PLEASE HELP: Is church for everyone?

[Floatingaxe]

First, Avoid acknowledging your own legalism as it appears throughout your writing on the topic of church attendance.

Then, repeat the scripture from Hebrews that we've been writing about all along, as if repeating it one more time will finally secure its status as a new law. And drag another scripture (Corinthians on Body life) as a red herring across the trail as if it negates what Paul says in Colossians against legalism -- even legalism about the Sabbath.

That's the "hmm" part.

But, at least, you've made some attempt to deal with Paul's argument in Colossians. Of course his argument was to people in a church. My argument is to you, and you're in a church, too. So what. The fact that something is written to people who are members of a church does not mean that it cannot discuss legalistic attitudes about church. I'd be happy, in fact, to bring up Paul's argument right inside of a church. I'm sure he would, too. So, the fact that it's TO CHURCHES does not in any way limit it from curbing excesses in church legalism -- even the prevalent legalism about church attendance. As I said before, Paul confronted legalism wherever and whenever he found it. It is precisely because Colossians is against legalism in churches that it is written TO A CHURCH. Who else would he write it to? Who else would care?

But the red herring across the trail isn't enough. You then pull a bait and switch:

I find it incredulous that one would tailor-make a belief that belonging to a local church is counter-indicated.

I find that "incredulous," too. Our debate has never been about whether or not belonging to a local church is counter-indicated by Paul. I've repeatedly said Paul says church attendance (or fellowship in some form) is a good thing. Our debate is about whether there is any dis"obedience," "rebellion," or backsliding in not belonging to a church. You insist in more than half of your entries on this topic that Paul has commanded us to attend church. I think that is incredible, since Paul consistently deplored all legalism. It's absurd. As I already said, Paul is saying, 1) Church is a good thing for all of you. 2) Don't let anyone treat you legalistically about what you do on the sabbath. Don't live by their rules. Paul likes church, and Paul hates legalism -- even legalism like yours about church attendance ... and he specifically says so.

Apparently, there is at least one important parishioner in the Colossian congregation who has assumed the role of a "spiritual umpire" (see 2:18), making judgments about what constitutes authentic Christianity.

That's what people do when they make judgments about people who are not attending church as "backsliders" or "in rebellion" or having "heart issues." These spiritual umpires presume they can know something about a person's heart or spiritual life by whether or not he attends church regularly. So, the commentator was writing directly to you.

According to Paul, wisdom, whether true or false, is measured by its results. Wisdom is true if it produces a community that worships and bears witness to God in its shared life.

That part is just the commentator, not Paul. Paul makes no such statement in Colossians. I think it's a good statement in and of itself, but it is not what Colossians is saying. Colossians does not say "true wisdom will result in the formation of a community that worships and bears witness to God in its shared life." Colossians says don't submit to legalism! Don't fall back into it. Christ set you free from it. Guard your freedom -- even with respect to observing the Sabbath! That's Paul, not me!

I notice you still avoided that part of Paul's argument. No surprise.

Are you an active member of a local church, David? Please know that I have always paid particular attention that I DO NOT take on legalistic attitudes. That is something I am very careful about, and if you knew me, you would certainly know that to be the case. It is a love relationship we have with Jesus.

Psalm 63:2

I have seen you in the sanctuary and beheld your power and your glory.

Loving God, to me, means worshiping Him and obeying Him...doesn't have to be in a church building, but it is at least for part of our time. I love to worship with others, my brothers and sisters in Christ, and I can't wait to be with them and worship Jesus together! We love and encourage one another. We teach and reprove one another! We pray together. We search the Word together. It is family! I would no more disassociate with my family than I would cut off my own arm. To love being in God's House is normal for a believer, and I just can't understand how one wouldn't want to do that. I am sure that these are the same reasons why Paul has told us not to abandon coming together in fellowship! I agree with him!

[billie]

The gospel is for everyone, the church is for everyone. However, saints can be very, very hard to find, especially in the USA.

And where exactly are saints easy to find?

Nice try, but I'm not that silly.

I am! I know! I know! In Heaven, right?

[David H.]

I would no more disassociate with my [church] family than I would cut off my own arm. To love being in God's House is normal for a believer, and I just can't understand how one wouldn't want to do that. I am sure that these are the same reasons why Paul has told us not to abandon coming together in fellowship! I agree with him!

That's good. Then agree with him ALL the way, and agree that you have no right to say that someone "must" or is "commanded to" go to church, as you have said. (Which IS legalism.) Because Paul says otherwise. Or are you only going to agree with the parts of Paul that agree with you? Again...

"Therefore, do not let ANYONE judge you ... with regard to ... a Sabbath day."

No on is trying to convince you that you should dissociate from your church. Jesus taught in the temples and synagogues. So, did Paul. No one is saying there is anything wrong with being there. Just that you have NO right (according to Paul) to judge somone as having "heart issues" or being "in rebellion" or anything else based on how they spend their Sabbath day. Paul is saying to each of us, "How you keep the Sabbath or don't keep the Sabbath is YOUR business, and DO NOT let ANYONE (not even your own pastor) judge you by what you do on the Sabbath." Period. So, if you're going to agree with Paul, then agree with all of him.

And don't claim you weren't being legalistic. Thinking you can know the condition of someone's heart based on their church attendance is legalistic. (It's judging their whole heart by the lack of one single outward act. There may be many, many ways in which they and their gifts are a blessing to others even outside of local church membership. And God may be very pleased, not "unhappy," with how they're living, and may lead them back to a church in time ... or maybe not.) Thinking Paul "commanded" (your word) church attendance or membership IS legalistic. Once it's a command, it becomes a yardstick by which people gauge the "obedience" (your word again) of others. It may even become a yardstick by which we gauge our own obedience or righteousness. That, too, is legalistic.

Paul did not write any new commands. He thought we had too much law as it was. He wrote exhortations and church guidelines. There is a big, BIG difference. One difference is that NO ONE can sin by not following Paul's advice. Even women talking in church is not a sin. They're simply running contrary to good advice. There will even be times in some individual's lives when that general advice is not appropriate. Paul recognized that. That's why Paul says not to let anyone judge you by what you do (or don't do) on any matters of religious observance. God knows your heart. Others should shut up and pass no judgment and think no judgment.

Just pray that all is well with the soul of one who has dropped out of church (without assuming that all is any less well than it is with your soul), hope for the best for them, be an encouragement without being cloying or preachy about church. They just might be doing exactly what's best for them at that time. They might even find a new creative form of fellowship, which is more suitable to them than the standard cookie-cutter (church with a small "c") model that works for most people. And God will probably be delighted (not unhappy) with the creative outcome because he's a God who is full of endless innovation.

Edited August 30, 2006 by David Haggith

[Floatingaxe]

So, David---are you an active member of a local body, then?

[David H.]

So, David---are you an active member of a local body, then?

While I have already answered that in my earlier posts, I won't answer it here because you don't really need to know.

[Floatingaxe]

Fine, be that way!

[David H.]

[Guest chatrismoy]

I believe the experience that you had shouldn't come between your relationship with God. Try a different church. The question that is coming to my mind is are you for church? Are you a believer?

[pointer]

I believe the experience that you had shouldn't come between your relationship with God. Try a different church. The question that is coming to my mind is are you for church? Are you a believer?

Everyone is a believer. The question is whether one hates what one believes, or not.

[Floatingaxe]

I believe the experience that you had shouldn't come between your relationship with God. Try a different church. The question that is coming to my mind is are you for church? Are you a believer?

Everyone is a believer. The question is whether one hates what one believes, or not.

What do you mean, "everyone is a believer"?