BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
General

A Band of Brothers... or a Banning of Brothers??

sermonindex Dec 10, 2012

There was a firestorm last week concerning the actions of several people toward Greg and the other mods on this forum. I want to say that I love Greg and the guys and they have always shown a tremendous amount of grace and patience toward me.

Last week the central point of the firestorm surrounded the Catholic Church and it’s many false doctrines. While I didn’t agree with the actions of those several people who seemed to come after Greg, I did agree with their grievances about SI’s apparent softening toward the RCC and seeming refusal to allow an honest discussion about the many false doctrines. I’ve watched the deteriorating state of things here on SI now for several years. Many doctrines that used to be refuted and rejected freely are now being accepted and those who dissent are being silenced to the point where even friendly discussions of them are being shut down.

In all fairness, this is Greg’s site and he can do as he sees fit. I have never met Greg, but I think he is trying to do what he believes is the right thing, and I do not question his heart for God and for the gospel. It’s just that on these matters I am beginning to have more and more disagreement. And I am OK with that. I count Greg and the other mods as brothers. Brothers disagree on things at times.

I find these issues of doctrine to be very important. I find the seeming acceptance of the RCC to be disconcerting. Now we are not even allowed to discuss the RCC… unless someone wants to raise Mother Teresa up on a pedestal. We are also not allowed to discuss Calvinism vs Arminianism... unless someone wants to attack John Calvin. We are especially not allowed to discuss anything that might even be remotely tied to politics... although most of the articles pertaining the politics were posted by moderators of this forum. Probably sometime this week the annual debate over Christmas will begin... and that too will be banned.

Doctrine and politics... What else is there to discuss? lol...

I was a bit surprised by the people who were banned. BrotherTom being one of them. While I do not always agree with Tom on everything… I was taken aback when I saw he was banned.

Considering all of this... and as an attempt to show solidarity with my brethren who departed from the forum last week... I too will be removing myself from this forum as soon as I hit the submit button. Not to showboat or do something grand so that you all can see. Nothing like that. This is just something that I have noticed and been bothered by, and it all came to a head last week. While I do not agree with how several people handled themselves, I do agree with the stand that they took… and so now that things have blown over I will lock arms with them and join them in their stand.

Simple as that.

If the mods wish to remove me from the forum they are free to do so. I am not angry or offended, I just need to take a stand. It’s the right thing to do.

Krispy

sermonindex Dec 10, 2012


Brother,

I am personally sad to see you go and feel you need to take a stand in this way against a supposed compromise on the part of myself or the site moderators. What I am in clear disagreement with is:

1) Brothers who 100% will not allow any chance for true believers to be in the catholic system or who were those that were martyred or simply persecuted their whole lives as they stood for truth in it. Those such as: Madame Guyon, Fenelon and many others throughout the 1500 years of history+

2) I am also against a tone that is not of the spirit of Christ, that clearly condemns and does not have a heart of love for catholic believers. Such fundamentalism is "right" but wrong in its spirit. There is a joy to expose but not burden and heart to see them come to the light.

3) Lastly, I am against a condemning of any ministry including sermonIndex that quotes or mentions a catholic such as mother theresa or more importantly a St John of the Cross, Madame Guyon, Fenelon and others who were true believers (Tozer, Ravenhill and others quoted them freely and did not condemn them). I do not believe it is ecumenical to accept God's true believers no matter what church they belonged to, were coming out of or died in.


On a personal note I have been blessed by contributions you have made brother and am again sad to see you leave in this way. On SermonIndex myself or other moderators are not trying to change people to believe a dogma or emphasis. Rather we are trying to allow for freedom of discussion but to preserve the unity of the saints in the bond of peace. Also our burden is for the body of Christ not to bite and devour each other (Galatians 5:15) but rather for body to be edified (Ephesians 4:12) and build each other up in the most holy faith.

We have made warnings and posted articles in the past to warn of false teachings and teachers but since the beginning of SermonIndex, 10 years ago I felt the Lord personally and clearly led me to emphasize on the truth and not the darkness and I was led to just show more of what is true and that will in turn light up all that is dark. This philosophy is biblical and allows for us to preach the true Gospel of Christ and live in it and in turn all false Ism's will be made known for what they are in contrast.

I have seen great fruit in so many believers on these forums over the 10 years and believe the Lord has sanctified them and given a special grace on these discussions. I believe God will continue to do so as we continue to this as He is fully trusted. There have been brothers who have came and gone and I have seen growth in both of them and in all of us who interact here.

May this site be simply an encouragement and place to gather strength on this pilgrim way we are on.

I ask for forgiveness in any way I did not or have not exhibited the fruits of Christ and brought about misunderstandings from my speech. May the Lord see past all of this and help us grow in Him.

sermonindex Dec 10, 2012

what does he mean by "banned"? they deleted their accounts after you requested them to stop participating here?

sermonindex Dec 10, 2012


what does he mean by "banned"? they deleted their accounts after you requested them to stop participating here?

Dear brother,

Over the years on SermonIndex the moderators have had to ask some users to not participate in the forums but they would still have access to the website as a free reference. It is the last choice of the moderators to delete a discussion forum account and we desire to have given the benefit the doubt to every user many times. Of recent there were 2 users who did not submit to any advice of the moderators on how to discuss the issue of the Roman Church and felt it was their duty to speak publicly against this ministry as compromising the truth, etc. After awhile we decided this is not suitable to allow this and deleted the accounts and notified the brothers.

as a moderator one of my main responsibilities is not to allow the forums to be a personal pulpit and a place where someone can use for their agenda to even give a bad representation to Christ. We do not do this perfectly but we try our best to follow Christ in helping the discussions here have a sense of peace and where the Lord is glorified.

C
ccchhhrrriiisss Dec 10, 2012

I have been reading through the drama of the past week with sadness in my heart. It brought to mind something else that has been discussed at length on SermonIndex -- the persecuted Church.

If we were persecuted as early believers were persecuted, would we fret over such things to the degree that we often do?

Doctrines.
Sectarian dogma.
Traditions of men.

Now, to be clear, there are issues -- doctrinal issues -- that I think are exceedingly clear from the Word of God and can be universally proclaimed. We can declare with boldness things that are "essential." We can even point to doctrinal or sectarian systems that are flawed because of those "essentials" and explain the reasons why.

We can point out the flaws of the Roman-pagan traditions. We can contrast the "added things" and "missing parts" of that religious system with the purity of the Word of God. However, we can cross the line when we deal with those who might be ignorant of such things.

The thing that is shared by all believers is that they hunger to know the Lord. There is a stirring in the heart that longs to know the one true Living God. When that stirring takes place in our hearts, we are all at different places in our lives. I felt that hunger for God while I was an agnostic honor student in high school. Others who feel that stirring may have been raised in church "going through the motions."

The question is whether or not a person has had the "born again" experience. I can go back and point to the very spot on this Earth where I passed from death to life. Others might not have had the experience...but are journeying toward it. Others may have come to Christ but haven't yet come to the conclusion about doctrines and traditions. Still others may have felt a longstanding connection with a particular "church" after coming to Christ and hope to point out the flaws there.

Still, I can't help but wonder what would happen if we were enduring the unimaginable persecution that other believers have experienced throughout their lives. Would we spend our time in house churches, caves or tunnels loudly debating about such things. Or would exert our focus and attention on things that are more important.

In THE CROSS AND THE SWITCHBLADE, David Wilkerson spoke about his grandfather. His grandfather was an "old time religion" preacher who wasn't short on the dramatic. Wilkerson remembers a story where his grandfather came to his father's respectable church in an affluent neighborhood and placed his old muddy boots on the clean altar. The grandfather then preached a message about being unashamed of the Gospel...and asked for the windows to be opened so that everyone in the neighborhood could hear. He then directed the congregation to sing the praises of God loudly. According to David Wilkerson, it was a turning point in the church where his father worked. It all started with a pair of muddy boots.

David Wilkerson was greatly influenced by his grandfather (more so, it seems, than his own father). His grandfather would preach anywhere -- including atop a city trolley. He was constantly proclaiming the Gospel and doing what he could to win others to Christ. Yet, Wilkerson's grandfather also believed in what he called "lamb chop" theology. He said:


“You win over people just like you win over a dog,” he used to say. ”You see a dog passing down the street with an old bone in his mouth. You don’t just grab the bone from him and tell him it’s not good for him. He’ll growl at you. It’s the only thing he has. But you throw a big fat lamb chop down in front of him, and he’s going to drop that bone and pick up the lamb chop, his tail wagging to beat the band. And you’ve got a friend. Instead of going around grabbing bones from people, or cutting feathers off them (he is referring to another method of bringing conviction to sinners – cutting ostentatious feathers off of lady’s hats as they walked down the aisle to the altar call) I’m going to throw them some lamb chops. Something with real meat and life in it. I’m going to tell them about New Beginnings.”

Sometimes, I feel like our debates are akin to trying to take the "old bones" out of a dog's mouth. When someone tries to take our old bone, we bite down upon it even harder. It is much more helpful to proclaim the truth than concentrate our efforts on exposing lies. That way, we leave our "old bone" by our own will.

Yet, we sometimes try to do both simultaneously by believing that exposing lies is the same as proclaiming the truth. It isn't the same thing. If we proclaim the TRUTH -- the Gospel of Jesus Christ -- we don't have to focus so much on the lies. Remember: A Mormon isn't going to Hell BECAUSE he is a Mormon. A Mormon -- like all others -- will go to Hell because he doesn't know Jesus Christ. The same is true of Muslims, Jews, Catholics, atheists or anyone else who doesn't know Jesus. Our mission is not to show them how flawed their systems of beliefs might be. We are most effective by introducing the Good News to them and allowing them to leave their former philosophies on their own.

When I left my agnostic views, it wasn't because a Christian convinced me of the "error of my ways." Rather, it was because I was introduced to Jesus Christ. Like the dog that Grandfather Wilkerson mentioned, I abandoned the "old bone" way of thinking for something that had substance to it.

I do wish that we could approach one another without the "gift of suspicion" and simply allow the Lord to have His own work. If we were enduring persecution, something tells me that we would already focus on the things that matter most.

*EDIT - I do appreciate the effort made here by Greg and the other moderators to prompt us to avoid divisions and focus on that which is most important.

S
Sree Dec 10, 2012


Doctrine and politics... What else is there to discuss? lol...

there are 2 sisters in these forums whom I have never seen discussing doctrines. But I have seen them bringing valuable revelation about Jesus Christ. This is what we need in our Christian walk, to know Jesus more and more in our life. There is plenty to discuss about Christ and plenty to share about him that will encourage people.

Hebrews 3-12:-
Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called “Today,” so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.

I personally believe that if we come into SI with an attitude to learn then we have million reasons to stay in SI.

L
Lordoitagain Dec 10, 2012

When I was growing up, there were many “oneness” Pentecostals in our area that believed that if a person was not baptized “in Jesus’ name” he could not go to heaven. The preacher could not say “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost”, he had to say “in the name of Jesus”, or the baptism wasn’t correct, and the person couldn’t go to heaven.

Likewise, I believed that since they were “believing a lie”, then none of the people in that religion could possibly go to heaven. Since then, I have met many of them whose lives I KNOW have been transformed by the gospel, even though they were taught the way that they were taught. They considered us “Catholics” because we believe in the trinity. Later I came to realize that within that religion there are some who are truly trusting in Christ for their salvation even though they have “the proper baptism” (improper according to the way I believe), yet there are others in that religion who are depending on their “proper (improper) baptism” for their salvation, and can in no way go to heaven.

With their doctrine, I have often wondered: “if your way is the only way to get to heaven, what happened to the millions of Christians who brought you the Bible and Christianity before the recent surge of “oneness” teaching began in the early 1900s.

Equally, I have to wonder how can anyone say that EVERY soul that is in the Catholic system will go to hell, when we don’t know each individual in the 1,500+ years before Protestantism and even the many in the system even today who may be in language groups that barely even understand the Catholic teachings, yet they can read the scripture, and possibly can have established a real relationship with God through simple faith in Christ’s sacrifice. Of course if they are depending on what they do in their religion to be their salvation, they are not saved … but how do we know their hearts to know that that is the case in every case? Some may be really trusting Christ and not their sacraments for their salvation.

H
hulsey Dec 10, 2012

Today we've limited the scope of doctrine to systems of belief and proper definitions of terms. Yet the doctrine of Christ was as much if not more about character than the proper definition of church dogma.

Discernment ministries (for lack of a better word) limit themselves to be the guardians of dogmatics these days. They are rightly concerned with wrong teachings: Jesus isn't God, the Bible has errors,...etc. etc. Where they go wrong is when they think that you have to have the 'fundamentals' absolutely correct or there is no fellowship.

Personally, I was a christian before I believed that Jesus was God. So was Keith Green btw. No man ever convinced me that Jesus was God. Christ taught me. I had come to the conclusion by reading the book of Hebrews. I still didn't even know there was such a thing as the Trinity and yet I was still a Christian...imagine that.

Christ through the Holy Spirit is more than capable of correcting our theology. We're called to be patient with each other. We can plead with each other but it must always be God who convinces and gives repentance. He is truly Lord of His Church.

Biblical discernment is one of the gifts of the Spirit. Therefore it is supernatural. It isn't gained by attending a conference or reading a book or taking a class. I am able to see the difference between a Buddhist monk and a preacher of the Gospel. That's not discernment, that's common sense. The spiritual gift of discernment warns when someone comes preaching the Christ of the Bible and yet is not one of Christ's own. He may even have all his doctrines in perfect alignment! "But I know that you do not have the love of God within you." John 5:42 That's discernment. Knowing that Jehova's Witnesses and Mormons, and Muslims etc. are in error, or that Jesus is God, God is eternal, God exists as a trinity...ect., this is not discernment, it's just good study. It's useful in its place, but it can become a weapon in the hands of a zealous brother.

M
Miccah Dec 10, 2012

I was a bit surprised by the people who were banned.

Incorrect. They were raptured. :)

A great Tozer quote... To be right with God has often meant to be in trouble with men. - Tozer.


This message is to the Moderators... PLEASE do not ever ask me to be a moderator. :P

This discussion is locked.

Archived
1 of 9 posts