Evidence for God from Science

Seraph wrote:I liked your post J.Davis. I was inspired by the wisdom in it and don't really disagree with it. And thanks for the words of encouragement.

I guess I feel that a transvestite sitting in the pews is much less harmful to a church than a couple fornicating in the back, or merchants offering substitute sacrifices for a price like in Jesus' day. In the latter cases, they are clearly people deliberately committing sins in the church with no regard for the Bible whatsoever. And in the case of the transvestite, if their agenda was to sit in at the church dressed like that in a hostile statement against God and Christianity, I would say they should most certainly be asked to leave.

Hi Seraph! Thank-you, you have help to inspire me as well.

Yes, some will see one sin as more severe than another, it is different for everyone and many will say that their sin is not that bad, so even though you may feel that two people fornicating in the back of the church is unacceptable (so do I by the way…lol), another person can say: It is not fornication because we made a verbal agreement to be husband and wife before engaging in the act of love and we believe that God predestined our holy union so we are worshiping and honoring God by ministering to needs he has placed in our hearts, it’s beautiful and pleasing in God’s sight. And who are you to judge our righteous act and say it is wrong when you allow that man to dress as a woman in God’s house?

I said in my pervious post that we can not see into the heart of a person and many will say that it looks like sin, therefore it is. If an individual is allowed to practice what appears to be intentional sin in church, why can’t another practice his or her preferred sin in the church (idol worship, porn, stealing, witchcraft and various dark arts etc)? And if those in charge of God’s house allow Individuals to practice that which appears to be intentional sin in the house of God, then who are they to say that the same sin should not be practiced in private?

Everyone will want to have things there way, but God has already set the boundaries of righteousness. He does not approve of any sin at all, He tolerates it and understands that we are humans, but for our own good He does not want us to do it. It is best to follow His lead and not approve of any evil (not good to do) sin, be understanding of it and tolerant (even forgiving ourselves), but we should not approve of it. And in a place that is recognized as God’s house, no one should have the nerve to intentionally sin.

Seraph wrote:But the scenario I had pictured in my head was a genuine person seeking after God but at the same time has a fixation for dressing like the opposite gender but is unwilling to even go to church without dressing like that or is simply unaware of it being sin. In this scenario, I think that forcing them to leave would essentially be abandoning them due to a single sin.

I understand, but I believe it would take some serious unrealistic leaps of reasoning and very uncommon circumstances for a person living in this day and age to be oblivious to what others think of their overwhelmingly socially rejected lifestyle as well as being oblivious to the fact that at the very least, behaving as a sex that you do not appear to be is something that the majority of Christians do not approve of. And again, it still looks like sin…

Now I chose my words carefully here concerning the paragraph above, there is a difference between what a number of Christians approve of and what God approves of. As far as God is concerned, behaving one way and the actions you take in your heart can be (but don’t play with the idea) two different things. So long as one does not act on their feelings in a way that is not good (causes self corruption or the corruption of others), they are not necessarily sinning, but that is a different topic.

However, I do not feel that any of the cross-dressers involved in this matter were ignorant concerning what they were doing. And they would all have a very hard time giving an acceptable reason (one that is right/good) for their actions in relation to anything Jesus would approve of concerning this matter.

Even if the cross-dressers clothes made him feel comfortable, it is still right to respect another’s house and set aside things that he knows is offensive to the owner of the house, it’s only a few hours, not much to ask if you believe that you are going to God’s house. I am sure that Jesus would respect the rules of the cross-dressers house, so long as He was not required to sin (in that case He would leave). But it’s not abandonment, just a request to change into something that is considered appropriate for his sex, the cross-dresser can come right back, or maybe someone can buy him clothes from a near by store if his house is far away or work out other arrangements like letting him wear a church robe etc. If the cross-dresser really believes that he is going to church to meet or receive God, and that is what he wants, nothing will stop him and he can deal with a few hours of not having his way.

But in all cases, it needs to be made clear that the church does not approve of anything that looks like intentional spiteful sin (even if that was not the intentions of the cross-dresser) in a place that people recognize as being the house of God. Once those who do not know the word are made aware of the word, then they have an obligation to behave in the way God approves of, especially when we are in His House, in front of His children and guest, and that goes for all of us.

Canuckster1127 wrote:I had a time when I was commuting by subway in a three piece suit and had to undo a few buttons .... apparently it was a case of trans-vest-tight ......

.... ...LOL!

Before the Law - there was no human knowledge of what makes sin - sin.

God set forth a set of Moral standards to teach what sin is and why it is sin. Without that, we would not know what is displeasing to God or why...

It is displeasing to God to be an unrepentant practicing homosexual – such – God turns over to a debased mindset granting them what they desire as they will not ever think what they practice is displeasing to God so a little enjoyment now in exchange for an eternity reaping what they sown – mocking God and displeasing him. Transvestitism is included in this.

Cross dressing is not normal thought patterns either for either sex. All can be forgiven by God thru Jesus Christ work on the cross but there is a change required from shedding a lifestyle which displeases God to one that pleases him. So what pleases him? Self effort or His grace? The answer is his grace helping one to change – that is what pleases God – depending on the Lord to help one mature into Christ likeness. There is pain in this as growth toward eternal change comes not easy but the Lord will change as promised as 1 John 1:9 reveals how. It is that easy. One can be set free as Jesus promised in John 8:34, 35, 36c.

Was Jesus a cross dresser? A Transvestite? A Homosexual? The answer is NO. Those behaviors are not Christ likeness at all. The moral Law of God reveals to us what displeases God. If one wants to choose displeasing God for what God defines as sin – so be it, enjoy, while you can for eternity such will be judged mocking God and abusing his patience. The greatnes of God is that you can choose this day whom you will serve...

Isaiah 26:10 stand on its own in matters such as these.
-
-
-

You could probably also make the argument that cross-dressing is bringing unnecessary attention to oneself. That attention seeking isn't Christlike either. We should really only bring attention to ourselves out of ordinary amounts when we are pointing to Christ. I don't think cross-dressing points to Him...

MarcusOfLycia wrote:You could probably also make the argument that cross-dressing is bringing unnecessary attention to oneself. That attention seeking isn't Christlike either. We should really only bring attention to ourselves out of ordinary amounts when we are pointing to Christ. I don't think cross-dressing points to Him...

That would only be valid to the extent that that was a motivation in the person involved in the activity, and to a certain extent "cross-dressing" is contextually defined at a societal level, not in terms of absolutes. It's more complex I think in many cases and we don't necessarily help the conversation when we attempt to simplify it to either/or propositions.

I'm not generically defending cross dressing or transvestitism. I just think we need to be careful as Christians against delivering blanket statements if we're not particularly aware of what is actually at work in all aspects.

That's always a risk when we focus in the area of law, morals, ethics and societal norms. Those are important and relevant issues. For the Christian however, these elements are ultimately derivative, not foundational, meaning that we're first and foremost called to focus upon Christ, come to Him, know Him and be known by Him and when we're in that place we're told that our thoughts and behaviors (often over time and not necessarily immediately) will come to reflect His because we love Him and want to be like Him. That the result of the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives.

It's not endorsing or ignoring "sin" to recognize that first and foremost the most effective change dynamic in anyone's life is the work of the Holy Spirit and until that takes place we're better I think to focus on pointing people to Christ than trying to convince them they need to change their behavior just because we want them to clean themselves up.

My thoughts anyway.

Nice post Bart, I do not see you comment on matters such as this often and have been curious about your view concerning various elements relating to this topic. And you always do a good job generating balance.

I agree with you on everything you said…what you speak of is (overwhelmingly) unrelated to what I have been saying as intentional, spiteful, malicious sin/acts against God and the church (beliefs, Christians and God‘s way) and sin out of habit, ignorance and nature, with the intent to love and follow Jesus and His way are two completely different things. But your post has prompted me to ensure that my comments have not been taken the wrong way by those who are young in Christ.

Many of the matters I have been discussing are quite technical and maybe confusing to those young in Christ or not in Christ and I want to be clear that nothing I have said is or was said with the intent to generate the idea that we should play God and decide when it is time for someone’s heart to produce results that lead to desires which cause them to accept and/or practice Godley righteous.

However, while I agree 100% with Bart, that Jesus, by way of the Holy Spirit or other methods He may use is responsible for cleaning a person up. I will add that it is also 100% true that Jesus, by way of the Holy Spirit He has placed in His Christians, will minister, teach, pray, heal, rebuke, correct, love and guide (etc) both the unsaved and siblings in Christ. Therefore, we can become the vessel the Holy Spirit (on Jesus’ behalf) will use to aid in the cleaning of others.

Bart, I would apply most of what you said strictly to those who are not the enemy of our lord Jesus. There are those who wish to destroy God’s work and will never serve Him and they will stop at nothing to destroy His kingdom, his children, love, peace order and all the good Jesus wishes for His creation. There is danger in applying one aspect of Jesus’ character and nature to every situation. And that goes for what I have said and your message as well (believing both would be approved by Christ). There are those that deeply, truly and sincerely hhhhhhhate Jesus and all that He represents and stands for. And then there are those that only think they do, and those who simply misunderstand etc.

But what is happening in America (and other parts of the world) today concerning the battle for one’s right to freely, equally and openly live by whatever unbiblical sexual preference or orientation they choose, concerning that which is not good to do in God’s house/church (such as approve of sin, perform same sex marriages in the house of God, have openly gay priest, cross dressers, transvestites etc who preach and approve of their lifestyle and so on) is getting downright ridiculous.

Various individuals and organizations contained within each of the (aforementioned unbiblical) orientations wish to enforce their beliefs on the church and it’s members and freely practice their sin in the house of God under the regulations that it is not sin and no one is allowed to say it is, they wish to readjust the boundaries of Godly righteousness to suit their personal lifestyle while wearing a counterfeit cloak of justice, equality, freedom and all that America is known for, proud of and admired for. They seek to generate sympathy and support from the hearts of all that respect these honorable attributes so that Americas (and others) will help them tear off (what they suggest are) God’s enslaving chains of bondage in order to give them the equality and power to stand up against God and His church and show them that freedom is a right for all, no longer will they be enslaved and punished by the merciless hands of God and His followers just because they were born different…

They use this countries greatest strengths against it, to help bring it to ruin…

Again…please…do not get me wrong here (talking to all reading) read what I said above..I mean strictly what I said above in this case and speak only of those who have such intentions on there hearts (though many are deceived as well).

There is a force coming against the church (not simply intentional spiteful sin) that wishes to strip God’s house of the respect people have for it in order to deceive many. This force means to deceive the world into thinking that God does not call the shots and His word (Jesus’ way) is not law and the church (beliefs, Christians and God‘s way) must change because it’s practices that which is unjust/not good. It means to create an opening, for what many will be deceived into believing is true freedom, but it’s not, it’s chaos, misery and pain wrapped in a pretty package. If this force gets it’s way, it will be open season against Christianity and true righteousness (along with all the true good that comes with it) on a completely new level.

This force is at the core of what I am speaking against concerning this topic, not necessarily people. So when I talk of intentional, spiteful malicious sin, I mean any acts that seek to accomplish what I speak of in the paragraph above. That is what needs to be dealt with and fought against concerning the church or else many will be lost (God has a plan).

I will say that Christians need to be lead by the Holy Spirit concerning this matter, hating on peoples unbiblical sexual preference or orientation/confused sexual identity does not help at all, telling people God hates them because of their sin (it’s not true) does not help, treating someone like they are doing the things I mentioned in the paragraphs above and they are not does not help, It’s very easy to spot for a Christian that is certain and lead by the Holy Spirit and the things I spoke of in this thread are things that are the responsibility of those God has placed in charge of the church, not the members, if someone in charge does not say/do something concerning this matter (the appearance of intentional, malicious spiteful sin in the church), talk to the one in charge about your concerns, not your fellow member, I only suggested what I did for Colin2000 (talk to his wife’s cousin then the pastor) because they are related.

And those in charge of the church would do well to lead their church and organize events that help put a stop to the forces that act against the church (in a positive, biblical good and Godley way) while at the same time teaching on the endless love God has for those who are dealing with various forms of confused sexual identity or unbiblical sexual preference or orientation.

Each person will have to examine their own hearts as to what their motives are on issues like this. I personally don't believe it is the responsibility of the "church" (and I think our views on what church is are different so we may have to define that before we have a chance to agree on an issue like this) to clean up society. The Kingdom of God is not the Kingdoms of Men. Jesus constantly fought in His earthly ministry against those (starting with the temptation in the wilderness from Satan) who expected Him to overthrow the corrupt government and people who were subjecting Israel to occupation and tribute. Jesus consistently differentiated between the two. Further, Jesus was constantly criticized from those circles for not separating Himself from those "sinners" and for spending "too much" time with those "sinners."

Different views lead to different priorities in this realm. Some see the role of the church today in society in large part to impliment reform and often times this is based upon a belief that the church's success in this realm will prepare for the return of Christ which will happen when Christian values are victorious. I believe Jesus Himself told us that we ultimately should expect that things will decline and become worse before His return and the solution to this world's issues is not for us to "clean them up" but rather to point people toward Christ and it's in the context of a relationship with HIm on an individual level that collectively and meaningful change will take place.

I take seriously my responsibility as a citizen to vote and to vote consistently with the values I believe Christ calls us to. I try not to confuse that however, with my citizenship in heaven and my belief that the only change that has any eternal value is the internal change that takes place when Christ saves a person and the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in their life. As a result I've become far less concerned about social activism and reform in areas like this. That's a significant change from my past.

When Christ's Church defines itself by the behaviors and lifestyles it is against, rather than whom we are for, the message received by many is that knowing Christ requires people to clean up their lives and then come to Him.

The forces at work against Christ are spiritual and our warfare in this realm is spiritual. Political and Social reform have value temporally but that is secondary to our primary calling collectively as the body of Christ. It's subtle, but I believe many have perhaps lost sight of that and are placing more of their efforts and focus upon that which is good but not best.

Even in this matter, as I stated out the outset of this, I believe if we focus upon Christ and ask Him to guide us, it will become clear what our priorities and where our efforts collectively should be placed.

Canuckster1127 wrote:Each person will have to examine their own hearts as to what their motives are on issues like this. I personally don't believe it is the responsibility of the "church" (and I think our views on what church is are different so we may have to define that before we have a chance to agree on an issue like this) to clean up society.

Hi Bart, I never said it was the responsibility of the church to clean up society. I said it is the responsibility of the church (Christians) to keep God’s house clean (maintained in the way He wishes), society will do as it will. Also, what I am talking about does not require all parties involved to search their heart, only that those in charge of the church obey the leading of the Holy Spirit concerning those who seek to cause disorder, confusion and chaos in the house of God (the church, where worship and teaching takes place). Scripture (Such as many of the things mentioned in Timothy and other books of the bible) shows that we (humans) are to maintain order in the house of worship and run things in the manner Jesus approves of.

1 Timothy 5:20-21 Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning. 21 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.

And this command is given to the elders, those in charge. It is extremely clear that God, throughout the bible has always worked through His children (and other means) in order to lead His creation as He desires. I see no point in trying to dispute that fact and any point besides the principle and reasons behind why God desires for us to maintain order (to keep respect, out of love, to stimulate spiritual growth etc) on His behalf and by leading of the Holy Spirit is outside of my intended point of view concerning this specific aspect of my position concerning Jesus message and desire for this element of His instructions.

Concerning defining the church, I am referring to the place of worship (any place people come together to engage in Christian activities ). And I am speaking against those who wish to redefine and adjust Christian activities within the place of worship to include (legally or otherwise) beliefs and practices that fall outside of the boundaries Jesus (God) has set for righteousness and those things that are right to do or speak against in the church. I don’t care what the state or anyone else says. The activities in the place of worship as a result of the beliefs, practices, moral standards teachings and leading of the Holy Spirit (as defined by the word of God) is ran by God through the leading of the Holy Spirit within His children. No one entering the place of worship will ever have a God approved sin that they are allowed to practice and if they can not deal with that then it is up to the individual to seek God in order to resolve the matter but no one is allowed to regulate the boundaries of righteousness but God period….

Canuckster1127 wrote:The Kingdom of God is not the Kingdoms of Men. Jesus constantly fought in His earthly ministry against those (starting with the temptation in the wilderness from Satan) who expected Him to overthrow the corrupt government and people who were subjecting Israel to occupation and tribute. Jesus consistently differentiated between the two. Further, Jesus was constantly criticized from those circles for not separating Himself from those "sinners" and for spending "too much" time with those "sinners."

This is not a relevant point against (not saying that that is your intent) my position concerning Jesus’ message and desires in relation to the issues I am discussing. Jesus set the boundaries of righteousness, lead by example and gave instructions to his children concerning the points I am making and Christians are to be lead by His guidance.

Canuckster1127 wrote:Different views lead to different priorities in this realm. Some see the role of the church today in society in large part to implement reform and often times this is based upon a belief that the church's success in this realm will prepare for the return of Christ which will happen when Christian values are victorious.

Again, your comments in the paragraph above are connected to the ideas in your pervious paragraph and when connected to that pervious paragraph it is not a relevant point against (not saying that that is your intent) my position concerning Jesus’ message and desires in relation to the issues I am discussing.

Canuckster1127 wrote:I believe Jesus Himself told us that we ultimately should expect that things will decline and become worse before His return and the solution to this world's issues is not for us to "clean them up" but rather to point people toward Christ and it's in the context of a relationship with HIm on an individual level that collectively and meaningful change will take place.

Concerning strictly this point you made from the paragraph above…I said…

J Davis wrote:However, while I agree 100% with Bart, that Jesus, by way of the Holy Spirit or other methods He may use is responsible for cleaning a person up. I will add that it is also 100% true that Jesus, by way of the Holy Spirit He has placed in His Christians, will minister, teach, pray, heal, rebuke, correct, love and guide (etc) both the unsaved and siblings in Christ. Therefore, we can become the vessel the Holy Spirit (on Jesus’ behalf) will use to aid in the cleaning of others.

Therefore, it is not “us” (Christians) who are doing the “cleaning” but the Holy Spirit’s work through us which points people to Jesus so that He may "clean them up". So, God is pointing people to Himself through the Spirit He has placed in us, just as God worked through the Human vessel he prepared for Himself…So in all cases, concerning a Christian that is lead by the Holy Spirit, God is always the one doing the work…My point stands..(said respectfully).

Canuckster1127 wrote:I take seriously my responsibility as a citizen to vote and to vote consistently with the values I believe Christ calls us to. I try not to confuse that however, with my citizenship in heaven and my belief that the only change that has any eternal value is the internal change that takes place when Christ saves a person and the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in their life. As a result I've become far less concerned about social activism and reform in areas like this. That's a significant change from my past.

This is not a relevant point against (not saying that that is your intent) my position concerning Jesus’ message and desires in relation to the issues I am discussing. Jesus set the boundaries of righteousness, lead by example and gave instructions to his children concerning the points I am making and Christians are to be lead by His guidance…(Matters inside the place of worship not outside, and no readers, it’s not fun for me to paste this again…lol).

Canuckster1127 wrote:When Christ's Church defines itself by the behaviors and lifestyles it is against, rather than whom we are for, the message received by many is that knowing Christ requires people to clean up their lives and then come to Him.

Repeat what I said above, I’ll add that I never suggested what you are speaking of here, if you believe I have, point it out and I will correct the misunderstanding. As I said, in all cases, concerning a Christian that is lead by the Holy Spirit (and I do mean only the ones that are lead by the Holy Spirit), God is always the one working through the Christian and doing the work and/or cleaning.

Canuckster1127 wrote:The forces at work against Christ are spiritual and our warfare in this realm is spiritual. Political and Social reform have value temporally but that is secondary to our primary calling collectively as the body of Christ. It's subtle, but I believe many have perhaps lost sight of that and are placing more of their efforts and focus upon that which is good but not best.

Repeat my famous “this is not a relevant point against (not saying that that is your intent) my position post above“. I am sure you know that both God as well as Satan and his forces work through humans on this earth (does not have to be possessions concerning Satan, only influence so let’s move on). The bible is extremely saturated with proof concerning that fact…

Canuckster1127 wrote:Even in this matter, as I stated out the outset of this, I believe if we focus upon Christ and ask Him to guide us, it will become clear what our priorities and where our efforts collectively should be placed.

Concerning this line….“Even in this matter”

Most of what you discussed here is (Yes I’m going to say it..lol)..not a relevant point against (not saying that that is your intent) my position concerning Jesus’ message and desires in relation to the issues I am discussing. So the matter you speak of overwhelmingly relates to the points you made alone.

Just trying to keep things clear for those that want to consider what I have said Bart. As I said, I agree with you on everything you said in your first post here. But there is danger in applying one aspect of Jesus’ character and nature to every situation. And that goes for what I have said and your message as well (believing both would be approved by Christ). I did not say you were wrong nor did I post with the intent of debating against your view (I agree with it). But people need to understand that the two truths (as far as I can tell) need to be put into practice as the Spirit leads.

In short, I will say that those who are members in the place of worship should consider your post and those who are in charge of the place of worship as well as those who have a concern for what goes on in the church (speak to the one in charge) should consider my pervious posts.

But I see no contradictions (though that last post is a bit misleading if one takes it as points against what I said).

I think our views on what church is are different so we may have to define that before we have a chance to agree on an issue like this)

J, above is what I prefaced my comments back with and your response makes it clear to me that we define "church" quite differently. You appear to see it as a building or place to meet, which is the house of God, and which it is our job to preserve and keep pure, much like the Temple or Ark of the Covenant in the Old Testament.

I don't believe "church" in the NT is ever presented in that manner. I believe the "church" is the body of Christ and is composed of people in relationship with one another under the headship of Christ, and in that context what is God's responsibility and what is mine are very different than what is typically construed as "church". I understand your point of view. I used to hold something similar to it. Further I spent 20 years serving in varying roles within "church" modeled on that understanding, but I've since left both the profession of ministry and the practice of "church" in that context and it has a radical impact upon many of the types of issues involved here. That's why I qualified my statements from the beginning as I did.

I'm sorry if you feel I misrepresented you in my response. You may take it as me furthering my comments, but I think there are some fundamental differences between us as to what the church is, how the church is to function and what the context of the church's functioning are.

It's my observation (and my past practice so I'll speak of myself here and you need take no offense) that the definition of and the function of "church" is grossly misunderstood. Most in that system give theoretical assent to the church as a body and called out group of people but in practice that's all it usually is, is theory. In practice it's seen as buildings, hierarchical leadership and the "house of God" that is to be kept clean from the influence of sin and sinners who may sully it if we make the mistake of being too loving, tolerant or accepting of people.

I do not suggest that there are no standards or that everything needs to be tolerated, but then my understanding and practice as I understand church now, has nothing to do with location, building or the need to maintain appearances in a spectator based context. I believe "church" is lived out in relationship where everyone is actively involved in building relationship with God and one another and all using their gifts to minister and worship together. In that context, when people "outside" come in there's usually little concern or worry about issues so much because usually there's been a period of relationship building and understanding before people come in and they're there either to understand Christ better and those involved know it and accept them where they are and seek to help them understand who Jesus is and how they can come to know Him better, or they already know Christ and they are there to begin learning and understanding to function in a paradigm of "church" that is decidedly different than it is practiced in most institutional settings but which, in my opinion and observation, is healthier and resembles more how early believers met and grew together collectively as the organic body of Christ.

Again, that's a radically different paradigm and understanding of church and it's difficult to speak to the type of issues we are here without having a higher level of agreement in this realm.

I hope that helps to clarify some. Again, please don't read any tone into my comments other than just trying to explain where I think some of these issues may be coming from.

Canuckster1127 wrote:

I think our views on what church is are different so we may have to define that before we have a chance to agree on an issue like this)

J, above is what I prefaced my comments back with and your response makes it clear to me that we define "church" quite differently. You appear to see it as a building or place to meet, which is the house of God, and which it is our job to preserve and keep pure, much like the Temple or Ark of the Covenant in the Old Testament.

Well…only if you ignore this statement I made in my second post in this thread…LOL!

J Davis wrote:Why is there a problem when it comes to showing respect in the house of God and not doing what He said is taboo when we are in His house? Or can anyone come to your house and do as they please? And yes, we are the church but the world still acknowledges the church building as the house of God.

It means that I do not simply see the church building as the church, the world has one view and educated Christians have another. And because of the worlds view we have a responsibility to operate as God instructed when we come to the place of worship ( the chapters in the book of 1 Timothy 5:20-21 <not just this scripture, Jesus as an example in Mark 11:15 concerning His reason for doing it, Corinthians concerning not abusing gifts when we fellowship together etc.

My post support one another and are to be taken as a unit, I respectfully ask that you keep my ideas intact. Also, please consider (again) my entire statement concerning the following portion relating to how I define the church (in a way that is biblical for our time and relevant to this discussion) from my pervious post.

I said…….

J Davis wrote:Concerning defining the church, I am referring to the place of worship (any place people come together to engage in Christian activities ). And I am speaking against those who wish to redefine and adjust Christian activities within the place of worship to include (legally or otherwise) beliefs and practices that fall outside of the boundaries Jesus (God) has set for righteousness and those things that are right to do or speak against in the church.

Notice I said the place of worship..(any place people come together to engage in Christian activities ), not the church building or even the church. I speak of any place that people gather in order to engage in Christian activities. That means outside, at home, on the moon etc. Wherever people gather in order to engage in Christian activities is the church. But I do not speak simply of the church but of the obligation those in charge of the church have to obey the leading of the Holy Spirit concerning maintaining order and opposing any ungodly forces coming against the church (so church meaning all the things God has given to His children to maintain under His guidance when engaging in Christian activities contained within Christian owned property).

So as is made evident by my pervious post and current statement, you are incorrect in your assessment of my definition of church making your pervious post overwhelmingly incorrect in relation to (here it comes!…wait for it…wait for…it..) “my position concerning Jesus’ message and desires in relation to the issues I am discussing“….(there it is!)…LOL!

Perhaps you can understand my confusion with the mixed message of what you're saying with this that you said as well?

I never said it was the responsibility of the church to clean up society. I said it is the responsibility of the church (Christians) to keep God’s house clean (maintained in the way He wishes), society will do as it will. Also, what I am talking about does not require all parties involved to search their heart, only that those in charge of the church obey the leading of the Holy Spirit concerning those who seek to cause disorder, confusion and chaos in the house of God (the church, where worship and teaching takes place). Scripture (Such as many of the things mentioned in Timothy and other books of the bible) shows that we (humans) are to maintain order in the house of worship and run things in the manner Jesus approves of.

I don't believe Timothy or any other portion of Scripture even refers to a dedicated worship space let alone refers to it as the "house of God."

I think we do have different views. I understand you're delineating between your use of the word "church" in terms of "christians" (universal) and your use of the word "church" in terms of a local building, facility and location or local assembly. I don't see any differentiation within Scripture at this level and so I believe it is eisogesis based upon looking at the Scriptures through the lens of how out culture practices "church."

That's why I mentioned that there appears to me to be an intellectual acceptance that "church" is the living body of Christ, but when it comes to practically living that out, I don't see that making any impact upon practice. I don't say that to be offensive or to infer that only my view is the right one and that genuine Christian's can't function in the context of an institutional church. I don't believe that at all. But I do believe that the concerns related to "public worship" and "location" that you cite are then based upon an extension of "church" in a context outside of what Scripture teaches and the early church modeled.

We can go more into this if you like, and maybe a separate thread would be appropriate as we're drifting off topic here. I hope I'm making some sense anyway and am clear about what I'm saying, even if you don't agree with what I'm saying.

Canuckster1127 wrote:I don't believe Timothy or any other portion of Scripture even refers to a dedicated worship space let alone refers to it as the "house of God."

Come on Bart..LOL! I have no desire to play word games and cause confusion concerning old and new testament terms.

Again..the following is the definition I gave for church, again, My post support one another and are to be taken as a unit, I respectfully ask that you keep my ideas intact.

J Davis wrote:Or can anyone come to your house and do as they please? And yes, we are the church but the world still acknowledges the church building as the house of God.

J Davis wrote:Notice I said the place of worship..(any place people come together to engage in Christian activities ), not the church building or even the church. I speak of any place that people gather in order to engage in Christian activities. That means outside, at home, on the moon etc. Wherever people gather in order to engage in Christian activities is the church. But I do not speak simply of the church but of the obligation those in charge of the church have to obey the leading of the Holy Spirit concerning maintaining order and opposing any ungodly forces coming against the church (so church meaning all the things God has given to His children to maintain under His guidance when engaging in Christian activities contained within Christian owned property).

Therefore, as sated in my pervious post, I believe we are the church, God dwells in us now, not temples of stone. As said in Matthew 18:20.…"For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.

And… Ephesians 2:19-21 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household, 20having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone,21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord.
22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit.

Therefore, when we engage in Christian activities God is there, no matter where we are…building or otherwise (so there is no point in trying to separate the two in this day and age, if we are there in His name, it is God’s house and everything I have said applies). Also, as I said in my pervious post…

J Davis wrote:the world has one view and educated Christians have another. And because of the worlds view we have a responsibility to operate as God instructed when we come to the place of worship ( the chapters in the book of 1 Timothy 5:20-21 <not just this scripture, Jesus as an example in Mark 11:15 concerning His reason for doing it, Corinthians concerning not abusing gifts when we fellowship together etc.

The quote above goes along with everything I have said in this thread and is not to be taken away from any other part of what I am saying, please keep my ideas intact. You can separate many parts of this matter which is why people get confused but it all goes together.

So I am being completely biblical concerning my quote which is used in your pervious post and….If our views differ I am ok with that.

Nothing changes, all points I have made stand and your pervious post is not a relevant point (LOL) against (not saying that that is your intent) my position concerning Jesus’ message and desires in relation to the issues I am discussing…

More supporting scriptures…

1 Timothy 3:5 (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?),

1 Timothy 3:14-15 I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; 15but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.

1 Peter 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 5:11-19 But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? 13But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.

Bart, please answer this for me….Is it ok (biblically) for people to do this…Approve of sin (make a sin a non sin), perform same sex marriages in the house of God (please keep my definition intact or use church if you wish, I approve of both as does new testament scripture), have openly gay priest, cross dressers, transvestites etc who preach and approve of their lifestyle and so on?

Concerning this topic, that is what people really need to know.

Bart, please answer this for me….Is it ok (biblically) for people to do this…Approve of sin (make a sin a non sin), perform same sex marriages in the house of God (please keep my definition intact or use church if you wish, I approve of both as does new testament scripture), have openly gay priest, cross dressers, transvestites etc who preach and approve of their lifestyle and so on?

No, I'm not saying at all that we wink at sin or ignore it. I do note however that most "churches" are rather selective about the "sin" they are willing to address in a strong manner. You don't see the same attention brought to bear in terms of public condemnation and social engineering with regard to lying, gluttony or even heterosexual forms of sexual sin.

You may deny our differences if you wish and try to speak around them, but respectfully, there is no "house of God" outside of His residence within the collective body of believers. God ceased to dwell in temples or buildings with the tearing of the veil in the Holy of Holies when Christ died and then Pentecost when it manifested in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. It's somewhat moot to me to speak of performing marriages, ordaining clergy or speaking of preaching in the context of an institutionalized worship service as all of those elements are to my understanding outside of the practice of the early church and not specifically taught in Scripture. There's freedom in Christ and so I accept that Christians may choose to operate in this manner, but I no longer practice in that manner as I find it counter-productive in many ways. The teachings of scripture apply in a different context for me than what you're assuming with an institutional traditional model and I fear we're speaking past one another.

If there is a need within the context of Christian Fellowship (and there is) to exclude people in open rebellion against Christ for a season with a view to eventual restoration if at all possible, then there is also a need to emulate Christ by going out in the context of daily life and spending time and developing relationships with those who are social outcasts and who are suffering and to show them the love of Christ. That then leads to a bringing of those "sinners" into the context of church fellowship where they either come to know Christ personally (if they haven't already) or they begin to grow and over time the expression of that faith and change makes a difference in how they live. Most "churches" tend to focus upon the former and to ignore the latter.

It's interesting to me that Jesus doesn't refer to people as "sinners". Jesus refers to people who are "lost" and whom He goes out to find them and whom he commissions his disciples and followers to go out and find as well. The purity of the fellowship isn't a matter of appearances in a social, organizational context. That's how the world operates. The purity of fellowship is a matter of degree (because we're all not practically perfect yet) where people are collectively focused upon Christ, desiring to grow and willing to love and nurture those who are younger in the faith and to allow the process of change to start first and foremost with the work of the Holy Spirit. We have a role to play in terms of discipleship and mentorship. My experience and observation within the institutional church model that more often than not standards of purity are arbitrarily applied and love and shepherding of new believers focuses more on outward appearance than true relationship building and a willingness to give grace to one another as the outward appearance catches up with our inward change.

That's probably enough for now.

Again, if you want to discuss the church issues primarily I think we should start another thread so we don't go too far off topic here.

Bart, is there something you would like to share with the group? It's OK, we won't judge.

jlay wrote:Bart, is there something you would like to share with the group? It's OK, we won't judge.

I appreciate that jlay. I'll try not be shy ....