What do you think qualifies one to be one of Christ's disciples?

[H. Richard]

“As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality.” (1 Timothy 5:20–21, ESV)

“This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith,” (Titus 1:13, ESV)


“When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 5:4–5, ESV)

​Your issue is with the Bible, not me.

***
It has always been a mystery to me how that Jesus said to cast the log out of your own eye in order to see how to cast one out of another. and then Paul writes those words to Timothy. How that Paul could write Romans 7 which clearly show he sinned too and then judge others for sinning.

But I understand that the perception of a man of God is holiness. But no man is sinless in this world. How can I judge another for their sins when I know I sin too? I thank God always for making a salvation based on His grace and it is a comfort to me to know that His grace is sufflcient for me and I have confidence in what He did for me on the cross.

 

[bbyrd009]

you must demonstrate this confidence in many ways, many acts, confessing your sins one to another, etc, and also recognizing that the descendants of the Wanderers in the Promised Land also had a confidence in Nehushtan, and the parallels should not be ignored, imo.

 

[bbyrd009]

“As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality.” (1 Timothy 5:20–21, ESV)

“This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith,” (Titus 1:13, ESV)


“When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 5:4–5, ESV)

​Your issue is with the Bible, not me.

Lol. Or we are assembled in the Spirit, and delivering you up to satan so that your spirit might be saved.
I'm guessing more like the latter one wadr. Gotta love the ol' "Your issue is with the Bible" defense, lol. Classic.
Wadr my issue is with you feigning authoritay when it suits you, yet failing to demonstrate any authority when questioned.

It becomes pertinent to ask your pov in all this, what your position in your congregation might be?
but it is pretty obvious, i guess, and you are welcome to take that rhetorically as well, if you prefer.

 

[bbyrd009]

The point is of course abundantly made now, regardless of any reply, but you are nonetheless welcome to give it a shot.
You even stated a personal example at one point, sans details; why not just tell that story?

Shall i answer this for you as well? Because you are not going to like my answer, ok?
Wouldn't it be better to reply/defend yourself, and correct what is quite possibly a misunderstanding right now?
Otherwise imo you may turn your wolf suit in on your way out, tyvm, and have a nice day.

I mean really, who do you think you are kidding? With this hypocrisy? Are you "church admin," and thus qualified to reply, or no?
My guess is that you are just a guy who is doing quite well by his 501c3 or whatever, and your duplicity here is not encouraging, but i am willing to keep an open mind, for now...but really, who is still being duped by this? Wouldn't it be better to ask our forgiveness now, so we could move on? Everyone understands the proclivity of people to perceive their own pov as sacrosanct. I am hardly immune. Regardless, an explanation is lacking here/now, and ignoring it will not make it go away, ok?

 

[Wormwood]

Please which one is it, it can only be one...

Says who? God can't use more than one translation? I think you have a very limited view of God if he is incapable of using anything other than one language and or one version of the Bible. My God is a God of all tribes, tongues and languages. I even believe he uses imperfect people. It's odd to me that you think God inspires your whims and gut feelings with absolute inerrancy, but he cannot use more than one Bible translation.

 

[Wormwood]

***
It has always been a mystery to me how that Jesus said to cast the log out of your own eye in order to see how to cast one out of another. and then Paul writes those words to Timothy. How that Paul could write Romans 7 which clearly show he sinned too and then judge others for sinning.

But I understand that the perception of a man of God is holiness. But no man is sinless in this world. How can I judge another for their sins when I know I sin too? I thank God always for making a salvation based on His grace and it is a comfort to me to know that His grace is sufflcient for me and I have confidence in what He did for me on the cross.

Richard,

I don't think grace is rationale to take sin lightly. I believe God deeply desires us to be transformed by grace and to hold one another accountable. Discipline in the church is a means to help people grow in faith and to keep leaven out of the holy people of God. It isn't a means of judgment or being "holier than thou." It is simply a means of trying to encourage one another to live lives worthy of the high calling of Christ.

I liken it to a sports team. Teams practice diligently and will try to demand excellence from one another as they work together. If someone is slacking off or not giving it their all, another veteran player will come along, slap them on the rear and tell them to get their head in the game. This isn't because they don't like the player or want to throw them off the team. It is because the DO like the player and want them to be their best for their sake and the sake of others on the team. Is the veteran player saying, "I never make an error" when he rebukes a teammate for being lazy? No. He simply recognizes the difference between a mistake and lazy, careless play. God calls us to discipline and hold other believers accountable who "persist" in sin and refuse to repent when confronted by others. Again, grace is not a license to sin. If anything, the cross should teach us how horrific our sins are and how badly God desires us to be free of them. The cross of Christ was not merely an accountant's trick.

I too thank God for making salvation a matter of grace alone. Yet, grace should cause us to desire to live transformed lives and embrace a humility that accepts rebuke and discipline from others. I think it is a significant error to imply that concern and passion for holy living is undermining grace. If anything, it truly appreciates grace. Perhaps another illustration will help...

Imagine a man is in debt 1 million dollars. He pleads for forgiveness and receives amazing, undeserved grace as the lender completely forgives the man of his debt. Then, once the man is forgiven of his debt, goes back to the lender and asks for a million dollar loan and begins to squander that money as well. A friend comes up to the man and says, "Friend, our master has treated you with immense kindness. You need to stop this reckless spending. You were forgiven so you could be free of debt." The man responds, "How dare you lecture me! You have a debt too! So don't pretend you are better than me! You just dont understand grace!"

So which person really understands grace? I don't believe the friend who confronts his brother is anything like the legalistic Pharisee who condemned others who they felt were not as righteous as themselves. This has nothing to do with condemnation or looking down at others.

 

[Wormwood]

Lol. Or we are assembled in the Spirit, and delivering you up to satan so that your spirit might be saved.
I'm guessing more like the latter one wadr. Gotta love the ol' "Your issue is with the Bible" defense, lol. Classic.
Wadr my issue is with you feigning authoritay when it suits you, yet failing to demonstrate any authority when questioned.

It becomes pertinent to ask your pov in all this, what your position in your congregation might be?
but it is pretty obvious, i guess, and you are welcome to take that rhetorically as well, if you prefer.

1. This is not a local Church body and you do not know me. So, no, I don't see this as anything similar to a group of believers confronting another who has taken advantage of a brother or sister because of their unrepentant sin. What sin, exactly, am I guilty of in this discussion? Even if my pov is wrong, am I blatantly sinning against you because I am trying to hold true to my biblical convictions?

2. mj rejected the clear teaching of a Bible verse I quoted. I quoted three more on the very same topic. Again, any time you or anyone else wants to show me that I am misunderstanding those Scriptures, I will be happy to listen. I would be more than happy to humble myself and admit I am wrong if you can show that the Bible does not teach something I believe it teaches. However, once again, what I will not be persuaded by is personal whims. If the Bible teaches Jesus rose from the dead and 10 people on this board say I am a fool, I will still believe the Bible.

3. I have served both as a pastor and a member of a congregation. My current job has me bounce around between those roles from time to time. I assure you, my views have nothing to do with my own glory or power. I have never taken any joy in confronting someone about destructive behaviors in the church. You can believe me or continue to imagine the worst. My conscience is clear and the Lord knows my heart. Even if I am wrong, he knows my desire is to follow him and his word, not my own desires or cultural mores.

 

[Wormwood]

Shall i answer this for you as well? Because you are not going to like my answer, ok?
Wouldn't it be better to reply/defend yourself, and correct what is quite possibly a misunderstanding right now?
Otherwise imo you may turn your wolf suit in on your way out, tyvm, and have a nice day.

I mean really, who do you think you are kidding? With this hypocrisy? Are you "church admin," and thus qualified to reply, or no?
My guess is that you are just a guy who is doing quite well by his 501c3 or whatever, and your duplicity here is not encouraging, but i am willing to keep an open mind, for now...but really, who is still being duped by this? Wouldn't it be better to ask our forgiveness now, so we could move on? Everyone understands the proclivity of people to perceive their own pov as sacrosanct. I am hardly immune. Regardless, an explanation is lacking here/now, and ignoring it will not make it go away, ok?

I can hardly make out what you are trying to say. I don't mean this in a disrespectful way, but you just seem to type whatever comes to your mind which doesn't always lend itself to coherency. Anyway, I will try to muddle through what I think you are trying to ask, but I may be mistaken in some areas. If so, I apologize, but its difficult to follow you.

1. Wouldn't it be better to reply/defend myself?
It seems you want to know my role in the local church and if I am not someone in a leadership role, then its all just a misunderstanding. However, if I am in a leadership role, and I believe the church leadership has the responsibility to confront persistent and unrepentant sin among members, then I am a "wolf." Is that what you are trying to say? Hmm, so lets forget about my role, because it really has no bearing on this discussion. Either the Bible teaches church discipline or it doesn't. That is the issue. Right? So suppose YOU are the pastor of a church. You find out that Joe, who sits in the front pew and applauds your teaching about grace, Jesus and loving others each Sunday is routinely stealing money from the offering trays each Sunday. Do you think you should confront Joe on the matter? And if you do, say he doesn't stop. Then what? Do you cast him out of the church, or do you continue to let him steal Betty Sue's $50 from her welfare check that she sacrificially gives out of her love for Jesus? After all, we are all sinners and wouldn't wanna come across as being legalistic! Or, perhaps you find out Joe beats his wife after he drinks too much, and this is something that happens on a weekly basis. He even put her in the hospital last month. Do you just smile at him at church each Sunday and pat his wife on the back who has a black eye and look the other way. After all, we all have our vices. Joe's is just drinking to much and making his wife a punching bag. Right? Are you a "hypocrite" and a no good Pharisee legalist for sitting him down with a few elders and saying, "Listen up Joe. Your behavior is unbecoming of a Christian. We implore you by the mercies of Jesus Christ to get help and we will even pay for your treatment. We will do whatever we can to help you. However, if you continue to drink and beat your wife, we will ask you to leave. This kind of behavior is unbecoming of a follower of Christ." Apparently you believe this kind of rebuke and warning is inconsistent with love and grace? I don't think so. If you really love someone, you care enough to tell them the truth and do anything in your power to turn them from destructive paths. Hatred is not the opposite of love, indifference is. You should take note of that.

2. Who am I kidding with this hypocrisy?
What are you talking about? How have I been a hypocrite? You don't even know me. I try to show you what I believe due to the clear teaching of a Biblical passage...and even show you how it clearly teaches these things from the Greek itself (to which you scarcely even respond)...and that makes me a hypocrite? A "hypocrite" is someone who pretends to love God but really is acting and only loves him or herself. I don't know how my desire to follow after the Word of God makes me a hypocrite in your eyes. I may be wrong in my interpretation, but I am not a hypocrite. Someone who claims to love God and yet refuses to do what pleases him is a hypocrite. Mistaken? Possibly, but I don't think so. Hypocrite? No.

3. Ask our forgiveness, ok?
So how have I sinned against you that you believe I need your forgiveness? You are the one accusing me of being a guy "doing quite well on his 501c3." You have called me a hypocrite, a wolf, regularly question my motives and are implying that I am likely a rich church leader who is in it only for the money. Meanwhile, you are the guy arguing that people shouldn't rebuke others for their persistent sins, yet you feel completely justified in name-calling and making accusations against a person you have never met. Unbelievable.

 

[mjrhealth]

Isnt this topic about Being a disciple of God?? What has that got to do with church and its leaders??

Says who? God can't use more than one translation? I think you have a very limited view of God if he is incapable of using anything other than one language and or one version of the Bible. My God is a God of all tribes, tongues and languages. I even believe he uses imperfect people. It's odd to me that you think God inspires your whims and gut feelings with absolute inerrancy, but he cannot use more than one Bible translation.

That was not teh question I asked, I have all these christians telling me the bible is His pure, undefiled, correct wirthout error word. seems that everyone avoids teh question. And you being so learned would know that every bible is dfffernet simply by the fact that they are copyright and therefore have to be different by Law. Of course there is teh errors , purposefull and accidental translations in teh text, even teh fact the yare based on two (that I know of ) different text. So now are ou saying that Gods word is defiled by man, for the case above surley says it is. So please again, simple question, which bible is teh pure inerrant, witoutout mistranslation perfect undefiled, word of God, There can only be one if they are all different.

Now as for God Himself. I certainly have no limited view of God, he who created teh world, teh seasons the times teh universe, us and all things therein, I have no problems with what He can do, it teh limted view that men put on Him

God cant save you if you havnt read a bible, goes against teh thousands of testimonies of muselims and others whom Christ revealed Himself to them. God doesnt need church nor bibles , just men who believe Him. Even Jesus Himslef calls all to to Himself and asks us to learn from Him, what is it that churdch has to offer or even teachers have tha tJesus or God do not have. It must be something really good, for there are lots of people in church and very few disciples.

Luk_14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Luk_14:27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Luk_14:33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.

Its a heavy price to pay. Nothing to do with church nor leadership in church.

Joh 8:15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
Joh 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.
Joh 8:17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.
Joh 8:18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

 

[tabletalk]

Isnt this topic about Being a disciple of God?? What has that got to do with church and its leaders??


That was not teh question I asked, I have all these christians telling me the bible is His pure, undefiled, correct wirthout error word. seems that everyone avoids teh question. And you being so learned would know that every bible is dfffernet simply by the fact that they are copyright and therefore have to be different by Law. Of course there is teh errors , purposefull and accidental translations in teh text, even teh fact the yare based on two (that I know of ) different text. So now are ou saying that Gods word is defiled by man, for the case above surley says it is. So please again, simple question, which bible is teh pure inerrant, witoutout mistranslation perfect undefiled, word of God, There can only be one if they are all different.

Now as for God Himself. I certainly have no limited view of God, he who created teh world, teh seasons the times teh universe, us and all things therein, I have no problems with what He can do, it teh limted view that men put on Him

God cant save you if you havnt read a bible, goes against teh thousands of testimonies of muselims and others whom Christ revealed Himself to them. God doesnt need church nor bibles , just men who believe Him. Even Jesus Himslef calls all to to Himself and asks us to learn from Him, what is it that churdch has to offer or even teachers have tha tJesus or God do not have. It must be something really good, for there are lots of people in church and very few disciples.

Luk_14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Luk_14:27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Luk_14:33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.

Its a heavy price to pay. Nothing to do with church nor leadership in church.

Joh 8:15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
Joh 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.
Joh 8:17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.
Joh 8:18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

"So please again, simple question, which bible is teh pure inerrant, witoutout mistranslation perfect undefiled, word of God, There can only be one if they are all different."

That's easy: none. There are no original manuscripts in existence.

 

[H. Richard]

Richard,

I don't think grace is rationale to take sin lightly. I believe God deeply desires us to be transformed by grace and to hold one another accountable. Discipline in the church is a means to help people grow in faith and to keep leaven out of the holy people of God. It isn't a means of judgment or being "holier than thou." It is simply a means of trying to encourage one another to live lives worthy of the high calling of Christ.

I liken it to a sports team. Teams practice diligently and will try to demand excellence from one another as they work together. If someone is slacking off or not giving it their all, another veteran player will come along, slap them on the rear and tell them to get their head in the game. This isn't because they don't like the player or want to throw them off the team. It is because the DO like the player and want them to be their best for their sake and the sake of others on the team. Is the veteran player saying, "I never make an error" when he rebukes a teammate for being lazy? No. He simply recognizes the difference between a mistake and lazy, careless play. God calls us to discipline and hold other believers accountable who "persist" in sin and refuse to repent when confronted by others. Again, grace is not a license to sin. If anything, the cross should teach us how horrific our sins are and how badly God desires us to be free of them. The cross of Christ was not merely an accountant's trick.

I too thank God for making salvation a matter of grace alone. Yet, grace should cause us to desire to live transformed lives and embrace a humility that accepts rebuke and discipline from others. I think it is a significant error to imply that concern and passion for holy living is undermining grace. If anything, it truly appreciates grace. Perhaps another illustration will help...

Imagine a man is in debt 1 million dollars. He pleads for forgiveness and receives amazing, undeserved grace as the lender completely forgives the man of his debt. Then, once the man is forgiven of his debt, goes back to the lender and asks for a million dollar loan and begins to squander that money as well. A friend comes up to the man and says, "Friend, our master has treated you with immense kindness. You need to stop this reckless spending. You were forgiven so you could be free of debt." The man responds, "How dare you lecture me! You have a debt too! So don't pretend you are better than me! You just dont understand grace!"

So which person really understands grace? I don't believe the friend who confronts his brother is anything like the legalistic Pharisee who condemned others who they felt were not as righteous as themselves. This has nothing to do with condemnation or looking down at others.

***
I think that every child of God has seen and understands what sin is. If they do not then why do they feel they need what Jesus did on the cross? That is why they do not want to sin (as others claim they do).

But every child of God lives in a body that sins and as Paul said in Romans 7, "the things I would not do those are the things I do and the things I would do those are the things I don't do."

For me to see things as others seen to do would mean I have control over my sinful flesh and that is not a truth. My control over it is limited because the sinful flesh wants the things that satisfy the flesh.. But, as I see it, people of religion think they have the power to refuse to sin even though they live in a sinful body.

To me, when I leave this sinful body, I will never have the desires of the sinful flesh and that is my hope in Christ. For me that is my faith in that Jesus has already spiritually put to death this sinful flesh of mine and imputed His righteousness to me while I still live in this body of sin.

I will not fall into the religious trap of thinking that Jesus gave us a plan but that plan needs us to complete it by what we do by our own efforts to not sin.

I do not sit on the sidelines barking out that a person must stop sinning in the flesh by their choice since I do not see that mankind has much of a choice. I thank God for His plan of salvation (grace) that was poured out on the cross.

I see that a child of God is like the tax collector Jesus spoke of --

Luke 18:10-14
10 "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself,'God, I thank You that I am not like other men — extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector.
12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.'
13 And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me a sinner!'
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."
NKJV

I have humbly admitted to God (and men) that I am sinful in this flesh and I have faith that what Jesus did on the cross He did it for me. This is my witness.

 

[bbyrd009]

What are the hardships a church can cause compared to God? A bruised ego, emotional distress, or worst they may not want to play with you anymore.

I'm not sure this is entirely fair. Especially in more rural settings, church is more central to peoples' lives, quite often, and is not just some sacrifice to be made for an hour on the first day of the week. Many lives have been destroyed by some church. Marriages wrecked, people imprisoned, families torn up, even people killed over office appointments in the church, you name it.

 

[bbyrd009]

"So please again, simple question, which bible is teh pure inerrant, witoutout mistranslation perfect undefiled, word of God, There can only be one if they are all different."

That's easy: none. There are no original manuscripts in existence.

this also seems kind of misleading, while also still being technically true. No, there are no originals, but there are faithful (enough) copies, so many that the copy errors are apparent; and this translation is provided in any Lexicon, along with the Strong's (but be suspicious now, of the new Strong's) number for every single word. And the Lex tends to read quite differently from any English translation.

fwiw, Shepherd's Chapel still has the old Strong's for sale, or did about 6 months ago, last time i checked.

 

[bbyrd009]

I can hardly make out what you are trying to say. I don't mean this in a disrespectful way, but you just seem to type whatever comes to your mind which doesn't always lend itself to coherency. Anyway, I will try to muddle through what I think you are trying to ask, but I may be mistaken in some areas. If so, I apologize, but its difficult to follow you.

1. Wouldn't it be better to reply/defend myself?
It seems you want to know my role in the local church and if I am not someone in a leadership role, then its all just a misunderstanding. However, if I am in a leadership role, and I believe the church leadership has the responsibility to confront persistent and unrepentant sin among members, then I am a "wolf." Is that what you are trying to say? Hmm, so lets forget about my role, because it really has no bearing on this discussion. Either the Bible teaches church discipline or it doesn't. That is the issue. Right? So suppose YOU are the pastor of a church. You find out that Joe, who sits in the front pew and applauds your teaching about grace, Jesus and loving others each Sunday is routinely stealing money from the offering trays each Sunday. Do you think you should confront Joe on the matter? And if you do, say he doesn't stop. Then what? Do you cast him out of the church, or do you continue to let him steal Betty Sue's $50 from her welfare check that she sacrificially gives out of her love for Jesus? After all, we are all sinners and wouldn't wanna come across as being legalistic! Or, perhaps you find out Joe beats his wife after he drinks too much, and this is something that happens on a weekly basis. He even put her in the hospital last month. Do you just smile at him at church each Sunday and pat his wife on the back who has a black eye and look the other way. After all, we all have our vices. Joe's is just drinking to much and making his wife a punching bag. Right? Are you a "hypocrite" and a no good Pharisee legalist for sitting him down with a few elders and saying, "Listen up Joe. Your behavior is unbecoming of a Christian. We implore you by the mercies of Jesus Christ to get help and we will even pay for your treatment. We will do whatever we can to help you. However, if you continue to drink and beat your wife, we will ask you to leave. This kind of behavior is unbecoming of a follower of Christ." Apparently you believe this kind of rebuke and warning is inconsistent with love and grace? I don't think so. If you really love someone, you care enough to tell them the truth and do anything in your power to turn them from destructive paths. Hatred is not the opposite of love, indifference is. You should take note of that.

2. Who am I kidding with this hypocrisy?
What are you talking about? How have I been a hypocrite? You don't even know me. I try to show you what I believe due to the clear teaching of a Biblical passage...and even show you how it clearly teaches these things from the Greek itself (to which you scarcely even respond)...and that makes me a hypocrite? A "hypocrite" is someone who pretends to love God but really is acting and only loves him or herself. I don't know how my desire to follow after the Word of God makes me a hypocrite in your eyes. I may be wrong in my interpretation, but I am not a hypocrite. Someone who claims to love God and yet refuses to do what pleases him is a hypocrite. Mistaken? Possibly, but I don't think so. Hypocrite? No.

3. Ask our forgiveness, ok?
So how have I sinned against you that you believe I need your forgiveness? You are the one accusing me of being a guy "doing quite well on his 501c3." You have called me a hypocrite, a wolf, regularly question my motives and are implying that I am likely a rich church leader who is in it only for the money. Meanwhile, you are the guy arguing that people shouldn't rebuke others for their persistent sins, yet you feel completely justified in name-calling and making accusations against a person you have never met. Unbelievable.

yes, unbelievable enough, apparently. I plainly stated "i guess," and this was only after repeated requests for a simple answer, to a simple question, that would bolster your argument for "church admin." We are typing, and so we do not get the inflection etc inherent in face to face conversation, and as no witness has come forward to reiterate my desire for a simple answer either, i'm not sure if the question is just overlooked or deliberately ignored. But then, i am a hypocrite, of that you can be sure.

As to your reply, i appreciate it, ty, and my answers to "Joe?" etc would not suit you, and would run along a vein like "what are you doing sitting in a mortgaged building on the first day of the week paying some guy who has signed a Contract for Jesus to indoctrinate you into the exact wrong way to understand Scripture, anyway? Stuff like that. If you want to resort to the Law again, have the guy arrested already.

And i would like to reiterate here that you seem more graceful than me, possibly by a long shot. I might ask you to reflect upon how you have been led into dealing with sin and death on a legal level, rather than creation and life on a spiritual level, which is also prolly reflected in your current model, your current belief, that the kingdom will manifest for you after you die, when you are in heaven, and the unaccepted are burning in never-ending torment in hell, the standard either/or logical proposition.

I would prolly put a camera on Joe as the plate is being passed, and throw him up on the video screen in close up, lol.
before i ran, as fast as i could, that is.

 

[bbyrd009]

***
I think that every child of God has seen and understands what sin is. If they do not then why do they feel they need what Jesus did on the cross? That is why they do not want to sin (as others claim they do).

But every child of God lives in a body that sins and as Paul said in Romans 7, "the things I would not do those are the things I do and the things I would do those are the things I don't do."

For me to see things as others seen to do would mean I have control over my sinful flesh and that is not a truth. My control over it is limited because the sinful flesh wants the things that satisfy the flesh.. But, as I see it, people of religion think they have the power to refuse to sin even though they live in a sinful body.

To me, when I leave this sinful body, I will never have the desires of the sinful flesh and that is my hope in Christ. For me that is my faith in that Jesus has already spiritually put to death this sinful flesh of mine and imputed His righteousness to me while I still live in this body of sin.

I will not fall into the religious trap of thinking that Jesus gave us a plan but that plan needs us to complete it by what we do by our own efforts to not sin.

I do not sit on the sidelines barking out that a person must stop sinning in the flesh by their choice since I do not see that mankind has much of a choice. I thank God for His plan of salvation (grace) that was poured out on the cross.

I see that a child of God is like the tax collector Jesus spoke of --

Luke 18:10-14
10 "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself,'God, I thank You that I am not like other men — extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector.
12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.'
13 And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me a sinner!'
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."
NKJV

I have humbly admitted to God (and men) that I am sinful in this flesh and I have faith that what Jesus did on the cross He did it for me. This is my witness.

you might note that Paul got over that approbation, and went on to find his crown, brother. Your free will is never, ever going to be dismissed or annulled by God, and satan might always be released for a brief season, wadr, at least until you cast him into the pit. I'm def still working on that myself, and i just got another lesson on this. Do you envision a heaven filled with "believers" who can no longer choose, even though the angels obviously can? I'm not interested in getting into another pointless faith v works discussion, as the Book is full of the requirements, but i suggest that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord, and also the dead know nothing, and these are two completely different states, ok?

If you have no control, then change your mind, meet Him in the air, and relinquish this control, that you do not have anyway. This focus on sin and death is not God's will for you. It is a trap, pointed at by "Who told you that you were naked?" ok? Wadr you would be better served to go sit in a cave than continue giving your hard earned money to people considered "successful" by the world's standards in exchange for a false hope that they certainly cannot come here and demonstrate to me from Scripture. Best of luck.

 

[bbyrd009]

Growing season is starting up north, and looks like i might get called out to the country for a bit, may not be around much for a while. It was good interacting with you guys. You might consider approaching Scripture dialectically, the way It was written. Wormwood, would love to read your first reflections after you turn heretic!

...rejected the clear teaching of a Bible verse I quoted

not to weigh in on that disagreement, as i have not been following it, but i would like to offer that anything "clear" extracted from Scripture is done so by logical reasoning, the result of the conclusion of "either/or" thinking, and relying on one's own pov as sacrosanct, when this may not be the best way to understand the Book. peace.

 

[bbyrd009]

I can hardly make out what you are trying to say. I don't mean this in a disrespectful way, but you just seem to type whatever comes to your mind which doesn't always lend itself to coherency. Anyway, I will try to muddle through what I think you are trying to ask, but I may be mistaken in some areas. If so, I apologize, but its difficult to follow you.

1. Wouldn't it be better to reply/defend myself?
It seems you want to know my role in the local church and if I am not someone in a leadership role, then its all just a misunderstanding. However, if I am in a leadership role, and I believe the church leadership has the responsibility to confront persistent and unrepentant sin among members, then I am a "wolf." Is that what you are trying to say? Hmm, so lets forget about my role, because it really has no bearing on this discussion. Either the Bible teaches church discipline or it doesn't. That is the issue. Right? So suppose YOU are the pastor of a church. You find out that Joe, who sits in the front pew and applauds your teaching about grace, Jesus and loving others each Sunday is routinely stealing money from the offering trays each Sunday. Do you think you should confront Joe on the matter? And if you do, say he doesn't stop. Then what? Do you cast him out of the church, or do you continue to let him steal Betty Sue's $50 from her welfare check that she sacrificially gives out of her love for Jesus? After all, we are all sinners and wouldn't wanna come across as being legalistic! Or, perhaps you find out Joe beats his wife after he drinks too much, and this is something that happens on a weekly basis. He even put her in the hospital last month. Do you just smile at him at church each Sunday and pat his wife on the back who has a black eye and look the other way. After all, we all have our vices. Joe's is just drinking to much and making his wife a punching bag. Right? Are you a "hypocrite" and a no good Pharisee legalist for sitting him down with a few elders and saying, "Listen up Joe. Your behavior is unbecoming of a Christian. We implore you by the mercies of Jesus Christ to get help and we will even pay for your treatment. We will do whatever we can to help you. However, if you continue to drink and beat your wife, we will ask you to leave. This kind of behavior is unbecoming of a follower of Christ." Apparently you believe this kind of rebuke and warning is inconsistent with love and grace? I don't think so. If you really love someone, you care enough to tell them the truth and do anything in your power to turn them from destructive paths. Hatred is not the opposite of love, indifference is. You should take note of that.

so, to rephrase my answer here, Joe could only ever be a member of "a" church, but is demonstrably not a member of "the" Church, that Christ and Paul are referencing almost surely. "We all have our vices?" i'll have to think about that one, it's a stretch for me to envision anyone calling any of my habits "vices" now, but that is debatable, whereas whether or not any of them are causing anyone else obvious distress is certainly not.

Personally i would take ol' Joe out back, with another member if i had to, and trust me he would not be beating his wife any more after he healed up; or i would explain "beautiful are the feet" to his wife, maybe, but county rehab is free, and i sure wouldn't be enabling him or offering to pay for jack where he is concerned, until he took it upon himself to straighten up and then come openly apologize on his own, and i wouldn't be sidling up to him all gentle and touching his butt and telling him that i hoped he came back and did that or anything, either. Or about 20 other things i might do, depending, but regardless Joe is not any fit member of any church in my book, except a mortgaged one i guess.

Funny, the only time i talk about or deal with sin and death anymore is when i come to "Christian" forums, ha. At least it seems like; guess i'll hafta set up an experiment to verify that now, but i'm racking my brain to come up with another personal example, and my post to you the other day is the closest thing comes to mind.

And fwiw i already knew you were a pastor, that was pretty obvious. I bet you are even a pretty good one. But i ask you to reflect upon why "Because..." has to be about church admin from your perspective, and how this might close you off to other interpretations, wadr.

 

[Wormwood]

Isnt this topic about Being a disciple of God?? What has that got to do with church and its leaders??


That was not teh question I asked, I have all these christians telling me the bible is His pure, undefiled, correct wirthout error word. seems that everyone avoids teh question. And you being so learned would know that every bible is dfffernet simply by the fact that they are copyright and therefore have to be different by Law. Of course there is teh errors , purposefull and accidental translations in teh text, even teh fact the yare based on two (that I know of ) different text. So now are ou saying that Gods word is defiled by man, for the case above surley says it is. So please again, simple question, which bible is teh pure inerrant, witoutout mistranslation perfect undefiled, word of God, There can only be one if they are all different.

Now as for God Himself. I certainly have no limited view of God, he who created teh world, teh seasons the times teh universe, us and all things therein, I have no problems with what He can do, it teh limted view that men put on Him

God cant save you if you havnt read a bible, goes against teh thousands of testimonies of muselims and others whom Christ revealed Himself to them. God doesnt need church nor bibles , just men who believe Him. Even Jesus Himslef calls all to to Himself and asks us to learn from Him, what is it that churdch has to offer or even teachers have tha tJesus or God do not have. It must be something really good, for there are lots of people in church and very few disciples.

Luk_14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Luk_14:27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Luk_14:33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.

Its a heavy price to pay. Nothing to do with church nor leadership in church.

Joh 8:15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
Joh 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.
Joh 8:17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.
Joh 8:18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

Discipleship implies following another, namely Christ. This discussion began because some have questioned how we determine the voice of Christ and have claimed that the Scriptures are to vague to be interpreted definitively or that the local church is not a valid voice of authority either. I have been trying to respond to certain test cases to show that neither is the case. Especially for the Scriptures, but often for the local church, there is an authority there that comes from Christ, himself that those who claim to be disciples should be willing to hear.

As for the reliability of the Bible and our translations, I encourage you to find some introduction to Christianity and the Bible books on Amazon that can provide some basic education in this area.

 

[Wormwood]

***
I think that every child of God has seen and understands what sin is. If they do not then why do they feel they need what Jesus did on the cross? That is why they do not want to sin (as others claim they do).

But every child of God lives in a body that sins and as Paul said in Romans 7, "the things I would not do those are the things I do and the things I would do those are the things I don't do."

For me to see things as others seen to do would mean I have control over my sinful flesh and that is not a truth. My control over it is limited because the sinful flesh wants the things that satisfy the flesh.. But, as I see it, people of religion think they have the power to refuse to sin even though they live in a sinful body.

To me, when I leave this sinful body, I will never have the desires of the sinful flesh and that is my hope in Christ. For me that is my faith in that Jesus has already spiritually put to death this sinful flesh of mine and imputed His righteousness to me while I still live in this body of sin.

I will not fall into the religious trap of thinking that Jesus gave us a plan but that plan needs us to complete it by what we do by our own efforts to not sin.

I do not sit on the sidelines barking out that a person must stop sinning in the flesh by their choice since I do not see that mankind has much of a choice. I thank God for His plan of salvation (grace) that was poured out on the cross.

I see that a child of God is like the tax collector Jesus spoke of --

Luke 18:10-14
10 "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself,'God, I thank You that I am not like other men — extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector.
12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.'
13 And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me a sinner!'
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."
NKJV

I have humbly admitted to God (and men) that I am sinful in this flesh and I have faith that what Jesus did on the cross He did it for me. This is my witness.

I am sinful too and in need of grace. Yet that is not an excuse to indifference or not humbly challenging others and being challenged by others to live a holy life. There is no inconsistency here. In fact, I believe that if we take grace seriously, we will be serious about encouraging others to walk in it and be changed by it. This has nothing to do with hypocrisy, legalism or looking down on others. Paul rebuked Peter for hypocrisy. It wasn't because Paul believed he was perfect (he clearly states he considered himself chief of all sinners), but because he cared about Peter as well as the witness of the church.

 

[Wormwood]

As to your reply, i appreciate it, ty, and my answers to "Joe?" etc would not suit you, and would run along a vein like "what are you doing sitting in a mortgaged building on the first day of the week paying some guy who has signed a Contract for Jesus to indoctrinate you into the exact wrong way to understand Scripture, anyway? Stuff like that. If you want to resort to the Law again, have the guy arrested already.

Again, it seems you are always looking for a way to convolute the discussion to avoid the plain, straight-forward answer. Who said they were in a mortgaged building? Maybe they are meeting in a gym that is donated or maybe it is a house church and they take collections to feed the poor. You keep looking for reasons to not come to simple conclusions on straight-forward Bible passages. To me, this is a simple case of allowing exceptions to define the rule on your part. If you can find any bad apple or odd case study, you use that as rationale to throw the whole baby out with the bath water. I just don't think discipleship or self-surrender is compatible with that kind of mindset that is always on the look out for a loophole in order to avoid a Scriptural mandate.

And i would like to reiterate here that you seem more graceful than me, possibly by a long shot. I might ask you to reflect upon how you have been led into dealing with sin and death on a legal level, rather than creation and life on a spiritual level, which is also prolly reflected in your current model, your current belief, that the kingdom will manifest for you after you die, when you are in heaven, and the unaccepted are burning in never-ending torment in hell, the standard either/or logical proposition.

I am sorry. I do not understand what you are asking.

not to weigh in on that disagreement, as i have not been following it, but i would like to offer that anything "clear" extracted from Scripture is done so by logical reasoning, the result of the conclusion of "either/or" thinking, and relying on one's own pov as sacrosanct, when this may not be the best way to understand the Book. peace.

Yes, I believe the Bible is logical and it was inspired to be understood. I don't think that is an unreasonable assumption. Otherwise, we have to assume that God is incapable of clear communication. Jesus sure seemed to think the people in his day were capable of understanding the OT Scriptures and would be accountable for their acceptance or rejection of them. I don't know why the NT would be any different. Seems the NT self-proclamation is that they are the handiwork of God and readers will be held to account for adhering to them. This just seems like a very basis Christian premise at this point. I am surprised we are still stuck here.

so, to rephrase my answer here, Joe could only ever be a member of "a" church, but is demonstrably not a member of "the" Church, that Christ and Paul are referencing almost surely. "We all have our vices?" i'll have to think about that one, it's a stretch for me to envision anyone calling any of my habits "vices" now, but that is debatable, whereas whether or not any of them are causing anyone else obvious distress is certainly not.

Well I was using a bit of sarcasm to make a point. Clearly it is an evil thing to ignore the abuse of another human being because of our own faults. That is just ridiculous. And I find it pretty silly to try to explain such a point away by differentiating between levels of "vices/habits" based on the level of distress they cause others. Come on...really? Again, this just looks like more looking for loopholes so as not to concede a very basic point.

Personally i would take ol' Joe out back, with another member if i had to, and trust me he would not be beating his wife any more after he healed up;

LOL, so you are going to give me grief about my stance that church leaders should confront persistent sin in their midst...whereas your answer to such an issue is to take the sinner out back and horse whip him. bbyrd, I must say, your opinion changes more than a woman in a shoe store.

And fwiw i already knew you were a pastor, that was pretty obvious. I bet you are even a pretty good one. But i ask you to reflect upon why "Because..." has to be about church admin from your perspective, and how this might close you off to other interpretations, wadr.

1. I was a "pastor" but am not currently. I am a US Navy Chaplain. Sometimes that includes pastoral work, but mostly it involves counseling and encouraging Marines, Sailors and Coastguardsmen and women in the midst of their stresses and challenges in life.

2. Thanks for the kind words.

3. Nothing like a compliment to prepare the way for a backhanded remark. Lol. I find it a tad offensive that you would assume that my role either as a pastor or chaplain would "close" me off to other interpretations. Again, I think that is a great deal of assumption by your part. FYI, I studied the Bible intensively for many years before I ever became a pastor in any capacity and my intention during that time of study was not to become a pastor. Moreover, I have studied at a host of different schools from all sorts of theological perspectives. So no, I have not approached the Bible or any theological study or course with merely wanting to confirm what I already believed. If you ever attend a Bible college or Seminary, you will discover this for yourself. It is most often the case that every seminary classroom will have students from a host of theological backgrounds. One class I took had a Methodist, a Nazarene, a Baptist and a non-denominational Christian and we spent a week worshipping and studying at a Benedictine monastery. So, I assure you, it was hardly an attempt at indoctrination in narrow thinking.

4. Finally, I have taken more Biblical courses than I care to admit I have yet to have a professor try to spoon feed his or her students into accepting their particular doctrinal stance. Rather, they encourage students to do their own research and the grades are based on how various tools and resources were utilized in the research....not based on the conclusion the student makes. I can assure you Ive had numerous debates with both students and professors on issues where I disagreed with them. These types of discussions are encouraged in theological studies. Yet one basic principles underrides pretty much all theological discussion...and that is the Scriptures can be understood and there are right and wrong approaches interpreting and applying the message of the Bible.