"Friendship with the world"

by Schizm 108 Replies latest jw friends

  • outoftheorg
    outoftheorg

    AS IT IS WITH MANY SCRIPTURES, THE ONE MENTIONED HERE IS VAGUE AND NOT SPECIFIC.THEN IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE SENSE OF IT, WE TRY TO FIND COHESION IN THE CONTEXT.

    THIS GIVES ONE, SEVERAL POSSIBLE SPINS WITH THE WRITTEN WORD.

    ON TOP OF THAT, THERE IS THE QUESTION OF "IS THIS A CORRECT TRANSLATION" OF THE ORIGINAL.

    THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, THAT WE DO NOT H AVE SPECIFIC INFORMATION TO MAKE ADAMANT CLAIMS AS TO ITS COMPLETE MEANING.

    TRYING TO DECIPHER THE TRUE MEANING OF STATEMENTS MADE 2000 APROX YEARS AGO FROM TRIBAL GROUPS WHOSE LIVES AND THOUGHT PROCESSES, LANGUAGES, SLANG REFERENCES, BELIEFS CARRIED OVER FROM PAGAN RIGHTS ETC. WILL NEVER GIVE US FULL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS SAID IN THE BIBLE.

    Outoftheorg

  • FairMind
    FairMind

    My take on not being friends with the world would be:

    1. Not to participate in or advocate practices that violate Bible principles, such as fornication, lying, stealing, doing your fellow man wrong, etc.

    2. Close friendships with non-Christians would probably fall into the category of "friendship with the world". This of course would not mean that these people should not be treated as ones self wants to be treated.

    3.I would think that involvement in wordly politics would constitute being part of the world. I do not think that holding certain appointed-to or hired-into positions such as City Manager, and so forth would be wrong.

    Let's face it being a "real" Christian has always been a challange and one is to work out their salvation with fear and trembling.

    FM

  • Schizm
    Schizm

    Narkissos,

    Thanks for your input into this thread. It's given me reason to consider James 4:4 in greater depth, and I will be doing just that. I'm not sure though but what the principle would naturally have an extended application to "what Christians do outside the church". If church members are admonished to not practice the things that worldly people on the outside practice, and they're said to be "friends of the world" if they do, then doesn't it stand to reason that this would also serve as a warning with regards to the dangers of associating with people of the world (people outside the church)? Like I said, I'll be giving more thought to this.

    .

  • Schizm
    Schizm

    Narkissos,

    While browsing through one of your past posts I learned that you no longer believe in God. That being the case, then you don't accept the Bible as God's word. Yet you attempt to interpret it? Weird!

    The argumentation that you offered proved to be "circular". It figures!

    .

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos
    Of course, persons who no longer believe in the Bible are also invited to respond.
    I learned that you no longer believe in God. That being the case, then you don't accept the Bible as God's word. Yet you attempt to interpret it? Weird!
  • outoftheorg
    outoftheorg

    LOL

    CONNED YA DIDN'T HE.

    Outoftheorg

  • NeonMadman
    NeonMadman
    2. Close friendships with non-Christians would probably fall into the category of "friendship with the world". This of course would not mean that these people should not be treated as ones self wants to be treated.

    Of course, the logical extension of that would be to sequester all the Christians into a compound so they could be truly "separate," wouldn't it? Christians are called to be "salt" and "light" to the world; it's impossible to do that if we do not form relationships with its people. You may be thinking of 1 Cor 15:33, about 'bad associations spoiling useful habits,' but the context indicates that Paul was speaking primarily of those who deviated doctrinally from the Gospel, not that we should minimize relationships with everyone who is not a Christian.

    3.I would think that involvement in wordly politics would constitute being part of the world. I do not think that holding certain appointed-to or hired-into positions such as City Manager, and so forth would be wrong.

    Well, then Joseph, Mordecai and Daniel must have all been "part of the world" and therefore enemies of God, according to this interpretation, right? Even military men like Cornelius are not said to have left their positions in order to become Christians. When soldiers came to John the Baptist and asked what they should do, he did not tell them to "get out of the world's politics"; he simply told them not to take advantage of those under their authority. Both Daniel 4 and Romans 13 tell us that God places the human rulerships in their positions - not that He 'permits them to exist,' as the Watchtower asserts. That being the case, can their really be an objection to Christians serving in governmental positions?

    Let's face it being a "real" Christian has always been a challange and one is to work out their salvation with fear and trembling.

    I see that you have cited one of the favorite out-of-context proof texts of the Watchtower, namely Phillipians 2:12. But, as Narkissos pointed out above, context is everything. Let's look at verses 12 and 13:

    Phi 2:12
    So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; Phi 2:13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

    Philippians 2:12 is often quoted by Jehovah?s Witnesses and others in an effort to prove that our works contribute to our salvation. Generally, they will stop short of continuing the quotation to verse 13, which demonstrates that it is God doing the work in us. To ?work out? our salvation is not the same as to ?work for? salvation. One who ?works out? a problem or a debt is not trying to gain a problem or a debt; he is carrying out the natural obligations of a problem or a debt that he already has. Similarly, the Christian ?works out? a salvation that he already possesses by yielding to God?s leading in his life.

  • FairMind
    FairMind

    NeonMadman, a couple of comments:

    1. I don't believe Daniel, Josephh or Mordicai were in ELECTED positions, were they? So what they did fits my opinion of being OK.

    2. Seems to me that 1 Cor. 15:33 ties right in with being no part of the world.

    3. My comment about working out one's salvation with "fear and trembling" comes from by Baptist days.

    Thanks for expressing your opinions.

    FM

  • Schizm
    Schizm
    Of course, persons who no longer believe in the Bible are also invited to respond.
    I learned that you no longer believe in God. That being the case, then you don't accept the Bible as God's word. Yet you attempt to interpret it? Weird!

    And I meant what I said up above, that "persons who no longer believe in the Bible are also invited to respond". But you *led* me to believe that you DID believe in the Bible, when in fact you do not. Comments made by you in the other thread (Why Jehovah is not included in some Bible ) would cause anybody not familiar with you to think of you as one who believes the Bible. You knew that! ... and yet you never saw fit to clarify your true position on the Bible. That's *deception* in the truest sense of the word.

    .

  • Jez
    Jez

    TRYING TO DECIPHER THE TRUE MEANING OF STATEMENTS MADE 2000 APROX YEARS AGO FROM TRIBAL GROUPS WHOSE LIVES AND THOUGHT PROCESSES, LANGUAGES, SLANG REFERENCES, BELIEFS CARRIED OVER FROM PAGAN RIGHTS ETC. WILL NEVER GIVE US FULL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS SAID IN THE BIBLE.

    Outoftheorg

    I shall commit the above statement to memory. Love it love it love it....thanks for sharing.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit