Pastors Leading the flock???)
George R (grimel@icx.net)
Mon, 07 Sep 1998 16:26:22
On 09/06/98 at 07:35 PM, ReedActs@AOL.com said:
>Mike:
> I guess you didn't feel like answering any of those questions. Oh
>well.
You said you didn't want to discuss this. So I didn't.
>>>MikeB4:
>>> I know we have discussed this before and I don't really want to get
>>>into a discussion of this matter but the programing on TV is
>>>destructive and not constructive.
> BTW- It seems strange to me that anyone could use a baby as an analogy
>for what little "good" TV programing there may be.
But the common analogy is "throwing out the baby with the bath water".
>Mike:
> Oh no! Three times in one week!
I think I mentioned in a post before the reason Christmas has a special
place in my family, it ain't the holiday.
> Skip cut and pasted all this:
> Skip:
>> (how many
>>times has someone on this list replied the UPCI rules/regs were made by
>>Holy Ghost filled prayerful men?) to the leadership.
>Skip this time:
> Doesn't matter to me one way or the other; but, the answer to the
>above question is significant.
>
> Mike this time:
> Okay then, how many times?
More than once. The significance to the answer is the reply is given at
all. That reply implies those who do not hold to their (the UPCI (or
org XYZ)) rules/regs are _not_ prayerful Holy Ghost filled men.
> Mike:
>You, (and others) seem to want to make any pastor that establishes extrabiblical standards >in their local congregations out to be some kind of totalitarian monarch.
Only some are totalitarian monarch; misguided, unresponsive, mislead,
blindly passing on what they've been taught are labels more fitting to
most.
>That may be the case in some circumstances. The lion share of the
>pastors that I know that have standards such as these don't make "their
>rules [and] God's rules giving both equal sway." Again, it seems you
>are setting up a strawman to beat down. If there are men putting their
>rules on equal footing with God's rules, they are wrong to do that, but
>that is a separate issue from pastoral standards.
Ah, now we are getting some where. What are pastoral standards if they
aren't rules of men? If they aren't on equal footing with God's rules,
why are the rules made? Why aren't the extra rules given as "these are
my rules in addition to God's rules" instead of these are the rules and
one big list of rules with both God's rules and man's rules?
> Mike:
> Sorry Skip, but I must hold your feet to the fire on this one. Who
>defines modesty? If that definition is in the bible, please show me
>where.
For starters:
Isaiah 47:1 Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of
Babylon, sit on the ground: [there is] no throne, O daughter of the
Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate. Isaiah
47:2 Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare
the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. Isaiah 47:3 Thy
nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take
vengeance, and I will not meet [thee as] a man.
> MikeB4:
> You don't think these standards follow logic or make sense?
>...If they seem illogical to you, I don't know if I can reach you.
> Skip:
> Nope, they don't make sense
>
> Mike:
> That is what I was afraid of.
Work on the love a little ;)
1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear:
because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
Skip
When all else fails read the directions:
Psalms 119:105 Thy word [is] a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my
path.
Proverbs 6:23 For the commandment [is] a lamp; and the law [is] light;
and reproofs of instruction [are] the way of life:
--
----------------------------------------------------
personal: http://user.icx.net/~grimel/MyPlace.html
I'm on a journey; "A Journey: Back to the Book of Acts".
Find out why http://user.icx.net/~grimel/back2acts.html
Why do we praise the way we do?
http://user.icx.net/~grimel/back2acts_why_we_praise.html
Best viewed at true colors
----------------------------------------------------