To Mark etal,
I was curious as to whether anyone would comment on Mark’s post of November 23rd I couldn’t have made the point any better than Mark has done inadvertently. Oddly, none of those who contend that believers are always “in Christ” seemed to be bothered by Mark’s comment, or at least, not enough to comment on it.
God bless,
Chuck
Hi Chuck!
I know that a lot of water has flowed under the BB bridge since you posted this, but I felt that I should respond to at least a part of it, since it was re. something I said.
Re. "inadvertent": Some of my best and most insightful comments are of this nature, but regardless of my clever rhetorical style they seem to pass without much notice.
Seriously though, I think the lack of response was because folks understood what I was getting at with my use of "in Christ, etc." when used in a true biblical sense vs. what I experienced in the group.
It is a very hard sell to come on the BB and use phrases from the bible that were especially twisted by GG (as your above quote also gives witness to) and to apparently take the position that GG teaching was correct, only applied incorrectly by Assembly members.
Nobody that I am aware of here has protested against the clear biblical teaching that God wants us to live righteous and godly lives--- the bible most clearly and emphatically enjoins just that!
The question is: what positive and practical relevance for the faith of former Assembly members can this discussion have? 1.) Most former members are very suspect of those with a strong theological axe to grind. Especially one that reminds them of the clanging of their former chains! I think Clarence's response demonstrates this pretty well. His take on some of the talk here was likened to "bros. laying a word on us from the Lord."
Some have come on the BB with a very strong view that is not open to moderation and treated those that disagree with them by assigning deep character flaws, bad motives, or stupidity to these who dare to do so. When they can't get others to take their side they just decide to shake the dust from their feet and leave.
Most view dogmatic styled biblical "experts" that have posted here as those that have a personal fringe biblical agenda, and really could care less about the individuals that they are addressing.
Not that I am saying that this is true of you, but by defending aspects of GG teaching in the same manner that they were originally delivered to us your ideas will be reacted against vs. actually heard with the above suspicion.
2.) An agenda to "set us straight". The problem is the former member, not the Assembly: Former members have an issue with those that wish to force feed their views. Authoritarism was the hallmark of Assembly "government" and has formed a very strong emotional reaction in some.
Your orginal contributions to this thread encouraged us to "put away bitterness, etc." putting the emphasis of forgiveness on us, vs. any kind of call to accountability to present/former leaders.
For decades these past GG followers have been told that even if their leaders were wrong
the members, not the leaders, were the responsible party. These members were to grovel at the feet of even clearly abusive actions by leaders, or else they would fall under the judgment of God!
Surely you can understand why your views are not popular, or are strongly reacted against. It is my view that God puts the onus on the abuser, and takes the side of the "little one" who has been offended.
To build faith in those whose well intentions were twisted, in "the name of God", is a very noble calling that I believe is close to the heart of God. God's "agenda" is to bring a strong confident trust to his wounded child, wherein there now may dwell a lot of cynicsim, confusion, and doubt.
Just winning theoretical biblical arguments (I'm not saying that theology is not important) without considering who I am talking to and what good my talk does is worse than being a "clanging symbol". If we really care about true Christian conduct we will put the greatest weight on showing mercy and love, along with our desire to defend the truth.
God Bless, Mark C.
