MK forum

Discuss anything MK here
It is currently Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:35 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 186 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 19  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
geminale wrote:
I realized in my first paragraph I should have used "indefensible" rather than "unforgivable". My apologies.

It's impossible NOT to be kind to a poster who takes pains to distinguish between "indefensible" and "unforgivable." :D I hope you will feel free to post many more times on this thread. Your caution with words is not really "pedantic." It is admirable and much needed in this entire discussion.

Thank you for your contribution.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
FrmrNTer wrote:
Geminale- I liked your verses. Hebrews 4:12-13 came to mind as well:

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

And that is where we are all exposed as to who we really are, inside and out, and that He can see and will use His Word to reveal us, should be utmost in our hearts.

I thought about the passage in Hebrews as well, FrmrNTer.

I would give Mr. Brown extra credit for not using it in the context of his message, however. It is about being naked before God, and his message was about being naked in front of men. The emotion is the same, but the reason for the shame is not.

It is an instructive commentary on our sinfulness, and I include myself in this, that our pain and shame at being naked before men causes us more embarrassment than when we stand "naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do."

Indeed, this thread was not started because any of us are not subject to the same sinful reactions as NTM leaders of the past or present. It was intended to help us see how important it is to use the Scriptures with skill, humility and accuracy. We all have a lot to learn.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
Interested wrote:
I am not a theologian but I am a student of the word. I totally get what Larry used to explain exposure of sin. And I think the embarrassment is a true emotion. I have no problem with his illustration. Matter of fact, I think it gives true human response to the passage.


You don't have to be a theologian to post here. The thread, to be pedantic about it, is for theological pedants, not pedantic theologians. Split that hair at your leisure. :lol:

I agree that the exposure of sin gives rise to the emotion of embarrassment. I agree with Larry Brown's comment that Naaman was insulted. I can see anger in the passage. It is there, exposed for all to see.

What I do not see in the passage is embarrassment.

Please don't misunderstand me. It's not that I object to making theologically indefensible comments. Sometimes it is done for effect, as when Ornery Thornery says that at one time in history, 25% of the world's population were murderers. That is not strictly true. When Cain slew Abel, there were only four persons in the world whose names we know. That's true. But, the context makes it clear that there were many more people than just those few named. It's just that only the events surrounding those four were germane to the narrative. Ornery Thornery has been issued a pass by the Pedantic Police, and is allowed to make those sorts of statements on other threads. Here, however, he would be issued a summons. He is an attorney, and he knows how serious that would be.

I have picked on Mr. Brown's example because he is a Bible teacher, not just a Bible student. He knows that teachers are held to a higher, stricter standard. He can tell you where the Bible says so. He is the CEO of a corporation that trains people in interpreting and understanding the Bible, and teaching it to those who have never had any background in it at all. He should set a good example. His organization prides itself, in a sanctified sense of the word, on following biblical principles. They have no women leaders, because New Testament spiritual leaders are men, by scriptural mandate. They do not seek outside recruits for leadership positions, because they believe that the Bible teaches that God will raise up leaders of the local church from among the local assembly; they have expressed, in writing, confidence that all the leaders they need are already in their ranks. It troubles me that this does not trouble them.

I believe this has been a counterproductive approach to the application Scripture. I believe it has been the root cause of most, if not all, of NTM's problems.

Mr. Brown will not retract his sermon. He will appreciate your support, and he is not interested in my pedantic, picky points. Nothing new there; that is the Old New Tribes Mission.

Oh, and if you really need a passage where nakedness and exposure of sin with its resulting embarrassment and shame are already in the passage, why go beyond the Garden of Eden?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
Way back on the second page of this thread I raised the topic of "sin." I asked a number of questions regarding how our view of sin may have affected decisions that were made regarding child abuse. I asked the questions because I did not have answers, and they are questions that plague me! In working through the maze, I've stumbled upon some related thoughts, thoughts that may be at home here on the "Picky, picky, picky" thread.

"Hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue." We all acknowledge that sin is awful, that it is shameful. Our natural inclination is to deny it, to hide it or to blame someone else for it. By and large, we are relatively successful in these efforts, since none of us appears as reprehensible as we would if we had no secrets. And, what sin is to us in our private lives, it is to our corporate associations as well - a source of shame, an object of derision, something we are loath to admit or have exposed.

It is doubly humiliating for us to have the good name of our organization, our friends, our relatives or our religion besmirched by the base actions of ourselves or our fellows. In fact, it is a recurring theme in both the Old and New Testaments that God's Name can be dishonored by the actions of His people. Not by the sins and disreputable acts of those who reject Him, but by those who own His Name.

How many people have heard someone express the desire to handle the awful topics addressed on this forum out of the glare of publicity? Wouldn't it be better to take care of this quietly, lest the Lord's Name suffer loss? These things are shameful to even speak about; let's not bring attention to them in front of the world. Think of the Lord's reputation!

Such thinking is diametrically opposed to what He instructs us to do! The repeated exhortations to righteous living lest the Lord's Name be blasphemed are difficult to interpret as justification for dissimulation. Please note: God does not tell us to hide our sinful ways lest He be slandered; He tells us to live righteously, so that He will not be slandered. We are commanded to live righteously in reality, not merely to pretend to do so.

The time to think about our reputation, and the Lord's, is before such acts are committed, not afterwards, as any survey of the passages dealing with this will reveal. Yet this mendacious excuse has been elevated almost to an article of faith - "What will people think?!" has displaced the Mercy Seat, the only place where God has promised to meet His people!

The failure to see our doctrinal teaching as practical, touching our everyday life, coupled with the practice of slipshod application and interpretation of God's Word, will take a toll. It takes a toll on us as individuals, and it takes a toll on us in our corporate dealings, even (especially) when we are leaders.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
Revenge, vengeance, and avenge. . . Three related words, but how many ideas? What does the Bible teach us about these concepts?

What about vindictiveness? Is this an emotional feeling? Does it require action? Is it forbidden by Scripture?

What is the Christian point of view on vindication?

And, where does bitterness fit into this puzzle?

These words crop up regularly when such hideous subjects as those that are the subject of this forum are discussed. Many comments assume that the Bible condemns them all, with no distinctions, no exceptions. Maybe it would pay us to review what the Bible says. . .


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
Words do not always mean what the dictionary says they mean. Their meanings are certainly not always a reflection of their origins. Meanings are more often determined by usage, and the meaning of words in the Bible need to be considered and constrained by their use in context rather than their usage in popular speech. "Sin" is a good example of such a word, but there are hundreds of others.

The account of Cain and Abel, the first recorded instance of killing in the history of the human race, is a good place to start when considering the general topic of "vengeance."

The brothers are often pictured as strapping youths in their twenties; they are more likely to have been strapping youths in their hundred and twenties! After all, Adam was in his 130th year when Seth was born "in place of Abel." I suppose, had the fatal altercation taken place when Adam and Eve were in their fifties, and the boys in their late twenties, that close to another century could have rolled by before another male was born, but that seems to stretch the odds a bit.

In any case, Cain killed Abel in what the text indicates was the final escalation of an interpersonal conflict between them.

Following the slaying, God punished, but did not execute, Cain. Yet Cain was concerned lest he be killed by "whoever" found him. For this to be a legitimate concern, a couple of conclusions can be made:

1.) There must have been quite a few people around. If only Cain, Adam and Eve were alive, it shouldn't have been difficult to avoid them. Or, at their age, outrun them.

2.) A common, if not universal, concept of retributory, reciprocal justice must have prevailed. In other words, the idea that a person who has been wronged has a right to compensation, to an evening of the score, either by themselves or by their kin. This is the first inkling of the "eye for an eye, life for a life" principle that would later be enshrined in the Law.

God allayed Cain's fears by promising seven-fold vengeance on anyone who killed Cain. Theologians call this "getting even with a vengeance." Not really, just seeing if you are still reading. One thing it does show, of course, is that vengeance is a part of God's system of justice. And, although this justice does not always demand an exact one for one retribution, it does entail punishment. Cain didn't get the death penalty, but he certainly received more than the proverbial "slap on the wrist." And, had anyone taken it upon themselves to kill Cain, they could expect vengeance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 5:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
We know that not all killing is murder. So, it's significant that the word "murder" is never used in the account of Cain and Abel. Cain "slew" Abel (KJV) or "killed" Abel (almost everyone else). Without going into all the implications of this, it should be borne in mind that the Hebrew word translated "kill" (KJV) or "murder" (almost everyone else) in Exodus 20.13 is a different word than that used for what Cain did to Abel. It was wrong, and it was punished. But, it isn't described as "murder."

Of course, there are a number of ways to talk about killing, and the significance of the use or absence of a particular word has to be evaluated in each case. In this case, we're going to avoid it! The subject at hand is vengeance, not killing, but the two topics intersect when we consider how God himself exacts vengeance in the case of killing. We won't be surprised to find that it is often through the agency of people. God's word to Noah after the flood waters receded was specific, even though the word "murder" was again not used: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed." (Genesis 9.6) Two instances of killing, one which displeased God, and one which was done at his command. God required that vengeance be taken, that accounts be settled.

"The Avenger of Blood" is an unnamed person who appears frequently in the Bible. He is, evidently, the person who is designated, by virtue of kinship or appointment, as the one to shed the blood of the man-slayer. An awful duty, but one that God imposed.

Cities of Refuge were established for the protection of those who killed without malice aforethought, those who killed by accident. These cities were spaced out more or less evenly in order that the perpetrator could reach them before the avenger of blood, in a rage, slew them (Deuteronomy 19.6).

God did not outlaw the avenger of blood; he appointed him. Indeed, he (she) was a part of God's plan, a part of God's provision and had a God-given responsibility to avenge. The land could only be purged from the guilt of shed blood by shedding the blood of the guilty.

God did not upbraid the avenger of blood for his (her) rage. God did not tell them to cool it, let's see how this turns out. Rage was no doubt an essential part of the avenger of blood carrying out his (her) duty; it is not easy to kill anyone, under any circumstances. God himself, the Ultimate Avenger, takes no pleasure in the death of anyone, not even the guilty (Ezekiel 18.32). Rage probably helps overcome the avenger of blood's natural, and commendable, reluctance to carry out the deed.

The man-slayer who killed without malice was given shelter in the City of Refuge until the death of the High Priest. If, however, he left the refuge, violating the terms of his parole/ house arrest, the avenger of blood could kill him without being guilty of murder. Again, note that God did not tell the avenger to let bygones be bygones.

I Kings 3.16-28 illustrates the idea of justice as a balancing of accounts. The two prostitutes had gone to King Solomon for justice. Not having DNA technology at hand, he made the wise choice to split the difference, and the baby. We all know the outcome. Justice was done.

The Bible does not record that Solomon lectured the women on the evils of their profession. To our knowledge, he did not blame them for their own situation. He did not encourage them to forgive and move on. He did, however, seek justice for them. He sought to balance the books, as it were.

Our confidence in God's justice is based on the assurance that he will pay back evil for evil. Paul says it this way: "God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you." (II Thessalonians 1.6) He goes on to speak about ". . . in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished. . . " (vss. 8-9)

All that to say this: Paying back, vengeance, punishment and getting even are part of the system of justice that God instituted, and through which he works. God requires justice. Vengeance, as used in the Bible, is part of that system. It is not wrong. On the contrary, it is holy.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
I realize and acknowledge that the image of "revenge" or "vengeance" as popularly used is a poor one, a deservedly poor one. And, I am not advocating for the use or avoidance of any word. What I am trying to do is look at how particular concepts are presented in God's Word. You can choose to use whichever word is used in the translation of your choice, or substitute an entirely different word. Or, if you prefer, you can do like the King James Version translators did and use cognates of "revenge" and "avenge" interchangeably! (Numbers 35.12, 19 and similar passages)

Regardless of the word/s used, there is a scriptural mandate for punishing crimes, for taking vengeance. So, what are we to think about the passages that clearly deny us that prerogative?

Romans 12.19 "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay, says the Lord.'" (NIV)

This verse equates vengeance with wrath and repayment, and assures us that revenge of this sort is good. After all, God himself is going to undertake to do it. The only prohibition is on our doing it ourselves; in the words of many translations: "Avenge not yourselves."

Unlike Old Testament instructions to the avenger of blood, we are to respond to those who have committed acts deserving of wrathful repayment by doing good, heaping burning coals on the head of the offender, and overcoming evil with good. We are to leave the role of Avenger to God.

Yet, in the same context, we are told to hate that which is evil. Does this entail any action on our part, or is it to be accomplished only in our minds? Do we do anything, or do we wait for fire to fall from heaven? Is justice held in abeyance until all men stand before the Throne?

Our not avenging ourselves does not mean that vengeance should not be taken. The fact that God will repay does not rule out his using human agents to accomplish his vengeance. In fact, Romans 13 tells us that this is exactly what should happen.

The civil authorities are the ones now ordained of God to exact the just penalty from the disobedient; civil authorities are the Avenger of Blood. They exist for our good, they exist to execute wrath on evil people. They are to be a terror to those who do wrong. And, everyone is to submit to them.

Doing good does not mean that we should not report crimes to the police. Reporting crimes to the police is not "avenging ourselves"; it is being submissive to the powers that God has ordained and through which he himself seeks to work wrath. These authorities exist for our good. We ignore them and overlook them and avoid them at our peril. We do not insult the police when we fail to report crimes, we insult the One who gave them the responsibility to punish.

I am indebted to Sir Ornery of Thornery for this comment: "When crimes have been committed, whether you are in Iceland, Poland or NTM land, the first, best and right thing to do is to call the police." Spot on, Sir Ornery!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 868
down and out wrote:
The basic problem I have with philosophy and by association, the legal profession (apologies to our lawyers) is that it is the manipulation of words to make any given idea plausible...It's easier for me to call a spade a spade ...ntm was wrong to cover up and transfer pedophiles..pure and simple. We are to obey the laws of the lands we inhabit. Turn 'em over to the authorities and let them determine the outcome! Is that so hard? Forgive and incarcerate...they used to tell me that punishment was good for me..ok, fine, so why shouldn't it be the correct thing for them? And why are our parents getting a pass?


I hope someone else will start the discussion on "forgive." Talk about dangerous ground! I've got a few more things to say on the general topic of revenge, a topic which seems quite tame by comparison! But, if anyone wants to cut in line and start something about "forgive" as it is used in Scripture, you will be forgiven for doing so. In fact, I'll be in your debt. I don't even know where to start!

Down and Out, you are certainly correct: It was wrong for perverts to abuse children, and it was wrong for NTM to cover up these crimes. It remains wrong for NTM to continue doing so today, in fact.

You are also right that we are to obey the laws of the lands where we live, whether or not we particularly like the punishments that are meted out to criminals. Easy to say, but probably pretty hard to do when it comes right down to it.

My discussion above concerned whether or not such words as revenge, avenge, vengeance and their relatives deserved a place at the table. I maintain that, as these words are used in the Bible, they do. As they are used in popular speech is another matter. It is dreadfully difficult to maintain the distinction, I admit.

I think there is already a "parents' thread" out there somewhere. Please find (or start!) a thread for this subject and invite comments there. Not that it isn't important - just that it deserves its own thread.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:55 pm
Posts: 16
down and out wrote:
...What really is your interest here...not being an mk or even an abused mk? What's your agenda, Gene? Just asking.



Down and Out,

Perhaps you are a relatively new reader to this website? If I were to generalize the subject matter of this site, I would say it all falls under the topic of spiritual abuse by those in positions of authority. Some of the most perverse abuses, obviously, have to do with what happened at Fanda/ Aritao/ PNG/ Tambo/ Via etc. and then there are the ones many don't even know about. (For example, adultery by Bible school staff with a student.)

I, for one, have been greatly encouraged/ blessed/ and instructed by Gene's thoughtful questions and explanations. I have been helped by his postings in trying to understand this subject---have found aid to help me think rightly and, above all, to discern what the truth is in these matters. So I welcome and am thankful for Gene's partnership and fellowship on this site.

My claim to be able to post on this site is based both upon spiritual abuse by leaders in Bolivia and, more recently in the last 2 years, by some of this so-called "new" leadership that NTM Inc. is writing about by their so-called spokespeople (who were on vacation last week instead of being on the front lines until the very end.)

So let's encourage one another to be good Bereans and to be those who revel in the truth for the purpose of protecting others who could be run over by the corporation and for those, at least til this point, who ARE being marginalized by the corp.

For further help in understanding this deceit and spiritual abuse, I have found the sight below to be a very instructive and well-written effort to document the corporation's strategy to railroad/ sideline/ and trample one believer and his family. And ultimately, the Name of Christ.
thailibel.blogspot.com

As a word of encouragement, having suffered abuse by some of the corporate bosses, praise be to God how He has completely restored my heart and mind in, actually, a spiritually richer way. The trial has strengthened me for my good and His glory. I pray for these bosses, that the eyes of their understanding would be opened. I have pity on the moles who have the assignment to glean this site. It appears that their hearts are not being exercised to trumpet what is right before our Holy God. Maybe all they do is some sort of word count without paying attention to the content?----so that in the back room at hdqtrs they can carefully craft their next little, little update. I still have to ask: Is there sin? Have there been crimes committed? Has there been a cover-up? Is there reluctance to repent in every nook and cranny? (Some have repented, supposedly. If this is really the case, why haven't they resigned? Why haven't they made a public---beyond NTM Inc.----statement?)

So, my friend, let's be ones who want to know the truth. Let's be confident that the Lord will set the abused free to truly sing songs of rejoicing again. Let's keep on and NOT GIVE UP.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 186 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 19  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group