Really angry pastor in the news

Where Fellowship and Camaraderie lives: that place where the CPS membership values fun and good fellowship as the cement of the community
Post Reply
User avatar
DepartedLight
Archfairy of Carolinia
Archfairy of Carolinia
Posts: 32053
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Tobacco Fairy HQ, North Carolina

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by DepartedLight » Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:14 pm

Didn't intend for thread devolution

Farts are funny
DL Jake

You should see if they can recalibrate your internal clock forward a month. - Cleon

User avatar
SlowToke
John Crosby's Friend
John Crosby's Friend
Posts: 9289
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 6:00 pm
Location: Cloverdale, IN
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by SlowToke » Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:44 pm

I'm pretty interested in the conversation JMG was trying to have because I agree it's interesting and important. Too bad it probably can't happen on CPS.
Wayne Teipen
http://teipenpipes.com
"Fools have no interest in understanding; they only want to air their own opinions." Proverbs 18:2

"Life is tough, and it's tougher when you're stupid." -- John Wayne

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2764
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by Jester » Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:17 am

FredS wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:47 pm
Jester wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:43 pm
FredS wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:16 pm
It seems like - because it is, in fact - the church building was closed for non compliance with "public health restrictions", not because it's a church. Or a Christian church. Or a Christian church with Christians inside. Or a Christian church with Christians inside who were praying. Or a Christian church with Christians inside who were praying or partaking sacraments. Or a Christian church with Christians inside who were praying or partaking sacraments or doing anything else Christ asks of His followers.

No, it's been locked down because they "held public worship gatherings in excess of size limits, and with many inside reportedly not wearing masks or following distancing guidelines."

Did He say "You shall gather in groups of more than 10"? Did He say "You shall gather in groups even if one of you may cause harm to a fragile brother"? Did He say "You may not gather virtually for a time even if it is best for your community". Did He say "You may not socially distance even if you miss the physical embrace of your brothers and sisters"? Did He say "Your life will always be comfortable and you will never face instances where it may not be in your best interest to worship corporately and you may need to meet in your homes in smaller groups"? Did He say "You shall gather to worship and sing praises to your God, but you may not do so in smallish groups and you may not wear masks and you must be within arms reach of one another"? Did He say "Where/when two or three gather in my name, there am I with them”? Oh wait, He did say that.
I am praying for you Fred.
If you're serious, then thank you.
If you're saying "bless your heart" well, then, you know what to do with that.
I am serious. We have a major disagreement on things but this is not a bless your heart situation.
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

If you can't say “amen” you gotta say “ouch.” -Voddie Baucham

Cessna152rg
Congregation
Congregation
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:32 pm

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by Cessna152rg » Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:24 am

The tendency to cry persecution at every little inconvenience is a snowflaky and dangerous thing. It is like the boy that cried wolf.
Being treated the same as the rest of society is not persecution.

I grew up as a missionary kid in Ethiopia, we had a church close to where we lived where the police stormed their youth group, kidnapped/conscripted the kids to the military, the boys as soldiers and the girls as sex slaves.
I am not saying that it has to be this bad to be persecution, but you guys over in the US is generally viewed as crybabies because everything is persecution according to you guys.

What about preaching the gospel instead of preaching about masks and how horrible the government is?

Or should we just do as Jesus himself said? 8) 8)
John 13:35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you will not wear a mask.”

“You don't have to eat the entire turd to know that it's not a crab cake.”

― Orson Scott Card, Shadow of the Hegemon

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16278
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by tuttle » Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:05 am

I still haven't heard a good argument for why the frog shouldn't jump out of the pot before the heat is turned up. Does someone have some convincing evidence that the heat will not be turned up?

At what point is it acceptable for someone to speak up about losing their freedom?

I keep hearing the arguments that justify these actions (disturbing and breaking up worship services, blocking church parking lots, fining churches, arresting pastors, now building fences around a church building) because they are breaking ordinances. And due to breaking the ordinances, they are getting what they deserve, thus: not persecution.

But breaking the law can't be the criteria because nearly every example of persecution in history is based on a law. Christian worship is legal in China as long as it abides by the law. Gather here in this church, not there in that church, and you're perfectly free to worship. If you don't want to face the consequences, then just follow the law. Jesus never said to meet underground, you know...

This puts the law or ordinance in the spotlight. Is the law righteous or unrighteous? Good or bad? If it's a bad law, is it right to resist? Is it a good law, but overreaching? etc.

And that's where we are right now. Some of us believe the COVID restrictions are an overreach of authority, arbitrary and/or narrative dependent ('salright for BLM protests), a violation of Constitutional rights, notoriously not even followed by those who have ordered them, and an easy path that could lead to more freedoms being restricted. Overreaching restrictions handed down by untrustworthy rulers who have signaled six ways to Sunday that they desire more power is more than enough reason to jump out of the damn pot before it heats up. Everything points to it heating up. Their hand is on the knob. Tell me why I shouldn't believe the hand on the knob will turn it off instead?
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
DepartedLight
Archfairy of Carolinia
Archfairy of Carolinia
Posts: 32053
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Tobacco Fairy HQ, North Carolina

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by DepartedLight » Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:28 am

tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:05 am
I still haven't heard a good argument for why the frog shouldn't jump out of the pot before the heat is turned up. Does someone have some convincing evidence that the heat will not be turned up?

At what point is it acceptable for someone to speak up about losing their freedom?

I keep hearing the arguments that justify these actions (disturbing and breaking up worship services, blocking church parking lots, fining churches, arresting pastors, now building fences around a church building) because they are breaking ordinances. And due to breaking the ordinances, they are getting what they deserve, thus: not persecution.

But breaking the law can't be the criteria because nearly every example of persecution in history is based on a law. Christian worship is legal in China as long as it abides by the law. Gather here in this church, not there in that church, and you're perfectly free to worship. If you don't want to face the consequences, then just follow the law. Jesus never said to meet underground, you know...

This puts the law or ordinance in the spotlight. Is the law righteous or unrighteous? Good or bad? If it's a bad law, is it right to resist? Is it a good law, but overreaching? etc.

And that's where we are right now. Some of us believe the COVID restrictions are an overreach of authority, arbitrary and/or narrative dependent ('salright for BLM protests), a violation of Constitutional rights, notoriously not even followed by those who have ordered them, and an easy path that could lead to more freedoms being restricted. Overreaching restrictions handed down by untrustworthy rulers who have signaled six ways to Sunday that they desire more power is more than enough reason to jump out of the damn pot before it heats up. Everything points to it heating up. Their hand is on the knob. Tell me why I shouldn't believe the hand on the knob will turn it off instead?
My experience is that once any form of gov't takes away things from citizens, it becomes the default and we rarely get them back. Once power has been relinquished by the citizen and taken by the gov't so it remains until there is a fight to change it. Taxes, 2a stuff, etc. I think we as citizens instead of giving up those freedoms should take it to the courts to see if the Exec & Legislative branches are operating inline with local and federal constitutions. But we're not doing that. We're just accepting executive orders and tryin to get along.
DL Jake

You should see if they can recalibrate your internal clock forward a month. - Cleon

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16278
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by tuttle » Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:51 am

DepartedLight wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:28 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:05 am
I still haven't heard a good argument for why the frog shouldn't jump out of the pot before the heat is turned up. Does someone have some convincing evidence that the heat will not be turned up?

At what point is it acceptable for someone to speak up about losing their freedom?

I keep hearing the arguments that justify these actions (disturbing and breaking up worship services, blocking church parking lots, fining churches, arresting pastors, now building fences around a church building) because they are breaking ordinances. And due to breaking the ordinances, they are getting what they deserve, thus: not persecution.

But breaking the law can't be the criteria because nearly every example of persecution in history is based on a law. Christian worship is legal in China as long as it abides by the law. Gather here in this church, not there in that church, and you're perfectly free to worship. If you don't want to face the consequences, then just follow the law. Jesus never said to meet underground, you know...

This puts the law or ordinance in the spotlight. Is the law righteous or unrighteous? Good or bad? If it's a bad law, is it right to resist? Is it a good law, but overreaching? etc.

And that's where we are right now. Some of us believe the COVID restrictions are an overreach of authority, arbitrary and/or narrative dependent ('salright for BLM protests), a violation of Constitutional rights, notoriously not even followed by those who have ordered them, and an easy path that could lead to more freedoms being restricted. Overreaching restrictions handed down by untrustworthy rulers who have signaled six ways to Sunday that they desire more power is more than enough reason to jump out of the damn pot before it heats up. Everything points to it heating up. Their hand is on the knob. Tell me why I shouldn't believe the hand on the knob will turn it off instead?
My experience is that once any form of gov't takes away things from citizens, it becomes the default and we rarely get them back. Once power has been relinquished by the citizen and taken by the gov't so it remains until there is a fight to change it. Taxes, 2a stuff, etc. I think we as citizens instead of giving up those freedoms should take it to the courts to see if the Exec & Legislative branches are operating inline with local and federal constitutions. But we're not doing that. We're just accepting executive orders and tryin to get along.
This is a good, used-to-be-normal, American response. God bless you. You are right.

More power to those who fight it.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

Cessna152rg
Congregation
Congregation
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:32 pm

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by Cessna152rg » Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:05 am

tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:05 am
I still haven't heard a good argument for why the frog shouldn't jump out of the pot before the heat is turned up. Does someone have some convincing evidence that the heat will not be turned up?

At what point is it acceptable for someone to speak up about losing their freedom?

I keep hearing the arguments that justify these actions (disturbing and breaking up worship services, blocking church parking lots, fining churches, arresting pastors, now building fences around a church building) because they are breaking ordinances. And due to breaking the ordinances, they are getting what they deserve, thus: not persecution.

But breaking the law can't be the criteria because nearly every example of persecution in history is based on a law. Christian worship is legal in China as long as it abides by the law. Gather here in this church, not there in that church, and you're perfectly free to worship. If you don't want to face the consequences, then just follow the law. Jesus never said to meet underground, you know...

This puts the law or ordinance in the spotlight. Is the law righteous or unrighteous? Good or bad? If it's a bad law, is it right to resist? Is it a good law, but overreaching? etc.

And that's where we are right now. Some of us believe the COVID restrictions are an overreach of authority, arbitrary and/or narrative dependent ('salright for BLM protests), a violation of Constitutional rights, notoriously not even followed by those who have ordered them, and an easy path that could lead to more freedoms being restricted. Overreaching restrictions handed down by untrustworthy rulers who have signaled six ways to Sunday that they desire more power is more than enough reason to jump out of the damn pot before it heats up. Everything points to it heating up. Their hand is on the knob. Tell me why I shouldn't believe the hand on the knob will turn it off instead?
You have some really good thoughts and questions there! The frog should be jumping at the right time, but that timing is really hard to get right.

My personal belief is that we should tolerate a lot more restrictions if those restrictions are aimed at the society as a whole than we should do if the restrictions are specifically aimed at specific religious groups or practices.
Following that line of thought a general restriction of assemblies is less dangerous than a specific restriction aimed at christians. Since it is general the restrictions will get less stringent across the entire population when conditions permit.

My church has been following the guidelines given by national and local authorities We have shut down for short periods, limited attendance and spaced out the pews, we have had outside services and even zoom meetings. It sucks! I am longing for the day we can sing shoulder to shoulder and hug each other, but we are just as much a living healthy church as we where a year or two ago.

I also believe that protecting the rights of others is a much greater calling than protecting our own. We are called to lay down our rights just as we are called to protect and serve the poor, immigrants, prisoners, fatherless and widows. That is literally serving Jesus vs serving our own right to assemble as we wish. It is better to be fined for giving food and shelter to Jesus than to be fined for not wearing a mask or insisting on being too many people in a room.

I believe we should be prioritizing with great thoughtfulness which subjects we should fight over and which we should let go of so we avoid letting the kinda important subjects overshadowing the really important ones. The world will hate us regardless, let them hate us for the right reasons!!

I'll be honest: persecution scares me a lot! I want my kids to grow up in a society that is as good to them as possible!
But how can I model Christ in the best possible way to my kids? Is it by fighting for our rights and thoughts and prayers for others or is it by fighting for the least among us and trusting the Lord when it comes to ourselves? I believe it is the latter, but it is so incredibly scary and difficult to truly live that way! I wish and pray that will be my legacy, but I feel small and powerless at times!

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 25049
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by FredS » Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:55 am

SlowToke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:44 pm
I'm pretty interested in the conversation JMG was trying to have because I agree it's interesting and important. Too bad it probably can't happen on CPS.
Perhaps that reasonable conversation is better suited to it's own thread. This thread started with a really angry pastor in the news and, by and large, it has stayed angry. That guy is controversial. If you ask me, the whole point of the videos he broadcasts is to stir people - to get them to act or react, and that's what's happened here. We've fallen into the familiar battle lines we've practiced for the last year:

1) Those who think Covid is a serious threat and think the government is right in setting reasonable (and fluid) rules to protect it's citizens.

- and -

2) %fracking idiots. JK. Those who think Covid is a real thing, but it's not such a threat that it requires or justifies over reaching governmental restrictions in the ways we work, shop, play, travel, or congregate for religious services or sporting events or anything else. "Give 'em an inch and they go a mile down the slippery slope." "Those who would give up freedoms for security deserve neither."

Just like our political parties have done lately, this pastor is saying there's a light side and a dark side, good and evil, right and wrong, friend and foe, for God and against God, and he's forcing us to choose a side. He's framed an argument that leaves no space in the middle.
Last edited by FredS on Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2764
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by Jester » Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:00 am

FredS wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:55 am
SlowToke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:44 pm
I'm pretty interested in the conversation JMG was trying to have because I agree it's interesting and important. Too bad it probably can't happen on CPS.
Perhaps that reasonable conversation is better suited to it's own thread. This thread started with a really angry pastor in the news and, by and large, it has stayed angry. That guy is controversial. If you ask me, the whole point of the videos he broadcasts is to stir people - to get them to act or react, and that's what's happened here. We've fallen into the familiar battle lines we've practiced for the last year:

1) Those who think Covid is a serious threat and think the government is right in setting reasonable (and fluid) rules to protect it's citizens.

2) %fracking idiots. JK. Those who think Covid is a real thing, but it's not such a threat that it requires or justifies over reaching governmental restrictions in the ways we work, shop, play, travel, or congregate for religious services or sporting events or anything else. "Give 'em an inch and they go a mile down the slippery slope." "Those who would give up freedoms for security deserve neither."

Just like our political parties have done lately, this pastor is saying there's a light side and a dark side, good and evil, right and wrong, and he's forcing us to choose a side. He's framed an argument that leaves no space in the middle.
So there should be a place in the middle? A church with willing congregants to gather at any capacity without masks? I personally don't have a problem with group one. It seems there is no option for group 2. The middle would allow room for both.
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

If you can't say “amen” you gotta say “ouch.” -Voddie Baucham

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16278
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by tuttle » Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:19 am

Cessna152rg wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:05 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:05 am
I still haven't heard a good argument for why the frog shouldn't jump out of the pot before the heat is turned up. Does someone have some convincing evidence that the heat will not be turned up?

At what point is it acceptable for someone to speak up about losing their freedom?

I keep hearing the arguments that justify these actions (disturbing and breaking up worship services, blocking church parking lots, fining churches, arresting pastors, now building fences around a church building) because they are breaking ordinances. And due to breaking the ordinances, they are getting what they deserve, thus: not persecution.

But breaking the law can't be the criteria because nearly every example of persecution in history is based on a law. Christian worship is legal in China as long as it abides by the law. Gather here in this church, not there in that church, and you're perfectly free to worship. If you don't want to face the consequences, then just follow the law. Jesus never said to meet underground, you know...

This puts the law or ordinance in the spotlight. Is the law righteous or unrighteous? Good or bad? If it's a bad law, is it right to resist? Is it a good law, but overreaching? etc.

And that's where we are right now. Some of us believe the COVID restrictions are an overreach of authority, arbitrary and/or narrative dependent ('salright for BLM protests), a violation of Constitutional rights, notoriously not even followed by those who have ordered them, and an easy path that could lead to more freedoms being restricted. Overreaching restrictions handed down by untrustworthy rulers who have signaled six ways to Sunday that they desire more power is more than enough reason to jump out of the damn pot before it heats up. Everything points to it heating up. Their hand is on the knob. Tell me why I shouldn't believe the hand on the knob will turn it off instead?
You have some really good thoughts and questions there! The frog should be jumping at the right time, but that timing is really hard to get right.

My personal belief is that we should tolerate a lot more restrictions if those restrictions are aimed at the society as a whole than we should do if the restrictions are specifically aimed at specific religious groups or practices.
Following that line of thought a general restriction of assemblies is less dangerous than a specific restriction aimed at christians. Since it is general the restrictions will get less stringent across the entire population when conditions permit.

My church has been following the guidelines given by national and local authorities We have shut down for short periods, limited attendance and spaced out the pews, we have had outside services and even zoom meetings. It sucks! I am longing for the day we can sing shoulder to shoulder and hug each other, but we are just as much a living healthy church as we where a year or two ago.

I also believe that protecting the rights of others is a much greater calling than protecting our own. We are called to lay down our rights just as we are called to protect and serve the poor, immigrants, prisoners, fatherless and widows. That is literally serving Jesus vs serving our own right to assemble as we wish. It is better to be fined for giving food and shelter to Jesus than to be fined for not wearing a mask or insisting on being too many people in a room.

I believe we should be prioritizing with great thoughtfulness which subjects we should fight over and which we should let go of so we avoid letting the kinda important subjects overshadowing the really important ones. The world will hate us regardless, let them hate us for the right reasons!!

I'll be honest: persecution scares me a lot! I want my kids to grow up in a society that is as good to them as possible!
But how can I model Christ in the best possible way to my kids? Is it by fighting for our rights and thoughts and prayers for others or is it by fighting for the least among us and trusting the Lord when it comes to ourselves? I believe it is the latter, but it is so incredibly scary and difficult to truly live that way! I wish and pray that will be my legacy, but I feel small and powerless at times!
The problem is that no one complaining about folks breaking the COVID rules have drawn the line. At some point, as you say, the frog has to jump out of the pot, and regardless what moment the frog jumps, there will be people screaming that it's too soon.

Personal decisions for safety is one thing. Mandating them is another. If we are going to allow our authorities emergency powers, the kinds of powers that are being used all over the country, (and let's be clear, I am for our leaders having those emergency powers) then there had better be a doggone emergency. The funny thing about real emergencies are how non-partisan they are. No one is standing inside their burning house tweeting about how dying from a burning house is a Political scare tactic. But say that house burned down and then politicians started passing emergency ordinances on the basis that every house in the town will burn to the ground (because science/experts/data), eventually there's going to be people calling foul on whether or not it's a real emergency, on account of, you know, their neighborhood still standing.

So there's that, and it's why I've called the restrictions an overreach. They're legit, they're just too much. Telling people to lockdown for two weeks is a logical use of the power. Kicking the can down the road for a year after that, adding other arbitrary stipulations here and there doesn't constitute a legit use of power. "What do you mean I have to wrap my house in polyester in order to prevent random sparks from catching the house on fire, how's that gonna work?" So what do you do with that? When the prescription doesn't address the sickness, namely because not everyone is sick. Well, some people stop taking the medicine. And some people get the weird idea that something else is at play when you're told to continuing taking meds regardless of your current health situation.

And in situations like this, when freedoms are being unnecessarily restricted by provenly unreliable and untrustworthy people, people who are taking away your neighbor's right to assemble or to exercise their religion, what is the best way to show love to our neighbors? If protecting the rights of your neighbor are more important than your own rights, is it even an option to exercise your rights in order to protect your neighbor's rights? When the airplane looses pressure and the oxygen masks fall before you, is it selfish to put your mask on first before your child?

It's one thing to lay down your rights for the love of your neighbor, it's another thing to lay down your rights when that's the very thing that protects your neighbor's rights. Do you want your children or your neighbor's children to grow up without freedom? Without the right to assemble or to worship freely? If your freedom is removed today, because you decided to not exercise your rights, will your slave neighbor thank you, like we thank our forefathers for the freedoms they handed down to us?
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 25049
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by FredS » Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:25 am

Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:00 am
FredS wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:55 am
SlowToke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:44 pm
I'm pretty interested in the conversation JMG was trying to have because I agree it's interesting and important. Too bad it probably can't happen on CPS.
Perhaps that reasonable conversation is better suited to it's own thread. This thread started with a really angry pastor in the news and, by and large, it has stayed angry. That guy is controversial. If you ask me, the whole point of the videos he broadcasts is to stir people - to get them to act or react, and that's what's happened here. We've fallen into the familiar battle lines we've practiced for the last year:

1) Those who think Covid is a serious threat and think the government is right in setting reasonable (and fluid) rules to protect it's citizens.

2) %fracking idiots. JK. Those who think Covid is a real thing, but it's not such a threat that it requires or justifies over reaching governmental restrictions in the ways we work, shop, play, travel, or congregate for religious services or sporting events or anything else. "Give 'em an inch and they go a mile down the slippery slope." "Those who would give up freedoms for security deserve neither."

Just like our political parties have done lately, this pastor is saying there's a light side and a dark side, good and evil, right and wrong, and he's forcing us to choose a side. He's framed an argument that leaves no space in the middle.
So there should be a place in the middle? A church with willing congregants to gather at any capacity without masks? I personally don't have a problem with group one. It seems there is no option for group 2. The middle would allow room for both.
Yes. I think there should be a place in the middle. A church with willing congregants to gather at any capacity without masks.
[EDIT] But in many jurisdictions, there's not. [/EDIT}

I wouldn't attend such a church and I'd like those that do not to be rubbing up against me at the grocery store. It's not a hill I'll die on or even defend though because I really think we'll be in that unrestricted place again, and soon. My church is pretty much there now. Technically, we're limited in capacity, but nobody counts. We socially distance because our pastor has asked us to. We wear masks when we move about because our pastor has asked us to. We loiter outside after church, with or without masks as we feel comfortable, because our pastor has asked us to. Those who aren't willing, stay home and zoom with us. We all get to choose.
Last edited by FredS on Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

Cessna152rg
Congregation
Congregation
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:32 pm

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by Cessna152rg » Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:50 am

tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:19 am
Cessna152rg wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:05 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:05 am
I still haven't heard a good argument for why the frog shouldn't jump out of the pot before the heat is turned up. Does someone have some convincing evidence that the heat will not be turned up?

At what point is it acceptable for someone to speak up about losing their freedom?

I keep hearing the arguments that justify these actions (disturbing and breaking up worship services, blocking church parking lots, fining churches, arresting pastors, now building fences around a church building) because they are breaking ordinances. And due to breaking the ordinances, they are getting what they deserve, thus: not persecution.

But breaking the law can't be the criteria because nearly every example of persecution in history is based on a law. Christian worship is legal in China as long as it abides by the law. Gather here in this church, not there in that church, and you're perfectly free to worship. If you don't want to face the consequences, then just follow the law. Jesus never said to meet underground, you know...

This puts the law or ordinance in the spotlight. Is the law righteous or unrighteous? Good or bad? If it's a bad law, is it right to resist? Is it a good law, but overreaching? etc.

And that's where we are right now. Some of us believe the COVID restrictions are an overreach of authority, arbitrary and/or narrative dependent ('salright for BLM protests), a violation of Constitutional rights, notoriously not even followed by those who have ordered them, and an easy path that could lead to more freedoms being restricted. Overreaching restrictions handed down by untrustworthy rulers who have signaled six ways to Sunday that they desire more power is more than enough reason to jump out of the damn pot before it heats up. Everything points to it heating up. Their hand is on the knob. Tell me why I shouldn't believe the hand on the knob will turn it off instead?
You have some really good thoughts and questions there! The frog should be jumping at the right time, but that timing is really hard to get right.

My personal belief is that we should tolerate a lot more restrictions if those restrictions are aimed at the society as a whole than we should do if the restrictions are specifically aimed at specific religious groups or practices.
Following that line of thought a general restriction of assemblies is less dangerous than a specific restriction aimed at christians. Since it is general the restrictions will get less stringent across the entire population when conditions permit.

My church has been following the guidelines given by national and local authorities We have shut down for short periods, limited attendance and spaced out the pews, we have had outside services and even zoom meetings. It sucks! I am longing for the day we can sing shoulder to shoulder and hug each other, but we are just as much a living healthy church as we where a year or two ago.

I also believe that protecting the rights of others is a much greater calling than protecting our own. We are called to lay down our rights just as we are called to protect and serve the poor, immigrants, prisoners, fatherless and widows. That is literally serving Jesus vs serving our own right to assemble as we wish. It is better to be fined for giving food and shelter to Jesus than to be fined for not wearing a mask or insisting on being too many people in a room.

I believe we should be prioritizing with great thoughtfulness which subjects we should fight over and which we should let go of so we avoid letting the kinda important subjects overshadowing the really important ones. The world will hate us regardless, let them hate us for the right reasons!!

I'll be honest: persecution scares me a lot! I want my kids to grow up in a society that is as good to them as possible!
But how can I model Christ in the best possible way to my kids? Is it by fighting for our rights and thoughts and prayers for others or is it by fighting for the least among us and trusting the Lord when it comes to ourselves? I believe it is the latter, but it is so incredibly scary and difficult to truly live that way! I wish and pray that will be my legacy, but I feel small and powerless at times!
The problem is that no one complaining about folks breaking the COVID rules have drawn the line. At some point, as you say, the frog has to jump out of the pot, and regardless what moment the frog jumps, there will be people screaming that it's too soon.

Personal decisions for safety is one thing. Mandating them is another. If we are going to allow our authorities emergency powers, the kinds of powers that are being used all over the country, (and let's be clear, I am for our leaders having those emergency powers) then there had better be a doggone emergency. The funny thing about real emergencies are how non-partisan they are. No one is standing inside their burning house tweeting about how dying from a burning house is a Political scare tactic. But say that house burned down and then politicians started passing emergency ordinances on the basis that every house in the town will burn to the ground (because science/experts/data), eventually there's going to be people calling foul on whether or not it's a real emergency, on account of, you know, their neighborhood still standing.

So there's that, and it's why I've called the restrictions an overreach. They're legit, they're just too much. Telling people to lockdown for two weeks is a logical use of the power. Kicking the can down the road for a year after that, adding other arbitrary stipulations here and there doesn't constitute a legit use of power. "What do you mean I have to wrap my house in polyester in order to prevent random sparks from catching the house on fire, how's that gonna work?" So what do you do with that? When the prescription doesn't address the sickness, namely because not everyone is sick. Well, some people stop taking the medicine. And some people get the weird idea that something else is at play when you're told to continuing taking meds regardless of your current health situation.

And in situations like this, when freedoms are being unnecessarily restricted by provenly unreliable and untrustworthy people, people who are taking away your neighbor's right to assemble or to exercise their religion, what is the best way to show love to our neighbors? If protecting the rights of your neighbor are more important than your own rights, is it even an option to exercise your rights in order to protect your neighbor's rights? When the airplane looses pressure and the oxygen masks fall before you, is it selfish to put your mask on first before your child?

It's one thing to lay down your rights for the love of your neighbor, it's another thing to lay down your rights when that's the very thing that protects your neighbor's rights. Do you want your children or your neighbor's children to grow up without freedom? Without the right to assemble or to worship freely? If your freedom is removed today, because you decided to not exercise your rights, will your slave neighbor thank you, like we thank our forefathers for the freedoms they handed down to us?
You have some really interesting and thoughtful points there! I agree with you on some of your points, but disagree somewhat on the severity of Covid.

I also think we both agree on the principle of holding back your punches for the important stuff, we just disagree on what the important stuff happens to be.

We also live in vastly different countries, you guys seem very suspicious of the government and your government seems to be suspicious of its citizens, so they overreach to make as many as possible comply somewhat. Over here there is a general thrust of the government and a general thrust from the government, so they get away with using very lighthanded tactics to make most people comply.
“You don't have to eat the entire turd to know that it's not a crab cake.”

― Orson Scott Card, Shadow of the Hegemon

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16278
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by tuttle » Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:16 am

Cessna152rg wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:50 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:19 am
Cessna152rg wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:05 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:05 am
I still haven't heard a good argument for why the frog shouldn't jump out of the pot before the heat is turned up. Does someone have some convincing evidence that the heat will not be turned up?

At what point is it acceptable for someone to speak up about losing their freedom?

I keep hearing the arguments that justify these actions (disturbing and breaking up worship services, blocking church parking lots, fining churches, arresting pastors, now building fences around a church building) because they are breaking ordinances. And due to breaking the ordinances, they are getting what they deserve, thus: not persecution.

But breaking the law can't be the criteria because nearly every example of persecution in history is based on a law. Christian worship is legal in China as long as it abides by the law. Gather here in this church, not there in that church, and you're perfectly free to worship. If you don't want to face the consequences, then just follow the law. Jesus never said to meet underground, you know...

This puts the law or ordinance in the spotlight. Is the law righteous or unrighteous? Good or bad? If it's a bad law, is it right to resist? Is it a good law, but overreaching? etc.

And that's where we are right now. Some of us believe the COVID restrictions are an overreach of authority, arbitrary and/or narrative dependent ('salright for BLM protests), a violation of Constitutional rights, notoriously not even followed by those who have ordered them, and an easy path that could lead to more freedoms being restricted. Overreaching restrictions handed down by untrustworthy rulers who have signaled six ways to Sunday that they desire more power is more than enough reason to jump out of the damn pot before it heats up. Everything points to it heating up. Their hand is on the knob. Tell me why I shouldn't believe the hand on the knob will turn it off instead?
You have some really good thoughts and questions there! The frog should be jumping at the right time, but that timing is really hard to get right.

My personal belief is that we should tolerate a lot more restrictions if those restrictions are aimed at the society as a whole than we should do if the restrictions are specifically aimed at specific religious groups or practices.
Following that line of thought a general restriction of assemblies is less dangerous than a specific restriction aimed at christians. Since it is general the restrictions will get less stringent across the entire population when conditions permit.

My church has been following the guidelines given by national and local authorities We have shut down for short periods, limited attendance and spaced out the pews, we have had outside services and even zoom meetings. It sucks! I am longing for the day we can sing shoulder to shoulder and hug each other, but we are just as much a living healthy church as we where a year or two ago.

I also believe that protecting the rights of others is a much greater calling than protecting our own. We are called to lay down our rights just as we are called to protect and serve the poor, immigrants, prisoners, fatherless and widows. That is literally serving Jesus vs serving our own right to assemble as we wish. It is better to be fined for giving food and shelter to Jesus than to be fined for not wearing a mask or insisting on being too many people in a room.

I believe we should be prioritizing with great thoughtfulness which subjects we should fight over and which we should let go of so we avoid letting the kinda important subjects overshadowing the really important ones. The world will hate us regardless, let them hate us for the right reasons!!

I'll be honest: persecution scares me a lot! I want my kids to grow up in a society that is as good to them as possible!
But how can I model Christ in the best possible way to my kids? Is it by fighting for our rights and thoughts and prayers for others or is it by fighting for the least among us and trusting the Lord when it comes to ourselves? I believe it is the latter, but it is so incredibly scary and difficult to truly live that way! I wish and pray that will be my legacy, but I feel small and powerless at times!
The problem is that no one complaining about folks breaking the COVID rules have drawn the line. At some point, as you say, the frog has to jump out of the pot, and regardless what moment the frog jumps, there will be people screaming that it's too soon.

Personal decisions for safety is one thing. Mandating them is another. If we are going to allow our authorities emergency powers, the kinds of powers that are being used all over the country, (and let's be clear, I am for our leaders having those emergency powers) then there had better be a doggone emergency. The funny thing about real emergencies are how non-partisan they are. No one is standing inside their burning house tweeting about how dying from a burning house is a Political scare tactic. But say that house burned down and then politicians started passing emergency ordinances on the basis that every house in the town will burn to the ground (because science/experts/data), eventually there's going to be people calling foul on whether or not it's a real emergency, on account of, you know, their neighborhood still standing.

So there's that, and it's why I've called the restrictions an overreach. They're legit, they're just too much. Telling people to lockdown for two weeks is a logical use of the power. Kicking the can down the road for a year after that, adding other arbitrary stipulations here and there doesn't constitute a legit use of power. "What do you mean I have to wrap my house in polyester in order to prevent random sparks from catching the house on fire, how's that gonna work?" So what do you do with that? When the prescription doesn't address the sickness, namely because not everyone is sick. Well, some people stop taking the medicine. And some people get the weird idea that something else is at play when you're told to continuing taking meds regardless of your current health situation.

And in situations like this, when freedoms are being unnecessarily restricted by provenly unreliable and untrustworthy people, people who are taking away your neighbor's right to assemble or to exercise their religion, what is the best way to show love to our neighbors? If protecting the rights of your neighbor are more important than your own rights, is it even an option to exercise your rights in order to protect your neighbor's rights? When the airplane looses pressure and the oxygen masks fall before you, is it selfish to put your mask on first before your child?

It's one thing to lay down your rights for the love of your neighbor, it's another thing to lay down your rights when that's the very thing that protects your neighbor's rights. Do you want your children or your neighbor's children to grow up without freedom? Without the right to assemble or to worship freely? If your freedom is removed today, because you decided to not exercise your rights, will your slave neighbor thank you, like we thank our forefathers for the freedoms they handed down to us?
You have some really interesting and thoughtful points there! I agree with you on some of your points, but disagree somewhat on the severity of Covid.

I also think we both agree on the principle of holding back your punches for the important stuff, we just disagree on what the important stuff happens to be.

We also live in vastly different countries, you guys seem very suspicious of the government and your government seems to be suspicious of its citizens, so they overreach to make as many as possible comply somewhat. Over here there is a general thrust of the government and a general thrust from the government, so they get away with using very lighthanded tactics to make most people comply.
Forgive me! I forgot you weren't an American. :lol:

I honestly have no idea the legal context you are in, I was most certainly speaking in an American context.

Even the things we're talking about, the pastor arrested and the church being barricaded, aren't springing from an American context (that's all taking place in Canada) so they serve Americans more as thought experiments. In my American eyes, that is a huge violation of religious liberty. Churches here have sued their governors in places like California and New York for their overreaching regulations and the Supreme Court has ruled on the side of the churches (for the most part), and I still think that these governments are violating the rights of these churches (ie. telling them not to sing, etc).

At the moment, it's tough to weed through the best Christian response in all of this in an American context. I'd imagine it might be a bit easier outside of the US. Freedom is a great responsibility and it seems many would rather the government be a king (or nanny) rather than a servant. Scriptures that teach us to obey our rulers need to be thought through differently here, since, technically We The People are the rulers and our governing authorities are subject to the Constitution. So if a governing authority makes an unconstitutional law, what's the best Christian response to that? Some say it's our duty to submit to them regardless, and other say, no, we are not to follow unlawful laws. The COVID stuff has really brought a lot of this to the forefront for people who haven't thought about it before.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2764
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by Jester » Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:23 am

FredS wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:25 am
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:00 am
FredS wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:55 am
SlowToke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:44 pm
I'm pretty interested in the conversation JMG was trying to have because I agree it's interesting and important. Too bad it probably can't happen on CPS.
Perhaps that reasonable conversation is better suited to it's own thread. This thread started with a really angry pastor in the news and, by and large, it has stayed angry. That guy is controversial. If you ask me, the whole point of the videos he broadcasts is to stir people - to get them to act or react, and that's what's happened here. We've fallen into the familiar battle lines we've practiced for the last year:

1) Those who think Covid is a serious threat and think the government is right in setting reasonable (and fluid) rules to protect it's citizens.

2) %fracking idiots. JK. Those who think Covid is a real thing, but it's not such a threat that it requires or justifies over reaching governmental restrictions in the ways we work, shop, play, travel, or congregate for religious services or sporting events or anything else. "Give 'em an inch and they go a mile down the slippery slope." "Those who would give up freedoms for security deserve neither."

Just like our political parties have done lately, this pastor is saying there's a light side and a dark side, good and evil, right and wrong, and he's forcing us to choose a side. He's framed an argument that leaves no space in the middle.
So there should be a place in the middle? A church with willing congregants to gather at any capacity without masks? I personally don't have a problem with group one. It seems there is no option for group 2. The middle would allow room for both.
Yes. I think there should be a place in the middle. A church with willing congregants to gather at any capacity without masks.

I wouldn't attend such a church and I'd like those that do not to be rubbing up against me at the grocery store. It's not a hill I'll die on or even defend though because I really think we'll be in that unrestricted place again, and soon. My church is pretty much there now. Technically, we're limited in capacity, but nobody counts. We socially distance because our pastor has asked us to. We wear masks when we move about because our pastor has asked us to. We loiter outside after church, with or without masks as we feel comfortable, because our pastor has asked us to. Those who aren't willing, stay home and zoom with us. We all get to choose.
I think we are closer to each other than we think (socially distanced mind you :D ).
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

If you can't say “amen” you gotta say “ouch.” -Voddie Baucham

User avatar
SlowToke
John Crosby's Friend
John Crosby's Friend
Posts: 9289
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 6:00 pm
Location: Cloverdale, IN
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by SlowToke » Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:46 am

I think we have to be careful applying Biblical examples to obedience to our "leaders/rulers." For every instance or example where we are instructed to be obedient, there are three examples of not.
Wayne Teipen
http://teipenpipes.com
"Fools have no interest in understanding; they only want to air their own opinions." Proverbs 18:2

"Life is tough, and it's tougher when you're stupid." -- John Wayne

User avatar
DepartedLight
Archfairy of Carolinia
Archfairy of Carolinia
Posts: 32053
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Tobacco Fairy HQ, North Carolina

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by DepartedLight » Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:55 am

Image
DL Jake

You should see if they can recalibrate your internal clock forward a month. - Cleon

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 25049
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by FredS » Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:16 pm

SlowToke wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:46 am
I think we have to be careful applying Biblical examples to obedience to our "leaders/rulers." For every instance or example where we are instructed to be obedient, there are three examples of not.
Well yeah. The devil is in the details though, and I see the issue as twofold:
- What law is just and what law is not? When is the water hot and when is lukewarm?
- What is the appropriate action in response to an unjust law? Shall we simply jump out of the pot or shall we jump out and shoot the cook?
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
AFRS
Darth Floof-Floof
Darth Floof-Floof
Posts: 11402
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: University of Mars

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by AFRS » Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:09 pm

DepartedLight wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:14 pm
Didn't intend for thread devolution

Farts are funny
Hahahahahaha, yes, yes they are. Just ask Fainn.

User avatar
Kerdy
Smootchie
Smootchie
Posts: 17106
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by Kerdy » Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:00 pm

Two words.

Neville Chamberlain
"Let it be understood that those who are not found living as He taught are not Christian- even though they profess with the lips the teaching of Christ." - Justin Martyr  ( c.160 )

“Moral principles do not depend on a majority vote. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong. Right is right, even if nobody is right.” - Venerable Servant of God, Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

Post Reply