Would you stay in a church if...

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I don't see "a" church. Just "the" church. As such, I will never leave "the" church over disagreements with people a part of "a" church.

And I agree with you. By the grace of God that He has given to me, I pray that I will never separate myself from "the" church, however, that is not to say I won't remove myself from a group that "knowingly" tolerates, and publicly publishes things that are not scripturally sound.

As I've already noted, the God-inspired words of Romans 16:17 and II Thessalonians 3:14-15 justify such an act, and even more so when the ministry of "a" church even acknowledges the error yet persists in preaching/teaching it.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I am not sure what you are trying to say in reference to my statement about fundamental doctrine. I referenced Heb 6, including all six parts, but fundamental doctrine is not limited to just those six things. For example the identity of Christ is part of the very foundation of the faith.

In regards to the unity of the Spirit, I will study and pray about that. Thank you for bringing up Witherspoon, I was not aware of him. It sometimes happens that we think we remember Scripture when we are really remembering tradition.

As for Paul and the "second advent" I'd like to at least hear your presentation of this mystery.

Although you referenced Hebrews 6:1-2, I must point out the fact that the "identity of Christ" is NOT an explicitly stated "principle" of the doctrine of Christ which forms the foundation" of His church. It is, instead, a component, or element of one such "principle," namely that of "faith toward God."

How is it possible for one to truly possess "faith toward God" if it be they don't even know Him and the manner of His manifestation as the Son of man? That is, in my humble opinion, the chief problem with those who embrace a belief in the Trinity. Can it be said that such folks truly possess "faith toward God," when the god whom they have placed their faith in is nothing more than a mere figment of their imagination?

As I write this, laying on the table beside me is a small pamplet, published by the UPCI, titled "Articles of Faith." In it are found such "principles" as Sacrament of Communion; Foot-Washing; Holiness; Tithing, and a host of others, even including Witherspoon's statement which is indicated as the Fundamental Doctrine. Yet, absolutely NONE of these are an integral part of those "principles" of Christ Jesus' doctrine which formed the "foundation" of His church!

I'm not being "nit-picky" here, rather I'm trying to help you to understand that many of the things that are believed and taught today as "fundamental doctrines" are not that at all, instead they are parts or elements of those enumerated by the Hebrews writer.

Remembering that when our Lord "commissioned" the chosen apostles to "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:, He also added an addendum to that the dictates or requirements of that "commission," and it is one that many today have not taken proper heed to. It was namely this: "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:19-20). It is my belief that many of the things being taught today as if they were "fundamental doctrines," are NOT that at all, rather they are part and parcel of that "addendum" our Lord commanded to be taught to those who believed the gospel and were baptized, notwithstanding the fact that many such things are nothing more than the corrupt "traditions of men" which must be properly discerned and discarded.

Regarding my disclosure of that "mystery" which Paul wrote concerning the peculiar, and widely misunderstand circumstances surrounding the "sleep of death" and the 2nd advent of the "Son of man," I would ask that you grant me so time to compose an exposition for your consideration of its scriptural merits and authenticity.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Absolutely not! And I don't, and won't, feeling NO condemnation in so doing. Paul's words of 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 "commands" me not to have company with those who do not preach and teach the SAME things which he and the other apostle's did! Aren't we to follow their steps? (see also 2 Thessalonians 3:6)

The Apostle Paul commanded the Thessalonians not to keep company with those who would not work, but were busy-bodies. The commandment was "...by this epistle...", not that they had to obey the letter or suffer a shunning. I tell my kids the same thing: don't hang out with loafers, or they'll help you into the poor house!

Verse 6 of the same chapter tells us that the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the way so that the man of sin can accomplish his purpose. His purpose is for the persecution of the saints.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Why question my integrity? Did I not explicitly state that when I made the statement "Absolutely not! And I don't, and won't, feeling NO condemnation in so doing"?

After several years of trying to persuade the pastor to accept that the things he was preaching/teaching about a certain doctrine was not scriptural, and even obtaining his agreement that it wasn't, and then being unsuccessful in my effort to persuade other members of the licensed ministry to also acknowledge the veracity of that which I was endeavoring to show them (from the Bible), and repeatedly being rejected, in fact, I DID "have NO company" with them, for almost 17 years!

Is our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, as stated by Paul in Ephesians 5:25-27, coming back for a Bride that has "spots, wrinkles, blemishes, or any such things" (that is, "heresies") amongst its teachings, and is therefore unsanctified and unclean? It is obvious that Paul, as well as the rest of the apostles thought NOT, and I do also!

Have you never read that Paul "withstood" Peter to his face because he was doing things which stood in stark opposition to the teachings and example manifested by the Lord Jesus Himself? And the reason wasn't even a matter of doctrine, rather one which displayed a respect of persons! Should we not emulate Paul's integrity?

One of the chief complaints that I have against my brethren in the contemporary Apostolic Pentecostal church is that many, if not the majority of them, do NOT "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." Nay, they've become much too complacent, tolerating "divisions" when Paul explicitly asserted that its presence amongst us is a sure indication of the presence of "heresies" (see I Corinthians 11:18-19). But what do they do when advised of such, and even given irrefutable scriptural evidence of such? More often than not, you're shunned, and looked upon as some kind of "black sheep" in the family of God. That, my friends, is wrong!!

And what was the advise which the Roman writer give to those who determined that there were those "in the church" who embraced and propagated things which were contrary to the doctrines that the apostles' taught? He said to "mark them" and then to "avoid them."

I am NOT a member of any institutionalized assembly, rather I belong to a small group of like-minded saints who have also separated themselves from other brethren for the same reason I've noted. We meet 2-3 times weekly in our homes, and exert our best efforts to conduct our affairs in the same manner as Paul described in I Corinthians 14:26-40.

And, yes, Mike Blume, every member of the group of saints of which I am a part, even serving as their Teacher, believe that Enoch experienced a common death. And NO, we do NOT believe in a so-called "rapture of the church," or that God would violate His guiding principle of "righteousness" by granting anyone an exemption from the judgment of death which was imposed upon ALL mankind through the corrupt "seed" of man's progenitor, Adam!

LAFON: No one is questioning your integrity: for no one can dispute that you believe what you believe. But your believing it does not make it right!

After "several years" of disputing with the pastor, and some licensed ministers on what you claim was unscriptural doctrine, you removed yourself from the congregation. Be honest: were those doctrines about baptism or receiving the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking :...as the Spirit gave utterance."?

You called yourself a "teacher": who called you, and who confirmed the calling? Can we can assume that the "students" are your followers?

You said you don't believe in the "rapture": well I also don't use that term. But I believe that the Lord is coming again: do you?

[Miss Scarlett]

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman

I don't agree with everything about the church I go to yet I still go there because it is the closest to the truth that I can find.

Great answer Bro. Eastman. I doubt you could find any pastor that would preach exactly what we want to hear. Search out your own salvation with fear and trembling, Study to show yourself approved. Pray and study that you may understand what thus saith the Lord.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esphes45

Maybe I am naive but when I go to a church I am expecting 100% truth. 99 and a half won't do. Anything less I believe people are wasting their time. They that worship God must worship him in spirit and in truth. When you accept less you are short-changing God. So you tell me that God came down here, got in a body and went through all that just so we could go to a building/house and not be told 100% truth? I'm shocked to be honest at some of the responses. If we weed out the opinions that are taught in church I believe truth exists.

Lafon in his post quoted all the scriptures that came to my head as I was reading this thread. One being John 16:13. I say this ... If you are unsure of something don't teach it. Wait and pray for understanding from God. Study, Pray and Wait on God.

I would not preach things I was not sure about. But I've been sure about things only to find I was still wrong. I think we need to tread softly about these issues. And be open for correction. Many who claim they are sure are also not open for correction and that's dangerous..

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Miss Scarlett

Great answer Bro. Eastman. I doubt you could find any pastor that would preach exactly what we want to hear. Search out your own salvation with fear and trembling, Study to show yourself approved. Pray and study that you may understand what thus saith the Lord.

I also agree with Brother Eastman's answer, but...I guess someone found out that his pastor is human! And so are we.

I have heard someone say that "iron sharpens iron". That has always summoned to my mind something violent: a battle scene where iron is lifted up against iron; sword against sword; and yes, brother against brother. But then I remember young David going against Goliath. David "...took his staff in his hand and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook...". Now that is where the best ammunition is found. In a brook of running water: where the stones are worked to perfection by the Holy Spirit; slowly and surely. That's where we are called to be perfected: and where we should lay our children.

[Esphes45]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I would not preach things I was not sure about. But I've been sure about things only to find I was still wrong. I think we need to tread softly about these issues. And be open for correction. Many who claim they are sure are also not open for correction and that's dangerous..

I agree. We all have said things we learned later were wrong.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

The Apostle Paul commanded the Thessalonians not to keep company with those who would not work, but were busy-bodies. The commandment was "...by this epistle...", not that they had to obey the letter or suffer a shunning. I tell my kids the same thing: don't hang out with loafers, or they'll help you into the poor house!

Verse 6 of the same chapter tells us that the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the way so that the man of sin can accomplish his purpose. His purpose is for the persecution of the saints.

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!

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

LAFON: No one is questioning your integrity: for no one can dispute that you believe what you believe. But your believing it does not make it right!

After "several years" of disputing with the pastor, and some licensed ministers on what you claim was unscriptural doctrine, you removed yourself from the congregation. Be honest: were those doctrines about baptism or receiving the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking :...as the Spirit gave utterance."?

You called yourself a "teacher": who called you, and who confirmed the calling? Can we can assume that the "students" are your followers?

You said you don't believe in the "rapture": well I also don't use that term. But I believe that the Lord is coming again: do you?

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!