Deeper Life Women
Home » Theological Doctrine » Eternal Purposes » New Order of Beings
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10560 is a reply to message #10559 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 14:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member
Marilyn Crow wrote on Sat, 07 December 2013 15:43

To all,

Can you please clear this up for me. The priesthood of believers - what is that, now & in glory? I`m not sure what you mean.

Marilyn.


"You also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ … But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light" (1 Peter 2:5-9).

In the Old Testament tabernacle and temple, there were places where only the priests could go. Into the Holy of Holies, behind a thick veil, only the High Priest could go, and that only once a year on the Day of Atonement when he made a sin offering on behalf of all of the people.

Because of Jesus' death upon the cross of Calvary, all believers now have direct access to the throne of God as royal priests through Jesus Christ our great High Priest (Hebrews 4:14-16).

We can access the throne of God because of the shed Blood of Jesus, He paid the price and made this possible.

I guess we don't think of ourselves as being priests in this capacity.

Gary








Re: New Order of Beings [message #10561 is a reply to message #10560 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 15:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Thank you Gary,

Yes I totally agree -

Quote:

`I guess we don't think of ourselves as being priests in this capacity.


But in what capacity do you see us as priests? You said -

Quote:

`Because of Jesus' death upon the cross of Calvary, all believers now have direct access to the throne of God as royal priests through Jesus Christ our great High Priest (Hebrews 4:14-16).


What does `royal priests,` mean to you?


Marilyn.


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10562 is a reply to message #10559 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 15:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
william  is currently offline william
Messages: 1190
Registered: January 2006
Senior Member
Administrator
Marilyn Crow wrote on Sat, 07 December 2013 14:43

To all,

Can you please clear this up for me. The priesthood of believers - what is that, now & in glory? I`m not sure what you mean.


Marilyn.


I just went back over the thread and you are the only one who has mentioned "priesthood" so when you say "... I'm not sure what you mean"... quote someone who has mentioned "priesthood" (besides yourself) and perhaps they can clear it up!

Blessings,
William


I want to believe!
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10563 is a reply to message #10561 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 15:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member
Marilyn Crow wrote on Sat, 07 December 2013 16:02

Thank you Gary,

Yes I totally agree -

Quote:

`I guess we don't think of ourselves as being priests in this capacity.


But in what capacity do you see us as priests? You said -

Quote:

`Because of Jesus' death upon the cross of Calvary, all believers now have direct access to the throne of God as royal priests through Jesus Christ our great High Priest (Hebrews 4:14-16).


What does `royal priests,` mean to you?


Marilyn.


Because I was quoting the scripture in Peter. We have direct access to the throne of God "as" priests.

The priests in the old testament had direct access to God on the day of atonement in behalf of the nation. We can go to God now in prayer or fellowship "as" priests. I don't know of anyone who things of themselves as priests part of a priesthood.

I think its like an example showing us we have access to the throne. We cannot read into scriptures and assume anything.

Gary



Re: New Order of Beings [message #10564 is a reply to message #10561 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 15:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
william  is currently offline william
Messages: 1190
Registered: January 2006
Senior Member
Administrator
The OT priests had three basic functions: 1- To serve God, 2- To serve the people, 3- to offer sacrifices on behalf of the people (and themselves).

The third function was rendered unnecessary by Jesus Christ. In fact the whole idea of a physical priesthood was removed at the cross.

With that in mind, a royal priesthood, in the NT sense would be metaphorical and not literal. I think the same thing could be said concerning believers being kings but you didn't ask about that. This doesn't mean that the term is an irrelevant distinction. All believers are called to serve God and serve others as spiritual priests.

The verse Gary quoted essentially says just that --"that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light" (1 Peter 2:5-9)

We are a chosen nation, holy people, a royal priesthood to do what? --to "proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light". Jesus gives believers the awesome responsibility to mediate (function as a priest) his gospel to others. We represent (minister) God to others and at the same time minister to God with our worship.

There is no formal "order" here. We're not like the Catholics who relish the setting up of specific "orders" (like the monastic order) which implies some sort of physical structure/office that we as believers function in.

Blessings,
William


I want to believe!
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10565 is a reply to message #10564 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 16:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
William,

Yes I mentioned Priesthood because that was what Gary was implying (Testimony of Discipling 10474).


Quote:

`When the Lord gave them the design of the temple, it was men who the Lord used to work in the temple, woman had an outer court. Why did not woman come into the temple to serve is some capacity? Because it was never the Lord's Will.

It is no different today God has called men who are created in His image to run churches and have authority over them.`



And I thought that concept was very Catholic also. But I wanted more information. Thus our discussion developed & went off into many areas.

A word concerning your comments to me about `my method.` I realise now that men tend to like the `bottom line,` approach & women like the details. Had you thought that if I came on OO & started laying out long posts of teachings, well you`d say, Who does she think she is!!!`

And because I have the privilege of reading much of what you have been taught I know that we have lots in common with a few details yet to be discussed.

Thus my approach is to bring up topics but also to follow the conversation so you can all understand where I am coming from. That is the foundation of good discussions but we are having to work through the `errors.` And Gary found the big one -Dominionism. And this great deceptive error is through out Christianity & twists all the doctrines of the Bible.

Now you know I don`t believe in that false teaching, more understanding is developing between us. You need to give me & others time to work through many topics in the Bible to understand where we are coming from.

Of course I would expect you all to discern very carefully what I or anyone else says, but give time & grace for conversations to develop for the men & for the women. And note I do see long posts by men expounding on their thoughts too.


Marilyn.


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10566 is a reply to message #10565 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 16:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member
Quote:

10474: Marilyn,

To be truthful I think the discussion has stagnated. Let me share one thing here. God who is the same yesterday, today, and forever, has from the beginning made man to be created in His image and to rule over the earth.

We know the whole story of what took place. When the Lord gave them the design of the temple, it was men who the Lord used to work in the temple, woman had an outer court. Why did not woman come into the temple to serve is some capacity? Because it was never the Lord's Will.

It is no different today God has called men who are created in His image to run churches and have authority over them.

This is just the way God wanted it to be, its not in our power to change God's order we just have to believe and accept it.

We must never add to or take away from what God has said in His Word. Women were created for men not to teach them nor to rule over them. It's God's design and we as His creation just have to accept it.

Gary




Quote:

Marilyn Wrote; William,

Yes I mentioned Priesthood because that was what Gary was implying (Testimony of Discipling 10474).



Marilyn,

Here is 10474 I do not see anything about priesthood that your saying I am quoting. Seems like your putting words in my mouth here, that don't exist.

Gary


Re: New Order of Beings [message #10567 is a reply to message #10565 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 16:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member

Quote:

Marilyn wrote: Now you know I don`t believe in that false teaching, more understanding is developing between us. You need to give me & others time to work through many topics in the Bible to understand where we are coming from.

Of course I would expect you all to discern very carefully what I or anyone else says, but give time & grace for conversations to develop for the men & for the women. And note I do see long posts by men expounding on their thoughts too.


Marilyn.


This sounds like a snow job here.

Gary




Re: New Order of Beings [message #10568 is a reply to message #10564 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 16:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Thank you William & Gary,

I can now appreciate where you are coming from & what you believe. William you said -

Quote:

`Jesus gives believers the awesome responsibility to mediate (function as a priest) his gospel to others. We represent (minister) God to others and at the same time minister to God with our worship.`


What a wonderful ministry that is. And I agree with your thoughts here -

Quote:

`The OT priests had three basic functions: 1- To serve God, 2- To serve the people, 3- to offer sacrifices on behalf of the people (and themselves).

The third function was rendered unnecessary by Jesus Christ.`


However I don`t fully agree with what you say here -

Quote:

`In fact the whole idea of a physical priesthood was removed at the cross. (True) With that in mind, a royal priesthood, in the NT sense would be metaphorical and not literal.`



If our priesthood is `metaphorical,` not literal, then wouldn`t God have written, `You are AS a royal Priesthood?` Yet we do minister to people & worship God as you said, so wouldn`t it be true to say we are a spiritual priesthood.


Marilyn.







[Updated on: Sat, 07 December 2013 16:36]


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10569 is a reply to message #10568 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 20:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
william  is currently offline william
Messages: 1190
Registered: January 2006
Senior Member
Administrator
Hi Marilyn,

Marilyn Crow wrote on Sat, 07 December 2013 16:27


If our priesthood is 'metaphorical,' not literal, then wouldn`t God have written, 'You are AS a royal Priesthood?'



Not necessarily... one might walk into a wild meeting where some were barking and some were making chicken noises and make the statement -- "this place is a zoo!". No one would think that it was necessary to correct the obvious implication and meaning by saying --"no brother, don't you mean that this place is LIKE a zoo!"

The literal priesthood of Israel with all of its trappings had come to an end with the renting of the veil of the temple. All believers had the same access to God as the literal priests in the OT. There was no temple. There was no more sacrifice. There was no more need for a mediator between God and man. Likewise, when Peter says you are an holy nation, there would be no need for him to explain that he didn't mean a "nation" in the political sense, just as there would be no reason for him to stop and explain his meaning was not to be taken as a literal nation.

Quote:


Marilyn said: Yet we do minister to people & worship God as you said, so wouldn't it be true to say we are a spiritual priesthood.



Wasn't that what I said? William said: All believers are called to serve God and serve others as spiritual priests.


I could have just as easily said, and I think that most would automatically assume that I meant --"...that metaphorically speaking we are spiritual priests." We are not priests in the literal sense of the word.

The word "priesthood" used in the passage (1Pet 2:9) is obviously (at least to me) meant to be a description of something using an implied comparison, not a literal comparison, which makes it by definition metaphorical.


Blessings,
William

[Updated on: Mon, 09 December 2013 09:49]


I want to believe!
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10570 is a reply to message #10569 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 22:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
William,

You said
Quote:

`All believers are called to serve God and serve others as spiritual priests.`


I agree. And I believe God`s word puts the emphasis on the actual & reveals the shadow as such, a `copy & shadow.`

`...For if He (Christ) were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law; who serve the COPY & SHADOW of the heavenly things, ....` (Heb. 8: 4 & 5)

You again said -

Quote:

"...that metaphorically speaking we are spiritual priests." We are not priests in the literal sense of the word.


This puts the wrong emphasis onto the copy & the shadow & not on the reality, which is Christ, the priest from whom all priests have their pattern.


`See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.`


`Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a high priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister of the sanctuary & of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, & not man.` (Heb. 8: 1 & 2)


Christ`s priesthood is the reality not man`s copy & shadow. This was given by God for us to understand Christ`s ministries. And the statement of us `a royal priesthood,` indicates that it is not of the copy & shadow, but of the reality, Christ`s Priesthood which is royal. His is a Royal Priesthood, while this kingly aspect was not of the copy & shadow priests. Christ`s Kingship, as we know was presented to us in a separate office of Kingship by King David. (& others)



Marilyn.









[Updated on: Sat, 07 December 2013 23:06]


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10571 is a reply to message #10566 ] Sat, 07 December 2013 23:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Gary,

You said -

Quote:

`Here is 10474 I do not see anything about priesthood that your saying I am quoting. Seems like your putting words in my mouth here, that don't exist.



Quote:

`When the Lord gave them the design of the temple, it was men who the Lord used to work in the temple..`



Isn`t that referring to the priests?



Marilyn.


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10572 is a reply to message #10552 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 00:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
THE ETERNAL PURPOSES OUTLINE. (of what I believe)

God`s Eternal Purpose

Is `that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven & which are on earth – in Him,..` (Eph. 1: 10)

This is brought about by –

Christ reigning `till He has put all enemies under His feet.` `...then the Son Himself will also be subject to...` God, `that God may be all in all.` (1 Cor. 15: 25, 28)

Summary

GOD (Father, Son & Holy Spirit) is `all in all.` (1 Cor. 15: 28)
THE LORD JESUS CHRIST – The pre-eminent Ruler. (under the Father) (Col. 1: 18)He rules as a Priest upon His throne appointed by God. (Zech.6: 13 Ps. 110: 4 Heb. 6: 20)


He rules in Time – All rule, authority & power to become subject to Christ . (1 Cor. 15: 24 – 28)

He rules in Eternity – Christ rules over thrones, dominions, Principalities & Powers, visible & invisible realms. (Col. 1: 16 Eph. 1 : 21)

Christ delegates authority in different realms.

The Body of Christ – ruling with Christ in the heavenly realms. (Rev. 1: 6 3: 21 1 Peter 1: 4
Phil. 3: 20 Eph. 2: 6 Col. 1: 5)

Israel – ruling with Christ over the nations of the world. (Gen. 22: 17 & 18 2 Sam. 7: 13 Is. 66: 22)


NOTE:

Christ`s Priesthood – In Him we offer spiritual offerings, now & always. (1 Peter 2: 5 Rev. 4: 10)

Christ`s Kingship – In Him we are His servants ready to serve now & always. (1 Thess. 1: 9 1 Cor. 6: 2 & 3)

We cannot perform these functions `worshipping & serving,` without Christ`s divine nature being formed in us. (2 Peter 1: 4 &8)


Marilyn.






[Updated on: Sun, 08 December 2013 00:41]


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10573 is a reply to message #10559 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 00:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
GWB  is currently offline GWB
Messages: 713
Registered: March 2008
Location: Louisville, Ky area
Senior Member
Marilyn,

You have very interesting perspectives and questions.

I am looking forward as to how others respond regarding their knowledge of this subject and *everything* we were taught at FA. Smile


Shalom,

GWB

"Be still and know that I am God."
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10574 is a reply to message #10570 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 00:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
william  is currently offline william
Messages: 1190
Registered: January 2006
Senior Member
Administrator
Okay, now you have switched from speaking about believers and suddenly you are speaking about Jesus who actually is the culmination of the priestly office. I have nothing to offer in rebuttal to that.

So when you say:

Quote:

Christ`s priesthood is the reality not man`s copy & shadow given by God for us to understand Christ`s ministries.


I say amen.

Man's copy, as you phrased it, had specific functions and requirements, all of which have been done away with now that Jesus has completed His work.

They wore special clothes, had specific duties, ministered at the temple, sacrificed, received the tithes from the people, carried the actual Ark of the covenant in the wilderness, participated in the hierarchy of the priesthood, were distinct from the other tribes of God's chosen, derived their livelihood from the rest of God's chosen, burned incense, etc.. None of which applies to the metaphorical priesthood, namely us.

Gal 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

This passage, if it teaches us anything, teaches us that there is no difference between believers with respect to hierarchy. As they say, "the ground is level at the foot of the cross." The OT priesthood is nothing without hierarchy. (I think the word is even derived from the Greek word for priest!)

I don't see any type/anti-type between the Levitical priesthood and believers, not in any sense that we see the type/anti-type between the high priest and Jesus.

That isn't to say that there aren't some similarities that would enable us to speak in metaphorical language to describe ourselves as ambassadors of Jesus Christ ON BEHALF OF THE LOST WORLD.

We've looked at Peter's usage of the term "priesthood" and we can allow for the concept that in some measure we have the responsibility to serve/minister the gospel to those who have yet to experience the good news. Going further we can even say with Paul that any evangelical offering (sacrifice) of the fruits of our ministry can be loosely equated with the offerings of the priests of the OT (see Romans 15:15-16.) But this cannot be compared in any typical/anti-typical way to the role of the priests in the OT and the role of the believer in the NT.

To equate this with some special "order" of believers is not warranted. The "type" doesn't fit the "anti-type."

My understanding is that the whole idea of the priesthood was not a precursor to some "new order" of priests but it was designed to teach mankind that fellowship with God required the shedding of innocent blood which they were not capable of securing on any permanent basis without the intervention of God Himself. When that aspect was secured by the Blood of His own Son, then the whole concept of the Levitical priesthood became a moot point with no other purpose (for the believer.)

Of course I've read the passages where believers are called "priests" (cf Rev 1:6, Rev 5:10, Rev 20:6) but those passages should be understood in the light of the "once for all" sacrifice of Jesus Christ and with the understanding that the normal priestly functions were completely rendered unnecessary beyond the loose connection of our ministry to the world and our minstry to God Himself.

Christian priesthood, if you must use the term, is not the fulfillment of typology.

I could say the same thing about us being referred to as "kings"... we reign and rule with Christ because of our relationship to him, not because we are fulfilling some type that we see presented in the OT. King David was a type of whom King Jesus was the anti-type, but Solomon and the rest of the kids don't represent a type of Christian believers who are supposed to be the anti-type. A loose metaphor, maybe, but not a new anti-typical order of littlekings.

Blessings,
William

[Updated on: Sun, 08 December 2013 00:58]


I want to believe!
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10575 is a reply to message #10574 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 01:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
William,

You said -

Quote:

`Okay, now you have switched from speaking about believers and suddenly you are speaking about Jesus who actually is the culmination of the priestly office.`


We cannot talk about a royal priesthood of believers other than looking at the Royal Priest Himself.


Marilyn.



Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10576 is a reply to message #10572 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 01:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
william  is currently offline william
Messages: 1190
Registered: January 2006
Senior Member
Administrator
Marilyn,

You furnished us with nothing that speaks to the central reason an outline was asked for:

Jman specifically asked:
Quote:

Please lay out this "Eternal Purpose/Melchizedeck" doctrine in a complete outline-type
overview so I can see what I am getting into if I invest more time into this thread.


An outline of the eternal purposes of God could be something like this:

I. God decided to create man.
II. God decided to reveal Himself to His creation.
III. God allowed man to fall in order to reveal Himself in a more complete way to His creation.
IV. God reveals that sin offends His nature and must be punished.
V. God reveals that He is merciful (a new concept to Adam who had no way of understanding the awesome Love of God until he sinned)
VI. God reveals that only He can provide a method for mankind to be restored to fellowship, How? --the innocent must die for the guilty.
VII. God drives home this point via the sacrificial system.
VIII. Man begins to understand that he cannot do anything to permanently restore fellowship without completely trusting God to do it. Man fails repeatedly.
IIX. God, after helping mankind see the futility of all of their efforts, takes the initiative, and provides for man's inability Himself. He provides His own Lamb --Jesus! ...for the restoration of mankind.
IX. Mankind begins to grasp the wonderful Being that is GOD!
X. Those who grasp the revelation of God, are restored to fellowship, they are filled with an understanding of His nature, and they praise and love Him forever!

That is the eternal purpose of God in a nutshell but it tells us nothing about the subject you introduced that is causing all of the stir.

I'm sure you agree with the ten point outline I've presented, just like I agree with your attempt at an outline (unless there is a veiled reference to the ultimate reconciliation doctrine that denies "eternal" punishment --and by eternal I mean eternal, not just a long time!) but it does nothing to address the specific point that needs to be addressed.

We could spend the rest of our time on earth fleshing out the outline but unless we get to the "Eternal Purpose" as it relates to the "Melchizedeck doctrine", nothing is going to be gained here.

Surely you understand that?

Blessings,
William

[Updated on: Sun, 08 December 2013 02:01]


I want to believe!
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10577 is a reply to message #10576 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 02:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
William,

Christ is the Royal High Priest after the order of Melchizedek.
I wrote that in my outline, Christ`s Priesthood & Kingship. The typology of that is as God`s word tells us, Melchizedek, a King Priest rather than just a priest, or just a king.

It is what we all know from scripture. The point of difference I see is that I believe we function as priests & kings, worshipping & serving, in the heavenly realms in eternity.

I never called my beliefs a Melchizedek doctrine. Jman did that. (10545)

Quote:

`Please lay out this "Eternal Purpose/Melchizedeck" doctrine in a complete outline-type overview so I can see what I am getting into if I invest more time into this thread.`



Marilyn.

[Updated on: Sun, 08 December 2013 02:34]


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10578 is a reply to message #10571 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 06:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member
Marilyn Crow wrote on Sun, 08 December 2013 00:43

Gary,

You said -

Quote:

`Here is 10474 I do not see anything about priesthood that your saying I am quoting. Seems like your putting words in my mouth here, that don't exist.



Quote:

`When the Lord gave them the design of the temple, it was men who the Lord used to work in the temple..`



Isn`t that referring to the priests?



Marilyn.


Marilyn,

Hi, I'm saying all of this in a nice, kind tone, so read it in that narrative.

It's an emphatic "No" I was not referring to the priests or even trying to imply it was priests. Your making it Priests.

The point I was making is that God always used men in the temple for ministry. God used men in every realm to lead the people.

But I think I know now why you keep insisting on this word priest, as the Spirit has shown me.

Your trying to tie the two in together. The priests in the old testament and now these royal priests who are mentioned in the New Testament, that you see as literal ministry rather then a type. William laid it out very clearly what these scriptures are teaching.

In using your method your trying to prove that now women are called to be ministers of the Word since they are priests and kings before the throne. Since there are no direct scriptures telling us women are to teach or rule over men then these scriptures are being woven together to mean something they are not saying. If what your saying is true then you can feel justified in teaching men.

Marilyn we on earth don't make the rules God is the one who created man in His image woman came from man that is just the facts.

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

In 2 Timothy 2:2
And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.

Paul does not say commit these things for the men and women to teach.

Marilyn just by the fact your taking a small portion of a scripture and trying to prove a point, or portions of peoples comments and implying things that do not exist. This is shown by your statement made by Jman.

Look at this statement made by you:

Quote:

I never called my beliefs a Melchizedek doctrine. Jman did that. (10545)

`Please lay out this "Eternal Purpose/Melchizedeck" doctrine in a complete outline-type overview so I can see what I am getting into if I invest more time into this thread.`



He is only calling it a doctrine to clarify a point and that is by you sharing your version it then becomes a teaching or doctrine.

Back to the subject on royal priests: As I said; William made it quite clear what the Bible is teaching on this. I would take the time and pray that God will show you, or help you to understand what William is sharing. Read over his post several times and see it though while praying. Were not trying to be mean towards you in sharing all this we want your best in Christ. God has more for you if you will listen to what is being said.

That's all I'm asking; pray, listen to the Spirit as you read them, try not to look at them through some past teaching that your holding to and may the God of heaven open your eyes to see it.

Gary




Re: New Order of Beings [message #10579 is a reply to message #10577 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 08:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
william  is currently offline william
Messages: 1190
Registered: January 2006
Senior Member
Administrator
Hi Marilyn,

When you say this:

Marilyn Crow wrote on Sun, 08 December 2013 02:18

William,

Christ is the Royal High Priest after the order of Melchizedek.
I wrote that in my outline, Christ`s Priesthood & Kingship. The typology of that is as God`s word tells us, Melchizedek, a King Priest rather than just a priest, or just a king.



I can't find that in your outline. Maybe you implied it.

Quote:


It is what we all know from scripture. The point of difference I see is that I believe we function as priests & kings, worshipping & serving, in the heavenly realms in eternity.

I never called my beliefs a Melchizedek doctrine. Jman did that. (10545)



If that is ALL you are saying, why didn't you just say so?

Now I've learned a great lesson here...

Venus woman speaks: "The point of difference I see is that I believe we function as priests & kings, worshipping & serving, in the heavenly realms in eternity."

Mars man's translation: "The point of difference I see is that I believe we function as [in a similar manner as] priests and kings, worshipping & serving, in the heavenly realms in eternity."

Or better still-Mars man's Amplified Translation: "The point of difference I see is that I believe in the heavenly realms of eternity, we will be worshipping and serving, like kings and priests in the OT."

Now that is something I can wrap my head around.

What say we let her go, Jman? Gary? James?...

She seems harmless enough...

...especially since she now knows the difference between
 doctrine and personal interpretation and seems to be
 picking up on some of our language...  <grin>


Okay mate, you're free to go... sorry about the rope burns... those night shift guys can be brutal! <grin>

Blessings,
William

[Updated on: Sun, 08 December 2013 08:49]


I want to believe!
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10580 is a reply to message #10579 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 10:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member
William Wrote:

Quote:

What say we let her go, Jman? Gary? James?...

She seems harmless enough...

...especially since she now knows the difference between
doctrine and personal interpretation and seems to be
picking up on some of our language... <grin>

Okay mate, you're free to go... sorry about the rope burns... those night shift guys can be brutal! <grin>

Blessings,
William


Ay Mate we just wanted to argue the toss, I don't think any of the mates have had a toey here. Its just the las had a bit of a perk on this scripture. Its just that its been a extra grouse with the Aussies here. I'm still trying to make a quid and stop in occasionally.

HooRoo




[Updated on: Sun, 08 December 2013 10:13]

Re: New Order of Beings [message #10581 is a reply to message #10580 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 10:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
william  is currently offline william
Messages: 1190
Registered: January 2006
Senior Member
Administrator
Gary wrote on Sun, 08 December 2013 10:11

William Wrote:

Quote:

What say we let her go, Jman? Gary? James?...

She seems harmless enough...

...especially since she now knows the difference between
doctrine and personal interpretation and seems to be
picking up on some of our language... <grin>

Okay mate, you're free to go... sorry about the rope burns... those night shift guys can be brutal! <grin>

Blessings,
William


Ay Mate we just wanted to argue the toss, I don't think any of the mates have had a toey here. Its just the las had a bit of a perk on this scripture. Its just that its been a extra grouse with the Aussies here. I'm still trying to make a quid and stop in occasionally.

HooRoo







Oh, NO!

We've been taken over by these... these... creatures!<grin>


Blessings,
William


I want to believe!
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10582 is a reply to message #10512 ] Sun, 08 December 2013 12:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
wishing34  is currently offline wishing34
Messages: 212
Registered: March 2009
Senior Member
Missing from the outline is the idea that believers ( human beings ) are of
the order of Melchizedek. This idea was present at the beginning of this thread.

All agree that :
Melchizedek was of order of Melchizidek in the Old Testament.
Jesus was/is of the order of Melchizedek.

---


Marylin, in past, present, or future - is anyone else of the
order of Melchizedek?




Jman





---sig------------------------------------------------------ ------------

At the time of this post . . .

FA, the satellites, the spinoffs,and the FA diaspora have been having church
without apostles for 41 years and 342 days.
Initial start date 1/1/72


Recommended: No faith stands that strongly impact our (our chil






Re: New Order of Beings [message #10584 is a reply to message #10567 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 00:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Gary,

Thank you for the friendly tone of the last comment I appreciated that. Now I just want to state my views on that link in Post 10556.


Quote:

Marilyn wrote: Now you know I don`t believe in that false teaching...`



In Andrew Strom`s recent board (The Lack of Hunger)I posted these comments -


Dear .......,

I hear your heart for our precious Lord but I am concerned with some of your words, as they are beginning to sound like `Dominionism.` Remember I spoke about that in the last thread. Andrew S. said that people on this site do not agree with NAR (New Apostolic Reformation) however it is infiltrating all areas of Christianity, through songs, books, teachings etc, like the frog who slowly gets boiled, this teaching is everywhere.

Here are it`s main false teaching.

1. `We can change the world. `They seek people of good will whether Christian or non-Christian to lead society in 7 areas – religion, family, government, arts & entertainment, media, business & education. They call them the 7 moulders of culture.
They partner with the world system, which belongs to Satan.

2. They say -There will be a special army, transformed so they cannot die who will physically fight the enemies on earth. They call them `Joel`s army,` from Joel 2 but they misinterpret this for God says this army is the Northern army, (Joel 2: 20)

3. They believe that they will take dominion of the earth & give it to Christ when He comes. They have an earthly focus.


Hope that helps Gary, to see that I am not into Dominionism but speak out about its errors. That link you had is a good example of this false teaching.


Blessings Marilyn.



[Updated on: Mon, 09 December 2013 02:40]


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10585 is a reply to message #10582 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 00:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Jman,


You said,

Quote:

`All agree that :
Melchizedek was of order of Melchizidek in the Old Testament.
Jesus was/is of the order of Melchizedek.`


Then you asked -

Quote:

`Marylin, in past, present, or future - is anyone else of the order of Melchizedek?`



God says of Christ,

`You are a priest for ever according to the order of Melchizedek,..... though He was a Son, yet He learned obedience by the things which he suffered & having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him, called by God as High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek, of whom we have much to say, & things hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.....

This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure & steadfast, & which enters the inner part behind the veil. where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.` (Heb. 5: 5, 9 - 11, 19 & 20)



Summing up Jman, We are IN Christ & whatever He desires of us we will do. Ask Him for the labels.

Marilyn.




Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10586 is a reply to message #10584 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 00:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
GWB  is currently offline GWB
Messages: 713
Registered: March 2008
Location: Louisville, Ky area
Senior Member
Gary,

Thank you for your kind and compassionate heart when presenting the Word. You are a treasure when presenting your views.


It is the difference between Law and Grace. I feel it is the difference between being able to deliver a groaning creation or being a part of a system that we supposedly abhorred.


Are we clanging cymbals and browbeating or are we showing the love and compassion of Jesus when others don't grasp doctrine or the Word?

The answer lies in the fruit of what everyone has shared. What is the fruit of this topic that we have discussed?

Have we ministered life or death and condemnation?

I have my answers. I hope other will wisely consider their conclusions.





Shalom,

GWB

"Be still and know that I am God."
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10587 is a reply to message #10579 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 00:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Great William,

As Joan, an elderly Godly woman from Andrew`s site said one evening as she was about to sign off, `Now put on your mittens & play nicely.` I think a few mittens are in order (!!!!) needed, Rolling Eyes in stead of mitts, !!!!! Mad Evil or Very Mad

I`ve learned a good lesson here also - becareful when using my own phrasing of truths as it can be confusing & misunderstood by others.

We live to .....another day. Smile Marilyn.

[Updated on: Mon, 09 December 2013 04:31]


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10588 is a reply to message #10586 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 00:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
That is a Holy Spirit word, Gillyann,

And I take sober note of it from Him.

Marilyn.


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10589 is a reply to message #10584 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 04:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member
Marilyn Crow wrote on Mon, 09 December 2013 01:06

Gary,

Thank you for the friendly tone of the last comment I appreciated that. Now I just want to state my views on that link in Post 10556.


Quote:

Marilyn wrote: Now you know I don`t believe in that false teaching...`



In Andrew Strom`s recent board (The Lack of Hunger)I posted these comments -


Dear .......,

I hear your heart for our precious Lord but I am concerned with some of your words, as they are beginning to sound like `Dominionism.` Remember I spoke about that in the last thread. Andrew S. said that people on this site do not agree with NAR (New Apostolic Reformation) however it is infiltrating all areas of Christianity, through songs, books, teachings etc, like the frog who slowly gets boiled, this teaching is everywhere.

Here are it`s main false teaching.

1. `We can change the world. `They seek people of good will whether Christian or non-Christian to lead society in 7 areas – religion, family, government, arts & entertainment, media, business & education. They call them the 7 moulders of culture.
They partner with the world system, which belongs to Satan.

2. They say -There will be a special army, transformed so they cannot die who will physically fight the enemies on earth. They call them `Joel`s army,` from Joel 2 but they misinterpret this for God says this army is the Northern army, (Joel 2: 20)

3. They believe that they will take dominion of the earth & give it to Christ when He comes. They have an earthly focus.


Hope that helps Gary, to see that I am not into Dominionism but speak out about its errors. That link you had is a good example of this false teaching.


Blessings Marilyn.






Marilyn,

To be honest, I just ran across the site and thought it dealt with this Melchizedec teaching.

I did not think you were teaching Dominionism (which I only have a faint idea of what it is at the time). I remember you telling others it was a false doctrine. I should of asked more questions about the site before posting and I may remove it since it promotes false teaching. Don't want the wrong person reading it.

Anyway thanks for sharing here, I hope you liked the Australian slang. I thought later I hope those words were good slang words as the web page had a kangaroo drinking a beer on it.

Thanks Gillyan for the kind words I hope and pray I can live up to them. LOL

Lord Bless,
Gary







Re: New Order of Beings [message #10590 is a reply to message #10589 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 04:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Gary,

I think it is important what you have posted as it will help people to discern what is true & what is false. We need to have discernment. So might be a good discussion point.

Was that Aussie? Well I better go & have another `bo-peep...... `Well, you are now fair dinkum, & really true blue.`

Blessings, Marilyn.

[Updated on: Mon, 09 December 2013 04:34]


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10591 is a reply to message #10512 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 06:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
wishing34  is currently offline wishing34
Messages: 212
Registered: March 2009
Senior Member


I asked:

Quote:


`Marylin, in past, present, or future - is anyone else of the order of Melchizedek?`




You gave a very slippery, crafty non- answer, Marylin.




William, if you were actually requesting comment, I am at
a point to sit back and watch Marylin work and watch others discern.





Jman





---sig------------------------------------------------------ ------------

At the time of this post . . .

FA, the satellites, the spinoffs,and the FA diaspora have been having church
without apostles for 41 years and 343 days.
Initial start date 1/1/72


Recommended: No faith stands that strongly impact our (our children's) lives until we figure out
why the signs and wonders are missing. Something is wrong.







Re: New Order of Beings [message #10593 is a reply to message #10591 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 10:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
william  is currently offline william
Messages: 1190
Registered: January 2006
Senior Member
Administrator
wishing34 wrote on Mon, 09 December 2013 06:19


William, if you were actually requesting comment, I am at
a point to sit back and watch Marylin work and watch others discern.



Yep. Me too.

I think that Marilyn is taking a personal opinion, based on scant evidence, and building a whole new order (doctrine). This is dangerous for the reasons that you mentioned in an earlier note to Gillyann in this thread:

wishing34 wrote on Sat, 07 December 2013 09:29

GWB,

I have pretty much decided that my spoon is not
big enough to bail out Marylin's ocean everyday so I thought
I might give you more info as to what to watch out for.


=============================
Example of Truth: Believers are "in Christ'

this results in:
  • have authority in spiritual realm
  • have imputed righteousness
  • called to imitate Christ in daily life
  • have eternal life
  • can approach the Father as Abba Father ("child of God" or "son" of God - small "s" )
  • generally are in fellowship with God

==============================


==============================
Example of Silliness: Say someone convinced you that you are "in the order of James Bond" the movie spy

this results in:
  • you have a license to kill - Un-Spriptural you say? But "the James Bond order" trumps the other Scriptures
  • you can imitate Bond with a worldly lifestyle
  • more???


If you accept the premise that you are in the order of James Bond then you are open to
many possible re-writes of Scriptural doctrines. The key is to sell you on the original
premise.

==============================

No one could sell you on the James Bond idea, but say someone convinced you that
you are "in the order of Melchizedek"
( Note: Jesus is of the order of Melchizedek, but human beings are not. )


Now that person can define what the order of Melchizedek includes. Their definition
is wide open because this Melchizedek doctrine is not in the Bible. If you have bought
into their Melchizedek doctrine then they can have you dismiss other Scriptures because,
after all, you are of the order of Melchizedek.


==============================
Example of Dangerous: You are "in the order of Melchizedek"

this results in:
  • ???
  • ??
  • ?



Notice the results are not known/given - not until first you are sold on the Melchizedek doctrine.




Marilyn, (I assume you are reading this) this is a real danger... not the part about your own personal beliefs, that's your own business, but you are, in reality, presenting these things as Christian doctrine and if you consider yourself a teacher then you also should consider yourself subject to serious scrutiny.

Serious scrutiny is never done with kid-gloves ("mittens," as you call them) --it is a serious task because "truth" is at stake.

In my last note I tried to mitigate the situation somewhat with a little humor, leaving you with a respectable exit on this particular matter but you didn't seem to want that and went on to indicate that you have "lived to fight another day."

Well, just so you know, we consider contending for truth, the ultimate expression of love, and if we do it in a manner that is offensive to those more accustomed to a lovey-dovey-let's-all-just-hug-and-be-nice kind of way, then accept this as fair warning to the contrary.

If, in the face of all we have said, there isn't enough to prompt you to re-examine things or at least acknowledge that what you are defending has precious little Biblical support, then it might be wise for you to re-consider your call as a promoter of SOUND doctrine.

Jman has given a pretty clear road-map that should help anyone to see the destination that results from building on shaky ground.

Blessings,
William


I want to believe!
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10594 is a reply to message #10591 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 11:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
GWB  is currently offline GWB
Messages: 713
Registered: March 2008
Location: Louisville, Ky area
Senior Member
"You gave a very slippery, crafty non- answer, Marylin."


Just for the record, Jman, I don't believe Marilyn is trying to be slippery (slimy), crafty (suggests manipulation which is witchcraft), or non-answers.

These are strong and flat out of order accusations towards Marilyn's character.

I think it is a good idea for you to sit out until you can figure out how to mix the character of Jesus with your vast head knowledge of the Bible.

Marilyn is new. Love and compassion is more important than being right about anything. You owe Marilyn a humble and compassionate apology.

I am not telling you to sit out, you voluntered. Correct doctrine is important. But, it can be presented and corrected with a right attitude.

Contending for the faith is admirable. But love is our highest calling. That does not mean we have to compromise anything we have been taught.


According to your sign off statement, yes, something is missing.

Faith works by love. Obviously, it is easier said than done and it is key to having signs following.

I do not mean to start anything. I just think some attitudes need to be seriously adjusted among all of us, myself included.

[Updated on: Mon, 09 December 2013 11:18]


Shalom,

GWB

"Be still and know that I am God."
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10595 is a reply to message #10512 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 11:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
wishing34  is currently offline wishing34
Messages: 212
Registered: March 2009
Senior Member

GWB,

Obviously we disagree a lot.

This post is to extend you to courtesy of acknowledging that
I read your post.







Jman





---sig------------------------------------------------------ ------------

At the time of this post . . .

FA, the satellites, the spinoffs,and the FA diaspora have been having church
without apostles for 41 years and 343 days.
Initial start date 1/1/72


Recommended: No faith stands that strongly impact our (our children's) lives until we figure out
why the signs and wonders are missing. Something is wrong.
























Re: New Order of Beings [message #10596 is a reply to message #10595 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 11:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
GWB  is currently offline GWB
Messages: 713
Registered: March 2008
Location: Louisville, Ky area
Senior Member
Thank you for the courtesy.

I have also been given your response and consideration towards being harsh towards brethren.

Some can sit around and wonder for 35 more years as to why "something is wrong."

I shared my heart as to what I felt we could do to to be better when sharing what we were taught.

You go ahead and be right and stubborn. Someone is hurting but the doctrine is now corrected.

Jesus did not and does not minister in this manner.

Yes.....Something is very, very wrong.

[Updated on: Mon, 09 December 2013 12:30]


Shalom,

GWB

"Be still and know that I am God."
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10597 is a reply to message #10596 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 13:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member
GWB wrote on Mon, 09 December 2013 12:41

Thank you for the courtesy.

I have also been given your response and consideration towards being harsh towards brethren.

Some can sit around and wonder for 35 more years as to why "something is wrong."

I shared my heart as to what I felt we could do to to be better when sharing what we were taught.

You go ahead and be right and stubborn. Someone is hurting but the doctrine is now corrected.

Jesus did not and does not minister in this manner.

Yes.....Something is very, very wrong.


GWB,

I don't know who would be hurting. Everyone has just been asking questions that never get answered. How can we learn if what Marilyn is saying is true unless she gives us the straight facts.

If someone is teaching on a subject they should be able to share what they believe, where it is found in scripture, and they should be able to back it up with several scriptures as confirmation.

If someone asks a question there should be no need to get offended, just explain what the Bible teaches on it.

Please go back and look at all the posts here from the beginning.

If anyone is presenting a doctrine or teaching then they should be able to make it plain and answer the questions. If what is being said is true then there is no need to be alarmed because the Holy Spirit who leads and guides us into all truths will reveal the matter. We all have to be teachable but we have to know what we are being taught to make a decision. That's the nature of the beast, if you cannot prove what your saying and it is not clear in the Bible then its not a valid teaching or doctrine. Then it could be error or worse yet heresay.

Think about it, Paul came preaching about the messiah to the Bereans, they took his teaching and searched the scriptures to see if the things Paul was saying was true. I am sure there was questions they would ask Paul. What happened? They saw it in the scriptures and believed what Paul was teaching them and they believed Jesus was the Messiah.

This is why I believe men where called by God to lead and be teachers or any other five fold ministry. Our brains are not controlled by emotions, we analyze what is being taught, and we are not affected by flattery.

After rereading all the posts I see where Marilyn is not able to answer the questions, she tells people I'm glad you shared what you believe, and she is running off on tangents that are not dealing with the subject. Unless she can show clearly where she gets this teaching and what she believes we can only assume that it does not exist in the Bible.

That is only fair to anyone. If your going to teach on a subject then prove it.

Honestly GWB you know good and well what God showed us, and we can prove it from scripture. I am talking about "sound" doctrine that leads to life.

I Timothy 1:10 ........and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,

2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine,

Titus 1:9
holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.

Titus 2:1
But as for you, speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine:

We have to have clear sound doctrine as we move closer to the end. If anyone contradicts the Bible we are called to exhort and convict those who contradict.


Gary
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10598 is a reply to message #10597 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 14:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Gary, William, Jman,

Let`s have a good look at where this discussion started -


Gary said - (in the discipling thread)

Quote:

`When the Lord gave them the design of the temple, it was men who the Lord used to work in the temple, woman had an outer court. Why did not woman come into the temple to serve is some capacity? Because it was never the Lord's Will.`



I replied -

Quote:

`Just a quick note of what I believe re the Temple. it was a structure given by God to show forth the Lord & His ministry. It was given to the nation of Israel who are ordered as you said. However the Body of Christ is of a different order, KingPriests, where there is no `male or female,` differences. To be given a body like Christ`s, & where there is no marriage (in heaven) shows that it is a new body for a new order of
beings.`


I thought that when Gary said it was `men who the Lord used to work in the temple,` that he was referring to the priests. I didn`t know that other men worked in the temple. Thus I was trying to point out that the priests who worked in the temple were of the Levitical order, temporal & not royal, whereas the Body of Christ are a royal priesthood.


We are not like the priests of Baal. (demonic)
We are not like the Pharisees. (of your Father the devil, said the Lord)
We are not like those who `lord it over` others. (like the Gentile rulers)
We are not like the Levitical priesthood which is temporal & not royal.
But we are like Christ, in Him, a royal priesthood because he is the Eternal Royal Priest, & the abilities & functions flow from Him as He wills to use us now & eternally -

- worshipping & serving now, reaching out to others in the ministry of reconciliation,
- worshipping & serving in eternity, - (no eye has seen, no ear has heard.....)


I don`t see that as any new doctrine that you are saying I`m trying to teach.


Hope that explains it more. Marilyn.


















[Updated on: Mon, 09 December 2013 14:47]


Marilyn C
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10599 is a reply to message #10598 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 14:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gary  is currently offline Gary
Messages: 870
Registered: August 2008
Location: Indiana
Senior Member

Quote:

Gary, William, Jman,

Let`s have a good look at where this discussion started -


Gary said - (in the discipling thread)


Laughing Laughing Laughing

Marilyn,

I don't think that is what everyone is talking about here. Whenever someone asks you a question on this order of melchizedek, you answer: Did you see that bird fly by, Look at that cat over there.

It's about that bad.

I think its about this new order of beings, the order of melchizedek is where all the questions are directed.

Please forget about that statement in the discipling thread.

Are you being serious here?

Gary





Re: New Order of Beings [message #10600 is a reply to message #10597 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 14:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
GWB  is currently offline GWB
Messages: 713
Registered: March 2008
Location: Louisville, Ky area
Senior Member
I understand how important it is to keep sound doctrine. Yes, you should be able to support your beliefs by scripture. It is very important to defend sound doctrine. It is very important to not entertain heresy. It is very important to correct people if they are wrong.


"I don't know who would be hurting."

Well, I do. Marilyn is. I have communicated with her in PM's. I feel her character has been attacked, as well. If some don't agree, fine. I have known some to be the way she was described, and worse, but did not say anything.


"If someone asks a question there should be no need to get offended."

I agree, Gary. But everybody's personality is different. Some people can just let things roll off of their back. Others are more sensitive. Personally, I feel that people with these types of personalities should be considered and handled appropriately. Most on here pretty much take it to the dirt, at times. That is OK. We walk away and it does not bother most of us. It bothers some.

Most of us on OO are very blunt. I believe it is to a fault, at times, after having watched people interact on the board. That is JMO. If others disagree, that is their right to do so.

Everyone here has been guilty of sarcasm, tongue in cheek, condescending to others, etc. It is human nature and it needs to be kept in check. I am guilty as well. I feel that, sometimes, new people do not know the sense of humor or personalities of the regulars on OO. Things can be taken wrong or misinterpreted.


"...and we are not affected by flattery."

OK. I did not know my expressing to you that I appreciate your heart when sharing would affect the thread to such a degree. I will not express things like this in the future if it clouds anything or a thread in general. I truly had no ulterior motives.

I have gone back and reviewed the thread. I appreciate everyone's willingness to try and solve this issue (whoops, flattery? I don't know anymore.)



"We have to have clear sound doctrine as we move closer to the end. If anyone contradicts the Bible we are called to exhort and convict those who contradict."

Agree. But, do we have to degrade people in order to do so? We should not. If some feel this has not happened, fine. We can just pray for each other and let it be. That is where I am at right now. I am letting it go. SMH....but I am letting it go.



So, here we are, again. The doctrine has absolutely been defended, cleared up, people exhorted, people convicted, and people set straight. Great. The doctrine issue is fine. The doctrine is safe. There will be no heresy here, I am sure of that. Even where Marilyn does not understand, etc., the doctrine will live on just fine.

There is a problem. Someone got their feelings hurt. Does it matter? Should it matter?

I have come to the conclusion that people have different answers than I do. However a person answers those questions is between them and Jesus. I am leaving it there.


If being kind, patient, and gracious to someone is being ooey-gooey, hugs, kisses, etc., I am not above that. Jesus was not either. I highly disagree that defending a doctrine harshly is the highest form of love. You have to meet people where they are at. If being lovey dovey is what it will take to help someone make it into heaven and to understand God's Word, I will do it. If other's don't want to, fine. Again, that is between them and Jesus.


I hope I have answered all of the points that you presented.


Shalom,

GWB

"Be still and know that I am God."
Re: New Order of Beings [message #10601 is a reply to message #10599 ] Mon, 09 December 2013 15:06 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Marilyn Crow  is currently offline Marilyn Crow
Messages: 532
Registered: September 2013
Location: Australia
Senior Member
Gary,

Let`s go on to Jman`s comment at the beginning also -


My comment,

Quote:

`Now Christ being a High Priest shows that there are other priests, (High Priest over other priests) & these would be of the same order – King Priest.`


Jman said -

Quote:

"these would be of the same order" <- This premise is not substantiated.

To think that redeemed people will be/are of the order of Melchizedek (king-priest) in God's eyes is a potentially dangerous idea. The "order of Melchizedek" was something unique to Jesus.`


There was a man in the Old testament raised up to represent Christ in some small measure as a priest & a king. He was called (as we all know) Priest of the Most High God & King of Salem.
But it is just an earthly representation & the writer to the Hebrews enlarges on this to tell us that Christ is the eternal Royal Priest ministering from the heavenly sanctuary, the wonderful riches of His grace & mercy.

So take the focus off the representative of Christ`s ministry & put our attention on Christ the Eternal Royal Priest.

`looking unto Jesus, the author & finisher of our Faith who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, & has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.` (Heb. 12: 2)Priest & King

If we are a royal priesthood as peter says, then please tell me what type of priest are we -

Baal, Levitical, Pharisee, lording it over, or a royal priest?

Marilyn.









[Updated on: Mon, 09 December 2013 15:07]


Marilyn C
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue May 23 09:47:02 CDT 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01533 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

OvercomersOnline.com is Powered by: FUDforum 2.7.3.
Copyright ©2001-2004 FUD Forum Bulletin Board Software