| Re: |
Havok, your hyperbole aside. I asked two basic questions based on long running conversations and warnings Greg has received from men well established and respected in the faith. The questions are. Do you believe in sola scriptura and do you believe that it is acceptable or within the pale of orthodoxy to pray to the dead. Hysterical statements like " treating us like dogs," is not going to make the questions go away. As a ministry, I write. If I were, in any way, making statements that would lead the Body of Christ to believe that praying to the dead was not disqualifying, I would expect to be challenged on it. If I were to assert that tradition has the same kind of validity as Scripture, I would expect to be challenged on it................bro Frank
| 2019/4/11 8:15|
| Re: |
Frank, Greg, havok, et.al.
I hope this is not too much of a rabbit trail from the OP, but since it has come up...let me give you my take.
Just because a man is an early church father does not mean that his ideas or his writings are Biblically correct or inspired or anointed. Just because a man is a great theologian does not mean that his doctrines are sound or correct.
The Bible was never meant to be interpreted solely by intellectual man. It is not an intellectual book. It is spiritual. His words are spirit and they are life. Sola Scriptura leads to gross error if it means that man, with is human intellect, studies only scripture and tries to understand it. Interpreting scripture through the eyes of the early church fathers leads equally to great error for it relies on man's interpretation to establish what we believe. We may use these men's writings to encourage and help us, but we absolutely must stop short of interpreting scripture through the lenses of their writings.
The Bible is spiritual, not natural. The word of God is alive. It is both an anointed book and a person (Jesus Christ). Both speak to us and neither contradict each other because the living word is the author of the written word. Paul tells us in 1 Cor. 2 that his teaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power. He goes on to tell us that the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness to him being that they are spiritually discerned. When we seek to understand scripture, we cannot do it with our natural mind. We will get it wrong 100% of the time. This is the reason for the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. He interprets His word for and to us.
You see, the word of God is not a book to be understood. It is spiritual truth that is meant to be received by us in our spirit, and then quickened to us by the Holy Spirit so that our understanding becomes fruitful. We were never meant to simply "understand" the word intellectually so that our doctrine is straight, we were meant to receive it into us so that we become that word. The word is spiritually discerned.
If the Holy Spirit is quickening the word to 100 different men of God, they will all have one common conclusion about that word. If 100 different men are intellectually parsing scripture, they will come up with many different interpretations and possibly 100 different points of view. You cannot interpret the written word without the spoken word by the Holy Spirit. And you cannot accept the spoken word without its veracity being confirmed by the written word. The two are one and they work in concert.
| 2019/4/11 9:14||Profile|
| Re: |
Travis, I appreciate your words brother. The only red herring was " Sola Scriptura leads to gross error if it means that man, with is human intellect, studies only scripture and tries to understand it." It is a red herring because no one suggested that man should interpret the Scriptures outside of the Holy Spirit, but I agree with your point and in fact made that very point to Greg, suggesting that his own confusion was not because he was trying to interpret the Scriptures apart from what other men have said before him, but because he was trying to interpret the Scriptures minus the Holy Spirit. It is quite something these days when we have to once again defend scriptures alone as the final authority would you not agree? It is quite something when once again praying to the dead has to be refuted or praying to Mary? And now the latest teaching from Greg, Apostolic succession. The mind boggles how Greg can attack a book like "The Pilgrim Church," in his defense of Apostolic succession. Greg writes publicly.....
"Essentially once I researched those splinter groups that the Pilgrim Church and Torch and Testimony or the Trail of Blood books explemify, I found these groups to be ridden with false teachers and strange ideas. Sadly it seems in our zeal to find an "un-broken" lineage of remnant or true ones we find ourselves mixing in the wrong with the right."
I might remind Greg that the only real history we have of these different groups mentioned in the Pilgrim Church was the history written by those who hunted them down and murdered them and then burned their writings. It makes me weep now to see the martyrs attacked in such a fashion. We will be hearing next that the Catholic church did the world a favor by killing all of those "heretics," that rejected the Apostolic succession claims of this Satanic counterfeit. ....bro Frank
| 2019/4/11 9:54|
| Re: |
Proverbs 18:13--"He who answers a matter before he hearts it, it is folly and shame to him."
This is the last thing I will say: I find it strange that the man you have been berating is the same one who is allowing you to post on HIS website all this information. Seems like a godly man who would tolerate a beating from someone with the audacity enough to dog him to the ground. You should think about that.
I won't respond further, since your inquiries are all directed at Greg and I can answer none of them. It's hard to have a discussion when you are talking at someone else.
| 2019/4/11 10:53||Profile|
| Re: |
Havok, since you have made this charge "berating," and "tolerate a beating," and "dog him to the ground." Can you give examples of this charge? Or, are you just furious that one man would have the audacity to question another man? Might be well for you to bow out since you seem so angry, this is merely a clarification of positions. If Greg actually stands by his words of late, wont be a problem for me, I would just disagree with him as I would disagree with anyone who holds to those positions. I came out of the Catholic church so I am well aware of those who hold these positions as well as Catholic charismatics. And you are right, it is "HIS," website and he has the freedom to do anything he wants with it. But the suggestion that he is beyond questioning is just a silly one to me.............bro Frank
| 2019/4/11 11:17|
| Re: Are These Christian Bloggers Tearing Down the Body of Christ? by Greg Gordon|
I recognize the potential for extreme positions. Those who desire to “tear down” and those who wear rose colored glasses. Personally, I am grateful for those Christian “Bloggers” who at the cost of their reputations, finances, careers and family seek the truth by exposing organizations, ministries, preachers and churches who are controlling and abusive. The so-called Church’s testimony in my neck of the woods(Chicago area) is laughable, sad and tragic. If it were not for some brave individuals who took on the Evangelical Mega-Industrial Church System partly through these Blogs the situations at Willowcreek and Harvest Bible would never have seen the light of day. Often I find that those Bloggers I’m most upset with are the ones who are not necessary wrong, they just don’t see things like me. By and large around these parts the traditional clergy/laity church, especially the Mega ones are a big mess and they need to be exposed for their abuse of power, lack of transparency, missuse of finances, sexual exploitation, and just pure greed. These are facts from personal testimonies, law suits, and documentation. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth must always be sought— not just the truth we want to hear. So let the Bloggers roll. Most can easily identify those who are just looking for the fly in the ointment anyway. As far as division is concerned the Body of Christ has done a pretty good job of that already so no need to blame Bloggers. This “thread” alone should give evidence of just how united we are?
| 2019/4/11 11:29|
| Re: |
Well, Sycophant is a new name for me...I'll add it to self-promoter.
But really, the thread is on divisiveness and judgmentalism, you have taken the thread off course and called Greg to account on other doctrinal issues.
Ok, fine, this is a discussion forum, but the tenor of your posting is to take Greg behind the woodshed for a spankin.
Since he is not responding ( no doubt he's read what you've said) it's not even a discussion it's a series of accusations from you.
I think appropriate decorum would be to have this a private matter between you and Greg so it can be settled.
lastly and I'll drop this, if Greg is not going to respond publically to your accusations, there is little reason to pursue this openly. He may chose not to defend himself here on the forum and there is biblical precedent for taking such a route.
| 2019/4/11 11:37||Profile|
| Re: |
This thread is about tearing down the Body of Christ, that is title of the thread. The issues that I raised goes directly to the heart of the Body of Christ. What you call accusations ( its a an ancient criticism) is simply questions asked based on public comments , read for yourself https://www.facebook.com/gregjgordon under the Igantius thread.
One does not have to agree with the actual practice of praying to the dead, they just have to acknowledge that it is within the pale of orthodoxy and it amounts to the same thing. This all traces back to certain men making overtures to the Catholic church, guys like Warren and Bickle. When they are rightly criticized, their critics are attacked by men like Chan who says that God will murder them. I am sure the Catholic hierarchy are delighted by it all. We are living in strange times indeed, the grand delusion is on it way and indeed is already among us.........bro Frank
| 2019/4/11 11:57|
| Re: |
So I decided to read the book of Ignatius by Greg. His opening chapter had little in it that pegs Greg as unorthodox. If you consider Ignatius teachings have a full stamp of approval by Greg (which was not explicit) at that point you need to get from Greg just what from Ignatius he will vouch for as his own.
I did read about 50 some comments (facebook) by Blaine, Ron, Ian, Jonathan and others, they were all making accusations to which Greg never responded to affirming or denying. All Greg did was say "we need context for the New Testament in order to obtain a more accurate interpretation of scripture today" (loose quotation). Well they didn't like that answer so out came other conclusions.
Ignatius was very fond of saying to his audience "you are this, this and this! Those who are that, don't do this! That form of warning/exhortation I found in all his letters ( supposed)
To me, its one thing to say "Ignatius missed it on some point or another scripturally". It's another to ignore the context of his life and how he was exhorting the believers to live.
If we were to reverse the table and let Ignatius speak to this generation...It would be no small wonder he would be full of rebuke and exhortation. He might fully validate why he exhorted to keep right with the bishop over against our pastors and teachers who violate the scriptures with such abominable lives and teachings. He would probably walk away feeling more vindicated than ever anyone had.
All I would say to all of this. Cookie cutter judgments eventually cut out everyone. When you finally realize your cutter just looks like you, everyone else doesn't. Then there are no orthodox in any age, only you. There are no doctrines or traditions worthy of acceptance other than those you approve of. Like it or not, God's grace makes room for 2000 years worth of all kinds of variations, the only variation of course that condemns all others is that kind who thinks they are the end all in doctrine and practice.
We are just not it.
Before I get ready to toss into hell all the sacredotals...I might check with God to make sure all of the 21st century worldly types are going to make it.
I don't buy it that Greg is making overtures to RCC There are plenty of sacerdotal reformed who have nothing to do with RCC.
Anyway I just wanted you to know I would make some effort to understand your position Frank.
| 2019/4/11 16:24||Profile|
| Re: |
Let me ask you a question, aside from the booklet you just read by Greg, do you know anything about Ignatius and what his teachings led to? The very foundations of the clergy/laity split, the notion of a universal Catholic church and the notion of the Eucharist, that the bread was actually the flesh of Jesus, we can in part thank Ignatius. Of course it grew into the monster that is the Catholic church with its monstrous teachings and its eventual hunting down and killing anyone who would not bow their knees to its authority.
"Before I get ready to toss into hell all the sacredotals...I might check with God to make sure all of the 21st century worldly types are going to make it."
The lightness with which you treat these subjects, your main aim seeming to be protecting Greg, is truly sad and may be indicative of this generation. I suppose that only in gross ignorance could the Catholic notions of praying to the saints, Eucharist, monarchical episcopate and sacraments raise its ugly head again..........bro Frank
| 2019/4/11 16:56|