The traits of a true believer are:

1. A sincere desire to learn and so teachability should be evident (...these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full)

2. A love of and adherence to the truth (1 John 5,6 God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth)

3. A sensitivity to sin (8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.)

4. A deep desire to obey and please the Lord (2.3 ..hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments)

5. Love of the brethren (2.9,10 9 He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. 10 He that loveth his brother abideth in the light..)

6. Separation from the world and error - other worldliness & doctrinal purity (2.15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 2.20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth 26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.)

Grave error even in believers should always be withstood firmly! (I will come back to what constitutes grave error).

However, as in every household, the parents will deal with each child based on their age, character and temperament so in the household of faith some who err will react much better to a gentle approach, a quiet word and others who are stronger willed will need a stronger approach - some may even need church discipline to mend their ways because private admonition (whether by one or in the company of 2 or three) may not be very effective with them.

This 2 fold approach depending on character is recognized in Jude who writes, "22 And of some have compassion, making a difference: 23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."

I would suggest that the approach is also implicit in the requirement for Elders to be men who know how to rule their households well.

But who are those of the household of faith? How do we recognize them on an internet board?

Thankfully we are not left to our own devices here. There are many distinguishing traits of true believers and these are clearly outlined for us in the epistles of John.

The danger is always that we use our own definitions or let society define for us what is and what is not "loving" and thereby prove ourselves to be unfaithful to the Lord!

Having spoken of false teachers Paul writes to Timothy in Titus 1
v13 Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith.

Was Paul unloving, uncaring, unkind? One would have to be foolhardy to answer this in the affirmative.

Let me ask, how many of our parents always spoke softly to us when rebuking us? Did anyone get smacked with a feather? No of course not. But did we ever doubt that they loved us, or that they did it for our benefit?

But what about those who are genuine brothers/sisters as opposed to those who are grave errorists with an agenda? Must we always take the tough line with them?

Firstly we have a mutual duty to admonish each other Col 3.16. Admonish (νουθετέω) means to warn, exhort, caution, reprove, put in mind. The idea is that we can forget, wander, err, endanger and need each other to keep us in check.

This is not a duty taken seriously in many circles, and we can hardly wonder that such churches suffer with ill disciplined members.

But to keep to the topic of love, this admonishing need not always be sharp reproof...

But what does this mean in reality? The apostle Paul, who calls us to imitate him, withstood Peter to his face when his error was grave. The NT letters controvert grave error in a passionate fashion, such errorists are named and shamed and their true nature exposed. John, the apostle of love, in 2 John says he rejoices in those who walk in the truth because he says that is what is commanded by the father (v4). He admonishes that those who don't bring the doctrine of Christ are not to be received into the home nor to be bid God speed, because says he, he who does so partakes of their evil deeds! We are not called to compromise truth in the name of love, because such compromise is not true love. Love and truth go hand in hand.

However, not all errors are equally serious nor are all errorists such on purpose. Those like Peter, who fall into grave error inadvertently, will be recovered because they have a high regard for the word of God and are brought to recognise their error by the Spirit of God. Those grave errorists who resist the truth all their days and continue in their error to their dying day we should fear for.

"The real heroes in life are akin to this little guy...not the celebrities in yoga pants playing ball for a living."

1. You could have compared to any number of meaningless things but you chose those playing ball. Why, if not courting controversy again?

2. Let's allow the comparison even if indecorous, why add the words "in yoga pants"? What did this add except another one of your pet peeves? Why not go the whole hog and include all your pet peeves in the comparison?

3. Even with such examples you continue to deny that you're preoccupied with such issues, and continue to lash out at those who kindly try and show you something that is not right.

Back on topic ... my heart bleeds for what the boy went through, what his family and church are going through right now. Sadly, we read of incidents like this virtually every day from some of the groups we follow and pray for regularly. Only occasionally does it make the news headlines. Oh Lord appear for your persecuted church!

Rodney K. wrote:
I think the KJV refers to them banjos as "harps". I still had't figured out what that there word "shoes" means.

==========================

Bro Lurker

Rodney K. wrote:
Hey fellers, if you've got room for one more, I'd be interested in reading your discussion.

Say, you read what bro Lurker said bout ma breath? I was kinda spittin feathers after readin that. You think chewin Toebako's causin ma problem?

=======================

Hey Chris

You've got it all wrong bro! You realise this is gonna be a literalism demolition 101 class?

But, I'll have ma banjo handy to play you a soothing tune to lift your heart.

It's getting late here, so I'm gonna wish all you saints a good evening.

Christopher000 wrote:
Ok, probably a more intimate, private, 4's a crowd sort of thing which I totally understand. Don't want too many going back and forth, tripping over each others emails. Wouldn't mind taking a look as time goes on though.

It would be good for you to be a part of this. Us Hillbillies can give you a real Hillbilly welcome! I'm greasing up ma skeeter as soon as I'm done posting this.

Lurker wrote:
Nah. In the words of Dirty Harry...... "Your mouthwash ain't cuttin it."
Hey, bro. James and I are just beginning a discussion on the Revelation. You interested in being copied?

Bro, I'd be honored to be on the journey with you.You already know my reservations are all in connection with my ability to contribute meaningfully, but happy to read and learn.

One other matter, do you really want town folk in the round who don't like Hillbilly smells?

Rodney K. wrote:
What is this "deodorant" of which you speak?

Lurker wrote:
Hey bro.
Glad to see you step in the room cause I've got to go for a while.

Lurker wrote:
...
Vote John Y. for president. He'll make America grate again.

Glad to see you posting again bro.

MS wrote:

A sermon that might be of interest to you and the "easily offended"
Effeminate Ahabs
Jason Cooley, SermonAudio.

Love the title and so will give it a hearing. Thanks sister MS.

Kev wrote:
Hey Buckeyes I will look into that video thanks. Yeah was horrible hearing their civil right abortion nonsense. I believe she was also a lesbian as she called another girl she was with babe, then carried on about how she was not ashamed about having two abortions as she wouldn't be able to take care of them anyways. Then said that old white ladies are trying to make it so their is no more abortion violating her civil rights. Then she knew she kind of messed up and said nothing against white people I'm half white. Boy it was a sad sight seeing such a lost God hating person.
Hey Dave will pray for Ben.

There are atheists/secular humanists who are also against abortion. Here is an article by one of them:

ladybug wrote:
Brother Observer,
Idon't know about the churches in Germany, but my former Lutheran church used external rituals like baptism and confirmation as a means of 'saving'.
As for 'nosem', didn't dopey and all his aliases go after penned? If memory serves me right, I believe she faced some serious accusations from all those aliases. It seems this nosem/nosey person has gone after her again. Pretty similar to our prior nuisances

Kinda makes sense that Lutheranism has degenerated into sacramentalism. What a great shame, considering their start.

Lurker wrote:
Bro.,
Before it was NOSEM it was NOSEY. I suspect this is a former poster who called himself Dopey (of the 7 dwarfs, hence Nosey for a new name) aka David. He seemed mentally troubled and eventually couldn't get along with any one, even threatened to sue SA for stealing his posts, and left. John UK would probably recognize him by his posts.
It seems he wants to pick fights with those he didn't get along with before. As for me, I've not said a word to him yet he was all over me for nothing.

Sure, I remember Pope Dopey. I had major run ins with him over the RCC.

If it is him, could explain the enigmatic posts.

Hope all's well with you and the family.

ladybug wrote:
Baptism does not save; with that said, let's pray these folks are born again by God and gifted with eternal life.

The offenders feel that they have a free speech contribution to make!!

Haven't produced anything from the BIble, but that doesn't seem to worry them. Funny that.

Sc said that many texts would be contradictory if wine were not non-alcoholic. I asked her to provide all the texts, and I'm still waiting. I also asked for evidence from commentators and lexicons predating the prohibition period for proof of the notion of non-alcoholic wine in the bible, but again nada.

The texts that have been cited as proof have been so strongly refuted that one wonders how they can carry on posting without blushing for shame. It doesn't seem to dent their superiority complex. Ah well, the Lord will deal with them in his own ways, and in the meantime, we can all learn to discern the spirits and learn from the way in which the texts they offer are refuted. BTW this is the reason why BM doesn't want to offer any texts (the do and don't verses) and wants to assume the higher moral ground with the general tenor of the Bibles teaching blah blah blah. When one cannot tie something down they should obfuscate and act superior. Yeah, we didn't spot that, eh?

B. McCausland wrote:
..
Wisdom does not exclusively materialize by the keeping of dos and don'ts, say by the keeping of the letter of the law.
This is what Christ tried to illustrate in Mat 5 with the sixth and seventh commandment.
One can be guilty of murder simply by hating, calling names or insulting a person.
Now the commandment only says 'thou shall not murder', it does not say 'thou shall not deride' or insult, or 'thou shall not hate'. It is obvious that the depth of the command goes beyond the literal interpretation of the text.
Often, those accusing others of legalism fail to see that they are the true legalists, because they abide strictly by the letter of the writ and miss out that the holistic interpretation of biblical facts and the character of God work as one for our guidance.
Scripture does not say that 'wisdom is the keeping of the law', though in part this is correct.
Rather it says that wisdom is to fear the Lord, and that the servant of the Lord should act prudently. ......