# Problems for Presbyterians



## hobbs27

Presbyterian Church Leaders Declare Gay Marriage Is Christian



http://www.nbcnews.com/#/news/us-ne...eaders-declare-gay-marriage-christian-n136256


 Here is where the problems started in my opinion...

_The Rev. Krystin Granberg of the New York Presbytery, where the state recognizes gay marriage, said she receives requests "all the time" from friends and parishioners to preside at their weddings. _


1Timothy 2: 
12  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.


----------



## centerpin fan

... and here's the result:




> Since the 2011 gay ordination vote, 428 of the denomination's more than 10,000 churches have left for other more conservative denominations or have dissolved, though some theological conservatives have remained within the denomination as they decide how to move forward. The church now has about 1.8 million members.
> 
> The conservative Presbyterian Lay Committee decried the votes in Detroit as an "abomination."


----------



## centerpin fan

John Calvin must be rolling over in his grave.


----------



## Hooty Hoot

hobbs27 said:


> Presbyterian Church Leaders Declare Gay Marriage Is Christian
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.nbcnews.com/#/news/us-ne...eaders-declare-gay-marriage-christian-n136256
> 
> 
> Here is where the problems started in my opinion...
> 
> _The Rev. Krystin Granberg of the New York Presbytery, where the state recognizes gay marriage, said she receives requests "all the time" from friends and parishioners to preside at their weddings. _
> 
> 
> 1Timothy 2:
> 12  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
> 
> 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
> 
> 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.



Yep! Women are suppose to look good and keep their mouth shut. I can't believe we allow them to vote.


----------



## centerpin fan

Hooty Hoot said:


> Yep! Women are suppose to look good and keep their mouth shut. I can't believe we allow them to vote.






> The Obama campaign's heavy focus on women's issues for the past year paid off in a big way on Tuesday night, resulting in an 18-point gender gap that largely contributed to the president's reelection.
> 
> According to CNN's exit polls, 55 percent of women voted for Obama, while only 44 percent voted for Mitt Romney. Men preferred Romney by a margin of 52 to 45 percent, and women made up about 54 percent of the electorate. In total, the gender gap on Tuesday added up to 18 percent -- a significantly wider margin than the 12-point gender gap in the 2008 election.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/gender-gap-2012-election-obama_n_2086004.html


----------



## hobbs27

centerpin fan said:


> ... and here's the result:
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Since the 2011 gay ordination vote, 428 of the denomination's more than 10,000 churches have left for other more conservative denominations or have dissolved, though some theological conservatives have remained within the denomination as they decide how to move forward. The church now has about 1.8 million members.
> 
> The conservative Presbyterian Lay Committee decried the votes in Detroit as an "abomination."



 They are in a fight for the name of the denomination, the split is coming and it will be big..IMO


----------



## centerpin fan

hobbs27 said:


> They are in a fight for the name of the denomination, the split is coming and it will be big..IMO



I'm sure many will go to the more conservative PC of America.


----------



## Ruger#3

There is a large Presby congregation meets in the same building as my church. They have already broke off and in the process of joining up with other congregations of like mind.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Presbyterian Church Leaders Declare Gay Marriage Is Christian
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.nbcnews.com/#/news/us-ne...eaders-declare-gay-marriage-christian-n136256
> 
> 
> Here is where the problems started in my opinion...
> 
> _The Rev. Krystin Granberg of the New York Presbytery, where the state recognizes gay marriage, said she receives requests "all the time" from friends and parishioners to preside at their weddings. _
> 
> 
> 1Timothy 2:
> 12  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
> 
> 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
> 
> 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.



You believe the problem of gay marriage in the Presbyterian Church started by allowing women preaching roles? Do you see the same progression in denominations that have women preachers?
Protestant denominations that allow women preachers but are mainly conservative in other aspects?
Was allowing women to preach the gateway transgression?


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> You believe the problem of gay marriage in the Presbyterian Church started by allowing women preaching roles? Do you see the same progression in denominations that have women preachers?
> Protestant denominations that allow women preachers but are mainly conservative in other aspects?
> Was allowing women to preach the gateway transgression?



Yes I do believe that.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Yes I do believe that.



You don't believe Paul's letter to Timothy in relation to women preaching had anything to do with the culture of the time and how they would view women preaching and nothing to do with ours?
What about the Bible was written for us but not to us? Why doesn't it apply to women preachers? Do we have other verses to validate women not preaching from others other than Paul to Timothy or the Corinthians?


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> You don't believe Paul's letter to Timothy in relation to women preaching had anything to do with the culture of the time and how they would view women preaching and nothing to do with ours?


No



Artfuldodger said:


> What about the Bible was written for us but not to us? Why doesn't it apply to women preachers?


This is (FOR) us & it does!



Artfuldodger said:


> Do we have other verses to validate women not preaching from others other than Paul to Timothy or the Corinthians?



Paul reffered to Genesis and the order of creation, notice this in Genesis 2

In Gen 2-3, we see God teaches man, man teaches woman, the devil is out of the picture. That's Gen 2. But in Gen 3, we see the devil teaching woman, woman teaching man, and God is out of the picture. And this is Paul's argument: there is a divinely ordained order to things that, if disturbed, could bring ruin.


----------



## Dana Young

hobbs27 said:


> Yes I do believe that.



me too


----------



## Dana Young

It's all the same people don't like what the bible says so they compromise again again again and again untill they are completely at odds with what the bible says


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> No
> 
> Paul reffered to Genesis and the order of creation, notice this in Genesis 2
> 
> In Gen 2-3, we see God teaches man, man teaches woman, the devil is out of the picture. That's Gen 2. But in Gen 3, we see the devil teaching woman, woman teaching man, and God is out of the picture. And this is Paul's argument: there is a divinely ordained order to things that, if disturbed, could bring ruin.



That makes it appear to be some type of punishement against woman. 
Maybe God knew that in the future women preachers would preach for homosexual marriage and tried to nip it in the bud.


----------



## Artfuldodger

1 Timothy 3:13
A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well.

It might have started with the deacons in the Presbyterian Church who weren't good managers. They let the women preach.


----------



## Artfuldodger

1 Timothy 2:10 
In like manner women also in decent apparel: adorning themselves with modesty and sobriety, not with plaited hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly attire, 

1 Timothy 2:12
I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly. 

It sounds like Paul is speaking for himself and not God. What he allows and wants as missionaries  and new Church leaders. He is setting up New Churches and wants it done a certain way. Paul has said before sometimes he speaks his words and sometimes he speaks as a prophet.

Maybe after the deacons stopped managing, women started wearing braided hair, jewlery, expensive clothing and started teaching men in Sunday School class. 
Anyway none of these rules has anything to do with Church services but life in general for that time. Women were to be submissive daily at home, church, or in the work place. 

Hardly rules to just prevent women preachers as it says teachers to men. Now given they can teach other women and children in homes etc. These are lifestyle rules and not just for Church to be ignored elsewhere.


----------



## WaltL1

Are you guys sure the women are responsible for this?


> The assembly voted 371-238 to allow ministers to celebrate same-sex marriages, and 429-175 in favor of amending the definition of marriage in the constitution.


Are those all women votes?
And -


> Since the 2011 gay ordination vote, 428 of the denomination's more than 10,000 churches have left for other more conservative denominations or have dissolved, though some theological conservatives have remained within the denomination as they decide how to move forward.


In 3 YEARS only 428 churches left or dissolved and over 9,572 DIDNT
Those would have to be some seriously influential women.


----------



## hobbs27

WaltL1 said:


> Are you guys sure the women are responsible for this?
> .



 I dont blame women, but the men that are suppose to be the spiritual leaders allowing these things to happen. They let the deception in the door when they allowed so-called women preachers to stand.


----------



## WaltL1

hobbs27 said:


> I dont blame women, but the men that are suppose to be the spiritual leaders allowing these things to happen. They let the deception in the door when they allowed so-called women preachers to stand.


Wouldnt you have to know how many of those votes that were cast by the Assembly were women?
And the over 9,572 churches who don't seem to mind?
All led by women?
Im not saying you are wrong but I think the numbers quoted show something very different.


----------



## centerpin fan

WaltL1 said:


> And the over 9,572 churches who don't seem to mind?



It's extremely sad that 9,572 churches "don't seem to mind" about gay ordination.  I'll say it again:



centerpin fan said:


> John Calvin must be rolling over in his grave.


----------



## hobbs27

WaltL1 said:


> Wouldnt you have to know how many of those votes that were cast by the Assembly were women?
> And the over 9,572 churches who don't seem to mind?
> All led by women?
> Im not saying you are wrong but I think the numbers quoted show something very different.



It should have never come to a vote, I just watched this story on the local atlanta news and they had a so-called woman preacher saying this is evidence that the spirit is working in the church----She's right, but it's not the Holy Spirit, it's an evil spirit, and she's a false prophet because she said Gods word is reforming.  We are warned of people like her.


----------



## WaltL1

centerpin fan said:


> It's extremely sad that 9,572 churches "don't seem to mind" about gay ordination.  I'll say it again:


Yeah Im not arguing whether they were right or wrong. 
I thought those numbers would have been the other way around. I was surprised.


----------



## Artfuldodger

1 Corinthians 14:34-35
34The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

What LAW is this Paul speaks of God's or the locals? If you believe it is in reference to Genesis, why doesn't the Law of Moses tell us women can't teach? Why would it matter if the Law has been abolished? Genesis doesn't prevent women from speaking in Church. We have been liberated from the Law.
Why are women allowed to speak in some Churches? Should they all wait until they get home and ask their husband?


----------



## WaltL1

hobbs27 said:


> It should have never come to a vote, I just watched this story on the local atlanta news and they had a so-called woman preacher saying this is evidence that the spirit is working in the church----She's right, but it's not the Holy Spirit, it's an evil spirit, and she's a false prophet because she said Gods word is reforming.  We are warned of people like her.


I think maybe you are focused on what a couple of women have said and are ignoring what those numbers clearly show.
Those are huge margins. It wasn't even close. It took men's votes also to do that. Im trying to find the numbers of how many women are on the Assembly but its a safe bet that its male dominated by a wide margin. The women probably had the LEAST amount of influence just due to the numbers.


----------



## Ruger#3

http://reformedpresbyterian.org/


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Paul reffered to Genesis and the order of creation, notice this in Genesis 2
> 
> In Gen 2-3, we see God teaches man, man teaches woman, the devil is out of the picture. That's Gen 2. But in Gen 3, we see the devil teaching woman, woman teaching man, and God is out of the picture. And this is Paul's argument: there is a divinely ordained order to things that, if disturbed, could bring ruin.



You've taken a lot of liberty and creativity into turning the deception  and fall into the devil teaching women. I've never seen it presented as you have. You've changed the meaning of deception to teaching. I see a difference.It is true that Paul referenced Adam, Eve, and the fall when describing why women can't preach. I can't answer that. Maybe that started the pecking order we have now. Man is the head of woman.
Who was the first to sin Adam or Eve? Whom did God have a covenant with?


----------



## Artfuldodger

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

After the fall woman took a subordinate role to man. Why didn't the cross restore the original order?


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> It should have never come to a vote, I just watched this story on the local atlanta news and they had a so-called woman preacher saying this is evidence that the spirit is working in the church----She's right, but it's not the Holy Spirit, it's an evil spirit, and she's a false prophet because she said Gods word is reforming.  We are warned of people like her.



I think people like me are being enlightened to what and how Paul teaches.  Paul presents things and you think that is what he is saying and then he rebukes himself. He sets people up and then hits them with something else. I don't think people understand what Paul is doing. So yes in that sense Christians are reforming what Paul is truly teaching.
Example:
Paul walks into the town square and points at the statue of an unknown god, and says, (in effect) "This god you worship that you do not, let me tell you the real truth about him" and then he proceeds to tell them the gospel. (See Acts 17: 22-24).

Rather than saying their god is false, Paul grants them that their own presumptions may be true, and adds a new twist to those presumptions that eventually will overturn their belief system!

Paul uses this same style to address celibacy, where he says "Now for the matters you wrote about, 'It is good for a man not to marry'." and then reverses himself just a few verses later by stating "it is better to marry than to be on fire". Grammatically, most scholars believe the first statement is a quote. He is saying, "So you say it is better for a man to never touch a woman". (See 1 Corinthians 7: 1 and 9)

Paul does the same thing with many issues, including kosher laws, vegetarianism, circumcision, works righteousness, etc....He is always presenting the opposing argument or assumptions of his listeners first, then overturning their beliefs.

Furthermore, he uses literary plays on words. In Titus 1: 12-13, the only Cretan who told the truth was the one who said all Cretans are liars. In another bit of humor, he says: I wish that those Jews commanding circumcision would slip with the knife and castrate themselves (See Gal 5: 12) 

http://paulonwomen.blogspot.com/


----------



## Artfuldodger

Could someone remind me exactly which laws were removed by Jesus dying on the cross? 
My belief or concept of Christianity is Jesus died for all of them. Now what I don't understand is why do we continue to add laws and requirements back to our free grace salvation? If we couldn't save our selves in the first place by keeping laws, why would we feel the need to add laws or requirements back to salvation? If one lives by the Law, he will die by the Law.
Either the cross fulfilled all laws or perhaps only ceremonial laws.
If you believe so and continue to live under the Law then you shall surely die under the Law. 
I believe God gives every Christian or person the option, accept that you can't do it and place your trust in Jesus or continue to live by the Law of Moses. I believe God gives us the option using our freewill. I also believe that if you continue to live by the Law, you will be judged by the Law. Perhaps even Christians. Still that's a strange concept, Christians who live by the law.
It's strange to me now but I actually tried it for about half my life. I can assure you that I had no luck in saving myself.


----------



## Artfuldodger

If you truly believe Paul is teaching us to follow laws of gender and sexual orientation then continue to live by those laws. See how that works out for you. Maybe you might want to add a few laws for yourself to follow including lust and anger.
As for me I'll place my trust in Jesus and his redeeming death on the cross. I have truly been blessed by finally understanding the concept of free grace and will continue to teach this Good News.
Now as I look back it is so strange that people can't see what Paul is teaching and how he teaches.
I guess it would be like a Christian finally understanding Jesus returning in 70AD. I myself haven't fully been enlightened to this but it does tug on my heart. I can't rule out being enlightened to this by the Holy Spirit in the future but I can see how someone else could be. When enlightened many scriptures finally fall into place and one wonders how they ever looked at them in the past. They don't understand why others can't see it.
Reformation if you will or want to use that term.


----------



## speedcop

There was a time I remember when I was young that if a member or members of the church we attended started "whispering or leaning towards the word of the world" instead of the word of God AS QUOTED in the bible, the deacons of the church would address it pronto, like firemen smelling smoke.

Now as an older man I can clearly see the yellow brick road the devil has laid down. I see it even now, in my church. Not drastic but suttle little things to "fit in" with todays changing world they say. Im not a scripturalist so I dont argue verses. I do remember very clearly that God destroyed soddom and gomorrah for a specific reason. So man continues to change the word of God for his own selfish reasons and I believe that by that sword alone he will die.


----------



## Artfuldodger

speedcop said:


> There was a time I remember when I was young that if a member or members of the church we attended started "whispering or leaning towards the word of the world" instead of the word of God AS QUOTED in the bible, the deacons of the church would address it pronto, like firemen smelling smoke.
> 
> Now as an older man I can clearly see the yellow brick road the devil has laid down. I see it even now, in my church. Not drastic but suttle little things to "fit in" with todays changing world they say. Im not a scripturalist so I dont argue verses. I do remember very clearly that God destroyed soddom and gomorrah for a specific reason. So man continues to change the word of God for his own selfish reasons and I believe that by that sword alone he will die.



 God did destroy Sodom & Gomorroh for their selfishness that manifested itself in evil ways. Their inhabitants were selfish, greedy, inhospitable, prideful, and idolatrous.
They never showed any hospitality to strangers from other towns and didn't even help the people of their own town. 
I've seen this story of showing no love and increased hatred of others repeatedly in the Bible. Becoming more and more selfish and evil by dwelling in their selfish ways. Idolatry always plays a part of it. 

Ezek. 16:49 "This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy." 

I don't know how city destruction or nation destruction by God happens after the cross compared to before the cross.
I don't know what lesson I can learn from Sodom & Gomorrah from my "being washed" prospective other than we should love and help people and to not be selfish.
Stand firm until the end and only worship God. Believe we are just as evil as the people of Sodom and without Jesus we are unrighteous.


----------



## Artfuldodger

In the story of Lot and the visit by angels in the form of men, all of the men from Sodom show up at his house to rape the visitors. Why did they want to do this? Were all of the men of Sodom homosexuals? How did they procreate? Why would Lot offer his his daughters to a gang of known  homosexuals?
No, I'm pretty sure these were all heterosexual men. They wanted to rape visitors to show them or prove something.

A similar story repeats itself in Judges. A stranger was invited in an old man's house.  A mob of heterosexual men from the city shows up to rape the visitor. The old man offers his concubine & daughter instead. The mob raped his concubine, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. 

Heterosexual sex is not a sin but rape is. Again this mob had a point to prove to the visitor and his savior the old man.


----------



## Artfuldodger

I must stress that God destroyed cities for selfishness and idolatry and Jesus condemned cities for unbelief. What is unbelief? It is when one doesn't believe that the death of JESUS paid the price for our sins. It is a belief that one is righteous without Jesus. It is a belief that one can save themselves(even in part) by living a certain way.
Well I can tell you it isn't possible and that one must repent from believing such foolishness. One must change his way of thinking and suddenly realize one needs Jesus. 
The following has been revealed to me from Matthews. It's a shame it hasn't been revealed to everyone. Certain things are only revealed to certain people. Regardless the passage is about replacing your yoke with the yoke of Jesus. Babes get the meaning and the wise & prudent don't. Finally I can rest. After 50 years suddenly I'm a babe and not a wise & prudent person. I can't explain my enlightenment but even Jesus said his enlightenment comes from his Father:

20Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:

21Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.

22But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you.

23And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to - I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.

24But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.

25At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

26Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.

27All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

28Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

29Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

30For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.
Matthew 11: 20-30.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Chorazin, along with Bethsaida and Capernaum, was named in the gospels of Matthew and Luke as "cities" (more likely just villages) in which Jesus performed "mighty works". However, because these towns rejected his work ("they had not changed their ways"), they were subsequently cursed.

I feel really terrible for people, cities, and nations who don't fully understand and repent from their belief that they can save themselves. I don't understand how someone can still be concerned with splinters in others eyes with planks(no repentance) in their own eyes.
Please do as Jesus request and repent. Please change your mind and realize you need Jesus. Why continue to place this yoke upon yourself and your fellow Christian brothers?
Please change your ways. Believe his work. Believe in his redemption on the cross.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> 30For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.
> Matthew 11: 20-30.



Yes, the yoke and burden of the law is hard and heavy, yet it seems to man to be easier to understand than grace.


----------



## centerpin fan

More problems:

_The Presbyterian General Assembly’s decision to protest Israeli policies by divesting stock in three major companies has triggered condemnations and congratulations, with the Israeli Embassy calling the resolution “shameful.”.

By a seven-vote margin, the Presbyterians became the largest American church to endorse divestment. Friday’s vote at the assembly’s national meeting in Detroit was 310 to 303.

The assembly voted to divest from Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions. Those companies are said to supply Israel with tools used in building Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which Palestinians want as the capital of an independent state. Divestment from the three companies would total about $21 million._

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-presbyterians-divest-reaction-20140621-story.html


----------



## StriperAddict

centerpin fan said:


> More problems:
> 
> _The Presbyterian General Assembly’s decision to protest Israeli policies by divesting stock in three major companies has triggered condemnations and congratulations, with the Israeli Embassy calling the resolution “shameful.”._
> 
> _By a seven-vote margin, the Presbyterians became the largest American church to endorse divestment. Friday’s vote at the assembly’s national meeting in Detroit was 310 to 303._
> 
> _The assembly voted to divest from Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions. Those companies are said to supply Israel with tools used in building Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which Palestinians want as the capital of an independent state. Divestment from the three companies would total about $21 million._
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-presbyterians-divest-reaction-20140621-story.html


 
I find this ridiculous as well.  No one told the Presbyterian leadership that the Lord Jesus and all the bible authors were Jewish I suppose, and that Israel is God's time piece on prophecy, and the all important Genisis verse "I will bless those who bless thee, and curse those who cure thee" ??
As the elect ought flee from them, another spirit-less institution bites the dust


----------



## hobbs27

centerpin fan said:


> More problems:
> 
> _The Presbyterian General Assembly’s decision to protest Israeli policies by divesting stock in three major companies has triggered condemnations and congratulations, with the Israeli Embassy calling the resolution “shameful.”.
> 
> By a seven-vote margin, the Presbyterians became the largest American church to endorse divestment. Friday’s vote at the assembly’s national meeting in Detroit was 310 to 303.
> 
> The assembly voted to divest from Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions. Those companies are said to supply Israel with tools used in building Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which Palestinians want as the capital of an independent state. Divestment from the three companies would total about $21 million._
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-presbyterians-divest-reaction-20140621-story.html



I dont get it, why does this matter to anyone? Shouldn't they invest their money the way they want to?


----------



## centerpin fan

hobbs27 said:


> I dont get it, why does this matter to anyone? Shouldn't they invest their money the way they want to?



Sure, but the reason they do it is because they've bought into the liberal lie that Israel is the bad guy in the Middle East.


----------



## Artfuldodger

StriperAddict said:


> I find this ridiculous as well.  No one told the Presbyterian leadership that the Lord Jesus and all the bible authors were Jewish I suppose, and that Israel is God's time piece on prophecy, and the all important Genisis verse "I will bless those who bless thee, and curse those who cure thee" ??
> As the elect ought flee from them, another spirit-less institution bites the dust



Is this verse still in affect? What about the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem? Where was their curse?
Do you somehow believe the Presbyterians will now be cursed? The Presbyterian resolution notes that the church is not divesting from Israel. I didn't even realize Churches had stock investments. Maybe their stock will plummet. I must have cursed Israel also.


----------



## NE GA Pappy

Artfuldodger said:


> .
> 
> Ezek. 16:49 "This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy."



we were just discussing this at Bible study.  Ezk 16 lays out the pattern that sin takes in peoples lives, but you must go on to further verses to see it.

49 Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it.

The Pattern of Sin
1. Pride
2. An Excess and indulgence
3. Laziness
4. Abundant Greed
5. spiteful arrogance or hubris

If you look at our nation, we have reached point 5 in this pattern.  When will God view our abomination and punish us?


----------



## Artfuldodger

NE GA Pappy said:


> we were just discussing this at Bible study.  Ezk 16 lays out the pattern that sin takes in peoples lives, but you must go on to further verses to see it.
> 
> 49 Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it.
> 
> The Pattern of Sin
> 1. Pride
> 2. An Excess and indulgence
> 3. Laziness
> 4. Abundant Greed
> 5. spiteful arrogance or hubris
> 
> If you look at our nation, we have reached point 5 in this pattern.  When will God view our abomination and punish us?



Our nation or the Presbyterians? Our nation and the Presbyterians give and help the needy, sick, poor, and other nations. Some say we are too quick to welcome visitors. The very things Sodom was destroyed for, we as a nation are good at. 
I'm not sure hubris will be punished after the cross. I did start a topic on "blessings & curses." 
I don't see our nation of today any more sinful than 100 years ago. Besides if our sins as individuals are just as bad as Sodom's without Jesus, then it matters not to me as my sins have been washed. My blessings or rewards will be in Heaven. God sends rain on the just and the unjust.


----------



## hobbs27

centerpin fan said:


> Sure, but the reason they do it is because they've bought into the liberal lie that Israel is the bad guy in the Middle East.



Israel is a thorn in our side, and I believe we as a nation would have been better off to have never recognized it as a state in 1948---which was by the doing of a very liberal/socialist president Harry Truman. His recognizing them came against the recommendation of several more conservative Generals and high ups.

 With that said, according to the news article the Presbyterian church reaffirmed the right of Israel to exist, apparently they are against the settlement expansion.

At this point I could care less about Israel and their right to exist as a religious matter, they are no different than any other nation of heathern. Sure they have a small Christian population, but so does Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Iran, etc.
 We only have a geo-political responsibility to them as an ally and that's it.


----------



## StriperAddict

Artfuldodger said:


> Is this verse still in affect? What about the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem? Where was their curse?


 
Check out "the rise and fall of the roman empire", a telling synopsis on our current state of affairs also.

All I can say is "replacement theology" abounds, and God's own are being swallowed up in it.


----------



## Artfuldodger

StriperAddict said:


> Check out "the rise and fall of the roman empire", a telling synopsis on our current state of affairs also.
> 
> All I can say is "replacement theology" abounds, and God's own are being swallowed up in it.



Was the fall of Rome from God or did God let them fall from their own sins? I agree that the United States could fall from our own doing but I don't see God forcing us in either a good or evil direction. If the United States falls from evil actions it will be the evil actions that make us fall.

Possibly the United States might fall from giving away more money to help people than we have to give away. This is bad business but it is being a good Christian. Jimmy Carter was a good Christian albiet a Democrat but a good Christian none the less. Perhaps our nation doesn't reap the benefits of a meek and humble Christian willing to give away our money to help the needy and allowing too many visitors to our country. It is true that we give money to individuals that don't deserve it.


----------



## hobbs27

Israel was the last nation destroyed by God.


----------



## Artfuldodger

StriperAddict said:


> Check out "the rise and fall of the roman empire", a telling synopsis on our current state of affairs also.
> 
> All I can say is "replacement theology" abounds, and God's own are being swallowed up in it.



Supersessionism (also called fulfillment theology and replacement theology) is the belief that the Christian Church supersedes or replaces the Israelites in God's plan, and that the New Covenant nullifies the biblical promises made to the children of Israel, including the Abrahamic Covenant, the Land Covenant, and the Davidic Covenant. The terms do not appear in the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, however the belief is considered part of most traditional Christian views on the Old Covenant, viewing the Christian Church as the inheritor of the biblical promises made with the Israelites.[1][2] This view contrasts with the minority views of dual-covenant theology on the one side and abrogation of Old Covenant laws on the other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism

I don't know enough about this topic to present an argument. Are you saying this is related to the OP and could be the downfall of the Presbyterians and our Nation?
That God's own "washed" people could be swollowed up to the point of losing salvation?


----------



## StriperAddict

Artfuldodger said:


> That God's own "washed" people could be swollowed up to the point of losing salvation?


 
Let's not go down the "loosing grace" mode.
But certainly I'd be checking my heart if I had the attitude that this nation & people should be discarded. 
The Presbeterian leadership, not necessarily the people within, as well as several other "ecumenical" (one religion) branches of todays 'church' are playing with fire, abandoning the totality of the word of God concerning Israel as a nation.  The doctrine you just esposed is a stench in the nostrils of a loving God, who still holds out salvation for His lost, especially those whom He calls "the apple of His eye".

BTW... it's a very biblical thing that she (Israel) is being abandoned...  even prophesied ...  but God help those who join inn the camp.

I like Paul's heart in the matter... shouldn't we covet the same?
Rom ch 9:
<SUP class=versenum>*2 *</SUP>That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
<SUP class=versenum>*3 *</SUP>For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
<SUP class=versenum>*4 *</SUP>Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
<SUP class=versenum>*5 *</SUP>Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Pauls's "brethren according to the flesh" = today's Israel, and from the above verses, and throughout the OT... He has PROMISED not to abandon them... 
how in the world can we????



Also Rom ch 11 (my emphasis)
<SUP class=versenum>*23 *</SUP>And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
<SUP class=versenum>*24 *</SUP>For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
<SUP class=versenum>*25 *</SUP>For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
<SUP class=versenum>*26 *</SUP>And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
<SUP class=versenum>*27 *</SUP>*For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.*
<SUP class=versenum>*28 *</SUP>As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.
<SUP class=versenum>*29 *</SUP>For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.


----------



## gemcgrew

StriperAddict said:


> I find this ridiculous as well.  No one told the Presbyterian leadership that the Lord Jesus and all the bible authors were Jewish I suppose, and that Israel is God's time piece on prophecy, and the all important Genisis verse "I will bless those who bless thee, and curse those who cure thee" ??
> As the elect ought flee from them, another spirit-less institution bites the dust


Striper, The Israel of God is a spiritual nation, not an earthly, physical nation.
"For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel"

The Presbyterians have problems, but this is not one of them. The "Elect" are the Israel of God. All things work together for their good.


----------



## StriperAddict

God is the covenant God of grace and mercy. The following article speaks volumes on the replacement theology subject. 



I updated the article source, as I think this explains better the case against RT:

======

Recently, I became more keenly aware of the spiritual conflict that rages over Israel. This conflict settles on the battleground of Replacement theology. While we reject this theological concept, it is worth noting that it is a 'new' that has strengthened itself over many centuries within churches of all traditions. It is therefore not easily removed and yet we are called to do so with the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God.

To some degree, Replacement theology is so deceptive because it rests on half-truths. For instance, the Church is the “Israel of God” but not in a replacement sense (Galatians 6:14-16).

In essence, Replacement theology removes from Israel a national destiny in the land of Canaan because of her rejection of Jesus’ Messianic credentials. All the biblical statements of Israel enjoying future blessings in the land of Canaan are said to be descriptions of the spiritual blessings that now accrue to the Church. The expectation of a physical kingdom has been spiritualized and taken from Israel and given to the Gentiles (Matthew 21:43), even though Jesus never denied that the physical kingdom would be restored to Israel (Acts 1:6-7).

That this way of expounding Scripture completely violates the principles of biblical exposition is of little importance to them. We should interpret Scripture by the nature of the text. If it is literal, then we should interpret it literally, but if it is spiritual or figurative, then we should respond accordingly. For instance, Jesus said, “I am the door!” Does this mean He actually is a door? Of course not! The context is clearly figurative and needs to be interpreted as such.

We are therefore not committed to any singular form of biblical exposition - literal or figurative - but rather to the context. This will determine our style of exposition and therefore we uphold the integrity of Scripture and its authority.

The Essentials of Replacement Theology

Replacement theology rests chiefly on the idea that the whole or part of the Abrahamic Covenant has been abolished, for it is this Covenant that promises to Israel eternal ownership of the land of Canaan (Genesis 17:7-8).

Once this 'promise' has been removed, the present-day restoration of Israel means nothing and her only hope is in the Church. Now it must be made clear that we believe that only in Christ Jesus can there be salvation for Jews and Gentiles alike (Romans 1:16-17). However, we do not believe that the promise of God in the Abrahamic Covenant bequeathing the land of Canaan to Israel has been removed, and therefore Israel’s modern restoration to the land of Canaan is indeed fulfillment of that promise and constitutes a milestone on her ‘way home’ to her Messiah (Ezekiel 36:24-28).

Two Points of View

The Replacement camp is divided into two opinions concerning the Abrahamic Covenant:

1. The Abolitionists

This camp sees the Covenant with Abraham as being entirely abolished. However they have serious difficulties because Paul writing to the Galatians states that Jesus died in order to bring to our lives the blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant and if we belong to Jesus, we are Abraham’s children according to the promise (Galatians 3:13-14, 29).

If the Covenant has been abolished, then what Paul says is wrong! Moreover the writer of the Book of Hebrews states that we can trust God to be faithful to the New Covenant because He has always been faithful to the Abrahamic Covenant (Hebrews 6:13-20). This constitutes a serious problem for the Abolitionists because, if the Abrahamic Covenant has been abolished, then God is a liar and indeed is not faithful, though the writer of Hebrews affirms that He is!

Many Abolitionists have perceived this problem and have consequently moved to the...

2. Reconstructionist Camp

This theory states that the Abrahamic Covenant has indeed not been abolished but it has been reconstructed. That is, the part that promises land to Israel now means spiritual promises and not literal ones. The problem with this theory is:

(a) It is a total presupposition and the Scriptures nowhere affirm it. That all nations would be blessed in Christ was actually the intention of the Abrahamic Covenant from the very beginning, but this does not remove from the Jewish people a national destiny in the Holy Land.

Reconstructionists lay emphasis on Paul’s teaching in the Book of Galatians concerning God’s promise in Abraham being made not to his “seed”, plural, that is the people of Israel, but to his “seed” singular, meaning Jesus (Galatians 3:15-18). Therefore they conclude that since the “seed” Christ has come, the promise to the “seed” of Abraham as in plural - meaning the people - has been removed! They have forfeited the land!

The truth is that Paul also uses the term “Abraham’s seed” in the plural in the New Testament (Romans 9:6-7). In other words both interpretations of the term “seed” are true! Abraham’s seed is singular and plural. The blessing God promised in Abraham is only in Christ Jesus because He died for the whole world, but the mediation or means by which this blessed “seed” comes into the world is through the “seed” plural - the people of Israel. The one truth does not contradict the other. Both truths are in fact interdependent (Romans 9:1-5), hence the extensive genealogy of Jesus given in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (Matthew 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38).

The Bible nowhere states that the promises of God in Abraham concerning Israel’s everlasting possession of the Land of Canaan are removed. In fact, everywhere it affirms the opposite! That is, that a day is coming when Israel will be restored to the land and to her Messiah (Ezekiel 36:24-32). This passage from Ezekiel teaches the very opposite of Replacement theology, in that Israel’s rebellion and sin has not led to land forfeiture but to judgment and correction, yet in the end God will, for His Name’s sake, restore Israel to her ancient land and to Himself! He does this in spite of her history of rebellion and sin. The truth is that Replacement theology reflects the heart of man and not that of God!

(b) The Scriptures refute it. Jesus came to confirm the promises to the Fathers, not to reconstruct them (Romans 15:7-9). Confirm means CONFIRM! He takes away nothing but reinforces every promise that God made to the fathers (Acts 3:22-26). Peter affirms that there must be a time of “restoration of all things” before Messiah returns. This “restoration of all things” is spoken about by all the prophets - meaning a final regathering to the Land of Canaan and repentance leading to salvation in Jesus (Amos 9:11-15; Jeremiah 36:26-28).

Purpose

Israel has always been God’s vehicle of world redemption (Romans 9:1-5). In a way, she is God’s microphone, the means by which He speaks to a lost world. Moreover, she has birthed all God’s covenants into the world and has now come back to her ancient homeland, by the promise of the Abrahamic Covenant, to birth the final great covenant of history, the Davidic Covenant. Herein lies the ultimate purpose of her modern-day restoration. Jesus will return to Zion as the root and offspring of David (Revelation 22:1-6; Psalm 2:1-12; Psalm 72:5-11).

No wonder the conflict over Zion is so great. Our ministry, partnered with you, is removing the stumbling blocks from Zion and thereby preparing her for the arrival of her great and most blessed King (Isaiah 62:10).

Replacement theology is thus an instrument of the powers of darkness to frustrate the purpose of God, by disconnecting the Church from this final great redemptive initiative in history. We reject it and stand fully on the promises of God concerning Israel and the Church.


----------



## centerpin fan

hobbs27 said:


> Israel is a thorn in our side, and I believe we as a nation would have been better off to have never recognized it as a state in 1948---which was by the doing of a very liberal/socialist president Harry Truman. His recognizing them came against the recommendation of several more conservative Generals and high ups.
> 
> With that said, according to the news article the Presbyterian church reaffirmed the right of Israel to exist, apparently they are against the settlement expansion.
> 
> At this point I could care less about Israel and their right to exist as a religious matter, they are no different than any other nation of heathern. Sure they have a small Christian population, but so does Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Iran, etc.
> We only have a geo-political responsibility to them as an ally and that's it.



I disagree.  Israel is a democratic oasis in a desert of Arab dictatorships.  It's a country the size of New Jersey surrounded by the worst countries in the world.  These countries want to wipe Israel off the map simply because it's a Jewish state.




hobbs27 said:


> At this point I could care less about Israel and their right to exist as a religious matter, they are no different than any other nation of heathern. Sure they have a small Christian population, but so does Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Iran, etc.



Here's the difference:


_Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded by urging the Presbyterians to come visit Israel — and then take a bus trip through Libya, Syria and Iraq to compare. And he offered them “two pieces of advice” for their travels into these other lands.

“One is, make sure it’s an armor-plated bus,” he said. “And second, don’t say that you’re Christian.”_

http://nypost.com/2014/06/23/presbyterian-holy-war/




hobbs27 said:


> With that said, according to the news article the Presbyterian church reaffirmed the right of Israel to exist, apparently they are against the settlement expansion.



They're against more than that:


_It is telling that one of the earliest and loudest affirmations of Zionism Unsettled was by David Duke, perhaps the most notorious white supremacist and anti-Semite in the United States today, who said:
In a major breakthrough in the worldwide struggle against Zionist extremism, the largest Presbyterian church in the United States, the PC(USA), has issued a formal statement calling Zionism “Jewish Supremacism” — a term first coined and made popular by Dr. David Duke.
The reality that David Duke would endorse a Presbyterian study guide available for purchase on the PC(USA) website is sickening to us, and should give all Presbyterians great pause in considering the arguments and language of this document and Zionism Unsettled’s ideological relationship to the overtures coming before the General Assembly._

http://pointsandfigures.com/2014/06/23/the-presbyterian-church-marginalizes-itself/


----------



## gemcgrew

God fulfilled every promise to the physical nation of Israel. "And, behold, this day I am going the way of all the earth: and ye know in all your hearts and in all your souls, that not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the LORD your God spake concerning you; all are come to pass unto you, and not one thing hath failed thereof."


----------



## gemcgrew

Restoring the physical nation of Israel is a bigger hoax than global warming.


----------



## hobbs27

gemcgrew said:


> Restoring the physical nation of Israel is a bigger hoax than global warming.


----------



## gemcgrew

And Striper, btw, as I have stated previously, I fully reject replacement theology.


----------



## Artfuldodger

28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.


----------



## Jeffriesw

hobbs27 said:


> They are in a fight for the name of the denomination, the split is coming and it will be big..IMO



This denomination has split numerous times already due to liberalism. One of the largest is what is now the PCA.



centerpin fan said:


> I'm sure many will go to the more conservative PC of America.



I wonder though, if they have stayed this long with the liberal leanings that have been going on for decades just how conservative these break away groups may be. I think a lot of them may wind up in the EPC or other middle of the road Presbyterian denominations.


----------



## centerpin fan

Swamp Runner said:


> I wonder though, if they have stayed this long with the liberal leanings that have been going on for decades just how conservative these break away groups may be. I think a lot of them may wind up in the EPC or other middle of the road Presbyterian denominations.



You may be right.  Other than the PCUSA and the PCA, I'm not that familiar with the current Presbyterian landscape.  Ruger#3's link above was a new one for me.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Presbyterian Church Leaders Declare Gay Marriage Is Christian
> 
> Here is where the problems started in my opinion...
> 
> _The Rev. Krystin Granberg of the New York Presbytery, where the state recognizes gay marriage, said she receives requests "all the time" from friends and parishioners to preside at their weddings. _
> 
> 1Timothy 2:
> 12  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
> 
> 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
> 
> 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.



Ordination of women in the United Methodist Church has occurred since its creation in 1968. Some of the groups that later became part of the United Methodist Church started ordaining women in the late 19th century, but the largest group, The Methodist Church, did not grant women full clergy rights until 1956.
On April 23, 1968, the United Methodist Church was created when the Evangelical United Brethren Church (represented by Bishop Reuben H. Mueller) and The Methodist Church (represented by Bishop Lloyd Christ Wicke) joined hands at the constituting General Conference in Dallas, Texas. With the words, "Lord of the Church, we are united in Thee, in Thy Church and now in The United Methodist Church" the new denomination was given birth by the two churches that had distinguished histories and influential ministries in various parts of the world.

Since you believe the progression started with women preachers, why has it taken the Methodist Church longer to progress?

I think it's cool that two Churches united into one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Methodist_Church


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Ordination of women in the United Methodist Church has occurred since its creation in 1968. Some of the groups that later became part of the United Methodist Church started ordaining women in the late 19th century, but the largest group, The Methodist Church, did not grant women full clergy rights until 1956.
> On April 23, 1968, the United Methodist Church was created when the Evangelical United Brethren Church (represented by Bishop Reuben H. Mueller) and The Methodist Church (represented by Bishop Lloyd Christ Wicke) joined hands at the constituting General Conference in Dallas, Texas. With the words, "Lord of the Church, we are united in Thee, in Thy Church and now in The United Methodist Church" the new denomination was given birth by the two churches that had distinguished histories and influential ministries in various parts of the world.
> 
> Since you believe the progression started with women preachers, why has it taken the Methodist Church longer to progress?
> 
> I think it's cool that two Churches united into one.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Methodist_Church



The Methodist church has split denominations many times, The Holiness church is from the Methodist IIRC. 

 The ordination of women is just a sign that a church is fearing the people more than God, Remember Saul and why God took his kingship away? It was about fearing the people more than God, and as you know Im a New Testament kind of guy, but the physical actions in the Old Testament many times are related to spiritual actions in the New.

 Have you been to a " On Fire" in a spiritual sense, Methodist Church lately? They use to exist.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Samuel+15&version=NASB


----------



## Ruger#3

Center Pin the congregation that shares our facility is a growing and vibrant church. The pastors of the conservative break off Anglican and Prebyterian churches in our community have preached to each others congregations and support each others mission.

You might be interested that my faith has reached a mile stone after the Anglican conservative break off. A Georgia priest is now leading the church.

"This is an exciting time in North American Anglicanism and, indeed, of Anglicanism throughout the world," Archbishop Duncan prefaced in the news conference introducing his successor to the world via the media. 
He lamented that fifty years ago -- during the 1960's -- "Anglicanism was terribly fractured over all kinds of issues and various accommodations to the culture, a stepping away from what the Word of God calls the Church to and has always called the Church to."

Archbishop Duncan's dedication and passion was the driving force needed to help reunite a fractured and splintering American Anglicanism into a Biblical, missionary and united Anglican family in North America. He brought together a dozen various Anglican entities and ecclesiastical structures to form the Common Cause Partnership, which eventually became the foundational building blocks of the Anglican Church in North America. 

Five years after its original foundation in 2009, ACNA has nearly 500 new church plants out of the 983 congregations spread across Canada, the United States and into Cuba. There are 28 ACNA-affiliated dioceses and a special military jurisdiction. ACNA shows a steady growth in numbers and attendance with a deepening of spiritual awareness and focus.
ACNA was originally birthed out of desire and a mandate from GAFCON I -- held in Jerusalem -- that an orthodox Anglican province in North America be formed. Five years later when GAFCON II met in Kenya, ACNA was recognized as the fulfillment of that original directive with Archbishop Duncan acknowledged as an Anglican primate and seated with the GAFCON primates. That GAFCON seat will be passed on to Archbishop-elect Beach when he grasps ACNA's primatial staff Saturday.

Six Anglican primates are attending the Anglican Relief and Development Fund trustee meeting also being held at St. Vincent's. They include: the Southern Cone Presiding Bishop Tito Zavala; Congo Archbishop Henri Isingoma; Jerusalem & the Middle East President Bishop Mouneer Anis; Myanmar Archbishop Stephen Than Myint Oo; South East Asia Archbishop Bolly Lapok; and Kenya Archbishop Eliud Wabukala. The visiting primates are also looking in on ANCA while they are in town. In addition, Archbishop Stanley Ntagali of the Church of Uganda, Archbishop Peter Jensen of Sydney in Australia and senior members of the Church of Nigeria are also present. 

The nay-sayers in The Episcopal Church and other parts of the Anglican Communion who felt that ACNA would live and die with Archbishop Duncan are being proved wrong. A second archbishop has been elected and will continue to lead the emerging North American Anglican province to the next level. 

"Many folks said -- and our critics in particular -- that we would never be able to elect a second archbishop," the first archbishop explained. "That it all depended on me (Archbishop Duncan) and I was the only one who could hold them together."

ACNA's founding archbishop speaks in a modulated voice. His expressions, which punctuate his speech, come through movement of his long thick eyebrows and infectious smile. 
"Well, guess what?" he said with his bushy eyebrows raised high. "That's not true!"

"I count it a real joy and a sacred trust to have been elected as the (second) Archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America," Archbishop-elect Beach stated in his introductory news conference.
He was deeply impressed with his fellow bishops in the conclave.

"I have never been around such spiritual men in my life ... such Godly men, such Christ-centered men," he said. "To have them elect me as their archbishop is a truly humbling and, to me, personally remarkable thing."

The Bishop Beach's election came as a unanimous vote on the third day of the conclave. Foley Beach has been a part of ACNA's College of Bishops since 2010 when he was tapped to be the founding bishop of the Anglican Diocese of the South. He is the founding rector of Holy Cross Anglican Church in Loganville, Georgia.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> The Methodist church has split denominations many times, The Holiness church is from the Methodist IIRC.
> 
> The ordination of women is just a sign that a church is fearing the people more than God, Remember Saul and why God took his kingship away? It was about fearing the people more than God, and as you know Im a New Testament kind of guy, but the physical actions in the Old Testament many times are related to spiritual actions in the New.
> 
> Have you been to a " On Fire" in a spiritual sense, Methodist Church lately? They use to exist.
> 
> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Samuel+15&version=NASB



I understand how you feel but knowing how you feel, why hasn't the United Methodist Church progressed more away from God since it's inception in 1968? You would think according to your beliefs that having female preachers would have started the downhill spiral that started the downhill spiral in the Presbyterian Church.
Why didn't we see this in the United Methodist Church in 1975 or 1985? How long do these spirals away from God take? Especially since you believe they start with female preachers.
If an individual Christian can't lose his Salvation, how can a whole group made up of assured Christians lure a Church away from God? Even if they did the whole bunch of them are still saved, does it only affect new recruits?


----------



## Artfuldodger

I stand corrected it takes longer for a Church to drift than I originally believed:

The Presbyterian Church (USA). In 1893, Edith Livingston Peake was appointed Presbyterian Evangelist by First United Presbyterian of San Francisco.[11] Between 1907 and 1920 five more women became ministers.[12] The Presbyterian Church (USA) began ordaining women as elders in 1930, and as ministers of Word and sacrament in 1956. By 2001, the numbers of men and women holding office were almost equal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordination_of_women_in_Protestant_churches


----------



## centerpin fan

Ruger#3 said:


> Center Pin the congregation that shares our facility is a growing and vibrant church. The pastors of the conservative break off Anglican and Prebyterian churches in our community have preached to each others congregations and support each others mission.
> 
> You might be interested that my faith has reached a mile stone after the Anglican conservative break off. A Georgia priest is now leading the church.
> 
> "This is an exciting time in North American Anglicanism and, indeed, of Anglicanism throughout the world," Archbishop Duncan prefaced in the news conference introducing his successor to the world via the media.
> He lamented that fifty years ago -- during the 1960's -- "Anglicanism was terribly fractured over all kinds of issues and various accommodations to the culture, a stepping away from what the Word of God calls the Church to and has always called the Church to."
> 
> Archbishop Duncan's dedication and passion was the driving force needed to help reunite a fractured and splintering American Anglicanism into a Biblical, missionary and united Anglican family in North America. He brought together a dozen various Anglican entities and ecclesiastical structures to form the Common Cause Partnership, which eventually became the foundational building blocks of the Anglican Church in North America.
> 
> Five years after its original foundation in 2009, ACNA has nearly 500 new church plants out of the 983 congregations spread across Canada, the United States and into Cuba. There are 28 ACNA-affiliated dioceses and a special military jurisdiction. ACNA shows a steady growth in numbers and attendance with a deepening of spiritual awareness and focus.
> ACNA was originally birthed out of desire and a mandate from GAFCON I -- held in Jerusalem -- that an orthodox Anglican province in North America be formed. Five years later when GAFCON II met in Kenya, ACNA was recognized as the fulfillment of that original directive with Archbishop Duncan acknowledged as an Anglican primate and seated with the GAFCON primates. That GAFCON seat will be passed on to Archbishop-elect Beach when he grasps ACNA's primatial staff Saturday.
> 
> Six Anglican primates are attending the Anglican Relief and Development Fund trustee meeting also being held at St. Vincent's. They include: the Southern Cone Presiding Bishop Tito Zavala; Congo Archbishop Henri Isingoma; Jerusalem & the Middle East President Bishop Mouneer Anis; Myanmar Archbishop Stephen Than Myint Oo; South East Asia Archbishop Bolly Lapok; and Kenya Archbishop Eliud Wabukala. The visiting primates are also looking in on ANCA while they are in town. In addition, Archbishop Stanley Ntagali of the Church of Uganda, Archbishop Peter Jensen of Sydney in Australia and senior members of the Church of Nigeria are also present.
> 
> The nay-sayers in The Episcopal Church and other parts of the Anglican Communion who felt that ACNA would live and die with Archbishop Duncan are being proved wrong. A second archbishop has been elected and will continue to lead the emerging North American Anglican province to the next level.



That's all very good to hear. 

I highlighted the portion above because that is conventional wisdom amongst the more liberal churches:  that the church has to change with the culture or it will die.  The reality is that it's the liberal churches that are dying.


----------



## centerpin fan

Ruger#3 said:


> ACNA was originally birthed out of desire and a mandate from GAFCON I -- held in Jerusalem -- that an orthodox Anglican province in North America be formed. Five years later when GAFCON II met in Kenya, ACNA was recognized as the fulfillment of that original directive with Archbishop Duncan acknowledged as an Anglican primate and seated with the GAFCON primates. That GAFCON seat will be passed on to Archbishop-elect Beach when he grasps ACNA's primatial staff Saturday.
> 
> Six Anglican primates are attending the Anglican Relief and Development Fund trustee meeting also being held at St. Vincent's. They include: the Southern Cone Presiding Bishop Tito Zavala; Congo Archbishop Henri Isingoma; Jerusalem & the Middle East President Bishop Mouneer Anis; Myanmar Archbishop Stephen Than Myint Oo; South East Asia Archbishop Bolly Lapok; and Kenya Archbishop Eliud Wabukala. The visiting primates are also looking in on ANCA while they are in town. In addition, Archbishop Stanley Ntagali of the Church of Uganda, Archbishop Peter Jensen of Sydney in Australia and senior members of the Church of Nigeria are also present.
> 
> The nay-sayers in The Episcopal Church and other parts of the Anglican Communion who felt that ACNA would live and die with Archbishop Duncan are being proved wrong. A second archbishop has been elected and will continue to lead the emerging North American Anglican province to the next level.
> 
> "Many folks said -- and our critics in particular -- that we would never be able to elect a second archbishop," the first archbishop explained. "That it all depended on me (Archbishop Duncan) and I was the only one who could hold them together."
> 
> ACNA's founding archbishop speaks in a modulated voice. His expressions, which punctuate his speech, come through movement of his long thick eyebrows and infectious smile.
> "Well, guess what?" he said with his bushy eyebrows raised high. "That's not true!"
> 
> "I count it a real joy and a sacred trust to have been elected as the (second) Archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America," Archbishop-elect Beach stated in his introductory news conference.
> He was deeply impressed with his fellow bishops in the conclave.
> 
> "I have never been around such spiritual men in my life ... such Godly men, such Christ-centered men," he said. "To have them elect me as their archbishop is a truly humbling and, to me, personally remarkable thing."
> 
> The Bishop Beach's election came as a unanimous vote on the third day of the conclave. Foley Beach has been a part of ACNA's College of Bishops since 2010 when he was tapped to be the founding bishop of the Anglican Diocese of the South. He is the founding rector of Holy Cross Anglican Church in Loganville, Georgia.



I used to listen to this guy on Sunday mornings before church.  He seemed very "orthodox" in his beliefs, so I figured he had to be a part some conservative Anglican group.  Glad to see he's "movin' on up".


----------



## Artfuldodger

I believe when something is controversial like same sex marriage it runs much deeper than denominations and religion. Society itself is divided. Reading about the Methodist Church, they had a split during the Civil War pertaining to slavery. 
Slavery didn't just divide the Methodist Church, it divided societies and families. Some were for it and some were against it and I'm not talking about the Civil War. 
Now in this age as same sex marriage comes into it's existence, the world will be divided again on this issue. Churches will be divided by men, all Christians, all assure of their salvation. Just like all of the other things that have divided Churches.


----------



## hobbs27

Art , it doesn't matter how many churches or people accept homosexual marriage it will never be accepted by the words of God in our Holy Bible. Neither will women preachers. We should (myself included) compare this with the letter sent to the seven churches in Revelation


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Art , it doesn't matter how many churches or people accept homosexual marriage it will never be accepted by the words of God in our Holy Bible. Neither will women preachers. We should (myself included) compare this with the letter sent to the seven churches in Revelation



Those letters were written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. They drip with Old Covenant judgment language. Those seven churches were being warned that the same thing that was about to happen to Jerusalem could happen to them. Old Covenant laws and God's wrath was still in affect.
I didn't see any connection to heterosexuals having gay sex.
I'm gonna have to give you woman preachers and say many Christians have their focus on the wrong perceived sinners. The real sinners were heterosexuals having unnatural sex.  I do recall something about idolators and fornicators. The idolator thing appears to be a key sin or root sin that God truly hates. That might be a place for us to focus instead of it's manifestations
such as unnatural gay sex amongst heterosexuals. I mean if it's a sin that would make a straight person exchange his natural sex for gay sex would have to be a strong sin. I'd give idolatry a score of 10 on the sin scale.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Those letters were written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. They drip with Old Covenant judgment language. Those seven churches were being warned that the same thing that was about to happen to Jerusalem could happen to them. Old Covenant laws and God's wrath was still in affect.
> .



 The Revelation is what we have as the introduction to the New Testament, the book itself is the unveiling! Things which must shortly come to pass, yet things which will be with us forever, " world without end".  It is the gospel of the New Testament, and yes the final warning to Christians that they must flee Jerusalem; but it is more than that. The letter to the seven churches is a perfect example of what our Lord expects from His church....even today!


----------



## Ruger#3

centerpin fan said:


> That's all very good to hear.
> 
> I highlighted the portion above because that is conventional wisdom amongst the more liberal churches:  that the church has to change with the culture or it will die.  The reality is that it's the liberal churches that are dying.



To your point, while reformed Anglicanism grows....

"Among the old mainstream denominations reporting to the National Council of Churches, the Episcopal Church suffered the worst loss of membership from 1992-2002 — plunging from 3.4 million members to 2.3 million for a 32 percent loss. In the NCC’s 2012 yearbook, the Episcopal Church admitted another 2.71 percent annual membership loss."

Info on Presbyterian reorg in our community.

http://www.layman.org/peachtree-city-church-splits-into-two-congregations/


----------



## Dana Young

Artfuldodger said:


> Those letters were written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. They drip with Old Covenant judgment language. Those seven churches were being warned that the same thing that was about to happen to Jerusalem could happen to them. Old Covenant laws and God's wrath was still in affect.
> I didn't see any connection to heterosexuals having gay sex.
> I'm gonna have to give you woman preachers and say many Christians have their focus on the wrong perceived sinners. The real sinners were heterosexuals having unnatural sex.  I do recall something about idolators and fornicators. The idolator thing appears to be a key sin or root sin that God truly hates. That might be a place for us to focus instead of it's manifestations
> such as unnatural gay sex amongst heterosexuals. I mean if it's a sin that would make a straight person exchange his natural sex for gay sex would have to be a strong sin. I'd give idolatry a score of 10 on the sin scale.



Are you saying some people are born gay and it's not a sin for them to have same sex relations but hetrosexuals having same sex relations is a sin?

I do not believe GOD made anyone gay. Or else there would be no sin in the act for anyone.
T believe what the BIBLE says that it is an abomination in the eyes of GOD no matter who you are.


----------



## tell sackett

"An unholy church is useless to the world and has no esteem among men. It is an abomination; it is he11's laughter and heaven's abhorrence. The worst evils that have ever come upon the world have been brought by an unholy church. O Christian, the vows of God are upon you. You are God's priest: act as such.

-C.H. Spurgeon


----------



## Artfuldodger

Dana Young said:


> Are you saying some people are born gay and it's not a sin for them to have same sex relations but hetrosexuals having same sex relations is a sin?
> 
> I do not believe GOD made anyone gay. Or else there would be no sin in the act for anyone.
> T believe what the BIBLE says that it is an abomination in the eyes of GOD no matter who you are.



Anytime someone exchanges the type of sex that is the natural sex God gave them could be the effect of idolism.
If you remember from the Bible they exchanged having sex with women and had sex with men. Women who normally slept with men started sleeping with other women. They made an "exchange." This was caused by idolism and selfishness. It was an effect not the cause. They were heterosexuals who "exchanged." Gays would have to sleep with women to "exchange."


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Anytime someone exchanges the type of sex that is the natural sex God gave them could be the effect of idolism.."



Negative....If it is with the person God put you with, then it will be as beautiful as the song of Solomon.

 If not then it does represent idolatry, adultery, and lust... We as Christians are betrothed to Christ and belong to Him, I will worship Him, but turning to strange flesh is turning away from Him.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts.

Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
(they were having sex with their male husbands) 
(after God game them over, they started having sex with other women)
(heterosexuals having unnatural sex is wrong in the eyes of God)


the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.
(straight married men "abandoned" their relations with their wives.)
(after God gave them over they turnt gay.)


Claiming to be wise they became fools and started worshipping idols.
God gave them over to sinful sexual desires. 
(straights suddenly having desires for gay sex)
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie.
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. (God lifted his veil or wing of protection and let straight people turn gay.)
Finally, their rejection of God was complete, and they became very wicked:
Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. (Romans 1:28-32)


----------



## Artfuldodger

After the worship of winged creatures & four footed animals:
(follow the progression)

Romans 1:24
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
(heterosexuals couples)
(straight couples having weird perverted sex with one another, not each other. Not only each other as only married couples but with one another. Possibly orgies, wife swapping, sodomy, oral sex, aural sex, who knows. The possibilities are unlimited to someone turned over to their own lust from idol worship. This all happened before any mention of them turning gay.)

Romans 1:26
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.
(heterosexuals "exchanged" their sexual preference and they turnt gay.)
( as one can see from the progression of verses, the straight people turnt gay
after the weird perverted sex didn't meet the needs of their lusts.)


----------



## Artfuldodger

In light of what was actually going on from idol worship and being turned over to their lusts, heterosexuals having gay sex was only a small part of the carnage.

Why can't we as Christians regardless of the above move on to the real message that follows? Why can't we see the progression of verses? Why do we stop at chapter 1 of Romans?
Well I don't and must include this from chapter two:

Romans 2:1
You may think you can condemn such people, but you are just as bad, and you have no excuse! When you say they are wicked and should be punished, you are condemning yourself, for you who judge others do these very same things.


If people continue to live by the law and never repent to believing Jesus died for their sins then they will continue to be judged by the law.

Romans 2:5
Since you are stubborn and don't want to change the way you think and act, you are adding to the anger that God will have against you on that day when God vents his anger. At that time God will reveal that his decisions are fair.

Romans 2:8
anger and fury on those who, in selfish pride, refuse to believe the truth and who follow what is wrong.


Follow yourself for salvation or believe the truth and follow Jesus.
It really is that simple. Cast aside those laws you could never follow. Quit living under the Old Covenant and accept Jesus.
I can assure you your sins are only washed if you believe they are, otherwise you will be judged by the law you are trying to live under.
Please repent today.


----------

