Obama's Church

[raoul duke]

I'm not running for President. Obama's church gave an award to Farrakhan. That doesn't mean Obama agrees, but he has done nothing to condemn the action. Philosophically, I would find it very hard to be a member of a congregation that hands out awards to someone who promotes racism and antisemitism.

Have you checked the history of your "congregation," should you have one? I'm not trying to bait anyone, but rather point out the absurdity, in this context, of linking something Obama had little control over (unless I'm missing something and he had something to do with giving the award). You could rumage through the history of ever major religion and find awards and accolades being handed to someone most people would find undeserving. How this affects how well he would do the job of president, is beyond me.

[Velvet Fog]

Have you checked the history of your "congregation," should you have one? I'm not trying to bait anyone, but rather point out the absurdity, in this context, of linking something Obama had little control over (unless I'm missing something and he had something to do with giving the award). You could rumage through the history of ever major religion and find awards and accolades being handed to someone most people would find undeserving. How this affects how well he would do the job of president, is beyond me.

I know was forced to be Catholic until my brain fully developed.

[DelawareDistrict]

Have you checked the history of your "congregation," should you have one? I'm not trying to bait anyone, but rather point out the absurdity, in this context, of linking something Obama had little control over (unless I'm missing something and he had something to do with giving the award). You could rumage through the history of ever major religion and find awards and accolades being handed to someone most people would find undeserving. How this affects how well he would do the job of president, is beyond me.

I believe I already indicated how I would react.

Philosophically, I would find it very hard to be a member of a congregation that hands out awards to someone who promotes racism and antisemitism.

In other words, I would switch to another Church. And, if I were running for President I would make it perfectly clear why I switched. I don't think that is an unreasonable standard to hold Obama to.

[raoul duke]

I believe I already indicated how I would react.

In other words, I would switch to another Church. And, if I were running for President I would make it perfectly clear why I switched. I don't think that is an unreasonable standard to hold Obama to.

I don't think it's a relevant standard. Everyone would have to leave or swutch their church if that were the case (except maybe Unitarians, they seem pretty judicious, but I could be wrong).

[Bannister]

I would accept their vision statement if they had a Book, Chapter and Verse to go along with it.
Whose culture will one be educated in?
Whose economical parity are they interested in?
Are they interested in the historical education of anyone else?
I'm just asking these things because usually a Christian Church lifts up and glorifies the name of Jesus Christ without respect to persons of any race. After all God is not a respecter of persons and says so in his Word

Romans 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

I don't know you too well Mesue, but from the little I've read, I have a feeling we come from similiar christian backgrounds.

With that said, in this case I look at that mission statement and I think, God uses all different kinds of worship styles for His kingdom. What I see is a church that appears to be involved in social issues as well as christian issues. That is typically something you see alot of in Black churches, which have a long history of applying their faith to social issues.

It wasn't too long ago that God used the Black church to move mountains in this country when it came to segregation. I believe there are many, many born again, bible believing christians who are attending churches with mission statements similiar to this one. Although it's not my cup of tea, I don't doubt God is using them for His purpose.

As for Obama's specific church and him personally, I'd have to get into the pew to hear what they were preaching to know for sure if it was a Bible believing church. The first three mission statements, although a little vague, give me hope. And Obama...again, like you I'd have to meet him.

I think there's just too little information here to know for sure. The one thing I'm sure of is a God could use a church like this and I can't tell from the mission statement that they're unbiblical.

[mesue]

...With that said, in this case I look at that mission statement and I think, God uses all different kinds of worship styles for His kingdom.
...

Therein lies the key phrase "His kingdom" not man's kingdom.
A church is to further the cause of Jesus Christ not any man. We do this through ministry.
The Mission Statement being, taken from http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

The Pastor as well as the membership of Trinity United Church of Christ is committed to a 10-point Vision:

1. A congregation committed to ADORATION.
2. A congregation preaching SALVATION.
3. A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION.
4. A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
5. A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION.
6. A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
7. A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.
8. A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
9. A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
10. A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY.

I have no issue with ministering to anyone. I just have an issue with men excluding others in the name of God. I don't care what country you're from. God is not a respecter of persons. If he is no respecter of persons, then who am I or anyone else to exclude people?
I'm so there when I read this statement, until I see statement #4. Then I have to go back to #1 and ask "Who are they adoring?" #2 "Who is salvation for?" and in light of statement #4 "Who, then, cannot be saved?" and #3 "Who's reconciliation?"
Christianity is not about man, it's all about the LORD Jesus Christ. This vision statement makes it about man. If we may be of a similar background, then you know John 3:16-17. It is the crux of the gospel
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
"For God so loved the world ..." That's the whole world, anybody, including those in the USA and Africa. Not excluding everyone except those that favor Africa or Africa itself. Am I not allowed to worship the LORD Jesus Christ in this church if my burden isn't for the Africans but for Russia or China? That's not Biblical and yet, in this church it is "non-negotiable". This is a form of legalism that the Bible clearly preaches against. What did Jesus say?
Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
"Go ye therefore and teach ALL nations..." He never made a list of nations, He said all. This includes the USA and Africa and excludes no nation. That's the problem I have.

[Bringthetruth]

I can't know his heart. I would have to actually sit down with him and open a Bible. And, still, I couldn't say for sure, it's not my place. I can say that the church he attends is not a Biblical church. I already stated this in post #4.

Mesue,because of its black emphasis, the church is overwhelmingly black but there is no requirement to be African-American for membership.