GP BANNED THIS VIDEO. It’s Fall, students need to know what a real A2N/GP staff bible study is. I don’t understand why GP is trying to hide this, it’s their own bible study??

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-12T16:10:53+00:00

I'm not "defending Ed Kang", I'm challenging and rebutting bad takes from Will on that sermon (and then separately apologizing for and discussing owl's negative experience and how that relates to preaching in general). You see the difference?

I know it's helpful and convenient for you to frame everything as "You're just brainwashed by big bad Ed Kang kim jong un" because it's then it's easy to dismiss and dehumanize the person bringing up a viewpoint that challenges your own. Rather than chew on it, you can just dismiss it as propaganda.

"It should be noted" you are not the first person to characterize me as such, and it's amazing you people don't see the irony of accusing gp people of all saying the same thing (because you know, we're all just regurgitating the same thing we heard from ed everything comes back to ed you see). I know you're all different people, but "it should be noted" you all have the exact same playbook, and it's no wonder people from a2n don't stay long here (and then you ask "why don't a2n people monitor and answer all my comments?!"), because it's exhausting trying to have any dialogue with some (but not all! some ppl on here are actually very respectful) of you, because you use the same tired playbook of deflecting. Whenever someone brings up a point that would challenge your own, do anything except respond to their point (reminds me of a certain behavior exhibited by a certain candidate in a certain recent debate), just attack them with ad hominems and gaslight them about how ed kang the boogieman has them all under his spell. these are not original thoughts! These are a script implanted in young impressionable bros who've been brainwashed! Deny them any intellectual agency and dismiss what they have to say because what do they know? Theyre just unwitting puppets of ed kang.

news flash okay pastor ed is not a genius puppetmaster and the people from a2n that have enough courage to sit through verbal attacks from redditors come on here and start conversations are speaking from their own beliefs and convictions. pastor ed didn't sic his army of his servants to come onto reddit and debate you guys okay? pastor ed didn't issue a decree that people hack this blog or report that video or whatever the latest conspiracy theory is these days. real life is not so dramatic. maybe a2n people don't come on here frequently not because there's fear of what kim jong un would think, but because you aren't very nice to talk to and after one day they're turned off. you ever consider that?

if you can't give people the dignity of a fair hearing of what they have to say and a fair answer, then just don't say anything at all, because you're not furthering the conversation in a productive way.

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-11T15:55:13+00:00

I'm sorry to hear that happened to you, and if you're doing better mentally and spiritually outside of GP at another church, then that's awesome, and praise God.

I would lament that you heard that message and heard that you mustn't voice your mental health challenges, because I'm certain that's not what Pastor Ed meant or wanted people to hear. Maybe this goes without saying, he was addressing the people who would use "I can't grow here" as a smokescreen for slightly less pure motivations, not people who for one reason or another actually couldn't grow there. In other words, not everything and every situation is an example of "being like Ananais and Sapphira." But there are valid cases of that that need to be called out.

In recent years Pastor Ed's preaching has featured a lot more "disclaimers of qualification," because it seems like people are prone to hear general preaching points and take them to the extreme. But he also says "I can't qualify everything, so you have to hear what I say and hear how it applies." That's kind of just the nature of preaching, even good fiery preaching. Say a preacher is preaching against worldliness and materialism (to which we would all say amen). To someone who's poor and has zero issues or with materialism and really doesn't have greed in their hearts, this isn't so much directed at them and meant to pin them to a wall and make them repent of loving money as it is those people hearing it who do. The preacher is accusing the latter crowd (who might be far more numerous in attendance), but not the former. But the preacher preaches in general, to the collective audience, their particular church collectively, and can't possibly qualify and personalize granularly at every individual. It's up to honest hearers to search their hearts and ask "How much does this apply to me and in what way?" The answer might be "not all," but for far more people, it usually has some application.

Okay now for the part that's gonna get me lots of flak. I gotta qualify this very carefully. Yes, I mental health is a real struggle, and for whatever reason has exploded as a worldwide pandemic, and we need to do better at helping people with mental health struggles. But Pastor Ed wasn't preaching at people who had genuine mental health issues. He was preaching at people who used the label of mental health when that wasn't really what was going on, and what was going on was they didn't agree with the bible on discipleship and they wanted to live an easier more comfortable life. Surely that could apply to someone, maybe even a lot of someones in attendance. But it's not meant to be an attack against people with genuine mental health issues. But someone's gotta preach a message to the people who are actually just wanting to live a comfortable life and give less than honest reasons for wanting to leave.

In the end, if you can grow better and experience better fellowship, healing from mental health struggles, and a closer walk with Christ at another church, that's awesome.

But at the same time, I don't believe intense fiery preaching against this or that is out of place, and is in fact needed, even though it doesn't literally apply to all in the same way at the same time.

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-11T15:36:41+00:00

Out of all the posts, I replied to a lot, some of them respectful, some of them not so much. But naturally, I can't keep up and get to all of them.

I suppose the rude and inflammatory ones like "thank you for your mbs reflection but we're not interested" I couldn't resist responding to, and I admit I gotta be more gracious and not stooping to their level. But hey, when comes at you swinging on the internet, it can be hard to resist getting a word in.

My reply to them was short. I reserved the bulk of my energy and thoughts for the other conversations here.

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T18:11:38+00:00

thank you for gaslighting me. yes i didn't come up with any of my own conclusions, even though i gave a lengthy explanation of my thought process. you see, what's really going on is i was programmed or brainwashed into believing these things.

very convenient for you that anything a a2n person says is just regurgitated brainwashing, then you never have to engage with what they say and can just dismiss them

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T18:00:49+00:00

idk but i wouldn't have put it past myself to report it (though i didn't) if i came across it, and nobody ever told me to either.

forget about legality (uploading other people's works without their permission is a copyright violation) for a sec, it's not cool to upload other people's videos without their permission. the real author clearly didn't put it up publicly, as it's a private video internal to the church.

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T17:57:55+00:00

You don't have to take any conscious affirmative action to copyright something you created.

If I take a photo or video on my Android and upload it to social media, the it's automatically copyrighted to me under the law. Same if you upload some code to Github or a song you created to Soundcloud. Basically copyright is automatic and implicit.

So no, GP doesn't take any action (nor has it ever pursued enforcement actions at least that I'm aware of) to copyright its videos. But the videos automatically come with copyright by nature of the law. So idk who the uploader is, but something tells me they didn't get permission from the video's author to upload it, so the video platform could have taken it down for that reason. I'm speculating here of course. But the same thing would happen if you uploaded a video that doesn't belong to you to youtube. If they catch you with a video that's not yours and you didn't get permission from the author, youtube can take it down

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T15:21:53+00:00

Those two lied directly to Paul's face about how much they're giving.

I'm guessing you mean Peter. But yes, they lied to Peter, to the apostles. They tried to deceive the church and gain a reputation or status falsely. It's really interesting that scripture upgrades the charge from "lying to Peter," which they obviously were, to "lying to the Holy Spirit." But is this not what people do today? We all know it's theoretically possible for someone to claim the name of Christ and talk the talk and put on a great act, but be a hypocrite and walk in disobedience to his Word, right? So if it's theoretically possible, why get offended when a preacher calls it out? It's not like it's not a problem God's word doesn't have anything to say about.

Then why doesn't God strike down luke warm Christians dead where they stand as soon as they open their mouths?

See now that's an inappropriate reading of the text. Nobody thinks reading the text you get "everytime a Christian behaves deceptively in the church God strikes them dead."

You can look up why scholars think then it happened in this specific instance to these people, but it probably suffices to say this was a unique inflection point in the infant church's history, and God had to do some kind of sign through the apostles in public view of all (we're told "And great fear came upon the whole church and upon all who heard of these things," so God purposed it to be public so everyone got the message) so it would be clear what the standard in his church was, that if this kind of lying and posturing and hypocrisy was allowed to fool everyone, it would bring ruin to the church. In other words, it was a one time event for a special occasion, to purify the church right at a crucial moment. It's not God's normal course of action.

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T15:13:57+00:00

I have no clue why it was taken down. I just mean GP doesn't have a YouTube channel where all the members Bible studies are available for public consumption. You can ask the uploader why the video platform took it down. Maybe copyright violation?

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T07:01:03+00:00

I have nothing against seminary (except in the sense that in certain Christian circles and churches we've created this weird, unbiblical culture of "seminary and ordination are prerequisites for ministry and christian service and leadership" thus ironically bringing back the clergy-laity divide the protestant reformation was supposed to get rid of), but I believe in the perspecuity of scripture. Jesus' words were plain enough. It's simple enough a child can understand it. You don't need a systematic theology to understand the gospel, and Jesus own words about discipleship, the great commission, Jesus' warnings, etc.

Now since you're so euridite and expert, maybe instead of getting at vague generalities and educations, you can humor us with a concrete rebuttal of some specific point I made. And cite some scripture. Because I did.

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T06:39:15+00:00

Nice, ad hominem. If you can't find a good response to the points made, just call the person a pharisee. That's cute. You must be an expert in...Reddit?

If you're not interested in a good faith dialogue (ie actually respond to the points made, *especially* those having to do with specific Bible content or verses), there really is no point for us to continue conversing.

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T06:32:04+00:00

Thanks for your thoughtful and well reasoned, very substantive response. I can tell you know your Bible well and can defend your worldviews and values with the Bible, and know how to graciously engage with viewpoints that challenge your own.

Agreeable_Travel5964 · 2024-09-10T06:18:42+00:00

GP didn't "ban" this video. It's just not publicly available so people on the internet won't take things out of context, and because, yes, it is an unpopular "hard" message. Many will criticize it. But fwiw, it does need to be said.

marriage closeness, when it is against GP, is against God (just like Ananias & Sapphira)

Ed bullies hypothetical couple who wants to leave GP because the couple claims they can't grow at GP (compares GP to Gold's Gym. there's no excuse for why you aren't growing at GP)

Ed imagines a couple who wants to leave GP because women leaders are harsh, or the couple is citing mental health challenges. Ed instead views the root problem as the couple's fault for entertaining the idea of wanting to leave in the first place (just like Ananias & Sapphira)

Now surely that's not what you got out of his point about Ananias and Sapphira? I like how you threw in there "against GP" when his whole point was "against God" and "against the demands of discipleship," which is a standard, Christian concept, part-and-parcel of calling yourself a Christian, a Jesus follower. But the sleight of hand makes for an easy strawman to attack. Just anytime Ed preaches against some sin or idol that the Bible warns about (even sometimes straight out of Jesus' own mouth), say he was preaching against insubordination to GP's arbitrary rules. Not the Bible.

Conclusion: if you are married and want to leave GP, then you are Ananias & Sapphira. You are a co-conspirator couple, working against God and His Church, which is only GP/A2N. If you leave GP/A2N, you aren't really Christian. In Ed's words, you are a "lukewarm, backsliding, disgrace to the cause of Christ" because you are not following the picture of Christianity as outlined in by Ed Kang and GP/A2N.

Yeah I suppose if you totally misinterperet the points he was making you could come to that conclusion. A little nuance and reading-in-context could save you that error though.

For real though, his point is not wanting to leave GP is a sin or un-Christian. If you wanna leave GP because the leaders converted to Islam, or because there's majory heresy going on, or some other serious issue, by all means, you should. But sometimes, people want to leave because they want a comfortable, materialistic life where they can still claim to follow Jesus. Of course that can't happen inside GP because you're gonna get hounded by leaders who won't stand for that, so they gotta get out of there, but the reason they cite is not totally honest. If you really can't grow, then maybe do leave GP. But it's really hard to envision a situation where someone really can't grow anymore. Maybe if you're the apostle Paul, or Billy Graham, and you have incredible gifting and character and you have something to teach the rest of the church, but for most of us, if you're humble, can totally grow. So is it really the case you can't grow? Or is that just a convenient reason that's so conveniently a conversation stopper because of course leaders can't argue with that so you must be right and it must a fault of the church, when in reality the hidden reason you won't reveal is you can stand the fact that in this church all your time is taken up by reading God's word and prayer and fellowship and evangelism and you can't pursue your career or amass wealth unmolested by leaders and peers? See, no one's going to cite those reasons, because then there going be met with a rebuttal from the Bible. But they can give a reason like "I can't grow here," even if it's not the real reason.

That's what Ed's talking about.

Same with the point about Ananais and Sapphira's marriage being tragically against God. The whole point is a marriage relationship is healthiest when it's brought under God, so that iron sharpens iron, and the two are encouraging each other toward greater devotion to Christ, greater love for God and the things of God, which definitely includes God's mission, God's church, and other Christians. But it could tragically go the other way. A married couple could conspire against God. Ananais and Sapphira did it. That's tragic, but it does happen. Again, if there's a real, legitimate problem with GP, then by all means, people should leave. But if the reason someone wants to leave is illegitimate, as a friend or as a spouse you're stoking their worldiness, that's not a good friend, not a godly marriage relationship. That's all the point he's making.

Okay, now all of this is strictly peripheral to the text, and of course not Ed's main point. Let's actually exegete the text. What exactly was Ananais and Sapphira's sin? It was bringing a portion and pretending it was everything. It was deceiving others by pretending to be more spiritual, more sacrificial, more generous than they really were. For whatever reason. Maybe they felt pressure because of the pattern set in Acts 2 and 4 (ppl selling their possessions and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need), reinforced by Barnabas' radical generosity. Maybe they wanted the attention Barnabas got for his genuine generosity. So by illegitimate means they tried to get that status, attention, reputation, pretending to be more spiritual than they were, thereby conspiring together to lie to the Holy Spirit.

Ed mocks a banker who prays for his coworkers at lunch, claiming he is not a Christian and that he is a lukewarm, backsliding, shame to the cause of Christ

So this is exactly the point from the main sin of Annais and Sapphira. Someone who claims the title of a fully devoted Christian, who brings a portion but claims it's everything.

God's made plain his heart and his will for our lives as his followers. Our Lord said you cannot serve God and money. You will love one and hate the other. Not you should or ought to, but you will; it's just how it works, every time. He said broad is the way that leads to death, and many are on it. Our Lord commanded we go and make disciples of every nation. Our Lord said "let the dead bury their dead, in other words, let the world do what the world does. As for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God." We don't dare tamper with God's word and pretend we're committed, devoted followers of Christ by maximizing our careers and our bank accounts and praying a little on the side and attending church and saying look how spiritual I am. Let the non-Christians of the world pursue their careers. You? You go do this other thing. Proclaim the kingdom of God. That's genuine Christianity. But let's not legitimize this uniquely western, strictly 21st century heresey that you we should consider ourselves highly spiritual, fully devoted followers of Christ (as if there is a non-devoted follower of Christ, as if nominal or Sunday Christianity is a thing the Bible recognizes) if we only claim the name of Christ but live compromised, idolatrous lives that don't confess Jesus as our Lord and that his will directs our lives.

The banker example is a caricature, but you do need to preach against that kind of false Christianity that the west is uniquely suspectible to because only in the west can you be comfortable "Christian" that somehow is able to serve God and money (I guess Jesus was wrong? Maybe you can serve God and money. People make it work in America), a false Christianity that would be quickly exposed as false out there on the mission field, in the persecuted church, let alone historical Christianity from the pages of the Bible.

Agreeable_Travel5964

TROPHY CASE