Err on the side of caution?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by deadeye

I don't disagree with most of this....in fact it has been a pet peeve of mine too..Pastors who make arbitrary rules without any basis for them.
But they aren't based on principles. You mention M&M's...it would seem silly to make a rule for a kid not to eat them...but what if he has Juvenile Diabetes?....is it so silly then. The duty of the Pastor (watchman) is to warn of things that can harm...and sometimes lay down rules that will deter folks from getting into trouble.
But I agree rules for the sake of rules are simply legalism.
But we sometimes criticize a pastor for a rule he may have set without knowing the context of that rule.
As Elder Terry said (I believe it was him)..."don't remove a fence until you know why it was put there."

I'm concerned with the making of rules that deter folks from getting into trouble. Why not just preach against "sin"? For example, couple teenagers might get naughty in the back seat of a car on lover's lane. Do you make a rule against "cars", "sitting in the back seat", or certain places where people "park"? Or do you preach against sexual sin?

The whole issue of "making rules" seems a bit power hungry to me. If preaching the Word of God isn't enough, no rule will save the people.

[Withdrawn]

Galatians 5.1
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

The "bondage" being referred to is the legalism/phariseeism that the judaizers were trying to require of the Galatian church. Man-required standards/restrictions are an unnecessary yoke.

What life that is truly surrendered to Christ would not automatically out of conviction present themselves modestly? What person who is truly filled with the Spirit, and walking in the Spirit, connected to the vine, not automatically produce fruit that is becoming of one professing godliness? It's a fear-factor control issue that seeks uniformity and homogeneity in every aspect of our lives that causes us (many) to make absolutes out of principles. If we truly understood what walking in the Spirit meant, and spent more time perfecting the saints in this manner, we'd see a lot less condemnation and unnecessary rebellion.

[Withdrawn]

Originally Posted by Aquila

If preaching the Word of God isn't enough, no rule will save the people.

AMEN!!!

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Jim H

Galatians 5.1
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

The "bondage" being referred to is the legalism/phariseeism that the judaizers were trying to require of the Galatian church. Man-required standards/restrictions are an unnecessary yoke.

What life that is truly surrendered to Christ would not automatically out of conviction present themselves modestly? What person who is truly filled with the Spirit, and walking in the Spirit, connected to the vine, not automatically produce fruit that is becoming of one professing godliness? It's a fear-factor control issue that seeks uniformity and homogeneity in every aspect of our lives that causes us (many) to make absolutes out of principles. If we truly understood what walking in the Spirit meant, and spent more time perfecting the saints in this manner, we'd see a lot less condemnation and unnecessary rebellion.

I have no issue with a pastor sharing his opinion or conviction as to what defines modesty. For example I don't see an issue with a pastor saying that he feels pants on women are immodest. However, to say that because he feels this way that a woman is forbidden to wear pants, or that women wearing pants is a "sin" is going way beyond biblical bounderies.

[Withdrawn]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I have no issue with a pastor sharing his opinion or conviction as to what defines modesty. For example I don't see an issue with a pastor saying that he feels pants on women are immodest. However, to say that because he feels this way that a woman is forbidden to wear pants or is "sin" is going way beyond biblical bounderies.

Agreed. But that's not what we see happen, though, is it? The sentence after that is what happens - if a pastor has a conviction against something, that something is sin, no question!

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Jim H

AMEN!!!

To many men are preaching the "word of Pastor" and not the Word of God.

PREACH THE WORD!

[Withdrawn]

BUMP!

Originally Posted by Jim H

What life that is truly surrendered to Christ would not automatically out of conviction present themselves modestly? What person who is truly filled with the Spirit, and walking in the Spirit, connected to the vine, not automatically produce fruit that is becoming of one professing godliness? It's a fear-factor control issue that seeks uniformity and homogeneity in every aspect of our lives that causes us (many) to make absolutes out of principles. If we truly understood what walking in the Spirit meant, and spent more time perfecting the saints in this manner, we'd see a lot less condemnation and unnecessary rebellion.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Jim H

Agreed. But that's not what we see happen, though, is it? The sentence after that is what happens - if a pastor has a conviction against something, that something is sin, no question!

My frist Senior Pastor was regarded as a prophet. And yes, let me tell you, he operated in the prophetic. But it was like a cult of personality developed. He needed to loose weight and said that he felt convicted against eating ham and bacon like he used to... later that week nearly half the church was saying that eating pork was a sin and we were returning to a Kosher diet as outlined in the Bible! All he did was make a passing remark in the pulpit. lol

I think sometimes congregations LET their pastors get out on a limb by hanging on their every word instead of reading the Scriptures for themselves. That's one of the greatest weaknesses among more conservative organizations.

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Aquila

My frist Senior Pastor was regarded as a prophet. And yes, let me tell you, he operated in the prophetic. But it was like a cult of personality developed. He needed to loose weight and said that he felt convicted against eating ham and bacon like he used to... later that week nearly half the church was saying that eating pork was a sin and we were returning to a Kosher diet as outlined in the Bible! All he did was make a passing remark in the pulpit. lol

I think sometimes congregations LET their pastors get out on a limb by hanging on their every word instead of reading the Scriptures for themselves. That's one of the greatest weaknesses among more conservative organizations.

Indeed. This is what I call NPS... New Prize Syndrome.

It is a constant fight against human nature to keep our eyes on the true prize and keep ourselves from finding us a new prize to focus on.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by deadeye

I don't disagree with most of this....in fact it has been a pet peeve of mine too..Pastors who make arbitrary rules without any basis for them.
But they aren't based on principles. You mention M&M's...it would seem silly to make a rule for a kid not to eat them...but what if he has Juvenile Diabetes?....is it so silly then. The duty of the Pastor (watchman) is to warn of things that can harm...and sometimes lay down rules that will deter folks from getting into trouble.

I completely agree with you here, and that's why I think church "rules" should be a local matter and not handed down from the top echelon of an organized group of ministers. A pastor's job is to know the congregation, know what their needs are, and try to meet them in ways that are productive. That would include making rules that are relevant to THAT congregation.

Of course, the problem is compounded in independent churches where the leaders aren't accountable to anyone. You end up with a judgmental church that judges all neighboring churches by the rules their pastor has laid down for them, because they've been taught that they're heaven or hell issues instead of pastoral preferences or guidelines. *sigh*

But I agree rules for the sake of rules are simply legalism.
But we sometimes criticize a pastor for a rule he may have set without knowing the context of that rule.
As Elder Terry said (I believe it was him)..."don't remove a fence until you know why it was put there."

True...and that's why the lines of communication need to be open. You and I both know that in some churches a simple question about why the fence is there will have you labeled as a troublemaker and out the back door ASAP.

Open communication, local leadership, and somehow managing to judge within and not without...those are the top things on my church government wish list.