Why do churches and the Bible have different standards? Both of men are they not

1. 48

   Ericdierkerposted 9 years ago

   Why do churches and the Bible have different standards? Both of men are they not?
   
   How can we condemn churches because they are of man and yet cite the Bible for this, which is also of man. (both can be divinely inspired) Condemnation of all churches because they are man lead seems totally inconsistent with history. I choose to read and accept what Paul says. Does that make me contrary to what Jesus taught? I do not thinks so. I choose to listen to sermons and consider them, does that make me less a Christian?

   replyreport
2. 66

   Lady Guinevereposted 9 years ago

   I am going to try to answer this.  I am not sure why the churches have a different datandard from what Jesus thought the church should be.  I do not partidcularly like Paul's teachings because they differ from what Jesus tells us to do.  Both can be divinely inspired.  The trouble comes when one church or leader or group in a church or denomination tells everyone else that they are the only church and have all of the truth.  It is when they convert (whch should not even exist today) others to thier beliefs.  It is as if they are playing the child's game of Red Rover.  None one owns another, period.  I listen to all views.  I have my own opinion too and fget into trouble when I voice my own opinion, especially if it does not equate with what another thinks about religion.  Sometimes I will even change my opinion...that is a shock to some eh?  It happens.  I was a different person 20 years ago than I am now and will be in the next 20 years...if I make it on this earth that long.
   Eric, I love your sermons.  I wish that I could write like you but am not asked to do it that way.  I have tired many times and it just does not come.  I do not condemn others, even if some think that I am by their standards.  I just try to open their eyes a little bit more and ot open their hearts and minds too.  Many things are not as they seem and there is always other sides of things.

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      If a "church" preaches that it is their way or the highway, I can get that. If they preach "our way or condemnation" I hit the highway. But I do not condemn all churches as some are upright and follow my thinking. That is just honesty.

      replyreport
   2. 66

      Lady Guinevereposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Hey I have some people on here that think they are all right and shove scripture down my throat.  I can read but I do not quote the same to them and they get mad at me.  That is not Christ-like at all. I don't care what church they are in.

      replyreport
   3. 51

      Norine Williamsposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      ED: I rejoice that you follow Paul's teachings consider Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; 10:16 which says Paul's teachings were from God! Paul's teachings continued Jesus' teachings considering those Scriptures! After 1st CHURCH estab Acts 2:42!

      replyreport
3. 52

   celafoeposted 9 years ago

   NO THEY ARE NOT BOTH OF MEN.   
   The scriptures were recorded at the behest of God by Godly men (there are so few of them then and today) that did as He directed.
   Paul NEVER referred to the church as a place where people meet God. he knew the difference and taught it, that the people of God are the church.   He gave instructions on what is to take place when the church "comes together", he never said when you go to church, he always says when you (the church) come together.    Yes some bible translations incorrectly say when they come to church, but the greek NEVER says that.   Paul understood that the church system of men between God and man was done away with at the cross.     And he clearly and distinctly tells us that the head of man is Christ and the Head of woman is man   (depending on her circumstances, her OWN husband or her father).   The law of Moses set up the old testament church structure and it, as the law was TEMPORARY.    in it man had to go through men to get to God , but when Jesus died and the veil was rent, God no longer required that man come to men to get to Him, He moved out of the temple into the temple not built with hands, the flesh and body called man and lives there with them.    We dont have to" go to church" to meet God because HE IS WHEREVER WE ARE AND WE HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO HIM.    And when we come together (the church) then wherever we are He is there.
   Man because of their desire to "be in charge" have corrupted the way things are supposed to be (as usual) and have re-instituted the dead temple system, calling it the "church".      And it is as we call it the "church system of man", which God has no part in because He ended it with Jesus on the cross.    Ask 10 people if they are Christian and at least 8 of 10 that they are, answer by saying I belong to -----church.    Sorry but that makes them church goers and not" THE CHURCH".   
   SINCE THE SCRIPTURES SHOW THAT THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH IS CHRIST, any AND all" CHURCHES" that have a HEAD OF MAN are NOT of God according to proper understanding of the bible.
   As usual you throw in some spurious irrelevant information to confuse the issue.    History of mans polluting the church  has nothing to do with the truths of scripture.      You say you read and accept what Paul says, but you have told me on too many occasions that there are too many rules and you dont agree with rules, just your brand of sloppy love is whats important.    The words of Paul do not support that stance.

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Are you saying that people should not gather together to worship? Or are you saying it is OK as long as they do not have a building? (not about leadership)

      replyreport
   2. 52

      celafoeposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      no problem in meeting together (the church) as long as no hireling pastor which means they are following the pattern of the defunct temple system.    they must follow 1Cor  14:26--  also seeTitus 1:5  & no building  $ is for care of people not th

      replyreport
   3. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Your position is well laid out. I pastored for years and took not one farling except for Christmas gifts. But I am not as opposed to that as you are. But it is ripe for abuse and should be avoided. Taking care of those that minister seems OK.

      replyreport
   4. 52

      celafoeposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      eric-  if you would like a detailed explanation read my hub
      the  true new testament tabernacle/  it gives all the scriptural backup

      replyreport
   5. 66

      Lady Guinevereposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Why follow Paul?  Not all pastors have taken that route Charlie.  What is wrong with the teachings that Jesus gave us all?

      replyreport
   6. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Son asked: "what did Jesus eat?" Food like all men. "Where did He get it?" Donations. "where does our pastor get his food?" Donations. "What was Jesus's job?". Pastor/minister/rabbi. So is it Christ like to live off donations?

      replyreport
   7. 66

      Lady Guinevereposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Eric, Christ was in no way poor or needy or lived off of donations.  He worked for his food and he also  had a large human family that loved him very much though the Bible does not speak much of that.

      replyreport
   8. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      How do you know that?

      replyreport
   9. 66

      Lady Guinevereposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Eric look into the history and the other family members accounts.  His uncle was a ship builder and traveled all over the world.  Jesus went with him a few times and took his mother as well.  Hie did not make little boats.  He bought metals for Rome

      replyreport
   10. 48

       Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       So they were donations from family. That is a distinction with no difference.

       replyreport
   11. 52

       celafoeposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       eric- she knows because the voices in her head told her.   Her  beliefs certainly came from another spirit as the Holy Spirit never says such things

       replyreport
   12. 66

       Lady Guinevereposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Charlie is that all you know how to do is throw insults at people?  You know where that will get you eventually.  Eric, Jesus was a carpenter, he did not make tinker toys or did he?

       replyreport
   13. 48

       Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       In "3" years of full ministry I know of no reference to him working as opposed to pastoring, ministering and teaching. Lady this point is not arguable.

       replyreport
   14. 51

       Norine Williamsposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Eric I Agree! The Disciples of Christ were asked by the Holy Spirit (JESUS) to sell their land and "donate" to CHURCH & u see what happened! (Acts 5:1-11). It's sad that MAN has shown greed n recving donations n the NAME of JESUS forming neg opin

       replyreport
4. 59

   neogenesis kaiposted 9 years ago

   the bible is a complex corpus of variegated and sometimes internally contradictory elements-not to mention apocryphal book contradistinction. When you build a house on this kind of thing, there is bound to be some type of eschatological backlash appearing  in social organizational efforts and communal identification with "judgment" like inclinations. It is very indicative of the fact that so many "denominations" exist at all. If they are of "men," then, by definition of the bible's own "teachings," it is prone to fallibility, i.e., mistakes, errors in judgment, misunderstanding, ignorance, as these lead to more nasty behaviors like; arrogance, prideful-ness, manipulation, deceit and so-on. Again, the foundation.

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      A very interesting answer. One worth reading at least twice and contemplating.

      replyreport