Holy Things and the Bughman Chart
September 17, 2007
Dear Friends,
Many years ago, I was visiting a brother and went to get something to drink. I grabbed a cup from the cupboard and was about to fill it with water when the brother asked me to use another cup. The cup I had grabbed was the cup they used for the wine at Sunday memorial service. The brother explained that this cup was holy and not to be used for anything other than its designated use to which I complied. This incident raised a question in my mind that still lingers – do we have holy items today? For example, is the table on which we put the bread and the wine on Sunday any more holy than any other table? Depending on who you talk to, you will get a wide array of answers.
Of course, we all know that holy items existed in the days of the tabernacle and the temple. For example, we read in 1Kings 8:4: “And they brought up the ark of the LORD, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and all the holy vessels that were in the tabernacle, even those did the priests and the Levites bring up.” Yet, it seems that these holy items of the Old Covenant were typical of the holy items in the New Covenant – us! Once we are sanctified in Christ, we are the holy vessels and need to treat ourselves accordingly. Now that the type of holy vessels has been replaced with the reality, the idea of holy items (other than believers) seems out of place to me.
By way of another example, my ecclesia has been blessed with our own building. To my way of thinking it is just a building. If we met in a warehouse, our worship would be no less holy than it is in our own ecclesial hall. Our building is simply a tool. If we cleared out the seats and used the main room for basketball for inner city youth to help keep them out of trouble during the week that would seem like a reasonable use to me. It would be putting our “tool” to use for the Lord. To others in my ecclesia, however, it would be a sacrilege like playing basketball in Solomon’s Temple.
These situations are not uncommon. When one views something as a tool and another person views it as holy, conflict naturally results. It is best in these cases, in my opinion, to try and be as sensitive as we can to those who see these things as holy. Unfortunately, I don’t always follow my own advice.
A few years ago I wrote a TFTW about a chart that hangs in our ecclesia painted by Bro. Bughman, now asleep in the Lord, suggesting that there was a better way to depict man’s journey back to the Garden of Eden. To my way of thinking, it was simply a tool and as such was open to reinterpretation. The intent of the article was meant to highlight the reconciliation that takes place between God and men when a person believes and is baptized. The positional ramifications of Adam’s transgression are removed while the physical ramifications (mortality, proneness to sin) remain. The chart was simply a prop to make that point as the chart shows, in my opinion, brethren still unreconciled to God because they remain outside of the Garden (metaphorically-speaking) after baptism.
This Thought created somewhat of a firestorm in that I was accused of attacking a dead brother (the furthest thing from my mind). I was accused of teaching we are immortal now, teaching “eternal security” (once saved, always saved) and so on. These false accusations continue to this day.
I am sorry that I offended so many people with that series. I really am. The reason that I offended so many is evident in one of the chief accusations–that I “desecrated” the chart. In order to desecrate something, that thing has to achieve holy status first. This is, in my opinion, what is behind all of that which followed. To many people the chart is holy and I trampled all over it. So, again, I apologize. It was an insensitive albeit unintentional misstep on my part. I had no idea people viewed the chart as holy.
Perhaps the best advice (and our last comment) we can give on this issue of whether things are holy is from the writings of the Apostle Paul:
One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way. Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. (Rom. 14:5,6,13,19 NIV)
Have a great week,
Comments»
This is an important discussion. To extend… Is the bread and the wine holy? Can we throw left-over bread to the birds? Can we tip left-over wine out – or drink it – or use it in a casserole?
Or is it holy as the Catholics believe? What then would we do with it?
God gave the Israelites a bronze serpent to look at if they were bitten by real serpents. In time this became a snare and an idol to them. That was NOT what God intended!
The cup, table, wine, bread are but tools as Kyle says. They are not holy in themselves. We must be holy – objects are not.
But I would baulk at drinking left over wine – or using it in a casserole. Logically surely it should not matter. Something inside me says “tip it out”… But thinking it through I think that “something” in me is wrong…
And should Kyle be concerned at questioning the chart? I don’t think so… I recall that incident and he was thought provoking. The chart was/is CERTAINLY just a tool and a valued one too. But just a tool.
It would be good for everyone to recognize that fact and take Kyle’s thoughts in the manner they were intended. Nothing man-made should be unquestioned. Or it can take an unhealthy place in our minds and worship.
Colin Green Sydney, Australia
Small clarification… I can’t go back and edit.
I feel that it IS OK to tip the left-over wine out…
What I baulk at is to drink that left-over wine or use it in a casserole. But surely it should not matter. It is not holy – we are to be holy…
Colin Green Sydney, Australia
Bro. Colin:
Thank you for your thoughts. I agree that this is an important topic which transcends Bro. Bughman’s chart or any local issue.
Personally, I have some of my own “holy” items like your example of the wine. Intrinsically I know that a Bible is just a collection of paper, cloth, leather and ink. It is God’s thoughts that are contained in the book that are holy, not the materials on which it is transcribed. However, I can’t throw away an old, worn out Bible. I have Bibles on my shelf here that are literally falling apart. So while I might casually toss any other book on my shelves that has outlived its usefulness, I can’t bring myself to do that with the Bible.
By way of contrast, I used to go to meeting with a sister (now asleep in the Lord) who would make you pick your Bible off of the floor if you put it down on it. To her, the Bible was too holy to be on the floor. Her level of imputed holiness to the Bible was a notch above my own.
We could probably find other examples of personal preference in relation to the care and handling of the Bible if we dug around a bit. Certain sects of Jews have specific rituals that go along with even opening the text, I believe.
Which way is right? I guess that Romans 14 handles most of this very well. We need to be sensitive to the perspective of others. We are all in different stages of our spiritual development. We need to be sensitive not to demand that everyone adopt our own definition of what is holy. Likewise, we need to be sensitive not to intentionally offend another whose faith is such that they see the thing as holy. The last verse of Romans 14 is the key to the chapter: “And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.†The stakes are high here.
I have what may be a somewhat unique interpretation of Matt. 18:18-20 where it talks about the binding and loosing that relates to this topic. When Jesus tells his disciples that “Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heavenâ€, I think he is saying that ecclesias have the right to make up their own non-fundamental rules (rules that don’t negate a fundamental principle of God’s Truth). In other words, Christ is saying “if you want to make a rule that says ‘all brothers must wear ties’ you have the right.†However, what he then goes on to say has a much more dire meaning than the touchy-feely spin we normally put on it. When Christ goes on to say “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them†what he is really saying is “Be very careful what rules you add because I am watching you.†If our elders put unneeded burdens on men’s shoulders as did the Pharisees, they will have to answer for it. This applies to adding to this area of “holy things†too.
Thanks again for your comments.
Grace and peace,
Kyle
Bro. Kyle, I don’t know of anyone that would consider Bro. Bughman’s chart “Holy” or “consecrated”. It simply displays our fundamental beliefs in a simple, logical, pictoral view. It is easy to follow and understand. The problem arose when you made changes to this chart. By modifying the chart, you changed the fundamental teachings of our founding brethren. Bro. Bughman’s chart depicts the Truth as I learned it as a child. You changed the chart to show us re-entering the Garden at baptism. Our founding brethren taught that we do not enter the Garden, or Kingdom, until after the Judgment. If we are judged worthy, then we are allowed to enter the Garden to partake of the Tree of Life. Until then, the way to the Tree of Life is guarded by a Flaming Sword that turns every way to protect it.
Oh dear – I see my name too many times in the response list but I feel a need to comment…
Bro Kyle – thanks for your thoughts. I clearly see your thoughts on the Bibles you cannot throw out. I am the same. Logic says they are just paper and ink. But I too would not do that. AND I agree that we must be sensitive to others – always. Although there ARE limits when others might insist on their viewpoint which may be illogical or plain incorrect.
However, we’re on the same page. Good thoughts…
Bro Bobby (could be “Sister??) – as I recall the dicusssion “way back then” the thought that Bro Kyle raised is that when we are baptised we actually – at that point – have a promised place in God’s Kingdom. We can lose that place if we choose to – but it’s promised and secure at that point. (I could be wrong in my recollection of the argument). So he suggested a change to the chart.
This is NOT as I was taught as a child either. Maybe not Bro Bughman too… But Bro Kyle gave some persuasive references and thoughts and to be frank I saw the point. It has stayed with me ever since and is has been tremendously encouraging and I sincerely thank Bro Kyle for illuminating that point of strength.
We can NEVER earn that wonderful gift. But we CAN dismiss and throw it away. How encouraging is that thought? How humbling is that gift? What better reason to try ever harder and to focus on doing all we possibly can to acknowledge God’s gift – the gift we can never earn? So I DO have the faith that God did give me that gift at my baptism and it’s for me to try hard (I can NEVER do well enough) but to constantly ask for forgivness – and to believe that too is freely given? So I now look forward to God’s Kingdom. I didn’t always…
So, if Bro Bughman’s chart did not reflect this and it needed a change, Bro Kyle did exactly as he should – he brought it to our attention. If it needed a change, so be it. We can disagree but we need to think about it.
Bro Colin Green Sydney, Australia
I am afraid that I cannot agree with Bro. Colin’s comments. Man was ejected and barred from the Garden after his sin and a Flaming Sword that turns every way to prevent man from returning to the Garden to partake of the Tree of Life. We will not be allowed to re-enter the Garden until after we are judged worthy. I would recommend reading the book “From Eden to Eden” by Bro. Albert Hall. This brother does a beautiful job of explaining our way back to the Garden.
The changes that Bro. Kyle made on the chart was to show us re-entering the Garden at baptism. This is contrary to what I read in scriptures. He also made a note that after baptism, we have eternal life. What I read in scripture shows that we are mortal and will not receive eterna life until after we are judged worthy at the Judgment Seat of Christ. At baptism, we the have to Hope of eternal life. Baptism guarantees that we will be at the Judgment Seat. It is up to us and how we live our lives not whether we will be granted eternal life.
Works are just as necessary for our salvation as is our faith. Faith without works is dead. You are right that we cannot “earn” our salvation, but we have to be doing Works to prove our Faith.
May the Lord be merciful to all of us at His Judgment Seat.
Bro. Bobby San Antonio, Texas
Dear Bro. Bobby and Bro Colin:
Thank you both for your thoughts. Let me see if I can briefly respond to a couple of them.
First, let me comment about the chart being holy. The word “desecrate†kept coming up over and over in discussions about what I had done to the chart. It was not my word, but what others were saying. Desecrating is the opposite of consecrating. To consecrate something is to take something that is not holy and make it holy. To desecrate something is to take something holy and make it unholy by using it in an unholy fashion. Again, I am not trying to put words or thoughts into people’s minds, just understand what people say. When I understood this perspective, a lot of the reaction made sense and I realized my insensitivity.
Second, Bro. Colin, your understanding of what I was trying to get across is accurate. It is unfortunate that the true message of what I was saying was lost in the skirmish that resulted from use of the chart and subsequent misrepresentations that followed, which brings me to my next point.
Third, Bro. Bobby, when you say “What I read in scripture shows that we are mortal and will not receive eterna (sic) lifeâ€, I fear you are unintentionally continuing one of the slanders that has arisen from this series. What you seem to be implying is that I think we are not mortal now. I have taken great pains to differentiate between the positional aspect of being alive in Christ Jesus (having eternal life) and the future physical transformation from mortal to immortal. Anyone carefully reading what I wrote cannot possibly think I believe we are immortal now. While I can respect your position that that eternal life is the exact same thing as immortality and agree to respectfully disagree with you on that issue, I cannot countenance slander and misrepresentation whether it is about me, a friend or a foe. I impute to you the best possible motives for writing what you wrote. I am sure you didn’t mean to leave people with the impression that I believed we are not mortal now. However, understand that sin itself is represented as a false accuser and slanderer. For your own sake, please try and be more careful. Our Lord died at the hands of false accusers and, as such, false accusation — whether intentional or unintentional– is something that should never be associated with those who call themselves his servants.
Grace and peace,
Kyle
Bro. Kyle,
Slander is a very serious charge and if you think that is what I am doing, please forgive me. I was quoting from the comments that you put on Bro. Bughman’s chart of us having eternal life after baptism when we come into Christ. I also stated what my understanding of eternal life is. I did not say that you said that we were not mortal now, but, by my definition of eternal life, that would be the logical conclusion. I guess we could get into a discussion of semantics here. I don’t recall reading from any founding writings equating eternal life to being in Christ. Forgive me for not understanding what you were saying. We are instructed by scripture to “let our yea be yea, and our nay be nay”. We should use terminology that says exactly what we mean to say without any misunderstanding.
Bobby
PS: For Colin: The book “From Eden to Eden” has been reprinted and is available from the Republic, Missouri Ecclesia and can be ordered from: http://www.republic-christadelphians.org/EDEN.html
Dear Brethren,
Seems to me that Bro Kyle has had a lot of “flack” from this issue. Perhaps Bro Kyle, you don’t appreciate just how life-changing your thoughts back then have been to some – me for one. So VERY encouraging to help through really tough times in terms of faith. There may be many brothers and sisters that have quietly absorbed and considered. I am certain your thoughts are correct. Maybe you could re-publish some time?
Regrettably it is the negative that is most vociferous and the comments may seem like barbs to be most hurtful but of course we all react when we perceive truth to be at risk. So I’m sure that you’ll appreciate that Bro Bobby was never wishing to “slander” – it’s a strong word. He is defending what he perceives to be truth as you did too :-)
Bro Bobby, the founding writings are always inferior to scripture. I know that you know that. So if our founders either didn’t make things clear – or got it wrong – it’s still incumbent on any of us to bring it to the attention of everyone. Bro Kyle did exactly the right thing. I would have to do the same if I spotted something – although I rather lack the insight I think!
Bro Kyle’s position that we HAVE eternal life is brilliant! And clearly true. Of COURSE we die – we are NOT immortal as yet! No-one suggests that, least of all Bro Kyle! But don’t we always speak of “asleep in Christ” at Christadelphian funerals? We go away sad from the grave site – but with fierce belief that our Brother/Sister has a future – when Christ raises him/her for judgement. When we pray that their gifted eternal life is confirmed to immortality!
While of course we DO have to let our yea be yea and our nay be nay – but what you suggest is NOT in context! Take a peek in Jas 5:12 – it’s about swearing an oath! Not related.
Matters do need to be explained at times. Look at how much Paul wrote to explain things. In fact the whole Bible is about explaining things! The book you suggest I read “From Eden to Eden” (which I’ll try to order when I’m done here today – thanks for that…) is presumably more than a “yea” and a “nay”. I hope so anyway!
Bro Kyle was (to me anyway) brilliantly clear in what he wrote. It behooves readers to try hard to understand and accept, refute or adjust. It’s not entirely on the head of the writer!
I really do believe that Kyle’s thoughts are vital and vibrantly important. Certainly incredibly encouraging!
As regards “works”… Seems to me that it’s faith that saves us. Never works. True, faith without works is dead (Jas). But to compare scripture with scripture, 1 Tim 1:9 …”not according to our works but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ before time began”. And “by their works you shall know them”… Seems to me that people with faith and Christian love bubble over to do God’s will and their works follow and abound from that position. NOT that we can win anything by our works. Our works manifest our faith.
Which, it seems to me, is a 360 degree turn back to Kyle’s position of the sheer JOY of knowing that our place in God’s Kingdom is actually HANDED to us at baptism! Who WOULDN’T want to share that joy and hope? To derive energy and WANT to work?
You two guys are great! I’m on the other side of the world to you both and it’s wonderful to wake up today to see what you have shared overnight! Thanks.
Love in Jesus to you both
Bro Colin Green, Sydney, Australia
Bro. Bobby:
Thank you for your apology, but it was not necessary as I didn’t think you made the inference intentionally (and even if you had I forgave you instantly). I am going to include a rather long quote from the original TFTW with emphasis added for how I tried to be clear on my understanding of the difference between eternal life and immortality. Again, I am not asking that you agree with me. It is perfectly OK with me if you and I disagree on this non-fundamental topic. All I ask is that is that people are fair and transparent on their representation of what I have said.
As to whether brethren in the past have understood this topic the way I have presented it, I think there is overwhelming evidence that they did. However, even as I say that, I also say that whether or not they did or didn’t understand it as I have is completely irrelevant. To me it is only relevant as to whether the Scriptures teach this or not which I clearly believe that they do. Again, since I view this as a non-fundamental issue, there is no problem on my part with disagreement.
Here are the eternal life portions of the original series with added emphasis.
I hope this makes it crystal clear once and for all that I do not believe, nor ever have believed, that believers currently possess immortality. We have a change in our position before God when we are baptized where we were dead in trespasses and sins and then become alive in Christ. Immortality will become a reality for the saints only at the Judgment Seat of Christ to those who are judged worthy.
Grace and peace,
Kyle
Bro. Kyle,
I am afraid that we do not agree with your use of the term “eternal life” as a present posession. Yahweh and His Christ see the end from the beginning and speak of future things as though they already were in existence. The references that you refer to were written with that in mind. If you know of our founding brethren using that terminology in the present tence, I would certainly like to see it. I looked in the dictionary for the definition of “eternal life” and it is: without end; everlasting; perpetual; timeless. To speak as though we already had eternal life, to me, is confusing, and I have been in the Truth for over 41 years now.
In your writings I have seen:
♦ An overemphasis of the subject of grace in opposition to the true balance of faith, grace and works.
♦ That all that has been done for us in the way of salvation occurs at our baptism.
♦ That we have “eternal life†now.
♦ That we are in the Kingdom now.
♦ That God’s Kingdom started at Christ’s resurrection – therefore is already in existence.
♦ That Christ is does not now fulfill the role of High Priest to the Household.
♦ That we do not need to pray in Christ’s name when offering up our petitions to God.
♦ The labeling and misrepresentation of those who hold to traditional Christadelphian beliefs and practices as “legalistsâ€or “Judaizersâ€.
To me, you are promoting “another gospel”. To me, promoting these ideas is dangerours to the Truth and confusing to those that hear them. These ideas do not appear in the writings of Dr. John Thomas, Bro. Robert Roberts, Bro. Thomas Williams, or Bro. J. J. Andrew.
I have said my piece. I will continue to believe and teach the “old paths”. You and I will continue to disagree on these issues.
Bobby
Bro Bobby,
In relying so heavily on the writings of early Christadelphians to the extent that you defy Bro Kyle to produce and quote from them if his thoughts are to carry weight, you are, I fear, in a very dangerous place. You are asking us all to add to scripture – forbidden in Rev 22.
He has done far better – he has quoted from Divine Scripture. THAT cannot be wrong. Kyle’s conclusions certainly COULD be – just as the early Christadelphians really could be. And so could their writings. That must always be tested for truth. Hence this forum is valuable.
On the basis of defying him to quote from early Christadelphian writings, if that held ANY water, couldn’t we just accept the writings of the (much earlier) “popes”, pseudo “saints” and the like? We would shudder to even think of such a thing! Yet millions believe in the “Nicene Creed” and the like and the conclusions they came to (“trinity etc). It does not make them right just because they said something a long time ago. Some, I am sure, were genuine in their conclusions, even if sadly wrong.
It took men like Bro John Thomas, Bro Robert Roberts and the like to debunk – at huge cost to themselves! I’m quite sure that they would be horrified to have their writings so revered if they were still with us! They are very valuable guides and references. No more…
We are Christadelphians because we try VERY hard to get the Truth of Scripture right – that is why we call it “Truth”. It can only EVER be enshrined in Scripture – not in the writings on ANY man or men. Unthinkable!
41 years since baptism counts for respect – as we must give everyone – but certainly no special position beyond that. If that was so (to quote Paul, “I speak as a fool”), I was baptised in October 1964 – 43 years next month. Does that give me any rights over you or anyone? I’d think not… Such “seniority” counts for nothing.
Bro Colin Green Sydney, Australia
Bro. Colin,
Thank you for your thoughts. Yes, we should rely on scriptures and not on the writings of me. Bro. Kyle also is a mere man so I would include his writings in this same class. In my studies of scriptures, my conclusions and thoughts agree with what was written by our founding brothers. The writings of Bro. Kyle are divirging from my understanding of scriptures and I do not agree with his conclusions.
You are correct that my 41 years and your 43 years in the Truth are nothing. It is how we end up that counts. We could be faithful up to the end and then turn from the Truth and lose our salvation. How sad to come to that end.
Bobby
Bro. Bobby:
If you would like me to send you some things off-line from old Christadelphian writings, I will gladly do so off-line. I won’t do it in this forum because I do not want to lend credence to the notion that this is the correct way to go in determining truth. There is only one way to determine truth in my mind and that is from Scripture.
No doubt you will find that a dictionary will support your misconception of the Greek words aionos zoe or “life of the age.†“Eternal†for aion can be a bad translation. Aionos (or an age) is always defined by that which it refers to. If it refers to this present age (aion) (see world in Gal. 1:5, for example), it is definitely not eternal. If it refers to the age to come, it is eternal. When John says we now possess the “life of the ageâ€, I believe he is referring to a positional change that comes with baptism which will be eternal or will not be eternal depending on that which is referred to – the righteous or the unrighteous. We can lose eternal life (our position before God as living creatures) in this age while those granted immortality in the age to come can never lose it. Again, I neither demand that you to understand nor agree, just please don’t imply that I am saying we are immortal now. It is simply not true.
As far as your other accusations, let me take them one by one.
♦ An overemphasis of the subject of grace in opposition to the true balance of faith, grace and works. [An unfortunate misunderstanding on your part. If you really understood what I was saying you would see that I am calling for more works, not less, and for the right reasons.]
♦ That all that has been done for us in the way of salvation occurs at our baptism. [This is true in a positional sense. Our bodies have not been redeemed, but if we continue in faith, that will occur when Christ returns. All we can do from our baptism on is lose our salvation, not save us any more than Christ did. If you are trying to save yourself beyond what Christ did, it must be a tough, burdened existence.]
♦ That we have “eternal life†now. [As explained above, yes, we do. We are not immortal. We have been transformed from “dead in trespasses and sin†to “alive in Christ.†It is the way God views us, not a physical reality. Please do not superimpose your definition of eternal life on mine, however.]
♦ That we are in the Kingdom now. [We are not in the future Kingdom of God on earth as it has not come yet. We have constitutionally left the Kingdom of Men and joined the Kingdom of God. My constitutional allegiance is not still with the Kingdom of Men and that is why I do not vote nor participate in their military. This is the sense in which we are in the Kingdom of God now.]
♦ That God’s Kingdom started at Christ’s resurrection – therefore is already in existence. [See above.]
♦ That Christ is does not now fulfill the role of High Priest to the Household. [False. Jesus is a priest/king after the order of Melchizadek .]
♦ That we do not need to pray in Christ’s name when offering up our petitions to God. [Bobby, you really need to read more carefully or stop listening to people who don’t read carefully. Please reread the chapter about prayer in the Judaizers. You have missed the point entirely.]
♦ The labeling and misrepresentation of those who hold to traditional Christadelphian beliefs and practices as “legalistsâ€or “Judaizersâ€. [I didn’t label anyone. I only labeled myself. Ironically, if anyone was labeled it was people who read the book and saw themselves in it and thus “self-labeled†themselves by saying the book was about them. I spoke out against certain practices the two most notable were 1) salvation by works and 2) selective morality. Again, the real irony is that the exact tactics of selective mortality I spoke so vocally against in the book – slander, schism, political maneuvering, bloc disfellowship – are the very tactics that have been used against me. To date I have suffered myself to be defrauded. God will repay. My preference would be, however, that God not repay anyone but that people repent. These tactics have no place in body of Christ but sadly have existed since the days of the Pharisees and Judaizers. As Jesus said, “by their fruits shall ye know them.â€
Bro. Bobby, much of what you have written about me in the above is wrong. I suspect that much of what you have written has been shaded by those who have falsely accused me and not gleaned by your own studies of what I have written. Regardless, you have a path before you of what to do now. One option, of course, would be to continue on your path which you alluded to at the close of your last post. Another course would be to rebuke those who falsely accuse me even though you don’t agree with what I have said. You see, false accusation is false accusation whether you are for or against the idea of the falsely accused. To speak out against the doctrines you believe I espouse but wink at the slander campaign against me is sadly another example of selective morality, isn’t it?
Even so, come Lord Jesus.
Grace and peace,
Kyle
Bro. Kyle,
Yes, I would like for you to send me those writings that you were referring to. I don’t mean to discredit you if that is what I am doing. Why am I so confused by what you have written? Why are so many others conconfused as to what you have written and what you mean? Is there a problem with your wording or phraseology? What is the problem?
Bobby
Thanks Bro Bobby for your thoughts. Now is probably a good time to close this.
I’m thinking that we’re on the same page – we all believe that what the founders of Christadelphia wrote is basically true or we’d be elsewhere. And I say only say “basically” to admit that they could in some way be wrong somewhere – not that I think they are!
Actually Kyle is in the same place as I read what he says. I too am a bit perplexed as to why there is this confusion. To me what he says is 100% clear, logical and extremely well presented – for the life of me I can’t see why there is any confusion at all!
I wonder if there is “history” here where somewhere, sometime something he said was maybe not right or read in another way to what he intended and from there on there is a perception that he’s wrong before he even opens his mouth?
I don’t know – I just wonder. To me he writes clearly with a very important message.
Thanks for the dialogue (British spelling!)
Bro Colin Green Sydney, Australia
Bro. Bobby:
Expect the articles shortly in your inbox.
Why are so many people confused? First and foremost I think it is because if the misinformation campaign that was started by a few. I know from experience that when a brother in Christ tells us something as if it is fact, because we are Christadelphians, it never enters into our minds that they might not have their facts straight or are misleading us. It happens all too often unfortunately. Your assertions about me are simply echoes of what has been written and said by others which leads me to believe that is where they came from. For example, after so many comments in my Judaizer book about the importance of good works, why on earth would anyone suggest that I don’t think they are important unless it was by listening to someone with less than stellar reading skills or a more sinister agenda?
The second reason I think that people don’t understand what I am writing is their paradigm. Honestly, I would have not understood what I have written today twenty years ago because of my paradigm at the time. I can cite dozens of incidences in my own life where someone was trying to explain something to me and it just didn’t make sense. Inevitably, when I finally comprehended what was being said it was, in hindsight, my own paradigm that had limited my understanding. Take for instance our discussion on eternal life. If you mentally insert “immortality†every time I write “eternal lifeâ€, there is no way what I am writing is ever going to make sense. It will sound like false doctrine. If you insert “constitutionally alive in Christ†in those passages instead, it might make more sense.
Third, I think people don’t understand a lot of what I have written because it is deeper material. I am not setting myself up as some kind of sage. All I am saying is that the TFTW is not first principle material. It is intended to be thought-provoking and challenging, not a compendium of first principles like Christendom Astray. While you may be affected by the first two, I would not think this would apply to you, Bro. Bobby.
Finally, let me state the obvious; I may just be a bad writer. I am a business major, not English major. I do the best that I can. As the TFTW is received only by people that ask for it (not spammed), people can “vote†with their subscriptions. Personally, when publications come to me that are poorly written, annoy me, are confusing or whatever, I just unsubscribe. I find this a breathtakingly simple solution. It strikes me as odd that the probably 95% of the subscribers like what I write, but the 5% want me to change for them. It is like me subscribing to the Watchtower magazine (the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ magazine) and then writing irate letters each month asking them to change their ways. Instead of following that futile path, I just don’t take the magazine in the first place. I think if we are brutally honest, a good portion of the 5% just subscribe to “keep tabs†on me. While that is fine with me if they want to do that, they need to respect the 95% for whom the TFTW is written. It is like going to another ecclesia. I may not like what is going on so I can either leave or keep quiet. Disrupting the service or expecting them to change for me is not a good solution unless I am just trying to stir up trouble.
A question back for you is why do you think so many people understood the TFTW about the Bro. Bughman chart such as Bro. Colin, but you did not?
Grace and peace,
Kyle
Dear Bro Kyle:
I would have to agree with Bro. Bobby Cox: that the arguments set forth in “The Judaizers, Another Gospel” as well as presented on this web site regarding the RE-definition of the One Gospel, the nature, location and timing of the kingdom of God, the reign of Jesus Christ as King-Priest upon the throne of David, etc. are very confusing and, as I believe, are scripturally unsustainable. Perhaps without intention you have miss-applied the scriptures, or at least miss-interpreted them as supporting many of your claims when they do not.
Kyle, what is the purpose of this “present kingdom – Jesus currently on the throne in heaven – now king/priest – maybe heavenly throne of David” doctrine? With all due respect, it makes me sick to my stomach to think that you have reached these conclusions and are leading others into the same error. These are not the things that we were taught when the both of us were “cutting our teeth” in the truth. I was there – I know that the doctrines you are teaching were the very ones we were both warned against in our youth. Did you believe these things when you were baptized? I do not think so. Will this new understanding of yours hereafter be taught as that which is fundamental and necessary for baptism? If this catches on then we as a community will have gone the way of the churches of the apostasy, for these are their doctrines and have been for centuries. As such, instead of baptizing Saints, we will only be bathing sinners.
Bro. Kyle… No, it is not my desire that you should choose this path. One with your energy and enthusiasm should be a voice for TRUTH, not a voice for confusion and error! Why then will you not relent? What are you trying to prove? You are at perfect liberty to teach and promulgate any doctrine you please as this is your free will to do so. But to continue to use the name Christadelphian, when your teachings so clearly do not represent what Christadelphians have understood as the truth for these many years, is a tragedy.
In the hope of the only kingdom to be RE-established ON EARTH,
Bro. Al Bryan
Dear Bro Al,
Greetings in the Name of the Lord Jesus, our Messiah and Redeemer! Allow me to introduce myself. I am Bro John Pople of San Francisco Peninsula, in California.
Bro Al, it is perhaps tricky to “meet†over difficult issues, and so I want to tread with due diffidence. But I am concerned about your post. You place words in Bro Kyle’s mouth, and my fear is that they are words he does not want there. What are these words? If I have understood your post correctly, you intend to portray Bro Kyle as one who neither believes nor teaches the return of Jesus Christ to the Earth to establish God’s Kingdom but rather only sees the Kingdom as existent at this current time – as do many Jehovah’s Witnesses, for example. Is it true that that is what you meant to imply? If not, I have misunderstood you entirely, I ask you to accept my apology and you may stop reading this post immediately.
[As an aside, to address your question: “what is the purpose of this “present kingdom…†doctrine?†I think of Matthew 13. Notice that what Jesus describes as “the kingdom of heaven†(a phrase which shows up several times there) is things that happened during the growth of the disciple, as well as referencing the return of our Lord. I conclude that Jesus is teaching that there are some elements of the coming Kingdom, be they only “cameo precursors,†which we are able to enjoy - and indeed which MUST be realized! - in this life. If the ONLY interpretation of “the kingdom†begins at Christ’s return, then many of Christ’s words in Matthew 13 are apostate babble – which you and I surely agree they are not. Does the teaching of Matthew 13 negate the physical reality of the coming Kingdom? Of course not! And, though you claim to know “what Christadelphians have understood as the truth for these many years,†I can testify truthfully that the Christadelphians in the six ecclesias to which I have belonged, on the two continents where I have lived, understood full well the teaching of the scriptures in both the reality of the coming Kingdom at Jesus’ return and the reality of our current emulation thereof, as per Matthew 13 and other places. But enough on this, for this is not the point I am trying to make.]
The book “Judaizers†may contain passages that could be better worded: passages which cunning minds could otherwise twist into all sorts of heresies, were they so motivated. Bro Kyle does not advertise himself as a man of letters, or as one well-skilled in the art of sophistry, or learned in the cunning verbal dexterity by which one may avoid every sling and arrow that might come one’s way. And frankly, I’m glad for that. Kyle may therefore be occasionally obliged to say: “Oh no, I didn’t mean that! Did it appear that way? Sorry, perhaps I chose ambiguous or clumsy phrases – here’s what I really mean…†Bro Kyle is an honest brother and honesty will bring forth its own good fruits; all the more quickly when it is honestly handled by those who are listening.
Bro Al, let us ‘cut to the chase’ of the matter. I invite you to ask yourself this important question:
“Do I REALLY believe, in my heart of hearts, speaking as an honest disciple attempting to emulate the Lord Jesus Christ, that Bro Kyle Tucker actually denies the doctrine of the physical return of Jesus Christ to this Earth and his reigning in Jerusalem as King?â€
If your honest answer before God and the brotherhood is “Yes!†then I suggest you swiftly seek Bro Kyle’s clarification. Invite Bro Kyle to publish his belief/disbelief of the coming Kingdom at Jesus’ return here – I’ll warrant he will not be afraid to do so.
If your honest answer is “I don’t know†then I would conclude you published your determinations prematurely and should withdraw them until such time as you are decided.
But if your honest answer before God and the brotherhood answer is “No†then I suggest you equally swiftly seek Bro Kyle’s forgiveness for your labeling him as a teacher of apostasy.
Either way, we can agree you have crafted words to label Bro Kyle as an apostate. If you are right, you will have correctly exposed a wolf amongst us, and I’m sure we will all commend you. Yet if not, you will have hung the label “apostate†around your own brother’s neck; and I will leave you to decide from your reading of the scriptures the appropriate path forward from there.
With love your brother, John
Dear John…
It is quite ironic how you speak of putting words in peoples mouths when most everything you write in an effort to deflect attention away from the false doctrine’s that I have issue with are no where to be found in my comments. Have you read Kyle’s Book published by WCF, particularly the section on THE (PRESENT) KINGDOM OF GOD. I have, and I believe it is full of error and wrested scriptures. With all due respect, good intentions, as some would have it, are no excuse for false teaching. God is no respecter of persons. Is any Brother a higher authority than the inspired prophets and Apostles? When someone errs from Bible Truth due to misinterpretation, etc. are we supposed to pat them on the back and say “there, there brother, all is well”? Those of you who with your lips speak of love and brotherly kindness ought to have the courage to tell a brother that he is endangering his eternal life. Are you really helping your friend by turning a bline eye and letting them walk off a cliff! Do you have the sense to say otherwise. I have said my peace. If WCF continues down this path there is nothing I can do but arm those as I am able with the truth in opposition to fables of “sky-kingdoms”.
Bro Al Bryan.
Dear Bro Al,
I do apologize to you if I put words in your mouth: I try never to do that: honestly. I truly supposed that you were saying Kyle taught an apostasy of no Kingdom on Earth but rather one now in heaven instead. In fact even now I am under the impression you are saying that because you speak of Kyle preaching “fables of ‘sky-kingdoms’†(I quote directly, to avoid putting words in your mouth). Have I misunderstood you again?!
I take your point about not smoothing over errors to the potential detriment of those in error. I quite agree with you, your point is scriptural. It is simply that you have misunderstood me: I will clarify. My point was never to encourage the smoothing over of error – which you adroitly point out is unwise and destructive – my point is that Bro Kyle has not made the errors of which I thought you were accusing him (preaching a present kingdom rather than a future one on Earth). Bro Kyle has pointed out that the future coming Kingdom on Earth has attributes which are accessible at this time and Jesus has attributes of a King that are relevant at this time. He is correct in this teaching, as it is a faithful representation of the teaching of Matt 13, Jn 12 and even Jn 20, among other scriptures.
I accept your encouragement that I “ought to have the courage to tell a brother that he is endangering his eternal life.†Allow me to redress my shortcoming immediately:
• Bro Kyle: if you ever depart from teaching the truth I know you to teach and begin to teach falsehoods about a kingdom in heaven instead of the coming one on Earth, you will potentially jeopardize your salvation. Acts 1:11; Zech 14:4 & Matt 24:30-31 are relevant scriptures that should guide us both here.
• Bro Al, if you label a brother in Christ as an apostate when he is not, you will potentially jeopardize your salvation. Mark 9:42; Proverbs 6:16-19 & Romans 16:17 are relevant scriptures that should guide us both here.
Now that I have acceded to your invitation to post warnings, Bro Al, the type of which you wished to see, I wonder if you would be so good as to respond positively to your own ‘call to courage’ yourself. In my former post, I asked you an explicit question at the end of the post, which question I notice still languishes unanswered. If you were to answer it I would be most grateful and I think it would help elucidate clearly the nature of your accusations, if any, against Bro Kyle.
With love unfeigned your brother, John
What God must think of us as we sit at our computers and type endless streams of words…
Asher said the blessing for our food tonight and ended with a simple statement, “and we pray for your son’s return and your Kingdom on earth.”
Christ said it himself in Mark 18:1-4 “At that moment the disciples came to Yeshua and asked, “Who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” He called a child to him, stood him among them, and said, “Yes! I tell you that unless you change and become like little children, you won’t even enter the Kingdom of Heaven! So the greatest in the Kingdom is whoever makes himself as humble as this child.”
It’s not arguing over words. It’s knowing what God has planned for us. A Kingdom to be established on this earth with a righteous King to rule over us!
Sis Marria,
I agree with your definition of the coming Kingdom, thank you for sharing that. But your criticism of brethren’s converse seems only fair if the words written above have no purpose and can be dismissively waved off as mere “arguing over words,†as you assert they can be. (Even then your input is considerably ironic, as you choose to lengthen the thread with words of your own! :) ). Do you not see accusations of apostasy in the above? Are you recommending that an accused brother should go undefended purely for the convenience of there being “fewer words†in our communications? After all, if someone had accused you of preaching apostasy, Sis Marria, would you not be comforted if someone came to your defense? It’s easy to disapprove of long conversations when your own integrity is not called into question, but perhaps a little more empathy is in order.
You pose the question: “What must God think of us as we type� Well, perhaps we can answer that, for we know God looks on the heart. I’m hoping that if God sees the PURPOSE of our typing as an outpouring of empathy in attempted defense of one we love, that He may be pleased by such a view. Ultimately of such is the continuing work and ministry of His Son Jesus, whom we attempt to emulate.
With love your brother, John
Colin Green: it’s the first time I’ve ever read anything from you/heard from you/known anything about you. And I must say: I like your style. When you say things like “Oh dear – I see my name too many times in the response list…” and “Now is probably a good time to close this” and “I’m thinking that we’re on the same page,” I must say I felt a true kinship with you! So much hurt can be prevented, and so much therapy transmitted, through those sayings and the attitude they represent!!!
Kyle Tucker: Author of TFTW, active member of WCF, father, husband, brother, uncle, and all-around-great-guy. I LOVE YOU KYLE TUCKER. You are fantastic. I think only fond things about you. I pray that no amount of cynicism will ever take root in you, and that you’ll continue to positively promote Scriptural concepts and even push the envelope of our understanding! It’s what you do best!
Bobby Cox: Faithful and consistent attendee and supporter of all things Christadelphian (it IS ALL your life), promoter of The Truth, husband, faithful and humble brother. I LOVE YOU BOBBY COX. I really do. I love you for your stability, for your obvious love of the Truth – not just in what you say, but in how I’ve witnessed you live your life for my own 31 years, 14 of them baptized in the same hope of God’s Kingdom. You are awesome in your humility, and I’d defend you in every case. I see only the best of intentions coming from you.
Al Bryan: Author of the Truth Gleaner, father, husband, brother, and former teacher of mine. I didn’t get to know you very well. I probably misbehaved in your classes and during your exhortations. (I KNOW I misbehaved way too much in Rick’s class…) When I read the Truth Gleaner, I clearly see the effort and time that you dedicate to the Truth, and it is fantastic. What little I’ve known of your family and your boys indicates you are a loving father and husband, and that you are raising your children in a way I only hope (and really do try) to. Any advice?
John Pople: Author of the Gospel of Peace, active WCF member/director, physicist (maybe relevant here, maybe not, but I love the science, so it gets you extra points with me, for what it’s worth…), genius, and most importantly: 2007 Arkansas Good Hope Ecclesia Invited Speaker! Although I haven’t spent a GREAT deal of time with you, what I know of you could certainly lead to love. I think fondly of the fantastic things you’ve added to my life in the short time I’ve been aware of your existence. There was quite a long hiatus between classes that I could honestly say “blew my mind,” and then along came your Job class at GLCBS 2005. It re-ignited my love of the deep and subtle things of God. I’m not sure if I ever shared that fact with you, so there it is.
Marria Hamlin: wife, mother, sister, daughter, natural-birth-advocate, and the most fantasticestestestestestest of all of the folks who have posted here (I’m a subject matter expert in this, so I can say it). What can I say? I LOVE YOU! And I know where you’re coming from all the time, and it is indeed a privilege. I read what you have to say and smile a huge smile.
Prediction: You’re all going to be in God’s Kingdom. You may not like it or feel worthy, or maybe you do, but I predict you will ALL be acceptable to God to serve in His Kingdom for all eternity – for age after age – and continue to duke it out over these principles and more! What a lively place His Kingdom will be!
In the meantime, I PRAY THAT YOU ALL will continue to invest your lives in pursuit of the Precious Hope that He has lain before us, to the extent that you feel it is a possession – that you OWN it – and that this ownership continues to incite a righteous jealousy over the ONE thing that you EACH holds nearest and dearest.
And in the meantime, it is a pleasure to know each of you (especially you, Babe).
(for clarification, “Babe” does not refer to Kyle)
Nice post, Dyron. Thanks! By the way, I knew “babe” didn’t refer to me. It refers to John, of course. ;-)
God bless you, brother!
Kyle
Dyron – what a simply lovely post! You picked great points from everyone and made a wonderful message. “Blessed are the peacemakers” springs to mind… And my favourite Bible passage Phil 4 – especially v6-8 (“Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever…) must be one of your favourites too! What a guy!
I sooooo much to echo all you say of Bro Kyle (I don’t know the others – wish I did!). My Dad called me from New Zealand early this morning and just HAD to tell me about the wonderful new thought that Kyle had for us this week so I raced to my computer to see what it was this time. Kyle reaches so many people and creates such inspiration and positive thinking and he really can only know when somone like YOU bubbles out! We need to tell him – and YOU did!
Dyron – I LOVE YOU! You have made my day with such lovely thoughts and for sure set me up for smiles to everyone I meet today! Which I’m thinking is glorifying God – what we seek to do.
Your thoughts on God’s Kingdom and our place in it is great. We must have that faith and believe that we will be there. And with your wonderful attitude I look forward to inviting you and the others over to my vine (or you may choose to sit under the fig tree) and we can enjoy that lovely glass of wine that Jesus has said the He will share with us new in His Father’s Kingdom.
BIG HUGS Bro Dyron! (Ummm… I assume “Bro”?? – No worries – HUGS anyway!)
Bro Colin Green Sydney, Australia
Amen and Amen to the excellent bridge-building comments here! Thanks to Colin and Dyron especially for your excellent spirits – which is one spirit. Bro Colin, which ecclesia do you attend in Sydney? I know there are 20 and I had only the privilege of visiting Castle Hill, but met many also from Moorestown. You can email me at madenglishscientist@yahoo.com if easier…
Great to hear from you Bro John!
I alternate between Hurstville (in the South) and Charlestown about 200KM north in Newcastle. Have never actually been to Castle Hill – as you say, there are so many ecclesia’s in Sydney and it’s just wonderful to be able to walk into great people at Hurstville one week and walk into great people in Charlestown the next. Or, I am sure, great people in Castle Hill.
It really IS a wonderful association we all share. I carry the CALS diary and it’s wonderful to “drop in” on Christadelphians around the world. Thus I soooo enjoyed the wonderful people in the Las Vegas NV (USA) ecclesia. And West Ealing in London and Bros/Sisters in isolation and many more too.
At our Bible Class in Charlestown this week the speaking brother got right onto Philipians 4. What a great lead in! I was able to share Dyron’s wonderful post and also to share Kyle’s great messages. We had a truely excellent class so just that little bit of happiness and brotherly love that Dyron bubbled with went even further.
A little leaven leavens the whole lump – negative. But so can a little Christ-like spirit too.
Bro Colin Green Sydney, Australia