The Thing about the Church, compared to the Thing about the Truth movement, is this thing:
At Church they (all churches) are not only hostile to the biggest revelation of our awakening, namely that the spinning ball realm is nothing more than a Satanic deception and the earth is flat, motionless, and enclosed beneath the very residence of God Almighty, may His Holy Name be forever uplifted and praised...
but they are hostile to every single idea that departs from the official "church doctrine" as established by, essentially, one man (man), sometimes shared with a committee of elders who agree publicly, if they know what's good for them, or handed down from a supervisory body - a pyramid, but without our Lord and Saviour in attendance, since a pyramid is a Babylonian structure not permitted by the law of the Lord, which places all men on the level ground before the Cross with God alone seated in His Glory and unspeakable Majesty on the Eternal Throne.
There is no room for a plurality of views: as soon as it is clear that a member of the congregation holds views that deviate from the official line, that person will never be invited to the platform or given freedom to express himself other than in the form of prayer (and it would be very wickedness to somehow use prayer as a vehicle to express an idea that departs from the notes in the Preacher's Bible or from the articles of faith, because the Lord would not be the primary intended recipient of such public prayer).
All this would be quite correct if the yardstick were the Word of God and no other, but it transpires that many different churches interpret the Good Book in different ways. Some of those ways may be mischievous and at odds with the plain teachings of the Bible, but others have their roots in the thoughts of bible scholars and other intellectuals through the ages.
Eternal salvation vs. justification by faith
Calvinism vs Arminianism
Pretrib, mid trib, post trib
Revelation timeline
Dispensationalism vs covenant theology
...
Arguments can be plainly found in Scripture to support all these views, most of which are antithetical. I can state this confidently, not based on my own cleverness, which is mainly absent, but because I can plainly see that clever men have made clever arguments on both sides of each, Without Departing from Scripture, although opposing camps may make such inferences or open accusations... an unedifying spectacle in very deed
Could it be that this means that we should humbly accept that the thoughts of God are far higher than the thoughts of man, choose a position for ourselves without entirely closing our mind to its counterpart or counterparts, share our ideas - interpretations actually - openly with the saints so that they can be for their benefit of all and be refined and corrected by the spirit of fellowship and love. A plurality of views within the House of the Lord. After all, as iron sharpeneth iron, so the countenance of one man sharpeneth another. Moreover, this situation exists already in the church, as each man has his own persuasions, but such thinking is suppressed and never voiced in the assembly for fear of causing offence, My questions are why? and on what authority?
Men fall out over these matters and refuse to set foot in churches that do not adhere to their preferred doctrine
This is true of all "bible believing" assemblies and has become almost a territorial issue that is surely not pleasing to our Heavenly Father
Of course the church cannot give a platform to those who would question the truth of the Bible and the identity of our Lord and those who would urge us to disregard unequivocal Biblical edicts or at least downplay their importance.
I speak of "those things that are most surely believed among us": from such matters, we may not depart.
It is this that sets the Church aside from the Truth movement. The Truth movement accepts the widest plurality of ideas, on the condition that they are not "mainstream" (noting here that the Bible is often viewed as a mainstream source).
I have managed to read a few verses from the platform without suffering any damage other than some choice sarcasm from certain members of the congregation after the events... and I'm already doing better than in Church!
But there is no boundary.
Unlike in the Church, a man (or woman) can argue opposite ideas to another fellow from week to week, with each attracting his following and no mention of the very meaning of truth. It is essentially a quantum realm (daemonic)
In church, however, where the daemon ever creeps in, if with greater subtilty, there are hymns. And there is nothing I like more than a good hymn (and, no lesser consideration, the devil is not reputed to enjoy them at all)
At Church they (all churches) are not only hostile to the biggest revelation of our awakening, namely that the spinning ball realm is nothing more than a Satanic deception and the earth is flat, motionless, and enclosed beneath the very residence of God Almighty, may His Holy Name be forever uplifted and praised...
but they are hostile to every single idea that departs from the official "church doctrine" as established by, essentially, one man (man), sometimes shared with a committee of elders who agree publicly, if they know what's good for them, or handed down from a supervisory body - a pyramid, but without our Lord and Saviour in attendance, since a pyramid is a Babylonian structure not permitted by the law of the Lord, which places all men on the level ground before the Cross with God alone seated in His Glory and unspeakable Majesty on the Eternal Throne.
There is no room for a plurality of views: as soon as it is clear that a member of the congregation holds views that deviate from the official line, that person will never be invited to the platform or given freedom to express himself other than in the form of prayer (and it would be very wickedness to somehow use prayer as a vehicle to express an idea that departs from the notes in the Preacher's Bible or from the articles of faith, because the Lord would not be the primary intended recipient of such public prayer).
All this would be quite correct if the yardstick were the Word of God and no other, but it transpires that many different churches interpret the Good Book in different ways. Some of those ways may be mischievous and at odds with the plain teachings of the Bible, but others have their roots in the thoughts of bible scholars and other intellectuals through the ages.
Eternal salvation vs. justification by faith
Calvinism vs Arminianism
Pretrib, mid trib, post trib
Revelation timeline
Dispensationalism vs covenant theology
...
Arguments can be plainly found in Scripture to support all these views, most of which are antithetical. I can state this confidently, not based on my own cleverness, which is mainly absent, but because I can plainly see that clever men have made clever arguments on both sides of each, Without Departing from Scripture, although opposing camps may make such inferences or open accusations... an unedifying spectacle in very deed
Could it be that this means that we should humbly accept that the thoughts of God are far higher than the thoughts of man, choose a position for ourselves without entirely closing our mind to its counterpart or counterparts, share our ideas - interpretations actually - openly with the saints so that they can be for their benefit of all and be refined and corrected by the spirit of fellowship and love. A plurality of views within the House of the Lord. After all, as iron sharpeneth iron, so the countenance of one man sharpeneth another. Moreover, this situation exists already in the church, as each man has his own persuasions, but such thinking is suppressed and never voiced in the assembly for fear of causing offence, My questions are why? and on what authority?
Men fall out over these matters and refuse to set foot in churches that do not adhere to their preferred doctrine
This is true of all "bible believing" assemblies and has become almost a territorial issue that is surely not pleasing to our Heavenly Father
Of course the church cannot give a platform to those who would question the truth of the Bible and the identity of our Lord and those who would urge us to disregard unequivocal Biblical edicts or at least downplay their importance.
I speak of "those things that are most surely believed among us": from such matters, we may not depart.
It is this that sets the Church aside from the Truth movement. The Truth movement accepts the widest plurality of ideas, on the condition that they are not "mainstream" (noting here that the Bible is often viewed as a mainstream source).
I have managed to read a few verses from the platform without suffering any damage other than some choice sarcasm from certain members of the congregation after the events... and I'm already doing better than in Church!
But there is no boundary.
Unlike in the Church, a man (or woman) can argue opposite ideas to another fellow from week to week, with each attracting his following and no mention of the very meaning of truth. It is essentially a quantum realm (daemonic)
In church, however, where the daemon ever creeps in, if with greater subtilty, there are hymns. And there is nothing I like more than a good hymn (and, no lesser consideration, the devil is not reputed to enjoy them at all)
No comments:
Post a Comment