One of the points of the sermon regarded how the visions of the temple guard and religious leaders had been clouded by their perceptions. They had agendas, and refused to hear what Peter was saying, instead focusing on what they wanted.
I had breakfast with one of our elders Saturday. We discussed my concerns as well as theirs. His perception, as well as that of the pastor, is that I am attacking the pastor. They have made it clear that his sermon material or presentation is not a matter for debate. I assured him that I am not attacking the pastor, but merely wish to discuss some concerns that I have. Were I attacking, I would not have sought a private audience with him. But if there are some concerns, should they not be discussed? I was able to discuss some of my concerns over breakfast. The elder stated that although he could not argue with my concerns nor find any fault in my logic, that the bottom line was, I just needed to stop what I am doing and embrace what the pastor says and try and learn from it. He even went so far as to state that my concerns were affecting the spiritual lives of my wife and children. Yet it is because I am concerned for the spiritual lives of my wife and children, as well as those of the congregation as a whole that I have voiced my concerns.

Peter and John were ordinary men, not men of great learning. They did not possess PhDs or seminary degrees. But they had been with Jesus, and were filled with the Holy Spirit. I find it frustrating when the pastor says that he has his sermons vetted by PhDs or other ministers and I should just accept that as enough. No need to discuss matters any farther, the religious ruling body has given their approval. But I have to wonder, is this just a flock of birds of the same feather, meeting to agree with one another? I don't know. But if I am wrong, tell me, don't hide behind others. I am not afraid of an honest discussion.

No comments:
Post a Comment