My Response to "The Devolution of Government - Globally & in the Church" by the NCO

[James Griffin]

"Such mentality is foreign to Scripture. Has not the fragmentation and infighting among religious bodies and church organizations gone on long enough? Is it not time to concentrate on our commonality instead? How does refusing to fellowship over such matters (by either side) fit into agape? How much more could be done for the kingdom with the blending of our talents and gifts?"

This is the question asked by the article. Any chance we could get your response?

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

So once again the question is begged where have I ever said anything anti-UPC

And once again, I would sincerely appreciate your comments on the theme of the article, which is what I believe you said you were going to respond to, as opposed to an anti-NCO posting.

I am NOT anti-NCO Brother, and I did respond to the full body of content within the original article. I did so in my first post.

My question, again, is "why do you need to mention the political mechanisms within the UPC in your blogs on NCO?"

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

"Such mentality is foreign to Scripture. Has not the fragmentation and infighting among religious bodies and church organizations gone on long enough? Is it not time to concentrate on our commonality instead? How does refusing to fellowship over such matters (by either side) fit into agape? How much more could be done for the kingdom with the blending of our talents and gifts?"

This is the question asked by the article. Any chance we could get your response?

Please

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

"Such mentality is foreign to Scripture. Has not the fragmentation and infighting among religious bodies and church organizations gone on long enough? Is it not time to concentrate on our commonality instead? How does refusing to fellowship over such matters (by either side) fit into agape? How much more could be done for the kingdom with the blending of our talents and gifts?"

This is the question asked by the article. Any chance we could get your response?

I agree with the basic premises of your questions, but see a dangerous theme under the surface. If commonality includes the fundamental doctrines of classic Oneness Pentecostalism, I'm in full agreement. But if you are saying we need to lay aside fundamental doctrine in order to build a kingdom, I would say "who's kingdom?"

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

I agree with the basic premises of your questions, but see a dangerous theme under the surface. If commonality includes the fundamental doctrines of classic Oneness Pentecostalism, I'm in full agreement. But if you are saying we need to lay aside fundamental doctrine in order to build a kingdom, I would say who's kingdom?

Then I guess we are in agreement. No one has been asked to set aside ANY fundamental doctrine.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

Then I guess we are in agreement. No one has been asked to set aside ANY fundamental doctrine.

Is there a fundamental doctrine in the NCO?

serious question

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Let me be clear then.

Here are two questions that demand an answer Brother Griffin.

1. Why mention the political climate in the UPC at all in your article? What purpose did that serve?

2. Why allow Saulters to give an open invitation that paints the UPC as dead, dry, and traditional as opposed to the new, shiny, sleek NCO?



BTW, I am not upset in any way. You had asked me to respond to your article and I was trying to be kind by doing so.

Care to respond Sir?

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Is there a fundamental doctrine in the NCO?

serious question

The fellowship as a whole? I am not aware. As individuals I can personally vouch that the leadership KP,JS,WH (and myself, not claiming any leadership capacity but staff attorney) are 100% Classical, Fundamentalist, Apostolic, and would not preach any doctrine that should not be welcome in any Apostolic pulpit.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Brother Griffin, I do not understand your apparent approval of Saulter's and Langston's back-handed slaps at the UPC.

CC1, the NCO is not the equivalent of AFF. It is a religious affiliation. That site is the official organ of the NCO much like our Herald.

Motive is shown by allowing those posts to stand.

I think it is quite clear that the motive of NCO is to be progressive, to encourage Pentecostal preachers to be progressive, and to criticize institutions or religous systems that stymie that.

As long as it is done in a generic fashion where ideas and traditions are being challenged, not a specific organization by name, etc then I think it is within the purpose of the NCO to promote progressiveism in Evangelism and thinking

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by CC1

I think it is quite clear that the motive of NCO is to be progressive, to encourage Pentecostal preachers to be progressive, and to criticize institutions or religous systems that stymie that.

As long as it is done in a generic fashion where ideas and traditions are being challenged, not a specific organization by name, etc then I think it is within the purpose of the NCO to promote progressiveism in Evangelism and thinking

Perhaps, but would you be so accomodating if the UPC posted similar content against the NCO, ALJC, and other orgs on their website?