What's the difference?

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I didn't run off to do anything. I'm simply trying to clarify and explain the difference between what I was talking about then vs. what I'm talking about now.

You did run away from the conversation and stayed away all yesterday. Now you come back this morning with some excuse, trying to claim it's about the actions of the Pastor when that isn't the issue in question.

Originally Posted by Aquila

In the context of the discussion, was the pastor making such a "request" assumed to be one to enforce that "request"? Yes or no?

The discussion is whether a Pastor is within his role to make requests outside of chapter and verse.

Period. Full stop.

In March, you said a Pastor is NOT allowed to do so. You condemned them. You mocked them. You called it man's traditions. You said a Pastor should follow the Bible. Anything not in the Bible was man's traditions.

Now you say, "as a pastor, he is within bounds to request what he desires."

So let's clear this up once and for all. Don't add to anything or try to twist anything.

Regarding the ROLE of the Pastor (NOT the actions of a Pastor):
Is it within the role (bounds) of a Pastor to request what he desires, even if not expressly found in the Bible, chapter and verse?

Yes or No.

In March you said no. Two days ago you completely flipped and said yes.

Which is it?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

You did run away from the conversation and stayed away all yesterday. Now you come back this morning with some excuse, trying to claim it's about the actions of the Pastor when that isn't the issue in question.

My brother, Christina and I are looking at residential centers that will provide adequate care for her ailing mother. I assure you, running away to "figure out how to explain it" was the last thing on my mind.

The discussion is whether a Pastor is within his role to make requests outside of chapter and verse.

Period. Full stop.

In March, you said a Pastor is NOT allowed to do so. You condemned them. You mocked them. You called it man's traditions. You said a Pastor should follow the Bible. Anything not in the Bible was man's traditions.

Now you say, "as a pastor, he is within bounds to request what he desires."

So let's clear this up once and for all. Don't add to anything or try to twist anything.

Regarding the ROLE of the Pastor (NOT the actions of a Pastor):
Is it within the role (bounds) of a Pastor to request what he desires, even if not expressly found in the Bible, chapter and verse?

Yes or No.

In March you said no. Two days ago you completely flipped and said yes.

Which is it?

Then perhaps we can cease the silliness and begin here. How we got here is immaterial. How we, as brothers, understand one another now that we're here is more productive for the conversation.

A pastor can certainly make a request about any given personal preference he wishes. He's the pastor. It is how he deals with those who do not share his personal preference that causes me pause. Does he use his "authority" to enforce his own personal preferences and requests, without any biblical necessity? If so, the man is out of bounds. If he's just voicing his preferences, without threat of Hell or penalty for disagreement, that's perfectly fine with me.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Dear Lord, I'm wondering how long he'll stomp his feet, clinch his fists, grit his teeth, and feverishly tell me what I meant over and over... as I continually explain it to him. Oh well. We're all at different places in our journey.

Stop with the self righteous prayers, Pharisee. Good grief.

Originally Posted by Aquila

The need to be right is overrated, NDavid. What is true is what really matters.

It's not just me trying to be right, Aquila. I'm not the only person who noticed the flip flop.

Originally Posted by Aquila

What I was talking about in March is not the same as what I'm talking about right now. You can take that and accept it... or live the illusion of your own making. It's up to you.

It is the same. I said a Pastor has the authority or is within his role (bounds, as you said) to request certain things of those serving on the platform.

You condemned that. You said Pastors must follow the Bible. Anything outside the Bible was man's traditions.

Now you've changed and said the Pastor does have that authority or is within bounds to do that.

The only illusion is the one you're creating for yourself.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

My brother, Christina and I are looking at residential centers that will provide adequate care for her ailing mother. I assure you, running away to "figure out how to explain it" was the last thing on my mind.

Oh here we go. Good grief. Of course, you had time to post on another thread...until I posted and asked why you were avoiding this thread.

Originally Posted by Aquila

A pastor can certainly make a request about any given personal preference he wishes. He's the pastor.

Even if he has no Bible for it? Because when I said that a Pastor didn't need chapter and verse, you condemned it.

Originally Posted by Aquila

If he's just voicing his preferences, without threat of Hell or penalty for disagreement, that's perfectly fine with me.

I already established it's not a hell issue for my Pastor. And recently I learned that he would have allowed me on the platform to assist during a service even with 3-day stubble.

Again, the actions aren't the issue. Whether the role of Pastor includes them being able to request certain things of those serving on the platform.

Previously you disagreed and condemned it. Now you say it's within his bounds.

That is all.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Stop with the self righteous prayers, Pharisee. Good grief.

It was an expression of exasperation, not a prayer. Do you see an, "Amen"?

It's not just me trying to be right, Aquila. I'm not the only person who noticed the flip flop.

You're not the only person who made the same mistake, is what you mean. You'll notice that I'm not popular. If I told you the sky was blue, there'd be an army aligned to disagree with me. lol

Nevertheless, I don't see many posting and insisting that my clarification was insufficient. For the past couple hours, you've been arguing alone. I'm sure some of my detractors might be reasonable enough to see what I've explained. Or... this very statement will draw the ideologues out of the shadows. lol

It is the same. I said a Pastor has the authority or is within his role (bounds, as you said) to request certain things of those serving on the platform.

Yes, you did. But in the context of that conversation, was the pastor assumed to be one to use his "authority" to enforce his personal preferences in the name of the Holy?

You condemned that. You said Pastors must follow the Bible. Anything outside the Bible was man's traditions.

I assume you disagree? Is the Bible complete, revealing all we need for the salvation of the soul? How do you deal with the confusion of so many pastors enforcing their preferences from the pulpit as though they speak for God? Is God talking out of both sides of His mouth?

If a personal preference or request is made peaceably, without any threat of reprisal, the man has done no wrong. But if he uses the "authority" God has given him to banish someone from the platform because they refuse to wear a purple polka dot tie, that's an abuse of sacred authority. Because there is nothing in Scripture condemning all colors but purple.

Now you've changed and said the Pastor does have that authority or is within bounds to do that.

Yes, however the context of each statement is different.

The only illusion is the one you're creating for yourself.

Let the reader note that you have refused to answer if in March the pastoral example you provided was one who was expected to enforce his opinion with his "authority" or not. The reader should note that you haven't answered this because you already know that I'm front loaded with evidence from that very conversation indicating that the context was indeed in reference to a pastor who goes well beyond just making a request or allowing personal preference to be known.

Selah.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Oh here we go. Good grief. Of course, you had time to post on another thread...until I posted and asked why you were avoiding this thread.

So, now you're upset because I posted in another thread before returning to your remarks? lol I'm so sorry my brother, I didn't know it would hurt you so.

Even if he has no Bible for it? Because when I said that a Pastor didn't need chapter and verse, you condemned it.

What I condemned is the notion that a pastor would try to use God entrusted authority to enforce a personal preference that isn't grounded in Scripture.

I already established it's not a hell issue for my Pastor. And recently I learned that he would have allowed me on the platform to assist during a service even with 3-day stubble.

Good. I've noticed many pastors distancing, moderating, or abandoning the facial hair standard, because the truth is... there is no Biblical grounds or necessity for it.

Again, the actions aren't the issue. Whether the role of Pastor includes them being able to request certain things of those serving on the platform.

A request is a request. I can say no to a request without fear of penalty. However, if a pastor would penalize one for not meeting the request, then it isn't merely a request. It is a command. And if taught as doctrine, then we are back to the commandments of men being taught as doctrine.

If the pastor in question would use his authority to enforce his preference or request, then I still stand opposed. If the request is merely a request, and one can take it or leave it, then I stand respecting the man's opinion... though I may choose not to meet said request.

Previously you disagreed and condemned it. Now you say it's within his bounds.

That is all.

I thought your statements in March assumed the pastor would enforce his personal preferences with the authority entrusted to Him by God to preach and enforce the Word. I apologize if I misunderstood you.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

So, now you're upset because I posted in another thread before returning to your remarks? lol I'm so sorry my brother, I didn't know it would hurt you so.

No, not upset or hurt. I referenced that simply to show that you were on AFF that day. You were trying to insinuate that you were too busy to be on AFF. That isn't the truth. You were on there. You chose to ignore and stay away from this particular thread.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

It was an expression of exasperation, not a prayer. Do you see an, "Amen"?

Whatever it was, it was condescending and stupid.

Originally Posted by Aquila

You're not the only person who made the same mistake, is what you mean.

Where there is smoke, usually there is fire.

Originally Posted by Aquila

You'll notice that I'm not popular.

Perhaps there is a reason. Have you thought about your role in that?

Originally Posted by Aquila

Nevertheless, I don't see many posting and insisting that my clarification was insufficient. For the past couple hours, you've been arguing alone. I'm sure some of my detractors might be reasonable enough to see what I've explained.

Okay

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Aquila

And perhaps even more importantly...

Would an entire counsel of pastors have the authority to change or reinterpret the baptismal formula to establish unity within the body and excommunicate those in the error classical Modalism, Arainism, and Ebionitism, who were known to baptized in the name of Jesus?

??? What rabbit trail is this? Anybody saying to be baptized any other way then in the name of Jesus is a heretic. Despite what any council of man said. Have I been so long time with you Aquila, that you even have to ask?

All im saying if it's God's man, and it's God's church you are responsible for your part. Because if the man of God is out of line God will move him out of the way. But if you wouldn't know God's church from a facade then well maybe then you would have to worry.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by n david

After so many times of doing this, he's become used to it and it doesn't faze him.

Kind of like huffing gas...

He's now "waxing elephant"...