Who gets to decide?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by menageriekeeper, Jul 26, 2009.

  1. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    On this board in the last few days have been threads that discuss the "worldiness" of certain activities. Belly button rings, cuss words and the like (though we could throw tobacco use, card playing and dancing into the ring as well.).

    Of course, being the BB, we have had several different opinions offered on each individual subject. I'd like to examine the criteria that one uses in deciding if a certain activity meets the definition of "worldly".

    I'd also like to examine the more abstract idea of if "_____" is considered worldly for me, it must by definition be worldly for you. Is this always the case?

    And as always here lately I might be a while in getting back to this thread so ya'll feel free to argue among yourselves.
     
  2. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting post MK.
    Worldliness is an attitude of the heart that often manifests itself in physical things.

    often times it is a matter of conforming to the styles of the day that some people have a problem with.

    If baggy jeans are in style, better wear tight ones.
    If tight jeans are in style, better wear baggy ones.

    That pharisaical mindset is, I believe worldly.

    Placing a primary emphasis on what it "worldly" on the outward man is itself worldly.

    If the Bible does not condemn an action then the action is then not wrong.
    Period.

    Now there may be heart problems, like a girl who wants to get a particular piercing to attract improper attention to herself. But the sin and worldliness is in her desires not in the actual action.

    By the way, according to the Amish, we are worldly for being on this web forum :)
     
  3. Alive in Christ

    Alive in Christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    0
    And for driving cars, of course.

    If we all werent so "worldly" we would be using horses and buggy's. (Amish or the Shakers...maybe both)


    btw, I dont want anyone to misunderstand. I have tremendous respect for both of those groups.
     
    #3 Alive in Christ, Jul 26, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 26, 2009
  4. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have zero respect for both groups on a theological level.
    They both have replaced the death of our savior with their own form of works-righteousness.

    ON a personal level, they tend to be nice people as far as I have met but respect for their beliefs? None.
     
  5. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Alive, that is a good quote by Dr White on your signature line.

    I should also add that I do have a level of respect on a secular level for the amish. A secular respect for their work ethic. I would not hesitate to hire one for certain jobs but I was talking about respecting their views of worldliness.
     
  6. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,129
    Likes Received:
    221
    Likewise you can respect Mormons for their emphasis on family life "evangelism" and refusal to borrow money, even to build a building.

    Of course, I totally disagree with their doctrine.

    Back to the augment - Mormons will not drink soda pop or coffee because they have caffeine, which is a drug. So are we Baptists sinning because we partake of (non-prescription) drugs?

    Salty

    PS M Keeper - I think it is a sin not to stay around for an arugment :laugh: :smilewinkgrin:
     
  7. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,666
    Likes Received:
    225
    Worldliness is the state of having an affection for things on the earth. (Col. 3:1-2).
     
  8. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    I said I was coming back, just not for a while! :D Can't help that real life means I must limit my computer time occasionally.

    Back to my own OP. I find it funny/strange/odd that a word that is used by many to limit the behavior of others is actually only used once in this context within the KJV(Titus 2:12). Surely if worldliness was such a danger to Christains God would have brought it up more often?

    Titus did place this particular adjective in the middle of his word on how to behave, but the overall context of the piece is that a Christian should have self control and integrity. With that definition in mind how then can we condemn one another for allowing a belly button ring? Where is the lack of self control? Where is the lack of integrity (well unless you fail to pay for either the ring or the peircing)?

    I believe that through the years our idea of what "worldly" actually means has taken on a meaning that Titus didn't intend.

    I also find it odd that those who shout "worldly!" the most often have yet to show themselves on this thread. I wonder where they are? ;)
     
  9. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hope you don't really mean the Shakers, which were a group split off from the Quakers (and I can tell you that their theological beliefs are historically not biblical). They had a woman leader, Annie Lee, who claimed to be a sort of female Messiah. They also taught there should be no procreation for anyone (though some did adopt children).

    http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/travel/shaker/shakers.htm
     
  10. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    How many times does God have to say it, every other page. If it is clear then once is sufficient.

    1John 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

    That should be clear to all and the churches are falling more in love with the world every day.
     
  11. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aaron's scripture first: Notice what Paul says to put to death--sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, greed (which is idolatry). And wait, he goes further--anger, rage, malice, slander, abusive language, do not lie to one another.

    Now based on this definition of the word worldly, we can say that "sugar coated cuss words" might be abusive, but really I think we are stretching the point in most cases where such words are an expression of pain rather than a reaction to something another person said or did. Even then, the cursing wouldn't be worldly as much as it would break our commandment to love one another. (which is reiterated at the end of Colossians 3)

    You certainly can't apply this to the belly button ring, playing cards, dancing etc.

    So it is loving the world to get a belly button ring? How do ya figure? I won't argue that it can't be, just that the opposite possibility could also be true. Hence the second part of my OP, is something that is considered worldly in one case also worldly for someone else? Where do we draw the line?

    Let's pass on to another subject. Making money is the world's priority at the moment, their "idol" so to speak. Should we therefore eschew a good paycheck? Should we fail to provide ourselves with enough retirement money so we can travel in our older years or settle in Florida or fund whatever retirement plans we decide on? Should we tell our children that a college education is worldliness because they will be exposed to ideas that we as Christians don't agree with and anyway, going to college in order to make an above average paycheck is something the world is concerned with?

    Where do we draw the line?
     
  12. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is exactly right.

    For some, making money is worldly. Making money is their idol. That is a worldly thing.
    So in a sense it is worldly for some but not for others.
    But for all people, the money itself is not the evil, it is the love of it. It is the worship of those things.
    As Piper has said, it is elevating gifts above giver.

    But that is why it is dangerous to categorize things are being worldly rather that attitudes and motives.
     
  13. Alive in Christ

    Alive in Christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    0
    Old Regular...

    True.

    But the point of the topic heading, and that was brought up early in this thread is.....what is "wordly"?

    To some christian groups like the Amish, having a TV, using electricity, and driving cars rather than horses and buggys is being in violation of the biblical admonition regarding "worldliness".

    Do you agree with them? If not, can you prove they are wrong?
     
  14. Alive in Christ

    Alive in Christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marcia,

    Thanks for the info. I didnt know that about the Shakers. What I was getting at is just "the Amish and other groups like them."

    I respect them because of their work ethic, simple lifestyles, honesty, peacefull non-violent attitude, etc.
     
  15. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Some of the Amish I have met are not Christians. They also see the lack of various utilities as something that avoids the distractions of TV, radio, etc. that distract from the family unity and their time together. Many I know have cell phones.
     
  16. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Rather than asking ourselves about what is wrong with something, maybe we should be asking ourselves about what is right with it.
     
  17. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now that would be a nice perspective, but not everyone plays fair. There will still be some who try to find the negative in any decision one makes. And then the question would become "who decides whether something is right?"

    Would looking at things from the positive really make things easier to decide?
     
  18. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    We usually classify worldliness as something another person does that we dont' like :laugh:
     
  19. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,666
    Likes Received:
    225
    Why not?



    It's at the very least vanity, another worldly vice—unless you can demonstrate that the absence of teen-age girl's belly-button ring is a stumbling block to weak Christians.
     
  20. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aaron, can you demonstrate how a belly-button ring might be a stumbling block to a new Christian?

    On the same lines can you demonstrate that vanity is "worldly"? (and go ahead and give us a definiton of vanity while you are responding please)

    Because I find both the issue of "worldliness" and "vanity" to be issues of attitude and not just of action. Putting on cosmetics to hide an ugly scar, might simply be necessary in order to stop unwanted attention. At the same time, (on a different person) cosmetics might be used TO draw attention. Are the cosmetics at fault? Or is it the attitude of the person who is wearing them?
     

Share This Page

Loading...