PDA

View Full Version : Cultural Christianity



ProjectPeter
Apr 27th 2007, 12:06 AM
This will take an hour of your time but you can watch this or download the MP3 and simply listen while you do what you do on line. I would that all hear and heed what this preacher says but what I want to do here is have folks listen and discuss what he said.

I'll give folks time to listen to it and then post their comments. If in a day or two that don't happen then shoot... I'll start myself. :)

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=52906154239

Quickened
Apr 27th 2007, 01:14 AM
His point of the American church being this way is completely spot on. In my readings of churches throughout the world we have become terribily complacent and worldly in our approach and our attempt to increase church attendence.

The very verses he uses are ones i often use when i discuss scripture. If we actually think about it its alarming.

The gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life and there are FEW that find it. When I look at the numbers of our Christian population and then i look at God's word which says "few" i see a contrast. Immediately what comes to mind is that there are many "believers" that dont know God's word. There are many that claim Christian that arent.

This message is especially great because it really calls us all out into accountability for our actions. Are we really putting God first and foremost in our lives? What are we putting before God?

In 1 Samuel 2:29 we see Eli, who appeared to be a Godly man earlier on, actually put his own sons before God. Thats where Eli failed. Eli loved his sons that he never rebuked their abominable actions and this made God bring forth results due to all of these things.

People focus on a God that they paint as lovey-dovey. A god that cant do anything but love and forgive. This message is a wake up call to that.

Johndigger
Apr 27th 2007, 01:16 AM
People focus on a God that they paint as lovey-dovey. A god that cant do anything but love and forgive. This message is a wake up call to that.

Indeed. A lovey-dovey God. People have basically made a God that they want.

JD

Quickened
Apr 27th 2007, 01:19 AM
Indeed. A lovey-dovey God. People have basically made a God that they want.

JD

Why do you think that is? I've noticed alot of believers take importance off the OT. Instead they feel now that Christ was crucified that the OT is irrelevant somehow. I think that is where we see a Just and Holy God that cant stand sin and we see what happens to the unrepentant because of such wrath.

God is the same yesterday, today and forever!

dljc
Apr 27th 2007, 01:22 AM
I intend on using this and giving a copy to anyone that wants one! I agree this is a wakeup call for anyone who says they are a Christian. Just as he says we are to examine ourselves. We should know the scriptures well enough and our walk be close enough that we know whether the man speaking from the pulpit is telling the truth or a lie. I have preached this very thing myself. You aren't going to know that if you don't get in the Word! A T-Shirt doesn't make you a Christian. The path and the gate are narrow, just as he says. Are you sure you're on the right path?

Johndigger
Apr 27th 2007, 01:24 AM
Why do you think that is? I've noticed alot of believers take importance off the OT.

I guess the main reason would be that society is becoming desensitized to religion. And religion has thought that the only way of keeping people in their Churches is telling them what they want to hear.

Not that they just decided this all one day. But it certainly seems to be a process that is happenning, gradually.

Even Traditionalist Catholics are becoming harder to find, in merry old England at least.


The OT emphasizes God's Justice a lot more and to ignore the OT because of the "horrible stuff" this is a natural consequence.


JD

Quickened
Apr 27th 2007, 01:33 AM
I guess the main reason would be that society is becoming desensitized to religion. And religion has thought that the only way of keeping people in their Churches is telling them what they want to hear.



Reminds me of Second Timothy 4:3. People want to have their ears tickled. Sermons like this and even the type that Jonathon Edwards gave make people vastly uncomfortable. It seems that its all about becoming spiritually self medicated.

Johndigger
Apr 27th 2007, 01:35 AM
The amount of people going to hell scares me (And rightly so.) It puts things in perspective.

JD

Mercy4Me
Apr 27th 2007, 01:57 AM
I intend on using this and giving a copy to anyone that wants one! I agree this is a wakeup call for anyone who says they are a Christian. Just as he says we are to examine ourselves. We should know the scriptures well enough and our walk be close enough that we know whether the man speaking from the pulpit is telling the truth or a lie. I have preached this very thing myself. You aren't going to know that if you don't get in the Word! A T-Shirt doesn't make you a Christian. The path and the gate are narrow, just as he says. Are you sure you're on the right path?

One of the things that struck me the most was his reminder that it's not just the gate that is narrow, but the path, as well. We cannot enter the narrow gate, but walk the broad path.

I wish everyone professing Christianity could hear this sermon.

Whispering Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 02:00 AM
One of the best sermons I have heard. It actually convicted me to stand up to the nonsense that has been going on in my church.

Jesusinmyheart
Apr 27th 2007, 02:10 AM
LOL Whispering, if it wasn't such a sad topic i'd ask you to take a video camera with you to show us how you overturn some tables at your church.

JenniferBerry
Apr 27th 2007, 02:29 AM
It is a wonderfull and convicting sermon that I think we all need to listen to and apply to our lives. God is truly speaking to his people through this man and the question is who is hearing. Even I am challenged with the words that I know are true. My prayer is God give me strength to do what I know I should do.

Whispering Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 02:38 AM
LOL Whispering, if it wasn't such a sad topic i'd ask you to take a video camera with you to show us how you overturn some tables at your church.

Actually, this is one of the hardest things I have ever done. I have actually grown very close to many of these people and come to love them.

But, as Paul Washer said, I am not there to be popular or liked. I am there to stand up for the truth of God's Word, no matter what.

miepie
Apr 27th 2007, 07:39 AM
Here in the Netherlands it's probably not much different than in the USA. When I go to church I see half dressed kids and adult women with mini skirts...... :rolleyes: They say the trend here is to do what you want in the week and then confess on Sundays and sin back in the week again.......
My own parents are praying "just out of habit before dinner", that's all they do as far as I can see.... There is nothing left of their faith and looking back they were good Christians, raised me Christian, but have lost their way completely..... :cry: Whenever we talk about this with them my dad gets angry and walks away and my mum simply doesn't listen to us....... they probably wouldn;t even understand what this guy is talking about and if they do, they just put it aside them and forget about it.
I threw out all my non-Christian music when I rededicated my life to Christ. I had a huge collection of one group but I couldn't face it listening to it anymore, as it was dishonouring to Christ. I started over with all Christian music, and every now and then we buy a secular album that we know is safe, or secular music from a Christian artist..... but I still love Christian music more than anything. I am also to some people "overreacting" when I pick out my clothes to buy.... I refuse to buy anything short, or showing something of my body. When I am inside in the house that's another thing, and I wear shorts there, but as soon as I set one foot out of the door I have changed my clothings into long skirts and no showing t-shirts. Charles says it's ok to wear shorts outside but I disagree. I did it one time last summer and felt very uncomfortable in it.
The same with books..... I love to read, but I only read Christian books these days..... Biblestudybooks or books like "Pilgrim's Progress" or "In His Steps".

What I am trying to say with this post is that if you really want to walk that narrow path, you can start with these things I told you about...... I am far from perfect and I have no intention to say that I am always on that path..... I fail daily, but pick up my cross and start over again on my journey on that path.......

It's like Paul said..... it's a choice you make.... count the cost and make that choice completely..... that's the only way you should go as a Christian......

Love you,
Mieke :kiss:

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 03:23 PM
‘In light of this website, my comments toward this website may be misunderstood, and it may even cause some of you to get angry with me, and you may not even agree or like what I am about to say, but I am accountable to God in presenting the truth, so I ask that we pray now for God’s enablement with what I am about to write…. I’ve spent many a sleepless nights troubled over America and this site as to the messaging it allows to display, and I have great concern that many of you do not know God’s salvation as you profess…’


//

OK folks… this is how this ‘preaching’ starts, and so I chose to write in the same manor… Notice anything glaring to you?

I appreciate the full Gospel, yet if one has to yell, if one has to elevate himself above the crowd, and if one has to set himself up as being God’s authority as he did with his opening 5 minutes, then I quickly judge the presenter and test him to the Word.


I listened to about 20 minutes into the message before I had to drop of for con-call… but to me, his shock tactics and condemnation without including himself, sets himself as declaring in a back-handed way to being God’s spokesperson – almost asking his listener that if you dare to disagree, then God’s judgment will befall on you -- when if his messaging were less about his views toward the audience and more upon the truth… I’d probably have gone back to finish the sermon after my call than to write this little ditty and move on…

starynite
Apr 27th 2007, 03:53 PM
Paul Washer has many other great sermons. His Home Page is www.heartcrymissionary.com. His wife Charo has a testimony everyone who thinks they are a christian should listen to. I appreciate this man of God very much.

threebigrocks
Apr 27th 2007, 04:01 PM
There is nothing backhanded about it. He spoke and backed up with scripture. He spoke truth, God's truth.

If we do not walk in the light of Christ, that narrow path to the narrow gate, we will not spend eternity in heaven. That includes all of humanity, not just those John deems unworthy.

The American church is indeed a mess. I've heard his statistics more times than I care to from preachers and others than this guy.

It is truth. It is convicting. And conviction can keep us on the path with Christ.

Pilgrimtozion
Apr 27th 2007, 04:02 PM
Sounds to me like he is making a very accurate assesment of where the Church in the Western world is at and backs it up very well with Scripture.

I find there to be a striking resemblance between our culture and what he says about truth having to be sugar-coated if it's even allowed to be spoken at all. Have we become so post-modern that we have forgotten that preachers are supposed to be mouth-pieces of God? We have forgotten the concept of spiritual authority and thus cannot accept it if somebody steps out in the prophetic anointing God has placed on him for a specific occasion.

I'm very thankful for the message and wish there were more preachers like this out there...

starynite
Apr 27th 2007, 04:06 PM
You need to listen to some of his other messages before you make this judgement. Paul Washer is a very humble man and throughly includes himself. Also why is it that a preacher cannot get excited about the message anymore. Paul Washer is a quiet mild mannered man but when he gets up to preach the emotions of God Himself come through him. Don't you think Isaiah and the other prophets got loud? You have it all wrong about him.

ProjectPeter
Apr 27th 2007, 04:14 PM
‘In light of this website, my comments toward this website may be misunderstood, and it may even cause some of you to get angry with me, and you may not even agree or like what I am about to say, but I am accountable to God in presenting the truth, so I ask that we pray now for God’s enablement with what I am about to write…. I’ve spent many a sleepless nights troubled over America and this site as to the messaging it allows to display, and I have great concern that many of you do not know God’s salvation as you profess…’


//

OK folks… this is how this ‘preaching’ starts, and so I chose to write in the same manor… Notice anything glaring to you?

I appreciate the full Gospel, yet if one has to yell, if one has to elevate himself above the crowd, and if one has to set himself up as being God’s authority as he did with his opening 5 minutes, then I quickly judge the presenter and test him to the Word.


I listened to about 20 minutes into the message before I had to drop of for con-call… but to me, his shock tactics and condemnation without including himself, sets himself as declaring in a back-handed way to being God’s spokesperson – almost asking his listener that if you dare to disagree, then God’s judgment will befall on you -- when if his messaging were less about his views toward the audience and more upon the truth… I’d probably have gone back to finish the sermon after my call than to write this little ditty and move on…
Interesting RbG! I actually figured that this would very much be a topic that you and I would actually agree on. Indeed a surprise!

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 04:45 PM
Interesting RbG! I actually figured that this would very much be a topic that you and I would actually agree on. Indeed a surprise!

Oh I don't have a problem with the topic, just approach and delivery.....

The most effective way to deliver the gospel is not by might or by intellect, but through humility and fear... IE

1 Corinthians 2:1-5
1 And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God.
2 For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.
3 I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling,
4 and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,
5 so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.


An effective preacher can challenge without threatning, can charge, but include himself within the charge... To see the lostness not only of the people, but within himself as well...

Setting up his message by saying he will be hated for what he is about to say is a very good sales technique... and being around this every day... that's what I saw....


The message of 'the way is narrow...' then you can say that you and I agree. The way in which it was delivered... ahh so subtle to discern, but I saw one who was selling instead of compassionately presenting... then this is where we disagree then.




But again, my 2cents

threebigrocks
Apr 27th 2007, 04:49 PM
How does verse 4 say that Paul Washer was too overboard?

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 05:08 PM
I'm not going to go any further about Paul Washer... my points are that I saw him "selling" within his opening... And then when he got an AMEN from the congregation... what was his response back to them?


To me, he judged their collective AMEN as insincerity... How does he know????


So my view is that I'm not a fan of his style, and I see his style as being effective for many who know the topic, for their ears are tickled with things they want to hear, and ineffective to those of us who are drawn to see his words more than the topic... and by the way -- stating that he will be hated before he even presents -- is a very subtle and sly way to set himself up for success... IMO...

And I agree that churches today have so much world in them, and by my view so does this preacher.... but to be effective, I think humility and fear are a key ingredient in presenting and receiving the Gospel.


If I may ask, I've given words as to why I'm not gravitated to his style.... so which words that he used that spoke to you that say you like him?

jesuslover1968
Apr 27th 2007, 05:24 PM
I think this was a great message! I burnt it to cd and let my husband listen to it last night.
I think every person, young and old, should hear this message. I didn't see the preacher as self-preserving, nor more condemning toward others and not himself. he even made a statement about how he couldn't even trust his own heart....
God Bless.

ProjectPeter
Apr 27th 2007, 05:24 PM
What I see was a man delivering a message to the church much like Paul did when he wrote the book of Galatians. I'm betting that frosted some shorts when that letter was read to the folks there. I would dare say that many a folk questioned the delivery. Then there was that whole way Paul chastised the Corinth church. Shoot... Paul was every bit a user of such techniques in communication.

Galatians 4:16 Have I therefore become your enemy by telling you the truth?

This guy is speaking from experience. He isn't well liked by many. He's too "hard" and he "yells" and etc. And it well may have been his last shot at speaking this message to that particular group of people. And he mentions as well that yes... he got their attention and that was his desire.

Again RbG.... show me one letter that Paul wrote that mirrors that letter to the Galatia church? There isn't one. He starts right off laying out by what authority he was speaking and then he lays right into them.

Galatians 1:6 ¶I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;
7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ.

I can hear the hollering when that letter was read! And you know... I think the church today (broadly speaking) is very much following a different gospel. So I find the shock the snot out of them tactic a very appropriate one. There is a time it is needed and this day in time... I think it is long past due truth be told.

jesuslover1968
Apr 27th 2007, 05:31 PM
I can hear the hollering when that letter was read! And you know... I think the church today (broadly speaking) is very much following a different gospel. So I find the shock the snot out of them tactic a very appropriate one. There is a time it is needed and this day in time... I think it is long past due truth be told.



Amen! :agree: with my whole being...it is long overdue, and I pray this message is spread throughout the world, and especially here in the U.S. where we have only been shown a warm and fuzzy Jesus rather than the whole.

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 06:42 PM
What I see was a man delivering a message to the church much like Paul did when he wrote the book of Galatians. I'm betting that frosted some shorts when that letter was read to the folks there. I would dare say that many a folk questioned the delivery. Then there was that whole way Paul chastised the Corinth church. Shoot... Paul was every bit a user of such techniques in communication.

Galatians 4:16 Have I therefore become your enemy by telling you the truth?

This guy is speaking from experience. He isn't well liked by many. He's too "hard" and he "yells" and etc. And it well may have been his last shot at speaking this message to that particular group of people. And he mentions as well that yes... he got their attention and that was his desire.

Again RbG.... show me one letter that Paul wrote that mirrors that letter to the Galatia church? There isn't one. He starts right off laying out by what authority he was speaking and then he lays right into them.

Galatians 1:6 ¶I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;
7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ.

I can hear the hollering when that letter was read! And you know... I think the church today (broadly speaking) is very much following a different gospel. So I find the shock the snot out of them tactic a very appropriate one. There is a time it is needed and this day in time... I think it is long past due truth be told.


You are too funny... I stated that I didn't like this man's approach but agreed that the narrow path is an important message -- and yet you still find fault... Hey this is how I read him... You know we aren't debating a view of scripture but another man's approach... Again, you've chosen not to see that we are in agreement in the need to preach messages like this [see my signature that I've had since posting here], yet you desire to defend this man's approach instead of seeing my agreement to the need to preach the full gospel today... Is he your brother-in-law?:rofl:

PP... I've given my opinion... so that's were I'll leave it...

Teke
Apr 27th 2007, 07:48 PM
This will take an hour of your time but you can watch this or download the MP3 and simply listen while you do what you do on line. I would that all hear and heed what this preacher says but what I want to do here is have folks listen and discuss what he said.

I'll give folks time to listen to it and then post their comments. If in a day or two that don't happen then shoot... I'll start myself. :)

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=52906154239

Well, first I have to agree with RBG on the delivery. If he does this in those countries he spoke of, they might see him as an American terrorist trying to start a holy war. Then he'd wind up like Rick Warren trying to get into Syria.:P

I think he should have stayed with his holiness message throughout and it would have likely been more beneficial to the youth he was preaching to.
If I knew my youth were listening to this guy, I'd stop them.
But I disagree with much of what he mixed in his message, such as Calvinism TD, that there is no such thing as a carnal Christian, and he doesn't sound to sure about judgment.

It's no wonder that Christian youth in America are so confused.:spin:

karenoka27
Apr 27th 2007, 07:58 PM
I honestly thought we would all be in agreement that America needs to wake up and possibly just the way Paul Washer did it.
I pray that he truly reached the hearts of many of the teens there that day and also those who watch his video.
I know I say this over and over again, but I teach a high school Sunday school class. I have been for some time preparing them for baptism as they all tell me they are saved. After listening to this message, my eyes have been opened. I have not seen changes in these kids...I see the exact attitude that Paul speaks of...Christianity on a tshirt. I am so saddened by this. I am taking this message of Paul's and I am teaching it to my class. We will take our time going through Matthew 7:13-27. I really question now whether these teens are saved...and I am praising God that I didn't just let them be baptized and have them walk the rest of their lives thinking they were saved to only one day here "I don't know you...":cry:

Centurionoflight
Apr 27th 2007, 08:26 PM
From his sermon.



I want to tell you something. If
you made a decision to follow Jesus Christ, if you made a decision to get saved in these last two
days, I want to tell you something. If it was genuine, it will last.


If after a few weeks you go
right back into the world, live like the world, act like the world, I want you to know something,
you didn’t get anything here this weekend.


You got emotion, that’s about it. If you really got
something from the Lord, I want you to know something, it will last.

I have to disagree; it is not about salvation; like he is trying to make it.

Example: We are not to live by bread alone.

We eat every day; if those young poeple are not fed doctrine every day; they will go back into the world.

They will return to a human view point.

Does that mean they was not saved? NO!!!
They are eternally saved.

They are not being fed truth; instead they are fed in church a good emotion; and in the world they are fed satanic good and evil.

So instead of bashing the kids with the "you might not be saved guilt trip" perhaps he needs to bash the pastors for not feeding their flock the milk and meat of the word on a daily basis..


He is targeting the wrong Crowd.

Whispering Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 08:33 PM
So instead of bashing the kids with the "you might not be saved guilt trip" perhaps he needs to bash the pastors for not feeding their flock the milk and meat of the word on a daily basis..

He is targeting the wrong Crowd.

While I disagree with other parts of your post, I think you do have a valid point here.

But I didn't take the message as being a "just for teens" one, but to ALL of those who profess to be Christians.

Centurionoflight
Apr 27th 2007, 08:47 PM
Whispering Grace


While I disagree with other parts of your post, I think you do have a valid point here.

But I didn't take the message as being a "just for teens" one, but to ALL of those who profess to be Christians.
If they are not taught doctrine; they will never mature in spirit to produce good fruit.

A mature plant produces fruit; a sprout or seedling can not produce good fruit. The teens in that room are for the most part sprouts, I would say many of them have no maturity in their doctrine.

So how can they produce any good fruit?

Oh yeah; the human view says we can replace the good fruit for a little legalism;
if they dont hit the dance club; avoid certain types of music; avoid certain tv shows; and have the gals not wear jeans or shorts; then that some how impresses Jesus enough to know them.

That is the good fruit.

That is not any sort of focus on the Spirit or Christ; rather its a focus on the world.

God is a spirit; thus the fruit also is of the spirit;

You dont get fruit of the spirit by being a paper cutout christain; who looks acts and walks in the same dull manner as other cut out christians.

His focus is on the flesh; not the spirit.

jesuslover1968
Apr 27th 2007, 08:56 PM
I was listening to another one of his sermons a little bit ago, and he talks about how it is the preachers and the pastors who are to blame. I still liked him. I liked the way he preached, and I liked what he had to say. He preached the Word of God and of course that is going to be offensive to some.
I think he wasn't necessarily targeting kids. I think the kids he was preaching to needed to hear what he had to say, in just the way he said it. In this day and age, our kids have been so babied around that they don't want to hear the truth, but only what they want to accept as the truth, which is pretty much anything that pleases them and nothing that doesn't. If he starts with those young kids, he is starting with the next generation that will be our pastors, preachers, teachers and evangelists. That is a good thing, as maybe they will preach, teach and evangelize with the truth and not the lies that are so prevalent these days.
These youth meetings that kids go to are all hyped up for the most part, and many are just a good ole rock and roll concert with a little "be good" speech thrown in for good measure. I would stand up for this man and what he is trying to accomplish any day of the week, from what I have heard from him so far, and I think others should, as well. God Bless.

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=32607155852

Ninna
Apr 27th 2007, 08:56 PM
Where there is salvation, there is change. No matter what age....we will desire the things of God. If that has not happened, it is correct to tell someone to examine themselves......

I agree we need to be fed. That is where we need to be taught. What has happened to discipling new Christians? What has happened in our churches to prevent teaching the word of God? Instead of programs and seeker-friendly events, our teachers and preachers should be teaching the Bible...sound doctrine instead of the fluffy, everything is wonderful, feel-good Christianity that is being taught.

Souled Out
Apr 27th 2007, 08:58 PM
So how can they produce any good fruit?

Oh yeah; the human view says we can replace the good fruit for a little legalism;
if they dont hit the dance club; avoid certain types of music; avoid certain tv shows; and have the gals not wear jeans or shorts; then that some how impresses Jesus enough to know them.

That is the good fruit.

That is not any sort of focus on the Spirit or Christ; rather its a focus on the world.

God is a spirit; thus the fruit also is of the spirit;

You dont get fruit of the spirit by being a paper cutout christain; who looks acts and walks in the same dull manner as other cut out christians.

His focus is on the flesh; not the spirit.

CoF, that was awesome. You hit the nail on the head. :)

Fallenbrooke
Apr 27th 2007, 09:06 PM
I don't know. I started listening and about 25 minutes into it I had heard it all before. Not to mention that his voice kept putting me to sleep. Every generation or so this all ebbs and flows: God is lovey-dovey – No, God is wrath and fury – God is lovey-dovey – No, God is wrath and fury. It always seems there is someone out there who wants to swing the pendulum to one extreme end or the other.

karenoka27
Apr 27th 2007, 09:09 PM
I have a question...what are the fruits? Are they at all visible?
Are the changes made in us as we grow in the Lord visible? I once was blind but now I see...I once drank but now I don't...I once went to nightclubs but now I don't...I once took drugs...but now I don't...and all of that changed "before" I met any paper doll cutout Christians..that was by the Spirit of God working in me.
So if I don't see any change in my students, no desire to walk with the Lord but rather walk in the world and its ways, I would be considered a legalistic judge if I were to question their salvation...or should I for the sake of those who don't want us to "judge" our children, just assume they were saved because they said a prayer or walked an aisle.
All I want to know is at what point are we allowed to be concerned that maybe ...just maybe some of these teens really aren't saved?

Teke
Apr 27th 2007, 09:21 PM
All I want to know is at what point are we allowed to be concerned that maybe ...just maybe some of these teens really aren't saved?


Lord have mercy. I hope we never believe that salvation in Christ isn't available for our teens.
And let's not forget their parents have a part in this as well.

karenoka27
Apr 27th 2007, 09:22 PM
I did not say that salvation isn't available to our teens...I said that my concern is that are we letting our children believe that a prayer and a walk down the aisle is all there is to it?

dljc
Apr 27th 2007, 09:34 PM
For those who feel it's the pastors fault or the parents fault. I'd like to remind you of the parable of the ten virgins (Matthew 25:1-13). The pastor and the parents and anyone else can preach till they're blue in the face. But if the listener isn't listening, it falls on deaf ears.

Paul Washer included himself in the very beginning of this message. When he spoke about the danger of preaching. If he was delivering the truth, then he was not included. But if he was lying there was greater condemnation on him than those who hear the message. How do you not see that as including himself? Every time you post something on this message board you believe it to be the truth don't you? Am I speaking the truth in that statement or not? Why are you different than he is?

Teke
Apr 27th 2007, 09:36 PM
I did not say that salvation isn't available to our teens...I said that my concern is that are we letting our children believe that a prayer and a walk down the aisle is all there is to it?

As I said, their parents have a part in this as well. They are the "we".

Whispering Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 09:38 PM
For those who feel it's the pastors fault or the parents fault. I'd like to remind you of the parable of the ten virgins (Matthew 25:1-13). The pastor and the parents and anyone else can preach till they're blue in the face. But if the listener isn't listening, it falls on deaf ears.

You are absolutely correct, but in this "seeker-friendly" atmosphere kids are raised in today, it's anyone's guess what these kids are being taught.

If it's anything like the stuff that comes from the pulpit at my church, it's no wonder they look just like the world. The churches look just like the world!

Fallenbrooke
Apr 27th 2007, 09:38 PM
I did not say that salvation isn't available to our teens...I said that my concern is that are we letting our children believe that a prayer and a walk down the aisle is all there is to it?

I think that is all there is to it. The rest is the process of growing closer to God. None of us can judge whether or not child was sincere in asking Christ to become his Savior. Only the progress of his life will tell the real story. I asked Christ to be my Lord and Savior when I was 5. Was I sincere? Was it a landmark in my life? Well I can tell you that I remember the scene vividly. And even though my life took some downturns...some serious ones...I am at a place now where I have such a hunger for God that I am replacing my other vices with time with Him because I want to ...not because I believe it is right.

Teke
Apr 27th 2007, 09:39 PM
For those who feel it's the pastors fault or the parents fault. I'd like to remind you of the parable of the ten virgins (Matthew 25:1-13). The pastor and the parents and anyone else can preach till they're blue in the face. But if the listener isn't listening, it falls on deaf ears.



I don't know any youth who are deaf to their parents, whether they be good parents or bad parents. :dunno:

karenoka27
Apr 27th 2007, 09:41 PM
As I said, their parents have a part in this as well. They are the "we".
I'm sorry, I misunderstood. We do have a part..but in the end every human being must choose for themselves who they will serve..what a shame to think of any parent especially a Christian one sending their child to hell.

Romans 1:19-"Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"

Centurionoflight
Apr 27th 2007, 09:42 PM
karenoka27



I have a question...what are the fruits? Are they at all visible?
Are the changes made in us as we grow in the Lord visible? I once was blind but now I see...I once drank but now I don't...I once went to nightclubs but now I don't...I once took drugs...but now I don't...and all of that changed "before" I met any paper doll cutout Christians..that was by the Spirit of God working in me.
So if I don't see any change in my students, no desire to walk with the Lord but rather walk in the world and its ways, I would be considered a legalistic judge if I were to question their salvation...or should I for the sake of those who don't want us to "judge" our children, just assume they were saved because they said a prayer or walked an aisle.
All I want to know is at what point are we allowed to be concerned that maybe ...just maybe some of these teens really aren't saved?
1 cor 1
18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Do they understand doctrine?
Are they growing in the spirit?

This is only a thing that those of a living spirit can do; that life is salvation.

The testing and application of that growth is the fruit.

dljc
Apr 27th 2007, 09:44 PM
I don't know any youth who are deaf to their parents, whether they be good parents or bad parents. :dunno:You mean to tell me that you don't see where a parent will instruct their child not to do something and they do it anyway? :o What difference does it make, if the child feels they are basically forced to go to church because the parents want them to. Are the really listening to the message? If they aren't are they truly saved?

Fallenbrooke
Apr 27th 2007, 09:47 PM
This is only a thing that those of a living spirit can do; that life is salvation.

The testing and application of that growth is the fruit.

So what if, at some point, a person sputters out and appears on the surface to have stopped growing for a month, a year, 10 years? What do you make of their Salvation then? Was it ever legitimate? Just wondering what litmus a person might use to accurately test a persons Salvation.

Centurionoflight
Apr 27th 2007, 09:50 PM
Fallenbrooke


So what if, at some point, a person sputters out and appears on the surface to have stopped growing for a month, a year, 10 years? What do you make of their Salvation then? Was it ever legitimate? Just wondering what litmus a person might use to accurately test a persons Salvation.


It is a birth of the spirit.;

If we sputter out and live in a way our parents dislike;
If we Go down a path our parents wished us not to go down
Does that mean our mom never birthed us?

Fallenbrooke
Apr 27th 2007, 09:54 PM
Fallenbrooke


It is a birth of the spirit.;

If we sputter out and live in a way our parents dislike;
If we Go down a path our parents wished us not to go down
Does that mean our mom never birthed us?

Alright then we are on the same page. Some say that if the "fruits of the Spirit" are not present on one's life, he was never saved.

Centurionoflight
Apr 27th 2007, 09:59 PM
Fallenbrooke



Some say that if the "fruits of the Spirit" are not present on one's life, he was never saved.
It is not our place to say such things.

A believer caught up in the world can outwardly appear as a unbeliever.

God knows the heart.

karenoka27
Apr 27th 2007, 10:10 PM
karenoka27

1 cor 1
18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Do they understand doctrine?
Are they growing in the spirit?

This is only a thing that those of a living spirit can do; that life is salvation.

The testing and application of that growth is the fruit.

Thank you..and I agree...but then I also agree that Paul Washer was right on because I read his transcript again this morning after watching the video...when he said, that we must each examine ouselves...

Psalm 26:2-"Examine me, O LORD, and prove me; try my reins and my heart."

2 Corinthians 13: 5Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?"

Teke
Apr 27th 2007, 10:13 PM
You mean to tell me that you don't see where a parent will instruct their child not to do something and they do it anyway? :o

Does that mean they didn't *listen* to their parents?
And if they don't obey the rules of the parents, they know the consequences. They likely *listened* to that part also.


What difference does it make, if the child feels they are basically forced to go to church because the parents want them to.

It makes a difference to the parents.


Are the really listening to the message? If they aren't are they truly saved?

Even if they don't listen to a message, their parents brought them, which is living the faith. Youth are taught not only by words, but by actions.;)

ProjectPeter
Apr 27th 2007, 10:16 PM
You are too funny... I stated that I didn't like this man's approach but agreed that the narrow path is an important message -- and yet you still find fault... Hey this is how I read him... You know we aren't debating a view of scripture but another man's approach... Again, you've chosen not to see that we are in agreement in the need to preach messages like this [see my signature that I've had since posting here], yet you desire to defend this man's approach instead of seeing my agreement to the need to preach the full gospel today... Is he your brother-in-law?:rofl:

PP... I've given my opinion... so that's were I'll leave it...Um... likening the guy to a "salesman" and "worldly" etc... that is a wee more than complaining about the approach there RbG! Is he your Mother-In-Law? ;)

dljc
Apr 27th 2007, 10:23 PM
Does that mean they didn't *listen* to their parents?
And if they don't obey the rules of the parents, they know the consequences. They likely *listened* to that part also.The same is being said by this preacher only it's concerning the Word of God. Does that make it the parents fault or the preachers fault?



It makes a difference to the parents.



Even if they don't listen to a message, their parents brought them, which is living the faith. Youth are taught not only by words, but by actions.;)You haven't seen what I've seen being said in the CA forum by ex-Christians. They feel that it was all part of a brainwashing technique. What did they learn?

Jesus wants us to willingly seek the kingdom of God.

Matthew 6:33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

If they aren't seeking they aren't learning.

Teke
Apr 27th 2007, 10:34 PM
The same is being said by this preacher only it's concerning the Word of God. Does that make it the parents fault or the preachers fault?

Is there a fault finding mission going on in the church......



You haven't seen what I've seen being said in the CA forum by ex-Christians. They feel that it was all part of a brainwashing technique. What did they learn?

Maybe it was a brainwashing technique, I see plenty motivational speaker technique used consistently.


Jesus wants us to willingly seek the kingdom of God.

:amen:



If they aren't seeking they aren't learning.

Maybe they are seeking to learn more about themselves before they seek something else. Maybe they need to learn about themselves and the world first. I know that is in my church's educational curriculum for youth.:)

Mercy4Me
Apr 27th 2007, 10:40 PM
Well, I'm going to add a couple of brief comments here...

I agree that there is a time frame after conversion where we are "baby" Christians...we are fed milk and not meat. We can't expect a large, strong, healthy fruit-bearing vine to grow instantly! But I am also of the opinion that we cater too much to society's typical "teen" image...rebellious, worldly, anything but godly. I've known too many teens who were completely sold out for the Lord, with the passion and zeal of youth...that have gone on in their faith in their maturity. I don't think the message he was preaching was at all too hard for them. And Karen, I so appreciate your burden for your students! As a parent, I wish I knew someone who cared so fiercely for the souls of my children. It's hard going it alone, sometimes.

Another thing I'd like to mention is that fruit is visible...it's not just something happening inside the branch. Jesus said very plainly that we WILL know people by their fruits...that means it must be something we can see from outside. Somehow our faith will come through and be visible to others...appearance? attitudes? priorities? choices?

And one last thing, then I'll stop...I was very blessed by Washer's statement that it's not whether or not we know Christ, but whether He knows us that will allow us to enter heaven...much the same as if he were to drive up to the White House and ask to be admitted because he knows George Bush. If George Bush knows him, then that's a different story. Unfortunately, there will be people that were sure Christ knew them, but He'll tell them to depart from Him, because He, in fact, did not know them. That statement was about religious people, who were busy doing things for Him but not obeying Him.

I appreciate the dialogue going on here...I hope this will wake us all up to our need to know AND be known by Christ!

ProjectPeter
Apr 27th 2007, 10:42 PM
Well... safe to say that I've only had one surprise in the mix! Everything else is going along just as I figured it would.

jesuslover1968
Apr 27th 2007, 10:44 PM
Well... safe to say that I've only had one surprise in the mix! Everything else is going along just as I figured it would.


care to enlighten us? :lol: I thought it was a great sermon myself. I was a little disappointed to see some disagreeing, but I was not at all surprised, and that isn't always a good thing. :( God Bless.

karenoka27
Apr 27th 2007, 10:49 PM
And one last thing, then I'll stop...I was very blessed by Washer's statement that it's not whether or not we know Christ, but whether He knows us that will allow us to enter heaven...much the same as if he were to drive up to the White House and ask to be admitted because he knows George Bush. If George Bush knows him, then that's a different story. Unfortunately, there will be people that were sure Christ knew them, but He'll tell them to depart from Him, because He, in fact, did not know them. That statement was about religious people, who were busy doing things for Him but not obeying Him.

I appreciate the dialogue going on here...I hope this will wake us all up to our need to know AND be known by Christ!

Amen...and Amen...http://sites.rapidus.net/gagnonse/gagnonse/smiley/smiley_fichiers/w_Praying_closed_eyes.gif let's just pray for our teens...and others as well.

dljc
Apr 27th 2007, 10:50 PM
Is there a fault finding mission going on in the church...... Not that I'm aware of, but it appears to me that it's everybody's fault but the individual's. If I'm wrong in that assessment of things that have been said in here, show me where I am wrong, and I'll shut up.


Maybe they are seeking to learn more about themselves before they seek something else. Maybe they need to learn about themselves and the world first. I know that is in my church's educational curriculum for youth.:)Are you sending them out into the world knowing the consequences of their actions?

Souled Out
Apr 27th 2007, 11:08 PM
Some say that if the "fruits of the Spirit" are not present on one's life, he was never saved.

If you are a branch of the true vine you will have fruit. No question about it.

Orthopraxy and orthodoxy should work togehter, not replace one another.




By the way, FB, if you started a thread based on this (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1243075&postcount=56) post of yours, using the word instead of music (the part depth and meaning plays in understanding) I would love to participate ;) {hint, hint}

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 27th 2007, 11:11 PM
Um... likening the guy to a "salesman" and "worldly" etc... that is a wee more than complaining about the approach there RbG! Is he your Mother-In-Law? ;)

Er... it looks like I assumed our relationship could discern a bit a humor between us and see it as humor for what it was... sorry if you took this as an insult....

Teke
Apr 28th 2007, 12:06 AM
Not that I'm aware of, but it appears to me that it's everybody's fault but the individual's. If I'm wrong in that assessment of things that have been said in here, show me where I am wrong, and I'll shut up.


I don't think finding fault is the answer. We are all feebly feeling for God somehow.


Are you sending them out into the world knowing the consequences of their actions?

One can only have faith that God will be with them in their understanding. :)

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 12:21 AM
I don't think finding fault is the answer. We are all feebly feeling for God somehow.


One can only have faith that God will be with them in their understanding. :)



How very much what Paul Washer was speaking out against.

God will indeed find fault easily if it is there. He would rather find pure love and righteousness, but it's us to us to prepaire the condition of the heart. That is what God will understand, that He would rather love than judge, but will not hesitate to call a sinner one whom He does not know.

I have faith that my God is just.

dljc
Apr 28th 2007, 12:35 AM
I don't think finding fault is the answer. We are all feebly feeling for God somehow. Do you agree that would should examine ourselves in the light of God's Word? That we ourselves should be the ones looking for the faults in the light of God's Word?

One can only have faith that God will be with them in their understanding. :)That's true.

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 12:38 AM
If you are a branch of the true vine you will have fruit. No question about it.

Orthopraxy and orthodoxy should work togehter, not replace one another.




By the way, FB, if you started a thread based on this (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1243075&postcount=56) post of yours, using the word instead of music (the part depth and meaning plays in understanding) I would love to participate ;) {hint, hint}


Of course you will have fruit. Whether or not another Christian (who may or may not be on a witch hunt) can determine a person's Salvation by how far along a particular season of growth has come is another matter.

That's the danger of saying "This one is saved...that one ain't" with regard to other Christians.

I suppose, in this event, fruit and "dry seasons" would have to be properly defined and applied.

I'll look into starting that thread forthwith. ;)

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 12:53 AM
Of course you will have fruit. Whether or not another Christian (who may or may not be on a witch hunt) can determine a person's Salvation by how far along a particular season of growth has come is another matter.

That's the danger of saying "This one is saved...that one ain't" with regard to other Christians.

I suppose, in this event, fruit and "dry seasons" would have to be properly defined and applied.

I'll look into starting that thread forthwith. ;)

Those who are in Christ will indeed produce good fruit. Not okay fruit. Not pretty good, not okay, but good fruit.

We are told not to judge, but we will indeed know other Christians by their fruit. In the midts of the condemnation of that sermon, which is truth, there is still this: love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself. Love covers a multitude of sins.

But we still need to be quite aware that we can indeed miss the point, we need the WHOLE gospel message. Until we are judge righteous, we will need to be our own judge of self. The scripture provides that guidance.

Souled Out
Apr 28th 2007, 01:22 AM
Of course you will have fruit. Whether or not another Christian (who may or may not be on a witch hunt) can determine a person's Salvation by how far along a particular season of growth has come is another matter.

That's the danger of saying "This one is saved...that one ain't" with regard to other Christians.

I suppose, in this event, fruit and "dry seasons" would have to be properly defined and applied.
Yup. I agree. ....................

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 01:27 AM
but we will indeed know other Christians by their fruit.

So, had you met me when I was sitting with my band (not Christian at the time) drinking and passing out behind the drums (while playing mind you...it's tough but it can be done)...would you have said "He is not a Christian. He didn't' mean it when he asked Christ to be his Lord and Savior when he was5 and God didn't take him seriously. He's going to have to ask all over again."

I don't know. I think a lot of people are in trouble if the fruit has to be in full view of everyone for the duration of a person's life.

And, incidentally, wasn't the "know them by their fruit" statement regarding teachers?

Teke
Apr 28th 2007, 01:34 AM
How very much what Paul Washer was speaking out against.

God will indeed find fault easily if it is there. He would rather find pure love and righteousness, but it's us to us to prepaire the condition of the heart. That is what God will understand, that He would rather love than judge, but will not hesitate to call a sinner one whom He does not know.

I have faith that my God is just.

So, don't feel for God, just conform.....

Teke
Apr 28th 2007, 01:39 AM
Do you agree that would should examine ourselves in the light of God's Word? That we ourselves should be the ones looking for the faults in the light of God's Word?


Examining ourselves doesn't entail examining others.
Our Lord was crucified by such methods of examination.

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 01:41 AM
I don't know. I think a lot of people are in trouble if the fruit has to be in full view of everyone for the duration of a person's life.

And, incidentally, wasn't the "know them by their fruit" statement regarding teachers?


Yeah, a lot of people are in trouble if the fruit has to be in full view of everyone for their whole life. It's a choice for Christ and maturing in that. When I was first a Christian, I still had lifestyle changes to make. An awful lot was immediate, but an awful lot I didn't even realize wasn't something I ought to be doing at all. You passing out while playing I can't say. However, had I seen you at that time, and you told me you were a Chrsitian, I'd have my doubts but I wouldn't have dropped you on your back side either. that's what's discipleship is about. And, that's what repent, and go and sin no more is about too.


And, do you consider yourself to be a disciple of Christ? If you are walking with Christ as a disciple, you will product fruit in abundance.

John 15



7If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
8Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. 9As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 01:44 AM
And, do you consider yourself to be a disciple of Christ? If you are walking with Christ as a disciple, you will product fruit in abundance.

You are absolutely right. Thank God I am not in charge of growing my own fruit.

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 01:46 AM
So, don't feel for God, just conform.....

Don't feel for God? God is not a feeling, emotion will lead one astray in the blink of an eye. The Americanize church in the sermon, once again, is exactly what this is about. We can't go on emotion.

And yes, we ought to comform to the image of Christ. That is striving for, in hopes of achieving, holiness. Don't conform to the world, comform to Christ.


Examining ourselves doesn't entail examining others.
Our Lord was crucified by such methods of examination.

We will know another is a Christian by their fruits. Those who walk with the Lord will have abundant fruit. It ought to be apparent, we shouldn't have to examine a person as we do ourselves.

If we aren't to keep each other accountable, then why fellowship and discipleship?

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 01:50 AM
You are absolutely right. Thank God I am not in charge of growing my own fruit.


How does fruit grow passively? :confused

We will produce fruit. Our faith in us will cause us to produce fruit if we let it. Just as we are free to choose him, it's up to us to take that faith and do with it as Christ expect us to.

You may have been a born again believer as a drummer, but your fruits were not apparent. You chose, I would hope, to stop that lifestyle and live a life that produced fruit. Fruit can't grow in that past environment of yours.

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 01:56 AM
If we aren't to keep each other accountable, then why fellowship and discipleship?

There's what I was looking for. Now you have something. That is true if the examination of the Christian in question is for that purpose. Most often, it is not.

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 01:57 AM
How does fruit grow passively? :confused

We will produce fruit. Our faith in us will cause us to produce fruit if we let it. Just as we are free to choose him, it's up to us to take that faith and do with it as Christ expect us to.

You may have been a born again believer as a drummer, but your fruits were not apparent. You chose, I would hope, to stop that lifestyle and live a life that produced fruit. Fruit can't grow in that past environment of yours.

We can't produce that fruit. We don't produce anything. The Soil (God's Word) and the Vine (Christ) is what grows the fruit. We allow it to grow by cooperating with the Vine. The process is the serum. Not everyone is in a place of healthy growth. But that doesn't put into question their Salvation.

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 02:02 AM
You may have been a born again believer as a drummer, but your fruits were not apparent. You chose, I would hope, to stop that lifestyle and live a life that produced fruit. Fruit can't grow in that past environment of yours.

What you may have seen was a Believer who was barren in one area but fruitful in another (like when non-believers would take me to coffee just to "hear me talk about Christ" because it gave them hope...true story).

That, again, is the danger of making snap judgments about one's Salvation. (I ma not suggesting you were...but the line of thinking you are entertaining can often lead to that).

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 02:13 AM
Firstly, I was going on the information that you gave. Simply, I had nothing else to go on. And, we are walking with or not with Christ.

Second, it's been a long day. I can see that it would be difficult to answer more without totally derailing this thread. :) One single word would upset this apple cart. So, I will retire from this for tonight. Not a cop out, just a tired woman without the energy to 'go there' yet tonight!

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 03:10 AM
Firstly, I was going on the information that you gave. Simply, I had nothing else to go on. And, we are walking with or not with Christ.

Second, it's been a long day. I can see that it would be difficult to answer more without totally derailing this thread. :) One single word would upset this apple cart. So, I will retire from this for tonight. Not a cop out, just a tired woman without the energy to 'go there' yet tonight!

Fair enough. Enjoy your evening. :)

Mercy4Me
Apr 28th 2007, 03:18 AM
Hi, Fallenbrooke! I'm not taking TBR's place...I'm a tired woman too :rolleyes: But I just was thinking about your question regarding "barren" times. In the sermon, Washer said if we are truly God's children, He will not let us tarry on the broad path...He will work in us to bring us back, which seems to be what He's done with you. :)

Also, I was just doing a search on "fruit", and found the parable in Luke 13 about the fig tree that had not borne fruit for three years...the husbandman of the vineyard asked to have the chance to dig and fertilize. If it still bore no fruit, then it would be cut down. I'm not trying to raise a controversy here at all, but I found this interesting...if the analogy holds true to John 15, this would be the Husbandman trying to restore health to the fig tree. That's God, trying to bring us back to that path of fruitfulness. But it appears to me that He will not allow fruitlessness to go on forever...eventually the tree would be cut down.

I've been doing a study on the Vine in John 15...it's our union with the Vine which enables it to produce fruit in us. As you said, as long as we stay connected to Him, in close fellowship with Him, He will continue to produce His fruit in us.

Blessings to you...

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 03:31 AM
I'm a tired woman too :rolleyes:

Then I wouldn't dream of raising too much of a stink. ;)




But it appears to me that He will not allow fruitlessness to go on forever...eventually the tree would be cut down.You are absolutely right. The difference is what Christ sees as opposed to what others see. Before cutting down a tree, Christ would know a person's heart was shut down to Him. God would never reverse a Believer's Salvation after a certain amount of "barren" time. Remembering, of course, that at one point this person was considered (in that very parable) to be a Believer.

What Christ knows to be true and what another believes (who is most often just an observer of one's life at an odd time) to be true can be quite different. What is dangerous about suggesting to other Christians that a person has stopped being a Believer is that that other person may give up on the "barren" Believer. I just have an aversion to discouraging other "fruitful" Christians from sticking with a "barren" Believer strictly because another person sees no viable fruit.

Trees will be cut down. No doubt. But only Christ wields the hatchet.



I've been doing a study on the Vine in John 15...it's our union with the Vine which enables it to produce fruit in us. As you said, as long as we stay connected to Him, in close fellowship with Him, He will continue to produce His fruit in us.

Blessings to you...I love John 15. It is what finally made me see the connection to Christ. My real purpose on this planet is to enter into a relationship with Him (the Vine). My actions of Faith come out as a result of my Love for Him (which, interestingly, He plants in me as well...dang...it seems I can't even Love Him correctly without His help).
;)

ProjectPeter
Apr 28th 2007, 10:20 AM
care to enlighten us? :lol: I thought it was a great sermon myself. I was a little disappointed to see some disagreeing, but I was not at all surprised, and that isn't always a good thing. :( God Bless.
Oh nothing major really. Those that adhere to the more ultra-grace doctrines certainly had a problem with the sermon. I figure that stands to reason. Teke disagreeing isn't a surprise simply because of doctrinal differences more so than anything else. And I already stated that RbG was my surprise although he was ok with doctrine (should be since the guy is stone cold Reformed) but "discerned" that the guy was as worldly as those he preached against (same as calling him a hypocrite truth be told) and likened him to a salesman trying to close a sale etc. because he didn't like the guys delivery.

But so far... those that disagree... no surprise.

ProjectPeter
Apr 28th 2007, 10:23 AM
Er... it looks like I assumed our relationship could discern a bit a humor between us and see it as humor for what it was... sorry if you took this as an insult....Hey... I got the humor! Hence my retort about the mother-in-law after listing what you saw as the guys traits. :lol:

ProjectPeter
Apr 28th 2007, 10:29 AM
So, had you met me when I was sitting with my band (not Christian at the time) drinking and passing out behind the drums (while playing mind you...it's tough but it can be done)...would you have said "He is not a Christian. He didn't' mean it when he asked Christ to be his Lord and Savior when he was5 and God didn't take him seriously. He's going to have to ask all over again."

I don't know. I think a lot of people are in trouble if the fruit has to be in full view of everyone for the duration of a person's life.

And, incidentally, wasn't the "know them by their fruit" statement regarding teachers?
I'd of certainly laid out the gospel to you because it would have been evident that you were either never saved or you were and walked away. Another subject yeah... ;)

Mercy4Me
Apr 28th 2007, 10:55 AM
Then I wouldn't dream of raising too much of a stink. ;)




Thank you...you are merciful indeed!


You are absolutely right. The difference is what Christ sees as opposed to what others see. Before cutting down a tree, Christ would know a person's heart was shut down to Him. God would never reverse a Believer's Salvation after a certain amount of "barren" time. Remembering, of course, that at one point this person was considered (in that very parable) to be a Believer.

What Christ knows to be true and what another believes (who is most often just an observer of one's life at an odd time) to be true can be quite different. What is dangerous about suggesting to other Christians that a person has stopped being a Believer is that that other person may give up on the "barren" Believer. I just have an aversion to discouraging other "fruitful" Christians from sticking with a "barren" Believer strictly because another person sees no viable fruit.

Trees will be cut down. No doubt. But only Christ wields the hatchet.


Absolutely! I'm in full agreement! I'm not your Husbandman, nor you, mine. We are here to encourage and edify and admonish one another...obviously, if we see a brother or sister in sin, we'd better be doing some teaching, rebuking, admonishing, whatever. As PP said, he'd have laid out the gospel to you. But by no means do WE wield a hatchet, thank God!



I love John 15. It is what finally made me see the connection to Christ. My real purpose on this planet is to enter into a relationship with Him (the Vine). My actions of Faith come out as a result of my Love for Him (which, interestingly, He plants in me as well...dang...it seems I can't even Love Him correctly without His help).
;)

I am also coming to love this passage dearly. We're doing a study on it by Andrew Murray in Daily Devotionals. There is so much depth in this one analogy alone! And I'm so glad that you've been able to see this connection to Christ. I appreciate your observation about Love...I think you are exactly right. :)

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 28th 2007, 12:59 PM
Oh nothing major really. Those that adhere to the more ultra-grace doctrines certainly had a problem with the sermon. I figure that stands to reason. Teke disagreeing isn't a surprise simply because of doctrinal differences more so than anything else. And I already stated that RbG was my surprise although he was ok with doctrine (should be since the guy is stone cold Reformed) but "discerned" that the guy was as worldly as those he preached against (same as calling him a hypocrite truth be told) and likened him to a salesman trying to close a sale etc. because he didn't like the guys delivery.

But so far... those that disagree... no surprise.



For clarification... To the highlight, which post of mine are you quoting from?


And Stone Cold... PP my heart is very very warm for the Lost

Whispering Grace
Apr 28th 2007, 01:24 PM
And Stone Cold... PP my heart is very very warm for the Lost

I could be wrong, but I think PP was referring to Paul Washer as being the one who is "stone cold Reformed", and I could be wrong again, but I think by "stone cold" PP meant "very, very, super duper, to the extreme".

:D

Whispering Grace
Apr 28th 2007, 01:25 PM
I actually listened to another of his sermons on the way to work last night, and I quite enjoyed it. He definitely gives God the glory and not man.

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 28th 2007, 01:50 PM
I only listened to 20 minutes or so yesterday, so I went back this morning and listened again and got to about 45 minutes...

I took more notes and I will say that the content of his message is not an issue for me, although I prefer an expository approach of scripture than a topical approach, I just see his style as being challenging...

I have more things written that I disagree with... BUT I also have a few things that I do agree with...

So being fair... Here are some of the things that I found within his statements I agree with...

- Churches preaching a convenient gospel
- USA full of seeker friendly churches
- Don't tell men that they are saved; tell them how to be saved
- Narrow gate [Jesus]; Narrow path [Life of self-examination]
- No one rebukes today, and if done not for the right reasoning

Sorta disappointed that he didn't use more scripture, for he read Matt 7, then reference Isaiah 53, 1 Corinthians 3 and Mark and John in passing, but was hoping to hear a stronger exegesis between them back to Matthew 7 in pointing to scripture in a tighter way.

A couple other points that would be viewed here that I also heard that would be construed as a negative... so I will leave them for another time if needed... :saint:


Good to see you're back... BTW

Teke
Apr 28th 2007, 02:04 PM
Don't feel for God? God is not a feeling, emotion will lead one astray in the blink of an eye. The Americanize church in the sermon, once again, is exactly what this is about. We can't go on emotion.

You've misunderstood me. I didn't mean feeling for God as in emotions, I meant as a blind person feeling for what they seek.
If our churches shouldn't be Americanized then what culture should they be?


And yes, we ought to comform to the image of Christ. That is striving for, in hopes of achieving, holiness. Don't conform to the world, comform to Christ.

The image of Christ is holiness. Which is why I said in my initial post, that is what this speaker should have focused on for those youth.




We will know another is a Christian by their fruits. Those who walk with the Lord will have abundant fruit. It ought to be apparent, we shouldn't have to examine a person as we do ourselves.

And what if our little tree can't hold abundant fruit. Would a little fruit be enough for others judgment.


If we aren't to keep each other accountable, then why fellowship and discipleship?

I agree with accountability. I just don't see that as finding fault.
Accountability can help with examining oneself, finding fault is prideful, putting another's judgment above the other. Which wouldn't accomplish much, other than the person who had been found in fault, possibly would then find fault with the one who accused them. As their accountability would come into play then.

Then Mr Washer would be called to account if he was a peaceful holy youth in his days as a youth. If not, his advice would be simply his opinion/judgment, and not one of experience. IOW he isn't giving an account of himself and his experience, just some heady knowledge from scripture mixed with his opinion.

Teke
Apr 28th 2007, 02:24 PM
Teke disagreeing isn't a surprise simply because of doctrinal differences more so than anything else.


Actually my first thought was on youth curriculum education wise. I did youth in the Baptist church (RAs, GAs, Acteens, Sunday School). Things have changed a lot since then in Baptist churches. But youth and their attention hasn't.:saint:

BTW, I had some youth listen to it and comment. They all got mixed messages, so their answers differed. Here is a couple comments, one from a boy and one from a girl.

Boy: Sounded like he thinks we don't know if we are saved or not. And I don't get the part about us being a dead bag of bones unless we repent.....

Girl: Does he think we don't know if we are saved because of how we dress?? If our parents are ok with the way we dress, then why does he have a problem with it.

All said: He didn't tell us what to do or explain what he meant (about clothes)........I'm glad he is not my parent.



All teachers know the attention span of youth. If you want them to focus on a subject, then you stay with the subject or you loose them



.

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 03:01 PM
There's what I was looking for. Now you have something. That is true if the examination of the Christian in question is for that purpose. Most often, it is not.

And that is because the one doing the correcting isn't any better off than the one they are correcting.;)

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 03:32 PM
And what if our little tree can't hold abundant fruit. Would a little fruit be enough for others judgment.

Even faith as small as a mustard seed can move mountians.

Such as with fallenbrook's situation of being a worldly man in a band to the other times he shared the gospel with those who drank it up in a coffee house. Why let that part that has a foot in the world hold you back from being all for Christ? Why not meeting twice for Christ instead of once a week? In holding back you aren't allowing Him to be Lord over your life. If He isn't Lord over your life, are you really not of the world? If you are of the world,.....

It's about doing the will of the Father in despite of the world.


Then Mr Washer would be called to account if he was a peaceful holy youth in his days as a youth. If not, his advice would be simply his opinion/judgment, and not one of experience. IOW he isn't giving an account of himself and his experience, just some heady knowledge from scripture mixed with his opinion.


I haven't done any digging into his story, his background or testimony. Someone else here I'm sure could help. Yet, that doesn't matter. What matters is that whatever his past has been, he speaks the truth now. Accountability is now, and repentance leaves things in the past, no?

What makes any of us not think anothers thoughts here are simply opinion or judgement? We take it to scripture, simple enough. Scripture doesn't, can't lie. Scripture certainly takes a degree of heady knowledge, combined with life experience and revelation of the Spirit.

Plus, Mr. Washer has those things, PLUS called to preach and isn't afraid to do so in His name.

Whispering Grace
Apr 28th 2007, 03:35 PM
I took more notes and I will say that the content of his message is not an issue for me, although I prefer an expository approach of scripture than a topical approach, I just see his style as being challenging...

I prefer an expository approach as well. Topical sermons can be very good and convicting, but the exposity ones at my old church really had us digging deep into the Word each Sunday.

And as I can attest at the church I am at now, topical sermons can too easily turn into man-centered self help seminars.


- Churches preaching a convenient gospel
- USA full of seeker friendly churches
- Don't tell men that they are saved; tell them how to be saved
- Narrow gate [Jesus]; Narrow path [Life of self-examination]
- No one rebukes today, and if done not for the right reasoning

I honestly don't know how any Christian can grow and mature in a "seeker-friendly" church.

I did okay for a few months because I was having other needs met that I had been lacking, but after a few months, I just started getting hungrier and hungrier for God to the point where I just started leaving church feeling confused and empty after the umpteenth syrupy-sweet "Improve Your Life in 5 Easy Steps" sermon.

Honestly, the experience has been good for me in many ways. It has shown me Whom it is that I truly seek. It has shown me how much I absolutely thirst for the things of God and yearn to know Him better. And it has shown me a side of modern day "Christianity" I didn't know was out there.

And I have realized that I don't care about big fancy churches. I don't care about the latest fads, the glitzy productions, the religion tied up in a big, pretty bow and sold on every street corner.....

All I want is Jesus.

I want to know Him better, love Him deeper, and walk closer with Him. I want to please Him and serve Him and glorify Him.

These churches can keep their worldly trappings, empty emotional displays, and slick packaging. Jesus Christ never needs to be "packaged and sold" to those who are truly seeking Him.

Whispering Grace
Apr 28th 2007, 03:36 PM
Good to see you're back... BTW

Oh, and thank you!

threebigrocks
Apr 28th 2007, 03:38 PM
These churches can keep their worldly trappings, empty emotional displays, and slick packaging. Jesus Christ never needs to be "packaged and sold" to those who are truly seeking Him.


AMEN!

I don't need the gift wrapping. Like a child, it's so easy to love the paper and ribbons and bows far more than the gift itself.

Teke
Apr 28th 2007, 05:19 PM
Even faith as small as a mustard seed can move mountians.

Such as with fallenbrook's situation of being a worldly man in a band to the other times he shared the gospel with those who drank it up in a coffee house. Why let that part that has a foot in the world hold you back from being all for Christ? Why not meeting twice for Christ instead of once a week? In holding back you aren't allowing Him to be Lord over your life. If He isn't Lord over your life, are you really not of the world? If you are of the world,.....

It's about doing the will of the Father in despite of the world.




I haven't done any digging into his story, his background or testimony. Someone else here I'm sure could help. Yet, that doesn't matter. What matters is that whatever his past has been, he speaks the truth now. Accountability is now, and repentance leaves things in the past, no?

What makes any of us not think anothers thoughts here are simply opinion or judgement? We take it to scripture, simple enough. Scripture doesn't, can't lie. Scripture certainly takes a degree of heady knowledge, combined with life experience and revelation of the Spirit.

Plus, Mr. Washer has those things, PLUS called to preach and isn't afraid to do so in His name.

Then I imagine some scripture is due.

Mat 7:1 ¶ Judge not, that ye be not judged.

Mat 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

This also reminds me of a thread from a while back on Romans 14 and 15. Here is what I posted.

The message is there are things that cannot be compromised, there are also grey areas. God is gracious and allows diversity in "doubtful things" (14:1), matters not involving Christian dogma. Those "weak in faith" are Christians of immature conscience and wisdom who may attach primary importance to secondary matters, such as foods and religious festivals. (14:2-6)

Christ is Lord of the community, it's religious practices and observances. It is when we make ourselves, our prejudices, and our cultural heritage the focal point that we lose sight of our oneness in Christ.

A mature conscience in Christ knows no food is "unclean of itself". But an immature conscience must be free to follow stricter rules if it sees fit.

Although Paul theologically stands with the mature in conscience, practically he supports the weak. The superior principle is to sacrifice one's rights and refrain from causing spiritual harm to another, "for the kingdom" is "righteousness and peace and joy".

In chp 15 Paul furthers this in that the mature in faith are called "strong" and exhorted to be patient regarding the "scruples of the weak".

Our Christian unity is for God's glory, not to further ourselves. So we shouldn't let other things divide us.
That could be any number of subjects. From our personal struggles to our political affiliation etc.

VerticalReality
Apr 28th 2007, 07:06 PM
I thought the sermon was pretty good. Most churches in this country don't like preaching holiness anymore. I keep hearing how we're nothing but a bunch of filthy sinners that are going to mess up anyway, so we might as well just ask for forgiveness and move on. There isn't much desire for being Christ-like. If I "mess up" and sin, shouldn't I feel more than just a passing "uh oh . . . my bad"? Shouldn't we love the things God loves and hate the things God hates?

Fallenbrooke
Apr 28th 2007, 09:51 PM
I thought the sermon was pretty good. Most churches in this country don't like preaching holiness anymore. I keep hearing how we're nothing but a bunch of filthy sinners that are going to mess up anyway, so we might as well just ask for forgiveness and move on. There isn't much desire for being Christ-like. If I "mess up" and sin, shouldn't I feel more than just a passing "uh oh . . . my bad"? Shouldn't we love the things God loves and hate the things God hates?

What I think you are forgetting is that we aren't capable of detaching from those things. Our only hope is increasing our "knowledge of God" and nurturing our relationship with Him. As we move along in the process (remembering that it can be a long process) we begin to lose the desire for those things.

It isn't something one can just shut off with any amount of real success. And self-punishing (which is what some advocate) is also sin. Wallowing in guilt is a form of pride. When we do fall we have to get up again and run to the Throne and get the Grace that is there for us. It's our only Hope. Of course we should Love what He loves and hate what He hates. But how much of that is going on in your life right now as it stands?

VerticalReality
Apr 28th 2007, 10:55 PM
What I think you are forgetting is that we aren't capable of detaching from those things.

Detaching from what things? Sin? The only thing attached to sin is the flesh and that should be crucified. If it's not . . . we're in bondage. Jesus Christ has delivered us from that if we would so choose to walk in it.


And self-punishing (which is what some advocate) is also sin. Wallowing in guilt is a form of pride.

I'm not saying we should wallow. However, committing sin is not to be approached with a "oops . . . I just committed a boo boo" type attitude. It is very serious.


When we do fall we have to get up again and run to the Throne and get the Grace that is there for us.

We already got the grace. We just need to stop sinning. If I choose to watch something right now that I know I shouldn't, it's not because I'm just a worthless filthy sinner that can't help but to sin. It's because I'm being totally disobedient to God, and practicing lawlessness instead of righteousness.



Of course we should Love what He loves and hate what He hates. But how much of that is going on in your life right now as it stands?


I would say it's going on the way it is supposed to. Staying away from sin is what we're all supposed to do. It should be where we all stand.

ProjectPeter
Apr 28th 2007, 11:20 PM
For clarification... To the highlight, which post of mine are you quoting from?


And Stone Cold... PP my heart is very very warm for the Lost
It is a saying RbG.... but then you know that I figure eh? There was nothing "bad" implicated in saying that and if you recall... I am the one that recommended that folks listen to the guy. Goodness man... is this one of those "Ken says up so you feel you must say down instead" things going on here?

But nevertheless... in post 23 here is what you said.


And I agree that churches today have so much world in them, and by my view so does this preacher.... but to be effective, I think humility and fear are a key ingredient in presenting and receiving the Gospel.

Does that help?

ProjectPeter
Apr 28th 2007, 11:21 PM
I could be wrong, but I think PP was referring to Paul Washer as being the one who is "stone cold Reformed", and I could be wrong again, but I think by "stone cold" PP meant "very, very, super duper, to the extreme".

:DYeah... figured that was pretty much evident.

ProjectPeter
Apr 28th 2007, 11:42 PM
Actually my first thought was on youth curriculum education wise. I did youth in the Baptist church (RAs, GAs, Acteens, Sunday School). Things have changed a lot since then in Baptist churches. But youth and their attention hasn't.:saint:

BTW, I had some youth listen to it and comment. They all got mixed messages, so their answers differed. Here is a couple comments, one from a boy and one from a girl.

Boy: Sounded like he thinks we don't know if we are saved or not. And I don't get the part about us being a dead bag of bones unless we repent.....

Girl: Does he think we don't know if we are saved because of how we dress?? If our parents are ok with the way we dress, then why does he have a problem with it.

All said: He didn't tell us what to do or explain what he meant (about clothes)........I'm glad he is not my parent.



All teachers know the attention span of youth. If you want them to focus on a subject, then you stay with the subject or you loose them



.But that proves nothing more really than they are a product of their environment. He was preaching to an audience that traditionally taught those various things. If a church doesn't then I don't suppose they would understand.

But that being said I think he explained it well. If your clothes highlight your face then good. If they highlight other things... bad. I figure most understand what that would mean without him going into vivid detail.

As to the attention span. Yeah... but let's be for real and at least call it what it is. Selective attention span. If it was their favorite music star then they would listen for a very long time. If it is their favorite video game then they will set their for hours. If it benefits them... take all the time necessary. Keep in mind that adults aren't any different. Point being... I don't put much stock in pop psychology and all of the "attention span" thing. It is too selective for them to prove it a scientific fact.

ProjectPeter
Apr 28th 2007, 11:44 PM
What I think you are forgetting is that we aren't capable of detaching from those things. Our only hope is increasing our "knowledge of God" and nurturing our relationship with Him. As we move along in the process (remembering that it can be a long process) we begin to lose the desire for those things.

It isn't something one can just shut off with any amount of real success. And self-punishing (which is what some advocate) is also sin. Wallowing in guilt is a form of pride. When we do fall we have to get up again and run to the Throne and get the Grace that is there for us. It's our only Hope. Of course we should Love what He loves and hate what He hates. But how much of that is going on in your life right now as it stands?See... I guess I don't understand how it is that we take the idea that we can't detach ourselves from these things? While we can't escape the fact that there will be folks of the world who do this and that and wear this and that etc... doesn't mean we have to participate in this and that in the name of "it is out there and we can't detach ourselves from it." Sure we can.

Fallenbrooke
Apr 29th 2007, 12:45 AM
See... I guess I don't understand how it is that we take the idea that we can't detach ourselves from these things? While we can't escape the fact that there will be folks of the world who do this and that and wear this and that etc... doesn't mean we have to participate in this and that in the name of "it is out there and we can't detach ourselves from it." Sure we can.

Peter you cannot tell me that you don't have a recurrent sin in your life from which you cannot escape. Even if it's simply using your calling on this board and your skills in articulation to make others think well of you (we all do it. I'm not suggesting that this is your recurrent sin). It is sin. Your heart is motivated by pride and so is mine. This is a very core level problem. And you cannot, try as you might, detach from it.

Understand, I am not saying we shouldn't work toward that end. But the process is nothing more than cooperation with Christ. There is nothing you can do about it but follow along. If I see a picture of a naked woman can I turn my head? Of course I can. Does that do anything to rid me of the nagging desire to find another? No.

You are advocating a wanton tearing away of roots that we haven't the strength to pull out. I think you believe I am advocating sin since Christ will forgive us anyway. That's not at all the case. I am saying that we haven't the power to rid ourselves of sin. God changed the direction of my Desire. It's the only Desire He put in me. the Desire for Him.

Attachments (or recurrent sin) are just perversions of that Desire. Misdirections. Let me ask you something that's be bothering since I read it.

You said that I had at least "walked away" from God while I was drunk behind my drum kit. Let me ask you: Had I died there, would I have gone to Heaven?

Fallenbrooke
Apr 29th 2007, 12:56 AM
Detaching from what things? Sin? The only thing attached to sin is the flesh and that should be crucified. If it's not . . . we're in bondage. Jesus Christ has delivered us from that if we would so choose to walk in it.

You are putting yourself in a very precarious position. You then, are in bondage. Because you are a sinner.




I'm not saying we should wallow. However, committing sin is not to be approached with a "oops . . . I just committed a boo boo" type attitude. It is very serious.

Fair enough. I agree with you there.




We already got the grace. We just need to stop sinning. If I choose to watch something right now that I know I shouldn't, it's not because I'm just a worthless filthy sinner that can't help but to sin. It's because I'm being totally disobedient to God, and practicing lawlessness instead of righteousness.

Have you ever thought yourself to be better than another...or perhaps worse...less than another? It's stubborn sin. Pray three times to have God remove it. That should do the trick.




I would say it's going on the way it is supposed to. Staying away from sin is what we're all supposed to do. It should be where we all stand.

So we should stand before God sinless?

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 29th 2007, 11:14 AM
It is a saying RbG.... but then you know that I figure eh? There was nothing "bad" implicated in saying that and if you recall... I am the one that recommended that folks listen to the guy. Goodness man... is this one of those "Ken says up so you feel you must say down instead" things going on here?

But nevertheless... in post 23 here is what you said.



Does that help?

Thanks PP… I just wanted clarification as to which post you were refering to…


So tell me PP, that if I, you or anyone else here posted a thread here charging in the same manor as Preacher Paul has done, would you, I or another take this to heart and agree that we are not saved as he claims? So the assumption should always be that no one is a true believer and that the assumption is that those within a Christian audience is that they are not truly saved?

Tell me that if I used the same words towards those here and with you, saying that your faith is false within a thread as this man has done with his audience -- this would 1) be right for me to say it, 2) right for me to claim it, and 3) received well by you and others?

Tell me that he wasn’t reaching for shock and sensationalism to a mass of folks whom he knew were claiming to be Christians and that he wasn’t looking for a keyed response to his message? Tell me in that knowing this was a youth group, that he didn’t make judgment as to their faith in Christ en mass? Tell me that he was not reaching for an emotional response….. Tell me that he didn’t have a plan to capture their heart in seeking to throw guilt upon them again that they might have already dealt with and now may have caused them harm than good? Tell me why if his style and messaging were good, did you not doubt your own salvation when you heard this as well? Did you think that this was for the other guy??? Just asking brother….

See, I see this as being subtle tactics that are just like most seeker friendly preachers, except here, I see a better use of the word within the delivery than most…. But looking for results all the same.

Good golly man, can’t you see this? Can’t you see that he is doing more judging than showing? He’s talking about change, talking about fruit, talking about repentance… and I agree with each point…. But he’s not showing the way, he’s judging that no one knows this but he…

Sure he’s addressing how folks say a prayer and show no change, but he’s assuming that his audience is filled but with folks who are false Christians. He assumes that no one has come to a true faith in Christ Jesus. Instead of preaching the word to continue to build the faith, he has predetermined to say that none within the ‘Christian audience’ is saved and yet he fails to light the path with scripture as to how to be sure…. He’s assuming the worst to a group who he knows as ‘Christian’, and yet pre-judges that it’s in word only…. How does he know?

Why did he not dive into John’s epistles? Why did he not talk about growing in the faith instead of blindly assuming condemnation that their faith was false? For he’s confusing his listener as to where they are in their faith, but didn’t give them God’s word to show them the light to take hold of. Why after tearing down, did he not use the word to build and build quickly?

PP… It’s his delivery and content that needs to be discerned together and I believe effective preaching uses both, and as I’ve shared in a previous post -- its best through humility and fear… for which I see this man lacking in this one sermon…

Now… if this delivery and message being acceptable by you, then why do you and I sit on the opposite side of the fence many times on doctrine and presentation than not? Do we not challenge in the same manner as Pastor Paul has done? Then why do you see me as being wrong and Paul being right? See, you could be saying right now, RbG, pretty self-righteous of you, aren’t you? If you do, then you should now see my point. Then should we not share this man’s ‘same’ love and concern for each other as he says he does with his audience and thus challenge each other’s thoughts and tear down each other’s faith because of love for each other? I dare say that we should not….

So as this man is preaching, he should be also teaching, how to live a Christian life, how to walk, how to grow in the faith, but assumes that the audience is full of unbelieving Christians. Yet he is a good speaker… I’d say he is good, for he has good flow and good tactics to build his position. All preachers are like sales people by the way, for they need to know their audience, then need to know their material, and they need to know how they relate…

Is he a good preacher…. Don’t know. But what I heard within this one sermon, I’d say he positions some good doctrine that I am congruent with, but is this doctrine rightly delivered and applied for the right purposes… I lean to say not as good as others.

Salvation cannot be achieved through yelling the gospel, or manipulating it to position one’s points, but when effectively presenting in love, humility and I also believe with a bit of reverencal fear as God enables both the presenter and the receptor… it’s the word presented through and by His Spirit that does the work…

Calling down fire from Heaven as Pastor Paul prayed within his opening or asking God to strike down dead those who Pastor Paul has asked for, or saying that America is a godless culture -- is over the line in my book…. And thus having the same effect as those ‘other’ churches….

So I doubt very much that if he penned something here at the forums that it would be received as well by you, me and others as it being purported through this thread. Many folks here, myself included offer challenges to folks to help examine one’s faith and as you have declared, find edge and friction because of it. But for me, I have never declared anyone who is saved unsaved as he and others here who have.

This subject is always a fine line, and for me, found his delivery to be controlling in both style and desiring of an outcome, and thus… a 180 degree twist to the seeker friendly style…. But ahhh it’s so subtle, that folks will walk right past it….

But hey, this is just my opinion….

Walstib
Apr 29th 2007, 05:14 PM
I read it a few times, did not see anything way off base. I did not see his message was about getting lost as much as knowing you found your way the first time. What I saw as the core of the message I agreed with. I do agree there are many who should question if they really have come into a personal relationship with Jesus. An alter call with a bunch of friends on a weekend does not make one saved. I got into more sin at church camp as a kid then any other place. Then I learned of Him there as well even if it took years to sink in. I can pick apart my own writing without straining out gnats in his. Plus we can’t talk with him to find his reasoning on the smaller points.

Past that I think I agree will all the posts made. Law first? Love first? Is a heart broken because of love or fear? Fear is the beginning to understanding and love sums up the law. I say you can’t love God without fearing Him and you can’t fear Him without loving Him. A good dose of fear every now and then is a good thing but using it to exclude people and judge souls is dangerous ground.

Peace,

Joe

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 01:21 AM
But that proves nothing more really than they are a product of their environment. He was preaching to an audience that traditionally taught those various things. If a church doesn't then I don't suppose they would understand.

Then the church doesn't understand the culture.
I believe the gospel can be presented to any culture.


But that being said I think he explained it well. If your clothes highlight your face then good. If they highlight other things... bad. I figure most understand what that would mean without him going into vivid detail.

And what does clothes have to do with the gospel?


As to the attention span. Yeah... but let's be for real and at least call it what it is. Selective attention span. If it was their favorite music star then they would listen for a very long time. If it is their favorite video game then they will set their for hours. If it benefits them... take all the time necessary. Keep in mind that adults aren't any different. Point being... I don't put much stock in pop psychology and all of the "attention span" thing. It is too selective for them to prove it a scientific fact.

Your right, adults are no different. So how about just reading scripture, comment on that and leave the rest to God.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 11:20 AM
Peter you cannot tell me that you don't have a recurrent sin in your life from which you cannot escape. Even if it's simply using your calling on this board and your skills in articulation to make others think well of you (we all do it. I'm not suggesting that this is your recurrent sin). It is sin. Your heart is motivated by pride and so is mine. This is a very core level problem. And you cannot, try as you might, detach from it. Sure you can. Show me that there biblical passage that says you cannot escape it? I can show you quite the contrary.


Understand, I am not saying we shouldn't work toward that end. But the process is nothing more than cooperation with Christ. There is nothing you can do about it but follow along. If I see a picture of a naked woman can I turn my head? Of course I can. Does that do anything to rid me of the nagging desire to find another? No. And again... sure it can.



You are advocating a wanton tearing away of roots that we haven't the strength to pull out. I think you believe I am advocating sin since Christ will forgive us anyway. That's not at all the case. I am saying that we haven't the power to rid ourselves of sin. God changed the direction of my Desire. It's the only Desire He put in me. the Desire for Him.

Attachments (or recurrent sin) are just perversions of that Desire. Misdirections. Let me ask you something that's be bothering since I read it.

You said that I had at least "walked away" from God while I was drunk behind my drum kit. Let me ask you: Had I died there, would I have gone to Heaven?If you walked away from God... turned... slid back... etc. No. Naturally based on the little you said there I certainly don't know. But I would say you were certainly in some stink based on the little I do know. And as I said... I would have witnessed to you as if you were a sinner in need of salvation.

Tell me this. Say I met you and had no clue your profession of Christ. I was in the neighborhood and stopped by and saw you in that state back in that day. Would I have had any clue by how you lived that you were anything but a sinner? So why would I not witness to you as a sinner in need of salvation?

Now if I knew you... then I could certain say this guy knows the truth. But you know... you'd of just been a brother that turned from the truth who still needed his soul saved from destruction. So either way... that is exactly how I would have handled it.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 12:18 PM
Thanks PP… I just wanted clarification as to which post you were refering to…


So tell me PP, that if I, you or anyone else here posted a thread here charging in the same manor as Preacher Paul has done, would you, I or another take this to heart and agree that we are not saved as he claims? So the assumption should always be that no one is a true believer and that the assumption is that those within a Christian audience is that they are not truly saved?It's been said before in here and with some it is taken to heart. And as to the "assumption should always be" part of your paragraph... I figure you are now the one going for the shock value and taking this discussion where it isn't intended. ;)


Tell me that if I used the same words towards those here and with you, saying that your faith is false within a thread as this man has done with his audience -- this would 1) be right for me to say it, 2) right for me to claim it, and 3) received well by you and others?Again... comparing a message on a message board is apples and oranges RbG. There is no way that such a comparison can be made. One.. it wasn't a few words made by person. It was a laid out... hour long message with a whole bunch of context. So your point itself is flawed and truthfully... makes no sense.




Tell me that he wasn’t reaching for shock and sensationalism to a mass of folks whom he knew were claiming to be Christians and that he wasn’t looking for a keyed response to his message?Uh... you said you listened to most of the message. He himself said it would shock them. He admitted that he shocked them and did so intentionally. So again... not sure why you are so "shocked" that he shocked them.

It was what one might call a wake up call. Very effective when done properly.



Tell me in that knowing this was a youth group, that he didn’t make judgment as to their faith in Christ en mass? Tell me that he was not reaching for an emotional response….. Tell me that he didn’t have a plan to capture their heart in seeking to throw guilt upon them again that they might have already dealt with and now may have caused them harm than good? Tell me why if his style and messaging were good, did you not doubt your own salvation when you heard this as well? Did you think that this was for the other guy??? Just asking brother….


That is interesting there RbG. Everyone in my house listened to that message and everyone of us had our own convictions and by God's grace... we will correct ourselves where correction is needed.

As to his mass judgment... he was right and statistics prove him out RbG. He made that case very well in his sermon and ask most preachers. If they answer honestly, they would be much like the Billy Graham example given in the sermon. They would be very happy if a small percentage of the people they have preached to were at the finish line when the race was ran.


See, I see this as being subtle tactics that are just like most seeker friendly preachers, except here, I see a better use of the word within the delivery than most…. But looking for results all the same.

Good golly man, can’t you see this? Can’t you see that he is doing more judging than showing? He’s talking about change, talking about fruit, talking about repentance… and I agree with each point…. But he’s not showing the way, he’s judging that no one knows this but he…Oh come on now. Now in reading this... you may have listened to what he said. But you didn't hear it.



Sure he’s addressing how folks say a prayer and show no change, but he’s assuming that his audience is filled but with folks who are false Christians. He assumes that no one has come to a true faith in Christ Jesus. Instead of preaching the word to continue to build the faith, he has predetermined to say that none within the ‘Christian audience’ is saved and yet he fails to light the path with scripture as to how to be sure…. He’s assuming the worst to a group who he knows as ‘Christian’, and yet pre-judges that it’s in word only…. How does he know?With many he need but look. Ever been to a youth conference today? Listen to the points he made? Talking for example about their appearance. Wearing clothes that were revealing etc. I assume he could actually see with the eyes he had in his head. Things like that. And AGAIN... he tells them about 20 minutes into the sermon... NOW THAT I HAVE SHOCKED YOU... listen and let me explain this to you. And he explained it well. He called for a people to change. God has empowered you to do this so you can. You know... sort of the same stuff we are told in the Scripture. ;)

Again RbG... read Galatians. Paul used that same "tactic" with them. He comes out of the chute laying in to them. Then he ends the letter telling them that this is how one lives in the flesh... this is how one lives in the Spirit. But I dare say... had you been on the receiving end of that letter... the beginning would have been no less a shock.




Why did he not dive into John’s epistles? Why did he not talk about growing in the faith instead of blindly assuming condemnation that their faith was false? For he’s confusing his listener as to where they are in their faith, but didn’t give them God’s word to show them the light to take hold of. Why after tearing down, did he not use the word to build and build quickly?

PP… It’s his delivery and content that needs to be discerned together and I believe effective preaching uses both, and as I’ve shared in a previous post -- its best through humility and fear… for which I see this man lacking in this one sermon…

Now… if this delivery and message being acceptable by you, then why do you and I sit on the opposite side of the fence many times on doctrine and presentation than not? Do we not challenge in the same manner as Pastor Paul has done? Then why do you see me as being wrong and Paul being right? See, you could be saying right now, RbG, pretty self-righteous of you, aren’t you? If you do, then you should now see my point. Then should we not share this man’s ‘same’ love and concern for each other as he says he does with his audience and thus challenge each other’s thoughts and tear down each other’s faith because of love for each other? I dare say that we should not…. It is because Washer wasn't there preaching TULIP. ;) He wasn't trying to convert folks to Calvinism or the Southern Baptist church. He was simply trying to awaken the dead (if you will). I already mentioned that doctrinally... Washer and I would clash. But I have told you many a time in the past couple of years we've yapped for example... I can live with the Reformed teaching in many ways because even though they are OSAS they are strong on obedience and when looking at the fruit of a person... you and I might agree that they are not saved and need to be told the gospel. Where you and I might disagree... is in the issue of whether that person has ever been "saved" at some other point in their life. But the important issue... they aren't saved now and are in need of Christ.



So as this man is preaching, he should be also teaching, how to live a Christian life, how to walk, how to grow in the faith, but assumes that the audience is full of unbelieving Christians. Yet he is a good speaker… I’d say he is good, for he has good flow and good tactics to build his position. All preachers are like sales people by the way, for they need to know their audience, then need to know their material, and they need to know how they relate…

Is he a good preacher…. Don’t know. But what I heard within this one sermon, I’d say he positions some good doctrine that I am congruent with, but is this doctrine rightly delivered and applied for the right purposes… I lean to say not as good as others.And certainly this would be a very good time to bring some common sense into the discussion. Here is a preacher that is invited to speak to a bunch of youth. He has one shot... one message... one hour. Plus keep in mind... the folks that invited him. They know what his message is. They know who they had invited. Gotta assume here too... they saw a need for that message because they also know the audience. All of these things can and should be factored into this.



Salvation cannot be achieved through yelling the gospel, or manipulating it to position one’s points, but when effectively presenting in love, humility and I also believe with a bit of reverencal fear as God enables both the presenter and the receptor… it’s the word presented through and by His Spirit that does the work… Funny how you make a judgment that he didn't preach what he did with right motive... and yet your big complaint was his judging the audience.

But myself... I heard it preached with a sincere heart. With love, humility and a boatload of fear.




Calling down fire from Heaven as Pastor Paul prayed within his opening or asking God to strike down dead those who Pastor Paul has asked for, or saying that America is a godless culture -- is over the line in my book…. And thus having the same effect as those ‘other’ churches….

So I doubt very much that if he penned something here at the forums that it would be received as well by you, me and others as it being purported through this thread. Many folks here, myself included offer challenges to folks to help examine one’s faith and as you have declared, find edge and friction because of it. But for me, I have never declared anyone who is saved unsaved as he and others here who have.

This subject is always a fine line, and for me, found his delivery to be controlling in both style and desiring of an outcome, and thus… a 180 degree twist to the seeker friendly style…. But ahhh it’s so subtle, that folks will walk right past it….

But hey, this is just my opinion….Sure you have... you are just more subtle with it... just as I am. Because of the medium and etc... we do have to walk that fine line at times. But again... using all the reasoning that I typed above with the common sense point... he isn't bound by such as that.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 12:24 PM
Then the church doesn't understand the culture.
I believe the gospel can be presented to any culture.


And what does clothes have to do with the gospel?


Your right, adults are no different. So how about just reading scripture, comment on that and leave the rest to God.And let's do that eye thing again here too. You have XXX amount of post on the board. Were I to go and read the last 200 post that you made on issues, minus the humor type stuff, how many of those post am I going to find of yours that contain only a passage of Scripture?

And he wasn't there sharing the "gospel" to a bunch of folks that never heard the gospel before. He was speaking to the church. When Paul wrote Galatians, Ephesians, etc... you don't find it full of Old Testament passages. You find it full of instruction and conviction and commands. Goodness... would you say we don't need preachers, teachers, and evangelist any longer... just read your Bible and live and let God?

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 12:33 PM
Here is something to ponder. Let's think of Paul being here today and he is an Apostle to the American church. What do we think he would write to us? I mean... would he just close a blind eye to Christian folk watching Desperate Housewives and the Maurey show etc.? Would he close a blind eye to folks listening to the music that I hear coming out of some of the folks radios? Would he close a blind eye to the fols wearing some of the clothes that they are sure enough wearing that conceal very little? Would he just brush off the whole video game issue?

I ask this because folks seem to think this guys judgment is harsh but then I wonder how it is that we read Scripture and the letters to the churches and yet figure... this isn't judged already.

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 12:56 PM
And let's do that eye thing again here too. You have XXX amount of post on the board. Were I to go and read the last 200 post that you made on issues, minus the humor type stuff, how many of those post am I going to find of yours that contain only a passage of Scripture?

And that would be because I was told to explain on this board and not just post scripture alone. IOW they want an explanation with scripture.


And he wasn't there sharing the "gospel" to a bunch of folks that never heard the gospel before. He was speaking to the church. When Paul wrote Galatians, Ephesians, etc... you don't find it full of Old Testament passages. You find it full of instruction and conviction and commands. Goodness... would you say we don't need preachers, teachers, and evangelist any longer... just read your Bible and live and let God?

Preachers, teachers and evangelist are to teach the scriptures according to Christ (the gospel of good news).
There are plenty of good people who do not know about the Son of God. They act like Christians and dress modestly also. But it doesn't make them Christians.

Is condemnation in Christ an acceptable practice of preaching or teaching?
Do you see Paul's letters in that light? I see them in relation to Christ and His Church, nothing more. And especially not in relation to the world or any worldly thing.

Paul also "knew" who he addressed. I don't read him telling those he didn't know, Christian or not, his personal judgment of them.

VerticalReality
Apr 30th 2007, 01:05 PM
Is condemnation in Christ an acceptable practice of preaching or teaching?
Do you see Paul's letters in that light? I see them in relation to Christ and His Church, nothing more. And especially not in relation to the world or any worldly thing.

I think one of the biggest problems in the church today is that everyone views correction as condemnation. I didn't see anything condemning about what Paul Washer was saying.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 01:05 PM
And that would be because I was told to explain on this board and not just post scripture alone. IOW they want an explanation with scripture.


Preachers, teachers and evangelist are to teach the scriptures according to Christ (the gospel of good news).
There are plenty of good people who do not know about the Son of God. They act like Christians and dress modestly also. But it doesn't make them Christians.

Is condemnation in Christ an acceptable practice of preaching or teaching?
Do you see Paul's letters in that light? I see them in relation to Christ and His Church, nothing more. And especially not in relation to the world or any worldly thing.There is a reason for that Teke. And why do you pick "condemnation in Christ" instead of "conviction of God's Spirit?"

Let me post some of Paul's letter here and you make the call.

Titus 2:1 But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine.
2 Older men are to be temperate, dignified, sensible, sound in faith, in love, in perseverance.
3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips, nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good,
4 that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children,
5 to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be dishonored.
6 Likewise urge the young men to be sensible;
7 in all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified,
8 sound in speech which is beyond reproach, in order that the opponent may be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us.
9 Urge bondslaves to be subject to their own masters in everything, to be well-pleasing, not argumentative,
10 not pilfering, but showing all good faith that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in every respect.
11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,
12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age,
13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus;
14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.
15 ¶These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.

As to the clothing issue for example... Here is his instruction to Timothy and what he needed to teach/preach.

1 Timothy 2:9 Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments;
10 but rather by means of good works, as befits women making a claim to godliness.


There is more if you need it.

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 01:11 PM
Here is something to ponder. Let's think of Paul being here today and he is an Apostle to the American church. What do we think he would write to us? I mean... would he just close a blind eye to Christian folk watching Desperate Housewives and the Maurey show etc.? Would he close a blind eye to folks listening to the music that I hear coming out of some of the folks radios? Would he close a blind eye to the fols wearing some of the clothes that they are sure enough wearing that conceal very little? Would he just brush off the whole video game issue?

I ask this because folks seem to think this guys judgment is harsh but then I wonder how it is that we read Scripture and the letters to the churches and yet figure... this isn't judged already.

He'd likely tell them they need to spend more time in prayer and less in worldly matters. Which is the same thing all the fathers say.
Or else they are carnal Christians (something which PW doesn't' believe in, yet Paul taught on):)

VerticalReality
Apr 30th 2007, 01:19 PM
He'd likely tell them they need to spend more time in prayer and less in worldly matters. Which is the same thing all the fathers say.
Or else they are carnal Christians (something which PW doesn't' believe in, yet Paul taught on):)

Here's what Paul said about being carnal . . .



Romans 8:6
For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 01:20 PM
He'd likely tell them they need to spend more time in prayer and less in worldly matters. Which is the same thing all the fathers say.
Or else they are carnal Christians (something which PW doesn't' believe in, yet Paul taught on):)
I don't agree with it either and I know what Paul wrote to the Corinth church as well. That passage is often taken grossly out of context and used in a way that Paul didn't intend. If he did intend it then he is a man that contradicted his own self.

And no... that is not at all what Paul would say. See the post above yours there which tells you exactly what Paul did sure enough say.

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 01:24 PM
There is a reason for that Teke. And why do you pick "condemnation in Christ" instead of "conviction of God's Spirit?"

Show me "conviction of God's Spirit" in scripture.


Let me post some of Paul's letter here and you make the call.

Titus 2:1 But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine.
2 Older men are to be temperate, dignified, sensible, sound in faith, in love, in perseverance.
3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips, nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good,
4 that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children,
5 to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be dishonored.
6 Likewise urge the young men to be sensible;
7 in all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified,
8 sound in speech which is beyond reproach, in order that the opponent may be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us.
9 Urge bondslaves to be subject to their own masters in everything, to be well-pleasing, not argumentative,
10 not pilfering, but showing all good faith that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in every respect.
11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,
12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age,
13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus;
14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.
15 ¶These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.

As to the clothing issue for example... Here is his instruction to Timothy and what he needed to teach/preach.

1 Timothy 2:9 Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments;
10 but rather by means of good works, as befits women making a claim to godliness.


There is more if you need it.

The Titus verses make plain in the beginning that sound doctrine produces proper behavior. And the Timothy verse is likened to the same. Faithful lives fitting for prayer (prayer being the subject beginning in verse 8).

So do you think PW put forth sound doctrine?

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 01:32 PM
Here's what Paul said about being carnal . . .

I know VR. But this speaker doesn't relate to that, from what he said.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 01:33 PM
Show me "conviction of God's Spirit" in scripture.John 16:7 "But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper shall not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.
8 "And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin, and righteousness, and judgment;
9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me;
10 and concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you no longer behold Me;
11 and concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.
12 "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
13 "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.



The Titus verses make plain in the beginning that sound doctrine produces proper behavior. And the Timothy verse is likened to the same. Faithful lives fitting for prayer (prayer being the subject beginning in verse 8).

So do you think PW put forth sound doctrine?Read it again Teke because what it actually says is this... "speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine." And sure Washer did that very thing.

VerticalReality
Apr 30th 2007, 01:55 PM
I know VR. But this speaker doesn't relate to that, from what he said.

I wouldn't say he didn't relate to it. I think Paul Washer made it pretty clear that being carnal would lead to death.

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 02:08 PM
John 16:7 "But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper shall not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.
8 "And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin, and righteousness, and judgment;
9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me;
10 and concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you no longer behold Me;
11 and concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.
12 "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
13 "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.


Those verses are clear on exactly what they are speaking of, Christ.
And the Greek word "elencho" used in that verse, which you have translated as "convict", is seen differently depending on ones beliefs.


from BibleGateway.com on this section of John

His central assertion is that this ignorance of the Father is culpable because of the witness he has borne in word and deed. He has spoken to them the words of the Father himself (14:10-11) and shown them the deeds of the Father (5:19, 30), deeds unlike anyone else's (v. 24). If he had not spoken and acted thus they would not be guilty of sin (vv. 22, 24). The text says literally, "they would not have sin" (hamartia). Hamartia can refer to guilt, but here the reference is more likely to sin itself. For in John's Gospel sin is understood as lack of faith in Jesus, that is, hatred of him and his Father (Michaels 1989:276). The opponents do not think they hate God, but such is the case given their hatred of Jesus (vv. 23-24). "This hatred is the human `no' to the divine `yes' expressed in the mission of his Son" (Ridderbos 1997:525).

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 02:14 PM
Those verses are clear on exactly what they are speaking of, Christ.
And the Greek word "elencho" used in that verse, which you have translated as "convict", is seen differently depending on ones beliefs.That is speaking clearly of the Holy Spirit Teke. That is the Helper Jesus speaks of in that passage... not Jesus.

And that commentary... that speaks nothing at all of this passage. So no clue what that is all about.

And whatever your "beliefs" here is what the word means.

elegcho -- pronounced: {el-eng'-kho}

of uncertain affinity; to confute, admonish: -- convict, convince, tell a fault, rebuke, reprove.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 02:15 PM
Let me highlight this part of the passage where Jesus is speaking of the same "He".

John 16:12 "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
13 "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.
14 "He shall glorify Me; for He shall take of Mine, and shall disclose it to you.

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 02:38 PM
I wouldn't say he didn't relate to it. I think Paul Washer made it pretty clear that being carnal would lead to death.

I disagree. He spoke of them as already dead, according to his doctrine.

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 02:47 PM
That is speaking clearly of the Holy Spirit Teke. That is the Helper Jesus speaks of in that passage... not Jesus.

And that commentary... that speaks nothing at all of this passage. So no clue what that is all about.

And whatever your "beliefs" here is what the word means.

elegcho -- pronounced: {el-eng'-kho}

of uncertain affinity; to confute, admonish: -- convict, convince, tell a fault, rebuke, reprove.

Yes, the Holy Spirit, not PW. The commentary speaks of the usage in John. If you disagree that is fine.

Do you believe those youth hate Jesus and His Father, and need to be convicted or convinced?

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 02:53 PM
Yes, the Holy Spirit, not PW. The commentary speaks of the usage in John. If you disagree that is fine.

Do you believe those youth hate Jesus and His Father, and need to be convicted or convinced?
And if Paul Washer is truly called to preach and equip the saints Teke... where do you think his message comes from? Why not the Holy Spirit? When Peter preached at Pentecost who was it that powered his mouth? And what happened... were they not pierced through the heart? In other words... they were convicted. But rest assured that there were many that would have said he condemned them. To some... the message smells of life. To some.. it smells of death. Understand that passage and you'll understand much.

VerticalReality
Apr 30th 2007, 02:55 PM
I disagree. He spoke of them as already dead, according to his doctrine.

Well, if Paul said to be carnally minded is death, then what state is a person in if they are indeed carnally minded?

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 30th 2007, 03:24 PM
Thanks PP… I just wanted clarification as to which post you were referring to…So tell me PP, that if I, you or anyone else here posted a thread here charging in the same manor as Preacher Paul has done, would you, I or another take this to heart and agree that we are not saved as he claims? So the assumption should always be that no one is a true believer and that the assumption is that those within a Christian audience is that they are not truly saved?

It's been said before in here and with some it is taken to heart. And as to the "assumption should always be" part of your paragraph... I figure you are now the one going for the shock value and taking this discussion where it isn't intended.

That’s so not true PP… by saying this is just avoiding the open question… :saint: if one is preaching to a ‘Christian’ audience, should they not then be Christian? [By they way, if you say my style is they same as Washer, and you like Washer’s style, then why the offence from you? Funny how this can be circular...]




Tell me that if I used the same words towards those here and with you, saying that your faith is false within a thread as this man has done with his audience -- this would 1) be right for me to say it, 2) right for me to claim it, and 3) received well by you and others?

Again... comparing a message on a message board is apples and oranges RbG. There is no way that such a comparison can be made.

Says who? You? Come on PP, there are many regulars here that we can see that we know very well here… just because we don’t have a face to see or a voice to hear doesn’t necessarily mean that we don’t know each other's walk. The words we use in type and how we treat one another as we reply are better judges of our walk with the Lord than with what we wear.... The bond of Christ is the common thread, so this is apples to apples – it’s just done virtually…


One.. it wasn't a few words made by person. It was a laid out... hour long message with a whole bunch of context. So your point itself is flawed and truthfully... makes no sense.
PP, so duration of an hour makes it right then? And you are judging my thoughts PP, just as I judging Washer’s …. Makes no sense indeed.




Tell me that he wasn’t reaching for shock and sensationalism to a mass of folks whom he knew were claiming to be Christians and that he wasn’t looking for a keyed response to his message?
Uh... you said you listened to most of the message. He himself said it would shock them. He admitted that he shocked them and did so intentionally. So again... not sure why you are so "shocked" that he shocked them.

PP… I’m not shocked, I stated that it is a tactic… where one states it or doesn’t , it’s still a tactic… that’s the point…. He is using shock tactics to make his points…


It was what one might call a wake up call. Very effective when done properly.
Wake-up call? Hmmm. OK So… this preacher is like a shock jock, were he positions for and expects refute… and demands that one measure their life to his voice or alarm clock? Again, you missed how little he uses scripture to point folks to, but instead hear his voice and call it good.




Tell me in that knowing this was a youth group, that he didn’t make judgment as to their faith in Christ en mass? Tell me that he was not reaching for an emotional response….. Tell me that he didn’t have a plan to capture their heart in seeking to throw guilt upon them again that they might have already dealt with and now may have caused them harm than good? Tell me why if his style and messaging were good, did you not doubt your own salvation when you heard this as well? Did you think that this was for the other guy??? Just asking brother….

That is interesting there RbG. Everyone in my house listened to that message and everyone of us had our own convictions and by God's grace... we will correct ourselves where correction is needed.

As to his mass judgment... he was right and statistics prove him out RbG. He made that case very well in his sermon and ask most preachers. If they answer honestly, they would be much like the Billy Graham example given in the sermon. They would be very happy if a small percentage of the people they have preached to were at the finish line when the race was ran.
I’m glad to hear you say you saw a need to correct something… So since you are sharing that you saw a need to change, care to share what it is that you saw in your life, so that I may see the need as well? I’m being serious here…

Statistics are statistics, and I use them every day myself…. For they try to join or separate the common and uncommon to make one’s point look right. For example, tell a man who is unemployed that the unemployment rate is only 5%, he will say not by my sight, it’s 100%. So statics are man’s way of rationalizing life around him. But when it comes to preaching the Gospel, I say statistics have little or no value… Why would they be important in presenting the Gospel?




See, I see this as being subtle tactics that are just like most seeker friendly preachers, except here, I see a better use of the word within the delivery than most…. But looking for results all the same.Good golly man, can’t you see this? Can’t you see that he is doing more judging than showing? He’s talking about change, talking about fruit, talking about repentance… and I agree with each point…. But he’s not showing the way, he’s judging that no one knows this but he…
Oh come on now. Now in reading this... you may have listened to what he said. But you didn't hear it.

Why PP… what I nice judgmental comment upon my hearing capabilities… see you do it too:lol: …




Sure he’s addressing how folks say a prayer and show no change, but he’s assuming that his audience is filled but with folks who are false Christians. He assumes that no one has come to a true faith in Christ Jesus. Instead of preaching the word to continue to build the faith, he has predetermined to say that none within the ‘Christian audience’ is saved and yet he fails to light the path with scripture as to how to be sure…. He’s assuming the worst to a group who he knows as ‘Christian’, and yet pre-judges that it’s in word only…. How does he know?
With many he need but look. Ever been to a youth conference today? Listen to the points he made? Talking for example about their appearance. Wearing clothes that were revealing etc. I assume he could actually see with the eyes he had in his head. Things like that.

Are looks deceiving? Isn’t the tongue a better measure to a man’s heart than his appearance to his heart? Don’t get me wrong - I support modest appearance as does the word, but to have someone on first glance use this to say that they are not saved is mighty risky…


And AGAIN... he tells them about 20 minutes into the sermon... NOW THAT I HAVE SHOCKED YOU... listen and let me explain this to you. And he explained it well. He called for a people to change. God has empowered you to do this so you can. You know... sort of the same stuff we are told in the Scripture.

Telling someone before they are shocked doesn’t mean that they weren’t… nor does this mean that it’s acceptable… And you are still focused on the ‘shock’ factor… it’s not so much the shock as it is a tactic…. If anything, my issue is with motive and shock is his tactic…. If you want to focus on something, move from the tactic to the motive! [And to repeat, his desire was to cultivate a keyed response to his message style, and not the word... which is no different from many PDCs]



Again RbG... read Galatians. Paul used that same "tactic" with them. He comes out of the chute laying in to them. Then he ends the letter telling them that this is how one lives in the flesh... this is how one lives in the Spirit. But I dare say... had you been on the receiving end of that letter... the beginning would have been no less a shock.

So you are saying that this group are as the Galatians….? You are applying a style without contextual relevance… Paul knew the Galatians and their condition, are you saying the Washer has the same history with this audience as Paul had with the Galatians? I don’t think so… Apples and Oranges.




Why did he not dive into John’s epistles? Why did he not talk about growing in the faith instead of blindly assuming condemnation that their faith was false? For he’s confusing his listener as to where they are in their faith, but didn’t give them God’s word to show them the light to take hold of. Why after tearing down, did he not use the word to build and build quickly?PP… It’s his delivery and content that needs to be discerned together and I believe effective preaching uses both, and as I’ve shared in a previous post -- its best through humility and fear… for which I see this man lacking in this one sermon…Now… if this delivery and message being acceptable by you, then why do you and I sit on the opposite side of the fence many times on doctrine and presentation than not? Do we not challenge in the same manner as Pastor Paul has done? Then why do you see me as being wrong and Paul being right? See, you could be saying right now, RbG, pretty self-righteous of you, aren’t you? If you do, then you should now see my point. Then should we not share this man’s ‘same’ love and concern for each other as he says he does with his audience and thus challenge each other’s thoughts and tear down each other’s faith because of love for each other? I dare say that we should not….
It is because Washer wasn't there preaching TULIP. He wasn't trying to convert folks to Calvinism or the Southern Baptist church. He was simply trying to awaken the dead (if you will). I already mentioned that doctrinally... Washer and I would clash. But I have told you many a time in the past couple of years we've yapped for example... I can live with the Reformed teaching in many ways because even though they are OSAS they are strong on obedience and when looking at the fruit of a person... you and I might agree that they are not saved and need to be told the gospel. Where you and I might disagree... is in the issue of whether that person has ever been "saved" at some other point in their life. But the important issue... they aren't saved now and are in need of Christ.

Now we are getting to the crux of the matter… I didn’t see him as preaching an OSAS message, nor do I see us making this an OSAS discussion.
Here’s my comment about fruit… a person’s fruit is not 1st seen in the clothes they were, or any outward appearance… or better, is not to be looked for in a person… the fruit of salvation as Galatians shows is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, self-control, which then manifests the visual in modest apparel – impurity, sensuality…. My contention is that Washer missed this if he thought the crowd to be lost Christians… maybe if he took Paul’s path and shared with them how to change by quoting Galatians’ 5, You and I would be squabbling about something else;) …




So as this man is preaching, he should be also teaching, how to live a Christian life, how to walk, how to grow in the faith, but assumes that the audience is full of unbelieving Christians. Yet he is a good speaker… I’d say he is good, for he has good flow and good tactics to build his position. All preachers are like sales people by the way, for they need to know their audience, then need to know their material, and they need to know how they relate… Is he a good preacher…. Don’t know. But what I heard within this one sermon, I’d say he positions some good doctrine that I am congruent with, but is this doctrine rightly delivered and applied for the right purposes… I lean to say not as good as others.
And certainly this would be a very good time to bring some common sense into the discussion.

Whoa…. I certainly hope that you mean from yourself :P ….



Here is a preacher that is invited to speak to a bunch of youth. He has one shot... one message... one hour. Plus keep in mind... the folks that invited him. They know what his message is. They know who they had invited. Gotta assume here too... they saw a need for that message because they also know the audience. All of these things can and should be factored into this.

That being said, they are assumptions… So you say that this youth group is wayward… How then could the leaders let this happen? Why didn’t Washer correct the leadership then, for as the leaders are, so is the flock. And as an aside, what was your point in presenting this to the forum? Do you feel that this needed to be shared in like manner as with Washer to the youth group?




Salvation cannot be achieved through yelling the gospel, or manipulating it to position one’s points, but when effectively presenting in love, humility and I also believe with a bit of reverencal fear as God enables both the presenter and the receptor… it’s the word presented through and by His Spirit that does the work…
Funny how you make a judgment that he didn't preach what he did with right motive... and yet your big complaint was his judging the audience.

Yep… that I guess is the beauty and the curse of fallen man… we have to make judgment as to what is right and what is wrong… problem is that man makes it to satisfy self 1st… In my view, I see this as being to create a keyed emotional response, and that he failed to bring himself into the fold as one who needs the same self-examination….



But myself... I heard it preached with a sincere heart. With love, humility and a boatload of fear.

Then Praise the Lord… I can’t say anything more… I wish I could see it the same way -- but thank the Lord that He used this man to reach you to change something in your walk.




Calling down fire from Heaven as Pastor Paul prayed within his opening or asking God to strike down dead those who Pastor Paul has asked for, or saying that America is a godless culture -- is over the line in my book…. And thus having the same effect as those ‘other’ churches….So I doubt very much that if he penned something here at the forums that it would be received as well by you, me and others as it being purported through this thread. Many folks here, myself included offer challenges to folks to help examine one’s faith and as you have declared, find edge and friction because of it. But for me, I have never declared anyone who is saved unsaved as he and others here who have. This subject is always a fine line, and for me, found his delivery to be controlling in both style and desiring of an outcome, and thus… a 180 degree twist to the seeker friendly style…. But ahhh it’s so subtle, that folks will walk right past it….But hey, this is just my opinion….
Sure you have... you are just more subtle with it... just as I am. Because of the medium and etc... we do have to walk that fine line at times. But again... using all the reasoning that I typed above with the common sense point... he isn't bound by such as that.

PP… one of our better banters in my opinion…. Thanks!


For God’s Glory…

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 04:00 PM
And if Paul Washer is truly called to preach and equip the saints Teke... where do you think his message comes from? Why not the Holy Spirit? When Peter preached at Pentecost who was it that powered his mouth? And what happened... were they not pierced through the heart? In other words... they were convicted. But rest assured that there were many that would have said he condemned them. To some... the message smells of life. To some.. it smells of death. Understand that passage and you'll understand much.

I understand the passage, it explains itself well.
The Holy Spirit is sent to convince the world of Christ. Even Jesus said, "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." John 3:17.

And Psalms reminds me....


Psa 146:3 Put not your trust in princes, [nor] in the son of man, in whom [there is] no salvation.

If the preachin isn't on Christ, then it isn't.

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 04:06 PM
Well, if Paul said to be carnally minded is death, then what state is a person in if they are indeed carnally minded?

I'm not replying to this post, as it would take the thread off subject. I'll just say I disagree with Calvinism, and Paul never said a Christian who is carnal minded, or natural or spiritual was dead (past tense).
Didn't want you to think I was ignoring your post. :hug:

jesuslover1968
Apr 30th 2007, 04:54 PM
I definately must have missed something, according to all the opposition I am seeing to this man's preaching. He preached like it was meant to be preached. He expounded on what scripture means.
He reached out to a bunch of kids that may not be saved. I apparently didn't see anywhere where he stated unequivocally that these kids were not saved. I think he was explaining to them how THEY could tell whether they were saved, or not. I think he made a great point about the fact that kids are taught these days if they wear a Jesus t-shirt, listen to Christian music and go to Church, they are saved, and that does NOT save them. I would much rather have a preacher preaching to my kids as this one did, rather than have some man get up there, tell a couple of stories, hear some hard rock music, and then send them home so they can continue to do what they have always done. It is the soul-condition that was Paul washer's concern, and you just don't see that much anymore. These days, we have to be politically correct and not step on anyone's toes, not offend them, etc...The truth is offensive to those who are perishing and that is something that every person must come to terms with. If we are offended, instead of attacking the messenger, maybe we should be examining ourselves to determine just exactly why we are so offended.
As for the carnal Christian thing, I tend to agree with Paul Washer. Being saved causes a change. It is called fruit. If there is no fruit, there is no salvation. Jesus said many who think they are saved, are not. He said that they would say Lord, Lord, didn't we cast out demons in your name,...etc..etc...and He would say to them, I never knew you...
The word Christian was first used at Antioch. It was made up by humans. We can call ourselves whatever we like, but it is the inside that will tell Jesus who we really are, and who we really belong to. We are either solid easter bunnies, full of the things of God, or we are hollow Easter bunnies, we look good on the outside but the inside is empty and dark, and rings hollow, attesting to our lost state and the condition of our soul.
I don't think there is a such a thing as a carnal Christian. That would denote someone who is given over to be carnal, not being repentant and sorrowful of sin, but rather wanting and expecting acceptance for it anyway, and continuing to do as they have always done, just like so many these days do, thinking they are saved, when in fact, they have been deceived.
There is a difference between someone who struggles and fights sin, one who is truly sorry, and wishes to change, and turns away from it and rebukes it, than someone who expects it to be accepted and excepted because it is what they want to do. One is a true Christian, and the other is not. God Bless.

VerticalReality
Apr 30th 2007, 04:54 PM
I'm not replying to this post, as it would take the thread of subject. I'll just say I disagree with Calvinism, and Paul never said a Christian who is carnal minded, or natural or spiritual was dead (past tense).
Didn't want you to think I was ignoring your post. :hug:

Okay. I also do not agree with Calvinism. However, Paul clearly stated that being carnally minded is death. Therefore, that should be taken that anyone who is carnally minded will not have life. It doesn't really have anything to do with Calvinism.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 05:21 PM
That’s so not true PP… by saying this is just avoiding the open question… :saint: if one is preaching to a ‘Christian’ audience, should they not then be Christian? [By they way, if you say my style is they same as Washer, and you like Washer’s style, then why the offence from you? Funny how this can be circular...]Huh?

And you are confusing style with doctrine. If your style was like Washer's then you wouldn't be complaining... or it is like I asked earlier... just one of those I say up things and you figure you have to automatically say down.

The message... and your message isn't even like Washers. Perhaps if Washer was in a bunch of discussions such as this and we got deep into doctrinal things... I would speak out against much of it. Same with McArthur and the guy that is in my quote. But as I said somewhere in all this... ultimately the sinner needs a savior and that we would agree on and we'd make that call by their fruit. Where the disagreement comes... were they really ever saved or not. You might say no and I might say yes (depending on what I know of the person). But if they lived like a stone cold heathen... we'd agree that something is amiss.

You make a video preaching like this... I'll post it too.



Says who? You? Come on PP, there are many regulars here that we can see that we know very well here… just because we don’t have a face to see or a voice to hear doesn’t necessarily mean that we don’t know each other's walk. The words we use in type and how we treat one another as we reply are better judges of our walk with the Lord than with what we wear.... The bond of Christ is the common thread, so this is apples to apples – it’s just done virtually…Oh no way RbG! If you honestly believe that then you are setting yourself up for failure. Words are just words. While they can tell you a bit about a person... they don't tell you much.

But in keeping with my actual point... There is a huge difference between an hour sermon... even two... and someone getting into every doctrinal detail known to man. Face it... there isn't much that we haven't said about most every issue that pops up on message boards. Talking doctrinal stuff. You know my stand on most of those issues and I know yours as well (speaking for the most part anyway). Washer didn't get into that. Take for example another sermon that I heard him preach in a Reformed pastor's meeting. He said "give me one Leanord Ravenhill over 20 dead Calvinist any day of the week." In context he was talking about the message to the church etc. This guy was very influenced by Ravenhill. Those who have ever heard him preach (he crossed denominational lines because of his message) will notice the similarity in a few places. Ravenhill died in the mid 90's but there are plenty of his sermons out there to be heard.





PP, so duration of an hour makes it right then? And you are judging my thoughts PP, just as I judging Washer’s …. Makes no sense indeed.Again... huh?



PP… I’m not shocked, I stated that it is a tactic… where one states it or doesn’t , it’s still a tactic… that’s the point…. He is using shock tactics to make his points…And you are totally missing the point. He told them that at the start. The folks that invited him to this conference knew that as well. Common sense should let us know that they knew their audience and yet chose this speaker. I trust they had their reasons.





Wake-up call? Hmmm. OK So… this preacher is like a shock jock, were he positions for and expects refute… and demands that one measure their life to his voice or alarm clock? Again, you missed how little he uses scripture to point folks to, but instead hear his voice and call it good.Um... alrighty then I guess.


I’m glad to hear you say you saw a need to correct something… So since you are sharing that you saw a need to change, care to share what it is that you saw in your life, so that I may see the need as well? I’m being serious here… No. What I am correcting isn't that big a deal to most but it is to me and the timing was perfect. It was a personal conviction that I doubt many would understand and I don't care to spend ten post answering questions as to why. I certainly will in private though... I will shoot you a PM later today.


Statistics are statistics, and I use them every day myself…. For they try to join or separate the common and uncommon to make one’s point look right. For example, tell a man who is unemployed that the unemployment rate is only 5%, he will say not by my sight, it’s 100%. So statics are man’s way of rationalizing life around him. But when it comes to preaching the Gospel, I say statistics have little or no value… Why would they be important in presenting the Gospel?I don't hold much stock in stats either. But then I don't totally discard them as useless either. He is correct though that the vast majority of this country claims to be "Christian". If you think questioning that is bad because stats are just stats and you actually believe those stats aren't rather telling... then you know... I don't even know what to say to you further on that issue. I don't need a stat to back me up on that but rest assured that there are many a preacher (especially Baptist... his audience here) that want to see the things.




Why PP… what I nice judgmental comment upon my hearing capabilities… see you do it too:lol: …Never denied it.



Are looks deceiving? Isn’t the tongue a better measure to a man’s heart than his appearance to his heart? Don’t get me wrong - I support modest appearance as does the word, but to have someone on first glance use this to say that they are not saved is mighty risky…Um... do you really think that this guys message was about making that judgment on a person by "first glance"? Again... listening and hearing aren't the same RbG. Either that or you are just picking the message apart for picking it apart sake.


Telling someone before they are shocked doesn’t mean that they weren’t… nor does this mean that it’s acceptable… And you are still focused on the ‘shock’ factor… it’s not so much the shock as it is a tactic…. If anything, my issue is with motive and shock is his tactic…. If you want to focus on something, move from the tactic to the motive! [And to repeat, his desire was to cultivate a keyed response to his message style, and not the word... which is no different from many PDCs]RbG... Ray Comfort witnesses with a certain tactic. Having a "tactic" is not a bad thing as long as it is for the glory of God. Goodness man... I can understand if someone disagreed so hard core with the message. But the only place I hear this sort of complaining on a persons style is from a Church committee who wants a say in where the pastor stands when he preaches... and yeah... true story I heard this weekend! :rolleyes:




So you are saying that this group are as the Galatians….? You are applying a style without contextual relevance… Paul knew the Galatians and their condition, are you saying the Washer has the same history with this audience as Paul had with the Galatians? I don’t think so… Apples and Oranges.Um... no. As I stated in the post... the folks who invited him knew. The guys was invited there by pastors. He didn't just show up and take over the pulpit. The pastors knew them and hopefully had that sort of relationship. So apples and apples RbG.




Now we are getting to the crux of the matter… I didn’t see him as preaching an OSAS message, nor do I see us making this an OSAS discussion. Actually it isn't the crux of the matter at all. I didn't see him preaching that message either. If I did... I'd of not been the one putting the link up there don't you think?


Here’s my comment about fruit… a person’s fruit is not 1st seen in the clothes they were, or any outward appearance… or better, is not to be looked for in a person… the fruit of salvation as Galatians shows is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, self-control, which then manifests the visual in modest apparel – impurity, sensuality…. My contention is that Washer missed this if he thought the crowd to be lost Christians… maybe if he took Paul’s path and shared with them how to change by quoting Galatians’ 5, You and I would be squabbling about something else;) …We can squabble about this if you like. I totally disagree with you on this.


Whoa…. I certainly hope that you mean from yourself :P ….Nah... I was already using it hence the reasoning behind the comment. ;)



That being said, they are assumptions… So you say that this youth group is wayward… How then could the leaders let this happen? Why didn’t Washer correct the leadership then, for as the leaders are, so is the flock. And as an aside, what was your point in presenting this to the forum? Do you feel that this needed to be shared in like manner as with Washer to the youth group?I think it needed to be shared with many folks. Youth, adult, old, young, male female. I figure the leadership was there and heard it too. Perhaps they were convicted as well along the way. He's preached variations of that message to many churches in the US. Not all kids. My assumptions here were logical ones. Now you are just asking me to make blanket assumptions about the leadership. Let's just say there could be many reasons why folks get to that state... I don't figure it takes an engineering degree to come up with a handful.



Yep… that I guess is the beauty and the curse of fallen man… we have to make judgment as to what is right and what is wrong… problem is that man makes it to satisfy self 1st… In my view, I see this as being to create a keyed emotional response, and that he failed to bring himself into the fold as one who needs the same self-examination….Do you not realize that you just judged while complaining about someone judging? Do you know that this man hasn't spent much time doing eye surgery on himself? Certainly you don't. Instead you judge simply because you didn't like the style... the tactic. ;)

And on another note... he can judge. There is nothing wrong with the church judging the church as long as the judgment is righteous. That judgment is made on those that claim to be Christian. That whole chapter in 1 Corinthians 5 speaks exactly of that and contextually... I am spot on.



Then Praise the Lord… I can’t say anything more… I wish I could see it the same way -- but thank the Lord that He used this man to reach you to change something in your walk.



PP… one of our better banters in my opinion…. Thanks!


For God’s Glory…no problem.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 05:33 PM
I understand the passage, it explains itself well.
The Holy Spirit is sent to convince the world of Christ. Even Jesus said, "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." John 3:17.

And Psalms reminds me....


Psa 146:3 Put not your trust in princes, [nor] in the son of man, in whom [there is] no salvation.

If the preachin isn't on Christ, then it isn't.And you did see that part about Him convicting the world of sin in that same passage? Why leave that off?

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 06:01 PM
And you did see that part about Him convicting the world of sin in that same passage? Why leave that off?

Didn't see any need in including it since I established by a previous post that John's book refers to sin as not believing in the Son of God.

Let me ask you something. Why did you make the subject title of this thread "Cultural Christianity"? That makes for a broad brush, wouldn't you say. Least it put my mind in the world view of Christianity. Which for me, in that thinking, means something negative. As Christianity isn't defined by culture. ie. no difference with God

So to my way of thinking about this, PW couldn't preach that to youth in other countries. Or could he?
Could he say that youth in Africa aren't, or might not be saved because of their inappropriate dress (by his standard)? IOW your present culture should define your Christianity, as well as all other cultures (I'd disagree on this).

I'd say in a way, this man is putting unnecessary peer pressure on those youth, using Christ.

jesuslover1968
Apr 30th 2007, 07:02 PM
Didn't see any need in including it since I established by a previous post that John's book refers to sin as not believing in the Son of God.

Let me ask you something. Why did you make the subject title of this thread "Cultural Christianity"? That makes for a broad brush, wouldn't you say. Least it put my mind in the world view of Christianity. Which for me, in that thinking, means something negative. As Christianity isn't defined by culture. ie. no difference with God

So to my way of thinking about this, PW couldn't preach that to youth in other countries. Or could he?
Could he say that youth in Africa aren't, or might not be saved because of their inappropriate dress (by his standard)? IOW your present culture should define your Christianity, as well as all other cultures (I'd disagree on this).

I'd say in a way, this man is putting unnecessary peer pressure on those youth, using Christ.


And it is exactly that opinion, and that world view, that has caused the Church to be the way it is today. Lax, uncaring and more concerned about stepping on someone's toes and hurting their feelings than whether they are saved, or not. :(
The whole point of talking about the clothes, in case someone didn't get it, was about the "fruit." when one is saved, GOD changes them through the Holy Spirit. If they are dressing like street walkers and thug punks, in goth, or whatever the current fad is, then they are of the world. We will know them by their fruit. If you take a baby Christian, no matter the age, and do not feed that baby on the milk of the Word, then they will never be ready for the Meat of the Word. They will starve to death and die in ignorance and lack of guidance.
If we talk about babies, we would never have a baby and not feed it until it starved to death, and not instructing the babies in Christ is even worse than that, but that is something the Church of today doesn't even see, nor care about. They care about numbers, in the congregation. They care about conversions they can tally up, not whether it was really a true conversion, or not. They care about how much money is in the coffers so they can plan on building a bigger building, and buy more musical equipment, and what else I don't even want to imagine.
There is absolutely too much evidence against what we call the Church today not to convict it under lukewarm, cold, or even just stone cold dead. That is what Paul washer is fighting against, and what we should be fighting against as well. We are so worried these days about giving our children everything they want, not disciplining them, letting them become adults with lack of self control and lack of caring for anyone but themselves to notice or even take into consideration that their souls are in danger of eternal damnation and we would let the false teachings that abound today shape their own spiritual demise, and I pray that we will all wake up to this fact, and do something about it. God Bless.

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 07:04 PM
Didn't see any need in including it since I established by a previous post that John's book refers to sin as not believing in the Son of God.

Let me ask you something. Why did you make the subject title of this thread "Cultural Christianity"? That makes for a broad brush, wouldn't you say. Least it put my mind in the world view of Christianity. Which for me, in that thinking, means something negative. As Christianity isn't defined by culture. ie. no difference with God

So to my way of thinking about this, PW couldn't preach that to youth in other countries. Or could he?
Could he say that youth in Africa aren't, or might not be saved because of their inappropriate dress (by his standard)? IOW your present culture should define your Christianity, as well as all other cultures (I'd disagree on this).

I'd say in a way, this man is putting unnecessary peer pressure on those youth, using Christ.It is obvious that you disagree on all of this. :lol: Again... I didn't suspect that you would have when I posted this. Don't know what he preaches to the church in Africa. Paul didn't write the same letter to the Philippians as he did the Corinthians either so I really don't think you have as much a point as you perhaps think you do here. The gospel is universal. The message to the church on direction... that depends on the church.

NHL Fever
Apr 30th 2007, 07:08 PM
Whether or not I agree with every point, I think it was a great sermon and great follow-up discussion for the board.

I'm not a pastor or theologian, but I think I stand more on the side of where PP is coming from.

The whole things about whether you can judge somebody by the way they dress - YES! you can definetly make the call that they should not be wearing sexually suggestive clothing. Also true that somebody's mouth speaks what's from their heart - but do you ever see a lady get up on stage dressed like Brittany Spears and deliver a wise fruit-evident message of any kind? Do you see the most serving and wise people in the congregation dress this way? No, you don't. Dressing in sexually suggestive manner and living a righteous life simply no not go together. This is clear evidence of a failure to act in a righteous manner in that area of life. The culture doesn't change genetics, nor the variations of testosterone of sex drive in a man's life. This has been the same for thousands of years. No matter where you are, you need to dress in a way that does not entice men to the flesh.

The other things I loved about this sermon, was how PW called people at the end to simply go home and live out their commitment if they made it, not come to the front and make an outward display. He only invited those who wanted help. If your heart is for God, then live that way.

As far as judging one another - its pretty clear that the church is charged with the responsibility of making judgment calls on its members. Our most revered leaders in scripture did this as a main part of their ministry. Believers are accountable to each other. We are supposed to correct one another with love. We are not supposed to live on isolated islands where nobody can criticize us because they don't know everything about us (since nobody does, therefore we would entirely free from any rebuke through a human mouth), and because the constitution of the state guarantees us privacy or whatever. If somebody has a rebuke for you, the consider it in prayer. If you don't find error with yourself, then keep praying just to make sure, and ask for forgiveness even for sins you may not even realize you've committed. If you feel no guilt, then live in peace and continue to do God's work with your righteous heart. There's no reason to be afraid of rebuke. If you search yourself and work out your salvation, you can discern the legitimate from what is not, and overall be a sharper instrument for God's purpose.

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 30th 2007, 07:51 PM
PP...

[Netting out your reply without wasting space in requoting it...]

Yep… life’s a pretty big judgment circle, you judging me by my words, I judging you back. Washer judges the youth group, I judge him judging them; you then judging me judging Washer; who I judge you judging me judging Washer judging the youth group, and all the readers judging us in the process… think of all the possibilities?

Decisions require judgments… every one needs to discern which door to go through and which path to follow… So which preacher is the one that we see as being the better, which one speaks clearly, which one has the best exegesis of scripture…. All needs judgment.

Yet ultimately, Jesus will judge every action and every motive, so in light of that, one’s [myself included] judgment needs to be sure, does it not…?

We are drawing to a point-counterpoint discussion so I think I will better spend my time in working on my video publication, now knowing that it will get air time here if it’s an hour long… LOL :rofl: :hug:

Thanks PP!

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 08:00 PM
PP...

[Netting out your reply without wasting space in requoting it...]

Yep… life’s a pretty big judgment circle, you judging me by my words, I judging you back. Washer judges the youth group, I judge him judging them; you then judging me judging Washer; who I judge you judging me judging Washer judging the youth group, and all the readers judging us in the process… think of all the possibilities?

Decisions require judgments… every one needs to discern which door to go through and which path to follow… So which preacher is the one that we see as being the better, which one speaks clearly, which one has the best exegesis of scripture…. All needs judgment.

Yet ultimately, Jesus will judge every action and every motive, so in light of that, one’s [myself included] judgment needs to be sure, does it not…?

We are drawing to a point-counterpoint discussion so I think I will better spend my time in working on my video publication, now knowing that it will get air time here if it’s an hour long… LOL :rofl: :hug:

Thanks PP!
Shoot... do it in half an hour. That will work for me too... doesn't take as long to download. ;)

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 30th 2007, 08:02 PM
Shoot... do it in half an hour. That will work for me too... doesn't take as long to download. ;)

It's nice to have friends in high places that can give a special dispensation to the rules....

;)

humbled
Apr 30th 2007, 08:11 PM
We are drawing to a point-counterpoint discussion so I think I will better spend my time in working on my video publication, now knowing that it will get air time here if it’s an hour long… LOL :rofl: :hug:

Thanks PP!


Shoot... do it in half an hour. That will work for me too... doesn't take as long to download. ;)I've been following along on your discussion a bit, but I'm confused. Are you guys gonna present video discussions on the board about this?

I think I missed something ... :hmm:

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 30th 2007, 08:16 PM
I've been following along on your discussion a bit, but I'm confused. Are you guys gonna present video discussions on the board about this?

I think I missed something ... :hmm:


Sorry John.... PP got the humor in the comments, unfortunatley, maybe you didn't.... I don't plan to shoot a video... sorry....

Centurionoflight
Apr 30th 2007, 08:23 PM
ProjectPeter



Sure you can. Show me that there biblical passage that says you cannot escape it? I can show you quite the contrary.



1john 1

5And this is the message that we have heard from Him, and announce to you, that God is light, and darkness in Him is not at all;

6if we may say -- `we have fellowship with Him,' and in the darkness may walk -- we lie, and do not the truth;

7and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light -- we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin;

8 if we may say -- `we have not sin,' ourselves we lead astray, and the truth is not in us;

9if we may confess our sins, stedfast He is and righteous that He may forgive us the sins, and may cleanse us from every unrighteousness;

10 if we may say -- `we have not sinned,' a liar we make Him, and His word is not in us.


The author of 1 John states he {as a believer} has sin; and we are lying when we say we dont.

humbled
Apr 30th 2007, 08:30 PM
Sorry John.... PP got the humor in the comments, unfortunatley, maybe you didn't.... I don't plan to shoot a video... sorry....lol ... prolly better that way :lol:

j/k bro :) I actually like seeing the face of the people I talk to online. makes it less impersonal, imo.

But i know a lot of people like the anonymity. To each his own :)

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 30th 2007, 08:36 PM
lol ... prolly better that way :lol:

j/k bro :) I actually like seeing the face of the people I talk to online. makes it less impersonal, imo.

But i know a lot of people like the anonymity. To each his own :)

Yep... probably best for all...

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 10:43 PM
ProjectPeter




1john 1
5And this is the message that we have heard from Him, and announce to you, that God is light, and darkness in Him is not at all;

6if we may say -- `we have fellowship with Him,' and in the darkness may walk -- we lie, and do not the truth;

7and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light -- we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin;

8 if we may say -- `we have not sin,' ourselves we lead astray, and the truth is not in us;

9if we may confess our sins, stedfast He is and righteous that He may forgive us the sins, and may cleanse us from every unrighteousness;

10 if we may say -- `we have not sinned,' a liar we make Him, and His word is not in us.
The author of 1 John states he {as a believer} has sin; and we are lying when we say we dont.If that is what John was saying then reconcile that with this there CoL...

1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;

Teke
Apr 30th 2007, 11:28 PM
It is obvious that you disagree on all of this. :lol: Again... I didn't suspect that you would have when I posted this. Don't know what he preaches to the church in Africa. Paul didn't write the same letter to the Philippians as he did the Corinthians either so I really don't think you have as much a point as you perhaps think you do here. The gospel is universal. The message to the church on direction... that depends on the church.

Since you didn't answer on the thread subject title, I'm not sure where your going with this.

As to my point, I don't think you are getting it.
American women aren't ignorant, and they enjoy their liberty. And quite frankly likely very tired of the old, keep the man safe from sinful thoughts argument.
Every man in every country should get a hold of their mind if it's that weak.
Speaking to these youth this way, only keeps promoting the same old bad habits.

This all reminds me of some Afghanistan women on TV being interviewed, while a man sat by directing them in what they could and couldn't do. They were laughing about how in America a woman can beat her husband, but not in their country. Anyway, they laughed a bit to much, and were told to stop laughing so much. "It is not good" the man said.

I thought we were in the 21st century in America. But it would seem, that some with scripture, would like us to be back in the first century.
Oh well, man's oppression continues......

I can tell you for sure that judging worldly things (clothes, music, food etc. ) has no bearing in Christ.
And sermons like that (which sounds like a Harvest youth sermon) do more harm than good. Why be a Pharisee, when the weightier matters should be addressed.

Redeemed by Grace
Apr 30th 2007, 11:30 PM
Hey PP...

I have to leave for a while -- but been thinking :hmm: ---- and I want to see your thoughts here...

Would you call what Washer was doing "preaching"?

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 11:34 PM
Since you didn't answer on the thread subject title, I'm not sure where your going with this.

As to my point, I don't think you are getting it.
American women aren't ignorant, and they enjoy their liberty. And quite frankly likely very tired of the old, keep the man safe from sinful thoughts argument.
Every man in every country should get a hold of their mind if it's that weak.
Speaking to these youth this way, only keeps promoting the same old bad habits.

This all reminds me of some Afghanistan women on TV being interviewed, while a man sat by directing them in what they could and couldn't do. They were laughing about how in America a woman can beat her husband, but not in their country. Anyway, they laughed a bit to much, and were told to stop laughing so much. "It is not good" the man said.

I thought we were in the 21st century in America. But it would seem, that some with scripture, would like us to be back in the first century.
Oh well, man's oppression continues......

I can tell you for sure that judging worldly things (clothes, music, food etc. ) has no bearing in Christ.
And sermons like that (which sounds like a Harvest youth sermon) do more harm than good. Why be a Pharisee, when the weightier matters should be addressed.
Uh.... is that what you think Paul was advocating when he penned the words for women to dress modestly?

ProjectPeter
Apr 30th 2007, 11:37 PM
Hey PP...

I have to leave for a while -- but been thinking :hmm: ---- and I want to see your thoughts here...

Would you call what Washer was doing "preaching"?
Works for me.

Redeemed by Grace
May 1st 2007, 12:54 AM
Works for me.


That's what I was expecting you to say....

Pilgrimtozion
May 1st 2007, 11:39 AM
That's what I was expecting you to say....

What would you call it, RbG?

karenoka27
May 1st 2007, 11:59 AM
I can tell you for sure that judging worldly things (clothes, music, food etc. ) has no bearing in Christ.
And sermons like that (which sounds like a Harvest youth sermon) do more harm than good. Why be a Pharisee, when the weightier matters should be addressed.

This is quite the discussion! I can't understand why Christians in America cannot admit that Paul is right when he says that we have "Americanized" Christianity. How can we not admit that the way a Christian woman dresses doesn't make any kind of statement as to who she represents..Jesus Christ?
How can we not admit that the music we choose to listen to is either for or against our Lord (have you listened to the words to the songs lately?)
How can we not admit that a good portion of the food we eat is to satisfy our flesh and not simply nourishing our body.
I think what is missing in America today is that we have forgotten Whom exactly it is we are serving.
As I am typing this I keep thinking of the word "Holy."
Holy-"exalted or worthy of complete devotion as one perfect in goodness and righteousness; devoted entirely to the deity or the work of the deity"

I think to be entirely devoted says it all.
If we were really honest and willing to be truthful everything we do should glorify God.
1 Cor 10:31-"Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or "whatsoever ye do", do all to the glory of God."
How anyone can take a verse like that and make it not apply to them is beyond me.
I know the Bible says that we have liberty to do certain things..but it also says this:
Galatians 5:13-"For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another."

I cannot believe that Paul's passion for the unsaved is misinterpreted as him being a Pharisee..my goodness..what would the apostle Paul have been called if he were here today!??:eek:

Teke
May 1st 2007, 12:57 PM
Uh.... is that what you think Paul was advocating when he penned the words for women to dress modestly?

I doubt any of us can be certain for sure, since we weren't there and don't know what was going on. Still, another time another place, doesn't apply to every time and place.

Modestly could just mean, not being a show off about it. Irregardless of what your showing off (clothes, jewelry, the body).

Do you think the guys had trophy wives back then?
And if this is all about scripture, the OT certainly speaks of women dressed up quite a bit. Including the verses on Israel and how God decked her out. Which sounds like God has an appreciation for the beauty of women.;)

Practically speaking, women usually dress according to their environment. For instance, women in the north eastern states dress differently from those in the southern states. In the west, those in the mountain areas dress differently than those on the California coast.

Then there is the matter of how far the church should take this. Like, what about tattoos, or piercings, whether men or women. Or how about hair, long or short for men and women.
So if one is going to be legalistic about this, then there is a host of questions to be answered.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 01:06 PM
This is quite the discussion! I can't understand why Christians in America cannot admit that Paul is right when he says that we have "Americanized" Christianity. How can we not admit that the way a Christian woman dresses doesn't make any kind of statement as to who she represents..Jesus Christ?
How can we not admit that the music we choose to listen to is either for or against our Lord (have you listened to the words to the songs lately?)
How can we not admit that a good portion of the food we eat is to satisfy our flesh and not simply nourishing our body.
I think what is missing in America today is that we have forgotten Whom exactly it is we are serving.
As I am typing this I keep thinking of the word "Holy."
Holy-"exalted or worthy of complete devotion as one perfect in goodness and righteousness; devoted entirely to the deity or the work of the deity"

I think to be entirely devoted says it all.
If we were really honest and willing to be truthful everything we do should glorify God.
1 Cor 10:31-"Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or "whatsoever ye do", do all to the glory of God."
How anyone can take a verse like that and make it not apply to them is beyond me.
I know the Bible says that we have liberty to do certain things..but it also says this:
Galatians 5:13-"For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another."

I cannot believe that Paul's passion for the unsaved is misinterpreted as him being a Pharisee..my goodness..what would the apostle Paul have been called if he were here today!??:eek:

Paul was a Pharisee, so he probably wouldn't mind being called one.

I believe different people have different ideas about what holy "looks" like.
Personally I believe God created us each unique, and in that we are to be who He created us to be.

Our youth are trying to find themselves and how they fit in this world. Jesus said, "suffer the children". I believe mature Christians should be able to do that. Even tho we may say, "Lord have mercy", sometimes.:)

Redeemed by Grace
May 1st 2007, 01:07 PM
What would you call it, RbG?

Washer's 'preaching'?

To be truthful, I'm not too sure...:hmm:


For the subject matter in preaching is always GOD, and the object matter is man.... This preaching is backwards in my opinion, whereas the subject matter as presented by Washer is man's view, and then the object is God...

In studying this further, I was drawn away from the style and now am focused in Washer's content, and I am discovering that what I was missing was his using the same contemporary approach of being man centered and to be truthful... I over looked this at first.

In my study -- here are a few notes regarding preaching that I saw this morning within the Bible... now this list is not inclusive of everything... nor did I annotate every biblical reference, but in seeing how Washer's preaching and the gospel related to each other, I'm having a difficult time seeing if he is preaching the Gospel as patterned by scriptural examples...

Who Preached:


- John the Baptist [Matt 3:1; Mark 1:4;]
- Jesus [Matt 4:17; 11:1;]
- Jonah [Matt 12:41; Luke 11:32;]
- The Appointed Twelve [Mark 3:14;]
- Philip [Acts 8:12;]
- Paul [Acts 19:13;]
- Silvanus [2 Cor 1:19]
- Timothy [2 Cor 1:19]
- Noah [2 Peter 2:5;]
- God [Rev 10:7]
- An Angel [Rev 14:6]

To Whom or Where:


- All nations [Matt 24: 14; Mark 13:10; 14:9]
- Poor [Matt 11:5; Luke 4:18; Luke 7:22; ]
- Nearby Towns [Mark 1:38]
- Synagogues throughout all Galilee [Mark 1:39]
- All creation [Mark 16:15;]
- Everywhere [Mark 16:20;]
- The people [Luke 3:18; Acts 10:42;]
- The synagogues of Judea [Luke 4:4; ]
- Throughout the villages [Luke 9:6;]
- In the temple [Luke 20:1; ]
- Those who had been scattered [Acts 8:4;]
- To many villages of the Samaritans [Acts 8:25;]
- In Antioch [Acts 15:35; ]
- In Rome [Rom 1:15;]
- From Jerusalem and round about as far as Illyricum [Rom 15:9; ]
- Not where Christ was already named, so that I would not build on another man's foundation [Rom 15:20;]
- To save those who believe [1 Cor 1:21;]
- The Gentiles [Gal 1:16; Gal 2:2; EPH 3:8;]
- To Abraham [Gal 3:8; ]
- Of this church [Col 1:25; ]
- The ancient world [2 Peter 2:5]
- To His servants the prophets. [Rev 10:7;]

What


- Repent the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand [Matt 4:17; 10,7]
- A baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. [Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3;]
- The Gospel of God [Mark 1:14; Luke 3:18; Luke 9:6; Luke 20: 1; Acts 8:40; 14:7; 14;15, 21; 16:11;]
- That men should repent [Mark 6:12;]
- Kingdom of God [Luke 4:43; Luke 8:1; Luke 16:16; Acts 8:12; Acts 9:25; Acts 20:25; Acts 28:31]
- Jesus as the Christ [Acts 5:42; Rom 15:9; Rom 16:25]
- The Word [Acts 8:4; 15:35;]
- Jesus [Acts 8:35;]
- Peace through Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all) [Acts 10:36;]
- To the Greeks [Acts 11:20;]
- The good news of the promise made to the fathers [Acts 13:32;]
- Jesus and the resurrection. [Acts 17:18;]
- The gospel of His Son [Romans 1:9;]
- The word of faith [Rom 18:8; Gal 1:23; ]
- Christ crucified [1 Cor 1:23;]
- He has been raised from the dead [1 Cor 15:12. 14;]
- Christ Jesus as Lord [2 Cor 4:5;]
- Peace [Eph 2:17;]
- The unfathomable riches of Christ [Eph 3:8;]
- Word of God [Col 1:25; ]
- Principals [1 Tim 6: 2;]
- The word [2 Tim 4:2;]
- Good News [Heb 4:2, 6; ]
- Gospel [1 Peter 1:12;]
- Of righteousness [2 Peter 2:5;]
- Eternal gospel [Rev 14: 6;]

Now in finding an example of someone preaching the Gospel... I find that Paul preached a masterful sermon at Antioch found in

Acts 13:16-49

16 Paul stood up, and motioning with his hand said, "Men of Israel, and you who fear God, listen:
17 "The God of this people Israel chose our fathers and made the people great during their stay in the land of Egypt, and with an uplifted arm He led them out from it.
18 "For a period of about forty years He put up with them in the wilderness.
19 "When He had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He distributed their land as an inheritance--all of which took about four hundred and fifty years.

20 "After these things He gave them judges until Samuel the prophet.
21 "Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for forty years.
22 "After He had removed him, He raised up David to be their king, concerning whom He also testified and said, 'I HAVE FOUND DAVID the son of Jesse, A MAN AFTER MY HEART, who will do all My will.'
23 "From the descendants of this man, according to promise, God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus,
24 after John had proclaimed before His coming a baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.

25 "And while John was completing his course, he kept saying, 'What do you suppose that I am? I am not He. But behold, one is coming after me the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.'
26 "Brethren, sons of Abraham's family, and those among you who fear God, to us the message of this salvation has been sent.
27 "For those who live in Jerusalem, and their rulers, recognizing neither Him nor the utterances of the prophets which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning Him.
28 "And though they found no ground for putting Him to death, they asked Pilate that He be executed.
29 "When they had carried out all that was written concerning Him, they took Him down from the cross and laid Him in a tomb.

30 "But God raised Him from the dead;
31 and for many days He appeared to those who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, the very ones who are now His witnesses to the people.
32 "And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers,
33 that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, 'YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.'
34 "As for the fact that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay, He has spoken in this way: 'I WILL GIVE YOU THE HOLY and SURE blessings OF DAVID.'

35 "Therefore He also says in another Psalm, 'YOU WILL NOT ALLOW YOUR HOLY ONE TO UNDERGO DECAY.'
36 "For David, after he had served the purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep, and was laid among his fathers and underwent decay;
37 but He whom God raised did not undergo decay.
38 "Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you,
39 and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses.
40 "Therefore take heed, so that the thing spoken of in the Prophets may not come upon you:
41 'BEHOLD, YOU SCOFFERS, AND MARVEL, AND PERISH;
FOR I AM ACCOMPLISHING A WORK IN YOUR DAYS,
A WORK WHICH YOU WILL NEVER BELIEVE, THOUGH SOMEONE SHOULD DESCRIBE IT TO YOU.'"

42 As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.
43 Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.

44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.
45 But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began contradicting the things spoken by Paul, and were blaspheming.
46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, "It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.

47 "For so the Lord has commanded us,
'I HAVE PLACED YOU AS A LIGHT FOR THE GENTILES,
THAT YOU MAY BRING SALVATION TO THE END OF THE EARTH.'"
48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.
49 And the word of the Lord was being spread through the whole region.

Now, I don't expect Washer to cite Paul's sermon word for word, but to I do expect every preacher to mimic the subject focus of God and the hope through salvation....


For God's Glory...

karenoka27
May 1st 2007, 01:08 PM
I doubt any of us can be certain for sure, since we weren't there and don't know what was going on. Still, another time another place, doesn't apply to every time and place.

Modestly could just mean, not being a show off about it. Irregardless of what your showing off (clothes, jewelry, the body).

Do you think the guys had trophy wives back then?
And if this is all about scripture, the OT certainly speaks of women dressed up quite a bit. Including the verses on Israel and how God decked her out. Which sounds like God has an appreciation for the beauty of women.;)

Practically speaking, women usually dress according to their environment. For instance, women in the north eastern states dress differently from those in the southern states. In the west, those in the mountain areas dress differently than those on the California coast.

Then there is the matter of how far the church should take this. Like, what about tattoos, or piercings, whether men or women. Or how about hair, long or short for men and women.
So if one is going to be legalistic about this, then there is a host of questions to be answered.

Modesty is modesty in any state...seriously. that's not legalism.
1 Timothy2:9-"In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;"

Did men have trophey wives in those days..I believe they did..but they enjoyed their "trophy" in the privacy of their own homes..not display them in public as they are today.
Why is modesty considered legalism? I am having such a hard time understanding this.

karenoka27
May 1st 2007, 01:10 PM
Paul was a Pharisee, so he probably wouldn't mind being called one.

I believe different people have different ideas about what holy "looks" like.
Personally I believe God created us each unique, and in that we are to be who He created us to be.

Our youth are trying to find themselves and how they fit in this world. Jesus said, "suffer the children". I believe mature Christians should be able to do that. Even tho we may say, "Lord have mercy", sometimes.:)

Paul was not a Pharisee in the way you say Paul Washer is one...so in that case...if you did use it in the same way...then the apostle Paul and Paul Washer..both Pharisee's had only one thing in mind and one common purpose..to see the lost come to know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

Whispering Grace
May 1st 2007, 01:13 PM
Since when did following and obeying God's Word become legalism?

karenoka27
May 1st 2007, 01:17 PM
I think this is the problem:
legalism-"strict, literal, or excessive conformity to the law or to a religious or moral code"...
since we no longer live under the "law"..and we now live under grace...some think that if we obey God's commandments in the New Testament which were given for His church...then we are confusing that with obeying the law. It doesn't make sense. If God says dress modestly then do it..that is not legalism...it is for today!

Teke
May 1st 2007, 01:26 PM
Modesty is modesty in any state...seriously. that's not legalism.
1 Timothy2:9-"In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;"

Did men have trophey wives in those days..I believe they did..but they enjoyed their "trophy" in the privacy of their own homes..not display them in public as they are today.
Why is modesty considered legalism? I am having such a hard time understanding this.

Modesty becomes a legalistic matter when one makes it so.
Dress can also be a matter of ethics in business, whether moral or legal (in the sense that you will loose your job if you do not dress accordingly, such as those who wear uniforms to work). Dress can even be a matter of health to some companies. Though they are not as hard nosed about this as they use to be. Such as women should wear pantyhose in the workplace. That is still pretty common northeast, but not in the south.

And our youth, in many of the schools now, are required to wear uniforms, so they don't cause a commotion about clothes. Should they wear uniforms even when they aren't in school? Should the church require such things as businesses and schools? Maybe, if they think they are a business or school.

Should the church take such matters and make issues of them, I don't think so. I believe all the church needs to do is present Christ. Leave judgment to God.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 01:33 PM
Eastern Orthodox Christians do not say much to the world and worldly matters, unless it concerns the church and Christ. When Madonna tried to play in Russia, not to long ago, tho EO have no interest in Madonna or what she promotes, they protested her concert. Not because of her clothes or what she stands for or promotes, but because she was using religious icons in her shows. Doing inappropriate things with the cross etc.
That is where I would draw the line also.:cool:

Whispering Grace
May 1st 2007, 01:34 PM
Should the church take such matters and make issues of them, I don't think so. I believe all the church needs to do is present Christ. Leave judgment to God.

I think if people are showing up inappropriately dressed, then the church can choose to make an issue about it.

I also think each church has a right to set and hold to a standard. I don't think that is legalism.

Legalism to me is saying "If you don't do this (wear suits or dresses), you are bound for hell." My husband grew up thinking if he drank alchohol, he was going to hell. THAT is legalism.

It wouldn't have been legalism if the church had said "We at this church choose to hold to a standard out of respect for the Lord" or something like that.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 01:37 PM
Since when did following and obeying God's Word become legalism?

WG, are you being Messianic with me? If so, I'll have to ask you what the "Word" is to you.

Whispering Grace
May 1st 2007, 01:40 PM
I attended a Pentecostal Holiness church this weekend. All the men wear suits and all the women wear long dresses and don't cut their hair. This church formed with the purpose of mainting a non-worldly standard.

I had to dig in the deepest recesses of my closet to find a skirt to wear, but I sure wasn't going to show up to the church without a skirt on.

If I desire to go back to this church (which I do), I am going to need to buy some more skirts and dresses, not because I think I am going to hell if I don't, but out of respect for the purpose and standard of this church.

Who am I to tell this church they can't maintain a standard and vision for their church? Is it not my choice to attend or not? Aren't there 5000 churches in the area I can go to if wearing a skirt would kill me?

Teke
May 1st 2007, 01:42 PM
I think if people are showing up inappropriately dressed, then the church can choose to make an issue about it.

They can, but should they. Should they decide who comes to church and who doesn't, by their standard.


I also think each church has a right to set and hold to a standard. I don't think that is legalism.

Legalism to me is saying "If you don't do this (wear suits or dresses), you are bound for hell." My husband grew up thinking if he drank alchohol, he was going to hell. THAT is legalism.

It wouldn't have been legalism if the church had said "We at this church choose to hold to a standard out of respect for the Lord" or something like that.

And some do, such as the Harvest churches, which have injured many youth spiritually here. Many of those youth want nothing to do with any church now. So what did they accomplish? They held their standard for their church. La de da..........who cares.:rolleyes:

Whispering Grace
May 1st 2007, 01:46 PM
WG, are you being Messianic with me? If so, I'll have to ask you what the "Word" is to you.

The Word is the Bible.

Whispering Grace
May 1st 2007, 01:51 PM
And some do, such as the Harvest churches, which have injured many youth spiritually here. Many of those youth want nothing to do with any church now. So what did they accomplish? They held their standard for their church. La de da..........who cares.:rolleyes:

Is it a church's purpose to compromise with the ways of the world in order to draw Johnny Q. Heathen off the street to fill one of their seats?

I don't believe so. I believe our purpose is to go out in the world to reach the lost, not to bring the world into the church. I believe church (aside from the ultimate purpose of honoring and glorifying the Lord) is to equip the saints and edify the body of believers.

So much focus is being given to attracting the outside world and filling seats, many saints aren't being fed and taught properly.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 01:52 PM
I attended a Pentecostal Holiness church this weekend. All the men wear suits and all the women wear long dresses and don't cut their hair. This church formed with the purpose of mainting a non-worldly standard.

I had to dig in the deepest recesses of my closet to find a skirt to wear, but I sure wasn't going to show up to the church without a skirt on.

If I desire to go back to this church (which I do), I am going to need to buy some more skirts and dresses, not because I think I am going to hell if I don't, but out of respect for the purpose and standard of this church.

Who am I to tell this church they can't maintain a standard and vision for their church? Is it not my choice to attend or not? Aren't there 5000 churches in the area I can go to if wearing a skirt would kill me?

Then spend your money to live up to a church standard, rather than give it to the poor.
The scriptures say if you have one set of clothes (coat included) and three days of food, you have enough.

Personally I don't know why we don't see more poorly dressed Christians in America, since they are to give all for Christ.
I have a couple dresses I wear to church, any more than that and I would feel like I had more than others and needed to give. As someone else may likely need it more than I.

If our youth need a standard, they should read the saints of the church and how they lived and died for the faith.:saint:

Teke
May 1st 2007, 01:57 PM
Is it a church's purpose to compromise with the ways of the world in order to draw Johnny Q. Heathen off the street to fill one of their seats?

I don't believe so. I believe our purpose is to go out in the world to reach the lost, not to bring the world into the church. I believe church (aside from the ultimate purpose of honoring and glorifying the Lord) is to equip the saints and edify the body of believers.

So much focus is being given to attracting the outside world and filling seats, many saints aren't being fed and taught properly.

That is not my focus. Nor is it my responsibility to reach the lost, that is the Holy Spirit's work.
If the church attracts anything from the world, it attracts it to the heavenly. The church should be as heaven on earth. That is what going to church is like for me, being in heaven on earth. :hug:

jesuslover1968
May 1st 2007, 02:05 PM
They can, but should they. Should they decide who comes to church and who doesn't, by their standard.


And some do, such as the Harvest churches, which have injured many youth spiritually here. Many of those youth want nothing to do with any church now. So what did they accomplish? They held their standard for their church. La de da..........who cares.:rolleyes:


The youth of this generation are already wounded spiritually. By the lies they have been told about how easy it is to be saved, to be a child of God. If they deny and reject the truth, they were never saved, anyway.
The way this sounds, we are supposed to keep teaching these youths the lie so they will be more comfortable with Jesus? I think not. Jesus would not tell them lies and He does not want to bring people into His Body on false pretenses, that is a lie, and it is sin. We can not water down the Word so it is more accepted. How can you truly accept something if you don't even know what it really is?
Yes, most certainly a Church has the right to decide who attends their Church. But, it is the way it is done that tells whether it is for godly reasons, or not. If women come into the Church dressed like they are going to a bar, then the Church has the right to tell them to dress more appropriately. If they do not, they have the right to tell them not to come back. That is respect. Whether some have forgotten, or not...it is a sin to cause someone to lust, just as it is a sin TO lust. If you are doing something to cause someone weaker to stumble, you have sinned. I think everyone here would agree that lust is a big issue for all people...men, women, teens, etc. If one is an alcoholic, you wouldn't offer him/her a drink, and it's the same principle. If a woman comes into the Church and she is properly covered, but her clothes are not up to worldy standards, then no, there would be no right to refuse her. And the same goes for men.
As for who cares......God cares. And that is way more serious, and demands more respect than your la te da....:( God Bless.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 02:07 PM
The Word is the Bible.

God didn't call me to follow a book, He called me to follow Him. And the bible isn't a book of legal standards. It's a book filled with witness and testimony of God's people and His interaction with them, irregardless of the world and it's standards.

jesuslover1968
May 1st 2007, 02:07 PM
That is not my focus. Nor is it my responsibility to reach the lost, that is the Holy Spirit's work.
If the church attracts anything from the world, it attracts it to the heavenly. The church should be as heaven on earth. That is what going to church is like for me, being in heaven on earth. :hug:


Yes, it is your responsibilty to reach the lost. Not sure where you get the idea it isn't. We are all to witness.
Heaven will not have half naked and scantily clad women, nor those who live as they world lives. Heaven will not hold those who cling to a faulty Gospel. God Bless.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 02:10 PM
The youth of this generation are already wounded spiritually. By the lies they have been told about how easy it is to be saved, to be a child of God. If they deny and reject the truth, they were never saved, anyway.
The way this sounds, we are supposed to keep teaching these youths the lie so they will be more comfortable with Jesus? I think not. Jesus would not tell them lies and He does not want to bring people into His Body on false pretenses, that is a lie, and it is sin. We can not water down the Word so it is more accepted. How can you truly accept something if you don't even know what it really is?
Yes, most certainly a Church has the right to decide who attends their Church. But, it is the way it is done that tells whether it is for godly reasons, or not. If women come into the Church dressed like they are going to a bar, then the Church has the right to tell them to dress more appropriately. If they do not, they have the right to tell them not to come back. That is respect. Whether some have forgotten, or not...it is a sin to cause someone to lust, just as it is a sin TO lust. If you are doing something to cause someone weaker to stumble, you have sinned. I think everyone here would agree that lust is a big issue for all people...men, women, teens, etc. If one is an alcoholic, you wouldn't offer him/her a drink, and it's the same principle. If a woman comes into the Church and she is properly covered, but her clothes are not up to worldy standards, then no, there would be no right to refuse her. And the same goes for men.
As for who cares......God cares. And that is way more serious, and demands more respect than your la te da....:( God Bless.

This is how Muslims teach. Does it bring every thought captive to Christ.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 02:16 PM
Yes, it is your responsibilty to reach the lost. Not sure where you get the idea it isn't. We are all to witness.
Heaven will not have half naked and scantily clad women, nor those who live as they world lives. Heaven will not hold those who cling to a faulty Gospel. God Bless.

Your life is a witness, not the words of your mouth, unless they are scripture being read, sang or chanted.

And really, you don't know what heaven holds. Do you think you need an A in gospel to get in. :rolleyes: I think your heart, prayer and worship will be all that really matters.

NHL Fever
May 1st 2007, 02:23 PM
Then spend your money to live up to a church standard, rather than give it to the poor.
The scriptures say if you have one set of clothes (coat included) and three days of food, you have enough.


Its hardly an issue of money and you probably know that. The sluttiest clothes are often the most expensive/designer. People are not dressing immodestly because they don't have the money. They dress that way because they value the opinion of man more than God.

If a person actually had only one set of clothes, it wouldn't be revealing because that wouldn't be good for all seasons anyway ;). What would they do in winter? You don't see people with literally only a few outfits, who wear revealing clothing. Dressing like a prostitute takes money. Because of styles and society, it costs a lot to look cheap.



Personally I don't know why we don't see more poorly dressed Christians in America, since they are to give all for Christ.
I have a couple dresses I wear to church, any more than that and I would feel like I had more than others and needed to give. As someone else may likely need it more than I.
I appreciate that. I do think people spend WAY too much money on appearance. You don't have to break the bank to look modest and respectful. From what you have, be respectfully dressed for the Lord and for being in His house. He knows the heart. He is aware of somebody can't afford a suit. He also knows those who are wearing things to be fashionable rather than for His glory.



If our youth need a standard, they should read the saints of the church and how they lived and died for the faith.:saint:Hey amen to that. I do believe that the saints of the early church put on respectable (and certainly modest) garb to worship as a congregation. Paul repeatedly criticized both sides of that spectrum - on the one hand saying rich people shouldn't get the best seats and shouldn't outwardly brag with long tassels etc, and on the other hand women definetly keep their hair covered. That in his time, was considered to be indicative of a women of less repute (prostitute). It was indeed acceptable and fashionable to dress that way for a certain sector of society, but Paul was making a clear judgment that such was not acceptable for the people of God. He recognized, as we do today, that if the priorities are right, its quite easy to find very cheap, respectable clothing, and so he didn't make excuse for cost. That woman who gave only the two coins (but a large amount for her) who was praised, most definetly had her hair covered, don't you think? For the person who cares about honoring God with their appearance, cost is not the object, nor is it a barrier in real terms.

People in South America, Russia, China, who worship in the church take it big time serious, and dress modestly. They are WAY poorer than any of us. It's an American, opulent, do-my-own-thing culture that has made it quite cool to say we don't have to make any changes in dress when we come into God's house. This is neither the model of the early saints, nor similar to the church in American 50 years ago or the churches all around the world in developing countries where your faith can cost you.

Also - we need to make sure we understand the difference between the professing Christian and the unbeliever in church. We want the unbeliever to come into the church building and hear the gospel (better yet to hear it from us inviting them over, going to coffee etc), so we're not going to demand they conform to our every dress wish. But once somebody declares they are a child of the most high God, and Jesus Christ will now preside over as Lord and Master, that sets the bar higher. It is not acceptable to wear something that is immodest or sexually suggestive at that point, otherwise its a huge contradiction between what you profess with the lips and what the body is saying.

If a pastor came up to a person and asked them to dress more modestly - that person should just do it. If it becomes a HUGE issue for that person to make those change, they just CAN'T change 'who they are' or whatever other me-first excuse is used, then clothes and appearance are an idol for that person, that they cannot let go of. We are to die to who we are, and be born again in a spirit of submission and looking out for the best interests of others (ie not causing other to stumble).

Teke
May 1st 2007, 03:18 PM
It's not about money or clothes. It's about people. And people are not all the same, nor do they think alike.

NHL Fever, you should see the way the Russian women dress at church in America. They'd likely be in your sleazy category....... but they cover their heads in church (all ethnics have their particular style of head coverings).
The Lebanese women dress modestly, but don't cover their heads. Same goes for Chinese and Japanese.
The South American women are much like the Greeks, they are very elaborately dressed for church, and may or may not cover their heads.

In a church like mine, with people from all over the world, clothes matter very little. Our respect for one another matters more.

Whispering Grace
May 1st 2007, 03:25 PM
God didn't call me to follow a book, He called me to follow Him.

Following Him IS following His Word, which He graciously compiled into a book for us. ;)



And the bible isn't a book of legal standards. It's a book filled with witness and testimony of God's people and His interaction with them, irregardless of the world and it's standards.

The Bible most assuredly gives us standards to live by.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 03:29 PM
Following Him IS following His Word, which He graciously compiled into a book for us. ;)

Christ isn't in a book. Are you sure your not Messianic.




The Bible most assuredly gives us standards to live by.

Yes, and they are, prayer, fasting, worship and repentance. And that is how one becomes holy. Not by changing their clothes.

NHL Fever
May 1st 2007, 03:52 PM
It's not about money or clothes. It's about people. And people are not all the same, nor do they think alike.

It doesn't matter what a person thinks, or how different they are. We are called to dress modestly. If culture matters a great deal, then it would be appropriate for women to bear bikinis to church so long as represented their culture, and they had 'the right heart'.

It's not about people, when you enter into the church its about God (as it should be with all of life). People are involved when it comes to serving people, the need for self-expression should be dead at the door of the church. You do not need any particular style of dress or preference, in order to serve others. If somebody is provocative in their dress and professing Christ, that is unacceptable, end stop.



NHL Fever, you should see the way the Russian women dress at church in America. They'd likely be in your sleazy category....... but they cover their heads in church (all ethnics have their particular style of head coverings).
The Lebanese women dress modestly, but don't cover their heads. Same goes for Chinese and Japanese.
The South American women are much like the Greeks, they are very elaborately dressed for church, and may or may not cover their heads.
I'm not insisting on people covering their heads. I mentioned it to show how even the poorest in Paul's day understood and respected the concept of dressing modestly. Their were those in their culture richly adorned with jewels, make-up, gold, etc (bible mentions this), but Paul took pains to emphasize that your preferences and habits should be dead compared to your desire to serve the Lord, in both inward and outward appearance.
If those Russian women are dressed in a sexually provocative way that might cause men to check them out or think sexual thoughts, then that is wrong. True, there will be still me men who will lust not matter what, but women should be doing their best, not just the bare minimum, to help their brothers, not hinder them for the sake of fashion style. Likewise, men should do their best not to look at women in a lustful way. Both sides need to cooperate on this, not just one or the other.


In a church like mine, with people from all over the world, clothes matter very little. Our respect for one another matters more.I can't make any call on your church since I've never been there (I'd like to check it out though if I'm ever there). If you respect your male brothers, then you should be doing your utmost to facilitate that walk, not putting stumbling blocks in their path.

PS Would you mind telling me the name of your church and where it is? If I'm ever there, I'll make a point of visiting :D You can send it in a pm as well.



Yes, and they are, prayer, fasting, worship and repentance. And that is how one becomes holy. Not by changing their clothes.Of course we accept that those things are important, it would be dishonest to imply that caring about appearance means we downplay those items. But clothes do matter, I'm not sure why you don't accept that. Your outward appearance should represent your heart. Rich or poor, its quite easy to dress shamefully or respectably. When your society is over-sexualized, and you wear the style of your society, there is a good chance your will be projecting an image of sexuality. That is contrary to biblical doctrine. Fortunately, in ALL societies, its quite easy to find modest, stylish clothing. The more modest clothing is also generally the cheapest (more discount brands). Style is truly not the issue, it only becomes an issue if you choose to make it one.

1 Timothy 2:9
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

Women are to dress modestly by Paul's advice. The outside and inside should mirror each other.

Exodus 28:2-4
And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty.

Aaron and priests station (which was a spiritual position) was reflected outwardly in how they were to be dressed.

Deuteronomy 22:5
The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God

While I understand we are free from the specific Mosaic laws, the OT shows Gods attitude towards things. God does care what you put on your body.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 04:47 PM
It doesn't matter what a person thinks, or how different they are. We are called to dress modestly. If culture matters a great deal, then it would be appropriate for women to bear bikinis to church so long as represented their culture, and they had 'the right heart'.

Oh, come now. That is being extreme.


It's not about people, when you enter into the church its about God (as it should be with all of life). People are involved when it comes to serving people, the need for self-expression should be dead at the door of the church.

I agree in Church it's about God, but it is also about His people. Jesus said, if you did it to the least, you did it to Him.


I'm not insisting on people covering their heads. I mentioned it to show how even the poorest in Paul's day understood and respected the concept of dressing modestly.

I'm not insisting on head covering either, tho it is my way. I only mentioned it to show the diversity involved.
It would seem from Paul's words they didn't.



Their were those in their culture richly adorned with jewels, make-up, gold, etc (bible mentions this), but Paul took pains to emphasize that your preferences and habits should be dead compared to your desire to serve the Lord, in both inward and outward appearance.

That we should be dead to the world and alive to Christ, I agree.


If those Russian women are dressed in a sexually provocative way that might cause men to check them out or think sexual thoughts, then that is wrong. True, there will be still me men who will lust not matter what, but women should be doing their best, not just the bare minimum, to help their brothers, not hinder them for the sake of fashion style. Likewise, men should do their best not to look at women in a lustful way. Both sides need to cooperate on this, not just one or the other.

All can't help their brothers, maybe some can. Such as the older women speaking with younger women. But that is not a definite, that will happen.
Men being perverted in their minds is their problem to speak with God about in repentance. And it's a bad argument. If it applies in this area of dress, then it should be applicable to other areas of their perverted thoughts, such as our children. Should we keep our children from church because some man may be having perverted thoughts about them.

A mature woman is fully aware of the dangers of the world. Myself as a mother and grandmother, have told my children of the evil in the world around them. As scripture states, do not put trust in men where salvation is concerned.



I can't make any call on your church since I've never been there (I'd like to check it out though if I'm ever there). If you respect your male brothers, then you should be doing your utmost to facilitate that walk, not putting stumbling blocks in their path.

I respect my male brothers and will tell them outright to keep their mind out of the gutter in church, if necessary. I'm a church mother, that's my job.:D
And the prescription for such thoughts is prayer, not other people making you more comfortable. Or if it be suffering to them, then as mature Christians they should be able to bear it.
But in my church, it would be difficult for one to be so comfortable. You stand and pray the whole time. If your not doing that, then your not in worship, but someplace else. We don't listen to long sermons and watch a show. We just worship, chanting/singing scripture and praying. There is no time for such foolishness.



PS Would you mind telling me the name of your church and where it is? If I'm ever there, I'll make a point of visiting :D

Sure. Holy Trinity Orthodox Church in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Teke
May 1st 2007, 05:02 PM
projecting an image of sexuality.

An image is in the eye or mind of the beholder.


But clothes do matter, I'm not sure why you don't accept that.

Oh, I accept that. Some people need clothes.:lol:


When your society is over-sexualized

A subject for another thread. Best not get me started on feminism and it's part in the American history. I teach younger women about just this sort of thing and how it has effected America. And, no, I'm not a feminist.

Whispering Grace
May 1st 2007, 06:38 PM
I'm not a feminist.

It took thousands of posts, but Teke and I finally agree on something! :lol:

Centurionoflight
May 1st 2007, 06:41 PM
PP



If that is what John was saying then reconcile that with this there CoL...

1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;


Yes and his future writing shows how to avoid sin; which is basically to stay in fellowship. If one is in fellowship they can avoid sin; if they are not then they are in sin.

Many times each day Christians fall out of fellowship thru sins of the mind.
It is a constant act to keep in fellowship thru 1 john 1:9.

You dont just do that once a week and expect to merit much gain in the spiritual walk..

NHL Fever
May 1st 2007, 07:00 PM
An image is in the eye or mind of the beholder.


I agree, but only to a point. We are built to be sexually attracted man and woman towards each other. The beholders eye cannot change your genetic code. There are ways of displaying oneself that accentuate that, and ways that do not. 99% of regular everyday people can appreciate their culture, and what symbols that culture associates with sex appeal. They can deduce what overall type of clothing is going to advertise the flesh more prominently.

I don't believe the bikini argument is extreme, because its conceivable that people might wear one everyday if they live in a hot climate and that's just how they relax. How would you tell those people to dress differently if was indeed their culture?

Regarding kids - its comes down to what is of benefit. Yes there might be people who are attracted to kids, but kids can't do anything to lessen that. Adults can lessen the chance someone would focus on their sexual aspects. The benefit of kids in church is clearly high regarding their spirituality, and the drawback (potential target) rare in the extreme. Overall, the benefit grossly outweighs the risk. On the other hand there is no benefit at all to dress in skin-tight or revealing clothing in church, and there is a significant drawback - the men who will look and be distracted/lustful. In my life I've never heard of a man who's reported stumbling because of kids in church, but the testimonies of men who report women's skin exposure as a stumbling block is pretty much endless. In no way would dressing with modesty and respect hurt a women's walk with the Lord, or her experience in church in the slightest, just as it does not hurt the man's walk to wear a decent shirt and not a wife-beater while in church.

Dressing modestly will have different definition depending on the person, but in the heart the person knows if they are being modest or not. If they are not dressing modestly, they are placing their own fashion desire above the concerns of their brothers, and they are in direct contradiction to biblical advice.



A subject for another thread. Best not get me started on feminism and it's part in the American history. I teach younger women about just this sort of thing and how it has effected America. And, no, I'm not a feminist.It sound to me like there may be a hidden "telling women how to dress is just a male technique to keep women down" between those lines. You can correct me on that if I'm wrong. In all sincerity, this is completely out of the mind of men like myself who want to promote modesty and discretion in dress. I believe that idea is hyped by those who want to resist for the sake of resisting something out of stubbornness or who want to justify themselves against a past correction they didn't receive well, not those who honestly want to make the church a place more conducive to righteousness for everyone. (I'm not saying this to you, but in general).

Toolman
May 1st 2007, 07:22 PM
After listening to the sermon I thought I would give my thoughts since that is what PP asked for :)

First off I would like to state that I am surprised that this message is said to be "shocking" and something unusual. That is the way I see it described on the internet and in this thread.

Having been in a pentecostal/charismatic Church for the 1st 10 years of my Christian walk I have heard this type of sermon more times than I can count. My pastor's son preached similiar sermon's almost everytime he spoke at our church which was many, many times. And the message was always very similiar, "you are only Christian in name and are not saved because you are acting wordly, don't witness, don't tithe, etc.". Very typical revivalism qualities, i.e. often lots of shouting and crying during the prayer.

So, this was definitely something that was not anything new, at least within my realm of experience.

The positives I found in the message and presentation

1) Sinner's prayer rebuked - He rebuked the sinner's prayer type conversion as non-biblical and as some type of magical phrase.

2) He encouraged study of theology and Church history.

3) He is addressing incorrect theology (as he sees it) within his own denomination, the in-breeding of arminianism/decisionism/"cheap grace" into a historically reformed denomination.

4) He is calling for people to deeply follow Christ.

The general negatives/concerns I found in the message and presentation

1) The Southern Baptist denomination was rooted in racism (and much exists today) and I didn't hear much addressing of that sin and it seemed to escape the list.

2) Clothing to accentuate your face is biblically allowed but that accentuates your body is not? I haven't found that in scripture yet.

3) He does a broad stroke of "bad mouthing" the kids parents. He says their parents want cars, good jobs, security, etc. (i.e. wordly things) for these kids but he (and not God btw :hmm:) wants them to serve Christ in radical ways, just like what he wants for his own son.
First and foremost this comes off as prideful. Second, he doesn't know what these kids parents want for them. Third, he is usurping authority and IMO bending (if not breaking) the commandment to honor mother and father.

4) He claims that nobody studies logic anymore. I know he's trying to encourage people to study but I think there are more effective ways than the guilt trip way.

5) Profession of faith means nothing :o. Once again, I know he's trying to motivate the kids but a teacher must be very careful with their words and to declare strongly that profession of faith means nothing is not biblical. Our declaration of faith DOES mean something and we are instructed to do so in scripture.

Larger concerns I have with the message

The largest concern I have with this message is something I have addressed here on this board many times and that is the idea of self-examination as a proof test of salvation.

I know scripture encourages us to do so and I support it within the FULL context of scripture and within a balanced approach to biblical Christianity.

Examining ourselves can be a slippery slope if not done within a fuller understanding of salvation and where our focus is to mainly be, which is upon the person and work of Jesus Christ as the ONLY thing that justifies us before a holy God.

If not done within that framework, self-examination can cause one to fall into the opposite ditch of legalism, pride, boasting and a trust in works.

The only warning against falling in that ditch is boldly proclaiming justification based on the person and work of Christ alone, apart from ANY works done by us and I found the message SORELY missing this key of the Gospel message.

This is my biggest concern with the message and I would have liked to see a balanced presenation of the fullness of the Gospel and an understanding of salvation. Without a clear cut understanding of Justification (and distinction from) our Sanctification will never be done in the correct spirit.

I have posted this before but I post it again to reiterate how I understand the biblical commands of examining ourselves within the larger context of the full understanding of salvation:



Sword and dagger.
I personally look at examining myself as a sword and a dagger.

The Sword
On the one hand I examine my position in Christ, that He has purged ALL my sin and the penalty for it FOREVER, that I am now seated with Him in the heavenlies secure in His Grace, and that in Him I am blessed with ALL spriritual blessings. My identity is found in Him and Him alone. I am justified before God because of Christ alone, apart from any work.

This is the sword of examination. I must constantly remind myself that when God looks upon me He sees His Son and not my sin.
This conquers the condemnation that the enemy would love for me to wallow in.

The Dagger
On the other hand I examine my practical walk with the Lord. Where am I missing the mark in what He would will for my life. Who would He have me minister to that I have neglected? What intents of my heart are not godly?

This is the dagger of examination. This conquers the complacency that the enemy would love for me to slide into.

The Precedence
The sword and the dagger are both vital but the sword must always proceed (take precedence over) the dagger or condemnation and guilt will result from the dagger. Sanctification follows and flows out of Justification. We are sanctified because we have been justified.

And just to clarify any examination we do is because of God working in our hearts to conform us to the image of His Son. We do not do it in our own power or strength. True examination comes from God and does not bring condemnation but brings about a progressive maturing and conforming to His image.

Those are my thoughts :)

Teke
May 1st 2007, 08:28 PM
It sound to me like there may be a hidden "telling women how to dress is just a male technique to keep women down" between those lines. You can correct me on that if I'm wrong. In all sincerity, this is completely out of the mind of men like myself who want to promote modesty and discretion in dress. I believe that idea is hyped by those who want to resist for the sake of resisting something out of stubbornness or who want to justify themselves against a past correction they didn't receive well, not those who honestly want to make the church a place more conducive to righteousness for everyone. (I'm not saying this to you, but in general).

Actually it is more connected with feminism in this country. So I'm not laying all the blame with the guys. Just the part about keeping their minds right.;)

It has been my experience in teaching younger women, especially high school and college women who are more ensnared by this amongst our society than most, that the feminist view is what they are being infected by. Most would never think this is the root of the problem. But it is. Not only with dress, but same s*x relations as well. It is truly what has promoted what men view as se*ual promiscuity among women.

A great book I use (one of many) is "More Spirited Than Lions" by Sarah Elizabeth Cowle. It lists the common myths, and gives some great history for background. It gives a good Christian response to feminism and a practical guide to the spiritual life of women. And it's written by a women, so it isn't insulting to most women. So if you want young women to know the truth about their culture (American) and it's problems (this one being feminism) in light of Christianity, this is the best way to approach the subject and educate them. And the truth will set them free. I guarantee it will change the way they think. :)

NHL Fever
May 1st 2007, 09:05 PM
A great book I use (one of many) is "More Spirited Than Lions" by Sarah Elizabeth Cowle. It lists the common myths, and gives some great history for background. It gives a good Christian response to feminism and a practical guide to the spiritual life of women. And it's written by a women, so it isn't insulting to most women. So if you want young women to know the truth about their culture (American) and it's problems (this one being feminism) in light of Christianity, this is the best way to approach the subject and educate them. And the truth will set them free. I guarantee it will change the way they think. :)


That book sound really appealing I think I'd like to read it myself and possibly give it to my fiance. Neither of us is over a quarter century old ourselves so that sounds fascinating, or is it mainly for teenage girls with minimal life experience?

Are you orthodox?

Teke
May 1st 2007, 09:50 PM
That book sound really appealing I think I'd like to read it myself and possibly give it to my fiance. Neither of us is over a quarter century old ourselves so that sounds fascinating, or is it mainly for teenage girls with minimal life experience?

No it's not written for teenage girls. I was pointing out the benefit of the education in it. They would be better informed before making any rash decisions. A mother or teacher should guide teens in studying this.
The college Christian ladies love it.:)

But no, it's not light reading. A practical Christian woman of my age, about half a century;) , may find some of the material quite shocking and repulsive. Yet necessary to get to the truth of the matter. And isn't that what we really want to know. :saint:


Are you orthodox?

Yes, I am.

SIG
May 1st 2007, 11:07 PM
Just listened to 20 minutes of this. My Truth Meter says "Partial."

Alas, he comes across more p***ed off than compassionate...

jesuslover1968
May 2nd 2007, 05:20 PM
Your life is a witness, not the words of your mouth, unless they are scripture being read, sang or chanted.

And really, you don't know what heaven holds. Do you think you need an A in gospel to get in. :rolleyes: I think your heart, prayer and worship will be all that really matters.

hmmm...:hmm: then when Jesus said to go out into the world, He was just mistaken? :rolleyes: And what about that part about confessing with your mouth? :rolleyes:

in order for your heart to be right with God, you have to know what He expects from you. ;)



Romans 10:9- That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Matt. 28:18-20
18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Romans 10:15
15And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
Romans 1:8
8First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.
Colossians 1:5-6
5For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;
6Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:

Here are just a few verses to make my point. Reading the Bible is one of the most important connections to knowing God. If you haven't read it, how will you know what is expected of you? I know what heaven holds, it holds our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, and you should know that, too. God Bless.

Pilgrimtozion
May 2nd 2007, 06:23 PM
Just listened to 20 minutes of this. My Truth Meter says "Partial."

Alas, he comes across more p***ed off than compassionate...

I would agree with you that he is ticked off. To be honest, I am ticked off when I see the wealth of the heritage of the Western Church and I see what she has done with it. The state of the Church today in the West is a sad one indeed.

But I would say that his presentation of this very truth in the way he does it is a sign of his compassion. I hear the heart of God through what this man is saying here. Sure, he's not perfect in how he says it and he's not perfect in the content of everything he says either. The bulk of the message and the presentation, however, sounds to me like a prophetic message from the heart of God to wake up! Of course it needs to be balanced with other messages - that is why we are a body. But this man has a heart for the holiness and purity of God's Church, which is something I admire and sense deeply in what he says and how he says it.

Redeemed by Grace
May 2nd 2007, 06:51 PM
Colossians 4:6
Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person.


If someone is ticked off and is so while preaching the gospel, I wonder how effective he is --- and how effective he could be even more [Not being ticked off... per se] --- if he measured his words and attitude?

Pilgrimtozion
May 2nd 2007, 06:56 PM
And what is grace, exactly, RbG? It is the empowerment from God to do what we cannot do in ourselves. As such, I do not see how his speech was not seasoned with grace. Don't you think Paul was ticked off at times when he wrote to some of the churches? Don't you think Jesus was ticked off at the Pharisees? Look at the Old Testament and see how ticked off God sometimes is with a wife who goes around sleeping with every lover she can find!

Redeemed by Grace
May 2nd 2007, 08:17 PM
And what is grace, exactly, RbG? It is the empowerment from God to do what we cannot do in ourselves. As such, I do not see how his speech was not seasoned with grace. Don't you think Paul was ticked off at times when he wrote to some of the churches? Don't you think Jesus was ticked off at the Pharisees? Look at the Old Testament and see how ticked off God sometimes is with a wife who goes around sleeping with every lover she can find!


Sounds like you're a little ticked of right now, eh? :lol:


And my answer is... no, not at all. Ticked off is 'very strong' in my book. Ticked off relates to uncontrolled anger and is not holy anger just in case you think it would be. Ticked off is not a positive emotion, but a negative one... Ticked off and the substitute P word instills shock and challenge and maybe even rage...


So if the comment was that you or someone else saw him being ticked off, then I state - why that's not good... not good at all. No one should say of a preacher of the word of God that he was ticked off.... for as an elder, he should not be pugnacious but gentle and peaceable....[1 Tim 3]

And if you go back a few pages of this thread, I pulled together a listing of scripture that shows pattern as to what and how preaching is all about... I didn't see one example of being ticked off as part of the pattern, did you?

If your saw him as being ticked off, how could that be good? How could that be good even when those within the audience applauded and amened in agreement to his words he was using and he maintained his 'tude in rebuking them, instead of letting grace settle the harmony to his words of maybe a changed heart within the crowd?

So no, I don't see being ticked off as being a trait that is acceptable, desirable or one that I would want to emulate.... but sadly... a bad trait I fight with daily.... maybe that's why it's so clear to me....

humbled
May 2nd 2007, 08:40 PM
So no, I don't see being ticked off as being a trait that is acceptable, desirable or one that I would want to emulate.... but sadly... a bad trait I fight with daily.... maybe that's why it's so clear to me....I'm with you on this one, brother.

Grace to you in your fight. Christ has delivered us from the burden of being ticked off ... we need to somehow learn to believe it.

I look at how far I have to go to be like Christ, and I feel as if I'm at the foot of Mt. Everest. I look back on my growth and see the subtle changes, and I feel like I'm at least half way. God changes us even if we don't see it. The fight has been won in Christ and can be acquired by faith, brother. I don't know how hard your struggle is, but praying the Word and acknowledging Christ's work somehow alleviates that for me.

I didn't mean to rabbit-trail the thread -- just a word of encouragement for ya from a fellow struggler :)

God bless

Pilgrimtozion
May 2nd 2007, 09:14 PM
Sounds like you're a little ticked of right now, eh? :lol:


And my answer is... no, not at all. Ticked off is 'very strong' in my book. Ticked off relates to uncontrolled anger and is not holy anger just in case you think it would be. Ticked off is not a positive emotion, but a negative one... Ticked off and the substitute P word instills shock and challenge and maybe even rage...


So if the comment was that you or someone else saw him being ticked off, then I state - why that's not good... not good at all. No one should say of a preacher of the word of God that he was ticked off.... for as an elder, he should not be pugnacious but gentle and peaceable....[1 Tim 3]

And if you go back a few pages of this thread, I pulled together a listing of scripture that shows pattern as to what and how preaching is all about... I didn't see one example of being ticked off as part of the pattern, did you?

If your saw him as being ticked off, how could that be good? How could that be good even when those within the audience applauded and amened in agreement to his words he was using and he maintained his 'tude in rebuking them, instead of letting grace settle the harmony to his words of maybe a changed heart within the crowd?

So no, I don't see being ticked off as being a trait that is acceptable, desirable or one that I would want to emulate.... but sadly... a bad trait I fight with daily.... maybe that's why it's so clear to me....

LOL, there have been cases but thankfully, this is not one of them. ;)

Perhaps we have a different definition of being 'ticked off'. Should we use the term righteously indignant instead? What I mean to communicate is an underlying attitude of dissatisfaction with the way things are and having a passion to do something about it, to encourage people to do what God has called them to do from that Divine dissatisfaction.

Does that help?

VerticalReality
May 2nd 2007, 09:27 PM
Just listened to 20 minutes of this. My Truth Meter says "Partial."

Alas, he comes across more p***ed off than compassionate...

I wonder how Jesus Christ came across when He began turning over the tables?

ravi4u2
May 2nd 2007, 10:32 PM
Psalms 118:22 & 23 - The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone; the LORD has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes.



Although I have read this portion of scripture numerous times, just the other day it struck me differently. "The stone the builders rejected..." The builders have always rejected this Stone. But why would they reject this Stone? Was not this the most precious Stone? Would this very Stone not have given the builders the kind of stability and value to what they were building, as no other stone could have provided?



The builders had to reject this Stone as this Stone will not allow anyone to build using it; for the Stone was the Builder Himself. This was the Living Stone. Anyone interested in building anything is repulsed by this stone for this Stone conforms to the imagination of no man. This stone has a will of His own.




This was a Stone that was so sharp that whosoever even falls on Him, will be broken to pieces. For this reason, even to this day, the pharisees, the religious leaders and all builders, discerning that this Stone is against them, have rejected Him. They seek an opportunity to ensnare this Stone and even to kill Him, for they have perceived that this Stone is against them.



This Stone from time past, has chosen other living stones like Himself. Other stones that transformed to be like the Living when they acknowledged that there is salvation in no other except in this Stone. And this Living Stone has now snatched the Kingdom from the hands of the pharisees, the religious leaders and all builders; and have given it to the others who have become like Him. Now these builders seek to ensnare and destroy those that have become like Him.



I hear the Spirit saying, "EXCEPT THE Lord builds the house, they labor in vain who build it;" While those who now try to build, labor in vain, this Ancient Stone now builds the House, His House; And His House is marvelous in our eyes.

Redeemed by Grace
May 3rd 2007, 01:11 AM
I'm with you on this one, brother.

Grace to you in your fight. Christ has delivered us from the burden of being ticked off ... we need to somehow learn to believe it.

I look at how far I have to go to be like Christ, and I feel as if I'm at the foot of Mt. Everest. I look back on my growth and see the subtle changes, and I feel like I'm at least half way. God changes us even if we don't see it. The fight has been won in Christ and can be acquired by faith, brother. I don't know how hard your struggle is, but praying the Word and acknowledging Christ's work somehow alleviates that for me.

I didn't mean to rabbit-trail the thread -- just a word of encouragement for ya from a fellow struggler :)

God bless

Thanks brother for your kind words of encouragement and more importantly, thanks for your prayers....

SIG
May 3rd 2007, 06:36 AM
In all fairness, I only listened to the first 20 minutes...

Some random thoughts:

1. He seemed to use the word "American" as if it were a dirty word. True Christianity is trans-cultural. While America's Christians are faced with difficult and unique cultural challenges, so were the Christians in the few other countries I have visited/lived in.

2. Judging people's walk with the Lord by outward appearance is problematic.

3. I have no doubt that many of the youth at a rally of 5000 are nominal Christians. There is no point in calling them to holiness until they are saved. Those at the rally who are saved are already involved in God's work of sanctification in their lives.

4. I dearly hope no one mistakes a call to holiness with a call to blandness.

Whispering Grace
May 3rd 2007, 11:41 AM
I left my "worldly" church this week. And I told my pastor all of my concerns before I left.

He said he completely disagreed that the church is worldly. This was one day after the church service where he showed a clip from Spiderman 3, played a secular C&W song to introduce his sermon, spent about 1/3 of the sermon quoting secular statistics/stories/quotes, and though the sermon was about love, he never once got around to preaching the love of Christ......he just preached on how to "find love" with a few Bible quotes thrown in for good measure.

And the sermons series he is doing is formulated around the tv show "Lost".

Honestly, it felt like a self improvement seminar with some hip Christian music thrown in for flavor.

Redeemed by Grace
May 3rd 2007, 01:23 PM
I left my "worldly" church this week. And I told my pastor all of my concerns before I left.

He said he completely disagreed that the church is worldly. This was one day after the church service where he showed a clip from Spiderman 3, played a secular C&W song to introduce his sermon, spent about 1/3 of the sermon quoting secular statistics/stories/quotes, and though the sermon was about love, he never once got around to preaching the love of Christ......he just preached on how to "find love" with a few Bible quotes thrown in for good measure.

And the sermons series he is doing is formulated around the tv show "Lost".

Honestly, it felt like a self improvement seminar with some hip Christian music thrown in for flavor.

WG,

Praise God for His grace and wisdom in giving you eyes that can see....!


It seems that good doctrinally sound churches are few and far between these days.. but they are out there... Keep praying and keep looking WG... [Any you know I will be praying for you in this endeavor as well]


For God's Glory...

humbled
May 3rd 2007, 04:31 PM
Well, after finally listening to that, I have to say I'm with RbG on this one.

The guy's style came across (to me at least) as "holier than thou" and condemning of everyone in general. For instance, in the first five minutes of this, Paul says "Christians shouldn't be like the world! They should be like Jesus Christ!!" -- and the audience claps. Then Paul condemns them for clapping and accuses them of being the very people he is talking about.

But he qualifies it with "I'm not here to get amens or applause, I'm talking about YOU -- all you people who claim to want to serve Christ, are not sincere ... you wouldn't really want to be a missionary. You wouldn't really want to do what I do"

But the truth is, he is right in what he says. Just not in how he says it, or how he accuses the people in the audience. He should do as the author of Hebrews does and tell them how they can know, and leave it in the hands of God and their conscience, not that they actually are false professers. Ironic, tho, how when it is said that the bible speaks of this very thing and the verses which speak of "losing" your salvation are doing nothing more than what Paul Walker did ... IOW, saying "you never had it to begin with" ... and those who say that phrase are said to be wrong.

Ironic that a NOSAS proponent would endorse this sermon really. Because when it is pointed out that the bible says this very thing, it is disagreed with.

"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter"

That is what Paul (Walker, and the Apostle) said, and that is what Hebrews says.

Whispering Grace
May 3rd 2007, 04:48 PM
I don't think one needs to be OSAS to believe there are many false conversions, especially with the watered-down gospel that is being preached in so many churches.

humbled
May 3rd 2007, 05:02 PM
I don't think one needs to be OSAS to believe there are many false conversions, especially with the watered-down gospel that is being preached in so many churches.Oh, sure, that's apparent to anyone who is paying attention ;)

But my point is that this guy says "they weren't really saved to begin with" and is hailed as the guy we need to heed by some people who disagree with that very statement, at least when it is purported on this forum.

Pilgrimtozion
May 3rd 2007, 05:37 PM
Oh, sure, that's apparent to anyone who is paying attention ;)

But my point is that this guy says "they weren't really saved to begin with" and is hailed as the guy we need to heed by some people who disagree with that very statement, at least when it is purported on this forum.

I don't think that is a fair assessment of what goes on here when the topic of OSAS/NOSAS is discussed. I am convinced everybody would agree that there are people who call themselves saved but are not. It is within the context of and in relation to the OSAS argument that this statement causes debate, since the OSAS position says all who fall away were never really saved to begin with, whereas NOSAS disagrees on this. So in the context of that discussion it is rejected as being always true, but in general it is not something that anybody denies as being true in some cases.

humbled
May 3rd 2007, 06:14 PM
I don't think that is a fair assessment of what goes on here when the topic of OSAS/NOSAS is discussed. I am convinced everybody would agree that there are people who call themselves saved but are not. It is within the context of and in relation to the OSAS argument that this statement causes debate, since the OSAS position says all who fall away were never really saved to begin with, whereas NOSAS disagrees on this. So in the context of that discussion it is rejected as being always true, but in general it is not something that anybody denies as being true in some cases.

And as I said, my point here is that Walker is saying "ALL who fall away, or live an ungodly life, or do not do the will of the Father, were NEVER saved to begin with."

And I 100% agree with that, and so does Scripture, in my opinion ... every time the bible speaks of falling away, it is telling us how to identify those who were "never saved to begin with" so that we DON'T lose hope and think that this great apostasy is because God's promises are not being carried out. God WILL SAVE His people, just as He promised. And those who fall away were never saved to begin with, because that would prove God to be a liar. And that is my biggest problem with NOSAS.

But this rabbit trail is for another thread at another time, I would think :)

Pilgrimtozion
May 3rd 2007, 09:27 PM
And as I said, my point here is that Walker is saying "ALL who fall away, or live an ungodly life, or do not do the will of the Father, were NEVER saved to begin with."

And I 100% agree with that, and so does Scripture, in my opinion ... every time the bible speaks of falling away, it is telling us how to identify those who were "never saved to begin with" so that we DON'T lose hope and think that this great apostasy is because God's promises are not being carried out. God WILL SAVE His people, just as He promised. And those who fall away were never saved to begin with, because that would prove God to be a liar. And that is my biggest problem with NOSAS.

But this rabbit trail is for another thread at another time, I would think :)

Yes, I would agree - a rabbit trail for another thread at another time.

Let me just add that I understand what you are saying, but I never heard Paul Washer say that during his sermon.