Phariseeism

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

The greatest pastors are those whose chief "weapon" is a towel and not a sword. True pastors serve the sheep who willingly connect with them and do not try to take authority over their lives. Pastors have no business sticking their noses into people's personal business unless they have been given permission by those people through trusting not dictatorial relationships.

This whole business of "obeying them who have the rule over you" has been misinterpreted for centuries at the benefit of those who use it as a club to beat the people who don't trust them into submission. God is not pleased with this type of behavior and never will be.

Remember, the sword is for the devil and the towel is for the people. Mix them up and you have a real mess on your hands. Too many pastors believe that their job is to wield the sword over the sheep to keep them in line. Sheep should run for the hills from ANY leader who has that mentality. Serve the people and they will give you authority. Rule over them, and you will have to use force, fear and any other underhanded scheme you can use to get them to follow you. But know this, one day they will have learned your methods and will turn on you and give you what you gave them! Mark my words! I have seen this happen more than a few times.

Thank you for the great advice MOW. I appreciate your words here.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by mfblume

So long as they do not make it heaven or hell, pastors need wisdom and discretion as to how they will deal with these things for leaders, etc. I see no problem with that. But if some saints want to be used and refuse to abide by some of these standards, then they should not necessarily be considered "rebellious" as has been a favourite title to throw upon such people, and I would recommend such saints to find another church.

I agree... well mostly.

Since I reject the idea that a single person has full control over an entire assembly, I also recognize there may be an obligation for some who fall short of full compliance to stay and support the greater body. This should not be with a goal of division in mind, but rather in the interest of promoting critical thought and keeping checks and balances in place.

Some dissent is healthy, and perhaps it is most precious when it is unwanted.

[Sister Alvear]

I think we should try to find a church where we can feel a part of a family...it if doesn´t feel good something might be wrong.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

I agree... well mostly.

Since I reject the idea that a single person has full control over an entire assembly, I also recognize there may be an obligation for some who fall short of full compliance to stay and support the greater body. This should not be with a goal of division in mind, but rather in the interest of promoting critical thought and keeping checks and balances in place.

Some dissent is healthy, and perhaps it is most precious when it is unwanted.

Good words.

[theoldpaths]

Originally Posted by Dora

Does my pastor have "rule" over me, or is he my shepherd? Does he stand over me with a whip or does he provide guidance and care for my soul? Does he "lord" his authority over me or does he shine a light on the path to try to prevent me from stumbling?

Who said anything about a whip or lording over you like he is some task master and you are a slave? Where in the world did you ever get those ideas from?

Does a Pastor have a God-given right to rebuke, reprove, and correct. Yes he does. Can it hurt and be grievous? Let's see what the bible says...

Heb 12:5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
Heb 12:6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
Heb 12:7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
Heb 12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
Heb 12:9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
Heb 12:10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
Heb 12:11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

Can he do it in public in front of everyone?

1Ti 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

Pro 27:5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.

Isn't it interesting that the world today has almost altogether done away with spanking, yet the church knows better. But for some its seems like an attitude is trying to creep into the church that the Pastor should not use the rod and correct if it is needed. We need to get that attitude of the world OUT of the church.

God's people had gotten to the place in the OT where they were like this...

Isa 30:9 That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD:
Isa 30:10 Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits:

They only wanted to hear smooth things. Makes me think of the following scripture...

2Ti 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;
2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

They wanted to get teachers that will tell them things that THEY wanted to hear - not what they NEEDED to hear.

Pro 9:8 Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.

Rebuke a wise man and he will what? Love thee.

Pro 15:10 Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die.

Psa 141:5 Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be an excellent oil, which shall not break my head: for yet my prayer also shall be in their calamities.

Because the man of God loves you, he will correct you because he sees that if you continue the way that you are going, it will end up bad for you. He doesn't do it to flex his power and authority muscles. He does it for YOUR SAKE because he loves you.

Pro 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him quickly.

Pro 28:23 He that rebuketh a man afterwards shall find more favor than he that flattereth with the tongue.

Psa 119:165 Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them.

Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. The rod is for correction and gives one comfort in that if they wander off the path or away from the flock where the wolves are, we can take comfort that the Shepherd may give us a swat with the rod.

God bless.

[shag]

Originally Posted by theoldpaths

Who said anything about a whip or lording over you like he is some task master and you are a slave? Where in the world did you ever get those ideas from?

Can he do it in public in front of everyone?

1Ti 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

Pro 27:5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.

Isn't it interesting that the world today has almost altogether done away with spanking, yet the church knows better. But for some its seems like an attitude is trying to creep into the church that the Pastor should not use the rod and correct if it is needed. We need to get that attitude of the world OUT of the church.

God's people had gotten to the place in the OT where they were like this...

Isa 30:9 That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD:
Isa 30:10 Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits:

They only wanted to hear smooth things. Makes me think of the following scripture...

2Ti 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;
2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

They wanted to get teachers that will tell them things that THEY wanted to hear - not what they NEEDED to hear.

Pro 9:8 Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.

Rebuke a wise man and he will what? Love thee.

Pro 15:10 Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die.

Psa 141:5 Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be an excellent oil, which shall not break my head: for yet my prayer also shall be in their calamities.

Because the man of God loves you, he will correct you because he sees that if you continue the way that you are going, it will end up bad for you. He doesn't do it to flex his power and authority muscles. He does it for YOUR SAKE because he loves you.

Pro 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him quickly.

Pro 28:23 He that rebuketh a man afterwards shall find more favor than he that flattereth with the tongue.

Psa 119:165 Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them.

Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. The rod is for correction and gives one comfort in that if they wander off the path or away from the flock where the wolves are, we can take comfort that the Shepherd may give us a swat with the rod.

God bless.

I believe that there is a difference between what we should expect from a pastor/overseer, and what we should expect from our "Good Shepherd", the Lord Jesus Christ. Though they both can be considered "shepherds", I don't feel we can insert "pastor" wherever we read "Lord" in scripture. I believe the primary argument is concerning how much the pastors should address what is not spelled out in scripture as "sin". I think everyone agrees that pastors have the right to address "sin" and "sinners", though the manner they choose to do so may raise different opinions.

[mfblume]

theoldpaths,

All you quoted from the bible is indeed in the Bible! However, you are assuming what the subject of the issues are that a pastor has the right to enforce. They were only explicitly written biblical issues. Not anything some one could make up. You never showed us any examples of specific new doctrines you abide by and imply and insert into these passages, that are not there, when you quoted these passages.

Mormons can quote these passages, too, and claim people MUST FOLLOW THEIR LEADERSHIP IN MORMON DOCTRINE.

It is rife error. Everyone ought to stay clear from anything like this!

And your references to SMOOTH SERMONS, etc., are implying that anyone who disagrees with the harsh unbiblical commandments of such new-doctrine-creators are in error, when that is so far from the truth I cannot begin to describe it.

In Post 98 you said "Jesus did in Matt 18 give his future leadership the ability to make binding decisions that Jesus himself said that he would back up in heaven.". That regarded the binding and loosing of forgiveness, etc. Matt 18 mentions binding and loosing and gives an example of LOOSING someone from prison and BINDING someone else in prison. He is not speaking of creating doctrines.

You said far more there than you latter excuse of enforcing standards that follow biblical principles. You referred to ENTIRE DOCTRINES in your quote!

Then you said, "And in Acts 15 that is what they did. There was only one question, but after conferencing about it, they ended up actually making more that one decision/rule that was to be communicated and obeyed by all the gentile churches. And God, by his spirit in man, the Holy Ghost, indicated that what James had suggested and became the rule, was good unto Him."

Once again, this is the TWELVE APOSTLES who were foundation layers, teaching things not to be added to by anyone else later. And that again is far more involved and more doctrinal than enforcing standards that are not in the bible that follow biblical principles.

Anyone can quote scriptures that say people ought to obey leadership, but what they make a mistake in is ASSUMING their pet-new-doctrines are what the texts are speaking about, when no such doctrines are in the Bible. They quote passages about clinging to the old paths, and they ERRINGLY ASSUME their pet-new-doctrines are the subject, when such are not the subject whatsoever.

People make up a doctrine and try to enforce it, and then quote "Obey them that have the rule over you." The problem is that ANYONE who sanctions and enforces a NEW doctrine is not qualified as a person under whom we must obey. Those verses and passages APPLY ONLY TO TRUE CALLED LEADERS WHO HAVE NOT ADDED NEW DOCTRINES TO THE WORD OF GOD.

Everyone knows the bible teaches and repeats need to submit and obey and follow leadership. But Paul told us to follow him AS HE FOLLOWED CHRIST. And when so-called "leaders" tell us to follow them in things that the Lord never led anyone into, then they are not following the Lord and we should not follow them.

You also said, "Thank God for Jesus' teaching and a very practical example in Acts of applying that rule. Truly God's word is awesome!

Act 16:4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem."

That is mistaken thinking. You cannot apply what the foundational apostles did in laying down foundational doctrine and think you can make up doctrines not in the bible, as they did in laying the foundation of the church. There are apostles in the church today, but not in the position of the twelve who were doctrinal foundation layers.

Instead of quoting passages that show the apostles laid down doctrines, show me passages that repeat your new doctrines.

[TRFrance]

This is amazing.
I never thought I'd see a day when a conservative Apostolic would try to make the case that Phariseeism is a good thing!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

This is amazing.
I never thought I'd see a day when a conservative Apostolic would try to make the case that Phariseeism is a good thing!

It is good old honesty, for once in a while.

[theoldpaths]

Originally Posted by shag

I believe that there is a difference between what we should expect from a pastor/overseer, and what we should expect from our "Good Shepherd", the Lord Jesus Christ. Though they both can be considered "shepherds", I don't feel we can insert "pastor" wherever we read "Lord" in scripture. I believe the primary argument is concerning how much the pastors should address what is not spelled out in scripture as "sin". I think everyone agrees that pastors have the right to address "sin" and "sinners", though the manner they choose to do so may raise different opinions.

Let's see what Paul had to say about such things...

Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such a one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

1Co 4:18 Now some are puffed up, as though I would not come to you.
1Co 4:19 But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will, and will know, not the speech of them which are puffed up, but the power.
1Co 4:20 For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.
1Co 4:21 What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness?

I believe that correction should start with love and the spirit of meekness and then a person should be given space to repent as that is what Jesus does...

Rev 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
Rev 2:21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.

But after given a space to repent, if they do not, then I believe it escaltes up from love and the spirit of meekness to the rod as Paul stated above and then give them space to repent again.

After using love and the spirit of meekness and then afterwards the rod to correct, then it can escalate to...

2Co 12:20 For I fear, lest when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:
2Co 12:21 And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.

I've used this analogy before in AFF, but I guess its worth repeating again especially in this context...

Its like a loving mother who sees her little boy with a fork going in the direction of an electrical outlet but is still far away. She tells him with loving concern to not go to the outlet. When she sees that the boy did not listen to her and continues, she raises her voice and gets a little firmer with the little boy. Finally, when she sees that he still hasn't heeded, she gets up smacks the boys hand.

Now why did she do this? Because she loved the little boy and saw that he was going to get hurt if he continued. Did the attempted correction escalate? Yes it did, for HIS sake.

So Paul's way of dealing with some were using love and meekness, using the rod, and bewailing some.

He even delivered 2 unto Satan that they would learn not to blaspheme...

1Ti 1:20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

Do you believe that God can express his anger through his ministry?

2Co 12:20 For I fear, lest when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:
2Co 12:21 And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.

Paul wrote about God humbling him to bewail some which have sinned and NOT repented.

2Co 10:8 For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed:

Tit 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

The authority that God gave the ministry is NOT for one's destruction like they are a task-master with a whip, but for their edification.

Heb 12:7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
Heb 12:10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
Heb 12:11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

Chastening for the present may seem grievous, but it is NOT for your destruction but so that AFTERWARD it may yield the peaceable fruit of righteousness; IF ye endure chastening and are excercised thereby.

God bless.