quote:

ORIGINAL: jayvance

quote:

I think the Head of the church has commanded many times to discern and point out errors, and rebuke and correct, don't you?

If you'll bear with me, I'd like to ask what New Testament passages we would use to justify the practice of "exposing sin," "point out errors...rebuke and correct" in the context of Internet blogs, etc. My one qualification would be that we can't use Scriptural instructions that were directed at members of a LOCAL ASSEMBLY to support attempting to exercise church discipline on those who are OUTSIDE our local Christian community.

i agree

I'd be sincerely interested in hearing responses from anyone who would care to comment.

quote:

Bottom line,

quote:

combating error in the Church

is ultimately the responsibility of the Head of the Church, and I suspect many of us have usurped His authority to a great degree in this particular arena.
The best way to combat error is to present Christ and Him crucified in a straightforward and loving manner, and leave the business of "straightening out" the apostates to Jesus. Darkness cannot cohabit with light, plain and simple. The way to dispel darkness is not to rail against it, but rather to bring the light of truth into the room.

quote:

ORIGINAL: prophet

quote:

ORIGINAL: jayvance

quote:

I think the Head of the church has commanded many times to discern and point out errors, and rebuke and correct, don't you?

If you'll bear with me, I'd like to ask what New Testament passages we would use to justify the practice of "exposing sin," "point out errors...rebuke and correct" in the context of Internet blogs, etc. My one qualification would be that we can't use Scriptural instructions that were directed at members of a LOCAL ASSEMBLY to support attempting to exercise church discipline on those who are OUTSIDE our local Christian community.

i agree

I'd be sincerely interested in hearing responses from anyone who would care to comment.

But you wrote:

quote:

Bottom line,

quote:

combating error in the Church

is ultimately the responsibility of the Head of the Church, and I suspect many of us have usurped His authority to a great degree in this particular arena.
The best way to combat error is to present Christ and Him crucified in a straightforward and loving manner, and leave the business of "straightening out" the apostates to Jesus. Darkness cannot cohabit with light, plain and simple. The way to dispel darkness is not to rail against it, but rather to bring the light of truth into the room.

By this, i take it you mean the body of christ as a whole since you mentioned Him as head. If so, then we are to actively combat errors with His word by discerning and point out errors, and rebuke and correct,And that is not ursurping his authority as its His command is for us to combat error

quote:

ORIGINAL: peacebringer


depends on the "weapons" used to combat error.

quote:

ORIGINAL: prophet

quote:

ORIGINAL: peacebringer


depends on the "weapons" used to combat error.

HIS word.

quote:

ORIGINAL: peacebringer

quote:

ORIGINAL: prophet

quote:

ORIGINAL: peacebringer


depends on the "weapons" used to combat error.

HIS word.

There is using his word, and there is engaging in flesh driven arguement. So it still depends on the weapons used.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rabanes

Another interesting take:

The Richard Abanes Ken Silva Fiasco

ra

quote:

personally not impressed with either of your approaches to "apologetics" in general

quote:

ORIGINAL: rabanes

quote:

personally not impressed with either of your approaches to "apologetics" in general

peace,

obviously, this whole controversy is not about my style of apologetics. and we disagree on its specifics, so no real point in rehashing all of that stuff.

but I would be interested, however, in hearing your thoughts on my actual works/books/publications dealing with apologetics -- and where you find them flawed or unimpressive -- and why. this way I could see another perspective on how I handle things such as false doctrine, alternative religions, defending the essentials of Christianity, etc.

RAbanes

quote:

ORIGINAL: peacebringer

I haven't seen your books, just the website, which is like I said following attack for attack, as it appeared to me. What I saw on your blog would lead me to stay away from them and the blog seemed to fit Pastor Silva's accusation in the 2005 post. It seems like a what a lot of what goes on in the internet is mutual finger pointing. LIke I said, I haven't heard of you prior to this whole escapade. I think following the biblical principles of love should always be our guide. We need to be confronting in truth and love. I see a mix of that out here in the nether regions of the internet. Some folks do a fine job. Some folks clearly operate from agenda or flesh and use tactics such as editing and taking things out of context. It has been seen with Lakeland, Bentley and Wagner. It has been seen with "contemplative" critiques. It has been seen else where. There also is a quick trigger to engage in ad hominum comments, often with the quickly tossed out "heretic" label. At some point I will write an article to flesh this out more. My article kingdom building expresses some of my thoughts of how we let self get in the way. I could say more but gotta run.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stateofgrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: peacebringer

I haven't seen your books, just the website, which is like I said following attack for attack, as it appeared to me. What I saw on your blog would lead me to stay away from them and the blog seemed to fit Pastor Silva's accusation in the 2005 post. It seems like a what a lot of what goes on in the internet is mutual finger pointing. LIke I said, I haven't heard of you prior to this whole escapade. I think following the biblical principles of love should always be our guide. We need to be confronting in truth and love. I see a mix of that out here in the nether regions of the internet. Some folks do a fine job. Some folks clearly operate from agenda or flesh and use tactics such as editing and taking things out of context. It has been seen with Lakeland, Bentley and Wagner. It has been seen with "contemplative" critiques. It has been seen else where. There also is a quick trigger to engage in ad hominum comments, often with the quickly tossed out "heretic" label. At some point I will write an article to flesh this out more. My article kingdom building expresses some of my thoughts of how we let self get in the way. I could say more but gotta run.

It's with some irony that I remember that the first sentence in PDL is....

"It's not about you."

On a side note, I'm amazed that there is a "Hate Fritz" web site out there. What a total waste of time.

quote:

...And now on the heels of Abanes’ unsubstantiated charges of libel, about which he has never supplied any specifics to either IPower or to me, comes yet another person alleging I am guilty of a “slanderous accusation” concerning him. First of all, this statement is in a short intro I wrote to a post at Christian Research Net called “Because The Bible Says So…”:Stupid Things Christians Say. Having spoken with my own legal counsel what this person actually means is “libel” because slander concerns the spoken word.

This man wrote to me privately in an email entitled, “You calling me agnostic” saying that we “need to resolve this issue” of my supposed libel “amicably.” Further he informed me that he’d had “two separate attorneys look at it and both agree there is a claim there that is presented as fact, when there is no facts to support your claim.” I do wish to acknowledge that this person was at least kind enough to inform me what it is that he considers libel. It would be the following opinion: “The title should make it clear to you what this Christian agnostic is communicating in his screed…”

quote:

But truth to tell, he has opened up quite a messy can of worms,

quote:

(a) Criminal Infringement. —

(1) In general. — Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed —

(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;

(B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or

(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.

(2) Evidence. — For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement of a copyright.

(3) Definition. — In this subsection, the term “work being prepared for commercial distribution” means —

(A) a computer program, a musical work, a motion picture or other audiovisual work, or a sound recording, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution —

(i) the copyright owner has a reasonable expectation of commercial distribution; and

(ii) the copies or phonorecords of the work have not been commercially distributed; or

(B) a motion picture, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution, the motion picture —

(i) has been made available for viewing in a motion picture exhibition facility; and

(ii) has not been made available in copies for sale to the general public in the United States in a format intended to permit viewing outside a motion picture exhibition facility.

quote:

Friend

quote:

SILVA opened the can of worms.

quote:

Not a single other soul would have known a thing and it all could have been handled behind closed doors.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rofaith

Actually, Mr. Abanes is ENTIRELY correct. A cursory look @ the New Testament reveals a straightforward procedure with dealing with disagreement within the body of Christ. And it's not throwing ugly slanderous accusations onto a forum where there is no accountability. In anyone elses view, it's cowardice. This so called band of what I consider rogue-apologist-bloggers(RABs) think that the US Constitution and Internet freedom trumps what God considers true relational growth through private dialogue, fellowship and prayer. The Bible is the only source of truth on the earth and the US Constitution/Internet Freedom have no bearing on this truth and are in fact, just cultural artifacts among the many cultures that have existed since human organized government began.

The truth is that these RABs think they can say anything in a public forum such as this w/o accountability. This is NOT biblical communication and I could state a plethora of bible verses that would support that assertion.

I have read this blog, wordpress, BOF and other blogs and the insults and hateful things said about Mr. Abanes, Rick Warren and other brothers in Christ by Christians, are reprehensible. It eventually evolves into a downward spiral where passion takes over for factual and civil dialogue and the namecalling begins as well as libelous accusations.

In short, Christians who blog about others..... it's essentially gossip and backbiting. We all know this is non-biblical as well. If John the Baptist were here he would say one word, repent ! So take responsibility for your tongue. Read the bible, OT and NT, about your tongue ! Amazing what a tongue can do when it's opinionated and speaks with cloaked and tactically chosen bible verses to hurt, destroy and character-assassinate other precious souls in the Body of Christ. I heard a biblical teacher say this AM that Christianity is the only religion that accuses, slanders and shoots it's own. I never thought that was true until I saw this phenomenon on these blogs.

My experience when debating the RABs is that biblical, faith-rich, logical, civil debate and dialogue is not possible. I might as well be debating an evolutionist with my creationist views. It turns into vain, verbal, unintelligent nothing-talk.

IMHO, Mr. Abanes is the lone person standing and fighting off this cancer in the Body of Christ. And God approves. I choose to stand with him.

Definition(Dictionary): Rogue: a unprincipled, deceitful and unreliable person.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rofaith

Actually, Mr. Abanes is ENTIRELY correct.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rofaith
In short, Christians who blog about others..... it's essentially gossip and backbiting.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stateofgrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: rofaith

Actually, Mr. Abanes is ENTIRELY correct.

and

quote:

ORIGINAL: rofaith
In short, Christians who blog about others..... it's essentially gossip and backbiting.

Unfortunately, Mr. Abanes has also participated in that behavior, so he couldn't be "entirely correct" according to your line of reasoning, could he?