pulls his few and says "WE are continuing as the church!!" Whose to say which is right and which is wrong and based on WHAT? IF the EXCLUSIVE church doctrine is true, and its the group founded in 1886 that is the true church or 1907 or whatever, then it will always be THAT group that will continue to be the True Church whatever decision they make or whatever they vote in as a group becuase the gates of hell can not prevail against the church. If it subdivides 2, 3, 4 or 7 times, the little tiny group that leaves the main group that GOD Himself chose CANNOT be that same group! It is not the original group! The splinters are not and cannot be the original group. The COG made changes before there were ever splits and that did not make them no longer the original group. No changes can ever make it NOT be the original group. It still is what it is.

It is the same with the Roman Catholic Church! They believe they are the One True Church established by Jesus. There have been Archbishops like Lefevre that didn't like changes like the mass being no longer in latin. He and a handful of ultra conservative men pulled out and declared that they are now the real Catholic church and the rest is all apostate because it changed. That is just dumb! The original Roman Catholic Church will always be the Roman Catholic Church no matter how many start something new that is conservative like in years past, that still doesn't make them the Roman Catholic Church.

So, if the exclusive church thing were true, and the true group was one called "COG" and rediscovered 100 years ago in the mountains of TN, the real true group would have to be the COG elders because no one leader or group of pastors is the original group just because they say so and pull out. It has to be the whole group that is the real group and not some dissenters from the original church's assembly decisions, nominations, or actions.

The problem is, that people who hold to the Exclusive Church doctrine (TCOG and other "splinter groups") believe it is completely possible JUST AS you have described it to be immpossible. If my understanding is correct they believe that there will be a "remnant" who believe and are called out. So to say that its just a handfull of dissenters (or faithful, take your pick) to pull out and carry on the "true church" is falling in line with exactly how they believe God is working things out.

I personally think its kind of a slap in the face to every other believer in the world who gives there hearts and lives to the Living God throught he sacrifices of our Lord Jesus. Its not an insinuation, its an outright statement of fact that they believe they have "held to the truth and remained faithful". BY DEFAULT they are implying that anyone who is not yet in there groups have not yet come to the knowledge of the truth. And even worse, those who WERE part of what they call the "true church" has LEFT THEOCRACY and are now walking according to the flesh in derect OPPOSITION to the leading of the Holy Spirit! If that isnt a slap in the face then I dont know what is.

well then you dont know what a slap is period. How cant you understand that they did not want to go against biblical standards and were bothered. They did not just start a new church on there own It was done by God through his thoecratic principles. They had many meetings and sought God as to what to do. If the Lord would had them to stay they would have but by all leading of the holy ghost from 1987 until he called for a solemn assmebly it was done by prayer and fasting directed by the holy ghost. So we contiune to teach the bible as it is. That s not a slap for me to follow God with a clean conscience.
SO on the other hand you must be slapping me much harder by saying this and saying that im worng. HMMMMMM you did not think of that did you.
2 people one says he believes this, tho other says well that is a slap because I believe this way your wrong, well you just slapped him by your own analogy. There should be no anger toward us, do you know how mant other large organizations feel they are the true church.
Theocracy means unanimous when that is left there is a problem.
I hope you understand agree to disagree and get a grip on the anger issues. I love you Brother but I will not change what is bible for anyone, as I hope you would not. May God Bless you I appreciate the comment

First off let me say that I wasn't even posting to you. Second, I have no anger problem, just frustration at the idea that you and others like you call the leadership of the cogop "evil men".

In you post a few back you said " The only thing that has happened is evil men doing there agenda's that have went there own way."

That's a slap my friend, admit or not it makes no difference. A tree is known my its fruits. The fruits of TCOG are pride and hautiness and self righteousness to the exclusion of the rest of the church which Christ bought with His own Blood. It is He who adds the His church, thats the "period" my friend.

OK I really getting aggrivated. You are wanting me to say cogop are evil. I said no such thing. Qoute that for me please. If I said that I will apologize. It would surprise me becasue that is not what is in my heart.
If you were not talking to me who were you talking to? Im sorry for that misunderstanding.

Now I think you should regonize your mistake on this. This is why I did not want to respond. You are expecting me to say you are evil so you did not even read the post here it is again ok.

Im stopping here to not upset anyone but in a nut shell if TCOG is the continuation there has been no break in the theocratic process, the doctrine is intact. The only thing that has happened is evil men doing there agenda's that have went there own way. The started on ther own will

Show me in that statement how that can be referenced to cogop? First this was a reference to groups that split way after we left cogop. I said evil men doing there own agenda's that have went there own way. I was refering to the groups that pastorables qouted. I eliminated 1fold from that group of people. Yes I think Nabors has done some very evil things, I have witnessed it. SO again your reference is wrong. How awful it is that you are comfortable to mudsling like that and say "you and people like you" you just proved my point. What about people like me? Again you are angry and I do not know why? Yet some thought it was in my head right. My father was COGOP leadership, Im going to call him evil?????????
The only thing haughty and prideful is your post. You just slammed a lot of people for no reason. Next time someone wants me to respond to these questions please remember this.

[Brian]

Ok, let me take a deep breath and explain my position.

When I said that I wasn't responding to you and you asked who I was talking to, I quoted and responded to ichthus' post about split off groups that still concider themselves the true continuation of the one true church even tho they have left the groups they were a part of and created different groups.

I started my responce to ichthus by saying "that people who hold to the Exclusive Church doctrine (TCOG and other "splinter groups")" I wasn't pointing you out in particular and I shouldn't have only pointed out TCOG and the groups that came off of that group. Man.....too many groups:)

I would say the same thing to anyone who would exclude blood bought christians who have giving there hearts and lives to the Lord and are walking in the Spirit to the best of there ability.

You said "How cant you understand that they did not want to go against biblical standards" ,

Its no secret that the "they" who you speak of are the ones in the cogop (at that time) who wanted to remain in the "old paths". You can't have it both ways one love. Those people believed that the leaders in the cogop had SINNED and LEFT Theocradic government. You state things like they did not want to go against biblical standards. Well guess what NEITHER DID THE COGOP and the leaders and members who were seeking change. THAT is the part that is so troubling to me and others who were in the cogop at that time. We/they were basically told that we were rebelling against the leading of the Holy Ghost and we were following man instead of God. I'm sorry, that is outright offensive to those who KNEW they were being faithful and continuing to walk in the light to the best of there ability. I'm sorry it sounds so ugly when it is said like that, but it IS ugly the way it went down.

You said "First this was a reference to groups that split way after we left cogop."

Again, Im sorry , but that simply isn't the case. YOU may have meant that you personally wasn't talking about the cogop but TCOG doesn't see it as them leaving the cogop they state on there web site and in reference material that the leadership of the cogop are the ones who LEFT THEOCRADIC government and did not follow the leading of the Holy Ghost.

Either TCOG left and splintered off or they remained faithful and the cogop left and went there own way. I believe, I COULD BE WRONG, but I believe that TCOG says that the cogop left and therefore they would be a splinter group just like all the others that have left since then.

Look, I didn't slam anybody. I am just not going to call what happened anything other than what happened. It wasn't nice, it wasn't pretty, it wasn't graceful, and it wasn't IMHO operating in the love that Christ called us to operate in.

Thank you for your comments and responces. I'm not angry , just emotionally charged.

[one love]

Ok, let me take a deep breath and explain my position.

When I said that I wasn't responding to you and you asked who I was talking to, I quoted and responded to ichthus' post about split off groups that still concider themselves the true continuation of the one true church even tho they have left the groups they were a part of and created different groups.

I started my responce to ichthus by saying "that people who hold to the Exclusive Church doctrine (TCOG and other "splinter groups")" I wasn't pointing you out in particular and I shouldn't have only pointed out TCOG and the groups that came off of that group. Man.....too many groups:)

I would say the same thing to anyone who would exclude blood bought christians who have giving there hearts and lives to the Lord and are walking in the Spirit to the best of there ability.

You said "How cant you understand that they did not want to go against biblical standards" ,

Its no secret that the "they" who you speak of are the ones in the cogop (at that time) who wanted to remain in the "old paths". You can't have it both ways one love. Those people believed that the leaders in the cogop had SINNED and LEFT Theocradic government. You state things like they did not want to go against biblical standards. Well guess what NEITHER DID THE COGOP and the leaders and members who were seeking change. THAT is the part that is so troubling to me and others who were in the cogop at that time. We/they were basically told that we were rebelling against the leading of the Holy Ghost and we were following man instead of God. I'm sorry, that is outright offensive to those who KNEW they were being faithful and continuing to walk in the light to the best of there ability. I'm sorry it sounds so ugly when it is said like that, but it IS ugly the way it went down.

You said "First this was a reference to groups that split way after we left cogop."

Again, Im sorry , but that simply isn't the case. YOU may have meant that you personally wasn't talking about the cogop but TCOG doesn't see it as them leaving the cogop they state on there web site and in reference material that the leadership of the cogop are the ones who LEFT THEOCRADIC government and did not follow the leading of the Holy Ghost.

Either TCOG left and splintered off or they remained faithful and the cogop left and went there own way. I believe, I COULD BE WRONG, but I believe that TCOG says that the cogop left and therefore they would be a splinter group just like all the others that have left since then.

Look, I didn't slam anybody. I am just not going to call what happened anything other than what happened. It wasn't nice, it wasn't pretty, it wasn't graceful, and it wasn't IMHO operating in the love that Christ called us to operate in.

Thank you for your comments and responces. I'm not angry , just emotionally charged.

You still walked right away from your mistake. You said you have a problem with me and people like me for calling the cogop evil. I reposted that and you still did reconize your mistake. You were wrong friend period.

The they were the chruch of god, we did not want to let down what we thought to be biblical standards. You can not ask questions then get angry at my response. You dont know how ugly things were for me and my family but I hold no ill will. This is why I will not post on this again. You want answers then even know I have done my best to not go into details regarding this it is still brought out against me. I never "slapped you" but you openly did us, and did not bother to correct it. That is a show of fruits.
Yes we believe 'theocratic " government runs the church.

I am sorry for all of this but im officially done. Here take the bait then we will prove how bad you are.......unreal

Sorry TW no more for now, I knwo I said I would post it tomorrow but this is not going to happen. I refuse to do this again.
To any that may have been offended im sorry from the bottom of my heart. Forgive me.

[stevenson]

I just thought of something......TCOG, ZACOG, 1Fold, etc..., anywho, they all believe that they are it, how do they explain John 10:16?

[pastorables]

Now with that said if you believed this at one time like I do now you should know the answer. I am not meaning to sound sarcastic at all.

One love,

I have not received you as sarcastic or condescending and I am sorry that you do not feel the liberty to discuss this issue

To be honest, I have never truly believed in my heart the "church" vs. "kingdom" theory even though I taught it for a time. I guess I was hoping to see something new from you with regards to the classic debate. There are just too many flaws with the "one church" theory as previously taught. I can't seem to find an "exclusive church" doctrine taught in scripture.

I will honor your desire not to discuss for now.

Blessings,
pa