SF from TX wrote: Got it. Communist. Unloving. Rude. CAPS LOCK WAS TURNED ON.etc. etc. Out of here. .. This is beyond silly. Um, people disagree and move on. That's life. Yall win. I'm done.
What a busy thread this has been!!
I too have to say wow, and again wow!
No regard for the facts, no regard for the false judgements that were passed on those who were misunderstood, no apology issued to them, but the innocent are the guilty ones, the judgemental ones, the tares no less. And this according to some is righteous judgement?!
The thin skinned who are not even given offense take offense and must be appeased at all costs. The intolerance of the so called "tolerant" is quite staggering!
Well, I too am done with this forum. I said a while ago that it is going to the dogs and this is further proof if any were required. The Romanizers and their sympathisers win the day with their false notions of love where the Bible and truth must always be sacrificed in the name of "Christian charity" no less.
Any wonder the churches are such a mess when we have people like this populating them?
May the Lord have mercy on us all.
To all who know me and love the truth, may the Lord's richest blessings be your portion.
Buckeyes wrote: (TMC) @Andrea P.s. I truly think you misunderstood SFâ€™s and Observerâ€™s posts. SFâ€™s post simply pointed out 2 logical fallacies you made in your post- (Something my own brothers do for me on a regular basis!) Observer then found it to be ironic for an American to inform a European of some logical mistakes, when the European had just cited stats that Europeans score higher than Americans. He didnâ€™t say the stats were untrue, just ironic. Which in America is considered non-offensive humor! They say comedy does not translate well, and unfortunatly, I think weâ€™ve stumbled across an example of that. Hope all is well with everyone, Blessings!
Andrea,Athens Greece wrote: Observer,why so much pride? It is lower,why do you not do some research.I am amazed at the comeback of my comment.Why such offense? Your own stats prove my point.
Since when is it a sin to find something funny?
And why shouldn't I give a thumbs up to sister SF for her well thought out response?
You are very quick on the judgement trigger - accusing sister SF of being angry (I detected no anger on her part), accusing me of pride, when all I did was have a laugh at the irony, and then attacking sister SF again for teaching people to be rude and sarcastic. Really? Where do you get off making such outlandish accusations? Maybe its a Greek thing? Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps you are being overly sensitive and reading things into people's posts?
Lighten up and get a sense of humor!
One final thing. This is a Christian forum and so people try and see things through the lens of the Bible. This is after all supposed to be the authority over our lives. Try and engage with the Bible on the issues of the day and stop offering personal opinions only or if you do, don't be surprised if folk here offer a biblical counter. if they do so it isn't an attack on you personally!
To counter the RCC shilling, perhaps we should also consider Wesley's letter to a Roman Catholic Priest:
"I have neither time nor inclination for controversy with any, but least of all with the Romanists. And that, both because I cannot trust any of their quotations without consulting every sentence they quote in the originals, and because the originals themselves can very hardly be trusted in any of the points controverted between them and us. I am no stranger to their skill in mending those authors who did not at first speak home to their purpose, as also in purging them from those passages which contradicted their emendations. And as they have not wanted opportunity to do this, so doubtless they have carefully used it with regard to a point that so nearly concerned them as the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome. I am not therefore surprised if the Works of St. Cyprian (as they are called) do strenuously maintain it; but I am that they have not been better corrected, for they still contain passages that absolutely overthrow it. .."
If we take the example of raising a family, we all know that kids have to be allowed to make mistakes to grow. If kids grew up in a family where their every failing was pointed out in big red letters, shouted from the roof tops or they were jumped on from a great height, they are very unlikely to grow up as balanced individuals. A censorious home creates a suffocating environment that can be toxic to the well being of the children and also the parents.
Similarly, we have to have wisdom on how to deal with minor errors among those of the household of faith. Some things are best left alone - they could just be minor slips, unthinking utterancs, pure mistakes. Take into consideration the spiritual age and maturity of the individual and ask should we turn a deaf ear and blind eye to this matter?
If it is a matter that needs to be pointed out, we should also consider, am I the most suitable person to bring it to attention? We have to be honest enough to recognize that sometimes the answer is no and let others step in.
The first correction should be private - very difficult on an internet board, unless the individual provides their email. So wisdom is needed on how best to do this. Maybe asking questions to probe and allow clarification first?
Re: Spurgeon's admiration of Wesley (not Wesley's doctrines) -agree or not
1. For those who have never read Wesley's sermons, I would encourage you to read them. They are easily accessible. You can feel his zeal, his heart alive for God and for lost souls. Doctrinally you might be surprised too. Newton and Venn claimed to have learnt from him!
2. We should realize that Wesley's followers developed his errors and that probably what we're more familiar with is not necessarily what Wesley personally taught. I am not denying one little bit that he did err, as we are no doubt aware of the dispute with Whitfield on election etc
3. Wesley was by no means a perfect man, but then who among us can claim that? I would even say some of his behavior was deplorable (e.g. fraudulently publishing a piece in Toplady's name).
4. The zeal that Wesley demonstrated in his life for the Lord's service and the salvation of souls is second to none. Anyone who has read of his labors cannot but admire the man. We could never accuse him of lukewarmness!
5. Even Whitfield, despite disagreement with Wesley on doctrine, had the highest regard for the man. Read Whitfield's funeral sermon for Wesley.
We should all realize that error, no matter how small, being a departure from truth is evil, whether it is caused by the evil one or by our own limited sinful intellect. Underlying error is an echo of the devil's words in Eden when he said, "Hath God said........?" It undermines the veracity of what God actually teaches and God is very jealous of his self revelation and his truth.
As sister Ladybug has stated, this is a spiritual battle and doctrinal errors lead to grossly disproportionate effects in human behavior. So for instance we should not be surprised that the teaching of Evolution has messed up education, society's moral compass, the field of medicine etc. So in the spiritual realm, error can make us and our views stunted, deformed etc.and seeking the wrong remedies and answers. We may find ourselves not so much on the way to Canaan, but wandering 40 years in the wilderness.
Finally, I will acknowledge that in some small circles known to me the drive for doctrinal purity is divorced from experiential Christianity and that therefore this has led to a kind of spiritual pride in knowing the truth rather than walking in the truth. A cranial Christianity which only loves to discuss the finer points of theology. This too is an error and a shame!
The question now is what is a serious doctrinal departure? We all acknowledge that not all doctrinal error is such. For instance we would, I hope, all allow differences on eschatology, because this will not cause anyone to be damned.
Most churches have some form of brief doctrinal basis consisting of those matters that they think are absolute essentials for church membership. They may even have an extended confession of faith that helps members appreciate the broader perspective they will hopefully grown into.
Even SA has a doctrinal statement that member churches have to subscribe to to be able to broadcast. Although not explicitly required for people on the comments section I would suggest that it is expected that those who post at least realize that SA is Evangelical and Protestant.
What in the NT was viewed as serious? I would suggest at a minimum
1. The person and work of Christ. This means his divine nature, his sinless perfection, death resurrection, ascension and heavenly ministry etc and also the essence of the Gospel - Grace, atonement, penal substitution, faith etc None of this is negotiable. By implication also the doctrine of the Godhead, the trinity and the plan of salvation
7. A deep desire for inward purity (3.3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.)
8. A love of all that God considers righteous (3.10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God)
9. Willingness to spend and be spent for the brethren (3.16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.)
10. Given to prayer (3. 22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him..)
11. DIscerning between truth and error (4.6 ...he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.)
12. Will be strongly against all forms of idolatry (5.21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols)
No matter how much a person may profess to be a Christian, if they do not value the Bible as their sole authority in life, show no teachability, no sensitivity to sin, no desires for holiness, doctrinal purity, separation from all evil, no love of the brethren etc. they are none of Christ's!! Period.
What then are grave errors as opposed to errors which we may consider minor or inconsequential?
1. A sincere desire to learn and so teachability should be evident (...these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full)
2. A love of and adherence to the truth (1 John 5,6 God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth)
3. A sensitivity to sin (8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.)
4. A deep desire to obey and please the Lord (2.3 ..hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments)
5. Love of the brethren (2.9,10 9 He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. 10 He that loveth his brother abideth in the light..)
6. Separation from the world and error - other worldliness & doctrinal purity (2.15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 2.20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth 26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.)
Grave error even in believers should always be withstood firmly! (I will come back to what constitutes grave error).
However, as in every household, the parents will deal with each child based on their age, character and temperament so in the household of faith some who err will react much better to a gentle approach, a quiet word and others who are stronger willed will need a stronger approach - some may even need church discipline to mend their ways because private admonition (whether by one or in the company of 2 or three) may not be very effective with them.
This 2 fold approach depending on character is recognized in Jude who writes, "22 And of some have compassion, making a difference: 23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."
I would suggest that the approach is also implicit in the requirement for Elders to be men who know how to rule their households well.
But who are those of the household of faith? How do we recognize them on an internet board?
Thankfully we are not left to our own devices here. There are many distinguishing traits of true believers and these are clearly outlined for us in the epistles of John.
The danger is always that we use our own definitions or let society define for us what is and what is not "loving" and thereby prove ourselves to be unfaithful to the Lord!
Having spoken of false teachers Paul writes to Timothy in Titus 1 v13 Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith.
Was Paul unloving, uncaring, unkind? One would have to be foolhardy to answer this in the affirmative.
Let me ask, how many of our parents always spoke softly to us when rebuking us? Did anyone get smacked with a feather? No of course not. But did we ever doubt that they loved us, or that they did it for our benefit?
But what about those who are genuine brothers/sisters as opposed to those who are grave errorists with an agenda? Must we always take the tough line with them?
Firstly we have a mutual duty to admonish each other Col 3.16. Admonish (Î½Î¿Ï…Î¸ÎµÏ„á½³Ï‰) means to warn, exhort, caution, reprove, put in mind. The idea is that we can forget, wander, err, endanger and need each other to keep us in check.
This is not a duty taken seriously in many circles, and we can hardly wonder that such churches suffer with ill disciplined members.
But to keep to the topic of love, this admonishing need not always be sharp reproof...
Let me start by pointing out the obvious viz. If we are to love our enemies then love is owed to all if we are to be like our heavenly father.
But what does this mean in reality? The apostle Paul, who calls us to imitate him, withstood Peter to his face when his error was grave. The NT letters controvert grave error in a passionate fashion, such errorists are named and shamed and their true nature exposed. John, the apostle of love, in 2 John says he rejoices in those who walk in the truth because he says that is what is commanded by the father (v4). He admonishes that those who don't bring the doctrine of Christ are not to be received into the home nor to be bid God speed, because says he, he who does so partakes of their evil deeds! We are not called to compromise truth in the name of love, because such compromise is not true love. Love and truth go hand in hand.
However, not all errors are equally serious nor are all errorists such on purpose. Those like Peter, who fall into grave error inadvertently, will be recovered because they have a high regard for the word of God and are brought to recognise their error by the Spirit of God. Those grave errorists who resist the truth all their days and continue in their error to their dying day we should fear for.
"The real heroes in life are akin to this little guy...not the celebrities in yoga pants playing ball for a living."
1. You could have compared to any number of meaningless things but you chose those playing ball. Why, if not courting controversy again?
2. Let's allow the comparison even if indecorous, why add the words "in yoga pants"? What did this add except another one of your pet peeves? Why not go the whole hog and include all your pet peeves in the comparison?
3. Even with such examples you continue to deny that you're preoccupied with such issues, and continue to lash out at those who kindly try and show you something that is not right.
Back on topic ... my heart bleeds for what the boy went through, what his family and church are going through right now. Sadly, we read of incidents like this virtually every day from some of the groups we follow and pray for regularly. Only occasionally does it make the news headlines. Oh Lord appear for your persecuted church!
BW - you are right that there is something very devilish about Islam and with those who religiously follow the teachings of the Qu'ran and the Hadiths. PC governments are blindly allowing the invasion of the West and there may be a heavy price to pay later.
Christopher000 wrote: Ok, probably a more intimate, private, 4's a crowd sort of thing which I totally understand. Don't want too many going back and forth, tripping over each others emails. Wouldn't mind taking a look as time goes on though.
I was only kidding bro.
It would be good for you to be a part of this. Us Hillbillies can give you a real Hillbilly welcome! I'm greasing up ma skeeter as soon as I'm done posting this.