but only when the blade is rubbed against the steel.
What am I getting at? Well, from time to time, I see people given the "right boot of fellowship" when they disagree with someone who claims authority over a ministry, a church, or so on. The response to the dissenter very often does not even address the content of the dissent, but centers around a few arguments: "you're welcome to leave," "I've got lots of friends who agree with me," and "you obviously don't understand this theology."
While sometimes separation is necessary, the ugly fact is that in all too many cases, the "right boot" is applied without the issue being debated.
In other words, iron is not coming into contact with iron, and hence the blade is becoming dull. As much as we dislike controversy, the reality is that friction is needed to sharpen us. You can see this, sad to say, in the tens of thousands of protestant denominations in the USA. Failing to debate and be corrected, we separate and become dull and useless for the Master's work.
Podcast #1047: The Roman Caesars’ Guide to Ruling
-
The Roman caesars were the rulers of the Roman Empire, beginning in 27 BC
with Julius Caesar’s heir Augustus, from whom subsequent caesars took their
nam...
6 hours ago
3 comments:
Well, maybe it has something to do with the attitudes of the sides of the issue.
Case in point: I'm having a debate with my pastor about the first part of Proverbs 31 where the "king" is told to avoid wine, princes to avoid strong drink, and the king should give strong drink to the dying and wine to the miserable and impoverished.
In what seems to be an unvarnished appeal to the teatotaller in him, my pastor says that the kings and the princes are the same people, the strong drink and the wine are the same thing, and the dying, impoverished and miserable are all the same people.
And, I'm saying that they are all different - by degrees.
And NOT arguing that this is a license to drunkenness. Just a spot in the Bible where alcohol is supposed to be prescribed/given to the needy. Not sought by someone who thinks: "I need a drink."
But, it was discussed openly in our Wed. Bible Study time and no voices were raised. No disfellowshipment.
Mark, I don't quite explain why having two categories of rulers and three categories of sufferers (and two types of liquor) would speak any differently to the issue than one type of ruler, one type of drink, and one type of sufferer.
That said, you're entirely right that it's commendable to discuss and debate the issue, even if this particular difference doesn't make a difference. One at the very least learns what is significant and what is not.
Oops--that should read "I don't quite understand", not "explain."
Post a Comment