Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601850)

None of the above.

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister (Post 1601851)

Brother leftcoast1: If you don’t mind, could you respond to some of these allegations specifically?

Are you a pastor?

Dis you go to the installation service?

Did you aspire to pastor this church?

Did the membership vote him in as pastor?

Or did they have a new pastor installed regardless of their opinion?

I think these are all questions that deserve truthful answers.

It’s not okay to say that if God isn’t in it, then it will amount to nothing. The church in the New Testament didn’t say that. It was the Jewish leadership that said that. It’s definitely not a model for the church to follow IMHO.

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601852)

No to all of your questions.

As far as what the membership voted on, I’m assuming no.

Originally Posted by TJJJ (Post 1601856)

Sounds good. Apparently lefty just woke up, not knowing anything about La Grande except what..... someone told him, researched James P, that many dont even know exists, and began a thread?

Coincidence? I think not.


The charges he brings about that assembly are false though. There are good men that are on the board, the church is having good solid growth, people are getting the HG, sounds like God is pleased with the transition...

Is lefty going to withdraw his false statements about the assembly and J Parker practicing nepotism?

Random......

"Snort...."

Originally Posted by navygoat1998 (Post 1601791)

Would that have been the Pentecostals of Gainesville?

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1601798)

But that was only because none of his sons wanted the church.

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968 (Post 1601836)

Because he is the established leader of that assembly.

Originally Posted by Bro Flame (Post 1601867)

Are you talking about the church I spoke of in Florida? That elder and his wife don't have any sons that I'm aware of. I know they have two daughters and they're married to evangelists that came from other churches.

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968 (Post 1601837)

One thing you and everyone else has to realize. Many of those saints there have been there for years. I believe when a Bro. Parker was given the church to Pastor back in 1988 or so, there was only 10-20 people. I believe there around 100 or more. They have multiple generations in the church. I’m not saying this just about you, yet, there are still churches, that still have saints, that still have trust in their Pastor or their leaders.

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1601869)

And this bestows ownership and dictatorial powers upon him? How is this Biblical?

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601783)

Does he have a board with voting privileges made up of members who ATTEND his church?

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601783)

Does he have a board with voting privileges made up of members who ATTEND his church?

Originally Posted by TJJJ (Post 1601765)

And how dare Jess give it to someone else and not you!

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968 (Post 1601779)

I copied and txted your post to an elder that is good friends with Bro. Jesse Parker. In fact, this elder is the one that started the church in Lagrande and handed over the reins to Bro. Parker.

Originally Posted by Bro Flame (Post 1601788)

There is a rather large church I know of in Florida where the elder and his wife turned their congregation over to another preacher and his wife some two years ago. This preacher nor his wife are related to them, but they are good people that will carry on what the elder taught and stood for.

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1601834)

How did it become HIS possession in the first place to be bestowed upon someone else at his will?

Originally Posted by TJJJ (Post 1601856)

Sounds good. Apparently lefty just woke up, not knowing anything about La Grande except what..... someone told him, researched James P, that many dont even know exists, and began a thread?

Coincidence? I think not.


The charges he brings about that assembly are false though. There are good men that are on the board, the church is having good solid growth, people are getting the HG, sounds like God is pleased with the transition...

Is lefty going to withdraw his false statements about the assembly and J Parker practicing nepotism?

Random......

"Snort...."

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister (Post 1601883)

This is an important concern thatleftcoast1 has brought up. I have noticed that there is a trend whereby other pastors are appointed to the board of a church. Sometimes from several states away. It seems to be designed for increased control by the pulpit faction, while diminishing the influence of the local members.

Originally Posted by loran adkins (Post 1601894)

Wow this whole thread sounds out of left field by left coast. I don't know personally Jessy Parker, but I do know very personally his brother Joe Parker. Both of them started a church with UPCI and both have left the UPCI for different reasons. The fact remains that one thing that is very wrong is that until just the last ten years both of the Parkers churches were not rich and most of the church finances were because the pastor worked and the tithe went into running the church and not into the pastors pocket.

I would go as far as to say that that is the case still today. And even if Jessie has been full time in ministry I would go as far as to say he is in no way rich. Yes he may live in a nice house but who paid for it him, with his tree cutting business or the church?

Regardless the pastor does have the right to put up anyone he wants as pastor to take over the church he spent to much time and money putting together.

Originally Posted by loran adkins (Post 1601894)

Wow this whole thread sounds out of left field by left coast. I don't know personally Jessy Parker, but I do know very personally his brother Joe Parker. Both of them started a church with UPCI and both have left the UPCI for different reasons. The fact remains that one thing that is very wrong is that until just the last ten years both of the Parkers churches were not rich and most of the church finances were because the pastor worked and the tithe went into running the church and not into the pastors pocket.

I would go as far as to say that that is the case still today. And even if Jessie has been full time in ministry I would go as far as to say he is in no way rich. Yes he may live in a nice house but who paid for it him, with his tree cutting business or the church?

Regardless the pastor does have the right to put up anyone he wants as pastor to take over the church he spent to much time and money putting together.

Originally Posted by aegsm76 (Post 1601896)

There is a theory in Apostolic circles that you show your reverence to God by showing reverence to your pastor.
While this is not a bad thing, it has sometimes led to pastor worship.
I am old enough to remember when the prominent UPCI Bible School taught that as a pastor, you should not have the best house/car/clothes in the church.
As it would hinder your ministry.

Originally Posted by votivesoul (Post 1601838)

Brethren, please change the course of this thread to more generically discuss the merits or lack thereof regarding pastoral nepotism, and leave off the specifics and personal names of the church in question, or I will lock the thread.

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601904)

Please delete this thread. I think its run its course.

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1601907)

Why? Nepotism is a great topic. Specific names do not have to be mentioned.

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601904)

Please delete this thread. I think its run its course.

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601904)

Please delete this thread. I think its run its course.

Originally Posted by aegsm76 (Post 1601909)

Agreed.
I know of many men who I would consider great men of God, who have blinders on when dealing with their own family.
I do wonder, where is Paul or Nathan who will speak the word of the Lord to them?

Originally Posted by TJJJ (Post 1601765)

And how dare Jess give it to someone else and not you! C'mon man, if it's not of God then it won't matter, if God is in it then it will. Period. That church has a board of elders who had to approve it, apparently they didn't see it like you. Roll on and find another place to Pastor so you can do the same thing when you retire.

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601916)

Many of the right wingers put pastors on such a high pedestal to where the individual saints will not have a word to say for themselves in judgement. Only the pastor will "give an account."

There was a fairly recent sermon preached by a now unnamed individual who said "there is a not a place in the Bible where the people chose their pastor."

WHOA!

This is a strange doctrine even within the UPCI ranks.

Some of these folks will point to the election of Judas' replacement and how the apostilles cast lots. This pretty much confirms that other Bishops will vote among themselves for the pastoral replacement at another church?

When did the church become the House of Representatives to where the average person does not have a voice? The is the primary issue with unlearned men joining the clergy and correlates to my original point. Various offshoots of the UPCI have become a good ole boys club void of true leadership.

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601916)

Many of the right wingers put pastors on such a high pedestal to where the individual saints will not have a word to say for themselves in judgement. Only the pastor will "give an account."

There was a fairly recent sermon preached by a now unnamed individual who said "there is a not a place in the Bible where the people chose their pastor."

WHOA!

This is a strange doctrine even within the UPCI ranks.

Some of these folks will point to the election of Judas' replacement and how the apostilles cast lots. This pretty much confirms that other Bishops will vote among themselves for the pastoral replacement at another church?

When did the church become the House of Representatives to where the average person does not have a voice? The is the primary issue with unlearned men joining the clergy and correlates to my original point. Various offshoots of the UPCI have become a good ole boys club void of true leadership.

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968 (Post 1601921)

Acts 1:23-26
[23] And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
[24] And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men , shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
[25] That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
[26] And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Who are the “they” in this portion of scripture?

Was it everyone in the upper room? I personally don’t believe so. I believe it was the apostles. This is a good reference that each Pastor should hold dear when he is coming to the end of his Pastorship.

Originally Posted by votivesoul (Post 1601927)

Honestly, if an argument is going to be made against nepotism in the church, particularly against ministers raising up their sons to replace them after they are gone, I think some Scriptures needs to be looked at, namely these:

Philippians 2:19-22,



Here, Paul acknowledges Timothy before the Philippians as someone who ministered with him as closely as if Timothy had been his own biological offspring, thus suggesting that if Timothy had indeed been born of Paul's flesh, and not just of the Spirit, Paul would have used Timothy in ministry in a way that suggests dads are expected to raise up their sons to work with them and perhaps even replace them after they are gone.

See also: 1 Timothy 1:2, 1 Timothy 1:18, 2 Timothy 1:2

Likewise, take a look at Titus:

Titus 1:4,



Paul thought of Titus as his particular son. Again, not by biological descent, but through the Spirit. Yet, Paul, who raised and nurtured Titus in the things of the Spirit and the common faith of Christ, made use of him as a son, by sending him throughout the Mediterranean.

See also: 2 Corinthians 8:23

Do these verses then speak of nepotism? If not of biological offspring, but then perhaps of spiritual fellowship and ministry?

The people Paul entrusted the most to carry on after him once he was gone he considered his sons. He passed on to them the responsibility of his ministry.

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister (Post 1601932)

No brother. This is not nepotism. It is in fact, the opposite of nepotism.

You’re way smarter than that.

Originally Posted by votivesoul (Post 1601934)

I am not saying it is or it is not, but that those verses needed to be entered into the discussion. And please do not presume upon my intelligence! :D

However, I will say this:

Definitionally, this is nepotism:

From: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/nepotism

- favouritism shown to relatives or close friends by those with power or influence

Paul definitely showed favoritism to close friends, those he considered fellow laborers and sons in the Gospel. Just because they were not biological relatives of the flesh, doesn't mean nepotism wasn't at play.

Doesn't mean it was, either. I am leaving it up to the members to hash it out. I am merely bringing up what seems to be unconsidered issues. So, you are welcome to make the case, one way or the other.

Originally Posted by returnman (Post 1601899)

I can appreciate your loyalty to whomever you serve under and also a man's labor should be recognized and rewarded but principles are either followed or not. Are we building earthly kingdoms or heavenly? The way some of this operates you'd very likely have these churches stay in single family control for 150 years.