Refused To Be Held Accountable For His Words

[creationliberty]

GREG FROM TENNESSEE, May 24, 6:04 PM:
As a brother in the fellowship of our Triune God, I was hoping we could begin a conversation regarding impressions I've been getting from the posts, videos and overall ministry in which you are the leader. To begin with, I understand much of the frustration and concern regarding the seemingly endless battles against true Biblical Christianity. Many of these battles I've had, but found that many times the battles were more superficial and often not doing anything but boosting a form of isolationism, superiority and a critical spirit. My hope is that this is not the case for you.

Because of deep sin in my life (drunkeness...though now I haven't had any alcohol in more than eight years), I lost my family. This happened before all nine children were out of the home. We homeschooled and were active in ministry, but my hypocrisy was the worst possible, I trained my family to keep my secret a secret. This forced isolation upon them, they were not allowed to tell their friends. One of my grave concerns is my x-wife started attending their newly formed church in her home with her pastor dad and all our kids. Now I was completely unsympathetic. But over time, I began to do some research to balance my views. Yes, practically every church was a home church at first. But as I researched more, I saw that there were various commands written in Scripture which made her "form" of a church not Biblical.

For one, her church (I'm just calling it that for ease, her dad was pastor) has been going for 10 years and it has nothing but their family in it. Now, I know that this is not something that can be rebuked just on who were attending, but it grew quite suspicious that the few non-family visitors (maybe 4 in 10 years) never returned. The problem Biblically is the one single ruler of a church being the pastor. When Dad's, whether pastors officially or not, are the sole ruler in the home and then in the church, it seems dangerous. For one, we don't see that at all in the history of the church in Acts or even implied in the epistles of Paul or Peter. Instead, we see a huge range of folks in local churches. Antioch was one of the best examples of various cultures being in the same place worshiping. There are various places where the Believers took the command seriously to "ordain elders in every city" (Titus 1:5). And as we read the Epistles, we see the diversity (sorry, I hate that word too) of multiple leaders in a church. I could go through Acts and point places where decisions weren't made by one man, but by a counsel etc. of believers.

Also, a one ruler church (for lack of a better word) isn't Biblical, I'm thinking because of accountability. If a pastor leaves a denomination and sets up his own home church and has absolutely not one person in his church who is also a leader, it is as close to a dictatorship as I know. It's just not Biblical. So, as a brother, your solo act of leading a church and having no accountability with any other elder, deacon, shepherd (yes, I know Christ is "Shepherd"...but leaders are called that in Scripture, also)...it is dangerous.

Another item I wanted to discuss with you is the King James Only controversy. Rather than hours and hours of rehashing all the research I already did (yes, I started with the Riplinger, years ago) by reading and listening to every argument over again, I was hoping if you would be kind enough to listen to just a couple of things, here. I'm not usually a screamer or name caller, and I love to discuss things Biblically as well as with reason (though, yes, I acknowledge the noethic affects (sin) on the mind, especially the unrenewed mind)

Since I've dealt with practically every reasoning I could find on the topic, here are a couple of issues worth discussing. To begin, I acknowledge there are two basic scholarship positions, lets call two camps, the Byzantine tradition (or school) of thought and the Alexandrian tradition. The Byzantine would contain the King James, New King James, TR (basically texts based on what the church accepted for over a thousand years, until the "discovery" in Alexandria of Dead Sea Scrolls etc). The Alexandrian is the critical text, you know this and the fact that it's quite shorter of a text, Wescott Hort, NASB, NIV, NEV, etc. But my point here is, it is quite impossible to be consistent with the claim that only the King James is and was the only legitimate Bible of all time. Its even impossible to do this for the English language, unless one wants to say no English speaker had the Bible till the King James (writing-off the Bishops, Geneva, etc etc). So, I think the position of holding that the Byzantine tradition is what holds the most accurate Word of God is good but not scholarly to discount all other Byzantine translations: NKJV, 21Cent KJ, etc. It is perfectly good to use the King James and use it exclusively, but to attack all others in the Byzantine tradition just because they dont match the KJ word for word is a logical problem. Of course they don't match EXACTLY, or else they would be the KJ. The key is the original text...and Zane Hodges and others have attempted to put a Greek text together which is in this Byzantine tradition.

Finally, my concern is the attacks on all churches that claim tax exempt status under the 501c3. I see the argument you were making, but it seems shallow. It seems you don't understand the issues of submitting to authorities rules (Rom 13). We obey their rules until it breaks one of only two things...if they attempt to force us to not preach the gospel or if they attempt to force us to harm someone (usually physically). It is simple as pie to attack churches bigger than your house/single-family-church for bending, but they are doing much for the Lord and I don't see any compromise. Sure one can make arguments that the constitution blah blah blah...and we can fight in court...but churches don't want to go to court...they just wanna worship God...so they get the tax exempt status and move on. If they are forced to break one of the above two rules...they break the rules and lose the "status"...and I say that is the name of the game...obey the law till you can't...and then get persecuted. Court just isn't worth it. And besides, if one doesn't want to get personally sued for their home...they'll get insurance. Insurance companies also have requirements that you might say are them ruling over churches, but look...who cares if the isles are so and so wide for fire code, etc? The only thing I could see anyone having a problem with the government or insurance at the time is the issue of endorsing a candidate or party. To be quite honest...I would leave a church that had a leader that did that. I don't want to be told who to vote for. In our church's case, the pastor is constantly saying abortion is horrible...and we're not stupid...we know which party is for or against abortion! So the one thing that can lose our tax status is the one thing I would immediately walk out the door if the preacher pushed on me...a candidate I must vote for. And by the way, a pastor (off the platform) can say anything he wants about who he is voting for.

My concerns are two, maybe three above...but they all fall into my concern for your isolation from community other than your own family, your lack of having any human accountability or authority which can challenge you in your church and the almost superiority projection of personality that seems to dominate your website. I'm not trying to be super picky...I'm a fun liking guy...and we should enjoy friendly debate. But, it seems you're attacking every one. Like taking little quotes from Michael W. Smith or others and building an entire argument on a sentence that might have been taken out of context. This guy has done great stuff for many years, some say, especially the movies and audio Bible. To attack him with one quote out of context makes me wonder if people in your community avoid you NOT because you're Biblically precise but because you have spiritual B.O.  We must not revert to the type of attacks to Bibles, Churches, Ministers & Governments which ruin our testimony for Christ. I've been around many years and people with critical spirits, especially attacking practically everyone and then isolating...are lonely lonely...and they can't even see why.

I didn't proof read all this, but hope you take some with a grain of salt. I will not attack and say anything other than I hope you reply and help me clarify where I might have been hasty in my assessment, here. God Bless...and hope the best for you and yours in ministry.
May 25, 1:58 AM
After reading your letter, I showed it to one of the men in our church. Together, he and I talked about it, and we would like to send your letter to our entire church (which I am doing now), and then we would like to see if we can schedule a Skype call where you can speak to our entire church, and they can respond. You have clearly made a number of accusations against all of us, so I thought since you had such great concern that we are living and believing in error, and in the spirit of charity, reason, and fairness, I thought that it would be best that you address all of us with your concerns, and then allow others to respond after they have heard you out.

I will contact everyone privately on our forum and share your letter with them. Let me know if those conditions are acceptable, and I will get back with you on a time/date to see if it coincides with your availability. Have a great day.
May 25, 10:21 AM
I appreciate your quick reply, but have since re-read my letter and realized that it lacked tack and was written too hastily.  This does not mean I retract my concerns over what appears to be a hyper-critical spirit against all churches and ministries but your own home church. For one, I'm not sure if I'm crossing over the line regarding some of my own hyper-critical assessments, here. That would be hypocrisy to the max, right?

Anyway, perhaps half of everything I said in that email was venting on you for what my x-wife had put my children through, namely, created a critical spirit and cynicism about any other home church than their own...so when they became adults and moved away, there were no "perfect" churches like her own anywhere else in the world. If you will please forgive if I concluded that you did not have other folks than your bio-family in your physical worship location. Some of this was perhaps hasty on my part, since I later saw that you met with folks on line. But I do keep with the concern that it seems best to have people fellowship together in a physical location so they can see HOW they live when off line. Church is more than talking on line, surely. It includes seeing if the words match the lifestyle in love for neighbors, family and such. That can't be done purely on line. So, if I was mistaken about others that are making leadership choices in your church's ministry, like elders, deacons, or the like...then please forgive me for drawing the conclusion.

Meeting on line is not what I'm willing to do, but I might be willing to be tapped into a 3, 4 or 5 party phone call. Let me think about that a little. I prefer email of all because we can be less emotional about things. Surely, my concerns are written without my own editing for sensitivity and accuracy. I'm limited on time and apologize. I told my long time friend about my discovery and the email I sent. He couldn't stop asking what did I see "good" on your website. And because I hesitated quite a bit, I needed to pray about all this. The next day, today, after praying, I decided it was only right to apologize for forgetting to tell you that the info on your website on the Gospel was fantastic. And, I even admire your enthusiasm on the King James Only stance you take, since it is with the motive to revere and preserve (in the minds of people) the inerrant and infallible Word Of God.

Sorry, I must go. Please understand (if you haven't already "read thru my possible motives"...that I'm probably taking my frustration out on you for resentments I have (buried and unaware within me) regarding my x-wife...and probably other local friends who have turned this Covid-19 thing into a forum to speak more openly than I would like about their conspiracy theories. I am not at all a conspiracy theorist, and let me tell you why. First, folks I've talked with who are are often very proud of being "in the know" or in some cases, proudly proclaiming "I told you this was going to happen...didn't I". There is probably nothing more obnoxious than a "I told you so". By making many predictions of where "this is going to lead", it allows a person to validate what they choose. They could be totally wrong in 90% and all their friends forget that...but right in 10% and the proclaimer tells all over and over. That is a concern. This is something I've seen over and over because, perhaps, it helps a person feel like they are validated. It happened with Y2K, Obama and Covid19...its never ending...where conspiracy theorists are desperately trying to figure out the end times and practically every single time, they are wrong. I so anticipate the Return of Christ...daily...but if the entire conspiracy theorist community for decades have been absolutely wrong on their predictions, what does that tell us. They forget that Y2K and all their hoarding of food and moving into caves made them look silly if not whacko in their communities. And the predictions of Obama being the antichrist...or others....  What I'm getting at is what we should centralize on is the proclamation of the Gospel and hospitality, especially in our communities. There is nothing more shameful than a bunch of folks who get on the internet and say high and mightly things but they haven't had a non-Christian neighbor in their home for dinner in years. I'm not accusing y'all in any of this...only saying I hope that this is not the case. And only suspect things get that way when there isn't a local body like we see in the Bible, where believers meet in a local church from all types of backgrounds.

I personally don't think I'm going to be helpful to y'all or vice versa...I can feel the heat rise...and suspect that perhaps our Lord will someday answer my prayer on why I'm even writing y'all...could it be that I'm venting on you because I'm being passive aggressive in being as frank as I should with those I converse about conspiracy theories? I think we perhaps need to put this one hold and let me get a clear answer first...which will free y'alls time to do evangelism and love neighbor.
May 25, 7:59 PM
Let me preface that I have read both of your letters in detail, and I will be responding to all of this in chronological order, both for your sake, and for those in our church who have already seen your first letter. I will warn you ahead of time, there is a lot of rebuke coming, but I will try to be as patient as I can because, the man in our church who I spoke with last night, his name is Dedrick, and he can testify that I told him I suspected in your first letter that this was really about you lashing out at your ex-wife and her family; it turns out that my suspicions seemed to have been somewhat correct, and so while that is understandable, that does not make it right for your to make false accusations against anyone for any reason.
But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ. For it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing.
-1Pe 3:15-17

As a brother in the fellowship of our Triune God
This is a strange way to introduce yourself because, not only do we not talk with one another that way in person (i.e. I do not address Dedrick, my brother in Christ, by saying, "as a brother in fellowship of our Triune God"), nor do I believe that you address other people that way in person, but it is also an attempt to get the reader to presuppose you are of Christ, instead of just allowing your words in conversation to provide the evidence of it. Thus, it's probably a better idea to leave that off, and just start with the next sentence:
 
I was hoping we could begin a conversation regarding impressions I've been getting from the posts, videos and overall ministry in which you are the leader.
Sure, and I'll hear you out, but I just wanted to make a note, since I have read the entirety of your emails, that you never once provide any references to any of those posts, you do not provide any reference to anything I have personally said or written, nor do you give any examples of what you have read and heard to back up the claims you are about to make.

To begin with, I understand much of the frustration and concern regarding the seemingly endless battles against true Biblical Christianity. Many of these battles I've had, but found that many times the battles were more superficial and often not doing anything but boosting a form of isolationism, superiority and a critical spirit. My hope is that this is not the case for you.
That's a contradictory statement at the end of that paragraph. Most of the paragraph was based on the assumption that I have a "form of isolationism, superiority and a critical spirit," despite the fact that you do not provide any evidence for that, but then you added in at the end "My hope is that this is not the case for you" as a sort of "get-out-of-jail-free" card that allows you to not have to be held accountable for your accusations, but I assure you, you will have to be held accountable for them, whether in this life or the next.
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
-Mat 12:36
Of course, I am held under intense scrutiny (i.e. I am critiqued) on a daily basis. Everyone, including yourself, holds me very accountable to the things I say and teach. However, the hypocrisy is when people write me and expect that I should not hold them accountable for the things they say and teach, and that's where a lot of the "superficial battles" takes place; namely, that I have to rebuke the hypocrisy, and most of the time, they are angry about it.

Because of deep sin in my life (drunkeness...though now I haven't had any alcohol in more than eight years), I lost my family. This happened before all nine children were out of the home. We homeschooled and were active in ministry, but my hypocrisy was the worst possible, I trained my family to keep my secret a secret. This forced isolation upon them, they were not allowed to tell their friends. One of my grave concerns is my x-wife started attending their newly formed church in her home with her pastor dad and all our kids.
It is sad when such things happen, but this was a bit odd. You started out saying that you wanted to begin by expressing concerns and frustrations in my direction about "isolationism, superiority and a critical spirit," and then you immediately turn to talking about your family. That is what led me to suspect that something else was going on here, and that this is not about me doing or teaching anything wrong, but rather, this about your grief over the situation you are currently in.

Now I was completely unsympathetic. But over time, I began to do some research to balance my views. Yes, practically every church was a home church at first. But as I researched more, I saw that there were various commands written in Scripture which made her "form" of a church not Biblical.
This last part of the paragraph was also a bit odd. There is nowhere in the Bible that uses any phrase (or any like phrase) called the "form of a church," and the more you are writing, the more I am seeing that you do not believe as we believe, namely, that the church is the collective body of believers. The church is not a building, and that is why I have tried my best to even stay away from the phrase "home church," (even though I am often forced to use it in passing to help others understand the matter) because the phrase implies that the church meeting in a home is different from any church in any structure. It's what I prefer to call a "temple-based philosophy" in which people tend to believe that in order to be "holy" unto God, you have to go to a "church building" (i.e. a temple), and that's why I generally refer to them as "church buildings" and "churchgoers" rather than "the church" and "Christians" because they have a different philosophy (i.e. way of thinking) than what Christ taught us.
To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
-1 Peter 2:4-6
Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
-1Co 12:27

For one, her church (I'm just calling it that for ease, her dad was pastor) has been going for 10 years and it has nothing but their family in it. Now, I know that this is not something that can be rebuked just on who were attending, but it grew quite suspicious that the few non-family visitors (maybe 4 in 10 years) never returned. The problem Biblically is the one single ruler of a church being the pastor.
I can understand that, but when a church is small, there does not need to be many overseers. If there is one elder overseeing like ten or twenty people, that's not a big deal. The elders grow in number as the church grows in number. However, I cannot assess their situation because I don't know it, nor do I know if all of what you tell me is true because if you were willing to falsely accuse our church on your assumptions, then I cannot trust that you would not do the same to them, which leaves me without enough reliable information to judge the matter.

When Dad's, whether pastors officially or not, are the sole ruler in the home and then in the church, it seems dangerous. For one, we don't see that at all in the history of the church in Acts or even implied in the epistles of Paul or Peter.
But likewise, we cannot say that did not happen either because blood relation does not matter when it comes the spiritual things of Christ.
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
-Gal 3:27-29
Furthermore, I am not sure what you're saying is necessarily true. For example, Philip was one of the seven deacons set over the duty of feeding the widows (Acts 6:5) along with Stephen, before Stephen was stoned to death. (Acts 7:59)
And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him. And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.
-Acts 21:8-9
So, the father was also an overseer and evangelist, and it only mentions his daughters. He may have had more children, but it does not say. Thus, it is presumptuous to draw such conclusions based on a lack of information. It's like an atheist saying that the Bible does not mention God creating the dung beetle specifically, and they conclude that it is safe to assume that God did not create the dung beetle, which is is an absurd argument. (It's actually called the "fallacy of presumption.")

Instead, we see a huge range of folks in local churches. Antioch was one of the best examples of various cultures being in the same place worshiping. There are various places where the Believers took the command seriously to "ordain elders in every city" (Titus 1:5). And as we read the Epistles, we see the diversity (sorry, I hate that word too) of multiple leaders in a church. I could go through Acts and point places where decisions weren't made by one man, but by a counsel etc. of believers.
Well, it's not hard to see that you are trying to superimpose this onto me and our church. Frankly, I do not want to even share with you who is in our church, how many people are there, nor do I want to share with you how we operate, not because I would not normally share that information with anyone (in fact, I have openly talked about it in many of my audio teachings), but because I know that you are simply making accusations without evidence, or rather, you are addressing a matter before you have heard it out first.
He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
-Pro 18:13

Also, a one ruler church (for lack of a better word) isn't Biblical, I'm thinking because of accountability. If a pastor leaves a denomination and sets up his own home church and has absolutely not one person in his church who is also a leader, it is as close to a dictatorship as I know. It's just not Biblical.
Well, first of all, leaving a denomination is a good thing:
Denominations Are Unbiblical
Secondly, if a man preaches in a foreign country, and two people get saved, what should he do? Should he send them away and tell them they can only come back when they have at least a certain number of people, and then they can only meet together for study and fellowship after they collect a quota of elders according to your personal requirements? Or... do they meet, study, grow, and learn together, and then as more are added to the church, they appoint elders as God provides them?
Now, if a man preaches, and a thousand people are saved, then yes, you need immediate elders marked as overseers, and they should be appointed because no one man can oversee such a number of people. Thus, what is happening is that you are not judging righteous judgment as much as you are judging based on the appearance because you have an emotional attachment to the situation.
Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
-John 7:24
Therefore, you are finding more ways to scoff in pride, than you are finding ways to be grateful to the Lord God that, not only did He show you mercy by helping you overcome alcoholism (assuming your testimony is true), but also that he showed your former wife mercy by bringing her to a safe place where she could be cared for.
Surely he scorneth the scorners: but he giveth grace unto the lowly.
-Pro 3:34
But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
-Jms 4:6
It should also be noted that Paul was called and started his ministry by command of the Lord Jesus Christ apart from the church before he ever joined the church. There are other men in Scripture who did the same thing, but the difference between then and now is the fact that, when you joined the church then, you got help, but when you join American church organizations today, it is a web of red tape that prevents you from getting work done.

So, as a brother, your solo act of leading a church and having no accountability with any other elder, deacon, shepherd (yes, I know Christ is "Shepherd"...but leaders are called that in Scripture, also)...it is dangerous.
Okay, so just to clarify, you are accusing me of having no accountability with anyone else, so I would ask you to provide the evidence of your claim. Go ahead, take your time. It should be noted that, Biblically, the person making the accusations has the burden of proof to provide the evidence of his claim.
Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.
-Acts 24:13

Another item I wanted to discuss with you is the King James Only controversy. Rather than hours and hours of rehashing all the research I already did (yes, I started with the Riplinger, years ago) by reading and listening to every argument over again, I was hoping if you would be kind enough to listen to just a couple of things, here. I'm not usually a screamer or name caller, and I love to discuss things Biblically as well as with reason (though, yes, I acknowledge the noethic affects (sin) on the mind, especially the unrenewed mind)
Well, there is a problem already in that you have capitalized the word "Only," so you have called it a "King James Only" controversy. I have to be careful about that because there are a lot of people with a lot of wild and crazy ideas out there. I only study the King James Bible, and encourage all Christians that they should only study the King James Bible if at all possible, but I am not a "King James Onlyist" depending on what you mean by that phrase, and a lot people tend to mean different things when they say it.

Since I've dealt with practically every reasoning I could find on the topic, here are a couple of issues worth discussing. To begin, I acknowledge there are two basic scholarship positions, lets call two camps, the Byzantine tradition (or school) of thought and the Alexandrian tradition. The Byzantine would contain the King James, New King James, TR (basically texts based on what the church accepted for over a thousand years, until the "discovery" in Alexandria of Dead Sea Scrolls etc).
The NKJV is not part of that because they went in and changed a bunch of stuff that's not based on the Byzantine. So if you're trying to slip the NKJV in there, you are welcome to tell people whatever you want, but I'm not buying that because I know better.

The Alexandrian is the critical text, you know this and the fact that it's quite shorter of a text, Wescott Hort, NASB, NIV, NEV, etc.
Critical text? I don't know what you mean by that.

But my point here is, it is quite impossible to be consistent with the claim that only the King James is and was the only legitimate Bible of all time.
Okay, please show me where I ever made that statement. You need to provide the evidence of your accusations.

Its even impossible to do this for the English language, unless one wants to say no English speaker had the Bible till the King James (writing-off the Bishops, Geneva, etc etc).
Again, show me the quotations where I have taught such things. Essentially what you have been doing so far in this entire letter is called a "Strawman Argument." This is where a person sets up a fake opponent (i.e. a strawman) and then attacks it without actually doing battle with the person he is addressing. So, for example, you talk about what your former father-in-law is doing in his home, and then superimpose that into our church; that's a strawman. Here, you are claiming that other people might claim that the King James Bible is "the only legitimate Bible of all time," and then imply that I teach the same thing. Again, that's a strawman argument (a logical fallacy), and I don't appreciate it.

So, I think the position of holding that the Byzantine tradition is what holds the most accurate Word of God is good but not scholarly to discount all other Byzantine translations: NKJV, 21Cent KJ, etc.
If those other new-age versions do not have errors, I will not discount them, but they have errors (even if you are willingly blind to them), and furthermore, are unnecessary when the King James Bible is the completed the work of preserving God's Word. If you do not like that I teach people that, then you are welcome to go somewhere else because I am not doing this to appease your personal preferences or gain popularity points.

It is perfectly good to use the King James and use it exclusively, but to attack all others in the Byzantine tradition just because they dont match the KJ word for word is a logical problem. Of course they don't match EXACTLY, or else they would be the KJ. The key is the original text...and Zane Hodges and others have attempted to put a Greek text together which is in this Byzantine tradition.
I know they scam people with their "original Greek" commentary, but again, I'm not falling for that scam because I know how it works:
The 'Original Greek' Scam
You are free to depart from this ministry and go follow Zane Hodges.

Finally, my concern is the attacks on all churches that claim tax exempt status under the 501c3. I see the argument you were making, but it seems shallow.
Having read your letter ahead of time, it seems "shallow" to you because you do not understand it.

It seems you don't understand the issues of submitting to authorities rules (Rom 13).
Okay, since you claim to have understanding on this matter, and also claim I do not have understanding on this matter, then I will ask you for one piece of information to verify the validity of your accusation: Where is the law that requires pastors, elders, and church buildings to get 501c3 incorporated? Please provide that at your earliest convenience.

We obey their rules until it breaks one of only two things...if they attempt to force us to not preach the gospel or if they attempt to force us to harm someone (usually physically). It is simple as pie to attack churches bigger than your house/single-family-church for bending, but they are doing much for the Lord and I don't see any compromise.
Well, a man cannot see what he is not looking for, and he certainly will not see what he is trying to justify. Since you have attacked me and our church on multiple points about our foundations, why have you not shared with me the church building you attend so I can go investigate them? I am a bit surprised you would not share that information willingly to provide me with a better example of what the church is supposed to be, since you seem to be so "concerned" about our present condition.

Sure one can make arguments that the constitution blah blah blah...and we can fight in court...but churches don't want to go to court...they just wanna worship God...
If they want to worship God, and they do not want to go to court, then just don't sign up for 501c3. Is it a difficult thing to NOT file a stack of paperwork and just go serve God? I mean, it really sounds like you did not read the book because no one can sue Creation Liberty Evangelism, nor can they sue our church, but, assuming you go to a 501c3 church, they can sue your religious organization, so the only ones who would have to go to court is the 501c3 organization you (presumably) yoke together with; not us. (The reason I say "assuming" is because you have not shared where it is you attend, but since you obviously believe that where you attend is superior in righteousness to other churches like ours or your ex-wife's, it stands to reason you attend a location that is incorporated.)

so they get the tax exempt status and move on.
Yeah, they do it for the money, out of their covetousness and greed, and they move on, refusing to hear any rebuke of their sin.
Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter.
-Isa 56:11

If they are forced to break one of the above two rules...they break the rules and lose the "status"...and I say that is the name of the game...obey the law till you can't...and then get persecuted.
And that is your lack of understanding of both 501c3, and Biblical philosophy. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego obeyed the law until they couldn't, right? The difference between Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego and your favorite incorporated preacher/church building is that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego did not sign a contract with Nebuchadnezzar giving their word, agreeing to bow to a golden statue, and then lie in rebellion against their contract.

Court just isn't worth it.
Then don't get incorporated, and you won't have to go.

And besides, if one doesn't want to get personally sued for their home...they'll get insurance. Insurance companies also have requirements that you might say are them ruling over churches,
Please, provide some examples. I wrote a 210-page book on the subject, with many examples, quotes, references, and Scripture to back up what I was saying, so I would expect, at the very least, you might provide one or two examples of an insurance contract and point out the problems. Please do not misunderstand, I am not saying that I am superior to you in any way, nor am I expecting you to write out a full expose, but just providing a couple of examples is not asking too much for someone who is making this amount of extraordinary claims. I would not want to presume that these are the kind of arguments you have heard out of the mouths of leavened preachers, and that you are simply regurgitating them without having verified the claims first, so I am looking forward to seeing your examples.

but look...who cares if the isles are so and so wide for fire code, etc?
The government does, and if those leavened preachers become a government entity through a 501c3 contract, and those pastors do not want to go to court, then they had better comply with what they contractually gave their word to do.

The only thing I could see anyone having a problem with the government or insurance at the time is the issue of endorsing a candidate or party. To be quite honest...I would leave a church that had a leader that did that. I don't want to be told who to vote for.
What is so hypocritical about what you said is that, just a moment ago, you were chiding me for not understanding Romans 13, which is obedience to governing rule. If you truly believed and followed Scripture, I would have expected you to say: "I would leave a church if they had a leader who broke the law." (Because endorsing political candidates under a 501c3 contract is illegal.) However, that's not what you did. You instead said that you do not want to be told what to do, and that right there is the problem; your philosophy (i.e. way of thinking) is based your personal feelings, it's about your selfish desires, and you make decisions based on what you want to believe instead looking at the facts, and because of that, your entire letter is bringing me back to a main question, which is whether or not you have read this:
Why Millions of Believers on Jesus Are Going to Hell
If you cannot read and understand that, then none of these subjects you're bringing up are of any importance whatsoever. Frankly, I have not yet seen a heart of repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow) from your letter yet. I am not saying that you do not have one; I am simply saying that I have not seen the evidence yet in your writing.

In our church's case, the pastor is constantly saying abortion is horrible...and we're not stupid...we know which party is for or against abortion! So the one thing that can lose our tax status is the one thing I would immediately walk out the door if the preacher pushed on me...a candidate I must vote for. And by the way, a pastor (off the platform) can say anything he wants about who he is voting for.
And by the way, where did I say that he could not say anything he wants off-platform? The phrase "And by the way," is you trying to say, "Here is something else you don't know Chris," when it is something I already know about, which is why I am wondering if you ever read the book I wrote in its entirety.

My concerns are two, maybe three above...but they all fall into my concern for your isolation from community other than your own family, your lack of having any human accountability or authority which can challenge you in your church and the almost superiority projection of personality that seems to dominate your website.
Well, that's why I invited you to a Skype call with our church. You are obviously are not going to believe me, so I was inviting you to gather evidence for yourself, since you believe you stand on the position of Biblical reasoning. This is furthermore insulting to every member of our church, in that you believe they lack discernment to see through my so-called "isolation, lack of accountability, lack of authority, and superiority projection." Since they all study the Bible in their own time, why don't you ask them yourself?

I'm not trying to be super picky...I'm a fun liking guy...and we should enjoy friendly debate.
Your letter is superbly picky, there is nothing "friendly" about false accusations and statements made in ignorance, and I do not care whether you are a "fun-loving guy" or not because that is irrelevant to the truth.
They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak.
-Psa 12:2

But, it seems you're attacking every one. Like taking little quotes from Michael W. Smith or others and building an entire argument on a sentence that might have been taken out of context.
That is why I provide references, so you can go look them up for yourself and see. But you did not go do research for yourself to find out, and that was easy to see because you said "a sentence that MIGHT HAVE been taken out of context." That means you do not know if they were or were not taken out of context because you do not do any research to find out, and that is because, based on your letter, it seems you stop doing research as soon as you run into information that contradicts how you feel (i.e. you likely listen to Smith's music and do not want to know that you're being deceived), and this is because you do not care what the Word of God says about these matters. Singing is not good if it is done without understanding:
What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
-1Co 14:15

This guy has done great stuff for many years, some say, especially the movies and audio Bible.
This guy has yoked together with so many wicked artists and corrupt organizations, it is sickening to even talk about what he has been involved in, but I can't help a man who does not want to hear.
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
-Mat 15:14

To attack him with one quote out of context makes me wonder if people in your community avoid you NOT because you're Biblically precise but because you have spiritual B.O.
Hmm, that's interesting because I just went back to the article, and I counted (not one, but) 17 quotes from Smith, including his own ridiculous, so-called "salvation" testimony, plus videos, and quotes from many other people who have interviewed him, worked with him, worked for him, and those he yokes together with, alongside Scripture that rebukes his wicked deeds and false doctrines. How much research did you do on the matter? Did you just listen to one of his songs where he mentions Jesus and you automatically believe he's a Christian?

We must not revert to the type of attacks to Bibles, Churches, Ministers & Governments which ruin our testimony for Christ.
I have received many emails like this over the years where instead of using the words "rebuke" or "reprove" or "speaking the truth," they will instead use the word "attack" because they are offended at the facts. Despite how you feel about me, I care enough about you to tell you the truth (which is why I have spent hours this afternoon on a response instead of doing other work I need to get done), and if you do not want to hear it, then you are welcome to go somewhere else, and I will bid you a pleasant day.

I've been around many years and people with critical spirits, especially attacking practically everyone and then isolating...are lonely lonely...and they can't even see why.
Yeah, that makes sense. I'm sure you are quite lonely.
For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
-1Co 11:31

I didn't proof read all this,
I can tell.

but hope you take some with a grain of salt.
That idiom means that someone should simply accept what you say is true, while being somewhat skeptical of it at the same time. I have no problem being fully skeptical of what you say because you have made MANY false claims in your letter, but expecting me to just accept what you say is the truth is absurd because you have not yet earned back that trust, and I would also say it is arrogant considering what you are about to say next...

I will not attack
Wait, what? Let me get this straight: You have accused me of being an isolationist, with a superiority complex, that is rebellious against all authority, who is super-critical, who will not listen to others, who lacks understanding on various topics, who presents false quotations taken out of context, who operates our church in error, having our church also being in error, without any evidence for those things whatsoever, and you expect me not only to accept your letter without offense, but then further expect me to believe that you are not attacking me? That is mind-boggling. I am baffled and having a really hard time taking you seriously, but as I said in the beginning, I am trying to exercise as much patience as I can.

and say anything other than I hope you reply and help me clarify where I might have been hasty in my assessment, here. God Bless...and hope the best for you and yours in ministry.
I hope I fulfilled your request thoroughly, despite the fact that you have falsely accused me and our church of many things, and then, in church-iantiy style, provide a generic, public relations "God Bless" at the end of your rant.

Now on to the next letter after I invited you to come talk with our church over Skype...

I appreciate your quick reply, but have since re-read my letter and realized that it lacked tack and was written too hastily.
Those are meaningless words because there is no repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow) of wrongdoing. False accusation has to do with sin because it is lying, and if you thought you were going to fool me by claiming a "lack of tact and hasty writing," you thought wrong.
Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
-Col 3:9
A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall not escape.
-Pro 19:5

This does not mean I retract my concerns over what appears to be a hyper-critical spirit against all churches and ministries but your own home church.
I know you are not repentant; that was already clear.

For one, I'm not sure if I'm crossing over the line regarding some of my own hyper-critical assessments, here. That would be hypocrisy to the max, right?
Yes, that has already been established.

Anyway, perhaps half of everything I said in that email was venting on you for what my x-wife had put my children through, namely, created a critical spirit and cynicism about any other home church than their own...
As I pointed out at the beginning, I already suspected that was the case, and I have no need to stand on pretense or be treated in any respectful manner because I am nothing but dust and ashes save for the Lord Jesus Christ; however, there is no repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow) of your wrongdoing.
Is Repentance Part of Salvation?
As I said before, I have not seen anything in your letters yet that tells me you have been born again in Christ. I am not saying you are not a saved Christian, but I have not seen the evidence in your words yet. All this stuff about your ex-wife is simply an excuse that you think will prevent you from being held accountable for your words. Again:
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
-Mat 12:36
Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil. Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.
-Ecc 5:1-2

so when they became adults and moved away, there were no "perfect" churches like her own anywhere else in the world. If you will please forgive if I concluded that you did not have other folks than your bio-family in your physical worship location.
Forgiveness is no problem among us, but the issue at hand is that you do not have repentance of the core problem, which is that you falsely accused. You want forgiveness for drawing conclusions (which is not a sin), not forgiveness for bearing false witness.

Some of this was perhaps hasty on my part, since I later saw that you met with folks on line.
Hastiness is not a sin. Lying (i.e. falsely accusing) is a sin.

But I do keep with the concern that it seems best to have people fellowship together in a physical location so they can see HOW they live when off line.
Okay, just let us know if you want to start funding everyone's plane tickets and moving costs for coming out here to be all in one location. Just to prepare you, some of those folks will also need U.S. citizenship, so if you want to get started on that, let us know.

Church is more than talking on line, surely.
Church is more than meeting in the same building, surely.

It includes seeing if the words match the lifestyle in love for neighbors, family and such.
Perhaps you should come on Skype with our church this Thursday and let them know how much they are not doing right.

That can't be done purely on line.
Assumption after assumption after assumption. You should really learn to ask some questions before you start judging a matter.

So, if I was mistaken about others that are making leadership choices in your church's ministry, like elders, deacons, or the like...then please forgive me for drawing the conclusion.
There is no need to forgive a man drawing a conclusion because there is no wrong done by drawing a conclusion. There is no law that says "Thou shalt not draw conclusions," but there is a law that says:
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
-Exd 20:16
And as the Bible teaches, it is a hurtful burden having to deal with such people:
A man that beareth false witness against his neighbour is a maul, and a sword, and a sharp arrow.
-Pro 25:18

Meeting on line is not what I'm willing to do,
I figured that would be the case before I made the offer. In fact, I told Dedrick that you would not likely do it. If you want to know how I knew that, just ask. However, I believe that men and women, especially those in the church, have the right to face their accusers, and since you wanted to accuse them, I figured you should say it to them directly. However, when a man knows he's made many false accusations, he is not so comfortable to be face-to-face with those who he has falsely accused.

but I might be willing to be tapped into a 3, 4 or 5 party phone call.
I'm not sure if you know what Skype is. If you're using a computer, it's really simple. In fact, you probably had to go through more to set up your email account than you have to go through to use Skype.

Let me think about that a little. I prefer email of all because we can be less emotional about things.
No, I understand. Email allows you to dodge being held accountable for your words. That is not as easy to do in a live conversation.

Surely, my concerns are written without my own editing for sensitivity and accuracy.
That has already been established, but if you don't believe you will be held accountable and judged for the things you write in email, then it is no wonder you want them simply taken with "a grain of salt."

I'm limited on time and apologize. I told my long time friend about my discovery and the email I sent. He couldn't stop asking what did I see "good" on your website. And because I hesitated quite a bit, I needed to pray about all this.
If there is nothing good here, then move on somewhere else. Why are you even here? Why are you writing me? If what I say and do is evil (i.e. not good), then you should not fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness:
And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
-Eph 5:11
That is what it means to be 'sanctified' because the word means to be set apart for a holy use. We are commanded to separate ourselves from the leaven, and the word 'leaven' means corruption, or false doctrines that come from a sinful heart:
A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
-Gal 5:9
Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
-1Co 5:7
If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.
-2Ti 2:21
The Biblical Understanding of Sanctification
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
-Luke 12:51

The next day, today, after praying, I decided it was only right to apologize for forgetting to tell you that the info on your website on the Gospel was fantastic.
There is no sin in forgetting something; thus, there is no reason to apologize for it. The sin is lying and bearing false witness. If your heart was truly in the right place when you wrote the first letter, the Gospel of Jesus would have been the first thing on your mind, but based on what you have written so far, I do not think you and I believe the same thing about the Gospel of Christ. Have you read my book, Why Millions of Believers on Jesus Are Going to Hell? That is my explanation of the Gospel of Jesus, so if you want to see if you really do agree, that is what you should read.

And, I even admire your enthusiasm on the King James Only stance you take, since it is with the motive to revere and preserve (in the minds of people) the inerrant and infallible Word Of God.
Admiration and praise is irrelevant. I have had atheists write me and say they "admire" my effort to defend what I believe. Simon the sorcerer in Acts 8 admired Peter, but Peter said to him:
Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
-Acts 8:22
A damsel that practiced divination praised Paul and Silas, even proclaiming that they would show the people the way to salvation, but Paul turned around and rebuked her because she had a devil in her:
And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.
-Acts 16:18
All these things you are saying are just flattering words that deceive because anything I have accomplished has been by the grace, wisdom, and power of the Lord Jesus Christ, not by me. It is by such vain compliments that men get deceived.
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
-Rom 16:17-18
I have always been simple-minded, which why I have been deceived so many times, and it is ONLY by the grace and wisdom of God that, today, He has helped me see through such words of vanity.

Sorry, I must go.
It is no burden to me if you depart. Sadly, the burden has been this conversation.

Please understand (if you haven't already "read thru my possible motives"...that I'm probably taking my frustration out on you for resentments I have (buried and unaware within me) regarding my x-wife...
That was accurate. You did foresee that I would see the reason behind the letter, and I believe there is whole lot more to it than just that; many things I will likely never get around to discussing with you.

and probably other local friends who have turned this Covid-19 thing into a forum to speak more openly than I would like about their conspiracy theories. I am not at all a conspiracy theorist, and let me tell you why. First, folks I've talked with who are are often very proud of being "in the know" or in some cases, proudly proclaiming "I told you this was going to happen...didn't I". There is probably nothing more obnoxious than a "I told you so". By making many predictions of where "this is going to lead", it allows a person to validate what they choose.
That is correct, UNLESS it is based on evidence. If a prediction is based on eye-witness testimony, or the words of the person in question, and is based on Biblically sound judgments, then that is what the Bible calls "discernment."
For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
-Heb 5:12-14

They could be totally wrong in 90% and all their friends forget that...but right in 10% and the proclaimer tells all over and over. That is a concern. This is something I've seen over and over because, perhaps, it helps a person feel like they are validated. It happened with Y2K, Obama and Covid19...its never ending...where conspiracy theorists are desperately trying to figure out the end times and practically every single time, they are wrong.
I understand that point.

I so anticipate the Return of Christ...daily...but if the entire conspiracy theorist community for decades have been absolutely wrong on their predictions, what does that tell us. They forget that Y2K and all their hoarding of food and moving into caves made them look silly if not whacko in their communities. And the predictions of Obama being the antichrist...or others....  What I'm getting at is what we should centralize on is the proclamation of the Gospel and hospitality, especially in our communities.
I understand that point too.

There is nothing more shameful than a bunch of folks who get on the internet and say high and mightly things but they haven't had a non-Christian neighbor in their home for dinner in years. I'm not accusing y'all in any of this...only saying I hope that this is not the case. And only suspect things get that way when there isn't a local body like we see in the Bible, where believers meet in a local church from all types of backgrounds.
But that is hypocrisy, and I don't know if you just can't see it, but the fact is that you just told me:
By making many predictions of where "this is going to lead", it allows a person to validate what they choose.
And yet, you still have not asked me one question in the entirety of your letters. You simply made "predictions" based on how you felt, which allowed you to validate in your mind what you chose to believe, and the only difference between your first letter and now is that you're putting in a lot more disclaimers like "I'm not accusing" and "I hope this isn't the case" and "only suspect things," to try and make it seem like you are not still trying to maintain your false presumptions. Again, there is no repentance in your letters; I'm not discerning anything that tells me you have a humbled heart that has come to the grief and godly sorrow of wrongdoing.

For the sake of the church, and for your sake, that is the reason I have spent an entire afternoon reading your letter carefully, responding to it, organizing it, and (into the night) proofreading it:
And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
-2Ti 2:24-26

I personally don't think I'm going to be helpful to y'all or vice versa...I can feel the heat rise...and suspect that perhaps our Lord will someday answer my prayer on why I'm even writing y'all...could it be that I'm venting on you because I'm being passive aggressive in being as frank as I should with those I converse about conspiracy theories?
Even that was not a question designed for me to answer. That was rhetorically directed at yourself. In both your letters, you have ended sentences with three question marks, and all three instances were rhetorical only. My ministry is designed for those who want to listen and learn, not for those who already believe they know everything about these subjects. If you believe you have found the truth elsewhere, no one is holding you back; you are free to go elsewhere.

I think we perhaps need to put this one hold and let me get a clear answer first...which will free y'alls time to do evangelism and love neighbor.
I was doing evangelism in this letter, whether you realized it or not. I have only made judgments based on what you said to me, and knowing the things you have said, it gives evidence to what is in your heart.
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
-Mat 15:18
Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.
-Pro 21:2
I am not going to return false accusations against you, but rather, I pray that the Lord Jesus Christ would bless you and your family with all your needs throughout the coming week, and I also pray that He give you as much mercy and longsuffering as He has given me.
Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.
-1Pe 3:9
May 25, 10:07 PM
I'm quite shocked that you took a letter addressed to you and the TONE of your website and sent to all your people. Was that really necessary? It was intended for you, alone. It was not a public rebuke, it was framed (I thought) like a question of the TONE of what I read on your site. Yes, I did not ask questions directly, but thought you would pick-up that all I really wanted was some clarification. Seems a few quick answers from you would have sufficed. Like, "Yes, I'm not the only leader in my congregation, there are others, it is not a dictatorship" and "Perhaps you misunderstood what you thought was only one quote of Michael W. Smith, there were more you might have missed, click here to read" and "My experience and passion against tax exempt status is rooted in my perception and prayerful research and I feel, my correct assessment of how the government places churches UNDER them". My letters contained a general flavor of humility in that I said stuff that allowed you to clarify. I said I could be wrong in what I saw (in my tone). Instead, you took them as attacks and false accusations. Thought you would see that just a little clarification would have cleared the issues up. To say a few times that I wasn't even a Christian was also shocking, especially without even yet having a dialogue both ways. You took my general questioning of the TONE of the website as attacks when they really were not. They were more like, "I hope this perception of mine is incorrect" kind of attitude I used.

To be clear, I am a Christian who falls under the full justification of the work which Jesus Christ because he broke me and allured me to himself (Hosea) out of my hypocrisy. He exposed my sin at the core (& specifically) and I repented not even because of something sensitive that was there inside me without his mercy. I believed in (him &) his substitutionary death for me, thus, experiencing the imputed righteousness of Christ at the same time he took all my sin (and actually became sin, Romans) for me. I am active in a ministry and have a good relationship with my kids and x-wife (now), all I consider a mercy of God on me.  This does not mean that the past will never flare-up...which it apparently did as I mentioned in my second letter. The reason I addressed you as a believer was because I read your presentation of the Gospel and your testimony...and it seemed obvious, even without knowing you personally.

With all this said, it saddens me that you took all my stuff as if I was making a declarative statement as if I knew exactly your motives and how things ran at your church. It was not intended to blast you or such. It was mostly to say this all concerns me cause I've seen this type of TONE on a website before and was hoping you would clarify...not accuse me of being a pagan. We both look forward to the return of Christ and asking for clarification of the TONE and what appeared to be a solo man leading a whole church and attacking all other churches (because they took tax exempt status). Oh, on this latter one, when a church (not a building!!!) grows, there is money involved, that is biblical...a collection. Try opening a bank account under a church name without a 501c3. So, who keeps the collection? Perhaps all will trust the solo pastor to deposit it in his personal account. I wouldn't. And few would so they use a bank account with a tax id in the name of the church.

Anyway, I appreciate you spending so much time trying to address me as a pagan, but it kinda was a mistake. Perhaps you asking the questions (like you accused me of not doing) in your first email to me...BEFORE YOU ACCUSED ME OF NOT BEING A CHRISTIAN...would have been doing exactly what you said I should have done. If you notice, I addressed you as a believer and never once ever...never...NEVER JUDGED your eternal destiny. Think hard before you do this twice or more in your first email reply to anyone...it comes across as probably the most eternally dangerous thing a person can do other than reject Christ themselves. There was nothing in my letter that said anything against Jesus, I even began with a clear reference to the Triune God...and you sure didn't like that. That was weird.

Look, you are welcome to reply if you think it will help. I don't, nor did I, say you were a non-Christian or were a heretic or even preaching a false gospel...I was only questioning the tone of how you seemed to jump on tons of ministries. If you are familiar with Keith Green from the 70s and 80s...he was a hard nose kinda Christian...but he spoke the truth in love. He took on tons of issues head on, but his ministry was known as loving as well as setting things straight.

Perhaps it is time to tell you that one concern was a particular friend I have had over the last 20 years pointed me to your website. He quoted it a few times but has had no contact with you. He used some of the information to deflect what I've been praying and trying to get him to see...that he can't remain a Lone Ranger Christian...he needs a church. He probably misread the TONE of your website...(see another NOT accusation if you read closely!) and it felt his intention to begin fellowshipping in a church (NOT THE BUILDING!) was thwarted because of what he read. We all understand that people misread. All of us. So, I will not repent of sending you the two emails because right here and now...I will clarify...I was not falsely accusing you...I was questioning what I saw. Yes, it might have been appearances and you quoting from Jesus on judging not on appearance was right...but I thought you would see all I wrote could be quickly clarified...and we'd both be on our way...in our own ministries.

A side note: I spend weekly time with "addicts" and don't preach 12 step...I point to the WORD. I'm an instrumentalist in my church, spend probably 15 hours a week meeting with men regarding the WORD and struggles in their lives. Most of my Bible reading is audible, attempting to make it through the WORD five times a year. I pray for people daily by name...and trust that its not me who convinces them. If you wonder about my lack of quoting Scripture, sorry, there is a very important reason I don't sound bite the WORD to prove my point. It feels on the level of the liberal media...and most the time people do this its deductive rather than inductive hermeneutics...chasing down passages to prove what they want. I love the WORD and trust it (and the Author of it) more than even my own perceptions...my epistemology is perhaps a Fideism for which only the WORD  can convince...but not sound bites. I need everything in CONTEXT. If I'm wrong in not quoting passages every few words...perhaps you can understand the time I spent with cultists who do that all the time. I'm looking for context!

Perhaps you can write one more reply...but I think we aren't going to go anywhere if you keep saying YOU KNOW I'm not a Christian based purely on appearance (yes, words are a form of appearance). I was concerned on the influence on my friend from your site's TONE. And when I began addressing you...the past with my x-wife began to bubble up. Surely, you understand that we don't always know our motives. And surely you understand that we have bad days...but it doesn't mean we're going to hell...duh. Let's also not forget that the Bible is filled with Christians who fail all the time. There is no need...I know you know them...its practically every "hero" of the Bible (except Jesus). I constantly go back to Galatians 2...and it blows my mind that Paul, many years after Peter's denials and later repentance...is rebuking Peter for playing the hypocrite...we're talking decades (!!!) after being a leader in the church...decades. Christians fail...that doesn't mean they are not believers...duh. And finally, I apologize if the WAY I said things seemed LIKE I knew your issues...I really only wanted to clarify that they were not as they seemed based on how I viewed the website.
May 26, 10:30 AM
I apologize if the WAY I said things seemed LIKE I knew your issues
Again, you take no responsibility for the things you say. The problem was what you said, not the how you said it. Greg is a man who thinks he can say whatever he pleases and he is automatically justified, no matter what; there is no fear of God in his tongue.
Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.
-Ecc 5:6-7
If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.
-Jms 1:26
When I pointed out your sin, your response was to use your works to justify yourself:
I spend weekly time with "addicts" and don't preach 12 step...I point to the WORD. I'm an instrumentalist in my church, spend probably 15 hours a week meeting with men regarding the WORD and struggles in their lives. Most of my Bible reading is audible, attempting to make it through the WORD five times a year. I pray for people daily by name...and trust that its not me who convinces them.
As you said in your letter, you do not like to go to the Word of God for justification (i.e. to prove your point), so even though I think I'm wasting my time here, I can only plead that you read carefully to what Jesus said because in the day that Christ judges men, no one will be able to give such a response to justify themselves:
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
-Mat 7:21-23
As I said before, if you do not like hearing these things, then you should go elsewhere. I do not understand why departing peacefully is such a difficult thing for you personally.
Cast out the scorner, and contention shall go out; yea, strife and reproach shall cease.
-Pro 22:10
strife: exertion or contention for superiority; contest of emulation, either by intellectual or physical efforts; contention in anger or enmity; contest; struggle for victory
As I already explained to you, you do not want to be held accountable for the things you say, so there is no point in repeating what I have already written. If you are of Christ, then you are not exhibiting like-mindedness with us at this time, so please depart from our ministry in peace. I'm glad to hear that things are going well with your family, and I hope you all have a great day. I also thank your friend for being kind enough to take some time to share some of the things I have worked on, and I pray that the Lord God would be gracious to me that He would use my work for His service.
END OF DISCUSSION
There are many things that could be talked about at this point, but I will probably save those things for replies since this post is a bit lengthy. Feel free to comment with your thoughts. The only thing I will point out here is that you will notice that Greg did not answer my questions and he did not provide anything I requested from him, which means he was talking AT me, not WITH me.

[creationliberty]

Dedrick and I were going over ANOTHER email he sent after this, and I thought you guys would want to read it before commenting:
May 26, 11:52 AM
Thank you for all your time and I will depart after these FINAL words, since you are asking me to depart. I wish you would have replied to the more important paragraphs (#2,#4) so your people who read all your correspondence can see the truth. The second paragraph was selectively not addressed, even though it explains what Jesus has done for my soul and my thinking. This is the foundation of everything I say and clarifies your accusations. If the worst words you said (that I'm not a Christian, in your judgement) were based on appearance and then I clarify it, why would you SELECTIVELY LEAVE THAT OUT and just quote the things I do in my ministry...as if I'm works based. This was SO UNFAIR...to quote the paragraph about my ministry...and SELECTIVELY LEAVE OUT MY TESTIMONY...and then accuse me with Matthew 7!!! Wow. Wow. Wow. That's like quoting only Ephesians 2:10 (the result of GOD's work in my life) and skip the engine that makes the car go (Ephesians 2:8,9). Instead, you begin, AGAIN, saying words that you KNOW for sure that I have "no fear of God in his tongue". That was especially odd, and seemingly "unstable" to say such a thing when I clarified that I wasn't accusing but was really asking for clarification. The tone of my letters, if you read them over and allowed yourself to see all in context, you would see that I wasn't attacking but was really saying "I hope it is not as it appears". My letters are flooded with this tone from my mouth.

I never said I don't "like to go to the Word of God for justification", instead, I clearly said that cult leaders are notorious for pounding people with verses OUT OF CONTEXT...and I was making it clear I don't do that. The cut and paste verse job you do ALSO do not justify your accusations. I read other letter of others and this is common from you...1. Read letter 2. Identify as the worst possible situation (this dude is a pagan!) 3. Find/Paste verses that fit your conclusion.  It is especially odd to accuse on your first reply so angrily when a few clarifying questions on your first reply would have been doing EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANTED FROM OUR FIRST EMAILS!!!! Its like you say you want people who ask humble questions but you come at them with hostility on your first reply. Practice what you preach, I'm serious...practice what you preach!. And I say this especially since you selectively choose to filter the most important paragraphs about my salvation. Instead, your congregation is probably only going to see that I'm not a Christian because I was censored on the most important reply to all your accusations of me being not a Christian.

Yes, I will leave, but it is sad because I was having some hope that we could possibly get somewhere. There was an admiration on my part for your passion for Jesus...this is the case for "addicts" I find in rehabs and such...the ones with all the energy and passion are exciting to work with...you know, the "Peters"...who are always drawing hasty conclusions and putting their feet in their mouths. I understand that perhaps you feel you have the "gift of rebuke" but it has the tendency to not attract kind and gentle people for a congregation...I've seen this over 30 years. To get a reputation in ones community for rebuking the devil around every corner...(that was a figure of speech...I know you DONT do that...youre not pentecostal) can cost much.

I think you should not ignore THIS letter or selectively forget that the following paragraphs were getting dangerously close to slander when you IGNORED them as my testimony of Jesus blood atonement for my soul. He is ALL I have, even my mind is to be corrected daily by the simplicity of the cross. Jesus is all in all...the only thing (person) I live for. My letters were perhaps a clarification so the name of Jesus isn't blasted because someone is running around hastily telling people who is and isn't saved...when they're basing this conclusion not on someone's doctrinal position or life...but on questions one is asking about the TONE of a website. Its like this is a freak show...or a house of mirrors...everything is blown up way way bigger than reality. Slow down buddy, and use this hyper energy with discretion. Deal? I wanted to say something kind...(and true) cause I really think you are a Christian....but YOU BLASTED ME LAST TIME FOR SAYING "GOD BLESS"...heck...I'm gun shy...GUN SHY around you.

[Kenneth Winslow]

 perhaps you feel you have the "gift of rebuke"
When this guy makes a slap at you he still feels the need to give himself some sort of an out. This instance it was   by throwing in a "perhaps".
He thinks doing this makes him look like a nice guy by acting non-accusatorial, but it just makes it worse by adding a lie on top of what is obviously a false accusation.

[creationliberty]

There's a few things I'll comment on. I don't really have any desire to go through the whole thing, but I'll add in a few things that I purposely left out because I knew he would not listen.

Ultimately, he wrote me this letter out of anger at his ex-wife, and I believe the real reason is that his ex-wife will not come back to him, and because her father is supporting her, he is angry with her father too. In short, because he did wrong in his life with alcohol and lost his family, that is no reason to take it out on me, and he is not justified to do so. I can be patient and understanding with someone who does that, and forgiving of them too, but he never repented of falsely accusing me, and instead tried to justify himself.

Furthermore, he never repented of falsely accusing our entire church, and for no reason at all, decided that I taught Christians that they should not be involved with a church. That is the opposite of what I teach because there many instances in my audio teachings and in articles and books that I have quoted:
And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
-Hebrews 10:24-25
If there are listeners out there who forsake assembling themselves together with a church, that is not my responsibility to fix. Essentially, Greg was blaming me for the choices of others, which was really the entire point of his letter.

We have a pretty diverse church, meaning that we have people from many backgrounds and cultures. When Dedrick and I were talking, he remembers when I privately told him a few months back that I love how diverse we are, and I wish we had even more. However, I was not going to tell Greg about the specifics details of all that because not only was he writing me out of his own selfishness (i.e. it had nothing to do with questioning our church, but rather, it had to do with his struggle between his ex and in-laws), but also because I am not going to use the ethnicity and backgrounds of our church members as pawns in his game. If he wants to believe that I'm hiding something, let him go believe that because I invited him to come find out for himself, and as soon as he realized he would have to face his accusers, he tucked tail and ran.

He also remarked on the "TONE" of my writing, many times. "The TONE, the TONE, the TONE!!!" And yet, if you look closely, not only did Greg not explain what he meant by was wrong by the "tone" of my writing, but also he never mentioned the "tone" of my website until the third letter, AFTER he got rebuked. How convenient for him.

He also claimed I accused him of not being a Christian. I didn't. I'll quote myself, so watch this:
"Frankly, I have not yet seen a heart of repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow) from your letter yet. I am not saying that you do not have one; I am simply saying that I have not seen the evidence yet in your writing."
"As I said before, I have not seen anything in your letters yet that tells me you have been born again in Christ. I am not saying you are not a saved Christian, but I have not seen the evidence in your words yet."
After his fourth letter, I suspect that he is not a Christian because of his rage and railing attitude, and I think that's why his friend is trying to work on him, but I still, even after his childish rant, am not sure. I do not have enough information to go on because he did not talk about hardly any of the doctrine he believes, and part of the reason for that is because, as he stated in his ridiculous excuse, he does not quote Scripture.

What is amazing to me is that he claimed that he does not quote Scripture because people might misinterpret it, which means what he did was confess that he is trying to share the Gospel of Jesus, without sharing the Gospel of Jesus. A few chapters earlier in Hebrews, it also says:
Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
-Hebrews 4:11-12
Thus, CONTEXTUALLY our labor involves study and quotation of God's Word, and when a man as corrupt as Greg starts talking to me, I want to discern his heart so I am not deceived, therefore, I lean heavily on God's Word for my own protection, but he feels he is above that, and also begins to throw out his fancy words like, "inductive hermeneutics," "epistimology," and "fideism" to show off how smart he really thinks he is, but if you read his explanation carefully and understand what these terms mean, his theology is nonsense.

Epistimology is the theory of knowledge, or in other words, how do we obtain knowledge? Thus, Greg's theory of knowledge is acquired is by fideism, or in others, he believes that knowledge can only be acquired by faith. The problem with that position is that unbelievers can learn how to make a ham sandwich. Of course, I understand that all knowledge itself, and all capability to grasp knowledge, comes from God, who sustains all things by his word and authority, but at the same time, faith in God is not required to make a ham sandwich because if it was, then God would not be blessing even the men who do evil:
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
-Matthew 5:44-45

Please do not misunderstand; everyone has faith, and as I have stated before, atheists have faith, but knowledge of Scripture and the spiritual things of God requires the Holy Spirit, and in order to help others see the truth, they need to hear the Word of God:
How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
-Romans 10:14-17

Perhaps he meant something else by his fancy words that used to try to make himself sound impressive, but since he did not fully explain himself, nor did he refer to any Scripture on the matter, then he leaves other to believe whatever they want about what he says. Greg spent more time trying to justify himself than explain himself, and if that is the case, it would not surprise me if his evangelism is ineffective.

He later claims that I purposefully skipped over his declaration of faith and focused in on his testimony of works, but the problem was his testimony of faith was pointless and hypocritical. Nothing in the words of Greg's emails reflected his claim to that belief, and furthermore, with the exception of the comments about repentance, a false preacher like Steven Anderson would say the same thing; thus, when a man's words does not match what he claims to believe, he's a hypocrite, and such hypocrisy is evidence against a man's so-called "faith."

Furthermore, because Greg will not quote the Word of God, nor will he define what he means by what he says, we cannot verify if he means the same thing we mean when he says words like "justification, Jesus Christ, sin, repentance, imputed righteousness," and more.

As he went into his third letter, and then transitioned into his fourth, you will also notice a lot more all-caps. There is a reason for that because his true heart is starting to be revealed. That's why Ecclesiastes (which I quoted to Greg in my emails) advises to let one's words be few when speaking before God because the foolishness starts to flow out of man's mouth when he does not know when to shutup, and as we can see, Greg just kept making it worse on himself.

He claims he was hoping we could get somewhere in conversation, and that would have be possible under normal circumstances, but what he was really saying is that he was hoping I would ignore his sin and lack of repentance of his sin, so we could keep talking about the vain things he was saying. That just wastes everyone's time.

One of the sentences he said at the end really stood out to me. In the third paragraph of his fourth letter, he starts accusing me again with his "gift of rebuke" comment that Kenneth was addressing in his post, which means you all can clearly see his hostility. He ends that paragraph by saying:
"To get a reputation in ones community for rebuking the devil around every corner...(that was a figure of speech...I know you DONT do that...youre not pentecostal) can cost much."
Here's what is really odd about this: Take away the "..." and the parenthesis, and it says:
"To get a reputation in ones community for rebuking the devil around every corner can cost much."
He intended that sentence as a warning to me. I'm sure most of you probably got that impression too. So how does he get around being held accountable for his accusation? He says that I don't do that. Okay, so what was the purpose of warning me about doing it, when I don't do it? Folks, as far as I can tell from these letters, Greg is a habitual liar, and under that circumstance, I can see why he ex-wife does not want to come back. If he talks this way to her, I feel bad for her situation, but if it is the case that she has not remarried, then I applaud her for her efforts to remain Biblical in her life. In summary, Greg is taking his frustrations with his wife out on me, and I do not appreciate that because I am not responsible for what Greg or his ex-wife have done.

As he closes he insists that he has never questioned if I was a Christian, and has always believed that I was. I believe he's lying. Part of the reason for this is because of one of his earlier statements, and I want to quote it so you guys will read this carefully:
"If you notice, I addressed you as a believer and never once ever...never...NEVER JUDGED your eternal destiny."
I don't know if you all have heard of this or not, but when studying lies and deception, this is what is called "convincing, not conveying." Conveying is when you simply communicate, in that you are transporting the information to the other person. Convincing is when you are trying to persuade someone to believe something. If what he said was true, then he would only need to state it clearly by saying, "I never questioned your salvation," but what he did instead was tried desperately to convince me that it was true.

For example, the following video is made by a man who studies body language and exposes liars in the media. The link takes you to the time stamp of when he shows democratic candidate Joe Biden trying to convince, instead of convey, because multiple testimonies from women have come out against him concerning his sexual assault of them:
https://youtu.be/TUiIlMuCwAA?t=290
In the video clip, Biden tries to convince the reporter by saying:
"No. It is not true.  I'm saying unequivocally, it never, never, happened. And it didn't. It never happened."
Liars typically have to repeat themselves over and over in rapid succession like this. If you listen to my teachings, you will notice that I don't do that. However, that is what we just read from Greg.
He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit.
-Proverbs 12:17

I hope that will help some Christians in their continued growth in discernment, so you will not be led astray by those who lie in wait to deceive.

[TheChickenWhisperer]

Wow!  Where does one even begin?  I was standing here going "what?" then, "wait, what?" "Where is getting this?" His many words remind me of Andrew, of whom I have spoken to the church.

The one thing that really struck me was the "critical spirit" thing.  I have heard that often from other people who look at the website and it seems to me to be an excuse to not really search out the truth in the website and teachings.

Just my thoughts.  I thought Chris answered him well.

[Jeanne]

Before reading Chris' last post, I was thinking, 'Wait, did I miss something? Chris never said he KNEW this man was not of Christ, so where is he getting that?'

He obviously does not read this forum, either, because if he did, he would have known that just because Chris did not address the first two paragraphs of his last letter does not mean that the rest of us never saw them.

As Chris pointed out, he assumes a lot without doing any research to see if his assumptions are correct or not.

[Jeanne]

I got to thinking about this again today, and I was wondering why this guy was so concerned that his friend was not going to any church building. 'Going to church' has no more to do with Christianity than, say, burning sacrifices would. I get the part about Hebrews 10:25 where it says we shouldn't forsake the assembling of ourselves together, but why would anyone want to fellowship with people who are not of like mind or share the same beliefs? That's the whole reason most of us here don't 'go to church' and why there are so many of us from various parts of the world. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to find people who truly have a heart for the truth of God's word and try to live accordingly.

[Kenneth Winslow]

I was wondering why this guy was so concerned that his friend was not going to any church building.

He wasn't concerned. He didn't even try to say why it was bad or wrong for his friend to not attend a church building, that I remember.
He was just trying to find an excuse for leveling another baseless accusation.
And in so doing he further exposed his wicked heart and his biblical illiteracy.

[creationliberty]

But it's impossible to "go to church" because the church is not a building. You can "go to temple," but not church. Since we are the members of the body, we are the church, so how do we "go" to ourselves?

[Kenneth Winslow]

I've heard some old timers say, "Go to meeting".

"Git yer shoes on youngins, it's time to go to meetin'!"

I suppose that's biblically sound.