Who holds authority in my life?

[davejonescue]

This is the issue I am dealing with. I am pretty sure I know the answer to this one; but a part of me feels bad if so.

My local church has really been pushing for people to minster to the community; in some sort of capacity. For a while I have been kind of setting that to the side and doing these Puritan eBooks. And yes, I feel bad when I think about just stopping doing them; but I feel even more convicted when I am in church, and hear the Pastor trying to direct the congregation to embrace evangelism and the thought of me going home and just editing more books. My problem is, I really dont have time to do both. I work full-time, I read my Bible regularly, I work-out; and this leaves like 3 hours a day free-time. Before I begin evangelizing, I know I need to study for a bit, but again, I cant both edit books and study. Some of these books are so big, that only doing a few pages a day would take years for them to be complete.

I am almost certain that our lives should first be dictated by the Bible and the Holy Spirit; but that we should also be directed by the local church. That while I may have desires to do this or that; the Preacher is in effect invested as the "mouth-piece" of God to the congregation; and congregants should be open to be swayed by the way God has directed his servant to lead his church.

This is not a problem of not being able to do one or the other; but not being able to do both. And if I feel bad for either giving up one, or neglecting the other; shouldnt the local church have pre-eminence and the final say in my decision either way? I think so, but I am just wanting to know if I am off or headed in the right direction? I have said I have wanted to do these books, but I am under no official or contractual obligation to do so; does this leave me the freedom to change course?

 

[Deleted member 13126]

You ask a very good question. I suspect you already know how I would answer, but in case you don’t, my answer would be along the same lines as what you’ve suggested: Our loyalty ought to be to our local church.

Except in three instances: (1) worldly or false churches, (2) churches which refuse to proclaim the gospel and engage in evangelism and (3) churches which refuse to exercise church discipline.

My question would be: “What does evangelism look like in the context of the SBC? Where am I leading people to?”

Don’t get me wrong, brother. I count you as a brother and as a friend. But you’re also my only friend in the SBC.

I’d say the same about the PCA. There’s a few brothers here that I’d gladly welcome into my home as brothers and friends if God were to grant me the opportunity. But there’s very few, and I think for very good, biblical reasons.

I think about this quite frequently when I’m distributing tracts out of town. If folks read the tract, felt convicted and wanted me to recommend a local church, where would I send them? I recognize that there were both Puritans (those who wanted to stay in the church and reform it from within) and Separatists (those who wanted to separate and reform from without).

I suppose we have some modern-day Puritans in the SBC like Tom Ascol and Founders. But I’m of a different persuasion. I think we ought to come out of a great many churches that fail to meet those three criteria above and instead come and worship together. I think we ought to be as pure as we can be.

I guess in the context of your question, what I’m trying to say is that the local church ought to have your loyalty and their needs ought to be a top priority, but do pray in all things about where you’re supposed to be. A church, to be sure. But that church? It’s between you and the Lord.

I’ve seen you struggle a bit with whether or not to continue with the book related work and I think it’s good and right to wrestle along these lines with what the Lord would have you do. Our time here is short, and while all things are lawful not all things edify. Not all things are expedient. Not all things are equally profitable. So whatever you do, do it to the glory of God, brother.

 

[davejonescue]

You ask a very good question. I suspect you know the answer, but in case you don’t, my answer would be along the same lines as what you’ve suggested: Our loyalty ought to be to our local church.

Except in three instances: (1) worldly or false churches, (2) churches which refuse to proclaim the gospel and engage in evangelism and (3) churches which refuse to exercise church discipline.

My question would be: “What does evangelism look like in the context of the SBC? Where am I leading people to?”

Don’t get me wrong, brother. I count you as a brother and as a friend. But you’re also my only friend in the SBC.

I think about this quite frequently when I’m distributing tracts out of town. If folks read the tract, felt convicted and wanted me to recommend a local church, where would I send them? I recognize that there were both Puritans (those who wanted to stay in the church and reform it from within) and Separatists (those who wanted to separate and reform from without). I suppose we have some modern-day Puritans in the SBC like Tom Ascol and Founders. But I’m of a different persuasion. I think we ought to come out of a great many churches that fail to meet those three criteria above and instead come and worship together. I think we ought to be as pure as we can be.

Evangelism in the context of the SBC, at least in my local church; would look like either Intentional evangelism; i. e. handing out Bibles, tracts, flyers to the church and talking to be people about Jesus; Environmental evangelism, i.e. talking to people around us about Jesus when the situation arises; and Lifestyle evangelism, i.e. living lives that are separate from the world in which testify to the truths of the Gospel. The first goal is to lead people to Jesus. The next goal is to lead them to our church so they can be edified, grow, and learn proper Christianity by those who have been given the authority to teach and shepherd.

The latter two I already try to practice. The first, Intentional evangelism, is the area I want to work on consuming the majority of my time. This is what I feel the church really calling the people to do. And the method by which that is done will vary within the confines of what is deemed appropriate for someone not called to preach.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

Intentional evangelism is terrific. You can reach a great many people that way. Far more than even most people called to full-time ministry will. Out at the last Clemson game, a fellow labourer and I were able to witness for the Lord Jesus Christ to a great multitude of people. There were about 60,000 present at the game, and where we were positioned I estimate at least a quarter of them saw our signs and heard the gospel being preached. Between that game and the one in Columbia, about a thousand tracts went out that day.

You’re likely to encounter a great deal of rejection, but it is enough for a servant to be like their Master.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

Evangelism in the context of the SBC, at least in my local church; would look like either Intentional evangelism; i. e. handing out Bibles, tracts, flyers to the church and talking to be people about Jesus; Environmental evangelism, i.e. talking to people around us about Jesus when the situation arises; and Lifestyle evangelism, i.e. living lives that are separate from the world in which testify to the truths of the Gospel. The first goal is to lead people to Jesus. The next goal is to lead them to our church so they can be edified, grow, and learn proper Christianity by those who have been given the authority to teach and shepherd.

The latter two I already try to practice. The first, Intentional evangelism, is the area I want to work on consuming the majority of my time. This is what I feel the church really calling the people to do. And the method by which that is done will vary within the confines of what is deemed appropriate for someone not called to preach.

Along these lines, if you wanted to get some more exposure on intentional evangelism, you could, of course, accompany those in your congregation who are already busy serving the Lord in that way. But as a backup plan, you could also obtain written permission from your elders to go and visit Tony Miano in Iowa. In exchange for reading a few books in advance, he's welcomed folks into his home and taken folks out every day to evangelize for a week up there in Iowa for some intensive training. He started out with Living Waters, came out of that group - I believe because of their position on women preaching in the open air - then went on to do his own thing for some time before submitting his parachurch ministry to his elders and integrating his private efforts in with the local church. You can find out a bit more about him here.

 

[davejonescue]

Along these lines, if you wanted to get some more exposure on intentional evangelism, you could, of course, accompany those in your congregation who are already busy serving the Lord in that way. But as a backup plan, you could also obtain written permission from your elders to go and visit Tony Miano in Iowa. In exchange for reading a few books in advance, he's welcomed folks into his home and taken him out every day for a week up there in Iowa for some intensive training. He started out with Living Waters, came out of that group - I believe because of their position on women preaching in the open air - then went on to do his own thing for some time before submitting his parachurch ministry to his elders and integrating his private efforts in with the local church. You can find out a bit more about him here.

Thank you for the information. I have spent sometime already doing public evangelism; in San Diego, Balboa Park, and my present local community. Getting out there isnt really the issue. The issue is taking my "3 years" and preparing for such an endeavor. I know some will agree or disagree with Billy Grahams style, that is not what I am talking about, but in an interview he was asked what are some of his regrets, and one of his biggest ones was not getting more educated and running head first into evangelism. I have heard it said before by someone, I cant remember who; but if they knew the Lord was returning in 3 years, they would study 2 and preach 1. I have the natural tendency to just get out there. But it is better to take a moment and prepare, then be out there and look like a fool. But even so, continuing to do these books is not working towards that; especially when my church is convicting me every week by its persistent commission. Which would be eased if I knew at least I was working towards that end.

 

[Jack K]

Has your local pastor told you personally that he thinks you ought to give up doing eBooks in favor of focused local evangelism? The fact that your church has made it a priority does not necessarily mean it ought to be the priority for every individual in the church. We need some people doing other things, too. You should make sure you have a lengthy one-on-one discussion (or two) with your church's leadership before you make a big change away from something else you feel is currently serving Christ.

That said, some outreach to others is usually healthy in anyone's life. If you sense your editing "work" has been comfortable excuse to avoid interacting with others, I suspect you probably ought to become more outward focused, at least to some extent. But do have that talk with your pastor if it has not happened. The fact that he talks about evangelism in front of the whole church should not necessarily mean his advice to you personally would be to drop your other work.

 

[davejonescue]

Has your local pastor told you personally that he thinks you ought to give up doing eBooks in favor of focused local evangelism? The fact that your church has made it a priority does not necessarily mean it ought to be the priority for every individual in the church. We need some people doing other things, too. You should make sure you have a lengthy one-on-one discussion (or two) with your church's leadership before you make a big change away from something else you feel is currently serving Christ.

That said, some outreach to others is usually healthy in anyone's life. If you sense your editing "work" has been comfortable excuse to avoid interacting with others, I suspect you probably ought to become more outward focused, at least to some extent. But do have that talk with your pastor if it has not happened. The fact that he talks about evangelism in front of the whole church should not necessarily mean his advice to you personally would be to drop your other work.

My only thing is that the eBooks are a "self" directed priority; as opposed to the local churchs "corporate" emphasis. It really has nothing to do with secluded introvertness or not wanting to deal with people. It mainly is just something to do with my free time that also glorifies God and blesses the universal church. But with that being said, either my Pastor has the authority to sway the congregation in the way he feels the Lord is leading him, or he doesnt. I am under the persuasion that an attentive ear should be had to the directs of the elders and leaders. They are called to that position for a reason. This is also under the weight that millions of books already exist while millions of souls are perishing. I have to factor that in with the Pastoral emphasis, and consider how to be a faithful steward of my time. While I enjoy doing things that bless the universal church, I believe I may be doing so at the ignoring of my local church; and really, my local church should be my first priority. I was reading Numb. and Deut. last night. And it pretty much seems Moses led the congregation at the dictates of God. I would like to hold my Pastor in the same respect up until, and if ever, he blatantly goes against scripture; not in trivial matters of various interpretations; but things that are blatantly sinful. If our pastor is speaking as if a prophet; meaning as God speaking to us, then it seems well I should listen. I dont really mind doing either, i.e. the books or studying. I am just tired of being convicted every Sunday.

 

[Phil D.]

I’d say the same about the PCA. There’s a few brothers here that I’d gladly welcome into my home as brothers and friends if God were to grant me the opportunity. But there’s very few, and I think for very good, biblical reasons.

That's quite a statement. Would you care to elaborate?

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Not everyone is a mouth or someone who hands out tracts (1 Cor. 12:16 KJV). If you want to do that with your limited time, do that. But it seems to me the Lord has already given you a talent, so I say, be "that" part of the body with a clear conscience.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

That's quite a statement. Would you care to elaborate?

Revoice + Secondary Separation.

 

[Phil D.]

I think it's safe too say that many, and perhaps even most folks in the PCA don't participate or support those things. As you implied, you evidently make exceptions in such cases, so why say "very few"?

 

[Deleted member 13126]

I think it's safe too say that many, and perhaps even most folks in the PCA don't participate or support those things. As you implied, you evidently make exceptions in such cases, so why say "very few"?

My interactions with PCA folks offline have been fairly limited. My interactions with you and others on PB who are in the PCA have been very warm. However, my understanding of the doctrine of separation (to include secondary separation) would still lead me to pray for and compel folks in the PCA to come out, just as Rick Warren and other recent events in the SBC would lead me to compel folks such as Dave to come out, or at the very least pray and consider where the Lord would have them. Where ever folks find themselves in faithful churches that remain in compromised denominations, I'd likewise encourage those individuals and/or churches to come out from among them and 'be ye separate'.

As I conceded in my original reply, there's a place for both Puritans and Separatists, but I'm not a Puritan in this regard.

 

[Logan]

Have you spoken with your session about this, Dave?

 

[Phil D.]

My interactions with PCA folks offline have been fairly limited. My interactions with you and other son PB who are in the PCA have been very warm. However, my understanding of the doctrine of separation (to include secondary separation) would still lead me to pray for and compel folks in the PCA to come out, just as Rick Warren and other recent events in the SBC would lead me to compel Dave to come out, or at the very least pray and consider where the Lord would have them.

As I conceded in my original reply, there's a place for both Puritans and Separatists, but I'm not a Puritan in this regard.

Alright, but in light of everything you've said I'm still not really understanding why there are only a very few PCA folks that you would invite into your home as brothers or even friends. But that's your call to make.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Separatism is a significant error. If you really think there are very few PCA folks you could have in your home, that is simply nuts. Read James Durham's Concerning Scandal.

My interactions with PCA folks offline have been fairly limited. My interactions with you and others on PB who are in the PCA have been very warm. However, my understanding of the doctrine of separation (to include secondary separation) would still lead me to pray for and compel folks in the PCA to come out, just as Rick Warren and other recent events in the SBC would lead me to compel Dave to come out, or at the very least pray and consider where the Lord would have them. Where folks find themselves in faithful churches that remain in compromised denominations, I'd likewise encourage them to come out.

As I conceded in my original reply, there's a place for both Puritans and Separatists, but I'm not a Puritan in this regard.

Not everyone is a mouth or someone who hands out tracts (1 Cor. 12:16 KJV). If you want to do that with your limited time, do that. But it seems to me the Lord has already given you a talent, so I say, be "that" part of the body with a clear conscience.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

Alright, but in light of everything you've said I'm still not really understanding why there are only a very few PCA folks that you would invite into your home as brothers or even friends. But that's your call to make.

Separatism is a significant error. If you really think there are very few PCA folks you could have in your home, that is simply nuts. Read James Durham's Concerning Scandal.

I'm going through it now, actually, thanks to your recommendation! I've also picked up extra copies of that first modernized version edited by Matthew Vogan and Catherine Hyde. Much appreciated.

 

[Jack K]

either my Pastor has the authority to sway the congregation in the way he feels the Lord is leading him, or he doesnt.

Your pastor does have much authority in that way, of course. But many pastors might have a general direction they think good for the congregation, something they speak about often to the group, but will still acknowledge that certain individuals are already working in other ways that are good and should continue. If your church supports a foreign missionary, would the pastor bring him home and reassign him to do local evangelism because that's his emphasis with the rest of the congregation? I hope not. Your pastor likely realizes that not everyone does the same work for Christ's kingdom, even if your pastor is emphasizing local evangelism when he speaks to the church as a group.

That's why I think you should make sure you have a good talk with your pastor before you decide to ditch a beneficial project in order to follow your pastor's guidance instead. You need to confirm that you truly understand what your pastor's guidance is for you. Perhaps when he hears your whole story, he will think that in your case you should continue what you are currently doing. Or maybe not. Find out by asking him.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

Separatism is a significant error.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts more on this. As I understand it, not only is it not a significant error, but it's a biblical command.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

The error is in the application. The PCA is nowhere near requiring separating from. Again, Durham addresses this. See also Rutherford against separation and Boston on schism, etc., at naphtali.com: https://www.naphtali.com/articles/

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts more on this. As I understand it, not only is it not a significant error, but it's a command.

 

[Northern Crofter]

The error is in the application. The PCA is nowhere near requiring separating from. Again, Durham addresses this. See also Rutherford against separation and Boston on schism, etc., at naphtali.com: https://www.naphtali.com/articles/

And while reading Durham and Rutherford, especially on this issue, keep in mind the terrible state of the Church (even in the midst of the Reformation) that they were warning against separating from - the PCA would in many ways be a better option than what Durham and Rutherford were remaining in at the time.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

The error is in the application. The PCA is nowhere near requiring separating from. Again, Durham addresses this. See also Rutherford against separation and Boston on schism, etc., at naphtali.com: https://www.naphtali.com/articles/

I’m looking forward to reading these articles you’ve linked me to. In the mean time, can you help me understand by what standard it can be said “the PCA is nowhere near requiring separating from?”

There are many Presbyterian denominations. Would you propose they all join the PCA? Or that we ought to all be Anglicans or Catholics?

What I imagine is happening is that we’re both reading the same passages on separation and drawing the line in different places (which, if we’re being honest, is what always happens). If this is the case, I’m still struggling to understand why you believe my application would constitute serious error. I’d also be interested to learn if you think the criteria for separation is identical to the criteria for not unifying.

I didn’t start out in the PCA, so I’m having difficulty understanding where schism would apply. Albeit, my understanding of how and why the PCA came to exist does make me question why some future withdrawal of conservative churches in the PCA wouldn’t be warranted. Wasn’t it largely driven by a conservative reaction to liberalism? Isn’t Revoice liberalism? A bit puzzled at a Presbyterian reacting so strongly against separation.

Any insight you’d be willing to provide here or privately would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks again for the links. I plan to go through them this evening.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

I’m looking forward to reading these articles you’ve linked me to. In the mean time, can you help me understand by what standard it can be said “the PCA is nowhere near requiring separating from?”

There are many Presbyterian denominations. Would you propose they all join the PCA? Or that we ought to all be Anglicans or Catholics?

What I imagine is happening is that we’re both reading the same passages on separation and drawing the line in different places (which, if we’re being honest, is what always happens). If this is the case, I’m still struggling to understand why you believe my application would constitute serious error. I’d also be interested to learn if you think the criteria for separation is identical to the criteria for not unifying.

I didn’t start out in the PCA, so I’m having difficulty understanding where schism would apply.

Any insight you’d be willing to provide here or privately would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks again for the links. I plan to go through them this evening.

I directed you to reading because, honestly, I don't have time to summarize. Yes; consist presbyterianism should lead to one unified church in a country; certainly at least one unified presbyterian church. That is the implication of the authors to which I directed you.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

I directed you to reading because, honestly, I don't have time to summarize. Yes; consist presbyterianism should lead to one unified church in a country; certainly at least one unified presbyterian church. That is the implication of the authors to which I directed you.

Got it. No worries. Thanks for the links.

 

[Northern Crofter]

I didn’t start out in the PCA, so I’m having difficulty understanding where schism would apply.

Consider that you don't have leave a body to be considered schismatic - the refusal to join with or fellowship with other believers without justification (an issue worth its own thread) can also be schismatic. I think your communicating that "there’s very few in the PCA that I’d gladly welcome into my home as brothers and friends" (I am paraphrasing despite the quotation marks) could be considered schismatic by many.

...presbyterianism should lead to one unified church in a country; certainly at least one unified presbyterian church.

Agreed.

 

[Deleted member 13126]

Consider that you don't have leave a body to be considered schismatic - the refusal to join with or fellowship with other believers without justification (an issue worth its own thread) can also be schismatic. I think your communicating that "there’s very few in the PCA that I’d gladly welcome into my home as brothers and friends" (I am paraphrasing despite the quotation marks) could be considered schismatic by many.

Agreed.

Perhaps the sentence needs more work. It has a lot of moving parts. “Gladly”, “welcome”, brother and “friend”, etc. Or perhaps I’m the problem. Perhaps I need more work!

But for our family, we have practiced secondary separation to varying degrees over the years. I love Dr. Joel Beeke, for example, but many folks keep him at arms length because of his association with John Piper. I would somewhat also. It is along these lines that I’d keep many folks in the PCA or the Anglican Church or the SBC at arms length. It doesn’t even just fall along denominational lines, either. A person who held very similar convictions to me who was a very worldly brother in the Lord who maintained close personal fellowship with other worldlings is someone I’d also keep at arms length.

I suppose in the grand scheme of things most of us look like schismatics to someone. The whole lot of us probably look like schismatics to the Pope.

 

[Ed Walsh]

This is the issue I am dealing with. I am pretty sure I know the answer to this one; but a part of me feels bad if so.

My local church has really been pushing for people to minster to the community; in some sort of capacity. For a while I have been kind of setting that to the side and doing these Puritan eBooks. And yes, I feel bad when I think about just stopping doing them; but I feel even more convicted when I am in church, and hear the Pastor trying to direct the congregation to embrace evangelism and the thought of me going home and just editing more books. My problem is, I really dont have time to do both. I work full-time, I read my Bible regularly, I work-out; and this leaves like 3 hours a day free-time. Before I begin evangelizing, I know I need to study for a bit, but again, I cant both edit books and study. Some of these books are so big, that only doing a few pages a day would take years for them to be complete.

I am almost certain that our lives should first be dictated by the Bible and the Holy Spirit; but that we should also be directed by the local church. That while I may have desires to do this or that; the Preacher is in effect invested as the "mouth-piece" of God to the congregation; and congregants should be open to be swayed by the way God has directed his servant to lead his church.

This is not a problem of not being able to do one or the other; but not being able to do both. And if I feel bad for either giving up one, or neglecting the other; shouldnt the local church have pre-eminence and the final say in my decision either way? I think so, but I am just wanting to know if I am off or headed in the right direction? I have said I have wanted to do these books, but I am under no official or contractual obligation to do so; does this leave me the freedom to change course?

Relax, David,

Consider how few–how very few–can do what you are doing for the Kingdom.
And as I mentioned before, I know you know all the following passages, but sometimes we (indeed ‘I’) need to be reminded.

I wondered if the leadership was not touching all the bases. Suppose your teaching elder presents his plan to reach the community as a group project; each member could have a role. In that case, he is doing some disservice to some individuals by encouraging unqualified, unmotivated, or, like you, filling up your “free” time doing an excellent work that few are qualified to do.

James 3:1 (ESV)​

Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers,​

for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.​

Anyway, I’m just guessing.

Following are two of the many passages I thought of when I read your post:

1 Corinthians 12:4–11 (NIV)​

4 There are different kinds of gifts. But they are all given by the same Spirit. ​

5 There are different ways to serve. But they all come from the same Lord. ​

6 There are different ways to work. But the same God makes it possible for all of us to have all those different things. ​

​

7 The Holy Spirit is given to each of us in a special way. That is for the good of all. 8 To some people, the Spirit gives the message of wisdom. To others, the same Spirit gives the message of knowledge. 9 To others, the same Spirit gives faith. To others, that one Spirit gives gifts of healing. ​

10 To others, he gives the power to do miracles. To others, he gives the ability to prophesy. To others, he gives the ability to tell the spirits apart. To others, he gives the ability to speak in different kinds of languages they had not known before. And to still others, he gives the ability to explain what was said in those languages. ​

11 All of the gifts are produced by one and the same Spirit. He gives them to each person, just as he decides.​

​

Ephesians 4:4–8 (NIV)​

4 There is one body. There is one Spirit. You were appointed to one hope when you were chosen. ​

5 There is one Lord. There is one faith and one baptism. ​

6 There is one God and Father of all. He is over everything. He is through everything. He is in everything. ​

7 But each one of us has received a gift of grace, just as Christ wanted us to have it. 8 That is why Scripture says, ​

​

“When he went up to his place on high, ​

he led a line of prisoners. ​

He gave gifts to people.” (Psalm 68:18)​

​

Your post also reminded me of David’s compassionate manner with his rag-tag crew of social outcasts.
Rather than me retelling the story, see the passage below for a peek into David’s heart.

1 Samuel 30:18–31 (NIV)​

18 David got everything back that the Amalekites had taken. That included his two wives. 19 Nothing was missing. Not one young person or old person or boy or girl was missing. None of the goods or anything else the Amalekites had taken was missing. David brought everything back. 20 He brought back all of the flocks and herds. His men drove them on ahead of the other livestock. They said, “Here’s what David has captured.” ​

​

21 Then David came to the 200 men who had been too tired to follow him. They had been left behind in the Besor Valley. They came out to welcome David and the people who were with him. As David and his men approached, he greeted them. 22 But some of the men who had gone out with David were evil. They wanted to stir up trouble. They said, “The 200 men didn’t go out into battle with us. So we won’t share with them the goods we brought back. But each man can take his wife and children and go home.” ​

​

23 David replied, “No, my friends. You must not hold back their share of what the LORD has given us. He has kept us safe. He has handed over to us the men who attacked Ziklag. 24 So, no one will pay any attention to what you are saying. Each man who stayed with the supplies will receive the same share as each man who went down to the battle. Everyone’s share will be the same.” 25 David made that a law and a rule for Israel. It has been followed from that day until now. ​

​

26 David arrived in Ziklag. He sent some of the goods to the elders of Judah. They were his friends. He said, “Here’s a present for you. It’s part of the things we took from the LORD’s enemies.” ​

​

27 He sent some goods to the elders who were in Bethel, Ramoth Negev, and Jattir. 28 He sent some to those who were in Aroer, Siphmoth, Eshtemoa 29 and Racal. He sent some to those who were in the towns of the Jerahmeelites and Kenites. 30 He sent some to those who were in Hormah, Bor Ashan, Athach 31 and Hebron. He also sent some to those who were in all of the other places where he and his men had wandered around.​

Take care,

Ed

 

[Joshua]

Evangelism, you say? Interesting word, especially when put forth by authorities as duty to others. Nevertheless…

 

[Deleted member 13126]

In that case, he is doing some disservice to some individuals by encouraging unqualified, unmotivated, or, like you, filling up your “free” time doing an excellent work that few are qualified to do.

A pastor does a disservice by encouraging someone unqualified or unmotivated?

So if I’m a lazy Christian (in the context of evangelism), my Pastor would be doing a disservice by encouraging me to do something I’m not motivated to do?

Am I reading this right?

 

[Jack K]

I love Dr. Joel Beeke, for example, but many folks keep him at arms length because of his association with John Piper. I would somewhat also.

I would be scared out of my boots to presume I should withhold fellowship from either of those men. I suspect both are much nearer to God than I am.