• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Have you ever been "that person"?...

FollowingHim

FollowingHim

Administrator
Staff member
Real Person
Male
This is Lutheran Satire's version of Vegetales. I think many of us can relate, as people who study controversial scripture deeply, sometimes falling into the trap of getting overpassionate about particular issues and ending up talking about them in completely inappropriate situations...
 
Yikes! Not like this.
But I have gotten a few Christian brothers riled up at work over discussions of polygyny. It got them all thinking for about two weeks, then they ran from it like the plague. Maybe they started talking to their wives about it :eek:
 
Ouch! Painful to watch, but so awesome in its sendup of Veggie Tales and "that guy"....
 
Thank you, FH. The video is a lot of fun. Thankfully, I have not been 'that person' in quite a long time. I don't talk much in 'public' Bible study anymore. One of the problems that I see in the whole endeavor of the 'interpretation of the Bible' is that the US has become very 'pastor-centric' . . . The pastor/ and or 'teacher' is the one who is supposed to teach everybody else what the the 'truth' is. Disagreement constitutes a threat to both unity and polity. All levels of maturity and immaturity are in one place, and I believe it kind of violates the hierarchy of the family. Husbands are to teach their wives. . .and really should be the 'pastor' to their families. On the otherhand a Bible study becomes kind of a free for all, "I think it means . . ." and can end up making scripture a nearly meaningless mess of contrary opinions. I would love to be involved in something more like the ancient Bayit Midrash (house of study) - where adult males discussed scripture and the interpretations of the Talmud and endeavored to come to understanding. Yet, I fear this is not to be (at least not in our area). Church culture claims to be about the Truth (at least in evangelical churches), but they want a captive truth. . . a Truth that is domesticated, comes in designer colors and fits comfortably in the corner of a backpack or purse. A truth that requires nothing from us. It has been nice to read what you and others have to say about scripture, faith and experience. Cheers, and thanks,

ABM
 
Agreed 100% on violation of family hierarchy and a free-for-all of contrary opinions.
 
ABlessedMan said:
Thank you, FH. The video is a lot of fun. Thankfully, I have not been 'that person' in quite a long time. I don't talk much in 'public' Bible study anymore. One of the problems that I see in the whole endeavor of the 'interpretation of the Bible' is that the US has become very 'pastor-centric' . . . The pastor/ and or 'teacher' is the one who is supposed to teach everybody else what the the 'truth' is. Disagreement constitutes a threat to both unity and polity. All levels of maturity and immaturity are in one place, and I believe it kind of violates the hierarchy of the family. Husbands are to teach their wives. . .and really should be the 'pastor' to their families. On the otherhand a Bible study becomes kind of a free for all, "I think it means . . ." and can end up making scripture a nearly meaningless mess of contrary opinions. I would love to be involved in something more like the ancient Bayit Midrash (house of study) - where adult males discussed scripture and the interpretations of the Talmud and endeavored to come to understanding. Yet, I fear this is not to be (at least not in our area). Church culture claims to be about the Truth (at least in evangelical churches), but they want a captive truth. . . a Truth that is domesticated, comes in designer colors and fits comfortably in the corner of a backpack or purse. A truth that requires nothing from us. It has been nice to read what you and others have to say about scripture, faith and experience. Cheers, and thanks,

ABM
Click to expand...
"Designer Truth". I like that phraseology.

You sir said a lot in a little.

How about Burger King drive thru church "Have it your way".

The worst types of studies for me are mixed men and women studies. Men and women just think so differently, and besides, women are to be quiet in a mixed assembly anyways...ouch! Just speaking it as I interpret it.
 
Thank you, MOJO. The consumer driven, business model of church is the heresy that shapes most modern Anglo-American thinking. A book I have REALLY intended to read for some time is Soon-Chan Rah's The Next Evangelicalism: Freeing the Church From Western Cultural Captivity. I have heard good things about the book: but I fear that it doesn't go far enough. (I have read similar books, that try to challenge Western Cultural distortion of the faith with one hand, while upholding it with the other).
Returning to FH's original post, though, our family's relationship with the 'church' in our area is difficult. I actually told my children NOT to tell their peers that they were Christians. Their peers think that a Christian is either equal to 'church goer' or equal to 'person who judges others.' I asked the kids to make up something creative that better expressed their relationship to Jesus without using words that their peer group has mis-defined. I don't know if it helped or not. Likewise, my wife and I struggle somewhat with how we relate to the local churches. I mentioned I'm not 'that guy' because I don't believe people listen or care. It is very rare to find anyone in our area who doesn't think they already know everything there is to know.
MOJO talks about the 'women speaking' thing . . . I have wondered if one stumbling block for the local church is because marriages typically stink. How can a person understand that 'Christ is the head of the church' with relationship to husband and wife? Honestly, I caused a ruckus at an elder's meeting because I suggested that the elder's prayed for guidance from Jesus . . .instead of just making the plans that they thought were the best. I was told that 'If you want to know what God is doing in the church . . .look at the bulletin". It is like the 'wife' rules Jesus' house without any concern for what his desires might be. I am curious to know how you guys navigate this one. The Church is Jesus' love and delight . . . and I have been convicted that I am altogether too negative when talking about the church . . .because of obvious reasons. How do you all relate with the local church?
 
This is probably veering off into another topic, but I will let mods switch it if necessary.

  • I attend a local assembly.
  • It's not perfect, but it's better that 99% of anything that us out there.
  • I've brought up bizarre topics with my pastor (including polygyny) and I wasn't excommunicated.
  • Eschatology is open for debate at this assembly.
  • Bible studies are interactive and not authoritarian, but I still don't like the mixed assembly
  • If I left this fellowship, I would have to either start a home ministry or look far and wide because I haven't been impressed with what I've seen out there.
 
ZecAustin said:
andrew said:
Agreed 100% on violation of family hierarchy and a free-for-all of contrary opinions.
Click to expand...
Why are you violating my family hierarchy? That should be inviolable.
Click to expand...
I was agreeing (100%!) with ABM that neither the violation of family hierarchy nor a free-for-all of contrary opinions is desirable in Christian fellowships....
 
We might be able to keep this thread together. The connection for me (the shift that we're making in our thoughts from the OP to here) is that there's a natural segue from "what kind of Christian do I want to be?" to "what kinds of Christians do I want to fellowship with?". Or put another way, a good laugh over a sendup of people who are so full of their own knowledge that all they can do is talk about it, regardless of context, has application to both our individual hearts and to the heart of Christian fellowship.

Meanwhile, to take a stab at your question, ABM, my family has been out of the matrix for about ten years now. I find no value in attending the services of the government-controlled 501(c)(3) corporations commonly referred to as "churches", and have very little use for the word "church" generally, preferring "assembly" and "gathering" as English interpretations of ekklēsia and "assembly" or "fellowship" to describe anything I'm involved in.

On the other hand, I dearly love many friends who continue to participate in the government programs, and do not bother my friends about their preferences. I would rather focus on building a positive alternative that will speak for itself than focus on simply bashing something I presently have no substitute for. And members of my family often hire out as worship leaders and musicians to churches in our local community.

I have been greatly influenced (beginning 22-23 years ago) by two studies by Henry Blackaby. First was Experiencing God: Knowing and Doing The Will of God; second was Created to Be God's Friend: How God Shapes Those He Loves. EG is driven by the life and calling of Moses; CTBGF by the life and calling of Abraham. One of my takeaways from the life of Abraham is that God just called him, meaning him and his family. Big adventures ensued for a guy who was willing to simply "get out your country and away from your kindred and from your father's house and get to a land I will show you". "Fellowship" just wasn't really an issue, and it certainly wasn't an excuse not to follow God where He led. Ya just get up and go.

Practical advice: For those still attached to what-we-grew-up-calling-"church", you don't have to quit going (yet), but go ahead and start a weekly home group (aka kinship group, cell church, house church, prayer group, whatever). Pick two or three close friends/families that are spiritually compatible and see if they'll agree to start meeting with you once a week (for us it was a weekday evening), mostly to talk about what's happening in your lives and pray for each other, but sometimes someone will feel led to share something from scripture, singing together is always appropriate, and a little food never hurts. Get together for the express purpose of doing Acts 2 and I Cor 14 in the light of Mat 18:20. Get that going and everything else will take care of itself.
 
NB - If you start a weekly group, don't refer to it as 'church'. I like 'kinship group' and 'cell group' if you need a label, but "that night I get to see my friends and pray with them" works, too....
 
Meanwhile, to take a stab at your question, ABM, my family has been out of the matrix for about ten years now. I find no value in attending the services of the government-controlled 501(c)(3) corporations commonly referred to as "churches", and have very little use for the word "church" generally, preferring "assembly" and "gathering" as English interpretations of ekklēsia and "assembly" or "fellowship" to describe anything I'm involved in.
Click to expand...

Our family is also "out of the matrix", for the same reason. I found a website (which I will not mention or recommend as it's an unpleasant mixture of truth and error) that promotes "coming out of her" publicly, yet, encourages starting a "home church". It stated the purpose was to prevent "extremism" in people's pursuits of doing what the Bible says. In other words, while not in such blatant wording, the website was suggesting the purpose of "groups" is to discourage people from doing "crazy" things like taking on more than one wife, and the way to discourage such things is by the group applying peer pressure on the "offender" and twisting of scriptures to deceive them from doing that which is unacceptable to society.

So, while we should definitely gather together with the saints more and more to spur one another on to love and good deeds more and more as the Day is approaching, at the same time, as Andrew suggested, it's wise to be choosy who we fellowship with, it's wise to define, "saints", biblically. Before gathering with the saints we should definitely determine who the Bible says the saints are. We must judge the fruit.

We found the fruit, the definition of a saint to be summed up in Acts 15:19-21. It seems to be a Believer in Messiah Yahusha who avoids sexual immorality, avoids idolatry, avoids blood, avoids things strangled, and is willing to meet on the Sabbath to hear Moses to learn the rest. Our family does not see "family hierarchy" or "contrary opinions" on the list of minimum requirements to be outlawed or accepted in fellowship assemblies. Yes, we see the husband to be a picture of the head of the body, how Yahusha Messiah is head/husband over the body/bride. We also recognize that the earthly husband does not trump the Heavenly Husband's position and authority over the earthly wife. In other words, her salvation is not determined by what the earthly husband tells her to believe and do, but by what her Heavenly Husband tells her what to believe and do. She can't serve 2 masters so the earthly husband should not be putting her in a position where she must choose him or Messiah as her head. The body shouldn't have 2 heads. There can only be one. Her earthly husband must be in line with the Heavenly One for the earthly husband's vote to count, for his opinion to matter. We've seen families in which there is total spiritual oppression and control coming from the earthly husband/father, where his word trumps the Heavenly Father's commandments, leading the family into sin. We've been in fellowships where this kind of "shepherding" is encouraged in the family. The wife should be gently led, not pushed. She should be convinced with Scripture, not manipulated with guilt trips or bashed with accusations of rebelliousness to get her to follow or submit to her husband's lead.

We've not found a fellowship yet that allows complete freedom for individuals to do what the Bible and the Spirit and their convictions lead them to do, say, and believe. We have not started a fellowship outside of our family because we do want to avoid setting ourselves or others up over the body as pastor-popes, as verifyveritas76 said. Not just that, while we've found others we consider to be saints online, we've not found that yet locally, and it's not for lack of seeking. Until then, we just gather together on the Sabbath and read Moses and worship YaH as a family. If we're faithful with the little, He will give us more, when we are ready...
 
Yes, we see the husband to be a picture of the head of the body, how Yahusha Messiah is head/husband over the body/bride. We also recognize that the earthly husband does not trump the Heavenly Husband's position and authority over the earthly wife. In other words, her salvation is not determined by what the earthly husband tells her to believe and do, but by what her Heavenly Husband tells her what to believe and do. She can't serve 2 masters so the earthly husband should not be putting her in a position where she must choose him or Messiah as her head. The body shouldn't have 2 heads. There can only be one. Her earthly husband must be in line with the Heavenly One for the earthly husband's vote to count, for his opinion to matter. We've seen families in which there is total spiritual oppression and control coming from the earthly husband/father, where his word trumps the Heavenly Father's commandments, leading the family into sin. We've been in fellowships where this kind of "shepherding" is encouraged in the family. The wife should be gently led, not pushed. She should be convinced with Scripture, not manipulated with guilt trips or bashed with accusations of rebelliousness to get her to follow or submit to her husband's lead...
Click to expand...

This is completely wrong. Numbers 31 makes it clear that God will hold the husband liable for sins that he forces the wife into but that she is to obey her husband or father (if unmarried) regardless. This isn't what this thread is about so I won't pursue it here but if anyone wants to resurrect one of the old submission threads it may be time to go here again.
 
ZecAustin said:
Her earthly husband must be in line with the Heavenly One for the earthly husband's vote to count, for his opinion to matter.
Click to expand...

@enlargeourtent I would have to agree with @ZecAustin on that due to 1 Peter 3. Often times this passage is used or interpreted as being to an unbelieving husband. However, the letter is specifically to Christians and the passage is specifically about a believing husband who is not obeying the word.

Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord:

It only serves to prove the point even more if you believe that the husband mentioned above is an unbeliever! Thus, a woman is to be in subjection to her own husband regardless of if he is "in the Lord". As it is written however, along with every other witness in Scripture, the husband is always the head of the wife with no conflict of interest between he and Christ because thats the way that Christ set it up!

So what if the husband demands something unholy or anti God's commandments for the wife? Or makes a decision that leads contrary to God's will or commandments?

According to every example that I'm aware of in Scripture, only the man is held accountable. See Numbers 14 and compare Joshua 5:4. Only the men of war and over 20 at Kadesh Barnea had to die in the wilderness before the rest of the people could enter Canaan.

1 Cor 11:3. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

1 Cor 11:3 is a prime example of a place that if what you stated above were true, this would be the place. However, that is not what is stated. There is a clearly defined chain of command, responsibility and accountability. When you attempt to circumvent what Christ has established as you described above, even if you claim an altruistic motive, the result is a home with two heads and that is truly a monster!
 
I'm going to respectfully distinguish my beliefs from EOT's on a couple of points, but try to demonstrate something important about Biblical Families in the process. Make that, demonstrate something important about communication generally and about Biblical Families in particular.

I have not found the definition of "saint" to be summed up in Acts 15:19-21, and I cannot find the term "heavenly husband" or any idea that could be summarized thus anywhere in scripture. But due to EOT's careful language, I have no beef with him that's going to lead to hostility (at least on my part ;)).

In the same way that "We hold these truths to be self-evident" is NOT the same as "This is the truth", so saying you have found a way of looking at things that works for you is not the same as saying "thus saith the Lord". Important distinction.

Meanwhile, I'm not torah-observant and settled that matter over 15 years ago. But it's not my business how EOT reaches his conclusions or runs his family, except to the extent we want to have a good-natured discussion about our differences and see if either one of us has thought of something the other one hasn't considered before. I'm not his judge and he's not mine. That whole conversation, though, is by definition peripheral to the core mission of Biblical Families, and to the extent anyone wants to 'go there', we have hundreds of posts on point already on this forum suitable for browsing.

The thing about a husband's authority, though, couldn't be more central to our purpose, and can always use some further conversation. I essentially agree with Zec and VV76 re what the scriptures have to say and how that affects my family, and can't think of anything to add to what they've already pointed out. However, I still leave a lot of room for other men to figure out how vigorously to defend their God-given authority in all things and how much to leave room for their wives to hear from God on their own. So again, an interesting conversation worth having, but nothing to get crosswise over.

Peace, y'all.
 
I'm going to be the contrarian here in this thread. Now mind you, I haven't thought this one out completely, like others have, because my experiences for the last umpteen years probably haven't been as negative as others.

It sounds selfish, but I still think "institutional" churches can serve us, as much or even more than we can serve them. Must we go to a brick and mortar location each week? No. But in my experience, these are some of the benefits of attending a designated location at a designated time:

  1. the larger the group that I am exposed to, the more I have to accommodate myself to deal with personalities, tendencies, idiosycrasies of others. The whole "love is patient, love is kind..." Is really put to the test in these assemblies.
  2. Community is something I think we are losing in our new society. This "virtual" community of BF is a tremendous blessing to me, but it's not the same as putting in the effort to interact with people in real time.
  3. The sheer numbers it takes to accomplish endeavors like world missions, home missions, and local outreach are hard to get done with dismembered, tiny groups all pursuing an individual cause.
  4. Jesus said that the first will be last, the servant will be master, and the abased will be exalted. I understand that each husband is a priest to his household, and that we are the final authority at home, but what better way to show servanthood to wives and children than by being an example of that ourselves? Serving others who have no blood ties to you, or even likeminded ties to you can be a powerful tool for teaching our families. Showing my family that I have the capacity to serve, increases my credibility when I ask them to submit.
  5. Our home groups will eventually act like "church" groups if we are to maintain order in our own homes. Sure, the people attending believe they are all like minded, but what happens with disagreements, strife, immorality? If you are the person opening your home, are you not obligated to administer judgment and perhaps discipline? That is what churches do to protect their assemblies too. The realities of social dynamics and human nature crop up in closed groups or open groups.

These are just a few of my thoughts. There are other reasons, but these just popped up.

Perhaps the answer lies in how we do "church". Rather than seeing our churches as "open to the public" storefronts, we need to see them as closed-door, exclusive groups. Going out to meet the public and evangelize is more of a /public, personal or family endeavor, while fellowship and learning needs to be closed to the public.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top