I do believe that Tim is on to something really important here.

How easily we replace these simple, universal methods for being the church and reaching the world with more elaborate forms and structures.

Your reference to Samwise Gamgee reminded me of a great essay by Matthew Dickerson on food and fellowship.

http://theotherjournal.com/2011/07/21/bread-surpassing-the-savour-of-a-fair-white-loaf-to-one-who-is-starving-food-and-the-culture-of-hobbits/

I’ve got one of his tapes which he presented the material at “Life in the Spirit” so will have to lend it to you if you fancied!

I am just wondering why my previous attempt on this message was not published? Do i not have permission to reply to someones question? Anyway, if that was an oversight, I respectfully ask if you would please publish it as I am keen to see the replies. This was what I tried to publish:

I just realised that I had not answered a specific question from Mark.

He asked about whether there were true believers before JN Darby introduced the church to the rapture. In answer to that, let us use some common sense thinking.

The Bible was not available to the common man until the 16th Century. The Bible was (up until then) monopolised by the Catholic clergy. They sought to control the people by preaching a Dominionistic, controlling, works theology which had been influenced by the gnostics (now known as new age) from Babylon origins.

Most of the common people (laity) from the 16th Century onwards trusted the protestant bible teachers for their systematic theology of the Bible. Calvin was one such person that the people trusted. However, he actually stated that his teachings came from Augustin as if it was Augustin writing through him. So this means the teachings of Calvin were still very much Catholic in origiin. Augustin was a gnostic before he became a Catholic and brought gnosticism into the church but with “christian” names. Basically Babylon religion taking over the Catholic church.

How can we trust Calvin if he taught from a gnostic Catholic?

Anyway, as the laity were still for centuries later (in most part) trusting the leaders for their theology, rather than studying the Bible direct for their theology, it took a long time for the old truths of the Bible to be restored to the church. The Anabaptists were such a group who DID read the Bible for themselves and were put to death by the Calvinists because they disagreed with Calvinism.

JN Darby was just one man (amongst others) who opened up the long lost truths that the early church knew about and practiced. The rapture is a CLEAR truth within the scriptures for those who read it. Calvin introduced Augustins gnostic ideas of Covenant theology and election. The reformed church became brainwashed into this theology. They were so brainwashed that it was extremely difficult to notice what the Bible ACTUALLY taught.

I come back to my point in closing, If believers are ignorant of what the Bible teaches about the rapture because of their Calvinistic or Arminian (rather than BIBLICAL) conditioning then they are excused for not believing in the rapture. However, for those (especially bible students) who read about the rapture and then choose to “spiritualise/allegorise” the clear truths away, I question the spirit within them.

I’ve read your blog for a good year now. I’ve found myself continually going back to this post over the past few months. I guess I really enjoy what you have to say in regards to the empowering of women in complementarian circles.

The church I now attend has occasionally had women preaching on Sundays, catching me off guard. I found myself in one service half-tuned out, judgmental, and unresponsive to the Spirit in the message, as if to rebuke my church for allowing it. I was confused and bitter and prideful. I responded horribly and scoffed at what the Lord was doing that morning within the congregation.

Your comments on drawing benefits from women in their ministries produced a conviction in my heart to repent toward me refusing the Lord to use women in the church as He so pleases to build me up in His Word. They have also revealed my need for discipline in submitting to my church leaders discernment. I’m sure they have dealt arduously with biblical issues such as these together.

I am glad to see and be in a church now that is developing women into the ministry, but I still have a tendency toward hesitance when it comes to these issues.

I tend to defend the empowerment of women in the body of Christ, yet also fear overstepping scripture.

The mystery of marriage is Christ’s love for the church, and His heart is to empower her in Kingdom ministry for His glorification in the hearts of man. I would like to say I have the same heart for my wife (at least in the imperfect, striving yet restful, human parable sense), but would be afraid if it led to her speaking week in and week out in my congregation, because of scriptural, social, and historical precedence regarding church leadership.

How do I balance this heartfelt dichotomy?

What has your background looked like in this arena?