I have long quipped that I would stay with the Assembly of God until they kick me out. I am a bit out of the ordinary. While I still hold dear our distinctives, I am a little too liberal politically, I am a neo-traditionalist (I like the power of liturgy and the richness of vintage devotion), I am a mystic, and I no longer consider myself a dispensationalist. I have desired to see the day when my generation comes to the fore and see what the A/G will look like. Will there be a place for me in it? I have always asked that question hopefully.
With the resignation of our current general superintendent, I suddenly feel that moment upon us and I am a little afraid. How will it come out? What will it mean. The announcement was a little sudden, Elaine and I hadn't planned on going to General Council as our church can't afford to send us. So now we are left out of the process of picking the next leader of our movement. I turn to the Lord in prayer and must trust him. I am greatly heartened by the messages and prayers posted on futureag.blogspot.com Thank you so much for the effort!
Hey, Chris, I mentioned your blog today on my blog:
ReplyDeleteThe General Council vote: issues and predictions
Happy voting!
Rich
BlogRodent
Liturgy? Vintage Devotion? Mystic?
ReplyDeleteNot a Dispensationalist?
This is Catholic Terminology and a clear reason why the AOG needs to ensure that "your day does not come"
And I take exception to the blanket generalization that you use that what you believe is based upon a generational difference! It is not.
I am of the younger generation and you and I are poles apart so please drop the misinformation that "your generation" agrees with you.
Lastly since when is Astrology and the Zodiac Biblical or Christian? It is not, its called opening the door to pagan influences into Christianity, and another reason why the AOG needs to ensure those of your beliefs are not given their day.
Repent of your apostasy and for the promotion of it as a leader to others!
To That man will not look towards men but towards Jesus!:
ReplyDeleteMan! What is wrong with you? You sound so bitter! Chris didn't say that the it was a generational difference. Try reading it again. He said, "I am a bit out of the ordinary" and "I have desired to see the day when my generation comes to the fore and see what the AG will look like." He never said that he was like his generation. Really, he said and implied otherwise. Sounds like he's scared he will be kicked out now because of his generation.
You said, "Lastly since when is Astrology and the Zodiac Biblical or Christian?"
Dude, read it again! Then go find yourself a dictionary. Being a mystic has nothing to do with astrology or zodiac signs.
Here is the definition of mytisicm: "1.
a. Immediate consciousness of the transcendent or ultimate reality or God.
b. The experience of such communion as described by mystics.
2. A belief in the existence of realities beyond perceptual or intellectual apprehension that are central to being and directly accessible by subjective experience" or "a religion based on mystical communion with an ultimate reality"
Please tell me what exactly is wrong with being more conscious of God? Chris may go about seeking God in different ways than you do, but who says you are right? Who says anyone is right? Isn't the most important thing that a person knows God and seeks to know Him better? "To glorify God and enjoy Him forever."
Lastly, I know that with all his different views, he still preaches the Word, and well too! He has never once preached on the fact that he's not a dispensationalist and furthermore, has promised to never preach anything other than what the AG believes. You need to slow down and read before you post comments. And if something scares you (which this obviously did) then you should find out more before lambasting people.
Chris: I don't think you should fear. Just like the AG is changing, you are too. Maybe you'll end up meeting.
Secretary said:
ReplyDeleteMan! What is wrong with you? You sound so bitter! Chris didn't say that the it was a generational difference.
I say:
No I’m not bitter, I just do not like it when people who call themselves ministers bringing shame to that office. I suggest you read the Word and find out what makes a true Biblical Minister. Since when are Biblical Ministers supposed to publicly air their unjustified grievances?
And what is much worse is he doing something that god does not approve of or honor. If Chris was a true Biblical Minister he would know that He is supposed to honor and respect the elders that have been placed over him and to not publicly whine and show disrespect towards them
He obviously is not aware of the “David Principle”
Chris if he was true Biblical Minister would know to PATIENTLY wait until GOD who is sovereign sees fit to raise up another Generation if an when he chooses. And also to wait patiently to see if God will raise Chris up with that generation.
Also one of the ways in which a person learns to Biblically lead is by being able to Biblically follow.
As far as his Generation statement you just quoted it:
“I have desired to see the day when my generation comes to the fore”
Secretary said:
You said, "Lastly since when is Astrology and the Zodiac Biblical or Christian?"
I say:
My statement had nothing to do with his statement about being a mystic. I suggest you look at his profile! No Minister of the Gospel should be playing into pagan astrology or Chinese pagan astrology by listing their astrological sign! And I know on Blogger this can be removed, so it begs the question why would he have it there?
Secretary said:
Please tell me what exactly is wrong with being more conscious of God? Chris may go about seeking God in different ways than you do, but who says you are right?
I say:
God’s word says that I am right:
Deuteronomy 12:29-32
When the LORD your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.
Now many will say that passage is just for the old covenant Israel, but as Paul says:
1 Corinthians 10:10-12
nor complain, as some of them also complained, and were destroyed by the destroyer. “Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.”
Too many who call themselves ministers such as Chris, want to bring in apostate, idolatrous, and non-Christian terminology and practices into the Church. They will be judged for this and especially harsh since they lead other Christians
Secretary said:
Who says anyone is right? Isn't the most important thing that a person knows God and seeks to know Him better? "To glorify God and enjoy Him forever."
I say:
God says not who is right but that he is right and there are specific methods for seeking him and also methods not to be used to seek him. It is not enough to say you want to seek God and know him better or to glorify God and enjoy him forever.
As Paul says about the Jews:
Romans 10:1-3
“Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God.”
So you can have all the zeal for God you want but if you are not doing it with knowledge and how God asks you to seek him, it is meaningless, and you will be deceived.
Men like Christ want to bring in Fallen and apostate Catholic Tradition into the Church. He wants to take the doctrine of being saved by grace away and out the mill stone of dead outward ritual acts on the necks of Christians. What this does is make the Cross of non affect! I suggest you read the book of Galatians:
Galatians 3:1-8
O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? Have you suffered so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain?
Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?— just as Abraham “believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.” So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham.
Galatians: 5:1-2
“Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.”
What Chris is speaking of is bringing in old dead traditions, although he may think they are not a law, they are a law because they are dead outward acts and not ones which draw us closer to God.
Secretary said:
Lastly, I know that with all his different views, he still preaches the Word, and well too! He has never once preached on the fact that he's not a dispensationalist
I say:
So he preaches what he does not believe? And this man should be trusted? He is a liar if he preaches what he does not believe. If he does not believe in Dispensationalism then he should leave the AOG.
Secretary said:
You need to slow down and read before you post comments. And if something scares you (which this obviously did) then you should find out more before lambasting people.
I say:
I am not in fear of what he preaches, I just know what he is doing is not of God and he should be pointed out, marked and avoided. I will be writing an article on my web site about him and others in the AOG like him.
Dude you are the one airing your grievances. He wrote a (short) post about how he is concerned about his not fitting in. You go off on him like he's the devil! I will no longer even stoop so low as to answer all of your lambasting. Please go away!
ReplyDelete@ the IT worker interestingly named "That man will not look towards men but towards Jesus!" …
ReplyDeleteWe value mystics in the Assemblies of God. Look up what happened at Azusa Street. That was pretty mystical, supernatural, and sovereign. We need more mystics.
As for liturgy, you should know that every Assemblies of God church has a liturgy. That you are freaked out by the term only reveals that you have probably spent more time mastering IT than Church History. Nothing wrong with that, really. (I work in IT, too.) But you should know your terms before you start railing against them.
As for the astrology thing, Blogger assigns that based on birth-date, which you know well. And if Chris is like me, he spends more time blogging than figuring out how to modify his profile. That you are willing to judge Chris without knowing him demonstrates quite a bit about your motives and character.
As for the "David Principle," last I heard, the Assemblies of God isn't a theocracy. Before you apply so-called principles out of context, try to at least apply them appropriately.
Relax. Take a breather, and come back when you don't have an emotional axe to grind.
Rich
BlogRodent
Rich Tatum Said
ReplyDeleteWe value mystics in the Assemblies of God. Look up what happened at Azusa Street. That was pretty mystical, supernatural, and sovereign. We need more mystics.
I say:
Yeah right, we all know what the Post-Modern definition is for “mystic” and it is no way related to anyone or anything that happened at Azusa Street.
I am a third generation AOG as well. And All my past generations (AOG Minister included have never seen the term utilized to describe Azusa Street, matter of fact they all knew and still know the connotation for “Mystic. So please don’t insult yourself by acting as if you have any historical AOG knowledge by showing that you have none!
Rich Tatum Said:
As for liturgy, you should know that every Assemblies of God church has a liturgy. That you are freaked out by the term only reveals that you have probably spent more time mastering IT than Church History. Nothing wrong with that, really. (I work in IT, too.) But you should know your terms before you start railing against them.
I say:
Oh we do have a liturgy do we? News to me and all the AOg Ministers in my family and the others we all know. And again you can stop with the condescending clap trap we all know what he means by liturgy. And as for you comment on my Church History Knowledge, although I work in IT I have a Masters of Old Testament Theology. So think next time you decide to throw out some prejudicial ignorance.
And here is one for you I don’t get freaked out. That is a nice little term you post-moderns like to use as negative connotation towards anyone who actually believes in defending sound doctrine.
Rich Tatum Said
As for the astrology thing, Blogger assigns that based on birth-date, which you know well. And if Chris is like me, he spends more time blogging than figuring out how to modify his profile. That you are willing to judge Chris without knowing him demonstrates quite a bit about your motives and character.
I say:
Nice try but no Blogger does not assign it. You can choose not to have it, I have a Blogger account, know many ministers in the AOG who have Blogger accounts who use wisdom and elect not to have Blogger assign those attributes.
Rich Tatum:
As for the "David Principle," last I heard, the Assemblies of God isn't a theocracy. Before you apply so-called principles out of context, try to at least apply them appropriately.
I say:
You obviously are Biblically blind as you do not understand the “David Principle” it has nothing to do with a Theocracy
Rich Tatum Said:
Relax. Take a breather, and come back when you don't have an emotional axe to grind.
I say:
Rich some more of you nice arrogant condescending claptrap. I am constantly amazed at the arrogance displayed by those who are the most Biblically Blind. And just to let you know I do not have any emotional axed to grind. Once again your terminology is the same run of the mill Post-Modern rebellion against those who actually believe and defend sound AOG doctrine.
To the IT worker with a Masters in Old Testament Theology:
ReplyDeleteYou continue to rail against people you have not attempted to befriend or get to know. You assume motive where there is none. You cast baseless aspersions. You redefine terms to your convenience.
Take a few moments to look up "straw man argument" and "ad hominem attack."
Perhaps we'll have something substantive to discuss then.
Regards,
Rich
BlogRodent
I see now why Chris has his concerns about the AoG kicking him out...
ReplyDeletePerhaps because the Assemblies appears right now to be populated not by people who care about God or about people, but rather by fools who find fault where there is no fault, defend their ideas without logic and without restraint, and lean on personal attacks rather than on truth. This man is ready to burn Chris at the stake because he finds comfort in some of the older traditions? So what? Because he doesn't believe exactly the same as him? Maybe that's because Chris has his own mind to question things. Maybe if you'd look deeper you could find some truth in what he says.
But you have no interest in knowing Chris or understanding what he's trying to say. You've got a chip on your shoulder and you're on some mission against no one.
And this doesn't really seem to be a Christ-like M.O., does it?
Am I the only one who's sensing this man's very proud of his AOG heritage, and it seems like he's defending AOG doctrine over the bible itself. Do you really believe that we and only we have it 100% correct with no room for error?
In regards to "that man" questioning you about not being a dispensationalist, I was just listening to GS-elect Wood's talk at AGTS chapel. He stated that AG theology was shaped out of a dispensational framework, we no longer have that framework, but we still have belief in the imminent return of Christ. So it sounds like the rigid dispensationalism of the mid-20th century is no longer considered essential.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.agts.edu/news/news_archives/2007_09wood_george.html