I have a Pastor friend in Athens Tennessee who ministers among the Amish people. He told me they are not Christians as we think of Christians. He doesnt mean Apostolic Christians by that he means as in Christianity Christians. He said they preach from a book of their own traditions.
That is what Bro. Robbins was saying that if there was an Apostolic version of the Amish, he would join in a heartbeat. He did not agree with their doctrine.
I would think that these people truly are separated from the world in the physical sense.
Apparently, there are some people that cannot handle discussions that go beyond and below shallowness. Since no Apostolic pastors want to delve deeper into the spiritual side of what being separated from the world is and I was chided for even asking the question, I will say this and let this thread die.
I John 2:15,16
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Good explanation From Gills' Exposition of the Entire Bible
For all that is in the world,.... This is the sum of the evil things in the world; or these following are the objects of sin in the world, or about which wicked men are conversant; even such as are carnal or grateful to the flesh, visible to the eye, and belong to this vain life, or serve to fill with pride and vanity; or these are the main things, which men that love the world most highly value and esteem:
the lust of the flesh; by which is meant, not lust in general, or concupiscence, the corruption of nature, which is the fountain of all sin, or indwelling sin, the flesh, or that corrupt principle which lusts against the Spirit; nor the various lusts of the flesh, fleshly lusts, which war against the soul, and which are many, and are also called worldly lusts; but some particular one, "a lust of the body", as the Syriac version reads; either the lust of uncleanness, which includes all unchaste desires, thoughts, words, and actions, fornication, adultery, rape, incest, sodomy, and all unnatural lusts; and which make up a considerable part of the all that is in the world: or else intemperance in eating and drinking, gluttony and drunkenness, excess of wine, surfeitings, rioting, and revellings, and all the sensual pleasures of life, by which the carnal mind, and the lusts of it, are gratified; whereby the soul is destroyed, the body is dishonoured, and a wound, dishonour, and reproach brought on the character, not to be removed; for which reasons the world, and the things of it, are not to be loved: the next follows,
the lust of the eyes: after unlawful objects, and may design unchaste and lascivious looks, eyes full of adultery, and whereby adultery is committed; see Matthew 5:28; but then this falls in with the other, unless that be confined to intemperance; rather then this may intend a sinful curiosity of seeing vain sights, and shows, with which the eye of man is never satisfied, Ecclesiastes 1:8; and against which the psalmist prays, Psalm 119:37, or rather the sin of covetousness is here designed, the objects of which are visible things, as gold, silver, houses, lands, and possessions, with which riches the eyes of men are never satisfied, and which sin is drawn forth and cherished by the eyes; and indeed a covetous man has little more satisfaction than the beholding his substance with his eyes, and in which he takes much sinful pleasure; see Ecclesiastes 4:8; and what a poor vain empty thing is this! therefore, love not the world, since this is a principal thing in it: as is also
the pride of life; by which seems to be meant, ambition of honour, of chief places and high titles, as in the Scribes and Pharisees, Matthew 23:6, or of grand living, for the word signifies not so much life as living; living in a sumptuous, gay, luxurious, and pompous manner, in rich diet, costly apparel, having fine seats, palaces, and stately buildings, and numerous attendance; all which is but vanity and vexation of spirit; see Ecclesiastes 2:1. The Syriac and Arabic versions read, "the pride of the age"; and every age has some peculiar things in which the pride of it appears. Now neither of these
is of the Father; of God the Father, as the Ethiopic version reads; the things which are desired and lusted after are of God, but not the lust itself; God is not the author of sin, nor is it agreeable to his will:
but is of the world; of the men of it, and agreeable to their carnal minds; and is a reason why things of the world are not to be loved by the saints, who are not of it, but chosen and called out of it; and besides, all these things are mean, base, vile, and contemptible, and unworthy of their love and affection.
______________________________________
According to this very good explanation of what NOT loving this world and being separate from the things in this world...how many of us are guilty of, if not the lust of the flesh...for we marry the one God gave to us for a lifetime partner and the marriage bed is undefiled... but even the lust of the eyes and the pride of life? How many of us are not satisfied with certain clothes, a simple home or do we lust after titles and recognition? How many coats do we have? How many pairs of shoes do we have? What is in our wardrobe, while somebody else wears rags? How many of us want to make a name amongst ourselves or are so very proud of our accomplishments in this life that it interferes with our walk in Christ? How many of us, if we are honest with ourselves, examine ourselves and find that we may not be as separate as we think we are?
Pride of life. Are we guilty?
But then, this has been called a silly question so everybody go back to sleep.
__________________
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. (Psalms 118:8)
That is what Bro. Robbins was saying that if there was an Apostolic version of the Amish, he would join in a heartbeat. He did not agree with their doctrine.
I would think that these people truly are separated from the world in the physical sense.
Apparently, there are some people that cannot handle discussions that go beyond and below shallowness. Since no Apostolic pastors want to delve deeper into the spiritual side of what being separated from the world is and I was chided for even asking the question, I will say this and let this thread die.
I John 2:15,16
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Good explanation From Gills' Exposition of the Entire Bible
For all that is in the world,.... This is the sum of the evil things in the world; or these following are the objects of sin in the world, or about which wicked men are conversant; even such as are carnal or grateful to the flesh, visible to the eye, and belong to this vain life, or serve to fill with pride and vanity; or these are the main things, which men that love the world most highly value and esteem:
the lust of the flesh; by which is meant, not lust in general, or concupiscence, the corruption of nature, which is the fountain of all sin, or indwelling sin, the flesh, or that corrupt principle which lusts against the Spirit; nor the various lusts of the flesh, fleshly lusts, which war against the soul, and which are many, and are also called worldly lusts; but some particular one, "a lust of the body", as the Syriac version reads; either the lust of uncleanness, which includes all unchaste desires, thoughts, words, and actions, fornication, adultery, rape, incest, sodomy, and all unnatural lusts; and which make up a considerable part of the all that is in the world: or else intemperance in eating and drinking, gluttony and drunkenness, excess of wine, surfeitings, rioting, and revellings, and all the sensual pleasures of life, by which the carnal mind, and the lusts of it, are gratified; whereby the soul is destroyed, the body is dishonoured, and a wound, dishonour, and reproach brought on the character, not to be removed; for which reasons the world, and the things of it, are not to be loved: the next follows,
the lust of the eyes: after unlawful objects, and may design unchaste and lascivious looks, eyes full of adultery, and whereby adultery is committed; see Matthew 5:28; but then this falls in with the other, unless that be confined to intemperance; rather then this may intend a sinful curiosity of seeing vain sights, and shows, with which the eye of man is never satisfied, Ecclesiastes 1:8; and against which the psalmist prays, Psalm 119:37, or rather the sin of covetousness is here designed, the objects of which are visible things, as gold, silver, houses, lands, and possessions, with which riches the eyes of men are never satisfied, and which sin is drawn forth and cherished by the eyes; and indeed a covetous man has little more satisfaction than the beholding his substance with his eyes, and in which he takes much sinful pleasure; see Ecclesiastes 4:8; and what a poor vain empty thing is this! therefore, love not the world, since this is a principal thing in it: as is also
the pride of life; by which seems to be meant, ambition of honour, of chief places and high titles, as in the Scribes and Pharisees, Matthew 23:6, or of grand living, for the word signifies not so much life as living; living in a sumptuous, gay, luxurious, and pompous manner, in rich diet, costly apparel, having fine seats, palaces, and stately buildings, and numerous attendance; all which is but vanity and vexation of spirit; see Ecclesiastes 2:1. The Syriac and Arabic versions read, "the pride of the age"; and every age has some peculiar things in which the pride of it appears. Now neither of these
is of the Father; of God the Father, as the Ethiopic version reads; the things which are desired and lusted after are of God, but not the lust itself; God is not the author of sin, nor is it agreeable to his will:
but is of the world; of the men of it, and agreeable to their carnal minds; and is a reason why things of the world are not to be loved by the saints, who are not of it, but chosen and called out of it; and besides, all these things are mean, base, vile, and contemptible, and unworthy of their love and affection.
______________________________________
According to this very good explanation of what NOT loving this world and being separate from the things in this world...how many of us are guilty of, if not the lust of the flesh...for we marry the one God gave to us for a lifetime partner and the marriage bed is undefiled... but even the lust of the eyes and the pride of life? How many of us are not satisfied with certain clothes, a simple home or do we lust after titles and recognition? How many coats do we have? How many pairs of shoes do we have? What is in our wardrobe, while somebody else wears rags? How many of us want to make a name amongst ourselves or are so very proud of our accomplishments in this life that it interferes with our walk in Christ? How many of us, if we are honest with ourselves, examine ourselves and find that we may not be as separate as we think we are?
Pride of life. Are we guilty?
But then, this has been called a silly question so everybody go back to sleep.
Like I said, it's a heart thing.
__________________
If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
2 Chronicles 7:14 KJV
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Micah 6:8 KJV
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 1 John 3:2 KJV
I'm sorry you feel this is a silly question. And I think that you are incorrect by calling the Amish "cultural extreme from some christian sect". They were around long before the Pentecostal movement came into existence.
The point is Ferd, that what one deems worldly, another does not. What one deems to be proper attire, another does not.
So while you may think it is silly, there are people out there who honestly feel like they have prayed about their clothes and do not feel that what they wear is indecent. Yet, you got preachers out there condemning others over what they wear and say that they are "separate" from the world. So...I want to know what "separate" means to individuals.
The Amish may feel that their clothing is what everybody should wear...even for Oneness pentecostals. They may consider what you wear to be, well while not indecent...but excessive cost. They might consider what Oneness pentecostal women wear to be indecent. Would you wear what the Amish men wear? Would you go to church without shaving? That is custom in the Amish community.
You all are the ones who want to say you are separate from the world but are you really separate?
And since UPC claims to interpret the Bible clothes "mandate" what would make their interpretation of biblical mandate any more supreme than the Amish?
Why is it that some will stand up and preach what others ought to do, but when we want delve into what is considered to be separate from the world, you say we ought to get down on our knees and pray about it and not answer? Double talk is all that is.
sigh. you missed my point entirely.
i wasnt talking about the amish. I was using a bit of satire pointing at how liberals treat more conservative Oneness Pentecostals.
and since I am neither a liberal or a conservative, I really do believe (and teach all the time) that we need to spend time with God as to the subject of seperation.
Sanctification as a doctrine is both necessary for salvation and utterly mis-applied....or ignored altogether.
I do not preach/teach what people should wear, where they should go, what is acceptable past times.
I do spend a LOT of time talking about the deep need to be spiritually aware of what you are doing and how God feels about it.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
I met some people who converted from the Amish community at Tampa. They maintained the dress code, and I admired their committment to living a life of seperation. Further, I never was made to feel condemned because their dress code was slightly from my own (though not by too much).
I could see myself enjoying some aspects of that life. However, I enjoy travel too much to be fully sold to it.
__________________
I am an Apostolic Pentecostal. Apostolic in teaching, and Pentecostal in experience.
Ahem.....How was I supposed to understand this point...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd
sigh. you missed my point entirely.
i wasnt talking about the amish. I was using a bit of satire pointing at how liberals treat more conservative Oneness Pentecostals.
and since I am neither a liberal or a conservative, I really do believe (and teach all the time) that we need to spend time with God as to the subject of seperation.
Sanctification as a doctrine is both necessary for salvation and utterly mis-applied....or ignored altogether.
I do not preach/teach what people should wear, where they should go, what is acceptable past times.
I do spend a LOT of time talking about the deep need to be spiritually aware of what you are doing and how God feels about it.
From this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd
Since this is a biblical mandate and not a cultural extreme from some christian sect, I suggest you and all other professing christians stop asking silly questions, get on your own knees, and talk to God about it.
Sanctification is not a grocery list of what to wear or not wear or any "standard" somebody puts on other people as a requirement of salvation.
Christ alone decides who is saved. And the Word tells us to be set apart from the world is to deny the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye and the pride of life. There are many people of all faiths who say that they are "separate from the world" yet practice one, two or all three of the lusts and think it is ok because they obey their church standards of dress codes.
__________________
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. (Psalms 118:8)
I met some people who converted from the Amish community at Tampa. They maintained the dress code, and I admired their committment to living a life of seperation. Further, I never was made to feel condemned because their dress code was slightly from my own (though not by too much).
I could see myself enjoying some aspects of that life. However, I enjoy travel too much to be fully sold to it.
But, would the Amish who maintained their own dress code along with their beards and customs be welcomed amongst the fellowship of Oneness ministers?
__________________
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. (Psalms 118:8)
Would some of the Apostolic men feel ashamed of somebody dressed in Amish attire at their Minister's meetings? Even if the Amish man received the Holy Ghost, but feels that this is what he feels the way God would have him dress? How many of our ministers would treat him with the same respect as they would...say Brother Urshan when he was still living?
Ah, sorry, been busy.
Some? Please, most of them would be so 'plexed
they'd prolly send their women to ask them
to leave. Or, some might welcome them with open hearts.
And most everything in between, 'tho you seem
to have incited mostly the former, for some reason.
An awesome test actually, AYR. I think as a rule
"anyone different" would prolly suffice?
I actually took the Q as rhetorical;
weird how a thread reads differently when
you haven't been active in it, and read it
"from the outside" hmm.
At least understand that if you're
"Apostolic/Pentecostal," you are famously legal
and close-minded toward others as a rule.
Linear Mode
