Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
The only comment I can provide about names is that, while I agree that the name of Jesus must always be foremost, the rest of it is based on parsing and applying scripture to something that does not fit what the scripture is discussing.
|
Well, I would ask the further point, then, OBW:
Where is the scriptural support in FAVOR of such names.
I just don't see that myself.
It makes no sense to say someone has misapplied scripture in a context where the other side has applied none at all, does it?
I will solidly declare that I've seen God practically manifest in places with names. Even if we shouldn't have the names, I'm not sure it's as big a deal to the Lord as some may have taught in the past. Under the principle of Romans 14, no one should feel to judge someone who felt the Lord had them in a particular place. Obviously, this is often the case and the teachings which taught that all must leave those and join another way is flawed at a minimum under the specific guidance on receiving the believers.
Like I said, I'm not able to close God in a box and my practical experience leans in favor of conceding the point but my review of the Bible stands in contrast to that.
I hope you can understand my dilemma. I don't have a "right" answer. I have two answers that are "right" for completely different reasons and no way at present to reconcile them (and no intention to try to impose that view if I get an answer!) I'm OK with the dilemma at present, anyway.
I'm clear once again that really "seeing the church" means seeing that it includes all of those not "seeing the church" at all.