|
send your Emails to |
| A WORD TO OUR CYBER-VISITORS: We have received several WRAPs from various people in countries that are predominantly Muslim whose governments either tolerate or promote persecution of Christianity, including murder and rape. These individuals all want us to assist them by putting their needs and their addresses on the web so that people can pray for them and send them money. Because we don't want to bring these individuals to the attention of the wrong people, we have chosen to respond to all such requests with this WRAP AROUND. ? WROTE: If you have sent us a WRAP like the one just mentioned, or have been considering doing so, please consider the following. DON WROTE: As we've just mentioned, we have received several WRAPs from individuals who feel they have a call on their life to share their faith in Christ Jesus with others. With few exceptions, the ones who have sent these WRAPs have visions of a great ministry with big buildings and lots of money to spend. If you are one of these individuals, please do not take what I am about to say in a negative way; for we pray earnestly the Lord of the Harvest will send workers into the Harvest. Perhaps, you are part of an answer to that prayer. However, we do want to point out a couple of things that might be helpful to you. First, let me apologize for the image of a ministry that so many churches and media ministries in America have set forth. (I feel that I can do this because I am a Christian and I live in America.) There is no way that going to church every now and then and dropping a few dollars into the collection plate is synonymous with fulfilling the Great Commission. This is a myth that has been created by self-serving pastors/evangelists. Also, I challenge anyone to show me from the Scriptures where we are to build big "ministries" with big buildings and big assets in the name of Jesus. It's just not there. What is in the Scriptures is the admonition to let our lights shine before others as individuals so that they can see Christ in us; and we are to always be ready to share with other individuals the reason for the hope that is within us.
True, we are told not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together in the name of Christ Jesus; but in the New Testament, this was done in houses and catacombs/caves--for the early believers often had to meet in secret for fear of their lives. Granted, it is convenient to have a building dedicated to the use of the "church/fellowship-of-believers," but this should never be the priority of believers. If we are confident that we have eternal life because we are in Christ Jesus, and that those who do not know Him as Lord and Savior are eternally lost, then our number one priority should be to share Christ with anyone and everyone that will listen. We are not commanded to do this in a church building--although if sinners everywhere would flock to a building, it would make our job easier--but we are commanded to take the reason for our hope to people where they are!
What I'm trying to say is, please do not hastily pattern your life/ministry after what you have seen from churches in the U.S.! True, America has been uncommonly blessed by God because of the faith of those before us; but very little "light" has gone out from our shores in the past 3 or 4 decades. Most missionaries that have been sent forth have not gone in the name of Jesus but in the name of denominations. Consequently, if the Lord delays His coming, the same pitiful church fights that have plagued the U.S. will creep over into other lands. Instead of hearing of the liberty and the love that is found in Christ, you, too, will be hearing about which baptism is the right one and what is the correct way of administering it; about "speaking in tongues"--is it real? and if so, which church has the "real" one, etc.--etc.--etc-- In fact, you'll be hearing churches claiming that theirs is the only true church and all others are imposters. How did the church-world in the U.S. get into this mess? We did so when preachers started teaching "the traditions of man" rather than the Word of God. (Oh, they all claim to speak for God, but their works and their fruit deny their claim.) In fact, in the 70's the traditions of man had so watered down the Word of God that God apparently had trouble finding it taught so that He could honor it--for He seemed to disappear. Consequently, the church went through a "long, spiritual dry spell" wherein it was hard to see Christ in His churches. It got so bad that some theologians decided that "God was dead" and a book of that title became a top seller. But enough of that. My point is, God does not call churches, he calls individuals. And He does not call individuals to build church organizations, but to seek the lost in His stead so that He can add to the true Church daily such as should be saved.
Maranatha, Don *By the way, the temple referred to in this passage was not a local New Testament church, but a temple of the Jewish religion--the same religion that God had to trash because they had fallen into teaching the traditions of man rather than the Word of God. Jesus had words for those Jews.
B'ANN WROTE: People often write us for funding/money for foreign church efforts. I have to remind them of the "true commission" and how it is accomplished. A good example would be Chairman Cho from Korea who started one of the greatest churches in the world right in the middle of a non-Christian nation by starting home cell meetings. After they met in a few homes, then more homes, and then many more homes, and had built a strong group of believers within their own community, then they proceeded to build their main sanctuary. If the church is built in this way, then it has personal/sentimental value to the neighborhood or city. If people come together and establish something in which they have invested sweat, toil and tears as well as faith, it will always be something precious to them. I would encourage anyone that is in a foreign land that they follow this formula. Start building a strong nucleus of believers by meeting in homes, getting to know one another, and seeing the needs in each individual dwelling. If a church cannot meet individual needs, first, then it will never be able to meet the needs of a larger congregation. It is just like being a mother. God lets most women have one child at a time; then, gradually more are added. The principle of tithing follows this pattern, also. The more dedicated people there are in a congregation, the more the offerings will remain strong as people give consistently week after week. I know that most of us would like to build a large, beautiful church for Jesus. However, he already has mansions in heaven and worlds without end. What we must do is go into the highways and the hedges and bring souls into the Kingdom of God. In this way, the mansions that are being built in heaven will have people to occupy them.. If we are busy doing "church work" by maintaining a building of stone, wood or brick, we could become very hindered in the walk. By "walk" I mean getting out there where the people are and meeting needs. As Don just pointed out, Jesus did not say, "Go ye and build many church buildings", but rather he said:
He made it even stronger with this plea:
We rejoice with all of you who feel the call of Christ on your life, for we, too, have such a call on our lives. So, let's get out in the fields and put our hands to the plow.
|
| A WORD TO OUR CYBER-VISITORS:
R______ sent us a lengthy WRAP AROUND. We've chosen to put up only the introduction to his Wrap. R_______ WROTE: Who is "the king of the north"? DON WROTE: First, let me compliment you on your zeal for studying the Word. Not only is Bible Study needful but it is in obedience to God’s wishes. However, I would like to share something that I have learned from my excursions into the Bible. When studying the Bible, ideas come to mind: some of the ideas can be correct, some partially correct, some in error—but all good, IF, we take them to the Holy Spirit and the Scriptures for verification. I learned this early on during my Bible studies when I would read a passage and jump to a conclusion as to what it meant—usually because of something that I had been taught or had absorbed by exposure. I soon came to the conclusion that not only did God want to teach me new things about Himself and His Word, but that He also wanted me to be aware of any false concepts that I had inadvertently adopted. Let me give you a couple of examples of what I mean and then I’ll get back to what you sent me. There are some passages of Scripture that are interpreted two ways by the church world. I Timothy 3: 1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. 8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; 9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. 10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. 11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. 12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. A similar passage is found in Titus. Titus 1: 6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; I have underlined the part in question which deals with the requirements that one must meet to be a deacon or a bishop in the church: i.e., being the husband of one wife. A large segment of the church interprets this to mean "having had one wife" rather than what it says which is "having one wife"--which of itself would simply support monogamy as opposed to polygamy. I chose this topic because, as a babe-in-Christ, it was one of the first misconceptions with which I had to deal. I don’t know how many times I had read this to say "having had one wife" before it finally sunk in that I was reading something in that just wasn’t there. Upon this discovery, I researched the topic throughout the Scriptures and found that all other Scriptures that were supposed to support this argument were also twisted or taken out of context—or just totally ignored. I know now that I reacted this way because the neighborhood in which I was raised was very strongly influenced by a denomination that would not allow anyone to preach or hold a position in the church who had been married more than once. There are several Scriptures that will not support this argument. For example, in I Cor. 7:10-15, Paul tells us that if someone has been converted to Christ that they should live godly lives before their unconverted spouse in the hopes that they, too, will come to Christ. But if the mate persists in leaving, then they are to let the mate go, and the new convert is no longer under bondage. Also, in Matthew 5:32, although Jesus stressed how important the marriage union is to God, nevertheless, He taught that adultery was grounds for a divorce--and this was when he and the ones he was teaching were living under the law of Moses and not the gracious guidelines of our present-day Age of Grace. Throughout our ministry we have had to deal with divorce issue many times and we have come to the conclusion that just as God deals with every person individually, so, too, does he with marriage situations. For example, we have come across instances where women in the church, who were being abused by unbelieving husbands, could not get a divorce from their husbands because the husbands didn’t want to pay child support. In some instances, the unbelieving husbands didn’t even try to hide the fact that they were being unfaithful. In such instances it is good to know that God has given each of us His Holy Spirit for the express purpose of guiding us and delivering us from the ungodly. We have also had to minister to people with less than perfect marriage records who felt strongly that God had called them to preach or to pastor a church. Our council has always been that when they stand before Christ, they will not have to answer to men and women who have judged them by their denominational dogma but before a Savior who is not only perfect in judgment, but also perfect in mercy and grace. In fact, when Jesus walked the earth during His ministry, He did not commit the building of His Church to those who were committed to their church dogmas and traditions, but to those who were the recipients of mercy and compassion. In short, we contend that if anyone has the call of God on his or her life, that they should prepare themselves by studying the Scriptures to show themselves approved to God and by being careful not to quench or grieve the Holy Spirit. If they will be careful to do this, then God will use them for His purposes. (If someone reading this has such a call on his/her life and the denomination they were raised in will not encourage and support them in their efforts for the Lord, then they should be opened to being led to another type of church.) Let me give one more example of a wrong approach to Bible study and then I’ll comment on your WRAP. In one of the Christians Schools where B’Ann and I were teaching, one day during the time appointed for Bible study, a young man jumped up from his desk all excited and came to my desk exclaiming that God had given him a "new revelation that no one had seen before." I sensed that the Lord was in the event, so I listened and then showed him a Scripture that disagreed with his conclusion. A little miffed, he went back to his desk; but it wasn’t long before he got another "brand new understanding" from the Scriptures. Again, I was able to show him Scriptures that faulted his understanding. He did this a third time with the same results. He was obviously very frustrated and he announced that he might as well not even study the Bible. This was definitely a teachable moment. I explained to him that he did not need to give up on the Bible, for God was trying to teach him something. The whole class then looked at the Scriptures wherein we were to study the Word relying upon the Holy Spirit and not on our own wisdom; and noted how that because this was a command of God, the devil would do his best to frustrate it. The class then discussed how we could know when we were studying "in the Spirit" and how we could recognize when we were in "self." The young man brought out how that he had felt "special" because he thought he had received a new revelation. This brought to mind several Scriptures, including "Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall" (I Co. 10:12 ) and "if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know (I Co 8:2). We then looked at II Peter 1:20 and compared it to the second chapter of first Corinthians. II Peter 1: I Corinthians 2: We then talked about the wisdom that comes from God beginning with the book of James and noted how that God wants all His children to have His wisdom and how that it is so important that He does not trust the teaching of it to man, but to the Holy Spirit. James 3: James 1: I John 2:
Now, let’s consider THE INTRODUCTION TO your WRAP and see if we can learn from it! I have highlighted my comments.You wrote: Who is "the king of the north"? The ones having insight Bible students noticed (this sounds like you feel you belong to a special "in" club and all who disagree with you are not very smart.): "The proof (sounds as though your declaration of it being "proof" is all the proof needed) lies in the obvious (this sounds like you're trying to "bully" your point across.) identity that exists between Daniel's "the king of the north" of the time of the end, and Ezekiel's "Gog" of the latter days. By comparing what is said about each of them in the two prophets, it will be manifest (again, a "bully" tone) that they can only be different titles for the same power. Ezekiel Chapter 38 and 39 = Daniel 11:45 (From this point on, if you were using these same tactics trying to prove a point in a court of law, your case would be thrown out as being purely circumstantial.) 1. Their geographical position is the same. "Gog's" country is the north parts in relation to the Holy Land; as it is written, "Thou shalt come from thy place out of the north parts". "Gog" is therefore "the king of the north", his place or country being there. 2. Both of them are the adversaries of Israel, and the invaders of the Holy Land. The eleventh chapter of Daniel abundantly proves this in relation to "the king of the north"; and of "Gog", Yahoueh said: "Thou shalt come up against my people Israel, as a cloud to cover the land". 3. The time they invade the land is the same. "The king of the north" invades it in the time of the end; and of "Gog" it is said: "It shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land". 4. The same peoples are named as components of their armies. The Libyans and Ethiopians are at the steps of "the king of the north"; and in the enumeration of Gog's forces, it says, "Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them". You may have had something in the remainder of your WRAP that was worthwhile, but I couldn't get past your introduction. Early on in my Bible studies, I learned that God was not going to dump the complete understanding of the Bible into my spirit during my first Bible study sessions. In fact, it is not unusual for me to have to change or update my understanding at a later date. It is my prayer that you will pray about what I've written. It is said that Thomas Edison was asked how he could continue in his efforts to invent a light bulb after he had failed so many times. His answer was that he had not failed at all, that every experiment had been a success for he had been discovering what substances would not work in his bulb. Of course, he eventually found the right material and the whole world has profited. It is not my intention to "fight" over a point, for I am sure of nothing except that Christ Jesus lives in me by His Spirit. All that I feel that I have gleaned from the Scriptures is always open to rethinking--this is why we named our web site "doweknow"--for we are acutely aware that we are imperfect vessels. In addition, we feel that all that comes from Christ Jesus will bear witness with the Body of Christ. Do not forget to pray for us. Yours in Christ, Don |
| You Wrote: Question-Comment: Don Wrote:
|
|
send your Emails to |
