| Poster | Thread | MaryJane
Member
Joined: 2006/7/31
Posts: 3057
| | Re: | | Greetings
I have a question that I have been thinking and praying about for some time now. In Amos chapter 3 verse 3 "Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?"
How does this apply? Is the idea of "agree to disagree" found in the Bible among early believers as an acceptable way to deal with situations? I am just really trying to understand this, it has come up in my own walk with some. If we are one body of believers working together in union with Him to further His kingdom, then how does it work if there is no agreement?
This is and has been really confusing to me for along time to be honest.
God Bless
mj |
|  2009/11/10 14:35 | Profile | elected
Member
Joined: 2004/11/21
Posts: 362
Tulsa OK
| | Re: | | We are often victims of our "environmental chill". How easy we get trapped in argument and think we have the truth and the other part should be humble enough to accept their error and change their minds about their wrong opinions.
From my experience i have found out that in my zeal for the truth i do more harm then good when i speak what i believe to be true without love and genlteness.
MaryJane:
Quote:
I have a question that I have been thinking and praying about for some time now. In Amos chapter 3 verse 3 "Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?"
You can agree with you brother/sister in Christ to disagree about secondery matters that dont affect our salvation in Christ.Many of us lack the Spirit of wisdom and revelation that Paul prayed about for the ephasians.
Many dont say it or acknowledg it, but i have figured out that theological speculations have a great deal to do with our prejudices. We often read the bible with an already well shaped prejudice that is deep rooted in our subconscience.
A simple example is 5 points of Calvinism or the 5 points of Arminianism. We show so much fidelity to a narrow man-made theological system that we often interprete the bible according to the principles of our theological philosophy.
I gave you just 2 classical examples, there is no doubt that there are good points in those systems but their is no such narow theological system in the bible.
Unity is in the Word of God and the Spirit of God. Unity of faith comes as we grow in Christ to maturity of believers.Unity in sound doctrine yes but its not the 5 points of calvinism or 5 points of arminianism, its in the whole revalation of the New Testamant inspired teaching and the doctrines of the apostles and not the doctrines of reformed churches or wesleyan churches or charismatic churches and you name it.
_________________
Redi
|
| | 2009/11/10 14:58 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
I have a question that I have been thinking and praying about for some time now. In Amos chapter 3 verse 3 "Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?"
Paul and Barnabas had a very sharp disagreement, according to scripture. Sharp enough that it was recorded for all history. Scripture never says who was right or wrong... but it resulted in their parting of the ways. AND... they [b]both[/b] went on to serve the Lord in ways that might not have happened had they not been in disagreement with each other.
Paul called Peter out in front of everyone for being a hypocrite.
All thru scripture, and even after Jesus ascended to Heaven scripture records disagreements among believers.
The unity is in our common faith in Jesus... our unity is that we believe the same thing about who Jesus was, and the salvation He came to offer us. But there are things that will never be resolved here on earth.
Krispy |
| | 2009/11/10 15:21 | |
| | Re: | | I think that spiritual maturity is defined not by being unified per se but how we deal with disagreements. This seems to be Krispy's take and I agree. We all have work to do in this area and I think most can agree that it is not the disagreement itself that produces animosity or strife on the forum but the manner in which one posts their position. We've all seen the tone of some here who come across as arrogant, condescending, and self aggrandizing. And the response to such is a reaction that starts a cycle of argument.
I can't walk in agreement with a Jehovah Witness, Mormon, and others but I can be more careful in my disagreement or I can ignore a poster who I know is stirring trouble. |
| | 2009/11/10 15:41 | | ccchhhrrriiisss
Member
Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779
| | Re: | | Hi Sister Mary Jane
Quote:
I have a question that I have been thinking and praying about for some time now. In Amos chapter 3 verse 3 "Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?"
How does this apply? Is the idea of "agree to disagree" found in the Bible among early believers as an acceptable way to deal with situations? I am just really trying to understand this, it has come up in my own walk with some. If we are one body of believers working together in union with Him to further His kingdom, then how does it work if there is no agreement?
Ive been thinking about this for some time too. It seems that many believers long to return to the power and unity of the early Church. While the early Church was obviously far from perfect (since there were already some flaws apparent within the Book of Acts and within the epistles), I do understand this desire for unity. That said: I am not sure that this unity of doctrine was quite the same thing that some believers might suppose. I just cant see the early Church picking apart some ideas and turning them into complicated prerequisites for doctrinal unity.
When I think about the childlike simplicity of a Gospel that drew children to crowd around Jesus, I am reminded about the council in Jerusalem that met to discuss the ministry of Paul to the Gentiles. Some believers had come to Syria and were insisting that Gentiles must fulfill the right of circumcision in order to be saved. This created a strong enough debate until Paul and Barnabas were appointed to accompany other believers to Jerusalem in order to meet with the apostles and elders about this question (Acts 15:1-21).
When the apostles met to consider this question, Peter stood up and reminded the brethren that the law had been a yoke that no Jews had been able to bear. He went on to remind them that it is only be grace that we are all saved Jew and Gentile (verse 10-11). James went further, saying that we should not make it difficult for people to be saved (verse 19). In fact, the apostles wrote their conclusion in an epistle that was sent along with Paul, Barnabas, Silas and Judas. In this letter, the apostles stated, [i] For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well[/i] (Acts 15:28-29).
This was pretty simple. There was no discussion of sectarian theological requirements for complete doctrinal unity or salvation. There was no discussion about whether or not a person is predestined to be saved
or could possibly lose their salvation or walk away from knowing and loving God. There were no mandates about music, eschatology, dress, or which available scrolls of Scripture were the most reliable or authentic. Yet I have met believers today who will part company and even dismiss the faith of those with whom they disagree about certain doctrinal peculiarities. If you want to be a member of many denominational churches, you must agree upon certain sectarian doctrinal prerequisites. Even many local churches require compliance with certain local doctrinal teachings just to fellowship with the congregation!
Now, I have no problem with requiring adherence to essential doctrines. However, who gets to define just what is essential? I have seen churches which desire to dictate whether or not men can wear facial hair! There are congregations who will expel pastors and congregants who are not pre-trib. There are probably congregations who will expel those who are not post-trib too. I fear that some of these strict doctrinal prerequisites actually work [i]against[/i] the faith. They can give some individuals a false sense of security based upon legalistic compliance with localized sectarian dogma. They might actually serve to thwart the need for individuals to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12). I have noticed that some of the people who are praying for unity are often praying that people will agree with those doctrinal issues that they (currently) feel certain of.
Of course, there are certain issues that are beyond debate. These are exceedingly clear from Scripture and are generally accepted by all believers. Hebrews 6:1-2 seemingly lays out some of these basic principles (such as repentance, the resurrection, faith in God and even eternal judgment). However, do we really need to agree about every last thing that is discussed under various church steeples? Should even more denominations be created in the hope to unite individuals around the specific things that often divide them from others?
Personally, I feel comfortable enough to fellowship with believers within a broad range of doctrinal diversity. I can worship, fellowship and break bread with a Baptist congregation in one town, a Methodist congregation in another town and a Pentecostal congregation in another. This is certainly NOT an embrace of every doctrine that might be espoused or proclaimed within these local churches (or those denominations). Rather, it is recognizing that the Body of Christ is much larger than a local church or set of beliefs that seem to vary from person-to-person and congregation-to-congregation. Even if someone doesnt believe as I do in regard to certain peculiarities, I feel the grace to genuinely fellowship with those who profess a sincere relationship with our Lord.
:-)
_________________
Christopher
|
| | 2009/11/10 16:15 | Profile |
| | Re: | | I agree with King Jimmy.
We should really define what unity we are talking about.
What is the "Unity of the Faith"?
Quote:
Ephesians 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:13[b]Till we all come in the unity of the faith[/b] , and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ:Ephesians 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;Ephesians 4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
Verse 11 is very clear that in order for us to come into the unity of the faith that we have the working of the 5 fold ministry. It says, "He gave SOME". The problem folks is that we have too many false one's mixed in with the "SOME". We have way too many Pastors. I say way too many because the Pastor today tries to fulfill all the other offices so that there won't be any rivals hence false doctrine.
A Pastor trying to fulfill the office of a teacher will only get into trouble by teaching false doctrine, he hasn't be called to expound, but he tries anyway, thus the end result is false teachings.
The only way a river can be free from trash is a swift current. It will push all the trash to the side and eventually down stream and into the ocean. An outpouring of God's Spirit will reveal who is and who isn't. |
| | 2009/11/10 16:30 | | PaulWest
Member
Joined: 2006/6/28
Posts: 3405
Dallas, Texas
| | Re: | | Quote:
We've all seen the tone of some here who come across as arrogant, condescending, and self aggrandizing. And the response to such is a reaction that starts a cycle of argument.
This is most true - and most unfortunate. One particular trademark of children is their frequent squabbling and picking on other kids in the schoolyard. Most small, upstart children have not yet learnt the beauty, peace and wisdom of minding their own business. Instead, they harbor a constant desire to project unto others whom they view as threats to their secret pride. As result, they pick sides, they form allegiances with the other "cool" kids (i.e. the most popular kids), and then take turns picking fights with those other kids who aren't part of their clique.
In Christianity we see the same - only the bullying is in the spiritual. Much of what passes for a believer's theological system is often nothing more than a gang's "color"; a means of identification and a public statement and warning to other believers with opposing colors that they will be aggressed on the spot.
The ubiquitious justification for all this seems to be "preserving the truth" - or their interpretation of the gospel as they see it. What they are doing is defending a set of ideals and shades put in their minds from the influences and surmizings of other men who once walked in the very rank and file which they find themselves today. Many of them have become so spiritually paranoid that they've long ago taken their eyes off the Common Master and have put them instead on the fellow sevants, bludgeoning them with a Sword that was never meant to pierce friendly armor.
But how can you convince an aggressor that his fellow combatant is really a friend in a different uniform? How do you stop a child from bullying his classmates? Speaking directly to them in admonishment is not enough; in their minds they are fulfulling a valiant mission. If they believed for a second that it was all a smokescreen to cover their own secret unrest and failure to content themsevles in Christ, they would at once stop and reevaluate their motives. But they are blind to it, and not only that, they'll even brandish their swords to them that now profess to see.
Through contentment and peace and joy in the Lord, discerment for the true enemy is granted by our Captain. Sometimes the enemy is very obvious, marching centerfield with drums and fifes - but other times it is guerilla warfare and sniper shots. Tactical understanding for rules of engagement is not granted to foolhardy believers who memorized just enough of their pet preacher's or pet theologian's handbook of battle. These are they who, more often than not, are responsible for either making the mistake of friendly fire, or a public nuclear air-strike when all that was needed was one strategic gunshot.
Brother Paul
_________________
Paul Frederick West
|
| | 2009/11/10 16:34 | Profile | Lysa
Member
Joined: 2008/10/25
Posts: 3699
East TN for now!
| | Re: SI posters called to be of one mind and have no divisons. | | Quote:
thingsabove wrote:
Here on the mighty, Sermon index, where the posters are the cream of the revival crop. Who wants to get low and be not wise in our own eyes?
I mean really. Where is the warm, humble hearts of true revival and like mind?
I am not saying we have to smile and agree even if it is blatant error. But we need to inventory ourselves on this. Below are some key scriptures calling us to be of one mind.
Now how can we achieve this here on SI?
I am learning that it takes TWO to argue, if one doesn't argue back then there is no argument, is there?!!
It's our flesh brother... our innate need to be right and to set someone else straight, bro that battles. (I mean really, if we don't do it, then who will??? lolol) When we overcome the need to be right and the "need" to be God's armor bearer and to protect His holy word, then we will stop.
If God can cause the rocks to cry out worship and praise unto Him... can He? Then He is fully capable of taking care of all heretics running around on SI!! (huge grin)
Again... just my fifty cents worth, take it or leave it!
_________________
Lisa
|
| | 2009/11/10 16:43 | Profile | Leo_Grace
Member
Joined: 2009/6/14
Posts: 703
| | Re: | | Kripsy said:
Quote:
The unity is in our common faith in Jesus... our unity is that we believe the same thing about who Jesus was, and the salvation He came to offer us. But there are things that will never be resolved here on earth.
Amen! You all speak the truth in the sense that the tenor of this forum changes from time to time, and all views expressed so far are accurate at certain times.
I have been blessed with a lot of encouragement and a lot of learning in this forum. I love you all. |
| | 2009/11/10 16:55 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Now again,I agree that any hope of attaining unity has to start and be maintained by our love for Christ. However the apostle pauls "take" on unity is what I am trying to focus on. I may be wrong, but if we can start to agree, in unity, on what Paul said in corinthians, that will move us further down the road on being of the same mind and judgement
10 ¶ Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment
There is a primary reason for Paul calling them to be of one mind.That reason will follow in the next vs. However there is a secondary reason perhaps not so evident.
Paul will speak on several topics all throughout the Corinthian letter. He will touch on many things that we are to be of the same mind and judgement about. Allowing fornication in the midst of the body.
Taking fellow christians before secular courts.
Relations with husbands /wives and divorce and remarriage. Circumcision. Virgins. Food offered to idols.
Headship of God, Christ, Man, women.
Spiritual gifts and there operations in the body.
Women speaking in church and a few more things before the first letter that we have to the corinthians is finished.Towards the end of the letter he will declare that they who are spiritual will know that the things he wrote are the commands of the Lord.
Now I think we can agree that we are not all of the same mind and judgement on what Paul taught about these subjects. Yet Paul is calling us to all think the same way on these topics previously laid out.
Right here is important. If I am off on what I just wrote then I will gladly adjust. I present this for us to work on and meditate and pray on. I am not calling for instant unity right this second or else. I know that some of these take some time to work through.
Back to the primary reason for the call to same mind and speaking same things.
11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
Here Paul is coming against those in the body who would divide and call themselves of this man's teaching or that man's teaching or even to declare," well I follow Christ's teaching, not any of you apostles."
Thats a tricky one but I think it should be noted. Our understanding of christian teaching and unity is based on Christ and the Apostles teachings 'together.'
We should not view Christs teachings seperate from what the Apostles taught.
|
| | 2009/11/10 18:01 | |
|
