Pride Of Words | SermonIndex

P

PreachParsly Aug 31, 2006

1 Cor 4:20For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.

I’m going to share some things the Lord has dealt with me on and I pray it will be an exhortation to everyone here.

The kingdom of God is ~~[u]~~not[/u] in word. It is not in your doctrinal statements. It is not in your theological precision. It is not mere words on a page or a message board. The kingdom of God is in power!

One thing I have noticed that is/was a trap for me is that when I hear someone say or type something that “I” decide is not worded right, I dismiss the man as a heretic or theological ignorant, like I are so wise. I thank the Lord he has delivered me from this! I fear that many do this. Ever since I was first born again I have studied what other Christians believe. I remember it was only weeks after my conversion that I was looking at all the different denominations doctrinal statements.

As I have grown in the Lord, so has my understanding (or so I hope). I believe if you look at the history of creeds and doctrinal statements most, if not all, were done as a reaction to another group. This group said this and we don’t believe it so we will post what we believe. Groups have done this all throughout history. I’m not saying it is wrong per say, but I am a firm believer that if we take a truth and stretch it too far it is untrue. I just don’t want to respond so strongly to one error that I make an error on the other side. A false balance is an abomination to the Lord just as condemning the just and justifying the wicked is. It seems many times as we “battle heretics” that we are only battling words, not powers of the air.

Words are only mere words unless there is a power behind it. It’s grieving to me to see two brothers argue over something just because of how one is wording it. The words may be different, but the power may very well be the same! Here is an example. Brother 1 says “he sins everyday.” Brother 2 says, “Christians do not sin everyday. If you sin everyday you are going to hell.” Instead of trying to understand what the other actually means they start playing “scripture wars” and showing who can come up with the most scriptures to prove the other wrong. Does that smell fleshy to you? I wonder if it would be more profitable to discuss what each other means. When brother 1 says he sins everyday he doesn’t mean that he fornicates or anything, but that he doesn’t walk in the same measure of the Spirit that Christ walked in. He “misses the mark.” When brother 2 says he doesn’t sin everyday he means that there is no rebellion in his life that he knows of and strives to live a life of holiness. Both live exactly the same; yet will spend their time arguing over words!

I know that in the above example there are people in both camps that may very well being lying to themselves. One may say "he sins everyday" but really doesn't have any rebellion in their heart. The other may say, "he never sins," yet is so full of pride he can't even see his own sin. Even though we will be judged by every idle word, just your confession won't save you. I'll remind you that one of the first to say "thou art, the Holy One of God (Mark 1:24)" was a devil! The real question is the power of God unto salvation in you and working through you?

With all that said, I am a high respecter of words. I believe they are important. And yes I believe that right response to right believe equals right living. And they all need to be there. I am also I firm believe that we should use words as the Bible uses them, especially when speaking theologically. Doctrine is surely important. I am a strong supporter of studying to show yourself approved so that we may have sound doctrine. I just want to make a challenge to everyone to make sure you are not just battling words, but the powers and principalities of the air that is behind false doctrine.

We should be zealous for the truth but, God bless us if we really don’t believe we see through a glass darkly and in all our sermonizing and theologizing we haven't missed one jot or tittle.

C

crsschk Aug 31, 2006

I wonder if it would be more profitable to discuss what each other means.

Well said brother. Ask a question, request a clarification... It is the greatest problem that comes about here and leads to all kinds of assumptions and speculations.

sermonindex Aug 31, 2006

Preach said

As I have grown in the Lord, so has my understanding (or so I hope). I believe if you look at the history of creeds and doctrinal statements most, if not all, were done as a reaction to another group. This group said this and we don’t believe it so we will post what we believe. Groups have done this all throughout history. I’m not saying it is wrong per say, but I am a firm believer that if we take a truth and stretch it too far it is untrue. I just don’t want to respond so strongly to one error that I make an error on the other side. A false balance is an abomination to the Lord just as condemning the just and justifying the wicked is. It seems many times as we “battle heretics” that we are only battling words, not powers of the air.

I think this captures a truth very accurately. My grandfather also was a writer who highlighted the mistakes he found in others' thinking. I didn't really 'know' him, as he died when I was two, but, the expectation that there is a 'right' stance, is very familiar to me. The very hardest battle I had with myself was over whether to admit that I'd realised I'd have to change, if I was to enter into the relationship with God which would please Him. My struggle lasted a whole year, and was definitely deeply significant in paving the way for my being able to admit many times subsequently, 'I was wrong'.

However, the Lord was also taking me through a journey at a different level, which was to rid me of false humility - the quick fix 'I was wrong' which tended towards the aggrandisement of others, regardless of whether they were right or wrong.... I just wanted their approval!

Later, (much later), I had to start making a stand for truth and righteousness, which pressurised my immaturity, my fears, my state of unhealedness. All these (pressures) were a necessary part of God moving me from a theoretically appreciated gospel in my mind, to transforming it by real experience into THE gospel which meets the actual needs of my real soul. Ouch! I would not like to go back. ?-)

So, perhaps we all need to (re?)interpret some of what some of us post, as a very real part of the very real journey with God, (and not just 'a statement of faith') which some of us are making. With this in mind, apart from what is said on the surface of the screenpage, may we take a little longer to consider the possibility that it took faith to post at all, and that not everyone has experience of explaining their beliefs, or sharing their testimony successfully?

Sometimes, only half a sentence of what's been posted really 'ministers' to me, but, that half-sentence tells me the other person is in touch with the Lord. AMEN! :-) I would encourage us to let these connections engender respect, and give us an open-heartedness to each other. Oh! About the half-sentence that didn't minister to me (and the rest of the post?)? I always think it must be for someone else.... and it doesn't cross my mind that those someone elses aren't gleaning what's been left for them..... lol ..... having written this, I realise I could be missing things which are meant for ~~[i]~~me[/i]! But I trust the Lord not to let me miss something I absolutely must embrace, somewhere along the way, walking with Him. I still have a LOT to learn....

sermonindex Aug 31, 2006

Thanks so much for sharing this. I know I am often guilty of placing the power with my words. If I am going to be speaking somewhere or leading a prayer meeting, I sometimes spend too much time arranging my words as opposed to clothing myself with the Holy Spirit's power that should go forth with them.

About the original post though, could someone please explain the example that was used:

Brother 1 says “he sins everyday.” Brother 2 says, “Christians do not sin everyday. If you sin everyday you are going to hell.” Instead of trying to understand what the other actually means they start playing “scripture wars” and showing who can come up with the most scriptures to prove the other wrong. Does that smell fleshy to you? I wonder if it would be more profitable to discuss what each other means. When brother 1 says he sins everyday he doesn’t mean that he fornicates or anything, but that he doesn’t walk in the same measure of the Spirit that Christ walked in. He “misses the mark.” When brother 2 says he doesn’t sin everyday he means that there is no rebellion in his life that he knows of and strives to live a life of holiness. Both live exactly the same; yet will spend their time arguing over words!

I have heard Ravenhill say things similar to this, such as, "If you sin everyday for the rest of your life you will go to hell at the end of it." I have always been a little confused at what exactly he is getting at.

C

ChrisJD Aug 31, 2006

Hi everyone.

Appreciate the sentiments here and am thinking also how each of us can pour different meanings into the words we use - different than what our readers/hearers will expect or understand.

P

PreachParsly Aug 31, 2006

About the original post though, could someone please explain the example that was used:

The example I used it debated fairly often. I think it would be refered to as the doctrine of entire sanctification or Christian perfection.

The side that does not believe it is possible to be "perfect" will say that even though we do not manifest the works of the flesh, we are not without sin. They will say that sin is not obtaining to the perfect will of God.

The side that does believe it says that Christ's blood cleanses us from all sin, so we do not sin everyday. They would usually equate sin as rebellion against what you know to do. And if you are not living in rebellion to Christ, you are not sinning.

R

roadsign Sep 2, 2006

PreachParsly, Your post, made me think of the verse “not the letter of the law but the spirit of the law”. I suppose you could say, “not the word itself, but the spirit of the word.”

I recently heard Paris Reidhead’s sermon, “The Hidden things of God” in which he addresses this exact issue that you share so very well. He talks about the danger of placing too much trust in words themselves, while not really understanding the spirit or concept behind the word.

Reidhead points out that church people tend to be very gullible because they aren't very intellectual. So when a heretical teacher comes along and uses "the correct" spiritual words, they assume that he is on track. And so they swallow the heresy. That’s how Gnosticism and a lot of other false teachings have snuck into the church.

Then there is the problem of those outside the church - they typically have a very distorted understanding of most Bible words ex: love, submission, God, faith, sin etc etc.

Because of this problem of misunderstandings, I feel that, as much as possible, it's best to avoid using overly-familiar terms. Instead somehow portray the meaning. I guess if you don't really understand the word, you won't be able to do that.

When talking to someone about being "born again", it seems better not to use those words, "born again" but instead just explain what it really is. After all, you don't need the word to have the real thing.

That's what I like about Jesus. He preached the gospel without relying on any certain set of words. And he sure knew how to get the intended meaning across! We have much to learn from Jesus' preaching style.

Diane