Agenda Driven or Accepting of Diversity?

[Sherri]

Originally Posted by Maple Leaf

Very well said Milady.

Very well said indeed.

Also, I have been feeling guilty since reading your earlier post. I read all of your reports and enjoy them, especially the missions oriented posts, but I usually just say "Praise the Lord," and go on my way. But, in spite of the lack of response, your posts have been a blessing to me.

It's nice of you to say this, ML. I've been very convicted lately just to learn to love people where they are, from one extreme to the other. That's my goal for 2008!

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

I haven't read this thread until just now. I thought that it was going to be about some social issue that always chaps me. But, it isn't

Having said that, I found this POST which is probably the wisest, most accurate and discerning post that I've read so far.

The realm of those accepted by God is so all inclusive that the shading of extreem light to extreem darkness fades away in such small increments that it cannot be known except by God Himself. (hope that makes sense)

I might consider myself to be in and walking in the brightest possible light, yet a recognized brother with whom we have fellowship is walking in a light that is so slightly dimmer than our own that none can tell the difference. This continues on to the next brother and the next and then the next until the light gradually fades into dusk like condition and finally the gross darkness.

Therefore, it is PRIDE that works among us that seems to cause us to think that the light that we have is just a cut, if not a very small cut above another group. The same PRIDE in them causes them to think the same. Hence, the body of Christ is not mystically divided but pride is deceiving...even causes us to doubt others to become suspicious.

Pride working on "true believers" is a terrible thing. The true believer, regardless who he may be is very dogmatic. True beleivers will follow anyone fanatically that strike their fancy. It is a personality trait among some to become dogmatic. Dogmatism together with PRIDE will cause one to become agenda driven. Thus, the fellowship of Christ is greatly reduced to "us four and no more." Worse yet, "Nobody is saved 'cept you and me but sometimes I worry about you."

I have had good fellowship with the rankest of all conservatives knowing all the while that I do not believe the same way he does. Those kind of men have a sweet spirit of Christ with whom I fellowship who does not make their agendas a matter of division. Also, I have had sweet fellowship with the rankest of libs under the same condition. I've also had the sweetest fellowship with an AOG preacher once...that is until he died. He knew what I was. We discussed it some. But there was no way that I could change him. He knew that he could not change me. So, we set it aside and fellowship with Christ.

Once he invited us over to eat one evening. As we all sat around the table, he asked me to ask the blessings on the food. I bowed my head to pray. But just then, I felt the little wheel in the middle of the big wheel turn over in my soul. I tried to stay straight and resume the prayer. Before I could fisnish, that little wheel turned over again. Then, it was all she wrote for about two hours. A spirit of prayer came upon us that was awesome.... We were swept away in prayer. We visited the heavenlies being lifted up above all the earth into glory.

Two hours later, we got up. The man's face was flushed. He said, "As you started to pray, I saw Jesus in a vision with his hands stretched out toward us. Surely, this AOG man and myself had great fellowship in the Spirit. The food was still on the table but cold and untouched. What happened to the women. Why! They had fellowship to. They went shopping and came back just as we were finishing our prayer. lol....

The dear man has now gone on to judgment. Oh, tears come to my eyes with longing to see this precious man once more.

Dogmatism and pride are the twin sisters of division. It ought not to be.

Apprehended,

I happen to agree with you, I believe you post is very insightful of what happens when believers in Jesus Christ fellowship in the areas of agreement.
Honest and open discussion of the areas of disagreement, all the while loving and worshiping together in the unity of the Spirit.

I am considered lib and heretic on this form by most, but I still fellowship with my family, and friends from our UPC days. I have friends that my wife and I "won" to the Lord that are still in the UPC and we fellowship and love them all. I do not have an agenda toward any of them, they are true believers, and they treat us the same. Do they think differently behind the scenes? Who knows? We have great fellowship anyway. JMO

Anyway, I loved your post, blessings to you.

GREAT RESPONSES TO THE THREAD!

I've enjoyed this thread immensely and appreciate the insight that we've gotten from each end of the spectrum. Again, respect begats respect and when you fail to respect others - in spite of your differences - you are setting yourself up to be written off as an obnoxious jerk.

Mind you, I didn't say that you had to 'agree' with them but respect the element of that person that you can see 'eye to eye' on.

Perhaps the greatest things so far to come out of this thread was...
A - Sherri's perspective in that dynamic post and
B - The true statement that 'those who will be agenda driven as either con or lib will be the very same way if they switch sides... it's just part of their nature!

Hope to see some more thoughts... and that we continue to do it void of attacks.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I would have said cons at one time (especially regarding 'holiness standards') until Daniel Alicea.

VERY true.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

QUESTION: How ‘wide’ is your willingness to have friends who, while Apostolic, don’t believe exactly like you?

QUESTION: Who do you find the most ‘agenda’ driven... ‘cons’ or ‘libs’… and why do you think that is?

I think that inside the apostolic movement, I do have friends who are not apostolic, that one MUST believe the new birth. This "saved at repentance" is a lie that will cost a lot of people for eternity. I just can't fellowship "apostolics" who believe that lie.

I used to think that the 'cons' were the more agenda driven, but after a few months on AFF I think both sides can be agenda driven. It boils down to if you have a christian attitude or not.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by StMark

just take their different preaching styles for instance -listen to a con preach then listen to a lib.the lib walks around with one hand in the pocket and sort of preaches like he's at a fireside chat. the cons hit it hard and aggressive, spitting, shouting, walking the pews lol
I think we make fun of each other equally

That group needs some anointing plain and simple.



I am not a con, I am a moderate, but I like the spitting, shouting, and walking pews. Why should we change who and what we are? That is the kind of preaching I grew up on and the kind of preaching I have done for 15 years now.

Originally Posted by Joseph Miller

I think that inside the apostolic movement, I do have friends who are not apostolic, that one MUST believe the new birth. This "saved at repentance" is a lie that will cost a lot of people for eternity. I just can't fellowship "apostolics" who believe that lie.

Is it because it upsets you that one can have faith in their salvation and you have to do all these things to do saved?

I mean, why should they be able to get into heaven when they didn't have near the sacrifice you did?

Wouldn't be fair, would it?

Kind of like those ones who complained because they were hired and worked all day long and then the owner hired some during the last minutes of the day and then paid them all the same wage and the ones that had DONE THE MOST were upset.

It does all depend on the attitude.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

The bottom line issue is not insignificant things. The bottom line issue is salvation itself.

You are right that the bottom line issue is salvation. When one believe that you can be saved without being baptized in Jesus name and being filled with the Holy Ghost then we don't see the bottom line the same. Our doctrine is not the same. I have a major problem with that.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by Walkbyfaith7

Is it because it upsets you that one can have faith in their salvation and you have to do all these things to do saved?

I mean, why should they be able to get into heaven when they didn't have near the sacrifice you did?

Wouldn't be fair, would it?

Kind of like those ones who complained because they were hired and worked all day long and then the owner hired some during the last minutes of the day and then paid them all the same wage and the ones that had DONE THE MOST were upset.

It does all depend on the attitude.

It boils down to what the Word of God says. If one does not repent, get baptized in Jesus name and receive the Holy Ghost they are NOT saved. That my friends is the bottom line.

Originally Posted by Joseph Miller

It boils down to what the Word of God says. If one does not repent, get baptized in Jesus name and receive the Holy Ghost they are NOT saved. That my friends is the bottom line.

Sounds right to me!