Moe: I have always agreed with what you say 100%. But you are not claiming,
as they have been for about a hundred posts.

that to treat as is the same as "IS". It is not. You will be hard put to
find one commentator in a 100 who would agree with that. As you say "Only
God knows". Chad and others have said THEY KNOW.

Wm.


-----Original Message-----
From: ic2@... [mailto:ic2@...]
Sent: 24 April 2005 14:56
To: soundofgrace@...
Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] RE:Acts. 2 teaches infant baptism.
[soundofgrace] "sound" = gospel


William,

 For some some reason you are missing the point. An unrepentant person is
just that. Whether he or she is a true believer is none of our concern at
that point. What we believe is irrevelant. If a person walks like the devil,
smells like the devil and eats with the devil and refuses the loving
discipline of the Church then let them go live with the devil. Only God
knows their end.

   Moe


> Matthew 18:17's mandate to declare the unrepentant to be an unbeliever.
> (Chad)
>
>
> Chad - the above words are incredible and indicative of a theology based
on
> deductions, presumptions and inferences instead of accepting what is
simply
> stated by Christ. Matt. 18 does not make any such declaration, any more
than
> Acts. 2 teaches infant baptism. It says what we are to do and how we are
to
> treat a man who says he is a brother caught in sin.
>
> Wm.
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chad R. Bresson [mailto:breusswane@...]
> Sent: 22 April 2005 15:23
> To: soundofgrace@...
> Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] "sound" = gospel
>
>
> William and Dorothy Oosterman <tulip01@...> wrote:
> > they were never saved in the first place and only after they came back?
>
> or
>
> > they may have been saved, despite the church's text-mandated declaration
> otherwise, and >they came back.
>
>
> It doesn't matter and it is irrelevant to Matthew 18:17.  That the latter
is
> a possibility is totally inconsequential to obeying Matthew 18:17's
mandate
> to declare the unrepentant to be an unbeliever.  One who is "as" a Gentile
> cannot be called brother.... because it is not the way we would treat a
> Gentile.  If we treat someone "as" a Gentile, we are treating them as if
> they are unbelievers.  We don't call unbelievers "brothers".
>
> Chad Bresson
> Xenia, OH
>
> --
> Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> http://www.soundofgrace.com
>
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
>
> To view our online archive go to our web page at
> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
>
> --
> Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> http://www.soundofgrace.com
>
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
>
> To view our online archive go to our web page at
> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
>
>
>

--
Read the Sound of Grace pages at
http://www.soundofgrace.com

To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...

To view our online archive go to our web page at
http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace