 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Can Christians disagree without wounds resulting? | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
Cliffy
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 26
| Posted 6/21/2004 6:56 PM (GMT -6) |   | quote:
Originally posted by quest for truth
Judgement is ugly. I was to dinner last night with my family. I noticed a gay couple with their two children sitting in a table next to ours. The way I was positioned at our table I also noticed a woman who continued to stare (not in a kind way) at this family sitting next to us. I had this anger within myself at what this lady was doing to these people - it almost appeared to be a hate stare. I thought of the children at that table and how much they must have to tolerate from people such as this woman. I played out in my mind what Jesus would do if he were physically present in the restaurant and what he would say...
Well I don't think Jesus would accept their sin, but he certainly wouldn't accept the sin of everyone else in the restaurant either (including the woman with the hate-filled stare). Judgement has to be tempered by tolerance, in my opinion.
quote:
Jesus tolerates and accepts us right where we are at and that is what we are to do for one another. Instead of allowing the ugliness of judgmentalism to enter into conversations and encounters, we are called to LOVE and accept people right where they are at.
Yeah, Exactly, because if he didn't, he wouldn't be justified in his judgement. (as if God could ever be not justified in his judgement) God makes the rules. If God's intentions weren't for us to grow and change towards what we were meant to be, (ie. tolerance allows for the time needed to do this), the judgement loses all meaning. If our lives weren't worth tolerating, we would have no reason to judge anything. I mean judgement is the driving force, and tolerance is like the ship you ride in. Judgement decontructs everything around it without the preserving force of the tolerance. I know there's plenty of statements in the Bible about judgement itself being a "refining fire," and other such statements, which look to me to have a purpose for both the victim and the victimizer.
I think the following goes without saying: Although sometimes in the Bible God's judgement seems harsh, I think we have to assume that God's judgement is for our best, and has in mind the ultimate growth of the human race as a whole. Unfortunatly (fortunatly?), sometimes judgement is ugly and for the best, considering it is in people's power to totally disregard the growth of others, so much so that they can't get out that mire,and drag many others down with them. I think we should leave it up to God who knows objectively, because we don't have enough information to really judge capital matters rightly. As it is written: "It is mine(God) to repay." and, "Bless and do not curse."
I suppose I fall on the more tolerant side of the specturm. I endeavor to see both sides of the story, as I believe God sees all sides of the story, of course without taking all sides. Just want to be more like my master, I suppose. Now for the pesky habitual sin I have in my life. Argh. 
Cliffy | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/22/2004 9:39 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Beloved of God,
So many good things you all had to say there, concerning judement tempered with mercy and the love of God.
One problem as I see it, is when was the last time you ever heard any real teaching from the Bible on the subject? You don't because they don't teach it. And if they don't teach it from the Word, then God's people often get of into wrong attitude land. But could they (being those who stand in the pulpits) just bring up a verse here and there? Because we are smart enough to figgure out what it's saying. And WHEN nor "IF" we get off into WRONG ATTITUDE LAND the truth will lead up back to the kingdom of which we are all really citizens.
HOW can the holy spirit bring back to our memory something we have not put there? I get into wrong attitude land on occasion and then certain things get brought back to my remembrance and I repent. Such as the following.
Titus 3
1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men.
For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
Gal. 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
2 Tim. 2:24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive (fight, be judgmental, angry); but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
WOW there's a lot right there. First of all it says nothing about just keeping your mouth shut and not confronting the person. But speaks of the manner in which people must be confronted with the truth. Of course it is the "truth" that will often offend and make people angry no matter how you say it. Because no one wants to hear that if they do not repent they will ultimately be raised from the dead, have to statnd before God and be judged for everything they did and said in their body, that was contrary to a Bible he had placed in every hotel room. And then being judged by the Word of God, eternally damned.
Of course you are standing there too, and God looks at you and says "Son you had a chance to speak up to this person why didn't you?"
And you say, "Well father you know how politically and religiously incorrect it was all though out history to speak your word to someone, EVEN in meekness and love. I mean I didn't want them to get angry at me, and think I was a narrow minded bigot. And besides that I didn't want to offend and hurt any one. AND I was told that doing this would not be LOVING them with the love of God."
God says: Son, speaking the truth in boldness AND meekness IS LOVING them with my Love. Keeping my commandments is abiding in my love, and speaking the truth about my commandments is abiding in me and in my son and in our love. I believe in your time they called it "tough love". And by keeping your mouth shut you became an enabler and a partaker of this man's sin. His blood is on your hands."
You: So God if I would have just spoken your Word in meekness and love this man would have repented?
God: Well NO, this man would not have repented no matter what you said. But the next guy in line for judgment here would have. And the point is that I told you to speak and not to deny my words, in doing so you have denied me.
(God looks REALLY SAD as Jesus hands him an ERASER. YOU look really worried staring at that ERASER.)
Well anyway who knows what's going to happen when we are judged for knowing the truth and not speaking it. There have been times that it was SO HARD for me to speak up about what someone was doing. Speaking the truth in love dose not mean that you get on a band wagon and go out to try and find sinners to speak to. Like for instance in that restaurant it's not your place to stand up and lovingly judge every homosexual you run into and tell them God's word.
Them "without" God judges, but there will be people in your own personal life, that God will have you speak the Word to. People that God has placed there for you to love, by your actions and your words. The point is that when that person came into your personal life, did you speak up? And secondly HOW did you speak and with what attitude? If he was dying of thirst, did you first say, "Well first believe my way and then I'll give you a drink". OR did you hand him a cup of cold water and then tell him of the love of God for him, that leads to repentance?
It's not easy to speak up about what you know is right, in today's atmosphere of total tollerance. I'm not speaking of the godly tolerance you were speaking of Cliffy, but the ungodly tollerance that says you have no right to speak no matter HOW you speak it or with what attitude you speak it with. And that ungodly tollerance that says you must accept the sin of others pushed right into your face and say nothing. In fact you are supposed to be ungodly tollerant while they try and make every law possible for your tax dollars or your "tithe" to go for the promotion of every abominable sin there is.
Everything that is "godly" has an "ungodly" equivalent. Godly sorrow (repentance) works life. Ungodly sorrow (brought on by judgmental condemnation a "better than thou" attitude.) brings death.
Godly judgment, discerns the sin and loves the sinner. Ungodly judgment sees the sin and automatically hates the sinner more than the sin.
Godly love calls the sinner to repentance and loves him by speaking the truth in mercy and kindness. It also keeps the commandments and standards of God's word himself being not just a spokesman but an example. Dose not hide it's own faults either.
Ungodly love, asks nothing of the sinner, is "nice" and keeps it's mouth shut. Might keep the standards of the Word, might not, but mainly keeps it's mouth shut and is sweet to the face of someone.
Quest for truth originally stated: Do you believe that part of the Christian walk of love is to hold to ones own beliefs and views while allowing others to differ in the name of Christianity?
I think of course we must hold to our views and allow others to differ, that is their right. But how will they ever know WE DIFFER if we do not speak up? Speaking up is always going to offend someone, but that dose not mean that they do not have the right or the power to keep on believing what they believe. I cannot "not" allow someone to hold to their own beliefs, and neither would I want to. That is why this country is so great because God can really see just where people's hearts are at because of the FREEDOM to choose what one is going to believe. I believe that is God's will and desire that people have the freedom to choose. BUT if they never hear another opinion it's not much of a choice.
I leave you with this last verse, where in Paul right in the middle of chapter 11 of 1st Cor. fortells the future of Christianity.
1 Cor 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
"Quest for Truth" is such a good user name, because it is what we must all do. We are approved before God for rightly dividing, understanding and applying his Word in our lives. There will be disagreements and divisions so that God can tell who really has that QUEST FOR TRUTH in their hearts and who dose not. Unfortunatly MANY are called but FEW are ......what? And why are they not saved? As Paul states "because they receive not a LOVE OF THE TRUTH." When you have a love of the truth you seek it with all your heart, and you have the meekness to realize that everything you may think today, may not be what you will think tomarrow as you learn more in your QUEST FOR TRUTH. That in general offends many people.
God bless you all.
In the love of christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 6/22/2004 10:50 AM (GMT -6) | | I heard the following true story and I believe this fits with what you posted, larris.
There was a Hmong couple who had a baby that was dying. The couple had married a few years prior to this time. The wife had come over from a refuge camp. The stipulation of this man marrying the woman was that she hold to the same belief as himself. He was a Christian and when they married they both attended a Christian church together.
Now, with their baby sick and dying the truth finally came out regarding her heart. The woman begged her husband for an animal sacrifice to save their babies life. She had been visited by her ancestors who told her several nights in a row that they must have an animal sacrifice. Despite the woman's pleading her husband refused and told her this was foolish. The woman was in devastated because down deep in her heart she believed this would save their baby. She never had abandoned her Hmong beliefs but rather "performed" as needed so that she could flee to America.
Regardless of whether you agree with the woman's belief I do believe that the husband would have won her heart and shown true Christian love by appeasing her plea. Perhaps a door would have opened for him to show her the truth found in Jesus Christ if he had FIRST shown her respect.
What do others think? | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/23/2004 2:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Quest,
You stated: Regardless of whether you agree with the woman's belief I do believe that the husband would have won her heart and shown true Christian love by appeasing her plea. Perhaps a door would have opened for him to show her the truth found in Jesus Christ if he had FIRST shown her respect.
My answer would be "NO", absolutely not. You do not show true Christ like love by appeasing pagan gods. Rather you deny him, by not speaking the truth. Soloman as you remember had MANY wives, of many PAGAN beliefs that he appeased. God did not reward him for it or approve of it in any manner.
If she'd been to Church for two years, she had ample opportunity to hear the Word spoken in Hmong as well as read a Bible in Hmong. What dose Christ have to do? Now in the name of love we are to just go ahead and sacrifice to DEVILS? We are to obey DEVILS in order to show Christian love. Absolutely not.
Another thing is and I just taking a "long shot" here. But exactly waht kind of "Church" was it, that insisted she be of the same 'belief' before she could get into that refugee camp. I am pretty positive it was probably "CATHOLIC". In that case she never would have heard of the aspect of not worshipping your "ancestors" since it's a common practice among Roman Catholics taught by the Church as Paton Saints. She didn't convert because she didn't have to convert. For it is common practice for the missionary movement in the Catholic Chruch to just let the people combine all their pagan practices pretty much with Catholic belief.
I feel sorry for the woman that she never heard any real truth in the two years she went to Church. Other wise her husband other than just thinking her plea was foolish would have been able to speak the truth in love to her, take a stand on the Word, and beseech the Lord for healing for the Child. In reality dosn't sound like he was much of a believer either, since the word states that those who believe will "lay hands on the sick and they shall recover."
Again it is not love to appease the requests of demons.
And I don't think that you can say "regardless of what you believe here", becase "regardless of what you believe would only apply in giving someone a helping hand as to food, clothing, kindness et. NOT sacrificing an animal to a pagan devil posing as someone's ancestor.
To me that is the hard facts of the situation. And the truth had it been told though it may have offended her to hear her dead ancesters that were speaking to her were really demons, maybe she would have repented and the child might not have gotten sick to begin with.
In Christ,
larris
That story leaves me with a LOT of questions. First of all what kind of "Chrisitanity" would insist that they both had to be of the "same" beleif. I think I already know, so I'm going to go look it up and come back.
I think the husband already lied and brought destruction to the family. And regardless I know that it would not have been OK to sacrifice an animal to another God, and have another God heal the child.
When I speak about speaking the truth and living it, that dose not mean that you compromise your principles or the dictates of the word regarding other god's.
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 6/23/2004 9:16 PM (GMT -6) | | Larris, thank you. Your reply was very helpful.
Here's a question, when I heard this story it made me think how hard it would be for ANYONE to convert from their belief to a totally different belief. In this woman's case the only escape to America that she had was to marry this man and convert to Christianity. I began to wonder how hard it would be if I was in her shoes and then encountered a crises such as they did. How is it that we can remain sensitive and respectful to someone who believes differently from us while preaching the truth? I haven't had a lot of experience in mission work so perhaps this is a common situation for those who work on the mission field. I would like to know how to work with those from different backgrounds in a respectful manner while also sharing the truth of Jesus Christ.
Actually, to tie in with the title of this thread, how can we speak our Christian convictions to one another in a sensitive and respectful manner? Is it possible, and okay, to allow fellow believers to hold to differing views from our own? Thank you. | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/24/2004 6:43 AM (GMT -6) | | WOW, I read those replies from you Don, Swan and Quest and just wanted to weep for such great hearts. Especially since I am kind of in the "death throws" of being so exasperated with the World and my own failures that I've been telling God. "OK God when Queeny (my beloved Border Collie and only child.) dies, just take me."
But of course I also add "But just let her live a long healthy doggy life, and die peacefully in her sleep, not get run over by a car or something."
Now I know that sounds nuts, but I really LOVE THAT DOG!
Oh you thought maybe I was talking about wanting to die when the dog died as being NUTS right? Well actually no, I've stated that many times, in feeling totally worthless and useless in this world for any purpose.
It's like I saw this picture of someone's tombstone once that said "All Dressed Up and Nowhere to Go". That's kinda how I feel, all this work, all this seeking and loving the truth and no one to speak it to who cares. Yet for some reason I can't quit talking about it, neither here writing, nor everywhere I walk to every person I talk to.
So in my worthlessness, you three come along and just say the kindest words, making me think, "HEY THERE, just because you are by your self, dose not mean you are ALONE."
Boy for being a person who loves the truth so much I sure have a habbit of listening to the devil talking to me in the first person, saying "Your life is worthless, there is nothing to live for but your dog. No one cares, no one listens, no one loves the truth, you are no help to yourself or anyone else. You could not make a right decision if your life depended on it."
And then just in the fewest of words folks like you come along and bring so much comfort and show me how stupid I can be. Whoa that was quite and Oxymoron (wise saying that seems foolish). How can someone comfort you by showing you how stupid you are? It CAN be done, I'm living proof. God and the kindness of others has shown me that in my own life many times.
Quest, you asked: I would like to know how to work with those from different backgrounds in a respectful manner while also sharing the truth of Jesus Christ. Actually, to tie in with the title of this thread, how can we speak our Christian convictions to one another in a sensitive and respectful manner? Is it possible, and okay, to allow fellow believers to hold to differing views from our own?
God tells me in his word that "Blessed are those who are not offended in me, on the one hand and on the other hand "Offences will come, but woe to the one by whom they come, for it is better that a milstone should be hung around his neck and he be thrown into the uttermost part of the sea, than that he should hurt one of these little ones how believe in me.
Really it is in the spirit and the manner in which we say it. Are we angry? Are we thnking evil of the person in general what is our attitude? What words do we pick to say it in? All these things play a factor in weather or not we are doing God's will in speaking the truth or weather we are beling led by our own will and some wrath we have developed over what someone has said.
You can be totally right and totally wrong if it's said in the wrong spirit with the words resulting from a spirit of anger.
Nevertheless, you can be totally right and say everything just right in a spirit of love and still have people get REALLY angry and offended in what you say.
The wrath of man works not the righteousness of God. What is the motivation behind what we say? Is it just to convince others to our way or to win the debate? Or are we truly concerned for the souls of others and souly committed to saying something that will turn them from following a certain course or train of thought, to what the Word of God is truly teaching?
You can't do it for "your" sake, and you can't even do it for "their" sake. You do it for the "LORD'S SAKE". But you have to keep in mind at all times, what attitude you are to have when doing it.
As Paul stated: And whatsoever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
We are "ambassadors" for Christ. We are not responcible for the actual message, but we are responcible for how we present that message. The message is presented in the love of God in a spirit of meekness and with BOlDNESS, in that we tell them what the Word says.
Take yourself out of the picture, and focus on what the Scripture says. Speak the WORD verbatum. That is the thing that convicts and turns people around. That is also the thing that offends and drives them further off.
I was a missionary for two years (1981-83)in one of the darkest geograpical areas of the globe where the people were wholly given unto idolatry.
Where was that? "The Univercity of Wisconsin...Milwaukee." (only second to Kalispell Montana Witchcraft Capital of the United States.)
Having lived in Milwaukee and understanding fully the darkness in that city, I was not surprised in the least that the nation's number 1 serial killer lived there and perpitrated his henious crimes. Heck I probably wittnessed to the guy. He was probably one of those we ran through our Bible class, that taught you were SAVED NO MATTER WHAT, after you believed Romans 10:9 and 10.
I know you think I'm kidding. ....I'm NOT! God seems to bring me into contact with the worst of the worst. In Wyoming I worked with a "Christian" who had been in prison for rape, got "converted" in prison ministry and was out and lived in the same town, went to an Assembly of God I also attended at a later time.
Now this fellow, I had "seen" not met at the prison years before while visiting another prisoner. At that time he was just getting out. And then 2 years later he was living in the same town as I. One day going to work I saw him standing in front of a house where they were doing construciton work. I did not recognize him, but as he saw me (it was on a golf course) drive around this pond on my way to another house, he came out and just stared at me as I drove by.
Later he showed up with the work crew to do some work on the house I was the caretaker of. And for the life of me, I knew I'd seen him, but could not place where. To tell you the truth I thought he was someone I wittnessed to on Colorado 6 years previous. And so kept pestering him about it. He could not place me either, and we were both stumped. But later with a friend whom I had wittnessed to in prison those years before who had believed, we all ran into one another and where this man came from then became clear.
OK so no big deal, he'd been gone to Arazona and then came back. Eventually after this meeting he started working with my friend who had a small construction business. I worked there also and we painted houses together.
When I would be with this person, it was if the Holy Spirit just welled up in me, and I constantly confronted him with the Word of God, and spoke of NOTHING ELSE. My other friend cornered me one day and told me that I should be more "gentle" to BOB, the ex raptist now converted "Christian", and not speak so strongly and so much of the Word.
I shook my finger in my friends nose and said "DON'T YOU EVER tell me how or when or how much to speak God's Word to anyone." In essence "GET BEHIND ME SATAN". I'm sure I was real OFFENSIVE.
A few months went by and I stopped by one day to see my friend, who "Bob" worked for. Him and his fiancee were in a tizzy. They had been over to another town about 50 miles away doing some construction work for a charity benifit where "Bob" the ex-rapist converted Christian was helping them. "Bob" had wanted to stay and so my Christian friend (ex-cat burgler converted Christian) left him his fiancees Bronco and they came back.
"Bob" at the time they were telling me this had been gone for two days, with narry a word. They had just gotten back from going to his house and finding that he was there with SCRATCHES on his face, and her car had a cracked front window.
At the same time, they were telling me that they had just read the paper and the top story was the finding of a girls body not far from where BOB, ex raptist converted Christian, had been last time they saw him. Putting it all together they were freaked out and suspicious that Christian BOB had killed this girl. I told them they better call the cops, and to make this long story shorter, they did, and BOB who I constatly bombarded with the Word every second I was near him, wound up CONFESSING...not Christ,...but to the murder of this 16 year old girl.
Come to find out, CHRISTAN BOB the ex-raptist converted Christian, had been raping and murdering women ever since he got out of prison, from Washington to Arizona, where he had been working construction.
Would God have FORGIVEN BOB? Yes if Bob would have believed me and listend to the WORD I spoke non stop, confronting him at every corner about his false beliefs that were infact labled as Christian. God could forgive Bob, because Bob was falsely converted by a prison ministry that taught Bob wrongly and Bob never got delivered from the devil spirits that entered him when he was a child, from his mother making him watch her have "relationships" with varrious men. And who know's what else.
As it was Bob heard the truth non stop every time he was around me, and had the opportunity to repent and get delivered. Perhaps then he would have confessed to his killings, and never killed again and gotten caught.
But here's the thing. I had Christians telling me, that I was being to hard on BOB, and speaking the Word too much and too strongly. And then I offended them by telling them to shut up and mind their own business. And what happens? BOB turns out to be a serial killer.
After the fact and in looking back on all these events later, God showed me that the time BOB came out while I was driving by to stare at me, it was not for the reason of "recognition", but that he was looking for his NEXT VICTUM. However these people rarely ever rape and then murder people they KNOW. God therefore made it a point to make sure that BOB knew me. And KNOW ME he did!
Well now BOB is back in prison and running his own prison ministry (WHAT A JOKE). Because BOB never did believe the true WORD of God, but only the false no delivering jargon of the current AOG, that assures you of salvation even if you are a serial killer non repentant. If BOB were to get out of prison today, if they were to believe that BOB had turned over a new leaf through his renewed "conversion", BOB would be right back out there raping and murdering women. For after all was said and done and BOB was back in prison he added insult to injury (murder in this case) by allowing his wife to name the baby born to her after the MURDER after the girl he MURDERED.
You MUST speak the Word, in love and BOLDLY not just for their sake, not just for your sake, but for the LORD'S SAKE
1 Peter 4:10 As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.
But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters.
Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf. For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? (how can they hear without a preacher? That's you and me.)
And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.
Blessed are those who are not offended in ME (Jesus), meaning in his word that you speak. To suffer as a Christian, is to suffer for what you believe and preach to others, because they don't like it. They will cast out your name as evil, as not being tollerant of their beliefs simply because you speak. Those that will believe will believe and those that won't won't. And they will cry and moan about how much you are hurting them by saying what you are saying.
Our ONLY responcibility is to SPEAK, stand and speak to the people all the words of this life, that life that is available in Christ through the accurate knowledge of the written WORD of God.
HEY I didn't write the book, I didn't make up the rules, I just quote it and then give my 2 cents as to it's meaning. They have the BOOK, they have the rules written down for them. IF they want to believe it they will.
How you speak it and what you speak, how much and when and all of that is as individual as the individual you are speaking to. I don't speak the Word to every person like I spoke it to "BOB", nor do I get in every Christians face, like I got in the face of my friend who told me not to speak to BOB in the manner I was speaking to him in.
Jesus was to tender with some, and just nailed others to the wall with his words. Paul was the same way.
1 Thes. 2:3 For our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, nor in guile: But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the gospel, even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts. For neither at any time used we flattering words, as ye know, nor a cloke of covetousness; God is witness:
Nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when we might have been burdensome, as the apostles of Christ.
But we were gentle among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children:
So being affectionately desirous of you, we were willing to have imparted unto you, not the gospel of God only, but also our own souls, because ye were dear unto us.
For ye remember, brethren, our labour and travail: for labouring night and day, because we would not be chargeable unto any of you, we preached unto you the gospel of God. Ye are witnesses, and God also, how holily and justly and unblameably we behaved ourselves among you that believe:
As ye know how we exhorted and comforted and charged every one of you, as a father doth his children, That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory.
For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
This is HOW Paul preached the gospel, and yet we see by his letters that he did not mince words when it came to reproof, and yet he usually always tells them how great they are first and then leads into specifics of exactly what's going on among them.
Paul hated writing reproof. He went to GREAT LENGTHS to tell them how much he loved them and then tell them how messed up they were at that same time by giving them the Word and then letting them choose what course of action they would take. It's THE WORD that dose it all in the end, that is what each person will either stand on or stumble on.
The truth of the Word, tries each man's heart of what sort it is. A GREAT example was your reponse to what I previously wrote Quest regarding the Hmong story. I flat out stated what I thought according to the Word Quest, and you didn't come back all angry because I disagreed with what you said. You took no offence because you saw the truth. It's YOUR HEART that made the fianl determining choice. And what a GREAT HEART you have to respond in such a manner.
You know that most people who worship pagan dieties or their "ancestors" as gods, do so out of fear and not love. Their so called "ancestors" have the power to either bless them or make their lives a living hell. They are not thinking of their ancestors as DEAD PEOPLE, but as "spirits" that still have the power to do good or evil. Thus why the womans ancestors told her to sacrifice an animal to save her child.
This woman had never been taught the TRUTH even though she had been involved in some sort of Christianity. If she had, she would have been told and shown clearly that Jesus Christ has much more power and overrides any bad things that her ancestors could do to her. And that she herself IN CHRIST had the power to rebuke not her dead ancestors, but the evil spirits who perpitrate the very lie to begin with.
Being taught the TRUTH, she could have then made a decision. Had her husband known the truth, he could have lovingly spoken the Word to her, and then also rebuked the spirits telling her such things and shown the power of God. She needed to see that God was more powerful than her pagan gods. For the kingdom of God is not in word only but in the power of the holy spirit. When you finally find the truth and speak it, there is power in that truth.
I thank you for allowing me to share these things with you. And also for your encouragment, in that it comforts my heart to see such goodness in the hearts of you all.
In the love of Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
might-be-don
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 830
| Posted 6/24/2004 8:56 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/24/2004 7:16 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Don,
Well I just thank you so much for sharing all of that and directing me to it. I believe that you made the right decision, but then “I” would. And as you read what I have included here you will also see why I think that. What I have included here is not the only reason why I think what you did was right, but it is one among the many.
You know that whenever I read something you write, though it’s in few words, those words are always very full of light and I have sensed a very noble spirit with you.
This spiritual sense I got from you made me seek a few weeks ago to look up some of your older posts, but I had missed the one you gave here about leaving the Church you had attended for 20 years.
I got “called out” 14 years ago. Though it took me four years from the time I heard that call, to actually come to the place where I was free from the bondage of thinking that I needed to belong to a group or start a group. Every time I tried to get back into a church of some kind, catastrophic things would take place and we would move to another state, another ranch even further from any town. Try and go to Church when you live over 75 miles of shale tire flattening road from the nearest gas station and can barely afford gas let alone to fix four tires every time you go to town. God kept me BROKE and ISOLATED long enough to learn enough to get me out of bondage to the whole idea.
Now this is funny, but until I read your posts I never quite saw the term “ekklesia” in quite this light as I am seeing it now. For the word dose in fact literally mean “CALLED OUT”....hum.....
Bullinger’s Lexicon states: ekklesia, the common term for a meeting of the ekkletoi (those summoned) to discuss the affairs of a FREE STATE; the body of citizens summoned (called out) and summoned together by a herald.
Hum, yes, not much “discussion” going on in what we call “The Church”. It's really a stage with one guy doing all the talking and God's people do not grow, when they cannot share. The best Churches I have ever seen were the one's that had different men get up and speak for a time. As Paul told the Corinthians
1Cor 14:29 29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
It's no wonder that people don't talk about Jesus much in the Church because they never get the chance to learn. The way in which we learn is by DOING, by speaking the Word. This is the true set up of how God would have a gathering of believers do things.
It’s funny but I really am into words and their origins. And about 7 years ago I just up and got curious about this word “Church”. I mean where did it come from anyway. How did we get this “English” word that we use to translate the word “ekklesia”?
I had no devious intention or suspicion, just curiosity, and a love of etymology, the study or words and their origins. Did you know for instance that the word “Church”, is what is called an “ecclesiastical word”.
Do you know what “ecclesiastical” means? I believe you defined it here when you stated: “We have setup a hierarchical structure that places a whole list of men between me and God, and by this we deny the priesthood of believers and the power of the Spirit to teach and regulate behavior.
This so-called English word “Church” was coined by those very HIGHER ARKS of which you are speaking. When the King James was translated, long before we had a standard Webster’s dictionary in RULE NO. 3, of the rules of translation they were to abide by (or chop, chop, burn, burn) it stated:
3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept, viz., as the word church not to be translated congregation.
The translators knew that the word "congregation" was the most equivelent English word for the word "ekklesia", yet they were ordered by reason of the Church higherarchy to keep their "special" word.
It’s that Church hierarcy that you were speaking of that gave us this very “special” word. So special in fact that it transcends the normal meaning of the actual Greek word which simply means “congregation”, becoming it’s own little special entity. After all the word “congregation” doesn’t exactly strike FEAR into the hearts of men, now dose it?
But back when they were burning people like you and I, the word “Church” had a very fearful impact on the ears of the hearers. For the Church was not the “congregation”, but an entity all it’s own in power over the congregation.
Even today in our culture the word “CHURCH” has a powerful impact on those who are bound to it’s traditions. I’m sure you’ve had “that experience”, where you didn’t make it to “CHURCH” one Sunday, and then ran into someone from the CHURCH who said to you with that “eye”, “Where were you? We didn’t see you in CHURCH last Sunday?” You know that whole GUILT trip, and the evil eye cast on you, since you must have been out sacrificing your first born to Baal, or at the least visiting the red light district since you weren’t in CHURCH that one day out of the last 15 years.
But here is the real funny thing about the word "church". As I will show below it is really another Greek word and not the word “ekklesia”.
What I will show is how they just REPLACED one Greek word with another Greek word and that other Greek word became one of the most powerful blood thirsty institutions in history?
And don’t think they wouldn’t be doing the same stuff now if they could get away with it. If they could FORCE you to go to CHURCH, if they could force you to believe what they determined was right, they would take full advantage of it. Power corrupts!
Well learning the real meaning of he word Church is one among the many things that freed me up from thinking something was wrong with me for not going any more.
Maybe you will find this interesting and maybe not, but here you go. I wrote this many years ago, before I had a computer, so I’ve had to copy it from my typed notes. And I’ve added a bit to correspond to some of what I just said.
(Some people aren't going to like this very much.)
WHERE DOES THE WORD CHURCH COME FROM ?
Webster's New Int. Dic. 1944 ed.
church (church), noun
[COMES FROM Middle English chirche,
from Anglo Saxon circe,
from Greek kryiakon the Lord's house,
from kryiakos concerning a master or Lord,
from kryos power, authority;
akin to Sanskrit sura mighty, bold,
Old Irish caur, cur, hero.
Latin comparison KIRK.]
What we see being done here by the usage of the word "church" coming from the Greek word “kryiakon“ is a replacement of the original Greek word "ekklesia" If this is so, then how can they tell us we have to go to, belong to, fellowship and submit to something that God never said in the first place.
If God would have wanted us called “kryiakon“, he would NOT have used the word “ekklesia““ Just because the word has been twisted around and made to sound different, as in "CHRUCH" it is still originally a Greek word, and not the word "ekklesia".
In the KJV of the Bible the Greek word "EKKLESIA" is most often translated into the English word "CHURCH".This word "EKKLESIA" is used in the New Testament 116 times and is translated church except for 3 times where it is translated assembly, and two other instances where it is often translated congregation..
The Septuagint is the Greek translation of the Old Testament often referred to as the LXX, and used by the dispersed Greek speaking Jews during the time of Christ and the first century believers. In the Septuagint or LXX the words "EKKALEO" AND "EKKLESIA" were used by seventy Jewish scholars to translate and convey the meaning of the Hebrew word "QAHAL"to the Greek mind. In much the same way as the Greek word "EKKLESIA" has been translated by the English word "CHURCH" to convey a certain idea to the English speaking mind. The Septuagint or LXX is the version quoted by Josephus and by writers of the New Testament.
The Hebrew word "QAHAL" and the Greek word "EKKLESIA" are closely related in thought and meaning as well as origin in the specific language to which they belong. Thus they convey the same sense and give a rule of uniformity of the two different languages spanning the Old and New Testaments. And the change over from the Hebrew to the Greek. The English word "CHURCH" on the other hand has a far different origin and 'original meaning, even though it came to carry in a since the same meaning to the English mind.
The Hebrew word "QAHAL" and Greek word "EKKLESIA" were used with fluency and regularity by the writers of the Old and New Testaments to convey Gods truth concerning those whom he has called out of both Jews and Gentiles. Therefore it would only stand to reason that in translating the Greek to the English the same type of transition should occur. The relationship, sense and meaning between "QAHAL" and "EKKLESIA" should extend to the English equivalent.
The evidence presented here will show that the English word "CHURCH" does not fit the before mentioned criteria and that although it developed over time into a similar meaning, it was in reality forced into that position by the authority and sword of Rome.
We must first look closely at the Hebrew word "QAHAL" and the Greek word "EKKLESIA" to see their similarities and uses. At the same time remembering that the LXX or Septuagint corroborates the translation and transition of these two words to one another between the Old and New Testaments, the Hebrew to the Greek. For a true translation you must be able to go from the Hebrew to the Greek to the English with not loss in the sense and meaning of the word.
QUHAL. verb, basic meaning "assemble".
The verb "QUHAL" conveys the idea of assembling without regard to purpose. The LXX often translates this root as "EKKALEO" (to call or summon forth)
1. It can give the idea of a group assembling themselves for...
a. Mutual defense (Est 8:11; 9:2; 15-16, 18)
b. To make war (Josh 22:12; Jud 20:1)
c. To worship (11 Chr 20:26)
d. To ask for idols (Ex 32:1)
e. For the anointing of Arron (Lev 8:4)
f. For erecting the tent of meeting (Josh 18:1)
g. For the transporting of the ark to the temple (1Kgs 8:2
h. For the assembling of a mob (Jer 26:9)
i. For rebellion ((Num 16:3; 20:2; 11 Sam 20:14)
j. Used for the assembling of groups, such as...
1. The people (Duet 4:10)
2. The officers and elders (Duet 31:28)
3. The Tribes of Israel (1Kings 12:21)
k. For Census (Num 1:18)
l. For purification of the Levites (Num 8:9)
m. To bring water from the rock (Num 20:8)
n. To hear the words of the law (Ex 35:1)
To hear Moses’ farewell (Deut 4:10)
The noun "QUHAL" is usually translated "EKKLESIA" in the LXX, but 36 times it is translated 'sunagoge'.
The noun is used 22 times in the prophets, most frequently in Ezk. The verb is used 39 times meaning to assemble or to gather. The root of this word 'qhl' is used in the 'no biblical' Qumran manuscripts for gatherings and for groups of varrious sorts. Only one case of which it is in a worshiping context that is equal to Psl 22:23.
2. An assembly of any type or sort may be designated by the word "QUHAL".
a. For evil council or deeds (Gen 49:6; Psl 26:5)
b. For civil affairs (1Kings 2:3; Prov 5:14; Job 30:28)
c. For war (Nub 22:4; Jud 20:2)
d. Assembled armies, David and Goliath, (1Sam 7:14)
e. An assembled multitude of nations (Gen 35:11)
f. Peoples (Gen 28:3; 48:4)
g. The dead (Prov 21:16)
h. Returning exiles (Jer 31:8)
3. But "QUHAL" is especially used for an assembly for religious purposes.
a. The experience at Horeb for receiving the Law was "The
day of assembly" (Duet 9:10; 10:4; 18:16)
b. Feasts, fasts, and worship ( 11Chr 20:5; 30:25; Neh
5:13; Joel 2:16). These cases show a gathering less than
the totality of the children of Israel.
c. Also the idea of the "assembly" gathered and ungathered
Is used. (Num 10:7 20:10)
d. Designating the congregation as an organized body.
1. qahal yisra el. And Moses spake in the ears of all
the congregation of Israel... (Duet 31:30)
2. qahal YHWH. The congregation of the Lord (Num 16:3
etc.
3. qahal elohim. The congregation of God (Neh 13:1)
4. Other times merely the assembly,
a. the congregation of Israel (Ex12:6),
b. the people of God (Jud 20:2)
Note no. 2 "qahal YHWH" "the congregation of the Lord" used 13 times. The LXX translates this "EKKLESIA KURIOU".
[Sources; Theological Wordbook of the Old Test.]
We will now look at the Greek word "EKKLESIA" and it's uses in the New Testament, along with examples of the same type of usage from the Old Testament.
EKKLESIA
From a compound of 'ek' a primary preposition denoting 'origin 'from' or 'out of'.
And a derivative of 'kaleo' to call, akin to 'kello' to incite by word, hail;
in essence to order; bid at; give a command.
a calling out, in essence. Concretely a popular meeting, a religious congregation. (Sources; Strongs Ex. Con.)
The Hebrew word "QAHAL" is also derived from a similar type of word as the Greek word 'kello' to incite by word. the Hebrew word 'qol' meaning 'to speak'. Note the similarities of origin from which the Hebrew "QAHAL"and the Greek word "EKKLESIA are derived.
QAHAL........... EKKLESIA
Derived from.....derived from
QOL..................KELLO
__________________________________
to speak = to incite by word
EKKLESIA was the common term for a meeting of the 'ekkletea', those summoned to discuss the affairs of a Free State; the body of citizens summoned together by a herald. The LXX transfers the term to the assembly of the people of Israel, whether summoned or met for a definite purpose
(1 Kings 8:65) or considered as representative of the entire nation. (Bullingers Lex.)
Old and New Testament usage compared.
N.T.
1E. Acts 19:32, 39; A riotous mob in Ephesus incited to violence against Paul. Summoned forth by Demetrius a silver smith, which made silver shrines for Diana , considered an unlawful assembly. "Pagans against God's people".
O.T.
1Q. Jer 26:9 usage 1h. Some of God's people 'gathered together' as a mob against one of God's people, the prophet Jeremiah (nothing unusual). Num 22:4 usage 2a. For evil council or Deeds (people other than Israel) "Pagans against Gods people Israel".Balak and the people of Moab; translated 'company'.
------------------------------------------------------------
N.T.
2E. Acts 19:39 The call for a lawful assembly or court of inquiry into the accusations made against Paul by the mob in Ephesus. (Governmentally legal not necessarily right.)
O.T.
2Q. Dan 6:6,11; Usage 2a, For evil council or deeds, and 2b, for civil affairs. Presidents and princes, of whom Daniel was the head, desiring to find an occasion against him because of envy and jealously of his position. Therefore they manipulated the King into making a law against asking anything of any God except the king for 30 days. Daniel as his manner was went and prayed to his God with the windows open allowing them to catch him and legally accuse him. This wound Daniel up in the lion’s den, but God delivered him. (As you see legal is not necessarily right.) (trans. assembled).
[Both instances were brought about by envy, jealousy and the love of money and power.]
------------------------------------------------------------
N.T.
3E. Acts 7:38 The "EKKLESIA" in the wilderness (trans. church) the congregation of the children of Israel.
O.T.
3Q. Ex 16:1,2 ...and all the congregation (eda) of the children of Israel came into the wilderness. Ex 12:6;
...and the whole assembly (qahal) of the congregation (eda) of Israel shall kill it at evening. (eda also translated assembly and congregation carries the meaning meeting at an appointed time.)
------------------------------------------------------------
N.T.
4E. Heb 2:12 The writer of Hebrews quoting Psl 22:22.
N.T. Translation and quote in Heb 2:12; (saying)
I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the 'church' will I sing praise unto thee.
O.T. Translation of Psl 22:22 what is quoted in Heb 12:12;
I will declare thy name unto by brethren, in the midst of the 'congregation' will I sing praise unto thee.
O.T. 'CONGREGATION' and the N.T. 'CHURCH'?
It is of utmost importance to note that this verse in Hebrews is the very same verse in Psl 22:22. Yet while the Greek word "EKKLESIA" is translated "CHURCH' in the New Test., in the Old Test. the Hebrew word "QAHAL" is translated "CONGREGATION". The question is, WHY? This question will be answered as we look at the origins of the English word "church" and how it came to be used. And by understanding some of what is called "Church History" from the first century up to this time.
For the most part the rest of the hundred and so uses of the word "EKKLESIA" are determined by the context. And come under these uses.
1. Individual groups of people within a city, both Jews and Gentiles who met in different homes. Romans 16.
2. The entire Group of believers with city collectively although meeting in different homes. 1Cor 1:2; Rev 2 & 3;
3. All believers, everywhere during all time collectively.
4. The 'EKKLESIA' of the firstborns (plural) registered
(Enrolled) in the heavens.
Evidence clearly shows that God never put any great divergence between the quahl of the Old Test. and the ecclesia of the New Test. Though under different covenants "at times", the ecclesia and the quahl are the exact same united group of those who have been called before the foundation of the world, hence the Israel of God composed of both Jews and Gentiles. Not some special secret all-powerful hierarchical "church" that is seperate from the "congregation" of God of Old Testament times. You my friend, as a believer in Christ, are simply a member of the COMMONWEALTH OF ISRAEL, not some special high and mighty Gentile CHURCH. You have been born again and adopted into the Isreal of God, the congregation of the Lord, the very same one God called out before Christ was born. The only difference being the New Covenant and gospel of Christ in force in our day.
Webster's New Int. Dic. 1944 ed.
church (church), noun
[COMES FROM Middle English chirche,
from Anglo Saxon circe,
from Greek kryiakon the Lord's house,
Now remember here that the Word says their are “LORDS MANY”. Just because the word “Lord” is used here to define the meaning of this word, dose not mean it’s THE LORD, as in Jesus Christ.
from kryiakos concerning a master or Lord,
from kryos power, authority;
akin to Sanskrit sura mighty, bold,
Old Irish caur, cur, hero.
the "Church" belongs to the STRONGMAN,
the "Ecclesia" belongs to God.
It is the "ecclesia" Jesus Christ would build.
THE STRONG MAN has built the "Church".
The "church" and the "ecclesia" are at this time combined as the "tares" are combined with the "wheat". But as the end of days approaches and the return of Christ edges closer, many will hear the silent call of the herald of God saying “Come out of her my people and be ye separate. And touch not the unclean thing and I will receive you.” For what we have today in The Church is not what they had going in the first century.
Jesus Christ will someday separate the wheat from the tares. The correct translation of the Greek word 'ecclesia' would have been "assembly" or "congregation".
By using the word "Church" an organism has been developed which has usurped the authority of Christ. The doctrines of the "Church" have taken precedence over the teachings of Jesus Christ.
The "Church" only looks like it teaches what Jesus taught, because it holds a Bible and quotes scripture. But it is all corrupted and taken out of context.
Translating the word "ecclesia" into the word "Church" is a means of corruption, with a very 'long' history, used souly by the Strongman to bring God’s people into bondage.
Jesus in speaking of the Devil’s house had some interesting things to say, especially if you read the Greek words. Now keep in mind that when Jesus spoke these words, the English word “church”, had not yet been derived and transplanted into the Bible to represent the true word ekklesia, which means simply congregation or “called out ones”.
What you will be seeing here is that Jesus is endeavoring to use words as close to what will become in the future. This is for the purpose of warning those who find them.
Matt 12:29; Or how is able anyone to enter into the house (oikia) of the strong (is chur os) and goods his to plunder, unless first he bind the strong (is chur os); and then his house (oikia) he will plunder.
Rev 18:9; And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning, standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty (is chur os) city! For in one hour is thy judgment come.
I don't care what anyone thinks about this, I KNOW he's talking about THE CHURCH, NOT the "ekklesia", not that one that he will build of called out ones, but this THING that has developed in the last 2000 years.
Now we see here that this word “is chur os” is translated “strong” in referring to the Devils house, and is translated “mighty” in referring to Mystery Babylon that “mighty” city.
Now interesting that in the etymology of the word “CHUR CH” coming from the Greek kryiakon the Lord's house, (house being “oikos” as in the strong mans house) and is traced back through kryiakos concerning a master or Lord, to
kryos power, authority; akin to Sanskrit sura mighty, bold, to Old Irish caur, cur, meaning, hero, and HENCE A STRONG MAN.
And here’s a thought, originally all CHURCH buildings looked like CASTLES for FORTRESSES, as in a LORD’S HOUSE. Daniel states that in the end of days they will worship "the god of forces". That word is really "fortresses" and alludes to Church buildings.
Somewhere in the OT, I’m not going to look it up here, but it foretells that the Lord will give to his people a PURE LANGUAGE. That means that we will have HIS WORDS, and use his Words to define our faith and not the corrupted words of The Church. The very word “Church” itself being a corruption of what we really are, that is the citizens of a FREE STATE, called out by a herald to discuss the matters of our state.
Now I had not read all of that for at least 4 years, since I last wrote it and worked on it. And now reading it hear again, I am even more astounded by the very quotes I had copied from your posts when I first started this reply. And wound up at the bottom of this page. And so I leave with that, because they just seem to fit here.
Don stated: While I do believe in the power of prayer, it's the whole notion of the current day "pastor" that doesn't sit well with me, I'm not so sure that's a battle I'm ready to fight. I don't need a priest ( most "pastors" act as priests ) to interpret God's will for my life or filter the Word for me. A pastors whole job should be bringing new converts up speed, not making converts eternally dependent on them.
We have setup a hierarchical structure that places a whole list of men between me and God, and by this we deny the priesthood of believers and the power of the Spirit to teach and regulate behavior.
You ask if I have attempted to change the church I was in, I think I'll answer that this way...
I changed the church I was in by my very presence.
(Boy Don if God is really calling people out of her, trouble must be on the horizon.)
But without the kind of fellowship my heart longs for, it was killing me. Over the past few weeks I've been struck by the simplicity of Genesis 3:8 :
"When they heard the sound of GOD strolling in the garden in the evening breeze, the Man and his Wife hid in the trees of the garden, hid from GOD."
God's desire was not a formal, lined up in little neat rows, gathering, but a walk together in the cool of the evening. God hadn't asked Adam to build a church, but a relationship built on love, not duty.
Over the last few weeks I've begun to wean myself from some of the thought patterns that were so ingrained in my life. I'm still unable to sit home on Sunday morning and not feel like I should be somewhere. But the feeling is beginning to lessen. I feel mostly that I need to put some distance(time) between myself and my former church. I do need to be careful about generalizing my "church" experience, but I see the pattern repeated over and over in many "churches" .
It's becoming clearer just how manipulated we were at the church I attended. Things like, our service started at 10:00am, so it was decided to have prayer at 9:30. Sounds spiritual huh, but the motive behind it was to get folks to the building earlier because many of the congregation didn't show up until almost 10:20. So it was thought that having something earlier might get folks to show up on time. The 1/2 hour prayer time in a church of 600 was attended by less than 20 people.
On the inside I'm doing great. My wife and I have used the time we have gained by not doing "church" to talk about Jesus. It now amazes me as I look back how little the folks at the church talked about Jesus. Lots of bible principles to act a rule book for our lives, but little Jesus.
I think that "church" should look the same as "Church" , only smaller. This is rarely the case. "church" is usually run by heirarchy of leadership that that leaves only the head guy (pastor,pope, etc.) responsible for listening to the Head (Christ) and communicating his version ( or passed down tradition ) of Christ to the people. This pattern leaves wide open the possibility of abuse and causes a weak and ineffective group. Folks tend to rely on the pastor to think and act for them.
I feel that the Spirit of God is stirring up a dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs in "church". We can continue to accept less than God desires for us, or repent.
Well said Don.
In the love of Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 6/25/2004 5:22 AM (GMT -6) | | While I think Larris' monologue had a bit of a conspiratorial sound to it, I think he/she is basically right about the etymology of "church" and how it is different from "ecclesia." I think a solid case can be made that "the church" after Constantine became, to a large degree, a religious version of the kingdom of the world, using the sword to further its agenda -- to WIN. To put it mildly, the church has not always looked like Jesus Christ dying for those who persecute it out of love. But I also think it important not to dogmatically distinguish "the church" from the "ecclesia." The church is partly composed of "called out ones" and God has used the church throughout history (as has the devil).
Greg
ps. Just FYI, most linguists agree that the meaning of a word is not to be found in its etymology, but in its contemporary USE. Words get called into service for a variety of different reasons and they evolve over time. Words are in this respect like "customs." Why do we shake hands when we meet someone? Its no longer to declare we're unarmed! So, while the etymology of the word "church" might be interesting, the case that "the church" doesn't represent the true "ecclesia" has to be forged on OTHER grounds -- e.g. LOOK AT IT. Does it look like Jesus Christ. When it does, to the extent that it does, its true ecclesia, the embodiment of the Kingdom of God. When it doesn't, its a religious version of the world.
"The responsibility is with the chooser -- God is blameless." Plato, Republic, 10. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Cliffy
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 26
| Posted 6/25/2004 8:08 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by GregBoyd
While I think Larris' monologue had a bit of a conspiratorial sound to it, I think he/she is basically right about the etymology of "church" and how it is different from "ecclesia." I think a solid case can be made that "the church" after Constantine became, to a large degree, a religious version of the kingdom of the world, using the sword to further its agenda -- to WIN. To put it mildly, the church has not always looked like Jesus Christ dying for those who persecute it out of love. But I also think it important not to dogmatically distinguish "the church" from the "ecclesia." The church is partly composed of "called out ones" and God has used the church throughout history (as has the devil).
Greg
ps. Just FYI, most linguists agree that the meaning of a word is not to be found in its etymology, but in its contemporary USE. Words get called into service for a variety of different reasons and they evolve over time. Words are in this respect like "customs." Why do we shake hands when we meet someone? Its no longer to declare we're unarmed! So, while the etymology of the word "church" might be interesting, the case that "the church" doesn't represent the true "ecclesia" has to be forged on OTHER grounds -- e.g. LOOK AT IT. Does it look like Jesus Christ. When it does, to the extent that it does, its true ecclesia, the embodiment of the Kingdom of God. When it doesn't, its a religious version of the world.
Hey I TOTALLY Agree with the above, (in my opinion Constantine was the WORST thing that ever happened to the church!) and I definitly would not be surprised at the (perhaps alleged) mincing of words in translation of "ekklesia" in Greek to favor "church" over "assembly" in English. I am one Christian who is more about personal worship rather than blindly listening to so called authority figures. I see it as a preisthood of all believers sort of thing.
But on that note - it's also good to have people who specialize out there. If used rightly, it is a built-in BS detector as a service to the greater group of believers. Jesus and Paul certainly didn't shy away from using thier knowledge and authority to tear down ungodly ideas and build up Godly ones. But I certainly think it'd require the sort of love implied in a place where believers' places are equalized by the very blood of Christ and should be for the edification of all. (something that seems obvious to me in light of scripture) Since then, it's been generally different, with a few notable exceptions. (groups such as Anabaptists and The early Quakers could be used as examples.)
Just a final note - People tend to be more judgemental when they have something to lose, such as power over others. It's as if with Constantine, the "backwards" Kingdom of God became a liability to the greater Fold of Christianity. I dunno, Christianity would certainly be neat to see if it never had sold out in favor of legality and power. But as Greg said before, I think there is always exceptions, and I am pleased to see that some groups seem to be taking steps to remedy the situations. The Church-as-a-battlefield motif seems to be true to life. Maybe that's why I beileve in cosmic conflict. 
I've been loving this thread, but I think with all the etyomology we've probably taken this thread off topic a bit. Just a observation, it's been awhile since I've been on, and I haven't really got a feel for how the mods operate here. Oh well.
larris, love what you brought here. I think you were right in preaching the word to "Bob" and I think some people are content to let things stay broken, sometimes to the point that they will fight to keep it that way. (reminds me of the Matrix and the woman in the red dress...) Latest weapon employed by them - unconditional tolerance. I am glad to see we are on the same page, even though I have been guilty of over tolerance myself.
Great stuff Folks!
Cliffy
| | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 6/26/2004 8:08 AM (GMT -6) | | larrisquote:
WOW, I read those replies from you Don, Swan and Quest and just wanted to weep for such great hearts. Especially since I am kind of in the "death throws" of being so exasperated with the World and my own failures that I've been telling God. "OK God when Queeny (my beloved Border Collie and only child.) dies, just take me."
But of course I also add "But just let her live a long healthy doggy life, and die peacefully in her sleep, not get run over by a car or something."
Now I know that sounds nuts, but I really LOVE THAT DOG!
Oh you thought maybe I was talking about wanting to die when the dog died as being NUTS right? Well actually no, I've stated that many times, in feeling totally worthless and useless in this world for any purpose
Are you serious? Does your life really feel that way? Life CAN definitely be hard and lonely. We all go through "the valley of the shadow of death" BUT the hope and reality is that we are NEVER alone! Regardless of who you are or what you've done... Jesus cares for YOU. Please, if this is a safe place for you, will you share further about what you posted above? I am praying for you. | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/27/2004 10:01 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Folks,
Thank you Quest, for your concern and for your prayers. My malady is a common feeling among many of God's people. I do not feel that way 24-7 but at "times". I also know that I am not alone, and do not feel "lonely", but simply get pretty disgusted with the affairs of this life, and the evil in men who seek not the truth. It just so happens that the day I wrote what I did, I was more disgusted than usual, and found encouragement and comfort in what seveal people said.
Don you said: First, sorry for dragging things off topic.
Don you didn't drag things off topic, God drug things off topic. God is not much for set "topics", that's more of a "church" thing. The pastor spends the week working on a sermon, or drags one out from a pile of past sermons he's preached. And then when it comes to preaching it, it's pretty hard for the spirit to actually reveal to him at that moment what the people truly need to hear, since he's got his "topic". Just another reason why the Church is DEAD spiritually.
You also said: Second, I acknowledge that the Spirit of God is making small advances in today's "churches", wherever folks love Jesus. As bad as I think "churches" are sometimes, a remnent remains.
I kind of see it as small advances in people, who will fianlly figgure out that the Church is really as bad as it seems.
The Church cannot be any better than where it's "roots" are planted. And since it's roots are taking all their true nourisment from Greek philosophy, modern psychiatry and maketing techniques out of the halls of "higher" learning, it's an unclean thing, because it's knowledge is tainted by the god of this world.
I saw this early on in the study of Church history. Men "almost" come out of her, and then they get drug right back in. What starts out as a good thing, a man finds a truth and it moves him to become disatitified with the Church, he leaves, but then just starts another Chruch, and eventually comes right back into what he was escaping from.
Even the reformers brought the very educational systems of what they were getting out of that led to all the abuse to begin with. You can't go any futher than you are led. And we see now that those institutions that came out of Moma Rome are in fact the first ones running to her bed again, as remember she is the "mother" of "harlots".
When God had men prophecy and speak of her, there was not word in their vocabulary for this "thing" that would come to be. Therefor he used similies all over the place. Such as:
Jeremiah 5:7 How shall I pardon thee for this? thy children have forsaken me, and sworn by them that are no gods: when I had fed them to the full, they then committed adultery, and assembled themselves by troops in the harlots' houses.
Similies, using words that were "similar" to what would come to be, but in reality describe what it really is. The harlot's house is the Church building, however it can be someones home, that also has a "church" in it disguised as not being a "church" but in reality winds up set up along all the same lines, and teachngs all the same things. My cousin was a professional protitute, she worked in Nevada, in a "building" made for the act, and when she was at home in Montana she worked out of her own house. She was no less the prostitute at home than she was in a legal cat house.
Spiritual whoredom is based on having an imprure knowledge of the Lord combined with the impure practices that result from it. Having an impure knowledge by the acceptance of a lie for the truth, brings a "spirit" with it that keeps one in the lie.
Unfortunately most men never take the time to get cleaned out spiritually once they leave the harlot's house, and wind up starting the very thing they got out of. God is looking for men, NOT who will go start churches, but who will take the time to find Him and Him alone. Most men can't hack that though because of the need for that group or the need to think they are doing some great work for God. And you know that great work for God aways takes MONEY. Then next thing you know they are prostituting God's people, and making a living off of them.
I KNOW that there are and have been good god fearing men in the Church. But the time for that will come to an end, because God's judgment is going to start there. God is calling people OUT to find Him and Him alone. And for God to straighten his people out, he is going to have to visit some pretty strong correction on them. This correction will begin with the pastors.
In prophecy you have to go back far enough in the context to see if it's referring to what took place with Israel then, or what would take place with the Isreal of God composed of both Jew and Gentile in the FUTURE. This following prophecy regards the future judgement of the harolots house, the Church.
(context)
Jer. 9:25 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will punish all them which are circumcised with the uncircumcised; Egypt, and Judah, and Edom, and the children of Ammon, and Moab, and all that are in the utmost corners, that dwell in the wilderness: for all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the heart.
Jer. 10:21 For the pastors are become brutish, and have not sought the LORD: therefore they shall not prosper, and all their flocks shall be scattered.
In the love of Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 6/27/2004 1:51 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
My malady is a common feeling among many of God's people. I do not feel that way 24-7 but at "times".
Just checking. Glad to hear it is manageable. I agree that MANY people in general feel this way at times.
God bless. | | Back to Top | | |
|
might-be-don
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 830
| Posted 6/28/2004 3:13 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by larris
Don you said: First, sorry for dragging things off topic.
Don you didn't drag things off topic, God drug things off topic.
The off-topic things a matter of order in the house. If I desire to talk about the state of churches today I could start a tread on that topic. No desire to quench the Spirit, only to do things decently and in order.quote:
You also said: Second, I acknowledge that the Spirit of God is making small advances in today's "churches", wherever folks love Jesus. As bad as I think "churches" are sometimes, a remnent remains.
I kind of see it as small advances in people, who will fianlly figgure out that the Church is really as bad as it seems.
On the occasion that one of these people is the "pastor" we could see a change from "church" to assembly of the righteous. If you find one let me know :) .
quote:
Unfortunately most men never take the time to get cleaned out spiritually once they leave the harlot's house, and wind up starting the very thing they got out of.
The pastor of the church I attend for many years prided himself on the fact that he never begged for money. He didn't badger people about giving and I found that to be a good thing about him. Lately, he has repented publicly of that stance saying he had failed to preach enough on how God could bless those that give to the church. Strangely this new stance happens at the same time he needs additional funds to keep his big new building running and trying to purchase additional land.
You may be right, the institution is dead and God is calling His remnant out.
peace, don
"Life is a gift from God, but the years have weight in them."
Terry Scott Taylor | | Back to Top | | |
| 44 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:26 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|