Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili ( Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.
This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.
 |
|
 |
|
James W. on Foxnews and church discipline.. - LAD Forums
James White has something to say regarding Foxnews and church discipline : http://aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3041
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
JBaker45 James White has something to say regarding Foxnews and church discipline : http://aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3041 Well, I agree with him about church discipline, but there's really a little more to it.
If you read the article this woman revealed her sins to her mentor without realizing the consequences of revealing them.
She left the church because of her sin.
Her concern about them making the sins "public" within the church congregation was the fact that her children would be sitting in the congregation.
(I'm like everyone else, though, in wondering just why she'd go to the national news with the story if her worries over her children are legitimate, but that's a little beside the point I'm interested in.)
The pastor says:
Quote: : The Rev.
T. Scott Christmas, pastor of the church, told the Florida Times-Union that the "process of loving accountability" is made very clear to members, and the church is doing "nothing more than following the practices of what biblical churches have done through history." That's up for debate I'd think when the woman apparently had no idea where her confession would lead.
For them to go ahead and reveal these sins to the congregation with her children present seems to me to be a sin as well...are they willing to put these children through this humiliation for something they have no guilt in?
There's more to this than strictly church discipline, and we're seeing the lack of wisdom, and perhaps a zealousness of power, in church leadership by how this is playing out.
This woman, according to her statement, did withdraw her membership after getting a letter from the church (two months after initially walking out) more or less threatening her, so then what right DOES the church have to reveal this when the whole point of the discipline is to cast her out?
If she's already out, then where does this authority to humiliate her children come in?
All of that is not to say that church discipline isn't necessary, but really, the church is expecting respect for discipline when they themselves are undisciplined.
Paul's pretty clear about not being divided by being "of" this one or that one, yet we're splintered into a bazillion different denominations.
And I think that's part of the problem with people balking at church discipline.
They don't see the church (universal) as united or in the position to HAVE the authority the church (individual congregation) is trying to have.
Incidentally, I have a friend in FL who thought of attending this church and has been following the story.
She says it's created quite the firestorm around there.
And, of course, we gotta realize this has media involvement and that can make the whole story off base.
Not to mention the 15 minutes of fame aspect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JBaker45 James White has something to say regarding Foxnews and church discipline : http://aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3041 Here is the verse in question:
11
But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner;
With such an one no not to eat.
Now, this church immediately honed in on the sexual sin of this woman, but how many members of the congregation who are covetous have been subjected to the same treatment if they have not stopped being covetous?
Or how many idolaters (perhaps worshipping power and money) have had their sin exposed to the collective Body?
I have read about these courses of actions in churches before, and I have never once heard of a man being brought before the Church for sexual impurities or sins.
It seems to me that the Church is very quick to condemn the "harlot," but men are often given a pass with a tap on the knuckles.
I have personally seen this in an Evangelical Free Church I attended for a while.
What I believe this verse is referring to is not particpating in Holy Communion with the individual ("with such an one no not to eat.") Witholding the Lord's Supper from a person in open sin is Scriptural.
Since the Bible cautions against receiving the sacrament unworthily, we are actually doing these individuals a favor.
As a last resort, it appears that unrepentant sin must be met with disfellowshipping, at which point the reason for that action would be disclosed (not a gossip session, but simply the statement that the individual is disfellowshipped for unrepentant sin).
13
But them that are without God judgeth.
Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athanasius Now, this church immediately honed in on the sexual sin of this woman, but how many members of the congregation who are covetous have been subjected to the same treatment if they have not stopped being covetous?
Or how many idolaters (perhaps worshipping power and money) have had their sin exposed to the collective Body?
Good point.
Quote: : What I believe this verse is referring to is not particpating in Holy Communion with the individual ("with such an one no not to eat.") Witholding the Lord's Supper from a person in open sin is Scriptural.
Since the Bible cautions against receiving the sacrament unworthily, we are actually doing these individuals a favor.
I agree. Instead of broadcasting the sin, it is wise to cover her and work with her to get her to repent.
If that doesn't work, remove her from the Communion and continue to work with her.
If she doesn't repent, there is a time to have her leave the fellowship of the saints and suffer the consequences of her sin.
Let you said Ath, wisdom is needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good points here.
Thanks everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JBaker45 James White has something to say regarding Foxnews and church discipline : http://aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3041 We have had to discipline in my church as well and it is a painful process all around.
While I understand JW's concern, I have a greater concern that this situation is amplified by the blog-sphere, including JW.
We recently lost a family from the church due to gossip on the internet.
Even though the woman went to news (which in and of itself is sin in my opinion), we need to let the local church deal with this, not participate in the broadcasting of the issue to the world.
I also notice the JW is suggesting that the news is lying simply because they are the news.
That seems a bit odd.
But I do agree with him on the need for holiness on the body of Christ, and the need for discipline to sustain this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He plugged my favorite author, R.C Sproul!!
Great Book too!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JBaker45 James White has something to say regarding Foxnews and church discipline : http://aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3041 When will the "church" discipline JW for his sins?
I smell a hypocrite.
On other news, a church in Florida decided to sew one of their scarlet letters onto the forehead of one of it's former parishioners.
More at 10.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travelah When will the "church" discipline JW for his sins?
Are you referring to some (as of yet) unrepented sins?
Parishioners are not to be spanked like a children.
It seems to me that church discipline (in this context) involves the revealing of sin that results (hopefully) in acknowledgment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For starters, telling someone in a church that actually PRACTICES church discipline that you are actively engaging in sin should have sent up a red flag to this gal.
It appears to me - and maybe I'm wrong - that if she had stopped it then it would hardly have been an issue.
That said - it strikes me as more than a little hypocritical on both parts.
She's gone to the news media over her sin (which got it in the public record) and the church looks bad (which was probably her intent in the first place) which begs the question of why you'd want your kids to go to such a place (maybe I'm giving too much credit to logic here?).
I have no problem with public discipline IF (and here's the key) it is consistent (which is hardly ever th case).
It can't be a case of 'Well that's the deacon's kid so we'll let it pass.'
Also, I see Fox talked to Darrell Bock from DTS.
Wonder if Darrell's got them on speed dial?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travelah When will the "church" discipline JW for his sins?
I smell a hypocrite.
On other news, a church in Florida decided to sew one of their scarlet letters onto the forehead of one of it's former parishioners.
More at 10. None of us is crystal clean, but can you elaborate?
Did you see James come out of the liquor store with a handful of lottery tickets and Jack D?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maestroh None of us is crystal clean, but can you elaborate?
Did you see James come out of the liquor store with a handful of lottery tickets and Jack D?
I listened to him murder a woman, beat a man half to death and then several others praise the good "Dr" for his good work for God.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travelah I listened to him murder a woman, beat a man half to death and then several others praise the good "Dr" for his good work for God.
Brother, have you "left the building" ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JBaker45 Brother, have you "left the building" ?
Nope .... the spiritual importance of what I stated just went over the top of your head.
Stretch your toes and see if you can still grab hold of what I stated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travelah I listened to him murder a woman, beat a man half to death and then several others praise the good "Dr" for his good work for God.
Again - can you elaboarate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travelah Nope ....
The spiritual importance of what I stated just went over the top of your head.
Stretch your toes and see if you can still grab hold of what I stated.
Well, it went over my head, too, and I'm pretty good at sarcasm and metaphor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maestroh Again - can you elaboarate?
Yes, while he used the moniker Dr Oakley, I observed this man tear a woman apart with his insulting, condescending and purely carnal attempt to exalt himself.
He then did the same thing to another man using an untamed tongue as a weapon.
When called to apologize or repent for his treatment in the discussion, he dismissed it immediately.
It was as carnal a display of enmity towards Christ (the Christian in Christ and He in them) by one professing Christ that I had witnessed in some time.
He is exalted as an elder by many among his own.
I see him as unfit for the role although obviously I cannot speak for the LORD.
Were it in my power, I would not allow him to sit under the roof of our church until he repents to the LORD and apologizes to the Christian community for his excesses (not that he would have any fellowship interest among Arminians).
In short, Calvinists exalt his "ministry".
I despise it for his unrepentant sins.
I'll be plain speaking as usual.
When somebody exalts James White in a discussion room or elsewhere, I see somebody who is either ignorant of the spirit about the man or they are not in a right relationship with the LORD.
We do not soldier in this walk to bring victory to the soldier.
Now, I have probably stated more than I should but all of these matters and more have been brought to the man publicly by many people.
For him to have a single word to state regarding the chastising of another's sins and to do so through a "ministry" is to engage in a charade of sorts.
He is in a very real sense the Jimmy Swaggart of Calvinism (and I am obviously not referring to sexual proclivities here).
I hope that cleared up what I am referring to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travelah Yes, while he used the moniker Dr Oakley, I observed this man tear a woman apart with his insulting, condescending and purely carnal attempt to exalt himself.
He then did the same thing to another man using an untamed tongue as a weapon.
When called to apologize or repent for his treatment in the discussion, he dismissed it immediately.
It was as carnal a display of enmity towards Christ (the Christian in Christ and He in them) by one professing Christ that I had witnessed in some time.
He is exalted as an elder by many among his own.
I see him as unfit for the role although obviously I cannot speak for the LORD.
Were it in my power, I would not allow him to sit under the roof of our church until he repents to the LORD and apologizes to the Christian community for his excesses (not that he would have any fellowship interest among Arminians).
In short, Calvinists exalt his "ministry".
I despise it for his unrepentant sins.
I'll be plain speaking as usual.
When somebody exalts James White in a discussion room or elsewhere, I see somebody who is either ignorant of the spirit about the man or they are not in a right relationship with the LORD.
We do not soldier in this walk to bring victory to the soldier.
Now, I have probably stated more than I should but all of these matters and more have been brought to the man publicly by many people.
For him to have a single word to state regarding the chastising of another's sins and to do so through a "ministry" is to engage in a charade of sorts.
He is in a very real sense the Jimmy Swaggart of Calvinism (and I am obviously not referring to sexual proclivities here).
I hope that cleared up what I am referring to.
Trying to clear up my understanding.
Trav - you and I are on the same side of the aisle on a lot of stuff here such as White's 'doctorate' (which I note you didn't mention but has been touched on before) as well as the necessity of a good attitude on things.
I want to make clear to you that I am NOT disputing your statements here in any way.
My own experiences with James White have actually been rather pleasant (which contributes to the disconnect, I guess) - although it is my view that he rides the Calvinism horse a tad too much.
I make no excuses for Mr.
White. But I do have one question - are you sure - absolutely SURE - that the poster Dr Oakley was James White?
Yes, I know he uses that moniker on his You Tube thing but could it not have been an impostor?
In addition to this - and just trying to make sure that I follow you here: when you reference Jimmy Swaggart, are you referencing his rather reckless disregard for Christian grace in some of his bald and bold pronouncements of heresy back in the 1980s - or what?
(Note: If you'd like to take this offline - which I would understand - please PM me).
That said - if Mr.
White did what you state (and again, I have no reason to dispute the veracity of events cited) then it is tragic, and I would hope that he would be man enough to apologize for it.
It is best that we not 'worship' the 'Christian celebrities' that are out there - and you have referenced those before who seem to be a lot like Limbaugh clones (yes, White has his, too) and fully testosterone-filled.
Damage once done cannot be undone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maestroh Trying to clear up my understanding.
Trav - you and I are on the same side of the aisle on a lot of stuff here such as White's 'doctorate' (which I note you didn't mention but has been touched on before) as well as the necessity of a good attitude on things.
I want to make clear to you that I am NOT disputing your statements here in any way.
My own experiences with James White have actually been rather pleasant (which contributes to the disconnect, I guess) - although it is my view that he rides the Calvinism horse a tad too much.
I make no excuses for Mr.
White. But I do have one question - are you sure - absolutely SURE - that the poster Dr Oakley was James White?
Yes, I know he uses that moniker on his You Tube thing but could it not have been an impostor?
In addition to this - and just trying to make sure that I follow you here: when you reference Jimmy Swaggart, are you referencing his rather reckless disregard for Christian grace in some of his bald and bold pronouncements of heresy back in the 1980s - or what?
(Note: If you'd like to take this offline - which I would understand - please PM me).
That said - if Mr.
White did what you state (and again, I have no reason to dispute the veracity of events cited) then it is tragic, and I would hope that he would be man enough to apologize for it.
It is best that we not 'worship' the 'Christian celebrities' that are out there - and you have referenced those before who seem to be a lot like Limbaugh clones (yes, White has his, too) and fully testosterone-filled.
Damage once done cannot be undone.
Here's the thing: White is not this woman's pastor.
He knows nothing about the situation but from third hand sources.
To do a video about this woman and the church she WAS a member of is really none of his business.
He's supposed to be an authority on apologetics - not the moral guru of all Christianity.
When's the last time he did a video on - say - a male minister's moral failure?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure I have seen this video.
Do you have a link Maestroh or Trav or anybody?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is one of the reasons that I dislike the new apologetics agenda of some of these types of ministries, and James White doesn't stand alone.
They are out to destroy their opponents with what they exalt as logic and common sense.
When we publicly destroy folks for the sole reason of winning debates and theological discussions, I am afraid we have bought into the spirit of the age.
The goal should be to win folks to Christ with the truth, not beat them up with it.
And, as is absolutely clear, most of these ministries place themselves above church discipline.
As long as they seemingly win for Christ, they are given freedom to do whatever they desire.
It seems that most of these ministries are supported by young men who have bought into the same mentality and belief that this is a good practice.
I look at the methods of Van Til and Schaefer, who were not afraid of controversy or defending their beliefs.
But the attitude was one of humility and seeking the truth.
A demonstration of love for those they they aimed their belief at.
Instead of looking for weaknesses in their opponents, they instead placed their faith on the line, not by condemning other Christians for what they believed.
Having met both of these men, I can tell you they lived a transparent life and were the same in their public life and private life.
Seeing themselves as flawed men who loved their Lord.
We are told to preach the gospel, not debate it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tallen
We are told to preach the gospel, not debate it.
Amen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tking Tallen We are told to preach the gospel, not debate it.
Amen. God bless you both,
But we are commanded to keep ourselves prepared such that we may offer an 'apologia' (a logical defense) for our positions (1 Peter 3:15).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... a defense of your Christian faith and not a stinging defense of your opinions (not speaking of you personally here)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JBaker45 God bless you both,
But we are commanded to keep ourselves prepared such that we may offer an 'apologia' (a logical defense) for our positions (1 Peter 3:15).
Blessings to you as well, but we do disagree here, at least on some level.
(And that's okay, family in Christ can disagree and still be very much family.)
I understand this verse is often used for the apologetics angle, but the verse doesn't really say that.
15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear :
We're not called on to defend in a manner of debate or argumentation, and I'm not exactly sure where apologia is in this verse (are you using a Greek text?..I don't have one).
We're called on to give a reason for our hope, and that is to be done with meekness and fear.
As far as I can tell, that is nothing like the type of discourse that passes for apologetics these days, and I don't find anything like that in scripture either.
Even Paul with his sarcastic tones doesn't appear to take that tact.
We're to rely on the Holy Spirit for our words, not our education or even our logic (though neither of those is a bad thing).
There's a difference between being prepared through scripture, meditation, prayer, and relationship with the Holy Spirit and being prepared according to what a course or seminary declares is preparedness.
Again, neither a course or seminary is a bad thing, but the Holy Spirit absolutely must be the final word on what we speak...always.
Debate isn't included in this, and scripture specifically tells us we are not to be divisive, not to fall pray to vain babblings, not to provoke, to avoid foolish questions, and contentions.
James also is pretty clear that if the tongue is unbridled the religion is in vain.
Just to be clear, I'm not singling out James White , I'm just saying that this is a very real concern about the entire apologetics circle.
Or at least, the apologetics that I've seen and read.
And I'll also say that some of the old timers were pretty caustic with their words, which I think was just as wrong.
We are to be strong in the Lord, it's true, but that strength can't be judged from man's idea of wisdom or defense.
If it does, it's been brought down to a level that is no different than the world's level, and the attitude is much the same.
This strength, attitude, demeanor, and the words that go with it, must come from above.
It's an anointing, and we really don't hear much about that anymore, unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|