“It Is Finished”: Authority Addressed by Fob James

“Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.”-Albert Einstein

wikicommons

Wartburg Castle-Wikicommons

ROLL TIDE

The email was addressed to "The Ladies of the Castle." Now that caught my eye! Into our lives bounded a delightful gentleman, Fob James who, much to our surprise, had been a lurker, along with his wife, around our "castle" for the past year. Lo and behold, Fob has followed the stories of SGM, along with others, with great interest. You see, he, along with his wife, are concerned about  authoritarianism and the church and have spent much time researching the issue. He also has a fondness for EChurch.

Fob graduated from Duke with his law degree (he was there when Deb was an undergraduate) and is the son of a two-term Alabama Governor, also named Fob James) and has written various "pro bono" briefs for his father in the seventies and then again in the nineties, concentrating on church-state cases.

Fob recently contacted Wade Burleson who posted Fob's analysis of what he succinctly terms "the Galatian error." Both Fob and Wade gave us permission to reprint their post. At Fob's suggestion, we have titled this "It Is Finished" for a reason.

We both agree with Wade. We have met so many wonderful people because of this blog. Everyday we thank God for our friends as we see the fellowship of the believers lived out in our little castle. Know this, we pray for each of you, even (or should we say especially?) the ones who give us a hard time!


One of the delights of Internet writing is making new friends who have so much to contribute to the people of Christ. One such new friend is Fob James. Fob is a semi-retired lawyer from Alabama. He wrote to me after my last post on the problem of authoritarianism in the church and told how he had become interested some years ago in how theologians routinely change the vernacular of scripture, creating theologies based on personal inferences. The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:13 writes, "These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual." Fob pointed out to me that attorneys change legal vernacular all the time to promote personal agendas and he believes theologians are no more prone to be honest with scriptural language than lawyers are with legal language.

Fob is the son of a two-term Alabama Governor and has written various "pro bono" briefs for his father in the seventies and then again in the nineties, concentrating on church-state cases. You may reach Fob at fob@email12.info if you have questions about the following guest article. Fob has written for my readers a few of the things Fob and his wife have discovered about so called Christian "authority" over the last few years. For those of you who emailed me and said that you are facing difficult struggles in churches where men are alleging to have "authority" over you, I urge you to read the following article by Fob James and if you have further questions, drop him an email. He has done some excellent work on the subject of authority, showing how real authority flows from the gospel, and how the unbliblical and worldly concept of authority as "power and control" has come to dominate Christian leadership. Read on…


"In the New Covenant scriptures, only the apostle Paul speaks of "authority" (exousia) in the context of leadership in the churches. The most descriptive words he uses to describe that "authority," which he (and others) exercise with tenderness and tears and sometimes toughness, are "authority in the gospel" (1 Cor. 9:18) and "authority given… [by the Lord]…for edification and not destruction." (2 Cor. 10:8, 13:10) The words "authority in the church" or their equivalent cannot be found in scripture.

In fact, "church" (ekklesia) and "authority" (exousia) never even appear in juxtaposition in the scriptures. The word "authority" (exousia) is never mentioned in regard to elders, pastors, deacons, prophets, local churches, or even any apostles, except for Paul himself and those who labored with him in the gospel. Not even Peter is said to have had "authority," even though Peter clearly had authority in the gospel in fact. "Keys" and "Open Doors" for instance signify authority.

The word "authority" (exousia) is mentioned in the Revelation of John, when "overcomers" in the church of Thyatira will be given "authority over the nations," at the judgment of the world, to rule them with a "rod of iron." (Rev. 2:26) Evidently a lot of people for a long time have wanted to get a head start on their potential reward at the end of days, and rule not the world, but the church, with a" rod of iron" until the end comes.

The common lingo of today (and almost the last 2000 years) such as "church authority" or "church government" would sound weird to the writers of the New Testament. I think this lingo also grieves the Holy Spirit, because it isn't His words. It is clear that the Holy Spirit backs up those who have authority "in the gospel." No church membership covenant or the like can substitute for the real authority that comes from the Holy Spirit. Many who actually do the work of the Lord today do not have titles. But they do have authority in the gospel. And by the way, we all have been given a gospel commission – it can be found it in Matthew 28. Another one, especially meaningful, is found in 1 Cor. 15:58, which reads, "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord."

The biggest eye-opener to me on "authority" came when I was noticing Paul's constant language about things "in the Lord." "In the Lord?" I went to a bible website called "Blue Letter Bible" and read every occurrence of the words "In the Lord" (or equivalents such as In Him, In Christ, In Whom, In God, In Jesus, etc.) in scripture. There are over 250 instances of these terms. In contrast, there are about a dozen instances of "in the church." I do not detract from the importance of "in the church," but point out that "in the church" has been extensively used by American "theologians" (of almost every evangelical stripe) to the exclusion of the words actually chosen by the Holy Spirit for a lot of things believers should do.  For instance, the scriptures talk about receiving other believers "in the Lord" and receiving "one another just as Christ Jesus has received us."
But you hardly ever hear these scriptures preached. Look them up. They are just as important as the scripture that notes the church at Jerusalem "received" Paul and his companions.Go further and read all 250+ occurrences of "in the Lord" and its equivalents (In Him, In Christ, In Whom, In God, In Jesus), and see what it does in your heart. See what it does to your fear of man. See what it does for your understanding of "authority" and every group out there that requires you to promise to submit to their "authority" in order to be allowed into the "group."

The scriptures teach mutual submission among believers, and a proper respect, indeed an esteem, for true leadership/eldership as exemplified by Paul and the other writers of the scriptures. The scriptures do not teach a "covenant of submission" to anyone. You submit as warranted by scripture, you do not make a vow or covenant to submit to man.

There is a lot more to say on this. Suffice it for now: the Galatian error remains with us. Supplemental covenants to recognize "church authority" or "make a radical commitment to the local church," etc., are everywhere in America, among just about every group. These supplemental covenants are the true "foundations" of many turf-driven works of the flesh. The end result is that they substitute a work of the flesh for that of the Spirit. The ecclesiological "commitment" (paratithemi) that scripture actually teaches is a commitment to the scriptures themselves, which is a commitment to the gospel. The gospel is essentially that Jesus died for our sins according to the scriptures, that He was buried, and that He rose from the dead on the third day according to the scriptures. It is the New Covenant in His body and blood alone that the Holy Spirit honors. This is the Covenant the Lord told us to remember and proclaim until He comes again. So, next time someone says that you need an extra authority-covenant, or extra unity-commitment, or the like, to be fully admitted to "their" fellowship, don't fall for it. If they press you, you might also consider telling them this. "IT IS FINISHED."

Lydia's Corner: Jeremiah 19:1-21:14 1 Thessalonians 5:4-28 Psalm 82:1-8 Proverbs 25:9-10

Comments

“It Is Finished”: Authority Addressed by Fob James — 106 Comments


  1. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Thanks for sharing this article. I am heartened by it and will study it carefully.


  2. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    I intially thought that this post involved Fob James, the Governor, and that you were going to say he had gone crazy and was comparing his administration to Christ’s work on the Cross – It (my administration) is finished! Or something like that.

    With the passing of George Wallace (RIP) hopefully Alabama will not have another Governor with so much hubris.

    Glad to hear it is his son, and that it involved normal Christian analysis and discussion of the truth.


  3. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Fob, I’m afraid your use of the words of Christ from the cross is kind of a non-sequitur, and not quite what I think they really mean. Christ did not mean all things are finished for all time. Obviously, there is still some “working out of our salvation” that happens after the cross. He was not referring to organized religion or organizational structures either. What was finished was Christ’s perfect life of obedience and full atonement for our sins. Just because our sins are atoned for and Christ has purchased for us a perfect righteousness doesn’t necessarily mean all church membership covenants are manipulative schemes to build ecclesial empires (though we can all agree that MANY obviously are).

    I’ve got to insist, thought, there is a good, healthy, non-abusive way to practice covenant membership, and right use of it can be an edifying tool in the contemporary pastoral toolbox. Here’s a list of point about formalized membership that I stole of the blog of a Presbyterian minister:

    The meaning of membership:
    1. It means that you realize that you’re not only called to Jesus but called into a community.
    2. It means that you’re recognizing you’re weak, and therefore need the deepest amount of commitment and accountability to support your weakness.
    3. It means that you’re choosing not to treat the church like a consumer product.
    4. It means that you help lead and guide the church.
    5. It means that you’re taking your discipleship under Christ seriously.
    6. It means that you want to be a fully committed part of the vehicle God has created to change the world.
    7. It means that you’re willing and committing to give sacrificially of yourself for the sake of others.
    8. It means that you’re willing to make and keep promises. (as in, as a member, I agree to….)

    I’m not denying that membership covenants can be wielded as weapons of spiritual abuse. However, spiritual abuse can occur with or without them; just look at the Calvary Chapels.

    Problems start when legalism comes into the covenant, and “Christian behavior” begins to accumulate a strenuously long and increasingly unbiblical behavior. As in, all covenant members are required to: tithe 10%, belong to a small group, abstain from alcohol, give FULL disclosure/submission to their pastors, etc…

    More problems come in when those in office begin to see themselves as having too much authority. In a good organization, all members contribute in some manner to decisions, and every grievance has a voice. But if the church copies the corporate model and lets the power flow top down only, then the leaders have free reign to trample on dissenters. It doesn’t have to be this way in order to make helpful use of a covenant.

    Bottom line is, followers of Jesus aren’t’ a massive conglomerate of self disciplers. We grow and serve through community, as Christ modeled well for us. You can’t have discipleship without discipline, and occasionally some tough decisions need to be made in that process (read; tough love). I think that proven and trustworthy persons (elders or deacons) should be given the authority to make those decisions. This should not include shunning under any circumstances.

    Are your church leaders using such authority for harm? Leave! There actually are pastors out there who love and care for their congregations. It may take a while to find, but it is totally worth it.


  4. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    We have been discovering this very thing: “So, next time someone says that you need an extra authority-covenant, or extra unity-commitment, or the like, to be fully admitted to ‘their’ fellowship, don’t fall for it. If they press you, you might also consider telling them this. ‘IT IS FINISHED.'” We have even seen this in home fellowships (outside the brick and mortar buildings or celebrity pastors) to be “united” by stating a group will “submit” to another group. I don’t believe it needs to be spoken outloud “I will agree to submit”. Because I feel as we are proven in our trustworthiness to the Gospel (to Christ), then we mutually submit to Jesus and through HIM (and HIS love) we ARE UNITED. It can’t be reached in the flesh or by making others recgonize it, but only by recgonizing Jesus. If all eyes are on HIM then we don’t become entangled with others on the issue nor will we force mutual “submission”. It will be a natural fruit of the Spirit among the brethren (and sisters in Christ) because we are all plugged into the Vine.


  5. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel–

    You are right, there are healthy, non-abusive ways to practice covenant membership. But not everyone interprets the Bible as demanding that such covenant formal membership is required of any believer. I dont care about a church practicing healthy, non-abusive covenant membership, because the fact that there is a formal membership process is superfluous to me.

    You say, “Are your church leaders using such authority for harm?”

    I say, “What authority?”


  6. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Trina, as far as I know, these sort of church membership covenants didn’t really exist prior to the Protestant reformation, so I would agree they are not Biblically mandated, but just one option as to discipleship methodology. My major concern is that churches do SOMETHING to instruct their congregation in pursuing greater Christ-likeness where the members actually help each other through intentional cooperation and mutual submission. But it seems I’ve yet to find a method without drawbacks. The “authority” that abusive church leaders use for harm is most certainly self-proclaimed, proof texting be damned! IF you sign a covenant, read it carefully, and see how much power it invests in specific individuals. It’s all about balance, imo. When one person/group assumes too much influence, they can often become above the influence of others. But those who are trustworthy and have proven it should be trusted with responsibility. Oh, if only we would learn to be more careful about who we place into positions of leadership! And always be ware of men who place themselves into such positions. Red flag number 1 imo.


  7. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Great to hear from a fellow citizen of Alabama. You stated my concerns about authority better than I ever could.


  8. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    I agree. As an Alabamian, I am glad to hear Mr. James’response!


  9. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    I agree. But I also say this, why sign anything at all. Just let your yes be yes and your no be no, and that should suffice. You can’t force intentionality and commitment. That is between the person and God. And the working of the Holy Spirit. Because here is no better way, doesn’t mean that this really is the only best way for the moment. The “leaders” will have to learn to trust in God’s providence in the same way those who warm the pews. Contracts and written covenants seek to ensure commitment because they MAKE people do so. A man’s commitment’s and intentionality is a matter of his own heart. You can preach to that heart and care for that heart, but never require it to sign anything making a commitment to be anything other than what it is. Let God do the changing…the molding…the shaping…


  10. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Trina,

    I agree with this:

    “Just let your yes be yes and your no be no, and that should suffice.”

    Oh, and the colon looked fine in your previous comment. 😛


  11. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    To Allen and Robin. Thanks guys. And Roll Tide and War Eagle.


  12. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    To Miguel:

    Miguel, you are right that a church, any church, can agree with everything I wrote in principle, and still be abusive. It is what’s in the heart that comes out eventually. However, on the basis of scripture, I think that supplemental church covenants that involve a vow to submit or recognize so-called church authorities, always lead to frustration and dryness, or worse still abuse, because they are idolatrous. These covenants put “church leaders” in the place of the scriptures, and of the Lord Himself.

    You used several significant words in what you wrote, words that the Holy Spirit also used in inspiring scripture:

    — covenant, community (fellowship), commitment, accountability

    Covenant — Look up covenant (diatheke G1242- Strong’s) at Blue Letter Bible or similar site. It occurs 33 times in the New Covenant Scriptures. Read them all. They’re so much about the Lord’s offering of His body and blood, as foreshadowed in the Old Covenant and fulfilled at the cross. This is exactly what the Lord Jesus meant when He said, “It is finished.” There is not a single verse with diatheke that can honestly be used to support the notion of a local church covenant.

    Community (Fellowship) — Look up fellowship (koinonia G2842 – Strong’s). It appears 20 times. There’s the “apostles’ fellowship,” the “fellowship of His Son,” the “fellowship of the blood of Christ,” the “fellowship of the body of Christ,” the “fellowship of the Holy Spirit,” the “right hand of fellowship,” the “fellowship of the mystery hidden in God,” the “fellowship in the gospel,” the “fellowship of His sufferings,'” the “fellowship with the Father and with His son Jesus Christ,” and finally this verse, “But if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship (community) with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His son cleanses us from all sin.” When someone says explicitly or implicitly that “committing yourself to Christ…brings salvation”, and “committing yourself to a specific group of believers….brings fellowship,” as many have done (see http://www.christianpost.com/news/following-jesus-means-belonging-to-a-local-congregation-43735/), they effectively separate what God has never separated. Our fellowship is “in Him.” Our fellowship is not “in the church.” Only to the extent that a local church is, in reality, in the Father and the Son, will there be fellowship in that church.

    Commitment — Look up the occurrence in scripture of the related words paratithemi (G3908 Strong’s), paratheke (G3866 Strong’s), and parakatatheke (G3872 Strong’s), about 20 altogether. When Jesus said on the cross, “Father, in to Your hands I commit my spirit, ” it was paratithemi. When Peter said for those “suffering according to the will of God, to commit their souls to Him in well doing, as to a faithful Creator,” it was also paratithemi. When Paul said He knew Whom he believed, and that “He is able to keep that which I have committed to Him against that day,” it was paratheka. When Paul said to Timothy to “keep that which was committed to your trust,” and “that good thing which was committed to you, keep by the Holy Spirit Who dwells in us,” it was parakatatheke. And finally, again paratithemi to Timothy, “And the things you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” There is not one instance in scripture where believers “commit” to other believers, to a local church, etc.. Believers commit themselves to god and commit others to God, and to the grace of God. But they don’t commit to someone’s authority structure in the name of committing to each other. Believers love other believers and do all the “one another’s” in scripture. However, “commitment” does have its place in the church. The Lord has “committed” the gospel to us, as Paul committed it to Timothy. We do have a great commitment enjoined to us in a great commission. This is our work, our joyful work. We will be better committed to this work of the gospel if we remove the false commitments and false covenants devised by man.

    Accountability (to give account) — look up “didomi logos” ( G1325, G3056 – Strong’s) and “apodidomi logos” (G591, G3056 – Strong’s). These words literally mean “to give word,” which is often translated “give account.” So do we as believers “give account,” that is, make ourselves “accountable” to each other? Or is this another word that has been taken by man for his own purposes “in the church?” I will answer this with something similar to what I wrote in an email to the ladies of the castle here at Wartburg earlier this week:

    Take the words “give account” (“didomi/apodidomi logos”- literally, “to give word”).  I used this term a few times, I think, in the past in regard to church but was never for some reason comfortable using it, and now I know why.  The Holy Spirit does not use it, not once in scripture, in regard to relationships among believers, including apostles, leaders, and all the flock.  It is always about worldly relationships, or at times an accountability of leaders to God (for teaching, leading).   There is just something sick about using it all the time in regard to brothers and sisters, and moms and dads.  No good early father I know wants an “accountable” son.  The prodigal, understandably, tried the accountable-I-am no-longer-worthy appeal with his dad, who cut off his speech and would have none of it. A cognate of lego/logos is the often used verb logizomai, which is what Abraham did when he believed God and it was “accounted” (logizomai) to him for righteousness.  The only “son” who could ever give “account” for my sins did so on a tree 2000 years ago, with his own blood. I wish all the folks calling for new church polities with true “accountability,” would consider that ‘accountability” is the wrong word, the wrong gospel.

    Miguel, the Holy Spirit with His words 2000 years ago anticipated all of these things that are happening. Many for so long have required a vow of submission to themselves as a pre-condition for acceptance “in the church.” They have utterly merged what they call “covenant’ (or call or commitment, etc.) with their authority/submission structures. In so doing they have turned their backs on the real covenant in the body and blood of the Lord Jesus. But the Lord gave us an answer to them when He said, “It is finished.” Fob


  13. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Deb–

    Thanks! I was hoping it could be used that way.

    Why do you believe letting our yes be yes and no be no is insufficient in these types of leaders?


  14. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Fob,
    Over on Wade’s blog, Scotty said,’ “church authority” stems from Jesus and not Paul. His command regarding the progression of dealing with differences (Matt 18:15-17) culminates in “tell it to the church.” If there is a refusal to listen to the (voice) of the church then the person is to be regarded as one who is unconverted.’

    The question I immediately had was “regarded by whom?” My personal answer is, “By the offended one.”
    So I’d say that in this particular situation the authority rests in the brother (thee singular) who does the forgiving. Peter seems to realize this since after the Lord’s further comments to the plural you (apostles) Peter immediately asks how often he (not “we” or “the church”) should forgive sin against “me” ( not “us “the church”.)
    Am I too far afield to be seeing a priesthood of all believers in this passage, with the church having precisely the same “authority” as the “one or two others”, — that of confirming the matter? But not even, necessarily having “church authority” to do the “regarding” which our Lord was still commending to a singular “thee”?


  15. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Fob–

    Whoa! What an amazing teacher you are…. Those are some really good things for me to study and consider. Thank you and please keep teaching.


  16. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Hi Trina…

    That is funny (ironic)…when the membership covenant deal came up and I had a disagreement over the word covenant…that particular scripture stuck in my paw…

    Let your yes be yes and your no be no.

    Good word.


  17. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Dave, give me a little time to get back to you. It’s a lot to think about and I have a lot of questions on it myself. Paul on 2 occasions that I remember literally turned over a believer to satan for the “destruction of the flesh” that his spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord.

    I’ve got some work that’s going to tie me up until weekend. Otherwise I would love to stay right here in the discussion. I will try to get back with you either here or on Wade’s blog in a few days. Regards. Fob


  18. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Trina, thanks, but all I have done is some basic word studies. What I think happened is that over the last 2-3 years the Lord opened our eyes (my wife Beth and me) to just how applicable the words chosen by the Holy Spirit in scripture are to the spiritual issues we face. The language that people use is so telling when it is compared to language of scripture. Fob


  19. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    As another proud Alabamian, I’d like to join Allen and Robin in welcoming Fob to the Congregation of Wartburgers.

    After a hard day of watch-blogging this Rick Warren situation, it was a real treat to be able to swell in state pride.

    Roll tide!


  20. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Fob, Sergius and all other Alabamians

    I have just amended the blog post to reflect the undying pride of the great state of Alabama. Simply look under the Wartburg Castle photo. And may I proudly add that my son, a student at Samford, now routinely says “Roll Tide” after asking us for money?


  21. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    I’m takin’ that boy to lunch at Jack’s!


  22. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Sergius
    With the cost of tuition, Jack’s is about the level that his dad and I can afford.


  23. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Well you can forward him my e-mail address and he can tell me “when’s a good time.”


  24. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Thanks Fob. No hurry, and I agree with Trina. Just to clarify, the reason I said “in this particular situation” is because I believe the Matt 18 situation and Paul’s situation are, to an extent, apples and oranges (sin, repentance, and forgiveness being common to both). In the case of the I Cor 5–II Cor 2 fellow, It was a church problem, since the man had caused sorrow, not to Paul, but in some degree, not to say to much, to them all. Thus, “punishment by the majority” was required. I’m not against churches as a whole occasionally following that pattern, so long as they don’t forget the “reaffirm your love for him” part. The Lord’s statement about ,”so that you might know that the son of man has AUTHORITY on earth to FORGIVE SINS” is, I think, closely tied to the binding and loosing of apostles and church in both these oft-abused examples.


  25. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Goodness me –

    I’m a d*mned Yankee! :p


  26. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Fob,

    Amen about the heart condition. Corrupt people will exploit any system or lack thereof. However, good systems have checks and balances to protect the innocent from such corrupt persons. But I agree it sends a counter-gospel message to say: “you must agree to obey us in all things before we let you in.” That is covenant membership done wrong.

    One purpose of a church covenant is to give pastors a platform from which to practice discipline. Discipline is not a unique feature of the old covenant, I think the Corinthian example is enough to prove that beyond question. The problem is that the “signing” of the covenant is NOT supposed to put the pastors in a legal/contractual advantage over the laity. Those using it in such a way are obviously looking for leverage. But the signing of a covenant, though not explicitly commanded in scripture, is not forbidden by the new testament, not in the manner that you pronounce it to be contrary to the new covenant.

    The thing is, pastors MUST have the authority to discipline membership in a compassionate, sensitive, and loving manner, or else they cannot disciple. A covenant gives the pastor the ability to say to someone, “Do you remember when you joined the church? Here’s your signature. You agreed to follow the teachings of Jesus as part of our community. Here’s what Jesus said about adultery. And you are running around on your wife. Can you see how there is a conflict there? Can you see that you agreed this wasn’t the life you were going to lead?”

    If such person should refuse to repent, the pastor should not serve them communion under any circumstances. That’s all that is necessary. No shunning, no witch-hunts or long lists of discipline warranting sin. It’s not the pastor’s job to keep the people from sinning, but it is his job to keep unbelievers from believing that they are forgiven.

    Covenants do not have to put “church leaders” in the place of the scriptures or Christ, though I’m sure that some certainly do. While I recognize the rampant spiritual abuse that pervades American evangelicalism (learning more and more about it here every day), the opposite extreme is not healthy either. We don’t need churches full hyper individualistic believers who insist that nobody has a right to tell them anything about what it means to be a disciple of Jesus. If we are to all practice mutual submission, the trustworthy, proven, and ordained men in the teaching offices ought to have the authority to confront those living in blatant sin or heresy. If they do not have that authority, than who does? Should nobody have a right to exhort a brother drifting from either orthodoxy or orthopraxy? That is completely contrary to the ethos of mutual submission.

    It is just insane for every Christian to insist on their right to be accountable to nobody but God. When pastors do this it creates massive problems instantly, so how is it right for the laity? To say that “It is finished” absolves all Christians from submitting to any church authority whatsoever is a non-sequitur in the same way that a man cheating on his wife might say “Judge not lest ye be judged.”

    You cannot ultimately have community without accountability. I’m not talking about confessing your dirty laundry to your small group. It’s just about checks and balances to protect from abuse and ensure that discipleship is happening. Once you start associating regularly and cooperating in mission, organization happens. Once organization happens, roles are delegated. You can even see this in the Trinity.

    Not to mention, all organizations have authority structures. Jesus did not come to put an end to earthly authority, just because all has been given to him. He entrusts fallible earthly men with the responsibilities to lead and make decisions for the benefit of all. Even with the prodigal son, God’s command still stands that children ought to honor their parents. The prodigal’s father may not have wanted an “accountable son,” but he certainly desired an obedient one. Obedience is not enough, as the older brother had that without love, but love without obedience is not love at all. God has given parents to have authority over the children, this is a good thing, and for the benefit of both.


  27. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel – you’re sounding distinctly un-Lutheran here. 😉


  28. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Forgive me for the digression, but I’m curious. What does “Roll Tide” mean? Is it a reference to something? #britishignorance


  29. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Anne
    Unless you live in the South in the US and enjoy football (American style) you would have no reason to know. This is the battle cry of the University of Alabama’s always great football team. Fob and a bunch of our readers are from the great state of Alabama!


  30. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Numo,

    The Fourth Commandment; Honor your father and your mother. What does this mean? We should fear and love God so that we do not despise or anger our parents and other authorities, but honor them, serve and obey them, love and cherish them.

    Luther said it, I believe it, that settles it 😛


  31. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    …not to mention, Bonhoeffer, in his book “the cost of discipleship” directly calls baptism without church membership an expression of cheap grace. But hey, with an internet connection and 30 minutes at blue letter, and we know better than that silly old traditionalist. We shall not be blinded by centuries of adherence to made up formulas! No, we will be the generation that finally gets it right.


  32. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel, You are wrong on so many levels. Let me take them one by one:
    The meaning of membership:
    1. It means that you realize that you’re not only called to Jesus but called into a community.
    “You must leave your mother and father….etc.” -Jesus
    (You are called to Jesus, and to love your brother.) “called into a community” is not found in the Bible.

    2. It means that you’re recognizing you’re weak, and therefore need the deepest amount of commitment and accountability to support your weakness.
    “Our weakness is made strong in Jesus” – Paul.
    (Note it is not made strong in the church!

    3. It means that you’re choosing not to treat the church like a consumer product.
    Your definition of church must be really weird. It sounds like you think it means a place you go during Sundays, or a club like structure. The Church is the body of Christians.

    4. It means that you help lead and guide the church.
    Bull. Go read about the various gifts.

    5. It means that you’re taking your discipleship under Christ seriously.
    No. Discipleship of OF CHRIST. Not of the church.

    6. It means that you want to be a fully committed part of the vehicle God has created to change the world.
    It never says that the church is to go out and change the world. That is not the commission. The commission (to the apostles) was to preach the Gospel, not to “change the world”.

    7. It means that you’re willing and committing to give sacrificially of yourself for the sake of others.
    Again BULL. There is nothing that says that that is the purpose of the church. Giving is something each individual does as prompted by the Holy Spirit. And the idea that you should abdicate your responsibilities in this area is ludicrous.

    8. It means that you’re willing to make and keep promises. (as in, as a member, I agree to….)
    This I agree with. Except that I would say it means you are willing to make uninformed, ill-advised legal commitments without the benefit of analysis.


  33. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    “Roll Tide?”

    That simply means the University of Alabama has the best amateur American football team money can buy.


  34. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Me–

    High five! That was good. So much of what I’ve been thinking. Thanks for clarifying that for me, Me. (haha) Keep at it. My ears are open.


  35. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel-

    Can I just say, that whenever someone brings up Bonhoffer’s phrase of cheap grace, it is just another way of saying my commitment to Christ is bigger than yours!

    I don’t care that he got killed for his convictions, so did Gypsies and atheists. The whole idea of cheap grace is just another bad paint job for legalism.

    If grace is grace – then it cost you nothing…in other words you got it on the cheap. The whole concept of grace is that your debts have been paid for you – because you were incapable.


  36. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel

    You write…
    “Luther said it, I believe it, that settles it”

    At one time I had some good Christian “Idols,” authors, theologins, that I liked to quote…
    But, alas – Power – Profit – Prestige – Honor – Glory – Recognition – Reputation,
    has brought down more then a few of my past human *Heros of the Faith.*

    Seems to me, God is a jealous God and wants folks looking to Jesus. NOT to a mere fallible human. When one of God’s sons, who started out serving only Jesus, become too important to themselves, and to others, eventually they will become a disappointment to those who look to mere humans and are NO longer looking to Jesus.

    Jesus made it available to ALL to “Hear His Voice” and follow Jesus.

    John 10:27
    My sheep *hear My voice,* and I know them, and *they follow me:*

    John 6:45
    It is written in the prophets, And they shall be ALL taught of God.

    Deuteronomy 4:36
    Out of heaven he made thee to *hear His voice,*
    that *He might instruct thee:*

    Here are a few more things Martin Luther NOT only said – but actually wrote. 🙁

    —————

    On the Jews and Their Lies… Written by Martin Luther
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies

    On the Jews and Their Lies is a 65,000-word **antisemitic treatise** written in 1543 by the German Reformation leader Martin Luther.

    In the treatise, Luther describes Jews as a “base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth.”[1] Luther wrote that they are “full of the devil’s feces … which they wallow in like swine,”[2] and the synagogue is an “incorrigible whore and an evil slut”.[3]

    In the first ten sections of the treatise, Luther expounds, at considerable length, upon his views concerning Jews and Judaism and how these compare against Christians and Christianity. Following this exposition, Section XI of the treatise advises Christians to carry out seven remedial actions. These are

    1. for Jewish synagogues and schools to be burned to the ground, and the remnants buried out of sight;
    2. for houses owned by Jews to be likewise razed, and the owners made to live in agricultural outbuildings;
    3. for their religious writings to be taken away;
    4. for rabbis to be forbidden to preach, and to be executed if they do;
    5. for safe conduct on the roads to be abolished for Jews;
    6. for usury to be prohibited, and for all silver and gold to be removed and “put aside for safekeeping”; and
    7. for the Jewish population to be put to work as agricultural slave labor.[4]

    ——————–

    And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
    them also I must bring, and they shall “hear My voice; “
    and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
    John 10:16

    One Fold – One Shepherd – One Voice – One Leader

    {{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}


  37. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    A. Amos Love:

    Based upon what you wrote above why do you think Martin Luther is so revered?


  38. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    “Thanks Fob. No hurry, and I agree with Trina. Just to clarify, the reason I said “in this particular situation” is because I believe the Matt 18 situation and Paul’s situation are, to an extent, apples and oranges (sin, repentance, and forgiveness being common to both).”

    Dave, I agree. Matt 18 is erroneously applied. People forget it starts in Matthew 18:1 and who is the greatest…

    It was taught by Jesus before Pentecost so what does that mean? What “church” is he referring to? Where is He teaching? And to whom? The passage is focused on PERSONAL OFFENSES by one brother (or sister) to another. It is NOT about church discipline there was no “Christian” church at the time. It mentions no “church leaders”. Only ‘witnesses’.


  39. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Me,

    Despite your incessant appeal to the male bovine, your reasoning appears to have missed my point on many levels. First of all, I am not wrong about these things. If you read my post clearly, I said that I stole that list from the blog of a Presbyterian minister. They aren’t my points. Food for thought, not dogma. At first I was not entirely convinced that your comments were even serious because they read so much that I clearly did not say into those points.

    But for the sake of progressing the conversation, here’s a few thoughts on your response to those points. I shall attempt to clarify somewhat.

    1. So you understand the teaching of Jesus to be fundamentally anti-community? Seriously? I never claimed the phrase “called into community” was in the bible, but neither is “called out of community.” However, I propose that no man can claim to have God as his Father that does not also have the church (universal, not institutional) as his mother. You can NOT say I love Christ and I hate his bride. His bride, the church, is the community of believers.

    2. I think you have misquoted Paul. He has said we are strong IN CHRIST, and weak in ourselves. Christ IS the strength of the Christian. But we are not so independently made strong by Christ that we have no need of fellow believers. God has clearly called some to be teachers, to deny this is to omit practically all the epistles. The teachers of the church are not superfluous; they are fulfilling a much needed function. Christ makes us strong, SO THAT we can be of help to others. So that we in turn can support, serve, and build up others. Sounds community-ish, no? We boast not in our own strength, but in the death of Christ.

    3. You are reading into my word “church” what I did not say. I didn’t mean to ignore the historic distinction between the visible and invisible church. The invisible church consists of all Christians in all times and all places who have ever believed in Jesus. These individuals, however, do have a corporate expression of their identity as those who belong to Jesus. Bouncing around from congregation to congregation (not church, mind you) based upon where you are most entertained does treat the body of Christ at large as something that exists to satisfy you, as opposed to a team on mission you are called to serve as a part of.

    4. The various gifts…. Isn’t the point that everyone has something to contribute to the body of Christ? They eye cannot say to the ear “I don’t need you,” but would you say that as a hand you have no need of the rest of the body?

    5. I did not say discipleship of the church. But we do not disciple ourselves; Jesus commanded the apostles to disciple the nations. We disciple each other. I am not enough for my own Christian journey. The Holy Spirit can speak into my life through the actual voices of other believers. I am not above critical feedback from anyone.

    6. Point taken. The Presbyterian minister who wrote this list is form the EPC and a tad more liberal than I. The church isn’t on a mission to better the world. However, where the church does act like Christ, it brings healing to the sick, food to the poor, and speaks truth to power. The mission of the apostles was NOT only to preach, but also “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:20. ESV)

    7. I didn’t say the purpose of the Church was giving. Belong to a specific congregation supplies you with ample opportunity for INDIVIDUALS to give sacrificially for the advancement of their common mission in the world. Who said anything about abdicating responsibility? I just can’t understand how you are reading all this into the list. Joining a congregation formally is all about the assumption of responsibility.

    8. Church covenants ought not be treated as legal contracts. They can be upheld as such in a court of law, but a church who takes a covenant breaker to court is flat out wrong. All they are to do is deny communion. That is it. All the covenant should be is a formalized agreement to walk together as brothers and sisters in a life of discipleship to Christ, working together for the mission he has given us. If signing a paper get’s in the way of that, do without it. Shake hands or whatever.


  40. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel – I think you are misunderstanding aspects of the cathechism [sp?] *as they are applied in contemporary society.* The rulers of Luther’s time were nothing if not authoritarian – parliamentary democracy was nowhere on the horizon in Germany at that time, nor anywhere else. (Divine Right of kings, absolute monarchs, warring principalities and electorates…. check some history, please!)

    If someone is baptized, they are part of the body of Christ – no ifs, ands or buts. There is *no* “membership covenant.”

    A. Amos – see, I can be pretty accommodating, even though I’m a Lutheran! 😉

    As for “On the Jews and Their Lies,” it is infamous and was used by the Nazis to justify Kristallnacht and all other actions against Jewish people (from bullying to death camps).

    I can’t make any excuses for Luther on this one – he was a messed-up guy in many ways. He assumed that once his reforms of the church started taking hold, there would be flocks of Jewish people lining up to convert. When that didn’t happen, he let the hate surge….

    That screed is unparalleled in his own time, and even now, still one of THE single most hateful anti-semitic rants, ever.


  41. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Oops – should have said “if a person confesses Christ, then they are part of the body of Christ.” Baptism could happen immediately, or it could take years… or it could happen when a person is an infant.

    Does not matter to me – nor, I think, to the ELCA, for the most part. 🙂


  42. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Doubtful,

    You can certainly argue that Bonhoeffer was wrong, but surely you aren’t saying was was not Lutheran! I referenced him in response to Numo’s saying that my comments sounded un-Lutheran. You can say Lutheranism is wrong, but I think my sentiments line up with them either way.

    Wow, my commitment to Christ is bigger than yours? Have you ever read Bonhoeffer? Sure people use his writing that way, but that was precisely the ethos he consistently railed against. If orthodox, confessional Lutheranism has one opponent is is most certainly Pietism. I don’t doubt his phrase is used as a cover for legalism, though. But to be protestant at all is to agree that God’s grace is freely given, but not that it cost nothing. It cost the Father the death of His only Son. He gives us this grace not with any conditions, but his commands still remain. Honor your father and mother. Thou shalt not murder. These are good and right things. To say you have freely received God’s grace and now have the right to ignore his commands was explicitly condemned by Paul in Romans 6:1.

    “…grace is that your debts have been paid for you – because you were incapable.” Spot on! So any good works I do from this point on have absolutely no merit! I can’t earn God’s favor because I already have it! But good works are still worth doing. We are still called to follow after Christ’s example. Not to earn his grace, but because it is already ours in Him.


  43. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel, WHOA!!!

    First of all, I am not wrong about these things.

    That’s pretty arrogant, dude.

    (I mean that lovingly and I think you know that.)

    *Maybe* the other folks here have good points, too, no?!


  44. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    If orthodox, confessional Lutheranism has one opponent is is most certainly Pietism.

    Again… how is it that you are so certain of all of this?

    There are widely (sometimes “wildly”!) differing viewpoints within the overall Lutheran movement(s) in both Europe and the States.

    And then there is history to contend with; political forces, Lutheranism as state church in many countries, changes from monarchy to democracy, etc. etc. etc.

    I might be wrong here, but my understanding of Bonhoeffer’s later beliefs is that he was more “Confessing Church” (his term) than Lutheran per se, since Lutheranism had been so successfully co-opted by the Nazis.


  45. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    A. Amos Love,

    The little smiley emoticon was a symbol for “tongue in cheek.” I was using fundagelical parlance to demonstrate to Numo that, right or wrong, my sentiments did reflect Lutheran teaching. But I’m glad you have ascended in your spiritual pilgrimage above the sin of idolatry. Thanks for sharing that.

    On the other hand, I believe all Lutherans recognize Luther as fallible and Christ as the only man worthy of our complete trust.

    John 10:27 – Following Jesus was precisely Luther’s point with the catechism. Jesus reaffirmed the 10 commandments in his teaching, and we ought to strive to obey them. Jesus also said, “If you love me you will keep my commandments.” If Jesus was God, then “thou shalt not steal” is included in this statement.

    Dear Buddha, can we recognize anything positive Luther said these days without the PC police playing the anti-semitism card? How many different ways can we say, “You are right! Luther was wrong when he said that!”

    One fold, shepherd, voice, leader; Jesus. Triple amen! But his voice continues to teach us through our fellow saints who are sent to encourage us and build us up. Luther, flawed as he was, was still a fellow saint that had much to teach the church of his time and ours. “Looking to Jesus” does not mean “ignoring all other teachers and preachers of the Word.” I don’t think Christ had in mind a bunch of disciples running around with fingers in their ear saying “I ONLY listen to Jesus, and certainly not to YOU.”


  46. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Overall, what you (Miguel) are saying about covenants (etc.) sounds like Calvin’s Geneva.

    Church = state, including the “authority” to execute those who criticize the Almighty Theologian’s pov.

    I find that completely at odd with what Jesus and the apostles taught about what the body of believers is supposed to be, and how we are meant to look – and act.

    “My kingdom is not of this world,” etc. etc. etc.


  47. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Postscript: if you do a bit of research on pietistic movements and theooogy within Lutheranism, you will find that a *lot* of people practiced – and still practice – pietism within the various Lutheran bodies.

    One of those movements is depicted in the film “Babette’s Feast,” which takes place in 19th c. Denmark. Am blanking on the name of the Lutheran movement and its leader, but I have read that the film portrays it correctly to the Nth detail… will have to do some digging on that. (It’s an active movement today in some parts of Denmark.)


  48. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    ” theooogy” hah! ;P


  49. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Numo,

    You are most certainly the greater Luther student than I, you have pretty much seen the extent of my knowledge of the small catechism: surface level. I haven’t learned a whole lot yet about the historical progression of Lutheran thought, I’m still working through the 16th century. We might apply the catechism differently now, but it was at least Lutheran at one point in history to understand it on the surface level that I quoted it. I think.

    I agree that all baptized are part of the body of Christ. You can have membership even without a covenant. Differing methodology, that’s all. I don’t attach a divine mandate to mine, I believe in “Christian freedom.” My only question is, which methodology is more edifying? Surely that is what we are all after.

    Wait – the ELCA doesn’t believe in baptismal regeneration? I feel like I’m missing something here…

    And seriously…. It’s ok for somebody to say I am dead wrong and throw cows at me, but it’s arrogant for me to say its not so? I wasn’t even saying his points were invalid! I was just saying that they were not my points, I was quoting somebody else! If the points are wrong, then the author is wrong. Who appointed you the humility police? At least be consistent.

    I get the Lutheran opposition to Pietism from current leaders in LCMS confessionalism. Google “Brothers of John the Steadfast,” they have a whole page devoted to it. But you are correct, again; Lutheranism is much more diverse than my preferred flavor of it. But I think that all versions are staunchly agains all and any works-righteousness. And you probably know more about Bonhoeffer than I as well, I’ve only read a few of his books and none of his biographies. I can see why he would attempt to distance himself format he state church.


  50. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Numo, you have GOT to be misunderstanding me somewhere here. Where do I say church = state? Does denying communion to unrepentant sinners = state? When has the “state” ever don that?

    And execution = denying communion? I don’t understand how the two could be equated. But if that’s how you understood my comments, I would agree it is certainly at odds with Jesus.

    And I would love to pick you brain sometime about history of pietistic movements within Lutheranism. You seem to know a ton about the history of the tradition. I will be looking up that film for sure. Thanks!


  51. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel-

    Yes, I’ve read Bonhoffer…but I can’t say I enjoyed it. No, I wasn’t saying he/ you weren’t Lutherans, only that the phrase “cheap grace” is often times quoted to hide a legalistic mindset.

    It seems that Bonhoffer was an advocate for a commitment to the Confessing church (through Baptism ?) as the main way to commit to following Christ. Slippery slope if you ask me….

    And yes, the no man can have God for his Father unless the church is your mother….yawn….I have had every church I’ve ever attended pull out this phrase, SGM, Catholic, Vineyard, Non-denominational….I believe it originates from Augustine, though I’m not sure.

    Miguel, you may or may not know, that I am no longer a Christian. So I don’t really have a dog in this fight, except that I hate seeing good people beat up with Theo babble that beats them down and tells them that they are nothing without their Church and their commitment to it. Been there, seen that movie, and it always ends up going from fairy tale to a horror flick by the end.


  52. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    LCMS and confessionalism – yes, I’m all too aware of that, having mng come across some pretty crazy material on the web, but have to confess to a superficial understanding (as well as not wanting to immerse myself in LCMS controversies!)

    Student of Luther: well, not as much as you think. But we do need to look at his writings with an understanding of both the political and religious systems of his day in mind. It’s not as if he was flag-waving for any kind of democratic rule – the peasants’ demands (which are pretty basic human rights kinda things) did NOT sit well with him – probably because it did not sit well with his patrons and protectors. (Y’know, princes, electors, etc.)

    Bonhoeffer: I don’t know as much as I might appear to know, believe me! Again, though, it helps to have at least some foundation in history of that period, very much including the co-option of most churches by the Nazis. The fact that the Lutheran church was the state church didn’t exactly help matters, but all state churches are potential vehicles for political manipulation and control… some high-ups in the C of E said some pretty horrible things about Germans during WWI, for example.

    As for saying “I am not wrong,” it comes across as, well, “I am NOT wrong!” rather than what you seem to have meant to convey – that it was a presby. minister who said it.

    Maybe just saying “I got this from a Presby. site and I agree with it” would work better?

    Just sayin’ (and I *don’t* mean that sarcastically).

    Text-only communication is so tough sometimes….!!! (For me as much as anyone else.)


  53. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    As a counterpoint, the Danish Lutheran church(es?) were very anti-Nazi during WWII and many Lutherans actively assisted Jewish refugees in escaping to Sweden. There’s a true story about a flotilla of small boats, for example… (Though the thing that’s often cited about the King of Denmark wearing a yellow star to show solidarity is – sadly – a myth. I 1st heard it from my mom when I was a kid – not long after the end of WWII – and wish it was true.)


  54. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel – re. Babette’s Feast, there is some *great* info. buried in the archives of this site. (You might have to register to be able to access it.)

    But if anyone asks who referred you, I would prefer that my name be left out of it. (Long, long story….)


  55. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Mot

    You ask…
    “Based upon what you wrote above why do you think Martin Luther is so revered?”

    Interesting question.

    Could be…

    …among you stands One whom you do NOT know.
    John 1:26

    I attended Lutheran Churches for many years growing up. BUT – Never knew Jesus.
    Went to religious classes after school, Sunday School, Memorized Bible verses, read the catechism,

    BUT – Never knew Jesus.

    Luther was a hero at one time – BUT – eventually realized – it was just “The Christ in him,”
    that was speaking truth – though him – And NOT Luther, NOT because of him.

    Seems Jesus taught “His Disciples” NOT to be called teacher,
    For you have “ONE” teacher – the Christ. Mat 23:8.

    If that’s true – then Jesus taught Luther – By Faith Alone – Grace – NOT – Works.

    Why give that Glory to Luther – When you can give the Glory to Jesus?

    After all – It was “The Blood of Jesus” that made “By Faith Alone” possible, and real…
    NOT Luthers blood.


  56. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    As for execution (etc.), I wasn’t saying that *you* said that, but it is part of what the original Calvinists did… because Calvinism became THE state church in Geneva and environs.

    The quotes from the Presby. minister lead me to think that the logical conclusion of his thoughts on church covenants could lead to a theocratic type of “government,” a la the Mass Bay Colony and other places where very severe Calvinist types conflated citizenship with being part of *the* church. (Since they only recognized one – their own. How convenient!)

    Am I clear on my aversion to so-called church “covenants” yet? 😉 More seriously, I have seen them abused and that abuse has been leveled against me personally. I think they are just plain wrong.

    Baptismal regeneration: well, now – that’s a whole ‘nother topic! And I am not altogether in line with the basic ELCA theology, insofar as I believe that one can experience regeneration apart from baptism. (The apostle Paul comes to mind…) But I do believe that something happens during baptism… what it is, exactly, I’m not sure, and I’m not certain any human being can comprehend everything that goes on, let alone explain it all.


  57. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel – de nada, and thanks for your comments as well!

    Lively discussion and *much* to think about. (See, I’m as firery as you are! ;p )


  58. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    A. Amos – My “conversion” happened when I was 16. My mom (raised in the Lutheran church) reports a similar experience – within church, during a Lutheran service.

    In fact, the pastor somehow gave a Lutheran version of an altar call, but no coming forward or anything. So… she prayed and that was that.

    I think it *can* happen within the context of Lutheranism, and even that the whole setup is meant to gently nudge people in that direction.

    But that’s just me. (Me who hated confirmation classes and quit going after a certain point.)

    Food for thought, maybe?


  59. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel–

    I find it interesting that almost EVERY time someone disagrees with you and pulls out your points, even if word-by-word, you say they have missed your point? Someone can clearly read what you write and understand what is written, or either you cannot write well enough to explain your own thoughts. It’s eitehr one or the other. But it seems all too common that people often “miss” your point? How is this so? You take paragraphs upon paragraphs to expalin your point, sometimes incessantly as well (to use your own words) and yet, we continue to miss your points? I think not. I dont think the readers here are that bad at understanding written language?

    Consider, for a moment, that your points are being responded to, understood, but disagreed with. Why not argue from the point of simple disagreement, rather than continuing to tell people that they have missed your point. For myself, I think you are making your points VERY clearly. I simply just disagree with some of the points you have made. That’s all.


  60. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel @ on Thu, Mar 08 2012 at 01:31 pm

    You write
    ““Looking to Jesus” does not mean “ignoring all other teachers and preachers of the Word.” I don’t think Christ had in mind a bunch of disciples running around with fingers in their ear saying “I ONLY listen to Jesus…”

    I believed I was called to be a teacher – and a preacher.
    That’s what My elders told me – I believed “mere fallible humans” and did both. Oy Vey!!! ;-(

    A man that flattereth his neighbour spreadeth a net for his feet. Pro 29:5

    Bread of deceit is sweet to a man; afterwards his mouth shall be filled with gravel. Pro 20:17

    Yes – I was caught in the trap – with a mouth full of gravel,
    thinking I was a “Special Class” of Christian – Clergy Class.

    When you believe the lie you start to die…

    Of course – I wouldn’t have said “I was special” then – Had to at least ACT humble.
    And God couldn’t possibly teach His kids – un-edjumacated sheep – ALL truth…
    Like He taught Jesus – Like He taught Paul – Like he taught Peter. He needed “me.”

    AND – It’s quite a HIGH – having 100-200 folks listening to “me” – sitting in rapt attention…
    I mean listening to God ‘s Word For an full hour or more – NO 15 minute sermonettes for us –
    Hanging on every word – Well, at least making believe they were listening to every word –
    And after this Glorious message with pats on the back, and, “good word brother.” I knew
    Amos had advanced the Kingdom Of God.

    Eventually realized – The best I could do was teach some truth – and teach some error…
    And teach some “Traditions of men” that make void the Word of God. Mark 7:13.

    Finding out about “Teaching Error” – stinketh…

    It’s the things you learn “after you know it all” – that really count… 😉

    Thank you Jesus – found out – In The Bible, there is – NO Clergy class – NO laity.

    We’re ALL bretheran – Mat 23:8 – And there is “ONE” teacher – The Christ. 🙂

    Found out Jesus is still the best teacher – Yes?


  61. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Doubtful,

    I appreciate your honesty. Anyone who has read Bonhoeffer has the right to disagree with him. God as father etc.. didn’t realize that was being used even in the Vineyard! It’s more universal than I thought. I was under the assumption that non-denominational churches that din’t care about membership would reject that ethos, but apparently not.

    I’m sorry to hear about your story, but I don’t doubt that theology often becomes a weapon of war, in every faith. I’ve taken my blows, but for some reason I can’t walk away form Jesus. To say that you are nothing without your church and your commitment to it is definitely un-Christian. Our hope is in the Savior, not the bride.

    Was there anything about Jesus himself which you found to contribute to your leaving the faith?


  62. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Numo,

    You may not see yourself as a Luther scholar, but I’m really the new kid on the block with some of this stuff. Your experience predates mine in terms of years, and you appear to be more well read as well.

    Like I’ve said before, I can hardly blame folks for their aversion to covenants after the experiences I learn about here. It is better to not use them at all than for these abuses to exist. I still insist it’s possible to use them without such abuses, just because my experience with them hasn’t been quite to traumatizing. Those arguing against covenants based on experienced have some major points I must concede them, but I’m not ready to scrap the whole system just yet. Would you insist that a pastor owes communion to a man who is publicly having an affair on his wife? Would it be wrong for the pastor to make a public recognition of the wrongness of this public betrayal? I just can’t see how that is fair to the wife for her unfaithful husband to be communing at the same rail as her. I think Jesus would stand up for her. (and forgive the husband should he repent.)

    I would definitely agree with you that humans can have only a limited understanding of what takes place in baptism, but “baptismal regeneration” is a broad enough category for me to fall under. I might take exception to your example of Paul saying that I don’t think his experience is necessarily prescriptive of all believers. We didn’t exactly become one of the apostles or write large sections of scripture either. But as a biblicist I’d have to concede that point isn’t clearly spelled out in the text, so your view isn’t heretical or un-biblical. 😛

    I’m really trying to keep the heat down. Now Trina is taking issue with my softer rhetoric. …


  63. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Jimmy
    Roll Tide anyway!


  64. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    A. Amos Love—

    Here’s the bigotry test for what Luther wrote. I have replaced all terms referring to Jews or Jewish people, with that of black people, African Americans and any other derrogatory term used to describe us:

    Here are a few more things Martin Luther NOT only said – but actually wrote.

    —————

    On the Blacks and Their Lies… Written by Martin Luther
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies

    On the Blacks and Their Lies is a 65,000-word **antisemitic treatise** written in 1543 by the German Reformation leader Martin Luther.

    In the treatise, Luther describes Blacks as a “base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth.”[1] Luther wrote that they are “full of the devil’s feces … which they wallow in like swine,”[2] and the synagogue is an “incorrigible whore and an evil slut”.[3] In the first ten sections of the treatise, Luther expounds, at considerable length, upon his views concerning Blacks and “black”ism and how these compare against Christians and Christianity. Following this exposition, Section XI of the treatise advises Christians to carry out seven remedial actions. These are

    1. for Black synagogues and schools to be burned to the ground, and the remnants buried out of sight;
    2. for houses owned by Blacks to be likewise razed, and the owners made to live in agricultural outbuildings;
    3. for their religious writings to be taken away;
    4. for rabbis to be forbidden to preach, and to be executed if they do;
    5. for safe conduct on the roads to be abolished for Blacks;
    6. for usury to be prohibited, and for all silver and gold to be removed and “put aside for safekeeping”; and
    7. for the Black population to be put to work as agricultural slave labor.[4]

    Is there any difference between his ideals and that of slave owners in the South; Nazi Germany; human trafficking and slave labor today?

    You can write all the greatest Gospel works in the world, but if I should ever hear that crap come out of the mouth of a preacher, I’d confidently, with a firm female tenor, exclaim that he is no representative of Christ.

    My ex-reformed Baptist church’s acceptance of Luther troubles me. In the same way that the SBC had for years condoned the enslavement of others. No wonder they can easily accept that a man can be a bigot and a representative of Christ at the same time, and not be beyond reproof.

    I, myself, would not sit under any African-American pastor who spoke ill of white people. Preaching hatred and bigotry is unacceptable from the pulpit, no matter what race you are.

    The same rules go for John Calvin. It baffles me that such self-proclaimed well-read, PhD possessing theologians can know so much about Scripture and church history, and yet NEVER mention this ish from the pulpit!!

    CHBC conducts what are called Henry Forums. A Henry Forum is generally some type of social topic, whether it be how to reach out to people in Islamic faiths, music and arts for Christians, particular Christian authors, writers… They are these academic forums where there is a speaker and they bring forth a certain issue to be addressed, and talk on the topic and then field questions and start discussions.

    So there was supposed (I say supposed, because I’m not sure it took place, but believe it did) one recently, that of course, I did not attend, given by Thabiti Anyabwile on the topic of Puritan authors, particularly those who owned slaves, and if African-Americans should trust what they preached? Should African-Americans consider their teachings? Is there value in their teachings for the black Christian.

    Of course my response was an absolute NO! For many reasons, but for the main reason mentioned. You can’t tell me crap about Christ when, although culturally acceptable, you treated other humans less than humane. Yet, one argument was that Johnathan Edwards (I think) was nice to his slaves. He treated them kindly and humanely.

    Thabiti’s view was that blacks should accept the teachings of men like Edwards because they have a lot to offer, and are good in many ways. Other black men he has known have begged to differ. I, myself, will beg to differ.

    The bottom line is that Chrsitians–black, white, asian or other, DONT NEED any teaching by Edwards, Burroughs, not even Spurgeon, or going back as far as Richard Sibbes. What they need are the teachings of Christ and understanding the sufficiency of Scripture through study of the languages, cultures, literature of that time. THAT, they already have.


  65. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Trina,

    That is not remotely fair. “Me” objectively put a ton of words I did not say in my mouth. How many examples do you want?

    Sure he responded point by point. But he also restated my points back to me. I agree with what I wrote, and I disagree strongly with much of what he said I wrote. If this isn’t a textbook example of a misunderstanding I don’t know what is. Keep in mind that it is possible for people to read between the lines things that are legitimately not there. Just because you see the same thing doesn’t mean its what I meant. I feel my comments are clear as well, usually until I get an argument against a position I don’t even endorse.

    Do you really think I refuse to recognize a legitimate disagreement? You should read my comments more carefully then. I’ve agreed to disagree with Numo on several points, and I even conceded one to “Me.” Here is me disagreeing quite strongly with you.

    I’ll own the possibility that I do not express my ideas clearly enough. I’m not brilliant. They always seem clear to me at the time. When somebody disagrees with me, I will simply tell them why I see it the way I do. If the disagree with something I do not endorse, I’m going to attempt to clarify my position.


  66. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel–

    I’m just going to put you on ignore. That’s about it. Re-read your statement again, and you will see that you are essentially telling me the same thing. You CANNOT see that, and that’s the problem.

    If this isn’t a textbook example, means that it should be “clear” to me as it is to you. You are still telling me that I dont have a clear understanding of what you’re saying.

    “You should read my comments more carefully then.” I have. “Me” also did. But you continue to use the “you’re missing my point”, “you’re not seeing clearly what’s there”, “you’re misquoting me”, or “you’re misinterpreting me” excuse.

    Apparently, MOST people here are missing your point, BECAUSE YOU KEEP SAYING THAT.

    You sure use a lot of words to express your ideas and still come out unclear to us. Yet, you think the miscommunication is on our part.

    You also continue to make statements like this “Numo, you have GOT to be misunderstanding me somewhere here.” But yet, you make statemetns like this “First of all, I am not wrong about these things.”

    I wish we all had the absolute clarity you seem to have. Your sentences are so cryptic, nobody can get your points. EVER. Really?

    Yes, I DO think you refuse to recognize legitimate disagreements. And trust me buddy, I have read your comments VERY CAREFULLY. You come across as rude very often as you tend to want to challenge the aptitude of your readers, as you had before in a previous argument we had. I think you are quite blind to your own arrogance.

    Maybe YOU should start reading your own comments more carefully before you hit send.


  67. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Amos, people can “know” Jesus in their own individual ways. It is not dependent on evangelical-speak-xtianese-biblical-schmiblical-accepted-the-lord-on-such-and-such-a-date….

    In fact, so far as I know, the most telling indicator of whether or not one “knows” Jesus, is how they treat those around them.


  68. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    A. Amos Love,

    Were you a preacher before? If so, it’s refreshing to hear one admit the high of public respect.

    “The best I could do was teach some truth – and teach some error… And teach some ‘Traditions of men’ that make void the Word of God. Mark 7:13”

    Right on, again! Was it N.T. Wright who said that he’s open to the idea that at any given time about 2/3 of his theology is wrong. One of the difficulties I have with systematic theology is it tries to reduce an incomprehensible God to bite sized propositions. There a limit to how far we can go in knowing God in this life, for sure.

    Nonetheless, Jesus for some reason chooses to use such foolish and fallible people as us. 1 Corinthians 1:21 – we are fools, but God still delivers the infinite through the finite. Don’t ask me why, but I’m happy enough to be playing for his team. If I were Jesus I wouldn’t give me a chance at bat!

    But not all “tradition” or teaching of men has to be the enemy of the gospel or true faith. 2 Thessalonians 3:6 encourages us to keep to the true tradition or right doctrine, and James 1:27 encourages us to keep to true religion. You think the author could have foreseen we would never agree on what that is.

    Clergy should not be treated as a “special class,” you are right to lament that. But they are a specific class, charged with specific responsibilities that don’t necessarily belong to everybody (though most of what they do can certainly be shared). But they are no more holy, spiritual, or righteous than any other sinner, ordained or not. Beware of any clergy that deny this! Also beware when the sermon is equated with God’s word. We ought to be able to distinguish the text from the commentary.

    And yes! IF a fallible human being does manage to teach us something true and worthwhile, it is really Christ that is the teacher, and his voice that is leading us. Jesus IS the best teacher, and an extremely creative one at that.


  69. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel-

    Thanks for the response….as for your question, it’s an interesting one. I’ll have to keep it short for now, but the short answer is that Jesus incorrect prophecy about the end of the ages and that some of his ethical teachings I do not see as healthy….but the main reason was my lack of faith in the scriptures, ie the differing manuscripts, the fact that we don’t really know what the original text recorded.

    Hard for me to put my faith in a book that’s supposed to be inerrant, when it has been tampered with and changed many times.

    But I think your question is a good one, thanks for asking.


  70. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel – I totally get what Trina is saying.

    A number of comments back, you said something about a comment of mine and “execution.”

    The thing is… I *thought* (perhaps incorrectly) that my 1st comment about Calvin’s theocratic Geneva showed the extent to which “covenants” can be abused, and that the supposed “authority” vested in John Calvin *was* abused (by him), big time.

    The whole “covenant” thing caught me by surprise back in the 1970s when Catholic charismatics started implementing it (The ideas came mainly from the Ft. Lauderdale Five – the head honchos of the shepherding/discipleship movement.) Clearly, they got it from somewhere else; likely multiple sources.

    Covenants and the abuse of covenants are not a new thing – what we’re seeing now is the latest iteration of these ideas, with a hardcore Calvinist slant, which (imo) makes them even more prone to abuse.


  71. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Trina – I might be misreading, but here’s what I got from A. Amos’ Luther quotes: that he is saying Luther’s not what some people make him out to be, and that he said and did some horrific things. (Like writing and publishing “On the Jews and Their Lies.”)

    afaik, A. Amos was raised Lutheran – maybe this was one of the things that was *not* talked about when he was growing up, in church? (I know it wasn’t talked about in the Lutheran church where I went to Sunday School as a kid, but I don’t think anyone was trying to *hide* it, either – because the Holocaust and WWII were very recent events and people knew of the connection between Luther’s ravings and what the Nazis did with his text.)

    I know you will probably disagree with me, but I think there are things of value to be found in the words of some people – Luther included – who did and said some pretty terrible things.

    Context and historical background is the key – though I am not for one second excusing anything vile (like slave-“owning” or involvement in the slave trade).

    I am sure future generations will look back on contemporary society and be able to point to things that are just as hideous that were either done by or condoned by otherwise decent people. (Case in point: US companies’ contracting with Chinese manufacturing companies where the workers are living in incredibly substandard conditions – even for China – and forced to work for 12-14 hours per day with almost zero breaks…. there’s a lot out there; I heard an interview with an NYT reporter last night on NPR – the writer is one of the people who’s done the most investigative reporting on the giant Chinese company that Apple has been using for the manufacturing of iPads. See Fresh Air audio from last evening, on NPR…)


  72. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel
    I’d like to summarize just one of your points, using statements from 3 different comments, and respond with just one subjective, anecdotal counterpoint. 
         “There is a good, healthy, non-abusive way to practice covenant membership, and right use of it can be an edifying tool in the contemporary pastoral toolbox.
    And: One purpose of a church covenant is to give pastors a platform from which to practice discipline.
    And:  A covenant gives the pastor the ability to say to someone, “Do you remember when you joined the church? Here’s your signature. You agreed…etc.”
        My understanding:  covenant membership is an important enabler of pastors for the edification, discipline, and exhortation of church members.
         My counterpoint: the most effective pastor I ever knew, in all 3 areas (for over 20 years) made no use of anything like covenant membership. He had no difficulty knowing who it was he was leading, and HAD a platform for discipline– primarily through the preaching and teaching of the Word. He was gifted with the ability to remind and exhort us — not based upon something WE had done because WE joined, WE signed, or WE agreed, but based upon our having been joined with Christ as members of His body (not the pastor’s organization) by grace through faith. IMO he also had great authority in the Gospel. I long to see such changed lives where we are now. Quite the opposite of individualism and lack of community took place in this church, as a result. With not one community care group ever, plenty of “teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom” and “speaking to yourselves with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” took place, even on Sunday mornings. Much of this was because our pastor focused on equipping ALL the saints to do the work of ministry, rather than doing it all himself. Just an inadequate summary of the subjective memories of a lifetime, I know.
    BTW. 2 years before I met him, he resigned Lutheranism (LCMS) but brought with him a good many good things, including an appreciation for Bonhoeffer, by which many have been blessed. 
     
      


  73. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Muff – amen!


  74. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Trina,

    Ok, you don’t want my defense so I’ll just apologize. Listen, I am really, truly sorry if what I’m saying is offensive. It’s certainly not my intent and I’m doing my best to understand where I’ve been inappropriate. I certainly have much more to learn about clarity and sensitivity. And I REALLY didn’t mean to imply that YOU were linguistically challenged, I’m willing to concede I just don’t express myself clearly. I’ve concede many points here and I’m willing to admit I’m wrong if you can help me to see it.


  75. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Numo,

    Thank you for clarifying the Calvin comment. I hoped you didn’t think I was endorsing his methodology completely, but then again, I haven’t read much Calvin at all.

    Catholic covenanters is a completely new thing for me. Never heard of it! I have no experience with the shepherding/discipleship movement either.

    I once belonged to a Southern Baptist church with a membership covenant. The closest thing I knew to abuse was this: I encountered a bitter former member who was upset that his membership was revoked. He hadn’t attended for years, and that was why they did it. He said, “I don’t understand. Why do I have to go to church to worship God? Can’t I just worship him at home?”

    Ten years later, my reply would be, “Why do you have to have membership in a church you don’t go to in order to worship God at home?”

    Oh, that an they removed from membership an unmarried couple who moved in together. Do you think that is abusive?


  76. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Dave A A,
    I feel totally understood 😀
    Your summary is quite fair.
    Good story. I would certainly agree that covenant membership is not even necessary for effective discipleship, but merely a frequently abused option. I would even agree that being “in Christ” is the true grounds upon which to appeal to a believer when confronting unchristian behavior. The use of a covenant in such situation was simply to affirm that since they did agree to it, we believe they are in Christ, thereby justifying our appeal to them as brothers, and not “you need to change first or you can’t be in Christ.”

    As far as “equipping all the saints for the work of the ministry,” I definitely believe this is high priority for all in ministry. Right use of a covenant goes would go to support this. Regardless of the proverbial list, the true membership of a congregation are those doing the work.

    When you refer to your pastor discipling primarily through preaching, I would agree this is THE primary method of discipleship. However, I would call this positive discipline. It points the direction. There is need, however occasional, for corrective discipline. 1 Timothy 3:16 encourages the use of Scripture for teaching, rebuke, correction, and instruction in righteousness. I feel like in our culture there is nothing more politically incorrect than open rebuke, but you would think a heart of wisdom would embrace it, according to the book of Proverbs.


  77. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel
    If I had to guess, I’d say there were many more instances of open rebuke and public correction (Sunday morning from the pulpit) than in a normal church. These were typically done in a spirit of great gentleness and generally needed and heeded, due to our highly participatory meetings combined with the times (Jesus people and charismania, for example). Sometimes people would bring in really crazy things “from god” the leaders needed to clarify that it was not so.
    Only once do I recall the pastor just announcing that a man was no longer welcome to commune with us after rejecting the private efforts of the elders. The term used was “immorality”, but I suspected there’d been sexual child abuse.


  78. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel – no, I didn’t think you were endorsing that aspect of Calvin’s life.


  79. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Wow Dave. I honestly can’t think of a positive thing that a church covenant would have added to your situation. What a great example!


  80. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    I missing something. What is “the Galatian error still exists” mean? Maybe, I’m tired, but I’ve rescanned the article. Thanks!


  81. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Queen Momma

    Not sure if this is what Fob James is referring to with “The Galation Error.”

    Galations 3:1-3
    O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you…

    …Are ye so foolish? **having begun in the Spirit,**
    are ye now **made perfect by the flesh?**

    Seems you obtain a free “Spiritual Birth” by Faith. Whosoever believeth in Him. Jn 3:15-16.
    Then “The Corrupt Religious system” comes along with a whole bunch of human *works.*

    Eph 2:8-9.
    For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
    *Not of works,* lest any man should boast.

    IMO – “The Galatian Error” is the mistake, “The Error,” “The Abusive Religious System” has made, over and over again. Attempting to enforce “Their Rules” on those who have entered into these “Church Membership,”“Church Authority” and “Church Discipline” agreements, Covenants. They are trying to have “Mere Fallible Humans” made perfect by the flesh. Just obey, submit to – our rules, our leaders, our authority, and you’ll be okay with God. 🙁

    As Fob James wrote…
    “The scriptures do not teach a “covenant of submission” to anyone. You submit as warranted by scripture, you do not make a vow or covenant to submit to man.”

    In “the Abusive Religious System” You’re told, you’re saved by grace, a free gift…
    And you’re made RIGHTEOUS by FAITH. And – It’s Christ in you the hope of Glory.

    And that is – **having begun in the Spirit.**

    BUT now – If you want to fellowship with us – “The Corrupt Religious System,”
    you have *our rules* to live by. And our “Denominations Doctrinal List” of “I believes.”
    Our “Church Membership Covenant.” And our *Church Discipline* – for your own good.

    And this is – you can be **made perfect by the flesh.** And our help… Follow us…

    No thanks – I think I’ll stick to following Jesus.

    Rom 8:14
    For as many as are *led by the Spirit of God,* they are the sons of God. 😉

    NOT those following “Mere Fallible Humans” or “The Church Membership Covenant.”


  82. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Trina

    Amen – much agreement when you write…
    “The bottom line is that Chrsitians–black, white, asian or other, DONT NEED any teaching by Edwards, Burroughs, not even Spurgeon, or going back as far as Richard Sibbes. What they need are the teachings of Christ and understanding the sufficiency of Scripture through study of the languages, cultures, literature of that time. THAT, they already have.”

    and again – Amen…
    “What they need are the teachings of Christ and understanding the sufficiency of Scripture”

    In my experience…
    Most today in “the Corrupt Religious System” do NOT believe…
    Jesus can teach ALL – ALL truth… John 6:45, John 18:37.
    And you need NO man to teach you… 1 John 2:26-27.
    And you can – *Hear His Voice* and follow Jesus… John 10:27.


  83. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel writes:

    “I’ve got to insist, thought, there is a good, healthy, non-abusive way to practice covenant membership, and right use of it can be an edifying tool in the contemporary pastoral toolbox.”

    I want to point out an assumption that is made with such statements made by many proponents of man-made mebership. The assumption is that there is not already a covenant membership in the pages of the bible. I’ve heard it argued many times that “since the bible is silent with respect to church membership” that pastors have the Christian liberty to invent their own membership covenants and processes.

    But there already is a covenant; it is the New Covenant in Christ’s blood. And there already is a membership. (Hey, Dee, may I give your readers a homework assignment here?) Look up all passages in the NT that have to do with member/members/membership. If I’ve studied all of them correctly, then my conclusion that every single passage indicates that membership for the Christian is an already done thing via union with Christ is a valid one. How can man improve upon the New Covenant? How can man improve upon the membership we already have in Christ’s body?

    Each of Miguel’s 8 points (assuming they’re correct for sake of argument here) is already taken care of when somebody is baptized. What is problematic with the man-made covenant model is that it is not necessary and imposes extra-biblical requirements, even if the only extra-biblical requirement it imposes is that one has to agree to the covenant to become a member (as the church leaders understand it) of the church! A matter of simple Christian conscience in obeying the Lord of the conscience can keep a person out of church.

    If somebody cannot fit the mold made for him, what is he to do? Go to another church? So then, the man-made covenant creates the same type of church shoppers and pew sitters that it claims to prevent. It also divides the body of Christ into “members” and “regular attenders” (who already are members according to the bible and are wrongly labeled “non-members” by the leadership).

    These are things that need to be thought out, and as in many of the authoritarian churches that TWW writes about, asking questions of the things that the leaders have already dictated is not allowed.


  84. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Hey Steve Scott,

    Love your thoughts. I’d agree that most of the goals in those 8 points (which are taken from Zack Hicks, actually) are covered in Baptism. However, looking at #3, even baptized Christians often treat the church like a consumer product.

    While I would certainly agree that all believers have membership in Christ automatically, this membership expresses itself through local congregations, be it institutional churches, house churches, bible studies, etc…

    It is true, though, that many membership covenants create a mold that strain out many. However, every individual congregation”s style and methods of ministry do about the same thing; some people just don’t fit in high church worship services, and others can’t endure high decibel music.

    This is why I’ve said again and again that the Bible most definitely doesn’t require covenant membership, or any one form of church organizational polity. Covenant membership is just one option on the menu of ministerial methods, all of which come with pros and cons.

    Even churches without covenant membership often see a divide between attenders and servants, via the 20/80 principle. Or between regulars and occasional worshipers.

    When authoritarian leaders begin pontificating on the personal details of the lives of the laity, that’s a red flag. But as I’ve also said before, when people come together for community, organization happens. Part of the organizational process is the delegation of roles, and leaders emerge. Nobody wants a pastor who says “I’m accountable to nobody except God, and therefore I don’t have to listen to you.” Is it really good for the laity to have that attitude then?


  85. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Miguel:

    If you read my post clearly, I said that I stole that list from the blog of a Presbyterian minister. They aren’t my points.
    >> YOU said (and I quote) “I’ve got to insist, though, there is a good, healthy, non-abusive way to practice covenant membership, and right use of it can be an edifying tool in the contemporary pastoral toolbox. Here’s a list of point about formalized membership that I stole of the blog of a Presbyterian minister:”
    If you don’t believe what you were quoting, it is certainly not at all clear from what you wrote. Either say that you do, or repudiate it. (Though it you repudiate it, I don’t know why you quoted it.

    1. So you understand the teaching of Jesus to be fundamentally anti-community? Fundamentally I think Jesus called us to believe in HIM, as the Son of God. To become disciples of HIM (not of some pastor.) We are certainly to love our brothers (and sisters) in Christ. But this idea of a “community of believers” which we are to ‘join’ is ridiculous. We don’t ‘join’ the Church – at least not be some membership criteria – we believe Jesus and become a member of the Church Universal. Yes, we can join churches (little c) to join with other brothers in following Christ – but it is certainly not necessary to join a little c church.
    You say “However, I propose that no man can claim to have God as his Father that does not also have the church (universal, not institutional) as his mother.” \
    Careful – you begin to sound like Witness Lee’s church. I have no idea where you came up with this idea, but it actually sounds heretical to me. Perhaps you need to expound exactly what you mean, to allay my fears?

    2. I think you have misquoted Paul. He has said we are strong IN CHRIST, and weak in ourselves.
    >> if you think I meant something else, I was unclear. The point is we are strong IN CHRIST. NOT strong in the church.

    >>God has clearly called some to be teachers,
    This is also true. But he has not called ALL to be teachers. And if the ego of a teacher is inflated by an assumed call, then they probably have misheard their call. The best pastor would be like Chaucer’s “But first he wrought and then he taught” if I remember correctly. Teaching is a lot more about listening to the one being taught than most pastors seem to think. And the (common) idea that if you have something to say you can twist a passage around to say that is abominable.

    So that we in turn can support, serve, and build up others.
    >> Yes – support, build up and server sounds good. Authority over others? Not so much.

    Sounds community-ish, no?
    >NO it doesn’t – not at all a description of what people who want to be in authority mean by community.

    We boast not in our own strength, but in the death of Christ.
    >> Don’t forget the resurrection. Let us not rebuild a foundation of dead works, but move on. If Christ be not risen, we are most to be pitied.

    3. You are reading into my word “church” what I did not say. I didn’t mean to ignore the historic distinction between the visible and invisible church.
    >> given the history of this blog and the discussion you were responding to, I think it is completely natural that I would make this assumption.

    “Bouncing around from congregation to congregation (not church, mind you) based upon where you are most entertained does treat the body of Christ at large as something that exists to satisfy you, as opposed to a team on mission you are called to serve as a part of.”
    >> Talk about a straw man. I doubt very many people would meet this description – though there are a few. However when people “in authority: in a church abuse that authority – and there are myriad cases where they do – then RUN do not walk away from that church. And a good indication that such are in charge is this idea of signing a covenant.

    4. The various gifts…. Isn’t the point that everyone has something to contribute to the body of Christ?
    And what did you say? Oh I am sorry – what did you quote?
    ” It means that you help lead and guide the church.” – I object because this is a typical mistake of those who abuse their position in a church – they think that only those ‘leading and guiding’ a church are doing God’s work.

    5. I did not say discipleship of the church. But we do not disciple ourselves; Jesus commanded the apostles to disciple the nations.
    >> Actually NO, HE DID NOT. He asked them to make disciples of all nations. Not to discipline them! And He didn’t want them to make disciples of themselves – He wanted them to make dsciples of JESUS!!

    7. “Who said anything about abdicating responsibility? ”
    OK – perhaps I read into this what you ddin’t mean. But we have so many congregations out there that decide they can better spend your money on charity than you can. That you must tithe to the church so they can decide how to spend the money – amazing how many nice houses and cars these guys have. (This blog lists a lot of them in early posts.)

    8. Church covenants ought not be treated as legal contracts. They can be upheld as such in a court of law, but a church who takes a covenant breaker to court is flat out wrong. All they are to do is deny communion.
    >> As long as they can be upheld in law, they are legal contracts and anyone who signs one is being very foolish. As to denying communion – you realize they are trying to deny communion not just from themselves, but from all other Christians? One of the writers of this blog was a victim of this!


  86. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    So I know I’m late in the game on this post but if anyone of you gets a chance to respond I’d be much obliged because I am extremely curious about the two questions that came up for me. Firstly I agree with the writer as a whole, the abuse brought up is real. My question thought is 1. What do you think Paul was actually like as a leader? Was he sort of a grass roots, stand by the peoples side and lead or was he an authoritarian. I think it’s interesting because we see him say things that let us know he wouldn’t impose anything on his churches that he himself wouldn’t do and we see him as an advocate for freedom in Christ but we also see him say things like in 1 Cor 4:21 if he should come to them with a rod?

    2. The good news referenced at the end of the article, the death burial resurrection etc…that is Paul’s gospel. But what was the good news that Jesus was preaching?


  87. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Me,

    Thanks for the detailed response. The more your write the more I agree, so I’m a bit baffled on how our conclusions are so different. The 8 points I quoted were just food for thought, not hard and fast dogma. I tend to agree with the general idea he is after, though I take some exception to a few details.

    1. I think the “God-Father; Church-mother” quote is Augustine. I don’t know witness Lee, but this is a popular quote among Catholics and many protestants use it as support for tradition. The idea is simply that if you have faith in Christ, that faith came by hearing, and that hearing by the word of God. This word was delivered to you by believers, or members of the universal church. Therefore, they brought the gospel to you and are your spiritual “parent.” Nothing to do with authority, they just came before you and brought it to you, that’s all. We don’t become members of the “universal church” by faith without contact from within reaching out to us, even if its’ just by reading a print Bible we found lying around. I agree that faith in Christ makes one a member of the universal church, and individual congregations make a (little c) church. While I would say it isn’t necessary for salvation to join the membership role of a particular congregation, I do believe true faith will lead one toward participation in worship, mission and discipleship with other believers. Congregations are primarily an expression of this.

    2. Not strong in church; agree. Teachers can become egocentric. A good listener is more likely a good teacher. I guess I’ve never personally seen a pastor or someone try to leverage their authority over somebody, I can only imagine it’s great potential for psychological harm. I have seen the reverse though; I’ve seen ministers get their administrative hands slapped over and over again for routine business because they didn’t jump through enough hoops and win sufficient laity approval on minuscule details. Clergy get beat up too, sometimes, and a little administrative authority (with accountability) can help protect both parties from each other. True, people who desire power over others are the direct antithesis of all community building. I guess the main reason I see things differently from many around here is while they are wounded by abusive ministry “leaders,” my experience has been much more with toxic congregations. Somebody needs to speak up for the trampled in the pew, but the ones in the pulpit get crucified too, on occasion.

    3. Ok, your assumption is a bit more reasonable then I let on. Straw man? Well at last we agree that examples of this do exist, and I guess I’ve just run into many more. Congregational loyalty is at an all time low, imo. And yes, when you see “authorities” abusing their power, running is the appropriate response. As to covenants, well, it possibly depends on what is on the covenant. Rules and hoops? Probably. But agreement with a brief statement of faith, commitment to share the worship and mission of the church, and the right to the services of the church (marriage, burial, baptism, etc…) are not abusive stipulations. In our church, we sign to that and the following: “Should Satan succeed in deceiving me into a life of sin, I earnestly desire my fellow Christians to give me loving admonition.” We don’t go after those who aren’t participating enough, but if you stop coming at all, you shouldn’t have a vote, so you name may be removed from the list. But not before we first reach out to you. Most people give notice if they are going to a different congregation, though.

    4. Yup. Every gift is doing God’s work. In a good structure, though, everyone has a say in certain matters. That is how all can help “lead and guide”; through a congregational vote of the membership on certain issues. For example: My congregation voted to call me as the new music minister. They didn’t force me on anybody, but they were considerate of whether or not the majority thought I would be a good fit.

    5. The phrase “make disciples” is translated from one word which means “to teach.” It’s not about converting people, but teaching them to believe in and obey Jesus. But discipleship (teaching) without discipline (corrective action) doesn’t work in any field, religious faith or academics. I’m also a teacher. If a kid doesn’t behave in my class, he may receive detention. I’m not trampling on his rights; I am fighting to help him become a better student. It’s called tough love. The church version of this, imo, is denying communion to people who insist on their right to a particular sin. They DO have the legal right to sin as they please, but clinging to sin is the opposite of faith, which is clinging to the cross. The pastor ought not administer communion to those who refuse the cross, imo. When questioning the pastor becomes sin, it’s certainly time to run.

    7. I’m of the firm conviction that if you aren’t convinced of the church’s wise handling of finances, you ought not to give. To give anyways would be enabling malpractice. However, a right ordering of affairs (and reasonable, fair salaries) almost demands the financial loyalty of the membership. It’s their duty to make sure their pastor has food to eat if they call him to serve them full time. They agreed to this. A church that hides all its financial info is fishy already.

    8. I remember that from an early story. That was just wrong on so many levels. I understand how some pastors try to respect the corrective discipline of other congregations, but this should ALWAYS involve hearing both sides of the story. Anyone refusing to do so is simply unjust. And this is a shameful practice for those who are servants of the gospel. Not everyone running from a discipline situation is trying to find a church where they can continue their sin without accountability. My experience has been I’ve seen people switch churches to avoid accountability more than I’ve seen pastors try to blacklist those who dissent their tyranny, but the number is too high on either side of the issue. Perhaps if the covenant has the type of material in it that a church could sue you over, its a good example of legalism. With what you sign to join our church, no court would hear any case if we tried to sue former members. I don’t think the American justice system much cares if somebody stops believing that the Bible is true or Jesus is the Son of God.


  88. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Nick

    I think many people misunderstand the ministry of Jesus. Jesus was unique in many ways. He stood as a bridge between the OT and the Age of grace. In fact, in His short time in ministry (3 years) he spent a lot of time extending the law. What do I mean? He told the Pharisees that lust in one’s heart was the same as adultery. They were definitely screwed. He forgave the woman caught in adultery yet told her to go and “sin no more.” Within minutes, she most likely sinned again-not adultery but something else.

    Then Jesus showed His interest in hanging around “seedy” characters and kids, totally eschewing the establishment.He actually seemed to enjoy those folks.

    Jesus pointed out our utter helplessness to fully obey the law and at the same time showed he cared for the unimportant in the view of society.Jesus was preparing them for the Cross and the Resurrection.

    Now Paul, jumping on that bandwagon, spent his time pointing out the Resurrection and the Cross. In fact, I do not think he mentioned any of the miracles of Jesus, save the Resurrection. Well, the miracles that people seem to care about such as the feeding of the 5000, healing the sick, raising the dead. For Paul, it was all about the Cross and Resurrection. And I think, if Paul was human, then he was a lot like us-sometimes loving, sometimes miffed off, etc. But, the one thing He always discussed is the reason for Jesus.

    Now, I have a post to finish. Welcome to TWW.


  89. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Where exactly though do we see Jesus pointing out our utter helplessness to obey the law? If I read the sermon on the mount with no church experience, I’d take away that he actually wants and expects people to live like that. And I agree with his care for the unimportant in view of society. That is one of the reasons I ask the question about Jesus’ gospel and Paul’s gospel because their using the same word and seemingly describing different things. For instance if you isolate the book of Luke the good news is only for the poor. Starting with the Magnificat and carrying through the idea is good things are coming to the poor and things are being taken from the rich.


  90. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Nick
    If you look at another woman with lust, you have committed adultery. As a few of my male friends have said, “All men are screwed at one time or another.” You cannot always obey the things of the law. That is the point that Jesus made. He was preparing our hearts for the freedom we would experience with His grace. As one of my current pastors says, “Even on my best days, my motives are mixed.” It is a glorious freedom to know that, although we try, and although we fail everyday, we are free in Christ. We are positionally holy and functionally sinful. It is finished, done.

    There is another theme that runs through the Gospels and that is the care of the poor, the lost, the outcast. And in that case, we have all failed at some point or another. Just look at our world and those that are dying of hunger, being sold into sex slavery, the mentally ill who live under bridges, those without fresh water, etc.Thankfully, in spite of our inability or neglect of those who suffer, Christ promises them a glorious hope that one day all will be made right.I hold myself up as one who has not done enough in this area. Yet Jesus spent his 3 short years of ministry in serving those outcasts. I cannot say the same thing of myself. But, there are probably many who have given themselves totally to this but even they will still struggle with lust, arrogance, anger, etc.

    No matter how hard I try, I will fail. That is the beauty of Christ’s gift to us. I am free.


  91. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Nick

    You write…
    “ 1. What do you think Paul was actually like as a leader?”

    What if Paul, and the other “Disciples of Christ,” did NOT * see themselves* as “Leaders?”

    IMO – Today – there is much emphesis on “Leaders” in “The Abusive Religious System.” And we have – division – separation. A special Clergy class – a lowly dumb laity. Some leaders and some followers. And followers are browbeat, coerced, into giving money to, obeying and submitting to, so-called “leaders.” Those who take “Titles” NOT in the Bible in order to control and manipulate.

    Jesus taught, “My sheep – Hear My Voice – and follow me.” And Paul taught, those who are “Led” by the Spirit are the sons of God. NOT those following a “mere fallible human.”

    Jesus, in Mat 23:8-10, taught “His Disciples” NOT to be called – Rabbi – Father – Leader…
    You’re ALL brethren. (NO division.) And there is “ONE” leader – the Christ. 😉

    Don’t know if you ever checked – but…
    Paul, never called himself “Leader.” And the Bible never calls Paul “Leader.”
    And NOT one “Disciple” called themself “Leader.”

    Paul, and the other “Disciples of Christ,”only refered to themselves as “Servants.”

    Jer 50:6
    *My people* hath been *lost sheep:*
    “their shepherds” have caused them “to go astray”


  92. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    “If I read the sermon on the mount with no church experience, I’d take away that he actually wants and expects people to live like that.”

    He does, Nick. It is a lie from the pit of hell that it is taught we cannot live like that. Otherwise, why would Jesus Christ bother to send the Holy Spirit to us? Why are “we” to be the temple where God dwells now?

    We will never be “perfect” because we are born in corrupted bodies and live in a corrupted world. Perfection is God and we “miss the mark”. But we can be “pure”. In fact, we are told that Jesus will present a “pure” Bride to Himself. We are even told to be righteous. But as NT Wright says, so many hear that word and think ‘self righteous’ and do not know the real meaning.


  93. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    “Was he sort of a grass roots, stand by the peoples side and lead or was he an authoritarian. I think it’s interesting because we see him say things that let us know he wouldn’t impose anything on his churches that he himself wouldn’t do and we see him as an advocate for freedom in Christ but we also see him say things like in 1 Cor 4:21 if he should come to them with a rod?”

    Study the book of Philemon. It is an excellent historical and doctrinal view of Paul and what kind of a “servant” he was. he was in prison when he wrote it. And if you understand the civil laws concerning runaway slaves, Paul’s message is even more incredible.


  94. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Anon1
    I know we are expected to live like that, I want to live like that, I try to live like that. I fail everyday. It is the want to and the follow through that is important. But, even on some days, I don’t try because I am tired, and sometimes even the want to falters a bit if I am being honest. In fact, there are days that I don’t even try, if I am honest. I am merely talking about myself.

    But, I admit that some Christians are just better at it than me. I am thankful for the righteousness of Jesus imputed to me because I know I daily fail. I think it was CS Lewis who said something to the effect of “In the next minute or hour I will fail to live what I believe to be true.” That describes me, not necessarily everyone else.


  95. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    dee

    That was good. And comforting. I fail often. 🙁

    Me too…
    “I am thankful for the righteousness of Jesus imputed to me because I know I daily fail.”

    Thank you Jesus – for your grace. For your blood.


  96. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    @ A. Amos Love,

    I dig your thoughts and I want to agree. That is what I hope that Paul is like, What do you make of when he says to the Corinthians..paraphrase…when I come see you should I come in love or with a rod? And other similar situations.

    @ Dee,

    What do you make of say something like the end of 1 cor 5 when Paul is saying that anyone who claims to be a bro or sis and is immoral, you shouldn’t even eat with that person.But then kind of this idea that Jesus likes sinners, hes not impressed with good church folk. Its humble and good and honest to confess our depravity (not total, just using the word). Doesn’t this appear to be a contradiction. Its almost like the message can be, “hey don’t be a “good” super religious church person and think its all about reading your Bible and not sinning, because Jesus likes sinners but once you realize that Jesus loves you make sure you become a good church person that reads there bible and doesn’t sin.” (Obviously I’m picking out a couple things…read bible and not sin…but hope the idea is clear)


  97. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Nick
    Paul is discussing a particular situation.There was frank immorality (a man sleeping with his mother in law). The man was twisting theology to say that there was nothing wrong with what he was doing. Freedom in Christ and all of that. When the church appears to condone wrong actions, we have a problem.

    Since I am the sinner I know best, let me talk about myself. I want to follow God, using Christ as my role model. I want to do good but sometimes I don’t. I don’t want to do bad but sometimes I do. Wait, I am sounding like Paul. In fact, here is a quote from Lewis “This year, or this month, or, more likely, this very day, we have failed to practise ourselves the kind of behaviour we expect from other people.”

    I am not as loving as I should be. I get impatient. There are times I care more about buying a car than caring for the lost.Many of the people that Jesus hung with were only too aware of their sin. The Pharisees had made darn sure of that. Many had given up all hope of being accepted and loved by God. Yet, they wanted God in their lives and Jesus gave them back their hope. The ones who were not aware of their sin seemed to be the Pharisees.And they rejected Jesus.

    You said “Jesus likes sinners but once you realize that Jesus loves you make sure you become a good church person that reads there bible and doesn’t sin.” First of all, who doesn’t sin? So if Jesus’ love of me is predicated on never sinning, then I am screwed. But Scripture says that while we were yet sinners, Christ came. He loved us. It is my understanding that, the moment the Holy Spirit resides in me, I begin a transformation that will continue and will not be finished in this world.It is the willingness to carry on, fall down, brush myself off and start again, repeating the process until the day I die. Then it will be finished. I am positionally holy but functionally sinful.

    It is only the grace of Christ that gives me hope and helps me not to become depressed that I still struggle in different areas of my life (and in areas that I don’t even know at this point). So, I proceed. Following Christ, sinning, asking for forgiveness and truly wanting to do the right thing (at least, most days). That is the joy that I have-forgiveness, hope, the love of God and the presence of the Spirit on my journey.Not so bad!


  98. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Nick

    You write – Mon, Mar 12 2012 at 01:56 pm…
    I think referring to the possibility of Paul also being an “Authoritarian”…
    “we see him as an advocate for freedom in Christ but we also see him say things like in
    1 Cor 4:21 if he should come to them with a rod?”

    Thought that an interesting observation so I looked up that verse. And the word “Rod.”
    And today you ask again… 😉

    IMO – One of our unique quandaries with the Bible…
    We all have the ability to use the Bible to validate our life style, and our beliefs…
    We seem to be able to find what we already believe.

    Here’s what I found. It seems – “Rod” can be harsh, to beat someone. “Authoritarian.”
    And – “Rod” can be a nice word. A baton of royalty. A shepherds staff – to lean on.

    If Paul means it to be “Harsh” here? Why is he “Asking” – shall I come to you with a rod?
    And giving this bunch an option? …with a “Rod, ”or in love, and in the spirit of meekness?

    Personally – I have never had “Authoritarian Leaders” *ask* my opinion about much at all.
    They just tell you, in many different ways, Many Messages, Just Pray, Pay and Obey.
    So, I see Paul, the Servant???, “asking” if he can come with a “Rod,” or in love… 🙂

    1 Cor 4:21.
    What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness?

    Rod – is Strongs #4464 – rhabdos – a cane or a baton of royalty, sceptre, staff.
    …….. In the KJV – rod 6, staff 4, sceptre 2; 12

    Rod – in Thayers Lexicon
    1) a staff, a walking stick, a twig, rod, branch (Nice)
    2) a rod with which one is beaten (NOT so Nice – Harsh)
    3) a staff as used on a journey, or to lean upon, or by shepherds (Nice)
    3b) when applied to kings
    3b1) with a rod of iron, indicates the severest, most rigorous rule (NOT so Nice – Harsh)

    And – When Jesus Rules – with a “Rod” – of iron no less… – Rev 2:27, Rev 11:1, Rev 19:15.
    Is Jesus being “Harsh?” Or – Is Jesus being “Nice,” loving?

    Rule – In Rev is – Strongs #4165. poimaino
    to tend as a shepherd of (figuratively, supervisor):– feed (cattle), rule.
    …….. In the KJV – feed 6, rule 4, feed cattle 1; 11

    Rule – Thayers Lexicon
    1) to feed, to tend a flock, keep sheep
    1a) to rule, govern
    1a1) of rulers
    1a2) to furnish pasture for food
    1a3) to nourish
    1a4) to cherish one’s body, to serve the body
    1a5) to supply the requisites for the soul’s need

    So, for me, when Jesus “rules with a Rod of iron” – (And Paul also with his “Rod”)
    Jesus is “tending the flock” with a “shepherds staff of royalty” made of iron. 🙂

    (Nice)


  99. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Dee,

    I agree he is discussing a particular situation but at the bottom when he makes the statement about not eating with such people he has opened it up to apply to all sorts of situations. Why I bring this up is because firstly I do think there is an apparent contradiction in our thinking that we are supposed to be okay with being sinners but are attempting to be holy. If we put it into an imperative statement it has to go something like…don’t think your not a sinner, know that you are one but try not to sin so much. Which I find as just strange! But this is theory I’ve been thinking about that Jesus didn’t love sinners and ask them to become not sinners(take this with a grain of salt I know no one becomes perfect but the general idea in Chrisitanity is try not to be such a sinner), he loved sinners and asked them to love greatly. I think this way because of Jesus statement that all the law and prophets are summed up in Do to others as you would have them do to you, and other statements in the bible with a huge emphasis on love that we don’t ignore but tend to keep sidelined. Now continuing with the theory I think every time morality, not sinning, good behavior is addressed it could be because if we do that it will make us better lovers even if it is not explicitly stated. But since it is not expoicitly stated, general evangelical Christianity says oh Bible says behave this way, it’s pleasing to God…etc and we don’t realize we are doing it to be better lovers. So it becomes a contradiction. And now we have grace and a new law(good behavior minimal sin) instead of grace and a new purpose(love). And law is always about ourselves where love is about others.


  100. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    A. Amos Love

    I like it. What does IMO mean by the way? I think that’s a cool thing you found. I’m still curious though because if that’s what he meant then why would he say in love OR rod, the contrast makes the rod seem opposite of gentle. Just to let you know where I’m coming from, I’m not making a case for nor do I support authoratarian leadership. In your first response you mentioned Paul never calling himself a leader and I think that’s the way it was meant to be, communities under the leadership of Jesus with certain people given spiritual GIFTS like eldership and signing and serving and whatever which is not in anyway a church office. There are wise dudes that seem to have a special sense when people are hurting or in need in the church I spend my time with and I consider them elders more than the people who are labeled elders. With that being said I still am up in the air about the way Paul was. I think there are theoretical parts of his theology that weren’t perhaps weren’t practical in his time and place. So I think the general message of equality and community is consistent with what you have been talking about but are there times when it seems like Paul doesn’t stand by that message? It appears possible. I don’t find this a reason not to trust Paul or his message, he was a recovering Pharisee who was open about his own struggles I’m just suggesting he might have been human and gotten angry and said things or did things at times outside of his own ideals. Ps this is speculation. Brainstorming.


  101. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    imo = in my opinion

    also, imho = in my humble opinion


  102. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    gracias numo


  103. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    De nada, Nick!


  104. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    Hi Nick

    Enjoying the thoughts and questions. Causing me to search, to ask different questions.
    Thanks numo for helping out with – IMO – Meaning – In My Opinion.

    Nick, you ask…
    “why would he say in love OR rod, the contrast makes the rod seem opposite of gentle.”

    That’s the way I always understood “Rod” – “opposite of gentle.” Paul, the tough guy.
    But – because of you asking this question – I can see Pauls “Asking” as being “gentle.”
    So, now, when I look at “Rod” I have some additional – maybe’s. 😉

    Maybe – Paul is offering something Nice – OR – something, really, really, Nice.. 😉

    Maybe – This “OR” is NOT opposite – but – This “OR” is offering something greater, better?

    Maybe – Pauls “Rod” is a shepherds staff – used to help, correct, protect, ”helpless sheep?”

    Maybe – Kinda like – offering help, correction, to a teenager – who knows everything…
    Errr…. Thinks they know everything – And desires to be treated as an adult.

    Maybe – Paul’s “Rod” is offering help, correction, protection – OR – love, spirt of meekness?

    How’s that for some – Maybe’s? 😉

    And Jesus, in Mark 10:42, teaches His Disciples NOT to be like those who rule over
    the gentiles – NOT to “Exercise Lordship” and NOT to “Exercise Authority” upon them.

    So, here, I would like to see Paul as a “Servant.” NOT as one who will “Exercise Authority.”

    What is popular is not always “Truth.”
    What is “Truth” is not always popular.”


  105. Notice: Undefined variable: button in /home/guswo2wr8yyv/public_html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/quote-comments/quote-comments.php on line 127

    A. Amos Love,

    Dig the maybes and ESPECIALLY the Jesus quote. The man said some radical things that would certainly mess up some Christians’ ideologies.