71 thoughts on “Our Daily Thread 8-22-16”

  2. Morning Aj, You are up and at em early today.
    I went to see a physical therapist today. She said I have stuck ribs. She not only worked to get them unstuck, but gave me things to do to work with them. So helpful and encouraging. She just ‘happens’ to be here for this year.
    I was very discouraged and did not know what to do. God is good.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. That is what I am trying to figure out. On my left side they are not moving the way they are supposed to. It feels as if one rib is slightly on top of another. Which is what the chiropractor said was happening. Mostly a feeling of pressure, that something is not right. Makes me want to hold my ribs to keep them in place.

    Like

  7. 17 people for lunch yesterday. I finished the final load of dishes at 8:30 and went to bed, exhausted. (They all left between 2-4).

    Then I woke up at 3. I finally let myself get up at 4:30. Off to my day!

    Like

  8. I have been invited to the commissioning of the USS Montgomery on September 10th. This will have me thinking of wardrobe for a while. I don’t know why I let myself obsess over what to wear. There used to be rules but now no one follows them. We are tooooo casual.
    My husband may have murdered 3 of our wisteria bushes yesterday. I held my tongue. They are in bloom. You don’t cut plants back when they are in bloom. It shocks them. They needed serious work but it should have waited until October or so. I helped him take the branches out to the street for the trash pick up this morning. They look sad this morning. What I had asked him to do was use the weed eater. I am still terrified of them. I can use the clipper to trim up hedges, trees, and vines. I don’t want to run the risk of that plastic cord chopping up my ankles and don’t tell me to wear boots—it doesn’t help.
    The across the street neighbor was BBQ’ing on his smoker yesterday. I saw him walk over and hand Mr. P something wrapped in foil. It was a rack of ribs. They were quite good. That was what was for dinner last nigh—I didn’t have to do anything. 🙂

    Liked by 4 people

  9. QOD if you choose

    In another state yesterday a woman was made to stand up in front of a LARGE (mega church) congregation and confess to adultery. There has been some discussion of this with a group of friends. The person she cheated with was not named nor made/encouraged to stand up with her.
    I unfortunately as I always do, can see both sides of this, but then I think of her husband and her children—especially her children. Do they need to hear this about their mother? (I don’t know that they were in the congregation but rumors spread and it will get back to them)
    Should this have remained a private matter between her and her husband? Should she have had to confess to the congregation?

    Like

  10. Kim’s QoD. There may have been a time in small communities where public confession by both parties was appropriate.
    These days with on-line chatter, total silence and secrecy is appropriate. Only those directly affected should be involved. That includes the Spiritual leader. Pastors and lawyers are sworn to silence concerning confessions. It should stay that way.
    This, as you tell it, was completely inappropriate.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Wear a hat to the commissioning.

    Adultery: I like to err on the side of grace because the Law makes me feel vindictive and I end up having to confess the sin of pride afterwards.

    I don’t know anything about what you described but I wonder about the why. Was there a reason why people who knew nothing had to know? I suspect the other party probably was not a churchgoer and probably didn’t care. 😦

    And I’m with you on the kids.

    I really think we need to be sensitive to the innocents among us. We played the hymn Blessed Assurance in church last week. People love it, but I had trouble playing it on my clarinet because of an emotional reaction to it from a movie I saw long ago

    I won’t corrupt you, but what the director showed while this hymn played troubled me. The point was to underscore hypocrisy, which it did, but it ended up disturbing a perfectly good hymn for me.

    I didn’t need any of that. 😦

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Kim, she wasn’t “made” to. No one served her with legal papers or held a gun to her head. The church is wacko, but this is really her own fault because she really didn’t have to do it. IMHO. (p.s. I read all the stuff on FB but chose not to comment there)

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Kim, it really depends on the circumstances. If she was a leader in the church (and women aren’t supposed to be pastors/ elders anyway), then it certainly might be appropriate. If she were to refuse church discipline and her husband was divorcing her, people in the church might very well need to know why–or at least know enough to know that he was the innocent party, that he had biblical grounds, and that he is free to remarry someday should you see him do so. If she conceived a child out of wedlock, and wasn’t marrying the father, then public acknowledgment, repentance, and a call to forgive her and come alongside her as a church family might well be more than appropriate. But in all such cases, it should be on a need-to-know basis. That is, for example, only adult church members are present and members are told this is not for gossip or social media. (I have been present in a meeting that was handled thus discreetly, though before the age of social media.)

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Linda, I have no idea what church was involved, having seen nothing of the story. But having a gun held to your head is definitely not the only way to “make” a person do something, especially in ultra-conservative religious circles. I’ve read of cases where women had no real options but to do everything they could to stay in the good graces of their church, even if it meant confessing to things that were a bit exaggerated in terms of how bad the church made her look. (“I’ve been a very unsubmissive wife.”) She has little education, no network outside the church, and no job experience that would count on a resume–and she’s likely to lose her children and her home if she doesn’t go along. I don’t know if such is the case here, but if it is, then she had little choice.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. PS Michelle, in the “what good outcome?” when I was present in the meeting, I realized that part of the purpose for church discipline is fear–godly fear. “If she could fall into such a sin, so could I.” For others, fear of such exposure might lead to repentance, a recognition that the sin you are covering up is just as heinous. Also, the church has the ability to forgive and love the repentant sinner–if that is not expressly said as part of what the elders are telling the church in such a setting, then they are doing it unbiblically.

    None of those reasons is adequate if there is no public need to know–but the repentant sinner might wish to repent publicly and be publicly forgiven, if she feels that her sin has harmed the whole body, if she feels (for example) that she has been a hypocrite and that young people are idolizing her without knowing that she is living a secret, ugly life. If she has been teaching middle school kids and is being asked to step down, the kids and their parents might well need to know why (with or without specifics). There are several possible scenarios when “what might come of this” is good, and/or when it is necessary.

    Like

  19. Some years ago the son (older teen, 18-19?) of one of our associate pastors confessed — in a members-only called meeting after church — to a relationship in which his girlfriend, also a member, had become pregnant (they married shortly thereafter and remain together).

    To our church’s credit, I never heard anyone ‘chatter’ about it afterward, it was like it didn’t happen. I can see the usefulness perhaps of it, though it was really uncomfortable for many of us, I think, I almost wished I hadn’t gone (we didn’t know the nature of the called meeting). But it was short and included corporate prayer for them & their families.

    And if it hadn’t been held, everyone would begin to notice that someone was pregnant and that could have been a lot more awkward.

    Like

  20. QOD, a church we used to attend had a couple of public confessions before we attended. It was the choice of the sinner to confess to all, seeking forgiveness and grace and mercy. The church offered all and stood by the confessors. One was a teen boy who was having s contact with other boys in the church. When people were made aware, they could be more watchful, and they all seemed to continue to love the young boy as well. The other was a divorce situation. Again, the church continued to love the person. But it was the choice of the two to confess before the church. They could have done so quietly to the elders or whomever they had offended. But they chose an open confession as they wanted to clear the air, find out if forgiveness was there. But in those mega churches, I don’t see it being successful. This was a church of between fifty and seventy people.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. And what Cheryl said in 10:54 also is very true — it had the effect of really prompting me, anyway, to examine my own life, realizing I am accountable to God first, of course, but also to the church body under whose authority I’d placed myself. What all needed to be addressed in my life to be more consistent with the vows I’d taken before God?

    It was all pretty sobering for everyone, I think.

    Like

  22. Mumsee, same in our situation, he had confessed to the elder board but had chosen to go before the church as a whole, perhaps to take responsibility publicly for something that might have caused his girlfriend dishonor as the pregnancy became apparent.

    We have something like 300 or 400 members, but I think only about 100-200, maybe fewer, may have attended that brief meeting.

    Like

  23. Jo, the rib thing sounds very uncomfortable, I’d never heard of that. Hope everything gets back into place soon.

    Cheryl, so you have a good vet to talk to about Misten. Re her perkiness on the walk, I do think mental stimulation really helps older dogs, too, which is why little walks etc. can be so beneficial to them. Even when dogs are older and not playful anymore, they still enjoy going out to places like the dog park where they can at least watch the world.

    Like

  25. The older cast iron tubs — like the 1920s one that is under my ugly acrylic tub liner — are natural soakers, I’m told, much deeper than the modern day tubs.

    My preference — if I ever did a bathroom makeover, something that could still be forced on me someday but hopefully not real soon! — would be to salvage the historic tub OR, if that’s not possible, to replace it with a replica version.

    I like what was done here in creating a 1920s bathroom:

    http://www.oldhouseweb.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21898&start=30

    I’m trying to figure out if my floor-to-ceiling square peach tiles would have gone back to the 20s or are something that was done more mid-century. Hard to say as the square pastel tiles were around the 1920s and being used in bathrooms back then.

    Not a look a dislike so I’d be reluctant to charge in and take it out unless I have to someday.

    I do like the pedestal or wash-stand style sinks that were a 1920s feature, though, and that would make sense in my teeny-tiny bathroom.

    (Funny scene on Saturday when the roofer in the tub working on the drain, the real estate dog park pal and me were all shoved into the space simultaneously. It was actually pretty comical.)

    Like

  27. So, my vet friend came by, with her mom, and examined Misten and then they had lunch with us. Not being exactly sure of their food preferences, I did a salad/wrap bar, with a salad bowl of lettuce, various cut-up veggies and meats, tortillas, and a couple of dressings, so that people could make a salad or a wrap. Everyone chose to make a wrap.

    She examined Misten, asked had she lost weight (maybe a little but she has always been thin), watched her walk around and struggle up a step, and then played with her feet a bit to check for her responsiveness, and determined it’s neurological and there is nothing to be done for it except treat the pain. She said she may have a bit of dysphasia/arthritis too, but that the neurological issue is the bigger part of it. She had suspected that when I first told her about it, but she tested and said that’s her thought on it. Thing is, Misten was doing much, much better today than she was Saturday night and she and her mom still thought it sad to watch her when they know that just a few months ago she was still vibrantly energetic. But with it quite a bit cooler than it has been, and without her being on the pill of which “sedation” is the main side effect (according to this vet friend), I’m inclined now to think that Misten can indeed have the one last fall that I wanted for her–and that she can enjoy it.

    She was trembling through some of the exam. She’s a very good-natured dog and she tolerated it, but I was holding and petting her head, and she was trembling, so I know it didn’t feel good. But afterward I gave her a treat and had our vet friend give her another treat, so she would know she is still a friend.

    Liked by 3 people

  28. Kim, I know nothing of the story behind your question, but what you tell me sends up red flags. You say the other person did not stand up and confess? That sounds very familiar:

    “The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery.” (John 8:3-4)

    In the law of Moses, both the man and the woman caught in adultery had to be brought before the elders and accused – not just the woman. Furthermore, that was the OT law, which we are no longer under. Paul does say that those elders who sin are to be publicly rebuked (I Timothy 5:19-20), and the unrepentant sinner who identifies as a Christian is to be publicly excommunicated (I Corinthians 5); but I see nowhere where the repentant Christian is to publicly confess. If we offend a brother, we are to ask for their forgiveness. The woman certainly needed to confess to her husband, but I do not see what business it is of the rest of the Church, unless they are needed to help; and, besides, even if the confession was lawful, it should, Biblically, have only been made if both parties were willing to confess. Otherwise, it just looks as if the woman was thrown under the bus, and the man involved is a predator waiting in secret for other prey.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. QoD- It reeks of the Pharisees bringing the woman caught in adultery to Jesus in John 7-8. Where was the man involved? He too should be present whether he was a member of the church or not. I can see the woman confessing before the gossips got the story out of control. But before the whole church? The elders and her husband are all who need to know. If she wants her children to know, she can tell them privately. Maybe she did that before the confession. The only reasons I can see her needing to go before the whole church would be if she were an officer of some sort.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. I have a problem with this concept of putting fear in the church. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, but it’s not the trembling concept of fear. It’s the awed, respect concept of fear.

    I think too many people are “guilted” into fear when Jesus’ love is not fear based, but open armed. He tells the truth and reveals the heart, but he uses the Holy Spirit to convict of repentance.

    This from OC this morning: Repentance does not cause a sense of sin— it causes a sense of inexpressible unworthiness. When I repent, I realize that I am absolutely helpless, and I know that through and through I am not worthy even to carry His sandals. Have I repented like that, or do I have a lingering thought of possibly trying to defend my actions? The reason God cannot come into my life is that I am not at the point of complete repentance.

    There’s a lot of fear-based parenting out there as well, and I don’t think that’s healthy either.

    Liked by 2 people

  32. Trying to catch up on reading. I picked up Miss Bosley from boarding earlier. She is happy to be back home! The conference was a lot of fun, but Friday went from around 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. I am still trying to recouperate!

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Kim H,
    What to wear? Just follow the rules. Those who know the rules will appreciate it. Those who don’t know them still won’t know, but you will!

    Liked by 4 people

  34. I have been praying for Listen.

    I don’t know the answer to the question. Too much sin is tolerated in the church and makes the church ineffective in prayer and as a witness. But grace is a given for the repentant, and needs to be modeled, too. So much depends on circumstances and the state of the hearts involved. Motives need to be fully checked and determination as to what to do that would best glorify God and be used for His kingdom building on earth as it is in heaven.

    Like

  35. 🙂 Mumsee and I pray for each other. I also pray regularly for others regularly. And those who post requests on the prayer thread.
    Though I’ll admit to not understanding some of them.
    But God knows.

    We have been blessed beyond measure. Much more than we disserve.
    We are having problems associated with old age now. But everyone. except Moses, has to endure that.

    Liked by 5 people

  37. I thought of the “woman caught in adultery” passage, too, but for several reasons I don’t think it applies here. One, it’s not completely clear that passage is genuine: scholars believe it probably happened, but it isn’t a true scriptural passage (a later addition). But more importantly, almost certainly the man wasn’t part of the church, and I think that bringing him in just to bring them to confess together is actually making them more a “couple” mentally in other people’s minds than is warranted. She sinned against her husband; that is the important part, not the face of the man with whom she sinned. If he also was part of the church, that would be different, but I still think I’d do it otherwise than bringing them up side by side, in effect as a couple sharing the experience.

    Whether public confession was or was not warranted is something I have no opinion on, other than presenting some scenarios where it might.

    Michelle, the idea of fear being only respect and not at all what we call “fear” tones it down a little too much, I think. Why is it that in Scripture any time anyone saw an angel, the first thing the angel did was tell them “Fear not” and lift them to their feet (and on some occasions, if my memory serves me correctly, it was basically “Don’t be afraid of me; I’m not God, but just an angel”)? I think that the kid who obeys Dad partly because he’ll get a spanking if he doesn’t is on the right track–that shouldn’t be the child’s only motivation, but it’s part of it, and rightfully so. Likewise, when we are told not to be afraid of the one who can only kill the body, but to be afraid of Him who can cast both soul and body into hell, I just don’t think it means ONLY awe and not (proper) fear. It’s right and holy for a man to see an elder brought before the church and removed from his position, and to say to himself, “I’ve been telling myself that a little flirting at work or a little pornography won’t harm anyone, and no one will ever know–but this could be me, if I don’t wake up and take sin seriously.” I do think that is a legitimate part of church discipline, just as it is a legitimate part of civil punishment. We should punish those who break the law because they deserve it, not just to serve as an example to others . . . but serving as a warning to others is very much a legitimate secondary reason. Likewise, you don’t punish your firstborn to serve as an example to your second child, but if you don’t punish your firstborn when he obviously deserves it, both he and your second child are likely to lose respect, and fear, of you.

    Speaking of civil government, Romans 13:4 (ESV) says, “for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” If fear of parents and of civil leaders is appropriate, how much more fear of proper church leadership ministering God’s discipline?

    Liked by 2 people

  39. Dinner? A nice canned salmon with mustard, kale, and green olives sandwich. Does that sound healthy? Good. Should set me up nicely for the second round of chocolate cake and ice cream in celebration of little girl.

    Liked by 3 people

  40. Given what we know, I think if such an event had happened in my church, I would no longer attend the church. I would not trust the church leadership if they forced a woman to confess.
    That’s it for me on this subject.

    Need something to encourage you? Here’s the video my daughter made of their mission trip to Nicaragua. The opening scenes made me feel like I was back at Sabalos Lodge.

    Like

  41. Confession before elders is typically how these matters are handled, I believe. I have a problem with ‘forcing’ someone to stand before the whole church, but if the person feels that might serve a purpose and wants to do that, then that is somewhat different.

    Anyone know much about something called the ‘eternal submission’ issue as it is being applied in marriage?

    Like

  42. Follow up to my QOD.
    My friend made an appointment to speak with the minister today. She told me that at the meeting they decided to “agree to disagree” and she will be trying out new churches.

    Personally, I know I have things I have done in the past that I would not like to be public knowledge, nor would I want my child to know. I spoke with my priest and we went through the reconcilliation of the penitent:
    http://www.bookofcommonprayer.net/reconciliation.php

    I have attended Celebrate Recovery and have:
    “8 We made a list of all persons we had harmed and became willing to make amends to them all.
    9 We made direct amends to such people whenever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
    10 We continue to take personal inventory and when we were wrong, promptly admitted it.”

    I have received absolution from a priest (I had begged God’s forgiveness for years but could not get over it) and have confessed to the person I wronged and have been forgiven by them.

    I don’t see the purpose in making a public spectacle of myself or anyone else.

    Liked by 5 people

  43. Michelle, I agree, if leadership forced (as opposed to accepting her voluntary decision) a member (not in a leadership position) to confess, that is a problem. But rather than just not attending any more, I’d talk to an elder or a pastor about my concern. I had to do that once, on a different matter, a communion service that was focused on something other than the death of Christ. I determined I couldn’t go back until I had talked with the pastor, and thus I had to have the conversation that week and not put it off. There’s always the possibility that something else is going on that you might know about, and in this case he readily acknowledged the Lord’s supper had not been conducted rightly, and I felt free to remain in the church. But if the confession was an abuse of authority, it is a huge red flag.

    Like

  45. Every time I see the word Nicaragua, I think of the song that has these lines:
    Managua Nicaragua is a wonderful place,
    You ask a senorita for a little embrace,
    She answers you samba mamba bomba rigo,
    But in Managua Nicaragua, that’s NO.

    Liked by 1 person

  48. Cheryl, the story of the adulterous is such an accepted part of the canon, not even modern scholars are comfortable removing it despite their questions. Furthermore, the fact that the law required both adulterous people to be present at an accusation does not depend alone on that passage.

    Like

  49. I would add that Augustine of Hippo treated the account as Scripture in the 300s, so it has been considered canon for a long time, while in the fragments that we have of Papias, a student of the apostle John, he seems to refer to the same story.

    Liked by 1 person

  51. Do you continue to attend a church with whom you don’t agree totally? Do you tell the pastor you don’t agree?

    I am of the opinion that not many of us totally agree with anybody and the body of believers is made up of people with opinions and different learning levels. I don’t think anybody has it right. Even me.

    Liked by 3 people

  53. That’s it Kim. Guy Lombardo, 1947, I was still in high school.

    The story about the woman taken in adultery is almost certainly true and part of scripture.
    It is not the kind of thing someone would make up because:
    No person fabricating a story would leave out what Jesus wrote on the ground.
    The man wasn’t taken according to law because it wasn’t really a legal issue. It was a temptation, a test to catch Jesus.

    Liked by 1 person

  54. Roscuro, the passage is usually included, but with notes that it isn’t original but is likely a true story. I have no problem with it being taught as probably a true story, but I think the doubts about it being a legitimate part of Scripture are strong enough that it should never be taught without that disclaimer. By the way, I just worked with a book on the canon of Scripture, and if I remember correctly (I might not) the references to Papias referring to the story were fraudulent. If you need me to, I can try to track down that passage.

    However, the woman-caught-in-adultery passage refers to a legal challenge, an insistence that the woman in question be stoned, which is why I said it isn’t relevant in terms of church discipline. Not including both parties in such an instance was a gross injustice. However, let’s say it is your sister who committed adultery. If she were to confess her sin to your family, must the man be present for it to be a legitimate confession? I would think, rather, that a much better course would be for her husband to be present and to say “She is still my wife, and we are working on restoring a healthy marriage relationship.” There might be a reason for the family to know (for example it had become known around town, or she was pregnant and it would soon probably be obvious the child belongs to someone other than her blond husband who had a vasectomy a year ago before she had an affair with a Chinese man, or whatever), but in such a case, you simply would not pull in the man. He’s not part of the picture anymore, and he is not welcome. In a legal case, yes. In a case of confession toward reconciliation, no; in that instance you would include only family, and not the one who briefly breached the family unit. The church is family, not civil / criminal law, in this comparison. Does that make sense?

    Like

  56. Mumsee: Most of the people at FBCHNC were pre-trip rapture premillenialist. I am pre-wrath rapture. That is, I suspect Christians will go through at least part of the tribulation.
    Millennial doctrine is not a big issue with me. It is for some.
    But most of the professors at SWBTS were non-millennial at the time. I struggled with that.

    Liked by 1 person

  57. Cheryl, I have read the fragments of Papias, and the introduction to them. I have never read anything about them being fakes and I have read a lot of material on the history and canonicity of the Bible. There is a very strong scholarly argument for the adulterous woman account’s authenticity, not least that to take it out would interrupt the logical flow of what is a very tightly constructed Gospel, since the story would then leap from the counsel of the Jewish leaders to Jesus in the middle of a discussion in the temple – the missing piece manuscripts includes the introductory words “Jesus went to the mount of Olives and early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down and taught them” (John 8:1-2).

    Like

  58. Roscuro, I’m probably thinking about something else, then. I looked for the text before I posted, but couldn’t find it to verify my memory, so I said I might be wrong.

    Like

  59. Not sure when I’ll catch up with the comments, so I’m jumping in here with this:

    As I’ve mentioned before, there is an order of protection for both Nightingale & Little Guy. Mr X is not supposed to have any contact with them. Last night, he sent Nightingale a text. She reported it to the police this morning.

    The officer said he had had a run-in with Mr X the night before, having to escort him out of the hospital, where he was “out of control”, trying to get himself admitted. He is currently homeless, “couch surfing”, since his girlfriend & he recently broke up.

    He will be arrested, & the charge is a felony.

    This young man doesn’t seem to be able to NOT shoot himself in the foot. We saw that with how he messed up with the custody agreement, too.

    Still praying he will be convicted & do some jail time. Again, not out of a spirit of vengeance, but out of a desire for justice, & in the hope that he would learn a lesson. As it is, as I’ve explained before (I think) that Mr X has skated on previous charges (two DUIs & a hit-&-run, that we know of, along with an arrest when he was a juvenile), & I’m afraid that if he gets out of this, he will be insufferable towards Nightingale, impossible to deal with.

    Liked by 1 person

  60. When dealing with my marriage the elders were very careful. He was disfellowshipped. They announced it to the church at a meeting after the evening service, the church was full. They did not mention a sin, but doctrinal differences. (He said she was his wife and that two wives were biblically okay, we were not divorced and they were not married. ) When asked by someone if there was another woman involved they told them to ask me. The best part of the whole process was that they called me and my children up front to have us kneel and the whole church prayed for us in tears. They made a commitment to take care of us during that prayer because I have felt the care for the last 20 years.

    Liked by 5 people

  61. Our current church has a stronger emphasis on what baptism is than I do. They seem to think you are not saved until you are baptized. They say they don’t think that but when the pastor and his wife came to educate eight year old on baptism, that was part of the message. I reminded her later that baptism is a response to the spiritual baptism of the Holy Spirit.

    Yesterday, the pastor made the comment that he is not Calvinist and hopes none of us are, and that we need to work out our salvation unlike what some believe that it is done for us. I disagree with that believing dead people cannot reach out to God. Instead He reached us in our sin and brought us out for His purposes.

    But I do believe we are to be in that church at this time. I will talk with the pastor and his wife over time. I see nothing wrong with not being in complete agreement as I have seen many strong believers with varying positions. All I know is Jesus Christ and Him crucified for me.

    Liked by 2 people

  62. I think that some differences can be tolerated, but others not so much. There has been one thing that I recall feeling at odds with that my current pastor said. I checked with another person to make sure I heard correctly what had been said in the sermon. What is funny is that now I do not even remember what it was. He really sticks to the text of the Bible, so what is to disagree about on That?

    I did have a big problem when a pastor in another church preached on the loaves and fishes and said the real miracle was probably that the people were all willing to share what they had brought for their own use. I think he was agreeing with a viewpoint that some famous theologian had written about. That made me mad to hear that preached as if God’s word was an exaggeration.

    Liked by 1 person

  63. The vet said Miss Bosley weighs 13 pounds and should only weigh 11 pounds. I suppose she will be my new weight watchers partner. I did have some cake at the conference, a few pieces of chocolate candy, a bit of sweet tea, and a Sprite. Those were my first sweets in maybe three months. Amazingly, having that did not begin a new craving for sweets. That is a gift from God.

    Liked by 2 people

  64. I wonder what the early church did. Did they all agree on everything? Did they drive to the next town over if they could not find a church with which they agreed? Did they work inside the church to help others understand their perspective or did they just quietly listen? We are told to go home and search the Scriptures. One would think that would mean, hold your pastor accountable but do any of us have an absolute understanding? Or can we accept each other with differences? When do the differences become too much? Why does my town of less than three hundred people, have at least five churches? Why is there only one Catholic church?

    Liked by 1 person

  66. Sure it did. But did they address them or did they divide? And God does say that He uses division to build His church.

    Like

  67. Obviously, the Reformation and a few other events indicated more than a little difference in opinion. I have known so many strong believers with such different views on things, it is difficult for me to say who is right. I know what I believe but I can’t discount what others believe. I know I believe in a six day creation, but it would not be the end of my faith if I found out God used millions of years to accomplish what He did. I believe He chose me and I think the rest is semantics but there are those who are adamant He did not choose them as they have free will. Some would say they are not my brothers and sisters but who am I to judge another’s servant? Who am I to say whether someone is saved or not, especially when the Fruit of the Spirit is evident?

    Liked by 2 people

  68. None of us will find a church with which we agree 100% until we stand with the myriad of saints before the Throne of God in eternity. There will be no disagreements about doctrine there.

    Liked by 2 people

  69. Michelle, at least the way you tell it in that blog post, you didn’t “nearly destroy someone’s faith,” but you were horrified at a discovery, thought about it, prayed about it, and chose to leave it in God’s hands. Also, for all that she says she would have left the church if someone had pointed out her sin, God does sometimes use His people to do exactly that. Remember Nathan and David? God might well use someone to go to His child in wise rebuke (as Nathan did), or He might well use His child to go to the sinning child in sorrow, or in empathy that they themselves had been there one day. Some He pulls up short by allowing them to experience the consequences of their sin. Others come to see the wonders of God’s grace and step away from the sin that grieves Him. He can–and does–work in many ways with us.

    Like

  70. DJ, I’ve heard about and done some reading on the concept of “eternal subordination [some call it ‘submission’ I think] of the Son,” or ESS, and how some people apply it to marriage relationships.

    The way I understand it, there are proponents of ESS who say that because the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father, and that this was not only true during the incarnation period, but, they believe, for all time — past, present and future — therefore wives will be eternally submissive to their husbands, as well.

    Apparently, because Eve was created to be a help meet for Adam, and that this happened before the Fall, then this pattern will continue throughout eternity, because marriage was part of God’s original creation, and God called it “good.”

    There’s a lot of misuse of scripture, trying to justify the concept of eternal submission, whether wife to husband, or Son to Father in the Trinity, including explaining away Matthew 22:30 [that in the resurrection, no one will marry or be given in marriage] with some lame explanation, to name one example I’ve seen, that there won’t be new marriages, but the old ones from earth will continue in the afterlife.

    Of course, the proponents of this can’t ever answer, “What about people who had more than one spouse in their lifetimes?” or similar questions.

    It’s a dangerous mixing of all sorts of things, IMO, about roles, relationships, earthly occurrences, heavenly realities and mysteries, humanity, the divine attributes of God…

    I don’t think I’m even scratching the surface with all the misinterpretations of scripture that can and probably already have arisen out of teachings like these…

    Liked by 2 people

  71. I should clarify the above by saying that this part in my second paragraph — “…because the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father…” — is not meant to sound like that is fact, or that I believe it is fact. I believe anyone who thinks the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father is in error.

    1:00 a.m. is not a good time to be expressing myself about such matters. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.