"High" Standards or "Low" Standards

I will just copy and paste the quote I posted in the other thread since nothing has changed.

Blessings,
Sue

 

The highest standard is to love my brother and accept him even if I disagree with him. From my experience, many people who adopt "high standards" in areas of dress, appearance, associations, etc. use them as a reason NOT to love the brethren. That's pretty low, don't you think?

[ April 19, 2003, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: swaimj ]

 

Although I am strongly against the legalism imposed by men, I do feel that God is calling those who are His to much higher standards than any of us could imagine. That's why it took Christ to fulfill them. And the only possible way we can meet these standards is through Christ.

In the meantime, though, we should -- each of us -- be showing improvement as we are conformed more and more to the image of Christ by the Holy Spirit.

 

I can't say I agree with you on the next to last statement. I do know some come across that way, and are just as likely to be guilty as well. But we do know what I John has to say, if a man hate his brother the love of God is not in him.

I know for a fact what you've stated is nothing more than what some use as an accusation against the brethren,( the devil is the accuser of the brethren by the way) I don't believe you meant it that way, but just as those who "snub" their noses on the "less" separated, it would be as bad to accuse anyone just the same.

I admire the man who is disciplined enough to maintain his standards w/o regard to another. Dr. Phil Kidd, "One of America's most controversial evangelists" is one. Many accuse him of so much, but they've never gotten to know the man. I'll admit, behind the "Sacred Desk" he's pretty bold, but apart he is one of the most gentle and sincere Christians I know. He is a friend of mine, and I have the utmost respect for him. He even knows this, I don't agree with everything he says, but then he doesn't agree with everything I say either, but that DOES NOT change our fellowship.

I've heard the cop out many times, a man in a suit and tie can't approach a bum on the street and get results. But I do know the attitude of that man makes all the difference. Ask that old fellow at Pleasant View Baptist in Taylors, S.C., Brother Larry Raynes, who won him to the Lord from off the streets of Greenville a few years ago! I can't think of his name right off hand.

It's never been a matter of occaision to look down your (self-righteous) nose at another, but the opportunity to live for Jesus, to maintain the standard. Take the Presidential guard, for instance. Would you really expect to see them at attention in blue jeans, tee shirts, etc., or just as they are, in their best? We are in the Lord's army, you know, shouldn't we uphold a standard to our Supreme Commander, Jesus Christ, to be neat and disciplined enough to show our respect?

I'd be a fool to even think that what you are saying doesn't go on, but that is all the more reason to show the love of God shed abroad in our hearts, don't you think?

Anyway, don't fall into the other ditch on this one, walk circumspect, that is what the Lord expects out of us once we are saved, and as we mature in Christ.

In Christ, Our Redeemer,

Brother Ricky

 

Your point is well taken. I think I overstated my case, so I went back and edited my post. Instead of saying "people who hold standards..." it now says "many people who...." My comments reflect my own experience.

Also, your comment on Phil Kidd (with whom I am not familiar) intrigues me, istherenotacause

Why is this? Why does a man speak one way behind the pulpit and another way away from it?

 

I like what you are saying. I have always
considered my personal standards to be high, but
when I look at it from the light of your post, that is
really a thought that showws a great deal of pride.
Thank you for knocking me off that pedistal; I
needed it.

 

"Higher" does not equal "more right" nor does it equal "more spiritual".

Usually the only ones who worry about these two categories (higher vs lower) are those who measure their Christianity in terms of "do's" and "don'ts" and not in terms of inward reality. Just my opinion and experience.

 

Also, your comment on Phil Kidd (with whom I am not familiar) intrigues me, istherenotacause
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll admit, behind the "Sacred Desk" he's pretty bold, but apart he is one of the most gentle and sincere Christians I know.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is this? Why does a man speak one way behind the pulpit and another way away from it?


I'm sorry if I made it sound like Brother Kidd is one way in the pulpit and another out, other than the fact he is preaching behind the sacred desk, and associating on an individual basis when he's not.

It has to do with that "fire shut up in your bones". He who is meek and lowly in heart, has fashioned a whip of cords as Jesus did and run the sellers of doves and the money changers out of the House of Prayer.(Notice that all true worshippers stayed)

I wouldn't call it two-facedness or double-tongued, because he definitely is not.

I would say that it more the annointing of the Spirit and holy unction expressed in preaching, but then again all the world is a pulpit , too. I'm known to start getting a little preachy (excited) anytime, anywhere.

Sometimes it's like you've got so much to tell and so little time to tell it, that while you have most everyone's attention, it just comes out with that fire of God. While a person is testifying would be the closest I can relate that to, they know that the Lord is welling something up inside and they're about to explode! It's much the same when a man is preaching. "Shelling the corn, picking out the wormy grains" Precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little, there a little. (Sometimes a whole lot!)

I guess you could also say that when a man has preached his heart out, the intensity is different from the general conversation in the one on one. Excitement about passing from death unto life eternal has a lot to do with it. One could even relate it to a performance, but I don't care for the performing type, you really can tell the difference. The manurisms are different, the Holy Ghost is prompting and is exhibited in power and demonstration of the Holy Spirit. When the performer is merely putting on an act. Preachers are supposed to "act", but be filled with the Spirit.


Since you aren't familiar with Brother Kidd, go to his website, it may take a little time time download, but it will give you a better picture of what he tries to get across. (And does a real good job of doing it) Let me know what you think,

http://www.drphilkidd.com/track2.wav


In Christ,

Brother Ricky

 

Sorry, BUt I tried to edit my last post with the URL http://drphilkidd.com/

Also I tried to go to the site myself and it's not downloading right. It's been almost a month since I previously went to it, I apologize for the inconvenience. If you've visted the "Clean Humor" section in BB.com, you'll understand when I say the fourth engine must have gone out and we'll be up here all day!

 

You'll have to label me a legalist then, "For when I am become weak, the is He made strong" This temple can't be overcome by the theif who cometh to steal and destroy as long as I let Jesus be that strong man guarding the door to my heart!

Just like when I visit any one's home, I am subject to their rules and regulations, I can't barge in the door demanding my personal freedoms be tolerated. I'm a guest, and subject to removal by the authority.

My wife is somewhat of a legalist as well, I come home with muddy boots from work and plop my feet on the table saying, "O.K., woman, where's the same old slop?" Man, you talking about legalism! She says,"Well the same old slop is for the same old pig! Get your feet off my clean table!" And this is in my own home! A man's supposed to be king of his own castle!

I was just kidding about waht I said about the slop and muddy boots. I used that illustration one morning in a message on husbands and wives and the home, and an elderly lady stood up right after I said that and she was the one who said it must have been the same old pig. Man, you talking about laughter in the house of God! The next time I preached , I made an intro in "pig-Latin"

The message went over real well, Sister Francis did come and apologize to me after the service, I just laughed along with everyone else and told her not to worry.

In Christ,

Brother Ricky

 

Ricky, that verse has nothing to do with what you just tried to use it for. When you read 2 Cor. 12, do you get the impression that Paul was proud of his stricter standards and was a legalist?

Dr. Bob is correct. Those who try to take disputable matters and turn them into absolutes are the weaker brothers. That is not something to take pride in. That is like saying: I am immature, I am immature. Since this is true, Phil Kidd has no business preaching the word for anyone becuase he is not skilled in handling the word but chokes on the milk. That is a shame.

Pretty much if you want to have a biblical ministry, take Jack Hyles, and do the opposite.

 

Ricky, that verse has nothing to do with what you just tried to use it for. When you read 2 Cor. 12, do you get the impression that Paul was proud of his stricter standards and was a legalist?

Dr. Bob is correct. Those who try to take disputable matters and turn them into absolutes are the weaker brothers. That is not something to take pride in. That is like saying: I am immature, I am immature. Since this is true, Phil Kidd has no business preaching the word for anyone becuase he is not skilled in handling the word but chokes on the milk. That is a shame.

Pretty much if you want to have a biblical ministry, take Jack Hyles, and do the opposite. </font>[/QUOTE]I really can't believe any one who even thinks they know what they're talking about would mention Jack Hyles and Dr. Phil Kidd in the same reply as you have. Truly I believe Brother Kidd has won more to Christ through his "unskilled" technique, and his way of "choking on the milk", than Hyles ever has with his "123, repeat after me".

For everyone's information Brother Kidd is a graduate of Tabernacle Baptisst College in Greeneville,S.C. and has nothing to do with Hyles-Anderson. Also, Dr. Harold B. Sightler was impressed with Brother Kidd, he had allowed him to preach many times in Tabernacle, and he is still preaching there every year.

Now I suppose you'll have something negative to say about Brother Sightler.

II Corinthians 12

5 Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities.
6 For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.
7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
8 For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me.
9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.


You really should consider what you've said, and acknowledge the scripture, unless you continue to take things out of context to back up some debate orn arguement you are trying to ensue.

In Christ, In His Grace, I am made strong, because of that which in my flesh I cannot do, that is I cannot please the Lord in the energies of my flesh, can you? NO!

It might do some one good to study II Timothy 2 in detail about the weakness of an individual and the strength one can obtain by responding to the grace of God.

Bless His Holy Name,

Brother Ricky

 

You might want to heed your own advice there DD

 

Ricky on this one I must agree with Dr. Bob and DD the leagalist is the weaker brother and contrary to your opinion that is not a position to be proud of. I like your quote above saying one can obtain strength by responding to the grace of God. A legalist does not respond to the grace of God but rather he holds to his self made rules and practices. Hopefully I am wrong about your stance here. On the matter of favorite and least favorite preachers I feel it often works best not to speak out pro/con on a pastor as someone will surely disagree. It is not against the rules but we must check the depth of our skin before we do so and we must be gracious to others who we dissagree with.
Murph

 

Helen said:

I have to agree.

Sherrie

 

Ricky on this one I must agree with Dr. Bob and DD the leagalist is the weaker brother and contrary to your opinion that is not a position to be proud of. I like your quote above saying one can obtain strength by responding to the grace of God. A legalist does not respond to the grace of God but rather he holds to his self made rules and practices. Hopefully I am wrong about your stance here. On the matter of favorite and least favorite preachers I feel it often works best not to speak out pro/con on a pastor as someone will surely disagree. It is not against the rules but we must check the depth of our skin before we do so and we must be gracious to others who we dissagree with.
Murph </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, that the Lord might reveal to all that we are all legalists to a point. Even in our opinions declaring what legalism is, or is not.

Many times a person who doesn't know the Lord can also tell us what a Christian is supposed to be like, but then we have to deal with those who have the appearances of the worldly examples that deny Christ as well, yet calling themselves to be Christians. Even the world knows.

A "peculiar" people are those who are distinguishable from the common, if not only by appearance, but also by character, and that character is identifiable by one's willingness to either look comparitively similar or distinguishably different from what one calls worldly or not.