AMF/Tulsa: the result of "tradition of men"

[Bro-Larry]

When men take a point of scripture and extrapolate it, or extend it out, or stretch it out to mean more than the true God intended meaning, then you have synthesized a doctrine or a tradition of men.

This was Jesus' number one indictment, against the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Jesus said that they made "...the word of God of none effect through your tradition,...: and many such like things ye do." (Mk 7:13).

He gave examples of, to what He was referring. The legalists had taken the commandment: "Honor thy father and mother", and extrapolated it to mean that if they pledged all their estate to the temple, they would be released from their obligation to care for their aged parents. Greedy! Greedy!

Jesus also pointed out that they had extended simple hygenic practices of the law to included all kinds of cumbersome ceremonial procedures that placed unnecessarily heavy burdens on God's people.

No wonder that no one could ever keep "their law". (Jesus kept the royal law.)

The Apostolic Movement; though not monolythic, has "many such like things ye do"; this is the same as, "...,teaching for doctrines the commandments of men". (Mk 7:7)

When these dogmas are raised to the level of God's intended meaning, they become sacred cows, in the minds of the adhearants. When those sacred cows are kicked over, some just can't let go of them.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by big-larry

When men take a point of scripture and extrapolate it, or extend it out, or stretch it out to mean more than the true God intended meaning, then you have synthesized a doctrine or a tradition of men.

This was Jesus' number one indictment, against the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Jesus said that they made "...the word of God of none effect through your tradition,...: and many such like things ye do." (Mk 7:13).

He gave examples of, to what He was referring. The legalists had taken the commandment: "Honor thy father and mother", and extrapolated it to mean that if they pledged all their estate to the temple, they would be released from their obligation to care for their aged parents. Greedy! Greedy!

Jesus also pointed out that they had extended simple hygenic practices of the law to included all kinds of cumbersome ceremonial procedures that placed unnecessarily heavy burdens on God's people.

No wonder that no one could ever keep "their law". (Jesus kept the royal law.)

The Apostolic Movement; though not monolythic, has "many such like things ye do"; this is the same as, "...,teaching for doctrines the commandments of men". (Mk 7:7)

When these dogmas are raised to the level of God's intended meaning, they become sacred cows, in the minds of the adhearants. When those sacred cows are kicked over, some just can't let go of them.

Since you named AMF and Tulsa in your thread title, wouldn't it only be right to show the examples of how these 2 groups fit into what you are saying above?

[Bro-Larry]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Since you named AMF and Tulsa in your thread title, wouldn't it only be right to show the examples of how these 2 groups fit into what you are saying above?

I thought the implication was clear enough. I've learned that a posting here is not as easy as it looks. You have to choose your words very carefully, otherwise there'll be so many side issue posts that you can't address them all. The more you answer the more they replicate.

When Res #4 was passed, somebody's sacred cows got kicked over, so they left the mothership.

[Bro-Larry]

There are many other sacred cows, besides TV. Pants, shorts, jewlery, make-up, ball games, movies, men/women's hair, red dresses, open-toed shoes, and the list goes on and on, ad nauseam. In many individual cases I've seen, these traditions of men are just ignored, however it the case of TV, license holders were forced be a non licence holder, a non TV owner or a liar.

When push finally came to shove, in the form of Res #4, Tulsa resulted, just as AMF resulted from some of the other traditions of men, being taught for doctrine. I am not saying that AMF and TULSA are either good or bad, just that they resulted from traditions of men being taught for doctrine.

[Apprehended]

Originally Posted by big-larry

There are many other sacred cows, besides TV. Pants, shorts, jewlery, make-up, ball games, movies, men/women's hair, red dresses, open-toed shoes, and the list goes on and on, ad nauseam. In many individual cases I've seen, these traditions of men are just ignored, however it the case of TV, license holders were forced be a non licence holder, a non TV owner or a liar.

When push finally came to shove, in the form of Res #4, Tulsa resulted, just as AMF resulted from some of the other traditions of men, being taught for doctrine. I am not saying that AMF and TULSA are either good or bad, just that they resulted from traditions of men being taught for doctrine.

You don't know if they are good or bad? From your own scriptures, Jesus did not think very highly of the traditions of men. He seems to have condemned them, from what I can see...especially since he said that it rendered the Word of God to none affect.

I would come down on the side of "bad."

[NW Pastor]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

You don't know if they are good or bad? From your own scriptures, Jesus did not think very highly of the traditions of men. He seems to have condemned them, from what I can see...especially since he said that it rendered the Word of God to none affect.

I would come down on the side of "bad."

Many traditions have great usefulness and accomplish the purposes of Christ and the church.

We all have traditions to which we adhere that have value. They are handed down by families, churches, political systems, etc...and have served us very well. Traditions can stablize us and provide a sense of connectedness and accountability to something bigger than ourselves.

So, can we really throw out all traditions? The problem is making our traditions God's. They ceace to derive their purpose from their effectivenss and become fixtures of society, family, or the church long after the reason for existance is past.

Knowing which man-made traditions to alter and when is tricky.

[Bro-Larry]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

You don't know if they are good or bad? From your own scriptures, Jesus did not think very highly of the traditions of men. He seems to have condemned them, from what I can see...especially since he said that it rendered the Word of God to none affect.

I would come down on the side of "bad."

You're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say I didn't know. I said I wasn't saying good or bad.

I don't want to be banned.

[Pastor DTSalaz]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

You don't know if they are good or bad? From your own scriptures, Jesus did not think very highly of the traditions of men. He seems to have condemned them, from what I can see...especially since he said that it rendered the Word of God to none affect.

I would come down on the side of "bad."

Not all traditions of men are wrong but to elevate them to the place of scripture is bad. To wash hands before eating is good but to condemn the disciples for not doing it according to their tradition is to add to the scriptures. To tell everyone to come dressed their best for church as they are coming to the presence of the King is not wrong, but to keep somebody out because of their attire is putting a standard not in the Word of God. To be in ministry at the local church we each make our standards, be on time, wear a tie, nylons or not, hair up or down, be at all church functions, be a tither, dress below the knees or to the ankles, long sleeve shirt, blouse mid upper arm or to the wrist, mustache or shaven, these are rules of conduct. Don't elevate these to the place of scripture requisites. Tithing excepted

We can warn of new forms of ungodliness because of company or influence that is in those venues. This is called discernment. We can judge for ourselves what is right before God. We teach these principles but each person will receive favor, blessing, and protection or judgement, chastisment, and correction based on that individuals decisions. Forced legalism brings an outward change but not always an inward conversion. Outside of pastors & churches sight another behavior altogether. If we have an inward conviction no matter if we leave a particular church our convictions will remain the same or grow with each new illumination as it pertains to our walk with God.

What about sports, amusement parks, beaches, proms, company parties, etc.. We can warn about dangers but not condemn somebody to hell, excommunicate, and dis-fellowship over non essentials.

Even new converts take some time to learn the concept of tithing but are they unsaved until they do. Thats another thread. They will either bless or curse their own lives by paying tithes or not. We will condemn a lot of saints who are in the process of learning this principle and others that we require as a measure of what is holiness. Change comes through a renewing of the mind. This is the process of sanctification. It takes time. Study brings knowledge. Knowledge brings understanding. Understanding brings Wisdom. Wisdom bings wise choices. Fools despise knowledge.

1Co 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
1Co 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
1Co 11:30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
1Co 11:31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
1Co 11:32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by Bro-Larry

When Res #4 was passed, somebody's sacred cows got kicked over, so they left the mothership.

AMEN!

[jaxfam6]

I do not remember the start of the AMF I was simply raised around it all my life. What I can say though is that I do remember my dad fellowshipped with men in several organizations until several stopped fellowship because of his connection with the AMF. At that time is was only a fellowship of many brethren from different groups. When other groups refused to be part of it or threatened the ministers that were in fellowship with the AMF then several refused to be bullied into non-fellowship and they all needed a place and that is when it stepped up from being a fellowship and they turned it into a fulfleged organization. I do know that even thought they held a tighter ship they still allowed men to fellowship with whomever they wanted to. I know we had men from the UPC and the ALJC who were much more liveral than we were in at our church to preach. I also know that as time went by that happened less and less for whatever reason.

I do not know the reason behind the Tulsa/WWPF (don't even know if that is right) and not sure I care to know. I think it would have to be more than just the use of TV though. I find it hard to believe that TV was the only thing that caused this and I also find it hard to believe it is impromptu. They say you don't backslide over night, well I say you don't leave you affiliation overnight either.

Just my thoughts.