Shop More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

Submitted on
May 8
Image Size
1.8 MB
Resolution
1800×1734
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
838 (1 today)
Favourites
69 (who?)
Comments
17
Downloads
10
×
Do Not Compromise These by pipoca6694 Do Not Compromise These by pipoca6694

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears from the truth, and be turned aside to fables." (2 Timothy 4:3-4 NKJV)

"Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves." (Acts 20:30 NKJV)



"God is Spirit, and those who worship Him just worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:24 NKJV)

"...endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling..." (Ephesians 4:1-6 NKJV)

"...they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so." (Acts 17:11 NKJV)

"...if you receive my words, and treasure my commands within you, so that you incline your ear to wisdom and apply your heart to understanding...then you will understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God. (Proverbs 2:1-5 NKJV)</small>

____________________________________

You need truth AND unity. Having only one (doesn't matter which one it is) is bad.


The Bible makes it very clear that unity is very important in God's church. But is unity so important that we should conform to other doctrines for the sake of getting along?

Truth is truth, and the amount of individuals that believe it is not what makes it true (blood isn't red because we believe it's red. It just is red.) Does the fact that thousands of denominations believe different things mean that all those things are true? Most of the doctrinal differences are direct contradictions to each other, so how can they all be true? There can only be one truth.

Now I'm not going to name off churches, but there are Christian denominations out there that, in history, have blatantly changed doctrines and even passages in the Bible itself to suit their own beliefs. Does humanity really have the authority to change what truth is?

There are many differences in beliefs between the many Christian denominations. Are you going to put aside the Bible for a doctrine contradictory to what it teaches for the sake of being united?

No. If a church is clearly teaching something different than what the Bible teaches, leave. Truth cannot be sacrificed for the sake of peace among brethren. Find a united church that does have the truth.
 Be very careful. You may have strayed from truth yourself and didn't even notice it. Look into your church history and see if you truly are on the right track.
_____________________________________

Sermon: Compromise and Conformity

I know a lot of you will hate me for this, but I feel it's important, especially in this decade.
Compromise in Prophecy
Add a Comment:
 
:iconlugia429:
lugia429 Featured By Owner Edited Sep 23, 2014
1 Peter 3:8 Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind.
Love unites people, God showing us how much he loves us starts speaking the truth in our minds and definitely in our hearts, so loving one another, helping one another, and even worrying and praying for one another brings us in unity and truth is just how God wanted us to be in either sex or race.'
Nice work BTW pipCan we go NAO 
Reply
:iconcosmicbrat:
cosmicbrat Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2014
Truth is all that is known..

Unity is fear based huddle...

Truth and Unity do not occupy the same space.. 

The scale can never be tipped.. Truth and unity do not carry any weight..  they don't exist...
Reply
:iconvioletasilvestre2011:
Brilliant!
Reply
:iconderroflcopter:
Derroflcopter Featured By Owner May 31, 2014
Sorry, I'm not a bibliolater. Because every attempt to follow scripture down to the last jot and tittle always crashes and burns, because there's always some sort of bias or different interpretations and there's even disagreements among literalists. It just doesn't work. I'd rather have ecumenical harmony involving compromise and accept that I can't always be 100% right or certain about everything than have stupid, meaningless devisions and contentions based on differing opinions that are going to happen anyway. Sorry. God bless.
Reply
:iconpipoca6694:
pipoca6694 Featured By Owner Jun 1, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I don't believe all of the Bible to be literal either. There is plenty of content that is clearly meant to be poetic and/or symbolic. However, just because something can be interpreted in multiple ways it doesn't mean it should be. It's like that annoying English teacher that reads in the book, "The curtains were blue." The author was only describing the color of the curtains, but the English teacher babbles on and on about the possible implications and hidden meanings in the sentence while there aren't any there. Anyone can find any interpretation of anything they want, and people use that excuse to say we shouldn't listen to any of the Bible. Let's not forget how even secular music can have multiple interpretations of their own, yet I don't see anyone discarding them for that reason, do you?

I don't know about you, but if everyone in the world suddenly believed that the moon was made of cheese I wouldn't compromise my knowledge to go with their idea for the sake of unity. It's been proven that it's not cheese, so why would I be ignorant enough to throw away all the facts to accept a new belief based on faulty assumptions?

Discarding truth for the sake of unity is edging towards the Utilitarian point of view, which according to multiple sociologists over the decades, does not work in a functioning society.

Consider this scenario:

Me: I'm tired of Kansas; let's move to California! We'll head east.
You: Umm, east? That's the opposite direction of where we need to go.
Me: It doesn't matter what you say, I believe if I go east I will end up in California!
You: But just look at this map! If we go east we'll arrive in Ne---
Me: I DON'T CARE what the map says! My parents said California is east, my grandparents said California is east, so it doesn't matter what the map tells me. I believe that California is east, so that's where I will go.

If I go by that logic will I end up in California, going east from Kansas? No, it doesn't matter how hard I believe it, if it's the wrong direction the country's geography won't change to suit my beliefs. Same goes with Christian doctrines. It doesn't matter what a Baptist, Catholic, or Lutheran believes. If it's true, it's true, and if it's wrong, it's wrong. Just because you don't know what truth is, is that motivation for you to not pursue it?

It doesn't matter how much people disagree about doctrine. Would you rather be happy with a lie or sad with the truth? I personally wouldn't be able to stand the fact that someone told me a lie that I believed for years. Going along with a lie for the sake of getting along is herd mentality, and even the apostle Paul praises individuals that seek the truth, "...they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so" (Acts 17:11).
Reply
:iconderroflcopter:
Derroflcopter Featured By Owner Jun 1, 2014
Clearly? It's pretty "clear" to me that Genesis 1 is poetic, but try saying that to the folks at the Creation Museum and the other 30-40% of this nation's population that believes this world is ridiculously young.

There's still the danger of taking things at face value. There was this one chick on here who made this stamp "the Bible isn't trail mix for you to pick and choose from!". I snarkily responded "I assume that your congregation or group doesn't allow you to speak while they're in session" (alluding to 1 Cor  14:34). Then she went on a rant about historical context and how women used to shout at their husbunds from across the room during sermons or something (and then she blocked me *facepalm*). It might've been complete baloney as far as I know, but even if it's true, how the heck are we supposed to know that outside of the "historical context" that we may or may not have access to? (Also, consider the possible incompatiblity of extrabiblical context with the sola scriptura philosophy.) Say there's a global nuclear war, 99% of accumulated human knowledge of science and history disappears. Luckily, some survivors come across some Bibles and read them. However, when they come to that dreaded sexist verse, they'll probably take it at face value because Paul (and perhaps the Holy Spirit) didn't bother explaining why women needed to shut up in church. And that's just one of many examples of parts of the Bible whose interpretation rely heavily on some sort of extrabiblical context. Catch my drift? (I'll get back to you on the truth thing.)
Reply
:iconpipoca6694:
pipoca6694 Featured By Owner Jun 1, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
If you don't want to believe the Bible that's fine, I can't force you to see my point of view any more than you can force me to see your point of view.

That verse in 1 Corinthians had its own context; it's not saying women don't have authority to speak. Corinth was a city full of travelers, and many foreigners visited the church. Men and women sat in different sections of the building, and since the majority of women at the time were illiterate they obviously would want to socialize with other women they could communicate with instead of trying to listen to the Scripture readings in a language they didn't know. Since anyone would know that a room full of talking would distract from the main message, Paul wrote this letter asking the women to be respectful and keep their voices down. Like a "please silence your cell phones" before a movie.

If 99% of information were destroyed, would it really be wise to base a doctrine on one verse without even ever seeing the rest of the book? Would it really be right for me to read a single sentence of a Charles Dickens novel and from that single sentence judge his entire novel? It's totally illogical.  Anyone who would do that shouldn't have the opportunity to influence the masses because it will only lead to chaos and fanaticism.

Writing styles were different in that time period. The scientific method didn't even exist until maybe the 10th century. People were not so skeptic and didn't demand a "who, what, where, when, and why" of every detail that spewed from someone's mouth, not to say people were totally gullible and ignorant, but they didn't have a "liar until proven honest" mentality like we have today. Paul was so deeply loved and admired by those churches that they didn't demand explanations to every word he wrote to them. He and his comrades were the one that started those churches, why would they suddenly stop trusting them so easily?

The fact that parts of the Bible can be explained with extra-biblical contexts makes it more believable because it shows that it's not exclusive to itself. Secular history and archaeology not only explain but also support the Bible's credibility.

If you want to continue the conversation, can we please do it by note? Thanks. ^^
Reply
:iconthe1enchantress:
The1Enchantress Featured By Owner May 9, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Amen and amen. Yes, I love that particular sermon you posted. :XD: I've watched it a couple times in the past. :heart:
Reply
:iconpipoca6694:
pipoca6694 Featured By Owner May 9, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
My whole class watched the original video last month and it gave me chills to hear what they were saying. It really makes me wonder, how much longer until it all starts coming together? I'm anxiously anticipating the future! :D
Reply
:iconthe1enchantress:
The1Enchantress Featured By Owner May 10, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Oh, a Sabbath school class? They were saying not good things? So much of the first sentence of your comment intrigues me. :XD: I know...so much is happening so quickly. :faint:
Reply
Add a Comment: