Anyone know where Christians and only Christians..

[carlos123]

I think your solution of a few people may be the way to go - 100 seems an awfully big group.

It may seem that it's awefully big but one list I was on have over 600 and it only generated about 30-40 emails a day. Admittedly many on that list had ceased to be active but had never unsubscribed. It's hard to say how big is best. Even 10 active members would be better than 1000 that are not.

I have one tiny group (5 people) of 'close' (close in terms of personal, not geographically) friends strewn all over the world (never met them personally) and we communicate via email with each other.

Do you all communicate individually with each other or with each other as a group. Meaning that each of you often gets each other's emails to everyone else?

Carlos

[Guest And8]

Do you all communicate individually with each other or with each other as a group. Meaning that each of you often gets each other's emails to everyone else?

We all send every email to everybody in the group, ie everybody sees everything. There are also emails between individuals, but those are more of a private discussion. But the larger discussion also allows everybody to chip in when they want/can.

[carlos123]

We all send every email to everybody in the group, ie everybody sees everything. There are also emails between individuals, but those are more of a private discussion. But the larger discussion also allows everybody to chip in when they want/can.

I hope you don't me asking you some more questions And8 but, I am curious to learn what I can from your experience of this little group since it seems to have some "features" that I would like to implement in similar groups though bigger than 5 members.

Assuming of course that you don't mind sharing more.

May I ask how you met these five friends of yours? Just in general. Was it off forums, chat rooms, or something else? How did you meet them and how did you work into making it an email list given that your friends probably did not know each other. Was it relatively easy for them to accept each other through you and to embrace the idea everyone's emails going to everyone else?

Are they all Christians?

What types of things do you all discuss as a group?

How long has this little group been happening?

Have you ever had conflicts that were leading to seperation and if so how did you overcome that to stay together?

If you care to share any more I would very much like to hear any input you could give me on this.

Thanks.

Carlos

[Guest shiloh357]

I am referring to head coverings on women. Now before anyone jumps up and down telling me there are multiply ways to see this, etc., etc., etc., whatever head coverings were isn't even the point. The point is that head coverings would be viewed, in light of what you have been sharing with me and in light of today's "enlightened" Christian thinking, as one of those inconsequential issues that we should just let slide in the interests of maintaining fellowship.

Please note Paul's words on this "minor" issue...

QUOTE

1 Cor 11:16

If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice

[carlos123]

Now your talking Shiloh! (For you non-native speakers of English that's a phrase that means something along the lines of "Your making more sense now!" )

I hear you, but what I think needs to be pointed out, is that whether you are dealing with headcoverings for women or issues of similar ilk, Paul DID say some things that were applicable from a cultural standpoint to the people of the first century, but non necessarily applicable to us today. 

Agreed.

I am not gong to get into the issue of headcoverings but ....

Me neither but ....

...Paul had women in the Corinthian church that had once been prostitutes from the oracles of Delphi, and that plays very heavily into his admonitions.

Yeah, I have heard that before. Not sure that I agree with that "interpretation" of things given that head coverings are a symbol of authority that is to be on a woman's head because of the angels among other things (1 Cor 11:10). Unless we are prepared to say that Angels are not around today and were likewise only for New Testament times we must conclude that head coverings are still applicable.

If we continue with the "It was only for the Corinthian church." approach we not only have to overcome the angel angle but also the fact that Paul appealed to nature to support head coverings (1 Cor 11:14-15). Unless we are prepared to say that Corinthian nature or even nature as it was then was unique in supporting head coverings then we must again conclude that nature today teaches the same thing.

Finally we have to contend with the problem that Paul said head coverings were practiced in all "the churches of God" (1 Cor 11:16). We must therefore conclude that it was not a practice meant to be done in Corinth alone but almost certainly in all the churches that Paul would have been involved in starting or ministering to. So now we have a practice that was practiced in Ephesus, Philippi, Corinth, Colosse, Thessalonica, and lots and lots of other places. All over the Roman world of his time in "all the churches of God".

I have to conclude bro, without really getting into it, that this is just another one of those Scriptural applications that has been regulated to the dustbin of history by our "enlightened" Christian thinking today such that God's instructions to do it are no longer applied. We have once again excused away one more practice that was meant to be applied in the church for the glory of God. No thanks.

Now getting back to our discussion, since you are apparently still interested in discussing it, let's say that you are a pastor of a church. A wonderful pastor. A godly man. Humble and obedient. You believe and teach that head coverings were only for New Testament times. You are a fine example of a godly man. Here I come into your church. I am there for let's say a few months getting to know people and otherwise integrating into your church. I like it there.

I come upon these passages and after careful thought and prayer come to the conclusion that we must get back to applying head coverings. So far so good. No problem.

Now let's say that I convince my wife of the need for such. Again no problem (though I daresay that in our highly feminist oriented society that might be a problem for many).

She in turn starts talking this up among her Christian women friends in the church. Hmmm....not looking so good here in terms of practicing this in the church were you are a pastor.

Come the next Sunday you again teach on 1 Corinthians (a yearly thing let's say) and you once again teach that head coverings are only for yester year. Only this time there are a number of women in your congregation that are wearing head coverings. Hmmm...that's odd you say to yourself. But you continue with your teaching.

Me, my wife, and now some of her friends in your church are now seeing how applicable head coverings are and how God is using them to teach us things. Some of us begin to share this in our home groups connected with your church excited about what God is teaching us about authority, women's roles, man's role, and other such things through the use of a symbol of authority on a woman's head. Oh, oh. We are running headlong into problems here!

Someone pipes up during such sharing....wait a minute! Our pastor (that's you) teaches that this is only for New Testament times. Add to that statement the natural tendency of a woman's flesh to not see herself under authority of a man and things start to get a little hot.

The pastor is called to iron things out. He still maintains that head coverings are for New Testament times. We (those of us practicing this) say it is not and all efforts to convince you otherwise from the Word fail. Okay now we come to the heart of the matter.

What are we supposed to do?

Let's see....ignore what the Word says and what the Lord is teaching us through application of it and continue in the church wearing head coverings? Hmmm...not good because it will undermine the teachings of the pastor even if we do nothing more than just wear a head coverings without saying a word. Hmmm.....let's see now.....what shall we do? I rightly don't know bro short of either ignoring what God says or else leaving your church.

Do you see any viable options?

Yeah I suppose this is a minor issue in comparison to salvation and all the really "good" stuff but it's relative importance is of no relevance when it comes to doing what God says. ALL of God's commands to us as New Testament Christians are to be applied to be the most that God would have us be.

Can you see how the choice comes down to following you in your "leading" or following God?

Can you see that your "leading" has now come down to everyone needing to side with your view of what the Scriptures say? That is why I think that the church of today has inflated the role of pastors to the point that those in congregations must pretty much believe what the pastor teaches or at least give deference to it. As opposed to having pastors lead by example of godly character and giving liberty in things, like head coverings, where there might be differences.

My point is that it is not good enough just to sit by yourself read something in the Scripture and say, "OK, I am going to do that." 

Well...I would say that generally...that's perfectly fine as long as we remain open to God's correction through other Christians so that we don't go off into some crazy notion that we are supposed to now cut all our hair in a vow like Paul did in Jerusalem or some such. I would rather have Christians do just that, and receive correction, than have it be like it so often is today where Christians MAY read the Word but even if they do and see something that we should apply they choose to wait or ignore it altogether because no one else is doing it.

There are hermeneutics that need to be applied to passages.  There are rules of interpretation that need to be adhered to.  The Bible as a piece of literature is no different than any other piece of literature in that it needs to be read the way the author intended.  Prophecies are treated differently than parables, the Poetry of Psalms is read differently than the book of Numbers.  Depending on what you are reading, you need to apply the proper rules of interpretation. 

I agree 100%. No problem there bro. I would be the first in line to say the same thing if we were discussing Biblical interpretation.

It is more than just looking words up in Strongs; it is getting to know the people of time period, the culture and the issues that the early Church had in it struggle to understand how to relate to the pagan culture around it.

Hmmm.....I definitely see the value in such BUT I do not think that it is a good thing to place such stock in such extra-biblical "understandings" when those "understandings" negate the clear commands or principals of Scripture in the plain English. It is much, much easier to make mistakes with regard to understanding what happened in history than to make a mistake in reading what the Word says in plain English I think. So we should not put so much stock in our historical understandings that we negate the Word of God by that same understanding.

Before assuming that people are just "ignoring what God says,"  ....

No assumption about it bro. Like I have said before I don't go around trying to cause a problem or assuming that the moment I go to a church and they are not doing something. I understand that pastors and churches have different reasons for which they do or do not do different things. And generally speaking their hearts are good. BUT if in talking to the pastor at length regarding the type of scenerio that I described regarding head coverings, they do not come up with any Biblically justifiable reason to not do something, then yeah. I would have to conclude that they are "ignoring what God says," . Depending on the reasons given of course. There are some areas that are not clear and over which there could be valid misunderstandings of interpretation in which case I would think the proper thing to do would be to give liberty to practice according to one's own conscience.

Taking the Bible at face value is not always a wise thing to do.  Some people mistake that as taking the Bible literally, and that is not the case.  Face value approaches to the Bible is why we have people handling snakes and other such nonsense.

Poor choice of words on my part bro. I agree with you. Taking it literally is what we need to do.

Carlos

Edited to clarify something I said.

[Mark]

Would the alcoholic, the money changer, the prostitute, etc., be allowed into your room, your presence, as did Jesus allow them into his?

So in answer to your question. You bet I would welcome such. Even into an online church now that I think about it. But I would not let them cause trouble and I would encourage any group of Christians I was with to lovingly correct them and help them feel welcomed as long as they did not cause trouble.

Carlos

Carlos,

Thank you for your responce. God Bless you brother.

Mark

[Guest shiloh357]

I have to conclude bro, without really getting into it, that this is just another one of those Scriptural applications that has been regulated to the dustbin of history by our "enlightened" Christian thinking today such that God's instructions to do it are no longer applied. We have once again excused away one more practice that was meant to be applied in the church for the glory of God. No thanks.

Actually I could poke quite few holes in your treatment of headcoverings but that is not our purpose here. So I will leave you to your convictions there.

The pastor is called to iron things out. He still maintains that head coverings are for New Testament times. We (those of us practicing this) say it is not and all efforts to convince you otherwise from the Word fail. Okay now we come to the heart of the matter.

What are we supposed to do?

Do you see any viable options?

If I were a pastor I would hold to what I believe, but I would permit you to do as you wish, and any woman who wants to wear a headcovering is free to do so, so long as they are not pushy about it. They are free to explain why they choose to do so, to anyone asks, but they are not allowed to make it an issue of condemnation against those who choose not to. There are women in my church that wear scarves or some kind of headcovering they are free to do so. As long as you do not cause division over it, then I don't see a problem.

I go to a Baptist church where people raise their hands and dance and stuff that Baptists don't do generally. Our pastor is OK with that, so long as they don't start trying to make others do the same thing.

Hmmm.....I definitely see the value in such BUT I do not think that it is a good thing to place such stock in such extra-biblical "understandings" when those "understandings" negate the clear commands or principals of Scripture in the plain English. It is much, much easier to make mistakes with regard to understanding what happened in history than to make a mistake in reading what the Word says in plain English I think. So we should not put so much stock in our historical understandings that we negate the Word of God by that same understanding.

They bear a great deal on what is going on in the Bible, and definitely have their place. I don't think they should be given too much emphasis, but they are definitely helpful.

[Guest shiloh357]

The truth is Carlos, you simply are not going to find what you are looking for, on this side of heaven. Among falliable human beings, it simply does not exist. You can try and start an online church and attempt to craft it according to the vision you have, but human nature, yours and everyone elses, plays a major part in this.

There is no way to remove human nature from the equation. You are going to have controversy, because we are still human, and while we strive to avoid it, human nature is what it is. We fight a war with the flesh everyday. Sometimes the spirit wins, sometimes the flesh wins. There has NEVER been a Church in human history that was not shot through with controversy, bickering, or other such things.

There is the "ideal," and there is also reality.

You really need to find a church home locally, and realize that not everything in it is going to be to your liking. There are things you think that are important, and I can appreciate that, but the fact that the Pastor does not see eye to eye with you is no reason to sit at home and do nothing.

Unless you are annointed to start a Church, be it online or whatever, it will end in disaster. It will not be of God. If you are wanting just to start something to fulfill your wants, and desires, and be crafted to suit what you want, then it will fail.

You need to make sure, that this is what God wants, and not just what Carlos wants, because you will not only hurt yourself, but you will hurt everyone who follows your lead if you are wrong. If it fails, it has the potential to hurt any young Christians in your midst. You need to think it over really good. I would also point out, that if it is not of God, and you do it in His Name, you will be held accountable for that. You will be held accountable for the failure of such an enterprise. This not something to be taken lightly. You are playing with fire when you do something for God. It had better be from his heart to your heart, or you will be in really big trouble when you have to stand before Him on the last day and give an account.

[carlos123]

Actually I could poke quite few holes in your treatment of headcoverings but that is not our purpose here.  So I will leave you to your convictions there.

Thank you Shiloh.

If I were a pastor I would hold to what I believe, but I would permit you to do as you wish, and any woman who wants to wear a headcovering is free to do so, so long as they are not pushy about it. 

Ah there's the catch in the phrase "not pushy". Personally I don't think it's a very workable situation since women as well as men are commanded to not only do but to teach all that God teaches them. It is my understanding that every one of us is to do and teach others what the Lord leads us to do. If that is so then I think it is very probable that such attempts to teach others contrary to what the pastor is teaching would in all likelihood be considered pushy if not downright divisive.

Different churches react to things in a different way. My personal experience tells me that your toleration for a difference of conviction in things like this, while commendable, is not very workable bro.

They are free to explain why they choose to do so, to anyone asks, but they are not allowed to make it an issue of condemnation against those who choose not to. 

As far as using it to condemn others I totally agree with you. We should not go around batting each other over the head with the Word and condemning each other with it. As for only explaining things to those that ask...well...I think that violates other Scriptures which say very explicitly that we are to do and teach all that God lays on our hearts. Proactively. Not waiting for someone to ask. I don't think a policy of don't ask, don't tell type of thing like the military has on homosexuals within it's ranks is very workable when it comes to not being able to freely share, encourage, and teach about head coverings (as an example) for the benefit of all.

There are women in my church that wear scarves or some kind of headcovering they are free to do so.  As long as you do not cause division over it, then I don't see a problem.

Totally agreed about not causing division. But I would be hard pressed to just practice this with my wife or her friends for example, while keeping our mouths shut otherwise. Espeically since Paul considered it important enough to say if anyone wanted to be contentious about this pracitice that the churches of God had no other practice. That sounds pretty important I think.

You know speaking about relative importance of one Biblical principle over another Shiloh I was thinking today......as a father, which command from me would I not want my children to obey? None of them! I would want them to obey the least and the greatest of my commands since ALL of them would show respect for who I am in their lives.

And any disobedience of even the least of my commands would show disrespect and a lack of trust in my love.

He who is faithful in little will be faithful in much. Meaning that he who shows a faithful response to the smallest things (expressed through obedience) will also show the same faithfulness (obedience prompted by faith) in the greater things.

It's not an issue, the way I understand it, of us weighing something God says against the "greater" issue of salvation and who Christ is and holding on to and applying only the greater issues. It's a matter of showing respect for God in ALL that He says and trusting His love to know what is best. Choosing to apply ALL that we know he wants us to do in loving response to Him.

This whole notion of keeping some of God's commands and ignoring others for the sake of greater unity is decidedly not Scriptural in my understanding bro.

I go to a Baptist church where people raise their hands and dance and stuff that Baptists don't do generally.  Our pastor is OK with that, so long as they don't start trying to make others do the same thing.

I think I would have a very hard time being in your church bro. Why? Because I would want every Christian friend of mine within that church to experience the freedom to worship God with their WHOLE being. Spirit, soul, and body. How could I stand by and watch a friend of mine keep themselves from fully worshipping God and experience less through their worship than God intends IF such was based on a wrong headed notion of it being more spiritual to not raise your hands and freely express worship through your body? What kind of a friend would I be if I did not at least broach the subject to better understand their perspective and possibly lead them to a fuller worship? I personally would not want a friend that kept his mouth shut about what he saw as greatly beneficial spiritually.

Of course from the sounds of it my efforts with my friend would run contrary to your pastors desire that I not start trying to get others to do the same thing.

I call such an approach, pseudo-freedom in Christ. I am free to apply things myself but God's fullest purposes for me to be involved in helping others benefit from what He is teaching me are shortcircuited through restrictions, however subtle, to not promote things contrary to established church tradition.

And no I am not saying it is more spiritual to raise your hands. The point is that we should be free to either raise our hands or not as an expression of worship. If someone is not free, freedom being the point here, then I would want to help them see their way to such freedom. Whether the end result was a raising of the hands or not.

I have been to lots of Baptist churches and although there are exceptions, I find the atmosphere in them to be quite stiffling. Many allow the rasing of the hands and things like that today but even so, they still feel stiffling because it is clear that this sort of things is just not considered acceptable and indeed wholesome. It is more often than not just tolerated.

Carlos

[carlos123]

The truth is Carlos, you simply are not going to find what you are looking for, on this side of heaven. 

I believe that what I am looking for, a church where we are free to apply ALL that God commands us to do, is most definitely possible. Just because I have not experienced such or that no one knows of such does not mean God cannot bring it to pass.

Why would Paul have written in such a way that he actually seems to have expected the churches he wrote to, to apply what he was writting about? If it was not possible for them to agree on what in the world Paul was telling them?

I mean was Paul a hopeless idealist or did he actually believe that what he was instructing the churches to do they would first understand and then do it? I like to think it was the latter.

Paul even had the gaul to say....

2 Corinthians 1:13

For we do not write you anything you cannot read or understand.

Which goes totally against the modern "enlightened" Christian thinking that we can't come to agreement as Christians due to our inability to understand what God says in His Word with one mind.

So yes I think it is possible but it's going to take a lot of work and a willingness to believe that God can bring about what seems impossible to realize in today's fragmented Christian world.

Who knows maybe I will fall flat on my face but I would rather spend my life trying and believing the Lord for what I have never seen but which is clearly laid out in the Word than not.

Among falliable human beings, it simply does not exist. 

I would say the group of disciples (the 12 and then the 500) had it. So did the the church of Jerusalem. If they had what I am talking about then I most definitely believe we can too since we have the same Holy Spirit in us that they had.

You can try and start an online church and attempt to craft it according to the vision you

have, but human nature, yours and everyone elses, plays a major part in this.

No question bro. That is why I do not trust my own heart.

There is no way to remove human nature from the equation.  You are going to have controversy, because we are still human, and while we strive to avoid it, human nature is what it is.  We fight a war with the flesh everyday.  Sometimes the spirit wins, sometimes the flesh wins. 

Agreed.

There has NEVER been a Church in human history that was not shot through with controversy, bickering, or other such things. 

I choose to believe rather that God can bring about a unity of the type that was present in the disciples when they followed Him, in the 500, and in the church at Jerusalem during it's early stages in our day and age. I think that is a reasonable belief don't you?

Unless you are annointed to start a Church, be it online or whatever, it will end in disaster.  It will not be of God.  If you are wanting just to start something to fulfill your wants, and desires, and be crafted to suit what you want, then it will fail.

You need to make sure, that this is what God wants, and not just what Carlos wants, because you will not only hurt yourself, but you will hurt everyone who follows your lead if you are wrong.  If it fails, it has the potential to hurt any young Christians in your midst.  You need to think it over really good.  I would also point out, that if it is not of God, and you do it in His Name, you will be held accountable for that.  You will be held accountable for the failure of such an enterprise.  This not something to be taken lightly.  You are playing with fire when you do something for God.  It had better be from his heart to your heart, or you will be in really big trouble when you have to stand before Him on the last day and give an account.

Words well spoken bro. Good advice. And I agree. Thanks.

Carlos