My Photo

My Online Status

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003


« Learning to BE Church: An Interview with a House-Church Team, part 3 | Main | Learning to BE Church: An Interview with a House-Church Team, part 4 »

October 09, 2004


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yes, and yes! :)

Christine: "But what I would hope to do is encourage each other into a place of greater sensitivity to our own responses and how things affect us, and to listening to the Holy Spirit - rather than expecting that we all need the same boundary lines."

Can I share a Zen story that, to me at least, seems to apply in a way that agrees with what you said?

Two monks were traveling in the rain, the mud sloshing under their feet. As they passed a river crossing, they saw a beautiful woman, finely dressed, unable to cross because of the mud. Without a word, the older monk simply picked up the woman and carried her to the other side.

The younger monk, seemingly agitated for the rest of their journey, could not contain himself once they reached their destination. He exploded at the older monk, "How could you, a monk, even consider holding a woman in your arms, much less a young and beautiful one. It is against our teachings. It is dangerous."

"I put her down at the roadside," said the older monk. "Are you still carrying her?"

We waste far too much time and energy carrying other people's women.

Good story John ... But your wife doesn't weigh very much :)

- slavery
- genocide
- oppression of the poor
- hoarding of wealthy
- destruction of earth-resources

my friends would probably consider these allowable, but not beneficial.

it sounds so horrible, i know. but the church has been involved in every one of these at some time during her history. they were not beneficial. but they were allowed. and at the time, most of them were considered to be God's will.

now we consider them to be sin.

it's interesting how things change over time.

I think the point was to tell the people that "just because you don't have to follow the laws, doesn't mean that what you do doesn't have a consequence."

There is always another side of the spectrum. He says that "not all things are profitable," which means that there are a lot of things that reap disadvantageous benefits. In the same sense, there are a lot of things that can break down the church. Law or no law, which would you think Christ commissioned us to do?

You can't read scripture out of context of the whole bible so let us not for get Galatians 5:13 : "For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another."

The comments to this entry are closed.