[George]

Originally Posted by Beth

I was curious about hearing more about how the instruction in the Bible of not rebuking an elder would be carried out on a forum such as this as far as the rules are concerned. I'm more than willing to adhere to the rules of this forum.

Ok, you've made your position very clear and I think I know where you are coming from.

I would just advise, (I'm speaking to the forum as a whole) that we take a little time in debate before we call someone a heretic or chase them off. Let's show humility and meekness. I agree that if the person continues in rude behavior then they need to be dealt with.

Where Is this "advise" found in the scriptures? Hmmm? Your "advise" is your own "humble" opinion - which doesn't mean a thing to me!

"I would just advise, (I'm speaking to the forum as a whole) that we take a little time in debate before we call someone a heretic or chase them off."

I wonder - why have YOU Have opened up this "can of worms" AGAIN? Do you think that I am going to come around to "your point of view", when all you can give is your "opinion" and a verse taken out of its historical and dispensational setting?

You ignored nearly my whole post! I demonstrated (with scriptural examples) that we are not obligated to "turn the other cheek" (Paul didn't!) and if you had more biblical discernment and understanding you would know that those verses in Matthew 5:39 & Luke 6:29 do NOT "apply" to "Christians" in the "Age of Grace", but to Jews (living at the time of Christ) "under the Law".

If those verses apply to us then ALL of Matthew Chapters 5, 6, & 7 and Luke Chapter 6 are "applicable" to us, and in 50 years of being a Christian I have never met one Christian that ever obeyed the command to: "cut off their hand"; or pluck out their eye" or cut off their foot;[Matthew 18:18 & Mark 9:45] - have you?.

This is known as "rightly dividing the word of God" 101. We can not "pick & choose" which verses apply to us just willy-nilly. There has to be some "scriptural basis" to Bible knowledge, discernment and understanding and that basis is found in "dispensational" teaching and "rightly dividing the word of truth" - or else you are going to try to make me "observe" something that God never intended for Christians (saved by Grace) to observe. ("turning the other cheek" - so we can have "debate"!)

If you don't understand these basic "dispensational" truths - what are you doing trying to "instruct" this Forum when you don't know what you are talking about?

I didn't call the man a heretic! I said that he was proud, vain, and arrogant. (which he demonstrated when he bragged about being "in rare form tonight", after he had just got through castigating, rebuking, and ridiculing me - a perfect stranger who he knew absolutely nothing about!) You still have not replied to my questions about his pernicious conduct, but I guess it was OK because he "agreed" with you on a post that you made about Dr. Peter Ruckman.

I also said that he was a "trouble maker" - which is obvious from what has happened. Why can't you keep your facts straight?

Why are we obligated to give someone who comes on this Forum and personally insults one of the members in less than a week, (who has had to re-write some of his Posts because of his lousy "attitude"), to give him a little time for "debate"? This isn't about "turning the other cheek". This is about a man who insulted me and you don't think that is such a big deal. I guess in your book "debate" is more important than decent Christian conduct!

But it is not so in my "Book":

Romans 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

In my BOOK God puts "debate" way up there amongst murder and deceit. Someone who "enjoys a good debate" is "carnal". I do not "enjoy" debate whatsoever! But I will contend for the faith, when it comes under attack. And I will defend myself from slander and insults.

This man came on the Forum and was almost immediately "contentious", but you ignored his abusive behavior because - you wanted some more "debate"?
1 Corinthians 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom , neither the churches of God.

I have tried to be less "harsh" and "direct" with you because of your past posts. What I cannot understand is why you ever posted those "charges" against brother Ruckman from Donald Waite (a man that you "admire" and "respect"). Did you think that I would let them just pass?

At first I carefully and respectfully dealt with them and you seemed to be satisfied until T4T showed up and (by taking them out of context) made 3 of them "appear" to support Waite's accusations; at which time you suddenly did an about face and declared that you were so pleased that someone proved that you (and Waite) were "right" all along.

I then demonstrated that 5 of those charges were FALSE! and the other 4 were FRIVOLOUS! and instead of examining my points, since you had now found an ally (T4T), you ignored them and proceeded to start to "upbraid" me for not being "nice" and "loving" and unwilling to "turn the other cheek".

What about the fact that a man that you admire and respect is proven to be a liar? Making "false" charges; taking words out of context; twisting words to make a man to appear to be something he is not, or believes something that he doesn't. Doesn't that "bother" you even in the least bit?

If I found out that someone that I admire and respect turned out to make false accusations and tried to isolate a fellow brother in Christ by taking his words out of context ,and tried to denigrate him I would be greatly disappointed in that person.

After the remarks that you made when you first returned to the Forum today - I find it hard to believe that you just couldn't help "commenting" on my statements earlier today. Haven't you learned to let "sleeping dogs lie"?

If you had taken time to "check out" the charges & accusations made by a man that you admire and respect, none of this would have happened. But instead, like Jerry before you, you accepted that man's word and maligned, slandered, and falsely charged brother Peter Ruckman with things that he is not guilty of - without reading anything by him; without ever hearing any of his teaching; and without ever having met the man; you judged him by what others said of him (that's known as "hearsay" in court).

I will not stand by while someone insults me, and neither will I stand by if someone falsely charges a man that I admire and respect. And if you can post charges and accusations against him without proof - I certainly can charge Donald Waite with making "false accusations" against brother Ruckman. And unlike you, I can "prove" it!
What's good for the "gander" is also good for the "goose".

The fact that you are a woman doesn't change a thing - "turn-about" is fair play. If you don't want to see me be "unloving" and "judgmental", then don't make charges that you can't prove! If you want to see me be more humble and meek then how about a little more "righteous judgment"?