tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post205755574615654369..comments2023-11-10T03:31:34.079-08:00Comments on In Defense of Landmarkism: What About AWANA?Jonathan Meltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09694832140058324532noreply@blogger.comBlogger179125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-65749888231718334572013-10-24T08:22:40.327-07:002013-10-24T08:22:40.327-07:00So, I just wanted to comment on your criticism of ...So, I just wanted to comment on your criticism of the doctrine. <br />Bible: No where in there statement do they say that our translations aren't the word of God. It does not say what you claim it says. Just because it leaves out what you state, it doesn't mean they don't agree. I have a feeling what you state is missing because of the different versions of the Bible in use and the KJV-only standpoint. They do not want to get into this debate, so they just leave it off.<br />The Church: There is a universal church. It is the Bride of Christ. Is just your local church going to go to heaven? Or just ABA churches (which I have heard preach)? I don't think so. I take the Bible at its word, and the only thing required to be a Christian is salvation. And all who have salvation are part of the Bride of Christ, the Universal Church. Again, you are spinning the AWANA doctrine and reading something into it that wasn't the purpose.<br />Ordinances: Just like the Bible, what you are saying isn't stated one way or the other. I believe that what you are saying is a grey area in the Bible where there are Godly men on either side of the debate, saved, but disagreeing on how communion and baptism should be done.<br />Have you ever heard of Faith Bible Institute and John Yates? He is the pastor of Rowland Road Baptist Church in Monroe, LA, an ABA church. I highly recommend FBI, a three year course through the Bible taught by Pastor Yates<br />We recently left an ABA church, and through our looking for a new church, we were astonished to read so much on how so many in the ABA think they are the only ones going to heaven. Luckily that wasn't true in the church we were members of (and still support). AJU5's Momhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05039236630636069326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-18352411190467187642011-02-18T09:17:09.185-08:002011-02-18T09:17:09.185-08:00Amazing. You should all take a hard look at how mu...Amazing. You should all take a hard look at how much time you have wasted spinning your tires here in the mud. I wish you all would have spent one tenth this much effort ministering directly to a child in a loving way. This is unbelievable.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08263865982448589858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-38124937084297645272010-05-27T23:00:19.749-07:002010-05-27T23:00:19.749-07:00Brother Wilkes,
You said,
"The problem toda...Brother Wilkes,<br /><br />You said,<br /><br />"The problem today is not the lack of a good youth program. The problem is that too many mom's and dad's are not faithfully raising their children in truth-teaching churches and then living a Christ-like example before these kids at home. There is no replacement for this. All of these programs are efforts to give these kids what they should be getting at home. Sadly, it just won't happen."<br /><br />Amen!<br /><br />Mark Osgatharp<br />Wynne, ArkansasMark Osgatharphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05585562082826860149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-15462970003564310942010-05-27T10:59:45.957-07:002010-05-27T10:59:45.957-07:00After having just read this post with all of her a...After having just read this post with all of her affixed comments, I must confess to being in a state of utter mental exhaustion.<br /><br />I must first state that I am not a fan of AWANA. Not because it is a program, but rather because it does carry with it a doctrinal statement with which I take issue. I do not believe in a "universal church" and I do not want to (personally or as a church) be cooperatively connected to an entity that does. Therefore, we will not be hanging an AWANA banner outside of Whispering Pines MBC.<br /><br />The problem today is not the lack of a good youth program. The problem is that too many mom's and dad's are not faithfully raising their children in truth-teaching churches and then living a Christ-like example before these kids at home. There is no replacement for this. All of these programs are efforts to give these kids what they should be getting at home. Sadly, it just won't happen.Mike Wilkeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06762423053340243936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-26214338231858943452010-05-15T18:51:16.796-07:002010-05-15T18:51:16.796-07:00I understand the trinity to an extent, and it does...I understand the trinity to an extent, and it doesn't pose a problem or paradox to me. Three physical presences (when desired), three wills (nevertheless not my will but thine...), one in reality/essence/makeup/attributes/qualities. That isn't a paradox to me. But anyway, your point is duly noted, in that sometimes we there are things we must accept by faith simply because we do not yet have that understanding. That is not to say we won't have it in the future, but that we do not currently have it. Understood and noted as correct.<br /><br />As to the marijuana issue, perhaps it was a poor choice of example. The point I'm making is that when you KNOW that one thing is right, and you believe a principle is right (yet you then find a contradiction), you will most likely change the principle to include the exception. This is why I have changed my mind on many issues.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Brother Osgatharp,<br /><br />Thank you so much for your clarity. I agree 100% with 100% of your last post.JamesCharleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00764716606179072128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-12135546158462064542010-05-15T18:19:25.662-07:002010-05-15T18:19:25.662-07:00Brother Osgatharp,
It's curious how the human...Brother Osgatharp,<br /><br />It's curious how the human mind works. A person gets saved at an altar and someone thinks we must have more altars. But a person gets saved in a bathtub and no thinks that having more bathtubs means more people will get saved. Why not? (Too bad it wasn't a swimming pool. With a catchy name and some slick promotion we might start a business...er, I mean, program...out of that.)<br /><br />Brother JamesCharles,<br /><br />You write, "Principle 1 - Using marijuana is wrong.<br /><br />"Smoking marijuana for fun is wrong. Using marijuana to be popular is wrong. Using marijuana, however, because it is the ONLY way of taking care of your body (prescribed by a doctor for such) is not wrong.<br /><br />"We conclude, then, that Principle 1 is inaccurate."<br /><br />I believe your illustration illustrates I am not actually getting my point across. You give the scenario and conclude "that Principle 1 is inaccurate." But we only conclude that <i>if</i> we already believe medicinal marijuana use is not wrong. Considered in the abstract, it does not prove Principle 1 is wrong, only that it contradicts Principle 1. Someone might interpret it in the reverse, holding on to Principle 1 as proof that medical marijuana use is wrong. The said inconsistency alone provides no proof unless it first be proven.<br /><br />Another problem in the argument from consistency/inconsistency is the thing we call a "paradox" in religion. Most Christians have some paradoxes in their theology. It is any two things we believe on the strength that the Bible says so, even though we can't explain how they are consistent or not contradictory. Without going too far off the theological reservation, I believe the Trinity constitutes one of these -- God is three, yet God is one. If we spend too much time explaining it instead of accepting it, we may be worse off than when we started. (Not trying to start an "off-topic" debate on the Trinity, just thought that might illustrate my point.)R. L. Vaughnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10992710377193518029noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-9725334451096675302010-05-14T20:03:29.251-07:002010-05-14T20:03:29.251-07:00Brother Charles,
You said,
"Dictionary.Com ...Brother Charles,<br /><br />You said,<br /><br />"Dictionary.Com defines programs as many things, but the first two being...<br />1.<br />a plan of action to accomplish a specified end: a school lunch program.<br />2.<br />a plan or schedule of activities, procedures, etc., to be followed."<br /><br />I didn't say I am against having a program. I said I am against programism - against those who make a religion out of their program - out of their "plan of action."<br /><br />If a man came along claiming to have contrived an order of services which held some power to make a worship service more spiritual and claiming it to be more conducive to the salvation of souls and trying to foist it on the Lord's churches, that would be programism and I would oppose it as much as I oppose AWANA an its ABA knock off Discovery.<br /><br />I'm not against pulpits. But if someone came along arguing that his pulpit, or lack thereof, made some difference in his ability to minister the word of God, that would be pulpitism and it would be an abominable idolatry.<br /><br />I'm not against camping. In fact, I like to go camping myself. But when men claim that the preaching of God's word is more effective at a so called "church camp" that is campism and it is a gross abuse of God's word.<br /><br />After been having led down the primrose path (you know, "the aisle" - can anyone imagine Jesus Christ the Son of God exhorting someone to "walk the aisle") at "church camp" in New Caney, Texas, I later began to miserably doubt my relationship to God and sitting in a bathtub in Webster, Texas I settled the matter of my salvation with God. Now far be it from me to oppose bathtubs. But should I therefore go out and began to preach the effectiveness of the bathtub in the salvation of souls I would be guilty of BATHTUBISM and should be laughed with scorn out of the ministry.<br /><br />In the Appalachian region of this country there are hundreds of Missionary Baptist churches that have made a fetish out of the so called mourners bench. There used to be one in South Carthage, Tennessee which was actually called "Mourners Bench Baptist Church." Now if a man is smitten with conviction and happens to fall down on a bench and pray, who could be offended, any more than he could be offended by a 12 year old boy crying out to God from a bathtub?<br /><br />But when men start promoting mourner's benches, "the altar", "old time camp meetings", VBS, seminary, children's church, children's camp, "the old country church", AWANA, its ABA knockoff Discovery, Easter, Christmas, America, politics, missions, themselves, their band, their music group, their literature, their ethnic group, their gender, their particular association of churches or any thing other than Jesus Christ and His holy words, they have made an ISM out of their traditions and they have exalted themselves and their abettors to the position of the Holy Spirit of God.<br /><br />As Jesus said,<br /><br />"But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."<br /><br />Is there someway I can make that more clear for you?<br /><br />Mark Osgatharp<br />Wynne, ArkansasMark Osgatharphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05585562082826860149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-18808876575413584022010-05-14T19:58:22.400-07:002010-05-14T19:58:22.400-07:00I agree. Yet, if a principle is carried through t...I agree. Yet, if a principle is carried through to every logical conclusion and does not fit in every instance, the principle cannot be true. It can, however, be true if modified.<br /><br />EXAMPLE:<br /><br />Principle 1 - Using marijuana is wrong.<br /><br />Smoking marijuana for fun is wrong. Using marijuana to be popular is wrong. Using marijuana, however, because it is the ONLY way of taking care of your body (prescribed by a doctor for such) is not wrong.<br /><br />We conclude, then, that Principle 1 is inaccurate. The inconsistency was actually simply showing the principle to be false. Now, if the principle is modified to say...<br /><br />Use of Marijuana for any reason other than last-resort medical prescription for caring for your body is wrong<br /><br />then we find the principle is true.<br /><br /><br /><br />Now, not all inconsistencies fit the principle. So when one shows an inconsistency it's best to clarify or further define your principle so as to avoid any misunderstandings (as you have already done well by showing you are not anti-AWANA based solely on non landmark missionary Baptist material.) This is why I am not using this argument any longer. You've already shown how you do not believe this is the sole reason for your view.JamesCharleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00764716606179072128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-90861853481009772832010-05-14T17:18:43.852-07:002010-05-14T17:18:43.852-07:00Brother JamesCharles, it appears you made a point ...Brother JamesCharles, it appears you made a point to support arguing from inconsistencies as if I object to it altogether. That is not what I said. It is fine to point out inconsistencies as long as we understand the proper use of it. It <i>should</i> give pause. It <i>should</i> make one think. But often people DON'T THINK DEEPLY ENOUGH. Someone may throw down the gauntlet of "you are inconsistent in 'B'" and walk away thinking he has proved "you are wrong about 'A'". It just doesn't work that way.R. L. Vaughnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10992710377193518029noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-91513581208320056692010-05-13T21:27:23.715-07:002010-05-13T21:27:23.715-07:00R.L. Vaughn
When Bible verses don't clearly p...R.L. Vaughn<br /><br />When Bible verses don't clearly prove a point in a theological debate (such as the idea that certain examples as opposed to other examples of a church "worship" setting ought to be followed over those other Bible examples), one must instead prove his point on proponderance of evidence or some other logic. In this specific form of debate, inconsistancies often win major points with the outside judge. Watch any high school or college debate team to see the truth of this. Also, I did not say it shows truth or untruth, but rather wins that specific argument with that particular person. Often, people showing me inconsistancies have changed points of view for me.<br /><br />As to showing inconsistancies, were you not doing the same thing in saying we follow some Bible example of government, but not Bible examples in other things???<br /><br /><br /><br />Mark Osgatharp,<br />Thank you for making it more clear by admitting it. First, note I did not say I was trying to win an argument, but rather that pointing out inconsistancies can help one win an argument with a person. I did not reveal my motives. I read these blogs, and post, to learn. So your speculation proves you are seeing only what you want.<br /><br />Also, nice to see how you use Scriptures such as letting God be true and use them to back up ideas about Discovery being wrong. They obviously have no connection. Find any one verse that says programs are wrong (programs, not other things). Find any one verse that condemns AWANA or youth programs. You said, "if the Bible teaches that AWANA and its ABA knockoff Discovery are wrong we ought to toss them." So then show where the Bible teaches this. You have epically failed to do so.<br /><br />Finally, thank you for admitting you are hostile toward anyone who advocates programs in any form. This shows your heart. It also shows you are against any form of organization.<br /><br />Dictionary.Com defines programs as many things, but the first two being...<br />1.<br />a plan of action to accomplish a specified end: a school lunch program.<br />2.<br />a plan or schedule of activities, procedures, etc., to be followed.JamesCharleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00764716606179072128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-68669636547308825322010-05-12T15:38:42.370-07:002010-05-12T15:38:42.370-07:00Ouch!!Ouch!!Brother Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02749242340231974747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-8081030956278643102010-05-11T17:58:27.496-07:002010-05-11T17:58:27.496-07:00Brother Charles,
You said,
"I don't rea...Brother Charles,<br /><br />You said,<br /><br />"I don't really understand Mark Osgatharp's point there either, Brother Adrian Neal. Pointing out an inconsistency in the person's actions will show they don't really believe what they are saying. This does win the argument with that person, since they don't believe the principle which they are proposing to teach."<br /><br />The issue is not whether or not I believe what I am saying. The issue is what does the Bible teach. If the Bible teaches it is wrong to use Protestant or interdenominational hymnbooks, then we ought to toss them and if the Bible teaches that AWANA and its ABA knockoff Discovery are wrong we ought to toss them. As it is written,<br /><br />"Let God be true but every man a liar."<br /><br />You said,<br /><br />"Comments like that come across as hostile as opposed to helpful or encouraging."<br /><br />Since you just admitted that your objective is to win against me, you are a bit hypocritical to chastise me for being hostile.<br /><br />Your hypocrisy notwithstanding, I free confess, without shame, that I am hostile toward all who advocate for programism in any form. Is there any way I can make that more clear for you?<br /><br />Mark Osgatharp<br />Wynne, ArkansasMark Osgatharphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05585562082826860149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-76445764383291045752010-05-11T17:52:07.377-07:002010-05-11T17:52:07.377-07:00Brother Neal, the part of Bro. Osgatharp's pos...Brother Neal, the part of Bro. Osgatharp's post I specifically meant as "a very good point" was that of consistency/inconsistency. I wouldn't agree with those who use "the you use hymn books' argument aren't really concerned about the truth" as a blanket statement. I have encountered some people who bring up those kinds of things who I do believe aren't really concerned about the truth but bring up any kind of decoy to keep their practices intact. I know others who I believe are genuinely concerned by what they think is an inconsistency here. As I pointed out, I believe if one argues against programs solely on the basis of landmark ecclesiology he needs to meditate on some of the things that might seem ecumenical, like hymns written by people we wouldn't let stand in our pulpits. But Bro. Osgatharp has brought another fine point when he wrote about the Newton hymn vs. fellowshipping Anglicans -- we shouldn't let an area where we have some uncertainties scare us off of another area that we know is right.<br /><br />Bro. JamesCharles, I've never seen many people "win" an argument based on pointing out inconsistencies. He may think he has. Often one observing someone's practice will see an inconsistency, but the person practicing it usually doesn't think he is inconsistent so isn't moved by the argument. Regardless, when you find two things that are inconsistent it is possible that one is right and the other is wrong (but which?) or that both are wrong. Also two things can be consistent with one another and yet BOTH can be wrong. So inconsistency vs. consistency is not any arbiter of truth. Something to make us think? It should be. Determinative of what's right? Never.R. L. Vaughnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10992710377193518029noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-79596334420617833522010-05-10T21:40:15.726-07:002010-05-10T21:40:15.726-07:00I don't really understand Mark Osgatharp's...I don't really understand Mark Osgatharp's point there either, Brother Adrian Neal. Pointing out an inconsistency in the person's actions will show they don't really believe what they are saying. This does win the argument with that person, since they don't believe the principle which they are proposing to teach. Also, the idea that we aren't looking for truth is not judgmental (per se), but rather is an opinion of our thoughts. As an opinion, and one of another's motives/thoughts, it is very easy to reject and dismiss. Comments like that come across as hostile as opposed to helpful or encouraging. Mark, if you truly want to help others understand the truth as you see it, using comments like that are not the best way to do it.JamesCharleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00764716606179072128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-24287359712265476532010-05-10T04:43:37.026-07:002010-05-10T04:43:37.026-07:00Just disregard the previous question if you want, ...Just disregard the previous question if you want, Bro. Robert. The judgemental stuff will keep coming & I will do my best to ignore it.Adrian Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02110429155192086938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-16647478606142707472010-05-09T19:41:05.616-07:002010-05-09T19:41:05.616-07:00Bro. Vaughn,
Do you agree with Bro. Osgatharp'...Bro. Vaughn,<br /><br />Do you agree with Bro. Osgatharp's statement..."Those who throw up the you use hymn books arguement aren't really concerned about the truth?" Just curious.Adrian Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02110429155192086938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-12765408920969681562010-05-09T18:05:50.546-07:002010-05-09T18:05:50.546-07:00A very good point. Inconsistencies prove just that...A very good point. Inconsistencies prove just that -- inconsistency. If I believe "A" and my belief about "B" is inconsistent with that, it doesn't prove whether "A" is wrong, just that I am inconsistent.R. L. Vaughnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10992710377193518029noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-9171759431492112242010-05-09T13:00:49.410-07:002010-05-09T13:00:49.410-07:00Brother Vaughn,
Those who throw up the "you ...Brother Vaughn,<br /><br />Those who throw up the "you use hymn books" argument aren't really concerned about the truth. They only want to throw up some inconsistency in your practice, as if some inconsistency in your practice won the argument for their side.<br /><br />Several years ago, in the Mid Atlantic association meeting, we were debating the propriety of Promise Keepers. One of the pro-Promise Keepers men pointed up that Amazing Grace was written by an Anglican priest. My response to him was this: I don't have to sing Amazing Grace but I do have to not fellowship with Anglicans.<br /><br />Mark Osgatharp<br />Wynne, ArkansasMark Osgatharphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05585562082826860149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-11770338357395027692010-05-09T12:24:20.602-07:002010-05-09T12:24:20.602-07:00Feeling sufficiently chastised for spending more t...Feeling sufficiently chastised for spending more time blogging than pastoring and hijacking the topic, I thought not to post again. But alas, I guess I just can't help it. Whether the tinman or the devil made me do it, here goes.<br /><br />I wonder if some of the angst isn't more about Awana itself than how much time is spent on blogging about it or whether the topic was hijacked. Regardless, as far as the hijacked part, I don't think it is irrelevant to investigate the fundamental thinking behind WHY we accept or reject Awana and some things but not others. IMO, it's very important.<br /><br />But the main reason I posted may be further hijacking the thread. The following quote I found interesting in light of some of the foregoing discussion about hymns, hymn books, etc. In 1836 Baptist preacher William Dossey published a hymn book titled "The Choice". The following gives insight into one Baptist's way of thinking about using material by non-Baptists (or perhaps even Baptists who disagree): "In selecting for the Choice, the question has not been, will it be proper to publish the compositions of men whose views differ in some points from our own? but simply, is the piece itself good, and adapted to the design?" (from the Preface, p. IV. You can find this hymn book on Google books or I have it linked on my blog.)R. L. Vaughnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10992710377193518029noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-69464564588254028422010-05-07T09:08:53.293-07:002010-05-07T09:08:53.293-07:00Brother James I have one you can have.Brother James I have one you can have.Brother Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02749242340231974747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-15262839295363898662010-05-05T21:43:26.407-07:002010-05-05T21:43:26.407-07:00Found a great reason to use AWANA over Discovery. ...Found a great reason to use AWANA over Discovery. <br /><br />http://www.abaptist.org/discovery/bcpresentation%281%29/bc18.html<br /><br />This site shows Discovery uses "cassette tapes" for their songs. I don't own such a player, and I'm not sure how to get one.JamesCharleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00764716606179072128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-91804536294007561192010-05-05T20:59:32.753-07:002010-05-05T20:59:32.753-07:00AMEN and AMEN.
Brother Adrian, the Jewish time do...AMEN and AMEN.<br /><br />Brother Adrian, the Jewish time doesn't solve the problem, because while the word "day" could indeed confuse us as to the time it starts, the word "dawning" refers to the sun rising. If it was "dawning toward the first day", then it could ONLY be referring to pre-6:00 A.M. It could not be "dawning" toward the first day at 6:00 P.M., despite the Jewish times.<br /><br />Also, while the Jews now use the evening/morning, and used to use it, the writers of Scripture were not using the Jewish time, since they referred to the "sixth" and "ninth" hours which were 12:00 M and 3:00 P.M. The times used in Scripture must have been based on some other time-scale... maybe the Romans? <br /><br /><br />As to meeting Saturday, I don't really care when we meet. I'd prefer we meet daily (thus giving greater opportunity for those who work different hours and days a better chance to attend, as well as giving more opportunities to help people draw closer to the LORD. I know, however, people most likely won't do this in the U.S., and so I'll settle with the "norm" because it works. As I said, I don't believe the Bible mentions we should have "church" on the day Jesus rose. This was simply a tradition we follow. It isn't a bad tradition, but I don't believe it is commanded either.JamesCharleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00764716606179072128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-1161473558278343892010-05-05T15:56:08.535-07:002010-05-05T15:56:08.535-07:00Jesus said "the Spirit shall guide you into a...Jesus said "the Spirit shall guide you into all truth" and that the Spirit "shall glorify me (John 16:13,14)."<br /><br />If one is just trying to win an argument, the motive is sinful. But if one is discusing to glorify Jesus, then it's worthwhile.<br /><br />At times I discuss to glorify Jesus, but at other times I discuss to poke, explore, irritate someone who has irritated me, etc.<br />For those latter times, I should repent (and often do).<br /><br />There is nothing better to discuss than God and His Word, however. And blogging at least provides an outlet, of sorts, to discuss the greatest book and the greatest Savior.Adrian Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02110429155192086938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-69134428437012302662010-05-05T06:49:36.004-07:002010-05-05T06:49:36.004-07:00Can you say topic hi-jacked? We have gone from de...Can you say topic hi-jacked? We have gone from debating the evils of AWANA and Discovery to now we are talking about worshipping on Sundays and Wednesdays and whether or not the Wizard of Oz is acceptable debate logic (staw-man). It doesnt matter if you think it is strawman...tinman or the cowardly lion...Dorothy made it home!<br /><br />One day, we will make it home and stand before the righteous judge and He will determine if these things were interpreted correctly. Will some be seen as modern day pharisees for straining at a gnat on some non important issues? I think so. Will others be seen as liberal heathens for allowing anything to take place in the Church they pastored? I think so.<br /><br />In the end I think this all boils down to a mindset that we were partially raised with in our home (by our upbringing which includes socio-economic status and location), partially things taught in school/seminary, stuff found in a book (not the Bible) and our understanding of the Scriptures that was either skewed(not sure that is spelled right) by the aforementioned things or led by the Holy Spirit.<br /><br />I know this...SOMEONE has to be right because we cant all be wrong. All a person can do is interpret the Scriptures to the best of his understanding and with much prayer and study see what the Father givies him peace with.Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311441181399783762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263428806106564933.post-41726109483515912592010-05-05T04:52:07.468-07:002010-05-05T04:52:07.468-07:00those ancient words : "the EVENING and the MO...those ancient words : "the EVENING and the MORNING were the first day"Adrian Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02110429155192086938noreply@blogger.com