Author Topic: Christ's Ways (Read 11149 times)

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #52 on:** March 18, 2019, 08:08:07 pm »

.
Rom 14:19 . . Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.

The koiné Greek word for "edification" is oikodome (oy-kod-om-ay') which is a word related to the building trades; and in this instance would be related to structural improvements like a new wing, or a bedroom, or another floor; and in many instances adds square footage to an already-existing structure and/or improves its appearance, its value, and it's utility. Edification then, builds up instead of tearing down.

Webster's defines "peace" as a state in which there is no war or fighting; viz: harmony and mutual concord.

"For I am afraid that when I come I may not find you as I want you to be, and you may not find me as you want me to be. I fear that there may be quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, factions, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder." (2Cor 12:19-20)
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #53 on:** March 20, 2019, 06:03:30 pm »

.
Rom 14:20-21 . . Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble.

The critters that God lists in the Jews' covenanted law as unsuitable for food aren't intrinsically unsuitable. They're only unsuitable for the Jews because that's how God wants it for His people. But outside the covenant; and for everybody else: whatever you'd like to eat can be eaten; all flora and all fauna.

"Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything." (Gen 9:3)

"The voice spoke to him a second time; "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." (Acts 10:15)

But still; you wouldn't want to invite someone over for dinner serving foods that they sincerely believe are wrong for them to eat. Prepare something else that you both can eat. That's the Christian way to go about it; it's also the sympathetic way to go about it. There are times when it's appropriate to accommodate people's feelings about certain things. The world has enough intolerant bigots as is; don't be one.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #54 on:** March 22, 2019, 12:41:53 pm »

.
Rom 14:22b-23 . . Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

In other words, it's possible to be wrong even when you're right because it's a sin to forge ahead when one's conscience is not sure it's okay to do so.

I once knew a Christian who felt guilty just setting foot inside a BlockBuster video store. Was he silly for feeling that way? Not in his mind; and it's your own personal moral compass that counts in gray areas. Some Christians can't permit themselves to dine in a restaurant that serves alcohol; while others see nothing wrong with it. If those two kinds of Christians should perchance dine out together, it's the more sensitive conscience that determines where to eat.

In other words; it makes good spiritual sense to avoid insisting upon your freedoms and rights sometimes in order to prevent dragging your fellow Christians into something that makes them feel guilty and/or uncomfortable.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #55 on:** March 23, 2019, 07:58:28 pm »

.
Rom 15:1-2 . . We may know that certain things make no difference, but we cannot just go ahead and do them to please ourselves. We must be considerate of the doubts and fears of those who believe certain things are wrong.

Webster's defines "considerate" as thoughtful of the rights and feelings of others, i.e. sympathetic regard; which is no doubt near impossible for Christians afflicted with narcissistic personality disorder: a toxic psychological condition characterized by a grandiose sense of self-importance, a need for excessive admiration, exploitive behavior in relationships, and a lack of empathy.

I think this would be a good place to interject a note pertaining to the statement below:

"By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." (John 13:35)

For many of us who grew up in dysfunctional families, broken homes, foster systems and/or orphanages et al; the concept of love doesn't resonate in our thinking; viz: it just goes in one ear and right out the other because we quite literally have no points of reference in our minds to aid comprehending what The Lord means by love; and this is what makes his commandments interspersed throughout the epistles so valuable-- many of them not only show us how to recognize love when we encounter it; but also how to exemplify it in our own lives so that those of us who were deprived of love growing up are not left to figure it out on our own.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #56 on:** March 24, 2019, 08:13:44 pm »

.
Rom 15:7 . . Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God.

That's a bit tricky but I think it just means all Christians should acknowledge each other as Christians, and treat one another as Christians though they may differ in opinion about what constitutes a true Christian.

For example: it's not unusual to hear a Christian pontificate that real Christians would never watch R-rated movies, gamble, wear a speedo or a string bikini, use cosmetics, smoke marijuana, expose cleavage or wear skin tight yoga pants in public, stop for a beer on the way home from work, have a glass of wine before bedtime, listen to RAP music, ditch church and Sunday school for years at a time, or go in a bar or a nightclub where there's **** female dancers up on a stage twining themselves around a pole while leering men stuff currency into the hems of their skimpy little costumes.

Too many Christians have the opinion that unless others believe and practice the very same way they believe and practice, then those others are not Christians. Well; the easiest way to settle this is to follow Webster's definition that a Christian is simply someone who professes a belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ. That's it: no more, no less, and no qualifiers. They don't even have to practice The Lord's teachings; they only have to profess to believe in them.

An internet forum I was on in the past made it even easier. In order to qualify as a Christian on that forum; one only had to believe they were a Christian; viz: they didn't have to prove they were a Christian; no, they only had to be convinced in their own minds that they were a Christian. If we all followed that rule it would put a stop to a lot of unnecessary quarreling, name calling, and bad feelings.

NOTE: Heresy is subjective. In other words: what's heresy to a Catholic may not be heresy to a Methodist, and vice versa. And what's heresy to a Mormon may not be heresy to a Jehovah's Witness, and vice versa. And what's heresy to a Baptist may not be heresy to the Church Of God, and vice versa. So my advice is: never, ever call another Christian a heretic.

Just to be on the safe side; edit that label from your remarks because it just might be that you yourself are the one infected with heresy and don't know it; viz: be circumspect with your choice of words because the hapless day just may arrive when you are forced to eat them.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #57 on:** March 25, 2019, 08:53:14 pm »

.
Rom 15:27 . . For if the Gentiles have shared in the Israelite's spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Israelites to share with them their material blessings.

Within the context of Rom 15:25-27, the Israelites to whom Paul refers are not those who believe and practice Judaism; but those who believe and practice Christianity. It is unbecoming for Christians to support religions that undermine their Master's; especially when it's taken into consideration that 1Cor 16:22 requires Christ's followers to regard the followers of religions opposed to his as cursed.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #58 on:** March 27, 2019, 12:04:22 pm »

.
Rom 16:17-18 . . I urge you, brothers, beware of those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naïve people.

In the 17th chapter of John's gospel, Christ prayed for unity. People in church who cause division and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned are detrimental to his wishes.

NOTE: Christianity isn't a democracy. It's a theocracy. The New Testament Greek word for lord and/or master in Luke 2:29, Acts 4:24, 2Tim 2:21, 2Pet 2:1, and Rev 6:10 is despotes (des-pot'-ace) from which we get our English word despot; defined by Webster's as a ruler with absolute power and authority.

People in church following a fire in their belly instead of the wishes of Christianity's despot are guilty of insurrection. In their own minds; the rebels no doubt honestly believe themselves working for the greater good, but that path is risky. For example: failure to obey God cost King Saul the loss of his reign. (1Sam 15:22-26)

"smooth talk" is the practice of sophistry; defined as a reason or an argument that sounds correct but at its core is actually false; viz: subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation. Sophistry is typically rational, reasonable, and sensible; but the thing to keep in mind is that faith believes what's revealed to it rather than only what makes sense to it.

According to Eph 4:11-14 the very reason that Christ endows some of his followers to speak for him is so that the rest of his followers may have access to true premises upon which to build their faith and thus achieve the unity for which he prayed.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #59 on:** March 28, 2019, 07:56:46 pm »

.
1Cor 1:10 . . I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.

I think it would be interesting to analyze the incident that prompted Paul to issue that order.

"My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this; one of you says: I follow Paul; and another says: I follow Apollos; and another says: I follow Cephas; and still another says: I follow Christ." (1Cor 1:11-12)

The "divisions" that Paul addressed were apparently related to the sins of rivalry and elitism-- some even going so far as to allege that their baptism was superior to the "second-rate" baptisms undergone by others.

Modern examples of that kind of elitism today might go like this: one might brag "I was saved at a Louis Palau crusade" while, not to be outdone, another might retort "That's nothing; I was saved at a Billy Graham crusade" or "My pastor got his degree at Dallas Theological Seminary" while another may counter by saying "So? My pastor got his doctorate at Yale Divinity School" or "I listen to Thru The Bible with J.Vernon McGee every day on the radio" while another may retort by saying "He's okay for some people; but Back To The Bible with Woodrow Kroll is where it's really at." or "I use nothing but the King James version of the Bible" while another may scoff with "People serious about Bible study use a Scofield Reference Bible in the NIV." or "I can read and write Greek" while another might retort: "You should try learning Hebrew sometime. Now there's a challenge." And then there's the hermeneutics know-it-alls who insist that the truth of a passage can only be seen in context and no other way

Those kinds of petty rivalries are harmful to unity; plus: they generate unnecessary bad feelings amongst Christians, and should be avoided.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #60 on:** March 29, 2019, 10:35:54 pm »

.
1Cor 1:26-31 . . Remember, dear brothers and sisters, that few of you were wise in the world's eyes, or powerful, or wealthy when God called you. Instead, God deliberately chose things the world considers foolish in order to shame those who think they are wise. And he chose those who are powerless to shame those who are powerful. God chose things despised by the world, things counted as nothing at all, and used them to bring to nothing what the world considers important, so that no one can ever boast in the presence of God.

. . . God alone made it possible for you to be in Christ Jesus. For our benefit God made Christ to be wisdom itself. He is the one who made us acceptable to God. He made us pure and holy, and he gave himself to purchase our freedom. As the Scriptures say: The person who wishes to boast should boast only of what The Lord has done.

Some of us tend to think ourselves pretty smart for having enough good sense to believe the gospel. But according to the passage above, we didn't become believers due to our IQ; were that the case, then Carl Sagan would've stood on the side of intelligent design instead of opposing it.

No; the credit is due to God's IQ, i.e. God alone was smart enough to make it possible for any of us to be in Christ Jesus. Personally, I look upon that as something not for me to boast about, rather; an incredible stroke of luck. (One of the meanings of "blessed" is fortunate.)

Boasting in what the Lord has done is sort of like the pride that sports fans feel for their favorite teams; especially when they win. Well; it goes without saying that God is a winner-- maybe He's not accounted a winner by the world's best and brightest, but certainly by those of us very pleased that Christ's mission succeeded.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #61 on:** March 30, 2019, 09:53:50 pm »

.
1Cor 3:21-23 . . So don't take pride in following a particular leader. Everything belongs to you-- Paul and Apollos and Peter --the whole world and life and death; the present and the future. Everything belongs to you, and you belong to Christ, and Christ belongs to God.

I've noticed that avid sports fans are afflicted with chronic identity syndromes. When their favorite team wins; they say "we" won; as if they were on the field playing the game instead of up in the bleachers or on the couch at home watching the action on TV.

Christians that idolize their favorite pastors and/or Sunday school teachers are just as avid. They want to be identified with those kinds of church luminaries because it makes them look really smart and elite; when in reality it just makes them look silly and star-crossed.

But the thing is; when it comes to inheritance; Christ's believing followers are equals-- the big shots with the little nobodies --because they are all, regardless of status, co-heirs with Christ (Rom 8:17) which is somewhat different than a regular heir.

Regular heirs each receive an individually specified portion of a benefactor's estate while co-heirs are heirs in common. For example: supposing a benefactor's estate totals 60 acres of land plus $10,000 in a bank account. Co-heirs-- i.e. heirs in common --inherit the whole ball of wax corporately as one beneficiary instead of six; viz: all six inherit the 60 acres and the $10,000 as if each one were the only heir. So then, whatever the Father bequeathed His son, He bequeathed everyone belonging to His son.

I honestly cannot wrap my mind around that because the ramifications are just too, too remarkable; I really don't even want to think about it.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #62 on:** March 31, 2019, 09:50:58 pm »

.
1Cor 4:1 . . So then, men ought to regard us as servants of Christ, and as those entrusted with the mysteries of God.

Big names like Mother Teresa, Charles Spurgeon, and Billy Graham are practically sacred cows-- but Christian celebrities like those are only human rather than divine. Just be grateful you're not one of them because their responsibility is proportional.

"Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly." (Jas 3:1)
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #63 on:** April 01, 2019, 09:18:02 pm »

.
1Cor 4:5 . . Judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till The Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and expose the motives of men's hearts.

The "appointed time" is probably referring to the event described at 1Cor 3:5-15 when the work done by outstanding Christians will be evaluated for performance awards.

Human nature has a propensity to shower accolades on religious celebrities without having all the facts.

For example; we now know from Mother Teresa's private letters-- made public by Father Brian Kolodiejchuk's book "Mother Teresa / Come Be My Light" --that Ms. Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu was a nun with so little personal belief in God as to be an agnostic; and yet for decades everyone the world over thought she was the cat's meow and the bee's knees: a veritable poster child of piety in thought, word, and deed. It turns out Teresa was a remarkable actor. Her public image bore no resemblance whatsoever to the secret life of her inner being.

The Spirit's corroboration that comes to Christ's followers via Rom 8:16 never happened for Teresa. As a result, the remarkable nun came to the end of her life worried that if perchance there is a God, He didn't particularly like her and might actually be quite intent upon condemning her.

Well; I'd have to say that if somebody is a Christian missionary with those kinds of thoughts going thru their head, maybe they really ought to seriously consider another line of work.
_

Olde Tymer · « **Reply #64 on:** April 03, 2019, 07:17:43 pm »

.
1Cor 5:1-5 . . It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father's wife. And you have become arrogant, and have not mourned instead, in order that the one who had done this deed might be removed from your midst.

. . . For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of The Lord Jesus.

Gentiles of course do sleep with their stepmothers on occasion; but the world's practice of that kind of behavior is more an aberration than a custom.

Well, the Corinthians were treating that man's behavior as if it were a norm, i.e. they apparently felt that the man's conduct was trivial, undeserving of either attention or criticism. They must have wondered why Paul was reacting so badly rather than just "get over it". After all; it's none of his business what goes on behind closed doors. Had he not heard of the right to privacy? And besides, didn't the Lord say: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Delivering someone to Satan for the destruction of the flesh just simply means to cull them from the herd, so to speak. In other words: exclude them from congregational activities; e.g. worship, Sunday school, and prayer meetings. This is not as radical as totally breaking off contact with someone; it's purpose is church discipline rather than the social blacklisting practiced by Jehovah's Witnesses.
_

patrick jane forums

News:

User

Stats ezBlock

Author Topic: Christ's Ways (Read 11149 times)

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Olde Tymer

Re: Christ's Ways

Related Topics

Recent Topics