The Narrow Path Ministries

I have heard this refrain throughout my life from teachers who seem to try to justify what I perceive as their indoctrinaire teaching style. At least one lately used it as an explanation of why he doesn't go into alternative views while also suggesting he avoids such a balanced approach out of fear that he might "lose" his audience. I'm curious what folks think of this sort of response. It strikes me as a cop-out, particularly since they almost never are the sort of teachers teaching the simple gospel alone to an unchurched or ignorant audience. If they were only teaching the basic gospel message, then I would suggest they might be more appropriately considered as evangelists more than teachers. If they are in fact gifted for teaching then it strikes me this would only be a legitimate response if their audience fit the mold of those in Corinth to which Paul used the words. In my experience, however, most "good" evangelical churches (at least in the bible belt) are not in the Corinthian morality trap and are more in the mold of Hebrews where they are just sitting stagnant in a simple faith and knowledge of the word, and as babes they should be learning more about the deeper things of God and sharpening their steel to be able themselves to teach.

What do you think?

darinhouston wrote:What do you think?

That God's ways aren't our ways.

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

God dying for man....while we still hated god? Now that's truly foolish!

Yet, that's exactly what He did.

RND wrote:

darinhouston wrote:What do you think?

That God's ways aren't our ways.

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

God dying for man....while we still hated god? Now that's truly foolish!

Yet, that's exactly what He did.

Other than the following, I agree with you, but I'm not sure how this relates to the question.

Did you mean the following?

"god dying for man...while we were yet sinners"

I think it's debatable whether all men "hated" god -- but, when we're making specific reference to scripture (presumably Romans 5:8), I find it best to track the language as closely as possible to avoid interjecting our own doctrine lest people think that's actually what the scriptures said on the subject.

[please move this debate to a new topic if you want to discuss it further so we don't lose the topic at hand]

darinhouston wrote:Other than the following, I agree with you, but I'm not sure how this relates to the question.

Did you mean the following?

"god dying for man...while we were yet sinners"

That God's ways aren't our ways.

I think it's debatable whether all men "hated" god -- but, when we're making specific reference to scripture (presumably Romans 5:8), I find it best to track the language as closely as possible to avoid interjecting our own doctrine lest people think that's actually what the scriptures said on the subject.

Sinners = rebellion.

[please move this debate to a new topic if you want to discuss it further so we don't lose the topic at hand]

Darin, maybe if you could clarify the OP for me I could respond differently. Maybe I'm just not understanding very well the point you are making. (That shouldn't come as a surprise to some! )

.

darinhouston wrote:I have heard this refrain throughout my life from teachers who seem to try to justify what I perceive as their indoctrinaire teaching style. At least one lately used it as an explanation of why he doesn't go into alternative views while also suggesting he avoids such a balanced approach out of fear that he might "lose" his audience. I'm curious what folks think of this sort of response. It strikes me as a cop-out, particularly since they almost never are the sort of teachers teaching the simple gospel alone to an unchurched or ignorant audience. If they were only teaching the basic gospel message, then I would suggest they might be more appropriately considered as evangelists more than teachers. If they are in fact gifted for teaching then it strikes me this would only be a legitimate response if their audience fit the mold of those in Corinth to which Paul used the words. In my experience, however, most "good" evangelical churches (at least in the bible belt) are not in the Corinthian morality trap and are more in the mold of Hebrews where they are just sitting stagnant in a simple faith and knowledge of the word, and as babes they should be learning more about the deeper things of God and sharpening their steel to be able themselves to teach.

What do you think?

Darin, I understand what you are saying, and I've been to churches that are just as you said: stagnant in a simple faith and knowledge of the word. Which do you think: Are the Christians in those churches babies because the teaching is weak; or is the teaching weak because the church is filled with baby Christians?

I finally struck out on my own to learn all that I can, and sometimes I feel like an oddball because so few of my friends seem to share a hunger to know more. I can't figure out, however, where the problem stems from.

Another sidetrack...what do you think are the telltale signs of a mature Christian?

Michelle wrote: Darin, I understand what you are saying, and I've been to churches that are just as you said: stagnant in a simple faith and knowledge of the word. Which do you think: Are the Christians in those churches babies because the teaching is weak; or is the teaching weak because the church is filled with baby Christians?

I finally struck out on my own to learn all that I can, and sometimes I feel like an oddball because so few of my friends seem to share a hunger to know more. I can't figure out, however, where the problem stems from.

I think this is indeed the experience of many here, and much of the reason Steve's ministry is so helpful to me.

Michelle wrote: Another sidetrack...what do you think are the telltale signs of a mature Christian?

Hmmm.. excellent question. Clearly, exhibiting the fruits of the Spirit, though that can be imitated in the carnal world (inside and outside the church). So, it's a combination, I think, of that and one who takes as settled the gospel message and who is seeking to learn not what they can get from God through Scripture (freedom from bondages, peace through adversity and the like), but instead is seeking to find what scripture tells them about what pleases God so that they can conform themselves to that image and live a life pleasing to God while seeking to disciple others to do the same. One who is living to serve others, who avoids quarrels, who sacrifices their will and pride to serve the Lord and Him alone. One who is no slave to tradition or institutional religion, while still avoiding controversy and respecting the establishment enough to work within it rather than buttress against it (I'm not speaking of myself here, I'm afraid, by the way).

I'm sure we could all come up with more, and that might be a fruitful exercise for another topic.

Darin,
I'm totally tracking with you here.
I've come to see Paul's words about "preaching christ crucified" not as an exhortation to simplicity but as a reminder that the heart of our faith, the atoning work of Christ, runs like a thread through all our teaching and conversation. "Christ crucified" isn't supposed to be the single subject matter of all our discussion, it is to inform all of our discussion on every topic under the sun.