Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 2:34:42 GMT -5
Fixit wrote, "As they say, this fellowship is not a democracy. Its more like a theocracy."
Was the church in the bible "democratic"? Did God give instruction for "democracy"? Did Jesus cast votes on any doctrinal issue?
What does a "democratic church" look like?
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 9, 2014 3:35:02 GMT -5
Absolutely he cast votes on doctrinal issues. Read what he said to the Pharisees. Did he ask others to follow him - yes, he had a following and chose those he wanted on his team. Those that continued in his church casted lots to choose those who stood in places of authority. Guess you can not call casting lots democratic but hit and miss.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 11:10:26 GMT -5
Fixit wrote, "As they say, this fellowship is not a democracy. Its more like a theocracy." Was the church in the bible "democratic"? Did God give instruction for "democracy"? Did Jesus cast votes on any doctrinal issue? What does a "democratic church" look like? God always likened his way to a kingdom, therefore a monarchy with Jesus as its head/King...
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 9, 2014 17:18:26 GMT -5
Absolutely he cast votes on doctrinal issues. Read what he said to the Pharisees. Did he ask others to follow him - yes, he had a following and chose those he wanted on his team. Those that continued in his church casted lots to choose those who stood in places of authority. Guess you can not call casting lots democratic but hit and miss. Democracies have "elected" leaders. Who elected Jesus?
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 9, 2014 17:59:13 GMT -5
God the Father. Of course you knew I would say that.
But further to that, I say the people elected him. By that I mean they choose to follow him. No one was forced to. They choose to follow him the same way as some choose to kill him.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 9, 2014 18:56:51 GMT -5
God the Father. Of course you knew I would say that. But further to that, I say the people elected him. By that I mean they choose to follow him. No one was forced to. They choose to follow him the same way as some choose to kill him. In the same way that people choose to follow the workers?
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 9, 2014 19:22:03 GMT -5
Not really. Only some make a free choice to follow the workers until they are older. As most are 'born and raised' I feel that most are not able to make that free choice until they get older and can think for themselves. Not saying that some in meetings can not think for themselves but as we get older we are more likely to make a choice to stay or leave. As children we didn't really think there was an option to leave or that there were even any other options out there.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 9, 2014 19:34:28 GMT -5
God the Father. Of course you knew I would say that. But further to that, I say the people elected him. By that I mean they choose to follow him. No one was forced to. They choose to follow him the same way as some choose to kill him. No, I thought you would realize that "God the father" appointing him would mean the opposite of "democracy". But people choosing to follow him has nothing to do with democracy. Democracy means the leader got his authority from the people, and all people are represented even though they didn't vote for him. When the choice a person is given is "choose me or leave", it's call a dictatorship.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 9, 2014 21:12:06 GMT -5
Jesus didn't say choose me or leave. People had the choice to follow him or not. Jesus wanted to be a servant to all - or at least that is what we were told. Some people make themselves leaders, others become leaders because people make them leaders. Poeple made Jesus a leader - including me.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 9, 2014 22:11:30 GMT -5
Jesus didn't say choose me or leave. People had the choice to follow him or not. Jesus wanted to be a servant to all - or at least that is what we were told. Some people make themselves leaders, others become leaders because people make them leaders. Poeple made Jesus a leader - including me. You're just playing with words because you like the word democracy. You obviously don't know what a democracy is.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 9, 2014 22:56:19 GMT -5
I am well aware of what democracy is - living in a democratic country with elections in a couple of weeks.
I actually wondered if someone would pick up what you did but then thought it was the people who put Jesus in that place, he did not put himself in the place of leader so went with it. of course I like a democratic society - don't you - or would you prefer a dictator run country?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 9, 2014 23:01:22 GMT -5
I am well aware of what democracy is - living in a democratic country with elections in a couple of weeks. I actually wondered if someone would pick up what you did but then thought it was the people who put Jesus in that place, he did not put himself in the place of leader so went with it. of course I like a democratic society - don't you - or would you prefer a dictator run country? Okay, you win. The people elected Jesus to his office.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 9, 2014 23:02:47 GMT -5
Depending what you mean by office By the way, it is not about winning or loosing......
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 9, 2014 23:39:38 GMT -5
Depending what you mean by office By the way, it is not about winning or loosing...... Exactly. Now, do you suppose Jesus will win the next election? How will they get rid of him when they tire of him> Democracy, remember.!!!!
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 10, 2014 15:58:11 GMT -5
Jesus didn't say choose me or leave. No, it was more severe than that. "Choose me or suffer eternal damnation".When a person is threatened with eternal damnation do they really have a choice?
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 10, 2014 16:29:27 GMT -5
They have a choice to believe it or not. You and millions of others have chosen not to believe it.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 10, 2014 16:42:39 GMT -5
They have a choice to believe it or not. You and millions of others have chosen not to believe it. All people have a choice to believe or not believe, and all people have a choice to stay in a government system or leave. Just because people choose to leave China doesn't make China a democracy. Just because people choose to leave the 2x2s doesn't make it a democracy. All I'm saying is, the choice to stay or leave doesn't make anything a democracy. Nothing is ever a democracy when there is no method for getting rid of the leader.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 10, 2014 17:01:39 GMT -5
They have a choice to believe it or not. You and millions of others have chosen not to believe it. Decision making with a gun to your head is not the way a democracy works. Jesus warned people about who they should fear. Turns out it was god. And as god's representative he was telling people to "Fear only God, who can destroy both soul and body in hell." It is like the plot from a bad gangster movie - "Oh, you don't have to make the pay-off. I only hope nothing happens to your knees - or your family."
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 10, 2014 17:15:33 GMT -5
Nothing is ever a democracy when there is no method for getting rid of the leader. According to Dale Shultz, only God can get rid of a leader because he calls them and uses them in guiding his work.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 10, 2014 18:01:23 GMT -5
Nothing is ever a democracy when there is no method for getting rid of the leader. According to Dale Shultz, only God can get rid of a leader because he calls them and uses them in guiding his work. A man owes his position to the one who gave it to him, not the ones was appointed to oversee. God and Jesus neither one owe their position to their followers. In democracies, the leaders DO owe the people who voted for them, no one else.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 10, 2014 20:01:47 GMT -5
In democracies, the leaders DO owe the people who voted for them, no one else. I would word it differently because their duty is to all the citizens, not only those who vote for them. In democracies, the leaders are elected by "the citizens" and their duty is to "the citizens" (including those who don't vote for them). Some societies got this wrong, to their peril e.g. Iraq.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 10, 2014 20:22:45 GMT -5
In democracies, the leaders DO owe the people who voted for them, no one else. I would word it differently because their duty is to all the citizens, not only those who vote for them. In democracies, the leaders are elected by "the citizens" and their duty is to "the citizens" (including those who don't vote for them). Some societies got this wrong, to their peril e.g. Iraq. Yes, you're right. In democracies the duty of the leaders is to ALL citizens, whether they agree with the leaders or not, or whether they voted for them. Sovereignty is in the people, not the leaders. This certainly isn't the case in Christian doctrine. Some churches do have a form of democratic oversight, and some congregations maintain their independence from congregations within the same denomination. But nowhere in Christian doctrine is sovereignty recognized to be anywhere other than with God and/or the Trinity. Christianity and Islam are all about submission to God.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Sept 10, 2014 23:46:24 GMT -5
Democracy "YES",chosen/selected,BISHOPS,ELDERS,PASTORS,DEACONS,COUNSILLORS,TEACHERS,EVANGALISTS,PREACHERS,SHARING ONES GIFTS FROM GOD. A WORKABLE,SELECTED TEAM,, AS SHOULD BE IN ALL DEMOCRACIES?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 11, 2014 4:59:04 GMT -5
Fixit wrote, "As they say, this fellowship is not a democracy. Its more like a theocracy." Was the church in the bible "democratic"? Did God give instruction for "democracy"? Did Jesus cast votes on any doctrinal issue? What does a "democratic church" look like? God always likened his way to a kingdom, therefore a monarchy with Jesus as its head/King... But in God's kingdom the first shall be last and the last shall be first. That's more like a democracy! God's kingdom is not an earthly kingdom. It relies on direct rule of men and women's hearts by God, and no other man or woman should come between. So, IMO, anarchy is the correct model for those who love and serve God.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 11, 2014 5:07:48 GMT -5
I would word it differently because their duty is to all the citizens, not only those who vote for them. In democracies, the leaders are elected by "the citizens" and their duty is to "the citizens" (including those who don't vote for them). Some societies got this wrong, to their peril e.g. Iraq. Yes, you're right. In democracies the duty of the leaders is to ALL citizens, whether they agree with the leaders or not, or whether they voted for them. Sovereignty is in the people, not the leaders. This certainly isn't the case in Christian doctrine. Some churches do have a form of democratic oversight, and some congregations maintain their independence from congregations within the same denomination. But nowhere in Christian doctrine is sovereignty recognized to be anywhere other than with God and/or the Trinity. Christianity and Islam are all about submission to God. And they are about submission to God and no one else! Although in practice that is often not the case.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Sept 11, 2014 5:12:21 GMT -5
What Hat,why? All the elements of church structures and various positions of serving God and each other,are laid out in the N/T,not to be ignored,but to keep the body of Christ strong and united. Terrible all that is a waste in a preacher only doctorine,because it works,if followed.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 11, 2014 9:32:42 GMT -5
What Hat,why? All the elements of church structures and various positions of serving God and each other,are laid out in the N/T,not to be ignored,but to keep the body of Christ strong and united. Terrible all that is a waste in a preacher only doctorine,because it works,if followed. We should separate, in our minds, the structure developed for man to take care of earthly things with a structure developed by God to take care of heavenly things. God is to rule our hearts, that is unequivocal, and that is His structure. So .. if a worker says that not respecting a worker is not respecting God, he is wrong. Because truth, mercy and love have to be the guiding principles in our behaviour as Christians, and those principles come from the heart of God to our hearts. We can't suffer anyone else to have the rule over us when it comes to those things. That's why Jesus went to the Cross! He wouldn't suffer that either. In the real world, we do compromise our principles; that is the essential nature of sin, but we shouldn't. This is where the forgiveness of God comes in, but now I'm digressing. Jesus never spoke to church structures. Paul did, and what he spoke to should be seen as relevant to the structure of the church in his day, a structure devised by man to suit the human needs of the early church. The structure itself does not matter so much, basically whatever works. This does not mean that God's kingdom does not have a structure, but the Bible does not provide the particulars of what that structure should be. What does matter is that those individuals called to service in various ways: in the work, elders, or however duties are defined within a structure, Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox; what matters is they consecrate their lives to God, and feel they can serve God within that structure. The structure itself and the people within it are going to be imperfect because they are left to man's devising.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Sept 11, 2014 14:04:27 GMT -5
God always likened his way to a kingdom, therefore a monarchy with Jesus as its head/King... But in God's kingdom the first shall be last and the last shall be first. That's more like a democracy! God's kingdom is not an earthly kingdom. It relies on direct rule of men and women's hearts by God, and no other man or woman should come between. So, IMO, anarchy is the correct model for those who love and serve God. What Hat, according to the definition of anarchy, the 2 underlined sections are not compatible! 1.A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority
1.1Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual,...
|
|