Humanism blackens Blake speech

Bishop Blake’s address to the gathering of world religious leaders December 2008. The following are points of contention we’d like to address:

Attendees addressed as an “august” and “extraordinary” body?
The word august means “Inspiring awe or admiration; majestic”. Are we to accept that the signatories of the Faith in Human Rights Statement who worship and pray to demons and idols and propogate doctrines of devils are majestic and inspire awe? What about them exactly should we admire? The bible tells us to turn away from such people because they have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof.

Faith Statement declares that “essential to religion is the struggle of human rights”
In what biblical context? The stuggle for human rights maybe essential to man’s humanistic religion, but it is not “essential” or the essense of the gospel. Human rights is not the message of the gospel, neither is a so-called social gospel the focus of the gospel. It is the preaching of the gospel which shows a fallen world that their only hope for redemption is in the acceptance of Jesus Christ. There is no other way. Jesus said unto him, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me (John 14:6) He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber (John 10:1).

“with this proclamation we possibly usher in a new international epock”
An epock designates the beginning of a new and important period in the history of anything. This is more social humanism. Under the spirit of the antichrist, which is already at work, these new beginnings signal a turn away from God to man’s desire to rule himself. No solution irregardless of how noble it may seem is worth partnering with workers of inquity. Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them; Eph 5:11

“This could be the day that intolerance and bigotry begin to die, the inglorious death these foes deserve”
Who exactly is on the receiving end of this “intolerance and bigotry”? Is it the poor peoples of the earth who have no food? Is it those in the teeming slums of the world who have no money? Or is it those who arrogantly demand that homosexual marriage is a inherent right? Those who are poor, hurting and hungry have no concern for “intolerance and bigotry”. They only want to eat and have clothes to wear.
No matter how the world terms it, its not “intolerance and bigotry” to stand on God’s Word.

“To protect and affirm the human rights and human dignity of all people everywhere”
Inclusion is a loaded word. Does all mean all or is that just to pacify the inclusionists? Does all include those who who adamant support homosexual marriage? Gays believe that the Universal Declaration of International Human includes their right to marry among other things. Are we bound to support their definitions of what constitutes human rights, whatever that might be?

Bishop Blake’s enthusiastic endorsement and association with this ungodly document is shameful and a poor representation of the faith once delivered to the saints. We are to contend for that faith, not to form partnerships or even agree to the work of people who’s motives are diametrically opposed to the Kingdom of God.

We challenge Bishop Blake to come from among them and be separated. We challenge Bishop Blake to be careful that his intent to do good is not attached to evil people. We challenge Bishop Blake to be sober, alert and a true watchman on the wall to prevent the enemy from launching an inside attack on God’s flock.

15 thoughts on “Humanism blackens Blake speech

  1. YOu know what is so scary is how beautiful and lyrical this speach is. Christians (who don’t listen closely) will be fooled into thinking that this is ok. Where are the other COGIC people “crying loud and sparing not”? I am appalled at the silence of the church in these last days when leaders align themselves with satan himself!

    Thank you for taking the time to respond to each point of contention with sound reasoning. Partnering with the wicked is NOT commanded nor suggested anywhere in God’s Word.

  2. Bishop G. E. Patterson would never have sign or been apart of this foolishness. What is Bishop Blake thinking? This is crazy.

  3. The reason I believe the COGIC laity has not responded is because they simply do not know this event has occurred. It was not widely publicized in an announcement sent to the various churches and his speech cannot be found unless you do some serious sleuthing.
    After hearing the speech, I am not surprised why this was kept so low key. There is something that is not quite right about it and even those not well versed in seminary level theological study will sniff that out.

  4. Tamara I can believe that. That’s one of the questions we raised. Why was this article released only to a small news outlet in Memphis? Why wasnt it put on the COGIC website if this was so great and magnificent. Why werent pastors advised before hand that they would be part of something they may or may not want to endorse.

    And to tell you the truth, I came on it purely by accident.

  5. I am a former COGIC but my parents still are. If I were to pick up the phone and call them now regarding this declaration and Bishop Blake’s endorsing it, they would not have any idea what I was talking about. And yet he is doing this on behalf of 12,000 COGIC congregations in the USA and COGIC churches in 60 countries around the world. I did not think even COGIC Bishops had that kind of authority to unilaterally sign off on a document fraught with problems on his denominations behalf yet not inform the denomination of what he was doing on their behalf.

  6. Bishop Blake has been doing whatever he wants since being elected Presiding Bishop. He is suppose to talk it over with the other members of the General Board, but he has not done that at all. I understand he has made a few new appointments, which he has not allowed the General Board to vote on as of this date (3-5-09). He thinks he can do whatever he likes. The Bishops in the Church of God in Christ are not going to do anything about this but cover it up. They are already sending out letters trying to defend his actions. It is the same old story.

  7. FYI it is being talked about amongst the brotherhood and there are many who are not at all happy about this situation. There has been a mass email sent out defending the Presiding Bishop’s actions stating that what he signed was not a declaration for gay marriage…..which was a mind game if you ask me.

    GCMW: Thanks DJones. I hope someone will email us a copy of the letter so we can analyze it. Perhaps he should just place a public statement on to demonstrate his willingness to be upfront and honest.

  8. This is only the tip of the iceberg. At the end of the day,all roads leads to Rome. God in His wisdom gave each human being their own brain……..will we follow our Church Leaders across the bridge spanning the Tiber River, or will we take up our cross daily and follow Jesus Christ even if it costs us our lives?

  9. Do you remember the old folks saying ,,,,,This is a shame before God,,,,,,it certainly is for the COGIC if the bishop does not denounce and recend his involvement. How do you sleep knowing God has witnessed you stabbing his son in the back for political or religious gains. what would the great New Testament Deacon Stephen say to this apostasy ?

  10. I would say this borders on apostasy. Its really hard to believe that with all the irrefutable evidence that this is at best a monumental error in judgment, some are attempting to frame it as an “attack” on COGIC. Nothing of the sort. Informing people of decisions which could negatively affect their ability to serve God according to his dictates is a act of love.
    Thanks Victor and I too hope that COGIC makes a real effort to reverse this decision.

  11. This information about the signing of the declaration is just now reaching the churches in my city, Atl GA. Everyone that I have discussed the occurance with is shocked and outraged that the Bishop of our church would get involved in something of this nature. An act that is surely out of the will of God. This man’s desire to be great in his own eyes has surpassed his desire to please God. He will certainly have to resend this action or the fundamentals of the COGIC church is in real trouble.

  12. I must say that I am appalled at the direction that Bishop Blake has taken but I’m not really surprised. The battle lines are being drawn in every denomination today between those who choose to remain faithful to the dictates of scripture and those who would rather follown the dictates of fallible men. But this thing with Bishop Blake kind of shakes me up. I used to be a member of the COGIC for most of my life and am now a member of the PAW. I’m pretty sure that we’ve got “termites” in our denomination too but I certainly hope that there are enough saints in every denomination who are willing to stand against the apostasy that seems to be creeping into the church at ever alarming rates.

  13. Question–
    Were there only 12 replies proffered ? If so -this might imply a tempest in a thumble !

  14. This is shameful. I know the published doctrine of COGIC is bible based, and therefore on a solid foundation. However this is what happens when an organization allows a hand full of individuals to control it with little or no checks and balances. Although the COGIC has a decision making body in place (General Assembly), It has never been effective. We’ve had over a hundred years to put a workable structure in place but look where we are . . . It’s time for laity to stand up and declare “We ARE NOT TAKING IT ANY MORE!”

  15. Glenda, all the proper channels of approval, vetting and research were bypassed. That’s why Bishop Blake has gotten this ad hoc general board damage control statement after all the ineptness that seems to characterize his administration. What’s so hard about informing people before you sign them up for something they may or may not agree with?

Comments are closed.