The Body of Christ: The True Purpose of the Church

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by APuritanMindset, Oct 7, 2005.

  1. APuritanMindset

    APuritanMindset
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2004
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. Brother Ian

    Brother Ian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,065
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some quick feedback. The color you selected for the article cannot be read against the background.

    Sorry.
     
  3. APuritanMindset

    APuritanMindset
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2004
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll have to fix that. Click the link again, and it will be readable. Sorry about that. I changed the background and stuff after writing that so that is probably why that happened.
     
  4. Artimaeus

    Artimaeus
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2002
    Messages:
    3,133
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would never argue with scripture...I would, however, argue with you. [​IMG] :D

    Overall, the article was pretty good and the crude reference to the difference between men and women was totally unnecessary. I will respond to this one other point though.

    From the article:
    Person "A" is lost and then gets saved.
    Person "B" is lost and never gets saved.

    Christ died for "A" and "B". Christ died for the lost (both start out that way). Rom 5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. "A", however, is the only one to recieve the benefits of that death. Christ did indeed die for "A" (the church). Christ died for ALL to have the possibility and no excuse. The verse you quoted did not say that Christ did NOT die for the lost, it said that He DID die for the saved. It does not say that He ONLY died for the church. One does not rule out the other.
     
  5. Roguelet

    Roguelet
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Sorry, I can't read it. the background is yellow and the words green. I think it hasn't been changed yet. I would love to read it but can't guess I could copy and paste to word. i'll try that tomorrow.

    I'm sure there has to be some positive feedback Art.

    I was always taught, try and find the truth in what soneone says and bring that out when discussing things you may not agree about. Find the positve or you will just turn others off. they will learn real fast there input or opinions are not worth your scruteny. ( I know I'm not the greatest speller sorry )

    also try and sandwich a negative response with something positive same principle I think.

    Not always easy to do but sure worth striving for.
     
  6. Artimaeus

    Artimaeus
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2002
    Messages:
    3,133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Point taken.

    I didn't. It set a tone of uncareingness that permiated the rest of the article which I had to make an effort to overlook and it was unnecessary.

    Viva la differance. Acknowledging psychological differences is VERY politically incorrect but they are there and indeed should be addressed.

    This is a major point that I think nearly everyone misses. I do not TELL my wife anything. I am not her boss. It is not my job to MAKE her do anything. It is really NONE of my business to police her obedience. That is her responsibility and mine is to help her if she wants it.

    [​IMG]

    Here is the problem. If I reject your first point, it tends to make your second point less compelling. I do, however, agree with your second point.

    I have never heard anyone even remotely say this. I have heard unlearned church members who seem to act like this is a significant part of what they do. It isn't taught in any church that I know of.

    Very true. Regular members do tend to shirk their responsibilities and this needs to be addressed frequently.

    This makes it sound as though people are trying to get LOST people to be members. I think they are trying to get lost people to hear the message, get saved, and THEN become members.

    Good point.

    Not directly but, indirectly.

    "proudly"? - I'm thinking, no.

    Now THIS seems to be the purpose of the church.

    (Is that better feedback. ;) )
     
  7. 2BHizown

    2BHizown
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Messages:
    763
    Likes Received:
    0
    After the analogy used I could never put any value of anything else you had to say. This is a christian forum and you should know what is appropriate and what is not! That was not!
     
  8. APuritanMindset

    APuritanMindset
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2004
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know that it was that crude though. Since when is it wrong to speak about issues relating to sex and the parts used? Leviticus talks about wet dreams and the like. I will give, though, it wasn't the best analogy that I could have used. Then again, what more obvious difference is there between men and women?

    Artimaeus, you said,
    I have never heard anyone even remotely say this. I have heard unlearned church members who seem to act like this is a significant part of what they do. It isn't taught in any church that I know of.</font>[/QUOTE]I have on more than one occaision heard preachers say things like this. It's sad. It is also kinda what The Purpose Driven Church teaches and most church growth models as well.
     

Share This Page

Loading...