Dichotomy of Focus

[Raven180]

A dichotomy is a division into two parts or concepts. These parts/concepts can be equal or unequal. They can be complimentary or contradictory. Essentially, what the parts/concepts are is less important than the fact of their division/separation.

Focus, obviously, is the intentional attention directed at a particular point or object.

Dichotomy of Focus, then, is having intentional attention directed at one of two separated parts or concepts, points or objects. It's not having one's focus divided or diverted; rather it's focusing solely in one direction as opposed to another.

A simple example will suffice. In a dish of ice cream, one may have vanilla ice cream topped by chocolate syrup. These two, separate--and in this case, complimentary--ingredients make up the dichotomy. As you eat, you may focus your attention through your taste buds on either the vanilla or the chocolate. You may even focus on the co-mingling of favors, as well. But if you are to taste the difference between the two ingredients, you must have a dichotomy of focus. If your taste buds are to determine which part is vanilla ice cream as opposed to which part is chocolate syrup, your brain must make a concentrated effort to focus solely on the taste of the vanilla and not on the chocolate.

In an example of a contradictory dichotomy, we can listen to a song that makes us feel happy or we can listen to a song that makes us feel sad. We then have a dichotomy of emotions: happiness and sadness. These are opposites, and so, contradictory. Depending on our mood, we may choose one song over another, and so focus our attention on one particular emotion. There may even be songs that are bittersweet, with a co-mingling of such emotions. But if we want pure happiness (or vice versa, i.e pure sadness) we must reject the bittersweet song and listen only to the song that makes us happy, and etc. This, again, is our dichotomy of focus.

In sum, complimentary dichotomies are usually joined by an "and". Contradictory dichotomies are usually joined by an "or".

Now let's get spiritual. There will come a time in your life, if you believe in God and follow the Lord Jesus Christ, that you will come to a dichotomy of focus. Let me explain. In the Bible, there are many dichotomies. Some are contradictory, and some are complimentary. An example of a contradictory dichotomy is "heaven or hell". An example of a complimentary dichotomy is "the blood of Jesus and the remission of sins". In both of these cases, the items in question are different, and thus divided into two concepts. But in the first example, "heaven or hell" are contradictory in that they do not share the same qualities, have a different purpose for their existence, and are two wildly different places to which one's eternal soul may go. The second, however, are complimentary because, though two different things, they inform and influence one another. Said another way, they go together. They are by no means a matching pair, but hand-in-glove, they are designed, one for another. "Heaven or hell" are not like this. One doesn't go to both after they die. They are mutually exclusive to each other.

So then, what is this dichotomy of focus to which we all must come? It comes down to this: what will our focus be? In any given, Biblical dichotomy, like heaven or hell, life or death, lost or saved (examples of contradictory dichotomies) or like the Father and Son, faith and works, commandments and obedience (examples of complimentary dichotomies), we will inevitably pay more attention to one than the other.

We can focus on heaven or hell. We can focus on life or death. We can focus on the lost or the saved. Eventually, no matter what we do, we end up paying more attention to one than the other. Even in complimentary dichotomies, we tend to focus more on one than the other. Some people focus more on the Father than the Son, some on faith more than works, and etc. It just naturally happens.

Of course, we must strive for balance and not over-emphasize one to the neglect of the other. But let's be honest. Who actually takes a balanced approach? Very few people do, in my experience. Take the Godhead debate. One can side so much with the trinitarian view that they end up in tri-theism. And one can dive so deeply into oneness they end up believing divine flesh. It is innately in us to go for the extremes, set up camp, and so, forever live there, in whatever side of the dichotomy we choose.

The question then is: What side or part of these various dichotomies will you choose to focus on? It is a supremely important question that must be asked. My answer, your answer, any given church's answer, will determine what we believe, preach, teach, and uphold as the standard for true orthodoxy and orthopraxy. If we allow ourselves an unbalanced approach (which is our natural tendency) we may end up over-emphasizing one aspect of the Bible to the exclusion of the other.

One may preach and teach the love of God so much that they, along with their listeners, come to forget about the wrath of God. Some may preach or teach so much against sin, that grace is never mentioned or is so infrequently mentioned, as to become meaningless with no real world application to those who constantly are warned about the consequences of sin.

Make sense?

(Continued in the next post...)

[Raven180]

(Continued from above...)

Here are two Scriptural examples, both of which are found in Romans, to help explain what I mean.

Romans 4:25,

25. Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

and

Romans 6:23,

23. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

In both of these verses, dichotomies are presented (These happen to be examples of contradictory dichotomies, but it wouldn't matter which kind they are, since the main point is that they are dichotomies, not that they are equal or unequal, etc). So then, we have a choice. We can make our focus be on one or the other, but not both. We may switch our focus at times, but it's very difficult to balance such concepts together, i.e focus on both of them at the same time, especially at all times.

So what end's up happening? This: we either end up focusing on Jesus being delivered for our offenses and that the wages of sin is death or we end up focusing on His resurrection which causes justification and eternal life.

I submit that we need to try and not allow this to occur. Doing this divides the Gospel and thus, never allows for the other side of the story to be told. Focusing solely on the problem never allows a solution to be implemented. Conversely, attempting to solve everything without correctly analyzing and understanding the problem is a disaster waiting to happen.

Therefore, this tendency towards a dichotomy of focus is actually, Scripturally and Biblically speaking, not a good thing. When it comes to ice cream or music, it doesn't matter all that much and maybe not at all. But to do this to God's Word is eventually detrimental to our cause as Christians. An imbalanced approach, such as we so often take, leads us to having undernourished saints who can't get over the hump because they're lacking the other half of the equation in their life and walk with God. To me, this is all just another sign of our demonically controlled and influenced bi-polar world.

The truth is, Christ came for many reasons to this earth. One of them is so that we could be made complete, i.e. whole, in Him (Colossians 2:10). But right now, we are a divided Body, full of bi-polar type faith in God. We lack balance and the spiritual rest that comes with balance. Very few love God just to love God. Now, it's either out of fear and the feeling like we to have walk on egg shells around our Savior, or because we think God's just some sugar daddy who can't say no to our kind of Veruca Salt "affections".

We need a healing Church, both individually and locally, corporately and globally. This bi-polar approach is slowly strangling the life right out of our faith. I don't know about you, but I can feel the pain of the Lord through the Spirit for an ailing, spiritually-as-opposed to mentally-ill, dysfunctional Bride.

The bottomline is this: Faithful messengers must tell the WHOLE old, old story of the Savior who came down from glory, not just the parts most easily focused on and so, allow the Word to do It's chief work: which is restore lost souls into a right, saving, healing relationship with the God of the Word.

To conclude, I make no other demands than this: Please prayerfully seek God and ask Him:

- What, if anything, am I missing in my walk with Him?

and

- Do I have a bi-polar dichotomy of focus that leads me to trump only one side of the Word to the harmful neglect of the other?

If God shows you that you are missing something and then also answers yes to question #2, then ask Him:

- To please send restorative, spiritual healing and so, make you whole

and

- To heal others who have so divided His Word that they can't faithfully embrace all of it or at all without constantly drawing lines in the sand and/or compartmentalizing It to pieces to find the parts they like.

After that, simply wait and trust that He will answer.

God bless you all and I hope this helps. Peace.

[Lynx]

Good thought, well expressed. 

I'm surprised you didn't use "...they that worship him must worship him in spirit AND in truth."   

Most of the churches I know either bias toward faith or works.

[onli-one-jehovi]

Yes, a very good thought. Excellent in fact. 

I think the biggest problem that leads to the situation described is: the Body overall practices the deeds of the Nicolatians, wherein the pulpit rules the pew. Conversely, the pew serves the pulpit above & beyond the Word & Holy Spirit, deceiving itself as being "righteous & holy".

The Body needs to obey Jesus and come out of that bondage; study individually to show themselves approved; and be taught/led by the Holy Spirit. This would allow true maturity & growth that increases knowledge/understanding to the nth degree. A proper Berean philosophy would "fix" so much in a saint's life, as well as strengthen involvement with the whole Body. Add to that a repentance from the pulpit and destruction of the "elite ministry" in order to share knowledge/experience with every member of the Body, and we go a long way toward healing the Church.

One thing for certain: Jesus will heal as much of His Church as He can. But He's going to do it with fire. Everything that is not gold, silver, precious stones will be consumed and blown away as chaff. Then we all will definitely focus on the true Word and not any errors or additions we tend to make.

Very good article. So much to ponder.

[Raven180]

Thanks, guys.

To Psalm_97:

That is a great dichotomy, one that many don't know how to properly balance. I suppose the reason I didn't refer to John 4:24 has to do with the inspiration of the content. The issue I was facing had to do with how much sin, death, wrath, and hellfire get preached, and how little righteousness, life, grace, and heaven get preached. Sometimes it seems people forget Jesus didn't stay in the tomb.

Regarding your faith and works comment, do you care to elaborate? I'd like to read your experiences.

To OOJ:

I know such sentiments are not always popular, but I find they tend to ring true. I guess we have Iraeneus to blame for that. Rome still rules in a lot of hearts. So does organizing a church according to secular models with traditional business world hierarchies. Such a division in the church--clergy and laity--is in itself its own dichotomy, one that lends itself toward the very bi-polarism I described. I'm not against elders. I very much acknowledge that local churches have pillars that are there to support and help the church at large. But I agree that the current model is out of balance and doesn't reflect the intention of the Lord for His people. Nor is it End Time sustainable.

Right now, the model is (and has been for a long time) that 20% of the people do 80% of the work. That 20% is the local clergy (licensed or not). Occasionally, they get help but otherwise, it has become the norm that the spiritual needs of an entire church are supposed to be (only?) met by a select qualified few. To me, this creates laziness on the part of the Body, because hey, life is easier when someone else does all the heavy lifting. But it also creates what you said: Nicolaitianism, where some have dominion over others, and the Lord is an afterthought. We tend to still treat other humans as the Mediator, when only Jesus can fit the position. The church in Corinth seemed to suffer this problem.

So, tell me, what do you think a practical solution is? You've hinted at it already, but do you care to go into greater depth? Do you know of any examples where change is occuring and can you share what benefits are being enjoyed because of such a change?

Hope to hear back soon.

Peace

[Lynx]

I think the biggest problem that leads to the situation described is: the Body overall practices the deeds of the Nicolatians, wherein the pulpit rules the pew. Conversely, the pew serves the pulpit above & beyond the Word & Holy Spirit, deceiving itself as being "righteous & holy".

I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with that one.  First, define "Body."  In my church certainly this is not the case.  I have seen some churches that do this, but (given the churches I have personally been to) I would not consider it a widespread problem.  Are you speaking of the majority of the churches you have visited? And what is your general geographic area?  Perhaps this problem exists in your area but not is not widespread in mine.

Whenever you say the Church in general does something, that's very hard to back up.  Each church is different.

[Melody]

I have to agree with Psalm.  And I appreciate the wording of OOJ's post in that it provided solutions rather than criticism.  I think the very title of this thread is applicable to the issue brought up.

While the letters to the Church held and hold an element of truth and application across the board, they were addressed to specific churches with specific issues first. 

We should learn from this.  It can be edifying to analyze where the church needs improvement, but we should be careful to make blanket statements. 

My church is one of many that does not have preacher worship.  I know many do, but not all.  It is not a problem everywhere.  My church has the primary emphasis on discipleship, which is ever growing.  My pastor also is a leader that trains leaders, not just in governmental offices per say but in general to win a lost world.  Our goal this year is to be teaching 300 Bible studies.  That requires far more than 20% to be involved.  And we are doing well, I believe! 

Also, we are not going to get away from the basic 20/80 no matter how much people study for themselves, it would however increase the Church as a whole. The more people grow, the more people will be won, forever keeping the scale similiarly. Because once a person is called out to start a work from the ground up, they begin discipling maybe one or a few.  Those then will ideally win and disciple more causing the leaders to be outnumbered by new converts.  As the first batch of leaders grows and the leader of that work imparts their vision, there is a strong family being built, moving in unity.  New converts, and many young Christians can only do so much.  Personality, maturity, abilities have to be accounted for, regardless of how much they apply themselves unto Godly things. There will never be a point in which everyone is on the same level and until Jesus comes, there will always be humanity/carnality throughout, magnified by position.

Yes, the church needs to shore up this subject, some churches more than others.  However, there are healthy churches, discipling people into leaders. We know that not all Israel is Israel.  So then it will be that tares will grow right up next to the wheat until the rapture. This is in part what purifies us! We have equal opportunity to follow after the power hungry legalistics or the anointed walking in humility and authority. It is not going to become clearer as a whole, if anything it will become crazier to where we individually must know God for ourselves. We see it becoming crazier daily. I don't think it is the Church getting crazier though, I see Christians buckling down like never before and being more passionate and honest! I know in my church particularly God is educating us in financial stewardship for work of God, and it's not coming from the pulpit, it's coming from personal relationships with Christ, unbenounced to others, yet at the same time!  THAT IS GOD. When the bridegroom called the 10 virgins, the first scene is chaotic, with half prepared and ready to go and the other half scrambling to get it together, until they parted ways, they were all mixed in together.

Jesus had 3 disciples he held the closest out of the 12 which were the closest out of many that followed Christ.  I find it interesting that Jesus 25% of the named disciples in a higher plane of revelation. Matt 17. I find it interesting that we have 11 apostles when right away there were 70 that Jesus sent out to do work in His name.  Luke 10.  Why not 70 Apostles?  Why does the family unit begin with 2 parents and many children?  Why do companies of any sort not be solely share holder ran equally across the board?  Why aren't armies more effective with everyone being a private going to do battle with the same equipment?  I believe that is the only way we'll be able to participate in the endtime, let alone sustain it.  Churches are being won by the congregation you guys.  That cannot be done with a socialistic mentality toward the church.

If we indeed follow Christ's example of leadership, there will always be less leaders and more followers that are following how to be what the leaders are who are following what Christ is.  1 Cor. 11. 

I really enjoyed the first two posts of this thread but feel the ball was dropped in demonstrating how it's done right, specifically with the issue brought up.

[Raven180]

Hi, Mel

Thanks for the input. I agree with you and Psalm that blanket statements are not advisable, since we all have very limited experience with the universal Body as it operates in the world. For my part, I wasn't trying to generalize that badly. There are definitely local assemblies (like your own) where such things are not an issue.

The question, I think, comes down to: To what end does the ministry exist?

Interestingly, the answer appears to come down to a comma.

Ephesians 4:11-16,

11. And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12. For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13. Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14. That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
15. But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
16. From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

If you notice the embolded commas in verse 12, those two little marks change everything. They have been supplied by the translators (since Koine Greek doesn't have such grammatical marks) as an attempt to clarify the passage. But what if they don't belong? It not, then suddenly the whole verse reads differently. Check it out:

12. For the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ...

Now, the five-fold ministry is not designed to do all the work of the ministry to edify the Body. Rather, now, the five-fold ministry is merely required to perfect the Body so the Body can minister to Itself and receive edification from It's own efforts. Such a paradigm is self-sustaining and helps to, if not completely eliminate the 20/80, at least helps it level out so that entire local assemblies aren't completely dependent upon one or two people to do everything.

I'll give you a case in point. This past week, we had a foreign missionary from Cyprus come to our church. He told us that he and his wife are the only Apostolic ministers in the entire nation and that he feels the burden to reach 1M+ people (which is the total population of the entire island).

I ask you, is this effective? Such percentages cannot get the job done. Now, I realize the man is called and has the right mind and burden for the work. But if no one else steps up to help, how successful will his mission really be?

I leave you with this idea (taken from Unseen Hands by Nona Freeman). She wrote that the members of the Apostolic church in Ethiopia came to the point that every single one of them was capable of winning one soul a week. Even the newest of the new converts came to believe this about themselves. And so they did. And in approximately 10 years, over 1,500,000 people were saved. Yes, it was God's sovereign plan in action, but it was also God's holy Bride doing the unthinkable: actually being the Body!

I think that's the proper view all saints need to take. The Gospel doesn't preach itself, and if there's only so many people in ministry doing the preaching (as opposed to the whole Body preaching, teaching and working together to save the lost) then we can only get what gets put into it. So, for me, it's not about an overly controlling, elistist ministry. It's just about, as you seemed to indicate, building a bigger base. I know it takes time and all need a chance to mature and grow, but some simply will not grow if they just sit and absorb someone else's labor in the Gospel. Their hands have to get on that plow, too.

Now, I don't know if that's where OOJ was coming from for his comments, but those are my sentiments. So I hope I've clarified.

(BTW, the post doesn't have to be about this. It's just where it ended up heading. This subject can easily be dropped, no hard feelings. )

[Lynx]

Both the last two posts are good. 

I would only add that they had the problem in the first church in Acts.  It ain't nothing new. 
6:2 Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables.

[onli-one-jehovi]

Well, I've had schedule change which has thrown me off, a text-eating computer which has almost gotten my goat, and I've started over 3 times so far.
Sorry for the delay!

I think a practical solution is for each individual saint to conciously & purposely quit going to "church" for at least a month. Don't listen to any TV, radio, internet, or taped sermons at all. Take that time to studiously read the Word w/o any pre-conceived conclusions whatsoever. Allow the Holy Ghost to restructure, re-examine, and remove as much as possible what is not gold, silver, or precious stone. Allow the wood, hay, and stubble of our erroneous understandings to burn off. This will begin a teachable mind/spirit capable of better discernment regarding "Thus saith the Lord."

Jesus changes things in the Wilderness. It is there that He teaches us to solely depend upon Him for everything. It is there that we begin to understand and walk in "thy will be done". It is there that the our minds are transformed by the renewing of the Word. Thus, when we walk among the saved and the lost, we are confident in not being so easily deceived. We learn the Great Shepherd's voice and can therefore be more likely to discern an imposter.

Please, do not misunderstand what I'm saying. I am not predicating the abolishment of churches. (Although what we currently have isn't working very well. There is a reason Jesus questions whether He will find faith when He returns. The great falling away or apostasy is our overall re-interpretation of the Word of God, and adding to/perverting its principles.) What I am predicating is the abolishment of absolute pastoral authority. The Bible says that Jesus is the head of His Body. Period. That means He alone is to be obeyed. He alone is to guide and teach us. He alone is the "ruling class" and not the current pastoral/ministerial system of the Nicolations. When a saint finally accepts that all members of the Body are equal; all members of the Body have a gift; all members of the Body are to exhort and encourage one another; then the bondage of religion is truly broken.

Scripturally, meetings are supervised by the elders. The younger are taught by the older, wiser saints. Take this forum for example: we gather together and share what the LORD has been speaking to us as individuals. We choose whether or not to accept or reject any advice given. Moderators oversee w/o attempting control. Each is free to speak their minds within the bounds of the guidelines. Likewise the Body of Christ. The Word is our guideline and the Holy Spirit the moderator. We are to use the Spirit to moderate everything that comes from both the pulpit and the saints. If it doesn't line up - you ignore it. Most irregularities are simply error through lack of understanding anyway. The wolves are there too, but a lot easier to spot.

Change is occuring all over the Body. Not so much in a large congregational or denominational capacity, but among the saints themselves. It happens here and there. It's that saint who always seemed so strong in the doctrine who suddenly questions everything and dares compare it to the Bible. It's the sister who insists her children feed widows, orphans, and the poor before helping to pay for Youthnight at Six Flags. It's the brother who thinks introducing someone to Jesus is more important than introducing them to our church. I could go on. But you can see it in every denomination. There are some who fearfully but trustingly, left the Camp to go into the Wildernss with Jesus.

What are the benefits? Freedom. Freedom to give to whomever the Spirit wills. Freedom to go where the Spirit leads. Freedom to camp when the Spirit says camp. Freedom to see Christ in all the denominations and not just mine. Freedom to work out my own salvation. Freedom to stop comparing myself with anyone else. Freedom from the guilt of "not measuring up". Freedom to know the "pastor" is not automatically right and I'm wrong. But mostly - freedom to know Jesus in a deeper, more intimate vein. 

There are some organic churches who are practicing eldership. Lots of smaller Spirit-filled ones too. They are scattered all over the country, so you just have to look for one near you. We do much of our "assembling" outside the traditional course. Much contact online and in more relaxed venues. When we do go to church, it is usually enjoyable. The group praise and friendships are great. You just have to discern the preaching though. Jesus pounded that in very well. lol!

I personally do not think that we will see Biblical church until a big enough catastrophe occurs to rip us out of our current system. We're so used to meeting in a big sanctuary that has lots of musical instruments and a crowd to praise. The concept of meeting on the internet, or over coffee, or breakroom at work, or even in a parking lot is strange to us. To think "I" may have something important to say w/o a preacher's approval is really way out there. But that's our conditioning. In the meantime, we continue to be led of the Spirit as we take full advantage of those times He allows fellow believers to cross our path.

I hope all this at least gives something to ponder. We'll all be perfect when Jesus comes. Until then, we just have to dig deeper in the Word and obey His Spirit.

Raven, I wish I had your command of words. Maybe you can clear it up for me.   

   

[onli-one-jehovi]

Hi, Mel

Thanks for the input. I agree with you and Psalm that blanket statements are not advisable, since we all have very limited experience with the universal Body as it operates in the world. For my part, I wasn't trying to generalize that badly. There are definitely local assemblies (like your own) where such things are not an issue.

The question, I think, comes down to: To what end does the ministry exist?

Interestingly, the answer appears to come down to a comma.

Ephesians 4:11-16,

11. And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12. For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13. Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14. That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
15. But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
16. From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

If you notice the embolded commas in verse 12, those two little marks change everything. They have been supplied by the translators (since Koine Greek doesn't have such grammatical marks) as an attempt to clarify the passage. But what if they don't belong? It not, then suddenly the whole verse reads differently. Check it out:

12. For the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ...

Now, the five-fold ministry is not designed to do all the work of the ministry to edify the Body. Rather, now, the five-fold ministry is merely required to perfect the Body so the Body can minister to Itself and receive edification from It's own efforts. Such a paradigm is self-sustaining and helps to, if not completely eliminate the 20/80, at least helps it level out so that entire local assemblies aren't completely dependent upon one or two people to do everything.

I'll give you a case in point. This past week, we had a foreign missionary from Cyprus come to our church. He told us that he and his wife are the only Apostolic ministers in the entire nation and that he feels the burden to reach 1M+ people (which is the total population of the entire island).

I ask you, is this effective? Such percentages cannot get the job done. Now, I realize the man is called and has the right mind and burden for the work. But if no one else steps up to help, how successful will his mission really be?

I leave you with this idea (taken from Unseen Hands by Nona Freeman). She wrote that the members of the Apostolic church in Ethiopia came to the point that every single one of them was capable of winning one soul a week. Even the newest of the new converts came to believe this about themselves. And so they did. And in approximately 10 years, over 1,500,000 people were saved. Yes, it was God's sovereign plan in action, but it was also God's holy Bride doing the unthinkable: actually being the Body!

I think that's the proper view all saints need to take. The Gospel doesn't preach itself, and if there's only so many people in ministry doing the preaching (as opposed to the whole Body preaching, teaching and working together to save the lost) then we can only get what gets put into it. So, for me, it's not about an overly controlling, elistist ministry. It's just about, as you seemed to indicate, building a bigger base. I know it takes time and all need a chance to mature and grow, but some simply will not grow if they just sit and absorb someone else's labor in the Gospel. Their hands have to get on that plow, too.

Now, I don't know if that's where OOJ was coming from for his comments, but those are my sentiments. So I hope I've clarified.

(BTW, the post doesn't have to be about this. It's just where it ended up heading. This subject can easily be dropped, no hard feelings. )

Like I said.... you have a better way with words than I. You hit the nail on the head.

[Lynx]

onli-one-jehovi I still must disagree with you.  I do not claim the problems you cite are nonexistent (I don't go to your church, so I can't say whether they are or not) but I do not see the specified problems in my church or in most of the churches around here.  When you mention the problem being a part of the whole church system you completely threw me - what system?  UPCI?  PAW?  ALJC?  The Roman Catholic Church? 

By the same token, while studying the Bible is essential for any christian, I do not think cutting oneself off from the church to devote yourself to study is advisable.  If in your church the pastor has made his church a dictatorship it is regrettable, and taking a break from church to refocus your priorities, perceptions and beliefs might be a good thing, even essential.  But as I said before, most churches I have attended do not have this problem.  And if one deliberately cuts oneself off from his church body for a time, he leaves himself open to all manner of spiritual attacks that would have no chance if he had remained in the church body. 

A lone animal is far easier to take down than a herd.  Unless you are certain the herd is running off a cliff, you should stay with it.  And if your church is indeed running off a cliff, by all means cut out.  But I repeat, most churches I have been in do not have the problem against which you are taking a stand.

[Roscoe]

onli-one-jehovi I still must disagree with you.  I do not claim the problems you cite are nonexistent (I don't go to your church, so I can't say whether they are or not) but I do not see the specified problems in my church or in most of the churches around here.  When you mention the problem being a part of the whole church system you completely threw me - what system?  UPCI?  PAW?  ALJC?  The Roman Catholic Church? 

By the same token, while studying the Bible is essential for any christian, I do not think cutting oneself off from the church to devote yourself to study is advisable.  If in your church the pastor has made his church a dictatorship it is regrettable, and taking a break from church to refocus your priorities, perceptions and beliefs might be a good thing, even essential.  But as I said before, most churches I have attended do not have this problem.  And if one deliberately cuts oneself off from his church body for a time, he leaves himself open to all manner of spiritual attacks that would have no chance if he had remained in the church body. 

A lone animal is far easier to take down than a herd.  Unless you are certain the herd is running off a cliff, you should stay with it.  And if your church is indeed running off a cliff, by all means cut out.  But I repeat, most churches I have been in do not have the problem against which you are taking a stand.

I agree completely, Isaac. Was thinking exactly what you've put, just didn't know quite how to put it without coming off as abrasive and offensive.
And I also feel that Hebrews 10:24 and 25 have something to say about cutting yourself off from the body.

24  "And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:

25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching."

In my way of seeing it- my opinion only, no intention of contesting anyone- it would be somewhat akin to becoming ones own priest to pull away from your church and Man of God. Seems to me that if your church is going haywire in the manner these last posts have addressed, a person would be well advised to seek out a solid church body and attend there.
After all, it is plain throughout the Bible what fate befalls those that become their own priest- Saul for example. If God says plainly that He will lead us in paths of righteousness, He will do so- but I don't feel He will go around the ministry, who He has ordained and established.
Now, I think a person should study, and seek the face of God, but the body of Christ in the church and the being with likeminded believers is invaluable. Personally there is not a time in my life that I would want to be seperated from my family in God, because they are there to uplift and strengthen me- and I them.
  I may have taken us off on a tangent, and completely misunderstood the way the post was flowing- if so, I am sorry. It is just that I have lost friends who studied and cut themselves off. Now, they are backslidden and don't even pretend to know God.

[sunlight]

[Melody]

I want to reply so badly but am in the processs of moving so I just my phone @the moment.

Ooj, I feel you have a wounded view & as much as I'd love to try & convince you that the Church is doing better than ever, it is something you may just have to experience for yourself. We have a few who come to cell groups but haven't come to service yet, &some that began that way. 

We all need a pastor. I think there is an element of submission with grace towards a leader's humanity that we desperately need to learn.

[Raven180]

I think the very title of this thread is applicable to the issue brought up.

It is certainly listing that way, isn't it?

We have, in this very post, a dichotomy of how a church should operate. Advocates from both camps are speaking. It will be interesting to see where this goes.

[Raven180]

Raven, I wish I had your command of words. Maybe you can clear it up for me.

I read and received your comments clearly. I think you articulated your position very well. Your post is quite lucid.

Thank you, though.

[Raven180]

I think a practical solution is for each individual saint to conciously & purposely quit going to "church" for at least a month. Don't listen to any TV, radio, internet, or taped sermons at all. Take that time to studiously read the Word w/o any pre-conceived conclusions whatsoever. Allow the Holy Ghost to restructure, re-examine, and remove as much as possible what is not gold, silver, or precious stone. Allow the wood, hay, and stubble of our erroneous understandings to burn off. This will begin a teachable mind/spirit capable of better discernment regarding "Thus saith the Lord."

Three questions, OOJ.

1.) Have you personally done this?

2.) Should a new convert (as an individual saint) partake in such an action?

3.) What, if any, negative or harmful results might come about if say, the average saint does what you suggest here? Basically, can this solution backfire (even if in only unintended or unforeseen ways)?

[onli-one-jehovi]

Good morning everyone!  I'm here and reading your responses. Just want you to know I will answer as quickly as I can,  but I'm slow and have to think about what/how to say things. No need to just rattle something off.   

Let me state again that I am not a novice Disciple. I'm 54 years old and have followed Jesus for 48 years. Received the Holy Ghost & baptized in Jesus' name for 37 years. If you believe nothing else, believe and consider that I just might know whereof I speak.

When I use the term "church", I am speaking about the entire Body of Christ made up of all denominations or lack thereof. Believers are not confined to the Apostolics. The Body is a whole lot bigger than that. So, to even begin to comprehend what I'm talking about requires chucking that belief point. It's a stumbling block that blinds one to the larger issues. If someone can't fathom anyone else in "their" club, then how will they see the truth about the entire system? No, you have to be willing to step out of the camp for the journey into the wilderness.

I use the term "wilderness" because it demonstrates so accurately what Christ does. Repeatedly He left the city/town/village and went out into the desert wilderness. He taught in the wilderness area. Scripture examples show GOD leads His people out of bondage into the wilderness. Think the Exodus. Look again at Revelation where safety lies in the wilderness. Think about Jesus being led immediately into the wilderness after baptism. Wasn't any priest there with Him. Wasn't any friends there with Him. Just He and GOD - alone - for 40 days. {Btw - that's longer than the 30 days I suggested.}

But look at the difference in Him when the Holy Spirit led Him back out!

That's an inkling of what I'm trying to convey.

If we want to understand what is truth and what is lies, then we have to take the red pill, Neo. Doing so will take things you thought were gold, silver, and precious stone standing firm upon solid rock; and reveal them to be wood, hay, and stubble propped up on sinking sand. Going into the wilderness with Jesus will change you forever, but it will become for the better.

Please, don't anyone blindly accept or reject. Take it to the LORD in prayer and search the scriptures. Not superficially, but intently to see if this is so.

[Melody]

Ooj  I think you would absolutely LOVE Galen Thompson's writings on this subject. 

[Raven180]

When I use the term "church", I am speaking about the entire Body of Christ made up of all denominations or lack thereof. Believers are not confined to the Apostolics. The Body is a whole lot bigger than that. So, to even begin to comprehend what I'm talking about requires chucking that belief point. It's a stumbling block that blinds one to the larger issues. If someone can't fathom anyone else in "their" club, then how will they see the truth about the entire system? No, you have to be willing to step out of the camp for the journey into the wilderness.

This is really going to be the crux of it all. Some can and will do what you are asking; other can't or won't (or both).

In my experience, however, I've had true wilderness experiences with the Lord, where it was just me and Him, without having to leave behind my church, my fellowship, etc. I've found the wilderness to be a deeply personal, intensely private spiritual experience not contingent upon my surroundings or even the people in my life.

I had a full two years (at least) the first go around, and then again over a year the next go round where God took me into the wilderness. At the end of the first time, God gave me a vision of myself all alone standing in a hole. I asked Him, "God, where have I been these last two years"? He said "Digging ditches". And so I was, for in the vision, I was standing in a massive ditch I myself had dug out. God then told me to end with a fast (which I did) after which, God built in my mind/spirit a hedge, founded in the ditch I had built. This hedge finished God's healing process in my mind from before I was born again. Spiritual attacks from the enemy of which I used to have no defense suddenly couldn't get to me. I was protected. This was my first wilderness experience.

My second, one that I am still currently in, has had to do with my health. Long story short, God told me in prayer "To the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak" From that, I knew God was going to allow me a time of personal weakness for the express purpose of being changed, so I could continue to become all things to all men that I may by all means win some.

Two weeks later I had a massive asthma attack that eventually cost me my job. From that point forward, I've had so many varied health concerns and issues (including all sorts of tests and treatments, including a surgery from which I am still not recovered and the possibility of needing a much more severe surgery that I am putting off) and when I pray, or have elders anoint me in the name of the Lord, the answer is always the same: God re-energizes my mind and attitude toward suffering, but does not heal my body. And I'm okay. I have changed and grown much. I have, as you say, re-evaluated many things, including my own mortality, and have come to different views and conclusions that I would have never come to without the experience.

But through it all, I've never had to leave behind or walk away from anything but my self. We will, of course, see where things take me and my family, and sometimes it's a challenge to stay reconciled when there are fundamental disagreements, but God has not yet instructed me to do anything else but be a servant, wash the saints feet, and love.

[onli-one-jehovi]

Ok...here we go.

Mellow: Wounded? Probably no more or less than any other saint who walks this narrow path. Life is full of woundings. They come from all quarters. No, I'm not angry and lashing out at the church or anyone associated. On the contrary, I love His people. All of them. Pulpit and pew alike. It simply breaks my heart to see so many precious saints deceived by the doctrine of Nicolations. A doctrine I must stress - Jesus hates!

Q: Has anyone here ever really researched this doctrine to find out exactly why Jesus hates it so? I hazard to say such an endeavor will be a real eye-opener, and hopefully, a game-changer.

Respectfully, no I do not need a pastor. At least not in the sense the current system implies. None of us require an ongoing, fabricated "pastoral covering" to maintain biblical relationship with Christ Jesus. What is needed is access to mature elders with whom advice and wisdom can be gleaned. Doesn't have to be a preacher at all. It might surprise folks to know I glean from some saints who post on this forum. How? By being respective of their experiencial input and submissive to their place within the Body. What the LORD reveals to the pew is just as - if not more - important as what He reveals to the pulpit. Remember, in the Body, Jesus is the head. Besides, He already did the priest covering thing back in the OT. Calvary changed all that. Now we're married.

Scripture says marriage is a type of Christ and the Church. Family life is the embodiment of our interactions. Does one brother have authority over another brother's wife? Does she look to another for protection and provision? Of course not. No husband in his right mind would stand for such a thing. Neither does Jesus.   

Rest assured I do appreciate the spirit of your concerns.

[onli-one-jehovi]

Forgive me, but I can't find the poster who mentioned backslidden. I will just answer blanketly.

Thank you for your concern. That's not the first time fearful implications have come my way. I assure you, I am not backslidden. Nor have I abandoned the LORD. Matter of fact, I'm closer to Him than ever before. No problem at all with the gifts of pastor, prophet, apostle, teacher, & evangelist. These were given to the Body for all our benefit. Raven covered that earlier. I am simply challenging the biblical validity of the current church system overrun with the hated Nicolation Doctrine.

Oh, the mention by someone about being culled from the herd? Perhaps the herd is not actually ranging free under the watchful eye of the Shepherd. Perhaps it is actually penned in the massive corrals of the slaughter house and doesn't know it. Perhaps the "culled" ones are truly free. Perhaps.

I have a rhetorical question to ask:

Are you a disciple/servant of Jesus the Christ?
                   
Or

Are you a disciple/servant of your church?

No, they are not the same.

[onli-one-jehovi]

Raven: Have you done this?

Yes I have. Many times over the last seventeen years. Up until then, I spent most of my life pretty much immersed in church. Every time the doors opened, every project, every prayer meeting, every revival, every area possible found me in the thick of it. Then the LORD gave me a great job with what I thought was a single flaw - shift work. Sometimes I could attend and participate, but most times not. I came to the conclusion real quick that it was my personal responsibility to maintain a relationship with GOD. Thus I began to read the Bible for myself w/o the influence of others conclusions. Don't misunderstand - I'd always been a reader and student. But it was mainly along the lines of cementing interpretations that came from and was approved by my church. It's amazing what the Bible really says when you read it.

For me it was not a quick process. I stubbornly clung to my beliefs even as the Holy Ghost gently shred them to pieces. It took years for the shackles and strongholds I'd established to be brought down. Oh so slowly - a chink at a time - Jesus set to work. Hasn't been easy. Hasn't been pretty. But it has been worth it. And He is still at it.

Suffice to say, the more the Holy Spirit reveals; the harder it is to embrace the error I see. It's so widespread throughout the Body. Naturally within varying degrees, but there all the same. So I limit involvement, choosing instead alternate avenues of fellowship and instruction until the LORD sees fit to lead to the next assignment.

Btw: there has been no falling out with our congregation. The purpose for which we came has ended. It is in the interim that we wait, regardless of the time involved.

Scenario: If a catastrophe occurred in which church-as-we-know-it was impossible to engage in for an unknown amount of Time; could you survive and thrive alone with Jesus?

Scenario: If suddenly bed/house ridden and attending church-as-we-know-it was impossible to engage in for an unknown amount of Time; could you survive/thrive alone with Jesus?

If the answer is anything other than the likes of: Yes.. I don't know but I'd try my best.., then there's a problem.

[onli-one-jehovi]

Raven: Should a new convert partake?

Let's look at a scriptural example: the Ethiopean Eunuch.

Philip is led by the Holy Spirit to a man pondering the meaning of scripture. Philip explains that passage is about the Messiah who was recently crucified in Jerusalem. He shares the gospel and give him a choice to obey. They come upon water and the man is baptized. Phillip immediately disappeared, leaving the eunuch with nothing but a Bible and an understanding of Jesus. As far as we know, he returned to Ethiopia and lived for GOD w/o the "covering" of a church or pastor.

We are commanded to make disciples, not bring them to church. New converts come to Jesus by the testimony of someone within the Body, or by direct revelation via the Holy Ghost. If it's you, then the Holy Ghost should have already placed upon your heart a desire to pray for and oversee their infant beginnings with Christ. Like a big brother or sister, we watch over those younger until they come to a maturity in Christ. {Eph 4:13} Perhaps it includes mega involvment with a congregation, or perhaps not. What we do is encourage them to read and obey the Word, pray and communicate with the LORD Jesus, and allow the Holy Spirit to lead and teach them. The LORD will show them what to do and where to go. I think we've both been around long enough to realize a lot of saints were doing fine until they joined a church and got religious.

Remember the scripture about the birds lodging in the tree grown by the mustard seed? And the one with the birds eating the seed before it takes root?
The birds represent the demons and their demonic doctrines within the church. The birds lodge there and have easy access to the seed of the Word. Also, as they are comfortable in their abode, they influence what is acceptable to them. That's what births the obvious and hidden perversions of scripture meaning.

So to answer your question: Pray and leave it up to the Holy Ghost to lead you both.