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

Discussion Forum : General Topics : The echo chamber of pride.

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
crusader
Member



Joined: 2006/2/22
Posts: 410
Australia:

 Re:


about 15 years ago a friend of mine who i call a "father of the faith" as he is about years old now and i am a witness to his life walking in the authority of jesus christ.

he saw the dangers and problems of a new movement that had moved accross the modern churches and our little church was packed with people who where scarred by these teachings, including myself. he wresteled day and night for a month on how to respond to the head of this church. then he wrote a letter to the head of the church warning them of the dangers they are leading the flock into. they dismissed the letter but somehow the letter had ended up in churches all over the world with so many pastors backing what he wrote in the letter.

our church flurrished spiritually and the indepth foundation taught to us had kept us from the various so called moves of the spirit through out the years.

about a year ago i asked him what he felt about that letter now and he said that he would not have written it. i was pussled by this and he explained that the letter cut off any further interaction with these churches and they have became so blinded by the teachings that so many lives have been destroyed by satan. where as if he remained a part of the churches God would have used him to help them from inside.

I am of this stance as well now, i would love to be in a fellowship as i discribed in my previous reply but i also realise that God needs his truth lighted in these churches for the ones that God calls me to sit beside and the only way that i see this happening is by walking in the truth, forgiving past hurts of these teachings and just love one another until such time that God decides remove the vail from the blindness.

just my thoughts, hope it makes sense of what i am revieling of my heart.

i would also like to add that through all of this the father has giving me a heart for those that pray and do not hear from God because of false teachings. i have been in this area myself and its so painfull when someone prays for you or tells you to pray a certain way and God doesnt respond.

I see pastors praying over people all the time for a sickness to be taken away but many do this through religious rituals rather then examining the persons spiritual condition first thus leading to no change in the condition of the body but rather a destruction in their spiritual walk leading to doubt, unbielf and resentment towards God as well as many turning to athiesm.

i am no better then anyone else in fact worse in the point that i Know the truth an do not act on it enough. but in saying this I love the father for he loves me in all my failings because of Jesus Christ and i must move in this same love to others knowing that i too would still be blinded by these doctrines if the father hadnt decided to open my eyes.

the spiritual war is in the church, the streets and the homes and only by Gods grace and mercy can these battles be won for each brother and sister.




_________________
karl rashleigh

 2014/10/9 22:39Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Beloved,

This whole situation of the condition of the churches, to me, and which I have been involved in more or less, is another replay of the events of the 15th and 16th century when the Puritans were trying to purify the church of England. There were those who felt the system too corrupt to fix and others who wanted to reform it from within. This was also generally true during the Reformation (though they were dealing with secular authority in contrast with denominationalism or some other organization). This is why we make a distinction between the Magisterial Reformation and the Radical Reformation. All of these subjects have been trodden before with similar polemics and grievances to the sore vexation and exasperation of many dear saints.


Since the beginning of the Church at Pentecost, there have been Christians who were concerned with its purity. “Too much corruption” has been the cry of those that were vexed by the unrighteousness that has existed within. Not only have corrupt forms of worship or false doctrines been of concern, but also corrupt membership. From the Apostle Paul unto this very day there have been those that sought to protect the churches from unbiblical practices and wicked persons. One of the first such groups were the Donatists. Their concerns were valid. How to deal with those concerns has been a different matter. This is also why Augustine came up with his theory concerning the "Invisible Church" and "Visable Church".

Fast forward to the Church of England when Elizabeth became queen. The Puritans desired a church where “the visible church” of Augustine’s model was like the invisible church. This meant they were concerned about every aspect of the church being Biblical. The Puritans main concerns were corruptions, unscriptural ceremonies and offices, and corrupt members. By attempting to make such drastic changes, an enormous conflict emerged between the Puritans and the Church of England. In fact, because the Church of England refused to address the Puritan’s concerns, some left the Church and became Non-Conformists and Separatists (ca. 1560). The rest remained loyal to the Church of England, but continued to reform it from within.

Although they both had the same basic objective, there was a fair amount of infighting as to how to proceed. The non-Separatists did make progress in various places throughout England. Some were allowed to choose their own pastors for their local churches. This gave weight to their argument that errors within the Church of England were not a sufficient reason for separating from it. The non-Separatists accused the Separatists of schism. The Separatists countered by claiming they were not guilty of schism, because the Church of England was no church at all. Hence, though they agreed on the basic issues, an unnecessary schism tried to surface.

Eventually the Separatists came to America, etc. They had their problems too. Nevertheless, as thouse who know their church history will admit, God was working among the Seperatists in America AND back in England. It proved to be a mistaken notion to suggest that God could not work within the church of England. In fact, John Wesley remained in the COE until his death. There is a plaque on his first pulpit with a quote of his along these lines. He strongly objected to separation. Consider this quote:

"To separate ourselves from a body of living Christians with whom we were before united is a grievous breach of the law of love. It is the nature of love to unite us together, and the greater the love the stricter the union...It is only when our love grows cold that we can think of separating from our brethren. And this is certainly the case with any who willingly separate from their Christian brethren. The pretences for separation may be innumerable, but want of love is always the real cause.” (John Wesley)

Therefore, let each believer be persuaded in his or her own mind as to what God would have them to do in this crisis hour. God has always had remnant people. They exist wherever He has sovereignly chosen to place them. He had remnant saints in Pharaoh's house on more than one occasion. Selah. Nevertheless, the arguments will go on if history is any indicator. That, to me, is the most vexing thing of all. Let every man put his hand to the plow in the field where God has placed him; and let every other be content therewith to let God be God. For we are none better than foot-soldiers. We can only ever follow the orders of heaven. If heaven be the source of our commands, we ought to obey God rather than men. This is the lesson of history, and I think we all will be the better to learn it.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2014/10/10 7:14Profile









 Re:

Brother Robert writes an interesting piece, he may be the first to talk about the actual subject rather than focus on the person who raised the subject and for that I applaud you brother. I disagree with a number of the premises you raise but simply because I disagree that the Church of England was the Body of Christ and those who left her, much like those who left the Roman church, were schism, does not mean I think you are elitist or proud because you hold a position I believe to be error.

It seems to me that the main premise, and correct me if I am wrong since Wesley's quote was used, you seem to be saying that if people have left the Church of England or the Roman Church and so on, that "The pretences for separation may be innumerable, but want of love is always the real cause.” I strongly disagree with that position.

The Donatist's , for instance, separated themselves from the Catholics when the Catholics joined forces with the state under Constantine. Now, were they lacking in love? Indeed, they themselves were hunted down and killed by the Catholics. In three hundred years Christians had not killed Christians, now for the first time " Christians," were killing Christians. If there was a lack of love Robert, it could be seen in the ones doing the killing.

The confessing church is another good example of brothers and sisters coming out of something so corrupt that they could no longer stand it. Yet, using your premise, they were lacking in love for leaving. And they themselves did not consider themselves to be a schism, quite the opposite. The Hussites, the Brethren, the Waldenses, the Anabaptists, the Moravians, none of these groups would have considered themselves to be unloving schisms.

Now while I disagree with my brother Robert and would question the premise of some of his points, this does not mean I do not appreciate his post. In fact, Robert's post is a great example of playing the ball and not the man. Thank you for your post brother and let us agree to disagree................bro Frank

 2014/10/10 9:18
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Dear brother,

I'm sure you know that I was not suggesting that the Donatists were exhibiting a lack of love for breaking with the Catholic church; nor were the Reformers. You are over analyzing my words. This is not a courtroom.

The basic message is that there have always been errors in the churches (churches). How we deal with those errors depends on a number of factors. Wesley did not believe that the condition of the Anglican church was sufficient cause for separation. Because we are living history forwards and not backwards, it is hard for me to understand his position. Nevertheless, he felt that those in his day who separated were suffering from a lack of love for those whom they left behind.

Wesley chose rather to travel England and allow the Gospel to do its work. He busied himself with the solution to the problems, rather than spending his energies on pointing them out. And the world is the better because of it.

Do I see the issues? You bet. What should we do? I prefer to take Wesley's approach by getting out and preaching the Gospel where doors are open. When men and women are Born Again many of these issues will self correct. How can we correct doctrine and practice when folks need to be born of God? I could blow my keyboard up trying to correct the churches; but what good would it be? The churches have to hear what the Spirit is saying to them. That cannot happen unless the people therein are born of God and are taught to make Him the Head.

This is how I express my faith. This is how I deal with the crisis at hand. I get out and preach the Gospel. If I didn't, I would build up so much frustration that I would be of no use to anyone. I may even backslide from all the disillusionment I would experience. I have to turn my eyes to Christ and preach in spite of what I see. This is what Wesley did. It's what I'm going to do. Like the lepers who headed over the hill to find the camp abandoned... I say, why sit here until we die? What have we got to lose? Let's preach the Gospel and let God bring correction by the change wrought in men.

Blessings,

Robert


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2014/10/10 10:16Profile









 Re:

HI brother,

I do not believe this is a courtroom, I was simply responding to the points you made. Should I not do this? As far as sharing the Gospel, why would I disagree with that Robert, this is something that I personally do every time I get the chance as I am sure many others on this forum do.

As for Wesley, he contended time and time again with the church of England, especially on matters of sanctification. So much so that it became a separate denomination in America. So, the notion that Wesley never contended strongly for issues and simply preached the Gospel is not correct brother, you can actually do both..........bro Frank

 2014/10/10 10:26
ADisciple
Member



Joined: 2007/2/3
Posts: 832
Alberta, Canada

 Re:

My own contribution to the other thread (Death by Denomination) was simply to state that denominationalism cannot be justified by Scripture. It is simply not there.

Let's put two people-- a Baptist, and a Pentecostal-- into a time machine, and send them back to Jerusalem or Antioch in the days of The Acts. They step out of the time machine and start looking for a Baptist church to attend, or a Pentecostal church. Can they find such a thing?

Those early Christians were baptized in water and in the Spirit, but they did not set up camps around their experience.

For my part, this is all I am trying to say, and I am perplexed as to why it makes me a spiritual elitist to say it.

Does it mean that there would be no problems in churches if they were not denominational? Of course not; there were problems in the early churches. But I don't know why all of us (who are Bible believers) cannot at least acknowledge that the present denominational system of Christianity does not have its origin in God.




_________________
Allan Halton

 2014/10/10 11:38Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re:

RE ///But I don't know why all of us (who are Bible believers) cannot at least acknowledge that the present denominational system of Christianity does not have its origin in God.///

That is a bit tricky because it seems that many denominations did originate from moves of God.

edit add : Quakers , Mennonites, Methodist, Moravians, Pentecostals, so on and so on



 2014/10/10 12:02Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

ADisciples's

Quote:
"But I don't know why all of us (who are Bible believers) cannot at least acknowledge that the present denominational system of Christianity does not have its origin in God."



I would certainly agree with this. I would take a similar position to G.H. Lang's in his book "The Churches of God" as the ideal.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2014/10/10 12:08Profile
ADisciple
Member



Joined: 2007/2/3
Posts: 832
Alberta, Canada

 Re:

RobertW said, "I would certainly agree with this. I would take a similar position to G.H. Lang's in his book "The Churches of God" as the ideal."

Thank you, Robert. That book was a real eye opener to me as well. It is the ideal, and I don't think God is willing to settle for less. He also has all that it takes to bring the ideal into being. And will yet do so.

What is my part in it all? Certainly not to force the ideal on others, but to walk in the light He has graced my eyes with.


_________________
Allan Halton

 2014/10/10 12:21Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
What is my part in it all? Certainly not to force the ideal on others, but to walk in the light He has graced my eyes with.



Well said!


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2014/10/10 12:22Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy