Timmy Talk

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Timmy

The serious ones among us will say you're right, of course. Forsake not the assembling etc. More to the point, though, I'm going to hell for an even more fundamental reason: unbelief. Or, more specifically, since I actually do have belief, I have chosen the wrong things to believe in. Like I've said many times before, much to the annoyance of some (), I have guessed wrong.

Well since you realize that you have now guessed wrong its time to change and guess right!!! :P

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Well since you realize that you have now guessed wrong its time to change and guess right!!! :P

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Lafon

And what, my friend, do "divisions" (i.e., differences, schisms, disunity) portend? There is, you know, an underlying "reason" for ALL things. If this is true, then tell me, I humbly beseech thee, what does the presence of "divisions" among those who proclaim themselves to be Christians, signify? And, please, provide an indisputable scriptural reference in support of your answer, and not just more of your "fair speeches" which only represent your "point of view" (which may, or may not, have a basis in fact).

I am truly interested in what you have to say in response to this question.

There's nothing wrong with divisions, if things are kept civil. Agree to disagree. No problem. And it shouldn't surprise anyone that there will be many different opinions on such matters. We're only human after all.

Oh, wait. You wanted a scriptural answer. Sorry. OK, there should be only one scriptural answer to any doctrinal question. Certainly, God has only one intended meaning for each doctrine in the Bible, yes? Or at least for all the important questions, such as how to dress and groom. You are all led by the Spirit, yes? You have that promise in writing! John 14:26! Not to mention Romans 8:14. And Jesus prayed for your unity in John 17. And in verses 21 and 23, we see that the world will believe God sent His Son because of the unity of His followers.

So, what does the existence of division among the church mean, scripturally? Well, either God's answer to Jesus' prayer was "No" (as it is for many of our prayers, these days), or maybe the real church consists only of a certain group of people (probably an incredibly small group) who enjoy unity, and who have it right (God's intended meanings for all the scriptural doctrines). Does it have to be perfect unity? Well, why not? That's what Jesus asked for. Don't you think God is able to accomplish it, if He wanted to?

[Timmy]

Got another scripture for ya!

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

So you should probably avoid me, e.g. And anyone who argues with you about this or any other doctrine. (If they're wrong about it, anyway. Or more precisely, if they try to tell you something different from what you learned before. )

[Timmy]

Is it morally wrong to walk away from what you've been taught all your life? You've always been respectful and obedient to your parents, including what they taught you about God. You believed them! But when you are grown, what if you read about other ways, talk with people who see things differently, think things out maybe a little "too much"? Is it wrong to change?

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Lafon

And what, my friend, do "divisions" (i.e., differences, schisms, disunity) portend? There is, you know, an underlying "reason" for ALL things. If this is true, then tell me, I humbly beseech thee, what does the presence of "divisions" among those who proclaim themselves to be Christians, signify? And, please, provide an indisputable scriptural reference in support of your answer, and not just more of your "fair speeches" which only represent your "point of view" (which may, or may not, have a basis in fact).

I am truly interested in what you have to say in response to this question.

Originally Posted by Timmy

Got another scripture for ya!

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

So you should probably avoid me, e.g. And anyone who argues with you about this or any other doctrine. (If they're wrong about it, anyway. Or more precisely, if they try to tell you something different from what you learned before. )

Already taking my advice?

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Timmy

Already taking my advice?

Allow me to note that my question to you was - “What does the presence of divisions among those who proclaim themselves to be Christians signify (i.e., portend)?” Now I was not referring to “divisions” among those who do not proclaim themselves to be Christians; but to Christians only. Let me provide you with just a few things which I believe the Scriptures disclose about the matter of “divisions” among “professing” Christians.

You write - “There’s nothing wrong with divisions, if things are kept civil. Agree to disagree. No problem.” Lets apply this response to the manner in which our physical bodies operate. What do you suppose would happen should my left foot decide not to agree with my right foot..... one wanted to go in one direction, and the other in a different direction? Or, what if my right eye decided that it wanted to look to the left, while my left eye wanted to look right? What if these parts of my body simply “agreed to disagree?” Boy, now that would be hilarious, would it not? The great apostle Paul wrote in I Corinthians 12 that the Church is likened to our physical bodies, so in much the same manner, I am convinced that it is not practical, nor acceptable, for Christians to “agree to disagree.” In fact, I believe that it is strictly forbidden, as clearly indicated in the following scriptural passages:

“Can two walk together except they be agreed?” (Amos 3:3)

“...every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.” (Matthew 12:25 - see also Mark 3:25 & Luke 11:17)

“Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” (I Corinthians 1:10)

“Filfill ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.” (Philippians 2:2)

There are others, of course, but these should suffice to help you to recognize my point - all Christians must be of the same mind (i.e., understanding) concerning all things!

With regards to the question, “What does the presence of divisions among those who proclaim themselves to be Christians signify (i.e., portend)?” For the answer I believe one need look no farther than the following statement written by the apostle Paul (whom, the Scriptures reveal, wrote all things by inspiration of God - see II Timothy 3:16):

“Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.” (I Corinthians 11:17-19)

Should one not conclude from Paul’s words that “divisions” among Christians portend (i.e., signify, or indicate) that this undesirable condition is a direct consequence of “heresies” (i.e., false teachings/doctrines, “doctrines of devils”) being present “among” them? This, at least, is my understanding of the matter, and also happens to be the reason which prompts me to refute the assertion (or, suggestion) that it is permissible for Christians to “agree to disagree.”

Am I surprised that even Christians “disagree” amongst themselves about all sorts of things? Of course not, for as you noted, “We’re only human after all.” However, this should not be used as an excuse, or justification, for “disagreements” among Christians, rather when this condition is recognized as being present, immediate steps should be taken to identify and eradicate the “heresies” which gave birth to such. This is why I always try to be sensitive to the presence of “divisions” among Christians.

With regards to your question - “Don’t you think God is able to accomplish it, if He wanted to (referring to “perfect unity”)?” My response must be a resounding Yes! Please note that in the words of Ephesians 5:25-27 -

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”

Yes, my friend, in the final analysis, the One True Church will be cleansed of all “divisions,” for when He returns to receive all “real” Christians unto Himself upon the clouds of heaven at the end of the present age, it will be utterly void of everything which would “blemish” His glorious Bride!

(Pls pardon my slowness in responding. I seem to have such a long list of other things to get done which prevents me from answering as quickly as I would have otherwise.)

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Timmy

Is it morally wrong to walk away from what you've been taught all your life? You've always been respectful and obedient to your parents, including what they taught you about God. You believed them! But when you are grown, what if you read about other ways, talk with people who see things differently, think things out maybe a little "too much"? Is it wrong to change?

No, in my opinion it is not "morally wrong to walk away from what you've been taught all your life." As one's knowledge or understanding of things increases, and in that process they should discover that some, or perhaps even many of the things which they have accepted and embraced as truth are, in fact, not true, then their previous understanding of the matter must be discarded. In essence, I believe it absolutely imperative that we always stand ready to "change," for to do so is to "grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."

I've discovered that there have been many beliefs which I once held to be true were, in fact, quite the opposite. And when I came to an understanding of what the truth about the matter was, I felt compelled to "change" my beliefs regarding it. You know, a lie is never identified as such when it is first aired, rather it is always broadcast as being true. Only by taking the time to closely examine everything the Scriptures disclose about that matter are we enabled to make that critical distinction between what is truth and what is not, and when that happens it becomes crucially important we discard the lies which we have been persuaded to embrace and replace them with the truth. This means that we must always be willing to pause and expend a few moments in re-examining all of the things which we initially accepted and embraced as truth, for in so doing we will often discover that we just might have been believing some things which are anything but truth.

Today, as I sit here typing these words, I can say that most (get that, most?) of the things which I now embrace as truth, are quite different than those things which I once held as truth (including those things which were taught me by loving parents). In other words, as my understanding of things concerning the fundamental teachings of the Bible has increased, it has necessitated a "change" from those things which were initially instilled in me during my youth. And thank God for it!

[Timmy]

Thanks, Lafon. Very good thoughts in both posts. I agree with most of them.

But:

Yes, my friend, in the final analysis, the One True Church will be cleansed of all “divisions,” for when He returns to receive all “real” Christians unto Himself upon the clouds of heaven at the end of the present age, it will be utterly void of everything which would “blemish” His glorious Bride!

Are you sure that's what Jesus had in mind when He prayed for unity? It doesn't seem like it, from what He said. The target was His current followers and "those who will believe in me through their message". All of the latter and most of the latter have lived and believed and died, already. And the purpose of the request was made clear: "so that the world may believe that you have sent me." If the answer comes only when Jesus brings the "real" Christians into Heaven, it will be too late!

If that prayer for unity is like many of today's prayers by ordinary Christians, most of the usual explanations for a "No" answer (or "Wait") don't apply. "Not enough faith" Uh, we're talking about Jesus, here! "God knows better than you what you really need"? Jesus is God! "Not asked in accordance to God's will"? Ditto. How about "hidden sin"? Definitely not that one! "He has something better for you"? Better than unity? Better than the world believing in Jesus?

I think we are stuck with just two possibilities:

1. Jesus' request was granted. This means that the true church consists only of people who agree on everything. And what they all agree on is actually correct. This, however, can apply only to the first part of the request: unity. The second part, the world believing, has not been granted. No way around that one!

2. Jesus' request was not granted. Either God rejected it (for who-knows what reason!), or it wasn't recorded accurately in the Bible.

A problem with #1 is that, as you pointed out, the Bible itself records several examples of division among the church, even in its infancy. I don't think we can claim that is wasn't really the true church. Another problem is that this elusive, theoretical, fully united "true church" of today almost certainly doesn't really exist. If it did, we'd all know about it, and it wouldn't have stayed tiny all through the centuries. It would actually work, in its commission to spread the gospel. Part 2 of Jesus' prayer would have been granted (most likely). Signs and wonders would follow it. Its people would do greater works than those of Jesus. It would get it right. No church has ever done that.

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Lafon

No, in my opinion it is not "morally wrong to walk away from what you've been taught all your life." As one's knowledge or understanding of things increases, and in that process they should discover that some, or perhaps even many of the things which they have accepted and embraced as truth are, in fact, not true, then their previous understanding of the matter must be discarded. In essence, I believe it absolutely imperative that we always stand ready to "change," for to do so is to "grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."

I've discovered that there have been many beliefs which I once held to be true were, in fact, quite the opposite. And when I came to an understanding of what the truth about the matter was, I felt compelled to "change" my beliefs regarding it. You know, a lie is never identified as such when it is first aired, rather it is always broadcast as being true. Only by taking the time to closely examine everything the Scriptures disclose about that matter are we enabled to make that critical distinction between what is truth and what is not, and when that happens it becomes crucially important we discard the lies which we have been persuaded to embrace and replace them with the truth. This means that we must always be willing to pause and expend a few moments in re-examining all of the things which we initially accepted and embraced as truth, for in so doing we will often discover that we just might have been believing some things which are anything but truth.

Today, as I sit here typing these words, I can say that most (get that, most?) of the things which I now embrace as truth, are quite different than those things which I once held as truth (including those things which were taught me by loving parents). In other words, as my understanding of things concerning the fundamental teachings of the Bible has increased, it has necessitated a "change" from those things which were initially instilled in me during my youth. And thank God for it!

Of course, the ramifications are obvious, though. Nobody can possibly know when anything they believe is finally, and forever, correct. Nothing is out of bounds. Your experience shows that neither you nor anyone else on AFF has any basis to claim that they will never change belief X, for any X. X could be dispensationalism, preterism, universal reconciliation, 3-step, 1-step, TV is evil, or you-name-it.

And yet people do claim this, at least for several beliefs. Most AFFers will, I think, claim that they will never stop believing that the Bible is the inspired infallible Word of God. I probably would have said that 20 years ago, or so.

What about me? Will I forever remain agnostic? How should I know?!