Exploring Christ's Spiritual Laws

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:1b . . eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.

An actual spiritual gift is an ability that comes from God, and there are quite
few of them, e.g.

• The word of wisdom (1Cor 12:8)
• The word of knowledge (1Cor 12:8)
• Faith (1Cor 12:9)
• Healing (1Cor 12:9)
• Miracles (1Cor 12:10)
• Prophecy (1Cor 12:10)
• Distinguishing spirits (1Cor 12:10)
• Languages (1Cor 12:10)
• Interpreting languages (1Cor 12:10)
• Helps (1Cor 12:28)
• Administration (1Cor 12:28)
• Ministering (Rom 12:7)
• Teaching (Rom 12:7)
• Encouragement (Rom 12:8)
• Charity (Rom 12:8)
• Leadership (Rom 12:8)
• Compassion (Rom 12:8)
• Evangelism (Eph 4:11)
• Pastoring (Eph 4:11)

The New Testament Greek word for "prophesy" is propheteuo (prof-ate-yoo'
o) which essentially means to speak under inspiration. That definition is very
similar to the Old Testament Hebrew word for "prophet" which is nabiy'
(naw-bee'). That word describes an inspired person of either gender; e.g.
Abel was a prophet (Luke 11:50-51) Abraham was a prophet (Gen 20:7)
Moses was a prophet (Deut 18:18) Miriam was a prophet (Ex 15:20)
Deborah was a prophet (Judg 4:4) and Huldah was a prophet (2Kgs 22:14).

Inspired people need not be highly educated; for example Amos was just a
simple farm boy whom God drafted into service right out of the blue. (Amos
7:14-15)
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:13 . . anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may
interpret what he says.

If Acts 2:1-12 is the model; then a genuine Spirit-endowed tongue should be
an honest to gosh real-life language instead of incoherent blabber that's
intelligible to no one, not even the speaker.

"Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation
under heaven. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in
bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language.

. . . Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking
Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native
language? Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea
and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the
parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to
Judaism); Cretans and Arabs-- we hear them declaring the wonders of God
in our own tongues!"

Mozart composed some amazing music; but had he not arranged the
components sensibly, it would likely grate on people's nerves instead of
entertaining them; sort of like when an orchestra verifies the pitch of its
instruments just prior to a performance. The discordant din that the
orchestra makes is a cacophony instead of a rhapsody.

"Even in the case of lifeless things that make sounds, such as the flute or
harp, how will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a
distinction in the notes?" (1Cor 14:7)

Modern tonguers typically don't compose anything pleasant to the ear. At
least if they would chirp like birds their speech would be a discernable song
instead of an unintelligible warble.

I was informed by a Charismatic friend that he prayed in a tongue because
he couldn't express his deepest feelings any other way. Mind you this was an
American adult of almost fifty years old; educated in America and spoke,
wrote, and read English his native language his entire life. So I asked him
how it is that his command of the English was so poor that he could only
express his thoughts in a language that not even he himself could either
identify or understand?

"If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. So what
shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will
sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind." (1Cor 14:13-15)

In other words: there are Christians out and about blabbering incoherently
because they choose to, rather than because they have to. With just a
simple act of their own will they could easily switch to something composed
with real words.

Why on earth would a grown-up prefer incoherent blabbering? Isn't that the
way small children communicate? Well, I can excuse small children because
they're uneducated. But shouldn't supposed educated adults be just a bit
more mature with their language and grammar than small children?

"Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your
thinking be adults." (1Cor 14:20)

The true gift of tongues is very handy for communicating with foreigners.
But in our day and age, Charismatics typically don't communicate with
anybody, either foreign or domestic . As a result, Charismatics are looked
upon with the same disdain as the kooks that hurl themselves on the floor,
faint, scream, writhe, shout, and dance with rattlesnakes.

Well; not too many sensible people care to accommodate kooks, so if you're
serious about influencing people for Christ, I highly recommend sticking to
an intelligible language. Here in my country, English is a good choice
because most people can understand it without requiring the services of a
translator.

And for God's sake, please do not allow yourself to be drawn to participating
in a tongues meeting.

"So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues,
and some who do not understand, or some unbelievers come in, will they
not say that you are out of your mind?" (1Cor 14:23)
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:22a . .Tongues are for a sign

The sign isn't intended for the benefit of believers, but rather, for non
believers.

"Not to them that believe, but to them that believe not." (1Cor 14:22b)

The purpose of any tongue is communication.

"Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know
what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air." (1Cor 14:9)

So if a tonguer is speaking a language nobody understands, they've actually
created a barrier to communication; viz: a regression to the tower of Babel;
and you can see for yourself how destructive that was to unity (Gen 11:1-9).
Webster's defines "regression" as: movement backward to a previous, and
especially worse or more primitive state or condition; viz: backwards
thinking.

Since tongues are for the benefit of unbelievers, then it's de facto that a
tongue should be a valid language that the unbeliever himself speaks and
understands (cf. Acts 2:4-11). Somebody who exercises a tongue for any
other reason has missed the point; and they're behaving like a little kid with
a toy.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:27-28 . . If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two,
or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if
there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him
speak to himself, and to God.

Tonguers are not permitted to speak all at the same time like a mob of
howling political protesters. One of the reasons why I get so annoyed by talk
shows like NBC's Talk with Kathy Lee Gifford and Hoda Kodb, and ABC's
The View is because everyone talks all at once like a bunch of undisciplined
dogs barking and yapping in a kennel. And the way they interrupt each other
back and forth before the other can even finish a sentence is one of the very
things we teach children not to do. You'd think those supposedly mature
adults grew up without supervision the way they conduct themselves in a
conversation.

NO; tonguers are to take turns; speaking one at a time, rather than an
entire congregation of tonguers barking and yapping like dogs in a kennel
whenever they "feel the Spirit" moving them. And if there's no one to
interpret, tonguers are not permitted to speak at all. If Christians the world
over followed those rules, it would put the charismatics out of business in
less than two weeks.

FYI: These directives regulating the exercise of tongues in a church meeting
were written by the apostle Paul-- a duly authorized agent speaking on
behalf of Christianity's Christ.

"If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge
that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of The Lord."
(1Cor 14:37)

Therefore, when Christians proceed to defy the rules regulating the exercise
of tongues, they are in shameful rebellion against the very lord and master
of Christianity; and yet, ironically, many tongue violators still have the
chutzpah to pass themselves off as The Lord's Spirit-filled followers.
However; a follower can be defined as someone who gets in step and/or falls
in line rather than going off-reservation to do their own thing.

"Rebellion is as the sin of divination; and insubordination is as iniquity and
idolatry." (1Sam 15:23)

"If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie,
and do not the truth" (1John 1:6)
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:29-31 . .Two, or three, prophets should speak, and everyone else
should weigh carefully what is said. If a revelation comes to someone who is
sitting down, the first speaker should stop. For you can all prophesy in turn
so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged.

Though God endows certain Spirit-selected people in church with the gift of
prophecy (1Cor 12:4-11) it is not He who endows them with the impulse to
talk out of turn. Self control is their responsibility; not His.

"The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets." (1Cor 14:32)

Actual prophets channel God's thoughts; viz: they speak as the voice of God.
People with opinions don't speak as the voice of God at all; they speak as
themselves. True prophets are revelators; people with opinions are little
more than a nuisance; and if not kept in check they will quickly derail a
Sunday school class and drag it off onto a perpetual bull session that never
gets to the bottom of anything.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:34 . . Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not
allowed to speak; but must be in submission (i.e. subordinate to the men)

It could be argued, with some merit, that this rule applies only to tongues
and prophecy; but Paul goes further with this rule in a letter to his friend
Timothy.

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman
to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam
was first formed, then Eve." (1Tim 2:11-13)

It's important to note that this is neither a gender issue nor an issue related
to competence; it's an issue related to primogeniture. For that reason it's an
act of contempt for authority when Christian women to lead Christian men in
a Christian congregation.

Q: Doesn't 1Cor 11:3-10 permit women to pray and/or prophecy just so long
as they cover their hair?

A: There is a gender limit to that privilege. In other words: Christian woman
are not allowed to pray and/or prophecy in the hearing of a mixed
congregation; i.e. where Christian men are present.

Q: What about women like Anne Graham Lotz. Is she out of order?

A: Though women aren't permitted to speak to a mixed-gender Christian
congregation, that doesn't mean they can't speak to a mixed-gender public
forum, or in the street; or in a coliseum, or in a stadium, or in a convention
center, or on radio and television.

The best place in church for women blessed with the Spirit's gift to teach for
Christ is in a women's group; and if a man should invade a women's group
that's led by a Spirit-gifted woman; I think he should be asked to leave.

Q: What about Deborah in the Old Testament book of judges? Exactly how
was she an exception to this rule, if indeed she was?

A: Things are quite a bit different now with Christ at the helm, i.e. Christ's
association with his church trumps Deborah's association with the Jews. I do
not recommend using her, or any other woman in the Bible, as an excuse to
defy Christ's edicts in matters pertaining to the governance of Christian
congregations.

Paul appealed to "the law" as the basis for 1Cor 14:34. Normally when Paul
speaks of the law he's referring to the covenant that Moses' people agreed
upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

Exactly where in the covenant that women are forbidden to preach, or teach,
or usurp authority over men in matters of religion, I don't know. However,
it's quite obvious that the covenant is very sexist, i.e. women are not
permitted in either the priesthood or the Sanhedrin.

NOTE: The law doesn't always speak explicitly about certain things.
Sometimes the law's rules and procedures imply principles that we call "the
spirit of the law". Not everyone is able to discern the spirit of the law. I think
most of us would prefer having everything spelled out in clear language.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:35 . . If women have questions, they should ask their own
husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

What's an inquiring wife to do if her husband is spiritually inept? I'd suggest
that women married to spiritually inept Christian men, and/or women
married to non-Christian men, and/or unmarried women; seek assistance
from one of the ladies in church known to be somewhat of a Bible expert.

But for God's sake, don't seek assistance from another woman's husband;
even if he's the pastor, or a deacon, or an elder; it's not only disobedient,
but that's also how rumors (and other things) get started.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:37-38 . . If anybody thinks he's a prophet or spiritually gifted, let
him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is The Lord's command.

If your Sunday school, or your catechism class, is being chaired by
somebody who disagrees with The Lord's commands regulating women's
subordination, or the use and abuse of tongues, and/or the speaking of
prophecy; then believe me you have a serious problem because it indicates
that your leader is humanistic rather than inspired.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:38 . . But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

In other words: if somebody in a Christian church refuses to accept the
apostle Paul as a duly authorized agent speaking for Christ; then Christians
are under orders to ignore that person's opinion of themselves that they're a
prophet and/or spiritually gifted.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 14:39 . .Therefore, brethren, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.

That rule applies only to people who actually have the gifts of tongues and/or prophesy because according to Rom 12:4-6, 1Cor 12:10, 1Cor 12:29-30, and 1Cor 14:5 not everyone does.

1Cor 14:40 . . Let all things be done decorously and in proper order.

In other words; it's okay to speak in a tongue, and it's okay to prophesy, but both must be done not only according to the rules, but also with intelligence and grown-up behavior.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 15:34 . . Come to your senses and stop sinning. For to your shame I
say that some of you don't have the knowledge of God.

That directive is in connection with some of the Corinthians' insistence that
dead people stay dead and never recover.

"Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do
some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?" (1Cor
15:12)

Apparently some of the Corinthians couldn't see that Christ's resurrection is
evidence that it's possible for dead people to recover. A measure of that
blindness exists even today among people who insist that Christ's natural
body didn't recover. They insist he rose from the dead with a so-called
glorified body; and some even insist that Christ returned from the dead as a
spirit being rather than a human being, and others postulate that his post
crucifixion appearances were done as an angel disguised in a fully
functioning human avatar. But if any of that were true, then Christ's
prediction at John 2:19-22 would be easily invalidated.

According to 1Cor 15:51-53 and 1Thes 4:13-17, the natural remains of
Christ's followers will first revive as they were and then be transformed into
something very wonderful during a flight up to meet The Lord in the air.

There is really no sensible reason to not believe that Christ's dead body
underwent the very same process, i.e. his crucified remains were first
returned to life just as he predicted; and then forty days later, at some point
during the flight to heaven as per Acts 1:9, his natural human body was
transformed into an immortal, supernatural human body; the likes of which
is on display at Matt 17:1-2; where it's depicted extremely incandescent.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 15:56-58 . .The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is The
Commandments; but thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our
Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing
discourage you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of The Lord,
because you know that your labor in The Lord isn't futile.

Though Mother Teresa put up a very convincing public image during those
five decades of missionary activity in India, her private letters to spiritual
counselors reveal that the poor woman was never really sure that
Christianity's God even exists; and if He did exist, she was plagued with
dread that He didn't particularly like her and might be quite disposed to
condemn her. Though she never said so in public, there were was hardly
ever a time when she didn't truly wonder if God wanted her in India in the
first place.

Had Teresa's personality not been the D-9 Caterpillar tractor that it was, I
think the celebrity nun would have given up in India after only one year. But
as anyone who knew her will vouch, Teresa wasn't a quitter; no, she was a
little bulldog, a survivor; and poverty was her dream venue. However, bull
doggedness is not what Paul is talking about in 1Cor 15:56-58; no, quite the
contrary.

Just imagine if somebody had it in the back of their mind that they might be
giving The Lord unreserved quantities of their time, talent, and resources in
a thankless endeavor only to end up being condemned anyway as per Matt
7:22-23. Well, Paul assured the Corinthians that Christ's work on the cross,
and in the grave, guaranteed that wouldn't happen to them— their
resurrection to a better life was in the bag; therefore they needn't fear that
in the end their work for The Lord will be judged all for nothing.

Ironically; and at the time of his writing, the Corinthians were not all that
spiritual. (1Cor 3:1-3). However; though their work in The Lord was being
performed by Christians whose spirituality was basically substandard, they
were still useful; which tells me that it isn't necessary to be a super saint
before one can begin serving Christ. Just serve him as best you can and pay
no attention to your location on the curve: keeping in mind that reliability
counts more than quantity. (Webster's defines reliable as "dependable")
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 16:1-3 . . Now about the collection for God's people: Do what I told
the Galatian churches to do. On the first day of every week, each one of you
should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so
that when I come no collections will have to be made. Then, when I arrive, I
will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with
your gift to Jerusalem.

The "God's people" to whom Paul referred were Jewish Christians whose
church was located at Jerusalem. They were having it pretty rough in the
early days of Christianity.

Lest somebody should get the wrong idea, that wasn't a tithe. Christ left it
up to each individual in Corinth the amount that they felt like donating
towards the Jews' relief effort.

"Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not
reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." (2Cor 9:7)

Tithes are not gifts; no, tithes are demanded rather than donated out of the
goodness of one's heart. I don't give the government my taxes; no, they
take them from me by force of law; viz: I pay taxes against my will, both
reluctantly and under compulsion; and I have absolutely no voice in the
parentage of my income that they take. When it comes to taxes: I am not
cheerful; no, I am grudging. Well; that is not the Christian way of giving.
Christians have a faith that works by love, not by law. (Gal 5:6)

It would be interesting to take a poll among America's churches just to see,
out of curiosity, how many have a program for assisting Jewish Christians
over in the modern State of Israel.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 16:13a . . Be on your guard, stand firm in the faith, be men of
courage; be strong.

Churches are like vegetable gardens in that they have to be nurtured or
weeds will take over and the soil will become fallow. And it's not just weeds.
Without irrigation, vegetables wither; while there's a pretty good number of
weeds out there that can get along without irrigation just fine. Well; the sad
reality is: there are Christian churches being led by pastors, deacons, and
elders who are just as arid as a Texas vernal pool in August.

"Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way
of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; but
was rebuked for his iniquity: the mute burro speaking with man's voice
forbad the madness of the prophet. These are wells without water, clouds
that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved
for ever." (2Pet 2:15-17)

Those kinds of church officers are in it only for the power, the career, the
prestige, the perks, and the income. Ergo: like Balaam, they're just prophets
for profit. And the sheep? bait fish for the barracudas.

The koiné Greek word for "men of courage" is andrizomai which means: to
act manly; which Webster's defines as: (1) having qualities generally
associated with a man; viz: strength and virility, and (2) appropriate in
character to a man.

Nowadays, what with the destructive influences of feminism abroad, it's
difficult to distinguish anymore between womanliness and manliness. Sexism
has been made a sin in feminist cultures; which Webster's defines as:
behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles
based on gender. Well, too bad for the feminists because the God of
Christianity is very sexist: take Him or leave Him; as is.

The koiné word for "strong" is krataioo (krat-ah-yo'-o) which means, in
common colloquialisms, to man up, step up to the plate, and/or take the bull
by the horns. A man doesn't have to stand tall to be a man, but he does
have to stand up; and if perchance you're a man reading this: don't you
dare ever let women define manliness for you; no, let Christ define it for
you. If you permit women to define manliness, they will manipulate you; and
your self respect (if you get my drift) will be in their purses. Tom-boys have
purses too so be especially wary around competitive she-males. They love
nothing better than to whittle a man's self respect down to that of a
squeaking little gerbil.

NOTE: There's been a quite a bit of flap in the media of late about a gender
issue called misogyny-- defined by Webster's as hatred of women --while
very little flap about misandry; defined by Webster's as hatred of men.

Misandry and feminism aren't joined at the hip; viz: not all feminists hate
men. Feminism is typically peaceful, objective, and political while misandry
is typically malicious, emotional, and personal.
_

 

[Jeauris]

.
1Cor 16:13a . . Be on your guard, stand firm in the faith, be men of
courage; be strong.

Churches are like vegetable gardens in that they have to be nurtured or
weeds will take over and the soil will become fallow. And it's not just weeds.
Without irrigation, vegetables wither; while there's a pretty good number of
weeds out there that can get along without irrigation just fine. Well; the sad
reality is: there are Christian churches being led by pastors, deacons, and
elders who are just as arid as a Texas vernal pool in August.

"Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way
of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; but
was rebuked for his iniquity: the mute burro speaking with man's voice
forbad the madness of the prophet. These are wells without water, clouds
that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved
for ever." (2Pet 2:15-17)

Those kinds of church officers are in it only for the power, the career, the
prestige, the perks, and the income. Ergo: like Balaam, they're just prophets
for profit. And the sheep? bait fish for the barracudas.

The koiné Greek word for "men of courage" is andrizomai which means: to
act manly; which Webster's defines as: (1) having qualities generally
associated with a man; viz: strength and virility, and (2) appropriate in
character to a man.

Nowadays, what with the destructive influences of feminism abroad, it's
difficult to distinguish anymore between womanliness and manliness. Sexism
has been made a sin in feminist cultures; which Webster's defines as:
behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles
based on gender. Well, too bad for the feminists because the God of
Christianity is very sexist: take Him or leave Him; as is.

The koiné word for "strong" is krataioo (krat-ah-yo'-o) which means, in
common colloquialisms, to man up, step up to the plate, and/or take the bull
by the horns. A man doesn't have to stand tall to be a man, but he does
have to stand up; and if perchance you're a man reading this: don't you
dare ever let women define manliness for you; no, let Christ define it for
you. If you permit women to define manliness, they will manipulate you; and
your self respect (if you get my drift) will be in their purses. Tom-boys have
purses too so be especially wary around competitive she-males. They love
nothing better than to whittle a man's self respect down to that of a
squeaking little gerbil.

NOTE: There's been a quite a bit of flap in the media of late about a gender
issue called misogyny-- defined by Webster's as hatred of women --while
very little flap about misandry; defined by Webster's as hatred of men.

Misandry and feminism aren't joined at the hip; viz: not all feminists hate
men. Feminism is typically peaceful, objective, and political while misandry
is typically malicious, emotional, and personal.
_

Yes feminism is one of the most evil things Satan and womankind has visited upon this earth

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 16:14 . . Do everything in love.

In context; "everything" probably refers to managing a church.

If church officers aren't sure how to be in charge and at the same time be
civil, then they might take some time to study 1Cor 13:1-8 with a
commentary and/or read "How To Win Friends And Influence People" by Dale
Carnegie.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 16:15-18 . .You know that the household of Stephanas were the first
converts in Achaia, and they have devoted themselves to the service of the
saints. I urge you, brothers, to submit to such as these and to everyone who
joins in the work, and labors at it. I was glad when Stephanas, Fortunatus
and Achaicus arrived, because they have supplied what was lacking from
you. For they refreshed my spirit and yours also. Such men deserve
recognition.

Paul and his associates depended pretty heavily upon the hospitality of local
believers for accommodations and daily necessities. Believers do well to
follow the examples of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus either by
opening their homes to missionaries or by funding their stay in a motel and
providing them with a rental car. You can usually arrange this through your
local church. Believers who do so "deserve recognition." That doesn’t mean
they should demand recognition, but there is coming a day of evaluation for
believers when they'll be fully compensated. (1Cor 3:10-15, 1Cor 4:5, and
Rev 22:12)
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 16:20 . . Greet one another with a holy kiss.

Kissing was a common form of greeting in the old world; and still is in the
Middle East and certain parts of Europe; but here in America— a super-sized
racial/cultural/ethnic amalgam of customs from all over the known universe
--it's wise to dispense your kisses with discretion. Some of us don't even like
to be hugged, let alone bussed; and if you should perchance try to make
physical contact with an autistic Christian, you're liable to cause them a
panic attack; so go easy on the touchy-feely stuff.

The people to whom Paul referred as "one another" are one's fellow born
again Christians. We're not required to kiss unbelievers. You can be
courteous to them, yes (cf. Matt 5:47) but reserve especially warm greetings
for your siblings; viz: those who've undergone a second birth as per John
1:12-13 and John 3:3-8, and thus share your adoption into God's home as
per Rom 8:15-17.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
1Cor 16:22 . . If anyone love not The Lord, let him be accursed.

One's love of The Lord is evidenced by loyalty.

"If you love me, you will comply with what I command." (John 14:15)

"Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me."
(John 14:21)

"If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching . . He who does not love me
will not obey my teaching" (John 14:23-24)

Does a Muslim have to be a terrorist to be accursed? No; they only have to
be a loyal follower of Muhammad ibn 'Abdullāh instead of a loyal follower of
Jesus Christ; same goes for Atheists, Nonreligious, Baha'i, Buddhists,
Chinese Universalists, Confucianists, Jains, Kabbalah mystics, Shintoists,
Spiritists, Taoists, Zoroastrians, Jews, Sikhs, and Hindus-- they're all
accursed and there is nothing to be gained in arguing about it.

How many people am I talking about? Well, as of mid 2014, worldwide there
were:

550,000 Scientologists
1,500,000 Mormons
8,200,000 Jehovah's Witnesses
7,794,000 Baha'i
515,951,000 Buddhists
451,292,000 Chinese Folk Religionists
8,424,000 Confucianists
974,597,000 Hindus
5,567,000 Jains
14,142,000 Jews
1,673,590 Muslims
2,819,000 Shintoists
24,918,000 Sikhs
14,183,000 Spiritists
8,660,000 Taoists
196,000 Zoroastrians
828,594,000 Nonreligious
692,111,000 Agnostics
136,483,000 Atheists.

The grand total of just those categories alone is 5,369,071,000

If those figures are in the ball park, and if classical Christianity is the reality;
then a minimum of at least 75% of the earth's 2014 population of 7.2 billion
people didn't love The Lord.

NOTE: Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons are Christians, yes, but not in the
classical sense.

Joseph Smith's movement is a spin-off; in other words: there's some
classical Christianity in Mormonism, but comprises only a portion of
Mormonism. The rest of it is extreme, to say the least.

Neither do Jehovah's Witnesses qualify as Christians in the classical sense.
Charles Taze Russell's movement is a spin-off too. There's some classical
Christianity in the Watchtower Society's doctrines, but comprises only a
portion of Russell's doctrines; and his slant on it is very peculiar.

BTW: A book that I personally consider an essential volume in every
Christian's library is called: "Kingdom Of The Cults" by Walter Martin.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
2Cor 2:5-10 . . The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient
for him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will
not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm
your love for him.

The cause for which Paul wrote that section was a guy in the Corinthian
church sleeping with his stepmother (1Cor 5:1). Paul had commanded the
Corinthians to not only hold the man's feet to the fire, but also to ostracize
him.

Some time had passed since then, and the man was apparently regretting
his actions, and broken off the illicit relationship with his kin, so it was time
to let him back into the group. No doubt the humiliation of it all had a
tremendous impact upon his attitude-- probably upon the congregation's too
because at first their attitude wasn't all that good about it either. (cf. 1Cor
5:2)

Here in America scolding and ostracizing a church member would probably
just make them indignant rather than repentant.
_