SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : Agendas

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )

 Re: For the sake of Unity.

Hello Brother Paul, I only dread the thought of using that word "agenda" because it describes or implies "the intents of the heart" that Only God knows.

Over-Zealousness is certainly what I see and feel it is not contributing whatsoever to the desired unity and the first goal of Seeking HIM for HIMSELF FIRST and encouraging one another to make Him our focal point and our only answer to any question pertaining to building up the Saints.
I would love to see more threads that focus on the Person of Christ Jesus - very much so.

And yes, the thought of you all meeting next month has also crossed my mind.
How can those who have split within the Body over certain differences now join in a peaceful spirit?

If a subject has taken more than three threads on one Section of a board and that's a moderate count, then there is schism present - yet I would not want to judge another's "heart" to say this or that person has an "agenda".
Credenda possibly as webster's defines:

CREDENDA, n. [L., See Creed.] In theology, things to be believed; articles of faith; distinguished from agenda, or practical duties.

Agenda to me is more equivalent to prevaricate.

From Webster's again.
PREVAR'ICATE, v.i. [L. proevaricor; proe and varico, varicor, to straddle.]

1. To shuffle; to quibble; to shift or turn from one side to the other, from the direct course or from truth; to play foul play.

eg. "I would think better of himself, than that he would willfully prevaricate."

2. In the civil law, to collude; as where an informer colludes with the defendant, and makes a sham prosecution.

3. In English law, to undertake a thing falsely and deceitfully, with the purpose of defeating or destroying it.

PREVAR'ICATE, v.t. To pervert; to corrupt; to evade by a quibble. [But in a transitive sense,this word is seldom or never used.]

I suppose it is just the accusatory tone of such words that are directed at the person themselves rather than the 'action' of them.

Our main purpose is to build one another up in the Most Holy Faith - and that can be done by just doing it.

Appreciate you taking the time to attempt to take all due caution and precautions necessary to get us back on His Purpose in our lives and lives together as the corporate Body of Christ.
Engendering Peace at all costs.

 2007/9/8 16:20

Joined: 2006/6/28
Posts: 3405
Dallas, Texas


I only dread the thought of using that word "agenda" because it describes or implies "the intents of the heart" that Only God knows.

Brother, not according to the Latin. This was not the purpose I had in mind when I used this word. Agenda is better defined as personal action for a preconceived cause, the cause being evident by the action.

I would not want to judge another's "heart" to say this or that person has an "agenda".

Neither would I, brother. I am sorry if you think I am judging hearts here in the forum; I assure you I am not, but I [i]am[/i] observing patterns and calling out what I see as unhealthy. Is this wrong? This is more or less along the same lines of Paul asking: "are ye not carnal" to the "I am of Paul" and "I am of Apollos" Corinthian church crowd. He observed agendas.

But, brother, we seem to differ on the definition of "agenda", and it may be that you are trying to make "agenda" have a purely negative connotation which I don't think it has. I did not say "creedenda" or "prevaricate", and I really don't know why you linked those words. They are not semantically related to the Latin word [i]aggendum.[/i] Why didn't you just simply look up the word "agenda"? Webster's states this:

[b]Agenda[/b] - [i]a program of things to be done; specif., a list of things to be dealt with at a meeting.[/i]

The infinitive root for "agenda" is [i]agere[/i], which is Latin for "to act".

Agenda to me is more equivalent to prevaricate

Interesting. How so? [i]Prevariccare[/i] means literally "to walk crookedly", whereas [i]agere[/i] simply means "to act". These are two separate roots. I don't see any implicit connotations of "crookedness" or "straddle" or even "evade the truth" in the verb [i]agere[/i]...but now we're getting technical. Word origins have long been a fascination of mine, so I would be delighted to uncontentiously hatch this out with you if you like.

Brother Paul

Paul Frederick West

 2007/9/8 16:38Profile

Joined: 2006/1/19
Posts: 1406


Brother Paul,

Why not make a list of the topics the Lord has given you as appropriate to be discussed on this forum. ;-) I'm joking brother this is not an attack.

Brethren, we should all have agendas, but I say take special heed to your motives propelling them. Even "good" things, such as reformed theology and Biblical nonresistance, when incessantly forcefed to other believers, can become noxious.

Brother, does your computer have a mouse in which you can click on a topic or are you forced by some unforeseen force to read every post. When we begin to tell others what there motives are and what spirit they are posting in, then are we not making ourselves the judge of all others. Should we all post devotionals, as I often do? What about the gospel, should we leave it out because some may be offended by it? The name of Jesus is no longer politically correct, and cannot even be used in the Presidents prayer breakfast;
Should we cease to use the name of Jesus?
How many different dominations and doctrines do you think will be in attendance at the revival conference? Is this not an agenda possibly ripe for division? Do we cancel it, because it is possible, of course not, we pray for the unity only the Lord can bring by His Spirit.

You see Brother Paul, the Holy Spirit is the one who brings unity and without Him fully controlling our lives through the Word of God there is no unity, even among Christians.
When we all come together and agree completely on everything, it will be for one of two reasons; 1. We have been called to forever be with the Lord, or 2. We have compromised our faith in Jesus Christ and have completely given over to the beast.

Yes, we must be considerate to the feelings of others, but at the same time we must speak the truth God has placed on our hearts, in love.
Let us not be found compromising the Word of God, for the cause of unity.

Ephes. 4:13
Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Is this not what we are all seeking?

In His Love
pastorfrin :-)

 2007/9/8 16:51Profile

 Re: Agendas

Hello brother Paul,

I'm in agreement with your concern in posting this thread, and am glad of the opportunity to say amen. The word 'unity' has been coming to me, and something of how much more God may be able to do in us and with us, if we are united.

At the same time, having been a person with heels dug in for a long time, to receive something personal from the Lord, perhaps it's ironic that I'm now aware of how out of synch we may be with the Spirit sometimes.

But this is not to say that the Spirit is not moving, to bring us together in the name of Jesus.

There is also the possibility that we interpret words like 'unity' and 'agreement' to mean [i]unison[/i] and [i]uniformity[/i]. These may have their place at times, and in certain aspects of seeking to be like Jesus in this world.

But, as an example, my feet are in agreement with my eyes, when I move away from a danger I've spotted, without either of them changing their natual function and purpose. And if I get grit in my eye, then my eye is in agreement with my finger to try to remove the grit. In fact, there'd be a bigger dysfunction in the end, if my hands didn't come to the rescue of my distressed eye... So, how do we get - the eye, the feet, the hand - all focusing on the Lord's will?

Turning to your point about the advent of the revival conference, I was very taken with a quote posted by freedbyjc in the Devotional Thoughts forum (Revival on our Terms - TOZER) in which Tozer puts this perspective on some people's proclaimed desire for 'revival':

[color=006699]Our mistake is that we want God to send revival on our terms. We want to get the power of God into our hands, to call it to us that it may work for us in promoting and furthering [b]our kind of Christianity[/b]. We want still to be in charge, guiding the chariot through the religious sky in the direction we want it to go, shouting "Glory to God," it is true, but modestly accepting a share of the glory for ourselves in a nice inoffensive sort of way. We are calling on God to send fire on our altars, completely ignoring the fact that they are our altars and not God's. [/color]

I thought he'd picked up on something which the individual believer may not be in a position to notice, but, we do well to examine our motives.

Now, I'm aware in posting the next comment, that y'all may think I'm not aware this may look like me posting [i]my[/i] agenda, namely yet another hymn. But this is sixteen lines of spiritual poetry you will never regret taking to heart, and to which I discovered a great tune last night, which I haven't been able to find anywhere else on the internet.

This tune really is worth taking on board as well, as an ally to the directing of the heart and mind and soul and strength to be given 100% to God. The whole thrust of it is a heart-to-heart invitation to God to take up the life of the singer and do what He wants. I've sung it many times, and I believe I've prayed the words most sincerely in the singing. Now, I hope some of you will let the words and music do their work to move you in [i]whatever[/i] way the Lord desires. God bless you! I hope you don't mind this invitation... :-)

O Thou Who camest from above,
The pure celestial fire to impart,
Kindle a flame of sacred love
Upon the mean altar of my heart.

There let it for Thy glory burn
With inextinguishable blaze,
And trembling to its source return,
In humble prayer and fervent praise.

Jesus, confirm my heart’s desire
To work and speak and think for Thee;
Still let me guard the holy fire,
And still stir up Thy gift in me.

Ready for all Thy perfect will,
My acts of faith and love repeat,
Till death Thine endless mercies seal,
And make my sacrifice complete.

Tune: Wilton

 2007/9/8 16:52

Joined: 2006/6/28
Posts: 3405
Dallas, Texas


Yes, we must be considerate to the feelings of others, but at the same time we must speak the truth God has placed on our hearts, in love.

Duly noted, good brother. Let it only be said that this post was never about dictating what others should or shouldn't post, and it certainly wasn't about stiffling the offense of the gospel. This was rather about using wisdom concerning the things that [i]can[/i] stiffle the gospel.

Your post is well taken, brother.

Brother Paul

Paul Frederick West

 2007/9/8 17:00Profile

Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4489



Yes, we must be considerate to the feelings of others, but at the same time we must speak the truth God has placed on our hearts, in love.

But isn't this the cause of all of the strife here? One person believes that they are speaking "the truth God has placed" in one's heart -- while others disagree. Some people make it their "agenda" to convert the "misguided" believers here at SermonIndex to the "truth" that God has "shown" them. Wouldn't it be better if we simply discussed issues without applying opinions as fact while still allowing people to make up their own minds on a matter?

I suppose that clarity of the purpose of SermonIndex forums would suffice in this. The forums are not meant to be a forum in which we proselytize for converts to our own particular beliefs or views, but a place for the free discussion of such things that would make us closer to the Lord.

We can argue for months on topics like whether the "rapture" will take place before, during or after the time of "tribulation." We can even discuss why we believe one way or another. But is it always necessary to coerce one group into our own beliefs?

The cause of strife isn't the discussion of controversial subjects. Rather, it seems to be the disrespect for the opinions of others regarding those subjects. One of my "pet peeves" here is when a brother or sister makes a statement or claim that is based upon an assumption, but introduces it into the forum as if it were a fact that should and must be recognized by all. We need to be careful when introducing statements as "fact" that are merely assumptions based upon opinion.

We also need to be mindful that disagreements about all sorts of matters will continue until we all are made perfect and no longer see behind a veil of our flawed humanity and logic.



 2007/9/8 17:33Profile

Joined: 2005/8/8
Posts: 256

 Re: Agendas

I agree Paul. Especially as of late, I feel like I'm digging through a bunch of mud to get to the jewels here.


 2007/9/8 18:04Profile

Joined: 2006/7/5
Posts: 640


Yes it's disheartening to see on a site dedicated to revival good men and women sink to such arguments as though the other side is lost and out of the grace of God.

Discussion is fine and can be profitable but to raise to rhetoric of Calvinism Vs Arminianism to one of proselytizing is uncalled for. I don't mind someone talking about the finer points of either system of theology, but to say I have to be just like you is dangerously close to being equal to telling me I have to be circumcised.

SI Moderator - Jeremy Hulsey

 2007/9/8 18:43Profile

Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 2732


The cause of strife isn't the discussion of controversial subjects. Rather, it seems to be the disrespect for the opinions of others regarding those subjects.

This is a good point to consider. I've had my views altered...that is to say corrected, many many times in the few years I've been thank the Lord for disagreements.

Yet, truth conveyed in diatribes and condemnations sends out conflicting signals. We all remember Job's friends spoke enough truth to write a best-selling Christian book, but they had to ask Job's forgiveness just the same. I suppose we need the right Spirit as much as we need the right argument.

For instance, consider the irony of a Calvinist wanting to prove 'election' by arm twisting...or a non-resistor wanting to eliminate all resistance to their point of view.

I am full of such irony myself, so I am embarrasingly familiar with how such logs in our eyes go unseen. How does Jesus, who sees all of my wretched heart, love me without reserve and irony...while I, who sees very little of the true heart of my brothers, often loves with reserved irony? Is it because I am contaminated with irony? I offer peace but only according to my unconditional terms of surrender...I offer grace but only according to my strict legal code?

Truth is worth fighting for, no doubt. But so is each other! Somehow the brother we love must become as important as the idea we love....without compromise in either arena. (I've noticed Zac Poonen and Kieth Daniels are wonderful examples in this aspect.)

Blessings fellow lobbyists!:-)


Mike Compton

 2007/9/8 19:38Profile

Joined: 2006/6/28
Posts: 3405
Dallas, Texas


Somehow the brother we love must become as important as the idea we love....without compromise in either arena

Excellent post, Mike (as usual). There is so much Biblical reality in that one-sentenced quote that it is staggering. Worthy of meditatation.

Brother Paul

Paul Frederick West

 2007/9/8 19:46Profile

Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy