# What are y'all's thoughts on this?



## oops1 (Apr 19, 2015)

I don't post here often but do read here a bit. I went for my nephews baptism this morning and the entire sermon was more or less focused on the divide in my home church. I was raised here and have since moved to church closer to my house but this still upsets me. I could not believe a separation was voted down. 

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2015/04/19/3677533/first-presbyterian-separation.html


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 19, 2015)

Sad. That's all I can say now.


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 19, 2015)

The gay issue is very divisive, and I expect to see a lot more stories like this.


----------



## gtparts (Apr 21, 2015)

This is NOT prophesy, but I strongly suspect that this situation will result in the separation of families and individuals from this congregation. Whether it will be those steeped in tradition, rooted in Scripture, or those bringing heresy, rooted in error, I would not care to guess.

Those who accept the behavior of the sinner that is unrepentant, who persist therein, also receive the condemnation that comes with their acceptance of that individual into the body of Christ, His bride, the Church.

That being said, there is the matter of presenting the truth, IN LOVE, that speaks to the sin. Otherwise, how does one know his or her offense to holy GOD, unless the sin is confronted. The heart of the issue is not whether any man is offended. If it offends GOD, it is not to be allowed in His church. 

As with all sin, every unrepentant sinner has the responsibility for yielding to the will of GOD, turning from his or her sin, and entering into that singular relationship with Christ who saves.

One who covets his neighbor's wife may never act on his desires... yet Christ says there is sin that demands confession and repentance. His transgression is against the Word of GOD, and therefore GOD Himself.

So it is with the person who finds desire in a homosexual relationship. While he or she may never act on the desire (nature or nurture aside), the transgression against GOD will stand until there is the complete act of contrition according to Scripture.

Whatever man's desire is, if it is outside the will of GOD, He finds it to be sin.

Harsh? NO! The sovereign LORD sets the Law that we might avoid as much as possible offending Him. He goes even further in His provision of a means of atonement, by the blood of His Son, the risen Jesus.

Some would do well to examine what they believe in the light of GOD's Word. Feelings, and especially personal feelings, can deceive.


----------



## formula1 (Apr 21, 2015)

*Re:*

Individuals or denominations can't choose grace or truth!  You must be like Jesus, that is, 'full of grace and truth' (John 1)!

In my mind and in application, the reality is 'grace' strives to say 'you are loved', while truth says 'You are wrong'!  Why can't we approach all who will come to Jesus and simply say, 'You are wrong, but you are loved!'  

And then Trust God to complete His transforming work without compromising His standard, which is 'Be Holy for I am Holy'!  I have no doubt of the power of God to transform lives!!


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 21, 2015)

oops1 said:


> I don't post here often but do read here a bit. I went for my nephews baptism this morning and the entire sermon was more or less focused on the divide in my home church. I was raised here and have since moved to church closer to my house but this still upsets me. I could not believe a separation was voted down.
> 
> http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2015/04/19/3677533/first-presbyterian-separation.html



Maybe the fact that the believers deem they are "the church" is more important than suffering a denominational split. Maybe the vote does not reflect on the propriety of who gets to marry, because most know, but on their pride of being reformed and therefore truly in Christ??? Maybe. Presbys can be stubborn, my grand-ma was one and on issues of worship( denomination) she did not budge...


----------



## huntersluck (Apr 21, 2015)

I would say that division of beliefs on the matter of homosexuality are in probably 99 percent of all churches. It may not come down to a split but it exist. Many families have gay relatives distant or close so it will continue to become a larger issue. I think the Bible makes it clear it is a sin but I cannot figure out why fellow Christians try to make it a larger sin than their own. I guess a man who is cheating his company or cheating on his wife thinks less of his own sin and more of the sin of someone else. Sin is sin anyway you slice it.


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 21, 2015)

huntersluck said:


> ... I cannot figure out why fellow Christians try to make it a larger sin than their own.



They're not.  However, there is a concerted effort among some to say homosexuality is not a sin.




huntersluck said:


> I guess a man who is cheating his company or cheating on his wife thinks less of his own sin and more of the sin of someone else.



As I've said in similar threads, there are no "adultery affirming" churches.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 21, 2015)

In the article, the senior pastor says, “We have read our doctrines and our polity, how we govern ourselves, maybe more than we have in the last 50 years,” he said. “But more importantly, we have searched God’s Word more faithfully and eagerly and humbly than we have as a church in a long while."

This boggles my mind.


----------



## Big7 (Apr 21, 2015)

Oh LORD.. Another split. 

Be nice if EVERYONE was on the same page.

1 Corinthians, Chapter 1:10

I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree in what you say, 
and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and in the same purpose.

1:11 For it has been reported to me about you, my brothers, by Chloe’s people, that there are rivalries among you. 

This would solve most of the problems.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 22, 2015)

Big7 said:


> Oh LORD.. Another split.
> 
> Be nice if EVERYONE was on the same page.


A Christian is not to be on the same page with the non-Christian worldview.


----------



## huntersluck (Apr 22, 2015)

centerpin fan said:


> They're not.  However, there is a concerted effort among some to say homosexuality is not a sin.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You have your head in the sand. And they don't always do it with words but with actions.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 22, 2015)

huntersluck said:


> You have your head in the sand. And they don't always do it with words but with actions.


If this is the case with your church, they are just as wrong as the homosexual affirming churches.


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 22, 2015)

huntersluck said:


> You have your head in the sand.



No, I don't.  I am very well-informed on this issue.

There are hypocrites in every church who condemn homosexuality but ignore their own sins.  That is wrong.  However, that doesn't negate what the "gay is OK" activists are trying to do.


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 22, 2015)

From the link:
_The 900-member congregation, which has been divided over gay marriage and other doctrinal issues, voted 266 to 146 in favor of the measure. But the number fell short of the 274 votes needed for dismissal from the denomination, which required a two-thirds vote. 

Some members were seeking to separate from the national denomination, which has become more liberal about same-sex marriage and other doctrinal issues in recent years.

_

 I can only speculate on what other issues were, but I'll assume it has to do with homosexuals having leadership roles in the church. Anyone know if this is the case? It seems I remember an openly lesbian so-called Pastor in the Presbyterian church.

 Several years ago there was a lesbian couple visited our church. They came for three or four weeks in a row and were welcomed in, I cant imagine a church anywhere turning someone out. The last time I saw them they were hitting the door in the middle of a sermon based on adultery, internet porn, and homosexuality.


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 22, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> I can only speculate on what other issues were, but I'll assume it has to do with homosexuals having leadership roles in the church.



The PCUSA has already addressed this:

https://www.pcusa.org/news/2011/5/11/pcusa-relaxes-constitutional-prohibition-gay-and-l/

I'm sure many are still unhappy with that decision.

As for other issues, the link in the OP specifically mentions divestment in Israel as being one of them.  This made national news last summer:  

https://www.pcusa.org/news/2014/6/20/slim-margin-assembly-approves-divestment-three-com/


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 22, 2015)

*In a related story ...*

You can't make this stuff up. 




> Patrick Cheng, an ordained minister in the majority-homosexual Metropolitan Community Churches and an openly homosexual faculty member at EDS, attempted to claim biblical characters such as the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 as examples of transgenderism.
> 
> "That's the first queer person of color in the Bible," Cheng said of the Ethiopian eunuch. Cheng also named Joan of Arc, Saint Perpetua, and early church theologian Origen as people who defied traditional gender expectations: Joan for her use of male clothing, Perpetua for her visions of gladiatorial combat, and Origen for reportedly castrating himself.
> 
> ...



http://www.virtueonline.org/episcopal-divinity-school-embraces-gender-continuum


----------



## Madman (Apr 22, 2015)

“Tolerance is the last virtue of a depraved society. When you have an immoral society that has blatantly, proudly, violated all of the commandments of God, there is one last virtue they insist upon: tolerance for their immorality. They will not have you condemning what they have done as being wrong, and they have created a belief system in which it is not, and in which they are no longer the criminal or the villain or the evil person, but you are!”
			D. James Kennedy


----------



## rjcruiser (Apr 22, 2015)

centerpin fan said:


> They're not.  However, there is a concerted effort among some to say homosexuality is not a sin.
> 
> As I've said in similar threads, there are no "adultery affirming" churches.



This.

There are a lot of sin affirming churches...but I'd say they are more of a social club than anything else.  You'd be lucky to hear more than one verse actually read in the Sunday morning pep talk at those places.



Big7 said:


> Oh LORD.. Another split.
> 
> Be nice if EVERYONE was on the same page.
> 
> ...



Yup...but even Catholics can't get on the same page.



centerpin fan said:


> You can't make this stuff up.
> 
> http://www.virtueonline.org/episcopal-divinity-school-embraces-gender-continuum



Wow.


----------



## Big7 (Apr 22, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> Yup...but even Catholics can't get on the same page.



Rong..

There is a difference in doctrine and dogma.
Interesting read may be found HERE:
http://catholicexchange.com/difference-between-doctrine-and-dogma

The term “doctrine” can be used generally to refer to all of the Church’s teachings. In addition, we can say that dogma is a subset of doctrine — all dogmas are doctrines, but not all doctrines are dogmas. A doctrine is a teaching of the universal Church proposed as necessary for belief by the faithful. Dogmas, properly speaking, are such teachings that are set forth to be believed as divinely revealed (Catechism, no. 88; cf. 891-892). When differentiating from dogma, we use the term “doctrine” to signify teachings that are either definitively proposed or those that are proposed as true, but not in a definitive manner (cf. Catechism, nos. 88, 891-92).

For Catholics, there is an important difference between the teachings that we must believe, which are infallible and unchangeable (doctrine), and the rules that we must obey but which are changeable (disciplines). Finally, there are areas where we are free to believe or not believe without offending against faith (theological opinions).

I assure we ARE on the same page on things that matter.

At least I used "divisions" instead of "schism",
defind as "A grouping that has split off doctrinalally".

Just for you Bro. RJ 
Inside joke for the rest of you. 

Please take the time to check out the link.


----------



## Israel (Apr 22, 2015)

There need be divisions amongst you so that those who are approved may be made manifest.


----------



## Big7 (Apr 22, 2015)

Israel said:


> There need be divisions amongst you so that those who are approved may be made manifest.



Break that down for us slow ones. Please?


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 22, 2015)

Big7 said:


> Break that down for us slow ones. Please?


1 Corinthians 11:19

Divisions serve God's purpose.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 22, 2015)

This issue makes one really have to think about how grace, salvation, repentance, election, and "once saved always saved" actually works.

Is it really all from God? Is the proof in the form of fruits actually from the Holy Spirit?
Why was a poor wretched sinner like me worthy? 
Why does the "washing" make me different? 
If I've repented (changed), why do I still sin? Is true repentance a change or just feeling guilty when I sin? 

What it boils down to is Lordship Salvation vs Free grace. I'm gonna stick with free grace. I'm officially off the religious roller coaster.

"and such were some of you, but you were washed."

I have truly repented and placed my faith in Christ.


----------



## rjcruiser (Apr 22, 2015)

Big7 said:


> Just for you Bro. RJ
> Inside joke for the rest of you.
> 
> Please take the time to check out the link.



I'll try and check out the link later...and I loosely see your point. But in the end...practice is what really matters, right?  Function over form?

I think the Catholic church has done a masterful job of keeping form over function.  They've got all types of beliefs when it comes to doctrinal practice and function. But, unlike Non-Catholic Christians...Catholics remain Catholics. Non-Catholic Christians just start another church. 

Also...did you miss my Catholic Reformation thread?

Lastly...the Catholic Church is not schism free....can't forget those pesky eastern orthodox folks. 





Artfuldodger said:


> This issue makes one really have to think about how grace, salvation, repentance, election, and "once saved always saved" actually works.
> 
> Is it really all from God? Is the proof in the form of fruits actually from the Holy Spirit?
> Why was a poor wretched sinner like me worthy?
> ...



Remind me again how you define Lordship Salvation and Free Grace...cause i think those two go hand in hand.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 22, 2015)

How do Christians decide to quit accepting the sins of their brothers?
The glutton who continues to overeat. The drunkard who continues to drink. The adulterer who continues to fornicate? 

Couldn't a Church make up a sin list that would keep someone out of their Church?
Maybe with a repentance amount such as;
Adultery 3 times, fornication 4 times, stealing 8 times, gluttony 20 times, homosexuality 1 time.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 22, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> I'll try and check out the link later...and I loosely see your point. But in the end...practice is what really matters, right?  Function over form?
> 
> I think the Catholic church has done a masterful job of keeping form over function.  They've got all types of beliefs when it comes to doctrinal practice and function. But, unlike Non-Catholic Christians...Catholics remain Catholics. Non-Catholic Christians just start another church.
> 
> ...



That's easy function over form.

Lordship salvation requires the sinner to repent or stop sinning. Salvation isn't easy like the Free Grace believers believe. It requires the person to perform works in order to receive salvation. The person has to repent from sins.
Catholics are a good example of Lordship Salvation believers.

Free Grace allows the sinner to repent or change from believing he can save himself to believing he needs Jesus.
The Free Grace believer knows he can't quit sinning and thus needs a messiah in the form of Jesus.
The Free Grace believer knows his salvation is all from God and isn't based on anything the lost sinner did that brought him to Jesus. The Free Grace believer believes God can elect the homosexual or the Hindu.
The Free Grace believer believes that any changes within the person are from the Holy Spirit. 
Mostly though it's all about the "washing." It really is that easy. Easy Believism.
Once saved always saved. 
None of us are righteous or worthy. We are all equally as guilty. We were all once as the sinners but were washed. Believing in Jesus is our repentance or change.
We know there is power in the Blood.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 22, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> Remind me again how you define Lordship Salvation and Free Grace...cause i think those two go hand in hand.


Lordship salvation is another term for progressive sanctification. 

"Works"


----------



## Big7 (Apr 22, 2015)

gemcgrew said:


> 1 Corinthians 11:19
> 
> Divisions serve God's purpose.



19 there have to be factions among you in order that (also) those who are approved among you may become known.
That's the chaf and wheat deal.
You really have to understand that.





rjcruiser said:


> I'll try and check out the link later...and I loosely see your point. But in the end...practice is what really matters, right?  Function over form?
> 
> I think the Catholic church has done a masterful job of keeping form over function.  They've got all types of beliefs when it comes to doctrinal practice and function. But, unlike Non-Catholic Christians...Catholics remain Catholics. Non-Catholic Christians just start another church.
> 
> ...



In this view, the primary difficulty is disagreement on the role of the Pope. The rest is the same and they do have their own Ecumenical Patriarch. And that's OK..


Ephesians 5:11 


Yes, RJ, I missed it. I try to stay out of here.
I will go back and check it though.
PM me a link.. Please.

But in the end...practice is what really matters, right?  Function over form?

That explains exactly James. Faith without works is dead.
You have to do both.
A simple Proclamation is not good enough.
Sure, Faith is key, but so are "practice" as you put it,
is/are works.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 23, 2015)

Big7 said:


> 19 there have to be factions among you in order that (also) those who are approved among you may become known.
> That's the chaf and wheat deal.
> You really have to understand that.


How is that different from what I said? Remember, you are the one who asked for help.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

gemcgrew said:


> 1 Corinthians 11:19
> 
> Divisions serve God's purpose.



That's interesting, I never thought of it that way.


----------



## rjcruiser (Apr 23, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> How do Christians decide to quit accepting the sins of their brothers?
> The glutton who continues to overeat. The drunkard who continues to drink. The adulterer who continues to fornicate?



I think your definition of gluttony is missing the mark.  It isn't simply over-eating...or being overweight.  It's over-indulgence...especially when it comes to food.  It's keeping from the poor, while wasting food and drink yourself.  Almost a worshiping of food.  I doubt this is such an issue as most nay-sayers like to point out.



Artfuldodger said:


> That's easy function over form.
> 
> Lordship salvation requires the sinner to repent or stop sinning. Salvation isn't easy like the Free Grace believers believe. It requires the person to perform works in order to receive salvation. The person has to repent from sins.
> Catholics are a good example of Lordship Salvation believers.
> ...





gemcgrew said:


> Lordship salvation is another term for progressive sanctification.
> 
> "Works"



Okay...thanks for the refresher.  I see LS as more of being committed to Christ through Salvation....and being committed to His authority and turning from sin through repentance.

If you don't have sanctification in your life, you're not saved.



			
				Big7 said:
			
		

> In this view, the primary difficulty is disagreement on the role of the Pope. The rest is the same and they do have their own Ecumenical Patriarch. And that's OK..
> 
> 
> Ephesians 5:11
> ...



http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=838205

And I agree...practice is what matters.

I think the biggest issue that we'll disagree on is that Faith=Salvation not Faith+Works=Salvation.

But, in saying that, Faith will produce works.  The works don't save, but they show the salvation is true.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

1 Corinthians 6:11
And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

"were sanctified" is past tense.

1 Corinthians 1:30
But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption,


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 23, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> 1 Corinthians 6:11
> And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
> 
> "were sanctified" is past tense.



Doesn't that mean if homosexuality was their charge, they no longer are?

 I've seen many times we say works or fruits of the spirit are evidence of salvation, so a homosexual is no farther out of reach of God's grace as anyone else, but if they proclaim Him a change would have been made.  Correct?


----------



## formula1 (Apr 23, 2015)

*Re:*

The goal of salvation is a transformed life and renewal of the mind to the mind of Christ.  It doesn't begin to happen until you come to Christ when Christ through the Holy Spirit comes in and starts sweeping out the hidden places.  As we walk in Him, as we reckon ourselves dead, we are renewed daily to the mind of Christ.

Romans 12:2 
Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. 

Colossians 2 
6 Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him, 7 rooted and built up in Him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving.

We know that the light of God cannot dwell in the darkness of sin and if we know that, how do we imagine that we could possibly hold onto sin's entanglements in us and "walk in Him" and "renew our minds".  Should we believe that was possible, this warning from Jesus becomes true:

Matthew 6
22 “The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light, 23 but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!

One who comes to Christ must allow him into our deepest crevices that His Light may touch all of us, every part!  Otherwise, that which we hold on to will drive us into great darkness!

God knows how to complete you, He knows exactly what is needed and how He plans to accomplish it and He is able to do it. There is no a thing about anyone He does not know and He loves you anyway, so much so that He died for you. Now if He loves us this much, can't we trust Him and Love Him enough to lay our everything at His feet?

Matthew 16:25
For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.

I really want to grow to the place where I find my life completely in Him!   God Bless!  Sorry if this seems off-topic!


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> Doesn't that mean if homosexuality was their charge, they no longer are?
> 
> I've seen many times we say works or fruits of the spirit are evidence of salvation, so a homosexual is no farther out of reach of God's grace as anyone else, but if they proclaim Him a change would have been made.  Correct?



And if he doesn't repent/change is it his fault or proof that God didn't elect him?

What about the rest of us who still suffer from our struggle with our sins? Must we repent/change or just feel really guilty when we do sin?

Using the example of a drunkard who can't quite stop drinking. Is trying to stop drinking repenting or must he actually repent/change?


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 23, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> And if he doesn't repent/change is it his fault or proof that God didn't elect him?
> 
> What about the rest of us who still suffer from our struggle with our sins? Must we repent/change or just feel really guilty when we do sin?
> 
> Using the example of a drunkard who can't quite stop drinking. Is trying to stop drinking repenting or must he actually repent/change?




All I can say is if you repent of something and return to it, then you did not repent at all.

Now, a worldly man does not struggle with his sins. He loves them , they are pleasure to him. When a man struggles with what he does, then he is in the process of correcting that problem...agree?


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 23, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> Okay...thanks for the refresher.  I see LS as more of being committed to Christ through Salvation....and being committed to His authority and turning from sin through repentance.


My commitment has no bearing upon my salvation or relationship. It is the love of Christ that constrains me.


rjcruiser said:


> If you don't have sanctification in your life, you're not saved.


And sanctification is 100% the work of God.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 23, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> But, in saying that, Faith will produce works.  The works don't save, but they show the salvation is true.


Show who? I have no more confidence in my greatest work, than in my greatest sin. Any works that would show my faith, are seen by God alone. He sees the inward.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> All I can say is if you repent of something and return to it, then you did not repent at all.
> 
> Now, a worldly man does not struggle with his sins. He loves them , they are pleasure to him. When a man struggles with what he does, then he is in the process of correcting that problem...agree?



Then it would be safe to say that none of us have repented by your definition.

What does the worldly man lack that makes the worldly man depraved?

I would call this process of correction from sin; salvation.


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 23, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> What does the worldly man lack that makes the worldly man depraved?
> 
> I would call this process of correction from sin; salvation.



And I agree, and this is why an openly and non repentant homosexual should not be allowed any position in a church...other than a pew to listen.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> And I agree, and this is why an openly and non repentant homosexual should not be allowed any position in a church...other than a pew to listen.



Meaning an openly non repentant homosexual lacks the Holy Spirit?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

I guess it wouldn't do any good to baptize the poor souls. Make them change first and then give them the Holy Spirit. Make them not a worldly depraved person first and then give them the Holy Spirit.

Is that how the Holy Spirit works? Prove yourself sanctified and then God will save you? Leave it up to a person who loves sin to repent? Works first and then salvation if the person sanctifies himself?

Is repentance any part of a person's pre-conversion experience?

If my salvation is based on a progressive sanctification process, when within this process am I saved? What kind of a promise from God is that?
God looks down and says; "one day when you have stopped sinning enough, I'll save you."

Wait a minute, I recall someone dying because we couldn't do that. Was his death in vain? Did it not work?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> And I agree, and this is why an openly and non repentant homosexual should not be allowed any position in a church...other than a pew to listen.



Why not remove all practicing non repentant sinners from holding Church positions?
You know, people who are openly sinning.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

When a person is saved and they feel the power of the HOLY SPIRIT deep within their souls, how long before God removes his Spirit? Let's say in three weeks I'm still sinning. I haven't had any luck repenting. 
How long will God give me to sanctify myself?

I'd rather let God do it himself. I'd rather believe in the promise God gave me than to prove something to my fellow man. If I can't believe God can do what he promised, then I'm up the creek saving myself.

God + nothing = Everything!

If the homosexual doesn't have faith that Jesus can save him, then how can the grace of God save me? I'm equally as guilty, perhaps even worse.
I commit a lot of sins. I haven't repented from sin.


----------



## Big7 (Apr 23, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> I think your definition of gluttony is missing the mark.  It isn't simply over-eating...or being overweight.  It's over-indulgence...especially when it comes to food.  It's keeping from the poor, while wasting food and drink yourself.  Almost a worshiping of food.  I doubt this is such an issue as most nay-sayers like to point out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Checked the link. Thanks..

The operative is:

"The Resistance" in defiance of the Vatican,"

Can't happen. The Vatican is the head of the church. 

Those dudes can schism all they want.
It don't matter. 

The Church has been passed down through what
we call a "three legged stool".

The Three-Legged Stool

The three-legged stool of the Catholic Church consists of: Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium. Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture together make up the Deposit of Faith, handed down by the Apostles to their successors, continuing down the ages to our own day. The Magisterium is the teaching authority of the Church which guards, defends and interprets the Deposit of Faith. The removal of even one of the three causes the collapse of the stool, with the resultant fall of anyone trying to sit on said stool.

Sacred Tradition was first, before there was a Bible.

Sacred Scripture is the Bible according to Sacred Tradition
That was second.

The Magisterium is responsible teaching and interpretation of the first and second. The Bible is NOT for self interpretation.
That came third.

That's just the way it is. As God intended.

Been around a LONG time. 

Be kool Bro..


----------



## hummerpoo (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Why not remove all practicing non repentant sinners from holding Church positions?
> You know, people who are openly sinning.



Aaah ... 1Cor. 5 ... positions, including membership.
But not pew, and definitely not prayers ... 2Cor. 2.


----------



## Israel (Apr 24, 2015)

Big7 said:


> Checked the link. Thanks..
> 
> The operative is:
> 
> ...



Jesus Christ alone is "head of the church".


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Why not remove all practicing non repentant sinners from holding Church positions?
> You know, people who are openly sinning.



That happens. Pastors are caught in affairs and fired all the time. What do you think would happen if a church Pastor or Deacon or lay member  came into the church drunk and still holding the bottle?

That is offensive to the Kingdom of God and goes beyond individual sin because it casts a shadow on the corporate body of Christ.

 Now imagine if the cheater and drunkard was non repentant and expected the congregation to accept their adulterous and drunken ways, This is the same offense that an openly practicing homosexual places on the church. I think this is why Gods word says no drunkards, fornicators, homosexuals, swindlers, etc. etc. shall enter the kingdom of heaven.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

Romans 8:28
And we know that God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them.

When one is called and accepts doesn't he then receive the gift of the Holy Spirit? Doesn't his regeneration start after salvation?
Doesn't the washing make the sinners, non sinners? Doesn't the blood of Jesus wash away all future sins?

If not then why did God promise that it would?


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Romans 8:28
> And we know that God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them.
> 
> When one is called and accepts doesn't he then receive the gift of the Holy Spirit? Doesn't his regeneration start after salvation?
> ...



It does. There's also fruits of that salvation that we the brethren can see. Not so we can judge but so we can protect ourselves from liars.


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Romans 8:28
> And we know that God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them.
> 
> When one is called and accepts doesn't he then receive the gift of the Holy Spirit? Doesn't his regeneration start after salvation?
> ...



Only five questions in one post?  

C'mon, man.  You're not even trying.  I want to see a minimum of eight questions in your next post.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 24, 2015)

Israel said:


> Jesus Christ alone is "head of the church".



Yes... but I believe that head here comes from Paul who suggests that the body, or the church, has the resurrection of Jesus' body as its no. 1 creed and the Eucharist as it's food. The body and the head are not separate-- they are intimate physically, spiritually and mystically. So in Paul's mystical way of speaking, "the head of the church" is not something that can be separated from the church he knows.

If we were to stand in front of Paul today and say,   "Brother welcome to the church of Jesus is the Head." I personally think he would ask "When is the Eucharist?". And if he could not find it as he knew it in his time, I think he might say, " Ah, I know you know of Jesus' head, but where is his all of this resurrected mystical body?" Then he'd go on to say, " Don't you know "God is in you, and you are in Him as God is in His Church and as it is in Him? You are the ambassadors of his resurrected body."

 And then he would go on for several more pages or for an hour or more on how, although the Spirit of Him who lives in i each individual member,  the church is the prophet and the apostle tending His sheep and returning the lost to the green field of His promise.... yada, yada, yada... so that now to the church He is present to all not just for the few and individual believers as per the heros and Ninavites of the Old Covenant.

The point is that Christ and the church as separate of the Eucharist* (*or where God and man sit at the table and share foods as a communion and one body ( similar to a married couple) ,  is not Christ nor the church--at least not the one Paul knew... The head and the body are now one. 

Maybe, kinda... hope you know where I am headed.


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 24, 2015)

gordon 2 said:


> Yes... but I believe that head here comes from Paul who suggests that the body, or the church, has the resurrection of Jesus' body as its no. 1 creed and the Eucharist as it's food. The body and the head are not separate-- they are intimate physically, spiritually and mystically. So in Paul's mystical way of speaking, "the head of the church" is not something that can be separated from the church he knows.
> 
> If we were to stand in front of Paul today and say,   "Brother welcome to the church of Jesus is the Head." I personally think he would ask "When is the Eucharist?". And if he could not find it as he knew it in his time, I think he might say, " Ah, I know you know of Jesus' head, but where is his all of this resurrected mystical body?" Then he'd go on to say, " Don't you know "God is in you, and you are in Him as God is in His Church and as it is in Him?"And then he would go on for several more pages or for an hour or more on how, althouth the Spirit of Him who lives in in each individual member,  the church is the prophet and the apostle tending His sheep and returning the lost to the green field of His promise.... yada, yada, yada... so that now for the church He was present to all.
> 
> ...





 Ok, so that I understand. The " Church" is the body of Christ. The church is the Kingdom, made up of believers which individually we make one corporate body. 
 Christ reigns as King and Lord of the Kingdom., therefore Christ is head of the church..?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

Galatians 5:1
So Christ has truly set us free. Now make sure that you stay free, and don't get tied up again in slavery to the law.

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.

"except homosexuals" They must always wonder if the blood of Christ covers their sin. They can't ever remove the yoke of slavery like we other sinners can. They must calculate their "works" into their salvation equation. 
 For them the equation is "God + no more sinning = salvation


The blood of Christ covers all sins except heterosexuals having gay sex.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

centerpin fan said:


> Only five questions in one post?
> 
> C'mon, man.  You're not even trying.  I want to see a minimum of eight questions in your next post.



I'm trying to repent. I am amazed on how free grace works until it comes to heterosexuals having gay sex. 
That appears to really throw a wrench into God's calling not being based on anything we do.
God is no respecter of man. He can even call a pagan from the middle of an African jungle.
But for some reason he can't effectually call a gay pagan from the middle of an African jungle.


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm trying to repent. I am amazed on how free grace works until it comes to heterosexuals having gay sex.
> That appears to really throw a wrench into God's calling not being based on anything we do.
> God is no respecter of man. He can even call a pagan from the middle of an African jungle.
> But for some reason he can't effectually call a gay pagan from the middle of an African jungle.



Maybe I'm wrong, but it appears to me that you have fallen for the popular lie of the day that homosexual s are born that way and cannot change who or what they are.

 Even if they are born that way, Christ. Can clean them and turn them away from their evil sickness. But don't tell me that contrary to the word of God that any of us are saved ," cleansed" and are not changed,because it is a life changing event.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but it appears to me that you have fallen for the popular lie of the day that homosexual s are born that way and cannot change who or what they are.
> 
> Even if they are born that way, Christ. Can clean them and turn them away from their evil sickness. But don't tell me that contrary to the word of God that any of us are saved ," cleansed" and are not changed,because it is a life changing event.



Perhaps God has changed us all at salvation. Maybe we can't ever actually turn from sin and thus is the reason we needed Jesus in the first place.
After salvation it is God's will to reconcile us as he sees fit.
Perhaps it's a life long journey between God and the individual. 
And such were some of you, but you were washed.

I don't really see any difference between me and the homosexual when it comes to my election and salvation.
If the blood of Jesus doesn't cover their sin then it can't cover my sins.
I haven't repented yet from sin.


----------



## Madman (Apr 24, 2015)

The problem is not the blessing of same sex marriages by the church, or any of the other "new societal norms" we see making their way in, it is that we no longer believe God's Holy Word to be God's Holy Word.  

It is a symptom of the problem but not THE PROBLEM.

I chose to no longer lick this ashtray.  God called me out of one of the first denominations to go through this nonsense and blessed me and my family mightily when he released me from it.

I cannot imagine how anyone can be a part of a group that calls blessed that which God calls sin.

CF has said it before, there are no "adultery affirming" denominations, there are no "alcoholic affirming" denominations, nor lying, nor murdering, nor swearing, affirming denominations, so why should the bride of Christ now affirm what God calls sin?

Homosexuals need to be in church because they are sinners just  like I am, but we need to repent of our sins not glory in them.  We need to flee from sin not dable in it.  

When God called me out of the denomination I was born into many of the people who stayed called me everything but a child of God, some still will not speak to me if they see me on the street.

Just as the Israelites looked up at the serpent and were saved we need to look to the cross, for it is our only hope. 

I hate it for oops1 to see his home church in such a battle, I pray that God will give him wisdom in the decisions he makes and I will give him no advice here other than this.  Be quite and listen to God, search the Scriptures, love the Lord, love your family and the people on both sides of this and other issues, but when the time has come beg God for His wisdom and His answer, then be prepared to do it.



As for me and my house we will follow the Lord.


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 24, 2015)

Another related story:

http://www.redstate.com/2015/04/24/the-culture-war-goes-to-church/


----------



## Madman (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't really see any difference between me and the homosexual when it comes to my election and salvation.
> If the blood of Jesus doesn't cover their sin then it can't cover my sins.



Has this hypothetical homosexual repented of their sin? Have you repented of your sins, or do you call your sins "Non-sins"?


----------



## Madman (Apr 24, 2015)

another related story:

http://www.str.org/articles/truth-and-compassion-in-action#.VTpkqCFVhBc


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

centerpin fan said:


> Another related story:
> 
> http://www.redstate.com/2015/04/24/the-culture-war-goes-to-church/



It's really bad that the parent association can take their Church. They should be able to just op out of the association and keep their Church. 
That's a very weird rule.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

Madman said:


> Has this hypothetical homosexual repented of their sin? Have you repented of your sins, or do you call your sins "Non-sins"?



I call my sins "washed sins." I haven't repented from sin.
My repentance or change was the realization that I can't repent from sin and thus needed salvation in the form of a Messiah.


----------



## Madman (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I call my sins "washed sins." I haven't repented from sin.
> My repentance or change was the realization that I can't repent from sin and thus needed salvation in the form of a Messiah.



Sorry to hear that.

Mark 1: 14 After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God. 15 “The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!”


----------



## Madman (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I call my sins "washed sins."



Nothing like good clean sin to make life better.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 24, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> Ok, so that I understand. The " Church" is the body of Christ. The church is the Kingdom, made up of believers which individually we make one corporate body.
> Christ reigns as King and Lord of the Kingdom., therefore Christ is head of the church..?



O my. The questions. Yes the church is the mystical body of Christ according to my understanding of it and my understanding of Paul. 

The church is not the Kingdom. The church is active in the spiritual Kingdom, just as the church active in a society, nation and a political Kingdom.

Christ is Lord of our spiritual Kingdom in history. But that Jesus is head of the Church stems from the fact that God's presence is with us, as God was with the Hebrews in the their tent--in the cloud that followed it and in the Holy of Holies-- but even more than this, He is now physically present, Him being in us ( in our hearts--our new disposition through grace)  and as such we are the body corporately, the His mystical body that is the church. And as such, His word is not divorced from His body or ours but is with us as spoken by the church.

I'm trying to lingo unsuccessfully as Paul would here. But I think safe it is to say that the church and the kingdom are two separate realities. The Kingdom stems before David when God was Lord of the Hebrews. The church stems from the resurrection on the "third day" and the promise of  redemption recognized; the promise fulfilled of God being intimate with his people again.

From " I mean to withdraw my corn, and my wine, when the season for it comes" from the priests because they are drunkards!  (Hosea) to the wedding at Canaan ( darn good news)  and " on the "third day" he will raise us and we shall live in his presence"  (Hosea) I suggest that his presence for us is not only our individual born again spirit and His Spirit with us, but also the church as his presence with us. 

The Holy Spirit fell on the people of the old covenant, as it falls on us due to the ascension of Jesus-- but His presence is made physical by his mystical body as the church--so that the word ( the New Testament) is the word of God and from God present today... as alive and present physically with us, via the church.

Kinda....


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 24, 2015)

Madman said:


> another related story:
> 
> http://www.str.org/articles/truth-and-compassion-in-action#.VTpkqCFVhBc



Outstanding response by the church!

I've seen some of Michael Brown's messages on YouTube.  He is excellent.


----------



## hobbs27 (Apr 24, 2015)

gordon 2 said:


> O my. The questions. Yes the church is the mystical body of Christ according to my understanding of it and my understanding of Paul.
> 
> The church is not the Kingdom. The church is active in the spiritual Kingdom, just as the church active in a society, nation and a political Kingdom.
> 
> ...



 Thanks, I understand your view a bit better now. I still see the church and the Kingdom and the body of Christ as one . 
 Sure the Holy Spirit fell on those in the old covenant, the difference today because of the atonement is the Holy Spirit dwells within us, not upon us. IMO.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

Madman said:


> Sorry to hear that.
> 
> Mark 1: 14 After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God. 15 “The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!”



That's what I did. I repented or changed my belief.
Now I follow the Greatest commandment and the second greatest commandment of the Teacher.


----------



## Madman (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I haven't repented from sin.





			
				Artfuldodger said:
			
		

> That's what I did. I repented or changed my belief.



Art,  

You have lost me my friend.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

Madman said:


> Art,
> 
> You have lost me my friend.



What is repentance and is it necessary for salvation?

Question: "What is repentance and is it necessary for salvation?"

Answer: Many understand the term repentance to mean “turning from sin.” This is not the biblical definition of repentance. In the Bible, the word repent means “to change one’s mind.” The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions (Luke 3:8-14; Acts 3:19). Acts 26:20 declares, “I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.” The full biblical definition of repentance is a change of mind that results in a change of action.

What, then, is the connection between repentance and salvation? The Book of Acts seems to especially focus on repentance in regards to salvation (Acts 2:38; 3:19; 11:18; 17:30; 20:21; 26:20). To repent, in relation to salvation, is to change your mind in regard to Jesus Christ. In Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts chapter 2), he concludes with a call for the people to repent (Acts 2:38). Repent from what? Peter is calling the people who rejected Jesus (Acts 2:36) to change their minds about Him, to recognize that He is indeed “Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). Peter is calling the people to change their minds from rejection of Christ as the Messiah to faith in Him as both Messiah and Savior.

Repentance and faith can be understood as “two sides of the same coin.” It is impossible to place your faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior without first changing your mind about who He is and what He has done. Whether it is repentance from willful rejection or repentance from ignorance or disinterest, it is a change of mind. Biblical repentance, in relation to salvation, is changing your mind from rejection of Christ to faith in Christ.

It is crucially important that we understand repentance is not a work we do to earn salvation. No one can repent and come to God unless God pulls that person to Himself (John 6:44). Acts 5:31 and 11:18 indicate that repentance is something God gives—it is only possible because of His grace. No one can repent unless God grants repentance. All of salvation, including repentance and faith, is a result of God drawing us, opening our eyes, and changing our hearts. God's longsuffering leads us to repentance (2 Peter 3:9), as does His kindness (Romans 2:4).

http://www.gotquestions.org/repentance.html#ixzz3FnwuFLuG


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

Repentance (Gk. metanoia) literally means “to change the mind.”

It usually refers to changing the mind regarding your former beliefs and behaviors, and turning to a new way of believing and behaving. This change, of course, is exactly what John’s baptism represented for the Jewish people. When they came to be baptized by John in the Jordan, they were turning away from the corrupt forms of religious Judaism, and turning to a new way of living according to the loving and forgiving ways of God. In this way, repentance and baptism have nothing to do with receiving eternal life, or even receiving the forgiveness of sins. Both are just a way of turning away from the past and turning toward a new life for the future.

The term “remission” (Gk. aphesis) does not refer to “forgiveness” but is closer to “liberty” or “freedom” (cf. Luke 3:3; 4:18-19; 25:47).

Again, it is crucial to understand how Jewish people would have understood this term. At this time, the Jewish people were under the occupation of the Roman Empire. Yet many Jewish people understood that while Rome was their physical enemy, their greater enemy was their own sin and rebellion as a nation. In fact, the Jewish people believed that it was because of their sin and rebellion as a nation that God had allowed the Roman Empire to occupy and control Israel.

This is why the Jewish religious leaders of that time became so focused on properly keeping the Law of Moses. It was thought that if the nation could perfectly keep the law, then God would finally deliver Israel from the Romans and restore Israel to her rightful place among the nations.

http://redeeminggod.com/baptism-of-repentance-forgiveness-of-sins/


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

2 Timothy 2:25 (ESV)
correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth,

Acts 11:18 (ESV)
When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”

Acts 3:18
But God was fulfilling what all the prophets had foretold about the Messiah--that he must suffer these things.
19 Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord, 

Acts 10:43 To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins. 

Galatians 2:16 - "man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ... for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified."

Ephesians 2:8-9 - "not of works"

2 Timothy 1:9 - "not according to our works"

Titus 3:5 - "not by works of righteousness which we have done"

Romans 3:21-22 - "by the works of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight"

Romans 4:4-5 - "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt."

Isaiah 64:6 - "all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags"

God + nothing = Everything


----------



## rjcruiser (Apr 24, 2015)

gemcgrew said:


> My commitment has no bearing upon my salvation or relationship. It is the love of Christ that constrains me.
> 
> And sanctification is 100% the work of God.



I would agree.



gemcgrew said:


> Show who? I have no more confidence in my greatest work, than in my greatest sin. Any works that would show my faith, are seen by God alone. He sees the inward.



Show others...show ourselves.

Sure...God knows our hearts...but do we?  Do other Christians?  Can we minister to others through our faith?  I believe so.

Also, why was I John written?



Artfuldodger said:


> Why not remove all practicing non repentant sinners from holding Church positions?
> You know, people who are openly sinning.



Brilliant idea.  It is called church discipline...as well as holding church leaders to the standards set in the NT.



Artfuldodger said:


> If the homosexual doesn't have faith that Jesus can save him, then how can the grace of God save me? I'm equally as guilty, perhaps even worse.
> I commit a lot of sins. I haven't repented from sin.



The homosexual does not believe they are sinning.  That is the difference.  They want to have it be endorsed so they can live in sin without guilt.



Big7 said:


> Checked the link. Thanks..
> 
> The operative is:
> 
> ...



Them Eastern Orthodox guys might not agree with this statement. 



Artfuldodger said:


> It's really bad that the parent association can take their Church. They should be able to just op out of the association and keep their Church.
> That's a very weird rule.



Well...that is a very poorly written article.  It says that the church was built by the members.  That just isn't true.  God built it.  And I would probably go as far as to say that they probably received help to build it from the association in either the form of a loan or financing and even advertising.

While I think it is pretty low down of the UMC to do that, they're not the only association that has that built into the rules of their affiliations.


----------



## Madman (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Question: "What is repentance and is it necessary for salvation?"



Art,

I did not ask if repentance is necessary for salvation?

I asked why in one statement you said you did not repent and in another you said you did.

Am I misreading something?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

Madman said:


> Art,
> 
> I did not ask if repentance is necessary for salvation?
> 
> ...



In one statement I said I didn't repent from sin. Meaning that I still sin. I try to follow the two New Testament commandments of love.

In another statement I stated that my repentance is changing from believing I could save myself by living a certain way to believing Jesus died for my sins. 
My repentance was changing my mind. Any repentance or changes that occur after my salvation are the results of the Holy Spirit. My sanctification is from God. 
My salvation is from God through the death of his son, Jesus.

My repentance was changing from a work based salvation to a 100% grace from God unmerited gift salvation belief.


----------



## Madman (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> In one statement I said I didn't repent from sin. Meaning that I still sin. I try to follow the two New Testament commandments of love.
> 
> In another statement I stated that my repentance is changing from believing I could save myself by living a certain way to believing Jesus died for my sins.
> My repentance was changing my mind. Any repentance or changes that occur after my salvation are the results of the Holy Spirit. My sanctification is from God.
> ...



Art,

If you want to keep this thought going we need to move to a new topic.

Suffice it to say you and I seem to differ on the need for repentance.


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 24, 2015)

Madman said:


> The problem is not the blessing of same sex marriages by the church, or any of the other "new societal norms" we see making their way in, it is that we no longer believe God's Holy Word to be God's Holy Word.





> But after Dr. Hulslander signed a “Unity and Integrity” statement calling on the United Methodist Church to maintain its standards of Biblical integrity with regard to marriage, the North Georgia Conference of the United Methodist Church sought to remove her.



Erick Erikson spent the entire last hour of his radio show tonight interviewing this woman and other members of the congregation.  She said that signing this statement wasn't the only thing that caused the problem, but it was a big part.  

It's mind-blowing that a minister can be removed for saying she believes the Bible.


----------



## Big7 (Apr 24, 2015)

Israel said:


> Jesus Christ alone is "head of the church".



RONG..

He (Jesus Christ) founded the church and passed it down through Apostolic Succession. That's the way he wanted it so.. there you go.

For your entertainment, read a little HERE:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01641a.htm

St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles..
You know that tiny part about the rock the church was founded on and St. Peter had authority to pass it on..
Right?

Little more on that HERE:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm

Israel: I like to discuss things on here and have a little fun. RJ and I have a little fun thing going.
You, on the other hand, have demonstrated once again
even after all your travels and churches you founded,
heck.. You might have rewritten the Bible..

Yet.. YOU NO NOTHING!


----------



## Israel (Apr 24, 2015)

We will all soon enough see where all appear.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

Madman said:


> Art,
> 
> If you want to keep this thought going we need to move to a new topic.
> 
> Suffice it to say you and I seem to differ on the need for repentance.



No we can move on. It 's only related to homosexuality if salvation is a one time event.  If the homosexual can gain salvation and then loose it because he isn't willing to repent from his sin, then that type of repentance is needed for a works based salvation. Under this plan sanctification is works based and the individual never knows when he's sanctified enough to be in or out. I guess one could be in one day and out the next. 

But if salvation is given to any and all regardless of their own abilities and works and is never taken away then never sinning again isn't a part of salvation. Sanctification is the work of God. Once you are in, you are in.

It still goes back to Lordship salvation or free grace salvation. What does God base his election on? Something we do or something he does. I hope it's something God does because as a man, I'm not very good at being righteous. 
If my salvation is based on anything I do, I'm lost. I will suffer eternal death. I can only hope I'm not following a false Jesus who is preaching a false gospel.
I can only hope Jesus accomplished what he promised. 
Again not dependent on my actions or works. If I could have just quit sinning then I would not have needed Jesus. I could have saved myself. I actually tried that method about half my life and had no luck whatsoever. One day I realized my sins were atoned by the blood of Jesus and I repented. I was able to remove the yoke of slavery. 
If the Jesus believing homosexual can't remove his yoke then neither can I. I'm just as guilty as the homosexual.
I have not repented from sin yet my sins were washed away. It's really that easy to have blessed assurance.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 24, 2015)

You have to excuse Big7. When his heart vomits, it vomits publicly.


----------



## rjcruiser (Apr 24, 2015)

No No:





centerpin fan said:


> It's mind-blowing that a minister can be removed for saying she believes the Bible.



Did anyone else see the irony in this?  

Sorry...just don't see how one can hold to traditional marriage but not traditional roles of men and women. 

Ahh...move along.


----------



## Big7 (Apr 24, 2015)

gemcgrew said:


> You have to excuse Big7. When his heart vomits, it vomits publicly.



Don't just throw grenades..

Splain' yo' self.

And, what's with the  ?



Must have went to public screwl...???


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> No No:
> 
> Did anyone else see the irony in this?
> 
> ...



Just another sin affirming Church. Next thing will be preachers who are gossipers or revilers.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 24, 2015)

Found this tonight while looking for something else. It might interest some here.

In antiquity[edit]
The Midrash is one of the few ancient religious texts that makes reference to same-sex marriage. The following teaching can be found twice in the Midrash:

"Rabbi Huna said in the name of Rabbi Joseph, 'The generation of the Flood was not wiped out until they wrote גמומסיות (either sexual hymns or marriage documents) for the union of a man to a male or to an animal.'"[85]

Another important reference is found in the Babylonian Talmud:

"'Ula said: Non-Jews [litt. Bnei Noach, the progeny of Noah] accepted upon themselves thirty mitzvot [divinely ordered laws] but they only abide by three of them: the first one is that they do not write marriage documents for male couples,...


----------



## rjcruiser (Apr 24, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Just another sin affirming Church. Next thing will be preachers who are gossipers or revilers.



How do you explain Matt 18?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 25, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> How do you explain Matt 18?



I can't explain it. It's confusing, confront sinners in the Church? Ya'll would be at my house every day to confront me. Then you would have to start treating me like a Gentile. Well I am already a Gentile. You might have to treat me like a tax collector.

What does "whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" mean?

What does "I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven" mean?

Then after we kick them out of the Church we should forgive them seventy times seven. 

Then it starts with kings forgiving slaves and debts being paid. Does this compare to Jesus repaying our sin debt?

Either my sin debt is paid and you can forgive me seventy time seven or treat me like a Gentile.


----------



## Israel (Apr 25, 2015)

If there is anything the apostles teach it is the preeminence of Jesus Christ of, in , and to, all things created. Before all, over all, the end of all. The disposition of the "all things" is placed under his authority and manifest to us in the power that raised him from the dead. 
Had Christ not risen, there is no purpose to our heeding him. There is a reason apostles are brought to this fundamental statement of what the religious consider unutterable, foremost, because of the truth of it must be manifest in themselves, and to themselves, of the truth of God. Nothing apart from what is of God, passes from death, to life. 
And Jesus is raised whole, perfectly intact, his full body, every member. This is done in God, by God, for God. The son sent to bring home every other son to the Father's house. Jesus alone knows the way, is the way, shows the way.

'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.

Every son knows his Father's voice. He may be found at a time to not like it, to resist it, to even pretend not to hear it...but that is because...he knows it. 

Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. "Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word. 

Every son hears his Father perfectly expressed through Jesus Christ. Every son knows he is both found...and found out, through Jesus Christ. And every son found out, has been shown the way home in the one who abides.

Before Peter, James, John...Paul, got infected with iconography, not of themselves, but of the earthy mind in a million pallid portraits of eyes cut to heaven haloed, of having their names stolen and plastered over temples of man to lend an illusion of godliness, to have titles thrust upon them of which they preferred death to contamination of ownership "Prince of Apostles", "Rock of the Church", before their statues of dust saw light, and their stained glass images caught it as a shiny thing to mesmerize the simple...they are men. But not mere men. 

Men who came to know, even in their flesh, this:

For, "ALL FLESH IS LIKE GRASS, AND ALL ITS GLORY LIKE THE FLOWER OF GRASS. THE GRASS WITHERS, AND THE FLOWER FALLS OFF, BUT THE WORD OF THE LORD ENDURES FOREVER." And this is the word which was preached to you.

What word do you hear?
What speech is not plain?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 25, 2015)

In relation to Matthew 18;

Luke 11:52
"Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering."


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 25, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I can't explain it. It's confusing, confront sinners in the Church? Ya'll would be at my house every day to confront me. Then you would have to start treating me like a Gentile. Well I am already a Gentile. You might have to treat me like a tax collector.
> 
> ( Judge within the church because individuals are representatives of what the church stands for or is about. They are individually "the church" to the world. )
> 
> ...



(The original sin which was the reason of all previous covenants is forgiven--hence the new covenant. Your individual sins today are not forgiven because original sin's debt is paid, rather you still have to acknowledge your guilt and repent of your individual sins be they sins against nature, against yourself, against people(s) and against God. The church is not unhappy with sinners that earnestly try to change their sinful ways--but it is  not very happy with those that don't and especially don't try to the point of remaking God to their image so as to justify their covens of sin.)


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 25, 2015)

gordon 2 said:


> (The original sin which was the reason of all previous covenants is forgiven--hence the new covenant. Your individual sins today are not forgiven because original sin's debt is paid, rather you still have to acknowledge your guilt and repent of your individual sins be they sins against nature, against yourself, against people(s) and against God. The church is not unhappy with sinners that earnestly try to change their sinful ways--but it is  not very happy with those that don't and especially don't try to the point of remaking God to their image so as to justify their covens of sin.)



I'm going to have to disagree with parts of you explanation but thanks for your input.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 25, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> In relation to Matthew 18;
> 
> Luke 11:52
> "Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering."




Love and justice is not done with a recipe, because the recipe sometimes gets more important than love and justice. The very first thing we learn that is the purpose of man will be the very last thing to register on any scale. Love: Love God with all your heart, your mind, your... Love.

 Love, love God.We were created in this desire. We are to live in this desire. We are to bear our cross with this desire. We are to resurrect with this desire. Love, love God.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 25, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm going to have to disagree with parts of you explanation but thanks for your input.



Just because you don't say the things the way I do does not mean we disagree. It means we say things differently. We might be totally agreeing... but are tripped up by the way we express  our witness... that's all.


----------



## centerpin fan (Apr 25, 2015)

rjcruiser said:


> Did anyone else see the irony in this?
> 
> Sorry...just don't see how one can hold to traditional marriage but not traditional roles of men and women.



I was thinking about it while listening to the show.  It's a slippery slope.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 25, 2015)

gordon 2 said:


> Just because you don't say the things the way I do does not mean we disagree. It means we say things differently. We might be totally agreeing... but are tripped up by the way we express  our witness... that's all.



This much is true, adoption, repentance, and sanctification. We both see all three just the origination being slightly different. We both see the need of the continuation of regeneration & repentance but maybe differ as to how they concern either salvation or our love of God.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 25, 2015)

Israel said:


> If there is anything the apostles teach it is the preeminence of Jesus Christ of, in , and to, all things created. Before all, over all, the end of all. The disposition of the "all things" is placed under his authority and manifest to us in the power that raised him from the dead.
> Had Christ not risen, there is no purpose to our heeding him. There is a reason apostles are brought to this fundamental statement of what the religious consider unutterable, foremost, because of the truth of it must be manifest in themselves, and to themselves, of the truth of God. Nothing apart from what is of God, passes from death, to life.
> And Jesus is raised whole, perfectly intact, his full body, every member. This is done in God, by God, for God. The son sent to bring home every other son to the Father's house. Jesus alone knows the way, is the way, shows the way.
> 
> ...



OOOOO! Brother Isreal? The word, it does not "mesmerize" the simple?


OOOOO! Brother Isreal? The word is not an icon when the hand dusts its pages?

OOOOO! Isreal? The Holy of Holies, did it not sport fancy winged creatures above a throne and above a tabernacle? 

OOOOO! Isreal? And for all this iconagraphy yet did not the train of his robe come down and cover the sins of His prophets?

OOOOO! My brother....Just last Sunday, I cast a glance at a stained glass next to me, one that had been silent up until then... and it said to me... "OOOOO! My brother, Mary was a Jew! Her mother and her father were one two."

OOOOO! My brother it is when I think that Moses was an Egyptian, and Jesus was a Jew, one makes the other like Jesus make me and you.

OOOOO! Why do we spawn atheist into the world?

" I am the Holy One in your midst and have no wish to destroy." said the Lord to his people.


 OOOOO! Isreal I have to wonder...


----------



## rjcruiser (Apr 25, 2015)

centerpin fan said:


> I was thinking about it while listening to the show.  It's a slippery slope.



when I read the article. ..I was hoping it was a man named Carole....but...when I heard the show....I just laughed a bit at the irony.


----------



## Israel (Apr 25, 2015)

For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:



Little children, keep yourselves from idols.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 25, 2015)

Israel said:


> For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
> 
> 
> 
> Little children, keep yourselves from idols.



Interesting. The context here is Sacrifice in the Temple vs Sacrifice in heaven.  The first in a place made by hands, the second in a place made by God. 

The question between you and I then is perhaps, is the church (accorded to the the church to which Paul is an apostle), a work of hands? And more precisely is the communion meal?

And idols are they not Baals, or figures in which we unfortunately would believe and heap all belief?

 Do we heap all our trust in our words?  Or are they as images? Said idols? No! Are they alone the reason for our trust in fellowship? No! The words made by our mouths? No! The works in common to our hands? No!


 Or do they turn us over to Christ in you and I, our words and our works?  Do we trust the work of God in us to fellowship and that we do not talk to just talk, or to the brother who shared his icon of the Resurrection, not in words but in his art--is his work, his word an idol, or does he fellowship with us Christ in him centuries ago?

My love for you in Christ is number one--- I hope my words are such signs to you--that I would never tempt you,-- ever!-- with an idol. Such is my faithfulness to you.


----------



## Madman (Apr 25, 2015)

centerpin fan said:


> It's mind-blowing that a minister can be removed for saying she believes the Bible.




I heard part of it, my heart broke again as I relived a part of my past.

I was the senior warden of an Episcopal church in 2001.  the standing committee of the diocese asked me and my family to leave, their exact words were, "there are churches that believe what you believe".  When I asked them if that was the Bible they all remained silent.

Get ready Christian.  Gather the believers, God has always left a remnant.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 26, 2015)

Israel said:


> And Jesus is raised whole, perfectly intact, his full body, every member. This is done in God, by God, for God. The son sent to bring home every other son to the Father's house. Jesus alone knows the way, is the way, shows the way.


A man can never understand this by his own wisdom. The very best of his traditions are at opposition to Christ.

Follow Christ directly. 

There is no other way.


----------



## hummerpoo (Apr 26, 2015)

Israel said:


> And Jesus is raised whole, perfectly intact, his full body, every member. This is done in God, by God, for God. The son sent to bring home every other son to the Father's house. Jesus alone knows the way, is the way, shows the way.





gemcgrew said:


> A man can never understand this by his own wisdom. The very best of his traditions are at opposition to Christ.
> 
> Follow Christ directly.
> 
> There is no other way.



So true.  And yet so foreign to the common teaching.




Israel said:


> 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> So true.  And yet so foreign to the common teaching.



To be with for me; to follow is a work. But then I guess I'm common and foreign.


----------



## hummerpoo (Apr 26, 2015)

gordon 2 said:


> To be with for me; to follow is a work. But then I guess I'm common and foreign.



A work is of ourselves; it is Jesus example of not following Himself which we must follow.

John 5:
… “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.  For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; … 
…He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.
 … “I can do nothing on My own initiative. … because I do not seek My own will, but the will of  Him who sent Me.

John 7:
“My teaching is not Mine, but His who sent Me.  If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself.  He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but He who is seeking the glory of the One who sent Him, He is true, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.

John 12:
... “He who believes in Me, does not believe in Me but in Him who sent Me. He who sees Me sees the One who sent Me.  … For I did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak.  I know that His commandment is eternal life; therefore the things I speak, I speak just as the Father has told Me.”




Israel said:


> And Jesus is raised whole, perfectly intact, his full body, every member. This is done in God, by God, for God. The son sent to bring home every other son to the Father's house. Jesus alone knows the way, is the way, shows the way.





gemcgrew said:


> A man can never understand this by his own wisdom. The very best of his traditions are at opposition to Christ.
> 
> Follow Christ directly.
> 
> There is no other way.





Israel said:


> 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.



What Jesus had was given to Him; we have nothing that was not given to us.
Please note that I did not say that we were given the same as Jesus was given.


----------



## gemcgrew (Apr 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> A work is of ourselves; it is Jesus example of not following Himself which we must follow.
> 
> John 5:
> … “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.  For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; …
> ...


This is so foreign to understanding because the default position is unbelief and self-centered. When a man truly loves, truly does, truly gives, truly desires, etc. Where does this come from in the first place?

"all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you."


----------



## Israel (Apr 27, 2015)

gemcgrew said:


> This is so foreign to understanding because the default position is unbelief and self-centered. When a man truly loves, truly does, truly gives, truly desires, etc. Where does this come from in the first place?
> 
> "all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you."


Yes. 
We can also consider this, perhaps.
For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all things that he himself does. _He will show him_ greater works than these, that you may marvel.

"He _will_ show him"...there is both a confidence there, but also (is there not?) an admission of not having already seen all?

Coming in the likeness of man in that submission, willing to forgo the "knowing of all things"...precisely to demonstrate the confidence (faith) which works by love...that the Father would hold nothing back from the son of his love. (Hope maketh not ashamed, manifestly proven by the resurrection...the approved man raised)

Thus that faith is delivered to those, in those, for those, so appointed. They have "seen" Jesus risen. They know well (or perhaps are learning)...this cannot be "chosen" to see, as if by work of will they can decide to see Jesus. (isn't it wonderful we are given Thomas?)
(We sometimes don't trust our own brothers)

Or make him appear...

(But also wonderful we are given Herod?)

Our own work has resulted in all the world.
His work, however...

Man's work of his best desire...is just curiosity.

But...to be touched by God's desire...O, the burning...O, the consuming fire of it. (That I may _know_ Him!)
The immolation of mere curiosity. And the all else but a flaming jealousy as it is for something that cannot, will not, be denied. To the son of his love.

God all, in all.


for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me, and have believed that I came forth from God.

And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. 


"as thou hast loved me"...I cannot believe this...except for the One who says it. I am forced to...to my everlasting wonder.
Thanks be to God through Jesus our Lord.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 27, 2015)

hummerpoo;


[I said:
			
		

> What Jesus had was given to Him; we have nothing that was not given to us.
> Please note that I did not say that we were given the same as Jesus was given.


[/I]


True. I suspect that my model of the glorified man, is from Genesis when man walked in the eternal with God, and that there he had not need to be lead nor a need to follow. Both walked together--there were no greener pastures.

Though our physical nature now still issue of a fallen world, our spirits, for the redemption, born again, I kin this to spiritual fellowship in the eternal with God. I see the eternal as the image for now of and the face of God--it is a spiritual restoration to the model of the first. What is to follow is a resurrection of another kind: this is the work of God. What was to follow for Isreal has come and is now to see, to view and to be with. Spiritually the sheep ( the flock) and the Shepard are one. Kinda.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Corinthians 12:27

27 _Now_ you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it.

I am starting to wonder that to the christian if our life in Christ is not from two spiritual traditions; one is in scripture the other is in the presence. Both traditions require spiritual discernment. I would argue that the tradition due to the presence is not of works. And the tradition that killed all the prophets within the old covenant was not the tradition from presence, rather it is the tradition which killed Jesus and that tradition was scriptural.

So I suppose this brings the question; What does it mean to spiritually discern? Was Paul's way of reasoning mystically and the mystical expression of his knowledge of God from scripture alone or was it from his experience in the presence? Did Paul reason within the church from the scriptural traditions of the Pharisees or from his presence experience on the way to Damascus?


----------



## oops1 (May 5, 2015)

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2015/05/04/3703197/first-presbyterian-senior-pastor.html


Sad state of affairs.


----------



## centerpin fan (May 5, 2015)

I read both articles and still have no idea where the pastor stands on the issue.


----------



## oops1 (May 6, 2015)

He wanted the church to leave the denomination.


----------

