Did I write in gentleness and respect?

[evangelist6589]

I am addressing this one to a lady pastor of one of the liberal progressive christianity denominations in the area.

I attached 3 tracts one from Grace To You, another on the Cross by John Piper, and another on the Good Person test using the 10 commandments to show conviction by Ray Comfort (I do not send money tracts in the mail).

Dear xxx xxx,

Looking on your churches website and at the video posted on your page on xxx xx I want to applaud you for doing such a thing. I am on Weight Watchers and can understand the value of a good diet with balanced nutrition. I work out weekly, eat healthy, and stay away from fast Food but only eat Subway. I do so because the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and I want to care for the Lord Temple in me. I see you have also ministered to people in DT Denver and I also applaud you for this, as I am a regular street evangelist to DT Denver and have bought people food a number of times in an effort to help the homeless for Jesus himself said in Mt 25:35-36 (NIV)

For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me

The apostle Paul also says in says in Rm 12:20 (ESV)

To the contrary, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing you will heap burning coals on his head.

Once again I applaud you for your efforts. However what concerns me is your and the churches departure from sound doctrine. Unless I misread your site I did not see a word on the gospel with no mention of sin, hell, judgment, repentance, faith, Justification, sanctification, the cross, nor Christ. This greatly concerns me and if this is true I am making a plea for your own salvation, for your good works will not save you (Eph 2:8-10). I have also included some gospel tracts for you to read and I would appreciate an opportunity to reason with you from the scriptures. Will you call or write me back and we can work through the scriptures together? Its vital to be able to reason through the scriptures and know it well (1 Pt 3:15-16) despite in our culture of relativism where everyone just believes whatever they want to believe and thinks that everyone is going to heaven (Pluralism) and denies Jesus Christ (Jn 14:6, Ac 4:12). The Bible is sufficient and can rejoice the heart, convert the soul, enlighten the eyes, and makes wise the simple (Psa 19:7-8).


Sincerely,


John

 

[Don]

I'm refraining from responding.

 

[JamesL]

Any time you express "concern" over someone's departure from sound doctrine, without being 100% certain what they teach, you're just liable to turn them off.

With "unless I misread your site" you've displayed either:

1) you don't know for certain what they teach, and therefore are in no position to declare that they've departed from sound doctrine

or...

2) you do know for certain that they've departed from sound doctrine, and you're either being condescending or offering a false humility


But, just for extra kindling, it's impossible to depart from somewhere you've never been.

In other words, you cannot depart from Spain unless you're in Spain. You would need to know what they believed before they departed, and what they believe now, in order for them to "return" to sound doctrine.

If not, your whole effort is predicated on ignorance - or worse, pride

Also, proper grammar and punctuation go a long way toward having someone accept your appeal to reason things out. If you write like an imbecile, it's likely you'll reason like one.

 

[PreachTony]

I am addressing this one to a lady pastor of one of the liberal progressive christianity denominations in the area.

I attached 3 tracts one from Grace To You, another on the Cross by John Piper, and another on the Good Person test using the 10 commandments to show conviction by Ray Comfort (I do not send money tracts in the mail).

Dear xxx xxx,

Looking on your churches website and at the video posted on your page on xxx xx I want to applaud you for doing such a thing. I am on Weight Watchers and can understand the value of a good diet with balanced nutrition. I work out weekly, eat healthy, and stay away from fast Food but only eat Subway. I do so because the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and I want to care for the Lord Temple in me. I see you have also ministered to people in DT Denver and I also applaud you for this, as I am a regular street evangelist to DT Denver and have bought people food a number of times in an effort to help the homeless for Jesus himself said in Mt 25:35-36 (NIV)

For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me

The apostle Paul also says in says in Rm 12:20 (ESV)

To the contrary, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing you will heap burning coals on his head.

Once again I applaud you for your efforts. However what concerns me is your and the churches departure from sound doctrine. Unless I misread your site I did not see a word on the gospel with no mention of sin, hell, judgment, repentance, faith, Justification, sanctification, the cross, nor Christ. This greatly concerns me and if this is true I am making a plea for your own salvation, for your good works will not save you (Eph 2:8-10). I have also included some gospel tracts for you to read and I would appreciate an opportunity to reason with you from the scriptures. Will you call or write me back and we can work through the scriptures together? Its vital to be able to reason through the scriptures and know it well (1 Pt 3:15-16) despite in our culture of relativism where everyone just believes whatever they want to believe and thinks that everyone is going to heaven (Pluralism) and denies Jesus Christ (Jn 14:6, Ac 4:12). The Bible is sufficient and can rejoice the heart, convert the soul, enlighten the eyes, and makes wise the simple (Psa 19:7-8).


Sincerely,


John

I read your whole post, evangelist, but I basically stopped with this sentence. While this is not a popular opinion among many in this modern age, there is no such thing as women called of God to preach the word, or to pastor. If we believe Paul's words to be inspired, how do you reconcile a "lady pastor" with Paul's writing that a man desiring the office of a bishop [read: pastor] should be the husband of one wife?

You can challenge their notions on sin, hell, etc. all you want, but they are wrong from the start merely by having a woman in a position of authority over the men of the congregation.

 

[InTheLight]

I'm refraining from responding.

Ah... c'mon Don.

 

[evangelist6589]

Any time you express "concern" over someone's departure from sound doctrine, without being 100% certain what they teach, you're just liable to turn them off.



With "unless I misread your site" you've displayed either:



1) you don't know for certain what they teach, and therefore are in no position to declare that they've departed from sound doctrine



or...



2) you do know for certain that they've departed from sound doctrine, and you're either being condescending or offering a false humility





But, just for extra kindling, it's impossible to depart from somewhere you've never been.



In other words, you cannot depart from Spain unless you're in Spain. You would need to know what they believed before they departed, and what they believe now, in order for them to "return" to sound doctrine.



If not, your whole effort is predicated on ignorance - or worse, pride



Also, proper grammar and punctuation go a long way toward having someone accept your appeal to reason things out. If you write like an imbecile, it's likely you'll reason like one.

I am trying to be humble but I know for certain that the church does not preach sound theology. When I stated "unless I misread" I am trying to show humility and not just auto declare them as heretics which will never get a respond but trying to use sound reason with her. I did check grammar but I am sure I missed something but you can go on all day about that topic. I find lots of grammar errors in books too you know. But I focus on the content of the book. No one is perfect. But maybe I can check it in more detail next time.

Some churches I write up and use a more condemning tone. I was not positive at all. I have used such a approach with the Joel Osteen, American Baptist, and homosexual rainbow baptist and other such churches whom I have also written. No I don't expect to reason with those churches as they are hellfire heretics and why I also include tracts focused on Hell. Chick tracts is great for those churches!

But this particular church does not preach sound doctrine, however I did see some good in the deeds of the pastor in her effort to help the homeless and why I was not as condemning. But in all honesty James not all false teachers are equal

 

[Crabtownboy]

No preacher, man or woman, has any authority over others. Every Christian is either clergy or laity as all are called by Christ to individual ministries. The poor of a church is called to prepare and help the other ministers in the church, in other words, all the people, for their ministeries in the world where that person often cannot go.

I keep seeing people talk about authority, but so far no one has explained what that authority is in a Baptist context

 

[go2church]

You're like hamster on a wheel, lots of energy expended, going no where soon.

 

[evangelist6589]

I read your whole post, evangelist, but I basically stopped with this sentence. While this is not a popular opinion among many in this modern age, there is no such thing as women called of God to preach the word, or to pastor. If we believe Paul's words to be inspired, how do you reconcile a "lady pastor" with Paul's writing that a man desiring the office of a bishop [read: pastor] should be the husband of one wife?



You can challenge their notions on sin, hell, etc. all you want, but they are wrong from the start merely by having a woman in a position of authority over the men of the congregation.

I disagree with women pastors however I can't declare one a heretic for being one. For example in the Missionary Alliance there are women pastors. I disagree and will never accept such a position but from what I can tell they preach sound doctrine in that denomination.

One woman pastor I wrote up recently and her I declared heresy. She taught not to interpret the Bible literally, she did not believe in the gospel, and also believed all religious faiths lead to God. She is a pastor and also a heretic and does not teach the gospel according to Jesus.

So as I said they are not all equal and I am not writing up churches whom have women pastors. I am writing up churches that are false.

 

[evangelist6589]

You're like hamster on a wheel, lots of energy expended, going no where soon.

At least I am doing something. All you do is criticize me.

 

[Jerome]

Also, there are prominent 'The Gospel Coalition' churches that have women pastors.

 

[evangelist6589]

This thread has gone OT. The question was did I speak in gentleness and respect? No one answered it so I assume I did. Thanks that's all I needed to know.

 

[evangelist6589]

Also, there are prominent 'The Gospel Coalition' churches that have women pastors.

OT. This thread is not about women pastors please start anther thread. Granted I agree with your position and women should not be pastors. However that alone would not make a church heretical.

 

[Jerome]

You began the OP with:

I am addressing this one to a lady pastor. . .

You really need to ponder why you 'felt the need' to include the irrelevant descriptor lady.

If you had just said "to a pastor" no one would have known or gone 'OT', would they?

 

[matt wade]

If you are looking only for constructive feedback and not debate and/or argument, then you should post in the Fellowship forums, specifically "Missions / Witnessing / eVangelism". Posting in the debate forums opens your thread for debate.

 

[Rolfe]

Any time you express "concern" over someone's departure from sound doctrine, without being 100% certain what they teach, you're just liable to turn them off.

With "unless I misread your site" you've displayed either:

1) you don't know for certain what they teach, and therefore are in no position to declare that they've departed from sound doctrine

or...

2) you do know for certain that they've departed from sound doctrine, and you're either being condescending or offering a false humility.

Yep. If I were to wish to confront a church over their doctrine (which I do not because it is not my place to do so), I would not write a letter. I would make an appointment to speak with the pastor to learn exactly who they are and what exactly they believe.

Also, proper grammar and punctuation go a long way toward having someone accept your appeal to reason things out. If you write like an imbecile, it's likely you'll reason like one.

:thumbs:

"Whom."

 

[Rolfe]

Ah... c'mon Don.

Could be that he is tired of fighting uphill battles.:laugh:

 

[Don]

This thread has gone OT. The question was did I speak in gentleness and respect? No one answered it so I assume I did. Thanks that's all I needed to know.

Then you're not paying attention. No one has agreed with what you did; nor have they told you "good job" or well done.

If what you take from that is that no one specifically answered your question, so you're good to go -- then the ONLY reason you started this thread was so you could receive accolades and praise from other fallible human beings.

You should be ashamed. But you don't know why you should be ashamed, because you don't think you've done anything wrong, which is why it's so disappointing.

 

[JamesL]

This thread has gone OT. The question was did I speak in gentleness and respect? No one answered it so I assume I did. Thanks that's all I needed to know.

But I did answer you. Any time your words reek of overtones (I have concerns) and undertones (unless I've misread your site), it is not done in meekness, humility and respect.

There is a subtle difference between over- and undertones. Neither is proper when trying to correct someone.

 

[quantumfaith]

I am trying to be humble but I know for certain that the church does not preach sound theology. When I stated "unless I misread" I am trying to show humility and not just auto declare them as heretics which will never get a respond but trying to use sound reason with her. I did check grammar but I am sure I missed something but you can go on all day about that topic. I find lots of grammar errors in books too you know. But I focus on the content of the book. No one is perfect. But maybe I can check it in more detail next time.

Some churches I write up and use a more condemning tone. I was not positive at all. I have used such a approach with the Joel Osteen, American Baptist, and homosexual rainbow baptist and other such churches whom I have also written. No I don't expect to reason with those churches as they are hellfire heretics and why I also include tracts focused on Hell. Chick tracts is great for those churches!

But this particular church does not preach sound doctrine, however I did see some good in the deeds of the pastor in her effort to help the homeless and why I was not as condemning. But in all honesty James not all false teachers are equal

Can't help but be reminded here of the old Mac Davis song....."Its hard to be humble but I'm doing the best that I can."