avoid vain arguments - do not bite and devour

[GodsGrace]

Yeah. Select elders that are beyond reproach, not someone becomes beyond reproach because they are an elder. I think the Bible is pretty straight forward on that.

Nice biblical idea.
Too bad that in real life it doesn't work out.

 

[Northman]

Nice biblical idea.
Too bad that in real life it doesn't work out.

Entertaining segments of the body that don't operate properly is probably something none of us should be doing, even if we feel the need for a bit o churchiness.

It's sort of like economic bailouts. Keep going and they will not only not ever learn, but actually expect support when they knowingly do wrong.

 

[jaybo]

Entertaining segments of the body that don't operate properly is probably something none of us should be doing, even if we feel the need for a bit o churchiness.

It's sort of like economic bailouts. Keep going and they will not only not ever learn, but actually expect support when they knowingly do wrong

What's with the gratis comment about economic bailouts? Who is "they"? Not only does it sound like the opposite of "love your neighbor as yourself", but is clearly off-topic.

The OP is about avoiding vain arguments and not biting and devouring. Clearly your post doesn't follow this precept.

 

[Northman]

What's with the gratis comment about economic bailouts? Who is "they"? Not only does it sound like the opposite of "love your neighbor as yourself", but is clearly off-topic.

The OP is about avoiding vain arguments and not biting and devouring. Clearly your post doesn't follow this precept.

You would just have to follow the short conversation between wondering and I to see it. The context of "they" are churches that don't feel like following scripture and instead do their own thing. In this particular case it's the selection of elders. Churches with elders appointed in reverse, as in becoming beyond reproach after their appointment rather than being beyond reproach before, are hotbeds of devouring and vain arguments, and generally follow culture rather than Christ. That is the witness from the persona known as Dorothy Mae, but she isn't alone.

Is there some sort of way you would like to try and guide the conversation?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Nice biblical idea.
Too bad that in real life it doesn't work out.

Does anyone even care about this? When elders are up for vote in our church their professional background is mentioned first. It’s especially favorable if they have upper degrees. How long they’ve been a believer or anything of their christian activities isn’t mentioned. I don’t even recall them saying what they believe. They do a speech though so we can get an idea.

 

[GodsGrace]

Entertaining segments of the body that don't operate properly is probably something none of us should be doing, even if we feel the need for a bit o churchiness.

It's sort of like economic bailouts. Keep going and they will not only not ever learn, but actually expect support when they knowingly do wrong.

I think we should entertain segments that are not operating properly.
Jimmy Swaggart got kicked out.
Baker got put in jail.

My own pastor...the 80's was found to be skimming from the top.
We were all so DISAPPOINTED.

We trusted him for learning, for behaving as he preached.
Didn't Jesus say to do as they (pharisees) say NOT AS THE ACT.

Whoa. I think that's pretty serious stuff.
And Priests....can we still trust our local parish priest?

No. They should be held to a very high standard.

Agreed?

 

[jaybo]

I think we should entertain segments that are not operating properly.
Jimmy Swaggart got kicked out.
Baker got put in jail.

My own pastor...the 80's was found to be skimming from the top.
We were all so DISAPPOINTED.

We trusted him for learning, for behaving as he preached.
Didn't Jesus say to do as they (pharisees) say NOT AS THE ACT.

Whoa. I think that's pretty serious stuff.
And Priests....can we still trust our local parish priest?

No. They should be held to a very high standard.

Agreed?

Yes!!! Simply because someone is a parish priest means nothing. There were many pedophile priests that were sent to New Mexico, where they continued their pedophilia. It was covered up by the local diocese. They just had to pay a $121,500,000 settlement.

 

[BibleStudentBorean]

Yes!!! Simply because someone is a parish priest means nothing. There were many pedophile priests that were sent to New Mexico, where they continued their pedophilia. It was covered up by the local diocese. They just had to pay a $121,500,000 settlement.

I completely agree, someones title doesn't mean anything. In the NIV Luyke 17:2 It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstonetied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble. Honestly, I don't believe that most people believe in the bible. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing these horrible things that they are doing. I pray for these innocent children constantly.

 

[TonyChanYT]

for those that want to deal with what they consider false doctrine - it can still be done with a friendly discussion - getting angry and unkind in a discussion produces nothing good

Exactly right. That's why I proposed A Disciplined Approach to Biblical Hermeneutics.

 

[WalterandDebbie]

discussing scripture is such a blessing - there are so many treasures in the bible and people see things differently which makes for an opportunity to expand our understanding of God's messages to us

i wonder what makes people turn a discussion on a topic into a discussion of the person we disagree with

it seems like when someone dislikes what another person says the next comments are about the person

why do we do that?

is it because we dislike anyone that disagrees with us?

is it because when someone disagrees with us we get hurt somehow and now want to hurt the person back?

what should we do when someone starts getting personal rather than continuing to discuss a topic?

what i do is try to talk to the person privately - and try to find out what i did that caused the person to start being unfriendly toward me and what i can do that would make things right between us - Romans 12:18 - Romans 14:19

almost every time trying to reconcile changes things for the better - 1 Peter 3:8 - Ephesians 4:32

i think we all know when someone is not being friendly to us - we can feel the tension

i think we all need to learn to love each other while we discuss topics

i think we all need to examine ourselves when we start disliking someone for disagreeing with us

Galatians 5:15 - 2 Timothy 2:23 - 2 Timothy 2:14 - says that when we start devouring one another rather than having a friendly discussion of scripture we risk tearing others down and ruining anyone that is listening to the ungodly attacking exchanges

i love you all and love hearing other pov's - i just wish we could be friendly in our discussions so that we look like people who love God and our fellow man - otherwise we are just clanging cymbals and noisy gongs - 1 Corinthians 13:1

for those that want to deal with what they consider false doctrine - it can still be done with a friendly discussion - getting angry and unkind in a discussion produces nothing good - people dig in their heels when offended - they stop listening to what you have to say because your delivery/tone was unscriptural - lacking the reconciliation goal - when people are treated as enemies they become irreconcilable - they lock into defending themselves - so the discussion of truth is buried beneath a fight for personal safety when under attack

imo theological discussions have 2 goals:
1. get a better understanding of what God is saying to us - expand our understanding of scripture
2. an opportunity to hone our skills at speaking the truth in love - iow continuing to genuinely love someone we disagree with - learning to keep loving people we disagree with helps us become more Christlike

praying for a more Godly approach to theological discussions

Hello Truthfrees, We Agree, Love always, Walter And Debbie