**preacher forums**

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Charnock

Providing haven means to offer sanctuary or protection.

The unnamed forum routinely boots men for "not believing the message," and the message includes the laundry list of 60 year old standards. Yet, for some odd reason, adulterers are allowed to stay and post.

Further, the guys that don't believe "the message," are excoriated endlessly while any mention of the gross sin of the ones doing the excoriating is taboo, and deleted immediately.

So I asked myself, "What is being promoted here?" The answer is clear. Adultery is preferable, and entirely more tolerable than not preaching "the message."

In fact, that exact sentiment has been expressed on this thread by bishoph.

My good friend, you are maligning good men with absolute false statements. Which is the case in the first highlighted portion of your post. The "unnamed forum" has a very clear doctrinal creed if you will, which one must agree to before becoming a member. If and when some have decided to make their doctrinal stance (which differs from the forum's clearly stated "creed") public knowledge and then debate for its acceptance......they are the ones who have been asked to either agree with the forum's "creed" or remove themselves from membership.......Personally I do not find that to be harsh nor hypocritical. In fact I have much respect for men who would leave an organization or a forum because their beliefs have changed, than to stay and essentially lie about what they really believe.

I have personally watched much heated debate over standards and other peripheral topics, and when the dust settled everyone went home believing what they had started out believing. No one was banned or "booted out," or removed from the forum just because their view of standards was different from the accepted "norm" of said forum. Heated, emotional debate.....you betcha.......kicked out over it.......NEVER.

In response to the second highlighted portion of your post, all I can say is that it is amazing to me how life's experiences sometimes only allow us to see through the lens tainted by those experiences. Take off the glasses Bro. and see reality.

"That sentiment" that you referenced, the "Adultery is preferable, and entirely more tolerable than not preaching "the message"" sentiment was never expressed by me on this thread, nor has it ever been expressed by anyone I know. Adultery hurts everyone involved, and usually many who are not directly involved. No one has denied that, nor tried to cover it up, etc. No one has tried to diminish the sinfulness of it in any way.

However, if not bringing it into an open atmosphere where it can be discussed by everyone (and we all know that just because it is a "private preachers forum" does not insure the "privacy" of discussion, nor limit its scope on the WWW) and putting the offender on the whipping post so that all can take their best shot: if that means the unnamed forum is preferring adultery over not preaching "the message" then so be it.

In my earlier post which you are referencing, I simply stated that when a minister commits adultery they should be/usually are, and IMO must be removed from ministry asap. By so doing it will hopefully limit the harm done to those who have already been affected, and limit further ability to hurt others from a position of spiritual leadership. (Please show where that makes adultery preferable to _____________)

I went on to say that a person who is preaching/teaching false doctrine, (whatever that may be) usually remains in their position of spiritual leadership for umpteen years and may be doing grave harm to those they lead with potentially eternal consequence. So the question is not "is adultery preferable to false doctrine," but rather the question is which one may have the greatest overall impact or present the greatest danger overall? Both must be dealt with IMHO! The tsunami in Japan killed approx 10,000 people because many were warned and were able to escape. However, the nuclear catastrophe may kill or significantly harm millions especially when you consider the long term effects.......is the tsunami preferable?

Again....no one is saying let's give safe haven to and promote the adulterer. But we are mandated by scripture to cover (not the sin but the sinner) and restore.

And finally, if the unnamed forum is a haven for all that you allege and for the reasons you state......then AFF is equally so, as this forum readily and openly discusses what people here deem as false doctrine, naming the perpetrators etc.......but I have yet to see an adulterer or fornicator named, skinned, beaten and left to die.

(As I stated in my earlier posts, forums IMO whether private "preacher forums" or public such as AFF, should promote thorough discussion of issues not people.)

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by RevDWW

Or what if an adultrous preacher condemned him/her while hiding in his own sin?

Charnock might want to consider what mercy he/she would want and extend that to those who depitefully used him/her.....

Sometimes when crazy things are happening all around us, we say/do things in the moment that we wouldn't do over time. I just don't want to be quick to jump all over someone who might be really hurting and is speaking out of their pain. Internet forums can be so impersonal. Maybe Charnock shouldn't feel the way he/she does. If I knew who they were and what they are going through/been through I might just want to back off and say a prayer and offer my friendship with a PM instead of going to war over a couple of statements you deem over the top. Evidently someone who knows Charnock vouches for their respect of ministry and ministers. Good enough for me.

[RevDWW]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Sometimes when crazy things are happening all around us, we say/do things in the moment that we wouldn't do over time. I just don't want to be quick to jump all over someone who might be really hurting and is speaking out of their pain. Internet forums can be so impersonal. Maybe Charnock shouldn't feel the way he/she does. If I knew who they were and what they are going through/been through I might just want to back off and say a prayer and offer my friendship with a PM instead of going to war over a couple of statements you deem over the top. Evidently someone who knows Charnock vouches for their respect of ministry and ministers. Good enough for me.

I can vouch for Charnock as well. He's my friend.

[RevDWW]

Originally Posted by bishoph

(As I stated in my earlier posts, forums IMO whether private "preacher forums" or public such as AFF, should promote thorough discussion of issues not people.)

A heart AMEN to this statement.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

I have no idea who Charnock is, but what if Charnock is the victim of an adulterer minister? What if Charnock's husband committed adultery or Charnock's wife was stolen by a pastor? I would be more understanding of these comments. Usually we are hair trigger with our defensiveness without knowing the full story. Just some thoughts to consider.

Good points.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Preacher forums are good for people that like those.I can understand ministers wanting their own forums.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by bishoph

My good friend, you are maligning good men with absolute false statements. Which is the case in the first highlighted portion of your post. The "unnamed forum" has a very clear doctrinal creed if you will, which one must agree to before becoming a member. If and when some have decided to make their doctrinal stance (which differs from the forum's clearly stated "creed") public knowledge and then debate for its acceptance......they are the ones who have been asked to either agree with the forum's "creed" or remove themselves from membership.......Personally I do not find that to be harsh nor hypocritical. In fact I have much respect for men who would leave an organization or a forum because their beliefs have changed, than to stay and essentially lie about what they really believe.

I have personally watched much heated debate over standards and other peripheral topics, and when the dust settled everyone went home believing what they had started out believing. No one was banned or "booted out," or removed from the forum just because their view of standards was different from the accepted "norm" of said forum. Heated, emotional debate.....you betcha.......kicked out over it.......NEVER.

In response to the second highlighted portion of your post, all I can say is that it is amazing to me how life's experiences sometimes only allow us to see through the lens tainted by those experiences. Take off the glasses Bro. and see reality.

"That sentiment" that you referenced, the "Adultery is preferable, and entirely more tolerable than not preaching "the message"" sentiment was never expressed by me on this thread, nor has it ever been expressed by anyone I know. Adultery hurts everyone involved, and usually many who are not directly involved. No one has denied that, nor tried to cover it up, etc. No one has tried to diminish the sinfulness of it in any way.

However, if not bringing it into an open atmosphere where it can be discussed by everyone (and we all know that just because it is a "private preachers forum" does not insure the "privacy" of discussion, nor limit its scope on the WWW) and putting the offender on the whipping post so that all can take their best shot: if that means the unnamed forum is preferring adultery over not preaching "the message" then so be it.

In my earlier post which you are referencing, I simply stated that when a minister commits adultery they should be/usually are, and IMO must be removed from ministry asap. By so doing it will hopefully limit the harm done to those who have already been affected, and limit further ability to hurt others from a position of spiritual leadership. (Please show where that makes adultery preferable to _____________)

I went on to say that a person who is preaching/teaching false doctrine, (whatever that may be) usually remains in their position of spiritual leadership for umpteen years and may be doing grave harm to those they lead with potentially eternal consequence. So the question is not "is adultery preferable to false doctrine," but rather the question is which one may have the greatest overall impact or present the greatest danger overall? Both must be dealt with IMHO! The tsunami in Japan killed approx 10,000 people because many were warned and were able to escape. However, the nuclear catastrophe may kill or significantly harm millions especially when you consider the long term effects.......is the tsunami preferable?

Again....no one is saying let's give safe haven to and promote the adulterer. But we are mandated by scripture to cover (not the sin but the sinner) and restore.

And finally, if the unnamed forum is a haven for all that you allege and for the reasons you state......then AFF is equally so, as this forum readily and openly discusses what people here deem as false doctrine, naming the perpetrators etc.......but I have yet to see an adulterer or fornicator named, skinned, beaten and left to die.

(As I stated in my earlier posts, forums IMO whether private "preacher forums" or public such as AFF, should promote thorough discussion of issues not people.)

Because it was handled behind the scenes and not discussed openly on NFCF or AFF.

[Scott Hutchinson]

I don't know Charnock personally,but he seems likes a good Christian.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by RevDWW

I can vouch for Charnock as well. He's my friend.

Charnock has every reason to feel like he does.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Charnock has every reason to feel like he does.

No doubt.