Church Authority and Hebrews 13:17

[Kevin Rector]

Yes, I have every right as a Christian to protest and speak out against false teaching, particularly when all attempts have failed to "dialogue".

You do, and we have a structure and format in the Church of the Nazarene for bringing charges of false teaching against clergy and laity. I bring your attention to paragraph 505.1 of the manual:

505.1. If a member of the clergy is accused of misconduct, conduct unbecoming a minister, or of teaching doctrines out of harmony with the doctrinal statement of the Church of the Nazarene, or of serious laxity in the enforcement of the Covenant of Christian Character or the Covenant of Christian Conduct of the church, such accusations shall be placed in writing and shall be signed by at least two members of the Church of the Nazarene who are at the time in good standing. Accusations of sexual misconduct cannot be signed by any person who consented to participate in the alleged misconduct. The written accusation must be filed with the District Advisory Board of the district where the accused has ministerial membership. This accusation shall become part of the record in the case.

Have you filed formal accusations in writing against those you consider to be false teachers? If not why not? Hebrews 13:17 requires you to submit to the authorities over you in the church. As long as you are a church member in the Church of the Nazarene that means following the requirements of the manual and filling a written accusation.

That does not mean that if the leadership refuses to even talk about it with us, we should shut up about it.

Interesting. Hebrews 13:17 commands you to submit to the leadership. If the leaders feel that you are wrong you can either:

1. Blatantly ignore and disobey Hebrews 13:17 and continue your campaign against the false teachers (whom the church leadership does not feel are actually false teachers).
2. Oben Hebrews 13:17, submit and recognize that you are actually wrong and the people you thought were false teachers are actually not false teachers.
3. Leave the Church of the Nazarene for one that better fits your understanding of theology and polity.

It seems from your behavior over the years that you are ignoring and in fact disobeying Hebrews 13:17, taking the first course of action above. I pointed this biblical command out to you on May 12, 2010. So what is it, is the bible your authority or not? Does Hebrews 13:17 apply to you? If it does, how do you justify ignoring it for the last two or so years? If it doesn't, why not?

I'm hopeful you'll actually answer me this time as you just ignored my question last time around.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

You do, and we have a structure and format in the Church of the Nazarene for bringing charges of false teaching against clergy and laity. I bring your attention to paragraph 505.1 of the manual:



Have you filed formal accusations in writing against those you consider to be false teachers? If not why not? Hebrews 13:17 requires you to submit to the authorities over you in the church. As long as you are a church member in the Church of the Nazarene that means following the requirements of the manual and filling a written accusation.



Interesting. Hebrews 13:17 commands you to submit to the leadership. If the leaders feel that you are wrong you can either:

1. Blatantly ignore and disobey Hebrews 13:17 and continue your campaign against the false teachers (whom the church leadership does not feel are actually false teachers).
2. Oben Hebrews 13:17, submit and recognize that you are actually wrong and the people you thought were false teachers are actually not false teachers.
3. Leave the Church of the Nazarene for one that better fits your understanding of theology and polity.

It seems from your behavior over the years that you are ignoring and in fact disobeying Hebrews 13:17, taking the first course of action above. I pointed this biblical command out to you on May 12, 2010. So what is it, is the bible your authority or not? Does Hebrews 13:17 apply to you? If it does, how do you justify ignoring it for the last two or so years? If it doesn't, why not?

I'm hopeful you'll actually answer me this time as you just ignored my question last time around.

Kevin, this is a well thought out post and I agree that it deserves an answer.

[Manny Silva]

You do, and we have a structure and format in the Church of the Nazarene for bringing charges of false teaching against clergy and laity. I bring your attention to paragraph 505.1 of the manual:



Have you filed formal accusations in writing against those you consider to be false teachers? If not why not? Hebrews 13:17 requires you to submit to the authorities over you in the church. As long as you are a church member in the Church of the Nazarene that means following the requirements of the manual and filling a written accusation.



Interesting. Hebrews 13:17 commands you to submit to the leadership. If the leaders feel that you are wrong you can either:

1. Blatantly ignore and disobey Hebrews 13:17 and continue your campaign against the false teachers (whom the church leadership does not feel are actually false teachers).
2. Oben Hebrews 13:17, submit and recognize that you are actually wrong and the people you thought were false teachers are actually not false teachers.
3. Leave the Church of the Nazarene for one that better fits your understanding of theology and polity.

It seems from your behavior over the years that you are ignoring and in fact disobeying Hebrews 13:17, taking the first course of action above. I pointed this biblical command out to you on May 12, 2010. So what is it, is the bible your authority or not? Does Hebrews 13:17 apply to you? If it does, how do you justify ignoring it for the last two or so years? If it doesn't, why not?

I'm hopeful you'll actually answer me this time as you just ignored my question last time around.

How convenient that you have selected certain scriptures. Its very late for me, but I will try to answer you tomorrow. You seem to have forgotten certain scriptures. By the way, the Manual is NOT the Bible.

[Bob Hunter]

How convenient that you have selected certain scriptures. Its very late for me, but I will try to answer you tomorrow. You seem to have forgotten certain scriptures. By the way, the Manual is NOT the Bible.

The manual contains a number of statements and resolutions that help us interpret the Bible in a manner that is faithful to our theological tradition and ecclesial structure. It answers questions for our members that the Bible does not directly. I never find it helpful to pit the Bible against the manual or vice verses. Just not a very productive and orderly way to proceed in matters. Perhaps that is why we have this firestorm on our hands, manual procedures (that are biblically based) have not been adhered to as Kevin so eloquently pointed out. Until you respect the collective wisdom contained in the manual, I don't see much good coming out of your campaign.

[Rich Schmidt]

How convenient that you have selected certain scriptures. Its very late for me, but I will try to answer you tomorrow. You seem to have forgotten certain scriptures. By the way, the Manual is NOT the Bible.

I look forward to your response. Of course the Manual is not the Bible. But for those who commit to membership in the Church of the Nazarene, it describes our agreed-upon understanding of how the Bible is applied to our life together.

[Jon Bemis]

You seem to have forgotten certain scriptures. By the way, the Manual is NOT the Bible.

I don't know that anyone is equating the Manual to the Bible. However, the Manual spells out the set of "rules" by which those who call themselves Nazarenes are governed when there are serious disputes. Surely you are not suggesting that as a member COTN, you are not required to abide by the Manual.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

You do, and we have a structure and format in the Church of the Nazarene for bringing charges of false teaching against clergy and laity. I bring your attention to paragraph 505.1 of the manual:



Have you filed formal accusations in writing against those you consider to be false teachers? If not why not? Hebrews 13:17 requires you to submit to the authorities over you in the church. As long as you are a church member in the Church of the Nazarene that means following the requirements of the manual and filling a written accusation.



Interesting. Hebrews 13:17 commands you to submit to the leadership. If the leaders feel that you are wrong you can either:

1. Blatantly ignore and disobey Hebrews 13:17 and continue your campaign against the false teachers (whom the church leadership does not feel are actually false teachers).
2. Oben Hebrews 13:17, submit and recognize that you are actually wrong and the people you thought were false teachers are actually not false teachers.
3. Leave the Church of the Nazarene for one that better fits your understanding of theology and polity.

It seems from your behavior over the years that you are ignoring and in fact disobeying Hebrews 13:17, taking the first course of action above. I pointed this biblical command out to you on May 12, 2010. So what is it, is the bible your authority or not? Does Hebrews 13:17 apply to you? If it does, how do you justify ignoring it for the last two or so years? If it doesn't, why not?

I'm hopeful you'll actually answer me this time as you just ignored my question last time around.

How convenient that you have selected certain scriptures. Its very late for me, but I will try to answer you tomorrow. You seem to have forgotten certain scriptures. By the way, the Manual is NOT the Bible.

Okay everybody, Manny promises to answer this post today. I'm looking forward to it. I'm interested in seeing how he gets around the inerrant, perfectly clear words found in Hebrews 13 about submitting to authorities and also, how he explains not keeping the promises he made when he joined the church.

I think we should let him answer and stop pressing him on so many fronts. For my part, I'm not pushing him concerning his inability to understand the action points at the end of the Holiness Today article we're supposed to be talking about in this thread. You know, the one I keep referring to:
http://www.holinesstoday.com/nphweb/...78&id=10011292

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

How convenient that you have selected certain scriptures. Its very late for me, but I will try to answer you tomorrow. You seem to have forgotten certain scriptures. By the way, the Manual is NOT the Bible.

You do, and we have a structure and format in the Church of the Nazarene for bringing charges of false teaching against clergy and laity. I bring your attention to paragraph 505.1 of the manual:



Have you filed formal accusations in writing against those you consider to be false teachers? If not why not? Hebrews 13:17 requires you to submit to the authorities over you in the church. As long as you are a church member in the Church of the Nazarene that means following the requirements of the manual and filling a written accusation.



Interesting. Hebrews 13:17 commands you to submit to the leadership. If the leaders feel that you are wrong you can either:

1. Blatantly ignore and disobey Hebrews 13:17 and continue your campaign against the false teachers (whom the church leadership does not feel are actually false teachers).
2. Oben Hebrews 13:17, submit and recognize that you are actually wrong and the people you thought were false teachers are actually not false teachers.
3. Leave the Church of the Nazarene for one that better fits your understanding of theology and polity.

It seems from your behavior over the years that you are ignoring and in fact disobeying Hebrews 13:17, taking the first course of action above. I pointed this biblical command out to you on May 12, 2010. So what is it, is the bible your authority or not? Does Hebrews 13:17 apply to you? If it does, how do you justify ignoring it for the last two or so years? If it doesn't, why not?

I'm hopeful you'll actually answer me this time as you just ignored my question last time around.

Well, bummer - I came home looking forward to seeing the response from Manny on this very important issue....but nothing yet. Maybe he's having a meeting with some of his advisers as to how to properly respond. I'm still quite interested in how these issues are dealt with - especially from someone who is very committed to the inerrancy of Scripture - it makes it hard to just trump one passage with another.

[Greg Farra]

Perhaps he is contemplating the merits of Kevin's post.

[Bob Hunter]

Yeah, I'm waiting to see if Manny will respond. Not sure if it will happen though. But Manny, if you are out there, we are hoping you will answer Scott & Kevin's request.

Anyway, I was amazed at the activity on FB yesterday, many folks that are not even remotely involved in the debate posted a link to the article. If the CNs had 3,000 hits, I just wonder how many Holiness Today had? Probably 3 times that! I did not see one negative comment posted on FB toward Ulmet's article. But I read a variety of comments from folks who were unaware of a growing threat to our denomination. So I think this can all work for the good and stiffen our resolve to be Nazarenes and not reformed Nazarenes.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

I look forward to your response. Of course the Manual is not the Bible. But for those who commit to membership in the Church of the Nazarene, it describes our agreed-upon understanding of how the Bible is applied to our life together.

I'm disappointed that there's been no reply to Kevin's post. Seems I remember before that Manny is a busy guy who has unexpectedly dropped out of conversations here. He probably just hasn't had time to reply today. Maybe he'll get on this evening or tomorrow and help explain this.

[David Morris]

Thursday Morning, 12:20am

How convenient that you have selected certain scriptures. Its very late for me, but I will try to answer you tomorrow. You seem to have forgotten certain scriptures. By the way, the Manual is NOT the Bible.

Friday Morning, Around 8:50am

We now try to ignore those from groups such as NazNet, a website that we believe is home to many of the core movers and shakers of the emergent church within our denomination. I will no longer waste time answering their questions again, because we have dealt with that many times over. Our concern now is for those who are willing to listen, and to at least consider some of the evidence we present, and let you make up your minds. Its only fair that you know everything that is happening, is it not?

Since Manny loves to document everything, I thought I'd help him out.

[Manny Silva]

Well, bummer - I came home looking forward to seeing the response from Manny on this very important issue....but nothing yet. Maybe he's having a meeting with some of his advisers as to how to properly respond. I'm still quite interested in how these issues are dealt with - especially from someone who is very committed to the inerrancy of Scripture - it makes it hard to just trump one passage with another.

I don't need a group of advisors. I'm very busy, sorry for not responding yet. Not afraid, if that's what anyone is thinking. Thank you. Been dealing with many important items this week. I'm a very busy guy. Lots of help packages to mail, advice to give, etc.

[Ryan Pugh]

I don't need a group of advisors. I'm very busy, sorry for not responding yet. Not afraid, if that's what anyone is thinking. Thank you. Been dealing with many important items this week. I'm a very busy guy. Lots of help packages to mail, advice to give, etc.

But you have time to make 17 comments (read: blog posts) on the HT Facebook link...

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

I don't need a group of advisors. I'm very busy, sorry for not responding yet. Not afraid, if that's what anyone is thinking. Thank you. Been dealing with many important items this week. I'm a very busy guy. Lots of help packages to mail, advice to give, etc.

I remember your saying your're a busy person, and I believe you. No problem on not having advisers - I just thought you had a group you turned to for support and advise and that maybe you wanted to get their input. It appears to me that it's a rather sticky situation for anyone who takes all Scripture seriously.

Glad to know you aren't ignoring the important concerns Kevin brought up and looking forward to your response.

[Kevin Rector]

Glad to know you aren't ignoring the important concerns Kevin brought up and looking forward to your response.

Yes, I am very much looking forward to Manny's response to my question in regards to church leadership and obedience to Hebrews 13:17.

[Steven Martinez]

Yes, I am very much looking forward to Manny's response to my question in regards to church leadership and obedience to Hebrews 13:17.

According to Tim Wirth, Manny did answer your question in the HT Facebook page and will not answer it here. Essentially the answer to your question is Manny brought up to the leaders who shot it down so now he pursues this his way. In other words, he does not respect the authority of our leaders. Manny is right and all others are wrong and the BGS and the DSes are all behind the heresy or are too afraid to address it. So he has, IMHO, rejected the Nazarene and biblical instructions for church leadership and obedience.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Manny said he'd respond here, and I think you guys need to let him do it without saying it's already been answered elsewhere.

[Paul DeBaufer]

You aren't hearing me. Twice he said he would respond here. You guys telling us what he's saying on facebook isn't the same as his posting here and participating in the conversation. Just let him do what he said he'd do.

Patience grasshopper.

Not to mention the fact that what is reported from FB does not address the question Manny said he would answer, so he hasn't answered over there.

[Kevin Rector]

So I pulled these posts out of the "Concerned Nazarene" thread because I wanted to give Manny a chance to answer and that thread has been closed.

[Steven Martinez]

Not to mention the fact that what is reported from FB does not address the question Manny said he would answer, so he hasn't answered over there.

Kevin posted the same question on FB as he did here.

[Paul DeBaufer]

Kevin posted the same question on FB as he did here.

Did he actually answer Kevin's questions concerning Hebrews 13? The response reported here didn't address that set of questions.

[Jim Chabot]

Kevin posted the same question on FB as he did here.

That doesn't change the fact that Manny said that he would address it here. Give the guy a break, and let him answer in his own time and with his own words.

[Jim Chabot]

So I pulled these posts out of the "Concerned Nazarene" thread because I wanted to give Manny a chance to answer and that thread has been closed.

That would explain why the reply section suddenly disappeared while I was trying to respond to wes?

So Wes; If you have managed to find us over here. I'm emergent pretty much the same as Scott, but I'm working hard to lose that ten extra pounds of ugly fat.

And no, it is not located above my shoulders.

And no, I'm not raising my hand until you tell us to close our eyes. We are not pentecostals you know.

[Wes Smith]

That would explain why the reply section suddenly disappeared while I was trying to respond to wes?

So Wes; If you have managed to find us over here. I'm emergent pretty much the same as Scott, but I'm working hard to lose that ten extra pounds of ugly fat.

And no, it is not located above my shoulders.

And no, I'm not raising my hand until you tell us to close our eyes. We are not pentecostals you know.

Jim,

Thanks for your response here on NazNet. Was so afraid that you had posted your answer on FB and it's difficult for me to keep track of both areas. Seems then that we are narrowing this down to you and Scott. Eager to learn more. I have shed 20 lbs. since being in Costa Rica, so I'm, at least, doing less moving and shaking than I used to, in this regard.

Friend,

Wes

PS. Promise not to post any more on this vein, but it actually does have to do with the overall issue. I think it is vital for us to understand that the emergent movement within the Church of the Nazarene is a paper tiger issue, not at all as widespread as the CNs charge. Eager to read Manny's response to Kevin's question! Have been holding my breath, but running out of oxygen.

[Bob Hunter]

Eager to read Manny's response to Kevin's question! Have been holding my breath, but running out of oxygen.

I think we would all like a response, but I doubt one is forthcoming. Earlier in the week, I challenged Manny on the subject of Biblical innerancy. I provided a number of articles and proofs that we have never embraced innerancy as he understands it. He completely ignored the challenge and walked away. I expect he will do the same here. But there are probably some articles on his blog that somehow address it and he will simply refer us to what he has already written. Most of his articles have very little support from credible Nazarene/Wesleyan sources, but there sure is a lot John McArthur material over there if anyone is into that.

[Jim Chabot]

I think we would all like a response, but I doubt one is forthcoming. Earlier in the week, I challenged Manny on the subject of Biblical innerancy. I provided a number of articles and proofs that we have never embraced innerancy as he understands it. He completely ignored the challenge and walked away. I expect he will do the same here. But there are probably some articles on his blog that somehow address it and he will simply refer us to what he has already written. Most of his articles have very little support from credible Nazarene/Wesleyan sources, but there sure is a lot John McArthur material over there if anyone is into that.

I have to wonder Bob, are you taking into consideration that there may be a bit of bad blood hindering your communication with Manny? I'm not talking necessarily in the present, but lets be honest here, there is an adversarial undercurrent in the conversation. Manny's response to your request to post over on his sites was that you and he have had problems in the past. Surely you don't expect that Manny will be beaten, threatened or forced into making a response? And I would hope that there is enough honesty here to say that should Manny not respond due to badgering or harassment, the fault lies with those who have badgered? Again I am appreciative of Scott's methodology here, he is waiting patiently for an answer and he has not been critical. I will say that Scott deserves an answer and an opportunity to have a conversation.

If we are to actually discuss this in any sort of manner, then we need to drop the rocks in our hands and willingly take a few blows. Of course, I must admit that when I say "we" I actually mean you. I'm concerned about the direction that our denomination could be headed in and my concern is somewhat in synch with Manny's concerns. Please notice that I carry no rocks and I am willing to converse with those who have rocks.

[Hans Deventer]

I'm concerned about the direction that our denomination could be headed in and my concern is somewhat in synch with Manny's concerns. Please notice that I carry no rocks and I am willing to converse with those who have rocks.

Which makes all the difference in the world. I have no problems with people being concerned. Who on earth should not be concerned if one's church is barely growing, if at all, in one's nation? Because we are clear that the Great Commission is what we are all about, right? Not to define orthodoxy to such detail that I'm the only one left standing in total isolation? If we are to be saved by correct beliefs, all of us will end up in hell, none excluded.

[Bob Hunter]

I have to wonder Bob, are you taking into consideration that there may be a bit of bad blood hindering your communication with Manny? I'm not talking necessarily in the present, but lets be honest here, there is an adversarial undercurrent in the conversation. Manny's response to your request to post over on his sites was that you and he have had problems in the past. Surely you don't expect that Manny will be beaten, threatened or forced into making a response? And I would hope that there is enough honesty here to say that should Manny not respond due to badgering or harassment, the fault lies with those who have badgered? Again I am appreciative of Scott's methodology here, he is waiting patiently for an answer and he has not been critical. I will say that Scott deserves an answer and an opportunity to have a conversation.

If we are to actually discuss this in any sort of manner, then we need to drop the rocks in our hands and willingly take a few blows. Of course, I must admit that when I say "we" I actually mean you. I'm concerned about the direction that our denomination could be headed in and my concern is somewhat in synch with Manny's concerns. Please notice that I carry no rocks and I am willing to converse with those who have rocks.

Jim,

I think if you go back and read my post on Biblical innerancy, it is not as you say at all. Granted I can be a bit testy on these matters. But I don't see that Manny has treated me any differently than he has Rich Schmidt or Hans. And truthfully, he's banned and blocked several people from his site. I think he has been especially cruel to James Diggs who has tried to nail him down on several issues to no avail. I have yet to see anyone succeed in getting a straight answer from him when presented with the facts of our history and polity. So I don't take it personally, and I have even invited Manny to join me for a sit-down the next time he vacations in Phoenix. I really have no animosity toward him, I just think he is wrong and his points of view do not align with that of the denomination. But yes, I can be a bit testy at times, but I'm really not a hater, I don't have time to hate for that.

[Jim Chabot]

Jim,

I think if you go back and read my post on Biblical innerancy, it is not as you say at all. Granted I can be a bit testy on these matters. But I don't see that Manny has treated me any differently than he has Rich Schmidt or Hans. And truthfully, he's banned and blocked several people from his site. I think he has been especially cruel to James Diggs who has tried to nail him down on several issues to no avail. I have yet to see anyone succeed in getting a straight answer from him when presented with the facts of our history and polity. So I don't take it personally, and I have even invited Manny to join me for a sit-down the next time he vacations in Phoenix. I really have no animosity toward him, I just think he is wrong and his points of view do not align with that of the denomination. But yes, I can be a bit testy at times, but I'm really not a hater, I don't have time to hate for that.

I understand and I agree, I was thinking more in the other direction.

[Kevin Rector]

Earlier in the week, I challenged Manny on the subject of Biblical innerancy. I provided a number of articles and proofs that we have never embraced innerancy as he understands it. He completely ignored the challenge and walked away.

This is something I'm not all that interested in. I grew up on the Olivet region (which includes the Indianapolis and SW Indiana districts) so I have always known that there are fundamentalists in the Church of the Nazarene. But the ones I've known have not worked outside the system and authority of the church. My question stems around some of the CNs who are not getting the answers they want from leadership, so they simply ignore the authority of the church as biblically granted in Hebrews 13 and continue their campaign. I simply want a simple answer as to why Hebrews 13:17 doesn't apply to Manny, especially as he often says that scripture is his only authority.

Hopefully I'll get one.

[Paul DeBaufer]

This is something I'm not all that interested in. I grew up on the Olivet region (which includes the Indianapolis and SW Indiana districts) so I have always known that there are fundamentalists in the Church of the Nazarene. But the ones I've known have not worked outside the system and authority of the church. My question stems around some of the CNs who are not getting the answers they want from leadership, so they simply ignore the authority of the church as biblically granted in Hebrews 13 and continue their campaign. I simply want a simple answer as to why Hebrews 13:17 doesn't apply to Manny, especially as he often says that scripture is his only authority.

Hopefully I'll get one.

Cognitive dissonance?

[Billy Cox]

According to Tim Wirth, Manny did answer your question in the HT Facebook page and will not answer it here. Essentially the answer to your question is Manny brought up to the leaders who shot it down so now he pursues this his way. In other words, he does not respect the authority of our leaders. Manny is right and all others are wrong and the BGS and the DSes are all behind the heresy or are too afraid to address it. So he has, IMHO, rejected the Nazarene and biblical instructions for church leadership and obedience.

That might be wishful thinking, although time will tell. I understand that it would be tempting to write someone off as a paranoid nutcase. It might even work if nobody was listening to the CNs and agreeing with their view on things in the denomination.

Maybe Manny and company overplay their hand and alienate the very denominational leaders who are quietly sympathetic to their cause. We'll see.

[Billy Cox]

This is something I'm not all that interested in. I grew up on the Olivet region (which includes the Indianapolis and SW Indiana districts) so I have always known that there are fundamentalists in the Church of the Nazarene. But the ones I've known have not worked outside the system and authority of the church. My question stems around some of the CNs who are not getting the answers they want from leadership, so they simply ignore the authority of the church as biblically granted in Hebrews 13 and continue their campaign. I simply want a simple answer as to why Hebrews 13:17 doesn't apply to Manny, especially as he often says that scripture is his only authority.

Hopefully I'll get one.

While the CNs are no friend of mine, invoking Hebrews 13 is laughably ineffective. They simply invoke 2 Peter 2 and then we have an exegetical stalemate. Do we then launch into dueling proof-texts? Arm wrestling?

[Dan Henderson]

I ask my dad for a short monograph on the title of this thread. This is the shortest response you will likely ever see:

If not it is not because we are crass and rude. Respect is earned, not automatic. It is presumed, however, until it is found to be undeserved. Just as in the military, superior rank must often be respected even if the person wearing it i...s not respectable--but that same officer or NCO might want to watch his back in combat if he does not deserve the respect that is required. David respected Saul's office as king and would not attack him for that reason. He did, however, decline to stand in God's way in dealing with Saul. He did nothing to protect Saul from the inevitable consequences of his own behaviors. Will that do as a mini-monograph?

Also, that is reminiscent of that old saw that Ray Dunning went around espousing about the authority of the church because "salvation is not possible outside of the church." That was an attempted setup to bring us under a Nazarene papacy.

[Dan Henderson]

While the CNs are no friend of mine, invoking Hebrews 13 is laughably ineffective. They simply invoke 2 Peter 2 and then we have an exegetical stalemate. Do we then launch into dueling proof-texts? Arm wrestling?

I prefer pistols at 20 paces

[Paul DeBaufer]

I prefer pistols at 20 paces

At dawn?

[Dan Henderson]

At dawn?

With the sun in your eyes

[Kevin Rector]

While the CNs are no friend of mine, invoking Hebrews 13 is laughably ineffective. They simply invoke 2 Peter 2 and then we have an exegetical stalemate. Do we then launch into dueling proof-texts? Arm wrestling?

Even a cursory reading will show that the two passages are not speaking to the same issue and do not stalemate. Hebrews 13:17 does not in any way preclude the searching out and exposing of false teachers. However, Hebrews 13:17 indicates that there is a way to do this that is appropriate, a way that is in line with submission to the leaders of the church that you have chosen to align yourself with. So go ahead and make the claim of false teaching, but do so according to the proper procedure and then submit to the decision of your leaders or leave.

[Dan Henderson]

Even a cursory reading will show that the two passages are not speaking to the same issue and do not stalemate. Hebrews 13:17 does not in any way preclude the searching out and exposing of false teachers. However, Hebrews 13:17 indicates that there is a way to do this that is appropriate, a way that is in line with submission to the leaders of the church that you have chosen to align yourself with. So go ahead and make the claim of false teaching, but do so according to the proper procedure and then submit to the decision of your leaders or leave.

Don't forget Heb 13:9.