Help! My Best Friend is a Liberal!!

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Theophilus

This explains my personal situation to a tee, yet, from time to time he still comes around. The problem is that it seems to be in effort to impose his persuasion subtly, though his persuasion has failed him over and over. That is usually when he comes back around, when his ways have cost him. To what extent should I maintain the friendship? It’s really a family to family friendship with a fairly bumpy past. We love them, but find ourselves in a dilemma on whether or not and to what extent we ought to fellowship.

I do not want to make this thread too personal, but rather to the issue in general.

Well, you didn't say that in your opening post. I got the impression you were talking about liberal, moderate, conservative, and ultra conservative apostolics.

I think I would find it (standards) a matter of convenience... if I were going to the beach but knew if I went with my Pentecostal friend and was going to spend half the day looking for a secluded beach to avoid mixed bathing, or I could go with my other friends and just park in the first spot that looks good, I would probably lean towards my non-Pentecostal friends.

If I was doing something where standards didn't matter (like playing games at someone's house), then it would just depend on if I wanted to go or not.

Originally Posted by Rico

Who's telling you not to keep your standards? I don't base my friendships with other apostolics on standards. There was a time I did, and I found out it was because I had a rotten attitude and thought I was better than other people. I'm not trying to sound like MLK, but something he said makes a lot of sense. He prayed for the day when men are judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. Well, what's wrong with judging someone by the content of their character and not their adherance to dress standards? Wearing or not wearing pants (for a woman) does not make the person a good or bad person. Bearded or clean shaven does not determine if someone is a good person or not either.

That's what we should be doing - character more than clothing - that ought to be our motto!!

Originally Posted by Theophilus

I appreciate your openness and honesty. Do you foresee a progression in your walk with Christ that may at some point ease some of this?

Honestly I have no idea... I don't really see that I have a walk, and the problem is I don't even desire one... I just want to be a good person and continue to improve myself as a person, that's the extent of my ambition spiritually. (I think my "spiritual" needs meter is broken).

I'm willing to discuss this further if you feel it will help you understand your relationship with your friend.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Theophilus

Is your best friend a laid back liberal? A mushy moderate? A mean-spirited Conservative? A pharisaical UC?

What do you do when your best friend isn't of your persuasion or changes course? Can there truly be fellowship when the lines have been redefined? If so, how so? Is there a limit? Can you ever hope to accomplish anything together for the Kingdom if you are not equally yoked and/or no longer "say the same thing?"

If this friend still loves God and is seeking after Him, that could be a basis for continuing relationship. Usually after time folks realize that what they left is not their enemy and moderate the attitude. There is so much in scripture that you should eventually be to celebrate together, things of the heart, and intimacy with the Lord. However, if this person has left even the love and pursuit of the Lord, then not too much for relationship at this time. If you hunt or do other activities with them maybe you could occasionally continue those for contact and possibility of future restoration.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Theophilus replied:

Theo,

I think you know the answer to your question. I don't. But I will give it a feeble attempt.

If a house is to stand it has to be united. Paul pointed out in many of his epistles things that might divide the body of Christ...such as heresies (circumcision and keeping the law of Moses in Galatians and I've been told Colossians was written against Gnosticism) Jesus, the Spirit, pointed out other heresies in the first few chapters of Revelation. Heresies will divide the body.

Pride and the pushing forward of a personal agenda will divide the body. We can see that in the Corinthian church...I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, I am of Peter...etc.

The members of the body need to have charity toward one another and seek peace.

Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. and

From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love

Those two verses 1 Cor 1:10 and Ephesians 4:13 would fit perfectly together if read one right after another.

Sorry this post is a little scattered.

Thanks for your input. I wouldn't call it feeble.

I have some ideas about those verses and there context, and unity in general, naturally, but I didn't ask my question for any other reason than to seek your opinion, as well as others.

I suppose the crux of the issue seems to be defining at what point is possible peace and unity breeched.

Ro 12:18 ~ If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.

When is it no longer possible or rather when do you say enough is enough and put the friendship on hold?

[StillStanding]

If I were a conservative, I would maintain a friendship with a friend that went liberal, as long a they didn't 'flaunt' their new freedom to me.

I try to show respect to my conservative friends. Most are still friends, but there are a few that won't give me the time of day since they learned I was 'liberal'!

Originally Posted by Rico

Well, you didn't say that in your opening post. I got the impression you were talking about liberal, moderate, conservative, and ultra conservative apostolics.

That is why I don't want to make it personal. My interest is in all points of view and how other's have dealt with the issue within friendships.

Have you ever had to deal with a similar situation?

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Theophilus

Quite right. What is your opinion Barb, in general and about the meaning of this verse?

Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

It means to me that the Body is not going to always agree on every point.

1Co 1:10 ~ Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

IMO, speaking the same thing is the Godhead, belief, repentance, baptism in the Name, Spirit infilling, living a godly and modest life, separated from the evil that this world represents.

Going back to my earlier post, in this the framers formed a united organization. The PCIer and PAJCer alike could agree on this and spoke the same thing, so much so that one could not tell who was who.

Where they disagreed, they would not contend for their different issues, "till we all come in the unity of the faith..."

Originally Posted by Rico

Who's telling you not to keep your standards? I don't base my friendships with other apostolics on standards. There was a time I did, and I found out it was because I had a rotten attitude and thought I was better than other people. I'm not trying to sound like MLK, but something he said makes a lot of sense. He prayed for the day when men are judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. Well, what's wrong with judging someone by the content of their character and not their adherance to dress standards? Wearing or not wearing pants (for a woman) does not make the person a good or bad person. Bearded or clean shaven does not determine if someone is a good person or not either.

Like I said, it's not all about "standards" and certainly not just dress standards. There are other standards of greater importance save perhaps functional nakedness.