You probably remember the account in the Bible. Acts 4:32-37 describes how members of the early Church agreed to share things in common, and those who had lands and possessions sold them and brought the money to the apostles. In Acts 5:1-11, Ananias and his wife Sapphira sold a possession of land and agreed between themselves to lie to Peter and the apostles about the amount they had received so they could secretly keep back part of the money for themselves. So Ananias brought only part of the money to Peter and the apostles, but representing it as the whole (verse 2).
"But Peter said, 'Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God' " (Acts 5:3-4).
Notice, the wrong Peter accused Ananias of was not keeping the land or the money, but lying about it. Peter said that by lying to Peter and the apostles, he was lying to the Holy Spirit and to God. Why? Because Peter and the apostles had the Holy Spirit dwelling in them.
I have heard this passage used in teaching by ministers to warn members about the dangers of lying to ministers. That is certainly a valid warning. If we are being counseled by a minister or are communicating with our pastor about something, we should be careful not to try to lie to him or deceive him.
I have heard a speaker say that sometimes in the Bible, God makes an example of someone to show how seriously He views a certain kind of sin, but after that does not repeat the punishment in every case that follows. So not everyone who lies to a minister will immediately fall dead as Ananias and Sapphira did. But God did this that time as an example for us, to show us how seriously he views that particular sin. It is up to us to read the account and learn from that example and avoid the same sin.
But there is more to learn from this example than just the lesson, "don't lie to your pastor."
Look carefully at what Peter said to Ananias. Did he say, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the apostles and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? .... You have not lied to men but to God"? No, that is not what he said. He said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit ...". Ananias lied to God, according to Peter, not because he lied to the apostles, but because he lied to the Holy Spirit. How did he lie to the Holy Spirit? He lied to men who had the Holy Spirit in them, that is, the apostles.
In other words, what made the sin so serious was not the office or position of authority as apostles that Peter and the other apostles had, or the fact that they were ministers, but the fact that they were converted members of the Church of God having the Holy Spirit in them!
This raises questions to consider. Do only leaders and ministers in the Church of God have the Holy Spirit? Do not members have the Holy Spirit also? And therefore, is lying to another member of the Church, whether he is a minister or not, also "lying to the Holy Spirit" and therefore falls into the category of this sin that God considers so serious that He struck Ananias and Sapphira dead as a warning to us not to do what they did?
"Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds..." (Colossians 3:9).
Now take it a step further. If it is lying to the Holy Spirit, and therefore lying to God, to lie to a human being who is converted and has God's Holy Spirit dwelling in him or her, would it not therefore being lying to God for a minister or pastor to lie to a member of the Church who is converted and has the Holy Spirit? And would this not include, not only lying to a member personally in face-to-face discussion, but also lying to a whole congregation by twisting and misrepresenting scriptures in a sermon, or even lying to an entire fellowship and the Church of God as a whole by doing the same thing in published articles, booklets, or books?
Christ sometimes represents the wrong we do to each other, or the good we do for each other, as if it is done to Him personally. "And the King will answer and say to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me' " (Matthew 25:40). See all of Matthew 25:31-46
We have a warning from God in the Bible. None of us, minister or layman, should lie to another converted member of the Church, whether in speaking or writing, whether to one person or an audience. Ministers, speakers, writers, and teachers in the Church of God should never deliberately twist scriptures out of context to make a point to Church members or lie concerning doctrine or anything else. Making honest mistakes is one thing. We all do that, God knows our level of knowledge is not perfect (1 Corinthians 13:9). We need to try our best to be accurate and true in our communications. But Ananias and Sapphira did not make a mistake about how much they sold their land for. They KNEW they were lying. In fact, they conspired together to lie. They agreed about what to say so their lies would match up! That would be like a pastor and a local elder, or a writer and an editor, agreeing between themselves to misrepresent a doctrine or a scripture to the members of the Church!
The impulse to lie to other Church members having God's Spirit, in Ananias's case, did not come from God but from Satan (Acts 5:23). "You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it" (John 8:44).
I think that is one of the things God is warning us about in Acts 5:1-11.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
My Latest COG "Olds" - UCG and LCG Meet
I can't call this "News", since it is about 3 weeks old, but I have fallen behind in my reading, and it is news for me. I like to chronicle what I feel may be significant events in the Churches of God, so even though many of you who keep up with COG news may already know about this, I will report it anyway, at least to provide anyone a chance to comment on this topic even though it is not "new".
On January 12, 2012, UCG reported in its Inside United: Realtime blog and LCG reported in its weekly updates that there was a meeting between leaders of United Church of God (UCG) and Living Church of God (LCG). The meeting took place January 9 and 10 at LCG headquarters in Charlotte, NC. Attending from UCG were Dennis Luker, Victor Kubik, and Peter Eddington. Attending from LCG were Roderick C. Meredith, Richard Ames, and Douglas Winnail.
They discussed subjects of mutual interest including disaster relief for Church of God members, strategies for preaching the gospel, differences of view concerning the structure of government, and matters of legal concern such as how the Church can help members get time off for the Sabbath and holy days. There was no discussion of any merger.
Here are links to the announcements:
UCG announcement:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2012/01/14/announcement-ucg-and-lcg-representatives-meet/
LCG announcement:
http://www.cogl.org/cgi-bin/cogl/weeklyupdates/cogl-wkupdates.cgi?category=WeeklyUpdate1&item=1326546011
I am a bit surprised because I would have thought it more likely that leaders of COGWA would first meet with LCG leaders. Several years ago, when they were part of UCG, COGWA leaders Jim Franks and Clyde Kilough had visited LCG headquarters and met with LCG leaders.
While leaders of UCG and COGWA have been willing to meet with LCG, I think it will be a while before there are similar meetings between UCG and COGWA.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Church Government, Chapter 7
On January 12, 2012, UCG reported in its Inside United: Realtime blog and LCG reported in its weekly updates that there was a meeting between leaders of United Church of God (UCG) and Living Church of God (LCG). The meeting took place January 9 and 10 at LCG headquarters in Charlotte, NC. Attending from UCG were Dennis Luker, Victor Kubik, and Peter Eddington. Attending from LCG were Roderick C. Meredith, Richard Ames, and Douglas Winnail.
They discussed subjects of mutual interest including disaster relief for Church of God members, strategies for preaching the gospel, differences of view concerning the structure of government, and matters of legal concern such as how the Church can help members get time off for the Sabbath and holy days. There was no discussion of any merger.
Here are links to the announcements:
UCG announcement:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2012/01/14/announcement-ucg-and-lcg-representatives-meet/
LCG announcement:
http://www.cogl.org/cgi-bin/cogl/weeklyupdates/cogl-wkupdates.cgi?category=WeeklyUpdate1&item=1326546011
I am a bit surprised because I would have thought it more likely that leaders of COGWA would first meet with LCG leaders. Several years ago, when they were part of UCG, COGWA leaders Jim Franks and Clyde Kilough had visited LCG headquarters and met with LCG leaders.
While leaders of UCG and COGWA have been willing to meet with LCG, I think it will be a while before there are similar meetings between UCG and COGWA.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Church Government, Chapter 7
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Should a UCG Member Leave Because UCG MIGHT Change Doctrine?
Someone commented in my December 12, 2011 post, "COGWA Headquarters Location", that UCG to date has not made any doctrinal changes, and UCG members should not leave that Church just because they MIGHT make doctrinal changes in the future.
I agree that UCG has not made any major doctrinal changes. As far as I know, they have not made any minor changes either, though I have not been watching them closely enough to know definitely one way or another.
Let's assume for the sake of discussion that they have made NO doctrinal changes to date, zero, nada. Should a UCG member leave that organization just because he or she thinks they MIGHT make changes in the future?
Though some UCG members who left to go to COGWA may have left because they expect UCG to change doctrine, many who left UCG to go with COGWA did not leave because they thought UCG might change doctrine, but they left to stay with their pastor who was leaving. In other words, when their pastor left UCG, the members had to make a choice to leave UCG or leave their pastor. Some of them stayed with their pastor giving greater priority to their relationship with the man they know than with a corporate organization. I do not fault them for that.
UCG has not officially changed doctrine, and maybe they never will, but it is not wrong for a member to read the signs of the times (Matthew 16:2-3) and foresee and avoid future problems (Proverbs 22:3, 27:12). Many members do not want to invest in the growth of an organization if that organization is getting ready to turn away from sound doctrine. They would rather invest the tithes and offerings God has entrusted them with in whatever group they believe will be most faithful now and in the future. Church of God members have the right to make those kinds of judgments. That is the right exercise of godly wisdom.
It's really up to each individual to exercise judgment to stay or leave, and there are so many factors involved including personal circumstances and levels of understanding that it is probably wrong for anyone to judge another member for leaving or staying in UCG. For one person it might be best to stay and for someone else it might be best to leave. God can give each person the wisdom and discernment to know God's will and make the best decision for that particular person, not someone else.
While I have seen no concrete proof that UCG is going to change doctrine, I think there is strong circumstantial evidence that many leaders and ministers in UCG want to change doctrine and are getting ready to make the attempt. The strongest evidence, in my opinion, is the Sabbath paper they published, one that I think is was very provocative and in its implications seemed to change doctrine and contained errors, a paper that was bound to provoke questions from members, questions addressed to their pastor who was then forced to take a stand for or against the paper. It appears to me that this paper was used as a vehicle for pressuring pastors to leave UCG, and it would be those pastors who were the most loyal to the Sabbath doctrine who would be pressured to leave. Now, if that is the case, and if UCG leaders are 100% faithful to the old doctrines, why and how could they use this method to get rid of the pastors they wanted to get rid of? As soon as those pastors left, UCG seems to have reversed itself on the Sabbath paper, basically affirming the old Sabbath teaching. It appears that once that paper had served its purpose in helping to get rid of most of the paid ministry, it was no longer needed and it was in effect disavowed. I think once the COGWA ministers were out of UCG and could no longer vote in UCG elections, UCG leaders had a different priority, namely, to reassure their members that they would NOT change doctrine so they would not leave to go to COGWA.
UCG ministers may not all be in agreement. They stuck together during the split to support their own side, but now that they won that battle, cracks in their unity may emerge. Probably, some want to change doctrine a lot, some a little, and some do not want to change doctrine at all. Time will tell whose policies will prevail in UCG.
I do not agree with the governance structure of UCG or COGWA, and I am concerned about COGWA's inability to do a strong work of preaching the gospel because of their budget situation. They have too many paid ministers and not enough tithe-paying members to support the ministry plus an effective work of preaching to the public. But if I didn't care about those things, if I were attending with UCG and my only priority was sticking to the old doctrines, I would definitely be considering going to COGWA at this point.
I agree that UCG has not made any major doctrinal changes. As far as I know, they have not made any minor changes either, though I have not been watching them closely enough to know definitely one way or another.
Let's assume for the sake of discussion that they have made NO doctrinal changes to date, zero, nada. Should a UCG member leave that organization just because he or she thinks they MIGHT make changes in the future?
Though some UCG members who left to go to COGWA may have left because they expect UCG to change doctrine, many who left UCG to go with COGWA did not leave because they thought UCG might change doctrine, but they left to stay with their pastor who was leaving. In other words, when their pastor left UCG, the members had to make a choice to leave UCG or leave their pastor. Some of them stayed with their pastor giving greater priority to their relationship with the man they know than with a corporate organization. I do not fault them for that.
UCG has not officially changed doctrine, and maybe they never will, but it is not wrong for a member to read the signs of the times (Matthew 16:2-3) and foresee and avoid future problems (Proverbs 22:3, 27:12). Many members do not want to invest in the growth of an organization if that organization is getting ready to turn away from sound doctrine. They would rather invest the tithes and offerings God has entrusted them with in whatever group they believe will be most faithful now and in the future. Church of God members have the right to make those kinds of judgments. That is the right exercise of godly wisdom.
It's really up to each individual to exercise judgment to stay or leave, and there are so many factors involved including personal circumstances and levels of understanding that it is probably wrong for anyone to judge another member for leaving or staying in UCG. For one person it might be best to stay and for someone else it might be best to leave. God can give each person the wisdom and discernment to know God's will and make the best decision for that particular person, not someone else.
While I have seen no concrete proof that UCG is going to change doctrine, I think there is strong circumstantial evidence that many leaders and ministers in UCG want to change doctrine and are getting ready to make the attempt. The strongest evidence, in my opinion, is the Sabbath paper they published, one that I think is was very provocative and in its implications seemed to change doctrine and contained errors, a paper that was bound to provoke questions from members, questions addressed to their pastor who was then forced to take a stand for or against the paper. It appears to me that this paper was used as a vehicle for pressuring pastors to leave UCG, and it would be those pastors who were the most loyal to the Sabbath doctrine who would be pressured to leave. Now, if that is the case, and if UCG leaders are 100% faithful to the old doctrines, why and how could they use this method to get rid of the pastors they wanted to get rid of? As soon as those pastors left, UCG seems to have reversed itself on the Sabbath paper, basically affirming the old Sabbath teaching. It appears that once that paper had served its purpose in helping to get rid of most of the paid ministry, it was no longer needed and it was in effect disavowed. I think once the COGWA ministers were out of UCG and could no longer vote in UCG elections, UCG leaders had a different priority, namely, to reassure their members that they would NOT change doctrine so they would not leave to go to COGWA.
UCG ministers may not all be in agreement. They stuck together during the split to support their own side, but now that they won that battle, cracks in their unity may emerge. Probably, some want to change doctrine a lot, some a little, and some do not want to change doctrine at all. Time will tell whose policies will prevail in UCG.
I do not agree with the governance structure of UCG or COGWA, and I am concerned about COGWA's inability to do a strong work of preaching the gospel because of their budget situation. They have too many paid ministers and not enough tithe-paying members to support the ministry plus an effective work of preaching to the public. But if I didn't care about those things, if I were attending with UCG and my only priority was sticking to the old doctrines, I would definitely be considering going to COGWA at this point.
Monday, January 2, 2012
How Europe May Finally Unite
With all the attention given to the growing unity of Europe, it remains a fact that Europe has not yet fully united. A "United States of Europe" doesn't exist. The beast power has not formed yet.
Europe is in no way ready to challenge the United States militarily. Not even close. The United States, though weakening, is still the most powerful nation on earth today.
Yet Bible prophecy predicts the rising of the beast power and the fall of the United States, probably in less than about two decades. And it is clear that the United States is weakening fast, mostly through economic problems and internal divisions.
I usually resist the temptation to speculate, except in my private thoughts. Not always. Maybe 5% or less of my speculative thoughts about the Church or the world make it into this blog. Like now.
How might a final, strongly unified European Empire form?
I think we can see clues in what has been happening in Greece and other weaker nations of the EU with their budget problems. They basically spend themselves into debt they cannot manage in order to provide "government benefits", or welfare, to the people, more in payouts than they take in in taxes (sound familiar?). And when government tries to cutback welfare spending, the people riot.
So here is a possible scenario.
The stronger nations of Europe, Germany and France for example, which basically have the power to control the Euro, tighten the rules to force smaller, less responsible nations to cut spending. They have to do that or the Euro will be ruined.
Germany will not allow the Euro to go down. It can't afford that. Germany wants a united Europe, and for that to go forward, there must be confidence, confidence in the idea of a united Europe and confidence in one European currency. If the Euro fails, that confidence is permanently damaged or destroyed. No one will be quick to trust the Euro or any other common European currency again, and the very idea of a united Europe will be harder to realize.
So Germany will require nations like Greece to cut welfare spending or leave the Euro-zone, and if they leave the Euro, they will still have to cut spending one way or another.
Now, under current circumstances, the strain may not be too severe. There may be some civil unrest, but it will be manageable.
But if there is a European and worldwide economic crisis, a severe recession or depression triggered, perhaps, by disruption of oil supplies from the Persian Gulf because of a war involving Iran, then hardship in some countries in Europe may reach the breaking point where rioting and internal division outpace the government's ability to manage them.
In that case you could have, in Greece for example, revolution, civil war, anarchy. If that happens, one or more sides may appeal to Europe to help to restore order and end human suffering and death, and Germany could send in the army. This would be a precedent that establishes a central European government, backed by a strong military, which would have real authority - authority backed by force - over individual nations in Europe. And if such an authority is successful, if it restores order, ends suffering, and brings a good result in the eyes of the people, that will tend to establish it firmly and permanently. There will be no going back after that. Independence of individual nations will be lost.
Europe is in no way ready to challenge the United States militarily. Not even close. The United States, though weakening, is still the most powerful nation on earth today.
Yet Bible prophecy predicts the rising of the beast power and the fall of the United States, probably in less than about two decades. And it is clear that the United States is weakening fast, mostly through economic problems and internal divisions.
I usually resist the temptation to speculate, except in my private thoughts. Not always. Maybe 5% or less of my speculative thoughts about the Church or the world make it into this blog. Like now.
How might a final, strongly unified European Empire form?
I think we can see clues in what has been happening in Greece and other weaker nations of the EU with their budget problems. They basically spend themselves into debt they cannot manage in order to provide "government benefits", or welfare, to the people, more in payouts than they take in in taxes (sound familiar?). And when government tries to cutback welfare spending, the people riot.
So here is a possible scenario.
The stronger nations of Europe, Germany and France for example, which basically have the power to control the Euro, tighten the rules to force smaller, less responsible nations to cut spending. They have to do that or the Euro will be ruined.
Germany will not allow the Euro to go down. It can't afford that. Germany wants a united Europe, and for that to go forward, there must be confidence, confidence in the idea of a united Europe and confidence in one European currency. If the Euro fails, that confidence is permanently damaged or destroyed. No one will be quick to trust the Euro or any other common European currency again, and the very idea of a united Europe will be harder to realize.
So Germany will require nations like Greece to cut welfare spending or leave the Euro-zone, and if they leave the Euro, they will still have to cut spending one way or another.
Now, under current circumstances, the strain may not be too severe. There may be some civil unrest, but it will be manageable.
But if there is a European and worldwide economic crisis, a severe recession or depression triggered, perhaps, by disruption of oil supplies from the Persian Gulf because of a war involving Iran, then hardship in some countries in Europe may reach the breaking point where rioting and internal division outpace the government's ability to manage them.
In that case you could have, in Greece for example, revolution, civil war, anarchy. If that happens, one or more sides may appeal to Europe to help to restore order and end human suffering and death, and Germany could send in the army. This would be a precedent that establishes a central European government, backed by a strong military, which would have real authority - authority backed by force - over individual nations in Europe. And if such an authority is successful, if it restores order, ends suffering, and brings a good result in the eyes of the people, that will tend to establish it firmly and permanently. There will be no going back after that. Independence of individual nations will be lost.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
The World and the Church in the Year Ahead
What's ahead in the world?
The last year and a half have been very eventful in the Church of God. Perhaps the next year will be quiet for the Church. Perhaps the big news in the next 12-14 months will be events in the world. I hope not. That is, I hope there will not be big news in the world. If there is, it is not likely to be positive. But I hope we have quietness and peace in the Church of God for a while. More events must yet happen, but I think we need a break.
There is an election coming in the United States. 2012 will be full of campaigning. That is known. But there are dangers on the horizon.
It really does look like Iran is close to making an atomic bomb. And it really does look like some kind of war with Iran may be close. If such a war comes, oil from the Persian Gulf could be disrupted and diminished, and gasoline prices would jump. That could further hurt a fragile world economy.
How fragile? Will a war crisis break the world economy? We may find out.
The Iran situation has developed slowly for a very long time. A war should be a surprise to no one. It has been much anticipated. What is unknown are the consequences. World history is full of examples of wars that were expected to be short, but turned out to be long. Men do not know ahead of time what war can bring. The whole world is like a trap ready to spring.
I saw some figures recently on the national budget deficit and debt. They were shocking. As much as I knew we have been spending ourselves into ruin, it was still shocking to me. It hit me in the gut. Why haven't we collapsed yet, I asked myself. How can we go on like this, even for another year or two? It truly is "scary" as they say. God's protection and mercy is the only hope of a Christian.
There are a number of interesting posts in Robert Thiel's COGwriter blog. Bob Thiel has posted numerous times about the Iran situation and our national debt. Here is a link to his blog:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/
The troubles the United States is in as a nation are troubles of our own making. We got ourselves into this mess through our own foolish decisions. Maybe half the country, or less, sees the seriousness of our condition, and the other half is blind to it. But almost no one outside the Church of God understands the true spiritual angle. About half the country sees that we are spending ourselves into oblivion. They see the solution as political. Elect leaders who will be conservative. Cut spending. Reduce the deficit. But they do not see their own sins.
The nation just finished celebrating a winter holiday that is said to represent the birth of Christ, but in actuality represents rebellion against God. Atheists and materialists often observe Christmas in a secular way, while many church-goers keep it for its religious meaning, but neither group seems to know how wrong it is.
About three years ago, the majority of American voters elected a president and Congress that is very "liberal", using the political label. That label represents a collection of views and policies that often come as a package. It includes massive government spending, and that spending is now ruining us. It is setting us up for a fall. The country is in a dilemma. Americans are addicted to a level of government spending far beyond what the government collects in taxes, yet the government cannot raise taxes without hurting the economy that generates those taxes. But members of Congress would be committing political suicide to cut spending as much as it needs to be cut. Every special interest group would say, "not us!" Not enough Americans grasp the need for sacrifice, for personal suffering now to avoid greater suffering later. Or, they see the need for others to sacrifice, but not "me", not "now".
So we drift (or race) into ruin.
Probably, at some point, there will be a severe worldwide economic crisis or collapse, then a recovery. The American economy would suffer the most during the collapse and come back the least during the recovery. When the smoke clears, the United States would be much diminished as a nation. Europe would lead the recovery and become strong.
There is one thing about all this that conservative Americans may see, but the liberals do not. When all our deficit spending catches up with us and we have to pay the price, the price will be have to be paid not just because our nation has elected politicians who massively spend us into debt, but because we have elected politicians who believe in abortion and other obvious immorality. It is the same group of people. In that sense, our own sins will punish us. By voting into office people who stand for allowing women to have abortions for any reason, for allowing men to have civil unions with men and women with women and call it "marriage", for promoting a godless agenda in the educational system, we have also elected into office people who spend government money at such a rate that we bankrupt ourselves. It is the same group of people.
Yet conservatives are not without sin.
While God may allow the liberals to be the instrument of our punishment, the whole nation, liberals and conservatives alike, is guilty.
The whole nation is guilty before God, but the religious segment of our society doesn't see their half of the guilt. I mentioned Christmas. The religious part of our nation thinks it is pleasing God by observing Christmas. I think Christ hates Christmas with a passion because it represents open disobedience towards God and a disrespect and disbelief towards God's word. But few people see that.
We in the Church see it. We know it is wrong because more than seventy years ago Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong started a work to preach the truth he learned from the Bible to the public, and most of us know what we know because he and others sacrificed to "preach the gospel to the world".
We now have the obligation to make the same kind of sacrifice to share that same knowledge with others in the United States who have not heard it before. We have to sacrifice just as Mr. Armstrong and Church of God members sacrificed in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s to get the truth out. If we do not, we become hypocrites if we claim to live by every word of God. The need is more urgent than ever.
That is why I am concerned when a Church of God fellowship so organizes and structures itself that it does not have the money it needs to do more than a very small work of preaching to the public. That can happen because it is overloaded with paid ministers who cannot be laid off because the leadership is committed to protecting their salaries in return for their votes.
Well, perhaps that problem could be solved. Many problems contain seeds of opportunity within them. The opportunity is that such a fellowship, having an abundance of professional ministers on salary, has the manpower to produce much published content in a short amount of time. Articles, booklets, and books can be produced. Then if, IF God chooses to empower that group to do a strong work of warning the United States and other nations, IF the leadership of that fellowship is willing to make hard decisions, then ministerial payroll can be cut, pastors' congregational responsibilities can be consolidated, and money can be freed up to publish and broadcast that content to a wide audience.
I think Church of God a Worldwide Association (COGWA) is on the right track to ask ministers and members to contribute content for preaching the gospel (Link to their announcement: http://members.cogwa.org/news/announcements-for-december-24-2011/). The leadership of that Church is wise to suggest collaboration between pastors who can provide strong content and others who have writing skills to shape and polish that content. They are starting an Internet work because that can be cheap, and right now that is the only way they can start.
If this opportunity is handled wisely, the coming year or two could be a golden era for COGWA in the production of content that can be published or broadcast.
My suggestion is that they use this opportunity to not just write short articles, but to follow that up with longer booklets and books and to write scripts for a TV or radio broadcast, even if the money is not yet available to publish printed literature or to record and broadcast radio or TV programs. Use the window of opportunity for writing while it is open - the money for using it may come later.
Consider also the copyright issue. There has arisen, within all the division within the Church of God, a tradition that is not good. Literature is written by ministers employed by a Church of God organization. That literature is copyrighted by the organization. Then, there is a split, many ministers and members leave that organization to start a new one, but they cannot use their own writings! The organization that has copyrighted them owns the rights and won't give "the other guys" permission to use them.
Yet these books, booklets, and articles really belong to God. They are produced with GOD'S tithe, and that tithe belongs to God. If you pray for God's help and inspiration in the writing and editing of this material, and Christ inspires your writing, He does it for the benefit of those who will read or hear the material, nor your benefit. The material belongs to Christ. It is not just for the benefit of an organization.
So why should its use be restricted?
Why should one Church of God organization use copyright protection to restrain another Church of God organization from using its material to publish the truth of God's word to a world that needs it?
So my suggestion is, consider putting some or all of this new material in the public domain, or consider a policy of allowing other Church of God organizations to use it to preach to the gospel to the world. Or, if you don't do that, consider how you would answer someone who says, "If this material is for the benefit of God's work and is intended to help people, why would you restrain others from getting it out to people so it can do them good?" Or consider how you would answer, "If God is financing and inspiring the writing of this content, doesn't it belong to Christ, and if so, should one Church of God organization prohibit another Church of God organization from publishing it to the world, which is what Christ wants anyway?"
It is a shame to the whole Church of God that we are so divided we cannot share copyrights for the good of new prospective members God is calling who need to know about the truth of God and for the good of the nations that need to be warned about the tribulation to come if they don't repent. And while many leaders in the organized ministry claim to serve Christ, their copyright policy is a witness that they are serving themselves.
The recent split between UCG and COGWA puts a spotlight on this whole issue. If UCG simply gave COGWA permission to use the body of literature copyrighted by UCG, but produced and paid for by many members and ministers now in COGWA, what would be wrong with that? What is the purpose of this material? Is it to help people outside the Church who have not been involved in our Church divisions and infighting? And who does this material belong to? Does it belong to Christ?
Look at Paul's attitude: "Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice" (Philippians 1:15-18). Did you get that? Paul REJOICED when others, even out of a spirit of envy and strife trying to hurt Paul, preached the gospel! Why? Because Paul was serving Christ, not himself. With that kind of love for the gospel, do you think Paul would have denied these people the right to publish his own letters if there were copyright laws in those days? I doubt it.
Come to think of it, COGWA might not really want that permission from UCG. Why? What would COGWA do with it? They do not have the money to publish. Right now, they have an excuse for not spending money on TV, radio, and printed literature and a magazine. "We have to produce content, and that takes time." But what would happen to that excuse if UCG handed them a whole body of literature on a silver platter? They cannot say the content is not sound, because the ministers and members of COGWA helped to produce it when they were in UCG just a short time ago.
I think COGWA would be on the spot. UCG would seem to capture the high ground morally and ethically because they would seem to be showing love towards others by sharing the right to produce the literature. The permission could contain the requirement that the literature would not be edited without the permission of the copyright owner (UCG), except the contact info (Church name and address) would be changed to the publisher who pays the expense of printing and mailing it (COGWA). Authors' names, when included in the literature as published by UCG, could not be removed. But in giving permission, UCG could force COGWA to explain why they are not publishing it.
Actually, LCG could make the same offer to COGWA. The doctrines are mostly the same, except for governance, and Church literature for the public rarely speaks about the governance issue. No major Church of God organization has ever done this. Any Church of God leader with literature compatible with COGWA beliefs could offer COGWA permission, and if he did he might shake things up a bit. What would COGWA say? "We can't publish it because we don't have the money?" Why don't they have the money? "We have too many paid ministers in proportion to our members?" Why do they have too many paid ministers?
I started this post about conditions in the world and prospects for the year ahead, and look where that led. Train of thought. One thought leads to another. Start with the national debt and end with copyright sharing in the Church.
Yet everything ties together. There is a direct connection between events in the Church and events in the world. It is all the same issue. A warning message and the true gospel have to go out as a witness to the American people and people of other nations, especially in Israel. Everyone in the United States should hear a warning so they know that the disaster that is coming is not just because some liberals have been elected but the WHOLE nation, conservatives also, are sinning against God. But the divisions in the Church make it more difficult to get that warning out. Governance is also a part of that same issue, because a governance that makes it hard for a leadership to make tough budget decisions, decisions unpopular with a voting ministry, also makes it harder to find the money to preach a warning message.
The Church of God needs to warn the American people that they are doing wrong and will face the tribulation if they do not repent. They need that warning so they will know God was fair to warn them while they had time to repent, and they need to accept responsibility for ignoring the warning. The more the Church of God follows God's Word, the Bible, in everything including governance, the more effective we can be in getting that warning out.
And if we fail to get the warning out because of our own disbelieve or disobedience, then the blood of the nation is on our own head (Ezekiel 33:1-6).
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
The Responsibility of a Watchman, Chapter 3
The Ezekiel Warning, Chapter 3
The Effect of the Holocaust, Chapter 4
My Comments and Conclusion, Chapter 4
The Two Witnesses and God's Fairness, Chapter 4
The Church, Chapter 4
Why the Gospel Must Still Be Preached to the World, Chapter 4
Church Government, Chapter 7
CHAPTER 8 - GOVERNMENT IN THE CHURCH OF GOD
The last year and a half have been very eventful in the Church of God. Perhaps the next year will be quiet for the Church. Perhaps the big news in the next 12-14 months will be events in the world. I hope not. That is, I hope there will not be big news in the world. If there is, it is not likely to be positive. But I hope we have quietness and peace in the Church of God for a while. More events must yet happen, but I think we need a break.
There is an election coming in the United States. 2012 will be full of campaigning. That is known. But there are dangers on the horizon.
It really does look like Iran is close to making an atomic bomb. And it really does look like some kind of war with Iran may be close. If such a war comes, oil from the Persian Gulf could be disrupted and diminished, and gasoline prices would jump. That could further hurt a fragile world economy.
How fragile? Will a war crisis break the world economy? We may find out.
The Iran situation has developed slowly for a very long time. A war should be a surprise to no one. It has been much anticipated. What is unknown are the consequences. World history is full of examples of wars that were expected to be short, but turned out to be long. Men do not know ahead of time what war can bring. The whole world is like a trap ready to spring.
I saw some figures recently on the national budget deficit and debt. They were shocking. As much as I knew we have been spending ourselves into ruin, it was still shocking to me. It hit me in the gut. Why haven't we collapsed yet, I asked myself. How can we go on like this, even for another year or two? It truly is "scary" as they say. God's protection and mercy is the only hope of a Christian.
There are a number of interesting posts in Robert Thiel's COGwriter blog. Bob Thiel has posted numerous times about the Iran situation and our national debt. Here is a link to his blog:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/
The troubles the United States is in as a nation are troubles of our own making. We got ourselves into this mess through our own foolish decisions. Maybe half the country, or less, sees the seriousness of our condition, and the other half is blind to it. But almost no one outside the Church of God understands the true spiritual angle. About half the country sees that we are spending ourselves into oblivion. They see the solution as political. Elect leaders who will be conservative. Cut spending. Reduce the deficit. But they do not see their own sins.
The nation just finished celebrating a winter holiday that is said to represent the birth of Christ, but in actuality represents rebellion against God. Atheists and materialists often observe Christmas in a secular way, while many church-goers keep it for its religious meaning, but neither group seems to know how wrong it is.
About three years ago, the majority of American voters elected a president and Congress that is very "liberal", using the political label. That label represents a collection of views and policies that often come as a package. It includes massive government spending, and that spending is now ruining us. It is setting us up for a fall. The country is in a dilemma. Americans are addicted to a level of government spending far beyond what the government collects in taxes, yet the government cannot raise taxes without hurting the economy that generates those taxes. But members of Congress would be committing political suicide to cut spending as much as it needs to be cut. Every special interest group would say, "not us!" Not enough Americans grasp the need for sacrifice, for personal suffering now to avoid greater suffering later. Or, they see the need for others to sacrifice, but not "me", not "now".
So we drift (or race) into ruin.
Probably, at some point, there will be a severe worldwide economic crisis or collapse, then a recovery. The American economy would suffer the most during the collapse and come back the least during the recovery. When the smoke clears, the United States would be much diminished as a nation. Europe would lead the recovery and become strong.
There is one thing about all this that conservative Americans may see, but the liberals do not. When all our deficit spending catches up with us and we have to pay the price, the price will be have to be paid not just because our nation has elected politicians who massively spend us into debt, but because we have elected politicians who believe in abortion and other obvious immorality. It is the same group of people. In that sense, our own sins will punish us. By voting into office people who stand for allowing women to have abortions for any reason, for allowing men to have civil unions with men and women with women and call it "marriage", for promoting a godless agenda in the educational system, we have also elected into office people who spend government money at such a rate that we bankrupt ourselves. It is the same group of people.
Yet conservatives are not without sin.
While God may allow the liberals to be the instrument of our punishment, the whole nation, liberals and conservatives alike, is guilty.
The whole nation is guilty before God, but the religious segment of our society doesn't see their half of the guilt. I mentioned Christmas. The religious part of our nation thinks it is pleasing God by observing Christmas. I think Christ hates Christmas with a passion because it represents open disobedience towards God and a disrespect and disbelief towards God's word. But few people see that.
We in the Church see it. We know it is wrong because more than seventy years ago Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong started a work to preach the truth he learned from the Bible to the public, and most of us know what we know because he and others sacrificed to "preach the gospel to the world".
We now have the obligation to make the same kind of sacrifice to share that same knowledge with others in the United States who have not heard it before. We have to sacrifice just as Mr. Armstrong and Church of God members sacrificed in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s to get the truth out. If we do not, we become hypocrites if we claim to live by every word of God. The need is more urgent than ever.
That is why I am concerned when a Church of God fellowship so organizes and structures itself that it does not have the money it needs to do more than a very small work of preaching to the public. That can happen because it is overloaded with paid ministers who cannot be laid off because the leadership is committed to protecting their salaries in return for their votes.
Well, perhaps that problem could be solved. Many problems contain seeds of opportunity within them. The opportunity is that such a fellowship, having an abundance of professional ministers on salary, has the manpower to produce much published content in a short amount of time. Articles, booklets, and books can be produced. Then if, IF God chooses to empower that group to do a strong work of warning the United States and other nations, IF the leadership of that fellowship is willing to make hard decisions, then ministerial payroll can be cut, pastors' congregational responsibilities can be consolidated, and money can be freed up to publish and broadcast that content to a wide audience.
I think Church of God a Worldwide Association (COGWA) is on the right track to ask ministers and members to contribute content for preaching the gospel (Link to their announcement: http://members.cogwa.org/news/announcements-for-december-24-2011/). The leadership of that Church is wise to suggest collaboration between pastors who can provide strong content and others who have writing skills to shape and polish that content. They are starting an Internet work because that can be cheap, and right now that is the only way they can start.
If this opportunity is handled wisely, the coming year or two could be a golden era for COGWA in the production of content that can be published or broadcast.
My suggestion is that they use this opportunity to not just write short articles, but to follow that up with longer booklets and books and to write scripts for a TV or radio broadcast, even if the money is not yet available to publish printed literature or to record and broadcast radio or TV programs. Use the window of opportunity for writing while it is open - the money for using it may come later.
Consider also the copyright issue. There has arisen, within all the division within the Church of God, a tradition that is not good. Literature is written by ministers employed by a Church of God organization. That literature is copyrighted by the organization. Then, there is a split, many ministers and members leave that organization to start a new one, but they cannot use their own writings! The organization that has copyrighted them owns the rights and won't give "the other guys" permission to use them.
Yet these books, booklets, and articles really belong to God. They are produced with GOD'S tithe, and that tithe belongs to God. If you pray for God's help and inspiration in the writing and editing of this material, and Christ inspires your writing, He does it for the benefit of those who will read or hear the material, nor your benefit. The material belongs to Christ. It is not just for the benefit of an organization.
So why should its use be restricted?
Why should one Church of God organization use copyright protection to restrain another Church of God organization from using its material to publish the truth of God's word to a world that needs it?
So my suggestion is, consider putting some or all of this new material in the public domain, or consider a policy of allowing other Church of God organizations to use it to preach to the gospel to the world. Or, if you don't do that, consider how you would answer someone who says, "If this material is for the benefit of God's work and is intended to help people, why would you restrain others from getting it out to people so it can do them good?" Or consider how you would answer, "If God is financing and inspiring the writing of this content, doesn't it belong to Christ, and if so, should one Church of God organization prohibit another Church of God organization from publishing it to the world, which is what Christ wants anyway?"
It is a shame to the whole Church of God that we are so divided we cannot share copyrights for the good of new prospective members God is calling who need to know about the truth of God and for the good of the nations that need to be warned about the tribulation to come if they don't repent. And while many leaders in the organized ministry claim to serve Christ, their copyright policy is a witness that they are serving themselves.
The recent split between UCG and COGWA puts a spotlight on this whole issue. If UCG simply gave COGWA permission to use the body of literature copyrighted by UCG, but produced and paid for by many members and ministers now in COGWA, what would be wrong with that? What is the purpose of this material? Is it to help people outside the Church who have not been involved in our Church divisions and infighting? And who does this material belong to? Does it belong to Christ?
Look at Paul's attitude: "Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice" (Philippians 1:15-18). Did you get that? Paul REJOICED when others, even out of a spirit of envy and strife trying to hurt Paul, preached the gospel! Why? Because Paul was serving Christ, not himself. With that kind of love for the gospel, do you think Paul would have denied these people the right to publish his own letters if there were copyright laws in those days? I doubt it.
Come to think of it, COGWA might not really want that permission from UCG. Why? What would COGWA do with it? They do not have the money to publish. Right now, they have an excuse for not spending money on TV, radio, and printed literature and a magazine. "We have to produce content, and that takes time." But what would happen to that excuse if UCG handed them a whole body of literature on a silver platter? They cannot say the content is not sound, because the ministers and members of COGWA helped to produce it when they were in UCG just a short time ago.
I think COGWA would be on the spot. UCG would seem to capture the high ground morally and ethically because they would seem to be showing love towards others by sharing the right to produce the literature. The permission could contain the requirement that the literature would not be edited without the permission of the copyright owner (UCG), except the contact info (Church name and address) would be changed to the publisher who pays the expense of printing and mailing it (COGWA). Authors' names, when included in the literature as published by UCG, could not be removed. But in giving permission, UCG could force COGWA to explain why they are not publishing it.
Actually, LCG could make the same offer to COGWA. The doctrines are mostly the same, except for governance, and Church literature for the public rarely speaks about the governance issue. No major Church of God organization has ever done this. Any Church of God leader with literature compatible with COGWA beliefs could offer COGWA permission, and if he did he might shake things up a bit. What would COGWA say? "We can't publish it because we don't have the money?" Why don't they have the money? "We have too many paid ministers in proportion to our members?" Why do they have too many paid ministers?
I started this post about conditions in the world and prospects for the year ahead, and look where that led. Train of thought. One thought leads to another. Start with the national debt and end with copyright sharing in the Church.
Yet everything ties together. There is a direct connection between events in the Church and events in the world. It is all the same issue. A warning message and the true gospel have to go out as a witness to the American people and people of other nations, especially in Israel. Everyone in the United States should hear a warning so they know that the disaster that is coming is not just because some liberals have been elected but the WHOLE nation, conservatives also, are sinning against God. But the divisions in the Church make it more difficult to get that warning out. Governance is also a part of that same issue, because a governance that makes it hard for a leadership to make tough budget decisions, decisions unpopular with a voting ministry, also makes it harder to find the money to preach a warning message.
The Church of God needs to warn the American people that they are doing wrong and will face the tribulation if they do not repent. They need that warning so they will know God was fair to warn them while they had time to repent, and they need to accept responsibility for ignoring the warning. The more the Church of God follows God's Word, the Bible, in everything including governance, the more effective we can be in getting that warning out.
And if we fail to get the warning out because of our own disbelieve or disobedience, then the blood of the nation is on our own head (Ezekiel 33:1-6).
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
The Responsibility of a Watchman, Chapter 3
The Ezekiel Warning, Chapter 3
The Effect of the Holocaust, Chapter 4
My Comments and Conclusion, Chapter 4
The Two Witnesses and God's Fairness, Chapter 4
The Church, Chapter 4
Why the Gospel Must Still Be Preached to the World, Chapter 4
Church Government, Chapter 7
CHAPTER 8 - GOVERNMENT IN THE CHURCH OF GOD
Monday, December 19, 2011
A Key to Faith
There is a need for more faith in the Church of God.
Many old-timers remember the atmosphere of faith that existed in the Church under Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's leadership in the 1940s, 1950s, and early 1960s, and even those of us who were not in the Church at that time are aware of the accounts of healings that took place. It seems there were many more healings in the Church at that time than now.
Mr. Armstrong had faith in God. He believed what God says in the Bible. He demonstrated that trust and belief in God's Word by giving up his own Sunday traditions and accepting correction in doctrine from the Bible. That attitude of willingness to believe the Bible more than anything else, more than his opinions, more than his traditions, and more than the teachings of any minister, was the foundation of Mr. Armstrong's faith. That is the way of life and of thinking that Mr. Armstrong practiced and it is the way of life and thinking he taught when he said, "Don't believe me, believe your Bible.
Mr. Armstrong always had a willingness to learn new knowledge from the Bible and to be corrected by the Bible, and it was because of that willingness that God was able to use him to restore lost doctrine.
I believe there is a direct connection between Mr. Armstrong's faith and trust in God's word, his willingness to change doctrine when necessary, and the healings that took place in those years.
Mr. Armstrong was willing to go, doctrinally, wherever Christ through the Bible would lead him (Revelation 14:4). He was more concerned with being faithful to teach the Bible accurately than he was about the reactions of human beings to the doctrines he taught. He was more concerned about what God thought than what man thought. He was not a people-pleaser. He was not trying to teach what the Church wanted to hear in order to build up and retain the largest possible number of members.
Since the death of Mr. Armstrong, some in the Church of God say with great emphasis that Mr. Armstrong was the Elijah to come (Malachi 4:5-6, Matthew 17:11), and they try to use that to say that Mr. Armstrong's doctrines can never be changed or added to, but in saying this they seek to overturn the most important doctrine Mr. Armstrong ever taught, that we must be willing to grow in knowledge and be corrected by the Bible. Some may think that our body of knowledge as a Church is complete and free of error, and that no doctrinal change is ever needed, but they forget that the Bible teaches that we know only in part (1 Corinthians 13:9) and that we are to grow in both grace and in knowledge (2 Peter 3:18).
When we preach the gospel, we ask the public to be willing to learn new things from the Bible. We have to be willing to do the same.
True faith comes from God, it is a gift, and we have our part to do also. We may ask God for the gift of faith, we trust Him to provide it, and we can seek God through prayer and fasting, which the Bible teaches. We also increase our faith as we exercise it, making right choices to believe and obey God when occasions arise.
And when we seek God with fasting, I think we would be wise to consider the teaching and positive example of Mr. Armstrong. He relates in his autobiography how he first began to fast when his wife Loma Armstrong was sick and when God was not answering his prayers for her healing. When he was fasting, he did not ask God for healing. Instead he asked God to show him what was wrong with HIM. He used fasting to humble himself so that he could more readily be corrected by the Bible, and he looked to the Bible, studying it while he was fasting, for the answer to WHY God was not answering his prayers for his wife's healing.
And after God corrected Mr. Armstrong and he received the correction, THEN God answered Mr. Armstrong's prayer for his wife's healing.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Our Attitude and Approach Towards God's Word, Chapter 1
The Source of Our Beliefs, Chapter 6
Practicing What We Preach, Chapter 6
Changing Doctrine, Chapter 6
A Lesson from the Autobiography, Chapter 6
Faith, Chapter 6
Many old-timers remember the atmosphere of faith that existed in the Church under Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's leadership in the 1940s, 1950s, and early 1960s, and even those of us who were not in the Church at that time are aware of the accounts of healings that took place. It seems there were many more healings in the Church at that time than now.
Mr. Armstrong had faith in God. He believed what God says in the Bible. He demonstrated that trust and belief in God's Word by giving up his own Sunday traditions and accepting correction in doctrine from the Bible. That attitude of willingness to believe the Bible more than anything else, more than his opinions, more than his traditions, and more than the teachings of any minister, was the foundation of Mr. Armstrong's faith. That is the way of life and of thinking that Mr. Armstrong practiced and it is the way of life and thinking he taught when he said, "Don't believe me, believe your Bible.
Mr. Armstrong always had a willingness to learn new knowledge from the Bible and to be corrected by the Bible, and it was because of that willingness that God was able to use him to restore lost doctrine.
I believe there is a direct connection between Mr. Armstrong's faith and trust in God's word, his willingness to change doctrine when necessary, and the healings that took place in those years.
Mr. Armstrong was willing to go, doctrinally, wherever Christ through the Bible would lead him (Revelation 14:4). He was more concerned with being faithful to teach the Bible accurately than he was about the reactions of human beings to the doctrines he taught. He was more concerned about what God thought than what man thought. He was not a people-pleaser. He was not trying to teach what the Church wanted to hear in order to build up and retain the largest possible number of members.
Since the death of Mr. Armstrong, some in the Church of God say with great emphasis that Mr. Armstrong was the Elijah to come (Malachi 4:5-6, Matthew 17:11), and they try to use that to say that Mr. Armstrong's doctrines can never be changed or added to, but in saying this they seek to overturn the most important doctrine Mr. Armstrong ever taught, that we must be willing to grow in knowledge and be corrected by the Bible. Some may think that our body of knowledge as a Church is complete and free of error, and that no doctrinal change is ever needed, but they forget that the Bible teaches that we know only in part (1 Corinthians 13:9) and that we are to grow in both grace and in knowledge (2 Peter 3:18).
When we preach the gospel, we ask the public to be willing to learn new things from the Bible. We have to be willing to do the same.
True faith comes from God, it is a gift, and we have our part to do also. We may ask God for the gift of faith, we trust Him to provide it, and we can seek God through prayer and fasting, which the Bible teaches. We also increase our faith as we exercise it, making right choices to believe and obey God when occasions arise.
And when we seek God with fasting, I think we would be wise to consider the teaching and positive example of Mr. Armstrong. He relates in his autobiography how he first began to fast when his wife Loma Armstrong was sick and when God was not answering his prayers for her healing. When he was fasting, he did not ask God for healing. Instead he asked God to show him what was wrong with HIM. He used fasting to humble himself so that he could more readily be corrected by the Bible, and he looked to the Bible, studying it while he was fasting, for the answer to WHY God was not answering his prayers for his wife's healing.
And after God corrected Mr. Armstrong and he received the correction, THEN God answered Mr. Armstrong's prayer for his wife's healing.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Our Attitude and Approach Towards God's Word, Chapter 1
The Source of Our Beliefs, Chapter 6
Practicing What We Preach, Chapter 6
Changing Doctrine, Chapter 6
A Lesson from the Autobiography, Chapter 6
Faith, Chapter 6
Thursday, December 15, 2011
How the Structure of Governance Affects Preaching the Gospel to the World
In my last post, I did not mention that COGWA has determined which members of the board will be up for re-election in four years and which will be up for re-election in eight years, according to a post in James Malm's Shining Light blog. This was determined according to a random drawing, in accordance with the governing documents. The terms of service of the following board members are eight years:
Arnold Hampton
Richard Pinelli
Larry Salyer
Richard Thompson
The terms of service of the following members are four years:
David Baker
Joel Meeker
Leon Walker
Also, a little under 8.5 million dollars was budgeted based on estimated income.
Here is the link to the post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=5837
As I said in the last post, COGWA does not seem to have the finances at this time to do a large work of preaching the gospel to the world and get a warning message out to the nations of Israel. There is a connection between their shortage of money for the gospel and their structure of governance.
Here is a quote from my book, Preaching the Gospel, chapter 7, section "Church Government", pages 347-348: "There is a direct connection between hierarchical government and the ability of a church organization to make the sacrifices and the hard decisions necessary to preach to the public. I think recent experience has shown and is showing that if the human leader or leaders at the top of an organization, who have the authority to determine the budget and how much money is spent on preaching the gospel to the world and how much is spent on ministers' salaries, are themselves elected by the ministers, it is unlikely they will make the hard decisions necessary to allocate sufficient resources to really finish the work of preparing Israel for the tribulation. It is just common sense that many ministers will not elect someone who would reduce their salaries or lay some of them off if that were necessary." This statement was written several years ago, long before it became apparent to me or to most people that UCG would split.
And now, COGWA is becoming an example to illustrate the truth of that statement.
How important is it that we get a warning message to Israel about the tribulation to come if we as a nation do not repent?
It is vital that the people in our countries hear the warning BEFORE the tribulation begins. This isn't just for making new members. It is for showing the public that God is fair to give them a warning before He punishes them. It is for helping Israel to accept their responsibility for their sins and the resulting suffering that will come upon them.
Most of the people will not heed the warning. That is expected. But then, when they go through the tribulation, they will remember that they heard the warning. Most important of all, they will remember their own responses, that they laughed at it, became angry, or ignored it, but did not check up in the Bible with an open mind to see if the warning was true. And that remembrance will help them realize what fools they have been. That will be their first step towards accepting their own responsibility for their sins, which is a first step towards repentance.
But if they don't hear the warning, how will they react in the tribulation, and even afterwards in the millennium? "God wasn't fair. I thought I was doing the right thing by keeping Sunday, Christmas, Easter, and using holy pictures and images when I pray. No one warned me that I was doing anything wrong, so why should I be punished?"
How will people react in the tribulation if they have not heard a warning? The closest thing to the tribulation in modern history may be the Holocaust when millions of Jews suffered and died in Nazi concentration camps during and before World War II. If you haven't studied the Holocaust, you might think that suffering always draws people closer to God, but that is not true. Many Jews who were religious before the Holocaust lost all faith in God because they couldn't understand why a just God would allow it, according to survivors who actually lived in the concentration camps, as I have documented with quotes from survivors in chapter 4 of my book. That could be a picture of the attitude of distrust and resentment towards God that the tribulation will produce if our people hear no warning. We MUST get a warning out.
But could Mr. Franks make the tough decisions to consolidate congregations, to let some paid ministers go and let those who remain serve several nearby congregations, to free up 30% or 40% of the budget to do a powerful work of preaching the gospel to the world and giving Israel the Ezekiel warning before it is too late? I doubt he could do that to the very ministers who elected him and his supporters to the Ministerial Board of Directors.
That is the connection between the structure of governance in the Church today and the ability of the Church to get a warning message out that is so vital to Israel's repentance during the tribulation and their conversion in the millennium. And since Israel is to serve as a model nation in the millennium for other nations in the world, their conversion is vital for the conversion and saving of the whole world.
How important is that?
By making the board directly dependent on the approval of the ministry, and the president dependent on the board, COGWA has organized itself into a form in which its ability to get the warning out depends on the collective willingness of the entire ministry to sacrifice some of their own income. It may be that from God's point of view, not every paid minister in COGWA should be employed as a minister at this time, but neither Jim Franks nor any other leader of COGWA is in a position to take paid ministers off the payroll to finance the preaching of the gospel.
I fear that COGWA may become another COG fellowship that mostly just "feeds" itself.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
CHAPTER 4 - WHY PREACH THE GOSPEL?
CHAPTER 8 - GOVERNMENT IN THE CHURCH OF GOD
Church Government, Chapter 7
Arnold Hampton
Richard Pinelli
Larry Salyer
Richard Thompson
The terms of service of the following members are four years:
David Baker
Joel Meeker
Leon Walker
Also, a little under 8.5 million dollars was budgeted based on estimated income.
Here is the link to the post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=5837
As I said in the last post, COGWA does not seem to have the finances at this time to do a large work of preaching the gospel to the world and get a warning message out to the nations of Israel. There is a connection between their shortage of money for the gospel and their structure of governance.
Here is a quote from my book, Preaching the Gospel, chapter 7, section "Church Government", pages 347-348: "There is a direct connection between hierarchical government and the ability of a church organization to make the sacrifices and the hard decisions necessary to preach to the public. I think recent experience has shown and is showing that if the human leader or leaders at the top of an organization, who have the authority to determine the budget and how much money is spent on preaching the gospel to the world and how much is spent on ministers' salaries, are themselves elected by the ministers, it is unlikely they will make the hard decisions necessary to allocate sufficient resources to really finish the work of preparing Israel for the tribulation. It is just common sense that many ministers will not elect someone who would reduce their salaries or lay some of them off if that were necessary." This statement was written several years ago, long before it became apparent to me or to most people that UCG would split.
And now, COGWA is becoming an example to illustrate the truth of that statement.
How important is it that we get a warning message to Israel about the tribulation to come if we as a nation do not repent?
It is vital that the people in our countries hear the warning BEFORE the tribulation begins. This isn't just for making new members. It is for showing the public that God is fair to give them a warning before He punishes them. It is for helping Israel to accept their responsibility for their sins and the resulting suffering that will come upon them.
Most of the people will not heed the warning. That is expected. But then, when they go through the tribulation, they will remember that they heard the warning. Most important of all, they will remember their own responses, that they laughed at it, became angry, or ignored it, but did not check up in the Bible with an open mind to see if the warning was true. And that remembrance will help them realize what fools they have been. That will be their first step towards accepting their own responsibility for their sins, which is a first step towards repentance.
But if they don't hear the warning, how will they react in the tribulation, and even afterwards in the millennium? "God wasn't fair. I thought I was doing the right thing by keeping Sunday, Christmas, Easter, and using holy pictures and images when I pray. No one warned me that I was doing anything wrong, so why should I be punished?"
How will people react in the tribulation if they have not heard a warning? The closest thing to the tribulation in modern history may be the Holocaust when millions of Jews suffered and died in Nazi concentration camps during and before World War II. If you haven't studied the Holocaust, you might think that suffering always draws people closer to God, but that is not true. Many Jews who were religious before the Holocaust lost all faith in God because they couldn't understand why a just God would allow it, according to survivors who actually lived in the concentration camps, as I have documented with quotes from survivors in chapter 4 of my book. That could be a picture of the attitude of distrust and resentment towards God that the tribulation will produce if our people hear no warning. We MUST get a warning out.
But could Mr. Franks make the tough decisions to consolidate congregations, to let some paid ministers go and let those who remain serve several nearby congregations, to free up 30% or 40% of the budget to do a powerful work of preaching the gospel to the world and giving Israel the Ezekiel warning before it is too late? I doubt he could do that to the very ministers who elected him and his supporters to the Ministerial Board of Directors.
That is the connection between the structure of governance in the Church today and the ability of the Church to get a warning message out that is so vital to Israel's repentance during the tribulation and their conversion in the millennium. And since Israel is to serve as a model nation in the millennium for other nations in the world, their conversion is vital for the conversion and saving of the whole world.
How important is that?
By making the board directly dependent on the approval of the ministry, and the president dependent on the board, COGWA has organized itself into a form in which its ability to get the warning out depends on the collective willingness of the entire ministry to sacrifice some of their own income. It may be that from God's point of view, not every paid minister in COGWA should be employed as a minister at this time, but neither Jim Franks nor any other leader of COGWA is in a position to take paid ministers off the payroll to finance the preaching of the gospel.
I fear that COGWA may become another COG fellowship that mostly just "feeds" itself.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
CHAPTER 4 - WHY PREACH THE GOSPEL?
CHAPTER 8 - GOVERNMENT IN THE CHURCH OF GOD
Church Government, Chapter 7
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
