Quote:

---

Calvinist also teach from the KJV which I have read and continue to read.

---

Every Calvinist I know reads the ESV

Frok said:

---

Quote:

---

Calvinist also teach from the KJV which I have read and continue to read.

---

Every Calvinist I know reads the ESV

---

Uh oh.

Not to mention Piper's belief that a properly submissive wife should "endure perhaps being smacked one night". Or that she endure verbal abuse "for a season".

Quote:

---

The problem I have with Piper is when he implies that you could lose your salvation if you "waste your life" as he describes it. He states that implicitly in his book on retirement..

And nothing wrong with a pastor exhorting his flock to do more with their lives for Christ. It is when you tie "evidence" of salvation to works that I have a problem. How much or what do I have to do to satisfy Piper and Macarthur?

Of course, he will say as a Calvinist that means you were never really one of the elect anyway. It just seems like a very condemning theology. I hope he is not correct.

---

It's not like Calvinists believe that the Book of John, or Romans 8 aren't in the bible or anything. Whom the Son sets free is free indeed. That is the whole point of TULIP. It places grace in it's proper context, in my opinion.

Its' not about satisfying PIper or Macaurthur. They are speaking against a life that is about saying you're following without following. Do they miss the mark? Sure. But as will anyone else whos preaching.

I have not liked the "oh you were never elect anyway" bit, because it only talks about the "negative" aspect. There's another side of that coin (ie, the "P" in TULIP)

diehard03 said:

---

Quote:

---

Nah, but I like going to Aggie sporting events and am sure he thinks that is wasting my life also.

---

There's nothing wrong with Aggie sporting events or hobbies or even having a dignified retirement. He's preaching against the seduction of the American Dream that says you chase after materialism.

I think you would agree that someone who solely spent the resources God provided them on going to Aggie sporting events to be a waste. No one on this board believes you do such a thing. There's no guilt or shame about your spending here. But, we are thankful that, even if they are abrasive and approach it the wrong way, there are pastors willing to lay the challenge before us so we can check our own hearts.

---

Exactly.

Satoshi Nakamoto said:

---

diehard03 said:

---

Quote:

---

Nah, but I like going to Aggie sporting events and am sure he thinks that is wasting my life also.

---

There's nothing wrong with Aggie sporting events or hobbies or even having a dignified retirement. He's preaching against the seduction of the American Dream that says you chase after materialism.

I think you would agree that someone who solely spent the resources God provided them on going to Aggie sporting events to be a waste. No one on this board believes you do such a thing. There's no guilt or shame about your spending here. But, we are thankful that, even if they are abrasive and approach it the wrong way, there are pastors willing to lay the challenge before us so we can check our own hearts.

---

Exactly.

---

You might google what Piper has said about losing your salvation if you do not persevere.

And as pacifist mentioned, both he and MacArthur are pretty demeaning of women.

As I posted, there is nothing wrong with exhorting listeners to do more for Christ. I have a huge problem when that is set as a standard of salvation.

Much like Macarthur's five "requirements".

Quote:

---

You might google what Piper has said about losing your salvation if you do not persevere.

And as pacifist mentioned, both he and MacArthur are pretty demeaning of women.

As I posted, there is nothing wrong with exhorting listeners to do more for Christ. I have a huge problem when that is set as a standard of salvation.

Much like Macarthur's five "requirements".

---

I guess we are at the stage where we keep repeating the same things without listening.

You don't persevere. You can't persevere. That's the whole point. God, through the Spirit, is what perseveres.

The demeaning of women is a bad take by him.

Not sure how many times we have to say that good works aren't the standard for salvation. They aren't requirements. They are indications or evidences of a salvific faith. You can't fake them either.

What you seem to be missing is that everything comes from God. Everything.

diehard03 said:

---

Quote:

---

You might google what Piper has said about losing your salvation if you do not persevere.

And as pacifist mentioned, both he and MacArthur are pretty demeaning of women.

As I posted, there is nothing wrong with exhorting listeners to do more for Christ. I have a huge problem when that is set as a standard of salvation.

Much like Macarthur's five "requirements".

---

I guess we are at the stage where we keep repeating the same things without listening.

You don't persevere. You can't persevere. That's the whole point. God, through the Spirit, is what perseveres.

The demeaning of women is a bad take by him.

Not sure how many times we have to say that good works aren't the standard for salvation. They aren't requirements. They are indications or evidences of a salvific faith. You can't fake them either.

What you seem to be missing is that everything comes from God. Everything.

---

I know everything comes from God. So why does Macarthur have five requirements? Does God?

I am sure you are aware of the LS folks and they all seem to have requirements, correct? And do they not judge people to not be of the elect unless they demonstrate those things?

I hear what you are saying but I do not think any man can judge whether someone is saved by what they do or don't do.

Piper and Macarthur both state that, correct? And are not they the most prominent Calvinist preachers in America?


And are there not Biblical stories where people were faking evidence of a salvific life?

And please do not get petty and claim I am not listening. You know better.

This really isn't getting us anywhere. You keep harping on this requirement thing and refusing to really see any other view. You're going to be upset and frustrated every time you see Macarthur and Piper on this board and post the same old "Calvinism bad" posts every time.

diehard03 said:

---

This really isn't getting us anywhere. You keep harping on this requirement thing and refusing to really see any other view. You're going to be upset and frustrated every time you see Macarthur and Piper on this board and post the same old "Calvinism bad" posts every time.

---

Fair enough.

If I was a Calvinist and these guys were apparently distorting my theology I would call them on it. But all the Calvinists I know swear by them.

And Merry Christmas! I will try to abstain from anti Calvinist posts.

PA24 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

PA24 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Like MacArthur and Piper? With their man made requirements of lordship salvation?

And it has nothing to do with the Gospel as that is very simple as Paul preached.

The Gospel is Good News. Man sinned, Christ died for our sins and the reconciliation of man and God, he arose, and sits at the right side of God.

That is the Gospel and if you believe you are saved just like Scripture repeatedly says.

Calvinism, Armenianism, free grace, lordship salvation, etc. are all theologies based on secondary things and not the Gospel itself.

Simple question, if you are a Calvinist and believe in TULIP, why do MacArthur and Piper require lordship salvation works that they define?

Do they not believe the U in TULIP stands for unconditional election?

And I am curious now my friend.

Which Marxist preachers do I like that are exposed?

---

I like you Dem but you don't know what you are taking about. Calvinist teach by grace alone and not works.
Your beef should be with the brother of Christ, the apostle James. He spoke of works, but really more Like a Calvinist, the believe that your faith will cause u to produce good fruit but Calvinist do not teach that those works will get u in heaven.

Calvinist are hardcore Christians, and I find JM teachings directly out of the gospel fascinating. From the Good Samaritan to Nicodemus, he brings the characters to life. A powerful orator teaching in the same church for over 50 years. I don't agree with everything he writes or says and I am not a Calvinist,

Calvinist also teach from the KJV which I have read and continue to read.

---

First of all, I like you also.

Are you familiar with Lordship salvation as preached by Macarthur and Piper? Very much a works based salvation model imho.

And what is a "hardcore" Christian? Where is that in the Bible?

My understanding is that through God's grace if I have faith in the finished work of Christ crucified and resurrected then I am born again, emdued with the Holy Spirit, and assured of eternal life.

What do I have to do other than that?

Sure seems like the Lordship salvation guys want evidence of more.

---

Hardcore as in a fundamental interpretation of the gospel (KJV) of Christ. This includes Revelations which is about end times punishment centered around the existing country of Israel. Very hardcore IMO.

I see where you agreed to stop with your self proclaimed verbal prosecution of Calvinist. Paul would be proud of you.
[url=https://texags.com/forums/15/topics/3255634/replies/60981745][/url]

---

So there were no "hardcore" Christians until the KJV was created?

Leaves out quite a few saints. And martyrs.

Quote:

---

This includes Revelations which is about end times punishment centered around the existing country of Israel

---

It's Revelation, and it's not about the modern country of Israel. Nothing in the Bible is.

Zobel said:

---

Quote:

---

This includes Revelations which is about end times punishment centered around the existing country of Israel

---

It's Revelation, and it's not about the modern country of Israel. Nothing in the Bible is.

---

Yep.

Actually about 90% of Revelation is about the Christian churches and the Roman Empire at that time.

But you can not make money off of that.

PA24 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

PA24 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

PA24 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Like MacArthur and Piper? With their man made requirements of lordship salvation?

And it has nothing to do with the Gospel as that is very simple as Paul preached.

The Gospel is Good News. Man sinned, Christ died for our sins and the reconciliation of man and God, he arose, and sits at the right side of God.

That is the Gospel and if you believe you are saved just like Scripture repeatedly says.

Calvinism, Armenianism, free grace, lordship salvation, etc. are all theologies based on secondary things and not the Gospel itself.

Simple question, if you are a Calvinist and believe in TULIP, why do MacArthur and Piper require lordship salvation works that they define?

Do they not believe the U in TULIP stands for unconditional election?

And I am curious now my friend.
Which Marxist preachers do I like that are exposed?

---

I like you Dem but you don't know what you are taking about. Calvinist teach by grace alone and not works.
Your beef should be with the brother of Christ, the apostle James. He spoke of works, but really more Like a Calvinist, the believe that your faith will cause u produce good fruit but Calvinist do not teach that those works wil
Calvinist are hardcore Christians, and I find JM teachings directly out ogospel fascinating. From the Good Samaritan to Nicodemus, he brings the characters to life. A powerful orator teaching in the same church for over 50 years. I don't agree with everything he writes or says and I am not a Calvin
Calvinist also teach from the KJV which I have read and continue to read.
Word

---

First of all, I like you also.

Are you familiar with Lordship salvation as preached by Macarthur and Piper? Very much a works based salvation model imho.

And what is a "hardcore" Christian? Where is that in the Bible?

My understanding is that through God's grace if I have faith in the finished work of Christ crucified and resurrected then I am born again, emdued with the Holy Spirit, and assured of eternal life.

What do I have to do other than that?

Sure seems like the Lordship salvation guys want evidence of more.

---

Hardcore as in a fundamental interpretation of the gospel (KJV) of Christ. This includes Revelations which is about end times punishment centered around the existing country of Israel. Very hardcore IMO.

I see where you agreed to stop with your self proclaimed verbal prosecution of Calvinist. Paul would be proud of you.
[url=https://texags.com/forums/15/topics/3255634/replies/60981745][/url]

---

So there were no "hardcore" Christians until the KJV was created?

Leaves out quite a few saints. And martyrs.

---

I would compare it to the Old Testament times, before Christ. Were there not men of faith before the Apostles?

KJV opened the scriptures to the world and in 2021, the first year that the entire world will have heard of the gospel of Christ.
Powerful!!! So many Christian dominations due to this translation including Calvinist.

Calvinist believe u r born from above, that God picks the bride of Christ. Maybe they are right, I just pray we are all in that group.

---

I firmly believe we can have total assurance of our salvation bought for a price by the precious blood of Jesus. There are no works, requirements, etc. that can add to the finished work of Christ. Just like there is no lack of works, sin, etc. that can separate us from God except possibly the sin against the Holy Spirit, which I believe means totally renouncing God and Jesus.

All our sins, past, present, and future have been forgiven.

Be assured of your salvation and rest in the Lord.

Is it possible to be a Christian, and to never become more Christ-like? While I agree with you on the beautiful simplicity of the Gospel, I also feel there is danger in presenting it half-baked. I think Bonhoeffer puts it well:

"Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.

Costly grace is the treasure hidden in the field; for the sake of it a man will go and sell all that he has. It is the pearl of great price to buy which the merchant will sell all his goods. It is the kingly rule of Christ, for whose sake a man will pluck out the eye which causes him to stumble; it is the call of Jesus Christ at which the disciple leaves his nets and follows him."

Maybe this is what Paul had in mind when he wrote we should work out our salvation with "fear and trembling"?

Wakesurfer817 said:

---

Is it possible to be a Christian, and to never become more Christ-like? While I agree with you on the beautiful simplicity of the Gospel, I also feel there is danger in presenting it half-baked. I think Bonhoeffer puts it well:

"Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.

Costly grace is the treasure hidden in the field; for the sake of it a man will go and sell all that he has. It is the pearl of great price to buy which the merchant will sell all his goods. It is the kingly rule of Christ, for whose sake a man will pluck out the eye which causes him to stumble; it is the call of Jesus Christ at which the disciple leaves his nets and follows him."

Maybe this is what Paul had in mind when he wrote we should work out our salvation with "fear and trembling"?

---

And that is the huge question that has been debated for centuries.

In my own walk,the more I realize love drives out fear and feel that I know the true character of God as revealed by Jesus, I just naturally seem to want to become more Christ like. I find myself much more "out there" with my witness and "works" than when I felt God was a more condemning, wrathful God.

As I said before, I am all for pastors exhorting their congregations to be more Christ like.

I do not like when they threaten or judge them with loss of their salvation.

In other words, I am not a "Sinners in the hands of an Angry God" believer.

And when I read sermons by Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc. in the Bible I do not read turn or burn. And Iknow, Matthew 25 41-46 but I believe that is describing what happened in 70 AD to Jerusalem and the Temple.

And I personally believe that the Gospel is so powerful as is the Holy Spirit that all a priest or preacher has to do is preach it and let the person accept by faith and the Holy Spirit convict and change the person.

IMHO, some pastors, especially "turn or burn" ones, seem to try to do the Spirit's job.

Read Paul's sermon on Mars Hill and then Sinner in the hands of an angry God. It is a completely different character of God and I think Paul is correct.

dermdoc said:

---

And I personally believe that the Gospel is so powerful as is the Holy Spirit that all a priest or preacher has to do is preach it and let the person accept by faith and the Holy Spirit convict and change the person.

IMHO, some pastors, especially "turn or burn" ones, seem to try to do the Spirit's job.

Read Paul's sermon on Mars Hill and then Sinner in the hands of an angry God. It is a completely different character of God and I think Paul is correct.

---

Agreed. The Holy Spirit convicts and changes a person. I think the WCF puts it well:

"These good works, done in obedience to God's commandments, are the fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith; and by them believers manifest their thankfulness, strengthen their assurance, edify their brethren, adorn the profession of the gospel, stop the mouths of the adversaries, and glorify God, whose workmanship they are...Their ability to do good works is not at all of themselves, but wholly from the Spirit of Christ."

And yes, I would agree that fear is almost never a good way to execute upon our Lord's Great Commission. However, I would say that I can't remember the last time I've heard someone preach on the sheep and the goats. Precious little pulpit time these days is spent on Romans 2 IMHO. Said another way - you can't have Easter without Good Friday.

I think this is perhaps were Piper, Keller, Macarthur et al are trying - imperfectly of course - to point us.

Not meaning to derail but I find the sheep and goats passages fascinating.

First of all, it is about nations and not individuals from my reading.

And judgement occurs based on being evil or good. No mention of the sinner's prayer, baptism, etc.

And the Greek word kolasin, is translated as "punishment", but usually means more of a "pruning" or rehab vs retributive punishment.

And of course the debate over whether anion means eternal or of an age has gone on for centuries.

And Romans 2 is interesting as it also discusses God's judgement is based on those who do evil vs. those that do good and or righteous.

Again no mention of the sinner's prayer, baptism, etc. And of course, Paul never mentions hell or eternal conscious torment.

And I agree it is very rarely preached.

dermdoc said:

---

And Romans 2 is interesting as it also discusses God's judgement is based on those who do evil vs. those that do good and or righteous.

Again no mention of the sinner's prayer, baptism, etc. And of course, Paul never mentions hell or eternal conscious torment.

And I agree it is very rarely preached.

---

Wouldn't you agree though that Romans 8 is set up - requires really - Romans 1-3? In order to fully appreciate Christ's work on the cross, do we not have to see our great need for His mercy?

Said another way, are we - as people, Believers, a nation, whatever - more or less aware of our sin and need for Christ today vs. 100 years ago?

Not a leading question. A real one. How does revival happen?

Great question.

I personally think our job is to be a witness for Christ and His love.

I think the Holy Spirit's job is to convict and regenerate.

Revival, to me, is a work of the Spirit and not of man. And that is from my reading of both the OT and NT.

And from reading Paul and others preaching in the NT, I just do not see judgement and condemnation used as a tool for conversion.

I believe Paul understood he was supposed to present the simple Gospel to the Gentiles and rely on the Holy Spirit to convict.

It is fascinating to me that the very preachers who preach God is totally sovereign seem to believe they have to help Him out.

dermdoc said:

---

Great question.

I personally think our job is to be a witness for Christ and His love.

I think the Holy Spirit's job is to convict and regenerate.

Revival, to me, is a work of the Spirit and not of man. And that is from my reading of both the OT and NT.

And from reading Paul and others preaching in the NT, I just do not see judgement and condemnation used as a tool for conversion.

I believe Paul understood he was supposed to present the simple Gospel to the Gentiles and rely on the Holy Spirit to convict.

It is fascinating to me that the very preachers who preach God is totally sovereign seem to believe they have to help Him out.

---

Our witness includes the way we live, no?

"Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead."

You're a far smarter Biblical scholar than I am, I concede. Just spit-balling here, but James isn't speaking about nations like Jesus was in the sheep and the goats is he?

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Just jerking your chain

The point though is that it's all well and good to witness about God's love, but if we don't actually DO it, what good is it? Have we not gotten a bit sideways in American evangelicalism with the whole "I said yes to Christ, so don't meddle with Saturday night?"

Wakesurfer817 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Great question.

I personally think our job is to be a witness for Christ and His love.

I think the Holy Spirit's job is to convict and regenerate.

Revival, to me, is a work of the Spirit and not of man. And that is from my reading of both the OT and NT.

And from reading Paul and others preaching in the NT, I just do not see judgement and condemnation used as a tool for conversion.

I believe Paul understood he was supposed to present the simple Gospel to the Gentiles and rely on the Holy Spirit to convict.

It is fascinating to me that the very preachers who preach God is totally sovereign seem to believe they have to help Him out.

---

Our witness includes the way we live, no?

"Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead."

You're a far smarter Biblical scholar than I am, I concede. Just spit-balling here, but James isn't speaking about nations like Jesus was in the sheep and the goats is he?

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Just jerking your chain

The point though is that it's all well and good to witness about God's love, but if we don't actually DO it, what good is it? Have we not gotten a bit sideways in American evangelicalism with the whole "I said yes to Christ, so don't meddle with Saturday night?"

---

Sure. And I believe actions speak louder than words.

James, in those verses, is speaking to believers and exhorting them on how they should live. Which is great.

He never questions their salvation. And that is where I have a problem with some pastors who do question that very thing.

If our works are responsible for our salvation, how many and what works are required?

Is working at the food bank enough? Going to church every Sunday?

Is it Mother Teresa works? Or just average person works?

And who determines which and what works?

And how many?

The problem is no man can ever do "enough" and why we are told not to judge as only God knows the heart.

I think this question is an unavoidable consequence of the way the west came to view salvation...the whole idea of merit underpins it all. And if I could be completely bold, I think both sides of this are wrong, or right, or both. But it's the wrong question, because I think it has the wrong idea in view when speaking of salvation.

Nobody can question another's salvation, because it isn't ours to judge. We also are completely free to observe and judge what is and is not sin. If sin is mud, we're perfectly correct to say "you're sitting in mud" as well as to acknowledge we're covered in it, but it isn't our place to opine about what that means for their salvation, or how they got there.

The other side to that is that we're also quite capable to observe and judge what is and is not salvific. The NT is full of exhortations to things that lead to the fruit of the spirit, to righteousness, to justification, which is salvation. Like sin, we can say "what you're doing is good" but not "you're saved because you did this." It's not our place.

Do you need to work out your salvation? Yes. St Paul is clear we have a walk, and a work, and we are syngeroi, God's co-workers.

Can action and inaction lead from salvation? Yes. For example, St Paul says that a person who doesn't care for his own family has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

Can anyone be saved apart from God? No. Because before we did anything, He moved to save us. Both St John and St Paul teach that creation itself was aimed to the ultimate deification of mankind. He began "saving" us before we were created, before we ever sinned, and during, and after.

Are the good works we do ours? No. They're His works He does through us, which a grace to us. So they're not to our merit or credit, but God's. But denying them is denying grace, which is salvation.

It's not quantitative, it is ontological. It's not how much stuff you did, but what you are. And only He can judge that. You can't be saved by your work, but who will say that God's work can't save????

Agree and then what James wrote makes perfect sense.

dermdoc said:

---

Sure. And I believe actions speak louder than words.

James, in those verses, is speaking to believers and exhorting them on how they should live. Which is great.

He never questions their salvation. And that is where I have a problem with some pastors who do question that very thing.

If our works are responsible for our salvation, how many and what works are required?

Is working at the food bank enough? Going to church every Sunday?

Is it Mother Teresa works? Or just average person works?

And who determines which and what works?

And how many?

The problem is no man can ever do "enough" and why we are told not to judge as only God knows the heart.

---

Excellent. Totally agree with you. It's all Christ. Our salvation is all Him. Thank God.

And now to an obvious, over-the-top, example of where I think the Reformed preachers are - perhaps also in an over-the-top manner - pointed.

Let's say you saw a situation where somebody - let's call him "Jim" - was clearly in trouble. Jim could tell you when he was saved (15 years old). How it happened (on a Young Life trip). Jim could articulate the Gospel to you perfectly. But Jim was a wreck. Jim parties every night. He sleeps around like crazy. He doesn't give a dime to the church - or anyone else for that matter. He's terrible to his wife and kids. In short, he's a narcissistic jerk.

But he's saved right? Jim can tell you it's all grace brother! He can quote John 3:16, and with tears in his eyes, remember the camp fire where it happened after all! Sin so that grace might abound!

Jim's obviously an exaggeration. And yes - to some extent we're all him. Yes, this example is pedantic and simple minded. I can feel your eyes rolling. But - bear with me for a second - do we pat Jim on the back and tell him he's good an carry on? Do we say it's none of our business? Or do we give him some hard truths about what it really means to pick up your cross and follow Jesus? Do we confront Jim with the reality of his sin - and that he might need to ask himself whether or not he really is follower of Christ? Is it loving to let him continue the path he's on?

In short - is there a place for accountability any more - either between Believers or from the pulpit? Is there a difference between accountability and fear mongering?

Yep. Well said.

Wakesurfer817 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sure. And I believe actions speak louder than words.

James, in those verses, is speaking to believers and exhorting them on how they should live. Which is great.

He never questions their salvation. And that is where I have a problem with some pastors who do question that very thing.

If our works are responsible for our salvation, how many and what works are required?

Is working at the food bank enough? Going to church every Sunday?

Is it Mother Teresa works? Or just average person works?

And who determines which and what works?

And how many?

The problem is no man can ever do "enough" and why we are told not to judge as only God knows the heart.

---

Excellent. Totally agree with you. It's all Christ. Our salvation is all Him. Thank God.

And now to an obvious, over-the-top, example of where I think the Reformed preachers are - perhaps also in an over-the-top manner - pointed.

Let's say you saw a situation where somebody - let's call him "Jim" - was clearly in trouble. Jim could tell you when he was saved (15 years old). How it happened (on a Young Life trip). Jim could articulate the Gospel to you perfectly. But Jim was a wreck. Jim parties every night. He sleeps around like crazy. He doesn't give a dime to the church - or anyone else for that matter. He's terrible to his wife and kids. In short, he's a narcissistic jerk.

But he's saved right? Jim can tell you it's all grace brother! He can quote John 3:16, and with tears in his eyes, remember the camp fire where it happened after all! Sin so that grace might abound!

Jim's obviously an exaggeration. And yes - to some extent we're all him. Yes, this example is pedantic and simple minded. I can feel your eyes rolling. But - bear with me for a second - do we pat Jim on the back and tell him he's good an carry on? Do we say it's none of our business? Or do we give him some hard truths about what it really means to pick up your cross and follow Jesus? Do we confront Jim with the reality of his sin - and that he might need to ask himself whether or not he really is follower of Christ? Is it loving to let him continue the path he's on?

In short - is there a place for accountability any more - either between Believers or from the pulpit? Is there a difference between accountability and fear mongering?

---

I believe Scripture instructs that if Jim is a member of the church then we approach him with love and point out our concerns. If he continues, then it is said that two believers do the same.

After that it is up to the Holy Spirit and Jim.

All we can do is plant seeds.

And pray.

And as Zobel posted above, I think it is not our place to assume we know who is and who is not saved in the eyes of God.

Here's the whole passage:

"If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector."

What do you think about that last sentence? How do we effect church discipline today? Paul seconds the idea in 1st Corinthians 5.

I agree with you - judgement is up to God. And yet - we are called to accountability - even when it's painful. I think you would argue that we err on the side of less is better. You're probably right.

The verse says if your brother sins against you.

I do not consider partying a sin against me.

Paul says work out your own salvation, not other Christians.

When somebody calls the pastor because they saw the wife of a deacon(Baptist church)buying a bottle of wine at the store and the pastor calls her on it, I do not think that is the spirit of the Scripture.

And that is a true story.