As I re-read my post, I realize that I have confused the words "accusation" and "charges." Upon a closer reading of the Manual, it appears as though the first step is to file an accusation... then an investigative committee is impaneled... and then the charges may be filed (if the investigative committee finds grounds).Originally Posted by Jon Twitchell
Grace and Peace,
Jon Twitchell
Cape Elizabeth Church of the Nazarene | YourChurchWeb.net | YourChurchPianist.net | FuneralChaplain.comPost Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 LaughingTodd Erickson - "thanks" for this post
Hey Manny, thanks for taking the time to engage the questions posed in light of the scriptural mandate to submit to your authorities in Hebrews 13:17, even if you did answer my question with a bunch of questions. I'll avoid the temptation to do the same.
Membership in the Church of the Nazarene is voluntary. By joining this church we are all agreeing to abide by the structures of authority in place. According to Hebrews 13:17 we MUST submit to that authority.
You asked if we should ALWAYS submit to an authority even if they are promoting false teachings.
There are two questions there, that we need to address:
1. who is the authority that we must submit to, and
2. who gets to determine if someone is promoting false teachings.
The highest authority in the Church of the Nazarene is the General Assembly. The GA has appointed General Superintendents to act in its place in implementing the procedures that it has put in place. The District Superintendents fill a similar role for the District Assemblies. In answer to question 1, the authority we must submit to is not the clergy person whom we think is promoting false teachings, it is the General Assembly.
The next question is of vital importance, who gets to determine if a member of the clergy is promoting false teaching. Again, the General Assembly is the highest authority in our church and it had delegated responsibility for this task to the District Board of Discipline (or a Regional Board of Discipline in certain instances).
What this ultimately means is that the authority we are submitting to is not the clergy person in question, but it is the General Assembly. So yes, according to Hebrews 13:17 we must ALWAYS submit to this authority - and if in it's wisdom the board of discipline (operating under the authority of the General Assembly) is NOT convinced the clergy person in question is promoting false teachings then we have two choices:
1. Submit to the authority of those appointed over us in line with Hebrews 13:17, or
2. Leave the Church of the Nazarene for a church where we CAN submit to their authority (being careful not to slander our former authority in the process).
So, I leave you with this question, why do you think that you have the spiritual authority to "expose" false teachers if the leaders of your church have not granted you that authority, and if they have not granted you that authority does your action not stand in direct violation of Hebrews 13:17?
Post Thanks / Like - 7 Thanks, 0 Laughing
And while that sounds like a lot of steps, I guess it's not that far removed from the UCMJ--which calls for an Article 32 Hearing prior to a Court Martial.
Grace and Peace,
Jon Twitchell
Cape Elizabeth Church of the Nazarene | YourChurchWeb.net | YourChurchPianist.net | FuneralChaplain.com
Manny, again I really want to thank you for engaging. It is so much more edifying when we talk TO each other even if we don't agree.
If you will give me direct scriptural citations that command us to expose false teaching and to rebuke false teachers I will be better able to directly answer that portion of your question.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I think there's a slight mistake going on here: it's not you or me who gets to decide what false teaching is, it's the General Assembly that does that for the Church of the Nazarene. We don't have popes, you know. And if we need interpretation, we have six guys to do that together, until the GA decides otherwise.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
My only clear authority is the Bible, which tells us that we are to expose and rebuke false teachers, and to eventually have nothing to do with them. Does Heb. 13:17 mean that we ought to obey leaders, and this includes any kind of leader, who promotes false teaching (not implying that our leaders are doing that by the way).
I'm not an expert on the church manual. I'll leave it at this without specifics: I tried some things which followed the manual's guidelines, and I ran into dead ends doing it. So much for following the manual.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Wrong. Anyone who became a member of the CotN has submitted him/herself to its teachings, to the community of faith that constitutes this church. The authority to define those is the General Assembly. Of course, one can always leave if one does not agree with them, of follow the procedures the church put in place to change them. I've been successful in changing some things, unsuccessful in others. But being a Nazarene, I have to accept that.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 3 Thanks, 0 Laughing
As followers of Christ, we are part of an overall community. Acting as individuals outside of community (and interpreting the bible within that context) is one of the curses of the Reformation...it freed us to read the bible on our own and come up with our own conclusions, and then seek, Don Quixote style, to tilt all available windmills on our own.
What you have said above is that you identify yourself as a Nazarene, but when the methods of the church didn't work for you, you abandoned them for your own ways. This would seem to strongly ask...in what way are you actually a Nazarene?
Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
So the bible which is your highest authority says in Hebrews 13:17 that you must submit to those appointed as leaders over you. Which means effectively that the bible delegates authority to the church leaders (General Assembly) who have delegated authority to others (general superintendents, district superintendents, boards of discipline, district advisory boards, etc).
Perhaps the "dead ends" indicate that you are wrong and that you do not have the authority to determine if someone is promoting false teaching.
If following the manual does not get you the result you desire does that mean you can now simply disobey Hebrews 13:17 - that wouldn't make sense since the scripture including Hebrews 13:17 is in your own words, "your only clear authority"?
Post Thanks / Like - 5 Thanks, 0 Laughing
He's a Reformed Nazarene, Todd.
Hey wise guy, don't start to get logical! It's not about logic, it's about truth!
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Also Manny, I would love to engage the biblical basis for exposing and rebuking false teachers if you will give me direct biblical citations.
I don't see any evidence that the Bible is "clearly" an authority for you at all.
Benjamin Burch pointed out Scripture (Galatians 5:22-6, Galatians 6:1-2, John 15:8-14) that you just ignored. you also just ignored the fact that I pointed out how you quoted Galatians 1 completely out of context and how it does not support what you are using it for. You don't seem to care about the authority of those verses nor any that Kevin, Dennis or anyone else has pointed out to you either.
I am sorry Manny, you saying you submit to the Bible is a joke when you just cherry pick it to make it say what you want.
Post Thanks / Like - 3 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Manny, by the way you have now have offers to dive into scripture and take a hard look at it with both Benjamin and Kevin. Both said they will take the time to really look at it to see what it says. But you don't seem interested in any of that and have ignored such invitations. I don't understand why you bail every time people are willing to engage in the bible with you?
The dead ends I refer to mean that the proper guidelines in the manual were ignored, not that I did not get my way as I saw it.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Read my blog articles, James. I don't have time to repeat everything I wrote there, here again. Sorry.
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the request. I would suggest that I and others have made our cases over and over on our blogs. Feel free to go there and make up your mind.
Perhaps I can send you a link later to a few that pertain to the question you are asking.
so you wrote a blog today that engages the scriptures that both benjamin and kevin have presented to you? otherwise it is another hit and run we can chalk up to you and your fear of dialoguing in a setting that is not completely controlled by you. see my theory is we all know that you have more than enough time....you just do not want to dialogue because you have been stumped.
"Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination end in nit-picking and divisiveness."-Mildred Bangs Wynkoop
All of your blog articles follow the following format:
A. There is an issue.
B. There are X experts (blog links follow) that support my view of this issue.
C. Here are a number of scriptures that I also feel, quoted individually, also back up this issue.
D. This is why this issue is important.
Essentially, each blog post is a statement of the people who agree with you, and the individual scriptures that you believe mean what you want them to believe. They do not function in the manner in which the Nazarene Church supports scripture.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I was suggesting that you look at scripture together with them, but you seem to prefer to be the teacher. By what authority do you teach? And why are you above learning?
Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
James, by what authority do you teach? And why are you above learning?
Apparently you have rejected what I wrote on my blog, which is your right. I'm glad I did not waste time in repeating things to you.
Hi Manny, just like you don't have time to wade through every post on Naznet, I don't have time to wade through your blog (you are rather prolific after all). I asked about Hebrews 13:17 and the question of authority and you asked what we are to do with the scriptures that tell us to expose and rebuke false teachers. I am merely asking you to cite those scriptures so that I can coherently answer your question.
Thanks.
Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
No, I have written previous posts that deal with the subject, Cam. I am not stumped, thank you.
You're pretty smart- since you speak for everyone, that your theory is that "everyone knows" that I have time for constant dialogue with you? You don't know me at all and the time I have. Unless you are God, and I know you're not!
And I don't spend a lot of time here- and I don't intend to. I have my priorities.
manny the point is simply directing people to wade through your blogs, none of which address the scriptures addressed earlier by ben and kevin, you are simply avoiding engaging in a conversation that you cannot ignore away. you have made it clear you have plenty of time to decide who you think are false teachers, be they emergent or "gasp" catholics, but no time to engage when people genuinely challenge your position. you are absolutely right that i don't know you or your time restraints, however i do have eyes.
"Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination end in nit-picking and divisiveness."-Mildred Bangs WynkoopPost Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Well, for what it is worth I teach with the authority of an Ordained Elder as my calling and gifts for ministry have been affirmed by the church. This kind of authority is humbling because it comes from the body of Christ as represented by our denomination. This creates a relationship of mutual accountability. I am not above learning, and am always seeking to learn and grow. I don't close myself off from hearing what others have to say. I listen to what others have to teach me wherever I can find them; here, from the leaders in our denomination, on my district, in my church, the comments of my blog (which I don't censor).
What concerns me though is that you and Tim have set yourselves up on your own authority as the head of "Concerned Nazarenes". You are the self appointed people in charge. You control everything that can be said and taught in the spaces you create and speak as if you speak for everyone that is "concerned". You have made yourself accountable to no one, yet demand that everyone be accountable to you. I ask you on what authority you teach and why you think you are above learning because you have positioned yourself as a teacher with no accountability as a learner.
I am not throwing my "credentials" around as a way to trump you or anything like that, that would be foolish because I have so much to learn from other Ordained elders and laity alike. But I don't teach on my own authority, I am part of a community that graciously affirms and holds me accountable to my calling to preach and teach the gospel as a Pastor and to keep growing and learning along the way.
So Manny, when it comes to looking at scripture I am not putting myself as authority over you, because my authority has come from you as you belong to the body of Christ in the church of the Nazarene. I think our theology and process of ordination is beautiful as it helps us live into Ephesians 5:21 which says "submit to one another out of reverence for Christ".
So again, instead of looking at scripture in an environment where you set yourself up as your own authority and you have no accountability, let's look at it together. Accept Kevin and Ben's invitation.
Last edited by James Diggs; May 12th, 2010 at 07:15 PM. Reason: added last two paragraphs to clarify point.
Post Thanks / Like - 12 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I'm sorry to hear that the Manual was not followed in this case. I'd love to know the details of what took place. Because if you presented a formal accusation to the DS & Advisory Board, as instructed by the Manual, and they did not follow through as directed by the Manual, then I imagine your next step would be to appeal to the GS's. If you did that, and still the Manual process was not followed..... well, I guess I'm curious as to why I've never read anything on your blog or on your Facebook group about how this all played out. As far as any of us know, none of the Concerned Nazarenes have ever made a formal accusation against anyone, in writing, to the proper authorities who could actually do something about it.
Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I think my mail is being censored. I did not receive an invitation. I would not have attended anyway. I am already in enough trouble.
That's the thing here, Manny. All of these other things you decry:
* Denying Biblical inerrancy
* Open Theism
* Evolution
* Spiritual Formation
Are not "another gospel." Our "gospel" is very simple in Christianity:
* God became incarnate in Jesus Christ and
* was crucified and
* on the 3rd day was resurrected and
* declared Lord of the whole of creation
That's it. That's "the Gospel." It gets more detailed in the creeds. However, anything more than the creeds is someone's interpretation. No one's "interpretation" equals "sola Scriptura."
To say "the Bible" is the authority, and then promote your reading of the Bible as "the Bible" is to say that your interpretation is the authority. It's not. This is what confuses me so much about your approach.
- Ben
Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death! And to those in the tombs, bestowing life!
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν, θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας! καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι, ζωὴν χαρισάμενος!Post Thanks / Like - 6 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Jim,
You're creating a false dichotomoy (and I assume Manny is using the same one) which does not exist in Scripture. "False teaching" is not an isolated "bad fruit." False teachers are always spoken of in the context of sin and evil-doing. Read Romans and Galatians! Read 1 Corinthians! Read 1 John! Read John!
Also, not only did I NOT take the word out of context, I actually used the context Manny provided. Manny talked about "wolves in sheeps clothing" and "fruits" to refer to false teachings. Yet, that's not what the text he cited says!
This is elementary exegesis class. Manny cannot cut a verse off and assume what it means. He can't say "false teachers will come, you'll know them by their fruits" and then assume that "fruits" means "false teaching" in that context. It doesn't. I showed Manny that by quoting the rest of Matthew 7 (which he conveniently ignored) and then following Matthew's narrative through to the actual judgment scene, where the judgment which is foretold in Matthew 7 actually takes place (Matthew 25). This is the first thing someone learns when doing exegesis.
If I have not responded to Manny's question, then Manny's question is out of context, and invalid Biblically. I responded in proper context. If there is any flaw, it is with the question, not the response. Manny is trying to create something which the Scriptures never speak about... Good, loving, Christ-like people who teach bad things. That doesn't exist in Scripture. Manny is creating out of whole-cloth and waving it around to show the world. I won't let him do that. If he wants to talk Scripture we can do that. If he won't respond... I'll take that as a concession that I am correct.
- Ben
Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death! And to those in the tombs, bestowing life!
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν, θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας! καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι, ζωὴν χαρισάμενος!Post Thanks / Like - 3 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Yes your correct Ben, nailed it, no response is possible except for total surrender. Honestly I can agree with your logic, but you are leaving out love when you decide for Manny which context is correct, you leave out any understanding of where he may be coming from. It's ok though, I suppose he had it coming? Ben you have talked right past him at a time when others have not.
Jim,
I am not asking for surrender. I'm asking for honest dialogue. I didn't say no response was possible except total surrender. Not at all. I said if he does not respond. Two days now and Manny has had plenty of time to respond to me, and this is evidenced by his responses to everyone else besides me. Why won't he respond to me? Especially when I did exactly what he asked for and exactly what he said he would respond to.
It is not "unloving" to decide what the context is. The context is provided by the text. Manny cannot rip a text out of context and expect that to hold true. If he wants to talk about Scripture, let's do that. That's exactly what I've done.
Edited To Add: I am the only person who responded directly with Scripture, which is what Manny asked for. However, I'm also the only person who Manny has not responded to that has addressed him directly. James is correct here.
I also don't understand how I've spoken past him. He asked for Scripture, and I gave them to him. If he says he wants to honestly dialogue about the Scriptures, then I want to do that. I did that.
Was it "talking past him" because I said his question was invalid? He is the one who said that he was using Scripture. He is the one who says that Scripture alone is our authority. He is the one who claims to be only saying what Scripture says.
However, none of that is true if he is going to create a scenario which does not exist in Scripture, then use Scripture out of context to prove it. It is not talking past him to show him the context of the Scripture. It is not talking past him to talk about what the Bible actually says on the issue. Since when is a correction, out of the source required and asked for, "talking past" someone?
I will address this in a PM. I know exactly what you mean here, and if you'd like to discuss this, we can do so over PM. No need to keep bringing it up, especially on other threads like you've done.
- Ben
Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death! And to those in the tombs, bestowing life!
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν, θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας! καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι, ζωὴν χαρισάμενος!Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Jim, I don't quite understand you here. What can Manny be coming from that would justify his behaviour?
As Ben wrote, none of the issues he fights (Denying Biblical inerrancy, Open Theism, Evolution, Spiritual Formation) have been labelled heresies by the Church Universal or the Church of the Nazarene. What history gives him the authority to sidestep all of that and declare people heretics, false teachers etc etc?
I don't understand how ANY history can provide that authority. Could you please explain?
I can understand how someone's history would give him aversion against these topics. All clear. But I cannot understand how it grant authority to do what he is doing.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)
I want to honor his history and where he is coming from. I do, Jim. However, my history, Manny's history, Hans' history, and your history, none of it makes the Scriptures say something they don't. They may make us read the Scriptures a certain way. Yes. However, that doesn't make that reading correct. It also doesn't give us a right to leave love out of our reading.
So again, I'm not trying to "leave out love" when "I decided what the context is." I'm trying to be honest with the text. It doesn't say what he said it does. It says something quite different; in fact, it says something which is detrimental to what he's doing, and supports many of those he fights against.
Maybe I could be gentler with my response. I'm sure you're right about that.
- Ben
Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death! And to those in the tombs, bestowing life!
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν, θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας! καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι, ζωὴν χαρισάμενος!Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Wrong, Hans. It's the scriptures that are the source of telling us what is false teaching, not us or a group of appointed leaders.
Sorry, I don't accept what you said because you seem to ignore much of what I have said, or you misquote it, James. As you have misquoted my friedn Tim as well.
Very wrong, Manny, it is the church that defined what the Scriptures are, and hence the church that defines what the truth is. In this case, the CotN as the part of the Body of Christ that you have freely joined and submitted yourself to.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I don't think the word "misquote" is a word you should use regarding someone else without turning red. You guys have turned the concept into a form of art.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I surrender Ben.
It's not a good thing for a Christian to lie, Manny.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)
The "church" defines the truth? Please tell me you are not serious about this claim.
Here is what defines the truth, Hans: God defines the truth because He is truth, Christ is the Truth, and the truth is revealed to us in the scriptures. WE do not define the truth.
You are absolutely wrong on this.
Posting Permissions
