Wheat and the Tares

Anon thank you for commenting again. This does confirm that you are not a troll as some would suppose. To that end I would ask that you please identify yourself in the future it does not have to be your name just some moniker that would allow you to be identified in the future. In reading your comment I am seeing quite a bit of misunderstanding about my calling and what I believe. Rather than make this a long post I will try and chop it up into many posts that cover specific topics. The funny thing is that a few years ago I would have been in lock step with you and Dr. Webb had I run into someone like my self in the past. Lets start with what I am not.

 

“Jesus, himself, in Matthew 13 said
that the angels, or you or I, were not to purge the church. Instead
He said that the tares and wheat were to grow up together and He
would separate them, purge the church, at harvest. If in any other
scenario, the tares were to be removed the wheat would most assuredly
be damaged. For anyone to say that they were call for this duty
automatically put themselves in conflict with Scripture.”

 

24Jesus presented another parable to
them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man
who sowed good seed in his field.

25"But while his men were
sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went
away.

26"But when the wheat sprouted
and bore grain, then the tares became evident also.

27"The slaves of the landowner
came and said to him, 'Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field?
How then does it have tares?'

28"And he said to them, 'An enemy
has done this!' The slaves said to him, 'Do you want us, then, to go
and gather them up?'

29"But he said, 'No; for while
you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them.

30'Allow both to grow together until
the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the
reapers, "First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to
burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn."'"

Matthew 13:24-30

First off I am simply a messenger. To use the wheat and tares metaphor I am not one of the reapers. It is not my place to reap the harvest. I have never said I was Jehovah's instrument for the purge. What I am saying is the I and others are called to call the elect back to the Word and a deeper relationship with Him. To quit perverting our faith in order to please a world that Yeshua Himself said would despise us. The more I grow in Him the more I realize it is not even my duty to point out where the tares are but to point to the truth so that people can see for themselves where the enemy has planted the tares.

Now I See

Annon’s comments continued to bug me. What could I have written that made someone think that I thought that the Jewish religious leaders in Yeshua’s time formed the church.  I went back and started looking at my posts and found the following passage that I think he has misconstrued:

“Oh my, how very astute of you. I read this and can not help but think of the number of outsiders from the religious orders of the day are in the Word. You do realize that the Pharisees and Sadducees were the accepted leaders of the “church” in the time of Yeshua and John. Each of them challenged the status quo. Please do not preach to me about the “dangers” of challenging our preconceived notions of what the church is. The scriptures teach that the church is Yeshua’s bride which consists of those whom have accepted His divine gift and made Him their Lord. There is no one way in which it is prescribed that believers are to meet and fellowship be it a mega church or a humble home congregation.”

This will teach me to be more precise in my wording of things.  If you will note the word church is put in quotation marks. I did this on purpose.  I was using a very loose interpretation of the term “church”.  Sometimes people’s preconceived notions get in the way and they do not see the real meaning behind the words spoken, or written in this case.  I should have been more precise and simply said that the Pharisees and Sadducees were the religious leaders of Jehovah’s children at that time. My point in that passage had nothing to do with who started the church, but with not blindly accepting a dogmatic definition of what constitutes the church.  The religious leaders in that time had an extremely rigid set of rules you had to follow in order to be considered righteous. It was also set up to keep them in power. Both John and Yeshua challenged them and their teachings and taught that all was not as they proscribed.  

Now that I know where this came from I realize I ought to be more precise in what I write.  I am not sure how it will come across because I tend to write like I think. The last thing I want this blog to become is synthetic where I am more concerned with what others think or may perceive than writing what is on my heart.

Perplexing

I
checked my blog this evening to find a most perplexing comment. I am
not sure who this anonymous commenter is, but he has gotten who I am
and my message ALL wrong.

“I am
both interested and distressed by your stance on scripture. You seem
to want your readers to think you stand on it, yet you seem to have
your own revelations, which is a violation of the sufficiency of
scripture. You seem to borrow from the NT but you tend to base your
stance on the OT.”

 

First
and foremost I stand on the in-errancy of the Scriptures. They are
sufficient for all things be it instruction, doctrine, reproof, or
correction. I have found that in order to understand the scriptures
you must study them as a whole. The New Testament has no foundational
meaning without the Old Testament.

16 All
scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction
in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect,
thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

2
Timothy 3:16-17

You seem
to think that somehow I believe Jehovah has given me some revelation
not in scripture. I would tell you that you are reading something
that is not there. Tell me do you truly believe that Jehovah quit
talking to His Children after the Bible was finished? I would tell
you that He does not. I know too many people that He has talked to
for you to tell me that, aside from my own experiences. You seem to
take some kind of umbrage with my status as a prophet. How is it
wrong to take what Yeshua has shown to me and others (I know I am not
the only one)and tell others before it is too late? I was simply told
to study what happened when the Hebrews strayed. Each time, Jehovah
sent them through a time of tribulation that ultimately brought them
back to Him. I am learn how to apply those lessons to our current
situation. Would it not be better if we did not have to go through
the fire?

This is
the part that got me really scratching my head.

“You
say that the first members of the Church were the Scribes and
Pharisees. This is a gross misreading of the Scriptures. Saul of
Tarsus was a Pharisee of the highest honor and yet he was out to
stamp out any and all evidence of the Church and eventually the
Pharisees called for, and secured, the cruel death of their Messiah.”

 

Seriously
I am quite perplexed. How can anyone even begin to think that
anything I have written even suggests this? I am not even sure what
the second sentence is trying to say. I know that Saul was a Pharisee
but he became Paul after his life changing encounter with Yeshua on
the road to Damascus. The church has nothing to do with the
Pharisees. I think that the book of Acts clearly shows the formation
of the early church, and for me to go through the entire book of Acts would be a bit much for this post.

“Your
banner seems to be that you are suffering from Asperger’s Syndrome,
unable to show love, and are otherwise insufficient for your calling
whereas a true minister of God does so under the banner of the
perfect Omnipotence of The Lord God. When I received Christ as my
Savior, my life immediately began to change and the Holy Spirit began
to transform me into the image of Christ by renewing my mind and my
ability to express Love was in His court. Insufficiency has it’s
place but as a banner shows an arrogance on your part to rob God of
His Glory, as does your use of the terms “Yeshua and G_d”, which
is extremely synthetic.”

 

How is
it that one comment about my personal struggle with an Asperger's
symptom and how it relates to the fact that Jehovah calls the most
unlikely people to do His work becomes a banner? I have a personal
difficulty in empathizing with the emotions of others. This in no way means that I am incapable of showing love. This personal difficulty makes me
realize that I have to lean on the Holy Spirit more to overcome all of my
difficulties. You have no realization the transformations in my life
that have happened since accepting Yeshua as my savior. Which brings
me to your synthetic statement. I have said this again and again.
This probably will not be the last. Jesus is the Greek form of the
Hebrew name Yeshua, it is simply my way of honoring Him as He was
Hebrew, or have we forgotten that salient point. To me names are important and how a name is said carries a certain amount of honor and respect. If you have some
problem with a personal means of honor then I am not sure what to
say. It makes no difference to me what name you use.

“You
say that you are called to encourage individuals to grow in Him, but
at the same time, you seem to be generally disgruntled with the
Church for which He laid down His Life. You say that you are in the
wilderness.”

“After
reading your mission statement and the last few weeks of your blog, I
wonder if there is a church of which you approve or do you completely
stand alone. If you do stand alone then why would you accept any
particular writings as scripture. I suppose your self indulgence of
your high level of intelligence would lead you in such a direction,
“Thinking themselves wise they became fools”. For the love of
Christ, make Him you Savior and the strength of you ministry. Lead
others to worship Him and Him alone.”

While
these statements came from different parts of his comment the answer
for each is the same because they dovetail. The answer is predicated
upon the understanding of what the church is. There are several basic
definitions of the church. When we are discussing the Church for
which He laid his life down we are discussing the Bride. This is the
church inclusive, it encompasses all believers. There is a second
definition and that is the local congregation of believers. The third
is a more modern one and that it covers the different denominations
such as the Southern Baptist Church. It identifies a basic core set
of beliefs or doctrines. My being in the “wilderness” comes from
a number of successive abusive local congregations I have been
involved in. It has been a time of healing for myself and my family.
My problems do not stem from the Bride, so to say I am generally
disgruntled with the Church is inaccurate at best, disingenuous at
worst. A question, how does my stance on certain congregations or the
doctrines of apostate denominations have any bearing on my
relationship with my Creator and Lord?

Your
last two sentences put the icing on the cake though. Yeshua (Jesus if
it really bothers you that much) is my Love, and my Lord. My ministry
is based upon calling those of faith to a deeper relationship with
Him so that we will avoid the purge that will assuredly come if we do
not return to our First Love. You have no right to make the claim
that He is not my Savior and Lord and it is the height of arrogance for
you to say that I would lead anyone to worship anyone other than the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit.