Would you stay in a church if...

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Lafon

LOL! When someone states to you, “Let’s be honest,” and you don’t construe that as questioning your integrity (honesty)? Come on! Give me a break, please! And please note that you turn right around and do the same thing! Absolutely astounding, indeed!

Admittedly, my saying that I believe something does not make it right. However, do I not have the right, just as you, to express my beliefs? Of course! And I will, whether you agree or not, albeit I would hope that you would, especially if that which I am expressing aligns with what the Scriptures express concerning the same thing.

And, NO, I did NOT state, or even insinuate that I “disputed” with anyone for “several years,” as you’ve stated! Furthermore, the issue which prompted me to separate myself from the assembly that I was attending had absolutely NOTHING to do with “the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking:...as the Spirit gave utterance.” In fact, I never even mentioned what the “unscriptural doctrine” was which precipitated my decision to discontinue my fellowship there, ONLY that the Pastor agreed that what he was teaching was “unscriptural.”

Regarding the question of “who called” me to be a Teacher, I will state to you that it is the same One who gave me an “interest of my eternal inheritance,” the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and I do NOT stand in need of any human “confirming” that calling! Yes, you can “assume” the other members of the group I am a part of are my “students,” for how can one be a Teacher and not have “students”? However, the activities during our gatherings do not consist entirely of a monologue, rather it is always a dialogue, with me introducing the topic followed by my understanding, and then everyone is invited to participate as they choose to do so (just as Paul “commanded” in the words of I Corinthians 14:26-40).

Insofar as my rejection of the teachings which advocate a so-called “rapture of the church,” I have said it on many previous occasions, here on AFF and elsewhere, that I consider it to be a “doctrine of devils,” and do so again now! To answer your question of whether I believe that the Lord is coming again, I almost consider even your asking to be “offensive,” for I know of none who professes to be an Apostolic Pentecostal that doesn’t tenaciously embrace that belief. So, of course I hold to the belief in the 2nd advent of the Lord.

However, I do NOT hold, in any manner, shape, or form, to a belief that God will violate His own “righteousness” by granting an exemption to the consequences of the judgment of death to an unspecified number of His saints that will be “living” upon the earth at the moment of His coming! I do believe, instead, in a resurrection and “changing” of the physical bodies of His saints from mortality to immortality at the moment of His coming, which implies, of course, that I hold to the belief that at the moment of the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ to the earth there will be NO “living” saints present upon the earth! And THAT, my friend, is the reason why I chose to separate myself from further fellowship from an assembly where the Pastor also agreed that such was true, yet refused to teach it to my brethren!

You are correct. I said "be honest", when I should have said something like, "Hey, let's lay our cards on the table." There are too many men that just will not be straight.

As for the calling, only the Lord calls to the ministry; and he has ordained the presbytery to confirm the calling into the ministry. However, if the ministry cannot, or will not, confirm one's calling, the Lord Himself will confirm it...but at this juncture I will not say how.

The ministry of the Lord Jesus has only one gospel: the essence of it is found in Acts 2:38. In it is the promise to ALL the church. Preaching anything less, at the least, deprives a person from a blessing; at the worst, it can rob a person's salvation. To them who are at the church's helm, I must say: BEWARE WATCHMAN!

Do you still believe that the judgment of the angels and unbelievers is the same? We're talking about fallen angels, here. And you believe that the difference between "pretrib' and "posttrib" is important enough to break off any fellowship. Do you believe that any person who believes in a "pretrib" will be lost? No salvation...no eternity with Christ?

Hey! Go ahead, ask me any question you want.

[phareztamar]

To me, saints take the Lord out of the equation when they decide to leave the church where God has placed them. Ever see a baby in a hospital nursery pack up his bottles and blankie, and decide he'd like to try another nursery? If the core tenets of salvation are being preached, then you are endangering your soul to walk out of the church where God has called you, because you don't agree with some things. My pastor was a stickler for long sleeve white shirts only, if teaching at the pulpit. After five years under his ministry, he changed his position. I gained more by obedience to the ministry, than if I'd have bowed up and left the church because I disagreed with his position on platform dress.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by phareztamar

To me, saints take the Lord out of the equation when they decide to leave the church where God has placed them. Ever see a baby in a hospital nursery pack up his bottles and blankie, and decide he'd like to try another nursery? If the core tenets of salvation are being preached, then you are endangering your soul to walk out of the church where God has called you, because you don't agree with some things. My pastor was a stickler for long sleeve white shirts only, if teaching at the pulpit. After five years under his ministry, he changed his position. I gained more by obedience to the ministry, than if I'd have bowed up and left the church because I disagreed with his position on platform dress.

What if he had asked you to leave? Just wondering.

[phareztamar]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

What if he had asked you to leave? Just wondering.

That's a loaded question. An apostolic pastor would never ask one of his saints to leave, unless that saint was disruptive or rebellious to the point of endangering the flock. Even then, asking you to leave would be a last resort.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Lafon

I will give you a one word response: HOGWASH!!!
There are about 25 versions of the Bible in my library and although I probably haven’t examined the words of II Thessalonians 3:14-15 in each of them (I may have done so, its just that at the moment I can’t recall), but I would be more than happy to know what translation you’re reading which states that Paul ”commanded the Thessalonians NOT to keep company with those who would not work, but were busy-bodies.”
In fact, I would like to know what translation of the Bible, including the King James, explicitly asserts that in II Thessalonians 3:6 Paul the apostle ”tells us that the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the way so that the man of sin can accomplish his purpose.” This passage in my King James Translation reads as follows:
”Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the traditions which ye received of us.”
It appears you’ve gotten your “chapters” awry, and are referring to 2:6 instead (and that is another issue altogether different), for I can’t find anything within this passage which even remotely suggests such as you’ve asserted, no, not one single thing about “busy-bodies” or the “Holy Spirit” being “taken out of the way so that the man of sin can accomplish his purpose.” What I do find, however, appears to support, in my opinion, the same thing that Paul asserted in the words of Romans 16:17-18, to wit,
”Now I beseech you, brethren, MARK them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and AVOID them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.”
Did you grasp what Paul was stating? Do you comprehend what the words “divisions” and “offences” imply? Is not Paul’s statement to the saints at Rome, wherein he said “the doctrine which ye have learned” the same thing as the “traditions which ye received of us” that Paul mentioned earlier (AD 54) to the saints at Thessalonica (Paul penned his letter of I Corinthians in AD 59)? I tender the following for your consideration of its merits:
In the words of Matthew 18:7, as well as in Luke 17:1, we read of our Lord Jesus Christ telling His chosen apostles, “Woe unto the world because of offences! For it MUST needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” In Luke’s writings he described our Lord’s statement as saying it would be “impossible” but that offences would come; meaning that God would do nothing to prevent such a thing from being introduced amongst the teachings in the church, and He hasn’t, as evidenced by the many “heretical” elements which abound in the contemporary church.
An “offence” is an English word translated from the Greek word “skandalon,” and is defined as an hindrance, stumbling-block, or anything that causes one to stumble or be “tripped up.” In the words of I Corinthians 11:18-19 we discover Paul advising that “divisions” amongst members of the church are the result or consequence of “heresies” (that is, false teachings or “doctrines of devils”) being present among them. THIS is precisely what Paul was warning the Roman saints to be diligent about, even MARKING those who would be found guilty of such acts, and AVOID them!
In Paul's words of II Thessalonians 3:14-15, when he penned that "if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him NOT as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother," he was, simply stated, advising us to warn that brother who was guilty of embracing and teaching things which contradicted the things which he wrote in this epistle, and to forsake fellowship with them if it be they continued in their error, yet NOT to consider them as an enemy. He said absolutely NOTHING about choosing to dis-fellowship oneself because of someone being a "busy-body" as you've stated!

You are right: got my pages crossed. But don't get so angry! Settle down.
II Thes. 2:6 was the wrong answer to the thread: but it is the right answer to the subject of the day of the Lord. The Holy Spirit will not be taken away from earth; it will be taken out of the way. WHY? The Lord will allow him to persecute the church: kind of like what the Lord allowed Pharoah to do to the Israelites: made them slave, etc. You are just holding your cards so close to your vest...you explode without any consideration.

LAFON: you don't need an excuse to leave a church: you don't need to justify your actions. You're a free man! It's just that as a teacher, I hope you are not spewing your anger into your students from your bad experiences, and from your last pastor...and maybe from me. Calm down!

The highlighted portion from II Thess. 3:14-15? You finally got it right.

[Praxeas]

Rom 14:1 And receive him who is weak in the faith, but not to judgments of your thoughts.
Rom 14:2 For indeed one believes to eat all things; but being weak, another eats vegetables.
Rom 14:3 Do not let him who eats despise him who does not eat; and do not let him who does not eat judge him who eats, for God has received him.
Rom 14:4 Who are you that judges another's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. But he will stand, for God is able to make him stand.
Rom 14:5 One indeed esteems a day above another day; and another esteems every day alike. Let each one be fully assured in his own mind.
Rom 14:6 He who regards the day regards it to the Lord; and he not regarding the day, does not regard it to the Lord. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, does not eat to the Lord, and gives God thanks.
Rom 14:7 For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself.
Rom 14:8 For both if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore both if we live, and if we die, we are the Lord's.
Rom 14:9 For this Christ both died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living.
Rom 14:10 But why do you judge your brother? Or also why do you despise your brother? For all shall stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Rom 14:1 And receive him who is weak in the faith, but not to judgments of your thoughts.
Rom 14:2 For indeed one believes to eat all things; but being weak, another eats vegetables.
Rom 14:3 Do not let him who eats despise him who does not eat; and do not let him who does not eat judge him who eats, for God has received him.
Rom 14:4 Who are you that judges another's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. But he will stand, for God is able to make him stand.
Rom 14:5 One indeed esteems a day above another day; and another esteems every day alike. Let each one be fully assured in his own mind.
Rom 14:6 He who regards the day regards it to the Lord; and he not regarding the day, does not regard it to the Lord. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, does not eat to the Lord, and gives God thanks.
Rom 14:7 For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself.
Rom 14:8 For both if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore both if we live, and if we die, we are the Lord's.
Rom 14:9 For this Christ both died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living.
Rom 14:10 But why do you judge your brother? Or also why do you despise your brother? For all shall stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

I believe all Apostolics / Pentecostals have read those verses: thanks for bringing them to our remembrance.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by phareztamar

That's a loaded question. An apostolic pastor would never ask one of his saints to leave, unless that saint was disruptive or rebellious to the point of endangering the flock. Even then, asking you to leave would be a last resort.

No, Beloved. The question did not have a nefarious reason behind it.
I agree that asking a person to leave (excommunicated) would be a very last resort. Of course there are at least two other measures the ministry should take, but they are not being utilized...at least to my knowledge.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

You are right: got my pages crossed. But don't get so angry! Settle down.
II Thes. 2:6 was the wrong answer to the thread: but it is the right answer to the subject of the day of the Lord. The Holy Spirit will not be taken away from earth; it will be taken out of the way. WHY? The Lord will allow him to persecute the church: kind of like what the Lord allowed Pharoah to do to the Israelites: made them slave, etc. You are just holding your cards so close to your vest...you explode without any consideration.

LAFON: you don't need an excuse to leave a church: you don't need to justify your actions. You're a free man! It's just that as a teacher, I hope you are not spewing your anger into your students from your bad experiences, and from your last pastor...and maybe from me. Calm down!

The highlighted portion from II Thess. 3:14-15? You finally got it right.

Please tell me where I've ever stated, or even intimated in any way, that I am angry. I am not angry, nor do I entertain bitterness in my heart toward any, including you.

What I did state, and will do so again, is that in accordance with Paul's instructions in Romans 16:17-18 and II Thessalonians 3:14-15, I did seek to "admonish" (i.e., WARN) other brethren of the dangers inherent in their continued publication of non-scriptural teachings, and will continue to do so!

It is up to them whether they ascertain the merits of the things which I show them from the scriptures or not, but it is my DUTY to tell them of their error. Woe be unto me should I fail to do that!

It escapes me how you can discern from any of my statements about this matter wherein I have displayed anger or malice toward any. God forbid that it be so!

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Please tell me where I've ever stated, or even intimated in any way, that I am angry. I am not angry, nor do I entertain bitterness in my heart toward any, including you.
What I did state, and will do so again, is that in accordance with Paul's instructions in Romans 16:17-18 and II Thessalonians 3:14-15, I did seek to "admonish" (i.e., WARN) other brethren of the dangers inherent in their continued publication of non-scriptural teachings, and will continue to do so!
It is up to them whether they ascertain the merits of the things which I show them from the scriptures or not, but it is my DUTY to tell them of their error. Woe be unto me should I fail to do that!
It escapes me how you can discern from any of my statements about this matter wherein I have displayed anger or malice toward any. God forbid that it be so!

Thank you: that's much better.

Beloved, I don't know from which denomination you came out. Maybe I'll never know, since I was never called to be a "registered member" of one. It (the denomination) doesn't seem to be a fully Apostolic/Pentecostal church...or did not utilize scriptures to speak to you: even before two or three ministers. But...only you know.

Personally, I would have stayed and first asked to be taught through scriptures, and corrected even by the full ministry. I would have preferred to be brought before the whole congregation, and openly rebuked for my alleged stubbornness (I am not implying you were stubborn: I am referring to MY own stubbornness). But there you have it.

Nevertheless, a believer (in God) can remain stunted in his spiritual growth if he never hears the preaching of salvation, or believes there is salvation in any other gospel than the one defined by the Lord Jesus, and his apostles and prophets. A person can repent, and the Lord may use that individual while he's obedient to the Spirit that brought him to repentance; but that person can never achieve the full potential that the Lord has for him until he submits to the full gospel of Jesus Christ: neither can his hearers.