Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | INVITATION | NT general | jlhetrick | 199995 | ||
IrishEyes- It may be that you have made a rush to judgment on this particular subject. Futhermore, by offering the poster advise to "seek another church..." you may be actually steering her away from where God has lead her. Consider 2 Corinthians 6:14. If we are commanded to not be "unequally yoked together with unbelievers" then it must be that it is possible to know a believer from an unbeliever. The answer is found in scripture and the place we start is John 13:35; working forwards and backwords from there. I'm not suggesting that I, or any other person, can know for sure the spiritual condition of another; whether he is saved or unsaved (nor do I believe that these passages are teaching that directly). But we are commanded to do the work of not allowing ourselves to become "unequally yoked". In the end, if we are fooled, let it not be because we are to lazy or uninterested in doing a proper investigation. Currently, my daughter is in a long-lasting relatinship with a man that she says she loves and wants to marry. She met him at church and originally knew him as someone who attended church and was "active". She recently put some distance between herself and him because she read something he had posted referring to himself as an agnostic. She confronted him and he admitted that the posting was true. I am not championing her as a righteous saint, but she said to him as well as her mother and me that she would not marry an unbeliever. Her heart was broken as she related it to me and she holds hope that Christ will save him. Otherwise, she is standing firm. To the young man's credit, he did not simply confess something he doesn't believe in order to have her hand though I know as much as a father can know that he wants to marry her. So let's be careful in how we give advise on the Forum and even more careful regarding what we declare is or is not in Scripture. Otherwise we err regardless of our good intentions. God Bless, Jeff |
||||||
2 | INVITATION | NT general | Irish Eyes | 200006 | ||
Note - repost since I inadvertently directed this response to the wrong person. Point taken, Jeff. It was not something I wrote with a nonchalant or cavalier attitude. It was only after prayerful reflection and serious discussion with my husband that I even responded at all to Sandra's inquiry. My husband was even more adamant than I. I would not and did not presume to tell her what to do in this matter. I truthfully told her what I would do in this situation IF IT WERE ME. It is not only legalism in the truest sense, but it is also an invasion of privacy. No believer should ever have to 'prove' himself worthy to another human to obtain membership and/or fellowship. Should a member become disruptive or divisive within the local church, however, it is then the responsibility of the pastor/teacher of that local church to send the member out from among the congregation. |
||||||
3 | INVITATION | NT general | jlhetrick | 200018 | ||
Thanks for the response Irish Eyes. Not meaning to be contentious; your suggesting that you would handle the situation in a certain way still amounts to giving advise but Hank has appropriately addressed the giving advise issue. Still concerned though that you may not be considering the scripture I included in my previous post to you as you still do not afford the Christian individual and the Church body as a whole the consideration of what scripture demands. That is, the RESPONSIBILITY of not being unequally yoked with unbelievers. What you are referring to as "legalism in the truest sense" seems to me to be what Scripture demands. That is, taking responsibility that we are not unequally yoked with unbelievers. I'm concerned that your position is based more in the emotion than in Scripture (as the Scripture has already been supplied). At least if you believe I'm misunderstanding you (as I very well may be) please try to address the Scripture references I gave you. Then we will be in a better position to understand each other. If Scripture says what it says (as referenced) where is the legalism you refer to so strongly. Again I may be misunderstanding you but your latests post, to which I am now responding, seems to be one of the truest fallacies of the modern day church. Perhaps it was true to some extent in the early church but there is no doubt that it is a major problem today. Open the doors wide and let anybody in. Not only that, but lure them in and even drag them if necessary. Not the biblical picture of the Church. I'm not saying deny anyone the opportunity to hear the Word, but membership is an entirely different issue. Your wrong, in my opinion, that the time of action is after a MEMBER becomes disruptive or divisive. That misses the whole point. Many of the local churches of today are so full of those types that if there were to be any "sending... from among" some local bodies would shrink to the point those that remained would be very lonely. One reason, again in my opinion, local church bodies refuse to follow the biblical mandates regarding accountability and discipline. Instead, the modern thinking seems to be how many, how fast, and hope that some are prestigious and wealthy enough to build us a really big building (not what your saying; what their saying). If you do respond please provide a biblical argument for your position so that we be productive and not involved in personal opinion/position arguments. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
4 | INVITATION | NT general | Irish Eyes | 200025 | ||
Very well. If my saying that this is what I would do is tantamount to giving advice then the conclusion I must arrive at is that I should never say what I would do or would not do on a public forum. I dislike debate and abhor conflict. I much prefer keeping my thoughts to myself or only sharing them with my husband. I reluctantly responded to Sandra's question for that very reason. Yes, you are misunderstanding me, Jeff. But you don't know me from Adam's off ox so I can certainly understand how you arrived at the conclusions you have. I would never condone dragging anyone into church. If GOD in HIS omiscience granted each of us our free volition to choose for or against HIM, then who am I, a mere human, to ever attempt to do otherwise? |
||||||
5 | INVITATION | NT general | jlhetrick | 200042 | ||
Irish E. These types of dialogues can only be fruitful when we stick to the point, rely on Scripture, and ensure that our emotions don't carry us away. Otherwise we end up in a battle of wills believing someone has to win. Of course, then the focus is entirely on self. In order that I don't further convolute the missed points here I'll just simply say that "I should never say what I would do or would not do" would be a good tact. The best way to handle things like the original inquiry of sqkeener is to offer Scriptural reference addressing the issue as best you can supply it so that the questioner can be better informed to make a decision. I hope this is an example of giving appropriate advise on the forum. It's not my opinion, it's in keeping with the Terms of Use of the Forum. We must strive to uphold the rules and standards of our gracious host, The Lockman Foundation, and keep this about bible study. Please forgive me if you understood me to be saying that YOU would drag someone into church. I specifically wrote in my last post "(not what your saying; what their saying)" to avoid being misunderstood in that way. You still have not attempted to respond to my biblical references or attempted to offer any biblical support of your own so I am left, at this point, assuming that you are unwilling or unable to do so. Sometimes the struggle is not with not having the answer, but in not being willing to let go of our assertions. Jeff |
||||||
6 | INVITATION | NT general | Irish Eyes | 200048 | ||
I respectfully withdraw from further dialog on this matter. I thank you for taking the time and effort to discuss them with me. In Him |
||||||