Enemies in the forum....

[SassySDA]

T&O help me to understand why God wouldn't convict you to love them in return.... Jesus said there were 2 commandments. Love God, and love your neighbor. He said love your enemies... so why wouldn't He convict you? He commanded that it be done....
__________________
Good point, does loving thy neighbor include criticizing one's deeply held beliefs about religious matters?

Hi catlover, and happy Sabbath...

God does convict US to love OUR enemies, ...but if they are not convicted to love US in return, they are still your enemy...they could still harm you if given the chance.

Does that make any sense? Or have I confused you even more, which was certainly not my intention.

 

[woobadooba]

Hi catlover, and happy Sabbath...

God does convict US to love OUR enemies, ...but if they are not convicted to love US in return, they are still your enemy...they could still harm you if given the chance.

Does that make any sense? Or have I confused you even more, which was certainly not my intention.

But the question is: who is your enemy?

Is a person your enemy because he disagrees with you, or is he an enemy because he opposes all that God stands for?

Please note that I said "all that God stands for"!

 

[tall73]

the real question here is not how to treat enemies, but divisive people:

*** 3:9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. 10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. 11 You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

It is true we should treat all in love. But divisiveness should not always be tolerated within the church.

Now there are two things going on in that text.

a. the authoritative leaders in the church determiing a person to be needlessly divisive, giving warnings etc.

b. the person is self-condemned.

First let me note that this is not the local church, and none are really appointed elders here with spiritual authority. The best we have is mods. And they can moderate questionable content.

So the real point is, do you feel personally that you are self-condemned as being needlessly divisive. If it is not your goal to be divisive, but you do have questions, that is alright. But if you really do like to just have a good argument at times, perhaps you need to look at that.

On the other hand, I really think this forum would benefit from a thread dedicated to tough questions. Then they could be hashed out in a known spot, and those not wanting that could just avoid it. It could be a sub-forum, one thread, or even what we did at another forum, we could designate it as a HOT TOPIC. Then we put a disclaimer, if you don't want open discussion, don't post in this thread. The choice is yours!

 

[StormyOne]

the real question here is not how to treat enemies, but divisive people:



It is true we should treat all in love. But divisiveness should not always be tolerated within the church.

Now there are two things going on in that text.

a. the authoritative leaders in the church determiing a person to be needlessly divisive, giving warnings etc.

b. the person is self-condemned.

First let me note that this is not the local church, and none are really appointed elders here with spiritual authority. The best we have is mods. And they can moderate questionable content.

So the real point is, do you feel personally that you are self-condemned as being needlessly divisive. If it is not your goal to be divisive, but you do have questions, that is alright. But if you really do like to just have a good argument at times, perhaps you need to look at that.

On the other hand, I really think this forum would benefit from a thread dedicated to tough questions. Then they could be hashed out in a known spot, and those not wanting that could just avoid it. It could be a sub-forum, one thread, or even what we did at another forum, we could designate it as a HOT TOPIC. Then we put a disclaimer, if you don't want open discussion, don't post in this thread. The choice is yours!

I like that idea...

 

[tall73]

Thanks.

If it was agreeable to folks a sticky could be made explaining the idea. A standard disclaimer could then be posted at the beginning of a post that was designated a HOT TOPIC.

Here is a possible disclaimer:

-------------

DISCLAIMER!
This thread has been labled a HOT TOPIC. This indicates that the topic could be of a controversial nature. It is possible that some posts will not conform with standard Adventist doctrine. The official statement of the church on fundamental doctrines is found here: http://www.christianforums.com/t1956403-official-sda-fundamental-beliefs.html
If you are bothered by controversial topics, or primarily wish to use these forums for fellowship you might not wish to post in this thread.
DISCLAIMER!

-------------
The disclaimer template could be put in the sticky, and then the original poster could include it, or a mod could if it was deemed necessary.

All of the usual rules of conduct would still apply, but it would give some warning that it might not be a topic they would enjoy. It would also give some indication that it might not be consistent with SDA doctrine in all respects.

this would allow people who wish to examine questions the liberty to do so, as well as freeing others from the burden of constantly reminding folks that the insights might not fit traditional teachings.

 

[payattention]

Personally, I think our belief in present truth includes the responsibility to honestly probe the accepted, but I have no reason to oppose this suggestion.

 

[tall73]

yes, I agree, it does. But for those who wish to not do it, or who simply come here for a different reason, and maybe do more of their study elsewhere, it would give them a slight heads up. I think part of the problem is they want to maintain an orthodoxy so that when visitors come they get something to go on about what we believe. So if we label some topics that may depart from that it means they don't have to constantly champion the faith just to keep people from getting the wrong impression. In fact, we could even put a link to the sticky with the fundamentals in the disclaimer...something like..."the official Adventist statement on the fundamentals is found here." I edited the disclaimer to reflect the idea.

That way if a visitor stumbled across a hot topic they could still get from there to the officially accepted view. But it would still allow the rest to question the accepted view to make sure it is worthy of acceptance!

 

[HoneyDew]

Makes good sense tall73. I like that idea.

 

[payattention]

That way if a visitor stumbled across a hot topic they could still get from there to the officially accepted view. But it would still allow the rest to question the accepted view to make sure it is worthy of acceptance!

What was it that the bard of Avon penned? "A Daniel come to judgment?" (Apologies to "The Merchant of Venice")

 

[HoneyDew]

Your English Lit teacher would be proud.

 

[jonno]

Its very very dark in Africa,and very very late. and i'm very very tired...I'm going to bed. Good night everyone.

 

[HoneyDew]

Its very very dark in Africa,and very very late. and i'm very very tired...I'm going to bed. Good night everyone.

Africa? Cool!
Night jonno. Have a good rest.

 

[payattention]

Its very very dark in Africa,and very very late. and i'm very very tired...I'm going to bed. Good night everyone.

Good night, jonno. Which country are you in?

 

[jonno]

Good night, jonno. Which country are you in?

Sorry I'm sleeping...havent learned to type in my sleep yet......
Let me try.......Beautiful Cape Town in sunny South Africa...now Good night!

 

[payattention]

Sorry I'm sleeping...havent learned to type in my sleep yet......

That should be easy, since you have already mastered reading in your sleep. LOL. See you around.

 

[TrustAndObey]

I like the idea too Tall73!

Also, I thought these verses would help in this thread.......

Luke 17:1 - Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! 2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones. 3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. 4 And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.

 

[payattention]

Luke 17:1 - Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! 2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones. 3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. 4 And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.

I have known some people who have erroneously applied those phrases to their personal obligations rather than to their obligation to the offenders. We are expected to forgive others long before they they ask for forgiveness, meaning that there should be no animosity in our hearts ever, and when they ask for forgiveness we should never refuse to tell them they are forgiven.

The text is not clear as to whether we need to tell them they are forgiven before they ask, and I can be persuaded that we don't have to, but I cringe whenever I hear victims on TV saying they will never forgive those who offended them. That is one of the harshest things one can do to an individual because it is forgiveness that makes one whole again.

 

[TrustAndObey]

We are expected to forgive others long before they they ask for forgiveness, meaning that there should be no animosity in our hearts ever, and when they ask for forgiveness we should never refuse to tell them they are forgiven.

Well it SOUNDS good, but I haven't seen scripture that tells us to forgive without being asked for forgiveness. Same goes for us, God doesn't forgive us until we ASK for forgiveness.

We are commanded to love our enemies and pray for them, but that doesn't mean they aren't our enemies. Wolves in sheep's clothing are still wolves. We still have to watch out for them, even if we love them.

 

[payattention]

Well it SOUNDS good, but I haven't seen scripture that tells us to forgive without being asked for forgiveness. Same goes for us, God doesn't forgive us until we ASK for forgiveness.

Forgiveness is an attitude, not a response. Not to forgive is to hold a grudge. God holds no grudges; neither should we. I offer the story of the prodigal son, more accurately the prodigal father. The father sat looking for his son because he had already forgiven him. This is why he cut him off when he began his prepared speech. The father did not have to wait for an apology nor did he have to think it over. There was never any animosity in his heart. The opposite is seen in the older brother who always despised his brother. We should do what is right whether we think can find scripture for it or not. To do otherwise is to lean heavily towards a legalistic approach to life.

 

[Cliff2]

Enemies in the forum

Just trying to get this back on track.