AssemblyBoard
May 01, 2024, 09:23:24 pm *
The board has been closed to new content. It is available as a searchable archive only. This information will remain available indefinitely.

I can be reached at brian@tucker.name

For a repository of informational articles and current information on The Assembly, see http://www.geftakysassembly.com
 
   Home   Search  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
  Print  
Author Topic: Does Hebrew 10:24-25 Really Say That Christians Must Go To Church?  (Read 29124 times)
Joe Sperling
Guest


Email
« Reply #30 on: June 06, 2003, 07:32:34 pm »

PeacefulG----

I thnik the actual word in the greek when properly defined
is "messenger". That's why in several cases when the King
James uses "angel" it could be the Lord Jesus Christ Himself because the actual word is "messenger". A "messenger" can be a man, an angel or the Lord himself.

At least this is what I have read in several commentaries--I am definitely open to correction though. I guess it's just an opinion about there being one Pastor for each church---but it seems to be the way of the Lord. The Puritans back during the Great Awakening all had One Pastor for each church, and it seems down through the ages this has been the case--so it seems to follow that it might be the way the Lord wants it to--but I'm just a layman, what do I know?


--Joe
Logged
Matt
Guest


Email
« Reply #31 on: June 06, 2003, 09:12:20 pm »

I am totally loving where the BB is going lately!!  Did you guys notice that we aren't being attacked all the time?  We are barely talking about the Assembly any more!  I am learning things...wow!  I guess this BB can be a blessing, eh?

Brent

At 40, Brent, I thought you would have figured out by  now that if you stop attacking people, you're more likely to escape being attacked, sir. Although, I have to laugh at your comment "did you guys notice that we aren't being attacked" LOL. I'm relieved for you sir - it's easy to see how you can feel attacked - you have um...1 person on the bb disagreeing with you at present. You said something like...um...99% of your emails are in support of you. I don't know how you handle all that opposition, Brent. I'd also like to add to your comment that I'm glad you're not attacking people anymore - but I guess that's not out of choice, but more out of necessity considering that your opposition (affirming, luke, paul, etc.) all moved on to better things. Maybe one day you will too? For now, I will do the best I can to repair some of the damage that you've inflicted on innocent people and hopefully reign you in a little more...
Lord bless.
- Matt
Logged
Peacefulg
Guest


Email
« Reply #32 on: June 06, 2003, 09:21:58 pm »

Ok, after doing more research on words, there are two main greek words used for messanger in the NT.

1st is Aggelo, a messenger, envoy, one who is sent, an angel, a messenger from God
          Example Rev. 1:1,20  and Rev 2:1

2nd is Apostolos, a delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders
         1. specifically applied to the twelve apostles of Christ
         2. in a broader sense applied to other eminent Christian teachers
               1. of Barnabas
               2. of Timothy and Silvanus
          Example found in Rev. 2:2, Heb 3:1

Love the way this BB is moving in the discussion way.

Cheers,
George

Again, I have nothing against Pastors, but the church has rasied them up to a level they should not be.  
Logged
Peacefulg
Guest


Email
« Reply #33 on: June 06, 2003, 11:07:43 pm »

Ok, to be on the fair side have done some research on the word pastors and elders.

The pastors are ones in which we commit ourselves to to be watch over.  The elders are the adminster and overseers of an assemble.

This now brings up a whole new slew of questions one would ask, but in all the studying of the NT you only see pastors mentioned once when referred to some man in relation to the church, whearas you see elders/deacons even workers mentioned multiple times.  Where you see the word for pastor (Presbuteros) mentioned the most is in relationship to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, since he is the Great shepard of the sheep.

Again pastors are needed, but one they must be men of high regard (noticed I said Men, oh boy look what you just went and started George, Christian Feminist of the world unite).

Last, Matts verse in his signature is a good one in regards to whom we see honor given.

Cheers again,
George

Logged
Arthur
Guest
« Reply #34 on: June 06, 2003, 11:18:48 pm »

This is good stuff!  Thank you so much for sharing the info. and insight.

Arthur
Logged
Eulaha L. Long
Guest


Email
« Reply #35 on: June 06, 2003, 11:34:36 pm »

Brent and others,

I am totally jazzed that this thread is staying on subject, and what you all have to say has encouraged me a lot!  Brent, yup, it is cool to not always be talking about the Assembly, but to figure out together what the Bible says about the verses we are discussing!  .

Keep on writing!  I've learned so much so far... Cheesy
Logged
editor
Guest
« Reply #36 on: June 07, 2003, 02:28:55 am »

This now brings up a whole new slew of questions one would ask, but in all the studying of the NT you only see pastors mentioned once when referred to some man in relation to the church, whearas you see elders/deacons even workers mentioned multiple times.  Where you see the word for pastor (Presbuteros) mentioned the most is in relationship to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, since he is the Great shepard of the sheep.

The way I understand it is that pastors are indeed elders, who pastor the flock.  Not all elders function entirely in the pastoral sense.  I think the idea of pastoring is implied, and was assumed as self-evident by Paul, due to the words he used to describe the various aspects of church government.

The key here is that we NEED pastors!  We also need elders, etc.

Paul did not rebuke Diotrophes because his church had the pattern of "THE pastor," but because Diotrophes lorded it over the flock.  In other words, the model of having "A" pastor seems scriptural, but when the pastor is an evil man, others must stand up and rebuke him.

Brent
Logged
Arthur
Guest
« Reply #37 on: June 07, 2003, 04:15:40 am »


The way I understand it is that pastors are indeed elders, who pastor the flock.  Not all elders function entirely in the pastoral sense.  I think the idea of pastoring is implied, and was assumed as self-evident by Paul, due to the words he used to describe the various aspects of church government.

The key here is that we NEED pastors!  We also need elders, etc.

Paul did not rebuke Diotrophes because his church had the pattern of "THE pastor," but because Diotrophes lorded it over the flock.  In other words, the model of having "A" pastor seems scriptural, but when the pastor is an evil man, others must stand up and rebuke him.

Brent

What verses in the Bible do you think supports the model of having "A" pastor as opposed to having a plurality of elders?

Arthur
Logged
Peacefulg
Guest


Email
« Reply #38 on: June 07, 2003, 04:17:31 am »

Hmm, could Diotrophes had just been and elder though, and since elders were to be teachers as well, he used his teaching gift to rise to "power" and start Lording over other.  

For example (hate using the assemble, but.....)  In Fullerton you had quite a few elders (Mark, TIm, etc.), say Tim rose to the point where he demanded the control (no need to go down the, "well he did" alley right now though).  There you have an elder becoming a Diotrophes.  I have also heard of this happening in other places.

Just another "rabbitt" hole to go down.  

Cheers,
G
Quote
I know what you're thinking, 'cause right now I'm thinking the same thing. Actually, I've been thinking it ever since I got here: Why oh why didn't I take the BLUE pill?
Logged
Lurker
Guest


Email
« Reply #39 on: June 07, 2003, 07:28:15 am »

At 40, Brent, I thought you would have figured out by  now that if you stop attacking people, you're more likely to escape being attacked, sir. Although, I have to laugh at your comment "did you guys notice that we aren't being attacked" LOL. I'm relieved for you sir - it's easy to see how you can feel attacked - you have um...1 person on the bb disagreeing with you at present. You said something like...um...99% of your emails are in support of you. I don't know how you handle all that opposition, Brent. I'd also like to add to your comment that I'm glad you're not attacking people anymore - but I guess that's not out of choice, but more out of necessity considering that your opposition (affirming, luke, paul, etc.) all moved on to better things. Maybe one day you will too? For now, I will do the best I can to repair some of the damage that you've inflicted on innocent people and hopefully reign you in a little more...
Lord bless.
- Matt

Dear Matt

May I please ask you to try your hardest not to go back to your former ways?  The recent discussion has been quite edifying, and your contribution has been the only stain on an otherwise uplifting discussion.

I know you are capable of far better.  Brent does not deserve your latest message.

Lurker
Logged
al Hartman
Guest


Email
« Reply #40 on: June 07, 2003, 09:56:31 am »

     I cringed when i saw this post, but i kept silent:
Quote
Quote from: B. Tr0ckman on June 05, 2003, 06:40:04 pm    
I am totally loving where the BB is going lately!!  Did you guys notice that we aren't being attacked all the time?  We are barely talking about the Assembly any more!  I am learning things...wow!  I guess this BB can be a blessing, eh?

Brent
    Why did i cringe?  Because (1.) the underlined statement was utterly unnecessary.  We are ALL enjoying not having the childish give-and-take accusations, insults and blame-tossing going on.  THERE IS NO NEED TO STIR IT TO LIFE AGAIN BY MENTIONING IT!!!  (2.)  It doesn't take a middle aged man with a doctorate to know that the highlighted quote above will be viewed as a challenge/insult by the person who has strong differences of opinion with the one saying it.  Any school kid would know that, because that's exactly how school kids behave.  (3.)  As there is no apparent justification for fanning the embers, the action is easily construed (even if mistakenly so) as a deliberate taunt.

     So, of course, Matt's response (hoped against, yet unsurprising) turned my cringe to a shudder:
Quote
Posted by: Matt Posted on: Today at 12:12:20pm

At 40, Brent, I thought you would have figured out by  now that if you stop attacking people, you're more likely to escape being attacked, sir. Although, I have to laugh at your comment "did you guys notice that we aren't being attacked" LOL. I'm relieved for you sir - it's easy to see how you can feel attacked - you have um...1 person on the bb disagreeing with you at present. You said something like...um...99% of your emails are in support of you. I don't know how you handle all that opposition, Brent. I'd also like to add to your comment that I'm glad you're not attacking people anymore - but I guess that's not out of choice, but more out of necessity considering that your opposition (affirming, luke, paul, etc.) all moved on to better things. Maybe one day you will too? For now, I will do the best I can to repair some of the damage that you've inflicted on innocent people and hopefully reign you in a little more...
Lord bless.
- Matt  
    This post was altogether as unnecessary as Brent's, and far more insulting and inflammatory.  But that's how these boys have historically played the game (and let's be clear on this:  It is a game to them, for if they were serious about serving the Lord on this BB, they would not be flaunting their negative attitudes nor their self-ascribed conversational cleverness and tongue-to-ear combat skills in an attempt to gain an appreciative audience.  Rather, if they feel they MUST carry on in such manner, they would do it out of earshot of the rest of us.  Their audience is CAPTIVE, but assuredly NOT appreciative!

     Finally, my shudder became horror when yet another county was heard from:
Quote
Topic Summary  
Posted by: Used to be a Lurker Posted on: Today at 10:28:15pm

Dear Matt

May I please ask you to try your hardest not to go back to your former ways?  The recent discussion has been quite edifying, and your contribution has been the only stain on an otherwise uplifting discussion.

I know you are capable of far better.  Brent does not deserve your latest message.

Lurker  

     The problem with Lurker's remarks is that they are only partly true:  Matt's contribution was NOT the only recent stain.  The first such was Brent's irresponsible comment, cleverly couched between "good" phrases, to make it appear to be utterly innocent.  The technique apparently worked on Lurker, who totally ignores Brett's indiscretion and bounds to his defense with remarks almost certain to bring another salvo from Matt, who insists on giving as good (read BAD) as he receives.
     Doesn't anyone understand that the issue here is not who's right & wrong, but the testimony to our Lord Jesus Christ?!  Doesn't anyone get it:  The problem won't go away if you keep dragging it back!  LET IT DIE!!!

WHAT CAN BE DONE???
    Saints, if you want the war to stop, POST your thoughts to the protagonists:  Each and ALL of them, BY NAME.  Some of us have tried repeatedly to reason with them by private messages, but apparently to no avail.  Now that it is on the public forum again, but BEFORE it reaches its former proportions, TELL THESE BROTHERS YOU WANT THEM TO CEASE & DESIST!
     This isn't about choosing sides:  There are only two sides.  Jesus Christ wants to express His nature through us all in Love, Peace, Joy.  Satan wants anything else but that.  The self-righteous character assassination of one's brother is just another form of pagan rite of human sacrifice.

     Brent, Matt, Lurker:  You are welcome to address any comments you wish to me personally.  i don't care if you ban me from the BB, IF ONLY YOU WILL STOP, ONCE AND FOR ALL, THE PUBLIC TRASH-TALKING AND ANY FURTHER MENTION OF IT!!!

     Dear Saints, there have been a lot of posts over the months in defense of righteous indignation and justifiable anger.  The above is my version of them.

al Hartman
     
« Last Edit: June 07, 2003, 10:47:07 am by al Hartman » Logged
Suzie Trockman
Guest
« Reply #41 on: June 10, 2003, 02:10:51 am »

Al

I don't know who you are, in fact I rarely get on the bulletin board.  However, when Brent told me he was done with this, I asked why and he showed me your post.

I read Brent's post, to which you responded, and I thought, "wait a minute.  What's wrong with your post, Brent?"  To me, it was a positive, encouraging post.  Since I live with Brent, I knew that he was greatly troubled about 2 weeks ago, and had been really encouraged lately, until your post.

I just don't get it.  I don't understand where you are coming from at all, but to just stir up the matter, and tell everyone that my husband is playing a game is outrageous.  Have you ever met him?  Did you ask him what he meant by saying, "Did you guys notice that we aren't being attacked all the time?"  I looked back at the posts, and these people were rejoicing, and were having great, meaningful conversations.   Your post was totally inappropriate.

However, I must say that all things work for good, because now I have all of his time, and don't have to share him with cyberspace anymore.

I hope you all get away from the Assembly and its influence.

This is my final post, not that it matters.

Suzie
Logged
Joe Sperling
Guest


Email
« Reply #42 on: June 10, 2003, 03:27:13 am »

Brent and Suzie---

If you are serious about posting no longer I wanted to say I am very sorry to see you go. Brent, I've said it before but want to repeat how grateful I am that you began the Geftakys Assembly Website and brought everything to light by it. Thanks for all of your posts and for your encouragement too. Maybe the Bulletin Board has run it's course, I don't know. I do know it is enjoyable to me to be able to come in and converse with Christians here.

It does seem lately that a lot of bickering seems to be going on, but there is still enough good posting going on that I find it a blessing too. I hope you change your mind and continue to post Brent, and you too Suzie.

But if not, may God bless you always.  take care,  Joe
Logged
Mark C.
Guest


Email
« Reply #43 on: June 14, 2003, 08:47:12 am »

Hi Everyone!
  I have tried to follow the postings of the last week and to understand what is going on before weighing in with a post re. our embattled BB.
  As I've said before, I've been involved with such forums in the past and this one is still far and away the best I've ever experienced.  I know that may sound hard to believe, but situations like the Laurie debacle were very common on these past sites.  Yet, at the same time, there were some good thoughts I was able to draw out from time to time from the former sites.
  Verne mentioned on one thread that Truth is as important as Grace and re. this he has mentioned a very important fact.  God's  Truth is not relative and it is key to our recovery from the Assembly deception we were involved with.  It is not arrogant to be confident in the facts of the Gospel, nor to anchor one's argument therein.  It is not judgmental to critically examine the teachings and practices of the Assembly, as the Bible commands us to do so.
   There are crucial Biblical truths that must be defended with great vigor and if some posters who have presented false teaching will not be entreated they can not be allowed to post unchallenged.  It has been said that "Affirming" was "chased" from the BB, but she was teaching Witness Lee local church nonsense that had to be rebuked.
   I realize that there are those who view all such arguments as confusing doctrinal "bickering", and those who hold this opinion show how little they learned in their Assembly instruction.  In the Assembly we were raised on devotional styled teaching that amounted to "let's get on with the Lord Saints", and "God can help you in your life with him." (nothing wrong with devotional thoughts, but there is more to our instruction then this)
    The Gospel is simple and can be easily grasped by those willing to have a change of thinking from their previous  Assembly twisting of the grace of God in truth.  There are areas where Christians have different opinions, but the nature of God and His Gospel are not matters of opinion.
   Now, to those who will not accept entreaty in the above matters:
   It has been suggested by some that there comes a point where the BB must be abandoned as further argument is futile; a point where gainsayers have stolen the forum and perverted the purpose of healing and restoration that is intended for those damaged in the Assembly.
   The BB will never be a perfect place that can be protected from the messed up folks of a messed up world.  Some will come here with self centered, mean, disturbed, or even evil intentions.  It is impossible for us to judge the motives of these individuals, or if their activities are conspiratorial.
   I would like to suggest that we take their presence as an opportunity to present the truth of the Gospel, if they refuse entreaty, we can try to patienty instruct.  When we feel we have done all that we can it is time to ignore them.  This worked with others who were obnoxious and/or sought mastery of the BB.  If those who stand for the truth leave, then the gainsayers have taken the forum for their own use.
  The truth, in the context of our discussion on this forum of the Assembly, is not just doctrinal/ practical theory re. Christianity, but it will illuminate what the Assembly was in fact.  The truth must help us to understand where the Assembly was in error.  If we don't understand the errors we can never understand the blessed liberty we have in Christ.  Assembly members sharing their histories and the distortion that was their life is not negative bitterness, but a necessary part of discovery.
  There will always be those who don't understand what we went through.  Some will ridicule us, others will defend the abuser, and still others will offer lofty "spiritual" formulas/attitudes for "overcoming" our past experiences.  This should not cause us to abandon our journey to understand and strengthen our life with God.
   In the Assembly all the evil was kept outside and as long as we were "faithful" we were kept safe inside.  We didn't have to think things through in the Assembly.  Now that we are out we have to learn how to think again.  What is the Gospel, the church, proper relationships, etc.
  If we leave the thought process that this BB provides it is true we might lessen some of the contention in our lives that others provide here, but remember that strife may help in the recovery of some free independant thinking; it helps us to learn how to frame persuasive arguments re. both truth and grace.
  Take some time off if you feel like you are spending too much time at it, but don't give up all together.  We all have a part to play and a gift to share here and it would be a shame to miss those contributions.  I have been greatly helped often from the posts of those here, and for this I thank you.
                                God Bless,  Mark    
« Last Edit: June 14, 2003, 08:57:27 am by Mark C. » Logged
Eulaha L. Long
Guest


Email
« Reply #44 on: June 15, 2003, 12:06:23 am »

I am really very angry that Brent has been allowed to be verbally abused.  I am upset that Brian Tucker, the "moderator" has done nothing to stop this.  Brent has taught us all a lot about the Assembly history, as well as church history.  His insight is the only reason I continued to come to this BB.  And now he has been shood away by someone's insensitive remarks.  Since when did thanking God become wrong?  What is the matter with some of you?  You are acting like George Geftakys himself, and you should be ashamed of yourselves!

Now we no longer get to read Brent's insight and learn from his wisdom.  Well, it's ALL of our losses, it really is.  Maybe now some of you will learn that a person can only take so much abuse before they say "forget it!
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!