Monday, March 2, 2009

Atheists Hold Out Hope For Their Ordination

A quick break from our regularly scheduled information...Yes, you read the title right.

On a recent trip to one of my favorite debate sites Debunking Christianity, I found an article stating that the Presbyterian Church central North Carolina has approved a measure to let gays and lesbians in partnered relationships be ordained. According to the News & Observer of Raleigh, the amendment was approved in a good ole Presbyterian vote

  • "the amendment carried by a vote of 177-139 with 10 abstentions during a meeting of church leaders of the New Hope Presbytery, a region covering 36 counties from the Triangle to the Outer Banks."

Yes, you read it right...the 2.2 Million member REFORMED believing, no women preaching (at least initially), Presbyterian Church USA, which has been allowing and ordaining homosexual elders and clergy for years...has officially amended their documents and will officially amend their documents to allow HOMOSEXUALS to be ordained as long as they are "chaste" and don't have "extramarital" relationships and "live lives obedient to Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church." ...WHAT???
This decision is known as the "voice of the middle-ground"

  • "We all held hands and sang 'Blessed be the Tie that Binds' in the Presbyterian way," the Rev. Moffit Churn, associate pastor at West Raleigh Presbyterian, told the newspaper. "The voice of the middle ground is being heard, at least in this presbytery. That was my sense."
All this has caused an atheist debate friend of mine to hold out hope that even he AN ATHEIST can be ordained within the Christian church one day...The problem is it sounds like that's already happening, and as I told him that idea isn't too far fetched based on the total moral breakdown that we are witnessing around the country in various pulpits...

Now this is all very interesting especially as it pertains to the allegiance that My church, The Grand Ole Church Of God In Christ has signed onto with the endorsement of the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights. As reported by Elder D.L. Foster of GCM Watch we be in TROUBLE if this declaration proves to be a way to sneak in an endorsement of homosexual rights, marriage and agenda into the church as it appears to be. The article can be viewed at the Tri-State Defender.

Of special interest is not only the eagerness of our Presiding Bishop, Bishop Charles E. Blake to sign onto the document,
“As Presiding Bishop of the Church Of God In Christ, International, it is my great honor and privilege to attach my signature to the 2008 Faith in Human Rights Statement. On behalf our 12,000 plus Church of God in Christ congregations in America and in 60 nations of the world, I endorse and encourage the great ideas and ideals of this document.”
The wording of the declaration is particularly problematic and without any qualifications. Please note these sections in particular:
  • Declaration 2 ~ "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty"

And Declaration 16 which says:

  • (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
    (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
    (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

"Without any limitation"??? Are these the ideas and ideals that we wish to endorse? I mean I thought that we held that marriage was exclusively between one man and one woman...Now it seems that we view "human rights" above any biblically instructed or restricted actions. Is that so? We must ask what the bible says about any limitation of humanity? You can read my thoughts by reading Homosexuality & The New Testament.

It's just much more simple to let it all flow isn't it? Don't worry about answering to God for anything, just make your life comfortable right here and right now...What a farce!

Matt: 7:12-14 ~ "12-Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets. 13-Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14-Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."

Hopefully we can see that SIN is a problem of all churches and denominations, even normally conservative ones. I won't go into great detail here, I believe it speaks for itself, but I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.

Blessed!

UPDATE: You can hear Bishop Blake address his endorsement for the document and it's signing 2008 personally HERE. Be sure to let us know what you think.

21 comments:

  1. Good Morning Pastor,

    I read your post, great post by the way. But I need me clarity on this one:

    When I read it, I read to me, "without any limitation due to (race, nationality or religion) " meaning specifically to those three and not sex, or orgin. If sex or orgin was listed then that's the killer key words there.

    Now don't get me wrong, I don't support what Bishop Blake is doing or the message that is been transmitted but for clarity maybe I missed it.

    T

    ReplyDelete
  2. Pastor B, this is a mega betrayal of the faith in my opinion.

    Let me answer T if I may in terms of clarification.

    Homosexuals support, applaud and endorse the same document Bishop Blake does. The reason is that the document is inclusive of homosexual marriage in its "human rights" pecking order.

    The problem it presents to our faith and in keeping congruence with the scriptures is that their definition of human rights is fluid, thus enabling them to assert that homosexual marriage is a fundamental human right. This is the exact arguement being using as we speak in California to overturn Prop 8.
    “[homosexual]Marriage is a civil right.”
    "Denying [homosexual]marriage is unfair & wrong.”
    “[homosexual]Love is a family value.”
    www.gettoknowusfirst.org

    In order to appear in sync without specifically turning of what appears to be a slither of those who voted against homosexual marriage. The talking points intentionally do not call it homosexual marriage.

    The same tactics have been employed over and over, thus removing the "ick" factor which would cause people to be immediately turned off. The declaration and its abominable faith statement follow the same path. The definition of what is a right is broadened and redefined to include homosexual marriage while in the short term using as much benign language as possible.

    But the proof is in the 100% approval of these documents by a wide range of homosexual organizations. And I will tell you that approval and legalization of homosexual marriage worldwide is their #1 obsession.

    It took me several weeks to study the documents and look closely at the response of the homosexual community to see the links and the end goal.

    You can google the document's name and add "gay and lesbian" to get the full monty.

    Again,it strkes me as completely strange that Bishop Blake would eagerly sign onto this without any investigation whatsoever. He claimed the same "ignorance" if you will when it was exposed about his connection to homosexual cleric Peter Gomes.

    You would think that the spiritual leader of 6.5 million spirit-led pentecostals would exhibit a level of wisdom which would not bring reproach upon the Word of the Lord.

    Thanks, sorry for the length.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gcmwatch,

    Thank you my brother and you always have the right to take as long as you need here...Me case es su casa(or something like that)

    Nevertheless, this is highly important and it takes looking at the heart of the issue to discern it. I'll tell you what, there's nothing hidden that shall not be revealed.

    one thing I've noticed, it seems that the church (COGIC) has a desire to be accepted mainstream so bad that we're trying to get into a lot of areas and are becoming weak as water and certainly less impacting when it comes to real spiritual deliverance.

    Criticize me, I don't care, all I know is what I see and experience for myself and it doesn't make me proud for my church to seemingly want to be so "accepted" that we get into agreements and endorse MESS whether directly or indirectly.

    Somebody said, "how did you get to be a Supt?" 1st of all I NEVER sought after a position and secondly, you do the work of who you are whether you have a title or not behind or in front of your name. I think the best thing the church can do is remain fauiithful to God and his word.

    That was off the subject but, people see my name attached to this post they need to know my position and I'm glad to share it with them.

    God bless

    ReplyDelete
  4. pastor burnett: You may have answered my question in your previous comment, but why does Bishop Blake feel the need to align himself with this organization and how is this benefitting your organization. By his signing this and his below message means that all of COGIC also endorse "On behalf our 12,000
    plus Church of God in Christ congregations in America and in 60 nations of the world"

    Did he know this when he accepted the invitation from Queen Beatrix (who is she and why did he feel compelled to conceded to her requests?

    "The Memphis-based Tri State Defender said Blake’s invitation came at the behest of The Netherlands Queen Beatrix whose nation in 2001 was one of the first to grant full marriage rights to homosexuals. Queen Beatrix assembled this diverse religious gathering on the 60th anniversary of the document’s signing. And everyone was giddy with ecumenical joy."

    ReplyDelete
  5. Gay marriage is not a human right.

    When Bishop Blake supported human rights he supported education, healthcare, a living wage, freedom of assembly, democracy, life, liberty, freedom from slavery, security, right to own property, the right to vote….

    But gay marriage is not a human right and never has been. Sexual orientation is specifically not mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights regarding marriage and family.

    Article 16.
    • (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
    • (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
    • (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

    Most Christians affirm that the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and should be protected. This in no way supports gay marriage.
    And nothing in the Universal Declaration or in the Faith in Human Rights Statement supports gay marriage.

    By endorsing the statement Bishop Blake affirmed what the Civil Rights Movement affirmed, what America affirms, and what the gospel of Jesus Christ affirms: life and liberty, healthcare and education, a living wage and freedom of speech.

    I’m a Pentecostal minister (fourth generation) and I think Bishop Blake’s endorsement of this statement is holiness in action! Praise the Lord!

    ReplyDelete
  6. It’s a real shame that those who claim to be Christian are so quick to uncritically jump on the bandwagon of accusation. The posts criticizing Bishop Blake demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of the Declaration of Human Rights. A critical and contextual reading of the document reveals that this is a document specifically and clearly dedicated to the larger concern of human rights. It fits within the framework of concern for all humans to be treated with dignity and calls for 'liberty and justice for all' regardless of race, ethnicity or social standing. Many of the world's great Christian leaders have signed the document. It has nothing to do with sexuality, does not mention sexuality and actually makes a very profound statement for the sanctity of the traditional family (Read the elements of Article 16 carefully). I encourage everyone to read the document, in its context, before making such rash and harsh decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oregonsistah,

    You pose a very good question and one that I can't resolve. However, I have noticed that the church that was once ridiculed is coming out of the corner and is taking center stage...I hope that desire to be a part of the "mainstream" religious movement is not our destruction.

    Blessed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Paul Alexander,

    I HOPE everything you state and have stated is true. That's what I really want to believe.

    All I can say is that in my studies of the modern homosexual movement the agenda is to make homosexual marriage and relationships etc a HUMAN right...

    In fact one only need view any modern news story on gay marriages and homosexual unions and you will find just as I do that the homosexuals consider their right to marry a HUMAN RIGHT...

    Considering the time and those facts, I question the signing of this document with ambiguous language...That DOES NOT sit well with me and until I see evidence to the contrary I don't believe that it was a good or prudently wise move to make ESPECIALLY on my behalf and for me and the churches that I serve...

    This is confusing and I along with the thousands of other pastors and ministers in this church across the country deserve more consideration than that.

    Thanks for the comment.

    Blessed!

    ReplyDelete
  9. EthicsProf,

    As I said, I HOPE with all that's within me that you're right and my initial feelings are WRONG...read my comments to Paul Alexander as they fit you too...

    There is a priority that should be envolved in ministry when it comes to things such as this. I know in my small churches I seek FIRST to protect the saints that I oversee...That means that I must guard the churches associations and who we connect with and what we connect with them for.

    Since you may be an Ethics professor, do you think it's ethically correct as a leader to make agreements that tie and lock others into agreements without first at least consulting them about it? expecially when those agreements may create particularly acute situations that have spiritual impact...

    So I don't agree that I or anyone is being TOO RASH or quick to judge...This is SOUL BUSINESS not fun and games...

    Thanks for commenting.

    Blessed.

    ReplyDelete
  10. One thing I don't do well is spell...look over the spelling errors please..."expecially"-LOL

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wow, Pastor Burnett! Wow!

    When I read "without limitation", that is considered "broad, inclusive language that gives place to the devil, in other words, that gives the enemy access or sinners approval. If the document stated, marriage is between one man and one woman for life til death do you part, THAT IS what the Bible says...CANNOT REFUTE or GAINSAY!

    Then, how can a Christian define marriage for heathens EXCEPT that definition is based EXCLUSIVELY on the Word of GOD? What does light have to do with darkeness???
    The heathens are suppose to be drawn to us, not us to them!

    Forget about the homosexual agenda for one moment, when marriage is defined by this document by leaders of various faiths(????)
    (1) Men and women of full age(?), without any(?) limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

    That goes against the Holy Scriptures. What about Bigamist and Polygamists??? What about those men who divorce a wife after wife when their flesh is no longer pleased. If we, the Body of CHRIST(that includes all of us who belong to the LORD), DO NOT SAY JESUS CHRIST, THE WORD of GOD IS THE WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE...in all our doings, especially as a Bishop, we are NO LONGER SALT, but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. Men being the World and the World system! The Church is suppose to be the head(forefront), NOT THE Tail, and I am not talking about financial prosperity ...but SPIRITUAL Prosperity!

    I mean could you imagine John the Baptist not confronting Herod Antipas and Herodias(his brother's wife) because "His Pastor" endorsed a document that says "without limitation". GOD forbid! John the Baptist could have kept his head LITERALLY!

    I stand with GCMWatch on this one! Willful blindness(or is it?) or a slight overlook of something of this magnitude is not going to cut it when we stand before the LORD! Can you imagine if the three hebrew boys had of took the easy way out and bowed to the "image"?

    Last thing, Who says that Christianity(The Way) is Inclusive and Universal(This word usually means inclusion!)? Answer, The Devil! Our faith is exclusive to those who have repented and have been born again and live and confess through their actions, behavior that JESUS is their LORD and SAVIOUR! Everybody will not enter! I mean tell me, I am missing it, because the Word of GOD says, Strait(Narrow) is the Way and wide is the gate(Universal, Without Limitation) and Broad(Universal, Without Limitation) is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many(the majority) therebe which goin thereat:...

    I mean we must preach and teach the Word of GOD, the Gospel of the LORD JESUS CHRIST and living this faith with ABSOLUTES! When I mean ABSOLUTES, that means NO EXCEPTIONS, NO OTHER WAY TO ETERNAL LIFE, NO OTHER MEANS OF SALVATION, ALL OTHER FAITHS ARE FALSE, and that what you or I stand on, correction, what I KNOW that I KNOW that I KNOW...beyond ALL SHADOW or REASONABLE DOUBT...that JESUS CHRIST IS LORD, that GOD(JEHOVAH, YAHWEH) SENT HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, the whole counsel of GOD from Genesis to Revelation....if I for once give an exception clause...then my faith is counterfeit and void!
    It is no longer a pearl of great price!IF that means that JESUS CHRIST is NOT the only way, the only truth, the only life...then I am deceived! But I know HE IS WHO SAYS HE IS! Amen! Our faith must be ABSOLUTE...UNSHAKEABLE!

    Sorry Pastor Burnett for being wordy, the typin' preacher man kicked in! SMILE! HALLELUJAH!

    ReplyDelete
  12. in reference to gay marriage not being a "human right"...See www.hrc.org There goal/vision is "WORKING FOR LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL AND TRANSGENDER EQUAL RIGHTS"..."The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is the nation’s leading gay and lesbian political organization, boasting nearly 500000 members nationwide" Most corporations endorse this organization and has gained a very large stronghold in corporate america..

    ReplyDelete
  13. Pastor Burnett,
    Another thing that came to my mind.
    When looking at "human rights", where is the language for protection for the unborn/the children in the womb?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Enochwalked,

    You said: "Forget about the homosexual agenda for one moment, when marriage is defined by this document by leaders of various faiths(????)(1) Men and women of full age(?), without any(?) limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution"

    Now THAT'S how it's done. That's called a minimal facts argument. Look past the ambigious language because the devil will hide himself, but let's look at what's abundantly clear...This isn't even biblically centered...Now, to align my church with a non biblically centered message is horrendous....Then on top of that to tell me I'm WRONG for being concerned is plainly stupid...and I don't use that language often, but it is.

    But look at how we are...They come here and criticize me, you, and us for what they say is "judging prematurely" with absolutely NO REGARD to what has actually taken place, or what my pulpit has been vicariously ascribed to. If that's not deception I don't know what is.

    We need to go back to CHRIST...That's all I know and can say!

    Blessed.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Oregonsistah,

    Excellent info my sistah. That should CONFIRM that gays view marriages and unions and a HUMAN RIGHT...nothing less...Thanks for the support.

    To all the FLESH ADVOCATES THAT COME TO THIS SITE AND OTHERS TO CRITICIZE, AND DOWNLOAD INFO TO HELP PREPARE YOUR SERMONS AND TO MAKE YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'VE STUDIED SOMETHING:

    If you come here talking at least know what you're talking about first! That way you don't get me all upset with STUPID comments regarding issues that you've spent NO TIME studying...

    "Oooh he's not a nice pastor, I wouldn't go to his church"...THANK YOU!

    Blessed! 4-real

    ReplyDelete
  16. Enochwalked,

    ABSOLUTELY...where are the protections for them? We want to sign onto something sign on to protecting the unborn or advocate for that...where are we there???

    Unfortunately SILENT.

    Blessed!

    ReplyDelete
  17. I will say in my defense to the ethics professor, since he has made his rounds...

    I took three weeks researching and reading BEFORE I wrote and published this article. Generally I can write a full article in about an hour with no distractions. This did take time to look at the language, connections, players, unspoken motives, etc to come to the conclusion I did.

    I am convinced that this is a stealth attempt to leverage homosexual marriage using religion via the UN. Either Bishop Blake was hoodwinked or he has had another "I didnt know" moment. At any rate as Supt Burnett asked, subject the entire church to this agreement, when he could have represented as a single individual if he believed so strongly? And I still would like to know how he got invited, when there are no other african american signatories there of any denomination? What about him attracted Queen Beatrix?

    I am calling it what it is.

    Please see my comment to you regarding your "critical reading". Quote: "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights celebrates the dignity of the human person, irrespective of religion, race, sex or other distinctions."

    What is your interpretation of "other distinctions"?

    There is much more history behind this but my article would have easily went 2-3000 words.

    PS: I hope these guys are not gutless trolls. Im sick of these anonymous "cogic member" types who want to run cover, but are man or woman enough to handle the reciprocal questions.

    ReplyDelete
  18. His "pentecostal, holiness, christian faith tradition" okay...

    I understand where he is coming from saying the following phrases like we should have "basic human rights"; "human dignity and mutual dignity; god intends for people to live peaceably; right to life; in spite of human differences; religious belief and culture; disinherited and weak; beauty of human life, the sacred calling..

    the key words for me that the homosexual community leverage at at groups and peopole they call homophobic are the words "intolerance and bigotry" and Bishop Blake was saying these will "began to die".

    I am not saying he condones homosexuality; but this could be a slippery slope and still wonder why he felt the need to sign on to this document; when he has been supporting the AIDS movement and orphans in Africa and the work he does should speak for him

    ReplyDelete
  19. Oregonsistah,

    You are right in your questioning and tentativeness. If you haven't done so already take a look at front page or cut and past theis link and tell me what you see or don't see...

    http://bethelburnett.blogspot.com/2009/03/are-human-rights-gay-rights.html

    I wanna know.

    Take your time. God bless.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This Blake person, and so many others belong in the pit of hell! Anyone who is following these dogs are destined to join him in hell. What was the cause of G.E. Pattersons death?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anonymous
    March 8, 2009 9:21 PM,

    "Anyone who is following these dogs are destined to join him in hell"

    Do you care to expound on that or support your assertions?

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete

Please send me an email if you try to post a comment and cannot do so. Dunamis1@netzero.com. Thanks.