Blaine wrote: > Dignity should be a part of anyone who thinks > to represent the Lord--I think he was a man > of great dignity and presence.
You might want to rethink this. The week of his crucifixion, he came into town meek and lowly, sitting on a donkey not some great steed. Remember how Isaiah described Him: For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. (Isaiah 53:2-3 KJV) And don't forget John the Baptist, whose clothing was described for us. He was one rough looking character. God's messengers don't always look like Mormons. :-) Blaine wrote: > Having discussed this before, I know what you > are thinking (:>) But LDS concept of authority > is different. For instance, I can trace my own > line of authority as a holder of the Melchizedek > Priesthood back to the Saviour himself--through > Joseph Smith, who received it of Peter, James and > John, who received it from the Saviour. All Mormon > missionaries can do the same. Can any street > preachers do that? This is the same line of thinking that the Roman Catholic Church uses. I see a lot of wickedness that comes from thinking this way. It is glorying in the flesh. I think Paul addressed this error in the following verse: For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise. (2 Corinthians 10:12 KJV) The Biblical way of receiving authority is directly from the Lord Himself. If the Lord Himself is not sending you into ministry, then you are following a ministry of men and not of the Lord. Ultimately, we are all accountable to him for what we say and do. Blaine wrote: > But when they go walking down the street, and have > bullhorns blaring, whistles, or whatever, it seems > this is crossing the line into imposition. They do > not usually go out walking expecting or wanting to > encounter this. They don't expect it only because free speech ended with the electronic age. Only recently are people putting it back into practice now that it has become clear that the ones with the power of communication keep out those who have some valid things to say. Free speech should NEVER be looked upon as an imposition. An imposition would be if they came into your Temple during the middle of one of your ceremonies and demanded that you listen. To preach in a public area is never an imposition because it is a public area. The imposition in a public area happens when someone complains and claims that they have a right to quietness when they go out in public areas. These are the ones who are imposing their unconstitutional views upon others. These are the lawless ones. You have to separate in your mind public areas and private areas to understand this concept. Once you recognize that public areas are places where the public may gather and have assemblies and initiate dialogue, etc., then you will be on the road to believing in free speech. If you don't recognize this, then you do not believe in free speech, but only in highly regulated and pre-approved speech. Blaine wrote: > This has been especially a problem with regards > to the street preachers who descend on the Plaza > in SLCity. Many people, Mormons and non-Mormons, > complain, but so far the street preachers have > vowed to continue. In this case, the ones who complain are acting lawlessly. The preachers are engaged in free speech protected by the U.S. Constitution. Blaine wrote: > BY THE WAY, Mormon missionaries are REQUIRED to get > permission/cooperation with any person they teach. That is a shame. They should be taught about free speech and acting under the free authority that comes from God Almighty. They should be taught how to voice their dissent of Mormon authority in a respectful and proper way. Instead they are programmed into being zombies of the Mormon church. Blaine wrote: > The key difference, however, is if you say "NO" > loud and clear, they will back off. In my opinion, I think most Mormon missionaries are spineless. They won't stand up to a good discussion. They back away. They are wimps. You applaud them for backing off if I say "NO" but I consider that a weakness not a strength. Blaine wrote: > Street preachers do not back off. They just get > more stubborn and insistent. Even a used car > salesman has nothing on them. I think that is a good and admirable trait. They are men of character and integrity. They are soldiers who do not run from the enemy and who are not intimidated by the enemy. Good for them. David Miller wrote: >> Street preachers generally speaking will respect >> others, but they rarely ever respect the religion >> of others. Blaine wrote: > I can't help but think this would alienate more > than it will attract. Maybe they need to reevaluate > their tactics? I can't speak for every preacher, but I always am re-evaluating my tactics. I always go before the Lord and seek for better ways of representing him. I always am concerned of being too hard on someone or too easy on someone. I think what you don't realize is that we obey the Lord in these things and seek to please God and not man. We ignore what men think of us. We are not trying to get people to join our club or our religion. We are testifying to Jesus Christ and his standard of righteousness. We are not trying to attract, we are trying to bear witness of God and the message that God has for these particular individuals who cross our path. Blaine wrote: > Just one thing--you can command attention and respect, > but you can't demand it--and I feel thats what the > street preachers in SLCity do. I doubt that any of them are trying to demand respect. If they were trying to do that, they would dress in a suit, they would not raise their voice in any undignified way, they would not build and carry these big banners, etc. These men are willing to appear foolish and to be a spectacle to the Mormons in order to get their message out. If the Mormons invited them into the Temple to address the convention with their message, they probably would not be outside. The Mormons don't realize it, but this is really the peaceful solution to what they consider to be a problem. They should allow Christians to teach alongside their teachers at these conventions. Then there would be no need for anybody to be outside protesting or preaching. Blaine wrote: > They are called ELDERS because that is an office > in the Melchizedek priesthood, which they are > ordained to hold and exercise. It has little > to do with age. I understand this, but such a view violates the Scriptures. According to the Bible, we understand that the terms "elder" and "bishop" in regards to a church office are interchangeable. The term "elder" refers to the person not being a novice and being seasoned and older, while the term bishop refers to his function to oversee the flock. For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ORDAIN ELDERS in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a BISHOP must be blameless ... (Titus 1:5-7 KJV) Once we understand that a bishop and elder is the same office, then we can read 1 Timothy 3 and see that elders are not to be novices, that they should be the husband of one wife, one that has his children in subjection to him, who has a household that he rules, etc. Blaine wrote: > I know your belief that ELDER should mean a person > of riper age than that, but that is not how it works. I understand that, but you should not claim to believe the Bible and then define an elder differently than the Bible does. Especially in this matter, it defies the English language and common sense. Blaine wrote: > they really have a spiritual aura about them, which > is more obvious as you get to know them. And, most > of them are more mature than you would expect a person > of that age to be. (:>) Yeah, this reminds me of a time at college, I saw a young man outside in the back of the student union smoking a cigarette. He looked despondent and I felt led by the Spirit to go share Christ with him. It turns out that he was a Mormon boy who was about to go on his two year mission trip. He was despondent about it, was not sure he really could do it, but he said the family pressure and pressure of the church was such that he saw no way of getting out of it. I told him that he needed to get right with God before he did any kind of missionary work. He agreed with me. As I shared with him, he began to cry and I prayed with him as he wept before the Lord. Now I realize that he might be an exception to the general rule, but even Mormons who seem to be outstanding young men are very ignorant of the Scriptures, in my opinion. They almost always promise to get someone more knowledgeable to come back and talk with me, but rarely ever follow up with that promise. Sometimes they do and I might have a weekly Bible study with them at my home for a few weeks before they quit coming back, but most of the time I never see them again. Blaine wrote: > They should have gotten past being defensive about > their title, but sounds like maybe you were making > them defend themselves, huh? I think if they had > thought about it, they might have allowed you some > slack there. Oh, so its my fault, eh? To be fair, the one guy seemed ready to give me his first name, but the primary speaker refused. The other guy just followed his lead. Blaine wrote: > I need to be nicer to Dean. (:>) Do you suppose > he will forgive me for tearing into him? I'm certain of it. Dean is a very nice guy. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
