Obedience TWO REPLIES

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

On Wed, 2 Sep 1998 14:03:21 EDT FITZGEREL@AOL.com writes:
>In a message dated 9/2/98 8:57:50 AM Mountain Daylight Time, 
>lyohnk@juno.com
>writes:
>
><< Amazing that those of us willing to obey are dubbed "ignorant" and
> unstudied and unwilling to work out our own salvation.  All untrue.
> 
> Lynne Yohnk >>
> 
>Sis Lynne,     It is a typical bully tactic and once we all recognize 
>that, you just leave them to their folly.
>
>Pastor Fitzgerel

Actually, it was NOT an attempt to "bully" anyone, and if the message was
read, it was clear in its premise.

Read it again.  It did not say that anyone willing to obey was
"ignorant".  The phrase used was "obedience >>IN<< ignorance", not
obedience.

Please don't automatically assume the worst when reading someone's
post...REMEMBER!!!  You are gonna have to put up with me for many billion
millenia!  ;)

+++++++++++SEPARATE POST+++++++++++++

> 	Do we as Saints have responsibility to verify truth?

>Yes. We ought to be like the believers in Acts 17:10-11
>
>And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto
Berea:
>who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
>
>These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received
the
>word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily,
whether
>those things were so.

In other words, they didn't just automatically obey everything without
question or thought to the matter, right?

> 	What do we do, when we find a Pastor in error?

>It depends on the time of error.

>Factual error (i.e. He says Mexico is in Central America) should be
dealt
>with as with any other person.

It's not?  <G>

>Doctrinal error should be dealt with according to the passages in
Timothy.
>Entreat him as a father, and after the first and second unheeded
warnings
>avoid him (i. e. go elsewhere). Speak to others in leadership about the
>matter if it is causing problems for the whole church.
>
>Moral error should be dealt with Scripturally, too. 

Do you believe that Pastors should be given better treatment than saints
when this type of error occurs?

>Confront him according to Matt. seeking a spirit of restoration 
>"when one is fallen, ye who are spiritual seek to restore him...". If 
>this attempt at restoration is unsuccessful and the lapse is 
>verifiable, take it to the elders of the church in a meeting, and 
>finally to the whole church as a body, should he refuse correction. 
>If in the face of clear evidene of SERIOUS moral failure,
>people wish to deceive and cover up for the sake of "peace", 
>leave that body ASAP. 

Agreed.

>Ichabod is on the door. 

Okay, although I have heard this phrase many times, no one has told me
what it means...

>What do we do, When the Pastor states he does not care, It's his way or
>the highway?
>
>Ask yourself if the point is worth it to fight over. If it is one of the
>situations listed above, choose from that list. Prayer can be remarkably
>successful n cases like this, too. God can intervene when a minister
uses
>the "my way or the highway" statement one time too many and discover
that
>God made "his way" the highway.

>Also depending on attachments to the assembly, you can choose to leave.
Paul
>and Barnabas parted ways for a time. Maybe you can, too.

It still hurts to do so, though.

> 	Should a Pastor have the right to impose HIS own CONVICTIONS on
the body
>that he is a shepard of?
>
>To me that depends. Did the pastor start the work from scratch? If so
and
>people undestood this was the way it would be, and chose to join, sure.
If
>he came in because of an "audition" as Bro. Jerry put it, and made this
>clear, and was voted in sure. BUT if he came in under false pretenses
and
>decided to "clean house" once he got there (I've known ministers who
have
>justified being deceitful, because God wanted them there to clean
house),
>then no, he should be given his coat, hold the door for him, so it
doesn't
>hit him on the way out. Why this answer to the last question? If he had
to
>deceive to get the position, God didn't want him there, so he isn't one
of
>the "shepherds

I believe that PERSONAL CONVICTIONS are just that; personal convictions
and, if blindly applied to an entire congregation, do major damage. 
Think of the same thing if one of the saints just suddenly decided that
his or her personal convictions should just automatically be made almost
a test of fellowship for the congregation.  It would be damaging.  The
same goes for ANYONE, even, in my opinion, a Pastor.  Should he be able
to teach about his own convictions?  Sure, but I believe that there needs
to be attention placed on the fact that they are HIS personal convictions
and not demands from God (Holiness).

God provides shepherds in a church for us to follow. Paul set the limits
for
their authority in his statement "follow me as I follow Christ." If I as
a
shepherd stop following Christ, I have no business telling others to
follow
me. A shepherd is not following Christ to the degree that he does not
submit
his will to Christ's, just as it is with any saint. I may be submitted in
one area, but not another. A pastor might ask his church to sign up under
him in an MLM on the basis of his pastoral authority. In this part of his
ministry he is not following Christ, so the request/command need not be
obeyed. One of the benefits of plural ministry is that the elders and
shepherds can keep each other accountable and avoid such things
happeneing.

And such abuse can be multiplied in a "family church", especially if the
family holds all the leadership positions and has for generations.  And,
no, I am not specifying any certain Church...

>Frank Vandenburg

Excellent post, Brother Vandenburg
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jerry Welch

www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2810/

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]