Showing posts with label legalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legalism. Show all posts

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Re-post: You Might Be A Pharisee If...





You Might Be A Pharisee If...

(With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy)

  • If you missed a family reunion or a funeral of a close friend because you didn’t want to miss the midweek service…you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you ever worried about whether or not you should read the italicized words in you King James Bible because they weren’t in the original text …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you ever gave your pastor a doctor’s excuse for missing a Sunday evening service …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you ever tried to exchange your bratwurst for an Italian sausage because you found out they were beer brats …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you say grace before in-between-meal snacks …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you won’t let your kids read The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe because there is a witch in the book …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you object to the new church hymnals because they have “contemporary” songs from the likes of Andrae Crouch and Dallas Holm …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you think the new youth pastor should not be trusted with the care of your children because he has an ICHTHUS tattoo…you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you rebuked the visiting preacher for not wearing a tie when he was in the pulpit …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you boycotted The End of the Spear because the part of Nate Saint was played by a homosexual …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you refuse to watch The Passion of the Christ because it borrows too heavily from Catholic tradition …you might be a Pharisee.
Feel free to add any "You might be a Pharisee if..." ideas to the comments section below.


This is all from Gamaliel's Desk by Rick Presley. BTW the comments are about as funny as some of the other "mights".


Be blessed,
iggy









Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, January 01, 2008

Tim, Ingrid and the Great Cover up.


Titus 2: 11-15

For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, while we wait for the blessed hope--the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good. These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you.

In a way I do not want to write this, yet after praying I realized that many of us need to speak out on this topic. It pains me as far as the examples I will use, yet I hope to give a real life presentation of the Gospel in action against the false teachings of some. One of the examples is a friend and I do not wish to bring any more pain to him so I hope that this will not add to his hurt, but lift him out of the pain of those who deem themselves as more worthy sinners than others.

Tim Reed is a good guy. I really enjoy his thoughts and have gained things from him. He is a pastor of Owasso Church of Christ. The first thing I want you to note is that I do not agree with Tim on some doctrinal issues, yet I see those issues as secondary to his faith in Christ so I focus on that instead of where we disagree.

Now, Tim loves to play some sort of “Fantasy” game which seems to include that one might become an evil dictator who wants to rule the world. Tim stated that he had played these games for many years before coming to Jesus.

Ingrid is a radio show host and “watchdoggie” blog. She likes to report on the failings of those she sees as heretics. Now, I agree with her on some things so this is not a total “I am against Ingrid” post. In fact, if I was to percentage out what she talks about, I would agree more with her than against her… yet she seems to think that all falls on the emerging church and is very vocal against those that have a differing “style” of worship ie, pastors should not wear jeans to preach in, churchs should have pews (though I understand she attends a house church) and music for worship can be performed by a secular choir, but not rock music by believers who desire to worship Jesus. So, my “beef” is that she confuses preference with God’s holiness and style with biblical mandates.

Now, my biggest issue with Online Discernment Ministries, (ODM’s) is that they often go way overboard in their zeal to expose and shame those they deemed as worse sinners as themselves. In this case Ingrid parsed through 1 and ½ years of posts to find one comment made by Tim (which I will not post here as it is very distasteful). Many of these comments were in defense against atheists who attacked him for his beliefs at the discussion forum, yet he made this one comment that later came back to haunt him.

Soon after Tim made the comment he was IM’d by a friend and the moderator who both rebuked Tim for his overboard comment. He saw his wrong and apologized to all offended parties and was forgiven by them.
Now, again 1 ½ years later, Ingrid finds times forgiven sins and resurrects them publically to shame Tim and expose him as one of the “new pastors today” she seems to dispise.

Now, remember Tim does not deny he stated the things Ingrid posted… and he does show remorse and did all he could to make it right with the people around him. He even went so far as to create a new story line for himself in the game so he would nto be so evil.

1. Tim sinned.
2. Tim was rebuked.
3. Tim repented.
4. Tim was forgiven.
5. All was well with the world again.

Tim later, (after the post at SoL), deleted his account where Ingrid quoted him as supporters at SoL were attacking those at the forum and judging and condemning them. He openly admits to all this.

Then came Ingrid who even after reading all the facts having already stated Tim to be one of the “enemies of Jesus Christ”, states he is being “deceptive”.

Here is Tim’s side if you want to read it.

As far as living out the obedience to Jesus by forgiving others as He commanded, Ingrid seems to think that is not a command that applies to her.

Forgiveness is not part of the ODM’s doctrine when it comes to those they hate. I am sorry, but out of all this I do not see these verses coming out of the ODM’s side at all.

“Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.”

“Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.”

“So watch yourselves. “If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. If he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says, `I repent,’ forgive him.”


I have heard the ODM’s state things as, “You redefine fundamentalist. You redefine pharisee You redefine salvation. You redefine Jesus and the Gospel. You are a credit to post-modern dogma. The Gospel is all about reconciliation and forgiveness. It is not an excuse to blow-off sin.” Yet, then miss the very opportunity to forgive the stated sin… but instead cast more self righteous stones at Tim or whoever.

Now, what motivates such people to hate others so much? I will not get into Ingrid’s or others motives, as they will be exposed by God in His due time. Yet, I have found from experience, both out of my life as one who would at one time cast stones without thought to giving forgiveness, and having received the stones from the ODM’s myself. They seem to express some sort of maturity yet seem to miss the core of the Gospel of Reconciliation. In fact these (again I include myself as I did this myself) mock the very Gospel they proclaim. I will add that a person who is inclined to cast stones often does not understand the forgivness and Grace of God as they trust their own works as the "back-up" if God's grace is not sufficient for them after all.

Is sin forgiven? According to the bible there is not one doubt and without hesitation I must state yes! Yet, it seems that if one does not like a person, a religionist will not accept the “so called” offender repentance. In this lack of grasping the Gospel of reconciliation they give no reconciliation to the other and only mock God and the gospel as they leave the other in their sin.

I will state this about Tim; he did all that God required so no man (or woman) has a right to add to that. To those who dig up old dirt then use it to shame and “expose” others only expose that they know not Grace nor love the Kindness of God. They seek only to show how right they are in their own eyes. Such a person need be avoided for they shame the Gospel and count Jesus Blood as nothing. I see that often the very sins one notices in others is the type of sin we see in ourselves. If one is under the performance type faith and sees God as the “God Father” instead of God the Father, then they well view obedience as “payment” to keep their god happy. They deceive themselves as only Jesus pleased the Father and we all need be in Christ to also be pleasing to God. Without Jesus no one is pleasing to God. In that being the truth, no one can boast that they are more pleasing to God than another. That is called humility.

Tim is being accused of covering up his sins… he is not. I see though that some sin openly against their brothers and sisters in the role of being the Accuser of them. They then cover their own sin in a thin veil of self righteous prater that only drive more away from Jesus or more into a false gospel of works.


Tim has grown from this and sees the error of his ways... yet it seems that God teaching someone and freeing them of their past sins, is not enough for Ingrid and others. I see the Great Cover Up is about those who condone the sin of Ingrid, Ken and others as they slander and lie and continue to set a standard of righteouness that is not biblical and in fact cuts across the grain of the Gospel. If one though did repent and confess their sin, I for one would be fighting for a place in line to offer forgivness and a huge hug.
Not only is this so, butI would also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. (Romans 5:11)


iggy

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

OK This guy usually bothers me... but... from poop emerges



This guy usually bothers me but at poop is emergent too he has an interesting take on Ken Silva and Tony Jones.. though I do not agree 100% I see that not all on Ken Silva's side agree with him and his tactics.










be blessed,


iggy

Monday, December 17, 2007

One subtle deception of John MacArthur: Bad Quotes


I am amazed that more people do not understand that Truth protects us... we do not protect truth.

John MacArthur states in his book The Truth War...
“It is our duty to guard, proclaim, and pass that truth on to the next generation." [1 Timothy 6:20–21]

Now let's go look at his reference.
"O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge— 21 by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith. Grace be with you. Amen."


Note how subtle this is... but that is how Satan works!

Yes, Paul is stating to Timothy to "Guard what was committed to your trust.." but does Paul go on to say "go out and fight and expose those who attack truth."? No.

Paul simply states to Timothy to guard Truth by, "avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge..."

Notice the word... "avoiding". It does not nor has ever meant to declare war on others.

My Truth is the Person of Jesus Christ. I see that He protects me... I cannot do anything to protect Jesus for He is God and I am a mere man.

So, my question is this... What kind of god needs protecting? And if that god does, how can a finite man protect an Almighty, all powerful God?


It seems to me that John MacArthur has diminished God from Who He really is in this "truth war" and the more I learn of John MacArthur's theology, the more I wonder if he thinks himself greater than God Himself...

Friday, December 14, 2007

So Ken Silva... What is your beef with Tony Jones?



I am going to just ask this open question.


I have read much of Ken Silva' "false" accusations against many... yet I am wondering what are the specific things Ken holds against Tony?


Now, if you use the "Tony used the "f" word... I will remind you Ken you used the headline,and the quote many more times than Tony has... and in fact I am on record as asking Tony to tame down his language... so let's move on from that one.


Yet, how can you justify the name calling?

What are the facts behind these "names"... that make them so true?


I am holding this out so that you can state your case. So far I see these as slander and lies... but then, it seems you thrive on those things.

So, without making this all about me... let's talk about Tony Jones... and all the facts (which seemed to become opinions as of late) that you have piling up against him.

iggy
Updated: This is an example of Ken's "research" (now opinion) in which as usual he gives only half the story.
So Ken... about the lies and slander (I mean "opinions") concerning Tony... I am still waiting for you to prove your lies and slander as Truth...

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Tony Jones is Reformed!

Tony Jones is Reformed! But then who will listen when we have MacArthurites to say Tony is not…

I thought it was a good read though a bit old now. Oh! and don't forget to update your links to Tony's new blog. http://tonyj.net/

Be Blessed,
iggy

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

You Might Be A Pharisee If...





You Might Be A Pharisee If...

(With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy)

  • If you missed a family reunion or a funeral of a close friend because you didn’t want to miss the midweek service…you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you ever worried about whether or not you should read the italicized words in you King James Bible because they weren’t in the original text …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you ever gave your pastor a doctor’s excuse for missing a Sunday evening service …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you ever tried to exchange your bratwurst for an Italian sausage because you found out they were beer brats …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you say grace before in-between-meal snacks …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you won’t let your kids read The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe because there is a witch in the book …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you object to the new church hymnals because they have “contemporary” songs from the likes of Andrae Crouch and Dallas Holm …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you think the new youth pastor should not be trusted with the care of your children because he has an ICHTHUS tattoo…you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you rebuked the visiting preacher for not wearing a tie when he was in the pulpit …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you boycotted The End of the Spear because the part of Nate Saint was played by a homosexual …you might be a Pharisee.
  • If you refuse to watch The Passion of the Christ because it borrows too heavily from Catholic tradition …you might be a Pharisee.
Feel free to add any "You might be a Pharisee if..." ideas to the comments section below.


This is all from Gamaliel's Desk by Rick Presley. BTW the comments are about as funny as some of the other "mights".


Be blessed,
iggy

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Ingrid pushes Contemplative prayer!



Ingrid Schlueter of Slice of Laodicea and Hope in Laodicea (both a bit ironic of names if you understand what happened biblically to Laodicea) has been often on rants against "contemplation" and "meditation" in which the emerging church has "latched" onto. Now, this is not the same as some Hindu practice... nor is it a derivative of it, though some practice a version of Yoga in which they focus on God and scripture and prayer...

Now the thing is that amazed me is that Ingrid in all her rants often turns to the Puritans for inspiration and either never really read this PDF form or missed what the writer stated... in a way it is not that far from something Doug Padgitt or Brian McLaren have stated. Here is the quote that caught my eye... I have added the bold to emphasize the part that Ingrid missed

"We rightly criticize those who engage in transcendental meditation and other mindrelaxing exercises because these practices are connected with false religions, such asBuddhism and Hinduism, and have nothing to do with Scripture. Such forms of meditation focus on emptying the mind to become detached from the world and to merge with the so-called Cosmic Mind, not to attach to, listen to, and to be active for a living,personal God. Yet, we can learn from such people the importance of quiet reflection and prolonged meditation." (PDF FILE)

So now it seems that IF Ingrid approves of a "form" of prayer it is fine, but if the emerging church practices it, it is worldly and of Satan...

I guess the Truth is that some see that some would rather exchange Jesus' righteousness for their own righteousness and judge others by themselves as the high standard... yet then turn around and practice and teach what they also judge others for doing.

Romans 2: 1-5
"You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance? But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. "

So is Ingrid now the new "emerging guru"?

Be Blessed,
iggy

Monday, October 08, 2007

Do we live by "Christianity" or by Jesus.





I have to wonder at some of critics that are out there.

I have seen these things.

1. A person write against Erwin McManus' "the Barbarian Way" as he took the side of the civilized religionist... proudly!
2. A person add to statements so that they fit their critic...
3. People who lift up foul mouthed reformers like Martin Luther then attack Mark Driscoll. (Martin Luther like to use colorful scatological language.)
4. People who when challenged for their teaching as being biblical quote Spurgeon to prove it is!
5. People who condemn me for "playing down heaven and hell" and that the Gospel is all about "me"... I have to laugh as it is them who say "I got saved so I will not go to Hell and I get to go to Heaven"... I state that God came through Jesus to preach the Kingdom of God and that I am privileged to be called and enter into His Kingdom. Heaven is a by product of the big picture God is doing... and so is my salvation... so I am wondering... were is this all about me. Yet, it seems that many do accuse myself and others, then turn around and preach a "me-driven" gospel themselves! The focus of Christianity is not me, but Jesus Christ.

Now, here is the big difference that I see and it is summed up it this quote by Chris P.

"I believe that Mike’s point is that the majority of those claiming christianity, which is a religion btw, are not necessarily true saints."

Notice that "Christianity is a religion to Chris and if you look at the other examples that seems to be the consensus of this group! It is not a relationship with God through the death, burial and resurrection of His Son Jesus and then being filled with the Holy Spirit! Nope, it is a religion that is civilized and controllable and that can be understood by mere human reasoning.

They worship a controlled God of their own vain imaginations!

Then they accuse others of being me-based, when their whole religion is the same as the Pharisees who thought they could get God to move by their strict obedience to the Law.

God is sovereign and in no way impressed with man's religion. He is impressed only with His Son and those who depend totally on Jesus for salvation.

Be Blessed,
iggy

Walking through Romans: Romans 9:13 - 33 part 12

Walking through Romans: Romans 9:13 - 33 part 12

Romans 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice with God? Absolutely not! 9:15 For he says to Moses: “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 9:16 So then, it does not depend on human desire or exertion, but on God who shows mercy. 9:17 For the scripture says to Pharaoh: “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may demonstrate my power in you, and that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.” 9:18 So then, God has mercy on whom he chooses to have mercy, and he hardens whom he chooses to harden.
9:19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who has ever resisted his will?” 9:20 But who indeed are you – a mere human being – to talk back to God? Does what is molded say to the molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 9:21 Has the potter no right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special use and another for ordinary use? 9:22 But what if God, willing to demonstrate his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the objects of wrath prepared for destruction? 9:23 And what if he is willing to make known the wealth of his glory on the objects of mercy that he has prepared beforehand for glory – 9:24 even us, whom he has called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? 9:25 As he also says in Hosea:
“I will call those who were not my people, ‘My people,’ and I will call her who was unloved, ‘My beloved.’”
9:26 “And in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’
there they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’”
9:27 And Isaiah cries out on behalf of Israel, “Though the number of the children of Israel are as the sand of the sea, only the remnant will be saved, 9:28 for the Lord will execute his sentence on the earth completely and quickly.” 9:29 Just as Isaiah predicted,
“If the Lord of armies had not left us descendants,
we would have become like Sodom,
and we would have resembled Gomorrah.”

9:30 What shall we say then? – that the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness obtained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith, 9:31 but Israel even though pursuing a law of righteousness did not attain it. 9:32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but (as if it were possible) by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, 9:33 just as it is written,
“Look, I am laying in Zion a stone that will cause people to stumble
and a rock that will make them fall,
yet the one who believes in him will not be put to shame.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is God unjust by His Mercy and Compassion and who He gives grace to? Certainly on the surface it would see that it is unfair. Why would some, who have strived to show they are followers of God, not be chosen in the end? Why would some be chosen as if by random and without any rhyme or reason? We are left with the feeling that we have a capricious God who really does not care for righteousness nor dose He care for man’s worship. He will just do as He pleases, and if He be a man, would be selfish in His doing so if not considered mad.

Yet, this is not the case as if God chose us on our own merit, or if somehow we gained favor from Him in something we did, we would still need to address that them men are righteous on their own without God. For you see God is Right and is The Just. If man could satisfy God’s required perfect holiness, then they would be gods themselves and in no need of God.

Now, Paul has already stated that all have sinned, (Roman 3:23) and that no one is righteous, (Romans 3:10) and so has set the foundation of this revelation in that we are dead in our sins… and that there was only One who was Just, and the Justifier… God through Jesus Christ.

Now many miss that Mercy is how God shows His power as God speaks of this as He spoke to Moses and Paul brings it up now. “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” We also find God chooses to show His power as He can soften the heart of some and harden the heart of others. Yet, it seems that as we look back in Romans 1 we see that this hardening is that man had the knowledge of God but forsook it.

“For although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God or give him thanks, but they became futile in their thoughts and their senseless hearts were darkened.” (Romans 1:21)

Man still chooses the direction of his heart but it is God who either draws man to himself or hardens man’s heart and they are turned over to the futility of their thoughts and vile worship of created things.


It is not that God response to man’s heart in its own turning but that if one turns away they are hardened… and all men have turned away. Yet, by grace God has mercy and softens some men’s heart… and in that moment grace breaks down the barrier and the heart of man turns once again to God.
Man can ask why God made him this way… yet still many peoples theology teaches that God made some people bad and some to be saved by Grace. The truth is in Genesis where man as part of creation was declared “Good” (Genesis 1: 31)

So man originally made good turned away as in that his heart was hardened. God did not make any man “evil” or any man to be tossed into the fire. He did not create some to just partake in wrath. Man was made and was declared good, then sinned and then was condemned to receive the wages of sin… which is death.

In that we are condemned to death.

Now from a purely human perspective God seems to have made some to be vessels of wrath and some to be vessels of destruction. And because of “sin” all men are vessels of destruction. God did choose the Jews as if by random to display His mercy and grace. They did nothing to be chosen though that seemed to be lost to some as they took God’s favor as earned because they kept God’s law. Now, God did bless them for keeping the Law, yet it was not for their salvation that the Law was given as the Law gave no provisions for salvation or forgiveness of sins. Sacrifice was needed for forgiveness of sins, yet all men still went to the grave… for all men still died even if forgiven by the blood of bulls and goats. Now, it was for forgiveness that the blood of bulls and goats was demanded, yet, that blood never nor could take away the sins of a person… only cover, yet, we find Jesus’ Blood takes away the sins of a person.

Hebrews 9: 11-14
“When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!”

Jesus did more than atone for our sins He took them away as the prophet John the Baptist stated in John "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! (John 1:29).


Hebrews 10: 2-12 also shows more that the sins are taken away not just covered.

“If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased.
Then I said, `Here I am--it is written about me in the scroll-- I have come to do your will, O God.'"
First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them" (although the law required them to be made). Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.”

God’s provision for sin is complete and for all. For by this grace that is Jesus who was sent to take away sin, was born also as a man, a vessel of wrath, learned obedience even unto death and so overcame death. We must now realize that we also must be born of heaven to live. It is in this new birth as we come to believe and receive Jesus, become the children of God… the same children of the Faith of Abraham. It is in this that Jesus is our Eternal Father, yet also being the first fruit of the New Creation, is our brother.

Now, God is willing to display His wrath on man, yet even more He wants to show His compassion. God chooses to endure those so deserving of wrath with patience… remember it is all of us that are deserving of His wrath…

In this patience, we find that there are those who are vessels of mercy. These vessels of mercy have not earned their title. In fact many thought that they were these vessels and called the “others” who they deemed not chosen as the vessels of wrath as dogs or even less than human. Many of the Jews believed that they were in God’s favor simply because of their birthright of being dependences of Abraham, yet Paul, sadly states that “not all those who are descended from Israel are truly Israel” (Romans 9:6) Yet, now we find the punch line… as some seem to twist this chapter to mean that God created some for wrath and some for destruction and in that negate the truth of creation. Men are created to be the image of the Living God. Man was created “good” and fell from this “goodness” and forsook it for a lie. To state that some were created for the purpose of destruction cuts across man being created to be the Image Bearer. Now, this punch line is that the very ones that were deemed dogs and vessels or wrath, are now as the Prophet Hosea states: “I will call those who were not my people, ‘My people,’ and I will call her who was unloved,’ My beloved. (Romans 9:25)

Now, one might ask if then the Children of Israel are all lost if God has now turned to such favor on the Gentiles… Yet, Paul states there is a remnant.

Now, here I see that to state that God made some to be tossed into the fire is a lie. God desired none should perish… (2 Peter 3: 9). Yet sadly there are some that will refuse to exchange the lie for truth.

God is merciful. He is Just. Those that were given the Law missed the purpose of the Law which was to reveal their sin and make them cry out to God for salvation. Instead they took the Law as a way to salvation. They sought to gain God’s favor by works and not by faith. They stumbled over the “Stumbling Stone” who we find out is Jesus. This Rock was given so that we would ALL fall and in that put our faith in this Rock and not perish or be put to shame.

The punch line is that by Jesus God flipped the very thought that some are created for destruction and some for wrath on it’s head. God planned before creation that in Christ Jesus all would have a way of salvation. Yet, again, sadly though all will hear the Calling, not all will be chosen as they will not believe on Christ or receive the Life of Christ that gives all men salvation. Some will be lost and instead of be lifted up, will stumble but all will have to face the “Rock” that is Jesus Christ.

Be Blessed,
iggy

The Emerging Church and Blogging About Grace

I have been blogging for over four years now... which I guess last May was my anniversary. Missed it myself.

In that time I have been chronicling my journey in the emerging conversation which commonly is called the emerging church. I have seen the conversation change over the years and move from being "postmodern" to "a conversation" to a "movement". I have seen many whose lives have been changed for the better and some that have lost their faith... which i do not blame the ec about... as I have seen many walk away who were not even involved in the ec walk away.

I have seen many grow in love more and more with Jesus and mature more in their faith, and I have seen really ugly things as some attack others in the name of Jesus and in the name of truth.

I have been called every name in the book... which used to bother me until I realized that it is not me they are attacking but Christ in me. I do not and have never demanded that "all" need agree with me on all things as I accept people where they are at and choose to love them as Jesus loves me... unconditionally (as much as possible).

I know I have made mistakes along the way, yet in all of this know more and more that most often when we attack another, we have lost sight of Jesus. We have taken our eyes off of Jesus and placed them on others... or ourselves.

We all fail in the presence of Jesus. We all stand wanting and in great need in His presence... and that is how it should be. Yet, in His presence we also lack nothing and need nothing. What a powerful paradox!

On our own none of us are "right". We may be close to knowing right and wrong, yet, on our own we cannot know how right is to be used properly. In that we often start with "right" and even good intentions and are just plain wrong... we cannot sustain goodness on our own for any length of time.

Many think that we are saved by Grace through Faith... and then miraculously then all we do is as good a God is. Somehow after we believe in Jesus and receive His Life, some think that God just blesses all their own works from that day forward. That is a seductive lie. It is the lie Paul wrote against in Galatians 3. 1-5

"You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? Have you suffered so much for nothing—if it really was for nothing? Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?"

Paul shows us that not only are we saved by Grace, but we are sustained by Grace and maintained by God's grace.

I have met many who teach contrary to this... i could name some big names. In fact some of my biggest critics teach that we whose fruit of self is turn to good when we are saved. I say again any fruit I produce on my own is always and will always be, rotten. The only Good Fruit, is of the Living Vine and we the grafted branch, can only produce the fruit from the source of the Life Giving sap as it flows through us. We are to abide in Christ... for in Him we have Life.

If one settles for accepting Jesus as just a "title" or even see Him as God, I see that as settling for less than what is given. For Life overcomes death in Christ Jesus. God is the God of he Living not the dead, so to be one's God, one must Live and Life is only in the Son.

I am amazed how often when I state these things I am called a heretic, liar or something worse. I am amazed that some who teach self righteous works as a form of godliness miss this truth... yet I see that they miss they are the ones who have fallen from grace to works... they have placed themselves under the Law and have forsaken grace by faith... for their salvation.

I do believe that one is saved, and can wander into works... yet I also see that some pervert the true gospel with this teaching. This is not as some call it, "old truth" it is "Living Truth" for our God is a living God...

Blessings,
iggy

Friday, August 31, 2007

"John MacArthur teaches(?) us who killed Jesus..." pt 2

I posted a video of John MacArthur where he stated some anti-Semitism statements and in response someone stated that I was taking John out of Context...

Here is a link to the context.


Note still that after John MacArthur makes his comment all hear what he states and takes it as anti semantic... also note that John states that the Law of the OT was not "true" which I think God and Moses would disagree with that statement! LOL! It was not that the "religion" was not true it was what and how the religious leaders used it that was wrong.



KING: Who killed him, John?

MACARTHUR: Well, the Romans executed him on the mountain, but they did it under duress and the pressure of Jewish leaders, who hated him, not because of the cure he offered but because of the indictment. I mean, he went to his own town. One of the most riveting portions of the whole New Testament, Luke Chapter 4, he goes to Nazareth, where he grew up, goes back to his synagogue where he attended every Sabbath, he's with his family, his relatives, his friends that he grew up with. He preaches one sermon there, and they try to throw him off a cliff. It wasn't that they didn't want the kingdom of God or salvation or forgiveness or heaven or whatever. They couldn't accept the diagnosis that their religion was not true, that it was not of the heart. And that was the issue that finally drove them to the cross.

KING: I want to see how a Jew reacts to that.

MANNING: That was a reaction especially significant to me, that what upset them was that Jesus was open to finding God's presence even among people who were not Jews. And that really shocked them.


Though John does state these things are secondary, it still does not negate that all there on the panel and also Larry King heard what John stated and heard it as anti Semitic. I might add also that John seem to have a disconnect between "social issues" and "religious issues" which shows a great error of compartmentalizing the Gospel to fit one context and not another.


KING: How does a Jew react to that? You killed him.

PRAGER: No. That's exactly it. I know you're not blaming me. He's not blaming me. He's blaming me. He doesn't like my politics. OK.

KING: I like you.

PRAGER: I know you do. And I appreciate it. It's mutual. Listen, this is key. I have no issue. No Jew will have an issue with saying Jewish leaders of the time, along with the Romans, conspired to kill him, even though the Jews couldn't do it alone, they didn't have the death penalty or crucifixion. Plus the fact that tens of thousands of Jews were also crucified, other Jews, which is also necessary to point out.

The problem has only been if Christians said Jews are to blame forever, all Jews all the time. That's, and unfortunately, in Europe, not in America, and I tell the Jews make a huge distinction between the Jewish experience with American Christians and European Christians. There, Jews were frequently blamed for something that they had no hand in, and that is evil. But to say that -- but I have no problem in saying that there were probably Jewish leaders, who, according to the story, who conspired with the Romans.

KING: It begins the era of anti-Semitism.

PRAGER: Yes, it does. Because the reader -- it's up to the reader. And this is what I have learned, no matter how divine you find the text, it is still in our hands what we do with the text. This is the ultimate freedom God has given us.

KING: Your interpretation.

PRAGER: Two people can read the same text and one can say, that God ultimately killed him and we are of the branch of Judaism, as evangelical Christians and many Catholics will say today, and others will say damn the Jews. Reading the same text.

KING: Jon Meacham, I'll come to you in a second. I got to take a break. You wanted to say something, John MacArthur?

MACARTHUR: It's much deeper than that. No true Christian transformed on the inside by faith in Jesus Christ is going to be an anti-Semite. What you have is people who call themselves Christians, but who have not been transformed by the power of Christ. They're the ones that would be anti-Semitic.

KING: In other words, if you're a racist, you can't be a Christian.

MACARTHUR: No, if you're a Christian, you will be converted from your racism.

KING: You can't be a racist if you're a Christian.

MACARTHUR: That's right. So true Christians...

KING: So when churches were segregated on Sunday morning, they were non-Christians.

MACARTHUR: You know, I have a real trouble believing -- we're talking about a different issue now. We're talking about a social issue, not a religious.

KING: But they were Christian.

MACARTHUR: I think Christians act like Christians. I think Christians are transformed people. And lots of people take the label, but don't know Christ.

KING: Wasn't it Mark Twain who said, if Christ came back, the one thing he wouldn't be is a Christian.

MACARTHUR: That's another overstatement by Mark Twain.

So, that is the context, and it shows that John did state anti-Semitic statements... Whether that be that he was lost in his secondary points or that he just forgot that the Father's Plan was that Jesus come and die for our sins... seems rather interesting as he has written books on this topic and is considered an authority. At least on enough to be on Larry King Live....

I will note also as one reads this, one will see John MacArthur's double speak as pointed out by Prager:

No. That's exactly it. I know you're not blaming me. He's not blaming me. He's blaming me. He doesn't like my politics. OK.



The point is this. If John holds others to a certain standard then does not live up to it... should he not then extend a Grace to them instead of declaring war on them?

Oh! Here is something to give a little more levity to all this from Bob Hyatt.



Be Blessed,
iggy

Monday, August 27, 2007

Getting ready for the fast and prayer Aug 28th...

The Christianity Today article is out...

"The angriest websites are those belonging to small, but disturbingly visible, fundamentalist Protestant groups outraged that fellow Protestants appear to be holding out a welcoming hand to Catholics or Orthodox Christians.

Leading the charge against alleged ecumenists is Apprising Ministries (AM), a New Hampshire-based group whose leader is Southern Baptist pastor Ken Silva. Rick Warren, according to AM, is a "milquetoast." Schuller and the late Norman Vincent Peale are "the devil's duo." Richard Foster (a leading Quaker writer on Christian spirituality), Brian McLaren (a leader in the emerging church movement), and Joel Osteen (pastor of Lakewood Church in Houston) are "vipers of new evangelicalism" and "whitewashed tombs." Through the Web, such commentary gains a global audience—Christian and non-Christian."

Again, Ken's reply was:

"Since Christ gave it to me, then I say, the Lord be praised…. Have these people ever considered that the anger coming through me as a pastor-teacher sent by the Lord just might not actually be my own?" ~ Ken Silva

Also Ken response to me about this day of prayer and fasting was this mocking response:
Ken Silva Will Be Blessed Next Week!

So, again join me in prayer and fasting to bless Ken Silva.

Blessings,
iggy

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Prayer and Fasting for Ken... while he mocks me over it!

It is so strange that "war" is at the heart of those in Ken Silva's camp... to the point that even when I state I and others will pray for Ken that God blesses him, Ken uses this as a point and issue to mock me! LOL! You can read it here at CRN. Ken Silva Will Be Blessed Next Week!

I will continue to seek Jesus' way and pray for my enemies...
"An emerging church nemesis of mine named Carlos Shelton (aka "iggy") has called for a day of prayer and fasting for me in order that God might set me free from…ah, well–whatever it is that he personally dislikes about me."


(Note: Ken is not my declared enemy or nemesis, as I have never declared him an enemy... maybe a confused brother in Christ who sees he speaks in the "anger of the Lord"... IOW he has declared he is my enemy. Ken has judged and condemned me as not saved and an apostate false teacher. The only Nemesis Ken has is in his own fantasies.)

I will also state that it is interesting to me that Ken declares condemnation on me and others in the Name of Jesus, while the Bible states clearly:

Romans 8: 1-2
"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2. because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death."

Note also that on my discussion forum there are many different people in which the "emerging group" is minority. It seems that there though we all get along (for the most part). Also, iggyROCKS! plays much of the artists that CRN, Slice of Laodicea and such are against... and some that they also endorse! It seems again that it is not doctrine but style that is the issue...

I will still pray for Ken and if you are for him or against him please join in our prayer and fasting for Ken to be blessed... the only catch is... either way Ken will be humbled by God to receive it. Humility is a good thing in the Kingdom of God so that is not a threat at all... unless Ken decided to continue in his pride and forsake the blessings of God for his own way.

Remember Ken has declared to be the mouth piece of God... he claims he speaks for God as God is angry with us all that do not agree with Ken.

"Since Christ gave it to me, then I say, the Lord be praised…. Have these people ever considered that the anger coming through me as a pastor-teacher sent by the Lord just might not actually be my own?"

I still wonder at that comment as I see in Hebrews God's word states:

Hebrews 1: 1-2
"In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe."

I do not see Ken's name in that verse, do you?

Note also Ken by stating what he has negates "cessasionism" which is what is taught in the "team pyro" so it would seem that Ken being a modern day prophet runs against the teachings of Frank Turk.

If you think that you want to join me in this time of prayer and fasting on Tuesday the 28th of August, email me. iggy@wwdb.org

I will declare peace in the Name of the Prince of Peace, in this so called "truth war". I am standing on the Word of God as our Lord taught:
Luke 6:
27"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31Do to others as you would have them do to you. "

Ken can call me whatever he wants... I still intend to pray ony for God to truly bless Ken in His full abundance.

BTW I actually do like Ken... no matter what he states otherwise... I mean... I am setting side a day to pray for him...

Blessings,
iggy



Related links:

Link 1

Link 2

~ emerging thought in Montana ~: Ken Silva will be blessed next week!


Ken Silva Will Be Blessed Next Week!

Friday, July 27, 2007

I could not help it... The DeVille made me do it!

OK this guy called rev scottie has been making some waves as he exposed SoL in how dishonest they are in who gets posted on their comments.

In this he made up a name and then posted mean and nasty things against his friends who were being spoken very meanly about at SoL... (what a surprise!)

So, I noticed a post that seemed to be a bit out of sync with what I know about the emergent church... and some poor guy named Jeff

Now Jeff also posted at rev scottie's blog:



"Slice" is a nightmare of a site. (I'm the "Jeff" about whom Ingrid created an "Emergent Quote of the Day" post, then blocked most of my lengthy, good-faith comments on that same post.) I told her I was leaving the site, and the recent rant about comment rights seems at least partially directed at me.

I agree that that site is stunningly divisive. I'm concerned that the heavy censorship may not be known to its users, creating a very imbalanced, unhealthy community. I've never been more frustrated or treated more poorly online in my life (and I post regularly on Slashdot and Fark!)

Thanks for posting your experience as well,
Jeff"

Posted by: Jeff Benson July 26, 2007 at 02:26 PM


With that as a background I just could not resist...

So I posted this rather non offensive comment:

"The biggest difference between the emerging approach and as it is
here…
Is that we would walk and talk with this guy as our friend and answer his questions lovingly.We would not “expose” him and mock him…
It amazes me that it is assumed that “all” emergents think this way when in fact they do not.

People are at many different places in their
lives. Some just have questions and doubt that need our love and kindness to help guide them…
So this post to me is a bit appalling as you trample on someone who may be seriously looking a Jesus and truly wants to believe.

Blessings,
iggy"


Obviously it was not posted as it was against their view...

So....

I did this obvious fake comment:



“Hue DeVille Says:
You have to say those emergents are sure ignorant Of the
truth.Unfortunately Christianity seems to me being sieged by this plague.

Let’s be sure that we do not allow access to them In our
churches.Everyone should be sure to pray against them.”



Now notice that if you look at the capitalized letters…
it spells out


“YOU C LIE.”

Busted again! And they call themselves a discernment ministry?
iggy


(Update: The comment was deleted... and Jeff has still not been able to defend himself on SoL and Ingrid continues to slander Jeff and all the rest of the emerging church with her lie. So as you read SoL... remember YOU C LIE. I also wanted to point out that some there who are on Ingrid's side wanted to actually converse and Ingrid denied them... here is a commont from one such person there

Cliff in WI Says:

Jeff, I agree with you that the
Bible is complicated. It is amazing. What part of it do you have such a problem with? If you have read it (I will assume you have a grasp of its
message) why do you make those claims? I noticed you used the words flawed and human in your description. What parts are flawed? I take it when you said human, you meant it was mankind’s ideas and thoughts. Really? How do you come up with that?
You’re putting your eternal soul on the line. Do you really want to stay there? You may not want to hear that people here
will pray for you and really care about what happens with you. We will and we do. I would like to know how you have come to your conclusion(s).
Thank you


Jeff has been denied being able to even answer this person who was truly concerned... and Ingrid did not seem to care at all. If one is going to be a discernment ministry and make accusations... and the people desire dialog, to deny them seems truly dishonest. To not let them speak and speak for them tell people
what YOU THINK they believe and not letting them speak for themselves is
more dishonest.
BTW Ingrid's repsonse to Jeff's quote was this:
"Response: Well Jeff, how can you know for sure that biblical fundamentalists are wrong? Are you sure about that?"
Interestingly she never let him respond back.)

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

More of the fruit of Lordship Salvation with Jim W.

I am really getting tired of this... but Jim W. wanted to let me know more of his love for me.

So here is an update here: I errored that this was James White (who has his own issues) and that this is the mysterious Jim W. It seems with this last comment he still thinks himself of some kind of superior Christian than me and others.

Here is the final comment toward me it is on the same link as above.


Jim W on July 24th, 2007
iggy, you just dont learn, do you? Now you claim
that I am “James White”. I wish I had half his Biblical knowledge. Shoot, I’d
settle for 1/4.
So, once again, you twist and slander someone who points out
your error by slandering someone else.
I have no idea how you arrive that
producing good fruit is works salvation. We produce good fruit by the grace of
God. Unless we are born again, all our works as as filthy rags. Once we are born
again, we do the will of God which is to grow in His Word, His grace, His
knowledge and by doing what He wills, we produce good fruit. That has nothing to
do with our salvation. Faith without works is dead. Remember that verse? It’s
popular with the emergent crowd. Usually used to say that we must do good works
to be saved. That’s works righteousness, which is false, and neither John Mac,
nor I, nor Jim B, nor Tony (here) believe that line of thought. Instead, our
faith in God produces good works (fruit).
And again, you claim I’m spitting
on you in my denunciation of you. How sad that you need to see correction as
people spitting on you. Do you accuse God of spitting on you when He chastens
you as He would a wayward child? Only if you are truly saved will God do this,
if you are still unregenerate, God could care less. So, maybe, just maybe,
you’re relying on your human understanding too far, relying on your sad
“friends”, MacLaren and Jones and their twisted lore for your faith and perhaps
God is using people like Tony and Jim B to show you the errors of your way.
When you learn how to read and comprehend, maybe we can talk. Until then, I
have nothing further to say to you.



Jim W's understanding of fruit is a bit off from the biblical teachings.. yet in the core we agree... yet for some reason as the same with Tony Rose and Jim Bublitz Jim W. cannot see this or admit it... notice he seems to also equate his chastisement of me with the chastisement of God... as if he is God at that point here to correct me in the things we agree on... and I can't read and comprehend! LOL!

He truly furthers my conviction to stay away from divisive people like him... If this is conforming to the image of Chirst, God have mercy on us all! I think this further shows the condition of his heart and why people need to beware of Lordship Salvation and its fruit. You see even when he agrees with me, I am wrong... and am lesser than him.

Before someone criticizes me over this please realize that I was defending Biblical truth over "absolute truth" which definition would mean that Jesus and the Bible are "just an abstract thought". This is the position Jim W. was defending. I was standing on the Biblical definition which is that Truth is the Person of Jesus Christ and from Him all Truth comes... remember it was through Jesus Christ all things were created... and He was full of Grace and Truth. (John 1)

I only am showing this to show what kind of people these are and how they treat others in the Name of Jesus... and how sad it is.

Blessed?
iggy


Here is part one

Monday, July 23, 2007

Banned for standing on Truth of Scripture.

First I was banned at oldtruth.com for pointing out that Jim Bublitz knew nothing of the emerging church and lies about it... (BTW I really don't care about being banned from there as there was some really mean people there).

Now I have been threatened from Tony Rose to be banned at His blog for stating that Jesus is not "just absolute truth" and standing on the Bible' teaching of Jesus being The Truth.

It seems that truth means nothing for all their talk.

A bit of an update here as Tony Rose came here to dialog over the topic of objective truth...
You can read his comments and my response here.

UPDATE: This was posted on Tony Rose' comments.

"Iggy I have no idea what you even mean by Jesus being “just an abstract thought.” I’ve never said that and don’t even know what you mean by it, or by claiming that I have said it.
Jesus is certainly not just an abstract thought, whatever you mean by that.
tr"

As I keep stating even though he agrees with me, I am still wrong.
Beware false teachers.

iggy

How Right I Am!!!

I accidentally found a great video by Brian McLaren... Where? On CRN...



This post
confirms what I have been saying for some time, that the "Truth War" is not about "truth" but about different views of the Kingdom of God.

Yet, as I stated many times here and elsewhere, this is not a war about truth, but about whether Jesus Resurrection brought the Kingdom to earth as in the Lords Pray.

Funny thing, the "editor" seems to be against the Lord's Prayer. He seems to be pointing out that the Kingdom of God is not here... that Jesus death, burial and resurrection were a huge waste of time... and the only reason Jesus died was to get our butts out of hell into heaven.

A version of the Kingdom that Jesus came to bring it... failed so left and will come again as the wrathful and angry God they worship, unless the emergent take over the church and all is lost...

or

A version in which Jesus being the first born of the New Creation ushered in the Kingdom of God, on Earth as it is in Heaven. It is not in it's fullness but it will be soon.

I think the second one seems a bit more biblical... well at least from what the scripture states being true.

So one can believe the truth, enter into God's Kingdom through Jesus Christ... or believe a lie...

Maybe this is a truth war... and the truth is some hate the Kingdom of God so much that they willingly exchange the truth for a lie and worship their own creation of what the bible says.

Beware false teachers.

I think the reason they think Brian McLaren is so dangerous, is that he makes them face what the bible actually teaches.

blessings,

iggy

Saturday, June 02, 2007

Discussions that are really just arguments… and a Biblical view of Amos 3:3

Discussions that are really just arguments… and a Biblical view of Amos 3:3

I fail at times to recognize that there are some who cannot have a conversation with people as people… in fact they have labeled the “other” and instead of address them as an individual, they carry in the baggage of that label…Of course I fully admit I do this also.

Yet, in these discussions I see that even when I have expressed myself clearly, the person who has placed themselves as my superior who needs to teach and admonish me for my “bad doctrine” fails to actually think they can learn something from me.

I will say that I do learn from others… even in disagreeing I learn… sometimes it is that I should not have even started a conversation with that person! LOL!

Time and time again, when I talk of the proper flow of which we should get our doctrine I am then accused of saying these things…

1. iggy is against all doctrine.
2. iggy states that doctrine divides.
3. If doctrine is presented as propositional iggy recoils.


I have found time and time again that in talking with certain people that even when we agree, they are too blind to see it in that they have already labeled and decided anything I say will be wrong.

The most recent comments on a post I was involved in make this point… I have changed the names as they seem to be a bit hostile and I hope to make a point and not continue in their fictitious war and hate they try to push on me…

Here is the last comment:

“Bob and Tom,
in fact Bob is stating what i have been saying…
“He’s missing what Piper is saying about the need to say something about Christ, and who He is, and what He has done. All of that is summed up in doctrine.”
We must first have Christ who is summed up in doctrine… that is what I stated summed up and what I teach… so you both are arguing against me teaching this very thing… note in the above comments I stated”
“Again, no doctrine has authority unless it comes from Jesus…”
Yet, "Bob" and now you have still twisted what I have said and slandered me as to saying something else…
Have both of your eyes been so blinded that you cannot even see when you agree with someone?
Goodbye.”

Of course there is much more to this…

I ended it there knowing that “Bob” will continue to slander me and Tom will continue to be a yes man to Bob… Both missing that they had a chance to reconcile in the Name of Jesus and chose to remain argumentative and divisive not over true doctrinal issues, but over their own perverse continuance to twist what others are actually stating.

I think Satan has blinded some people’s eyes so much that they can only agree with those who think just like them… which leads me to Amos 3:3
People use this scripture over and over to prove that unity must be that all must agree on doctrine… interestingly scripture states the opposite… and the passage they quote is part of and admonishment from God as to their fallen ways.

Now in Amos 3:3 it is not that two must agree on everything… but in order that two walk together they must agree on that. God is stating to agree to walk with Him and to trust Him. God is calling those to get out and walk with Him. God just wants us to trust Him because He called us… not because we agree in all things. In fact the scripture states we do not agree with God and that the ungodly cannot be agreement as the mind of sinful man is death.

Romans 8:6-8 “The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.”
The point is that without Christ Jesus present we cannot agree to walk with God, let alone agree on all point with each other.

In the book of 1 Kings Chapter 18, we have two kings of Israel that “agree” and divide the Nation of Israel into two parts. Israel and Judah… Yet there was one man that agreed with God.. Elijah. I thin kit interesting to note the two Kings that agreed were Ahab who allowed the worship of Baal, and Obadiah who loved and served the Lord.

Elijah confronts the Ahab and the sin that he had allowed. In that Elijah eventually goes up again the prophets of Baal in a stand off over which of the “gods” was true and would bur up the offering to him… of course most have heard the story and know that Baal did not burn up his offering… and that YHWH sent a ball of fire down and devoured His offering. (Which had been doused with a ton of water!)

The point is that agreement of two was not uniting… in this case it was divisive…
So the used of Amos 3:3 as to mean that we must agree on all things to walk together misses the point. God wanted people to turn to Him and walk with Him even though they may not have agreed with Him… God wanted them to remember how faithful He was to them in the past and on that trust and learn more and more how to agree with Him more and more.

Another example is the Tower of Babel… it is said that all mankind at that time came to one mind and goal which was to build a tower to reach God. They were all of one mind to reach a goal to reach God on their own terms. If God had not stepped in and caused them to become confused by giving them all different languages, mankind might have been lost.

So again, just because two agree and even if they agree in all things, does not mean it to be “biblical” unity. That can and only comes from God alone. It must flow from God to us… and not from us agreeing and then turning to God in our own way.

Many approach scripture and doctrine in this way. In fact the Pharisees held that if they kept God’s word to the minutest detail, they could force God to come and run out Rome. They sought to control God by their doctrine… and this still happens today by those who hold that Jesus and doctrine are equal or inseperatable. In a true sense they are but with out the proper understand that doctrine must flow from Jesus, we then we have an unbalanced view of doctrine and its true purpose.

This is a bit like understanding the relationship of Jesus and the Father... though both God, Jesus stated that the Father was greater... and that He did nothing unless the Father had already done it.

Blessings,
iggy