July 28, 2017<\/p>\n
By Cedric Fisher<\/strong><\/p>\n During the 57th Assemblies of God General Council in Anaheim, California, August 7-11, 2017, the denomination\u2019s membership will vote on Resolution 3. The Resolution is presented as an affirmation that the church should be involved in peace-keeping through conflict resolution. One is compelled to ask why such a resolution is needed. As most denominations, the AoG already has bylaws and leadership positions that promote peace and engage in conflict resolution within the denomination. Apparently, Resolution 3 proposes to involve the membership in the affairs of races, religions, and nations outside the denomination.<\/p>\n The General Council of the Assemblies of God, district councils, and local churches should be involved in conflict resolution between churches, denominations, races, religions, and countries. We believe justice and peacemaking are necessary complements of compassion ministries, and this should be clearly stated in our Constitution. \u2013 Resolution 3, 57th General Council, August 7-11, 2017, Anaheim, California.<\/p>\n Some members are deeply concerned that the Resolution will weaken and perhaps obliterate the denominations support for Israel. I believe they have good cause for concern. The leadership has already approved two position papers, \u201cChurch Mission and Peacemaking\u201d <\/strong><\/a>and \u201cIsrael \u2013 the Church\u2019s Response<\/strong><\/a>,\u201d both which negatively affect Israel. Those position papers are essential to understanding the consequences of passing Resolution 3.<\/p>\n