Re: David P. Brown on brethren who "lie"! - A Paraphrase
- ContendingFTF Contending For The Faith
Message 1756 of 1756
From: "David P Brown"
Date: Thu Apr 6, 2006 12:30 pm
Subject: Re: [ContendingFTF] Re: Update on Simons--TCSOP--Fellowship
It should be noted and emphasized that one of the sad facts about
some people is the seemingly routine practice by several brethren in
their efforts to defend and protect commonly held doctrines in the
brotherhood at all costs, even seemingly taking pleasure in "playing
foot loose and fancy free" with moral conduct in regard to simple
It seems that some brethren think that if anyone is opposing their
pet doctrine, no matter whether the reason for the opposition is
scriptural or factual, they are at liberty to say or do anything (or
for that matter intentionally omitings undone what ought to be done
or said) no matter how contrary to what the facts actually are in
their sad attempts to defend their pet doctrine.
Is it or is it not a sin to lie (deliberately tell a falsehood as if
it is the truth with the intent to deceive the hearer into accepting
the falsehood as the truth)?
Also, there seemingly is no compunction of conscience with some
brethren when they know they are misrepresenting the facts in a
case. They behave as amoral pragmatists - if something works in
their efforts to preserve their pet doctrine - that makes it right.
Shades of Bill Clinton.
Furthermore, they have no problem in seeking great sums of money
from the brethren, while refusing to answer questions about what
they believe, practice, and who they support/fellowship.
They expect the brethren to accept and live with the arrogant
attitude that declares, "Don't expect us to answer your questions,
but give us lots of your money, your approval and promote us" - a la
MSOP, AP, GBN.
And we thought such mind sets and tactics were only to be found at
ACU, her sister institutions, along with the R. Shelly, and Max
Brethren we might as well face it - we have had the wool pulled over
our eyes by some brethren that we thought stood for truth simply for
the sake of truth itself, no matter the sacrifice they would have to
make to continue to stand by whatever the truth happens to be and
expose anyone who would oppose and compromise the truth on anything.
But the reality is this: these brethren are false. They were and are
self-serving characters who will compromise truth for power or
money, or for simply an intransigent closed-minded adherence to a
traditionally and fondly held doctrine that we now know happens to
be utterly wrong, while making merchandise of faithful brethren.
For those who cannot see through a barrel with both ends knocked
out, they will have to continue to make their minds up, such as they
are, on the basis of subjective emotionalism.
They will have to continue to blind themselves to the facts in the
case(s) and be happy - such happiness as it is - while willingly
ignoring the facts in any given case as well as the truth of and
application of 1 Thess. 5:21 ("But examine everything carefully;
hold fast to that which is good") and like verses in there efforts
to determine right from wrong.
After all the subjective, emotional, and relative mind set is the
easy way out (for the present). It is the wide gate and broad way in
which the great majority of people find themselves as they rejoice,
for the time being, in it.
Indeed, this certainly covers some so-called "sound brethren" who
think more in terms of religious tradition or a "buddyhood" than a
brotherhood, and "flattership" of fellow followers of the tradition
than religious fellowship that does not shrink from truth and
correcting that which is known to be wrong.
But the faithful need to remember the words of Paul to Timothy
regarding such characters. Paul declared: "But evil men evil men and
seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived"
(2 Tim. 3:13).
Let us highly resolve to be no part of them, oppose them no matter
who they are, proclaim the gospel no matter what befalls us, and
know that this is the way that is right and cannot be wrong.
David P. Brown
1 Tim. 1:3-7 (NASB):
As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus
so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines,
nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give
rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration
of God which is by faith. But the goal of our instruction is love
from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. For
some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless
discussion, wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do
not understand either what they are saying or the matters about
which they make confident assertions.
- Pardon me, there's one sentence I started to edit and then got
interrupted and forgot to finish that one.
--- In Maury_and_Baty, I wrote (post #7797):
> It seems that some brethren think that if anyone is opposingThe parenthetical phrase is supposed to be:
> their pet doctrine, no matter whether the reason for the
> opposition is scriptural or factual, they are at liberty to say
> or do anything (or for that matter intentionally omitings
> undone what ought to be done or said) no matter how contrary to
> what the facts actually are in their sad attempts to defend
> their pet doctrine.
> (or for that matter intentionally omitting relevant information) Todd Greene