Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate

Wannabe Exegetes Obliterated by COG Academic Scholars (L)
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Wannabe Exegetes Obliterated by COG Academic Scholars (L) Old Time Country Preacher
http://www.faithnews.cc/?p=25442

Last edited by Old Time Country Preacher on 12/21/17 6:04 pm; edited 1 time in total
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 15559
9/15/17 1:48 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post OTCP ... Mat
OTCP, are you in support of this doctrine statement? What would you do to deal with those who openly violate this position and promote drinking in moderation? It seems that if the statement/study is an end point and there is no consequences for behavior contrary to the conclusions, what's the point of the statement. It becomes another well-crafted document that is "filed away" with a number of other well-crafted doctrine statements. Will there be instructions to read this document in every local church during a service or business conference? Will it simply appear in an Assembly Minutes and than be shelved in the "Vatican Library" (General Offices) along with other past position papers?

I'm not trying to incite you on this issue, but practice and policy seem to be disjointed these days. An example is Initial Evidence, a key doctrine of most Pentecostal denominations and a "touchstone" of the Pentecostal Charismatic Church of North America fellowship. Yet, many ministers and local church within this denominations have long since moved away from this doctrine.

What will come of this? Will it be enforced?

Mat
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1972
9/16/17 6:47 am


View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Reply with quote
Post bradfreeman
Dr. Arrington's "brilliant" defense:

The author says Dr. Arrington "brilliantly" defends total abstinence. In his defense of tithing, he omitted the LARGEST passage in the Bible on tithing (one in which God OK's alcohol), I'm not surprised that he has done it again. Any fair treatment of a subject will fairly consider the scriptures FOR and AGAINST a matter if there are such.

Here is God's OT position on strong drink:

Deut 14:26 You may spend the money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of the Lord your God and rejoice, you and your household.

Of course Arrington would fail to acknowledge that God OK'd the spending of tithe money on "whatever your heart desires" or especially "wine or strong drink" or to be spent and enjoyed by "you and your household."

Arrington omits the 1 Cor 11 passage where the Corinthian church obviously used intoxicating beverage in the Lord's supper. Paul does not tell them not to use intoxicating beverages but instead tells them not to get drunk and to do their drinking at home.

1 Cor 11:20 Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper, 21 for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I will not praise you.

Arrington then suggests that Jesus never tasted alcohol. Jesus Himself said He came eating and drinking (Mat 11:19)...and for this He was called a drunkard, a winebibber. You don't get the label "drunkard" for drinking grape juice. He omits Jesus' words in Mat 26:29 Jesus says he will never "again" drink wine until He drinks it with us in the kingdom.

Arrington omits Luke 5:33,34 where Jesus acknowledged that His disciples also drank.

Arrington omits Jesus' teaching that "nothing that enters into a man defiles Him" (Mat 15:11), Paul's teaching that the "kingdom of God is not meat and drink" (Rom 14:17) and "nothing is unclean of itself (Rom 14:14)."

Arrington then offers several weak suppositions about the wedding at Cana that hardly form the basis for a church-wide doctrine that prohibits people from ministry. Jesus Himself said, as anyone who knows wine would obviously say, that the best wine is "old wine." Old wine is fermented wine.

He also fails to acknowledge that the qualifications for leaders listed in Titus 1 and 1 Tim 3 both only disqualify those who are addicted to alcohol.

His analysis of Paul's words to Timothy to "use a little wine" totally ignore the fact that Paul told Timothy to "use a little wine!" Paul obviously did not adhere to total abstinence or believe Timothy's use of a little wine would disqualify him from ministry.

Teaching moderation and self-control is good. Drunkenness is bad. But it is obvious where Arrington wanted to arrive (as in his book on tithing) by the shear quantity of scripture that is omitted.

Arrington's position, and the COG's, on this issue would disqualify all of the Apostle's, Timothy, the Corinthians, Paul and Jesus from ministry and membership in the denomination...too bad.
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/
Acts-dicted
Posts: 9027
9/16/17 7:53 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Nature Boy Florida
Right on OTCP.

And this thread is even better when you can see the rank amateur Brad trying and failing miserably, as usual, to refute it.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today!
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16599
9/16/17 8:10 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post I've always been a teetotaler, bonnie knox
and I think there is a good case for the wisdom of complete abstinence, but I think Brad is correct in pointing out the weakness of the scriptural foundations for the argument made in the position paper.
I've never had an alcoholic beverage in my life, and I don't foresee a good reason to change that, but I think we have to be intellectually honest about the debate.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
9/16/17 8:54 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post bradfreeman
Nature Boy Florida wrote:
Right on OTCP.

And this thread is even better when you can see the rank amateur Brad trying and failing miserably, as usual, to refute it.


Dr Arrington, NBF and others apparently think that God doesn't know how to distinguish between wine and grape juice. Well, He does...

Num 6:3 he shall abstain from wine and strong drink; he shall drink no vinegar, whether made from wine or strong drink, nor shall he drink any grape juice nor eat fresh or dried grapes.

Jesus made 180 gallons of good wine for a wedding party, not the "juice of grapes."
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/
Acts-dicted
Posts: 9027
9/16/17 9:19 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Brad wasn't rank :P Dan Eason
I don't feel like I have a dog in this hunt, it's not a topic I worry about and I am not Church of God, but - IMHO Brad used the scriptures to speak for themselves.
_________________
http://areyoureadyfortherapture.blogspot.com/
Friendly Face
Posts: 473
9/16/17 2:41 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post I'll go with the wise guys.... spartanfan
Dr. Frenchie (my teacher) and Nature Boy (my apprentice). Those are a couple of guys you can count on to be right. Brad - a broken record player stuck on "all things are lawful" over and over again so you don't get to hear about all things not being expedient. Our supposedly smartest guys (guys like me and French) affirm total abstinence so the non CoG interlopers have nothing to add. Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3638
9/16/17 3:38 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: I'll go with the wise guys.... Dan Eason
spartanfan wrote:
Dr. Frenchie (my teacher) and Nature Boy (my apprentice). Those are a couple of guys you can count on to be right. Brad - a broken record player stuck on "all things are lawful" over and over again so you don't get to hear about all things not being expedient. Our supposedly smartest guys (guys like me and French) affirm total abstinence so the non CoG interlopers have nothing to add.


WOW!
I am shocked by the tone of this post.
_________________
http://areyoureadyfortherapture.blogspot.com/
Friendly Face
Posts: 473
9/16/17 3:50 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Sorry Dan spartanfan
You are really a nice guy and my comment really should have been aimed at Brad instead of shot gunning everyone who sees validity in some things he contributes. I was really glad to see some of the greatest Theologians in our fellowship do an exhaustive search of all Scriptures and take my side over Brad's. 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3638
9/16/17 4:15 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Do what you thinks best Brad ... Mat
Do what you thinks best Brad, but for those who wish to live for Christ according to their convictions (such as the Amish or abstainers or pacifist, etc), you're condemnation of their spiritual sacrifice has no value.

Mat
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1972
9/16/17 4:30 pm


View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Reply with quote
Post Sorry, it won't work. Aaron Scott
I have never had a single sip of alcohol. And I never intend to. But there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that we can derive complete abstinence as a command of scripture...unless you are a Nazarite.

Period.

Yes, I believe we SHOULD be abstinent. But that is my belief based on the dangers that drink holds for those who abuse it. It is NOT based on a clear-cut statement in scripture.

DRUNKENESS is contray to God. But drinking, in and of itself, is not.

To say that Jesus turned the water into wine...but didn't drink any Himself holds no weight. You might as well claim that David was not guilty of Uriah's death since he didn't kill him by his own hand.

I do believe it is perfectly acceptable to say, "The Church of God, because of the unworthy elements that surround or come from the drinking of alcohol, holds that our members should not drink at all. Not because it is, in and of itself, a sin, but because of the strong moral danger that it presents."

Consider those Islamic beheading videos we have heard about. It may not be a sin at all to watch them. But as for me, I refuse to even consider it. Why? Because it cannot be unseen. Because it can contaminate my thought life for the rest of my life. Because it is contrary, it seems, to the the notion of "whatsoever things are pure."

The same goes for alcohol. It may not be a sin, but it can certainly become one. It can certainly take us to places that are utterly at odds with the love of Jesus.

So let's put it that way...instead of building a fake case against it from scripture. If we act like the scripture is really calling for abstinence when it is not, we are using the scripture amiss. Best to simply say we believe that the dangers so outweigh the benefits, that it is best to avoid it altogether.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
9/16/17 5:44 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Sorry, it won't work. Cojak
Aaron Scott wrote:
...

So let's put it that way...instead of building a fake case against it from scripture. If we act like the scripture is really calling for abstinence when it is not, we are using the scripture amiss. Best to simply say we believe that the dangers so outweigh the benefits, that it is best to avoid it altogether.


I must agree with Aaron. I had a brother, a brother in law and several friends who were alcoholics. Some even died very young. I know first hand the terrible things this can do to a life. I have even drank too much personally in my own life, thanks to God's grace I am still his, but I must agree with Aaron here. It is best never to drink but total abstinence is not taught in the scripture. Idea
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24269
9/16/17 10:22 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Sorry, it won't work. Cojak
Aaron Scott wrote:
...

So let's put it that way...instead of building a fake case against it from scripture. If we act like the scripture is really calling for abstinence when it is not, we are using the scripture amiss. Best to simply say we believe that the dangers so outweigh the benefits, that it is best to avoid it altogether.


I must agree with Aaron. I had a brother, a brother in law and several friends who were alcoholics. Some even died very young. I know first hand the terrible things this can do to a life. I have even drank too much personally in my own life, thanks to God's grace I am still HIS, but I must agree with Aaron here. It is best never to drink but total abstinence is not taught in the scripture. Idea
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24269
9/16/17 10:25 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Position Paper Change Agent
Church of God position papers are always going to come up to support the current COG position which is abstinence. The men doing this paper are good men but they did not choose to look at other scriptures that show that drinking in moderation is not condenmened in the Bible.

Even in a court of law you are susposed to hear all the evidence before making a conclusion. Brad won and BTW I do not drink strong drink.

This is a good example of why we need to know the scriptures because even the Church higharchy can lead us astray.

Why do denominations want to control how we believe and chastise us if we do not believe in the proposed intrepretation? If we can go to hell for believing wrong all of us would be going. Freedom to believe the scripture should be a fundamental position of Christainity.
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1449
9/17/17 8:41 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: I'll go with the wise guys.... bradfreeman
spartanfan wrote:
Dr. Frenchie (my teacher) and Nature Boy (my apprentice). Those are a couple of guys you can count on to be right. Brad - a broken record player stuck on "all things are lawful" over and over again so you don't get to hear about all things not being expedient. Our supposedly smartest guys (guys like me and French) affirm total abstinence so the non CoG interlopers have nothing to add.


Sparty, I wish they had said "all things are not expedient." However, they didn't. They affirmed the disqualification from ministry and membership those who engage in lawful activity and took a position not supported by scripture.
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/
Acts-dicted
Posts: 9027
9/17/17 8:58 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Do what you thinks best Brad ... bradfreeman
Mat wrote:
Do what you thinks best Brad, but for those who wish to live for Christ according to their convictions (such as the Amish or abstainers or pacifist, etc), you're condemnation of their spiritual sacrifice has no value.

Mat


Thanks Mat,

I don't condemn anyone who is being led by the Spirit. Romans 14 is clear that we are not look down on anyone whose faith is weak (who have rules about what they are allowed to eat and drink). To their own Master, they stand or fall and they will stand. My concern is that these writers perpetuate a position that disqualifies Jesus from ministry or membership in the COG...if He wanted to join.

We don't live FOR Christ, He lives through us...we live AS Christ.
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/
Acts-dicted
Posts: 9027
9/17/17 9:02 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
I don't think it's healthy for everyone to have to state this prior to offering an opinion -- but, for the record, I also practice abstinence and would advise others to do the same.

Here's my question to those arguing in favor of this position paper. I hope it can be answered as the simple question it is.

The denial of access to the Lord's Table is an act of discipline ordered against proclaiming believers who engage in persistent, unrepentant sin. I'm not trying to make any connection between alcohol and the wine of Communion. I'm asking how serious you are about believing this is a biblical injunction.

Would you affirm that believers who consume any amount of alcohol should be denied access to the Lord's Table?
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
9/17/17 11:05 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: I'll go with the wise guys.... Tom Sterbens
spartanfan wrote:
Dr. Frenchie (my teacher) and Nature Boy (my apprentice). Those are a couple of guys you can count on to be right. Brad - a broken record player stuck on "all things are lawful" over and over again so you don't get to hear about all things not being expedient. Our supposedly smartest guys (guys like me and French) affirm total abstinence so the non CoG interlopers have nothing to add.

First - my admiration and honor of Dr Arrington know no bounds - he is a mentor to me and I am a disciple of his.

Second - like others on here - I do not drink. I have offered reasons for that at other times (on this forum).

Much of what this position paper contained is also contained Dr Arrington's contribution to the book, "Issues in Contemporary Pentecostalism," in the chapter entitled, "The Dangers of Strong Drink."

With all respect, I disagreed with his conclusions about total abstinence then, and I do now. I told him, "Personally, I just can't get there." He was, and is, so very gracious in dialog.

The scriptural call to sobriety and the refutation of drunkenness seems irrefutable to me. A dogmatic conclusion regarding total abstinence is not.
The linguistic support, historical evidence and scientific considerations for a "no-alcohol" wine (in scripture) seems strained at best.

I offer what I've written with no malice or any fragrance of arrogance or superiority - just the fruit of scores of hours of research I've done personally due to my interest in ministering to addiction and an addictive culture. And I offer it with all measure of humility I can muster because of my deep value of spiritual fatherhood and the countless hours in which Dr Arrington has given me access to him personally. He is an absolutely authentic worshiping, son of God, whose heart and passion for God has never been threatened by his amazing mind and academic engagement. Love that guy!!!
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4507
9/17/17 2:15 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Looking on the COG website Mat
Looking on the COG website under "Practical Commitments":

ADDICTION AND ENSLAVEMENT
One of the primary benefits of our liberty in Christ is freedom from the domination of negative forces (John 8:32, 36; Romans 6:14; 8:2). We are counseled not to put ourselves again under bondage (Galatians 5:1). Therefore, a Christian must totally abstain from all alcoholic beverages and other habit-forming and mood-altering chemical substances and refrain from the use of tobacco in any form, marijuana and all other addictive substances, and further, must refrain from any activity (such as gambling or gluttony) which defiles the body as the temple of God or which dominates and enslaves the spirit that has been made free in Christ (Proverbs 20:1; 23:20-35; Isaiah 28:7; 1 Corinthians 3:17; 5:11; 6:10; 2 Corinthians 7:1; James 1:21).

My position is, if there is liberty on alcoholic beverages such as beer and wine (as some argue for), I see little to no scripture addressing tobacco, marijuana or even opiate based substances. If the line between sinner and saint is drawn at the line of intoxication, then the individual can "walk up" to the door of indulging as much as he desires as long as he does not pass over the threshold into the house of drunkenness. Its similar to the old game "ring and run", where you go to a house, ring the doorbell and run away before the "strongman" of the house opens the door and catches you. If one generation can drink as long as they do not get drunk and profess Christ, the next generation can smoke marijuana as long as they don't get stoned. You tell me I'm wrong for not drinking and I'll tell your kids that its OK with Jesus to smoke a joint.

A term used when I was young for those who did not drink was that of being a "lightweight", in the since that we were somehow weaker and less experienced in the things of the world. Some today say those Christians who believe in abstinence are "spiritual lightweights". I say a commitment to abstinence as a Christian is a "radical" spiritual position. Some Christians seek the "lukewarm" life of being like the culture, radicals seek to transform the culture for Christ (in my opinion).

As has been said, some Christians today know more about brewing beer than the know about the Bible.

Mat
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1972
9/17/17 6:23 pm


View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.