Grapevine Pastor Tells Followers To Bone 7 Days A Week...

[UNT_playmaker]

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/....1a170c99b.html

Also, is thise the mega church that is by Grapevine Mills

Too bad im not married myself....looks like fun.....

[UNTLifer]

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/....1a170c99b.html

Also, is thise the mega church that is by Grapevine Mills

Too bad im not married myself....looks like fun.....

Yes, this is the church. I was a member there prior to moving to Houston and really miss it.

[Eagle1855]

Yes, this is the church. I was a member there prior to moving to Houston and really miss it.

His brother and father are both pastors at Second Baptist in Houston. His brother Ben is actually pretty good. I saw him a couple times.

I used to go to Grapevine on occasion since I lived right by it. Im not really into the megachurch and all the production and hooplah (yeah I just used that word) that surrounds it. I think its kind of stupid, but to each his own. I think Ed's a pretty good speaker. He usually thinks outside the box. Well except for in this instance... *rimshot*

I think if I were child going to church with my parents, this might be the most horrifying thing I could think of hearing on a Sunday morning.

[LongJim]

His brother and father are both pastors at Second Baptist in Houston. His brother Ben is actually pretty good. I saw him a couple times.

I like Ed, but he looks kind of alienish.

He usually thinks outside the box. Well except for in this instance... *rimshot*

Hiii-Yohhh!!

[UNTLifer]

I think if I were child going to church with my parents, this might be the most horrifying thing I could think of hearing on a Sunday morning.

That is why the encourage families to take their children to the children's area during the service for age appropriate lessons.

I met Ed when I worked for a health club in Irving in the early 90's. Ed and his family were members, and he came in daily. I remember the conversation when he told me he was a pastor and invited me to his church. This was the same guy that I'd talked sports, professional wrassling, fishing, etc... with on a daily basis. I did a quick rewind to try and remember if I had told him an inappropriate joke or not. Anyway, I visited his church and really liked his message but had a tough time getting used to the style of service, because I had grown up in a very traditional church in Denton and this was in 1992 before they even built the current facilities.

Anyway, I visited with Ed and really liked how he was approaching the "church thing." His idea was everyone that attends Cowboys, Rangers, Stars or Mavs games want to sit on the front row, courtside, but at church everyone wants to slide in the back pew, hear the message, chalk up their weekly attendance and be on their way. He wanted a service where people would want to sit on the front row, where people didn't want to leave when the message was over and a place where people looked forward to coming on a weekly basis. Too bad that is "out of the box" thinking when it comes to religion, but too many of us were raised to believe that true worship should be quiet, boring, hymnal/pipe organ music, etc... and the results speak for themselves. Twindling attendance across the board.

Ed started a church conference in probably 1994 that I volunteered to work. About 20 pastors attended from around the area to hear how, at the time, Fellowship of Los Colinas put together a worship service, structured Sunday School and children's programs, etc... The last year I volunteered for this conference was 2005 and around 2,000 church leaders from all of the U.S. and Canada attended.

Sure, marketing is a big reason they attract people, but the message, programs, service, etc... are what have kept them coming back. I admire him for what he has done and how he has led Fellowship Church.

I know Fellowship Church's style isn't for everyone, and they would be the first to admit it. They just want people to attend somewhere.

[SilverEagle]

Naturally I don't agree with this guy excluding same sex couples from the broad catagory of "marriage", but I approve of his message/suggestion.

[UNTLifer]

Naturally I don't agree with this guy excluding same sex couples from the broad catagory of "marriage", but I approve of his message/suggestion.

Regarding Christianity and the Bible's take on marriage, same sex couples/marriage is a sin, so I wouldn't think he would condone this behavior.

What Does the Bible Say?

The biblical teaching on sex is not merely negative. Contrary to popular belief (admittedly fostered by some Christians over the years), sex in biblical thought is not sin. It is sex outside the proper relationship that constitutes sexual sin. That relationship, according to the Bible, is the husband-wife relationship.

Edited November 12, 2008 by UNTLifer

[Censored by Laurie]

Regarding Christianity and the Bible's take on marriage, same sex couples/marriage is a sin, so I wouldn't think he would condone this behavior.

We've amended a 200 year old document 27 times.

I'm sure we could come up with at least twice that many for a 2000 year old document

[Mean Green 93-98]

We've amended a 200 year old document 27 times.

I'm sure we could come up with at least twice that many for a 2000 year old document

There is a big difference between revising a product of men, however visionary they may have been, and the authoritative book of God.

[Eagle1855]

There is a big difference between revising a product of men, however visionary they may have been, and the authoritative book of God.

Of course, Im sure you know what questions are coming next...

Q1) Who literally wrote the Bible?

Q2) Who literally compiled 66 books of the Bible?

a1) men. inspired men.

a2) men. The Council of Nicaea, some four centuries later.

Edited November 12, 2008 by Eagle1855

[Censored by Laurie]

There is a big difference between revising a product of men, however visionary they may have been, and the authoritative book of God.

I agree...and I'm not suggesting we keep the same revision ratio...but certainly we could update that book every once in a while.

[Mean Green 93-98]

Of course, Im sure you know what questions are coming next...

Q1) Who literally wrote the Bible?

Q2) Who literally compiled the Bible?

a1) men. inspired men.

a2) men. The Council of Nicaea.

I think that was CBL's point.

Q1) Men who were directly inspired by the Holy Spirit; thus writing words that expressed not their own thoughts, but the thoughts of God (I Cor. 2:9ff; II Tim. 3:16; II Pet. 1:20-21; et al.).

Q2) The Council of Nicea merely recognized as canonical books that the churches had viewed as canonical since the first century (although doctrinal departures in the 2nd century led to a few disagreements in the canon). The books had been circulated among the churches (Col. 4:16), and considered the word of God (I Cor. 14:37). When Clement of Rome wrote his epistle to the Corinthians in A.D. 96, he did not view his own epistle as inspired or canonical. But he knew whose were as he quoted from the Gospel accounts, referring to the "words of Jesus," and from the epistles of Paul as authoritative.

[Censored by Laurie]

Q1) Men who were directly inspired by the Holy Spirit; thus writing words that expressed not their own thoughts, but the thoughts of God (I Cor. 2:9ff; II Tim. 3:16; II Pet. 1:20-21; et al.).

Q2) The Council of Nicea merely recognized as canonical books that the churches had viewed as canonical since the first century (although doctrinal departures in the 2nd century led to a few disagreements in the canon). The books had been circulated among the churches (Col. 4:16), and considered the word of God (I Cor. 14:37). When Clement of Rome wrote his epistle to the Corinthians in A.D. 96, he did not view his own epistle as inspired or canonical. But he knew whose were as he quoted from the Gospel accounts, referring to the "words of Jesus," and from the epistles of Paul as authoritative.

Just curious...if you were looking to authenticate a different book...lets say James Hilton's Lost Horizon (read it...greatness)...would a reliable source really be the book itself?

[Mean Green 93-98]

Just curious...if you were looking to authenticate a different book...lets say James Hilton's Lost Horizon (read it...greatness)...would a reliable source really be the book itself?

I did refer to Clement, who made no contribution to the book itself. And yes, internal evidence is still evidence. Regardless, my point was not to prove the authenticity or genuineness of the Bible, my initial point was what type of document the Bible claims to be. It makes clear, and it has been historically understood, that the Bible is not open to revision. After the first century, the canon was closed. You take it or leave it.

[HoustonEagle]

Really? Are we really going from arguing politics to arguing religion?

How about we all just run into the closest brick wall we can find and call it a day.

[Censored by Laurie]

Really? Are we really going from arguing politics to arguing religion?

How about we all just run into the closest brick wall we can find and call it a day.

Simmer down...I just saw a nice chance to stir the hornet's nest a bit and coax a few out to investigate...I wasn't about to knock the whole nest down and watch them angrily swarm bystanders

[EagleD]

Simmer down...I just saw a nice chance to stir the hornet's nest a bit and coax a few out to investigate...I wasn't about to knock the whole nest down and watch them angrily swarm bystanders

Stirring some more...

Marriage has nothing to do with religion. Again, marriage has nothing to do with religion.

If it did you'd have to go to a church to get a divorce. Marriage is contract b/w two people. Contracts are legal matters. Marriage is a legal matter, not a religious matter. Most ceremonies are religious but not exclusively. A marriage performed by a JP is just as valid as one done by a preacher.

[UNTLifer]

Stirring some more...

Marriage has nothing to do with religion. Again, marriage has nothing to do with religion.

If it did you'd have to go to a church to get a divorce. Marriage is contract b/w two people. Contracts are legal matters. Marriage is a legal matter, not a religious matter. Most ceremonies are religious but not exclusively. A marriage performed by a JP is just as valid as one done by a preacher.

Depends on your belief. Being a Christian, I believe marriage as it is stated in the Bible, which is the definitive word of God.

[EagleD]

Depends on your belief. Being a Christian, I believe marriage as it is stated in the Bible, which is the definitive word of God.

So if you decide to get a divorce are you going to your preacher or an attorney?

[GreenMachine]

come on guys, the dude is telling everybody to shag your old lady 7 straight days. Quit the bickering and get to it.

[Green P1]

Stirring some more...

Marriage has nothing to do with religion. Again, marriage has nothing to do with religion.

If it did you'd have to go to a church to get a divorce. Marriage is contract b/w two people. Contracts are legal matters. Marriage is a legal matter, not a religious matter. Most ceremonies are religious but not exclusively. A marriage performed by a JP is just as valid as one done by a preacher.

Dead solid perfect.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

Depends on your belief. Being a Christian, I believe marriage as it is stated in the Bible, which is the definitive word of God.

Completely agree.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

His brother and father are both pastors at Second Baptist in Houston. His brother Ben is actually pretty good. I saw him a couple times.

His brother Cliff is the lead singer of Caedmon's Call too....which is a pretty good band (though it was better before Derek left). His father is a pretty good teacher.

[FirefightnRick]

Depends on your belief. Being a Christian, I believe marriage as it is stated in the Bible, which is the definitive word of God.

I agree.

[UNTLifer]

So if you decide to get a divorce are you going to your preacher or an attorney?

I don't plan on getting a divorce, especially after this week!

BTW, your question isn't relevant. You would retain a lawyer for the legal ramifications of property, children, etc... which has nothing to do with the definition or marriage.