Home
« Home | Next: A wonderful time indeed! »
| Next: Does your faith move your mountain? »
| Next: Time Out »
| Next: Faith is not the Gift »
| Next: He even has my haircut »
| Next: DST and your PC »
| Next: Regeneration »
| Next: Elect in Christ »
| Next: Why do you believe...? »
| Next: Time Out »

Thoughts

Topics

Archives


Subscribe

Feed Link

Study Help

Real Help

    Needed Prayers


Links

About

About Kc


Awards

Quotes

    "You are really cool you are married to an European!! How cooler can you be??"
    Fisherman Pecheur

    "Smarty Pants"
    Mad Matt

    "Oh, you did not ask for Bonhoeffer's opinion did you? You wanted mine..."
    the SOFYST

    "You are like the master at this "feelings" stuff!
    Kind Kristi

    "I enjoy your comments, but they are always delightfully enigmatic"
    Dyspraxic Fundamentalist


Friday, March 23, 2007

Why do you believe...?

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
1 Corinthians 1:10


For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
Romans 8:6


One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Romans 14:5


These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
Acts 17:11


Given the above verses it would seem to me that the single mindedness we should strive for has less to do with theological agreement than it does with our willingness to be subject to God, to one another and to the scripture.

Why do you believe Christian fellowship and assembly should be dependent on theological agreement and/or common practices?

Labels: , ,

26 Comments:

Blogger Gayla said...

Casey, I'll pop back in here a bit later and comment on the post, but I wanted to make you aware that I replied to you on the God Contro? post. In case you didn't see it.

:)

3/23/2007 08:48:00 AM  
Blogger Gayla said...

I mean "Got" Control. But I guess God control would be appropriate too! LOL

3/23/2007 08:49:00 AM  
Blogger Gayla said...

"Why do you believe Christian fellowship and assembly should be dependent on theological agreement and/or common practices?"

I don't think it should be 'dependent'on theological agreement, necessarily.

...and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near. ~Heb 10:24-25

I think the possiblity exists that there could always be some disagreement over one issue or another. Doesn't negate the above verse, though, or the verses you posted.

And what about 1 Cor 2:1-5:

And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.

I think we should be iron sharpening iron. We should be more concerned about being righteous rather than 'right.'

As far as common practices. This may come into play moreso than theology. For example, I'm not so much into 'feelings' and 'experiences' and 'words' and 'prophecy' etc, as some of my friends who have become a bit more charasmatic. We (me and hubby) don't practice these things so much; they do. We don't 'gather' with them as much anymore; though we certainly agree on most other issues. Does that make sense?

I find the discussions with my brothers and sisters here in the blogosphere to be beneficial to me in many ways. Drives me to delve into the Scriptures to either confirm or challenge what I think and why.

I hope I answered the question. You know me - I tend to ramble. LOL

3/23/2007 11:37:00 AM  
Blogger Kc said...

Gayla I hope you're sitting down...
We agree! (hehe) ;-)

3/23/2007 11:46:00 AM  
Blogger Gayla said...

I do believe that was your shortest comment to me ever! LOL

Do you want to post about the spritual gifts, or should I? I really want to talk about that. I really think I'm still forming my thoughts regarding them, and it would be a good iron sharpening iron moment. :)

3/23/2007 12:07:00 PM  
Blogger Kc said...

Gayla,

I will be terse then...

yes, please! (hehe)

3/23/2007 01:12:00 PM  
Blogger dorsey said...

"Why do you believe Christian fellowship and assembly should be dependent on theological agreement and/or common practices?"

I don't. In fact, I tend to think that making fellowship contingent on agreement is sin (not to mention incredibly small-minded). A reading of 1 Cor. 12 (one body, many different parts) cautions against such homogenization, the result of which might be a body that consists of only elbows. Our Lady of the Blessed Nudge?

3/23/2007 01:15:00 PM  
Blogger Missy said...

KC, I waffled here for a bit (big surprise, huh?) but I think I have formed an opinion...maybe...?

Once a member of the Cathedral of the Holy Toe, I agree with Dorsey. As long as we are spiritually-minded in our fellowship, we are like-minded. I am not sure that these scriptures mean that we must have all spiritual things worked out to a mutual satisfaction. If that were the case, as far as I know, fellowship would almost always be unbiblical!

I waffled because I know how difficult and hurtful it can be when a church is in turmoil - and it seems no one can agree on anything. But then I also know how God is glorified when resolution or peace returns and the disciples involved have matured.

I think history has proven over and over that segregation is never the answer. It seems useful in the short term - but only works to prolong the suffering.

3/23/2007 03:25:00 PM  
Blogger Kc said...

Dorse, I don’t know where we’d be without the funny bone members of our body. That was so hilarious but very much to the point. I’m still laughing.

Missy I know it’s tough. I think we all (believers) have a sincere desire to please God and if we “see” something we think displeases Him we just have to fix it! I think a major problem concerns a clear division of responsibility within the body that’s grown to enormous proportions over the centuries.

To all:

Since there is no dissenter let me ask, how do you visualize assembly as a practical matter? What happens when we assemble? In other words do you find the scripture to teach or give a model for assembly? I think this might be the most difficult aspect of Denominationalism to overcome.

3/23/2007 03:50:00 PM  
Blogger Gayla said...

Oooooh, Casey, good question. We are gathering with another Believer couple to break bread with one another, and they'll be at our house in mere minutes, so I cannot expound right now. (In the nick of time, I've just finished another comment to you on my blog)

I'll be back...

So the answer to my question is, you want me to post about the gifts, correct?

3/23/2007 05:47:00 PM  
Blogger Kc said...

Gayla, yes please.

I was trying too hard to be terse and failed to connect! (hehe)

I think it more appropriate if you post in that we can all then ask our questions of you whereas all I could post is a question and probably the wrong one at that. ;-)

3/23/2007 05:58:00 PM  
Blogger dorsey said...

"...how do you visualize assembly as a practical matter? What happens when we assemble? In other words do you find the scripture to teach or give a model for assembly?"

Excellent question. My reading of scripture suggests that the real requirement in getting together is just doing it. There are others, such as being decent and orderly in fellowship and remembering Christ when we break bread. But scripture doesn't really prescribe the style of our gathering.

As such, I don't necessarily think any form of "doing church" is wrong, except when a specific way is proclaimed to be more correct than another (like saying that coming to a meeting on Sunday has more spiritual merit than bringing a good bottle of Shiraz to a friend's house and sharing it over dinner.).

3/25/2007 03:20:00 PM  
Blogger Missy said...

Dorsey, I would prefer a little plum wine with sushi, but a nice shiraz is good too. ;-)

KC, still thinking on this one...

3/25/2007 07:04:00 PM  
Blogger RF2R2 said...

Dorsey,

Just a quick observation: 1 Cor. 12 does not divide believers based on creed or theological doctrine, rather it is talking about division based on talents. I get your point about division over doctrine being sinful (I don't agree with it, but I don't have time right now to get into it), but 1 Cor 12 does not appear to support it.

kc,

I'll post my thoughts on your OP tomorrow... probably... what else am I going to do in Witchita Falls?

3/26/2007 12:19:00 AM  
Blogger dorsey said...

My point about 1 Corinthians is more a worldview perspective than a literal one. Would you agree that a person's personality and disposition influence their interpretation and understanding of scripture? I think it does, most certainly.

Consider that different talents very often tend to correlate to different personality traits. A person with an aptitude for engineering or mathematics might very well approach scripture differently than the thespian or musician. The entrepreneur certainly sees the Bible through different eyes than the field hand. I think a better quality of truth (to coin a phrase) emerges when these folks contend together in love for the faith (not for doctrines). Love transcends disagreement.

3/26/2007 07:52:00 AM  
Blogger Kc said...

Dorse, I agree with the exception that I think we should strive for agreement in the doctrines of Christ and the Apostles just not in theology or practice. I think most people tend to think they’re one in the same but I see a sharp distinction between the very clear and practical teachings of Christ and a full system of theology. I see the doctrine of love for God and others as being foundational.

3/26/2007 08:24:00 AM  
Blogger dorsey said...

The doctrine of love is about the only page left in my playbook, brother. There's a synergy that occurs when we strive together, in spite of our differences. And, when I say strive together, I mean anything we do whose purpose is love. And that synergy cannot be described in words (Yaconelli came the closest, though). It must be experienced to be understood.

Systematic theology is akin to dissecting a kitten to find the purr. In the end, you're left with neither.

3/26/2007 08:40:00 AM  
Blogger Missy said...

Oh, KC, that last sentence might be worthy of a sidebar quote!

3/26/2007 09:00:00 AM  
Blogger Kc said...

I probably should amend that to say that I don’t think doctrinal agreement is necessary for fellowship, only an agreement to strive for it. I think Christ’ teachings have a great impact on our relationships and so the effort to find agreement in them should result in discipleship. I think our theology only reflects our present perception and practice is almost always a reflection of our relationship with one another. I think it happens, or doesn’t, in accordance with our current agreements on doctrine.

3/26/2007 09:16:00 AM  
Blogger Kc said...

Dorse, I think we cross-commented. Did we just say the say thing with different words?

3/26/2007 10:27:00 AM  
Blogger dorsey said...

Yeah, I think we sort of did. I become more and more convinced that our relationship with Christ is worked out in our relationships with each other. I like what you said about agreeing to strive for agreement. That's a critical process. But even when agreement cannot be found, it's still possible (and vital) to understand each other.

3/26/2007 06:45:00 PM  
Blogger Kc said...

Zacly! ;-)

3/26/2007 07:48:00 PM  
Blogger Missy said...

Funny thing. I have been coming to the same conclusion. I searched for scripture regarding all the things people say concerning assembly - in earnest, not specifically to disprove - and what I found did not always prove what I had been taught. Almost all of it simply implied that we be considerate of one another.

The scripture that I have been thinking on lately, about the sisters, Martha and Mary, was enlightening.

Now as they were traveling along, He entered a village; and a woman named Martha welcomed Him into her home.
She had a sister called Mary, who was seated at the Lord's feet, listening to His word. But Martha was distracted with all her preparations; and she came up to Him and said, "Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to do all the serving alone? Then tell her to help me."
But the Lord answered and said to her, "Martha, Martha, you are worried and bothered about so many things; but only one thing is necessary, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her." Luke 10:38-42


Women often use this scripture to encourage one another to stop the busy-ness and take some time in the Word.

I stopped to consider what Mary's action here is: Listening.

As a church, or organized group (whatever the shape!) we often get bothered about many things, which are just as useful as the hospitality that Martha provided. Yet, listening to one another is the only thing that is necessary.

3/27/2007 08:09:00 AM  
Blogger dorsey said...

POW!!

The sound you just heard was Missy, hitting the nail on the head.

3/27/2007 08:24:00 AM  
Blogger Kc said...

Great thoughts Missy. I really appreciate you searching the scriptures on this as well. I have a related tough question coming up on Friday and I think your willingness to search the scripture will prove invaluable on this one.
;-)

3/27/2007 11:24:00 AM  
Blogger Missy said...

gulp.

3/27/2007 12:18:00 PM  

Post a Comment