| Acts20.com https://www.acts20.com/ |
|
| Is the Church of God good for ARC? Questions about ARC https://www.acts20.com/viewtopic.php?t=88087 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | SouthFloridaman: Is the Church of God good for ARC? Questions about ARC |
| Apart means... |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | spartanfan: |
| Re: Apart means... |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | FLRon: |
| If I were seeking to plant a church I would certainly consider every available resource. That being said, when I saw that Christine Cain was on the ARC leadership team, that would cause me to keep looking. YMM “Hell will be filled with people that didn’t cuss, didn’t drink, and may even have been baptized. Why? Because none of those things makes someone a Christian.” |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | cogcia: ARC |
| Re: Is ARC good for the Church of God? Questions about ARC |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Travis Johnson: |
| Great topic. Here’s my take:The ARC partnership and others (CMN, etc...) along with the COG Church Planting Bank is a very solid, Gospel posture for the COG. They are two different mechanisms that work in conjunction with one another. We have historically had our COG sons and daughters connecting with ARC in absence of a functional partnership and structure for funding. The reason these ARC churches with COG pastors do not organize with the CoG is that it doesn’t make sense financially for the church plant. The partnership along with our own bank solves that very legitimate objection/condition. The church Planting Bank received $1.5 million in funds in its first year. My sense is that appropriation level will and should continue annually. Since it is a loan repayment Bank, that will be a growing fund. 10 years from now with zero fundraising (which can and should happen), the fund would be a $15 million dollar fund in a constant state of lending and repayment. The fund is replenished as new churches begin paying the loan back. This happens upon launch (not a fuzzy organization day that happens somewhere out in the future). The repayment happens at a rate of 10% or all tithes and offerings. Upon repayment, the church then begins sending in 10% of tithe, which is actually a lower commitment than the repayment amount. This arrangement:-funds more church plants-raises denominational investment into new churches-retains more young leaders-speeds the organization of new churches-and attracts young leaders, a demographic we cannot afford to continue losing to ARC, Acts 29and other church planting networks. Thank God for their work. But, thank God for our sons and daughters too. We are doing some good things in this arena to advance the ball. |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Dean Steenburgh: |
| Curious to read your response to Travis SouthFlorida.Not picking on you.I'm a big ARC fan & I attend their events as often as possible - very encouraging every time.Interesting I often see other CoG guys there & some seem a bit out of sorts with the whole ARC plan when I visit with them. I think we should get behind it with our funds, our commitments & advance the daylights out of these types of opportunities. Empty nest syndrome is for the birds!Email me at: [email protected] planters are focused on just one thing ...introducing people to Jesus! |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Travis Johnson: |
| I think that’s just a misunderstanding of the church Planting partnerships/church planting back setup. That isn’t your fault. We’ve just got to communicate it well. That takes time, work, and intentionality. They are COG plants. Michael Williams in Madison, AL and Shane Tarpley in Temple, GA are very sharp guys...new churches...digging it out. They each received $50,000 and had to raise a matching $50,000. They are both launched and are sending in 10% total to rebuild the bank for the next planters behind them. I love that! |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | SouthFloridaman: |
| I think that’s just a misunderstanding of the church Planting partnerships/church planting back setup. That isn’t your fault. We’ve just got to communicate it well. That takes time, work, and intentionality. They are COG plants. Michael Williams in Madison, AL and Shane Tarpley in Temple, GA are very sharp guys...new churches...digging it out. They each received $50,000 and had to raise a matching $50,000. They are both launched and are sending in 10% total to rebuild the bank for the next planters behind them. I love that!When you think about that, we have the capacity to push $3 million into church planting from our $1.5 million appropriation. The next ten years, that would have us looking at a rolling $30 million into church planting. Powerful! |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Travis Johnson: |
| Hi Pastor Woodard,The General Assembly doesn’t need to pass an agenda item in order for an appropriation to be made to church planting. The COG should be functioning in that direction as a default. However, the GA did pass a motion to establish a church Planting Bank at the last GA. Sean O’Neal submitted the motion. The body is speaking. |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Travis Johnson: |
| I think that’s just a misunderstanding of the church Planting partnerships/church planting back setup. That isn’t your fault. We’ve just got to communicate it well. That takes time, work, and intentionality. They are COG plants. Michael Williams in Madison, AL and Shane Tarpley in Temple, GA are very sharp guys...new churches...digging it out. They each received $50,000 and had to raise a matching $50,000. They are both launched and are sending in 10% total to rebuild the bank for the next planters behind them. I love that!When you think about that, we have the capacity to push $3 million into church planting from our $1.5 million appropriation. The next ten years, that would have us looking at a rolling $30 million into church planting. Powerful! 30 million in 10 years with a “ BIG IF†that none of the churches plants fail or have hard times. What will be our loss ratio of church plants? I love arc it is a great deal for the Church of God international office and an excutive committee that is desperate for church plants. It relieves them of the finding funds burden. . But how much is the church of God contributing to the local church aside from what arc is bringing to the table. We know 50 grand is coming from ARC how much money in addition to the arc funds is coming from the church of God. The church of God needs to contribute as well. 1.5 million in an account is great but what is the church of God’s expectation. What is the church of God’s financial commitment to the church plant that receives arc funds is the cog providing 50,000 like arc or is it much less. I just want to make sure the cog brass is pulling the weight. I have been involved as a consultant at 4 arc church plants. I have been on the launch Sunday’s no one presently plants churches like arc. They are excellent. I have seen a/g and non denominational churches launch in Florida with over 200 on the first Sunday. But what is the church of God contributing? 1.5 million will only supply funding for about 10-20churches if we do Those churches RIGHT. We need to pull our weight in this relationship. Cause if we don’t the planting pastor will just do arc on there own with no relationship with the COG. I think the COG needs to commit to giving a set amount of money just like arc. We need to make this fair we don’t need to give more funding to one plant while neglecting the other plant. Politics need to neutral in this. The cog just needs to say X amount of money is available to x amount of church plants if and only if you commit to the cog/arc planting agreement . No more no less money than x amount of money to the church plant. Arc tells you up front what is available to you. We need to do the same. if The COG doesn’t provide more than name to the planting relationship we are just going to lose more churches. And if those church splits and pull outs occur they can get arc funding. We really are at a disadvantage. I know 2 churches in the last 5 years that are COG pull outs or splits that have gotten arc funds presenting themselves as new Church plants it is tough we need to bring something to the table. SouthFloridaman (I like that name),ARC isn’t putting up the money. The COG is. If an approved church planter comes up with $50,000, a matching $50,000 comes from the COg church planting bank. That money largely comes from the TOT. I cannot agree with you more. The COG needs to have skin in the game (as does the planter). This arrangement achieves that. Another thing that I very much agree with you about. Favoritism and politics should have zero place in who received this money. That specifically has been addressed. I do not think it is settled for life. We are particularly prone to that. It is very important that we elect leaders that advance people based on merit and not on anything else. We have put together a process to shield against this. I believe it is our heart to do this. If there is a place that we will slip up on this intiqgive, this is it (I believe).Finally, some church plants are will fail. We need to be OK with that. The way we ins Kate ourselves against that is to get and keep solid church planters on the approval committee and stay out of our way so they can select the right people without interference. If we award funds to people who are not ready, who have a spouse who isnt ready, who hasn’t demonstrated the qualities necessary for planting, or who isn’t properly vetted, we will have too high of a failure rate. That will result in lost credibility and the inability to maintain the trust needed to co TJ he advancing the initiative and the fund. |
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC-04:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited | |