I almost corrected her when she said “God never fails” but then I realized that since “God is love” she’s actually right on. Out of the mouth of babes!
This could be a book-length article, but it won’t be. It’s just an appetizer; something to whet your appetite before a life-long meal at God’s table discovering his love for yourself.
I’ve found the understanding of God’s love to be the keystone in the arch spanning God and man, his creation. It’s what makes the Bible, God’s inspired history of mankind’s time on Earth, make sense. Without an understanding of God’s love, the Bible–yes, even the Word of God itself–becomes merely a “sounding brass, and a tinkling cymbal.” It is a chaotic compilation of laws, commands, letters, prophecies, wars, fiery judgments, promised lands, history, and instructions if we don’t grasp God’s love. In short, love is the “secret decoder ring” of the Bible.
The move from a covenant based on law, to one based on love and grace, was hard for the Jews in Jesus’ day to understand. The culture of the teaching in their synagogue was so legalistic that it gave them blinders that kept them from understanding his message. Why? Because they had become so conditioned to think of God as a rule-maker, and righteousness as rule-keeping. Had the Sanhedrin (religious leaders of the Jews) grasped God’s love and grace, and his desire for a relationship with his people, the message would have clicked instantly, as it did with so many Gentiles when the message was brought to them.
The message of God’s love for mankind, and mankind’s loving response back, was not always so obscured by legalistic ideas about rule-keeping. David was a fallible man who sinned greatly against God and man. He even murdered a man and stole his wife. Yet he was not a legalist. He was a man after God’s own heart, because he loved deeply.
He understood that God is love and reveled in it, as is so apparent in reading the Psalms. There is no place his love for God and man was more evident than in his relationship with Saul and Jonathan. Saul was a declared enemy who was trying to kill him, and Jonathan was a friend closer than a brother who was trying to protect him. Yet he loved both equally.
Because he knew and felt God’s love personally in his life, he was able to display it and pass it on to truly one of the most despicable personalities in the Bible, Saul. Love your enemies? David “got it” long before Jesus taught it.
Out of nothing more than ego, Saul wanted to kill David in spite of his loyalty to the king and to God. David did not return either the sentiment or the actions. I believe he also saw through the legal implications of eating the shewbread in the tabernacle simply because he had a clear understanding of the loving nature of God.
So what does God’s love mean to us today? Well, it means the New Testament is not a law book, first of all, so we need to stop trying to decode it as if we were all lawyers practicing before the bar, as May Meetings so often sound.
In fact, can we agree to speak accurately and acknowledge that the “New Testament” is not really even a book? “Testament” means “covenant.” The New Testament is the covenant between God and man through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. Matthew through Revelation are the scriptures (writings), inspired and accurate, that tell us all about this New Covenant. Therefore, what we conveniently call the New Testament, or New Law, is really no such thing, it is the New Covenant Scriptures, really; or the scriptures about the New Covenant.
If we are going to say we have a “law of Christ,” then perhaps it is to bear one another’s burdens (which sounds suspiciously like love):
Galatians 6:2 – Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
Yes, of course we need to keep his commandments:
1 John 3:22 – And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
But maybe we ought to read the next verse, as well:
1 John 3:23 – And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
The law of God is no longer contained in legal ordinances, that was abolished. He didn’t nail one legal code to the cross only to create another in its place:
Colossians 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
It only stands to reason, then, that we shouldn’t pretend we’re lawyers (like the Pharisees were) and treat the New Covenant Scriptures as if they were the Uniform Building Code (UBC), trying to find in it a bunch of rules and regulations that are simply not there.
Instead, for believers who are filled with the Spirit, the law of God is written on our hearts:
Jeremiah 31:33-34 – But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
It makes as much sense to interpret the scriptures like a legal code book as it does to read a love letter from your spouse, or a travel diary of your last family vacation in that way. God loves us, and because of that, he recorded a history of where we came from, his people, his son, his son’s death, and the spread of his son’s message of redemption in the first century. That written record is our Bible.
Let that paradigm shift sink in and everything else will follow. Your life will be filled with love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, and all the other fruits of the Spirit, because love allows the Spirit to work in your life. Love brings life. The letter kills.
Some of you may be feeling like this message of love is too good to be true; that it’s a “soft” and “easy” gospel. It is no such thing. Try it. Loving unconditionally is harder than it sounds, and fills every decision of every day, but it is filled with a reward of more joy, peace and confidence in Jesus Christ than you can ever imagine. Loving God is truly “joy unspeakable and full of glory” and brings alive the message of the cross so that the Word is no longer a dead letter; no longer a sounding brass and tinkling cymbal. With love, it comes alive.
Take a look at this scandalously “soft” message penned by Paul:
1 Corinthians 13:1-8 – If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing. 4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails.
All the law-keeping in the world, absent love, is worth absolutely, positively nothing. No “well done, good and faithful servant.” No healed relationships. No healed families and repaired marriages. Nothing.
Ponder love, then tell me where women wearing black jeans but not blue jeans to Bible class fits into the scheme of things. Let me help: it doesn’t.
Let’s not strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. Embrace the paradigm shift of love rather than law, and it will revolutionize your world and turn it upside down. Funny, that’s what the gospel did in the first century. Hmmm, maybe we’re on to something here.
So here's my testimony on God's love…although "testimonies" aren't something we do much of in the COC, mainline or otherwise. 🙂
The understanding of how gracious God's love really is and how much I needed it was a gradual awakening for me, but I remember clearly the night the facade of being righteous by my own hard work came crashing down all around me. Before that, I thought I was a pretty good guy and studied my Bible and went to church every Sunday and did all the right things. I was "following his commands," or so I thought. All of them, maybe, but the Greatest Command, to love. But laying in my bed, it dawned on me how much I needed God's forgiveness personally, and how much I was loved by God and hadn't been expressing it enough to others.
I saw then how God wanted a relationship with me, but I had turned religion into a rule-keeping game. The scales fell off my eyes so to speak, and I started going back through my life and seeing how I'd hurt so many people by judging them instead of helping them along in their faith. I said never again. If God had been patient with me while I was growing to know him better, then I had better offer the same patience toward my brothers instead of judging them.
After that, I decided Jesus was going to be apparent in my life, not for appearances, but because he really was. I've never looked back. It's been a joyful journey to know God as a good and loving God who wants and pursues a loving relationship with his children.
Kevin, may I say that Jesus is apparent in your life as shown through your writing. I have not known you as an adult but your writing moves me and creates in me a desire to know Him the way you do my brother.
Kevin! I've been waiting for this post, thank you.
If I were going to give my testimony, I would say that the Church of Christ's doctrine of "time and chance" is what really was the kicker for me. I wasn't raised in this church and attended briefly for a couple of years. I had experiences outside this church where I knew God was working and I absolutely reject this doctrine. To say that God is only in control of the goings on for CoC members and the rest of the world is left to its own devices is rejecting God. It is putting HIM in a little tiny box and almost telling him what HE can do and how HE can do it. Insanity. I believe it is a form of self worship.
I was dearly loved as a child by some members of this coc we're talking about but that all just about came to a screeching halt somewhere in my late teens/ early twenties. I was aware of the us/them mentality that I believe comes from this bad theology of "time and chance", but nowhere was it more apparent than in the unloving gestures, judgements, and attitudes of these so called Christians in response to real life hurting people all around them. During my late teens and early twenties there were multiple shocking examples of this shallow love and I was forever changed. "I will not be one who loves this way", I decided.
Since then I have devoted myself to reading God's word and living out this real kind of love. I've also heard people in CoC say leaving them and going to an "off-church" would be taking the easy way out, and to that I also say the easy way out would be to stay in! I know God is working in my life. Without a shadow of a doubt, I know He makes Himself known to me in various ways and I have the,peace that passes understanding! I've been saved, I've been changed and I've been set free.
Thank you God, for salvation through Jesus and no other name. Thank you for the love you lavish on us, your children. AMEN!
And all of God's people said "amen" sister! Maybe even with hands raised to heaven! Oh wait, we can't show too much emotion, can we? 🙂
Yes, we humans love to put God in a little box bounded by our own limited human understanding. That's not really just a Stanton thing, I do it all the time.
God can do so much more than we can ever ask or imagine (Eph 3:20), but sometimes we don't ever ask, and we don't ever imagine.
Andrea, you're right, sometimes staying in is much easier than leaving.
Easier, because the mind gets comfortable in its ruts, like a beast of burden walking the same worn path for its entire lifetime.
Harder, because once you know the truth, your spirit won't give you peace until you are out of that bondage.
The pressures and judgements of people who are still in are enough, I think, to keep people in for a long time. Think about it, many of these women would essentially lose all of their friends. Unless of course there was some sort of mass exodus. That is what I think keeps lots of them in.
If you are reading this and thinking that, I assure you… God cares more for you than the birds of the air and they never have to wonder if they will have another meal. God will give you friends outside this group!!
I had to leave, it was the most negative thing I'd ever seen and my conscience would no longer tolerate it. The hurt the preachers/leaders do to their members on a continual basis in my mind showed wickedness, hypocrisy and pride. Stepping out still was very difficult for me because I had been so brainwashed into believing that every church but theirs was "the enemy." I knew I loved God and had to trust Him that there was something better for me out there and that not every church was like the Merie Weiss congregations. God encouraged me every step of the way and continues to do so. Thank you my Father in heaven who sees how much we hurt and leads us into safe havens. To get the will to leave you have to have faith that He cares for you and you have to stop the fear-based negative brainwashing effects and choose love, faith and hope instead.
And I would venture to say that there is an army of people waiting to love on anyone who allows their conscience to outgrow the constraints of this church.
The new mainstream COC encourages me all of the time. Instead of feeling condemned and worthless I now feel loved and valued and they love everyone, to the least of them to the greatest. People treat each other with respect and kindness overall. They tenderly tell me how much they miss my presence when I can't be there with them because I am ill. And as i write this I am weeping. There is so much needless pain and suffering I allowed in my life, but no more. We have to love ourselves because God love us and we can't be kind to others like we should unless we know that his love towards us is endless.
Isaiah 42:16
I will lead the blind by ways they have not known, along unfamiliar paths I will guide them; I will turn the darkness into light before them and make the rough places smooth. These are the things I will do; I will not forsake them.
Very uplifting! Which is stronger? Love or hate? I can answer this with my own 'testimony'. Growing up in the church (coc- it feels weird to call it this for some reason) surrounded by negativity, harsh words/actions, and constant judging of character, I don't know how I've been able to walk away still full of love. All the love I was deprived of growing up has been able to flow from me onto the people around me and has helped me have relationships that I've previously knew nothing about.
I envy some of you that we're able to have close connections with people in the church. From as far back as I can remember we were taught that pretty much everyone besides my parents and a few select teachers were 'following the word of god correctly'. Hearing this as a child was confusing and made it it very hard to trust others, even those in our congregation.
Punishments growing up consisted of spankings (which I've learned qualify as 'beatings'), long lectures, and most hurtful- our own 'withdrawal' from our friends in the church. Not being allowed to talk with kids in the world this meant that we were only allowed to speak/hang out with kids during school. At church events we had to fiollow our parents around so that we wouldn't be a bad influence on the other children in the church.
Somehow with all this in my past I have still had this curiosity, this hunger for God even despite all the pain and humiliation that I learned to associate with anything 'godly'. Within my own spiritual journey I have learned how loving God and Jesus really are and upon the realization I broke down in tears. Not in pain. But in the unfairness of it all. God has always been on my side but I never knew it until recently. Somewhere deep down I knew there was more than what I had grew up in and for this I can answer upon experience.
Love is much stronger than hate.
Thank you for sharing, I know how you feel. The part that's so sad about all of this is that so many of them behave this way thinking it really is what God wants. I hope someday they'll know the joy that we know.
I just found this site due to my curiosity of finding a Church of Christ in my area. I ran from the Church b/c of ALL these things, and now my daughter is of age to ask questions I want to raise her in the Church but w/o the hypocrisy I remember as a child. I'm so confused so pray for me.
Thank you.
Lovely blog post, and lovely comments. I too, was born and raised in this sect. It was very difficult to leave even after just 1 year of "adult christianity." It was the hardest thing I ever did at that point in my life. And it does feel like you are leaving all of your friends and everything because then they stop talking to you. I felt so lonely when I was in, and knew that friends would not really do that to someone if they were your true friends. God doesn't want people to hurt, he doesn't want families to be separated, he doesn't want all of this fear and pain to the unhealthy level that the CoC gives. God is Love, not pain. I urge anyone who is still attending, to really take a step back and really do some meditating on this because you don't have to live like that to go to heaven. God did not want it to be like that, so many people hurting and feeling as if they cannot even comment on a blog with their real name. Does that even seem right?? No, it doesn't. Trust your gut, and take a leap of faith. I tell you now after being gone for 8 years or so, I have more faith, a better relationship with God and those around me, awesome friends, awesome family than I had before. It just takes awhile to clear your mind of the food you have been fed for so long. Just because it's what you have done for so long, doesn't make it right.
That's so true. It can take quite awhile to clear your system of all the "toxins" that have been pumped into it in terms of bad teaching and bad exegesis. God won't strike anyone dead for honestly searching and questioning with boldness. He wants you to have peace and confidence, not doubt.
Once your conscience becomes free of the tyranny, it won't let you stay in it. Trust God to make it clear what your next step needs to be.
Today's Quiz: Who wrote the following quote?
"The members of the church have a right to question and ask for Bible answers from those who are doing the preaching. But this is considered almost tantamount to heresy by the preachers of today; and if a member persists in such he is usually slandered and called a trouble-maker…We should know our Bible and we should be ready and willing to take a stand for the truth. We are commanded to 'contend for the truth.' But this can hardly be done seeing that the church is ignorant and the preachers are content to have it so. Individually and collectively we should take scriptural stands upon all subjects…"
Answer:
a.) Thomas Aquinas
b.) Joan of Arc
c.) Bruce Springsteen
d.) Merie Weiss
Correct answer: d.
Any irony here?
I thought the May trip was for the purpose of asking questions then the right to have conversation about the questions. If the answer was agreed upon then, of course, we consented to the answer so we would not have contention.
Anonymous 2:29, that's a great quote. I wish the current membership would take heed.
Here's another one:
"If we turn away from the New Testament to teach our own opinions, we are in no position to take the truth to those around us."
Anonymous 6:52, you said:
"If the answer was agreed upon then, of course, we consented to the answer so we would not have contention."
So if your group of higher-ups sent to May Week agreed upon the answer, everyone else consented to the new doctrine in order to avoid contention.
How is this any different than the Baptist Convention, where they annually review doctrines and change them as they reach "new understandings?" Or Catholics bishops getting together to discuss new doctrine, or the Pope issuing new doctrines, etc.?
Can you tell me the difference?
Is it the fact that it's the Baptists or Catholics doing it that makes it wrong? Because since a little child I've heard about how all those changing doctrines were proof of error.
Take for example the Catholics not being allowed to eat meats for several decades, then suddenly it's only during Lent. What about all those people who supposedly went to hell for eating meat on Friday before the ruling was changed, and now it's OK? This example was a popular and effective one in non-member class.
So explain to me again…how is that any different than you arriving to a "new understanding" on divorce/remarriage, or the rules for when someone travelling must "keep the calendar" of the church he's in closest proximity to, or women wearing black jeans vs. blue jeans vs. black jean skirts vs. blue jean skirts to Bible class?
Anon 6:52, can you offer an example of a question you would be discussing? I think that would help me to understand your point. You have every right to meet and talk about whatever you want to talk about. The problem is with consenting to an unbiblical answer for the sake of unity, then going back and binding your "answer" on everyone else.
What you are essentially doing is usurping the work of the Holy Spirit in a Christian's life when you bind them to a rule. That produces a Christian who cannot think for himself/herself. Jesus said to go out and make disciples in all nations. What you guys are doing is making a bunch of people who are dependent upon you to go to those meetings and who are dependent upon the answers you consent to. They are not disciples of Jesus Christ because they are not allowed by you to follow the Holy Spirit convicting them of sin on an individual basis. They have to ask you and get your consent. Do you see the difference?
Great question Anon 12:57. Some examples of questions at May meetings have been as follows:
Must a woman wear nylons with a dress on Sunday or when door knocking?
Must a christian traveling to a different congregation keep the schedule of the congregation they are visiting?
Are there 2 types of punishments the church can implement on disobedient members or just one. Withdrawal/ mark and avoid… are they the same thing or separate punishments.
Should Christians be allowed to attend 4 year colleges or should their children be allowed to attend a 4 year college?
When is a divorced person free to remarry?
Where does the Church stand on spacing children/birth control?
Should preachers use electronic devises while preaching? ie: laptop, iPad, etc.
Should Christians have Facebook accounts?
What is the most acceptable way to make confessions- face to face, by letter, by text, by email.
Is it allowable in scripture to break the bread of the Lord's supper more than once? (to break it into smaller pieces)
Is is acceptable to use gluten free flour for the unleavened bread of the Lord's supper? Can the Church use two different types of bread at the same time? (one wheat the other gluten free?) Can a gluten free christian take only the grape juice and not the bread?
Is it acceptable to use grape juice that has vitamin C added to it? (for the Lord's supper?]
I am sure others could add more.
Anon 1:17, thanks for these examples, if anyone has more, please post. I'm working on an article that will address issues of unity and the May Meeting, etc.
Ok thank you. Can you clarify why some of these questions come up, like what they are afraid of? I understand about divorce, and birth control but what's the point in the vitamin c added to the juice? Or nylons? Is there an appearance of evil if a gluten free person sustains from wheat crackers because they don't want to have stomach pain and diarrhea? Or is their sin somehow not atoned for?
Why are they not allowed to have Facebook?
And what's the point in whether or not they can use technology?
I'm not mocking. I really want to know what their argument is. Thanks to anyone who will share.
Regarding your questions Anonymous 1:41 concerning the May meeting questions…
The church at one time used only pure grape juice with nothing added (such as vitamin C) and not from concentrate for the Lord's supper. It was decided Welches grape juice etc. was okay to use with added vit. C and made from concentrate.
The church decided Christians (and children of Christians) should not have Facebook because of the children discussing private matters on Facebook.
Some of the preachers have started using electronic devices to type out their sermons and some people use their iPhones for a concordance in class or on personal work. Decided it's not a good idea. What if the battery dies during the sermon or something else happens with the device.
The nylon question came about because some teachers were teaching that a woman must wear nylons to be properly 'finished' for worship and personal work. It was decided that yes, a christian must wear nylons to worship and other Christians should help pay for them if a Christian can't afford them.
It was decided that gluten free people cannot partake of the fruit of the vine only because they would not be partaking of the entire Lord's supper so they must not partake of 1/2 of it. (God's mercy is there). It was decided that the church must use wheat bread because the preponderance of evidence in the Bible pointed to wheat bread. It was decided that one bread means only one type of bread can be used.
If anyone can remember other reasons for these teachings please add.
More May meeting questions which have arisen in the past…
A: Must a women refrain from wearing a zipper in the front of her pants?
(Until approx 1993 front zippers in woman's pants were not allowed. The women of the church were required to wear only side zippers, back zippers or no zippers in their pants. Some women actually wore their pants backwards, some wore elastic waist pants and removed the decorative fly stitching if there was any on an elastic waist pair of pants; some removed the zipper from the front and added it to the side or back.)
B. Are Christians allowed to go to amusements parks such as Disney Land? (Up until approx 1993 this was not allowed)
C: Are Christians allowed to own a gun for hunting or target shooting? (Until approx 1993 owning guns and hunting were taught against)
D: How does the Church handle Christians who are illegal immigrants?
E: Are married Christian women allowed to work outside the home?
F: Can Christians enter into religious buildings? If so for what reasons?
G: Can the church pay for a Christian's funeral out of the Lord's treasury.
I had better qualify here that when we had questions about an understanding we would spend good time together, in our Bibles, to come to our answer in our respective congregations not just the May trip. So I agree with anonymous 6:52.
Just because you have your bible open and spend good time in your congregation does not make the practice of devising doctrines pleasing to God, or any different from that which you condemn. You can plainly see it is wrong when the Baptists do it but you are blinded by your own justifications.
To continue the above discourse about May meeting discussions before and during the May meeting… It's great to discuss both sides of questions but I believe that it should start and end with the concept of discussion; nothing more. A discussion gives food for thought to respective listeners but a binding decision should not be the intended or unintended outcome. There are individuals at the meeting (such as Tom) that have warned the participants not to bind what is decided but somehow that warning is lost in translation or not heeded by the teachers. Congregants are often told "this is what the church teaches"… or… 'thus and such was decided at May week'. If we can't back up the statement "this is what the church teaches" with scripture we have no right to "teach" it because the church would be "teaching for doctrine the commandments of men". It seems safer to say… "here are a couple ways to look at it, it's for you to decide"…. or…. 'Some Christians see it this way and other's see it this way'…Remember how Gary used to teach his opinion about preachers not having facial hair? He was very specific about the fact it was his opinion and nothing more. Gary later sported facial hair so obviously his opinion changed which is perfectly okay; no harm done. On the other hand; Gary has taught publicly that wearing thong underwear is not acceptable attire for a Christian; period. He said if he finds thong underwear in his home (I assume in a basket of laundry) he will throw it away. If I recall correctly Tracy G. from San Antonio got herself in big trouble for disagreeing with Gary's teaching on thong underwear. Gary also taught publicly and rebuked Tom for not wearing a t-shirt under his dress shirt at a meeting in the south. Regarding the subject of women wearing nylons with a dress; Kim said at a May meeting that she tells young ladies visiting her congregation to go put nylons on. The May meeting discussion about nylons concluded with instruction that if a woman in your congregation couldn't afford nylongs someone in the congregation should give the sister money to buy them. (that's how important they are) I believe whether to wear nylons with a dress, tee-shirts, thong underwear or facial hair are ALL decisions to be made by the individual Christian and should in no way be encouraged or discouraged by the teachers and preachers. Those are opinions that have absolutely no place in the public or private teachings of the church.
I must confess, the bloggers were slowing down so thought I would toss a little meat in the ring and get you all going again. Looks like it worked. :D. Again Romans 2:15 comes to mind; accusing and excusing one another. You didn't disappoint me.
Anon 2:46, you just admitted that debate for sport and amusement was your goal, which is pretty unscriptural and one of the few things I believe churches ARE actually supposed to toss someone out of their midst for. This forum is for honest dialogue and enlightenment, not sport. If your motives are otherwise, please find another venue.
Anon 2:46, that's weird to try to get people at each other. Are you from Stanton coc? Because if you are then a public confession may be in order. I don't think it is authorized to confess via blog. Maybe this May we will get an answer on that one.
Interesting question: If you sin anonymously, can you confess anonymously? Oh, the rules and regulations mankind can come up with to "interpret the law" for the masses.
Confessing Sins:
(I'm no longer a member of the sect) BUT, thinking about confessing sins before the congregation, I kinda thought that seemed like the Catholics who confess their sins to the priest; but there's one intercessor between God and man and that is Christ not the priest. If I sin against someone I apologize to that person that I hurt (and I now say I apologize & don't necessarily say "I ask your forgiveness for…". If no one in the congregation knew what I did publicly that is wrong but only people I may never see again, why isn't it good enough to ask my Lord to forgive me? All the confession stuff (private/public) always left me totally confused. I used to see women mostly pop up to confess things all of the time for stuff that wasn't even a sin which to me just showed the horrific pressure and oppression these poor souls were under all of the time. Really sad.
Confession of sin. See Luke 17:3 Christ said (Paraphrased) if a man sins and afterwards says I repent, to forgive him. The man never says I ask your forgiveness, but he does convey the idea that he did change his conduct and made some kind of confession. To Christ this was sufficient.
To Christ it was sufficient to confess the name of Christ and upon this confession at baptism God is more than willing to forgive us our sins.
If we were insincere during baptism, God knows and we would be dealt with by him. It is the same concept in Mathew 18:15-17 Concerning withdraw. If at any point a Christian so much as says, I repent; you are to forgive him and the withdraw is no longer imposed at that point, at least that is how I read it.
There are people that are withdrawn from for decades that have repented of the sin they were withdrawn from for but because they have not come back to the church to make themselves right and have not shown fruits of repentance they stay in a perpetual state of withdrawl.
On making the wrong chooses.
We all hold responsibility on not standing up and correcting wrong teaching when it comes out, even if it's to say "Something does not feel right about that teaching to me". But how do you explain suborning people? That's persuading others to do the wrong thing by influence or argument because God made us the preacher, teacher, deacon, elder, or those who just say: well we know better and your wrong.
When I heard the teaching recently about it is OK now to go to a post secondary school, or even college, because we have the responsibility to take proper care of our families. I was glad, but I am 30 years older now and I realized I allowed myself to follow such erroneous teachings in the past, I start wondering; Did I sin by not following my common sense when I followed the wrong teaching? My family had to go on public assistance in order to survive in those days. I felt guilty at the time.
When we questioned those teachings; The responses were reproachful. Being reviled for not humbly following the teachers word; Being called rebellious, contentious or haters of God, publicly. That is reproachful.
The older ones, now seem to avoid taking responsibility on this subject even though they should have known better. After all God did give us everything that pertains to life and Godliness by giving us the perfect law of liberty. It seems as though the older ones in the C.O.C. blames God for their own incorrect understandings.
Instead the teachers now say God choose not to reveal this understand to us until now, which cued me to the realization that yes he did communicate the proper understanding on going to school. He told you by the cries of the brothers who were reproach, reviled to silence, or discouraged to the point of falling away.
At what point was the decision made to reverse the teaching on this subject. Was it only after the older christian and teacher's children cried unto them? Was it only when you seen how your children had to struggle to get by? That would mean you heard the complaints of your own children and not of the brothren. Where is the love of the brothren in that? It also would mean You seem to only change the teaching to serve your own interests as Paul said in the book of Romans 16:17. I would hope that is not the case.
Changing the teachings was done previously also when your children departed from the church to seek education first or meaningful jobs prior to being baptized. They moved far away from their moms or dads. Weren't they the clever ones? They seemed to possess the craftiness of their parents. Putting the worldly things first before baptism. I believe this is what the old ways instilled within many, yet perhaps God used it for our good. It showed us who we were really listening to. People who had faults just like us. He wants us to subject ourselves one to another so we can grow to a better understanding without the suborning and the confusion that seems to come with it.
Children leaving home left many teachers and older ones in a dilemma. They could not see their children or grand children under the previous teachings when their children left home and moved far away. Under the previous teaching we could not just up and travel if it meant we would miss Sunday at our home congregation. So again the teaching was changed albeit for the better. Now the teachers and older ones could go visit their departed children and go to Church assemblies outside their home congregation.
But what of the people who were withdrawn from previously for leaving their home congregation on business although they attended a congregation somewhere out of state on their trip and then returned. How do you account for the trouble we caused these people. Should we be the least bit remorseful? I say Yes!
What does God say about causing divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine (of Christ)?
We have a sister here; very ill. Her husband just recently fell away. Teachers say he fell away from the commandments of God. I don't believe that to be true. I believe he reeled back from the burdensome teaching that caused him to drop out of school many years ago. I bet he is asking himself why did I do that? Would his wife have deteriorated to the level she is today if he had a better paying job. She is so weak she cannot even come to class. Is he blaming himself for not taking better care of her in order to follow a faulty teaching? Spreading words like he fell away from the commandments of God does not help him find his way back.
Is the only time we are going to hear our brethren is when it comes from our own children? But isn't that being partial in the law of Christ? Isn't that serving our own bellies?
If we complained we were labeled contentious and I am sure others did the same and were withdrawn from for contending on what they believed to be true. Now I hear In class how one young christian was thought to be contentious, but since she was speaking from her heart felt conviction the teacher choose not to withdraw from her. The accused was a child of an older one. I am glad the young person was not withdrawn from. Although this shows progress, it is still a reminder of a double standard.
I was withdrawn from 16 years ago for speaking up on marriage and divorce. They called it sowing seeds of discord. Several years later I learned from my estrange wife and a teacher in separate encounters that what I wrote was correct after all. So why am I still in withdraw? The teacher and preacher here says I have to confess to "possibly confusing a babe". and "owning it".
Those leading the congregations need to take responsibility on the changes they made to the doctrine even if it were for the better
If they rebuked people on any of these items where the teaching later changed, they need to sit down and repent of the trouble they caused many. If they just sat by and said nothing; they need to repent and apologize for not taking action to correct a hurtful teaching.
You/we need to read the book of Leviticus 4th Chapter concerning sins of ignorance. Any of us Including myself who allowed ourselves to be suborn, need to apologize to our fellow brethren for not standing in the gap and for not standing for the defense of many who were so abused.
When a Church stops following the scriptures and instead follows the leader or esteems the leader higher than God and Christ it is corrupted. I was baptized into the Church of Christ and in week one I was given a written lesson from Merie Weiss to study; welcome to Christianity here is our leader we follow. I should have been taught to study the bible not the deceased leader. Many of the teachings were given not from scripture but rather from what ever mood the teacher was in; if the teacher was in a good mood it was a good lesson, if the teacher was in a bad mood (as was often the case) it was a your going to Hell lesson. Many of the lesson I heard were Merie said lessons and not Jesus said or any of the other inspired writers. College was not for me nor advanced training in any technical field, I work a simple job and the lesson is for me to be content with my wages. Parents who do not want to see their children suffer financially are doing their children a disservice, how else are you going to learn to control your spending? How else are you going to learn to control your desires which will so easily destroy oneself? I am a teacher and everything I do is true and right should be let's follow the scriptures which lead us unto eternal life.
Anonymous 6:58
I am not sure if you are being sarcastic or what? Are you saying you enjoy seeing your children suffer financially so they can learn to pinch a penny? I would think that to be foolish. And the last sentence does not make sense, unless you are being sarcastic.
Personally I learned awhile ago that sarcasm does little to help in counseling folks. Your sarcasm sounds like mocking, but maybe that is why you work a job of little to no means? What is your point here?
Not sarcasm, but rather anger. When I hear stories of church abuse I get angry and start spitting out everything I know to be wrong with the church. When someone is going through a serious illness of end of life situation it is a time for comfort not insult. When a man suffers the loss of his mate it is an overwhelming loss and the person is in need of comfort and compassion which the church is incapable of. The practices of the Church of Christ are the practices of a cult; that is all for the leader at the expense of its members, they practice predatory leadership. I apologize if my rant left you hurt or confused.
To the Mule: Your anger is justified! While I was in the group, a Christian who was in another congregation lost her Mother. Later she told me that I was the only one who sent her a sympathy card! They certainly lack compassion, this I learned firsthand too.
You speak of the leaders and that the group has the practices of a cult-at first when I left I didn't want to believe that. Especially the part about following a leader and that the leader gets money. But later I realized that this was also true about the group.
The evangelist in California gets money from the members, even though he doesn't travel much. I remember ALSO paying some of his regular bills, such as auto insurance, in addition to his regular pay. The same thing happened when we got an evangelist from the south, his auto insurance was paid in addition to his regular pay!
And the shocking thing is-neither one has to account for how much money and assistance they receive! When ones have tried to get them to reveal this information, they are rebuked and I know of one that got withdrawn from.
And yet the other religions that they so ardently revile show where all of their money is going, including the pay to their preachers and others (including secretaries).
Yet the two evangelists insist it's none of the other members' business. How is it not? Makes a person wonder what they are hiding? How much do they get paid, and receive in assistance anyway?
I know it's a lot more than I make! And why so secretive?
That's one of the biggest earmarks of a cult. Paying leaders, and secrecy.
Well thank you, I know now that I am not the only one to understand these things. Many more than the two evangelist's get paid, but it is just indirectly. I was told to cancel my apartment lease, pay the fine, and move in with the Volkswagen mechanic from Oxnard. I paid most of the bills and freely gave of my tools to him thinking he was sending all of his money back to his estranged wife and two children and needed my help financially. When I found out that he had decided not to support his first wife and kids I lost all respect for him and considered him a scoundrel. He was a sharing preacher and did not get paid but I was the mule that supported him. (When you enter into a prison ministry one course you take is called "Games that inmates play" and the goal of all the games is to create a mule to serve the inmate; I was the mule that served the scoundrel from Oxnard.) Another method of getting paid is for older members to borrow money from the new babes and never pay it back. I saw this done time and time again, (again not directly being paid, but indirectly.) Receiving free auto repair is another way to financially exploit others, as is free house repairs. If you are poor and cannot pay it is one thing, but many older members and leaders could afford to pay for the repair services, but exploited others accepting "free" services.(Again indirect pay) I was told the watch story several times when I did not want to help. Some man in Stanton bought himself an expensive watch and then had no money for food and asked the church for help. Merie said that even though he had been foolish with his money it was right to help him because he was a christian. When I was homeless in the church I asked for help and was told no. I asked about the watch story and was told that does not apply to you (I was never a preacher) When the leaders (preachers or teachers) need help you are to jump to it, but if you need help you are on your own. Evangelists should be paid, that is very clear from the example of Paul the apostle, but why are there only two evangelists for so many years? Maybe if older members stopped freeloading, worked full time jobs, and put more into the collection plate there would be enough money to support more evangelists.(and the needy in the church.) The same things could also be said about emotional support. When someone is going through an end of life situation with a close relative or spouse it is a time for comfort and compassion. I saw all the compassion going upward and never downward. Everyone showed concern for the evangelists health problems but never knew about the lower members needs. The babes and lower members were just not important to the leadership. Example: one couple in Boise lost a child to cancer and the "tub of guts" teacher in Boise said afterwards: well now they couple is really showing an interest in coming to class, (cruel just cruel.) No love for the lay members. I cannot find it in my heart to show love to these type of scoundrels, I tried fake love (love bombing) but could not do that either. I left the church but still see these scoundrels from time to time and I go the other way. I would rather give my love and support to those truly in need.
Steven Hassan in his book: combating cult mind control explains that a cult creates a second personality in a person. A cult member has their regular personality sometimes and sometimes the cult personality and you have to know which one you are speaking to, or speaking with. I do have a Church of Christ personality and it is difficult for me to control when I get upset. My COC personality is a copy of my first teacher. My first teacher was cold, cruel and indifferent to the feelings or sufferings of others. He spoke the truth, but not in love, he spoke the truth to punish and to hurt. My first teacher has ice water running through his veins and can say the most hurtful things with no remorse. My first teacher is a copy of his teacher, the evangelist in Spring Valley, who is a copy of his teacher Merie Weiss. When I speak with my cult personality I offend people with my bluntness and insensitivity, just as my first teacher did to me. My cult personality has no conscience, no remorse, no consideration for others. I have to bite my tongue many times to prevent the cult personality from coming out but still I fail at times to control it. I need to apologize for calling Jay Reynolds a tub of guts and for the hypocrisy of pointing out his cruel comment and then making one myself about him. I will try harder to suppress my COC personality in future comments.
TO Mule and others: I have no objection to paying an evangelist. But the problem with the group is that the evangelists are not doing the work of an evangelist. They both own houses and are in the same congregation that they have been for years! They are not constantly travelling and living with other congregations, and assisting those congregations in need. Consider some of the congregations that had teachers withdrawn from-those ones needed the evangelist to come and stay for a while, yet they did not. Some of those congregations have now shut down.
Also, why is it a secret as to what the MEMBERS are paying these men? My salary is no secret to the people who are paying me. As a matter of fact, the people paying me have even determined how much I should be paid, and how often. And I have no objection, after all they are the ones paying me!
It should be the same with the evangelists. They should be accountable to those who are paying them! If it's a secret, then it could even be possible for them to abuse the privilege. I'm not saying that the two are abusing it, I'm just saying that it makes it very easy for one or both of them to do so.
The religions that the group loves to look down on and put down in talks and classes are open about what they pay folks, including their preachers. They are also more open about what they teach than the Stanton group is.
Secrecy, that's what cults love to maintain. That's why members can't talk to each or start to ask questions without being accused of murmuring! Or being contentious!
The evangelist from Spring Valley sure has taken thousands of dollars from my Earned Salary and Pension via my ex-wife over 25+ years. I am NOT a COC member . Why does he continue to take money from a non-Christian source. Funny "Mule" is exactly what I think of CF.
GP's family lived in a rental of ours in Santee for a number of years, so have several children of his and other COC families. So I do know how this guy operates.
How can he listen to the pain of the children and adults on this blog and not respond with some sort of kindness. That my friends is MY definition of EVIL
So take this phrase of Matthew from your bible and speak directly to your evangelist Here on this blog he will not answer. It is not "between thee and him alone" He does "hear you" on this blog, but he is not your brother
King James Bible
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
Just another Hipo-Christian Preacher
Oh and David I don't think you know me well enough to discuss my choices in life. My best choice was to get out from under my ex-wife's cult association.
Kevin, Please, I wasn't speaking of you. The message was for the COC or SCOC as you guys call it. Even when Juda and Isreal went in different directions, God was still both their God for a long time until they both went down a road and they would not even think of repenting. My hope and desire is to see the Brotherhood restored; The COC and the SCOC and you guys also.
But here is a question for you, When Paul says when that which is perfect has come, that which was done in part shall be done away with.
What is Paul speaking of?
The Bible?
Christ upon his second appearing?
or perhaps the Church when she is finally adorned as a bride for the Groom?
Just a thought I have been pondering about lately. In Christ Love. David
I was reading the auto post on the E-mails from this site. Are the headings over our comments automatically written by the computer or can they be re-edit by some one. How in the world did the e-mail miss quote what I wrote unless someone re-edit it? The Heading seems to suggest I included a implicit cuss. I said, Kevin please, I was't speaking to you …. but the heading in the e-mail states it as; Kevin, Please I wasn''t speaking to you. Typo error I guess. If not please whoever did that, be not deceived mischief does not elude the watchful eye of the Angels who appear before God. Unless our righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the Sadducees and Scribes we in no wise shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
One way to tell if you are in a corrupted or "off Church of Christ" is to watch and see if the doctrine stays the same, or changes to suit the leader. Once upon a time the sin of masterbation (uncleaness), was not only a withdrawable offense it was the root of all that is vile and evil. One day, without explanation, a "new understanding" was received in which is was no longer withdrawable. This "new understanding was received when the leaders own children were being condemned by it. A narcissistic leader will change the doctrine so as not to condemn his own children. When you realize that Merie Weiss was a narcissist leader, and those who now lead are also following her narcissist example, you will be able to see your way out. To prevent this, church history has to be hidden, and those members with knowledge have to be silenced or discredited. Why are so many persecuted out of the COC? They tell the truth about the abuses in the church. To stand back and see how many who question leadership are driven out it to see the corrupt leaders in action.
Anony 1:43 I believe it is easier to prove those things they said publicly, as I recorded earlier. The Lord said they/we will be judged by their/our own words. I won't say your allegation is false, but I have never heard that before. What I wrote earlier was for their benefit. It seem as though they do monitor this site. I mentioned the existence of this site to them and they seemed to know something of it. I am withdrawn from and they of course won't allow me to bring it up in class. And to avoid public discourse, I thought it best to post it here.
That is the problem, David. While we are all responsible for our own faults, the teachers have severe allergies to being corrected, even in private, by those they fancy themselves masters of. I took four issues in private to my teacher, without telling another earthly soul of them, and like clockwork, within three months I was withdrawn from, and in four years time, I was excommunicated. Quite dangerous to see faults of your teachers. They successfully air all your faults before all congregations. If you go to them with your faults, they will all be dredged up and used against you. That makes true relationships impossible, because if you know your faults will be used against you, you won't go to the teachers, as only a fool will tell people things about themselves who will use it against them. But if you do tell them, you will get severe backlash if you ever disagree strongly with any of their practices, or do not 100% agree with their scriptural teachings. There is no compromise. Either the church is 100% right, and you are 100% wrong, or you get out of the church for being a troublemaker.
Terry Smith runs a COC site on Facebook. He also runs a bible class in the boiler room where he works. Each one of us may have brought something up in the SCOC. But did we all use the proper way; ??? I don't know, I believe you tried. We all need to make a decision. Decide each of you if you believe what Paul said in Romans 16:15-20 or do you forgive and try, try again? John said in the 3rd book of John follow not that which is evil and he suggested a man with a good report. Each of us will stand alone before God. If God has never given you anything , you nor I will ever be able to do his will. But when he does show you the door walk in and follow him with all your being. If it is the ways of Christ and you keep those ways, then you will go on to know both the father and the son. And you will know you have the truth. I have a class to get to. So Good night.
David I just love you for your honesty. Do you have any tapes of your lesson I could listen to? I am getting tired of listening to the same old tapes of Merie and am looking for a new teacher to follow. You would make a great evangelist.
I thought it was rather interesting that Terry Smith not only started his own bible study, A way was made for him to share the word in of all places his work place in a boiler room. Wow. I am inspired by his example and how God will make a way for those who want to know and share.
Church Zombie; Maybe you could follow Christ. With a user name of zombie? Only God can raise anyone from the dead. He will do that only with those who follow Christ. So give up your walking among the dead.
There are many Terry Smiths on Facebook. How can the Terry Smith you're referring to be found? Please copy and paste the url to his facebook page please.
David, what congregation do you currently attend? Which congregation withdrew from you? Was it because you spoke out about the former rule about worshiping in your home congregation?
Seeker, There is many things best left unsaid especially with your question the why it is worded. That was not brought up. I have to go now, but will try to say something about this later.
Seeker; What congregation do you attend and what do you think of what I posted August 18, 2016 @ 5:35 and August 18, 2016 @ 5;36?
David I have to ask you where you are preaching this Sunday; I want to be there and hear of the persecutions you have suffered. There is, the milk and the meat; the easy and the hard, and I know from Exodus 2 with Moses that preaching is hard. Moses stepped in and saved his fellow Hebrew from a beating or death and the very man he saved went out and gossiped about it to everybody. Three people knew about Moses killing the Egyptian, Moses who said nothing, the Egyptian who was dead, and the Hebrew whom Moses saved, he was the one who was the talebearer. Did the people of God accept him for his act of valor? Nope, they railed against him as if he was evildoer. Being a leader of God's people is a thankless job at times, and the very people you are trying to help will turn and rail against you; leadership is not for the faint of heart. If you are willing to be a leader for God then your only motivation for doing so has to be the love of God because you will not receive any love from the people you have to reprove. I believe you have the love of God in you David and that would make you a great man for God.
David, the teaching on higher education has changed? Can you please give me more information as to who you heard this from? Initials are fine.
Oh! Anonymous; What has it changed to this time?
To: Looking for a new leader.
When people are willing to put their money where their mouth is, then you know they are serious. I'm not asking for your money, but put your reputation on the line and stop hiding behind your URL names. If you are so willing, as you say, to travel 2,000- 3,000 miles to listen to a 20-30 minute mini surmon then you must be serious if you actually were to do that or maybe you are crazy. You write suggestive words with no real name; it suggest to me you are not serious.
I share things from scripture. Reprove? Reprove who and for what? Jesus at the well did not reprove the Samaritan woman now did He? The woman caught in adultery; he defended against those who would come down heavy upon her. He was willing to teach them mercy but so many hearts were as stone. Yet through all that, Christ was able to ground that stone down so people were able to drop their stones and regain their composure and I suppose their compassion.
You use words like talebearer, reprove and gossip. What do those words mean?
Some people like to associate one who gossip as a murmurer. I maybe wrong but I do not believe that. Otherwise just about everyone in the COC, SCOC, and others could all be considered murmurers.
A teacher once told me that people are going to gossip. And so they do.
I was reading in the book of Deuteronomy 22:13-21. It spoke of when a man takes a wife and hates her and gives an occasion of speech against her, and brings up an evil name upon her simply because he says: "I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid."
What was wrong with what he did? It has to do with disrespect doesn't it? Disrespect is just another form of hatred.
Isn't that murmuring? I believe it is. Thirty years in the COC no one seem to easily defined murmuring but accused others with it anyway. But what Moses says in Deuteronomy simply made it clear to me.
But be wise, How can that be murmuring if what Korah, Dathan and Abiram said in The Book of Numbers 16:1-11 was murmuring? and the murmuring in The book of Joshua 9:18-21 where the congregation murmured against the princes. God did not strike them all dead. (Continued)
Part two
Wow! Yet we also noticed that in all situations murmuring maybe alleged without killing the person or even withdrawing from anyone, nor even a rebuke as it is in The Book of Acts 6:1-5 where the Grecians murmured.
Just because Philippians 2:14 says "let all things be done without murmuring" does not mean all murmuring is disciplined alike.That is what Christ try to tell us in Mathew 5:21-24; where a person may be disciplined in different degrees.
The Grecians in Acts 6; I believed were mildly reproved when the twelve apostles said, "it is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables" and then showed by example on how to get things started. They simply empowered the Grecians and us to resolve the problem ourselves without complaining against someone.
Where as Paul in 1st Corinthians 10:10 warns of a more serious murmuring as in the wilderness where God destroyed those who spoke against HIM and those to whom he spoke face to face with and approved that man Moses with signs among the people.
Also notice the man in Deuteronomy 22:13-22 If the thing the man says about his wife is true and there is no proof of her innocence, Then he is not punished, but she is. So we see a need to definitely prove the thing said was not only spoken against someone, but the thing said was untrue and spread as gossip outside the process God established.
So any kind of murmuring does not show the graciousness Christ bestowed upon us. Therefore do not murmur, but all murmuring is not treated the same. It is as when a wife disrespects her husband, She would not suffer the same punishment of another who committed capital murder or struck another.
All disrespect is different degrees of hatred.
But now what is a talebearer? Look at Leviticus 19:15-15. What does it say?
( I am improvising a bit here)
Basically he tells us whether great or small we must not respect one above the other. We all must be judged with the same equity. Then he says we do not go up and down as a talebearer. Instead we are to go and rebuke our neighbor privately if possible.
Will you say something false about your neighbor to his face? Probably not. But if you do, You may find yourself reproved real quick, but not reprove publicly as long as what you said was private to him. So make sure what you are saying is true.
A talebearer spreads information about you before taking it to you first.
A murmurer spreads false information about someone without even trying to check with you first.
If he shall not hear you, Then you may chose to over look the problem and forgive and forget. Or You may chose to take one or two more witnesses with you, without biasing then first. That means you are to take one or two more than those who may of been there on the first confrontation. Take them to your neighbor who you have ought with and establish every word as Christ says in Mathew 18:15-17. Only after that you can bring it to the congregation. That is how I read it.
Check 1st Corinthians 5:1-13 The very first verse says "it is reported commonly that there is fornication among you"… How can it be reported commonly without someone being guilty of being a talebearer? So, I believe the process of Mathew 18:15-17 was already carried out; they just had failed to stop fellowship with the established fornicator until Paul wrote them. (continued)
Part 3
Again even with a teacher, preacher or older one we show respect as Paul tells Timothy in 1st Timothy 5. In-treating an older one as we would a beloved relative.
But in 1st Timothy 5:19-21 Paul indicates; as I suppose, that a person already came privately to an elder, and only after they (the older one) has failed to repent and you have already established every word with one or more witnesses with that elder, may you chose to bring the matter before the church and rebuke him before all. and be not partial in your judgement just because he or she is an older one. Again this is how I read it.
1st Timothy 5:22
Lay hands suddenly on no man , neither be partakers of other men's sins: Keep thyself pure. I am thinking this is actually saying we must not just go along with what a witness might say. Just because the withdraw was brought up by an elder or teacher or preacher does not make the matter right before God. Establish all your facts before you bring it to the church. The only way you can do that; is to go to the person privately, establish all the facts between you and one or more witnesses and then bring it to the Church.
If at any point the person says, "I repent" you are to forgive him as Christ says in Luke 17:3-4.
Some say Ephesians 5:3 trumps all that I just said and we must withdraw immediately even if the person should have already repented, but I do not find any scriptures to confirm that idea. Actually though God and the apostles has said many times NOT TO SIN IN ANYTHING; but if you do, I believe then the process should be followed as stated by Christ in Mathew 18.
To assume Paul's words in Ephesians 5:3 "But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as become saints";… is a statement to withdraw even if the person already repented, would run contrary to what Christ said in Luke 17:3-4. How can you bring something to some one, hear them say "I repent" and then just go ahead and tell others without being an talebearer? If you think I am wrong please articulate your argument clearly matching point for point.
The road to reprove another is full of responsibility and carefulness and of course love, to see that we all make it.
Love does not come out with both barrels blazing, but is gentle kind, easy to be entreated.
I do not believe I am there yet. So instead of speaking any more about wrongs others have done to me, I would much rather talk scriptures and how they may apply to me. Thank you.
Also remember all the tribes of Israel. To often they wanted a king like some of you seem to want a teacher to lead you. This is the very idea that lead so many away from God. For when the King or teachers were right with God did the people have a good example to follow, but when those kings or our teachers have gone off as Christ forewarned us, it becomes to easy to follow the King/teacher and be partakers of their sins as Paul said in 1st Timothy5:22
The only way we can keep ourselves pure is by following God's Word Jesus Christ. Don't you think so? So my name is irrelevant. But that is my identity in part as I posted. (End)
David, you misunderstood me. I was asking you a question about the teaching on attending college. Is it okay for members or their children to attend college?
Yes! I believe some of that teaching was already being taught previously. My wife 30 years ago went to college while in the Church, but she said it was because the state mandated she had to go after the divorce. Oddly though they also allowed my daughter to go to a short course after she was baptized and that was some 15-16 years ago. But now I believe they opened the teaching up to include 4 year degrees or more if your field of interest is such.
Please remember, I am still withdrawn from and unable to inquire further.
OH Brother! I need to make a correction about my previous definition of murmuring. I included in a previous post one of the characteristics of murmuring had to include a false allegation.
I believe that is not correct.
Murmuring is complaining, but if what you are complaining about is correct then it should be looked into as the apostle did in Acts 6 with the Grecian brethren. Although because it is still complaining it should be discouraged, but not necessarily withdrawn from or even rebuked.
I have a question. 16-18 years ago I had daughters in children class. The teacher opened the class for questions. One of my daughters ask, how does a person avoid answering a question they feel uncomfortable answering. The teacher called in the preacher who explained on how to accomplish that task. If I understood it correctly, The children were told that If you pretty much are unaware of every detail of the answer you then can honestly say that. Simply say; You don't wish to answer the question because of your unfamiliarity with the whole situation.
That was before I was withdrawn from, but was told this by my daughters well after my withdraw.
Something did not sound right about that. What do you think?
What I understand seems to be a child already knows how not to answer their friends in school and their friends in church and strangers they don't talk to. So who would a child feel uncomfortable answering, besides their parents, teachers, or police officers.
Most Parents already understand their children may not know all the events in a situation, but the few bits of information may help to diffuse another situation that maybe brewing.
At the time prior to finding this all out, I remember feeling rather frustrated when my one daughter would answer me in that ill advised manner.
What the Preacher did not understand was the mischief and contention he was sowing into my family and the contentions it caused.
That same preacher shortly there after had me withdrawn from for being contentious over a letter I wrote.
The letter did not mention any names nor did it complain about anything if I remember correctly.
Several years latter I was told, what I wrote was correct about divorce and the error in counseling people to divorce. If we should council folks to divorce we are actually counseling them to walk contrary to the word of God.
Now that they allegedly agree with what I wrote; They tell me I need to still confess to possibly confusing a babe into thinking I was a teacher.
I thought this was already settled by Moses when the people complained that there were people prophesying in the congregation without God's or Moses' personal authority.
So pardon me for asking. Why am I withdrawn from?
David you ask a very important question. The answer to your question will apply to many others who are in withdrawal or have fallen away. You are an independent thinker and as such represent a threat to the control the leaders have over the members of their respective congregations. The preacher/teacher will do your thinking for you, and the group, and anyone who thinks for themselves is a threat. Members are to give up their decision making ability and let the preacher/teacher make all the decisions for them(this is called seeking council in the COC.) The church, in the recruitment phase, sells a fairy tale of love, joy, and peace. Many members believe that they will find utopia in the SCOC but in reality the members are used and abused, but still cling on in hope of finding the fairy tale ending. When one starts to ask questions like how much does the evangelist get paid, or where in scripture does it say the church has the authority to tell members they can or cannot go to college, or where in scripture does the church have the authority to control members sex lives, you will realize that it is not a church at all but a totalitarian group (AKA cult). Totalistic groups have rules for everything and new rules are added constantly as new situations arise. After the death of GP your withdrawal will be lifted, just like after the death of Merie Wiess many members were allowed to return. Change of leadership will result in change of rules as the leader sets the rules and not the scriptures. Domination, control, and exploitation is the way of the oppressor and you would threaten their control by asking simple questions about their abusive practices. When DWC was kicked out, many members who had been forced into submission by her, through false accusation and unscriptural withdrawal started saying "I was right after all" and the evangelist feared rebellion in the churches when people figured out they were right and the church leaders were wrong. The COC follows the pattern of many other cults in their control of its members. By controlling the social settings the leader can set boundaries for group membership and once set, the boundaries can be brought in closer and closer to gain even greater control over individual members. High demand groups allow little time for reflection always keeping it's members very busy so they don't have time to ask questions like "why are we doing this?" Sleep deprivation is a method of control and practiced by the COC. We were run to death by DS and when we were physically tired he preached, from the pulpit, that our rest is in Heaven. This is taking spiritual rest and twisting it to apply to physical rest. DS also taught that christian do not sleep in the daytime; again this causes sleep deprivation and when sleep deprived you are unable to think rationally, but only emotionally. One day you will ask yourself "why am I doing this?" You get little in return for your service to this church. David you also fill the role of scapegoat and are blamed for many thing you have not done, this serves to exalt the preacher as the good guy because he has found the sin in the camp which is you (or any of hundreds of others who have been drive out.) With new leadership your freedom will be limited though, it will be a short time and the new leader will make you a scapegoat again and back into withdrawal you will go. Omnipotence is also required to attract new members; such as "We are the one true church" or "we are the truth" Many group such a the LDS church (Mormon), Jehovah Witness, use this same line to prove their omnipotence and also prove all other religions false. I no longer believe the Stanton church of Christ teaching that they are the one true church but that they are a cult started by a disillusioned member of a mainline Church of Christ. What is called the "off Church of Christs" is in reality the true churches of Christ.
The controlling of members sex lives in the Stanton COC was done through the teaching of "defiled marriage bed" in which many rules and regulations were created for the sex lives of it members. Being able to have such deep and intimate control over others is an incredible high for the oppressor.
You are right. It was even brought out in classes when I stopped seeking counsel. I knew what was going and even told one of the preachers that scripture and the examples of the congregation were not the same. I studied a lot and quickly out grew them, so I was seen as a threat as I could stand on my own and not rely/depend on them. I was after truth.
Wow all this is very interesting concerning anon August 21, 2016 5:29 am with the evangelists not revealing what their support is if asked. If this is true that's troubling to me especially when my income is helping with their support of one. Likewise with another commenter on another subject whom brought up the fact how you need to exhaust all options when in need before coming to the treasury for help. Also no evangelist has visited Portland for 7 years even though Portland hadn't baptized from the personal work for 6 years 8 months. That was concerning and odd to say the least. Also I do believe 4 year colleges (university) are taught against or at least discuraged.
I was taught that in I timothy 4:3 that false religion would forbid to marry but you read in Matthew 19:12 about eunuchs, that is, people forbidden to marry by God. When you look at the entire Bible you will see the same things that happen to the wicked also happen to the righteous. Sudden destruction, early death, and being forbidden to marry are just three examples of equal circumstances. If the righteous and the wicked both experience good and bad, both experience blessings and curses then what is the profit in being righteous? If there is no special protection, no extra blessings, no position of superiority in this life, then why be righteous? Simple: the righteous know that this life is preparation for the next life. In Revelations 7:15 it tells us that the righteous serve God day and night; we learn to serve God in this life first which prepares us to serve God in the next life. We endure many hardships and trials to teach us to depend upon God for our very survival at times and our daily needs each and every day. We learn to recognize and control our pride and lusts to be acceptable before man and God. Your trials of faith will serve you well in the next life Christian.