[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Don, you are a smack talker. Were you the Mr. Smith in your story who was given the left foot of fellowship? We aren't called to stay in a church family or an organization to be troublemakers. Because you feel you figured it all out, and now desire the need to take everyone to school. No matter if it is eschatology, soteriology, or theology. If the pastor or the elders don't agree with you, you have three roads to go down. One shut up and sit down. Two leave and take your beliefs down the road with you, or three, joust it out with the pastor, and elders. If they are so inclined, and even have the strength to want to climb that mountain. Plain and simple. Also, if you weren't so bent on your ecclesiastical narcissism, you would of noticed this is a self moderating forum. Why? Because there is just a handful of active posters. With one active admin. If you really have a problem with me pointing out the obvious to you take it up with Votivesoul, the active admin. Other than that place me on ignore. I'm not your friend, you don't want friends because true friends won't always agree with you. You want spiderbots and that is all you get on this forum.

Any not wanting to discuss 1Co11 in this thread are fine by me. Let's talk about Ro14, shall we?

Dom opens post 12 with Don, you are a smack talker. And thereby sets the tone for understanding his remaining words. Being addressed to me, it sets me on edge - in a defensive posture. How can this lead to open viable theological discussions?

Dom says in post 12: We aren't called to stay in a church family or an organization to be troublemakers. Perhaps Dom is calling me a trouble maker, making this to be in line with his opening tone. And what of those who earnestly contend for the faith? Are they trouble makers by your definition, Dom? Or instead, are they trying to be obedient to the Word? A trouble maker is one from the heart. It is their nature to do so, regardless of the time or circumstance. Wherever they go, it will come through to the surface because that is what they are. What does Dom have as a definition of trouble maker? Do you Dom describe Jude as one instigating trouble?

Would Jude say to leave the fellowship of the NT faithful to contend from outside the Church, or not to stay in a church family? I don't read Jude to say to leave, which Dom seems to indicate. Those who contend for others to continue with or to return to the faith which was once for all delivered, do not leave the Church, or church, to do what the Word commands. They stay and from there contend.

Those who contend may have the appearance of being contentious. Some describe contending as troublemaking but not the Word. Godly Paul had much contention with Judaizers over circumcision but wouldn't in the end call him a trouble maker. you have three roads to go down. One shut up and sit down. Two leave and take your beliefs down the road with you, or three, joust it out with the pastor, and elders. #3 sounds like earnestly contend. So we agree. But why are you advising me to do what I'm already in the process of doing? What motivates you to give this motivation to me when I am self-motivated already? What gives?

Why have you been asleep at the helm of 'Good Ship AFF' and have not previously pointed out this neglect I see of Ro14 to Apostolics? Instead, it is left for some ecclesiastical narcissist to do it. Captain, you've been asleep at the wheel.

This thread is about Ro14 and its place in Church practice. Lets hear some comments from you on it, instead of sidetracking to describe me as a trouble maker with an unscriptural description of trouble making. I suppose those who went to the Apostles when unfairly treated in the daily distribution, Ac6, were trouble makers by your definition, right? The Apostles gave heed to them. Pastor Doe rejects B. Smith and is disregarding Paul's teaching of acceptance seen prominently in Ro14. He does not give heed.

Dom also says: Also, if you weren't so bent on your ecclesiastical narcissism (well, giving heed to Jude's advice to contend for the faith is not narcissism, but is showing love for the Word. But I understand you feel a need to 'paint bad' those you don't wish to be friends with, doing so with terms like ecclesiastical narcissism)...If you really have a problem with me pointing out the obvious to you take it up with Votivesoul, the active admin. Is it obvious that I am an ecclesiastical narcissist? As I've stated many times before in other threads, I welcome replies having to do with the Word, including any who would not consider themselves to be my friend. I'm not your friend, you don't want friends because true friends won't always agree with you. Your statement lacks cohesion but I say Amen, thinking I know what you mean. True friends will not always agree and should then tell you if they think you are wrong. All should welcome one who does so in amicable ways. As a true friend of AFF and Jesus, I have taken on the task to amicably show Apostolics the neglect of Ro14 in some areas of scripture. Plz do show how you think my reasoning and understanding of scripture is wrong. Your comments are always welcomed if amicably given. Not so much so if you persist in name calling without any accompanying scriptural arguments. You got it you to do so but you don't, for reasons unknown to me.

Change your ways and show my thoughts wrong, without name calling.