Garet finds the group I am accusing as credible and me not. He wrote, "YOU have made the judgment that they are servants of Satan, I can hardly see how that lends you ANY credibility in your comments". I am confused by Garet's position because that is exactly my issue with the folks I am speaking of. I think they are accusing the body of sin, I believe their accusations are not always correct, and I believe their methodology is often inappropriate.
Why would Garet say I lose credibility by accusing them of sin but maintain that they have credibility while they question (or attack depending on perspective) others?
So my questions are:
- Can one be a Christian and still be deceived and sin?
- Can one publicly confront another in a graceful way?
- Under what circumstances?
- Who decides when the confrontation is inappropriate or has gone on long enough?
Technorati Tags: Christian living
2 comments:
OK, I'll take a stab at it.
Q: Can one be a Christian and still be deceived and sin?
My A: Sure. That's almost a rhetorical question in my mind.
Q: Can one publicly confront another in a graceful way?
My A: Yes. You follow Biblical rules of confronting someone. You do it with gentleness and love. You do it with an attitude of wanting to help the person. As Jesus taught in Matt. 18 on church discipline, I would think you would do it privately first, then get some help, etc. The "bringing it before the church" is almost the same as the modern-day posting it on a blog. I know you are not asking about church discipline, but I think the same principles apply. In any case, I don't think you would publically call the person an idiot or say they were of Satan unless there is ample evidence to support that.
Q: Under what circumstances?
My A: I think there are several variations here. If the person has openly presented their theology to the public in a forum that was meant to be public (e.g. a book, blog, etc.) then you could gracefully confront them in public. If the person is preaching error within a local church, it should be handled there. I suppose it would always be best to check with the person and make sure you understand correctly before going public. That isn't always possible. Christ blasted the Jewish leaders publically because they were leading the masses astray, and that was probably the only way to address it. Paul publically (in epistles) scolded some people by name with some pretty harsh words. I assume he had communicated with the accused previous to going public.
Q: Who decides when the confrontation is inappropriate or has gone on long enough?
My A: That's a good question. A person could always seek advice from mature believers. The ultimate standard is the Bible with Christ demonstrating how to do it perfectly.
no-blog ... you and I are aligned.
Post a Comment