I was thinking about some of the personal revelations I've had recently and thought I'd write them down:

- Our salvation is not fragile. I grew up with a mentality that every tiny sin and thing done wrong would automatically flick a "saved/not saved" switch and I'd be bound for hell. What condemnation that mentality results in! We don't go to hell for a specific sin we commit, we go to hell for not accepting Jesus Christ. We're not saved by our works or attempts at righteousness, we're saved by grace and faith in Christ.

- Given the above understanding, I had been thinking about judgmentalism over the last year or so. I used to be quick to call someone backslidden and not saved. Well, just because a teenager stops coming to church doesn't mean they're not saved. Just because you see them drinking does not mean they're not saved. Who are we to judge so firmly that a person is not going to heaven? God's grace is far more than we imagine. Our salvation is not based on how holy we are. We'll never attain it, our righteousness is like filthy rags. I believe our attempts at holiness and righteous living will certainly bring blessing, but short of a backslider's outright and unrepentant rejection of God, I think we need to be very careful whom we call unsaved.

- I had a mentality that my church was one of the few that were the "most right" with God, and that we had the correct balance in what God's purposes were on the earth. Sure, I'd mouth the words that other churches were also doing good things, but I likely didn't fully believe it. How wrong that mentality is. The christian world is so broad, and elitism and exclusive attitudes only serve to isolate a church and its believers from the rest of the body of Christ....to their own detriment.

- Being a Christian really is about loving God and loving your neighbour. I used to think that our goal 24/7 is trying to witness to people. Then I realised I need to take a step back and simply show some love and grace. We tend to over-spiritualize things sometimes. For instance, being high-strung and always talking about God to your unsaved family is more than likely making you look like a nutcase. Definitely take advantage of opportunities to witness to them, but if they're not seeing an approachable, gracious example of Christ, you have attained little.
You know how much grace your family had towards you when you acted like a "religious nutcase"? We need to show that same grace back to them. Is there a need to bring up their bad habits or language constantly? Will having them 'act' like christians make them saved? We can't push our own christian standards on them, because....they're not christians.

Amen. I think that's enough for one post

Great post Dave...agree totally...condemnation is so cruel...i still struggle with that *on and off saved switch*

DaVe wrote:I was thinking about some of the personal revelations I've had recently and thought I'd write them down:

- Our salvation is not fragile. I grew up with a mentality that every tiny sin and thing done wrong would automatically flick a "saved/not saved" switch and I'd be bound for hell. What condemnation that mentality results in! We don't go to hell for a specific sin we commit, we go to hell for not accepting Jesus Christ. We're not saved by our works or attempts at righteousness, we're saved by grace and faith in Christ.

- Given the above understanding, I had been thinking about judgmentalism over the last year or so. I used to be quick to call someone backslidden and not saved. Well, just because a teenager stops coming to church doesn't mean they're not saved. Just because you see them drinking does not mean they're not saved. Who are we to judge so firmly that a person is not going to heaven? God's grace is far more than we imagine. Our salvation is not based on how holy we are. We'll never attain it, our righteousness is like filthy rags. I believe our attempts at holiness and righteous living will certainly bring blessing, but short of a backslider's outright and unrepentant rejection of God, I think we need to be very careful whom we call unsaved.

- I had a mentality that my church was one of the few that were the "most right" with God, and that we had the correct balance in what God's purposes were on the earth. Sure, I'd mouth the words that other churches were also doing good things, but I likely didn't fully believe it. How wrong that mentality is. The christian world is so broad, and elitism and exclusive attitudes only serve to isolate a church and its believers from the rest of the body of Christ....to their own detriment.

- Being a Christian really is about loving God and loving your neighbour. I used to think that our goal 24/7 is trying to witness to people. Then I realised I need to take a step back and simply show some love and grace. We tend to over-spiritualize things sometimes. For instance, being high-strung and always talking about God to your unsaved family is more than likely making you look like a nutcase. Definitely take advantage of opportunities to witness to them, but if they're not seeing an approachable, gracious example of Christ, you have attained little.
You know how much grace your family had towards you when you acted like a "religious nutcase"? We need to show that same grace back to them. Is there a need to bring up their bad habits or language constantly? Will having them 'act' like christians make them saved? We can't push our own christian standards on them, because....they're not christians.

Amen. I think that's enough for one post

Great thoughts DaVe. Keep thinking mate, you're on the money!

Hey DaVe, what a blessing to read that post...spoken from a heart that understands compassion...I confess to my own shame that I did live "not in condemnation" BUT quick to condemn others...lost sight of grace and became a pharisee. Then I backslide...I didnt feel condemnation but GRACE even in my sinful condition, God manifested himself to me, I learnt more about Grace when I was a sinner,sadly.

A lot of my friends are still backsliden, primarily because church leadership did not have a heart for redemption and restoration, and so people looked down at failures, because they were focused on those who were successful. But how different that would have been if we had the attributes you spoke of.

DaVe, as for me, the most encouraging post I have read on this forum.

P82...dont want to die on the wrong battlefield

Hi, I'm new to the forum but have been sneakinapeek for a bit and encouraged and enlightened by most posts. Thanks for your honesty here DaVe, I empathise with your post. Being out is awesome but often difficult to overcome them 'ol religios attitudes', but this will come by His grace. I was reminded in a recent sermon - Everything God does is redemptive and we need to be that kind of person too.

Dave, what an absolutley fantastic post, I really appreciate your honesty. I too, have recently had a similar revelation in my own life.

On a different tact but still coming under the revelations topic, I have come to understand something fairly critical in regards to being involved in the kingdom of God. It's not actually that critical but I think it is important. There will be some out there who will think ...DUH!?!?!?! because it is so simple.

Coming out of the potters house where the "pattern" is upheld and disciples are basically clones, all believing the same thing, saying the same thing, acting the same etc. I was concerned that people would continue in ECC in the same vein, I was really worried about killing individualism, because God created individuals, he didn't use an assembly line to manufacture us.

Recently I have come to realise that fullness of Phil 2:12 ("work out your own salvation with fear and trembling") is talking on an individual level, convictions for you, might not be the same convictions for me. And yet we are still called (as one body) to love one another, as a mark for the world to see that even though we still have differing ideas (not heretical ideas) we can still not only get along, but to love eachother.

Simple I know, but profound after being in PH for so long.

Mythbuster wrote:Recently I have come to realise that fullness of Phil 2:12 ("work out your own salvation with fear and trembling") is talking on an individual level, convictions for you, might not be the same convictions for me.

We actually touched on this in a bible study recently, and this scripture was brought up:

Romans 14:1-3 (NLT): “Accept other believers who are weak in faith, and don’t argue with them about what they think is right or wrong. 2 For instance, one person believes it’s all right to eat anything. But another believer with a sensitive conscience will eat only vegetables. 3 Those who feel free to eat anything must not look down on those who don’t. And those who don’t eat certain foods must not condemn those who do, for God has accepted them. 4 Who are you to condemn someone else’s servants? They are responsible to the Lord, so let him judge whether they are right or wrong. And with the Lord’s help, they will do what is right and will receive his approval.”

Basically some people in the Roman church did not feel it was right before God to eat anything they wanted (in this case, not eating meat). While those with perhaps a greater understanding of the new covenant did not have a problem eating anything they liked. Personally I think the veggie eaters had the more humble heart. Some of the meat eaters in the Roman church, while technically correct, were perhaps flaunting their freedom in Christ. "Doctrinal pride", some people call it.

So Paul simply says leave it alone. If you're going to discuss it, do it a with a right heart. It's not a major doctrinal issue (as you said, Mythbuster).

It's kinda funny: veggie eaters vs meat eaters....I wonder if they sat on opposite sides? And then they're at it again in the Ephesus church! (I Tim 4:3-4). It's like, guys, stop worrying about food!

Although it's probably not far off from disputes that arise in church these days anyway.

Sometimes when we get a revelation we're so excited that we just want to share it with everyone. In these times we can become a stumbling block to those who haven't 'got' the revelation yet. I think this is the case with the veggie eaters vs meat eaters situation. Sometimes it's better to say nothing and let the veggie eater get the revelation from God than to try to give it to him ourselves, even though our intentions are good. One of my pastors sayings is "Get it from God before you get it from man." It makes a difference.

Good point AZA, my recent revelation was born out of somebody mentioning something in conversation with me. I took a mental note and went and found out for myself and.....voila, revelation.

AZA, (I'm asking in a right spirit, not nasty) where do you think our pastor's preaching comes in to play? can we not hear from God through a man, in conversation, over the pulpit?

I know there is a balance, and that is when we look down on those who have not "got it" yet, and trivialise where they are in their personal walk with God. Although I do believe you can question error.

Mythbuster wrote:Good point AZA, my recent revelation was born out of somebody mentioning something in conversation with me. I took a mental note and went and found out for myself and.....voila, revelation.

AZA, (I'm asking in a right spirit, not nasty) where do you think our pastor's preaching comes in to play? can we not hear from God through a man, in conversation, over the pulpit?

I know there is a balance, and that is when we look down on those who have not "got it" yet, and trivialise where they are in their personal walk with God. Although I do believe you can question error.

That's a very valid question. Getting a revelation and getting knowledge are similar yet very different things. Most weeks we get knowledge from the pulpit. I'm not saying the preacher isn't preaching under the HG, I'm saying that we draw in knowledge. You know more but knowledge does not change your life. Revelation does change your life. E.g. when you got saved you had a revelation of who Jesus is and your life was changed. It wasn't the knowledge that changed you. Many unsaved people know that they need Jesus as their saviour but until they get the revelation they will stay in their sin. Revelation is the catalyst for conviction. When God reveals a truth to you, you will fight for it. I think the most powerful revelations are those that we have worked hard for. Digging through the word, praying for the will of God. When you get that revelation it's not just knowledge, it's the pearl of great price. Imagine then that you've received this revelation, and then the pastor preaches it on Sunday without discussing it with you. How much more powerful is that than if you'd only received it over the pulpit? This is what I mean by 'Get it from God before you get it from man'. God gave it to you. Man confirmed it by the preaching of the word.

As to getting revelation through a man, in conversation, over a pulpit, of course God can speak to you in these ways. Hey, God gave Balaam a revelation through his donkey. But I still think getting it directly from God is best.

As to questioning error, that's a whole 'nother issue. The bible is very clear on this also and error absolutely should be questioned. Suffice to say for now that in all these things we should be like the Bereans.

Aaron

great post AZA. I think that if any truth is revealed or disclosed, whether by God or man, is a revelation. Conviction, I believe has more to do with a belief or faith, a mental acceptance of that revelation. Is there a difference in the value of a revelation if it ultimately comes from the same source, whether by God or through man? I don't think so.

Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating that we do not search the scriptures for ourselves, just trying to bring a balance.

Did you (AZA or anybody else) have any real epiphonies/revelations when you first left PH?? I find I am having to re-dig all my wells.

Hey all - I have enjoyed reading these posts - all of them great!
It is nice to feel that there can be healthy discussions without any feeling of bitterness or hurt coming thru- means we ALL have been moving past the hurts and are now seeing things in a new light...
It is healthy to realise that we are not there yet and do some soul searching...puts the 'me, myself and I' back in perspective

Mythbuster wrote:Did you (AZA or anybody else) have any real epiphonies/revelations when you first left PH?? I find I am having to re-dig all my wells.

Hey Dave, just thinking about your first post in this thread, there seems to be a fine line between grace and the calvanistic doctrine of "once saved, always saved", what are your thoughts on that??

Mythbuster wrote:great post AZA. I think that if any truth is revealed or disclosed, whether by God or man, is a revelation. Conviction, I believe has more to do with a belief or faith, a mental acceptance of that revelation. Is there a difference in the value of a revelation if it ultimately comes from the same source, whether by God or through man? I don't think so.

Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating that we do not search the scriptures for ourselves, just trying to bring a balance.

I suppose it depends on how loosely (or tightly) you define what a revelation is. At the very loosest (and I haven't gone to the dictonary here) a revelation is something that has been revealed to you. So in that context we could say we have revelations on a daily basis. Every news article we read, every conversation we have, etc would be revelations. For me personally, when I talk about a revelation, I mean something that the Holy Spirit has opened my eyes to that I had not previously seen before. You know, when you're reading a verse for the umteenth time and suddenly, whammo! God hits you with something new.

In regards, to the value of a revlation in context to its source, I agree with you. The difference I'm pointing out is the overall effect it can have. Thus if you get a revelation from God while reading you bible and then the pastor preaches it over the pulpit, the effect on you is going to be more powerful than if you didn't read your bible but only got it from the pulpit. The value hasn't changed, the effect has.

Read the story of Cornelius in Acts chapter 10. The ultimate outcome of the story would be the same whether or not God had given Peter his revelation, but the effect on Peter was far more powerful because He did.

Mythbuster wrote:Did you (AZA or anybody else) have any real epiphonies/revelations when you first left PH?? I find I am having to re-dig all my wells.

Yes, lots.

Thanks Aza, I understand. Is there any disclosing of your fresh views ???

Mythbuster wrote:

Mythbuster wrote:Did you (AZA or anybody else) have any real epiphonies/revelations when you first left PH?? I find I am having to re-dig all my wells.

Hey Dave, just thinking about your first post in this thread, there seems to be a fine line between grace and the calvanistic doctrine of "once saved, always saved", what are your thoughts on that??

now there's a can of worms I was hoping to avoid. The best way I can explain my own revelation on this, is that I tended to think on the opposite side of a balanced scale. On one end, if you tell a lie and get hit by a bus straight away, you'll go straight to hell. No matter if you accepted Christ and have been pastoring for 30 years.
On the other end is living in unrepentant sin without concern for God, and still expecting to go to heaven because when you were four years old you prayed a sinner's prayer.

Currently I believe God's grace is somewhere in the middle of these two extremes. Perhaps leaning more towards the 'calvinistic' side (it sounds bad, but hear me out). Yes we can still lose our salvation, but we don't make heaven our home because we didn't sin today. What about sin in our lives we haven't recognised yet? What about attitudes we're still struggling with? The grace of God and Christ's atonement covers those.
When Christ said lusting is committing adultery in your heart, I think he was also making a point that we can never fit God's standard of righteousness. Have christians verbally repented for every single lustful thought they've had? Or everytime they were "angry without a cause"?

Christ's blood has already atoned for both our past sins and our future sins. When we recognise sin in our own life, we apply the blood and move on. The 'performance-based' mentality ("oh no I sinned again, I can never get it right and now I'm going to hell") brings unnecessary condemnation. Of course, there's a balance, but I hope you can see what I'm getting at.

I don't expect everyone to agree with me (the calvinism debate will never be solved until we're in heaven), but these are simply my own thoughts that I'm throwing out there. A good pastor once said when you have two extremes, the balance is usually somewhere in the middle. For me, that logic seems to fit this doctrine.

I'll write about some other things I've been thinking about later.

Thanks for clarifying Dave, I do agree with you and when you talk to 'true' calvinists they haven't given themselves over to the corrupt nature of the world just because they believe in God and have confessed this. They are actually trying to serve God as best as they can like the rest of us. Balance really is the key, and I am not going to say either side is totally right or wrong becuase there are scriptures for and against calvanistic theology and who's to say which is the most right scripture.


P.S. looking forward to more thoughts/discusion points from you (and others).

One preacher a lot of us knew in the old days once said 'your mind is like a storehouse, the Holy Spirit uses what you put in there when God decides to reveal something to you'. Obviously there is a lot more to it than that but it's a good starting point. Fill up the storehouse.

I think i would have get shares in Selley's with the amount of NO-MORE-GAPS I would have to use on my storehouse. Anyway, very good thought Seagull.