Many of you might remember Rodney King. His plea was "Can't we all just get along."
I fear that many of today's Christians are crying this mantra all the while compromising what they believe.
To me this give a great foothold to Satan. He can and will do his level-headed best to get us to give some deference to those of other beliefs. I will tell you that it will not be happening in my camp. I will come against it at every point. And yes, I know this might not seem very loving but my name is not Robert Schuller.
10 comments:
Oh my! I simply cannot stand that phrase!!! "Can't we just all get along?" sounds like TOLERANCE to me. Phooey!!! I'm quite sure that the Bible does not speak for tolerance. The Bible is crystal clear (sorry, not meaning to bring up Schuller there)... there is ONE way... God's way. True followers of the Lord Jesus Christ can't simply "get along" with everyone. If we, as Christians, are following the Truth, it is going to cause divisions and quarrells. We are in the world, yes, but we are not to be LIKE the world. Therefore, we can't simply just "get along".
His,
Mrs. U
Luke 12:49-53 kind of smashes Rodney King(of kings) theology.
Dear Dead,
I look forward to many future visits to your very interesting blog.
I join you in disdaining compromise and dilution of truth. But I wonder how you would reconcile a post like this with the Biblical commands to love, serve, and make peace whenever possible with the *persons* who hold contrary beliefs. I think we have to distinguish carefully between irreconcilable positions and immanently reconcilable people. Certainly though not all beliefs are reconcilable, those who have been reconciled to God by His grace must seek to be reconciled to other *people* by extending grace, welcome and hospitality to others, regardless of their beliefs.
And would such obedience not entail a commitment to "getting along..."?
mm
If Christ commands us to be tolerant of any and all, then why was He so intolerant of the pharisees and sadducees, etc ?
There is no word in scripture which is translated as tolerant.
I already cited Luke 12.
Peace is not the absence of hostility.
We are never called to be "broad-minded" which is what tolerant is all about.
Dear Approved,
If we go along with your seeming intent to base an entire theology of ecumenical relations on one Scripture passage (which I am reluctant to do, for obvious reasons) we had better keep in mind that the Luke 12: 49-53 pericope begins with reference to Christ's fundamental action with regard to erroneous sinners like the Pharisees: His atoning death on their behalf. (As you know, the passage begins with Jesus saying "I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is completed!") It seems to me that we ought to read any seemingly "intolerant" gestures of Jesus towards the Pharisees in light of His final disposition towards all His enemies. As you know, this disposition is revealed in His outpouring of His life for His enemies on the Cross.
Jesus predicts that divisions will follow as the inevitable fall-out of His Resurrection, but this should certainly not be read as His endorsement of divisions. We know that it is the UNITY of all believers that Christ requests from the Father in John 17.
- and yes, we will not find the language of "broad mindedness" in Scripture :) We will, however, find plenty about the charity, generosity, and forbearance that is commanded of those who are saved by grace.
I agree with mm. When we say Christ was intollerant, we should also remember that Christ was obedient, even to the point of death. We should try to emulate the obedience part, rather than the intollerance part.
Abraham
Abraham,
Here is a comment that I made in an earlier post.
know that people think that my approach is too harsh or divisive. But I have to fear God and not man. As I mentioned in one post wolves are not coming around the sheeps gate to sing in the ear of the sheep. He is not wanting to lick the wounds of the sheep. He wants to rip the throats out of the sheep to kill them. That is what the enemy wants to do. The shepherd cannot in great Osteen style say "now sheep, you be nice to that wolf, he can be a rough customer." A shepherd has to WARN THE SHEEP TO FLEE AND CALL THE WOLF OUT BY NAME so that they will not be harmed or misled.
As a pastor I HAVE to warn the sheep when false teaching comes around. I have to call names like Paul so that the sheep know what they are being warned about.
Love and generosity yes. Never at the expense of truth.
DT
By mistake I posted this in another sectiion. Hence copying it here.
DT,
Don't you think we need to draw a line somewhere to distinguish between a wolf and a brother who interpreted the scripture in a slightly different manner? For example, if someone preaches that Jesus was a good teacher, but was just another human being, I would say he is a wolf. But I wouldn't call people like Rick Warren wolves. Even Apostle Paul had difference of opinion with Apostle Peter. But they didn't anathemse each other and forbit their congregation members from having any fellowship with each other.
Abraham
I dot base any belief on one passage either, I was simply mentioning that I had cited Luke 12. Here are some more:
Matthew 7:15-23 compare to Acts 20:28-30 and 2 Cor 11:12-15
All of Matthew 23
Matthew 10:34-37 goes along with the Luke 12 scripture
Jude's letter, and 2 Peter 2 are also good examples.
All of them, including Jesus, would be booted out of the more "tolerant" fellowships.
As for obedience that is all God requires from us. Obedience is worship, and a thorough study of worship, both OT and NT, bears this out. This is what we teach in our church. Worship is not just a service, nor merely singing. These can be expressions of worship.
Anyway
Jesus is the divider. If one is truly obedient to God, I guarantee that such obedience will cause a division with somebody.
Here is a quick, but good study on obedience and its costs.
http://www.rbc.org/utmost/index.php?day=11&month=01
Post a Comment