Should we teach others to rebel against standards? - Page 77

Evang.Benincasa · #**761** 02-23-2020, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Like EB says. No

The Hebrew church had pastors at the same time that the Jews had rulers of the synagogue. The rulers of the synagogue weren’t a type of the pastor. Neither were the priests a type of the pastors or preachers exclusively.

Yet, the Levites taught the people. Synagogue system happens sometime in Babylon along with the Pharisaical system. Pharisees taught people and kept them together while in Babylonian captivity (as the legend goes) then return with the diaspora to rebuild Jerusalem. But in the Old Testament it was the Levites job to instruct the people between the difference between the holy and the profane.

Evang.Benincasa · #**762** 02-23-2020, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coksiw

The truth is not a dangerous path. It brings more blessings to preach it with clarity.

You have to look at the bigger picture. Truth is dangerous when it is in the hands of a novice. Because they are one dimensional, not seeing the end game to how they handle the truth. If this is so easy, then why isn't everyone doing it? Why isn't everyone in lockstep with TRUTH???? Why does discussion and debate turn into a slugfest? Or constantly round and round of repeating each others arguments back and forth like the "Why Sunday" thread? Each other wants his ecclesiastical truth to be right. Atheists and the rest of the rank and file look on and laugh. While we beat our little tin drums flat. Hence the reason why Paul stated that you are wise and we are foolish. Because there are none so blind who will not see. My lands, we have a problem in this country, pretty much the entire planet. It is called KNOW IT ALL. The Socratic paradox is recorded by Plato of his teacher. "I know that I know nothing." When the Oracle of Delphi (supposedly), stated that "Socrates is the wisest of all in Greece." Socrates already knowing that everyone in Athens were a bunch of know it alls, replied "I know that I know nothing." Yet, not around here or anywhere else there is computer internet access. Religious people all across the spectrum be they Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, or whatever cult or schism all have the TRUTH. Good God from Zion, you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad. Right? So, yes, the truth is dangerous and any wise mature individual knows that. But only us dummies can't wrap our minds around that, so we search the internet for electronic gurus to spoon feed us. Gurus who have NEVER dug a work out, or worked with a church family for any length of time to see fruit.

diakonos · #**763** 02-23-2020, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

When you read that, please keep in mind....

John 18:36
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Remember Jesus didn’t set up an earthly kingdom. He set up a heavenly, spiritual kingdom. Instead of seeing through the natural eye, how about reading through a spiritual one.

Uhhh... because the Word was written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. It already says what the Spirit would have it say. There’s no more “spiritual” meaning behind what is already written.

Nicodemus1968 · #**764** 02-23-2020, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diakonos

Uhhh... because the Word was written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. It already says what the Spirit would have it say. There’s no more “spiritual” meaning behind what is already written.

I respect your opinion.

diakonos · #**765** 02-23-2020, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

I respect your opinion.

The way you believe allows for everyone to have their own private interpretation violating the principle of I Peter 1:20

Nicodemus1968 · #**766** 02-23-2020, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diakonos

The way you believe allows for everyone to have their own private interpretation violating the principle of I Peter 1:20

I don’t believe people should have their own private interpretation of the Bible. I just believe there are differences in writing between the epistles of Paul and John with Revelation.

Nicodemus1968 · #**767** 02-23-2020, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diakonos

The way you believe allows for everyone to have their own private interpretation violating the principle of I Peter 1:20

What does this mean to you?

John 16:13
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Nicodemus1968 · #**768** 02-23-2020, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

While the Ruler of the Synagogue presided over everyone in the congregation. He didn't teach or preach. He directed the course of the day. But there were more than one rabbi, and group of men who taught large groups. Even in the chapter of Ephesians 4 Paul points out a five fold ministry. Jesus sends His students out in twos, not in ones. Because of the checks and balances of accountability to each other. Paul shows us this in the book of Galatians when he withstood Peter (an elder in the church longer than Paul) to his face in front of the entire congregation. Plus in front of visiting ministers sent from Jerusalem by James. Rebuke before all that all may fear isn't against young saints in a church being scolded by the pastor. It is for ministers correcting unruly rouge ministers. Yes, give honor to where honer is due, but that isn't just one man. We don't have a Roman Catholic priest system.

Where is the traditions they had then fit here today? Should there be several bishops, elders, and one Pastor for each church? That would mean several counsels for any given situation. If the men of wisdom find that the angel
did mean the Pastor, why wasn’t it written to the church instead? Just to note, John said “I was in the spirit on the Lords day” Angel to what we know is the messenger of God. I wonder if John saw what the Pastor is to the church (spiritually)? Back to the subject, of we have several Pastors, Bishops, Elders in the church would that be considered several heads to the church?

diakonos · #**769** 02-23-2020, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

Where is the traditions they had then fit here today? Should there be several bishops, elders, and one Pastor for each church? That would mean several counsels for any given situation. If the men of wisdom find that the angel
did mean the Pastor, why wasn’t it written to the church instead? Just to note, John said “I was in the spirit on the Lords day” Angel to what we know is the messenger of God. I wonder if John saw what the Pastor is to the church (spiritually)? Back to the subject, of we have several Pastors, Bishops, Elders in the church would that be considered several heads to the church?

You’re saying that spiritually the pastor is an angel?

Evang.Benincasa · #**770** 02-23-2020, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

Where is the traditions they had then fit here today? Should there be several bishops, elders, and one Pastor for each church? That would mean several counsels for any given situation. If the men of wisdom find that the angel
did mean the Pastor, why wasn’t it written to the church instead? Just to note, John said “I was in the spirit on the Lords day” Angel to what we know is the messenger of God. I wonder if John saw what the Pastor is to the church (spiritually)? Back to the subject, of we have several Pastors, Bishops, Elders in the church would that be considered several heads to the church?

I didn’t say they were pastors. If I did I would be adding to a book which we are told not to add to. Correct?