Actscelerate.com

OHIOBISHOPBILL

You can change 1 thing in the Church of God…what?

Friendly Face Posts: 101 **2/17/14 10:28 am**

I'm writing this week and one of my studies this weekend finds me in Joshua 3 where the people are told that they must be mindful of the location of the ark of the covenant because they find themselves in a place where they have never been before. It caused me to be reminded that often I'm in the same state--living, ministering in places and environments where I've never been before and so the change challenges me because it is unpredictable and like the People of God, unfamiliar.

I think the same is true of our beloved Church of God. These are unprecedented times and as such, change can challenge us. I think about the church my grandfather labored in and the Church of God does not resemble remotely that church in so many ways--but I don't think that is necessarily bad! Is it? Change is indication of movement and while we may disagree on whether this change or that one is good, the fact is change is part of our landscape and we must accept that.

So, if you could change just 1 thing (and you can only change one thing so I'm thinking of the things that would most dramatically impact the direction, momentum and spirit of our church) what would it be?

I'll go first…

It seems to me that we must change the way in the Church of God we look at the culture we are in and quit thinking that this is society of christian leaning people. We are missionaries in a culture that does not know God, does not know what God has done and are conditioned to be fearful, resisting to any inclusion of God in their thoughts or actions. The Church must change its strategy and thinking in order to address this big change. Jesus said the world would hate us and we keep leading our churches like we have favored status. We must change the language that we communicate Jesus with. We are called to bring hope of Jesus Christ to a world that is more open to homosexuality than any before it, more godless than anytime in history and less interested in the trappings of religion than ever. I continue to believe people are open to Jesus and that we serve a God whose power to do miracles in today's society for His glory has not changed.

Now, your turn.

What is the 1 thing you would change?

Bishop Bill

Nick Park

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1021 **2/17/14 12:01 pm**

Bill,I'm in full agreement with the one thing you picked.

In the early 11th Century King Canute of England wanted to stop obsequious flattery by his courtiers. They had praised him as having the power to stop the tide from coming in. So Canute had them carry him on his throne down to the ocean's edge where he loudly commanded the tide not to come in. Needless to say, both king and throne ended up getting wet.

Today, both in Europe and North America, there is a rising tide of secularism. It's no good bleating about it - it is part of a major worldwide cultural shift similar in scope to the Fall of the Roman Empire, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment or the Industrial Revolution.

We have a choice to make. We can loudly bewail the loss of the privileges the Church enjoyed under Christendom - demanding that the non-religious majority should live by laws that enforce our religious morals. Or we can learn to live more like the Early Church of the First Three Centuries after Calvary - behaving more like King Jesus than King Canute and thinking more like ambassadors of Christ than like a frustrated Christian version of the Taliban that wants to use the law of the land to enforce our vision of righteousness.

In fact secularism can be very good news for authentic Christianity. In Europe we are further along this process than is the case in the United States. We are seeing a huge decline in nominal religion and established churches such as Catholicism, Lutheranism and Episcopalians. But we are seeing a dramatic rise in Pentecostals and other Bible-believing Evangelicals. We are learning the truth, already noted by scholars such as Alister McGrath, that Pentecostalism flourishes better in a secular society than any other form of religious faith.

So I agree that the Church in general (not just the Church of God) needs to stop trying to fight a rearguard action against inevitable cultural change. We can't stop the incoming tide. What we can do is learn to swim.
_________________
Senior Pastor, Solid Rock Church, Drogheda
National Overseer, Church of God, Ireland
Executive Director, Evangelical Alliance Ireland

http://eaiseanchai.wordpress.com/

Nick Park

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1021 **2/17/14 12:06 pm**

And since Bill already picked the one thing that I would change, I'm going to add a second thing that I would like to change about the Church of God.

From an organizational standpoint, I would ditch Roberts' Rules of Order. They are a hindrance to sensible discussion and stop the Church doing the work of the Kingdom.
_________________
Senior Pastor, Solid Rock Church, Drogheda
National Overseer, Church of God, Ireland
Executive Director, Evangelical Alliance Ireland

http://eaiseanchai.wordpress.com/

Cojak

01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011 Posts: 24285 **2/17/14 1:28 pm**

I agree wholeheartedly with Brothers Bill and Nick. That is a deep thought. We the followers will follow the leaders whose hearts are in the charge.

Now a complicated decision that seems to be accepted quietly but never expressed. I remember the Monthly report # saved, # sanctified, #filled with the HG. The sanctified was always a problem to me.

Now that I am speaking from the congregation, I would like to see a very good explanation to the COG on sanctification. We travel a lot and visit many churches. I am a firm believer now that most of the COG accepts sanctification as a growing blessing or doctrine. Actually I think overall we probably agree more with the AOG on the subject, I know I do.

I have NEVER in the last 20 years saw or heard of anyone 'seeking' sanctification. Embarassed

_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **2/17/14 2:08 pm**

Nick,

I would certainly agree that we should not try to enforce "our" religious beliefs on others like the Taliban does or like the Roman Catholic Inquisition did during the Middle Ages or like John Calvin did in the city Geneva in his day.

Even still the fact remains that no society anywhere has a right to enact laws that contradict the eternal moral law of God. They may have the ability to do so, but they certainly have no right to do so.

For instance, if a government decided to make murder legal, it could never be truly justified in doing so, and good citizens would be duty bound to stand against such unrighteousness in government. Alas, they already have done this.

So to say we shouldn't try to 'enforce' our religious beliefs on others is to basically allow the secularists (who have no really objective moral standard at all) to dictate to us what is right and what is wrong, and is tantamount to endorsing immorality/sin altogether.

wayne

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1274 **2/17/14 3:08 pm**

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **2/17/14 3:13 pm**

There would still need to be some form of order by which to conduct business. Is there one that works better than Robert's Rules?

Aaron Scott

Robert's Rules

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6042 **2/17/14 4:01 pm**

I think what Nick and other are looking for is a way to allow discussion without forcing everyone to know all the particular terms--and without allowing people to USE Robert's Rules as a means of stopping legitimate debate or progress.

That is the issue for me.

I shouldn't have to become a parliamentary procedure expert to simply speak my mind without interruption.

And no one should be allowed to squelch honest and needed debate because they know more about Robert's Rules than they know about the Bible.

The keys should be brevity, politeness, honesty, fair play, and flexibility (or something like these things). If the Golden Rule can't guide us in discussing things, nothing will.

Aaron Scott

My view

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6042 **2/17/14 4:10 pm**

To me, there is one very important change that needs to be made. It regards the setting of the agenda and business meetings: ABSOLUTE TRANSPARENCY (except in cases of, say, church discipline that require confidentiality).

If every single submission for inclusion in the agenda were revealed, and if every comment and every vote were public record, you would see a difference, I think. If nothing else, it would eliminate the whole conspiracy theory that there is a small group at the top that pushes THEIR agenda, etc. It might be that some very important issues showed up on the agenda, while some lesser ones waited.

Business meetings that are public record will ensure that men who vote at odds with the field will be accountable to the field. It will become less and less about name recognition and more about a person's position on certain matters.

It would be nice to couple this with allowing voting by phone/e-mail, etc., so that we could vote on what goes on the agenda (items are placed on the agenda depending on the number of votes they receive, except in cases where the General Overseer, say, recommends that maybe one or two issues be given priority).

I do not believe there is a conspiracy, by the way. I do believe, however that there is not enough accountability for the votes that are case and the decisions that are made. If you don't know how people voted, how can you reward them or hold them accountable at election time?

Poimen

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 5657 **2/17/14 4:41 pm**

Tracy S Hamilton

very interesting question and a good one!

Golf Cart Mafia Capo Posts: 2714 **2/17/14 5:08 pm**

I agree with Bill about changing how we communicate the gospel. That would be at or at the least, close to the top of my list.

I also agree with Nick about Robert's Rules.....

One change that I would like to see is as it relates to mentoring others. I know this might be done on some scale, but not to the measure of Fathers raising up Sons.

I don't believe that there are enough Fathers raising up Sons in the ministry. It would be the Elijah -- Elisha affect. The mentoring should be because of relationships. I know that there are different ministries out there that you can pay to mentor you, but that is NOT relationship. If you quit paying, there is no more mentoring, so I don't think those scenarios are of the Father - Son relationship.

I can honestly say that at 52 years old, I never really had a mentor in ministry. I have worked with some great men, but they really did not spend time truly investing and mentoring. It was all about making sure the ministry you were leading was doing well and growing.

I have the best dad anyone could ever ask for and have been mentored from him, but not as it related to ministry.

I think we need to be raising up Sons and Daughters in the faith and ministry and I think this would go a long way in developing what Bill's idea was all about.

One other thing by the way...... do away with the practical commitments and emphasize living according to God's Word as the standard!

OK that is two things!

Clint Wills

One thing I'd change...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 5161 **2/17/14 5:36 pm**

This may be more than one, but the broad stroke would be to eliminate anything that is more divisive than necessary. I believe there are certain principles that we hold that are 100% Biblical and are not available for debate or change. Other things, however, are positions that we cannot back up with the Word 100%. I believe those things draw unnecessary lines between believers and hinder our ability to effectively minister the gospel.

As far as Robert's Rules, I kinda like having them there. It isn't rocket science to have a basic understanding, and may keep the debate more educated. Of course, Mr. Soddy Daisy has proven that it isn't fool-proof, but it has got to be better than a free-for-all. I can't imagine what it would be like if everyone was allowed to blurt out whatever they want whenever they want.

muricewatsonsfriend

start from scratch

Acts-celerater Posts: 733 **2/17/14 6:02 pm**

that's the one thing i'd change. i tried to come up with a "start from scratch" motion a few years ago. our system is stuck and its noones fault; it is what happens to things that get organized.
what started our movement (i still believe its a movement) was that a few people that wanted more came together. God showed up.
start from scratch; impossible, but necessary.

-Darius

W. Ray Williams

How could we morph back into a movement?

Acts-celerater Posts: 881 **2/17/14 6:24 pm**

In the early COG it was a movement. The messy, unbridled, and sometimes heretical movement that saw tremendous growth and powerful moves of the Holy Spirit.

It was akin to the early church when things were messy and unbridled and sometimes heretical. They saw tremendous growth and powerful moves of the Holy Spirit.

We are now a bureaucracy with unending rules, power plays, power people and ruling caste. There is memory and nostalgia that is more powerful than the present and a defensiveness toward anything that smacks of "modern".

We are no longer a movement. The fire in the belly is slowly going out.

If I could change one thing, it would be to transform our mindset into one of a movement and not the prison we now live in. How cool would it have been to live in the time of Paul or Tomlin.
_________________
Pax,

Ray

roughridercog

Open and complete voting results

Acts Mod Posts: 25305 **2/17/14 6:44 pm**

Regarding AB's and even pastors. Show how many votes a returning AB received. Show whether he really got the vote. Votes tabulated by outside agency.
_________________
Doctor of Bovinamodulation

skinnybishop

My humble suggestion

skinnybishop · Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1055 **2/17/14 7:24 pm**

No disrespect is intended here to the OP.

But I would like to see some adjustment in leadership authority and responsibility. It seems to me that the most powerful office in our denomination is an Administrative Bishop (State Overseer). While I have mostly had positive experiences with AB's, I can see where the extent of their authority could be a problem. If a minister has a legitimate issue with an AB, what course of action does he or she realistically have? It seems there is none.

Perhaps the office of District Overseer could be revived to function in a more hands on role. That would lessen the load of current AB's and give pastors another level of leadership to carry concerns or issues, if initial efforts break down. What I'm saying is, there would be another person to express concerns too.....not a single person.

Right now, if there are issues, a pastor generally only can deal with the AB and above him, there is nowhere to go. While we do have DO's in place, they are not always given a great deal of authority or responsibility.

I hope what I'm saying makes sense.....I'd just like to see some of the authority of State Overseer's delegated.

DHDRabbi

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13680 **2/17/14 7:26 pm**

I can't name just one thing. But at the top of my list would be to revamp the teachings/practical commitments to everything I believe which would include an emphasis on HOLY, HEALTHY and FIT living!! Smile

BTW, my father-in-law brought Robert's Rules of Order to the assembly. I assume he did it for a good reason. Maybe the assembly was out of control. I don't know. I do trust his decision with everything within me. I miss him!

ITPOME2005

Here is mine....

Friendly Face Posts: 243 **2/17/14 9:33 pm**

I wish that we could all trust one another. There is mistrust from the laity to State offices. Overseers do not trust ministers, ministers don't trust overseers, always expecting an ulterior or political motive. Local pastors cannot even fellowship with the minister across town because they don't trust one another. When did we become so mistrusting that we no longer expect the best and want the best for one another? When did we lose our love and compassion for one another? What would it take to get it back?

Bro Bob

Golf Cart Mafia Underboss Posts: 3944 **2/17/14 9:42 pm**

In defense of Bro Conn, Robert's Rules, correctly understood and used is specifically intended to make sure that every voice (idea) is given a fair listen for the consideration of the body, wherein rests the final authority.

Yes, they can be manipulated and abused. Yes, they can be intimidating to those who are ignorant of them. When Paul instructs the church to do everything decently and in order, it is the same goal.

Our denomination, to its credit, does not take an official position on many things (that some people think we do). Some examples: 1) We do not take a position on pre / mid / or post tribulation. 2) We do not anyplace state that tithing is a requirement for any Christian. (We do dance all around it.) In fact we plainly state that Tithing is not and has never been a requirement for membership. 3) We do not declare Young Earth Creation understanding to be our position.

I am by nature a conservative. That means I am very skeptical of change. I view a desire for change to be a rejection of what has gone before us, and provided us the very platform we now occupy. Change says, our fathers got this wrong. Change also says, I have a better idea, and I want to impose my idea upon the entire body from this point forward. Change is radical in its very nature.

The irony, of course, is that change is inevitable. It is part of creation itself.

So, it is not change, per se that I would love to see. It is repentance. It is a turning back from some of the unwritten 'changes' we have already made.

One of my renters called me today. "My son backed into the door on the storage unit next to ours. Figure out what the repair will cost."

I told him I had a new renter just last week who ran a U-Haul into the corner of the building and then denied he did it even with my building and their truck swapping paint. Sheer integrity is a rare thing these days, out there in the world.

Ahem, I said, OUT THERE IN THE WORLD.

It is a rare thing in the Church of God as well. Every one of you know what I am talking about. If we were to begin a thread listing all the cases of blatant lack of integrity, it would be an all time acts-celerate record.

The one 'change' I would love to see? Repentance. Return to fidelity to our own vows. Operate with complete faith and compliance with what we have already declared. Do it at every level, from the pew to the highest office on Keith St.

In case you find yourself agreeing with me at this point, you might want to consider what that would mean. It would require that we undo some changes we got wrong.

We'd have to stop hiding the fact that you are a Church of God from your newest members.

We'd have to stop it with the "local tithe" trick to get around the ToT.

We'd have to recognize as we used to that "husband of one wife" does not mean two or sometimes three.

And our integrity would require that we stop bringing back extra-biblical 'changes' over and over again until you finally prevail, after which any further re-considerations are absolutely forbidden.

..............................

I can guarantee you that the change I would like to see will not happen before the Mount of Olives splits in two. We have not only judged our fathers and found them lacking, we have judged our creator and fixed some things for him as well.

philunderwood

Golf Cart Mafia Underboss Posts: 3954 **2/18/14 4:13 am**

To die as a church and be reborn as a mission.
_________________
Live an epiK life!

Discover More...
http://www.refocusing.org

A Mission in Formation
www.bluewaterinthekeys.com