I agree that racial preference is incompatible with Presbyterian government. But that begs the question, why does the PCA have a scholarship fund for travel to the GA exclusively available to minorities?
Not defending the fund, but is there much difference between this, and funds made available to send ruling elders to GA, or to help rural churches go to GA?
Let's say the Korean PCA presbyteries, which are well known for poor representation at GA, had a wealthy Korean businessman donate money to help elders go to GA. Most of us would consider that to be a good thing, not a bad thing.
Helping minorities get to GA is not the same as telling them they aren't welcome in the church.
I understand. I was just using the author's words to make a point. Of course, the difference in example and yours is that yours aren't based on race. At least for the first two. For the last one, maybe the wealthy businessmen ought to make the arrangements himself. Maybe.
There are practicalities involved in setting up funds to help elders go to General Assembly. While a case can be made that the fund should not be managed by the general assembly but rather by a local church or presbytery, or perhaps by a non-profit 501(c)3 organization not under church control, there does need to be third-party external oversight when donations are involved. That doesn't necessarily need to be oversight through the courts of the church but there does need to be oversight by somebody, and preferably several "somebodies," and ideally people who are biblically qualified as elders or deacons (this does involve money, so a diaconal role would be appropriate) even if they don't serve in those roles.
Bad things can happen when people take money given in Christ's name for Christian purposes, or give money, without oversight.
Good word, but this applies to planting "black" churches as well. As a denomination, we need to beware of making too much of race. We have given into the spirit of the age.
You also gladly accept propaganda from By Faith Magazine and do not condemn ‘Christianity Today’ (or ‘Christianity Atray,’ which is better) nor TGC, etc. So what are you talking about? And if you have, why isn't it loud and passionate enough to make a difference? Try harder!
Why then did the PCA Gen Assembly adopted ‘racial reconciliation'? The title alone is unbiblical. It's based on a misconception and continues to be the rule today. You all need to be serious. You are also completely ignoring the big names pushing this forward. Why? They are just men. Bring them forward and end this charade.
They claim Spanglerites(for lack of a better word) believe in ontological superiority. Plainly false.
They say we deny all interracial marriage. Plainly false.
They say we deny all immigration or naturalization. Plainly false.
They say we oppose minority elders in substance. Plainly false.
That's just the libel. You're all liars.
Then there's the inconsistency.
They talked about Dabney and Edwards as having erroneous views. Or "questionable"views. And that they were still valuable. They can keep the baby and throw out the bath water.
But when another dude says the same thing, it's heresy. Is that because the RPCNA magisterium spoke on it? So it wasn't heresy and now it is?
I can listen or Orthodox or Mormons, Catholics or charismatics.
But these are my own people lying about people like me and excommunicating us. It's not a fad. It won't go away. They delude themselves out believe we are small or not growing.
We are recovering our history and these scriptural principles where you like it or not.
I agree that racial preference is incompatible with Presbyterian government. But that begs the question, why does the PCA have a scholarship fund for travel to the GA exclusively available to minorities?
Not defending the fund, but is there much difference between this, and funds made available to send ruling elders to GA, or to help rural churches go to GA?
Let's say the Korean PCA presbyteries, which are well known for poor representation at GA, had a wealthy Korean businessman donate money to help elders go to GA. Most of us would consider that to be a good thing, not a bad thing.
Helping minorities get to GA is not the same as telling them they aren't welcome in the church.
I understand. I was just using the author's words to make a point. Of course, the difference in example and yours is that yours aren't based on race. At least for the first two. For the last one, maybe the wealthy businessmen ought to make the arrangements himself. Maybe.
We likely agree.
There are practicalities involved in setting up funds to help elders go to General Assembly. While a case can be made that the fund should not be managed by the general assembly but rather by a local church or presbytery, or perhaps by a non-profit 501(c)3 organization not under church control, there does need to be third-party external oversight when donations are involved. That doesn't necessarily need to be oversight through the courts of the church but there does need to be oversight by somebody, and preferably several "somebodies," and ideally people who are biblically qualified as elders or deacons (this does involve money, so a diaconal role would be appropriate) even if they don't serve in those roles.
Bad things can happen when people take money given in Christ's name for Christian purposes, or give money, without oversight.
Good word, but this applies to planting "black" churches as well. As a denomination, we need to beware of making too much of race. We have given into the spirit of the age.
Now when I run into the “race” question on paperwork, I’ll have a great reply- I’m Christian.
You also gladly accept propaganda from By Faith Magazine and do not condemn ‘Christianity Today’ (or ‘Christianity Atray,’ which is better) nor TGC, etc. So what are you talking about? And if you have, why isn't it loud and passionate enough to make a difference? Try harder!
Why then did the PCA Gen Assembly adopted ‘racial reconciliation'? The title alone is unbiblical. It's based on a misconception and continues to be the rule today. You all need to be serious. You are also completely ignoring the big names pushing this forward. Why? They are just men. Bring them forward and end this charade.
They claim Spanglerites(for lack of a better word) believe in ontological superiority. Plainly false.
They say we deny all interracial marriage. Plainly false.
They say we deny all immigration or naturalization. Plainly false.
They say we oppose minority elders in substance. Plainly false.
That's just the libel. You're all liars.
Then there's the inconsistency.
They talked about Dabney and Edwards as having erroneous views. Or "questionable"views. And that they were still valuable. They can keep the baby and throw out the bath water.
But when another dude says the same thing, it's heresy. Is that because the RPCNA magisterium spoke on it? So it wasn't heresy and now it is?
I can listen or Orthodox or Mormons, Catholics or charismatics.
But these are my own people lying about people like me and excommunicating us. It's not a fad. It won't go away. They delude themselves out believe we are small or not growing.
We are recovering our history and these scriptural principles where you like it or not.