"Religion! Who needs it?" or "Religious Tyranny:"

[Truman]

When broken people like junkies, thieves and hookers try to find God, they may take a chance and go to a church. If anyone knows God, they should, right? What a mistake. Instead, they find a place where they are shamed when instant sanctification doesn't work for them. It's got nothing to do with them; it's that the "holy" ones have deemed them unworthy. I relate more with songs like, "It's Been Awhile " and, "We Used To Talk" than I do with these containers for demons. My son won't go to church. I don't blame him. They don't even care that people like me come and go. They think that they are too holy to be around people like me. Most Christians are carnal believers.

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus was the friend of tax collectors and sinners; and Christians should follow His example.

It does not mean that they shouldn't live holy lives themselves; and neither does it mean that they should not encourage each other to live holy.

If a drug addict or prostitute comes from outside and is encouraged to live holy by the church, and finds that they cannot live up to the standard that the church sets for itself, is that the church's fault?

I believe that the church should expect of itself that it would live holy, but should expect visitors to just be sinners that we are to love on.

Now, preaching should be towards holiness; but if the preaching has nothing of grace in it, the sinner coming in from outside may indeed feel that there is a standard that they cannot live up to.

So, we need a balance of grace and holiness in our preaching.

And Christians, in treating others around them, ought always to err on the side of grace and mercy. Never pointing the finger; but always loving the person who is not there yet so that they will understand that they are "accepted in the Beloved" at least, that they are accepted as a brother or sister any time they set foot inside the walls of the church.

 

[marksman]

Religion will not be relaced with relationship until we get rid of religion. What will that mean? May I suggest the following...

NO fancy buildings old or modern.
NO Sunday morning services where one person tells everyone else what to do.
NO having fellowship with the back of people's heads.
NO the priesthood of one believer who is paid to do a job.
NO denominations.
NO paid ministers running the church.
ONLY one church in each town.
ELDERS in charge of each church with the assistance of apostles and prophets, not a pastor.
PEOPLE meeting daily from house to house.
WHAT people do is more important than what people say.
THE only statement of faith is "Jesus Christ is Lord."
MEALS a priority especially for those not well off.
DUMP the catholic idea of the Lord's Table.
THE supernatural to be an everyday occurrence.
THE church to focus on four things. Teaching, Praying, Eating together, Fellowship.
EVANGELISM is the province of the Holy Spirit
LIVING no more than one day at a time.
BE my brother's keeper at all times.

NO doubt you can add your own ideas about this.

 

[Yan]

If anything speaks of te hugliness of religion

catholic wife, protestant husband, where not allowed to be buried in same cemetry. United in love., divided by religion.

just like the Berlin wall.

Yup, its correct. In this world we had noticed the proportion of each churches as a whole body of Christ. We see Holy Spirit in Protestant but in Catholic we see the Scriptures (Thy Words) that clarify the Holy Spirit in Protestant (1 Corinthians 12:12-31), the image of the obelisk was representing the reality of the churches, but we are separated by the walls of the classification of this world.

 

[bbyrd009]

I try to share my experience, strength and hope, but each time I get ostracized by Traditional Ritualistic Churchianity. And once I calm down and think of it, I'm reminded to forgive, bless and love. That our fight is not against flesh and blood. I'm at the point where I'm trying to think of a good reason not to blow this pop stand. But the Lord is telling me stay. Anyone interested in the lost tribes? BTW - I know this thread is old, that's okay, maybe I just need to vent.

well, in truth you do not "know that it will fall on deaf ears," right? You have a message, and imo you should trust that there is an audience, even if no man ever acknowledges or praises you for it; doesnt matter, imo. Someone could find your message in search ten years from now even, in a search for "Traditional Ritualistic Churchianity"

so fwiw i suggest you stop looking for approval from ppl, bc thats prolly not going to happen much when you are telling the truth

that may not be too fair. After all, you came from religion, yes? So you talk to people who are still in religion, where you once were, and you only get a snapshot of them in time, and when you are disagreed with you likely tend to think that you are rejected, when you actually plant a seed that will produce fruit in them, if they are really seeking.

 

[Truman]

well, in truth you do not "know that it will fall on deaf ears," right? You have a message, and imo you should trust that there is an audience, even if no man ever acknowledges or praises you for it; doesnt matter, imo. Someone could find your message in search ten years from now even, in a search for "Traditional Ritualistic Churchianity"

so fwiw i suggest you stop looking for approval from ppl, bc thats prolly not going to happen much when you are telling the truth

Thank you, I needed that. All I ask is for one to take what I say to the Lord. Shalom

 

[Truman]

Sounds to me like you are talking about the birth of a new church, a new way of doing church. Like allowing God to run God's church. Shalom.

 

[bbyrd009]

Sounds to me like you are talking about the birth of a new church, a new way of doing church. Like allowing God to run God's church. Shalom.

hmm
i know the wolves will rush in as soon as i leave, not sparing the flock so maybe new to us, yeh