Posted on 11/22/2005 7:11:21 AM PST by nckerr
Chapter and verse, please. You'll see that Jesus spoke to multitudes but only committed his deeper teaching for his disciples.
Sounds pretty lazy and luke-warm to me.
Sounds arrogant and inexperienced to me.
I have yet to meet a saved person who was content to hang out in kindergarten and sing songs all day.
Have you met any that never graduated for kindergarten? I have. They get saved, get excited and then fade away. But there are other parables that deal with that phenomemon.
Not everyone who is saved will always hunger and thirst for righteousness; some will be filled sooner than others and some will be filled for a while to again hunger for more.
I didn't know that you were into the business of so many churches! Maybe you should bring up their failings to them instead of us?
While I appreciate the humor, I son't feel that my particular denomination is the "one true" denomination.
In my opinion, denominations are rather secondary to sound teaching, and that is the root of the debate at hand.
Many teachers, preachers, and denominations are leading their congregations down the wide, broad path to perdition simply because they want to be as appealing as possible to as many as possible - at the sake of sound doctrine. Because they're afraid to call sin for what it is, regardless of where they see it. Because they want to appeal to man's fleshly desires in order to make him more "comfortable" in their building. Because they want to use every method possible OTHER than sound Biblical teaching.
I believe that pastor was Charles Stanley.
Although it is often read as, and many hold it means, that an elder is not to be divorced, the Scripture says he is to be the husband of one wife. A strict interpretation would indicate that he cannot be remarried so long as the previous wife is alive.
I may be wrong, but I think in Stanley's situation, his wife left him. I am unaware that he has remarried.
"Many first-time attendees I've seen in church were backslidden or out of fellowship,"
Slightly over half of our new members are not church goers and a number of them have never been to church.
You are correct. Funny thing is, many evangelical churches that have no problem at all speaking out against homosexuality will gloss over the biblical teachings on divorce.
wouldn't leading worship be leading? or singing a solo, encouraging? wouldn't both both demonstrate faith?"
As I understand it, spiritual gifts need to be affirmed by the body...ie the body should recognize that gift in you. I've never heard the line of argument that you can sort of piggy-back a gift onto a pre-existing talent. But I guess if you tee it up that way, you recognize it that way, and the body affirms it, then you might get there.
Also you can't violate the requirements for worship by the exercise of a gift. We can think of all sorts of talents which are not appropriately used in the body....this thread has already pointed them out. So I think that however you think about this, we can't be so open-ended that any and all talents can then morph into spiritual gifts.
Crowds of what? So does the Superbowl. So does WWF Wrestling. It most often means they're entertaining, not teaching.
"Maybe you should bring up their failings to them instead of us?"
I'm working on it...but it't not an easy sale.
Check out the John Piper article and the other Piper articles like it. See if you are convinced that an elder should not be divorced. He makes a pretty strong exegetical case. If you google "John Piper and divorce" you can find about 3 or 4 good articles.
yeah, that's not a surprise when you have churches built on worldly principles and teaching vain worldly philosophies (Colossians 2:8) e.g. purpose driven/entertainment based, church growth, emergent churches, word-faith fulfillment gospel, or other experientially based churches rather than preaching the whole truth, the hard truth, and nothing but the truth.
If it isn't an easy sale to the preachers who should be in tune with the Lord, why would it be any easier for them to be more confrontational to the general congregation?
I understand that there were times when Jesus would say provocative things to confront the crowds; he even points out that there is a time to prune the tree of dead branches, but he didn't do it willy-nilly. Perhaps these pastors are cowards; perhaps they are trying to walk circumspectly and do more behind closed doors than is apparent?
"the only talent i haven't figured out how it could be used to glorify God is marksman."
One of our Bible study groups whose theme is outdoor activities frequently goes skeet shooting after church.
We also have a one weekend per year Bible study that is a duck hunting trip.
>>You'll see that Jesus spoke to multitudes but only committed his deeper teaching for his disciples<<
Because he knew his time was short - which is why he instructed his disciples to teach others. The Great Commission springs immediately to mind.
Paul's numerous letters all contain instruction to the individuals or churches to train, teach, grow, and exhort others in righteousness. Christianity is not for the idle. To start:
Luke 6:4, Matthew 13:52, 1 Peter 2:2, Hebrews 12:11, 2 Peter 3:18, Titus 2:11-13, 2Tim 3:16, 1 Cor 3:7, 1 Tim 4:7, and nearly the entire book of Ephesians.
Those who hear the word and accept it are the ones who produce fruit. The rest fall by the wayside.
>>They get saved, get excited and then fade away. But there are other parables that deal with that phenomemon.<<
And as the parable of the sower indicates, they were never truly regenerate in the first place.
John MacArthur claims it means "One woman man." which he went on further to say it meant to not be a womanizer, and married to only one woman at a time.
BUt, I think he is full of himself.
There was a REASON why Jesus told the woman at the well that the day had come to worship in spirit AND truth. Both are neccessary, IMHO. Bible-study church services are devoid of spirit and soul, and experiential services, as you call them, are simply entertainment. I believe with all my heart that Jesus wants both. At the same time.
Our former church had two deacons who were divorced from their spouses, and living with each other (one male and one female).
Good to see you here, Sister.
"If it isn't an easy sale to the preachers who should be in tune with the Lord, why would it be any easier for them to be more confrontational to the general congregation?"
Perhaps they are not as in touch with the Lord as we would like them to be.
I am glad it is your FORMER church. Not only is the divorce thing a problem, but having a woman deacon is definately out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.