A Shame?

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

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998 18:11:02 -0500 tlwitness@juno.com (Jerry Welch)
writes:

>MY LINE is that as long as the Pastor exercises SCRIPTURAL Authority, 
>he has the leadership of the local congregation, but as soon as he 
>starts making things up OUTSIDE of the Bible, then it is not a 
>salvational expectation from God and most assuredly should NOT be 
>taught as such, since that would be a lie.  

And that is my line also.  Of course it would seem that what you think is
Biblical and what I think is Biblical are two different things at least
as far as pastoral authority.

>Again, not blindly it is not.  I don't know if a good Pastor would 
>want a bunch of blind and dumb sheep.

I doubt it too.

>By taking your posts into context, I would assume that you are meaing 
>a DOCTRINAL issue that was promoted before the whole Church that would 
>affect the entire congregation, but what about the promotion of 
>personal convictions that only affect a few saints badly?  

I would challenge that too if I felt it was necessary. Now, HOW I would
challenge it is another story.

>How many saints is it okay to spiritually hurt or run out of Church 
>before the promotion of a personal conviction would be deemed wrong by 
>you?
>
>Is one enough?

Yup.

>This is a yes or no question; if the standard is not in the Bible 
>(let's take the color of socks since that was recently put to me), and 
>the Pastor states that the color of your socks will determine whether 
>you go to Heaven or Hell, is he right in putting that burden on the 
>saints?  

Really, it is not a yes or no question as you first asked it.

 Okay, I will address the issue of socks for a moment. 

We must ask why this standard?  Something that seems stupid may have a
very good reason.  Say we are in a city where a bad gang that kills
people has mandated that all members wear a certain color of socks.
Sister so and so brought a visitor who has family members who have been
killed by said gang.  This visitor sees someone wearing these color socks
and being slightly off balance she flips out.  The visitor really wants
to come to church but refuses because of her fear.  Pastor so and so then
asks the church to kindly not wear color A socks so the visitor can come
and feel comfortable and as long as he is at it says that it would be
good to refrain from those color socks because too many people associate
it with that gang which has permeated the area.

If certain members say it is stupid and refuse, it is not the color of
socks that is the problem, it is the lack of caring about this poor woman
who needs God. It is rebellion and refusing to be united in the efforts
to reach their city.

Now, a different scenario.  Pastor Lunatic says yesterday he heard a
voice from heaven. AAOOOOMM. He is the most spiritual person who ever
walked the face of the globe.  You can tell because God speaks to him
about everthing.  The pews ( they must not be padded because people may
get too comfortable).  The lightbulbs ( they must be 40 watts) God told
him. And NOW!!! Da-Da-DUM!!!!! The color of your socks!!!  Pastor Lunatic
says NO socks but white because only the PURE will inherit the earth and
white socks denote purity!! All others from any church both far and near
will go to hell because THEY wear BLACK socks straight from the pits of
hell SHOWING their uncleaness!!

Okay, nuff said about that.

Now, if I was going to the first church, I would obey the pastor and see
a good reason for it.  If I was going to the second, what would I do? 
Obey the pastor.  Why?  Because there are people who REALLY BELIEVE what
he says!!  If I had to continue going to this church ( and sometimes God
requires this) I would be on a mission to change it.  This is how I would
do it:  I would obey because those who think the pastor was right could
not be made free if they saw me as a rebel ( they would blow off anything
I said). Then, when I got the go ahead from God ( the voice from heaven)
I would go and talk to him about it.  Of course, Pastor Lunatic is so
spiritual *I* certainly couldn't tell *him* anything.  I would bide my
time.  I would do little things to try to free the people that would
ruffle everybody's feathers but it would be right and without rebellion
and thereby no one could find fault with it. There is a difference
between people finding fault with you when you are wrong and them finding
fault when you are right. If you are right you will have God's backing
and when the doors open spiritually it is awesome.  All the work you did
will come to fruition.  But a person can only do this by walking very
close to God.  And you will make mistakes, but not out of rebellion.

Admittedly, this is a very hard road to travel.  " For what glory is it,
if when ye be buffeted for your faults ye take it patiently? but if, when
ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptible
with God." 1 Peter 2:20

Now, if the thing is real bad, like a doctrinal thing, it should be dealt
with accordingly. ( Like taking it to the district board.)  But often,
the things that hurt people the most are things like you described that
the district board and the church will not deal with.

>Surely you would recognize that SOME Pastors consider any type of 
>questioning as rebellious...

Right, but I'm talking about rebellion toward God and not man.  There
comes a time when we have to care about what God thinks more than what
men think.

>Then he would be guilty of willful spiritual blindness 

No. Because if there is rebellion, then it IS wrong toward God and as
long as you are wrong that is all he will see.  It does not mean he is
not right with God anymore than when you make a wrong family decision
that you are wrong with God. 

The Bible is FULL of examples where Prophets were saying things 
>contrary to the Word of God and God sided with people who stood 
>against them.  

Right.  Isn't that great?

>So if we're wronged by the Pastor then we have to watch out so that we 
>don't hurt his feelings?

If we are wronged we have to make sure that we are right regardless of
what someone else does. We are not talking about the pastors feelings. 
If a pastor doesn't care about your feelings I wouldn't care too much
about his as long as you are completely right and not rebellious in any
way.

>>You must be impeccable. 
>
>Why doesn't the Pastor have to be?

He should.  That's the whole problem.

>Then try to prove me wrong.  Tell me SPECIFICALLY what risk was 
>involved when television first came out.

I think the men who made this decision discerned the direction it would
go.  People say they control it, but I wonder how many actually succeed.

>I also know that at that same time, RADIO had soap operas on them.
>
>So, why not speak out against RADIO?
 
As I previously stated, radio is not as powerful a medium.

Lynne Yohnk

_____________________________________________________________________
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]