1. The Board of Acts 29 will be myself, Pastor Matt Chandler, Pastor Darrin Patrick, and Pastor Dave Bruskas. Each man has been able to hand off their network to full-time staff, thereby freeing them up to go to the next level of leadership and help me work across all of Acts 29 and serve all of the networks that comprise the A29. Each man also has a church staff that is large enough with sufficient funding to do more than one network and help invest in others. Furthermore, Pastors Darrin and Matt can help me be in community with wise counsel from A29 and navigate the ever-increasing complicated waters of the broader church and culture, and represent us in the media and at events, as well as through preaching and publishing. Pastor Dave runs the entire ministry side of Mars Hill and can assist me with the details of running Acts 29 centrally.

With Pastor Scott’s encouragement and the board approval, this means I am resuming the presidency of Acts 29. I want to invest every resource and relationship at my disposal to serve our church planters. Consider this primarily the “Prophet” board. This board is not closed and other men may join it in years to come. This board will be meeting soon in California, long before our annual retreat, so that we have a clear battle plan for the next season of Acts 29.

He alone is the Giver and Sustainer of life.

Titus 1: 10 & 11

You might also find this interesting:

The human cost of T.D. Jakes’ false prosperity gospel

Point taken!

Thank you for making your point, and doing so politely. I am open to being shown that I am wrong, but only from the Scriptures – if you can show me that Jakes’ handling of the Scripture in this sermon was valid, and that the passages he uses really do teach the things that he is claiming, then I shall, of course, amend this review accordingly.

Grace and peace.

I really appreciate the heart that you have for God’s word. However, I am very sorry to inform you that you are wrong. I had the opportunity to listen to Pastor Jake’s message and it was awesome. How can false doctrine and false theology draw people closer to God. If it weren’t for preachers like TD. Jake’s and Furtick, youngsters like me would be far from God. Both these preachers don’t preach doctrines that tickle the ears. In fact, the teaches of both these men of God encourage us to press on God and see his glory unfold in our lives. If you use your influence in a productive manner, God will surely use you for the glory of his name. May God bless you Sir.

Greetings,
Jobin Joseph Kottaram

I have been thinking the same thing. I have always hated the emphasis on having to have a certain number of any color people in the church. What if God doesn’t call those people till later? Do we have to do something to get them in the door? Why does color of skin even matter in all this? Shall we start dividing along hair color and eye color, freckles or no freckles, tall people or short people?

The visual object lesson that was told to me as a child, about how dumb sheep are, keeps coming into my head. The idea that if sheep are running in a herd and one sheep jumps over something, even if it is only jumping because it THOUGHT it needed to, all the other sheep will jump over it too, thinking there was a real obstacle there. The prison door is open, all you have to do is walk out. The people stuck inside will resent you for it, but oh well!

If you keep treating that race boundary as if it exists, IT WILL KEEP EXISTING. Ignore it, walk right over it, if people get mad because you are shattering their illusion (on either side) so what? It should be your joy to ignore and thus break down such bondage producing lies.

I think part of the problem here is that there is a wide variety of beliefs among Oneness Pentecostals (see here, for example). Note too that Jakes was not UPCI (United Pentecostal), as he pointed out in his ER2 conversation. Since Jakes is rather reticent to spell out exactly what it is that he believes in unambiguous terms, one is left to proceed based on what he has said, and any rebuttal must therefore necessarily be broad-brushed in certain respects. We do have his congregation’s statement of faith, of course, and his words at ER2 and in other interviews he has given. (One might also think to look at the Higher Ground Always Abounding Assemblies, Inc. website, since Jakes is still listed as Vice Prelate of that organization. However, there do not appear to be any doctrinal statements there.)

Now, no one is arguing that individual modalists necessarily follow their beliefs consistently to their logical conclusions. What Dr. Harold O. J. Brown does in the quotations I cite from him, is to point out the logical consequence of modalistic belief – either docetism, or some form of patripassianism. I was originally following Dr. Brown’s lead in opting for the former as the more likely expression of modalism but, as a result of your comment, I have modified the relevant paragraph in this article to leave open the latter possibility.

I understand that Dr. Bernard believes that his brand of Oneness theology is effectively the same thing as modalistic monarchianism, provided one is careful to exclude patripassianism. One can of course reject the charge of docetism, and also deny patripassianism by asserting that the being who died was the manifestation of God designated by the appellation ‘Son’. But that is a distinction without a difference if one simultaneously asserts that the Son is the same Person as the Father, and existed as the Father prior to His incarnation.

doubleplusgoodthink, comrades.
doubleplusgood doubleplusduckspeak!

i.e. Vegas has been Silenced in the name of Gawd and Mark Driscoll.
(Not necessarily in that order.)
Long. Live. Big. Brother.

You are in denial.
As long as you and others stay in the denomination, you are sending a loud and clear message to the church and to the world. Silence equals complicity. Are there no Bonhoeffers among you?

Seriously brother? X-rated visions and porn sermons are faithful? I see a big disconnect between that being ok and the er2 (really gives elephants a bad name) handling being wrong. All are part and parcel of the same issue, which is NOT being faithful to the Gospel.

I am assuming that you know that the pastor’s blog post no longer exists.

Zach

Loritts, in warning about implications, made an explication, himself. That explication is that his spiritual and theological concerns are race based, a disgusting and sinful rejection of the protocol of Scripture which makes it spiritually based.

Great lessons from this video and this is but one of many.

Your information is interesting, but I suppose your answer applies to more traditional churches, meaning of course, denominations. Here’s my point, churchianity in general has become a hugely blinding-to-the-sheep arena.

There is a HUGE difference between supporting a building fund of a traditional denomination church and a nondom church. BUT, the nondom pastors won’t mention it! Ever! NEVER! Why? It would expose nondom building fund self-dealings. And such a churchianity is vehemently opposed to exposing the sin of self-dealing.

Because, as you know, a nondom church’s assets are often simply the assets of the husband and wife pastor and perhaps a few monied individuals who partnered with the church’s start up. Hence, money contributed to this kind of church’s building fund (or later, broadcast facilities) are subject to division through divorce. So the donors, who are normally kept blind of all this, need to really have insurance issued against such likes.

For example, Zachery Tim’s church in Florida has had all this and more. Divorce. Suicide of principle due to apparent overdose? Takeover by the unstoppable Paula White, also divorced.

And when does anybody teach sheep to love Western Enlightenment’s core principles of “watch the other hand”, expunge self-dealing in leaders, trust but verify, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, hold leaders accountable to at the bare minimum — answering questions (nondom pastors are famous for never answering questions!), top leadership must allow bad news and remedies to percolate from bottom to top, the best leaders ask for correction instead of pretending they never need it!

But no, when the next nondom leader says his church or broadcast situation needs a new facility, all NLP witchcraft and every supporting bible verse is used… without any kind of disclosure of risks associated with proposed new asset.

So then sheep need to be detectives, and learn how to see spiritually for themselves, since churchianity is opposed to it because too much revelation is a very bad thing for wayward ministries.

And what, pray tell, is the solution. Why, it’s Christ-in-You! (Which churchianity leaders, if it detects it in any sheep, is dedicated to candle-snuffing, or playing whack-a-mole, or… like they did to Father-in-Jesus, crucifying.)