Salvation issues

[Bootstrap]

Heirbyadoption asked: "if Jesus commanded us to do something and we knowingly refuse to do it, what is the consequence, in your understanding?

Sorry I got away, but am still curious your personal take on this question, Boot, regardless what your affiliated congregation does. Thanks.

First the obvious: we should do what Jesus tells us to do with "want-to" obedience.

I can't answer your question about consequences directly, the Bible is full of examples of people who initially did not obey, or who failed to obey in one way or another, but are still held up as examples of godly men. The disciples, for instance, sometimes even after the resurrection. I don't think we should use this as an excuse to disobey, but I do think we should be very cautious about judging other people. On the other hand, if I know Jesus is telling me to do something, I should do it.

And I do think that there are some places where people legitimately disagree about how to apply what a passage says today. And other places where I am just baffled that someone would approach a passage the way they do - and they are similarly baffled that I would approach it the way I do. I don't see any way around that, I think they need to obey according to their understanding, and I need to obey according to mine.

[Sudsy]

So getting back to the OP, women preachers who believe God has called them and gifted them to preach and/or pastor are not deliberately sinning as this fits with how they interpret scripture. Likewise with those other areas listed in the OP.

Another example - if a person was taught through scriptures that we don't need to attempt to win the lost and make disciples as this command is for those gifted as evangelists then they are not being willfully disobedient whereas for others who believe this command applies to us all and they continually refuse to do it, their salvation is in jeopardy.

Would it be correct then to say we might chose a way of understanding scripture that best suits what and how we want to obey so we can see ourselves as not willfully disobedient ? Isn't that what conservatives say of liberals and liberals say of conservatives ?

[RZehr]

If a women feels called to be a preacher, I say that they are not being called of God.

[Bootstrap]

Would it be correct then to say we might chose a way of understanding scripture that best suits what and how we want to obey so we can see ourselves as not willfully disobedient ? Isn't that what conservatives say of liberals and liberals say of conservatives ?

And worse, we focus on the things that we are most comfortable obeying. And one danger of these controversies is that we can focus on them and feel good about ourselves if we have the right opinion on everything (in our own opinion, of course). I have a hard time fellowshipping with people who do not take obedience to the Bible seriously, but I also have a hard time fellowshipping with people who spend too much time and energy tithing mint and cumin and judging those who do not. Sometimes while ignoring things that are at the heart of Scripture. Sometimes focusing so much on the speck in the other's eye that they cannot see the log in their own.

I suspect most of us are failing to obey much of the Sermon on the Mount as fully as we should. I suspect most of us are failing to love the brethren as much as we should. I suspect most of us are doing less to spread the Gospel than we should. I suspect most of us are not doing well enough at asking God to show us every day where we are in denial, where we are resisting his voice, what he is calling us to while we fail to listen. If we really focus on the things that are central to the New Testament, with a heart of obedience, I think that will do more good than trying to agree on every controversy.

So here's a nit I have with the OP. I do think we should obey what Scripture says, but I don't think, for instance, that the holy kiss is a command for all Christians - it appears only at the end of the letter in the context of greetings, where it reads a lot like "give Betty a hug for me," and I do think the way we greet each other varies by culture. Someone else may disagree. If the other person says, "but that's a salvation issue", hasn't he just made myself my judge, violating some things that Jesus and Paul said clearly and repeatedly? And doesn't that make it really difficult to see what is central by elevating every single disagreement to the level of a salvation issue?

We must not lose the ability to focus on what is central in the New Testament. And there's a real danger of that.

[Hats Off]

Would it be correct then to say we might chose a way of understanding scripture that best suits what and how we want to obey so we can see ourselves as not willfully disobedient ? Isn't that what conservatives say of liberals and liberals say of conservatives ?

No, that would not be correct. Do we choose how we understand scripture? Or do we read and hear the scriptures taught and then believe? I have chosen not to look for ways to understand scripture that would free me to do what I would like to.

I am reminded of the book "A Way Was Opened" by Ruth Brunk Stolzfus of how she challenged the status quo to open the way for Mennonite women to enter the ministry. The title sounds quite passive but she was quite aggressive in her quest. Her father taught her public speaking skills, not realizing how she would choose to use them.

[Sudsy]

Would it be correct then to say we might chose a way of understanding scripture that best suits what and how we want to obey so we can see ourselves as not willfully disobedient ? Isn't that what conservatives say of liberals and liberals say of conservatives ?

No, that would not be correct. Do we choose how we understand scripture? Or do we read and hear the scriptures taught and then believe? I have chosen not to look for ways to understand scripture that would free me to do what I would like to.

I am reminded of the book "A Way Was Opened" by Ruth Brunk Stolzfus of how she challenged the status quo to open the way for Mennonite women to enter the ministry. The title sounds quite passive but she was quite aggressive in her quest. Her father taught her public speaking skills, not realizing how she would choose to use them.

However, what you might want to do is find scriptures that make your life less free, not to say that you do but some could who choose a narrow way and look for how to make it more narrow.

Regarding the underlined. For example, my view of God through scripture is not one where God is unjust and so, from what I understand to be just, I look for harmony in scripture interpretation that fits what is just. Now a Calvinist would say we all deserve hell but God in His mercy has chosen to save some. Those God has chosen to save, He will save. I don't see this as just. So do I just accept that the Calvinist view of God is correct and agree with the way they use certain scriptures to support their view of God being sovereign and therefore He can do what I see as unjust because 'His ways are above our ways ?'. Or do I look for scripture that supports my view that I don't see this as just and that somehow, even if scripture doesn't clearly explain how, God does want all to be saved and will justly allow everyone to, at some point, be saved ? I believe God is love and truly is willing that none should perish but for all to come to repentance and in some way God will give everyone a choice. Now this goes against certain traditional views of how God operates and will operate.

I know this is not an issue of choosing what to obey but rather what I believe and yet I think it applies to obedience also. The way I view God affects my understanding of what God sees as important to obey from the scriptures in a literal sense. That is why I look closely at what guys like Greg Boyd say when they challenge certain understandings of God that make God so far removed from the understanding God gives us of what is fair and just and loving, etc.There are other non-traditional understandings of God that do harmonize with scriptures (i.e a certain understanding of open theism).

As far as women preachers, when God says He will pour out His Spirit and women are included in prophecy through that outpouring, then I view what Paul is dealing with to be a local church situation where women were interrupting the meetings and needed to be quiet. My view of God is that He is more concerned about His Kingdom being furthered than whether or not a male or female is active in that mission. And I have seen the results of this in my own family, so why would I believe God doesn't call and gives gifts to women for leadership roles ? So, I maintain considerable understandings of scripture comes not only through our view of God but what we see happening.

[silentreader]

Would it be correct then to say we might chose a way of understanding scripture that best suits what and how we want to obey so we can see ourselves as not willfully disobedient ? Isn't that what conservatives say of liberals and liberals say of conservatives ?

No, that would not be correct. Do we choose how we understand scripture? Or do we read and hear the scriptures taught and then believe? I have chosen not to look for ways to understand scripture that would free me to do what I would like to.

I am reminded of the book "A Way Was Opened" by Ruth Brunk Stolzfus of how she challenged the status quo to open the way for Mennonite women to enter the ministry. The title sounds quite passive but she was quite aggressive in her quest. Her father taught her public speaking skills, not realizing how she would choose to use them.

However, what you might want to do is find scriptures that make your life less free, not to say that you do but some could who choose a narrow way and look for how to make it more narrow.

Regarding the underlined. For example, my view of God through scripture is not one where God is unjust and so, from what I understand to be just, I look for harmony in scripture interpretation that fits what is just. Now a Calvinist would say we all deserve hell but God in His mercy has chosen to save some. Those God has chosen to save, He will save. I don't see this as just. So do I just accept that the Calvinist view of God is correct and agree with the way they use certain scriptures to support their view of God being sovereign and therefore He can do what I see as unjust because 'His ways are above our ways ?'. Or do I look for scripture that supports my view that I don't see this as just and that somehow, even if scripture doesn't clearly explain how, God does want all to be saved and will justly allow everyone to, at some point, be saved ? I believe God is love and truly is willing that none should perish but for all to come to repentance and in some way God will give everyone a choice. Now this goes against certain traditional views of how God operates and will operate.

I know this is not an issue of choosing what to obey but rather what I believe and yet I think it applies to obedience also. The way I view God affects my understanding of what God sees as important to obey from the scriptures in a literal sense. That is why I look closely at what guys like Greg Boyd say when they challenge certain understandings of God that make God so far removed from the understanding God gives us of what is fair and just and loving, etc.There are other non-traditional understandings of God that do harmonize with scriptures (i.e a certain understanding of open theism).

As far as women preachers, when God says He will pour out His Spirit and women are included in prophecy through that outpouring, then I view what Paul is dealing with to be a local church situation where women were interrupting the meetings and needed to be quiet. My view of God is that He is more concerned about His Kingdom being furthered than whether or not a male or female is active in that mission. And I have seen the results of this in my own family, so why would I believe God doesn't call and gives gifts to women for leadership roles ? So, I maintain considerable understandings of scripture comes not only through our view of God but what we see happening.

In your view of God, would you consider Him a God of order?

[Sudsy]

In your view of God, would you consider Him a God of order?

Yes, I think the scriptures reflect this. However, what was the 'order' under the OC is not the 'order' of the NC in how I interpret it.

[silentreader]

In your view of God, would you consider Him a God of order?

Yes, I think the scriptures reflect this. However, what was the 'order' under the OC is not the 'order' of the NC in how I interpret it.

Would an order that was instituted at creation still be relevant to-day?

[Sudsy]

In your view of God, would you consider Him a God of order?

Yes, I think the scriptures reflect this. However, what was the 'order' under the OC is not the 'order' of the NC in how I interpret it.

Would an order that was instituted at creation still be relevant to-day?

If this issue constituted part of the created order and God’s ideal, we would not find counter-examples of it. However, the Bible contains many examples of women exercising spiritual authority over men. Since we have so many examples is enough to prove to me that the prohibition against women being spiritual leaders is cultural, not timeless.

Here is an Anabaptist preacher and pastor giving this view - http://reknew.org/2016/06/thoughts-women-ministry/