Laodicea Had A Warning

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by rrford

Ask 50 different people and get 50 different answers. IMO, the legalism we deal with today is when folks have sincere stands of consecration that exceed a Biblical teaching (which is not wrong in and of itself) and contend that everyone must follow the same or risk being lost.

POTD

Happy Thanksgiving!

Blessings, Rhoni

[ChTatum]

Elder,
thanks for taking the time to share this with us. You have been missed.

[meBNme]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

Your remider that the Colosian letter should be read also in the church of Laodicea brougt to my mind the fact hat there was also an Epistle written by Paul specifally to the Laodicean church.

It apparently reamains a lost letter. I have wondered what Paul may have had to say to this church.

Paul refences this letter also in Colosians 4:16 ...."and see that you also read the letter from Laodicea"

Umm... doesn't that say "letter from" and not letter to?

Wouldnt that mean the church wrote to Paul, (probably informing him of their present state and actions) and he was saying to read that letter so the person he was addressing would be aware as well.

I don't think it was a "lost" letter from Paul to the church.

[meBNme]

Originally Posted by rrford

Ahh, but the difference is he was attempting to get her to disobey the original. He was not merely adding to the original. Had she obeyed the origianl she would not have fallen. After all, you can't eat unless you touch.

IMO, if one takes a Biblical stand of modesty to mean to properly clothe the body and then goes further and wears only long sleeved shurts, there is absolutely nothing wrong with such a stand in and of itself.

Actually, God didnt tell Eve not to eat.
He told Adam right? Adam should have told Eve.
Eve should have obeyed, but then adam should not have eaten either.

[meBNme]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

..............some people will have personal convictions that sometimes exceed what the bible requirements...and THAT is fine--- for them. But what's not ok is when they want to impose those convictions on everyone else and imply that those who dont share those same convictions are going to hell.

That sounds like what he was actually saying. That also happens to be something I very much agree with.

So, if someone sincerely believes that God does indeed desire his people to have standards, and that by not doing so one runs the risk of displeasing God, living to close to the world and "playing next to the cliff" if you will.

Then you believe that is fine right? (I happen to agree if so)

However, if that person is a pastor, and is responsible for the souls of the people he pastors. Then wouldn't it be wrong, and neglect for him NOT to preach what he believes is the will of God for his people, what pleases God, and the dangers and traps that could cause someone to fall?

I agree that one should not go around telling other churches and people that they are going to hell for wearing makeup. (even though I strongly support the no makeup standard)
But if one truly believes that something is the desire of God and a danger to do otherwise, then I believe it would be gravely wrong for them NOT to share/teach that belief.