House Church Talk - Re: House Church Talk Digest, Vol 3, Issue 116

[Dan Beaty]

Claire,

If Jonathan believes that a husband is disobeying the Word of God if his
wife works for an employer, then I would have to disagree. In fact, my wife
has with my approval worked for the public school system, and also a support
community for the handicaped.

In both cases, we felt she represented the Lord and served His Kingdom in
the process. Sometimes, I have to admit in the latter case it seemed
slavish. But Paul had some encouraging things to say to even the literal
slaves of his day.

You may or may not have better knowledge of Jonathan's beliefs than I do.
But I want to say that he recently spent some time with close friends of
mine in the Lord in India. Most have different views on these subjects than
Jonathan, but the report I recieved from them was positive.

>From what I gather, he mostly shared on New Testament Church life, things
which those attending the meetings desired.

His teaching at last years conference was encouraging to me. There was not a
hint of legalism IMO. I felt it presented an excellent balance between the
extreme ends of both charismatic and fundamentalist groups, showing that the
Spirit AND the Word are equally important in our lives.

Having said this, I might have a more negative impression if I only knew
Jonathan via his web site. That is precisely why I was eager to meet him in
person when the opportunity came several years ago. The policy I try to
follow is to judge teachings when I find them to be harmful, but to reserve
judgment on the individual's motives for a relatively longer time.

Dan B.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Claire Bennett" <clairebnntt at cox.net>
To: <House Church Talk  at housechurch.org>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 8:11 PM
Subject: House Church Talk -  Re: House Church Talk  Digest, Vol 3, Issue 116


By agenda, I did not mean that it is wrong to have plans and goals.  I am
talking about an agenda that may not be hidden, but many may be unaware of.

Regarding the idea that if one works for an emplorer they are slaves, and if
their wives work for another they are slaves and therefore the husband is
not ruling his household well:  I discussed it elsewhere, but business
owners will tell you they are slaves to their customers, employees,
creditors, suppliers, the market forces and most of all the various
government tax and regulatory agencies.  We are all slaves, yet, we are all
free.

We could just make a list of what is required to be chosen for the A-list,
leader-worthy group.  It sounds a bit like the Mormon "temple-worthy"
concept.  Do you go down a check-list?  Or does the Lord use whoever he so
choses, sometimes many who don't fit the "requirements."  Jesus didn't
fulfill the requirements that the Pharasees, Zealots and others had on their
list either.  So, they didn't receive him, but they freely received another,
and another after that, who more adequately lined up with their agenda and
preconceived idea.

I see good works as mercy, kindness, love, - not women remaining silent,
pregnant, head-covered, not educated or working, dressed according to
specification.  I don't see that a person who doesn't work for an employer
rates a higher place in kingdom pecking order (I thought our pecking order
was upside down) as well as one who homeschools, doesn't drink alcohol and
has a non-working wife.

I found it a concern that Atkerson states that apostolic tradition is
binding as biblical law - sounds like the Roman Catholic Church to me.

It is not a matter of homechurching - it is coming at it from a different
angle.  Most homechurch because they see it as supportive of mutuality in
ministry; the legalists homechurch because they believe it is the correct,
letter of the law method to follow.  These are two opposing philosophies,
IMHO.