|
Tab Menu 1
Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun! |
 |
|

04-01-2020, 04:00 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,982
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Quote:
Originally Posted by n david
What store are you in with 1,000 people?

|
Probably Kroger’ s
|

04-01-2020, 04:12 PM
|
 |
New User
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Northwest Zion
Posts: 3,288
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Hyperbole
__________________
“Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos.”
-Homer Simpson//
SAVE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP
BUY WAR BONDS
|

04-01-2020, 04:23 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 17,807
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Quote:
Originally Posted by diakonos
Hyperbole
|
I thought so.
|

04-01-2020, 04:26 PM
|
 |
New User
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Northwest Zion
Posts: 3,288
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Quote:
Originally Posted by n david
I thought so.
|
150-200 people
__________________
“Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos.”
-Homer Simpson//
SAVE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP
BUY WAR BONDS
|

04-01-2020, 04:48 PM
|
 |
Not riding the train
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 48,544
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Posted by Connie Bernard. Yes, I know Spell isn’t UPC.
Quote:
For all of you that are wondering about our churches, all churches, not just our organization, my husband has written a constitutional law article that is really good.
David K. Bernard:
Constitutional Law.
As a matter of US constitutional law (which I studied in law school), the government does have the right to enact measures for health and safety. Thus, churches must follow building, fire, and health codes. Governments routinely shut down meetings, including church services, that violate these safety regulations. It can't discriminate against churches, and it must use the least restrictive means possible. If it passes ordinances of general applicability based on professional medical advice for the safety of the community, it is presumptively constitutional. Some states have gone the second mile to treat churches with extra respect, but they are still asking churches to cooperate voluntarily. They have both the law and public opinion on their side when they do.
We shouldn't question anyone's motives if they try to have church, and we shouldn't attack them. However, that doesn't mean their actions are constitutional, legal, wise, advisable, or divinely ordained. We shouldn't rejoice if they suffer consequences, but the burden of civil disobedience is to accept consequences. The burden of not following medical advice is either to have superior medical knowledge or ask God to intervene. However, it is one thing to trust God for yourself, but it is another thing to take the responsibility for the entire community, including vulnerable people.
For those who believe they must have large gatherings in order to please God, I would suggest that they think more creatively. While I endorse large crowds & buildings (having built a congregation of up to 1,000 and a building of 100,000 SF); we cannot say this method is biblically required. I agree that this method is highly effective, and over the long term I want to find ways to resume this method. But in times of crisis (war, pandemic, persecution, natural disaster), we can use other methods, even as the apostolic church did in times of persecution. In doing so, we aren't violating God's Word, becoming cowards, or acting in unbelief. We are operating outside our modern, traditional, Western box.
Finally, we are right to be concerned about religious liberty. Some might want to use this situation for a future precedent, but we will fight against that idea if it surfaces, and we will have the Constitution on our side. Right now, we aren't facing religious persecution in this situation, and we shouldn't characterize it as such. If we do, and then we lose, that could become a negative precedent. We must be vigilant to protect our freedom, but we must choose our battles wisely.
|
__________________
|

04-01-2020, 05:05 PM
|
 |
This is still that!
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sebastian, FL
Posts: 9,680
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Ron Desantis just issued a stay at home order for Florida but he exempted churches as an essential service. I'm watching the CV19 briefing and one of the reporters is questioning it
Last edited by Amanah; 04-01-2020 at 05:09 PM.
|

04-01-2020, 05:08 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,982
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On
Posted by Connie Bernard. Yes, I know Spell isn’t UPC.
|
I’m thrilled that Brother Bernard’s wife endorses his opinion of the constitution. I have known that this is how he interprets it.
He is wrong. Him studying the constitution doesn’t make him right. Almost all legal cases have attorneys arguing both sides of the case. All attorneys have studied, and passed the bar. Almost all cases have one attorney that is ruled against by either a judge or jury. In other words, that attorney was wrong. Brother Bernard is the attorney that is wrong.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Brother Spell has an attorney, that has studied constitutional law, that believes he is on sound legal footing. It’s called an opinion.
|

04-01-2020, 05:25 PM
|
 |
Not riding the train
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 48,544
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tithesmeister
I’m thrilled that Brother Bernard’s wife endorses his opinion of the constitution. I have known that this is how he interprets it.
He is wrong. Him studying the constitution doesn’t make him right. Almost all legal cases have attorneys arguing both sides of the case. All attorneys have studied, and passed the bar. Almost all cases have one attorney that is ruled against by either a judge or jury. In other words, that attorney was wrong. Brother Bernard is the attorney that is wrong.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Brother Spell has an attorney, that has studied constitutional law, that believes he is on sound legal footing. It’s called an opinion.
|
And I just read your opinion.
__________________
|

04-01-2020, 05:33 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 17,807
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tithesmeister
I’m thrilled that Brother Bernard’s wife endorses his opinion of the constitution. I have known that this is how he interprets it.
He is wrong. Him studying the constitution doesn’t make him right. Almost all legal cases have attorneys arguing both sides of the case. All attorneys have studied, and passed the bar. Almost all cases have one attorney that is ruled against by either a judge or jury. In other words, that attorney was wrong. Brother Bernard is the attorney that is wrong.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Brother Spell has an attorney, that has studied constitutional law, that believes he is on sound legal footing. It’s called an opinion.
|
Besides your opinion that he's wrong, do you have a source Case?
|

04-01-2020, 05:35 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,982
|
|
Re: Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On
And I just read your opinion. 
|
Yes you did. My point is that someone having a legal opinion is not much different than having an opinion on the weather. Even if it goes to the Supreme Court, which is the ultimate in our country. There are normally two opinions written, the majority opinion, and the dissenting opinion (providing the opinion is not unanimous).
Do you know of Trey Gowdy?
Here’s his opinion on religious liberty, in general.
https://youtu.be/DmpoYb-hA1s
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:16 AM.
| |