Acts20.com

COG ministers are reporting that they have been receiving emails letting them know of the website nash16.comwhich contains some of the issues being discussed at the upcoming General Assembly. The site is professional looking; very good in my opinion. So we are sharing the link. Of interest is how did they get the email addresses?We have been so busy lately until our ER has been on Diversion Mode - ambulances diverted to other hospitals because we can't handle any more. We receive 90-100 ambulances a day and another 300 people come each day to the ER Waitng Room making ours the busiest ER in Georgia except for Grady Hospital (downtown Atlanta) on Saturday night.So, I have only today grabbed the time to look at the Agenda. But as I looked at what the site published, I asked, IS THAT IT? Like you, I am someone who has a heart for the COG. We signed up because we felt this was a world-changing organization. We want it to be powerful and stronger than ever, but if what I saw on the Agenda published on nash16, is the entire Agenda, then somebody is not serious about the Harvest.Indeed, there are some individuals who are very concerned about the Harvest, but if what I saw on nash16 is the complete Agenda, it means the COG has decided not to be a leader. The world is going to hell in the proverbial handbasket. Where is the COG boldness we once knew? Where is the Hurry Up Offense? Where is the call to Go and find them, help to win them. Win the lost at any cost. I did not see any of that kind of Spirit in what is published on nash16. That is not a shot at nash16.One must ask, was nash16 begun to show all of us how weak and puny this Agenda is? It seems to be the kind of Agenda an organization that has no vision for the future, distributes. It is a busyness Agenda - keep those attending the Assembly occupied with discussing minor stuff.IF WHAT IS PUBLISHED ON NASH16 is the Agenda in it's entirety, in my opinion,

That concept would be wonderful, IF...

Has that been explained to our ministers - the reason for such a little Agenda is so more time can be spent through the Motions Committee? In my opinion, that would be excellent, but I haven't heard that. That concept would be wonderful IF it is allowed to actually take place.If that is the case, what controls have been put on the Motions Committee? Who will be making those motions? Are they going to allow those participating in the Ordained Ministers Council, to make motions? What restrictions will be put on that?How many motions will be considered? Who decides behind the scenes which motions actually get to the floor? If there is going to be a free-flowing ability to discuss issues, if that is allowed and not thrawted, then every COG minister should pack up and go to the Assembly. But if the published Agenda ends up being the main discussion issues, the editorial stands.If my editorial is not accurate AND a free-flowing discussion of ideas is actually allowed, when that happens, I will joyously withdraw the editoral and apologize. Doyl

Agenda

I'm not buying it

Visionary leaders do not wait around for the Motions Committee unless they do not have a vision or, unless such committees are used to hide their real Agenda. An effort to keep their proposals from being discussed in advance. It would be kind of like taking an unseen Agenda underground so the people do not get an advance notice or the ability to discuss it.Visionary leaders do not restrict the people who are affected by their policies, to only discuss once every four years, AND THEN keep the people from the discussion prior to popping it on them through a Committee.What is happening before your eyes, is that the involvement of the Assembly, the COG ministers and members who are present, now only get to discuss issues every four years. That means a smaller and smaller group at the top, is making the decisions instead of the Assembly. They begin to view themselves as the Assembly in abstentia.It really is ONE OF THE DUMBEST things an organization that hopes to have a bright future, can do. Only church organizations with a death wish, push the people, the faithful workers and supporters, further and further away from being able to have input. Organizations that want to survive and thrive, are working like crazy to include the people more often.Isn't anybody aware of the revolution going on now in politics? Does anyone believe church politics gets a free pass? People are feed up with establishments which seem more and more distant. Is that happening now in the COG? It seems so. It will be interesting to see what meaningful issues will come through the Motions Committee. How much motion taking place will be interesting to observe.As the people are pushed further and further out of the process (which has been going on now in the COG for about 16 years), their enthusiasm for an organization that piushes them away, dwindles away. Their loyalty is crushed, kind of murdered really. They long to be a part, to feel connected, to feel appreciated. Organizations who push them from having input, do not receive their loyalty. They evenentually go somewhere else where they can feel that their presence is appreciated. By the way, what are the growth figures for the COG these days? How many new churches are being started? We have long known that new churches generate much more growth than older established ones. New is an important word for a reason. It indicates that there is

Won't happen....Too many Special Orders of the Day...that will kill enough time to prevent tha

Now I've heard it all! How many times have I heard something like: They have so much non essential stuff on the agenda that it looks like they are just trying to fill up the time with meaningless discussion so we don't get through the motions submitted to the Motions Committee!So now we don't have the so-called meaningless stuff and it's Is that it? None of them deserve to be re-elected. You just can't win with some people so I guess you just do your job and ignore the naysayers. First of all - only 2 of them are eligible for re-election so you are pointed at 2 guys. How can you know whether or not those two were trying to get more items on the agenda or not and were out voted - if that's what you want? The answer is that you don't know. You have no way of knowing. You could be attacking 2 guys who were fighting for exactly what you want. You can't reasonably advise the rejection of 2 gentlemen over the number of items on the agenda since they in number are a minority and you don't know if they proposed more items that were rejected or not.This is unreasonable and irresponsible in my opinion - and I am entitled to my opinion. I just wanted to weigh in on the side of sanity. I will vote for both of them to return and I hope everyone else does too.

Doyle, do you ever think about retiring from the sensationalism industry? I'm a credentialed minister and haven't received one email from the nash16 website. I have, however, received the agenda for the general council. Like the previous poster, I remember some arguing about the 50 plus items on the agenda two years ago. Maybe the EC LISTENED to that griping.

It is my understanding that the Council, not the Committee sets the agenda. If I am mistaken, please clarify.That said, it is obvious to all who keep up with this stuff that the only real agenda of this Assembly is to make sure the women get a voice on the General Council floor.I'm not against that, but this is a repackaging of what continues to get voted down in previous GAs in Orlando.If we don't change under the guise of let's make it so younger guys have a voice...which would include women, too, then it will be repackaged again for 2018.Whether I'm for or against allowing women more authority in church government is not important. The key is to understand that the leadership in Cleveland will continue to repackage the same stuff until we allow it to pass.As for the General Assembly, 90% of the Ordained Bishops are only truly interested in the elections on Tuesday. Watch the attendance on Wednesday-Friday as many opt out of meaningful discussion about the direction of the movement.