Community

quote:

ORIGINAL: doer

One of my 6th graders let me know that God is a Spiritual dude.

now I know!!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Heavendweller

quote:

ORIGINAL: doer

One of my 6th graders let me know that God is a Spiritual dude.

now I know!!!!

I would have corrected that child and said, "While you may think of God as a "Spiritual dude" He is FAR more than that. He is the Wonderful Counselor, the Almighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. He is our Provider, the Spotless Lamb, the Alpha and the Omega=Beginning and End, Creator of all that Is, and yes, Jesus is your Friend who sticks closer than a brother.

Just because a child says something about God, does not mean that said child is correct. Yes, children can have wonderful heart attitudes, and they can be very humble in their approach to God, but they still need to be instructed and corrected. As a teacher, I am often reminded of how distorted children can be in their understanding of various matters regarding life and God. We, who are more mature in Christ, should lead these children into a better understanding of who God is. And we, too, should always be ready to be corrected by those who are wiser and more mature in Christ than ourselves.

Heavendweller

quote:

ORIGINAL: Heavendweller

quote:

ORIGINAL: blue1914

Maybe the answer to your question lies in the answer to a more pertinent question-what do you hope to accomplish when you address the name of the Lord?

Accomplish? Perhaps, we should start with a scriptural understanding of the names of God and why the Bible gives God these names, and no other. IOW, I don't see "dude," "hey you," "man in the sky," "old man," "comrade," "yo," "y'all," "yous guys," "hey man," "home boy," or any of the myriads of other "hip" names that we use in our culture, used in Holy Scripture as names for God.

quote:

What I mean is this-"dude", "YHWH", "Adena" are all incomplete references to the greatness and glory of the one true and living God. It appears that in your opinion, the term "dude" is more incomplete than some of the others, but a quick perusal of the Word of God will make it clear that any title we use is woefully inadequate (even the ones in there!).

Dude is most definitely inadequate. But the other names, which God has penned through Holy Writ, incomplete and woefully inadequate...according to whom? You? So, therefore, since you deem Holy Scripture as woefully lacking in giving us names that signify who our God is, therefore we can, according to you, use ANY name we deem as sufficient in expressing who God is? Therefore, since Holy Scripture is so deficient, we can take it upon ourselves to call God whatever we please?

So where you see Holy Scripture as lacking, you can just "fill in the blanks?" Wouldn't it be wiser to trust that the names God has chosen to give Himself are the names He desires we call Him, instead of going beyond Holy Scripture and taking liberties upon ourselves?

With your line of thinking, we can "fill in the blanks" in other areas of our theology where Holy Scripture is lacking. The Bible doesn't say anywhere literally that smoking pot is wrong. Marijuana isn't even mentioned in the Bible. So, if I want to get high, on something that is in God's natural creation, what's wrong with that? BTW, I've heard people argue for all kinds of things because the Bible isn't definitive on a particular matter. (in their minds)

quote:

Therefore, the use of a title is really for OUR edification instead of that of God-His greatness is so incomprehensible that we couldn't begin to properly address Him-if we spend our whole lifetime saying words to express His greatness.

Really, and where did you get this idea from? Do you mean to tell us that the names which God has given to Himself in Holy Scripture are not meant to give Him glory? Do you mean to imply that Holy Scripture is lacking and God somehow by default, forgot to include all the names by which we should understand His nature? Is it only all about us and how we perceive Him? Then why, pray tell, did He go through the trouble of giving these names to Himself in Holy Scripture if it's only about our edification?

His greatness is so incomprehensible that we couldn't begin to properly address Him???? Where in the world did you get that idea from? God's precious Word has been given to us to teach us how we should reverence Him, how we should worship Him, how we should adore Him and how we should address Him. Whatever ways you may see Holy Scripture as deficient, that is your problem, your weakness, not God's. If you aren't satisfied with Holy Scripture's rendering of the names God gives Himself, but rather feel justified in giving Him names that He never gave Himself, then the problem lies with you, Not Him!

quote:

That brings me back to my question-what do you hope to accomplish when you address God?

BTW, the same question could be asked of you. But, I will answer. When we as Christians address God in corporate worship, that is with and among other believers, we should desire to glorify Him, that is, give Him all the Honor, Respect, Adoration, Love, Deference, that is due Him. And, we should desire to reflect our precious Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in addressing God with the same attitude He addressed His Heavenly Father. We should address God the same way that Holy Scripture teaches us to. We should use those names that He has chosen to call Himself, and thereby give Him the glory, and not ourselves.

quote:

Are you looking for those around you to approve of what you are doing and/or are you looking to approve of what they are doing?

This has very little to do with being concerned about our own ego. Rather, we should be concerned about defending the nature of God. The names given to God in Holy Scripture are given to Him for a reason and a purpose. Each of those names describe WHO He is, His very nature. Do a study on the names of God and learn what each of them mean and their purpose for being in Holy Scripture. If "dude" was one of the names God gave Himself, I would gladly call Him "dude."

quote:

If someone deliberately offends, that is wrong-be it by name calling or eating meat. If this pastor did this because he KNEW it would offend others, then yeah, that's the offense. If, on the other hand, he was freely expressing how he communicates with God, I guess I wonder-was that even really your business?-he wasn't talking to you, he was talking to his Daddy.

Some one's intentions can be right, but they can still be wrong. A baby Christian can be well meaning but cause a lot of damage. Christians do many things, believing they are right, but finding out later they were wrong. Should someone who is well-meaning not be corrected if they are wrong in what they have said or taught regarding God and Holy Scripture? I'm sure you've heard of the adage, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." The more important issue here, is whether or not we as Christians are being faithful to God's Word and His expression of Himself in that inspired Word of God.

The manner in which we conduct ourselves among other believers is most certainly other peoples' business. "Freely expressing how he communicates with God" is not a license to address God in whatever manner and with whatever name he wants to. What if he chooses to "freely express" himself in the future by addressing God as "She" or "My Dear Lady" or "Mind-melder of the Universe" or whatever. Where do we draw the line? I say we draw the line with what Holy Scripture has revealed to us, and the names that Holy Scripture teaches us are His names, given to Him for His glory.

Again, we should not address God diminishing Him down to the lowest common denominator of human terms. The Word of God shows us that it is sufficient and complete in the names with which it teaches us to use and address Him. We have no need to go beyond that. When we do, we are taking liberties that are not defensible from Holy Scripture.

Heavendweller

quote:

Romans 14

5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He 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. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

9For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. 10You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat. 11It is written:
" 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.' "12So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.

quote:


13Therefore 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.14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.

19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bzirk

It bears repeating that each of us will give an account of himself to the Lord. That means if using dude is indeed disrespectful, it will be between that person and the Lord.

quote:

If you aren't satisfied with Holy Scripture's rendering of the names God gives Himself, but rather feel justified in giving Him names that He never gave Himself, then the problem lies with you, Not Him!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Heavendweller

quote:

ORIGINAL: blue1914

Maybe the answer to your question lies in the answer to a more pertinent question-what do you hope to accomplish when you address the name of the Lord?

Accomplish? Perhaps, we should start with a scriptural understanding of the names of God and why the Bible gives God these names, and no other. IOW, I don't see "dude," "hey you," "man in the sky," "old man," "comrade," "yo," "y'all," "you's guys," "hey man," "home boy," or any of the myriads of other "hip" names that we use in our culture, used in Holy Scripture as names for God.

quote:

What I mean is this-"dude", "YHWH", "Adena" are all incomplete references to the greatness and glory of the one true and living God. It appears that in your opinion, the term "dude" is more incomplete than some of the others, but a quick perusal of the Word of God will make it clear that any title we use is woefully inadequate (even the ones in there!).

Dude is most definitely inadequate. But the other names, which God has penned through Holy Writ, incomplete and woefully inadequate...according to whom? You? So, therefore, since you deem Holy Scripture as woefully lacking in giving us names that signify who our God is, therefore we can, according to you, use ANY name we deem as sufficient in expressing who God is? Therefore, since Holy Scripture is so deficient, we can take it upon ourselves to call God whatever we please?

So where you see Holy Scripture as lacking, you can just "fill in the blanks?" Wouldn't it be wiser to trust that the names God has chosen to give Himself are the names He desires we call Him, instead of going beyond Holy Scripture and taking liberties upon ourselves?

With your line of thinking, we can "fill in the blanks" in other areas of our theology where Holy Scripture is lacking. The Bible doesn't say anywhere literally that smoking pot is wrong. Marijuana isn't even mentioned in the Bible. So, if I want to get high, on something that is in God's natural creation, what's wrong with that? BTW, I've heard people argue for all kinds of things because the Bible isn't definitive on a particular matter. (in their minds)

quote:

Therefore, the use of a title is really for OUR edification instead of that of God-His greatness is so incomprehensible that we couldn't begin to properly address Him-if we spend our whole lifetime saying words to express His greatness.

Really, and where did you get this idea from? Do you mean to tell us that the names which God has given to Himself in Holy Scripture are not meant to give Him glory? Do you mean to imply that Holy Scripture is lacking and God somehow by default, forgot to include all the names by which we should understand His nature? Is it only all about us and how we perceive Him? Then why, pray tell, did He go through the trouble of giving these names to Himself in Holy Scripture if it's only about our edification?

His greatness is so incomprehensible that we couldn't begin to properly address Him???? Where in the world did you get that idea from? God's precious Word has been given to us to teach us how we should reverence Him, how we should worship Him, how we should adore Him and how we should address Him. Whatever ways you may see Holy Scripture as deficient, that is your problem, your weakness, not God's. If you aren't satisfied with Holy Scripture's rendering of the names God gives Himself, but rather feel justified in giving Him names that He never gave Himself, then the problem lies with you, Not Him!

quote:

That brings me back to my question-what do you hope to accomplish when you address God?

BTW, the same question could be asked of you. But, I will answer. When we as Christians address God in corporate worship, that is with and among other believers, we should desire to glorify Him, that is, give Him all the Honor, Respect, Adoration, Love, Deference, that is due Him. And, we should desire to reflect our precious Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in addressing God with the same attitude He addressed His Heavenly Father. We should address God the same way that Holy Scripture teaches us to. We should use those names that He has chosen to call Himself, and thereby give Him the glory, and not ourselves.

quote:

Are you looking for those around you to approve of what you are doing and/or are you looking to approve of what they are doing?

This has very little to do with being concerned about our own ego. Rather, we should be concerned about defending the nature of God. The names given to God in Holy Scripture are given to Him for a reason and a purpose. Each of those names describe WHO He is, His very nature. Do a study on the names of God and learn what each of them mean and their purpose for being in Holy Scripture. If "dude" was one of the names God gave Himself, I would glady call Him "dude."

quote:

If someone deliberately offends, that is wrong-be it by name calling or eating meat. If this pastor did this because he KNEW it would offend others, then yeah, that's the offense. If, on the other hand, he was freely expressing how he communicates with God, I guess I wonder-was that even really your business?-he wasn't talking to you, he was talking to his Daddy.

Someone's intentions can be right, but they can still be wrong. A baby Christian can be well meaning but cause a lot of damage. Christians do many things, believing they are right, but finding out later they were wrong. Should someone who is well-meaning not be corrected if they are wrong in what they have said or taught regarding God and Holy Scripture? I'm sure you've heard of the addage, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." The more important issue here, is whether or not we as Christians are being faithful to God's Word and His expression of Himself in that inspired Word of God.

The manner in which we conduct ourselves among other believers is most certainly other peoples' business. "Freely expressing how he communicates with God" is not a license to address God in whatever manner and with whatever name he wants to. What if he chooses to "freely express" himself in the future by addressing God as "She" or "My Dear Lady" or "Mind-melder of the Universe" or whatever. Where do we draw the line? I say we draw the line with what Holy Scripture has revealed to us, and the names that Holy Scripture teaches us are His names, given to Him for His glory.

Again, we should not address God diminishing Him down to the lowest common denominator of human terms. The Word of God shows us that it is sufficient and complete in the names with which it teaches us to use and address Him. We have no need to go beyond that. When we do, we are taking liberties that are not defensible from Holy Scripture.

Heavendweller

quote:

ORIGINAL: bgwill3

Just a question,

Has anyone, in public or private prayer, ever addressed him as Jealous (Exodus 34:14)? Or Avenger (1 Thess. 4:6)? Or "Man of War" (Ex. 15:3)?

quote:

OK- so my understanding is that "dude" is perfectly acceptable and I just have to get over myself. I should not be offended that a pastor would use this term in a Bible study where he knew that his mom would be offended.

quote:

Let's fast forward a little bit. I was going to say 10 years, but with how often slang changes, let's make it a year. It's suddenly considered a term of endearment to refer to your close friend with a word that we now consider foul. Are you going to be OK with your pastor saying that word during prayer or at some other time in a church setting?

quote:

It might be offensive to you.

quote:

it's a good thing that he feels comfortable calling the King of kings that name, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: blue1914
For the OP, I've just go to ask-the one thing I keep seeing as a theme is a personal offense here-and I've just got to ask-why that as the focus? 90% of what we do in churches today offended someone at one time and in some cases still does (bring your average Catholic into an Evangelical service and watch their head spin at the "sacrilege" of it all). Does that change your intent when you go to an evangelical service? So that said, is personal offense a good measure of the "rightness" of something?

quote:

quote:

OK- so my understanding is that "dude" is perfectly acceptable and I just have to get over myself. I should not be offended that a pastor would use this term in a Bible study where he knew that his mom would be offended.

Not at all! Who has given you that impression?

quote:

quote:

Let's fast forward a little bit. I was going to say 10 years, but with how often slang changes, let's make it a year. It's suddenly considered a term of endearment to refer to your close friend with a word that we now consider foul. Are you going to be OK with your pastor saying that word during prayer or at some other time in a church setting?

Until someone lets the pastor know that they're offended by it, yes, I'd be just fine with it.

quote:

Probably when someone told me that I was presenting a "Holier Than Thou" attitude. Yet when I used that same statement in her thread about something that she felt strongly about, others weren't too keen about that.

quote:

Oh my! I hate to see that coming. Some of the names that I can easily see Him being called in the future would catch the filter here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrFribbles

quote:

If you aren't satisfied with Holy Scripture's rendering of the names God gives Himself, but rather feel justified in giving Him names that He never gave Himself, then the problem lies with you, Not Him!

So, why aren't we praying in Greek and Hebrew? None of the titles for God were given in English. How dare we use English? If the Greek and Hebrew was good enough for God, shouldn't it be good enough for us?