24But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
25The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the LORD. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
26And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
29Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. (John 20:24-29, King James Version)
What to do when someone doubts? Thomas doubted, and the account is recorded for all of us to read. He is even recorded that seeing was not good enough, but rather he would have to feel the wounds as well. How’s that for doubt?
WWJD? Well, we see what Jesus did. Jesus showed Thomas the proof. He told Thomas to do exactly what Thomas said was needed for belief.
On the Discerning Reader Blog, Mark Tubbs writes in the article “Counseling the Disciple Who Doubts” about someone who doubts in Christianity at all, and what one pastor did as a result. What did that pastor do? He gave the young woman exactly what she needed to get rid of her doubts.
Christianity is not about “blind faith”. It is faith based upon the evidence.
The Church of God does not teach from traditions of men, but rather it teaches from the evidence of Scripture. It is not blind faith or blind teaching. Otherwise, our beliefs can run all sorts of directions.
What about in our dealings with each other? Do we prove that our hearts are where our mouths are? Do our actions show ourselves to be firmly planted in Scripture? Or, do we go in all sorts of directions?
Can people point to you and I and to the Church and know that our faith rests on the rock solid foundation of Scripture and the apostles? Do our actions and words offer proof that others need in order to believe that Christ is working in and through us?
ABC News had a facinating report last week about long-time church pastors who privately admit they've become atheists — yet they still serve as pastors because they need the salary.
One actually said his study of the Bible led him to conclude it was riddled with inconsistencies.
When I watched this report, I couldn't help comparing the situation with what some WCG ministers did in the early 1990s — and what some in UCG might be doing now.
Sad but true. We know it happened in the past.
The stories of some preaching the changes then turning right around when UCG started makes you wonder.
Richard,
You need to realize that the typical ham-eating, Sunday-keeping, Easter-observing so-called "Christian" with weird ideas about heaven and an ever-burning hell that will torment people forever simply DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE AT ALL.
It is not the Bible that is "riddled with inconsistencies." Rather, it is the Catholic and Protestant churches that are full of unbiblical, pagan-based teachings that contradict what the Bible teaches. They have Bibles but DO NOT OBEY THEM, and therefore DO NOT UNDERSTAND THEM. It is the false churches of this world that are "riddled with inconsistencies."
This reminds me of an author who noticed that the teachings of the Catholic church were virtually all of pagan origin. (The Protestant churches that came out of the Catholic church have many of the same teachings.) He then carelessly and erroneously concluded that the Bible was of pagan origin. He utterly failed to notice that the teachings of the Bible are completely different than the teachings of the Catholic church.
Frankly, I'm always saddened and then angered when I hear about a pastor becoming an atheist yet goes on teaching. The person is living a lie. The respectable thing would be to find another profession.
I have just as much trouble understanding (mostly American) Catholics who teach that abortion is OK, the ordination of women is OK, etc. How can you call yourself a Catholic?
And, yes, it should have been the same with Tkach. If you suddenly find yourself no longer believing what your church teaches, go find another one. Don't destroy the one you are in.
Well John–I agree–but what good will it do us?
"If you suddenly find yourself no longer believing what your church teaches, go find another one. Don't destroy the one you are in."
The problem is, when corrupt people finally come to the point of themselves being in control, they automatically feel that whatever they have gained control of is theirs for the taking!
There is a possibility, now that this resolution/petition is being passed around to the GCE–that the corruptors in UCG can be ousted instead of taking over, like in the WCG–but that will remain to be seen.
I am sure that those on the council and in adminstration offices who are against this will have their say on it while they are still in power–and may thwart it's efforts—hence some more good men will be ousted from UCG, if the majority of the GCE don't wake up in time.
It is already in the wind that Clyde Kilough and Jim Franks are targets because they will not sign on with the present council and its ways. Rumors are being spread (Probably by the corruptors themselves)that they (Kilough and Franks) have already started another organization.
The editor
Well, there are way too many rumors these days. I heard one that the four of them sat down (Clyde Kilough, Jim Franks, Dennis Luker and Melvin Rhodes) and had a discussion. But, that's just a rumor.
I think that what's important is to keep our eyes on what God wants. If UCG splits, then see who head that direction. If they don't, then don't follow them.
"I think that what's important is to keep our eyes on what God wants."
Yes, and again I agree–but the only way to determine what God wants is to get it straight from His word–praying for the Holy Spirit to lead–not just depending on the local ministry. Hopefully, I stopped being a follower of men a long time ago.
The way I understand it–the meeting is not just a rumor, it took place last week, supposedly behind closed doors–but somehow was leaked,(Possibly from a council member supportive of Franks and Kilough and against the changes.) as a source tells me that Kilough and Franks were asked to sign a kind of pledge of aligence to the existing council–but they refused.
FWIW, I was also told personally by a council member quite some time ago that R. Holladay was right in the "thick of it all"–either personally or behind the scenes. I don't think he was lying–but then who can be sure these days?
The editor