Should we obey church leadership, or the Holy Spirit?

[Tenchi]

I don't remember reading any Bible verses that say when God speaks to you, you are to hold Him at bay until you can verify what He says to you is found in Scripture.

??? And I've never said anything like this, either. Again, this is a weak, cartoonish version - a Strawman - of what I've actually explained from God's word.

Yet, when we read what Jesus said about the Father who lived in His heart's insructions, He indicates that He heard loud and clear what the Father wanted Him to say and do, and He limited his words and actions to only what the Father who lived in Him told Him to say and do. Nowhere do we see any indication that He vetted what the Father told Him against Scripture before He followed through on His instructions or that through experience He knew what the Bible said and could instantly determine that what the Father said was consistent with Scripture.

But this is Jesus, the God-Man, the second Person of the Godhead, that you're talking about here, not a mere human creature. His union with the Father was quite unlike any connection to Him that we have through the Holy Spirit. "I and my Father are one," Jesus said (John 10:30). "In him dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily," Scripture declares (Colossians 2:9). The fact of Jesus's deity, it seems to me, has a very profound bearing upon how he followed the Father's will, making his doing so entirely unique. We have no such oneness with God and cannot, therefore, act in exactly the way Jesus did in regards to God's leading.

Precisely because this is so, God has given us His word, His special revelation of Himself and His will in Scripture.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

The Father spoke to Him from inside His heart,

??? This is bald-faced conjecture. You are assuming that the "Father spoke to him from inside his heart." What does this even mean? Again, the Bible doesn't say, so, then, why are you?

And now we see the same paradigm applies to us.

No, we don't. See above.

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit live in our hearts.

No, only the Spirit dwells within us. God the Father is in heaven, seated on His throne, and Christ is at His right hand making intercession for us, our Advocate with the Father (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 7:25; 1 John 2:1). It is because Jesus went to the Father that the Spirit was sent to us in his stead.

John 16:7-11
7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.
8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;
10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer;
11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.

Nowhere are we told to hold Him at bay or to vet what He says.

I've never said anything like this. But I have pointed out from God's word that we are to discern in the light of God's Truth, His word, who is speaking to us. If it is the Spirit, we must obey, absolutely; but this obedience is predicated upon our certainty that it is truly the Spirit who is communicating with us, not merely our own Self-talk, or a demonic deception. This certainty is provided by assessing the origin of what we think is the Spirit's leading against what God's word says and discovering its true nature, not by way of an entirely subjective confidence that the Spirit's leading us.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I've never said anything like this. But I have pointed out from God's word that we are to discern in the light of God's Truth, His word, who is speaking to us. If it is the Spirit, we must obey, absolutely; but this obedience is predicated upon our certainty that it is truly the Spirit who is communicating with us, not merely our own Self-talk, or a demonic deception. This certainty is provided by assessing the origin of what we think is the Spirit's leading against what God's word says and discovering its true nature, not by way of an entirely subjective confidence that the Spirit's leading us.

The topic of this thread is more about church leadership than the spirit. The church is the body of Christ, having a vibrant, lasting relationship with God requires membership in the church, there''s no solo Christianity. Anybody who thinks he can study the bible, listen to the spirit, pray to God and take it under his own control is deceiving themselves, that's a painful lesson I learned in the hard way after the COVID shutdown.

So, to break out our own bubble and partake in the Body of Christ, we must go to church for worship, and that means obeying church leadership is not optional, fpr faith comes through hearing, the voice of God is manifested through voice of human. If you believe that God's word is not just ink on the paper in an ancient collection of books, but alive and active in the 21st century, in our personal lives, then this is the only logical conclusion. The word "apostle" means "sent one", rejecting God's apostle is rejecting the Lord himself. In theory, Jesus is the intermediary between God and man, we can directly communicate with God through Jesus; but in practice, God must come to you first through his apostles and fill you with the Holy Spirit, not you to God, you can't bypass the apostle's church leadership and go find a way to reach God with your own effort. If you think you can, you're deceived by an evil spirit.

And therein lies the challenge - how can you tell whether a church leader is really an apostle sent by God or not? It's more complicated than you think, and just by telling me "follow the spirit" or “read God's word" ain't gonna cut it, that's a rather dismissive attutide. Some church leaders openly promote demonic agenda such as transgenderism or climate change, these are the most obvious false teachers; some preach a juventile, watered-down gospel that only contains the positive elements like hope, salvation, freedom and life abundantly, while they never mention the hard stuffs such as sin nature, Israel, second coming, tribulation, judgement or disciplin, they carefully craft their message to avoid any sensitive issues and not stir the pot; and then there are some who do abide by the word of God, they're really filled with the spirit and they're on fire for God, but there're pesky theological difference that cause doubt and divide, such as rapture, OSAS or, again, relevance of bible prophecy. These sticky situations exist in nearly all churches, you as a pastor should've known it better than anybody else. So, how to follow the spirit in these situations? How, when my pastor openly condones homosexuality? How, when my pastor preaches a gospel without atonement for sin? How, when my pastor interprets the Sciprture in a questionable way? "Discern in the light of God's Truth, His word, who is speaking to us" is not an answer, 'cause I'm like the Ethiopian eunuch who humbly admitted that he needed guidance - "how can I (understand what I'm reading), unless someone guides me?" (Acts 8:31) Maybe you think you don't, but I do.

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

But this is Jesus, the God-Man, the second Person of the Godhead, that you're talking about here, not a mere human creature. His union with the Father was quite unlike any connection to Him that we have through the Holy Spirit. "I and my Father are one," Jesus said (John 10:30). "In him dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily," Scripture declares (Colossians 2:9). The fact of Jesus's deity, it seems to me, has a very profound bearing upon how he followed the Father's will, making his doing so entirely unique. We have no such oneness with God and cannot, therefore, act in exactly the way Jesus did in regards to God's leading.

Now we are starting to get to the nub of the issue. Our oneness with God the Father and God the Son is not "unlike" Jesus' oneness with the Father. It is "just as" They "are one". In Jesus' High Priestly prayer, He said this...

20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: 23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me. (Jn 17:20–23)​

This prayer is fulfilled every time a person believes in Jesus: "But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him." (1 Co 6:17). This "oneness" we have with the Lord is what makes us complete...

9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; 10 and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power. (Col 2:9–10)​

The Greek words behind the English words I've underlined have the same root. In Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead, and with Him living in our hearts we are completely full. If we were stuffed animals, He would be the stuffing, and we would be fully stuffed.

Precisely because this is so, God has given us His word, His special revelation of Himself and His will in Scripture.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

You are reading more into those two verses than what is actually there. Though Scripture is inspired and profitable, Scripture has not supplanted God's role in instructing us, correcting us, or leading us. This is a made-up doctrine to help people avoid Scripture's many instructions to trust the Lord with all their hearts.

??? This is bald-faced conjecture. You are assuming that the "Father spoke to him from inside his heart." What does this even mean? Again, the Bible doesn't say, so, then, why are you?

All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable, including this one: "Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak." (John 12:50) When it says Jesus spoke just as the Father "told" Him, it means the Father told Him what to say. The same is true for this Scripture: "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works." (John 14:10) When it says that Jesus' words did not represent His own words, but the words of the Father who lived in His heart, it means that the words Jesus spoke came from the Father who lived in His heart. The same is true for this Scripture: "I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge" (John 5:30) When it says, "As I hear, I judge", it means first that He hears what God the Father is telling Him, and it means second that He aligns His own judgment to be in line with the Father's judgment.

No, we don't. See above.

The paradigm does extend to us. Though these are not the only verses that says it, John 15:5-8 say it plainly...

5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. 7 If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you. 8 By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples." (Jn 15:5–8)​

As Jesus said of Himself, "I can of myself do nothing", so He says of us, "Without Me you can do nothing". If live by His words that He speaks to us from within our hearts just as He lived by the words The Father spoke to Him from within His heart, we will truly be following His example (i.e., we will be His disciples) and we will bear much fruit.

No, only the Spirit dwells within us. God the Father is in heaven, seated on His throne, and Christ is at His right hand making intercession for us, our Advocate with the Father (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 7:25; 1 John 2:1). It is because Jesus went to the Father that the Spirit was sent to us in his stead.

John 16:7-11
7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.
8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;
10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer;
11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.

They all live in us. God the Father lives in us (Ephesians 4:6, 2 Corinthians 6:16, and 1 John 4:12). God the Son lives in us (Romans 8:10, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 3:17, and Colossians 1:27). God the Holy Spirit lives in us 1 Corinthians 6:19, 2 Timothy 1:14and James 4:5).

Several Scriptures mention multiple members of the trinity in combination as living in us (Romans 8:11, 1 Corinthians 3:16, Ephesians 4:30, 1 Thessalonians 4:8, Galatians 4:6, and Romans 8:9). My favorite is John 14:23 -- “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him."

I've never said anything like this.

For the record, you are objecting to my statement that, "Nowhere are we told to hold Him at bay or to vet what He says." Then you say this:

But I have pointed out from God's word that we are to discern in the light of God's Truth, His word, who is speaking to us. If it is the Spirit, we must obey, absolutely; but this obedience is predicated upon our certainty that it is truly the Spirit who is communicating with us, not merely our own Self-talk, or a demonic deception. This certainty is provided by assessing the origin of what we think is the Spirit's leading against what God's word says and discovering its true nature, not by way of an entirely subjective confidence that the Spirit's leading us.

This sounds like you are saying that we need to vet what we think we hear from the Lord against what the Bible says in order to determine if it is actually Him speaking to us and not our own thoughts or demonic deception. Certainly, if this were the case, we would need to hold God at bay until we confirmed by way of our knowledge of Scripture that it was Him talking. However, as I said, Scripture does not instruct us to interact with God in that way.

 

[Tenchi]

The topic of this thread is more about church leadership than the spirit.

As conversations often do, this one in this thread has wandered. It's not necessarily a bad thing that this has occurred.

The church is the body of Christ, having a vibrant, lasting relationship with God requires membership in the church, there''s no solo Christianity.

Yes. Why explain this in response to what I've posted? In no post have I ever stated that a Christian can operate solo in their life as a disciple of Jesus Christ.

Anybody who thinks he can study the bible, listen to the spirit, pray to God and take it under his own control is deceiving themselves, that's a painful lesson I learned in the hard way after the COVID shutdown.

Okay. I'm glad to know you're learning new things.

It's entirely biblical, though, to say that study of God's word, the illumination of the Holy Spirit, and prayer are crucial features of Christian living. I don't know what you mean by "take it under his own control," however....

So, to break out our own bubble and partake in the Body of Christ, we must go to church for worship, and that means obeying church leadership is not optional, fpr faith comes through hearing, the voice of God is manifested through voice of human.

Yes, being a member of a properly biblical, God-honoring community of born-again believers involves being under the authority of the spiritual leaders of that community. And so, no believer ought to venture into membership, or serious involvement, with any local church without having first got a very good idea of the kind of spiritual leaders under whom they would be active in the church. Speaking from recent, personal experience, the spiritual leaders in a church may be entirely unfit for the spiritual office they're occupying. What's worse, they may be quite oblivious to this fact, wanting to direct others spiritually from a state of spiritual blindness and sin! Yikes. But worst of all, those over whom they're exercising spiritual authority are happy for them to do so, brought by their spiritual leaders under the same spiritual blindness and sin afflicting their leaders, oblivious to the "ditch" into which their spiritual leaders are taking them. Double yikes.

The word "apostle" means "sent one", rejecting God's apostle is rejecting the Lord himself.

Uh, there are no apostles today, in the sense in which Paul, Peter, or John were apostles, legitimately serving the Church. The only modern "apostles" trying exert the apostolic authority of these men are shysters, self-appointed "apostles" with no more authority than they can convince others to give to them. Unfortunately, there are an enormous number of foolish "Christians" very eager to have such spiritual "wolves" slavering hungrily over them. Sheep really are very stupid creatures...

In theory, Jesus is the intermediary between God and man, we can directly communicate with God through Jesus

There is no "theory" in this, only the concrete fact of the matter indicated in God's word. Read 1 Timothy 2:5.

but in practice, God must come to you first through his apostles and fill you with the Holy Spirit, not you to God, you can't bypass the apostle's church leadership and go find a way to reach God with your own effort. If you think you can, you're deceived by an evil spirit.

Inasmuch as you just denied the plain declaration of Scripture about Christ's mediatory role, you might want to be very careful about speaking of others who are deceived.

God has come to many people entirely apart from any "apostle." Muslims tell of dreams by which they were prompted to discover Christ. I had a guy show up at my church wanting to be baptized who had never had anyone share the Gospel with him. He had been prompted to "get right with God" while he was staring out his kitchen window one morning and this sent him on a two-year search for God that led him finally into my sphere. I ended up discipling him for over a year. I know of others who came randomly across a Bible and/or Gospel tract and were saved. And so on.

God needs none of us to save all those He has always known in His omniscience would be saved. He gives us the privilege of being involved, but we are not vital to what He is doing.

And therein lies the challenge - how can you tell whether a church leader is really an apostle sent by God or not? It's more complicated than you think

You don't really know what I think on this head since you've never asked me to explain. In fact, it is not complicated at all when one has the criteria for an Elder/Pastor/Bishop/Overseer clearly laid out in the Bible. The only thing that's needed is time and opportunity to observe those things that are required of an Elder in the life of the Elders of whatever church one wants to belong. See 1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9, 1 Peter 5:1-3.

and just by telling me "follow the spirit" or “read God's word" ain't gonna cut it, that's a rather dismissive attutide.

I have no idea what you're talking about here...

These sticky situations exist in nearly all churches, you as a pastor should've known it better than anybody else.

??? I know a great deal more than you understand that I do. In light of this, perhaps you should...curb your rather obnoxious remarks (that seem always to arise from ignorance).

So, how to follow the spirit in these situations?

*Sigh* My answer is already given in this thread. It appears you haven't bothered to read my posts - or, if you have, to understand them.

"Discern in the light of God's Truth, His word, who is speaking to us" is not an answer, 'cause I'm like the Ethiopian eunuch who humbly admitted that he needed guidance - "how can I (understand what I'm reading), unless someone guides me?" (Acts 8:31) Maybe you think you don't, but I do.

No, from what I can tell from your posts, you are very opposed to guidance, your "cup" already full of what you think. In any case, your situation by no means serves as ground for prescriptions for all others. God's word says what it says whatever your (or my) personal experience may be.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I don't know what you mean by "take it under his own control," however....

It means thinking you're smarter and holier than church clergy, you know the bible better than they do, you disrespect them and you dismiss them as false teachers. That's not the attitude. I know some pastors who don't believe that God created the universe in six days, "yom", day in Gen. 1 means a long geological period like a billion years. I don't call them false teachers infused with evil spirit, I still listen to them and inquire their wisdom on other aspects.

Yes, being a member of a properly biblical, God-honoring community of born-again believers involves being under the authority of the spiritual leaders of that community. And so, no believer ought to venture into membership, or serious involvement, with any local church without having first got a very good idea of the kind of spiritual leaders under whom they would be active in the church. Speaking from recent, personal experience, the spiritual leaders in a church may be entirely unfit for the spiritual office they're occupying. What's worse, they may be quite oblivious to this fact, wanting to direct others spiritually from a state of spiritual blindness and sin! Yikes. But worst of all, those over whom they're exercising spiritual authority are happy for them to do so, brought by their spiritual leaders under the same spiritual blindness and sin afflicting their leaders, oblivious to the "ditch" into which their spiritual leaders are taking them. Double yikes.

See, therein lies the conundrum. Solo Chritianity doesn't work, neither does false christianity, so what's the third option?

Uh, there are no apostles today, in the sense in which Paul, Peter, or John were apostles, legitimately serving the Church. The only modern "apostles" trying exert the apostolic authority of these men are shysters, self-appointed "apostles" with no more authority than they can convince others to give to them. Unfortunately, there are an enormous number of foolish "Christians" very eager to have such spiritual "wolves" slavering hungrily over them. Sheep really are very stupid creatures...

If so, then the great commission wouldn't ended with John, nobody else is sent by God to preach the gospel and baptize in the name of the trinity, 'cause according to you, they have no authority to do so.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Inasmuch as you just denied the plain declaration of Scripture about Christ's mediatory role, you might want to be very careful about speaking of others who are deceived.

God has come to many people entirely apart from any "apostle." Muslims tell of dreams by which they were prompted to discover Christ. I had a guy show up at my church wanting to be baptized who had never had anyone share the Gospel with him. He had been prompted to "get right with God" while he was staring out his kitchen window one morning and this sent him on a two-year search for God that led him finally into my sphere. I ended up discipling him for over a year. I know of others who came randomly across a Bible and/or Gospel tract and were saved. And so on.

God needs none of us to save all those He has always known in His omniscience would be saved. He gives us the privilege of being involved, but we are not vital to what He is doing.

You should be careful of what you're saying. You've just undermined all the sacrifices made by the church fathers, the brave missionaries to risked their lives and ventured to the dangerous places to preach the gospel, all the brothers and sisters persecuted for sharing the word of God, the martyrs who died for God. If God can connect with his people automatically and spontaneously as you say, why do you bother to preach the gospel at all? Why not just leave your mission field to God, let God send them signals and dreams and wonders, and you go mind your own business? Aren't you interfering? This sounds like fatalistic view of Calvinism, which is a false doctrine.

Actually, there's nothing new under the sun, the ancient Israelites shared your mentality, they thought everybody in the world would be prompted to "get right with God", all believers were predetermined, and they will come to them, to Jerusalem to worship and pay tribute, they didn't need to come to anybody. And surprise, surprise, that ultimately ended up in their own corruption and destruction.

You don't really know what I think on this head since you've never asked me to explain. In fact, it is not complicated at all when one has the criteria for an Elder/Pastor/Bishop/Overseer clearly laid out in the Bible. The only thing that's needed is time and opportunity to observe those things that are required of an Elder in the life of the Elders of whatever church one wants to belong. See 1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9, 1 Peter 5:1-3.

What if they don't measure up to that criteria based on your "observation"? You insisted that an Elder/Pastor/Bishop/Overseer must be married with kids, what if they're not? Are you gonna denounce their leadership and stop going to their church just because they're single?

I have no idea what you're talking about here...

About calling other church leaders "entirely unfit for the spiritual office", and implying only you yourself is fit.

*Sigh* My answer is already given in this thread. It appears you haven't bothered to read my posts - or, if you have, to understand them.

No you didn't. If one day you're given an ultimatum to support LGBTQ or shut down your church, what would you do? Just shut down and abandon your flock? How do you settle a theological disagreement? What qualifies your answer as a right one from the Holy Spirit while other people's on this thread are not? They quote the Scripture and articulate their points as good as you do.

No, from what I can tell from your posts, you are very opposed to guidance, your "cup" already full of what you think. In any case, your situation by no means serves as ground for prescriptions for all others. God's word says what it says whatever your (or my) personal experience may be.

And somehow you're inclined to guidance? You, who just called his fellow soldiers in the spiritual warfare "entirely unfit for the spiritual office they're occupying"? What exactly had they done to deserve that? Did they condone homosexuality? Preach prosperity gospel? Deny Christ's dinivity and exclusivity? Practice demonic rituals? Steal money from the ministry? Sleep with parishioners? Or maybe just some theological disagreement? At least I know that God's word says you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

 

[Tenchi]

It means thinking you're smarter and holier than church clergy, you know the bible better than they do, you disrespect them and you dismiss them as false teachers.

I see. And if you do know Scripture better than they do? And if your life is lived in greater holiness and devotion to Christ than theirs? These things don't legitimize hating one's siblings in Christ, nor does it mean one can dismiss them as false teachers, but it does mean that you have a responsibility as one more mature in the faith to help them grow in their understanding and deepen in their fellowship with God.

I know some pastors who don't believe that God created the universe in six days, "yom", day in Gen. 1 means a long geological period like a billion years. I don't call them false teachers infused with evil spirit, I still listen to them and inquire their wisdom on other aspects.

Uh huh.

See, therein lies the conundrum. Solo Chritianity doesn't work, neither does false christianity, so what's the third option?

Solo Christianity isn't ideal, but in circumstances where it can't be avoided, the believer is not left hamstrung spiritually. The Church merely assists the individual believer in their walk with God, it doesn't replace the role of the Holy Spirit and God's word in the believer's life.

Anyway, that one has discovered spiritual corruption in the leadership of the church doesn't mean one must "go solo" but that, first, one must challenge that corruption and work to see it removed from the leadership. Failing that, one must find a different, better church to be a part of.

If so, then the great commission wouldn't ended with John, nobody else is sent by God to preach the gospel and baptize in the name of the trinity, 'cause according to you, they have no authority to do so.

As I said, there are no "apostles" today of the sort that Paul, Peter and John were. Certainly, there are Elder/Pastors and missionaries, but the apostles uniquely-invested with spiritual power and authority who established the Early Church have been gone for nearly 2000 years. Please read my remarks more carefully.

You should be careful of what you're saying.

I'm always as careful as possible in the things I write. The problem is that some who read my words have poor comprehension skills.

You've just undermined all the sacrifices made by the church fathers, the brave missionaries to risked their lives and ventured to the dangerous places to preach the gospel, all the brothers and sisters persecuted for sharing the word of God, the martyrs who died for God.

See? This is the sort of stuff that comes from not reading carefully and with understanding what I wrote.

If God can connect with his people automatically and spontaneously as you say, why do you bother to preach the gospel at all?

Because my point wasn't that God never uses saved people to reach the lost but that He doesn't need to do so in order to reach the lost. Please read my remarks more carefully.

This sounds like fatalistic view of Calvinism, which is a false doctrine.

Your rhetorical questions based on a Strawman of my words does sound fatalistic. But it's not my view.

Actually, there's nothing new under the sun, the ancient Israelites shared your mentality

So far, you haven't understood my "mentality" really much at all.

What if they don't measure up to that criteria based on your "observation"?

Then they should not be an Elder.

You insisted that an Elder/Pastor/Bishop/Overseer must be married with kids, what if they're not?

If they've never been a husband and father, they do not qualify to be an Elder. Scripture is very plain about this.

Are you gonna denounce their leadership and stop going to their church just because they're single?

Any church that would permit an Elder to serve as such in flagrant neglect of the criteria for being Elder is not a church I would be a part of.

No you didn't.

Yes, I did.

If one day you're given an ultimatum to support LGBTQ or shut down your church, what would you do? Just shut down and abandon your flock?

Obviously not. This is what is known as a false dilemma. There are other options. Obvious ones.

What qualifies your answer as a right one from the Holy Spirit while other people's on this thread are not? They quote the Scripture and articulate their points as good as you do.

??? I could ask you the very same question. You have a very strongly-held point of view. What makes you right and everyone else of a differing, reasonable, well-articulated, biblical view wrong?

And somehow you're inclined to guidance?

Yes. But not from just anybody. If I'm going to receive guidance from someone, it will have to be from someone with the requisite knowledge, reasoning skills, understanding and experience. They will also have to have a real, concrete, Christ-manifesting walk with God.

You, who just called his fellow soldiers in the spiritual warfare "entirely unfit for the spiritual office they're occupying"?

They were. Should I have lied and said they were not?

What exactly had they done to deserve that?

Lived in willful rebellion to God's explicit commands to them as Elders for nearly ten years. Over which time I repeatedly reasoned with them from Scripture, urging them to take up a proper fulfillment of their responsibilities as Elders.

Did they condone homosexuality? Preach prosperity gospel? Deny Christ's dinivity and exclusivity? Practice demonic rituals? Steal money from the ministry? Sleep with parishioners? Or maybe just some theological disagreement? At least I know that God's word says you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

??? You have absolutely no idea of the state-of-affairs I mentioned. Not the slightest glimmer of knowledge. And yet, you insinuate that I have borne false witness against my neighbor? Well, at least you're consistent in your constant jumping to conclusions from ignorance.

 

[hawkman]

TOS 1.1: Grant others the courtesy to be understood and acknowledge their views. As best as one is capable, speak truth in love.; ( Mathew 7:12, 1 Corinthians 13:1-13)

Carry_Your_Name

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I see. And if you do know Scripture better than they do? And if your life is lived in greater holiness and devotion to Christ than theirs? These things don't legitimize hating one's siblings in Christ, nor does it mean one can dismiss them as false teachers, but it does mean that you have a responsibility as one more mature in the faith to help them grow in their understanding and deepen in their fellowship with God.

You can lead a horse to the stream, you can't force it to drink. Just tell you one thing for example, many self identified Christians, if not the vast majority, listen to pastors who either never teach prophecies or comepletely allegorize them, and that leads to the heresy of amillennialism - all prophecies ended by 70AD, Jesus has already been reigning in heaven for 2000 years, and we've living in the kingdom right now. I can show them why this is a heresy, but I can't change their worldview built around this heresy, only God can.

Solo Christianity isn't ideal, but in circumstances where it can't be avoided, the believer is not left hamstrung spiritually. The Church merely assists the individual believer in their walk with God, it doesn't replace the role of the Holy Spirit and God's word in the believer's life.

Anyway, that one has discovered spiritual corruption in the leadership of the church doesn't mean one must "go solo" but that, first, one must challenge that corruption and work to see it removed from the leadership. Failing that, one must find a different, better church to be a part of.

That sounds like "church shopping" instead of God's calling. Run away from problems doesn't make them disappear.

As I said, there are no "apostles" today of the sort that Paul, Peter and John were. Certainly, there are Elder/Pastors and missionaries, but the apostles uniquely-invested with spiritual power and authority who established the Early Church have been gone for nearly 2000 years. Please read my remarks more carefully.

Then are missionaries sent by God or not? On whose authority do they preach? Who gave you the authority and credibility to preach? Who sent you if not God? And what does this have to do with the early church? You believe in the continuous lineage of papacy all the way back to Peter or something?

I'm always as careful as possible in the things I write. The problem is that some who read my words have poor comprehension skills.

See? This is the sort of stuff that comes from not reading carefully and with understanding what I wrote.

I have no obligation to read your mind. You are undermining missionary work, including perhaps your own, just to make an argument on shake ground, and all I did was calling you out on that.

Because my point wasn't that God never uses saved people to reach the lost but that He doesn't need to do so in order to reach the lost. Please read my remarks more carefully.

Again, I have no obligation to read your mind. If God can reach the lost without our missionary work, then why do we have to? Why don't we step out of the way, just preach to the choir and let God reach the lost? I did read your remark carefully, and here I give you my remark - the gospel doesn't preach itself, God's people do, is that clear?

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Your rhetorical questions based on a Strawman of my words does sound fatalistic. But it's not my view.

You're playing word game around the title "apostle", that somehow only the twelve, Paul and maybe the seventy and others in the early church periods were legit apostles sent by God preaching on God's authority, only they were the legit "sent ones", anybody else after that are not "sent ones" anymore. You're also implying that God can communicate with particular peopne among the "lost" through dreams and visions and other mysterious ways without any missionary work, even though in an earlier post you explicitly rejected the idea of God speaking in one's mind.

Then they should not be an Elder.

If they've never been a husband and father, they do not qualify to be an Elder. Scripture is very plain about this.

No, that's your bias. Show me any evidence that pastor Timothy, to whom Paul wrote the letters, was married with kids. Any biblical or historical proof. If not, you just got it wrong. I've debated this before in another thread where others correctly pointed out that this qualification is simply a disapproval of polygamy, Jesus taught that there are eunuchs who choose to be single for the righteousness of the kingdom, Scripture is also very plain about that. I don't believe all the priests, missionaries and martyrs who took a vow of celibacy were frauds just because your out-of-context verdict.

Yes, I did.

Obviously not. This is what is known as a false dilemma. There are other options. Obvious ones.

If you had, you would've given your response to that situation I just posted. It's not hypothetical, it's very real and serious. If there're "obvious solutions", why don't you enlighten me? Why accusing me of making a false dilemma? And I'm not the one who came up with this "false dilemma", the government did, they shove up these demonic LGBTQ agendas in our faces, don't shoot the messenger.

??? I could ask you the very same question. You have a very strongly-held point of view. What makes you right and everyone else of a differing, reasonable, well-articulated, biblical view wrong?

I never said I was right while "everybody else" was wrong. As long as you beleive in the basics such as deity of Christ, substitutionary atonement, salvation in faith through grace, second coming in bodily form, we have more in common than you think. I don't paint with a broad brush. I only disagree with you one some issues such as church leadership.

Yes. But not from just anybody. If I'm going to receive guidance from someone, it will have to be from someone with the requisite knowledge, reasoning skills, understanding and experience. They will also have to have a real, concrete, Christ-manifesting walk with God.

Good, I receive guidance regularly from my trusted sources too, and there're some simple litmus tests to show where their allegiance really lies. I can tell you one thing with absolute ceitainty, sir, that I would not abandon my pastor or any pastor and call them unqualified like you just because they're single. I value real knowledge, reasoning skills, understanding and experience, not marital status.

They were. Should I have lied and said they were not?

Lived in willful rebellion to God's explicit commands to them as Elders for nearly ten years. Over which time I repeatedly reasoned with them from Scripture, urging them to take up a proper fulfillment of their responsibilities as Elders.

Again, what are specific charges? What exactly have they done wrong? Did they bring a drag queen to the pulpit? Or just have some theological difference, such as understanding of "husband of one wife"?

??? You have absolutely no idea of the state-of-affairs I mentioned. Not the slightest glimmer of knowledge. And yet, you insinuate that I have borne false witness against my neighbor? Well, at least you're consistent in your constant jumping to conclusions from ignorance.

I would never disaparage someone without proof out of resentment and bias, especially not a fellow brother or sister. Even if your accusations are true, we wrestle not with flesh and blood, our real enemies are the evil spirits. We should pray for them and talk with them, not rush to judgement. You have no idea what perilous time we're living in, we should unite with every believer in Christ and stand as one against the dark, hostile forces more than ever.

 

[Tenchi]

Now we are starting to get to the nub of the issue. Our oneness with God the Father and God the Son is not "unlike" Jesus' oneness with the Father. It is "just as" They "are one". In Jesus' High Priestly prayer, He said this...

20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: 23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me. (Jn 17:20–23)
This prayer is fulfilled every time a person believes in Jesus: "But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him." (1 Co 6:17). This "oneness" we have with the Lord is what makes us complete...

9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; 10 and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power. (Col 2:9–10)
The Greek words behind the English words I've underlined have the same root. In Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead, and with Him living in our hearts we are completely full. If we were stuffed animals, He would be the stuffing, and we would be fully stuffed.

No, this is all predicated upon the idea that we are near-equals with God, able to operate, with His help, on His level. But this is the thinking of the man who has enlarged himself and vastly diminished God. God is "a se," which is to say "non-contingent," existing as a necessity of His own being, dependent upon nothing. He is the uncreated First Cause who has never not existed and will never cease to exist. He has made Reality and sustains it moment by moment by His will and power. Galaxy-devouring black holes, supernovas, vast tracts of empty space so large we cannot comprehend them and every particle constituting every cell in your body God made and causes to continue to exist. He has always known all things and is everywhere present.

What about you and me? Are we omnipotent? No. Are we universe-making beings? No. Have we always known all things? No. Are we without beginning, necessarily-existing beings? No. Are we everywhere present in the universe? No. But this isn't the end of the way in which we are hugely less than God. He is perfect in wisdom, righteousness, justice, mercy and love. We aren't. God is perfect in patience; faithful in ways we can't understand; He cannot lie; His holiness exceeds our understanding. And yet, you think you can be "one" with this Being as Jesus is, who shares an essential, divine nature with God the Father.

Yes, God the Holy Spirit is within every born-again believer as he was within Jesus and in this way we are connected to God the Father. But being made one with God - united to Him - by the Holy Spirit doesn't make us as God is. As Jesus indicated in the passage above from John 17, our "oneness" with God has to do with being connected to Him, not sharing in His deity. In the Person of the Holy Spirit, the "Spirit of Christ" (Romans 8:9), we are indwelt by Christ, made a "temple" of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). But the house in which the President of the USA dwells is not itself the President, only a place he occupies. He may decorate the house in expression of his particular tastes, manifesting himself in the decorative character of his home, but never is the house just as the President is. By virtue of its nature, the house can never be as the President is. So, too, you and I who have been made a "temple" or dwelling place of the Holy Spirit. Though we "house" the Holy Spirit, and he manifests himself in us, we don't thereby become in nature the same as he is.

And so, if we are "stuffed" spiritually, as you suggest, it is not with the result that we are one in divinity with God, sharing fully in His divine nature, as only Jesus and the Holy Spirit can do.

You are reading more into those two verses than what is actually there. Though Scripture is inspired and profitable, Scripture has not supplanted God's role in instructing us, correcting us, or leading us. This is a made-up doctrine to help people avoid Scripture's many instructions to trust the Lord with all their hearts.

No, it is the God-given means whereby believers can objectively assess the "leading" of God they think they've had. As Paul wrote to Timothy, the Scriptures are entirely sufficient to guide the Christian in all matters of doctrine and practice. This has the effect of constraining believers who want to go off into the tulips, declaring any old thing they like about God and His "leading." It's frustrating for them, of course, to have such limits on shaping God and His will according to their own human preferences and thinking. God can't be the mirror they want Him to be, when His word keeps interfering and making Him Master, instead.

In any case, it isn't that I'm reading too much into 2 Timothy 3:16-17 but that you're reading too little into the verses. You would do, since you want to create lots of room for whatever "leading" you want to say you've had.

All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable, including this one: "Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak." (John 12:50) When it says Jesus spoke just as the Father "told" Him, it means the Father told Him what to say. The same is true for this Scripture: "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works." (John 14:10) When it says that Jesus' words did not represent His own words, but the words of the Father who lived in His heart, it means that the words Jesus spoke came from the Father who lived in His heart.

Well, now, watch out for those little additions to Scripture that you're making here. "Dwells in me" is not necessarily the same as "lives in my heart." This is, as in points in your earlier posts, an assumption your pressing into the text. In the record of the Gospels, only the Holy Spirit was said to have "come upon" Jesus. Remember the time of Christ's baptism by John? The Holy Spirit descended like a dove upon Christ but the Father spoke from heaven his approval of His Son, Jesus. The account of this instance doesn't say, though, that the Father also descended upon Jesus. And it wouldn't since the Father dwells in heaven. No, only the Holy Spirit was ever upon Jesus and never does Scripture say "in his heart."

In any case, as I've already explained, our connection to God the Father and Christ in and through the Person of the Holy Spirit can't be identical to that enjoyed by Christ because we aren't God in the flesh, as Jesus was. This has an important bearing - limits, actually - on what sort of interactions with God we can have with Him. And so, as I pointed out, God has given to us the Bible, full of His wisdom, truth, spiritual principles and examples and commands.

Don't have time for more, at the moment.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I see. And if you do know Scripture better than they do? And if your life is lived in greater holiness and devotion to Christ than theirs? These things don't legitimize hating one's siblings in Christ, nor does it mean one can dismiss them as false teachers, but it does mean that you have a responsibility as one more mature in the faith to help them grow in their understanding and deepen in their fellowship with God.



Uh huh.



Solo Christianity isn't ideal, but in circumstances where it can't be avoided, the believer is not left hamstrung spiritually. The Church merely assists the individual believer in their walk with God, it doesn't replace the role of the Holy Spirit and God's word in the believer's life.

Anyway, that one has discovered spiritual corruption in the leadership of the church doesn't mean one must "go solo" but that, first, one must challenge that corruption and work to see it removed from the leadership. Failing that, one must find a different, better church to be a part of.



As I said, there are no "apostles" today of the sort that Paul, Peter and John were. Certainly, there are Elder/Pastors and missionaries, but the apostles uniquely-invested with spiritual power and authority who established the Early Church have been gone for nearly 2000 years. Please read my remarks more carefully.



I'm always as careful as possible in the things I write. The problem is that some who read my words have poor comprehension skills.



See? This is the sort of stuff that comes from not reading carefully and with understanding what I wrote.



Because my point wasn't that God never uses saved people to reach the lost but that He doesn't need to do so in order to reach the lost. Please read my remarks more carefully.



Your rhetorical questions based on a Strawman of my words does sound fatalistic. But it's not my view.



So far, you haven't understood my "mentality" really much at all.



Then they should not be an Elder.



If they've never been a husband and father, they do not qualify to be an Elder. Scripture is very plain about this.



Any church that would permit an Elder to serve as such in flagrant neglect of the criteria for being Elder is not a church I would be a part of.



Yes, I did.



Obviously not. This is what is known as a false dilemma. There are other options. Obvious ones.



??? I could ask you the very same question. You have a very strongly-held point of view. What makes you right and everyone else of a differing, reasonable, well-articulated, biblical view wrong?



Yes. But not from just anybody. If I'm going to receive guidance from someone, it will have to be from someone with the requisite knowledge, reasoning skills, understanding and experience. They will also have to have a real, concrete, Christ-manifesting walk with God.



They were. Should I have lied and said they were not?



Lived in willful rebellion to God's explicit commands to them as Elders for nearly ten years. Over which time I repeatedly reasoned with them from Scripture, urging them to take up a proper fulfillment of their responsibilities as Elders.



??? You have absolutely no idea of the state-of-affairs I mentioned. Not the slightest glimmer of knowledge. And yet, you insinuate that I have borne false witness against my neighbor? Well, at least you're consistent in your constant jumping to conclusions from ignorance.

Look, sir, the bottom line is that, as long as Christ is the head and church is the body, Christ and his church are one as much as the head and the body are one, Christ's body is not decapitated, but forming and developing. When He taught that we must eat his flesh and drink his blood (Jn. 6:53-54), that means not cannibalism or eucharist, but joining the church and having some skin in the game, being a player on the mission field instead of a spectator in the bleacher, in that case, obeying church leadership is inevitable, at least to some degree. I may not disagree with the pastor, but I wouldn't disrespect him and usurp his authority by claiming that I'm more Spirit led than he is, and the church in which he has invested his whole life is merely "assisting me".

YOu accuse me of presenting a false dilemma, but you know what, sir, I'm beginning to see that the title of this thread is the real false dilemma, obeying church leadership and the holy spirit are NOT mutually exclusive, most of the time they come hand in hand.

 

[Tenchi]

You can lead a horse to the stream, you can't force it to drink.

Especially if the "stream" is fouled and stinking.

Just tell you one thing for example, many self identified Christians, if not the vast majority, listen to pastors who either never teach prophecies or comepletely allegorize them, and that leads to the heresy of amillennialism - all prophecies ended by 70AD, Jesus has already been reigning in heaven for 2000 years, and we've living in the kingdom right now. I can show them why this is a heresy, but I can't change their worldview built around this heresy, only God can.

Uh huh.

That sounds like "church shopping" instead of God's calling. Run away from problems doesn't make them disappear.

Do you actually think before you post these sorts of remarks? Wow. Just so you know: I'm not twelve, as the latter statement in the quotation above seems to suggest you think I am. I'm nearly sixty, actually. Please keep this in mind when you think to "teach your grandmother how to suck eggs."

Then are missionaries sent by God or not? On whose authority do they preach? Who gave you the authority and credibility to preach? Who sent you if not God?

Some missionaries are genuinely sent by God. But others are not.

No preacher has any spiritual authority except what he borrows from God's word as he teaches it and that is invested in him by fellow believers who see that his life warrants their trust in his leadership.

Who sent me to teach and preach fellow believers? God, of course. Not once have I had to chase after, or dig up an opportunity to serve God in these capacities. He has always opened the doors to such opportunities (sometimes through very unusual ways) without my ever having to push on them. In this, God has indicated that I ought to walk through them.

And what does this have to do with the early church? You believe in the continuous lineage of papacy all the way back to Peter or something?

*Sigh* No.

I have no obligation to read your mind.

??? Who said that you did? I didn't. I simply asked you to read carefully what I wrote. You can do this, I hope (though you seem to be having some difficulty...).

You are undermining missionary work, including perhaps your own, just to make an argument on shake ground, and all I did was calling you out on that.

??? Not from where I stand. You made some off-point, knee-jerk assumptions about my meaning, mixed in a few obnoxious insinuations, and now appear to think you've called me out on my views. Really? Seriously, take more time to carefully consider what I write.

Again, I have no obligation to read your mind.

If you're going to offer a reply to my words, you DO have an obligation to have actually understood them first.

If God can reach the lost without our missionary work, then why do we have to?

Because God wants us involved. It's no more complicated than this. Our involvement is entirely a privilege, conferring on us the joy and fulfillment of serving our Maker. But our involvement is not at all necessary to God saving a person.

I did read your remark carefully, and here I give you my remark - the gospel doesn't preach itself, God's people do, is that clear?

You don't read my posts carefully by which I mean actually understand them. You jump to conclusions, overlaying on my words your own prejudices and knee-jerk thinking, but you have rarely understood what I've written. Mostly, it seems to me, because you simply don't want to - like the horse led to water that you mentioned.

You're playing word game around the title "apostle", that somehow only the twelve, Paul and maybe the seventy and others in the early church periods were legit apostles sent by God preaching on God's authority, only they were the legit "sent ones", anybody else after that are not "sent ones" anymore.

No, I stipulated what I did about the term "apostle" because these days the term is much-abused, meaning much more than merely "sent out one." Check out Holly Pivec and Doug Geivett's stuff online about the New Apostolic Reformation movement.

You're also implying that God can communicate with particular peopne among the "lost" through dreams and visions and other mysterious ways without any missionary work, even though in an earlier post you explicitly rejected the idea of God speaking in one's mind.

I've never once excluded dreams as a means of God's communication to a person. Such a means is repeatedly used by God in Scripture, as I've noted a number of times in this thread. But a person hearing the Spirit's voice in their head is not. See? This is an example of you not carefully reading and understanding my posts.

No, that's your bias. Show me any evidence that pastor Timothy, to whom Paul wrote the letters, was married with kids.

??? No, it's not "my bias." The husband-and-father qualification is explicitly and repeatedly given in Scripture. I don't, then, have to defend it; the qualification is given clearly and strictly. I have only to uphold it.

Continued below.

 

[Tenchi]

Any biblical or historical proof. If not, you just got it wrong.

??? Biblical proof? Are you serious? Again, please read my posts carefully.

1 Timothy 3:1-7
Titus 1:5-9

I've debated this before in another thread where others correctly pointed out that this qualification is simply a disapproval of polygamy

It isn't only prohibitive of polygamy among Elders. This might be a side-effect, but the main reason for an Elder being the "husband of one wife" and a father to children is just what Paul explained:

1 Timothy 3:4-5
4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive,
5 for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?

Jesus taught that there are eunuchs who choose to be single for the righteousness of the kingdom,

And did he teach that they could and should be Elders in churches? Nope.

I don't believe all the priests, missionaries and martyrs who took a vow of celibacy were frauds just because your out-of-context verdict.

What's with this totally false mischaracterization of my view? I have done no out-of-context arguing. Scripture says what it says, plain as day. Deal with it. Sheesh.

If you had, you would've given your response to that situation I just posted.

See? Just more jumping to unfounded conclusions.

If there're "obvious solutions", why don't you enlighten me? Why accusing me of making a false dilemma?

Because when you offer only two options in a circumstance when there are more, you've formed a false dilemma.

I didn't offer a third option because it bugs me how little you're wanting to think hard about what you post. If it's obvious to me what other options there are, surely you can stop for a minute and think and see these other options, too. Instead, in an attempt simply to be argumentative, you refuse to do this. Well, I'm not helping you see the obvious. Think.

And I'm not the one who came up with this "false dilemma", the government did, they shove up these demonic LGBTQ agendas in our faces, don't shoot the messenger.

Governments and rulers of the past have tried to force the Church to adopt ungodly beliefs, values and practices. Some in the Church went along and others didn't. Did the Church dissolve? No. Did Christians find ways to continue on in a God-honoring, collective way despite the oppression of governments and rulers? Yes.

I never said I was right while "everybody else" was wrong.

Not in so many words, no, you didn't.

I can tell you one thing with absolute ceitainty, sir, that I would not abandon my pastor or any pastor and call them unqualified like you just because they're single.

Uh huh.

I value real knowledge, reasoning skills, understanding and experience, not marital status.

False dilemma, again. It's not either-or, here.

Again, what are specific charges? What exactly have they done wrong? Did they bring a drag queen to the pulpit? Or just have some theological difference, such as understanding of "husband of one wife"?

To be blunt, it's none of your business. I will say only this: They were not fulfilling their responsibilities as Elders and had not done for nearly a decade, at least. What's worse is that they agreed that they weren't and yet refused to act to change their constant defaulting on their spiritual duties as Elders.

I would never disaparage someone without proof out of resentment and bias, especially not a fellow brother or sister.

??? I'm afraid your posts don't bear this out.

Even if your accusations are true, we wrestle not with flesh and blood, our real enemies are the evil spirits. We should pray for them and talk with them, not rush to judgement.

Why do write this sort of stuff? You have no idea how I've acted in the situation, though I have said that I remonstrated with the men for nearly an entire decade before things came to an impasse. I suspect I understand far better than you what it is not to rush to judgment.

You have no idea what perilous time we're living in,

And, again, a silly remark. You don't have any idea what I do or don't have any idea of. It's amazing to me, then, that you write stuff like the above. Most sensible, thoughtful people wouldn't want to offer assertions from such a profound ignorance concerning the thing about which they're making the assertion.

we should unite with every believer in Christ and stand as one against the dark, hostile forces more than ever.

Lead the way!

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

??? No, it's not "my bias." The husband-and-father qualification is explicitly and repeatedly given in Scripture. I don't, then, have to defend it; the qualification is given clearly and strictly. I have only to uphold it.

No, that’s your misinterpretation of that qualification. Scripture doesn’t contradict itself, there are eunuchs, i.e. singles, who give up marriage for the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 19:12), and singleness is preferred by Paul (1 Cor. 7:7-7). If “husband and father” are real hard qualifications, then as I said, all the priests, monks, theologians, nuns, missionaries in history would be frauds, even those who are infertile and couldn’t have children would be frauds, the only thing you uphold is your own bias and discrimination against unmarried people.

??? Biblical proof? Are you serious? Again, please read my posts carefully.

Is Timothy a pastor or not? You insist that a pastor must be a father and husband, so I ask you again, where’s Timothy’s wife and children? Where’s Titus’s wife and children? God’s word says Timothy was a brilliant, well spoken young man, he met Paul through his Jewish mother, and he joined the missionary trip (Acts 16:1-5), then he traveled to Corinth (18:5), at the time he received the letters, he was presiding the Ephesus church. Nowhere indicates that he was married with children, and he was highly unlikely to have been married. You read my post carefully and show me proof of Timothy’s and/or Titus’s marriage.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

And did he teach that they could and should be Elders in churches? Nope.

Again, word game. Do you really think that none of the twelve apostles was qualified to be an elder just because they were not married? If they can’t be elder, ok, just change to another title, a rabbi, preacher, pastor, priest, worship leader, bible teacher, etc. Two can play this damn game.

What's with this totally false mischaracterization of my view? I have done no out-of-context arguing. Scripture says what it says, plain as day. Deal with it. Sheesh.

Scripture doesn’t contradict itself, you do. The qualifications in 1 Tim. 3:1-7 or Titus. 1:5-9 only apply to ELDER or BISHOP, right? Does it say a rabbi, preacher, pastor, priest, worship leader, bible teacher, etc? No? Ok, then this qualification is irrelevant. Just be honest to yourself, sir, have you ever met one church leader who publicly or privately addresses himself as an elder or a bishop?

You have totally taken this out of context by ignoring a simple fact that all other qualifications in that context are virtues, none of them have anything to do with marital status. I pointed this out before, and you’ve been shamelessly and relentlessly denying it. Obviously you’re slavishly following the letter but not the spirit, so I just give you a taste of your own medication.

 

[cherithbrook]

You are there for the sole purpose of obeying the church leaders.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Uh huh.

Are you one of them? Is your message tainted with replacement theology? That's the most stinky and foul stream.

Do you actually think before you post these sorts of remarks? Wow. Just so you know: I'm not twelve, as the latter statement in the quotation above seems to suggest you think I am. I'm nearly sixty, actually. Please keep this in mind when you think to "teach your grandmother how to suck eggs."

You have a funny way of showing your seniority. Is an old man being twice a child?

Some missionaries are genuinely sent by God. But others are not.

No preacher has any spiritual authority except what he borrows from God's word as he teaches it and that is invested in him by fellow believers who see that his life warrants their trust in his leadership.

Who sent me to teach and preach fellow believers? God, of course. Not once have I had to chase after, or dig up an opportunity to serve God in these capacities. He has always opened the doors to such opportunities (sometimes through very unusual ways) without my ever having to push on them. In this, God has indicated that I ought to walk through them.

All genuine missionaries sent by God are apostles by definition, for apostle means "sent one". Isaiah was widely recognized as a prophet, but he was also an apostle according to this definition. You're either an apostle with God's spiritual authority or a fraud with no spiritual authority. This authority is that "more" element beyond the simple definition of "sent one". Declaring there's no modern apostles is undermining your own authority and credibility. It doesn't matter what title you call yourself, missionary, preacher, chaplain, messenger, if you're not an apostle, you're not sent by God.

Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying:“Whom shall I send, And who will go for Us?”Then I said, “Here am I! Send me.”(Is. 6:8)

??? Who said that you did? I didn't. I simply asked you to read carefully what I wrote. You can do this, I hope (though you seem to be having some difficulty...).

??? Not from where I stand. You made some off-point, knee-jerk assumptions about my meaning, mixed in a few obnoxious insinuations, and now appear to think you've called me out on my views. Really? Seriously, take more time to carefully consider what I write.

If you're going to offer a reply to my words, you DO have an obligation to have actually understood them first.

All I can read is your complaint and contempt against your fellow brothers and sisters. You accuse other church leaders of "willful rebellion to God", that they are "entirely unfit for spiritual officies", and yet you can't elaborate one single crime; you assure yourself that you're sent by God, which effectively makes you an apostle, and yet you call others who use the title apostle frauds.

The only difficulty is to imagine what they've done to deserve your wrath which should've been unleashed upon the devil who's spreading discord with a lying tongue like Iago, persecuting God's people and suppressing God's word, you're supposed to make judgement of the world, expose wokeness, Climate change, new age, LGBTQ and other evil spirits that have been corrupting the church, you're supposed to hate the sin and love the sinner. What I see is that you don't see to know who's your friend and who's your enemy. This is why I highly suspect, based on your remarks and attitude, that you point your finger at your fellow "elders" only because of theological difference, maybe some of these "elders" are single, maybe some of them are women, and that irritates you, since you've been so vehemently and consistently picking Scripture out of context to justify your own discrimination against single people and women.

 

[Tenchi]

The paradigm does extend to us. Though these are not the only verses that says it, John 15:5-8 say it plainly...

5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. 7 If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you. 8 By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples." (Jn 15:5–8)
As Jesus said of Himself, "I can of myself do nothing", so He says of us, "Without Me you can do nothing". If live by His words that He speaks to us from within our hearts just as He lived by the words The Father spoke to Him from within His heart, we will truly be following His example (i.e., we will be His disciples) and we will bear much fruit.

This passage actually makes a very clear distinction between Christ and Christians. Christ is the Vine and we Christians are but branches in the Vine; he is the Life Source of every born-again person both physically and spiritually; we are merely the blessed recipients of his life in us, having no life except what is given to us by him. There is no obligation upon Christ to "abide" in us; no, we are the ones who need to abide in him.

It seems extremely evident to me, then, in this passage from John 15 that we are, in some very profound ways, quite unlike Jesus. Rather than supporting the "paradigm" you think exists, the unique communion, the oneness, of the Godhead extending to Christians, Jesus's words in John 15 show us to be in a dynamic with Christ that exposes the vast differences between Creator and creature, Vine and branch, Life Source and helpless dependents ("without me you can do nothing").

There is also nothing in this passage about being spoken to by God in our hearts, as you think Jesus was.

They all live in us. God the Father lives in us (Ephesians 4:6, 2 Corinthians 6:16, and 1 John 4:12). God the Son lives in us (Romans 8:10, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 3:17, and Colossians 1:27). God the Holy Spirit lives in us 1 Corinthians 6:19, 2 Timothy 1:14and James 4:5).

Ephesians 4:4-6
4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

In the Person of the Holy Spirit, who is God.

John 14:16-17
16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.


2 Corinthians 6:16
16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, “I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Again, as God's word indicates, God dwells in us in the Person of the Holy Spirit, who is God.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20
19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own,
20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.


1 John 4:12-13
12 No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us.

This was a slippery use of Scripture. Once more: It is God, the Holy Spirit, in us and no other. The very next verse states this plainly:

13 By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit.

How does John explain that we know God abides in us? Because we have been given, not God the Father, not Jesus Christ the Son, but the Holy Spirit. Inasmuch as the Spirit is God, sharing the same divine nature/essence as the other two members of the Trinity, he can be regarded as a sort of stand-in for, or representative of, these other two Persons of the Godhead, which is exactly what John has indicated in the verses above.

In your post, you continued on in a slippery manner, using Scripture to make your case in a very edited way. You cited Romans 8:10 in an effort to establish that Christ the Son, who is seated at God the Father's right hand in heaven (1 John 2:1; Romans 8:34) personally occupies the born-again person. The immediate context of verse 10, however, denies this idea very directly:

Romans 8:9-11
9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.
10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

Concerning the fact that God is present in the saved individual in the Person of the Holy Spirit, no passage of the NT could be plainer. It is the SPIRIT of God, the SPIRIT of Christ, who dwells in us. It is the SPIRIT who is life, the SPIRIT who raised Jesus from the dead, who dwells in the redeemed child of God. Lifting out verse 10 from its context and offering it as though it makes the case for your idea that all three members of the Trinity are simultaneously present in the Christian actually contradicts what Paul was clearly teaching in the passage.

Continued below.

 

[Tenchi]

Galatians 2:20
20 I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Here, also, you take a single verse from its context in order to misconstrue its meaning. Consider what follows this verse in Paul's letter to the believers in Galatia:

Galatians 3:1-3
1 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified.
2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith?
3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?

In light of all I've shown from God's word above, and in connection to the passage directly above, Galatians 2:20 can only be understood to mean that in the Person of the Holy Spirit, Christ lives in Paul. Your serious mishandling of Scripture is a very common feature of attempts to impose on it ideas about God and the faith that are actually foreign to Scripture. Always, this is accomplished by removing a text from its context thereby making of it a pretext for non-biblical views.

Several Scriptures mention multiple members of the trinity in combination as living in us (Romans 8:11, 1 Corinthians 3:16, Ephesians 4:30, 1 Thessalonians 4:8, Galatians 4:6, and Romans 8:9). My favorite is John 14:23 -- “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him."

See above.

For the record, you are objecting to my statement that, "Nowhere are we told to hold Him at bay or to vet what He says."

I wrote:

"I've never said anything like this. But I have pointed out from God's word that we are to discern in the light of God's Truth, His word, who is speaking to us. If it is the Spirit, we must obey, absolutely; but this obedience is predicated upon our certainty that it is truly the Spirit who is communicating with us, not merely our own Self-talk, or a demonic deception. This certainty is provided by assessing the origin of what we think is the Spirit's leading against what God's word says and discovering its true nature, not by way of an entirely subjective confidence that the Spirit's leading us."

Then you say this:
This sounds like you are saying that we need to vet what we think we hear from the Lord against what the Bible says in order to determine if it is actually Him speaking to us and not our own thoughts or demonic deception. Certainly, if this were the case, we would need to hold God at bay until we confirmed by way of our knowledge of Scripture that it was Him talking. However, as I said, Scripture does not instruct us to interact with God in that way.

??? Please read more carefully. I wrote that believers must examine the origin, the source, of whatever leading they think is of the Spirit and make sure the the origin or source of the leading is truly divine. If it is, then one must follow it. I'm not, then, saying a believer ought to question and vet a leading they are confident is truly from God, but to make sure their confidence is correctly placed in a genuine communication from God and not a counterfeit one. As I pointed out, one's own Self-talk and/or a demonic counterfeit of God's leading are possible and so one must have an authoritative, objective and clear means of distinguishing these counterfeits from the Real Thing. This is not "holding God at bay" but simply making sure of who (or what) it is we think is giving us a "leading."

Your alternative seems to be simply to decide the source of a "leading" on the basis of the strength of a feeling or impulse that seems "godly," on an undefinable "spirit knowing" that is, as far as I understand you, pretty much entirely subjective. I see no such basis for walking with God in His word, however, and have observed many professing Christians move into spiritual disaster as they operated on such a basis.