My Weekly Devotional

[chansen]

Mendalla, Chansen asked about the conse-uences of not following God's laws. I tried to give him an example.
Jesus was asked which was the greatest (most important) of God's laws. He answered -uoting two separate verses from ancient Hebrew scripture. Love God; and e-ually important, love your neighbour. I answered with the possible cones-uence of loving, or not loving, your neighbour.

In the context of my non-belief, it would have been more appropriate to discuss the consequences of loving or not loving God. By framing it in terms of your neighbour, you get to show the non-respectful person in a negative light. But if a person just rejects the claims about God, how does the analogy change? That's more in context with the discussion.

To tell the truth, I don't put too much stock in the idea of God as judge handing out punishment. Actually I think God weeps over the natural conse-uences of our behaviour.

Okay, again, what are the expected, natural consequences of not buying into the God thing?

 

[Seeler]

I'm not sure what you mean by 'not buying into the God thing'.
If you mean not believing in the sacred and holy that I call God, I am not sure there are any expected, natural conse-uences.
If you mean God's commandments, as we were discussing, I've already given you an example.

 

[Luce NDs]

I reiterate that if you believe in a God of rules then you are working under a false understanding of the gospel and regardless of what you think, you are clearly either not being led by the Holy Spirit or you are misinterpreting what the Holy Spirit is telling you. No shame in that.

Should you choose to associate yourself with that which is destroying the church then you are passing judgement on yourself. Otherwise, I'll only say that this is a sad attempt at deflection. Show me where I said that people shouldn't read the Bible or apologize for bearing false witness against me. That's a simple request. If you're not going to do either one of those things, then please don't post again.

Could be a ghostly failure on night duty cleaning airs ... like Jesus perhaps taking 33 years to dump the indoctrination!

 

[Luce NDs]

I'm not sure what you mean by 'not buying into the God thing'.
If you mean not believing in the sacred and holy that I call God, I am not sure there are any expected, natural conse-uences.
If you mean God's commandments, as we were discussing, I've already given you an example.

Could be isolated in the Shadow as a sub conscious observer ... all alone in a singularity of recycle on your own track ... thus the Dark Principal-eddies?

 

[airclean33]

Good afternoon Rev Steve--
Airclean-post-- This is were I first seen or believed you to be saying . We should not, listen to His word , or obey it.


Rev Steve--
It is Rev Steve--
It is legalism which is destroying the church by turning it into something that the church should not be; by making the church an arbiter of people's behaviour rather than an instrument of God's grace.

Airclean--post..Here you state that reading GODS Word makes you a legalist. You say you know right" from Wrong" ? I don't think so". I believe I will just keep listing to GOD. I will pray for you as well though minister.

Airclean--post--
All through GODS word are Legalisms. Just for GOD to say no , means GOD has forbidden you. Do not eat from the tree of knowledge. The devil lied to Eve and told her GOD did not mean you shell die. It would seem , it was to bad" they had not been, Legalists , Rev Steve--

Airclean--post--Because they were not , the devil could lie to them. So they sinned against GOD, who" it would seem", is a Legalists" .
airclean33.




.

 

[revsdd]

Good afternoon Rev Steve--
Airclean-post-- This is were I first seen or believed you to be saying . We should not, listen to His word , or obey it.


Rev Steve--
It is Rev Steve--
It is legalism which is destroying the church by turning it into something that the church should not be; by making the church an arbiter of people's behaviour rather than an instrument of God's grace.

Airclean--post..Here you state that reading GODS Word makes you a legalist. You say you know right" from Wrong" ? I don't think so". I believe I will just keep listing to GOD. I will pray for you as well though minister.

Airclean--post--
All through GODS word are Legalisms. Just for GOD to say no , means GOD has forbidden you. Do not eat from the tree of knowledge. The devil lied to Eve and told her GOD did not mean you shell die. It would seem , it was to bad" they had not been, Legalists , Rev Steve--

Airclean--post--Because they were not , the devil could lie to them. So they sinned against GOD, who" it would seem", is a Legalists" .
airclean33.




.

Good grief. I most certainly did not say that reading the Bible makes a person a legalist, I said legalism is destroying the church. I do suggest that if you've read the Bible and still consider God simply a God of rules rather than a God of grace that you're a legalist. You've read the Bible and not understood it. I stand by that. Anyway, it's a new week, and I'm moving on to a new reflection to follow.

 

[revsdd]

Thanks, folks, for last week's spirited discussion. Exactly what I always want to shoot for with these short reflections from whoever reads them. We're engaged in a visioning process in my congregation as we look ahead. Part of the goal is discerning how to be more welcoming and approachable to those who may have interest in the church but for whatever reason don't think they'd be welcome. I stumbled on this verse during one of my morning devotional times last week that struck me as relevant to that discussion. Sharing some reflections here:

http://randomfaiththoughts.blogspot.ca/2017/03/a-thought-for-week-of-march-27-2017_29.html

 

[Jaebius]

Thanks, folks, for last week's spirited discussion. Exactly what I always want to shoot for with these short reflections from whoever reads them. We're engaged in a visioning process in my congregation as we look ahead. Part of the goal is discerning how to be more welcoming and approachable to those who may have interest in the church but for whatever reason don't think they'd be welcome. I stumbled on this verse during one of my morning devotional times last week that struck me as relevant to that discussion. Sharing some reflections here:

http://randomfaiththoughts.blogspot.ca/2017/03/a-thought-for-week-of-march-27-2017_29.html

Your thoughts on welcoming people are good Steven. At the same time, there is a place for identification of sin, and appropriate discipline thereafter, in the local church.

 

[Mendalla]

Your thoughts on welcoming people are good Steven. At the same time, there is a place for identification of sin, and appropriate discipline thereafter, in the local church.

If we are talking someone who has done their time and is looking for a new start, what discipline by the church would be appropriate? The so-called justice system has already taken care of that and the church's role, to my eye, would be to support and guide them as they reintegrate.

 

[revsdd]

Your thoughts on welcoming people are good Steven. At the same time, there is a place for identification of sin, and appropriate discipline thereafter, in the local church.

Christians are accountable to one another, and the New Testament clearly provides for that mutual accountability and for accountability to the community. However, as Mendalla points out, I'm speaking more of people who are outside the church and who are looking for a fresh start within the church; for a community willing to overlook their past actions and accept them as part of the community.

 

[Seeler]

How welcome would a person who has been found guilty of a crime, paid his fine and/or served his sentence, be if he (or she) came to your congregation?
I hate to say it, but I think a great deal would depend upon the circumstances: the type of crime, his previous position in the church (if any), and his family, as well as his appearance and attitude.
Some crimes would make him difficult to accept -- child abuse, rape (especially stranger rape), home invasion where the victim is physically abused and/or elderly or handicapped.
Other crimes are much easier to forgive -- traffic violations, speeding, distracted driving; or fraud, or tax evasion, or smuggling. Fights? drug related offences? property damage?

A good, clean-cut boy who grew up in the congregation but who got into the wrong crowd involved with drugs, probably could come back after time in rehab and be accepted - especially if his family were behind him. A stranger with tatoos, and an attitude would be suspect.

 

[airclean33]

Christians are accountable to one another, and the New Testament clearly provides for that mutual accountability and for accountability to the community. However, as Mendalla points out, I'm speaking more of people who are outside the church and who are looking for a fresh start within the church; for a community willing to overlook their past actions and accept them as part of the community

.

--Hi Rev Steve --I see no problem here . As I believe it was Peter who was teaching Gentiles about Christ ", at the house of Cornelius a Centurion.

Act 10:44While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word.

Act 10:45And the believers from among the circumcised who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles.

Act 10:46For they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared,

Act 10:47"Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
Peter knew Brothers and Sisters when He seen them.

 

[Luce NDs]

Is split decisions binary ... like within the stars ... can cause a singularly larger flame out there ...

Thus the fires of passion grow and though goes where? Tis a state of mind, my being told in church that mind does not exist here as Psyche ... as Hur and Sophie are denied in grasping emotional, a stuff of gravitas ... that's the point man! Behind that ... backup gossamers ... wisps?

 

[Carolla]

Many in my own church certainly fall into this 'we're welcoming but not really' category. Welcoming to those who are like us already - or at least look & behave as if they are 'acceptable' or familiar to us. When they're noticeably different - well, people get pretty judgy. I've been taken aback in recent months by comments & actions made by some church members regarding another person who is often with us on Sundays & does seem to have some mental health issues. Makes me sad. Seems these same people are willing to go out to our local charitable social hub & interact/do good with these same marginalized people - but let them come into the church - well, that's another matter altogether it seems. Invite the clients of the social hub to join them for the monthly coffee & conversation on Wed afternoon? Nope. Make tickets available to the pancake supper or other events? Nope. As I said, makes me sad.

 

[Jaebius]

Many in my own church certainly fall into this 'we're welcoming but not really' category. Welcoming to those who are like us already - or at least look & behave as if they are 'acceptable' or familiar to us. When they're noticeably different - well, people get pretty judgy. I've been taken aback in recent months by comments & actions made by some church members regarding another person who is often with us on Sundays & does seem to have some mental health issues. Makes me sad. Seems these same people are willing to go out to our local charitable social hub & interact/do good with these same marginalized people - but let them come into the church - well, that's another matter altogether it seems. Invite the clients of the social hub to join them for the monthly coffee & conversation on Wed afternoon? Nope. Make tickets available to the pancake supper or other events? Nope. As I said, makes me sad.

It sounds to me Carolla that there are some members of your church (and there are some of same in just about every church I'd imagine) who are willing to do ministry to marginalized people - but not with marginalized people. I find this, as you said, sad.

 

[Mendalla]

Many in my own church certainly fall into this 'we're welcoming but not really' category. Welcoming to those who are like us already - or at least look & behave as if they are 'acceptable' or familiar to us. When they're noticeably different - well, people get pretty judgy. I've been taken aback in recent months by comments & actions made by some church members regarding another person who is often with us on Sundays & does seem to have some mental health issues. Makes me sad. Seems these same people are willing to go out to our local charitable social hub & interact/do good with these same marginalized people - but let them come into the church - well, that's another matter altogether it seems. Invite the clients of the social hub to join them for the monthly coffee & conversation on Wed afternoon? Nope. Make tickets available to the pancake supper or other events? Nope. As I said, makes me sad.

I think the problem is that church functions in a social, as well as or even instead of, a spiritual role for too many people. We don't want to open our social clubs to those who we don't feel comfortable socializing with. I'll bet a lot of "liberal" and maybe even some "progressive" churches that are largely white and middle class would actually not be especially welcoming to those who don't fit that bill. UU'ism is wrestling with the fact that it is a predominantly white middle class movement right now, so I doubt the liberal end of Christianity is much different.

 

[Luce NDs]

It sounds to me Carolla that there are some members of your church (and there are some of same in just about every church I'd imagine) who are willing to do ministry to marginalized people - but not with marginalized people. I find this, as you said, sad.

There are those that would say such observation is Machiavellian and thus darkly avoided in outright judgement of the margins at loose NDs ... like Johns wandering in an arid space ... needing a bier, so they can sing in their cups ...

 

[Luce NDs]

I think the problem is that church functions in a social, as well as or even instead of, a spiritual role for too many people. We don't want to open our social clubs to those who we don't feel comfortable socializing with. I'll bet a lot of "liberal" and maybe even some "progressive" churches that are largely white and middle class would actually not be especially welcoming to those who don't fit that bill. UU'ism is wrestling with the fact that it is a predominantly white middle class movement right now, so I doubt the liberal end of Christianity is much different.

You know Pierre Burton said that in 1964, albeit the wording was not exact?

Better still have we got beyond that state or deeper into apathy regarding strange other kinds ... unknown and unseen ... blindsided?

 

[Carolla]

I think the problem is that church functions in a social, as well as or even instead of, a spiritual role for too many people. We don't want to open our social clubs to those who we don't feel comfortable socializing with. I'll bet a lot of "liberal" and maybe even some "progressive" churches that are largely white and middle class would actually not be especially welcoming to those who don't fit that bill. UU'ism is wrestling with the fact that it is a predominantly white middle class movement right now, so I doubt the liberal end of Christianity is much different.

I agree Mendalla. The challenge is in looking into the mirror & acknowledging the social club focus may now be stronger than the spiritual focus. Many in my church would dispute that - although for me it seems to be what I see. Sigh.

 

[revsdd]

I'm a day later than usual publishing this week. Busy week. But I have been thinking about the long journey through Lent, and how that reflects life. And so I'm offering some thoughts on the journey and on what keeps us going.
http://randomfaiththoughts.blogspot.ca/2017/04/a-thought-for-week-of-april-3-2017.html