# Any Morality Police care to comment???



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 11, 2009)

All this talk about Miss Cali on that other thread got me to thinking, would any of the people piling on her care to comment/campare her "sins" with those of people such as the "Rev" Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, or Atlanta's own "Bishop" Earl Paulk. It would seem to me that these should be held to a greater accountablility or "rebuke" then the beauty queen, as they held themselves up as leaders and perhaps even caused some who were weak in the Faith to backslide.

Any comments???


----------



## Huntinfool (May 11, 2009)

They WILL be held to a higher standard.  That's clearly laid out.  What they did is no better or worse.  It's sin IMO.

Sin repented of is forgiven.

The "morality police" comment has me curious though....in your world are there any moral absolutes?


----------



## Jranger (May 11, 2009)

Or should I dare say The Revrund Jessa Jackson...


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 11, 2009)

Sure, thou shalt do no murder etc etc, I just find odd that you think Ted Haggard shaking up with a gay hooker is no worse then miss cali's PARTIALLY nude photo


----------



## PWalls (May 11, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Sure, thou shalt do no murder etc etc, I just find odd that you think Ted Haggard shaking up with a gay hooker is no worse then miss cali's PARTIALLY nude photo



Sin is sin. No middle ground. Pastors/Bishops are held to a higher standard though.


----------



## fishndinty (May 11, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Sure, thou shalt do no murder etc etc, I just find odd that you think Ted Haggard shaking up with a gay hooker is no worse then miss cali's PARTIALLY nude photo



Who said that?


----------



## Free Willie (May 11, 2009)

This is too funny. 

Where is Sister Bertha Beddernyu who sits up there in the Amen Pew?

I admit I looked at the picture. The girl had her arm over her chest. The pics showed less than if she'd had her bikini top on. (Maybe I saw the wrong pics). Ted Haggard did drugs and had gay sex. You can say a sin is a sin but the level of thought that had to go into the gay sex and drugs is far deeper than posing in your own house not showing ANY reproductive organs or any more skin than a bikini would normally show. 

Give the girl a break, she was only 17 when the pictures were taken according to what I have read.

Now, I'd break my foot off in my daughter's hind parts if she did something like that but that's just me. I'd be disappointed, but not devastated. If my kids find out about .001 of the wrong I had done before I was 18, I'd have a whole heap of explainin' to do. 

Come to think about it, if my daughter came to me and said, "Daddy. There are some pictures of me on the internet without a top on but I was covering my breasts with my arms and nothing was showing", I'd be a little miffed and upset. BUT if my son came up to me and said, "Daddy. Me and this gay hooker did some meth and then had some wild gay sex", I'd die right then and there. 

I'm gonna go throw up now.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 11, 2009)

I thought so, a lynch mob for miss cali, but just a few grumbles about these guys, that is hypocricy, pure and simple.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 11, 2009)

Free Willie said:


> This is too funny.
> 
> Where is Sister Bertha Beddernyu who sits up there in the Amen Pew?
> 
> ...



Thank you..


----------



## ToLog (May 11, 2009)

this thread is very interesting. thanks to the OP for agreeing to present us with the thread, whether we option to reply or not. 

i know, early on, i'm probably off-target, but the reference to the morality police causes me to think about some of the signs along the sides of the roads posted by the Police or Sheriff Depts.

it states 94 percent of travelers are belted up...a record high. or a monthly goal was exceeded.

later, it (the sign) indicates 98 percent compliance. i like it. it tells me the travelers, in their various vehicles, are following the Law, in general.

so, in terms of Lawfulness/Sinfulness, absolute perfection would be 1.0  right, 100 percent?


----------



## Lowjack (May 11, 2009)

"Christian are just People who have being Forgiven"
But those who point fingers speak from the fullness of their heart.
You see that was Satan's job the great accuser, he could see the wrong in people because he is the father of everything that is against God.
Those of us who are sinners tend to see the good people are or do and pity those that fall, Satan and his children are unable to pity anyone.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 11, 2009)

PWalls said:


> Sin is sin. No middle ground. Pastors/Bishops are held to a higher standard though.



Yes....and yes.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 11, 2009)

Free Willie said:


> Ted Haggard did drugs and had gay sex. You can say a sin is a sin but the level of thought that had to go into the gay sex and drugs is far deeper than posing in your own house not showing ANY reproductive organs or any more skin than a bikini would normally show.



Free,

Which sin will you go to he|| for if you are non-repentant?

Just curious.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 11, 2009)

Lowjack said:


> "Christian are just People who have being Forgiven"
> But those who point fingers speak from the fullness of their heart.
> You see that was Satan's job the great accuser, he could see the wrong in people because he is the father of everything that is against God.
> Those of us who are sinners tend to see the good people are or do and pity those that fall, Satan and his children are unable to pity anyone.



Amen, brother.


----------



## Free Willie (May 11, 2009)

Could I PM it to you? It's kinda private.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 11, 2009)

The nude pics....or the gay encounter?  Which one?


----------



## formula1 (May 11, 2009)

Lowjack said:


> "Christian are just People who have being Forgiven"
> But those who point fingers speak from the fullness of their heart.
> You see that was Satan's job the great accuser, he could see the wrong in people because he is the father of everything that is against God.
> Those of us who are sinners tend to see the good people are or do and pity those that fall, Satan and his children are unable to pity anyone.



Double Amen Lowjack!!  

Sometimes its better to answer a question with a question, so here goes!

What is in your heart? Can God our Father say of you that you are a man after His Heart (like King David, for example)? 

Cmparing sins probably doesn't get it done, IMHO. Comparing repentance is where it's at!!!


----------



## earl (May 11, 2009)

Huntinfool said:


> They WILL be held to a higher standard.  That's clearly laid out.  What they did is no better or worse.  It's sin IMO.
> 
> Sin repented of is forgiven.
> 
> The "morality police" comment has me curious though....in your world are there any moral absolutes?



If sin is sin ,why the higher standard ? A better seat in heaven ?
If my living was made in televangelism and I got caught with my pants down , you can bet I would repent . On TV with tears streaming down my face. After all ,christians are forgiving [gullible ? ] Then I would be able to keep all those worldly possessions I had wracked up.


----------



## earl (May 11, 2009)

It has been said many times that this is a predominately christian forum. Since I would have to agree ,it stands to reason that the membership of Woody's has not voiced enough outrage to have these pictures taken off said predominately christian forum, so it appears that the majority of said forum must not find them objectionable.
HOORAY for WOODY"S membership !!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Lowjack (May 11, 2009)

earl said:


> It has been said many times that this is a predominately christian forum. Since I would have to agree ,it stands to reason that the membership of Woody's has not voiced enough outrage to have these pictures taken off said predominately christian forum, so it appears that the majority of said forum must not find them objectionable.
> HOORAY for WOODY"S membership !!!!!!!!!!


I don't have access to the delete Button otherwise Vamooos


----------



## christianhunter (May 11, 2009)

Lowjack said:


> I don't have access to the delete Button otherwise Vamooos



I second that motion.


----------



## PWalls (May 11, 2009)

earl said:


> If sin is sin ,why the higher standard ?



A higher standard because they are TEACHERS of the Word. Their actions and their words reflect even moreso on the Gospel than a Christian not called to be a Pastor.


----------



## PWalls (May 11, 2009)

earl said:


> appears that the majority of said forum must not find them objectionable.



What pictures?


----------



## earl (May 11, 2009)

If you even peeked at the pictures ,you have no cause to look for a delete button .Banjo's original description should haven give you a clue as to what you would see.


----------



## PWalls (May 11, 2009)

earl said:


> If you even peeked at the pictures ,you have no cause to look for a delete button .Banjo's original description should haven give you a clue as to what you would see.



Only thing I saw in the original thread was a link to the news story. I don't see any pictures. Although Big7 put one up at the end of the thread that is harmless. And, that was my point. There should not be any pictures on the open forum of what has been discussed here.


----------



## earl (May 11, 2009)

PWalls said:


> A higher standard because they are TEACHERS of the Word. Their actions and their words reflect even moreso on the Gospel than a Christian not called to be a Pastor.



Not to split hairs ,but wouldn't that make their sin greater ? Will their punishment be greater, or will they just have to go to the back of the line ? I still don't quite ''get'' how the scale of sins works when you get to heaven. I would think that once you repent It wouldn't matter if you only cussed or were a mass murderer.


----------



## earl (May 11, 2009)

PWalls said:


> Only thing I saw in the original thread was a link to the news story. I don't see any pictures. Although Big7 put one up at the end of the thread that is harmless. And, that was my point. There should not be any pictures on the open forum of what has been discussed here.



What ??????? ''Big7 put one up at the end of the thread that is harmless'' and then ;;There shouldn't be any .... ''
You lost me on that one.


----------



## PWalls (May 11, 2009)

earl said:


> What ??????? ''Big7 put one up at the end of the thread that is harmless'' and then ;;There shouldn't be any .... ''
> You lost me on that one.




Then, I'll try again.

The picture that Big7 put up at the end of the thread is the one where they announce the winner. All you see visually is two women in evening gowns. Nothing lewd or crude of non-G rated. However, a picture of the woman in her bikini or the topless photos that are being suggested would be against the G-rating.

One is harmless. The other not.


----------



## earl (May 11, 2009)

OK now I got it. Would the link provided by the link Banjo gave ,that goes to the semi topless have been OK ? 
What I meant to imply was ,if you made the effort [linked] to see the pics after Banjo described [written] them ,you don't need to d
cry foul. Describe a beautiful young woman in any stage of dress or undress ,and most guys I know are going to look . If you didn't look ,your mom or wife was proud of you . Mine told me to grow up .


----------



## Banjo (May 12, 2009)

Just saw this...I guess I am the "morality police."  You asked, so here goes:

Ted Haggard, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al. have all made a mockery of the church.  I believe Gold Dust Woman brought up Ted Haggard in another thread.  The Rev. that is in front of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton's names is a joke.  They are both leeches......

Ted Haggard ought to have the decency to let it go....He claims forgiveness yet still receives money for speaking engagements.  I say he needs another job....but that is just me.  

And yes....I agree that all of these men are doubly accountable because they claim leadership positions.  They lead God's people astray...


----------



## Banjo (May 12, 2009)

Here is something about Ted if you care to read it:

Ted Haggard reportedly thoroughly enjoyed a performance of a play relating the story of his gay hooker/drugs scandal. The Christian Post reports that he was seen smiling and laughing at points during the performance.
The hallmark of today’s pervert/fraudster false preachers in the pulpit is the absence of shame and repentance when they get caught _____________ (fill in the blank with the sin of your choice.) No sackcloth and ashes needed after getting caught with a gay prostitute for this guy. The former head of the National Association of Evangelicals, pastor to thousands, father and supposedly Christian husband shows up with his wife to watch his sin played out on stage and laughs and smiles his way through it.

More can be found here:

http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/?s=ted+haggard


----------



## Jeffriesw (May 12, 2009)

Banjo said:


> Here is something about Ted if you care to read it:
> 
> Ted Haggard reportedly thoroughly enjoyed a performance of a play relating the story of his gay hooker/drugs scandal. The Christian Post reports that he was seen smiling and laughing at points during the performance.
> The hallmark of today’s pervert/fraudster false preachers in the pulpit is the absence of shame and repentance when they get caught _____________ (fill in the blank with the sin of your choice.) No sackcloth and ashes needed after getting caught with a gay prostitute for this guy. The former head of the National Association of Evangelicals, pastor to thousands, father and supposedly Christian husband shows up with his wife to watch his sin played out on stage and laughs and smiles his way through it.
> ...





Pathetic


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

Banjo said:


> Just saw this...I guess I am the "morality police."  You asked, so here goes:
> 
> Ted Haggard, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al. have all made a mockery of the church.  I believe Gold Dust Woman brought up Ted Haggard in another thread.  The Rev. that is in front of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton's names is a joke.  They are both leeches......
> 
> ...



I'm glad you're consistant, Banjo. I don't agree with you on a lot of things but, I can respect you're position as long as you're consistant with it


----------



## Branchminnow (May 12, 2009)

TV preachers are nothing more than show, as far as the lady you are talking about if she sinned she sinned and will pay accordingly just like those "preachers " will. we are not any of us perfect we are all subject to the flesh, all we can do is try to do better, and what we preach.


----------



## formula1 (May 12, 2009)

*Re:*

I can't even express the pain I feel for the Christ's children on the earth who have been deceived by one of these so called 'leaders'.  I have experienced it and unfortunately felt it's sting. Yet by the grace of God and His leading by the Spirit, I came out of it with Christ.  It all boils down to this, "Who do you follow, men or Christ?" In the end, that is the issue that matters!!!

I hope those who belong to Christ will read this passage and understand in the Spirit!!!  

Jeremiah 5
26 ‘ For among My people are found wicked men;
They lie in wait as one who sets snares; 
They set a trap; 
They catch men. 
27 As a cage is full of birds, 
So their houses are full of deceit. 
Therefore they have become great and grown rich. 
28 They have grown fat, they are sleek; 
Yes, they surpass the deeds of the wicked; 
They do not plead the cause, 
The cause of the fatherless; 
Yet they prosper, 
And the right of the needy they do not defend. 
29 Shall I not punish them for these things?’ says the LORD. ‘ Shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?’ 
30 “ An astonishing and horrible thing Has been committed in the land: 
31 The prophets prophesy falsely, And the priests rule by their own power; And My people love to have it so. 
But what will YOU do in the end?


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

formula1 said:


> I can't even express the pain I feel for the Christ's children on the earth who have been deceived by one of these so called 'leaders'.  I have experienced it and unfortunately felt it's sting. Yet by the grace of God and His leading by the Spirit, I came out of it with Christ.  It all boils down to this, "Who do you follow, men or Christ?" In the end, that is the issue that matters!!!
> 
> I too have felt the sting of a false shepard, it made me much more careful and suspicious of people present themselves as holier then thou


----------



## crackerdave (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> I thought so, a lynch mob for miss cali, but just a few grumbles about these guys, that is hypocricy, pure and simple.



The "lynch mob," as you call it,consists mostly of the left-leaning news media.They didn't like the fact that Miss Prejean stood up against gay marriage.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 12, 2009)

earl said:


> If sin is sin ,why the higher standard ? A better seat in heaven ?
> :



Why the higher standard?  Maybe that's poor wording.  Pastors are held accountable because they are leaders in the church.  Elders, etc are held accountable in the same manner.  It is what it is.  





> If my living was made in televangelism and I got caught with my pants down , you can bet I would repent .



Let me help you with your terminilogy a bit.  That's what we call "apologizing".  Repenting is the following:

To turn from sin and dedicate oneself to the amendment of one's life.  

You can apologize in public and swear you are repentant.  But, if you don't turn from the sin and change, there is no repenting going on.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 12, 2009)

earl said:


> Not to split hairs ,but wouldn't that make their sin greater ? Will their punishment be greater,



The sin is not greater....the punishment is.  

Let's use an example from recent threads:

If a 10 year old picks up an gun and kills someone, we don't punish them the same way we would a 30 year old.  Same crime (assuming same intent)....different punishment.

It's not a perfect example, but I think you might be able to follow where I'm trying to go.

You, as a pastor, are held to a higher standard because of the responsibility you've been given to lead a congregation.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> The "lynch mob," as you call it,consists mostly of the left-leaning news media.They didn't like the fact that Miss Prejean stood up against gay marriage.



I know, ain't it somethin' the pharisees and the heathens both stoning the same person......strange


----------



## formula1 (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> I too have felt the sting of a false shepard, it made me much more careful and suspicious of people present themselves as holier then thou



As well you should, sir!  These are interesting times and there are snares attempting to trap us all.   I wish the best in Christ for you and your family!


----------



## Free Willie (May 12, 2009)

Huntinfool said:


> The nude pics....or the gay encounter?  Which one?



I think they were both on the same night...I don't remember.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 12, 2009)

Hilarious answer....



....even better dodge.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

formula1 said:


> As well you should, sir!  These are interesting times and there are snares attempting to trap us all.   I wish the best in Christ for you and your family!



And the same to you and yours, sir. Thank you.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

Free Willie said:


> I think they were both on the same night...I don't remember.


----------



## reformedpastor (May 12, 2009)

The folks that get "dirty" doing Christ work will run across others who are into the "church" for all kinds of reasons except for the right one. I have been disappointed by men I held in high esteem, very sad and many terrible consequences. But my faith isn't in men, only Christ and He has never been anything but holy and faithful! 

Richard Baxter, author of the book 'Reformed Pastor' stated that the road to h e l l will be paved with the good intentions of pastors who preached to others but failed themselves to live by the same word. 

1Ti 6:11  But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. 

1Ti 6:12  Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses.


I find it interesting that christians are the one bashing "moral police" as if one should be embarrassed by being moral and desiring in in others, especially those who profess Christ. 

I don't think my post is going to change any here so y'all have at it, tell me how bad I and others are, fell good about your selves, look up in heaven and say 'God, thank you I am not like them moral police." Ummm............sound familiar. Have a good one. 

Titus 1:15-16  To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled. 
They profess to know God, but they deny him by their works. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work. 

and to cap it all off..............

Titus 2:15  Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

reformedpastor said:


> The folks that get "dirty" doing Christ work will run across others who are into the "church" for all kinds of reasons except for the right one. I have been disappointed by men I held in high esteem, very sad and many terrible consequences. But my faith isn't in men, only Christ and He has never been anything but holy and faithful!
> 
> Richard Baxter, author of the book 'Reformed Pastor' stated that the road to h e l l will be paved with the good intentions of pastors who preached to others but failed themselves to live by the same word.
> 
> ...



Gettin' awful defensive there Pastor, did I thouch a nerve??

Also, would you care to address the question of this thread,
which is, is not what ted haggard did worse then miss cali's photo shoot. I think that it is.


----------



## Lowjack (May 12, 2009)

earl said:


> Not to split hairs ,but wouldn't that make their sin greater ? Will their punishment be greater, or will they just have to go to the back of the line ? I still don't quite ''get'' how the scale of sins works when you get to heaven. I would think that once you repent It wouldn't matter if you only cussed or were a mass murderer.



I guess you Earl don't understand the benefits of knowing Christ.
Romans Chapter 1.
THERE is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh. 

Now A Believer who makes a wrong decision is not cut off the flock, he has an open door to the throne of Grace to receive forgiveness for their sins, whatever it is.
Now if you commit that sin knowing that you are taking advantage of that grace that God provides then, you need a Lawyer(advocate) and that Lawyer is Christ himself.
"My Children  Do not sin, but if you sin we have an advocate in Christ Jesus"

As I understand it that girl had pics taken when she was a minor at 17 and she was not a believer then, once she accepted the atonement of Christ Blood, those sins were erased forever.
Now that she continue to pursue a flashy life and being known ? We all have to do growing before we realize the things of this World are Vanity.

When I was Younger I too wanted to be famous, I put a rock band together and played rock and even audition for a famous band here in the US, but the Lord led me away from that.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

Lowjack said:


> I guess you Earl don't understand the benefits of knowing Christ.
> Romans Chapter 1.
> THERE is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh.
> 
> ...



Good post, Lowjack.


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

Scripture is scripture and RP seems to have a BIBLICAL basis for his comments.  I've seen verse after verse posted to Mr. Greywolf and he never seems to try and refute them, he just goes off on some red herring fishing trip.

There is some truth to the statement that sin is sin.  It is ALL punishable by eternal ****ation.  That said, there are different earthly consequences.  Haggard's reputation is gone and his livelihood has (rightly) been taken away from him.  Ms. Cali has been called out in the Huffington post and on this message board.  The consequences for Haggard's sin certainly seem to be more severe (perhaps as they should be).

Regardless, that doesn't make the "morality police" hypocrites.  The events you brought up are old.  I wasn't here at the time, but I'm sure it was not dismissed.  Public sin by self-professed Christians should be called out for what it is.

Why some folks have a problem with that is beyond me.


----------



## Free Willie (May 12, 2009)

Huntinfool said:


> Hilarious answer....
> 
> 
> 
> ....even better dodge.



Not a dodge. Just something I learned from reading contemporary American literature.

"Snappy Answers to Stupid Questions"

MAD Magazine.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 12, 2009)

Sin is sin....there are not levels.  




We may be appauled by one over the other...but he is no sinned "more" against by one.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> Scripture is scripture and RP seems to have a BIBLICAL basis for his comments.  I've seen verse after verse posted to Mr. Greywolf and he never seems to try and refute them, he just goes off on some red herring fishing trip.
> 
> There is some truth to the statement that sin is sin.  It is ALL punishable by eternal ****ation.  That said, there are different earthly consequences.  Haggard's reputation is gone and his livelihood has (rightly) been taken away from him.  Ms. Cali has been called out in the Huffington post and on this message board.  The consequences for Haggard's sin certainly seem to be more severe (perhaps as they should be).
> 
> ...



OK, Mr Lightin, here are a couple of verses for you, Luke18:9-14 for one, and my favorite, "he that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone"

Are you without sin?? Mr Lightin??


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> OK, Mr Lightin, here are a couple of verses for you, Luke18:9-14 for one, and my favorite, "he that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone"
> 
> Are you without sin?? Mr Lightin??



Of course I'm not.  Are you equating pointing out sin and stoning someone to death?

That's just plain silly...especially considering that Jesus instructed the woman to go and SIN no more.  He did exactly what you are condemning others of.

Was Paul without sin when he instructed the early church?  Peter? John?

Of course they weren't.  They were instructing and, at times, correcting Christians on how they should live.  To hold out the standard that is laid before us in Scripture is certainly not the same as throwing stones in order to kill.  It is what we, as Christians are INSTRUCTED to do.


----------



## earl (May 12, 2009)

Where is the line between correcting and stoning drawn ? Could it be the difference in lovingly correcting a loved one ,or just being Bertha Beddathenyou ? From what  I have read Miss Cal. wasn't feeling too much love here.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> Of course I'm not.  Are you equating pointing out sin and stoning someone to death?
> 
> That's just plain silly...especially considering that Jesus instructed the woman to go and SIN no more.  He did exactly what you are condemning others of.
> 
> ...



Glad you're carryin, the standard there bro...

How about answering the question that this thread is about,
if miss cali sinned at all it was one, enticement.
ted haggard commited adultry, theft, lying, and condemned
others for sin HE WAS COMMITING.

To say that they are equally guilty is insane.

Remember it was Jesus who told the pharisees "you shall receive the greater ****ation"


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

earl said:


> Where is the line between correcting and stoning drawn ? Could it be the difference in lovingly correcting a loved one ,or just being Bertha Beddathenyou?



Of course it's not drawn there.  They were seriously going to stone the woman to death.  They weren't going to go around the circle and say nasty things to her.

Bertha has her reward in full.  It's not about projecting a sense of superiority.  Clearly some have taken it that way, but they are judging motives they are not equipped to judge.

My only point has remained that pointing out the public sin of a Christian is not a sin.  Of course, there are right and wrong ways to do that, but in principle, there is nothing sinful about calling sin what it is.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> of course i'm not. Are you equating pointing out sin and stoning someone to death?
> 
> That's just plain silly...especially considering that jesus instructed the woman to go and sin no more. He did exactly what you are condemning others of.
> 
> ...


 

*amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> 1. Glad you're carryin, the standard there bro...
> 
> 2. How about answering the question that this thread is about,
> 
> ...



1.  That sounds nice, but what does it mean?  Feel free to point out any faulty logic in what I've posted. ("nuh uh" doesn't count).

2. I've already done that.  

3. Both sinned and both sins have been acknowledged.

4. There is guilty and not guilty.  Both are guilty.  As far as punishment, I've already addressed this.

5. See #4.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Glad you're carryin, the standard there bro...
> 
> How about answering the question that this thread is about,
> if miss cali sinned at all it was one, enticement.
> ...


 

James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

If you have ever lied, dishonored your parents, had a god before the God... you are guilty of all the others....

DB BB


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> my only point has remained that pointing out the public sin of a christian is not a sin. Of course, there are right and wrong ways to do that, but in principle, there is nothing sinful about calling sin what it is.


 

*amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

edited so as not to blow out the margins.... sorry got a little loud there...


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> 1.  That sounds nice, but what does it mean?  Feel free to point out any faulty logic in what I've posted. ("nuh uh" doesn't count).
> 
> 2. I've already done that.
> 
> ...



Can you define for me exactly what "sin" miss cali is guilty of??


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> Of course I'm not.  Are you equating pointing out sin and stoning someone to death?
> 
> That's just plain silly...especially considering that Jesus instructed the woman to go and SIN no more.  He did exactly what you are condemning others of.
> 
> ...



Instructing and correcting are fine when they come from a pure heart, problem is in my exp they generally don't

Reminds me of a youth pastor I had as a teen, he was real fond of reproving and rebuking kid who did'nt kow tow to him and everybody thought he was "a real man of god"
until he got caught "instructing" a couple of 14 yo girls.


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Can you define for me exactly what "sin" miss cali is guilty of??



At the very least...

1 Corinthians 8:9


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Instructing and correcting are fine when they come from a pure heart, problem is in my exp they generally don't



And your qualifications for judging a man's heart?


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> And your qualifications for judging a man's heart?



Read the rest of the post you're quoting from


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Read the rest of the post you're quoting from



You encountering a pedophile at your church qualifies you to judge the heart of other men?


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Can you define for me exactly what "sin" miss cali is guilty of??


 
The real question is do you think enticement is a SIN?

No matter what is being enticed...

DB BB


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> You encountering a pedophile at your church qualifies you to judge the heart of other men?



My exp on that occasion and a number of others teaches me that, as a general rule, those who hold themselves up as righteous and despise others are generally hiding worse sin. Again ted haggard comes to mind


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

Double Barrel BB said:


> The real question is do you think enticement is a SIN?
> 
> No matter what is being enticed...
> 
> DB BB



I don't know, why don't you instruct..me


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> My exp on that occasion and a number of others teaches me that, as a general rule, those who hold themselves up as righteous and despise others are generally hiding worse sin. Again ted haggard comes to mind



So many presuppositions...so little time.

1. You ASSUME that those who comment on PUBLIC sin of a self-professed Christian despise her.  Please provide evidence. 

2. You ASSUME that those who comment on PUBLIC sin of a self-professed Christian are holding THEIR righteousness up as the standard.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  The righteous standard is the word of God.  Text after text has been provided and you've still not refuted the WORD.  You choose to focus on the messenger, not the message.

3. You ASSUME that those who comment on PUBLIC sin of a self-professed Christian are hiding some worse sin.  First, this would not invalidate their comment, even if it could be proven to be true.  

You've still not addressed the MESSAGE.  You've just made assumptions about the messengers.

So tell me...are only those who are sinless capable of pointing out the sin of others?  If so, why?  I've already shown you that the writers of the NT were sinners.  Do their admonitions count or are they to be written off because you're just sure they're hypocrites?


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> So many presuppositions...so little time.
> 
> 1. You ASSUME that those who comment on PUBLIC sin of a self-professed Christian despise her.  Please provide evidence.
> 
> ...



Gettin' touchy there aint'cha

1-This thread is about THE MESSENGER not the message


2- As for making assumptions, I clearly stated that it was MY EXP. that teaches me this.  every case of morality policing that I personally have dealt with, the self righeous were always hiding something as bad or worse. I will state again MY EXP.

3- If you can't see a credibility problem with a preacher condemning gays while he has a gay hooker on retainer, then I wonder about you


----------



## reformedpastor (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Gettin' awful defensive there Pastor, did I thouch a nerve??
> 
> Also, would you care to address the question of this thread,
> which is, is not what ted haggard did worse then miss cali's photo shoot. I think that it is.



Sorry Johnny it takes more than this to upset me, I just don't wan't to keep repeating myself. 

I was addressing the fact that I have been close to some that were not the real deal. Thats all. 

As far as these others you have listed I find them repulsive and shameless. Yes what Ted Haggard did was more sinful because he was a pastor. His was a sin against office, knowledge, trust, and age. Anything else?


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

reformedpastor said:


> Sorry Johnny it takes more than this to upset me, I just don't wan't to keep repeating myself.
> 
> I was addressing the fact that I have been close to some that were not the real deal. Thats all.
> 
> As far as these others you have listed I find them repulsive and shameless. Yes what Ted Haggard did was more sinful because he was a pastor. His was a sin against office, knowledge, trust, and age. Anything else?



Thank You, Bro. Pastor that was excellent and well reasoned.


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Gettin' touchy there aint'cha
> 
> 1-This thread is about THE MESSENGER not the message
> 
> ...



No...disagreeing doesn't make me touchy.  

1. If you keep focusing on the messengers, you'll miss the message.  All messengers, save one, are sinners.  You still haven't answered my question about the qualifications of a messenger.  

2. Your experience is what it is.  You then take your experience and try to apply it to the folks here.  If we're going to universally apply it, it will get universally questioned.  You've insinuated that your experience qualifies you to judge men's hearts.  That's ridiculous.  I'm sorry your experience has been so jading, but you should put things in perspective.  There are something like 82,000,000 professing evangelical Christians in this country.  How many hypocrites have you come across?  What percentage of the whole is that? 

3. Where in the world do you get that I don't see a credibility problem with Haggard?  I was one of the first to say that Haggard's sin carried a more severe consequence (something you seem to have looked over).  Regardless, TH's credibility issues do not, in themselves, invalidate his message.  A guy can be a hypocrite, but be correct.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> I don't know, why don't you instruct..me


 
I am not sure I can instruct you... You seem to take oposition to anything that is said by reasonable people on here...

To me you seem to be jaded, by your experiences...

I will try...

If a woman dresses provocatively, is she not enticing others to sin?

She is not making them Sin, because they should have better self control...

DB BB


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> No...disagreeing doesn't make me touchy.
> 
> 1. If you keep focusing on the messengers, you'll miss the message.  All messengers, save one, are sinners.  You still haven't answered my question about the qualifications of a messenger.
> 
> ...



1- Again, this thread is about the messengers, not the message. I started this thread specificly to talk about the messenger, not the message.

2-My experience both teaches and entitles me to exercise caution and to protect myself.

  example 1-if you fall off the roof, "experience" teaches you to wear a safety belt

  example 2-if i'm traveling through an area of town known for carjaciking, and someone approaches me who looks and acts like a carjacker "experience" teaches me to take the proper action to protect myself and others.
 I am not judging what's in the suspects heart, that is between him and God. I am using my "experience" to ensure the safety of myself and others

example 3- if a preacher shows up at your mother's door 
and ask her to sign over her s.s. check, "experience....well you get the idea

3- My oversight, Sorry.


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> 1- Again, this thread is about the messengers, not the message. I started this thread specificly to talk about the messenger, not the message.
> 
> 2-My experience both teaches and entitles me to exercise caution and to protect myself.



Okay, let's talk about the messengers.  What qualifies one to be a messenger in your eyes?  Who is qualified to speak out against sin?  The Scriptures that have been pointed out that instruct Christians to speak out against sin, who are they directed towards?

How have your reactions to these threads protected you?  You've made some pretty strong statements in both that COULD be taken as judgmental toward those you've deemed hypocrites on this forum.  Tell me, if you're not judging their hearts, how do you know they're hypocrites?


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

Double Barrel BB said:


> I am not sure I can instruct you... You seem to take oposition to anything that is said by reasonable people on here...
> 
> To me you seem to be jaded, by your experiences...
> 
> ...



Point 1- are you trying to say that my points are not reasonable??? if so how do justify??

Point 2- I am somewhat jaded, score 1 for you.

Point 3- The question I was asking, is this, is some clothing sinful. I don't know that it is. But maybe that is a topic for another thread


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> Okay, let's talk about the messengers.  What qualifies one to be a messenger in your eyes?  Who is qualified to speak out against sin?  The Scriptures that have been pointed out that instruct Christians to speak out against sin, who are they directed towards?
> 
> How have your reactions to these threads protected you?  You've made some pretty strong statements in both that COULD be taken as judgmental toward those you've deemed hypocrites on this forum.  Tell me, if you're not judging their hearts, how do you know they're hypocrites?



Ok, that was good, now we can address the points

Point 1-I actually agree that we should speak out against sin, my point in this thread is to remind or to point out that we should hold ourselves to the same standard that we hold others to. I do not think that is unreasonable, nor unscriptural

 One thing I find very telling here is a lot of the folks are more interested in defending their right to "correct" others then they are in asking themselves this question "could I measure up to my judgement" and also "am I doing this out of the love of Christ or do I just feel like picking on someone today" remember "with what judgement ye judge...."

Point 2-my intent was to provoke thought and question, I would ask all to ask themselves the questions above.
I cannot judge the heart of anyone as Jesus said, there is one that judgeth. The hypocrites know who they are, I'm just asking the question.

p.s. I really encourage everyone to go back and read Luke 18:9-14 and really reflect on it. Which one do you want to be?? I'd rather be the publican any day.


----------



## Banjo (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Ok, that was good, now we can address the points
> 
> Point 1-I actually agree that we should speak out against sin, my point in this thread is to remind or to point out that we should hold ourselves to the same standard that we hold others to. I do not think that is unreasonable, nor unscriptural
> 
> ...



I sure didn't see it this way....Perhaps you have come around some.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

Banjo said:


> I sure didn't see it this way....Perhaps you have come around some.



No I have'nt come around I'm just trying to get my point across, a little more clarity, a little less accusation so to speak. BTW it was'nt intended to be a personal attack


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Point 1-I actually agree that we should speak out against sin, my point in this thread is to remind or to point out that we should hold ourselves to the same standard that we hold others to. I do not think that is unreasonable, nor unscriptural
> 
> One thing I find very telling here is a lot of the folks are more interested in defending their right to "correct" others then they are in asking themselves this question "could I measure up to my judgement" and also "am I doing this out of the love of Christ or do I just feel like picking on someone today" remember "with what judgement ye judge...."



We are all held to the same standard and we ALL fall short of that standard...that's the starting point of the Gospel.  Once someone is a Christian, they are in the process of becoming sanctified.  Part of sanctification is having your behavior modified by the grace of God.  The means of that modification is very often the admonition of  brothers and sisters in the faith.  The pointing out of a short-fall is a great benefit to the body.

I wouldn't read too much into the reactions to these threads.  Folks here defend their right to call sin "sin" because that is what was called into question.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> We are all held to the same standard and we ALL fall short of that standard...that's the starting point of the Gospel.  Once someone is a Christian, they are in the process of becoming sanctified.  Part of sanctification is having your behavior modified by the grace of God.  The means of that modification is very often the admonition of  brothers and sisters in the faith.  The pointing out of a short-fall is a great benefit to the body.
> 
> I wouldn't read too much into the reactions to these threads.  Folks here defend their right to call sin "sin" because that is what was called into question.



If you say so.


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> If you say so.



You can do better than that.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> We are all held to the same standard and we ALL fall short of that standard...that's the starting point of the Gospel.  Once someone is a Christian, they are in the process of becoming sanctified.  Part of sanctification is having your behavior modified by the grace of God.  The means of that modification is very often the admonition of  brothers and sisters in the faith.  The pointing out of a short-fall is a great benefit to the body.
> 
> I wouldn't read too much into the reactions to these threads.  Folks here defend their right to call sin "sin" because that is what was called into question.



No, what is called into question is, can you measure up to what you hold others to?? "with what measure ye meet, it shall be measured to you"


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Point 1- are you trying to say that my points are not reasonable??? if so how do justify??
> 
> Point 2- I am somewhat jaded, score 1 for you.
> 
> Point 3- The question I was asking, is this, is some clothing sinful. I don't know that it is. But maybe that is a topic for another thread


 
What are your points exactly? Please line them out in one post....

I am not trying to score points here... I am trying to explain a point... if you are not willing to open your mind up and accept then there is nothing anyone is going to be able to say to change your mind...

Yes, in fact I find a lot of today's fashions sinful... Even to the point that if someone wears such sinful clothe's they are not only responsible for their own sin of wearing it, but of enticing others to look at them...

DB BB


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> No, what is called into question is, can you measure up to what you hold others to?? "with what measure ye meet, it shall be measured to you"


 
But what people have to remember is what you are to measure by is Bible...

DB BB


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

Double Barrel BB said:


> But what people have to remember is what you are to measure by is Bible...
> 
> DB BB



Can you meet that measure??


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

Double Barrel BB said:


> What are your points exactly? Please line them out in one post....
> 
> I am not trying to score points here... I am trying to explain a point... if you are not willing to open your mind up and accept then there is nothing anyone is going to be able to say to change your mind...
> 
> ...




OK, #1 are the sins of ted haggard, jim bakker, jimmy swaggart, et al equal to miss cali,s photo shoot??

     #2 for those who insist that is their business to "correct" others for their "sin" I would ask, can you meet the standard you hold others to. Matt 7:1-5


I don't get on point 2. Please clarify.


Point 3 you may be right, but I think that might be another thread


----------



## SkeeterEater (May 12, 2009)

If your scared go to church!


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

SkeeterEater said:


> If your scared go to church!


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Matt 7:1-5



Good.  Now we're getting somewhere.  Could you first tell me what you understand the message of that passage to be?

In other words, tell me what you think qualifies as judgment.  Was this an absolute command not to judge in any way shape or form?  If so, how do you understand the second half of verse 5?


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> Good.  Now we're getting somewhere.  Could you first tell me what you understand the message of that passage to be?
> 
> In other words, tell me what you think qualifies as judgment.  Was this an absolute command not to judge in any way shape or form?  If so, how do you understand the second half of verse 5?



Let's quote the whole verse "Thou hypocrite, first cast the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye"

I would understand it this way: if you hold yourself to the same standard that you hold others to, you will have more empathy for their struggle against sin and temptation because you struggled with it yourself before you proceeded to judge someone else.

To put it another way, one would be better enabled to minister to a backsliding brother or sister from a position of empathy and Christian love, rather then judgement and condemnation


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

So, the admonition is against inappropriate judging?


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 12, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> So, the admonition is against inappropriate judging?



Verse 1 states "judge not that ye be not judged"
I think that John 8:3-11 illustrates this principle.

There is a difference between judgement and ministry I think


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 12, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Verse 1 states "judge not that ye be not judged"
> I think that John 8:3-11 illustrates this principle.
> 
> There is a difference between judgement and ministry I think



But ministry isn't what Jesus is addressing.  It's talking about judging, then it equates judging and taking the speck out of your brothers eye with a log in your own.  It then says that when your log is gone, you can go on and help him with the speck.  If the first is judging, I don't see how the second is not.

John 8 talks about punishment, not judgment.  After the stoners D) leave, Jesus instructs the woman to go and sin no more.  In effect, pointing out that the way she was living was sinful.

I think it should be remembered that in the sermon on the mount, Jesus often compared his righteousness with the self-righteousness of the pharisees.  The pharisees did not hold people just to the standard of the Scripture, but also to the standard of their extra-biblical tradition.  I just think it helps to understand who these words were "aimed" at.  

Its easy to read our own definitions of judgement into the text, but I don't think that's always a reliable thing to do.  It works sometimes and doesn't work other times.  This text is a good example where we might read our own definition of judgement into the text.  If we do, however, we end up with a direct contradiction with some of  Paul's admonitions that have been laid out earlier.  

BUT, if we understand this judgement to be superficial/petty judgement (a speck in the eye is not a big deal), there is no contradiction with Paul or with Jesus' own "judgement" that the woman's actions were indeed sinful.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 13, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> But ministry isn't what Jesus is addressing.  It's talking about judging, then it equates judging and taking the speck out of your brothers eye with a log in your own.  It then says that when your log is gone, you can go on and help him with the speck.  If the first is judging, I don't see how the second is not.
> 
> John 8 talks about punishment, not judgment.  After the stoners D) leave, Jesus instructs the woman to go and sin no more.  In effect, pointing out that the way she was living was sinful.
> 
> ...



What Jesus said was "niether do I condemn thee, go and sin no more"

More to the point, do you not think that holding someone else to a standard you are not willing to hold yourself to, is unjust?? yes or no???


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 13, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> What Jesus said was "niether do I condemn thee, go and sin no more"
> 
> More to the point, do you not think that holding someone else to a standard you are not willing to hold yourself to, is unjust?? yes or no???



So he didn't punish her.  He still judged her actions.  Otherwise, the "sin no more" was meaningless.

Of course holding someone to a standard you're not willing to hold yourself to is unjust...more importantly, it's hypocrisy and sinful.  BUT, there is a difference between recognizing the standard and acknowledging that you don't live up to it.  What I'm trying to say is that you don't have to be perfect to be able to point out what the standard is without being a hypocrite.  My evidence is that The writers of the new testament were not perfect.  Were they unjust in their instruction to the early church because they were not perfect?


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 13, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> So he didn't punish her.  He still judged her actions.  Otherwise, the "sin no more" was meaningless.
> 
> Of course holding someone to a standard you're not willing to hold yourself to is unjust...more importantly, it's hypocrisy and sinful.  BUT, there is a difference between recognizing the standard and acknowledging that you don't live up to it.  What I'm trying to say is that you don't have to be perfect to be able to point out what the standard is without being a hypocrite.  My evidence is that The writers of the new testament were not perfect.  Were they unjust in their instruction to the early church because they were not perfect?




The key there is what you said "acknowledging that you don't live up to it"

The point of this thread is to point out that a lot of people don't do it that way. in which case, from your post you would agree that is hypocrisy. 

Again t. haggard comes to mind as an example of this.


----------



## johnnylightnin (May 13, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> The point of this thread is to point out that a lot of people don't do it that way. in which case, from your post you would agree that is hypocrisy.
> 
> Again t. haggard comes to mind as an example of this.



And those people are wrong, but how can you know the status of a man's heart?

Is a preacher supposed to have an extended confession session prior to each sermon?  How practical is that?

Anyone who knows the Scripture even minimally knows that no one is perfect.  

If your point is that Christians should be empathetic on account of their fallen nature, I agree.  But I would point out that there's a difference between empathy and silence.  The Scripture COMMANDS that Christians in community with each other correct a fallen brother.  From a position of empathy and not self-righteousness to be sure, but correction is what's called for.


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 13, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> And those people are wrong, but how can you know the status of a man's heart?
> 
> Is a preacher supposed to have an extended confession session prior to each sermon?  How practical is that?
> 
> ...



I will go back to an earlier post, suggesting that a true Christian ask themselves before they jump on a tatal stranger, "am I doing this from a standpoint of love and ministry or do I just feel like picking on somebody today"

Now I know, if you spend any time in church, you've seen plenty of the latter. It's called gossip and backbiting but they justify it by saying they are "correcting" or "sharing"
like I said if you spend much time around churches you'll plenty of this.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 13, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Can you meet that measure??


 
No one can... even those that wrote the Bible for God... But we should hold ourselves to that standard....

You think I hold others to a standard that I do not hold myself to? You are wrong...

DB BB


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 13, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> I will go back to an earlier post, suggesting that a true Christian ask themselves before they jump on a tatal stranger, "am I doing this from a standpoint of love and ministry or do I just feel like picking on somebody today"
> 
> Now I know, if you spend any time in church, you've seen plenty of the latter. It's called gossip and backbiting but they justify it by saying they are "correcting" or "sharing"
> like I said if you spend much time around churches you'll plenty of this.


 

Just curious... do you go to a Church?

DB BB


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 13, 2009)

johnnylightnin said:


> good. Now we're getting somewhere. Could you first tell me what you understand the message of that passage to be?
> 
> In other words, tell me what you think qualifies as judgment. Was this an absolute command not to judge in any way shape or form? If so, how do you understand the second half of verse 5?


 


johnnylightnin said:


> so, the admonition is against inappropriate judging?


 


johnnylightnin said:


> but ministry isn't what jesus is addressing. It's talking about judging, then it equates judging and taking the speck out of your brothers eye with a log in your own. It then says that when your log is gone, you can go on and help him with the speck. If the first is judging, i don't see how the second is not.
> 
> John 8 talks about punishment, not judgment. After the stoners d) leave, jesus instructs the woman to go and sin no more. In effect, pointing out that the way she was living was sinful.
> 
> ...


 


johnnylightnin said:


> so he didn't punish her. He still judged her actions. Otherwise, the "sin no more" was meaningless.
> 
> Of course holding someone to a standard you're not willing to hold yourself to is unjust...more importantly, it's hypocrisy and sinful. But, there is a difference between recognizing the standard and acknowledging that you don't live up to it. What i'm trying to say is that you don't have to be perfect to be able to point out what the standard is without being a hypocrite. My evidence is that the writers of the new testament were not perfect. Were they unjust in their instruction to the early church because they were not perfect?


 


johnnylightnin said:


> and those people are wrong, but how can you know the status of a man's heart?
> 
> Is a preacher supposed to have an extended confession session prior to each sermon? How practical is that?
> 
> ...


 

*amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 13, 2009)

Double Barrel BB said:


> No one can... even those that wrote the Bible for God... But we should hold ourselves to that standard....
> 
> You think I hold others to a standard that I do not hold myself to? You are wrong...
> 
> DB BB



I never said you did, I just asked the question of everybody. why you take it personal??


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 13, 2009)

Double Barrel BB said:


> Just curious... do you go to a Church?
> 
> DB BB



Yes, but not as often as I used to


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 13, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> I never said you did, I just asked the question of everybody. why you take it personal??


 
I didn't take it personal... I just wanted to clarify that I do not hold others to a standard that I do not hold myself to...

DB BB


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 13, 2009)

Double Barrel BB said:


> I didn't take it personal... I just wanted to clarify that I do not hold others to a standard that I do not hold myself to...
> 
> DB BB



I'm glad to hear that


----------



## Double Barrel BB (May 13, 2009)

JOHNNY GREYWOLF said:


> Yes, but not as often as I used to


 

I am glad you are going to Church.

As I have been reading your posts and conversing a little with you... You remind me of my best friend... When we were in college together, we used to have lengthy discussion about Church and Religion in general...

He stopped going to church after he entered college... and he told me the reason he didn't go to church is because there was nothing but hypocrits there... Well I had many discussions with him and then it finally hit me... We are all hypocrits to a point... We just need to remember that we are to try our best to reduce being a hypocrit to as little as possible... It will never go away... as long as Sin is here, we will all have some measure of hypocrispy in us... We just have to guard our hearts that we keep it in check and don't let it get out of hand...

When people post messages on this forum, a lot gets lost in how they post messages... I know it has happened to me when I have read others posts... and sometimes after reading my own, I can see how somethings can be taken too personal, or seem like an attack, when they are very far from it... I think we can all be better about how we post, and how we word things that we talk about... but we are eventually going to offend someone, no matter how much we try not to...

If I have offended you in anything that I posted, it was not meant that way...

DB BB


----------



## JOHNNY GREYWOLF (May 13, 2009)

Double Barrel BB said:


> I am glad you are going to Church.
> 
> As I have been reading your posts and conversing a little with you... You remind me of my best friend... When we were in college together, we used to have lengthy discussion about Church and Religion in general...
> 
> ...



DB, Thank you for a very well thought and reasoned response. I agree with you.

Likewise about giving offense, nothing I have posted was meant to be personal. As I said I just asking the question. I have to ask myself whenever I get to feeling too smug.


----------

