Pick 5
Well, I'm probably crazy for doing this, but I would like to know the top 5 topics that you would like to discuss on this blog. While there is no guarantee that we will discuss them, I will do my best to cover most topics, for I'm sure there are many areas of discussion that I have not thought about yet. Besides, this is one way for you to help direct this blog (which I will still control...muahahaha...you know, the evil laugh).
Posts
In other words, ubiquitous carapace
19 hours ago
46 comments:
Why Big Ten football is so vastly superior to Big Twelve and SEC football, specifically, why the University of Michigan consistently has the best NCAA football program in the country and why their student athletes never get arrested, even after they turn pro.
Will we be required to say "Madame President" or "Mrs. President?"
Oh, and shouldn't we find a new name for football, since futbol is already taken?
I've got a suggestion - American rugby
The Big Ten supremacy is due to a vast left-wing conspiracy. I am opposed to any attempt to rename the sport of football.
Miss President will the the proper address, if, and only if, Condi Rice is elected.
Leland Acker
Condistas unite!!
Now, now, anoetos...we have had some disagreements before, but this is by far your biggest mistake! Big 12 football is much superior to all the others. I mean by the time we get through beating each other up, we hardly have anything left for the "rest of you!"
(Love the Michigan comment!)
Beating each other up? Please! How hard is it to beat Baylor?
Leland Acker
For real.. I want Scripturally expositional reasoning for why all the saved won't be in the Bride...
Mwahahahahaha! I AM EVIL.
Leland,
Will you take any of my classes in the future? Just wondering!!!
Stephanie,
First of all, yes, you are evil. Of course, we all knew that didn't we?!?
Second, I cannot give you any reason. I, myself, believe all the saved are incorporated in the bride (not just a select few!). Well, I'm sure that will stir somebody up somewhere!
Matt, I knew there was a reason I loved you. Can you believe we've known one another for roughly 15 years? Oh yeah.
Ok, my new question is this: Do you recognize, then, the Church Universal (i.e. the saved past, present, future as one)?
P.S. Stubb should arrive shortly to roast you on the Bride issue.
Almost 15 years...wow! It has been awhile hasn't it?
Okay, here's the real deal on the church issue (which I thought about blogging about soon anyway). The church can only be a "local, visible assembly of scripturally baptized believers." The Greek word will not allow for any other interpretation. Furthermore, the teachings of Christ and the apostles, specifically point to a local body. Now, at times mind you, they will refer to "The Church" as an institution like we talk about THE American flag, even though there is not one great big American flag flying somewhere up in the sky. However, they are referring the institution and not a universal church. Without going further, I will say this. Most people have the church and God's family confused. You are voted into a local body (i.e., church). You are saved into God's family. All believers are part of God's family. This is where most people confuse the issue.
God's family = all the saved.
Church = scripturally baptized believer who has joined up with a local assembly.
Think about this, were Jews the ONLY saved people on earth during the Old Testament? Of course not, however, they were God's specific instrument of ministry. The rest of the believers belonged to God's family but not to Israel per se. The same is true today. God's churches are His instrument of ministry. Those who are not members of one of His churches still belong to the family of God, just not to a church.
[Otherwise, if someone was saved and became a member of "the church," then how could they be excluded from "the church" without losing their salvation, for if one is saved into the church, then wouldn't they have to lose their salvation to be excluded from the church? Of course, that is Catholicism, so let's not go there!]
Yes, you need to blog on this, because YOU'RE GOING DOWN!!
Er... I have thoughts to share.
Bring it on sister! Hahahaha...
To be honest, I have a hard time seeing myself return to seminary for a couple of reasons. (1) God has not placed it on my heart that I need to return. (2) Finances continue to be an issue. If God called me back to TBI, finances would be a non-issue. That being said, I miss the fellowship.
Now, back to Big 12 football. True, Baylor is a tough foe to beat. The Bears have wreaked havoc on such traditional powerhouses such as Northwestern (Louisiana), and I'm sure they could probably even beat the Pine Tree Pirates. None the less, I think the Aggies will beat them again, maybe even by double digits!
Leland Acker
(Because I don't want to create a google account)
Ah, the Big Twelve football fan is so cute. I could just pinch your little cheeks!
Stephanie is a Texas Tech fan.
'Nuff said
Teaching that all the saved are in the bride often seems to lead people to a universal church position. On the other hand the teaching that only the faithful of the churches are in the bride often leads to a "new light" position.
I think that this argument is not unlike Predestination vs. Foreknowledge debate. Leaning one way or the other can take you down a bad road. Balance is the key and that balance can only be found in the Word!
Leland, you said:
If God called me back to TBI, finances would be a non-issue.
Why not go back to seminary trusting that He will provide, even if things are INCREDIBLY uncomfortable? Not that TBI is the only seminary...
(Matt's gonna hurt me.)
Hang on while I go get my balances...Hahaha...just kidding.
Anoetos...yes, I'm afraid Stephanie is a TT (Texas Tech) fan. It is one of her biggest downfalls...but I guess we should still love her, right?!?
Leland,
Well, Baylor does have a good softball team! (Come on man...you're killing me here! Hahaha...)
We don't like playing Texas Tech...because they have TT on their uniforms.
Oh, and who's the Big 12 champion in baseball. Whoop! Gig'em Aggies!
There are other seminaries besides TBI?!?!?!?
Woo. The GAGgies won a few baseball games. Big flippin' deal. We live in TEXAS. All that matters is FOOTBALL and the fact that A&M can't win against Tech, and sometimes can't even pull it off against Baylor.
SURE! There are other seminaries. Even some that teach y'all's stuff (hehe). There's that BMA thingy over there in Jacksonville... and then of course, a real seminary at Westminster in Dallas.
(I wish we had emoticons on this thing. I'd have evil grins everywhere.)
"Think about this, were Jews the ONLY saved people on earth during the Old Testament? Of course not..."
that was a little too quick for me. break it down for me scripturally, if you don't mind. i realize that arminians believe that when God told israel "I will be your God and you will be My people", they don't want to interpret that salvifically...but i'd like more than just your opinion that there was salvation apart from israel in the OT (and certainly some gentiles were gathered in and included with the faithful jews in the OT.)
a problem for me:
eph3:11 Remember that (before Christ) you who are Gentiles by birth...12were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.
paul also tells us in galatians 3, "29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, and heirs according to the promise" even in the NT, it appears that those salvation promises made to abraham are what we gentiles have been included into (or grafted onto, if you're reading romans.)
Anon,
Thanks for the question. I'm glad you're thinking about all these things.
Okay, let me ask this: Was there anyone saved before Abraham? Certainly there was. However, these people were not Jews. Being a "Jew" did not start until Abraham. Also, how about Melchizedek? He was not a Jew, yet he was godly man. He lived in the time of Abraham, so technically, there were Jews then. Most scholars also believe that Nebuchadnezzar was saved (after some time of course). Also, Rahab, the harlot, she was not a Jew (at least to begin with).
You must also remember, Christ told the Pharisees that being a Jew is not what saved them. In fact, God could raise up children unto Abraham from the rocks. It was their Jewish lineage (i.e., being a Jew) that was important; it was "what they did with God" that was important.
The Jewish nation was to be a witness to the whole world of God's great salvation. However, they became so inwardly focused that they forgot their purpose (something that we may run into today as Christians?)
Anyway, I'll stop here, let you catch your breath, and see where we need to go from here.
How about this for a topic? Which cellular company is better for wireless internet? Cingular or Alltel? (All others are excluded because I can't get them in my area!)
That's because you live in Satan's Summer Home.
Oohhh...you are E-V-I-L.
Texas A&M 12, Texas 7.
There, happy?
Stephanie, the reason I haven't returned is that I don't feel led or called by God to return. (I did complete two full years and received TBI's Associates diploma). That being said, I wouldn't mind returning. I want to clarify my position. I think seminary is a great thing. (There are those who don't). I just don't feel that it is the place for me. As for it being uncomfortable, I have a family of five that I had to support on $1,300 per month when I did go to seminary. Thanks for the encouragment, though.
You probably think this is cliche, but I am learning more, faster, pastoring the church than I did in 24 years of Sunday School and two years of seminary.
Here's a topic for you. Should people of different races worship together in the same church? Is it wrong for two believers of different ethnicities to marry?
Leland Acker
(Still don't want a google account)
www.thecherokeean.com
Softball (fast pitch) is the 2nd greatest sport, right behind football. (My Rusk Lady Eagles went three rounds deep in the Texas High School playoffs this year. 11 of their 12 players will be returning next year, with several talented incoming freshmen.)
Leland Acker
Leland,
My daughter is learning how to pitch (fast pitch softball). Maybe one day she'll be on the A&M team...I would love to see her whoop! t.u.
texas m&a 27 TEXAS TECH 31
in CoStat.
Heck yes, baby.
"Also, how about Melchizedek?"
he may have been a theophany. regardless, in pre-abrahamic times, i really don't have any issue with what you're saying.
"Most scholars also believe that Nebuchadnezzar was saved (after some time of course). Also, Rahab, the harlot, she was not a Jew (at least to begin with)."
you could have also mentioned ruth the moabite. but all of these were saved (though nebuchadnezzar's fate is surely speculative) by their having connections to the jews and their teachings about God. that didn't seem to be what you were saying before.
"You must also remember, Christ told the Pharisees that being a Jew is not what saved them. In fact, God could raise up children unto Abraham from the rocks. It was their Jewish lineage (i.e., being a Jew) that was important; it was "what they did with God" that was important."
no one is saying they were "saved" by being born jewish...no more than anyone is "saved" by going to church. paul is clear in romans that even among jews, not all "physical" israel is true israel - (in romans 9, that seems essential to understanding how God's promises in the OT to His bride israel did not fail, and therefore we can trust His promises in romans 8) - it's always been about a "remnant chosen by grace" (rom11:5) the question is whether you believe that "remnant chosen by grace" was, in fact, chosen for salvation.
we agree that their jewish lineage was not sufficient for salvation, but if you're saying it was unimportant, i don't see how the scriptures back you up.
"The Jewish nation was to be a witness to the whole world of God's great salvation. However, they became so inwardly focused that they forgot their purpose..."
sweet - now we're back on topic. if they "forgot their purpose", are you suggesting that God continued to reach non-jews by some other method? how could paul still be sure that "gentiles...(were) excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise" and " without hope and without God in the world."
which brings me back to the main point, if someone refuses to associate with a local church, on what grounds would you presume they were "saved" and "part of God's family?" if all their fruit suggests they "hate their brothers" and refuse fellowship with them, does the bible suggest you should warn them or assure them of their salvation?
i'm fairly new to this discussion and may not understand some of what your saying though. your final parenthetical comment seems to suggest that paul was "catholic" in 1 cor 5 for pushing the church to exclude a man from fellowship as a warning.
Anon, you said:
"which brings me back to the main point, if someone refuses to associate with a local church, on what grounds would you presume they were "saved" and "part of God's family?" if all their fruit suggests they "hate their brothers" and refuse fellowship with them, does the bible suggest you should warn them or assure them of their salvation?"
I technically do not have a disagreement with you, all I'm saying is that being a church member is not a requirement for salvation. Someone can be saved and not be a church member. However, if they continually deny fellowship with other Christians, then yes, I would question their salvation.
You also said:
"i'm fairly new to this discussion and may not understand some of what your saying though. your final parenthetical comment seems to suggest that paul was "catholic" in 1 cor 5 for pushing the church to exclude a man from fellowship as a warning."
Okay, I'm not sure what you mean by this. But let me try to clarify one thing anyway. I am not suggesting Paul was a catholic. I am suggesting that he told the Corinthians to not fellowship (have membership) with one such as is found I Cor. 5. If this person had church discipline enacted upon them (which I have no problem with) then when they were "kicked out of that church," would they be a lost sinner? Well, if they were saved, no. However, their actions would make one wonder about their salvation.
Well, I'm not sure if I really clarified or just muddied the water. Please let me know if I can explain something better. After all, it is hard to explain some things by typing!!!
Matt, if your daughter becomes serious about softball, you'll probably need to see about getting her picked-up by a select team. Most of the girls who are successful on the high school and collegiate levels play select softball. (Rusk has 6 players who also play for select teams.)
Okay, I'll bite...what is a select team?
"Okay, I'm not sure what you mean by this. But let me try to clarify one thing anyway. I am not suggesting Paul was a catholic."
yeah - i just meant that excommunication itself has solid biblical roots. whether the catholics implement the doctrine appropriately is another discussion...
"If this person had church discipline enacted upon them...would they be a lost sinner? Well, if they were saved, no. However, their actions would make one wonder about their salvation."
IMO, the point of 1 cor 5 is twofold. the purity of the church (in actuality and in the perception of outsiders) is defended by excluding someone in open, unrepentent sin from membership. second, it forces the person under discipline to examine himself and seriously consider repentance (2cor13:5)...it is possible that he is saved and the church is acting politically (or maybe he refused to pay his indulgences ;) ) but it's also possible that he is "faking" his faith and will demonstrate that by hardening himself against the discipline.
while we agree that we can't see the hearts of men and can't absolutely say who is saved and who isn't, it is significant to note that exclusion from the church in 1cor5 and matt18 is an extreme form of discipline that demonstrates our collective uncertainty about whether certain people are living according to a genuine faith that brings salvation. it doesn't guarantee that they are a "lost sinner" but ought to make them examine themselves...because the evidence may be pointing to exactly that.
so i'm guessing you're mainly arguing a very speculative theological point here: that people can live in unrepented sin (like king david did for a year or so, i guess) and still be saved. i would concede that speculative point with the reminder that even david the adulterer/murderer/liar (cover-up-erer?) was brought to repentance when his sin was challenged.
but in general, i would say the church and the family of God are synonymous. fellowship with other believers and ordinances such as baptism and communion are never taught as "optional" in scripture. if being excluded from such fellowship is such a severe form of discipline in the NT, what is to be said of those who willfully exclude themselves? i don't think they should ever be cheerfully assured that they may still be in the "family of God" on a technicality...they need to be warned that unwillingness to fellowship with and love those they claim as "brothers" (regardless of how shallow/hypocritical/narrow/generally imperfect those "brothers" are) suggests their faith is, in fact, dead. IMO, those who refuse to participate in a local church are living in unrepentant sin and, as Jesus taught in matt 18:17, should be dealt with (and reached out to) in practical terms as pagans.
(if they have genuine faith, they will repent and commit to investing in a local church...but if someone never joins a local church, i don't see any biblical support for your larger "family of God" theory. God only knows if they are "saved" but we are taught to treat them as if they are not, for their benefit.)
i suspect we're in basic agreement but, in arguing a speculative theological point, i'm concerned that you're missing the main teaching of scripture.
-charles
Charles & Matt-
I'm going to call you both to the carpet on this one.
"If this person had church discipline enacted upon them...would they be a lost sinner? Well, if they were saved, no. However, their actions would make one wonder about their salvation."
I think you REALLY need to be careful when making statements such as this. The whole purpose for church discipline comes in two parts: 1. To call your brother to repentance and sanctification; and 2. To protect the Body. Just because someone sins, even grossly, and even unrepentantly to this point, doesn't negate their salvation, nor does it make them less likely to have been saved in the first place. Saying so puts one at high risk for sins of pride, don't you think?
Because how many of us live in secret sin that we pray no one ever has to know about? I know I do, and as a Christian, it is my duty to battle against it! It should be one of the MAJOR functions of the Church (both local and universal) to engage one another in such a way that confession to one another is both welcomed and encouraged. We are all screwed up. Nobody's got it all together, no matter how hard we try to give that front. The best we can do is fight to live BIblically, and that means being real about who we are and how ANY of us is in danger of falling into unrepentant sin at any time. When/If that happens to me, I pray that my church will love me enough to enact discipline on me-- thus ushering in confession and sanctification in my life.
Let me be clear, though... I'm not saying that sin should be allowed to run rampant. I believe that church discipline is essential, and that if a member refuses to submit and repent, excommunication/exclusion may be necessary to protect the local body.
And I think you need to discuss the Trail of Blood and why you think it's accurate.
A select team is a team that travels to tournaments year-round. Theya re affiliated with a national association and attend tournaments to qualify for the national tournaments. These teams have professional coaches who teach pitching, fielding and hitting. Players get one-on-one coaching.
The drawback is that you have to try out for the team. Once on the team, playing time is not guaranteed. Plus, it is expensive.
FOr more information, visit the SMokehouse Forums on Smoaky.com. Go to High School sports and browse the softball section. There will be some info there.
I'm not a big fan of select softball, but girls who get involved do very well at the sport, and seem to have fun.
Charles,
I too believe we are basically in agreement. In fact, I agree with every thing you wrote except for there being no difference between the church and the family of God. However, besides that I agree totally with what you said. And don't worry, I'll have a post here sometime soon about the universal vs. local church discussion!
Thanks for your insightful input.
Stephanie,
Well, your real argument is with the apostle Paul because he said to treat them as a lost sinner.
I believe that this after exhausting as much as possible in trying to bring the person to repentance. At the point of exclusion, yes, you are to treat them as a lost person. In the initial processes of discipline, no. You're to treat them as a brother who needs those who love him to come along side and show him tough love.
I can see where there may be confusion, where the ABA is concerned, because I've never seen or heard of an ABA church exercising church discipline other than exclusion. There is a whole step that is not addressed in any ABA church I've ever been associated with, giving the impression that "if you sin, you're gone." Anyone who is honest about their life will see that we all sin all the time, and all are in desperate need of guidance and accountability from one another, and especially Scripture.
Okay, Stephanie, I can see your point. However, here at Ebenezer, we have only excluded one person (and I wish that had not been the final result...but we did everything we could). There have been, however, many other cases, where we approached someone out of love and spoke with them concerning an issue, etc. Needless to say, every case has been resolved. Sometimes they repented, sometimes we came to the realization that we were wrong or had bad information. In every case though, it was not made public. I think, according to your previous comments, we think alike on discipline.
"The whole purpose for church discipline comes in two parts: 1. To call your brother to repentance and sanctification; and 2. To protect the Body."
dear stephanie-
you can't "call me on the carpet" on one hand and practically quote me on the other... ;-)
we jumped ahead to discussion of excommunication but, as bro. matt has said, that is never the starting point of discipline, but the very last resort.
...Saying so puts one at high risk for sins of pride, don't you think?
it is the responsibility of church leadership to judge those inside the church. (1cor5:12) that responsibility may put them at an increased "risk for sins of pride," but i wouldn't consider that a justification for shirking.
do be praying for your church leadership, though.
-charles
Is it football season already?? My how time flies....I heard that the ATM decided not to have a football team this year due to not haveing skilled players? Has anyone else heard this?
Post a Comment