Howdy hisalone (I like your name!)...

Thanks for sharing. A couple of things you said that I would like to comment on.

Originally Posted by hisalone
I understand what you are saying but it must be considered from the view of others also. I think we are in agreement that the teaching of Christ is of the most importance correct? The things you are mentioning have nothing to do with our salvation in Jesus Christ, tongues, head coverings and other things you mentioned.

Agreed so far...

It would be wrong for you to become a part of a body in whom you are in disagreement with.

Hmm...not sure about that. I mean who of us is in complete agreement with every other of us? I daresay that not a single one of us is ever in complete agreement with any other of us.

If it is perfectly acceptable for me to fellowship with you or others with whom I am not in perfect agreement why must I exclude myself or otherwise be excluded from fellowship with a body of believers (as opposed to individual believers) just because I or they are also not in perfect agreement?

Is there any biblical basis for believing that such a thing is...well...biblical?

I mean is there any scriptural support for the idea that a Christian cannot or should not fellowship with a local representation of the Body unless that Christian is in agreement with that body regarding the particulars of what that group might believe?

I don't think there is such support. I could be wrong but I think the whole notion that believers who disagree cannot be in the same body and actively so is itself unscriptural and promotes ungodly division.

If you and I disagree on some particular point of doctrine and we both have a third individual who is a common friend are we not both able and free in the Presence of God to expound to our common friend our respective views? In love and a spirit of humility and respect for each other? Without endangering our friendship in Christ?

If we can do that in person among ourselves why does it now become taboo to do so simply because we now find ourselves among a much greater group of believers as represented by a local body (otherwise called a Church)?

Why, because you cause a brother to stumble.

The context of causing a brother to stumble biblically has to do with wounding someone's conscience and embolding them through the exercise of our freedom to do what for them is wrong (i.e. with the example given being that of eating meat sacrificed to idols).

How would I cause anybody in your Church for example, assuming your Church differed with me on the matter of spiritual gifts, to so stumble?

At what point do we draw the line between walking in love and walking in fear of offending the sensibilities of any of our brothers and sisters who simply have an incorrect understanding of truth?

Can we not walk in love and allow each other freedom to express variying points of view regarding what the Bible says on a given subject? Without neccessarily having such a difference force a division?

Without getting into where I stand on those issues, you must realize we are all at different places in our biblical understandings as to the issues you mentioned. As you said, who has the corner on the truth? With that in mind, it is best to join a body that has the same view as you and grow together with them.

Admittedly that would be ideal but I know of no group anywhere that is as homogenous in their agreement as the ideal that you describe.

I have found no group, other than non-aligned Christians that is, who allow each other freedom to follow the Bible in the totality of what it plainly says to do and believe. So the choice for me and countless others is to either shut our mouths and restrain ourselves and abide by group policy or open our mouths, speak the truth as we see it in love, do what the bible says, and let God work.

Between the two I think it is safe to say that I have no choice before God but to do the latter. Of course that also means that I tend to not fit into existing Church structures which is regretable but more an indication of how stiffling and suppresive Church strucutures presently are than in my having a wrong heart or unwillingness to work with my brothers and sisters in Christ to do all that God might want to do through us all.

For some of us, if you were to bring those things up during the service other than just as questions in a teaching setting, it would be considered an attack on the unity of the church.

Mind you I am not so unaware of God's ways that I would just barge into Churches and start mouthing off some "thus saith the Lord" to one and all but I am curious, if I did do that, why would you and others consider it an attack on the unity of the church?

Would not the example set in Corinth where each one has this or that and is free to express it before a gathering of the Church (where the rest judge what is said) point rather to the fact that such an expression is the healthiest expression of the Holy Spirit having free reign to operate as He might want to rather than as an attack on unity?

Where would it stop? People would want to expound all kinds of wild doctrines causing confusion and disunity in the church.

Paul would not have encouraged the Corinthians to so do if your concern is what would result. The fact is that under such freedom of expression the Holy Spirit Himself would lead through the Body to judge and otherwise highlight wrong expressions. That Body would be a most healthy Body that would allow freedom in Christ for all to freely exercise their gifts while also judging wrong thought and action.

The fact is that we are encouraged to operate in such freedom right in the passages I quoted if not by explicit command then certainly by example. It's there in black and white.

Why are we not doing that?

Certain individuals have been gifted for pastoring and teaching, it is a gift of God that the church must recognize.

Absolutely! That does not negate what Corinthians says by way of example about how we should operate in more freedom within assemblies of the Body.

Much like the sons of Korah, everyone thinks they are a teacher or pastor, and that isn't biiblical.

What is not biblical are present day Church structures that hinder the Holy Spirit freely expressing Himself through whomever He wills to do so. Again it's in black and white in the example set out in 1 Cor.

So what if everyone thinks they are a teacher? Is it a sin to think that oneself is a teacher? I am sure every Pastor thinks they are a teacher.

The wrongness is not in thinking we are teachers. The wrongness is in so restricting everyone from freely expressing what they feel is God within them wanting them to do that none of those who think they are teachers ever got much chance to say anything at all. Such that they might be able under the correction of the Spirit through others to come to a place of brokeness to realize that perhaps they are not the great teachers they have thought themselves to be.

Again, setting all opposing logic aside, what do you make of Paul's instructions for the Corinthian Church? Are we to follow the example he set for them? If not...why not?

Jumping up to give a prophecy is better done in a church that allows that, in our church it would probably freak someone out, causing them to stumble.

So now the criteria for whether we allow something, a biblical something at that, to happen in our modern assemblies is whether we will cause someone to "freak out"???

I'm not saying it is wrong if you feel led to do that, but don't do it in a church you know is more reserved in their worship.

Hmm...I wonder what Jesus would have done in such a Church? Would he have given way to the more reserved way of that Church or would He not rather have strongly rebuked that Church to stop their stubborness?

What gives any of us as Christians the right to tell other Christians to not fully express themselves to God in our company???

That strikes me as incredibly arrogant.

Am I to believe that biblically, assuming that I was a tongue speaking prophet (which I am not), that I cannot express myself to God in a wholesome and biblical manner when around some Christians because they are sensitive such that their religious sensitivities might be offended by my expression???!!!

Is that biblical?

Is the only choice here for one such Christian to further seperate and divide from other Christians so that they might freely express themselves to God in an assembly of His called out one's??

Does no one else see anything wrong with that???

We are all different, we all have our styles, join the one you best fit with.

Yes that is what is natural. I mean that we join with those who we best fit with. Fortunately for us all that is not God's way for if He had done the same not a one of us would have been deemed fit to join with Him!

If you take notice, even Jesus obeyed the form of worship in the synagogue by going to the front to read the Scriptures, why didn't he just give the exposition of the reading from where He stood in the congregation?

A valid point but if I may also point out what Jesus did among those in the synagogues is more akin to what we do among unbelievers who are religious than among those of us who are truly called by His name.

If I attend a Catholic Church for example (and no I am not saying all Catholics are unbelievers) I am most certainly not going to stand up and start running up and down the halls yelling "Praise God!" (not that I do that anywhere mind you but just by way of illustration).

It would not be winsome to do so.

But that gathering is not my family gathering. It is best I think to look at what Jesus did when with His disciples to gain a better understanding of how what He did might be an indication of what we should do in the Church. Not to what He did inside a synagogue that listened to Him one minute and the next tried to throw Him off a cliff!

While Jesus did follow the order of how things were done with respect to reading please note how he handled the subsequent dialog. He most certainly did not kowtow to existing tradition by what He subsequently said. Indeed they tried to kill Him!

We must recognize the order in the churches we attend, God is a God of order.

The context of that oft misused and misquoted verse is a context of the Holy Spirit instituting an order into a gathering by the free expression of His gifts within the Body. Where prophets are allowed to speak one at time, where woman must keep silent, where tongues speakers cannot speak unless their is an interpreter and so forth.

It is not at all related to the proper order that we have today where saints sit, and stand, and kneel, and say Amen when they are told to do so and at not other time in an hour long service.

Isn't it incredibly ironic that today any such expressions of tongues, prophecy, and so forth are considered out of order when those very things were PART OF THE ORDER being spoken of then???!!!

I am not saying this to discourage you, just trying to point you to what I believe is best for you and the church.

I appreciate your heart in doing so if not your views with respect to why we shouldn't or can't follow the order of assembly as laid out for us by example in 1st Cor.