Global Rain

mjona3 said:

Which is why we should be spreading the word, and not focusing on making ourselves perfect.

Many people seem to be in favor of getting rid of people from the church who aren't perfect, this strikes me as from the devil. I know that this global rain isn't about that, but still... I think that the main issue with the church today is hypocrisy and lack of life. To fix it, we need to get rid of the doctrines of men and focus on saving people for the kingdom. Too many people are self focused instead, and I include with that focusing on finding and removing their own sins. If we do God's will, He will change us.

JM

Click to expand...

Will the harvest come if the fruits are not ripen?

The bible tells us Christ won't come until His church is purified, perfect.

That isn't what it says. Can you give verses?

And golden wheat doesn't refer to the state of the church, rather the state of the message (that it has gone out to everyone). The state of the church is as usual, as the tares are still there.

JM

Woobadooba,

When you said,

I think we ought to go back to the way it was during the time of the Apostles. But that's just my opinion. Take it for what you will.

What do mean by that? What I am asking is what would you change? What was it like in the time of the Apostles that you are refering to?

I don't think I am allowed to start a thread here, and I don't mean to derail this thread's topic, but I am curious.

Annie

mjona3 said:

That isn't what it says. Can you give verses?

And golden wheat doesn't refer to the state of the church, rather the state of the message (that it has gone out to everyone). The state of the church is as usual, as the tares are still there.

JM

Click to expand...

The wheat represents the true believers. The tares represent everyone else including the lip service christians. The true church are the true believers. Read the Parable of wheat and tares again. The tares will be gethered to be burned up.

The harvest will not come until the wheat turns golden. The bible talks about the church will be purified before the second coming.

2 Peter 3
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

Also read the chapters in Great Controversy on the Times of Trouble. In the end, the golden wheat will be in stark contrast of the black tares.

annie1speed said:

Woobadooba,

When you said,

I think we ought to go back to the way it was during the time of the Apostles. But that's just my opinion. Take it for what you will.

What do mean by that? What I am asking is what would you change? What was it like in the time of the Apostles that you are refering to?

I don't think I am allowed to start a thread here, and I don't mean to derail this thread's topic, but I am curious.

Annie

Click to expand...

Well, pastors worked hard to teach the people how to be soul-winners. Moreover, their gospel was pure. They didn't add all kinds of elements to it that really have nothing to do with what it means to manifest the gifts of the Spirit.

Finally, such ministers of truth were just that, they called sin by its rightful name. They did not tolerate heresy, nor were they passive about dealing with people that were in error. They were firm and uncompromising. Most pastors that I have noticed today do not fit this description. Of course, there are some that do fit this description, but they are few and far between.

The tares get burnt up in the harvest time. I am not the one who doesn't remember the verse.

I am not saying that we shouldn't seek to purify ourselves. That is good and righteous. I am saying that seeking to purify the church is what we are told not to do (and also that it wouldn't work).

JM

woobadooba said:

Well, pastors worked hard to teach the people how to be soul-winners. Moreover, their gospel was pure. They didn't add all kinds of elements to it that really have nothing to do with what it means to manifest the gifts of the Spirit.

Finally, such ministers of truth were just that, they called sin by its rightful name. They did not tolerate heresy, nor were they passive about dealing with people that were in error. They were firm and uncompromising. Most pastors that I have noticed today do not fit this description. Of course, there are some that do fit this description, but they are few and far between.

Click to expand...

Well, Paul did back down when he returned to Jerusalem.

Additionally, these were apostles. A lot of the discussion now is over stuff which people disagree in. If you have people who are uncompromsing about heresy then we have a bunch of smaller churchs. Probably of the size to meet in someones house. Everyone on this forum is a heretic to someone else on this forum, if people were uncompromising about heresy. This might be a good thing, but I think that the large church structure allows for more organized action, which allows us to accomplish more in missionary work and service to man.

Now the fact of the matter is that many of us are willing to allow small heresies, in order to keep the church strong and unified. People who go around acting like they are the Pope doesn't help anything, particularly the Christian church. If you don't like how a Christian church worships, find another one.

JM

mjona3 said:

The tares get burnt up in the harvest time. I am not the one who doesn't remember the verse.

I am not saying that we shouldn't seek to purify ourselves. That is good and righteous. I am saying that seeking to purify the church is what we are told not to do (and also that it wouldn't work).

JM

Click to expand...

Who said we seek to purify the church? God is going to do for Himself.

OntheDL said:

Will the harvest come if the fruits are not ripen?

The bible tells us Christ won't come until His church is purified, perfect.

Click to expand...

What are you saying here? And the Bible explicity says that the purification of the church will come at His return. Not before. Many who are seeking to purify the church are just seeking to drive away good Christians.

JM

mjona3 said:

What are you saying here? And the Bible explicity says that the purification of the church will come at His return. Not before.

JM

Click to expand...

explained to you in post #44.

mjona3 said:

Well, Paul did back down when he returned to Jerusalem.

Additionally, these were apostles. A lot of the discussion now is over stuff which people disagree in. If you have people who are uncompromsing about heresy then we have a bunch of smaller churchs. Probably of the size to meet in someones house. Everyone on this forum is a heretic to someone else on this forum, if people were uncompromising about heresy. This might be a good thing, but I think that the large church structure allows for more organized action, which allows us to accomplish more in missionary work and service to man.

Now the fact of the matter is that many of us are willing to allow small heresies, in order to keep the church strong and unified. People who go around acting like they are the Pope doesn't help anything, particularly the Christian church. If you don't like how a Christian church worships, find another one.

JM

Click to expand...

The type of people that I was referring to in my post are those that Jesus spoke of in Matt. 7:21-23

Some will look at Jesus' words as a forewarning and respond to them in a positive frame of mind, while others will ignore them, and go on living as they always have, not allowing the sanctifying power of the gospel to take hold of their lives. Either way, Jesus' words will come to fulfillment.

By the way, rather than looking for another church to suffice ones taste, as if to imply that Christianity is a shopping center of churches, I think it would be better for a disciple of Jesus Christ to work within the church that he/she is a member of, and try to make a difference in aiding people to come to a right understanding of what constitutes the true gospel of Jesus Christ. There are still a few of us left that really know what the gospel is.

Thanks Woobadooba.

Annie

woobadooba said:

Well, pastors worked hard to teach the people how to be soul-winners. Moreover, their gospel was pure. They didn't add all kinds of elements to it that really have nothing to do with what it means to manifest the gifts of the Spirit.

Finally, such ministers of truth were just that, they called sin by its rightful name. They did not tolerate heresy, nor were they passive about dealing with people that were in error. They were firm and uncompromising. Most pastors that I have noticed today do not fit this description. Of course, there are some that do fit this description, but they are few and far between.

Click to expand...

OntheDL said:

explained to you in post #44.

Click to expand...

Uh, yes, and it doesn't say what you are claiming it says. It urges church members to purify themselves, to hasten the coming the Lord, and to look for it.

I don't see anywhere in that verse which says the Church will be purified before His return. And there are other verses which explicitly say it won't.

Woobs: I also think that we should work within the church. But that means that we do compromise with other's heresy a bit and not kick them out of the church.

JM

mjona3 said:

Woobs: I also think that we should work within the church. But that means that we do compromise with other's heresy a bit and not kick them out of the church.

JM

Click to expand...

Do you realize what you are saying?

Heresy is much more than a minor exegetical error. It is something that is an affront to the gospel of Jesus Christ, and can bring a whole congregation of believers to spiritual ruin if left unaddressed.

You don't have to compromise with heresy to love people.

Truth is, to compromise with heresy for the sake of keeping the peace with the people is to love yourself more than God. You see, when you leave people in such a state, or frame of mind, while knowing the truth and having the means to admonish or correct them, you certainly aren't demonstrating that you have love for them, otherwise you would correct them. And it seems to me that the most common reason why someone wouldn't correct another person in this way would be because he would be fearful of making an enemy. Hence his appearance among the people is what matters most to him. In fact, this is exactly what Pilate did when he faced the opposing crowd before Jesus was crucified. He compromised his right view of Jesus Christ in order to keep the peace with the people that held to the wrong view about Jesus Christ. As a result of this a murderer was set free and Jesus Christ (an innocent man)was crucified (certainly food for thought). Matt. 27:11-24

Now, we may have to address certain issues with patience, but that in no way means we must tolerate the inculcation of heresy within the church. Those who are in the wrong must be corrected before they infect the whole flock with their false doctrine.

There aren't many ways to God. There is only one way to God; and that is through Jesus Christ. If there is someone in the church that is teaching things that are contrary to what Jesus taught, then that person ought to be addressed.

It's not an issue of throwing people out of the church, but one of "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ..." (2Co 10:5)

By the way, compromise does not equal patience. You can be patient with one who is in error, for a time, but not indefinitely. However, To compromise is to agree to waver in ones own belief for the sake of coming to an agreement with someone that holds to a belief that is opposite to his own. On matters of taste this is acceptable; but when it comes to matters of principle, or absolute truth, according to the verse that I quoted above, it isn't acceptable.

mjona3 said:

Uh, yes, and it doesn't say what you are claiming it says. It urges church members to purify themselves, to hasten the coming the Lord, and to look for it.

I don't see anywhere in that verse which says the Church will be purified before His return.

JM

Click to expand...

The whole church is not going to heaven. Being a SDA does not guarantee you a spot up there. The church is the collection of true believers.

And there are other verses which explicitly say it won't.

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? The shaking or the purification of each believer?

woobadooba said:

Do you realize what you are saying?

Heresy is much more than a minor exegetical error. It is something that is an affront to the gospel of Jesus Christ, and can bring a whole congregation of believers to spiritual ruin if left unaddressed.

You don't have to compromise with heresy to love people.

Truth is, to compromise with heresy for the sake of keeping the peace with the people is to love yourself more than God. You see, when you leave people in such a state, or frame of mind, while knowing the truth and having the means to admonish or correct them, you certainly aren't demonstrating that you have love for them, otherwise you would correct them. And it seems to me that the most common reason why someone wouldn't correct another person in this way would be because he would be fearful of making an enemy. Hence his appearance among the people is what matters most to him. In fact, this is exactly what Pilate did when he faced the opposing crowd before Jesus was crucified. He compromised his right view of Jesus Christ in order to keep the peace with the people that held to the wrong view about Jesus Christ. As a result of this a murderer was set free and Jesus Christ (an innocent man)was crucified (certainly food for thought). Matt. 27:11-24

Now, we may have to address certain issues with patience, but that in no way means we must tolerate the inculcation of heresy within the church. Those who are in the wrong must be corrected before they infect the whole flock with their false doctrine.

There aren't many ways to God. There is only one way to God; and that is through Jesus Christ. If there is someone in the church that is teaching things that are contrary to what Jesus taught, then that person ought to be addressed.

It's not an issue of throwing people out of the church, but one of "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ..." (2Co 10:5)

By the way, compromise does not equal patience. You can be patient with one who is in error, for a time, but not indefinitely. However, To compromise is to agree to waver in ones own belief for the sake of coming to an agreement with someone that holds to a belief that is opposite to his own. On matters of taste this is acceptable; but when it comes to matters of principle, or absolute truth, according to the verse that I quoted above, it isn't acceptable.

Click to expand...

Do you know how many people disagree with you? On many points? Are you going to say... you are all heretics, and not consider them Christians?

Even Paul and Peter disagreed. It is natural in Christianity, when there are very deep and complicated ideas, and the light that people have received is not all the same. (I am not saying that there is different Truths, rather that some people are have different components of the Truth)

And I am not saying that you should be completely silent either. I am not here, over the heresies the SDA church has been teaching about jewelry, alcohol, and some other things. But I am also not saying that the good Christian people who think that wearing jewelry is sin should be removed from the church (that the church should be purified ). Now there are some things that I think are different enough that you should worship with someone else, like if you beleive that Sunday is the correct day to worship on (and I would try to convince you of the Truth of the Sabbath).

But I wouldn't say that you were a heretic, and try to kick you out of the church.

JM

OntheDL said:

The whole church is not going to heaven. Being a SDA does not guarantee you a spot up there. The church is the collection of true believers.


What are you talking about? The shaking or the purification of each believer?

Click to expand...

I don't think that being associated with any organized Christian church will get you to heaven.

Do you think that heaven will mostly be made up of members of SDA church? Or even that those who are truly following Christ will mostly be SDA at the time of His return? I don't think so, I see a lot of adventists who have the doctrine right, but are missing the crucial component of Love. Some of our brothers in other denominations might have some doctrines wrong (even as serious as the Sabbath!), but still are good Christians, who I expect to be in heaven.

JM

Double posting madness!

JM

mjona3 said:

Do you know how many people disagree with you? On many points? Are you going to say... you are all heretics, and not consider them Christians?

Even Paul and Peter disagreed. It is natural in Christianity, when there are very deep and complicated ideas, and the light that people have received is not all the same. (I am not saying that there is different Truths, rather that some people are have different components of the Truth)

And I am not saying that you should be completely silent either. I am not here, over the heresies the SDA church has been teaching about jewelry, alcohol, and some other things. But I am also not saying that the good Christian people who think that wearing jewelry is sin should be removed from the church (that the church should be purified ). Now there are some things that I think are different enough that you should worship with someone else, like if you beleive that Sunday is the correct day to worship on (and I would try to convince you of the Truth of the Sabbath).

But I wouldn't say that you were a heretic, and try to kick you out of the church.

JM

Click to expand...

I already told you in my post that I am not referring to minor exegetical problems (I'm not talking about jewelry, or the theater here) when I speak of heresy; rather, I am referring to outright false doctrine, such as the idea that humans have evolved, which is a denial of a literal six day creation.

Ideas like these can not only cause people to turn away from God altogether, and thus become atheists, but they can also corrupt an entire congregation, and encourage people to implement a higher critical hermeneutic (the wrong kind) when studying the Bible. This, of course, would lead people to believe that many of the stories such as Jonah are merely fables. Such people even go so far as to deny that the miracles spoken of in the Bible really happened.

As for your argument that Paul and Peter disagreed with each other, it does not apply within this context, because neither one of them were heretics. And as for their so-called disagreement, it really wasn't a disagreement. Peter knew that what he did was wrong before he did it. This explains why he did not argue with Paul after being rebuked for siding with the Jews while refusing to sit with the Gentiles. It wasn't an issue of Peter teaching falsehood, but one of him being a hypocrite. And Paul was well within his right to rebuke Peter for this. Peter was a hypocrite in this case, not a heretic. There is a big difference.

It seems to me that you really need to spend some more time reading the scriptures, so that you will come to see that heresy was something that was never tolerated by God's people, except for when they were in rebellion against God. The idea that we should compromise with heretics is not Biblical.

You say that we ought to compromise with heretics, while providing no scriptural basis for such a teaching. Yet, I have provided you with Biblical proof that, without a shadow of a doubt, states that we should not do this. So as far as I am concerned this is where the discussion ends.

By the way, I never said we should throw these people out of the church. You inferred that. I said we should correct these people. And I will also add that if they refuse to accept the truth as it is in Jesus Christ they should not be allowed to teach in the church, since they would endanger the spirituality of the church by inculcating false doctrine.

Here is an example of how Paul instructed Timothy to regard heretics:

"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some."(2Ti 2:16-18)

Notice how he says nothing about compromising with them; rather, he instructs Timothy to shun their teachings. In othwer words, the idea here is that God's people should have nothing to do with the teachings of heretics. So what does this say about pastors that allow false teachers to teach in their church? It tells me that they really don't care about their flock!