|
Post by John on Sept 19, 2019 9:49:07 GMT -5
I do not believe that is what it means when he says not to Lord over God's heritage. You don't have authorities if they can't exert control. If they can't actually rule over someone, they are not authorities but just advisors. It has to be speaking of attitude.
I agree with exerting a certain amount of control in situations, but not total control of the flock, were you say what everything goes in their life. And I do believe it is right this definition, but exerting some power in decisions, and stuff like that, of course there is some of that within a position of authority, but it is not like an Hitlertarian way, no not at all, because also there is other scriptures to consider, and yes it does cover attitude. A preacher must also be sensitive to the Holy Spirit. And literally, that definition is what lording over literally means, but of course it goes on the side of attitude, and their is exerting control of certain situations, but it is not total control. And along with the word saying submit yourselves to the elder, it also says submit yourselves one to another. And yes their is leadership, but also the leader must be sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit and to allow people to be used of the Holy Spirit, otherwise you are not using your authority in a biblical manner, and all you are about is yourself, and not the body, for it is a body ministry, and not a one man show. It is not total control to were we say what people do in every aspect of their life, that is not biblical. While I am not sure we see everything exactly alike, I agree far more than disagree. It was helpful knowing about your past experiences with denominations, and I have seen abuses from Pastors trying to rule over every aspect of the congregation's lives. I feel much the same way you do.
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 19, 2019 9:53:02 GMT -5
A Jezebel spirit as I understand it is a spirit of rebellion against authority. It is not an overbearing leader. The problem as I see it is that some people try to be servant leaders while others are just control freaks. That is the difference.
|
|
|
Post by Giller on Sept 19, 2019 9:55:02 GMT -5
Lording over literally means to subjugate, control and so on, that is what lording over something is, you subdue it, until you control it in every way, which with it follows a self righteous attitude..
And there is a difference between exerting control of situations, in a biblical manner according what the word allows via a role of authority, and controlling, subjugating the flock and so on.
To me it is very simple to see.
The one who is the ultimate leader is the Holy Spirit.
All leaders must submit to him and his guidance otherwise, they will not be leading well.
And they must lead in the right spirit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2019 9:56:28 GMT -5
1Pe 5:3 (3) Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. Here is what " Lords over" means in the Greek: (Strong's concordance) (G2634 κατακυριεύω katakurieuō
kat-ak-oo-ree-yoo'-o From G2596 and G2961; to lord against, that is, control, subjugate: - exercise dominion over ( lordship), be lord over, overcome.) Leaders are not to Lord it over the flock or control the flock, but rather to build them up in the most holy faith , so they grow in their walk with God, and learn to trust in Jesus. God says no (Lording over the flock), and he means no. I do not believe that is what it means when he says not to Lord over God's heritage. You don't have authorities if they can't exert control. If they can't actually rule over someone, they are not authorities but just advisors. It has to be speaking of attitude.
I see it as the difference between the flesh and the spirit. Authority and leading by the Holy Spirit is not the same as fleshly/worldly authority and control. The way I see it they are different animals altogether, and scripture is warning against the latter. This is why I don't believe that "ruling" in the church is speaking of ruling in the same sense as worldly ruling. Jesus simply did not use worldly ways of dominating and controlling, His authority was spiritual, and people followed Him from their own free will or not at all. He never tried to coerce people in any way.
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 19, 2019 10:03:03 GMT -5
I do not believe that is what it means when he says not to Lord over God's heritage. You don't have authorities if they can't exert control. If they can't actually rule over someone, they are not authorities but just advisors. It has to be speaking of attitude.
I see it as the difference between the flesh and the spirit. Authority and leading by the Holy Spirit is not the same as fleshly/worldly authority and control. The way I see it they are different animals altogether, and scripture is warning against the latter. This is why I don't believe that "ruling" in the church is speaking of ruling in the same sense as worldly ruling. Jesus simply did not use worldly ways of dominating and controlling, His authority was spiritual, and people followed Him from their own free will or not at all. He never tried to coerce people in any way. If a person chose not to obey Jesus, the threat hanging over them was eternal damnation. If you rebel against a church leader, what is the threat, being put out of the church?
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 19, 2019 10:07:05 GMT -5
There can be a problem on both sides. It is a problem when a leader becomes abusive and there is a problem when the people are rebellious. They are both wrong. Who decides the leader is being led of the flesh? It is obvious in situations like Giller experienced, but not in all situations. They are not always that easy to recognize.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2019 10:16:15 GMT -5
Amen brother.....there's a big difference between authority in the spirit and authority as it is wielded by the world and the flesh. The flesh wants to dominate, control and intimidate people into submission, and attain to fleshly ambitions. When we see worldly authority exercised in the church it more resembles a Jezebel spirit than the spirit of Christ. But as you are saying, it is not to be like that in the assemblies of Christ where HE is truly the Head and leads through the Holy Spirit. Mat 20:20-21
Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him.
And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom.
Mat 20:24-28
And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren.
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many
I like this sister, so very true. I want to put a bit of emphasis on the verse you mentioned: Mat 20:24-28 And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren. But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many Amen. Servant leadership...so upside down from the ways of this world. Characterized by meekness, but at the same time it is not weak but strong through the Holy Spirit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2019 10:35:41 GMT -5
A Jezebel spirit as I understand it is a spirit of rebellion against authority. It is not an overbearing leader. The problem as I see it is that some people try to be servant leaders while others are just control freaks. That is the difference.
Well, I partly agree brother....to me it is a spirit that rebels against the headship of Christ by trying to stand in His place. That is what Jezebel did in a way...and Ahab was essentially compromised by putting her ahead of the Lord.....due to being intimidated, dominated and controlled by her (and I think the genders are irrelevant as to how it plays out in life...but very relevant for the harmoniousness of scripture...the woman in the ephah called wickedness taken to Babylon/Shinar and how the false is portrayed as mother of harlots). It can start out by manifesting in gentle, subtle ways or in more overt harsher ways, but still being the same spirit, which morphs and waxes worse over time when it is tolerated and allowed to.
|
|
|
Post by Giller on Sept 19, 2019 10:38:28 GMT -5
1Pe 5:3 (3) Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. Here is what " Lords over" means in the Greek: (Strong's concordance) (G2634 κατακυριεύω katakurieuō
kat-ak-oo-ree-yoo'-o From G2596 and G2961; to lord against, that is, control, subjugate: - exercise dominion over ( lordship), be lord over, overcome.) Leaders are not to Lord it over the flock or control the flock, but rather to build them up in the most holy faith , so they grow in their walk with God, and learn to trust in Jesus. God says no (Lording over the flock), and he means no. I do not believe that is what it means when he says not to Lord over God's heritage. You don't have authorities if they can't exert control. If they can't actually rule over someone, they are not authorities but just advisors. It has to be speaking of attitude.
Eph 4:11-12 (11) And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; (12) For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: These offices were truly given for the building up of the church. Yes there is a type of rule (them who rule over you), but it is done from a servants' spirit, out of the right heart, and not as the ruling Gentiles of that time who sought dominion over the people. There is exerting control over situations, their is leadership, and things are not just suggestions, but at the same time you can lead a donkey to water but you can't make him drink, people do still have a free will to obey and disobey, but you will reap the consequences, and the leaders , depending on the matter may have to make a decision on that matter, and not all situations are the same. And the leadership should preach with all authority, great confidence and boldness.
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 19, 2019 10:44:45 GMT -5
A Jezebel spirit as I understand it is a spirit of rebellion against authority. It is not an overbearing leader. The problem as I see it is that some people try to be servant leaders while others are just control freaks. That is the difference.
Well, I partly agree brother....to me it is a spirit that rebels against the headship of Christ by trying to stand in His place. That is what Jezebel did in a way...and Ahab was essentially compromised by putting her ahead of the Lord.....due to being intimidated, dominated and controlled by her (and I think the genders are irrelevant as to how it plays out in life...but very relevant for the harmoniousness of scripture...the woman in the ephah called wickedness taken to Babylon/Shinar and how the false is portrayed as mother of harlots). It can start out by manifesting in gentle, subtle ways or in more overt harsher ways, but still being the same spirit, which morphs and waxes worse over time when it is tolerated and allowed to. I am coming from the standpoint of rebelling against Christ by opposing leaders he placed in positions of authority. Elijah was God's human authority, he wasn't trying to stand in God's place. When Jezebel withstood Elijah, she withstood God. The same thing can happen today.
|
|
|
Post by Giller on Sept 19, 2019 11:24:19 GMT -5
Of course when Paul said things, it was not a suggestion, in the sense, well maybe you should obey this or that.
But rather it was action words, which I will give examples:
Heb 12:1 (1) Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,
Col 3:8 (8) But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
Col 3:9 (9) Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
These are just do it words, and not suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by Giller on Sept 19, 2019 13:09:37 GMT -5
Anywhos back on the main track of denominations.
But first I want to quote a scripture on the word sect.
Act 26:5 (5) Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.
Now here is a quote from John Gill:
(John Gill)
(...that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee; there were three sects of religion among the Jews, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes; ...)
Paul of course at one time was a pharisee.
And this is what the word sect means?
(Webster's dictionary)
(Sect SECT, n. [L. Sp. secta; from L. seco, to cut off, to separate.]
1. A body or number of persons united in tenets, chiefly in philosophy or religion, but constituting a distinct party by holding sentiments different from those of other men. Most sects have originated in a particular perlon, who taught and propagated some peculiar notions in philosophy or religion, and who is considered to have been its founder. Among the jews, the principal sects were the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes.)
So it seems to be people especially of a religious group, who hold on to tenets, but who hold sentiments in certain areas, differing from the main religion.
Thus they are a sectarian group, they have made themselves a group that is somewhat apart from the main after a fashion.
The pharisees seemed to be very influential in their day.
Now what about the word denomination, which I know that there are other words that is the word denomination that is used in a different way, but I am focusing on the word that points to a religious denomination.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_denomination)
(Religious denomination
A religious denomination is a subgroup within a religion that operates under a common name, tradition, and identity.
Major denominations and religions of the world
The term refers to the various Christian denominations (for example, Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and the many varieties of Protestantism). It is also used to describe the four major branches of Judaism (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist). Within Islam, it can refer to the branches or sects (such as Sunni, Shia and Ahmadiyya),[1][2] as well as their various subdivisions such as sub-sects,[3] schools of jurisprudence,[4] schools of theology[5] and religious movements.[6][7]...)
Now of course this article puts Roman Catholicism as a Christian denomination, but I do not consider Catholicism to be Christian, but generally speaking it gives us a good ideal of what a denomination is, which is not that much different than a sect really.
Today is having many denominations in protestant or Christian circles, helping our cause, or is it really damaging our cause?
It is actually damaging our cause, and it is actually bringing division, and many unbelievers that I have talked to, have asked me which denomination is right, and I tell them, that it was never God's intention to bring in denominations, and it is not these denominations that are right it is God that is right.
Even some people in the world see it as being very confusing having all these denominations, and God is not the author of confusion, these denominations do not bring the people of the church closer together but rather further a part.
It does not produce good fruit, it really does not, and sometimes unbelievers, in certain circumstances, see the truth of this, more so than some Christians.
What unites the church is the gospel of Jesus Christ, not the seeker sensitive gospel, not having a bunch of denominations , who have every wind of doctrine, just the gospel.
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 19, 2019 13:21:07 GMT -5
If you did away with denominations entirely, do you really think that would end divisions? Wouldn't people just cling to personalities, doctrines and local churches?
|
|
|
Post by Giller on Sept 19, 2019 13:24:37 GMT -5
If you did away with denominations entirely, do you really think that would end divisions? Wouldn't people just cling to personalities, doctrines and local churches?
It would not end divisions, but it would be a good start at least.
|
|
|
Post by Giller on Sept 19, 2019 13:26:39 GMT -5
And regardless of this, if a person's heart is set in a certain way, then they will go in that direction, no matter what.
|
|