I don’t have the book with me but I will follow up with some quotes in the future.

You are exactly right, and that is the response I would have liked to have heard from our two friends.

As far as I know, there is no evidence of heresy on the part of either Packer or Guinness. If they were heretics, it would be right to say so, but all their works speak for them, and I know of no one who has discovered any heresy in them.

Thank you again. Here’s hoping our two friends haven’t flown the coup! They would both benefit from your careful response.

The Bible is clear that sin is to be confronted with gentleness (I do not think that Shane and anti-ECT would disagree with this), but it is also clear that Christians are to avoid and expose error (which I think is what they are trying to do). They are not in a position to reprove Os Guiness personally for his error, but they are warning others of his error. If someone is teaching error, it is the job of every Christian to warn other believers of this error. I also think that just because a man holds to erroneous beliefs in one area, doesn’t mean that all his beliefs are such, but it should serve as a caution not to blindly accept his teaching (which should already be the case).

You said, “So one last time, does judging the actions of a brother in Christ include publicly calling him a heretic and declaring that he has no wisdom to share with the church?” If a man is a heretic (and, knowing very little about him, I am not in a position to say that) shouldn’t he be called such? It is what it is, isn’t it?

Okay, let me try to respond to what you did say.

“Sorry, Sky” You don’t owe me an appology. Paul wrote Galatians 6:1, not me. And if you don’t confront with gentleness, you broke God’s command, not mine.

“It the truth that you find offensive” I don’t find the truth offensive at all.

“There was nothing gentle in Nathan’s words to David” I couldn’t disagree with you more. Personally I can’t think of a gentler way to tell someone he is an adulterer and a murderer. Did you notice that Nathan didn’t resort to any name calling?

“At least David had a teachable heart because he took ownership of his sin and repented” I wish you and Shane had David’s heart. Galations 6:1 is very clear about how sin is to be confronted…with gentleness.

And do you imagine you are confronting Packer and Guinness by calling them heretics on an internet blog? Since they will never read your words, you aren’t confronting them all. You’re just engaging in name calling and justifying it by imagining that your confronting sin and sinners.

So one last time, does judging the actions of a brother in Christ include publicly calling him a heretic and declaring that he has no wisdom to share with the church? If not, then shouldn’t you and Shane repent and appologize for doing it?

There was nothing gentle in Nathan’s words to David when David clearly needed to repent. If calling sin what it is is not gentle, then I suppose we should just let sin run rampant and never confront it, lest we offend someone and appear to others as being judgemental. The unbelieving world calls God judgemental and unkind when you boldly claim that people will go to Hell if they refuse to repent and obey God and submit to His Gospel.

Please refer back to my comment on Nov 8 @ 3:25am. At least David had a teachable heart because he took ownership of his sin and repented (Psalm 51).

My question was simple. Let your answer be simple. And in a spirit of gentleness please.

What examples of blame-shifting and excusing did you find in my reply? I quoted Shane twice and the Bible once.

On the other hand, I asked a simple question and in response I got a lot of words, but no answer.

Let me try again. Does judging the actions of a brother in Christ include publicly calling him a heretic and declaring that he has no wisdom to share with the church? If not, then doesn’t that judge have something to repent of?

“Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one >>in a spirit of gentleness…

Your typical natural fleshly response………shifting blame and making excuses, rather than excepting full responsibility for sin and disobedience……..goes on all the time, in fact since the garden of Eden. Eve blamed the serpent, Adam blamed Eve, the woman God gave him.

How is anybody ever going to move forward in greater holiness if we are not encouraged to do so by repenting of wrong actions and lucid disobedience? The more we condone disobedience or just wink at something that doesn’t seem so bad, the more immune to compromise we become. And the worse part is that many unassumming sheep just follow right in line. Those who know better have the responsibility to stand up for what is Biblically righteous, that is, if you care at all about loyalty to Christ Jesus……which will always be the “narrow” road!

The not so humble Shane:
“Read their stuff if you like, tell others about their stuff if you must, just don’t expect me to make much of these men.”

Will the real Shane please stand up?

“Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall.” 1 Cor. 10:12

Let me be clear so you can understand my position on all this. Packer, Colson, Guinness, and others who have signed ECT and have not repented of their participation will not be getting any recommendations from me.

If these guys were wise, then they would not have signed ECT. It’s that simple.

Read their stuff if you like, tell others about their stuff if you must, just don’t expect me to make much of these men.

There are plenty of other men of God in this world we can learn from who have not compromised the Gospel.