GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: What exactly is a change agent?  (Read 27819 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Thor

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #70 on: Tue Apr 29, 2003 - 09:12:22 »
Mosers analogy does not illustrate this situation because carried to its logical conclusion it end in falicy.
A shot will kill malaria without the person's knowledge of the disease in his body of the cure that is being given....
This illustration fails because so many verses say that we must know (at least) something before baptism. We must know of Christ. We must know of our own sin. We must know of the death, burial, and ressurection of Christ, we must know baptism is for the remission of sins.
What the illustration truly expresses is an idea that we should be out dunking people under the water because it doesn't matter if they know anything or not they will be saved by the action, That's false.
God's grace is shown in that he provided a way for us to escape sin: hear, believe, repent, confess, be baptized, and walk in the light. That path will lead one into heaven one day because it is the one that Christ first blazed and the one which we can and must follow today.

Christian Forums and Message Board

What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #70 on: Tue Apr 29, 2003 - 09:12:22 »

Offline Kevin

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #71 on: Mon Mar 03, 2003 - 11:17:57 »
Steve,
My concept of the Church of Christ comes from the Bible and not from men.
(1) Anyone who teaches false doctrine is a false teacher.  I personally have never characterized someone as a  "Change Agent," but if they teach false doctrine, then yes they are false teachers.
(2) I haven't.  Since men sin, it will never happen, but we should strive to replicate the divine pattern as closely as possible.
(3) I can't remember.  You see the Church of Christ as just another denomination; I see it as the Church we read about in the NT, the Church for which Jesus died.  
(4) I don't believe that in matters of doctrine we can "see" scripture in different ways and still be pleasing to God.  I think "scripture's view" can be determined positively (II Tim 3:16).  The scriptures describe the distinctive nature of Christ's Church.  

I believe the Church of Christ is the Church you read about in the NT.  I don't believe it to be a man-made institution that was "spawned out of the RM of the early 19th century."  The Church universal is comprised of those individuals that come to a faith in Christ, repent of their sins, confess their faith in Christ, and are baptized for the remission of their sins.  Upon baptism, the Lord adds them to His Church.

Christian Forums and Message Board

What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #71 on: Mon Mar 03, 2003 - 11:17:57 »

Offline Lee Freeman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10368
  • Manna: 240
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #72 on: Thu Apr 03, 2003 - 15:25:47 »
Steve, thank you for what you said in your last post. I'm sure I'm not worthy, but thanks, nonetheless! Arkstfan, Kanham and Rocketman, thanks to you guys also!

Arkstfan, I think you're right. The church of Christ by and large doesn't understand the OT. This is true among "conservatives" and "liberals"; I know there are many people from my own church family (we've been disfellowshipped by most of the mainline coC's in Florence for worshipping with Methodists, Baptist and others) who don't understand the OT. They see it as mainly about the Law of Moses and since it is "pre-Jesus," assume that there is NO grace in the OT. Bobby's study, however, and the writings of Tom Olbricht, have thoroughly convinced me of the fallacy of this view. Now, when I read it, God's grace shines through every page of the OT. And I thoroughly believe that without a proper understanding of the OT you CANNOT understand the NT. Nor do we understand the nature of the Bible itself. As Dr. Robert Richardson warned us in 1847, the Bible CONTAINS the gospel, but the Bible itself is NOT the gospel.            

You're also right to say that Stone and Campbell would be disfellowshipped; so would T. B. Larimore (for not drawing lines of fellowship and for preaching in Baptist, Episcopalian and Presbyterian churches); David Lipscomb and James A. Harding (for teaching premillennialism); F. D. Srygley (for calling "denominational" preachers his brothers); probably even N. B. Hardeman (for saying that his brethren in the coC were "Christians only, not the only Christians").

Thor, brother, how can you have read our posts and STILL not understand what we're saying? (Actually I know how you can do it because I used to do it, too.)  NO ONE'S saying the Bible's not important; NO ONE'S saying that rules aren't important. What we're saying is that all rules have contexts. For too long, the coC has ignored the contexts of the rules. We've emphasized the rules and keeping the commandments to the exclusion of all else. But without Jesus, the rules are useless!

The coC reminds me of the folks Paul wrote about to Timothy in I Timothy 1:5-7, which says: "Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: From which some having swerved have turned aside UNTO VAIN JANGLING; Desiring to be teachers of the law; UNDERSTANDING NEITHER WHAT THEY SAY, NOR WHEREOF THEY AFFIRM." (KJV emphasis added).  

If anyone asked me what they must do to become a Christian, I'd tell them exactly what Peter did in Acts 2: 38. BUT, FIRST, I'd try to be sure that they had a FAITH in HIM, not in the "work" or act of baptism itself. Without the death, burial and resurrection of Christ Baptism is just an empty ritual, devoid of any meaning. Without a believing faith what good is baptism anyway? So I'd urge them, if they hadn't already, to be immersed. But I WILL NOT condemn unbatized Christians. I have NO RIGHT to do that! I have heard coC preachers as much as say that  "denominational" Christians just don't want to follow God or that they refuse to correctly interpret the Bible-that they'd rather follow the traditions of men, otherwise they'd put away their heresy and join the "true" church. This in spite of what Jesus CLEARLY said: "Whoever is not against us is for us," and that we should NOT FORBID such people. (This seems to be ONE commandment of Jesus we're not too worried about obeying! Again a selective hermeneutic!) And Paul said in Romans 14: "Who are you to judge another's servant?" In the words of Dana Carvey playing George Bush (the elder), "Not gaaaaaaa do it! Wouldn't be prudent!"

Neither will I insist that immersed believers in Baptist or Methodist churches (we had two Methodist folks immersed in our baptistry by their pastor last Sunday, and just two years ago eight teens from that same Methodist church were immersed in our baptistry) be re-immersed or that they leave their churches and "join" ours; as I understand Acts 2, anyone who is immersed is made a member of Christ's church by God, whether the sign on the door says "Church of Christ" or not. The girl I'm tryin' to date is Baptist and I'm certain that she's been immersed. There is no reason for me to ask her to leave her congregation and I won't do that. I'd love her to be a part of my church family, but it hasta be HER choice.

Thor, we're not against the plain teaching of scripture regarding baptism. But we are against trying to argure, force,  guilt-trip or condemn people into the water. K. C. Moser once wrote in the Gospel Advocate that any teaching, no matter how unorthodox, would be tolerated in the coC so long as it was seen to uphold baptism. Its the whole plan vs. man theory. I believe, with Paul, that legalism is a false gospel. No one was EVER saved by keeping commandments. God saved them via grace through faith. Again, I'm NOT sayin' rules aren't important! I'm just sayin' that for the last fifty or seventy-five years, our main emphasis has been to focus on keeping commandments with little or no mention of the Man. Did Christ die so that baptism could save us? Did Christ die for the Bible? Did Christ die so that obedience to His commandments could save us? Did Christ die for a "pattern"? We've focused on form over function for too long.

Pax vobiscum.

Christian Forums and Message Board

What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #72 on: Thu Apr 03, 2003 - 15:25:47 »

Offline spurly

  • All glory to God and to Jesus the Son!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15743
  • Manna: 319
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #73 on: Fri Mar 28, 2003 - 17:03:07 »
Thor,

If you are ever in OKC, you are welcome to come to our church anytime.  We accept everyone who places their faith in Christ.  So you too would be welcome here.

I hope to see you.  If you want more information on the church you can send me a PM.

Kevin
Antioch Christian Church
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Christian Forums and Message Board

What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #73 on: Fri Mar 28, 2003 - 17:03:07 »

Offline jarschqua

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 277
  • Manna: 0
  • Jambo
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #74 on: Tue Apr 08, 2003 - 11:47:00 »
howdy segell!

i keep up with these posts and i just can't get past the discrepancy in your post...
you say that one must believe that Jesus died to save us as a contingency to being saved
then you say there is no contingency...

the fatal flaw in your reasoning is that you cannot take God's grace to it's fullest possible extent.
you cannot say that Jesus died, therefore by the fullness of grace everyone is saved.
because they're not. i must still believe. and that's still a contingency.

perhaps you contend that the Holy Spirit controls me, therefore i don't actually do the work of believing. i find that to be useless. the Holy Spirit already believes; just because He takes control of my body/mind and coerces it, irregardless of my free will, to believe - then it was just Him believing, not me... just Him playing a video game, steering me around, putting me under hypnosis...
i deny that. because that makes Christ's death purposeless. if the HS can control me like a mario brother to force me into belief, then Jesus' death was just a puppet show. meaningless.

why wouldn't God have the HS coerce my mind to believe that Jesus was green? or that water is tasty? what's the point in murdering His child if the HS is going to bring salvation by forcing our minds to believe in something?
your rationale does just that - puts salvation on the Holy Spirit; you teach that the HS saves us... no verses for that.
God would kill His Son for nothing? no. did He make Him into a puppet just so the Holy Spirit would have something obligatory to hypnotize my mind into believing in?

and if it takes blood to make the sacrifice count to God (instead of having us believe Jesus was a certain color).. why is that? because God set it up that way - Christianity is bloody, right?... so why not have Jesus prick His finger? isn't one drop of blood from the veins of God incarnate more than sufficient for the salvation of all men?

why would God make the Spirit force man into a choice? in so many little things we do everyday, the keys i choose to type, the steps i choose to take, the color of car i buy, the way i style my hair, who i marry, how many dogs i buy, etc... God has created a being with free choice... why? because the greatest glory that God can have from us is that we didn't HAVE to glorify Him; but we CHOSE to!

if the HS grabs our minds and forces us to believe in Christ, taking from us the ability to chose, taking from us the ability to impact our salvation, taking from us the contingency that salvation DOES rest on us at the single most important moment in our existence (when we become Christ's) then God has negated everything He has ever told us to do, negated everything that He created us to do...

here's why - He created us to have the ability to make choices indepently of His control... otherwise it would impossible for us to sin... He isn't taking away from us the most important choice of all... the HS does not master our minds like puppets to force us to believe... believing is our choice, our work - not to merit salvation, but because God knows that the greatest glory He can have from ants like us is that we actually choose to glorify Him without Him forcing us to.

giving glory to God because i'm a puppet is just God giving glory to God with His hand up the back of my shirt...

verse after verse of God's Word encourages us to make certain choices and to refrain from making other choices... the HS isn't jumping in here and there making our choices for us... this is not a video game... or a dream... or a puppet show of God's...  this is the fullness of living from the very breath of He who created us; with all the free choice that goes along with it...


so the point of all that is that we do the work of believing. or of accepting. or of receiving. it's a very tiny work because God does all the giving and it is far better to give than recieve...

so, since belief is then an act solely of our own choice; and without belief there can be no salvation... we certainly do play a role in our salvation... not to merit it, but to believe in it...

understanding that, is the first step to understanding why God commands the devine institution of repentance and baptism... so that our belief is not incomplete, that belief must act... God knows this... action is intricately intwined not only with faith but with grace... faith is the motivator and definition of our actions... grace is the substance of God's actions...

a true belief can be had by those who refuse to act. the pharisees prove that. they believed in Christ but did not follow Him. action is the result of faith and is highly rewarded by God... that's because God wants us to choose Him, to His greater glory, not only with our minds but with every part of us...
the parts: the mind gives glory to God in belief
the conscience gives glory to God in repentance
the heart gives glory to God in confessing Christ
the strenth gives glory to God in baptism

love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength... because that is the greatest glory we pitiful humans can give... and God loves us so much for it... because we choose to glorify Him in all those ways...

that's why God instituted (God not man) belief, repentance, confession, and baptism...
unfortunately there are those that lift one over another... be it baptism... be it faith...

but no matter what they're God's idea, they're God's command, and there's nothing about obeying Him that is heavy, and nothing about obeying Him that doesn't affect how much glory we are giving unto Him...

it was God's grace to give us the oppurtunity to glorify Him with our belief-mind, baptism-body, etc... unfortunately there are those that seperate the "man" and the "plan"... but God has put them together, all for His greater glory...

belief is in Christ - that's all about the man, not a five finger plan
repentance is for killing Christ - all about the man, not at all about my ability to clean myself
confession is that Jesus is the Savior - all about Jesus, not magical incatation in the plan
baptism is into Christ and His name and His blood - not a man  made plan... not a work... but all about being clothed with Christ and having our old lives killed to rise a new creature

a new creature that glorifies God in every aspect, not to merit His grace, but be in His Son - the perfect sacrifice to bring the perfect glory of which we can only be clothed in belief, repentance, baptism, continuous confession, as His brother and/or sister...

segell, my friend i started this towards you, but it's out there for everybody... it's far too long but know that i had planned on saying how much i appreciate your spirit of discussion down here at the bottom, and hope that we can continue with such mentally invigorating discussion... thanks for your time, hope there's not too many typos! i think that your discrepancies are too hard to reconcile my friend... faith is an act, a work on our part... our salvation is certainly contingent on it... as well as the fullness of glory in God's plan (which man didn't create or fabricate or misapply from scripture)...
i digress!
in Christ
josh

Christian Forums and Message Board

What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #74 on: Tue Apr 08, 2003 - 11:47:00 »



Offline segell

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Manna: 283
  • Gender: Male
  • segell
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #75 on: Tue Apr 08, 2003 - 13:28:08 »
Josh

I appreciate what you just wrote.  Don't mean to disappoint you, really don't.  I just feel like we've discussed this before.  

And thanks for the clarification.  

By the way, do you think you have the power to transform your heart?

Take care,

Steve

Offline segell

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Manna: 283
  • Gender: Male
  • segell
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #76 on: Fri Apr 11, 2003 - 11:33:38 »
As for the the person who never has been exposed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, here is my take:

Paul tells us that noone is left with an excuse.  Romans 1:18 -20.  God has revealed and manifested Himself - His invisible qualities, His divine nature and eternal power - since the creation.  

So what does that mean?  It means, in my view, that we can rest in God's character, His mercy, justice and power.  It means to me that God's pursuit is the individual's heart and that it's the content of the heart that matters.  

Will the one who has never heard the Gospel message have opportunity to realize his need for a saving God?  I would think so.  Will the content of the heart that realizes his need and cries out to the heavens to that God he cannot see be saved?  Well, I personally think so, but am comforted in knowing that God is sovereign and that He is just and I can leave that issue to Him.  

And the good thing is - matters like this drive me to Almighty God and absolute dependence on Him.  I don't have to have the exact answer because my God does, indeed.  And whatever is done will be right!!

Steve

Offline Lee Freeman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10368
  • Manna: 240
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #77 on: Mon Apr 14, 2003 - 13:20:38 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (kanham @ April 14 2003,11:23)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]One other key about change, there has to be an agreement that change is needed. Many times people don't see the need to change. In this case no amount of time will make something change.[/quote]
Kanham, this is the crucial factor. Many people are so caught up in tradition and religion that they forefeit their personal relationship with Christ for a relationship with the their interpretation of the Bible, with tradition, etc. etc. Then when someone like Rubel Shelly or Lynn Anderson comes along suggesting that we need to be more grace centered and Christocentric, many people resist, out of fear, uncertainty, the fear that they will lose control, personal dislike of the "change agent, " etc.

Here in Alabama, in the belt buckle of the Bible belt, the coC has a very strong presence. Change comes very slowly, but it is coming. Sometimes it doesn't seem fast enough. As an example, one preacher wrote in one of our well-known brotherhood papers here a few years ago that he was glad to see that some preachers were still willing to maintain the status quo! I as see it, that's the main problem with change. The changes being advocating by Shelly, Anderson, Cope, etc. are not as strange or weird as people are afraid they are anyway. But many people are afraid of ANY change.

Lynn Anderson's 1996 book Navigating the Winds of Change had many good points in it, but the most important was one that you and BOG have already alluded to-making sure the congregation knows that any change being advocated has a sound scriptural/theological basis.

Pax vobiscum.

Offline charlie

  • Quoted on every stupid baptism thread
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3361
  • Manna: 95
  • Gender: Male
  • Here I come to save the day
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #78 on: Fri Apr 18, 2003 - 09:05:03 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]I wonder how you teach in a way that helps open people’s eyes to this? Any thoughts? [/quote]

In this aspect, you are trying to teach people who are already taught, or at least consider themselves taught. You can try to explain as best you can the logical fallacy of earned grace. You can try to fill the void by reminding them of God's power and purity. Who could disagree with the statement that even our very best efforts to obey the truth are poorly done at best, either because of improper actions or impure motives. Appeal to Paul's example in Rom 7:13-25 where even the great apostle himself couldn't seem to do the right thing. Obedience is vital, but it is never perfect. One thing I've noticed is that people like this almost always condemn others for not obeying the truth, but then claim that they themselves "try their best" or something like that. That's about the most hypocritical and inconsistent mentality I can imagine in terms of following the will of God. No one, when pressed, will admit they are perfect. Admitting that it's okay for others to be imperfect is the next big step.

At some point, and with some people, you may just have to accept that they are going to come to God on their own terms: by meticulous and fearful obedience rather than on relying on his grace alone. If God can cleanse the heart of the one who puts his faith in Jesus who died for his sins, he can also cleanse the heart of the one who puts his faith in Jesus who commanded that he be baptized.

Christian Forums and Message Board

What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #78 on: Fri Apr 18, 2003 - 09:05:03 »

Offline jarschqua

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 277
  • Manna: 0
  • Jambo
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #79 on: Tue Apr 29, 2003 - 09:30:53 »
kanham, yes i certainly see the differences between myself and many others here, including thor... i hope my attitude is acceptable, and for any unknown offense i may have caused i ask forgiveness...
    leef - thanks very much for sharing the Campbell stuff, i really enjoyed reading it
   spurly, i certainly see your point... the author of hebrews concurs - hebrews 6: let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, instruction about baptism, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.
    thor - thanks for your spirit of perseverance, though i too disagree that the only "right reasons" for immersion are "belief and repentance" or that they must know it is for the remission of sins... if one is baptized into the name of Christ because of their faith then they're in Him... and the remission of sins is something that God has promised to occur at that point; He won't forget His promise because of the fallibility of the baptized person's teachers...
     an interesting thought - if it's a sin to not know baptism is for remission of sins, baptism would still wash that sin away with all the others!
    duckman, your post was very well presented and appreciated, thanks for your thoughts...
    charlie - i don't think i've told you recently that i appreciate your insights and random inserts into the discussion
    segell, nice to see you insert those tokens of encouragement you give...
    james - glad to see you here, thanks for sharing your life and for the worthwhile suggestion of varying our topic selection here...
    janine, it's always so fun to hear from you with such unique insights and witty appropriateness... i feel the same as you that other's disection of something i feel God values tends to draw my attention to it...
     bog - sounds like an interesting article and balancing those tensions may be very valuable to our discussion here...
i went back about 5 pages there, so i hope i didn't miss anyone recently posting... ; oh yeah HI "memmy" thanks for gracing us with a smile!
agape all!

     :inlove: josh

  • Guest
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #80 on: Thu Feb 27, 2003 - 14:39:05 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (nerdneh @ Feb. 27 2003,2:28)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]An ancient method of debate where you hope to win by showing disrespect for those you disagree with on some topic.[/quote]
So this debating method is kind of like the "trash talking" about your opponent before a boxing match.  

I see this method of debate alot...seems more appropriate for boxing than a Christian discussion!

boringoldguy

  • Guest
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #81 on: Mon Mar 03, 2003 - 15:13:45 »
Shorty,

Without a question, exclusion happens in the Church of Christ, and will continue to happen.    

What I was trying to say is that, in theory, we accept everybody Jesus accepts.   That's the aspiration.   My understanding of the "denoniminations" is that many of them require extra-biblical things before a person is admitted to communion.  For example, I was raised as a Presbyterian.   When I reached adolescence (sp?) I had to go through a "communicant's class" before I was permitted to take communion;   there was a little about Jesus, and a lot about John Calvin and John Knox, and I had to say I agreed with it.   Of course, as an ignorant kid from a country town, I agreed with whatever the preacher said to agree with.

My understanding of the church of Christ is that we don't make people accept these kind of things.   That's our goal.   Sadly, you're right that we often miss the target.  But at least I think it's the right target.

Thanks for your friendly comments.  I've enjoyed the discussion.

marc

  • Guest
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #82 on: Thu Mar 27, 2003 - 11:30:56 »
More are than you admit.

The problem comes when we equate those who agree with us with those who belong to Christ. His church is not just another man-made organization, but we imperfect men continue to create imperfect organizations.

None of which, logically or scripturally, can be equated with the whole body of Christ.

Offline Lee Freeman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10368
  • Manna: 240
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #83 on: Thu Mar 27, 2003 - 21:19:29 »
Thor, Shorty, Nevertheless, Marc, et. al, greetings! Shorty, thanks for the nice stuff you said. I'm not worthy! But thanks. Say a prayer for me and Alice.       

Thor when you say that A. Campbell was a Seceder, a Baptist and then a Christian, are you implying that Campbell was NOT a Christian while he was a Seceder and a Baptist? If so, how can you judge whether Campbell was saved or not?                                                                               
Secondly, Barton Stone said to follow Stone and Campbell only so far as you see them following Christ. To which I say "Amen." They were not inspired as was Paul. But, I think we owe them a great deal of gratitude; without Stone and the Campbells the coC as we all know it would not exist.                                                                            

Thirdly, the Campbells and Stone were not attempting to restore a NT church which had ceased to exist; "Restoration Movement" is not even an accurate description of their movement. They referred to their movement as "The Reformation," or "The Current Reformation," as they considered themselves reformers in the spirit of Luther, Calvin and Wesley. What they were trying to do is unite sincere believers from all the denominations around the core doctrines, or central tenets of the apostolic church. When Campbell spoke of a "pattern" he meant, not a complex pattern of doctrinal orthodoxy, but rather, the basics, or essentials, of NT faith. To Stone and the Campbells, this insistance on doctrinal orthodoxy was one of the chief causes of diviision in the first place.                                                                        

For Campbell the essential tenets of the faith were; the death, burial and resurrection (the central tenet of the faith); adult immersion for the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit; the Lord's day assembly; and weekly communion. Anything else, to Campbell, was an OPINION and as such not to be made a test of fellowship. Campbell realised that not every sincere believer understood every scripture just like he did; this is why he could refer to a German Dunkard who differed with him on the frequency of communion, as his brother. And in his 1809 "Declaration and Address," Thomas Campbell stated that inferences were not binding on a Christian further than she perceived the connection.          

Both Campbells and Stone believed that the NT church had never ceased to exist and that their group was merely a fragment of a much larger church; they NEVER claimed to be the only Christians. Even as late as his second series of Tabernacle Sermons at the Ryman Auditorium in Nashville, N. B. Hardeman could say that his brethren were "Christians only, not the only Christians." Dr. Robert Richardson adequately expressed the goals of the Reformation in the MH of 1847. In his article "Reformation" he wrote:                                                                          

"Were we, indeed, asked to define theoretically, in terms the most brief and expressive, the reformation which we urge, we should denominate it-a generalization of Christianity. It is in this character that it presents a basis of Christian union. It is in this point of view that it lays aside the differences; the peculiarities; the distinctions, which disunite and mark out sects; and retains the agreements, the universalities, the identities which secure harmony and peace."                                                                          

Somewhere along the line the coC lost this emphasis on unity.

In an 1825 CB article Campbell says the only two requirements necessary for salvation and membership in the NT church are belief in Jesus and immersion; a person is a member of the church in the fullest sense of the word, Campbell says, the moment they have met the preceding two conditions, and no one, he says, has a right to ask them whether they hold Baptist, Quaker, Armenian, Calvinist, etc. views. But even while insisting that adult immersion was the only scriptural mode of baptism, Campbell nevertheless refused to condemn unbaptised believers. He fervently wished everyone would be baptized, but realised that if only immersed believers were saved that some of the most righteous and faithful Christians would be in hell, which he could not accept.                                  

If Stone and the Campbells were here, under mainline coC tests of orthodoxy, they would all three be disfellowshipped as "change agents."                                                                        

Some ask, "Who cares what Stone and the Campbells said?" To which I respond; what makes their teaching any less authoritative than preachers today?                                                                          

Its all well and good to say that the coC somehow exists "outside" history, that we have not been in any way affected by culture or history, however, even a brief study of our history exposes the fallacy in this line of reasoning. I say again, the coC as we know it would not exist had it not been for Stone and the Campbells. No, Stone and the Campbells were not inspired; but we can still learn much from them if only we will listen. We owe them our very existence. This particular "change agent" hopes to point people back to their vision of one church united, not on some nebulous "pattern" of doctrine, but upon Jesus Christ and Him crucified.                                                                      

I apologize for the length of this post; I tend to get carried away talking about the Stone-Campbell Movement.  Pax vobiscum.

Offline Son of a Preacher Man

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 662
  • Manna: 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #84 on: Sat Mar 29, 2003 - 10:27:01 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (Thor @ Mar. 29 2003,09:18)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]We must take the Lord’s Supper- to use cup’s or a cup is nothing.[/quote]
Tell that to the one-cupper's side in the CofC.

Who by the way, would not fellowship with you because you are not following the NT pattern by using but one cup.

bob & weave.

Offline janine

  • Guardian-Patroller of Lee's Outer Darkness
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 14000
  • Manna: 370
  • Gender: Female
  • Good Stuff
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #85 on: Tue Apr 01, 2003 - 10:12:47 »
Guess that makes you a Change Agent.

Offline jarschqua

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 277
  • Manna: 0
  • Jambo
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #86 on: Wed Apr 02, 2003 - 15:19:20 »
howdy lee freeman
may i inquire for clarification on a couple points?[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]The church of Christ is inconsistent and selective when choosing what items to include in its "pattern." I made reference to the fact that we insist on elders but not on widows' rolls. Why? [/quote]
why is it that these inconsistencies are used as the rational for why other groups should be able to do anything they want?
i agree with your overall point, but don't understand how this is a valid rationale unless one seeks to simply discredit the claims of the coc.
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]I even used to believe it-That God was more concerned with my following the rules than having a personal relationship with Him. [/quote]
why is it portrayed that these are contrasting goals? for someone to put firm control on their desires, denying self, to follow Him and His rules (which He has every right to make) is a very spiritual goal... one (or the HS in one) must master themselves and put God's desires first... it's certainly not sinful and certainly not contradictory to building a relationship with Him...
if one's relationship with God is right (loving Him) then one will obey Him... that's how Christ puts it anyway...
having a personal relationship with God does not in any way take away the "rules"... which by the way is a light burden... according to Jesus i mean...
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--] Under a "pattern" theology circumstances don't matter, only blind obedeience[/quote]
how is such obedience to God blind? how is it blind if one searches the scripture to see what God wants? pattern theology is a genuine effort. it is not perfect. but it is not blind.[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]In Leviticus 10: 9 Yahweh tells Aaron: "Do not drink wine or strong drink, thou NOR THY SONS with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, LEST YE DIE..." (KJV emphasis added).  That is why the two men were killed[/quote]does that mean the whole "strange fire" bit had nothing to do with it? God wanted all to know that His temple was to be kept holy (see the following verses)... that was the lesson the people were to learn from nadab and abihu's deaths... how was it to be kept holy?  by obeying His commands (rules)... how do they know what holy is? by what He has told them... either way (b/c of wine or fire) it was the disobedience that got them blasted... your thoughts?

anyway, just tossing some debate fodder out there; thanks!
 :juggling: josh (juggling josh.... tossing... ?)

Offline segell

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Manna: 283
  • Gender: Male
  • segell
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #87 on: Tue Apr 08, 2003 - 12:21:27 »
Josh

All we can do is receive by faith God's grace and gift of salvation.  Want to call that a condition in order to support the other steps or conditions?  Well, I guess you can.  I just don't see it that way at all.

All we can bring is our sin and then trust Christ for our salvation through faith.  

As to your other contentions, Josh, I'm not going to get into it with you.  I've expressed what I believe the Scriptures tell us about the work and power of the Holy Spirit.  I've given Scripture to consider.  

You use words like "control", "coerced" in order to ridicule (it seems to me) a perspective I've shared with you and others in much depth.  Go back and read those postings.  There were plenty addressed to you, if I recall.

If you don't like what I've said - well, then don't.  Your perogative.  All I would ask, my friend, is that you prayerfully  do a study on the sovereignty and sufficiency of God.  And also, please do a study on the workings of the Holy Spirit.

Did you get any of those books I suggested?  You said you would.  What are your views?

Lastly, Josh, I appreciate your spirit too.  However we disagree with regard to God's plan and His grace.  I'm very familiar with your arguments.  I just believe you place those actions as conditions before salvation and I believe Scripture places them as responses to salvation.

Take care.

Steve

Offline gbShorty

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #88 on: Wed Apr 09, 2003 - 21:30:41 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (Lee Freeman @ April 09 2003,4:18)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]NO ONE except CHRIST has ever, or COULD EVER obey perfectly.

Our faith is called "Christianity," after Christ, not immersianity."[/quote]
:amen: to all of Lee's post
To me thinking that we could/should be perfect is completely contrary to Christianity.  A perfect sinless person doesn't need Christ.  
Our salvation can't be all about water immersion...after Christ came then it was His blood that we are baptised into.  
Matthew 3:11
I baptise you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry; he will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
I don't understand how it ever evolved to water saves us (the Holy Spirit is what saves) nor do I understand how it evolved to we don't even need saving because we can be sinless.

Offline jarschqua

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 277
  • Manna: 0
  • Jambo
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #89 on: Thu Apr 10, 2003 - 11:03:50 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Because we are not talking about people who have not been baptized, who have not “built

Offline Thor

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #90 on: Thu Apr 10, 2003 - 16:59:36 »
Steve,
You can call it a cop out or whatever. The plain truth is Your Application Of The Verse IS Incorrect, and Nonsensical.
Isaiah WAS writing to a specific audience. That audience did NOT have freedom from sin because it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats could wash away sin.
Jesus alone can provide the blood that does that and then it is only promised in baptism. The sacrifices they made NEVER freed them of their sin. They had to WAIT until Christ came. Their works of righteousness did not avail because only Christ's blood washes away sin. HOWEVER, without those sacrifices they would have been unpleasing to God and rejected from His people. Then the blood of Christ would never have been applied to their sin. The Jews recieved forgiveness ONLY in promise of Jesus, and that only as they remained true to their works of righteousness! Without both they have no hope.

Just as today we have Christ's blood, THE ONLY thing that can free us of our sin. It is however applied only at baptism.
Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21............
btw,
Under the Old Law people were physically born into covenant with God.
In the New people are born into that covenant by water and spirit. (baptism)

btww,
People argue over baptism I suppose, just as they would have over the sin sacrifices of the Old Law. Because they are arbitrary commands of God. We don't understand exactly WHY God ordained baptism as the door of enterance into the kingdom. He just did. Just as we don't know why He chose the blood/ sacrificial Lamb to rid man of sin in the OT. We make some good arguments, we look to what He has given us, but basically it comes down to the fact that we do it because "He said so."

btwww,
Faith without works is dead.
The OT examples are valid.
God is just in His demands.
For just a moment consider IF the New Testament was somehow more clear than 1 Peter 3:21 "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:" Though I don't know how it could be MORE clear. And Peter, and Paul had said- If you are not immersed in water you will die in your sin. But if you submit your will to God and are immersed you shall be saved.
What then?
What would your argument then be?
Would you no longer be seeking after Christ?
Would you reject God for 'placing such a horrible burden on man?'
What then?

If Peter and Paul had not place such an emphesis on baptism if there were not so many verses that showed its necessity, I would gladly recieve admission into the kingdom prior to and without baptism.
The problem is that God says it is necessary. It saves 1 Peter, It washes away sin, Acts; It is the new birth, John....

Offline Lee Freeman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10368
  • Manna: 240
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #91 on: Fri Apr 11, 2003 - 09:22:37 »
Thor, I meant that at baptism, a person's sins are washed away. That IS what we all still believe isn't it?              

remit: to release one from the guilt or penalty of; pardon: forgive - Webster's Third International Dictionary

Pax vobiscum.

Offline brandt

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
  • Manna: 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #92 on: Sat Apr 12, 2003 - 09:59:49 »
I have very much enjoyed the debate on this thread and have intensely read every post.  I would like to offer my limited view on the thread topic and the direction this "Change Agent" thread has taken.

Each side to this topic has adequate scriptural basis for their position.  Also, each side puts baptism as an ultra-important part of obeying Christ.

Since no one is really discounting baptism, is this really the definition of a Change Agent?  

The Questioning Brandt

Offline kanham

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Manna: 208
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #93 on: Mon Apr 14, 2003 - 11:23:02 »
Boringoldguy,

Good point about change. I have read it takes 3-5 years to see any real change in direction for a church. It reminds me of when colleges hire coaches. They usually give them five years to get the program going. Change is slow and we are all in this together as a church.

One other key about change, there has to be an agreement that change is needed. Many times people don't see the need to change. In this case no amount of time will make something change.

Offline segell

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Manna: 283
  • Gender: Male
  • segell
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #94 on: Tue Apr 15, 2003 - 12:44:49 »
Sorry, this part did not get copied in the last post:

~ gracEmail ~
Edward Fudge
___

ONE LORD



A sister in California asks what Paul means in Ephesians 4:5, when he says that there is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism." This gracEmail concerns the "one Lord."



*          *          *



The "one Lord" common to all Christians is Jesus Christ, God's Son, our substitute and Savior. Jesus' saving work included both his life of perfect human obedience in our place ("dressed in his righteousness alone, faultless to stand before the throne," as the hymn rightly puts it), and also his atoning death for our sins. We are saved by Jesus' life (Rom. 5:10). Jesus lived out God's will fully in his human body, then offered that body on the cross to make his people holy and perfect (Heb. 10:10, 14).

One way to describe Jesus' representative work for sinners is to speak of his faith or faithfulness to the Father -- a faithfulness we should have shown but have not, a faithfulness which is reckoned to all who place trust in Jesus for right standing with God. Paul literally says that we are "justified by the faith(fulness) OF Christ" and not by our own imperfect obedience to God's commandments (Gal. 2:16). We believe God's promise that he has set us right with himself through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ our representative.

By the sacrifice of his fleshly body, Jesus presented God with his perfect life of human obedience (Heb. 10:4-14). Jesus' blood constituted the atoning sacrifice for our sins (Heb. 1:3;  9:11-14). There is no other sacrifice for sin, and no other offering which can set sinners right with God (Heb. 10:26). All that Jesus accomplished for sinners by his perfect "doing" and his perfect "dying" he did gratuitously, out of God's kindness for sinners, and wholly undeserved by any of us. Our salvation is therefore "by grace" -- for we do not deserve it, earn it, or contribute anything to it.

Offline kanham

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Manna: 208
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #95 on: Thu Apr 17, 2003 - 14:20:54 »
Josh,

I’m not sure why you ask? Does my post to you smack of univeralism? If so I apologize to you. I reread it and am not sure how you see me saying people who follow Satan and the world could be seen by any, no matter what they may personally claim, to be children of God.

Offline Thor

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #96 on: Fri Apr 25, 2003 - 10:38:46 »
Lee,
John had a lot to say about knowing we are saved.
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]1 John 2:3-5 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

1 John 3:18-24 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

1 John 4:2-3 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

1 John 5:2-3 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

1 John 5:13-15 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.14 And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:15 And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.[/quote]
What things did John write about which should allow us to KNOW that we have eternal life (5:13)? It seems that John speaks a lot about following the commands of God as they are coupled with Christ….

Steve:
This is your opinion of how one gets into Christ…
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]As to how do we get into Christ?  By God's grace through faith.  There is no guessing there, Thor.  It seems that you espouse a need to have some kind of outward physical manifestation that can/must be done by a person in order to be saved so that you will know who you can fellowship with.[/quote]
I would rather obey Paul as to how one gets into Christ….
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.[/quote] There is NO guessing there!

As for baptism…Mr Fudge says “What does baptism have to do with salvation? It is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38)

Offline segell

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Manna: 283
  • Gender: Male
  • segell
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #97 on: Mon Apr 21, 2003 - 15:13:33 »
Thor

By the way, I don't know if you know Edward Fudge, but he is a world renown Bible scholar and will be teaching at Pepperdine during the Bible Lecture series where Bobby Valentine will be attending and teaching.  Finally, not to disparage your contributions, but Mr. Fudge's credentials should be examined a little more carefully.  I don't say this so that you should accept what Mr. Fudge writes, but that what he writes should warrant respect and consideration.

Your accusation that he asserts his own theology is really kind of funny.  After all, that's what you are doing, Thor.  That's what I am doing.  To assert that your view is the only scriptually correct view is, frankly, not founded.  And it smacks a bit of the Pharisee, in my view.  

And like you will respond to my commentary, you can expect my comments on yours, as well.  We can't let the wrong views go unchallenged, can we?  ;)

Steve

Offline James Rondon

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 19760
  • Manna: 1746
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #98 on: Sat Apr 26, 2003 - 00:41:18 »
I've stayed away from these threads for quite some time, and not necessarily by design. Due to recent circumstances that have occurred (and have been occurring) in my life, as most of you know, I have not been active on this Board. Needless to say, I am back.

Prior to my extended absence, and even now, I have made an observation that I would like to share... Granted, I may be completely wrong in what I am about to say, but I've been wrong before... What I've noticed is that it seems that some treat baptism almost as if it is the single most important "issue" in the world. In fact, some that would maintain dialogue on this subject seem uncompelled to discuss any other topic. This is evidenced by their absence on the other threads, which, by the way, cover a myriad of compelling, and important topics. It also seems that some of these ardent "defenders" of baptism treat baptism as some treated circumcision in the first century. (If need be, I will elaborate more on this later, if necessary.)...

I write this with love, and not to cause offense. I use to be on that side of the fense. I know what it's like to think that way... But after God's grace was truly revealed in me, the layers of legalistic thought began to melt away. The scales started to fall from my eyes, allowing me to see much more clearly.

I only hope that I might have something to offer in such a discussion, especially considering my "law-centered" past.

May God open all of our eyes, that we might truly see.

-------------------------
[span style=\'color:blue\']post tenebras lux[/font][/span]

Offline charlie

  • Quoted on every stupid baptism thread
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3361
  • Manna: 95
  • Gender: Male
  • Here I come to save the day
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #99 on: Mon Apr 28, 2003 - 05:32:28 »
We seem to have no problem agreeing that the Lord's Supper is a kind of re-enactment of the last supper that Christians do regularly in memory of Jesus. Why is it so hard to think of baptism as a re-enactment of the crucifixion, burial, and resurrection of Jesus? Baptism is only important insomuch as it points to Jesus' death for our sins and resurrection for our hope. It makes our faith solid by underscoring what it is that we put our faith in. When we talk about how necessary it is for US to be baptized so WE can be saved (by God's grace, of course), we kick Jesus off center stage and yell to the world that WE DID IT! WE GOT SAVED! Well, I'm sorry, that's not what baptism is for. Even when you acknowledge God's part in making a promise to save those who are baptized, you still put the emphasis on our part, and as you can see, that always, always, always, without fail, leads to division. There has never been a single act of man in the history of God's people that has not ended up in division when the act itself is the center of attention. Baptism is no exception.

There's a pattern for us to follow:  Focus on man's part = division. Focus on God's grace = unity. And in case you didn't know, division = bad. unity = good.

Offline charlie

  • Quoted on every stupid baptism thread
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3361
  • Manna: 95
  • Gender: Male
  • Here I come to save the day
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #100 on: Mon Apr 28, 2003 - 11:08:03 »
I'm glad somebody brought up Acts 19. Notice that when Paul arrived he found "disciples". And when he finds them he assumes two things about them: 1. that they believed, and 2. that they had been baptized. Based on that, he could ask them about the variable effect of the Holy Spirit upon them. We know that repentance and baptism result in forgiveness and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts. 2:38). Paul is asking if these disciples had received the Holy Spirit when they believed (not when they were baptized, although he does assume that they had been baptized). What we seem to be arguing here is exactly what salvation will look like when we dissect it into its various components. I'm waiting for someone to start a thread on "what saves us, grace or faith?" Paul encountered "disciples" and correctly assumed that they believed and had been baptized. After all, according to Jesus, that's how you make disciples.

So now we come to people who claim to be disciples, find that they believe and have been baptized, but we then whip out our scalpels and cut into their conversion and find that their hope of heaven is on the wrong side of their baptism! Horrors! How is grace ever going to flow over that sin with that blasted hope blocking the passage coming out of baptism!

What we've done is cut into perfectly healthy saints and tried to fix what wasn't broken. Judge them by their fruits, not by your semantics. Jesus promised that a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Well, when you see a fruitful believer, you'd best be believing that there's a saved Christian in there somewhere.

Offline Thor

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #101 on: Mon Apr 28, 2003 - 13:40:55 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]By the way, spiritual gifts were bestowed by men other than apostles, according to 1 Tim. 4:14:"Do not neglect the gift that is in you, which was given to you by prophecy with the laying on of hands of the eldership." [/quote]
I.   Timothy's spiritual gift had been imparted to him through the apostle Paul. "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands" (2 Tim. 1:6). Our text indicates that the presbytery (the eldership) was involved in the operation in some way.
1)   The elders joined with Paul when he actually imparted the gift; they did not have the ability to impart the gift, for only apostles had that power (Acts 8:14-17; 19:6; Rom. 1:11). On the occasion in which Timothy received the gift, Paul laid hands on him to impart the gift; the elders also laid hands on him, but for another purpose.
2)   Another explanation offers the proposal that there was a prophecy regarding Timothy and his reception of the gift, and that this was the elders' connection with the case; that they laid hands on him in connection with the prophecies that were revealed concerning Timothy. "This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare" (1 Tim. 1:18).

Acts 19 Continued:
"Verses 3-4: "And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus."
a.   Because of their answer to his opening question, Paul saw something was wrong. He asked them about their baptism. They had been baptized according to John's baptism. The apostle accepted as a basic premise that they had been baptized, because they had believed.  Nothing had been said about baptism till now, but their belief included baptism. However, the baptism they received was not the baptism of the Great Commission.
b.   Paul properly appraised John's baptism; it was valid for a time.  But when it was being practiced with God's approval, it pointed forward in time to the coming of Christ.  New Testament baptism (Mark 16:15-16; Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 2:36-38) points back in time to the fact that Christ has come and has completed his mission.  
c.   This relatively "small" matter was sufficiently important to make their immersion inadequate.  Many today think that believers are to be immersed, but assign to baptism a role that is unscriptural: "One is first saved by faith only, and then he is immersed as an act by which he joins the church; baptism is, they say, an outward demonstration that he has been saved."
d.   But since it was the case that these disciples had been baptized, being told to believe on Jesus who was to come, and since their immersion was flawed, the immersion of believers for the wrong purpose today nullifies their immersion. For baptism to be correct and beneficial, it must be done by the right people (people who believe and repentCHeb. 11:6; Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38), it must be done in the right manner (immersion in water), and it must be done for the right purposes (Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom. 6:3f; 1 Pet. 3:21; Mark 16:16).  Anything short of this makes it ineffectual.  One cannot be taught wrong and be baptized right!
e.   John's baptism was for the remission of sins (Mark 1:4); the remission offered was prospective, in that it looked forward to the death of Christ (Heb. 9:22; 10:1-4; 1 Pet. 1:18-19; Rev. 1:5; Col. 1:13-14; Eph. 1:7).  It looked to the coming of Christ and the completion of his mission (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:7; Luke 3:16; John 1:15).
f.   It is clear from the context that these disciples had been taught and baptized by Apollos (18:24-28; 19:1).  At the time he worked with these individuals, all he knew was John's baptism. We speak of being "re-baptized," but that is a misnomer.  If one has been baptized, he is baptized correctly; if he has received sectarian "baptism," he has not been scripturally baptized; he is no better off than these disciples were.  Those who received John's baptism when it was valid, were not subsequently immersed again; but these who received it after it was replaced by the Great Commission, were.
 "When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve."
 
a.   When these men learned this new and updated information, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.  That is, they submitted to the authority of Christ fully, and for the first time received the baptism of the Great Commission.  Matthew 28:18-20.
b.   After their genuine conversion, Paul laid hands on them; they received the gift of tongues and of prophecy.  Notice that the Spirit did not, apart from the apostle's actions, come automatically upon them; it was necessary that Paul lay hands on them.
c.   If the gift of the Spirit was a natural indwelling, such as many maintain is taught in Acts 2:38, Paul would have had no need to ask; that would have been assumed. But the apostle had in mind the miraculous gifts which the early saints needed.  In those passages where the "gift of the Holy Spirit" is exemplified or discussed in detail, the gift is miraculous (Acts 8:5-24; 10:19-48; 11:1-18)."

Offline segell

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Manna: 283
  • Gender: Male
  • segell
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #102 on: Tue Apr 29, 2003 - 11:00:41 »
Thor

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]If I am pugnacious its only because I HAVE experienced God's grace and know that it is more than an emotional response. [/quote]

You know, I thought I wouldn't write another post on this thread, but, Thor, old buddy, just reading your commentary causes an urge too bold to ignore.   :D

With regard to God's grace, I thought you would have said something along the lines of "I am experiencing God's grace every day."  Didn't know it was a one time thing that you "HAVE experienced".

Also, seems to me that experiencing God's grace is a continued humbling experience as we grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus.  I don't know where you got the idea that some say its just an "emotional" experience.  

Your writing gives a sense, at times, of setting you apart.  It's just interesting to me, Thor.

Take care,

Steve

Offline Sylvia

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 0
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #103 on: Wed May 07, 2003 - 18:56:52 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]The dictionary won't help you find the usage of change agent by the branch of the cofC that finds the gc movement unsettling.

In its common usage it means people who come into a cofC and don't like the status quo and start yammering for changes like praise teams, clapping, hand-raising, discussion of baptism outside the standard answer. It is also used for people who believe in embracing Christians outside the Church of Christ SOF congregations, especially those who would dare to work on an outreach or benevolence with non-cofC. It is applied to those who believe that the focus of ministry should be Jesus instead of teaching the five steps to salvation.

In the mind of those opposed to change agents, these are people trying to push the cofC down the slippery slope of denominationalism and ecumenicalism and away from its distinct and exclusive heritage.[/quote]
It appears that those who use the term are afraid of change and want to maintain the status quo.  People can fear new ideas because they tend to fear the unknown.
 
I agree very much with what you are saying, and although I had to look up ecumenicalism, I think the CoC desire for unity is at odds with their resistance to a world wide universal church, if that is really the case. Do such people who resist change on this basis really know what Christ wanted, or are they more concerned with protecting their own turf and position?  Maybe some people confuse conformity with unity.
 
The slippery slope of denominationalism?  I love it. I love it.
Show me a faith group with unique or common viewpoints and I'll show you a denomination.  Like it or not, the CoC movement is very much like a denomination in the abstract sense.
 
All that heritage and tradition plus a buck will get you a coke at McDonalds.  We can and should profit from the experiences of those that have preceeded us, but living in the past just doesn't sell these days.  Modern people have modern needs and a good responsive religion will adapt in order to try to serve those needs.

Offline segell

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Manna: 283
  • Gender: Male
  • segell
    • View Profile
What exactly is a change agent?
« Reply #104 on: Thu Feb 27, 2003 - 15:12:52 »
I thought a "change agent" was a necessary machine found at laundromats.