Spotting Heretics

Marymog said:

OK…lets put your theory into practice:

I have decided that Ferris sinned against me.
You disagree with me.
I get 2 others to agree with me.
You refuse to listen to the 3 of us.
I get the entire congregation to agree with me.
You refuse to listen to the entire congregation.
The sin is sooooo obvious that there is no need to vote or debate as to who is right or wrong. The sin is just KNOWN by all to be against Scripture, except the 1 who refuses to acknowledge it, he dosn’t think it’s a violation of Scripture.
Someone from the congregation then announces (there is no vote) that the sin the person committed is bad enough for them to be treated as a pagan.
The congregation has NOT determined that the person is guilty or innocent of the sin (even though they have admitted to the sin) they have just determined that they are wrong about it being a sin. The person is treated as pagan UNLESS they admit it was a sin then they can come back to the church.
No need for 100 bishops or cardinals to do all this. All you need are100 members of the congregation to do all this .

Click to expand...

This is amusing...trying so hard to evade and confuse the obvious truth because it doesn't agree with what your men have taught you.

Here's how it works (You can follow along in the pages of your very own Bible if you want):

A brother sins against you. You show him his fault and he listens to you. He repents and asks for and receives the forgiveness of the offended person. God is there with them and approves, placing his stamp of approval on the forgiveness worked out between them, for "if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven" (Matthew 18:19). Done! No need for a pope, or a cardinal, or a bishop. No ceremonies or rituals needed. The person is forgiven here on earth and in heaven above. The matter is resolved. End of story.

But if he doesn't listen to you the offended brother brings in two or three witnesses. Jesus cites the scriptures that stipulate that a person is not to be condemned and treated as a pagan or a tax collector without the testimony of two or three witnesses. The offended person by himself could not pass this judgment. That would be unlawful. And so this is not to establish whether or not what he did is a sin (though he may well be insisting it is not, lol), but rather to convict this person of their wrong doing. This is the verse Jesus cites in Matthew 18:16...

So we can see this is not about whether or not what the man did is a sin. It's about whether or not he really committed it, and to be convicted if he did. The hope is, of course, that the sinner will acknowledge his guilt and ask for and receive forgiveness, for "if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them." (Matthew 18:19-20). Once again, no popes, no cardinals, no bishops, no ceremonies, no rituals required. The matter of forgiveness and reconciliation can be settled in the earth and in heaven by those present.

Now, if the brother still doesn't acknowledge his guilt and ask for and receive forgiveness, that is when the matter is taken before the whole congregation. It doesn't matter if Sally, or Ralph, or Gerald aren't in attendance at that meeting. It's not a vote. The matter of forgiveness and reconciliation could not be settled by the parties and witnesses involved so the matter is taken before the pastor, elders and congregation. The matter is reviewed, perhaps discussed, all under the authority and guidance of the pastor and elders of the congregation. And if the sinner still does not repent and receive forgiveness he is turned over to his sin and is to be regarded by the whole congregation as a pagan or a tax collector (IOW, an unbeliever).

Behold said:

the one common denominator is that they do not believe that Jesus or God = keeps them saved.

Click to expand...

Wrong.
You should really understand the argument correctly before you assert something that it is not saying.

Jesus does all the keeping.
The question is whether or not a person is going to continue to avail themselves of Christ's keeping.

Marymog said:

As a “facilitator” at a church meeting your ONLY option is to guide the members of the meeting to the Truth. Wouldn’t you agree?

Click to expand...

No. Like at work, my primary role is to let all sides have their say and then guide the attendees dispassionately weigh the pros and cons, without bias or malice.

Marymog said:

What would you do if the congregation does not agree with the Truth you have guided them to as the facilitator?

Click to expand...

Mary, I don't play the 'what if' game.

Initially, people do disagree. As the discussion of pros and cons proceeds, it generally becomes clear, not only what is the better argument but what the consensus seems to be before concluding the affair. Again, there is that word consensus.

Often times the conversation turns from the matter at hand but how people who disagree with the prevailing direction handle it. Often, I can see the valid points of both sides. Then these are evaluated. What is the milk and what is the meat argument? Have faith in the Spirit and love the people in the congregation no matter what the verdict is. Trust the Biblically ordained process.

I feel we've been over this ground a few times and suspect you are a Roman Catholic entrenched on one individual having the final say. Here is where Catholics and Protestants disagree. Protestants accept that one individual who has the final say is Christ. Roman Catholics usurp that role on Earth. I guess it comes down to how do you view your fellow man; equals as brothers and sisters, or sheep where you are appointed to lord over the flock of subordinates. (I think you'll be hard pressed to find Scriptural support for the latter proposition).

I've been a part of some heated church debates but these were about bypassing established administrative procedures or splitting, not what constitutes a sin. My personal struggle with someone who sins is what should the punishment be.

Hope this helps.

Ferris Bueller said:

And if the sinner still does not repent and receive forgiveness he is turned over to his sin and is to be regarded by the whole congregation as a pagan or a tax collector (IOW, an unbeliever).

Click to expand...

A couple of months ago a friend of mine who I play tennis with went through this process.

2 ministers gave him an ultimatum. Repent or be banished forthwith. He stubbornly refused to repent.

He is my friend but he has sinned. Because I am not an official member of that church, I have not shunned him. However, his ongoing sinning is troubling me and I am contemplating repeating the process. I feel that his sin of pride is corroding the peace of the tennis group, starting with me.

Marymog said:

Based on your “numbers not being a concern” scenario what if it is an 80-20 vote concerning Scriptures clear violation of what a SIN is?

Click to expand...

Friend, we've covered this several times already. I thought @Ferris Bueller explained clear enough but let me be emphatic.

No human decides what a sin is. Scripture defines what a sin is, the law is already defined.

The purpose for humans is to be like a grand jury, determine if the facts of the case 'rise to the level' of violating the law. And like a grand jury in a different jurisdiction, what is it to you if a grand jury/congregation decides differently than you think they ought when it is their call to make and not yours, it is their authority to exercise, not yours?

Behold said:

Every Heretic will believe that they can lose their salvation, as that is THE deception that is found in them all.
Some have really crazy Theology, but, the one common denominator is that they do not believe that Jesus or God = keeps them saved.

So, reader, when you dont believe that Jesus keeps you saved, HIMSELF< or GOD, HIMSELF< then what is left for you to believe that gets you into heaven?
What is it?
?
?
= Its YOURSELF.....trying to do something.... And that can be..."im holding unto my faith".. or "im keeping commandments", or
"I joined the one true Church".... Or..."im enduring to the end". "My salvation is all about ME ME ME ME doing something, vs, only trusting in Christ to get me to heaven" = which is the REAL FAITH.

See all that? ??
That is YOU Trusting YOU....as you dont TRUST CHRIST or God To get you into heaven, if you are a heretic.
What does that literally mean?
It means your faith is wrong, or broken. And Paul says you are "fallen from GRACE"<... "bewitched"...and "In the Flesh".
It means that Jesus is off the Cross, and YOU are up there on it, as your FAITH.

So, what is the worst thing about heretics as found on a Forum?
Its the fact that they can ruin your faith for life, and most especially the faith of a New Christian.
"christian" forums are deadly regarding a New Believer's Faith.
And that, is the one thing that the Devil wants..
He wants a new Christian to be FAITH DESTROYED, and then their entire life is nothing but nothing for God.

See, if you have a head full of theology and can teach it, then that is actually harmful unless what you teach is based on your correct understanding of the Grace of God as the BLOOD ATONEMENT only and always being the foundation of your FAITH.
And when you are trying to keep yourself SAVED, and trying not to go to hell, then that is THE proof that you have no real faith in Christ.
Its gone, or was never there to begin with.

Remember...ALL HERETICS have 2 core issues with their faith..

1.) They believe they can lose their salvation

2.) The do not believe that Jesus keeps them saved.

So, when you listen to a person and they are talking theology, notice if they are those 2, and if so, you have spotted a heretic.

Find them in the pulpits
Find the on the forums
Find them as Denominations
Find them in your family

Click to expand...

You wrote "Every Heretic will believe that they can lose their salvation, as that is THE deception that is found in them all.
Some have really crazy Theology, but, the one common denominator is that they do not believe that Jesus or God = keeps them saved."

Try reading your Bible more carefully!

Romans 11:13-25, "Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches.

But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree."

Wrangler said:

Friend, we've covered this several times already. I thought @Ferris Bueller explained clear enough but let me be emphatic.

No human decides what a sin is. Scripture defines what a sin is, the law is already defined.

The purpose for humans is to be like a grand jury, determine if the facts of the case 'rise to the level' of violating the law. And like a grand jury in a different jurisdiction, what is it to you if a grand jury/congregation decides differently than you think they ought when it is their call to make and not yours, it is their authority to exercise, not yours?

Click to expand...

Wrangler...I agree with you that the law is already defined in Scripture. BUT it takes man/men to interpret Scripture! So which man/men do you choose to interpret Scripture and decide if a person committed a sin against you? The men of your church or the men of The Catholic Church?

ALSO, the passage in debate literally says if your brother sins against you and the brother disagrees with you that it is not a sin we are to take our difference to the church for them decide who is right/wrong. WHO makes up the church Wrangler? MEN (and women)!! So, contrary to what you said HUMANS DECIDE!

If the men of the church across the street from your church say XYZ is a sin and the men of your church say XYZ is not a sin.....which MEN are right Wrangler? I know, I know, your going to say the men across the street are wrong and your men are right because THOSE MEN don't know how to properly interpret Scripture but YOUR MEN do properly interpret Scripture!

AND you contradicted yourself with your grand jury analogy. Men make up the grand jury Wrangler. The men of the grand jury determines if the facts of the case rise to the level of violating the law! That means MAN does decide!

Marymog said:

BUT it takes man/men to interpret Scripture!

Click to expand...

We cannot disagree more!

Interpretation is for translators. It is a misnomer to say courts 'interpret' the law. They apply the law to a given case. Most of the time, it really is not that hard. Law. Facts. Logical Conclusion. Spirit conveyed.

Marymog said:

So which man/men do you choose to interpret Scripture and decide if a person committed a sin against you? The men of your church or the men of The Catholic Church?

Click to expand...

Mary. This ground has already been covered numerous times. I doubt answering it again will cause your eyes to see.

Marymog said:

WHO makes up the church Wrangler? MEN (and women)!! So, contrary to what you said HUMANS DECIDE!

Click to expand...

I think you are playing a semantics game. We are no longer under the law and you are making a legalistic argument. And repeating yourself again.

Marymog said:

(What) If the men of the church across the street from your church say XYZ is a sin and the men of your church say XYZ is not a sin.....which MEN are right Wrangler?

Click to expand...

You are playing the What if game again.

Marymog said:

I know, I know, your going to say the men across the street are wrong and your men are right because THOSE MEN don't know how to properly interpret Scripture but YOUR MEN do properly interpret Scripture!

Click to expand...

No, I would not say that. Your scenario is like the grand jury analogy. Scripture has the answer but you just don't want to hear it. Scripture says to submit to the authority you are under. You propose circumventing the authority you are under.

Marymog said:

That means MAN does decide!

Click to expand...

And your solution to this?

Wrangler said:

No. Like at work, my primary role is to let all sides have their say and then guide the attendees dispassionately weigh the pros and cons, without bias or malice.

Click to expand...

Ok....As the facilitator you don't feel like you need to guide the members of the church to the Truth. Soooooo what is the purpose of a facilitator in that church meeting to decide if someone committed a sin or not? If the church members make a decision that you clearly believe is opposite of the Truth written in Scripture, then you let them go thru with that decision?

Mary

Wrangler said:

Mary, I don't play the 'what if' game.

Initially, people do disagree. As the discussion of pros and cons proceeds, it generally becomes clear, not only what is the better argument but what the consensus seems to be before concluding the affair. Again, there is that word consensus.

Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Soooo initially they do disagree but in the end they will all come around to the Truth? Hmmmm.......so why are there so many denominations with so many different Truths?

Soooooo it's not a game Wrangler, it's reality and it is happening right now!

Wrangler said:

And your solution to this?

Click to expand...

What is MY solution? You are the one saying that man doesn't decide if the person committed a sin, and I am saying that man does decide soooooo what is your solution????

YOU have taken man out of the decision-making process so who replaces man in YOUR solution?

Wrangler said:

You are playing the What if game again.

No, I would not say that. Your scenario is like the grand jury analogy. Scripture has the answer but you just don't want to hear it. Scripture says to submit to the authority you are under. You propose circumventing the authority you are under.

Click to expand...

Nope Wrangler, not playing a what if game. I have given you facts. There are churches in your town that teach opposite of what your church teaches. Some churches in your town say gay marriage and abortion is not a sin. Most say it is a sin. Some churches in your town say the Eucharist is His body and you shouldn't defile it some say it isn't His body! Some churches have the Trinity teaching and say you can't be a Christian church if you don't accept the Trinity and non-Trinitarian churches....probably in YOUR TOWN...call that a twisting of Scripture.

Soooooooooo it is NOT a what if game....It is actually happening TODAY in your town and all accross the world.

What I think is happening here is that I have stumped you because you know if you were to honestly answer my questions you would have to admit your wrong. So instead you cast aspersions onto me.

Wrangler said:

Mary. This ground has already been covered numerous times. I doubt answering it again will cause your eyes to see.

Click to expand...

I already knew the answer. You choose your men. I choose my men. @Ferris Bueller chooses his men and all 3 of us think we are right...even though our men disagree with each other.

Sooooo for you to suggest that you are going to help make my eyes see any better is a bit presumptuous and condescending kiddo.

Wrangler said:

We cannot disagree more!

Interpretation is for translators. It is a misnomer to say courts 'interpret' the law. They apply the law to a given case. Most of the time, it really is not that hard. Law. Facts. Logical Conclusion. Spirit conveyed.

Click to expand...

Lol....really. So all this time you have not been giving me YOUR interpretation of Matthew 18:17? You have been giving me WHO's interpretation then? Remember, you can't give me the name of a man soooooo you MUST be getting direct guidance from the Holy Spirit?

Judges apply the law. The Supreme Court interprets the law!

Marymog said:

Ok....As the facilitator you don't feel like you need to guide the members of the church to the Truth.

Click to expand...

I see. You have no where to go in this debate and your gigantic ego will not allow you to capitulate and submit to reason. So, your claws come out and pretend I am saying ridiculous things.

It is not my job to guide anyone to the truth. Jesus is the truth. And the Holy Spirit will lead people in all truth. What part of this do you not grasp?

And it is not about truth but discernment, judgement. I have a voice but mine is not the only voice.

Marymog said:

If the church members make a decision that you clearly believe is opposite of the Truth written in Scripture, then you let them go thru with that decision?

Click to expand...

'Let them' implies some power and authority to stop them. Not even God exercise the power to stop men from having and acting on their individual conscious. This is why I left the Roman Catholic Church; they consider themselves above God. I doubt it will be edifying to continue this conversation.

Make a Blessed Day!