Jason Wallace Misrepresents Abolition

Jason Wallace is a religious service provider at an OPC branch in Utah. Unsurprisingly, James White mentioned him specifically as a personal friend in a recent Dividing Line program. In recent social media interactions he has shown himself to be, much like Rich Pierce, a closed-minded sower of division who cares not at all when he willfully misrepresents servants of the living God despite numerous corrections.
Since I'd say the odds favor his eventual deletion of one of the notable threads in which he amply demonstrates his evil thinking, I'll reproduce it here. First, though, his 13 objections to AHA, which will be followed by rebuttals.

UPDATE: Before the fold, though, I'd like to throw in a sideways sigh toward JD Hall, who refers obliquely to this article in his copy+paste of Wallace's 13 points.

He even mentions me specifically and the fact that I criticise the points here, but unsurprisingly doesn't link here so people can evaluate the 13 points and their rebuttals. He does take time to make the assertion that my statement that "Virtually all abolitionists are part of faithful visible churches" is a "laughable inaccuracy", and of course, though he has been corrected on that many times, gives no indication that he cares about correction, truth, or fairness. Nor does he give any evidence that the statement is inaccurate, let alone laughable.
And since JD reads this blog, I will now make another plea to him directly: Jordan, let us be brothers again. You invited me over to your house! You left me alone in your house where I had access to anything I would have wanted to steal or sabotage or whatever you think a dangerous church-hating cultist might do. You called me "closer than a brother" in public not long after, and then less than two months later were tossing me aside in public as a cultist. I guess better a cultist than a jihadist...

Joel McDurmon spits truth, implicitly endorses Church Repent

"Even here, however, we are going to face opposition and pushback—largely from fellow evangelicals. I can think of only one remedy for this problem, and it has to start in the pulpits. Absent this initiative, it falls to parachurch ministries and individual Christians to state the truth. This is where we’re at." (Source)

So... when abolitionists said these kinds of things (three years ago), many in the Reformed crowd asked us who our elders were, which elders sent us out so as to say things like this, and whence our authority came to say things like this. Men like Marcus Pittman, Jon Speed, Shane Dodson, and Tony Miano publicly and hypocritically excoriated abolitionists for being consistent with the doctrines that we hold (and, actually, the doctrines that they themselves hold), called us "rebels", "nomads", a cult, and ecclesiastical anarchists. They said that since we are not part of the local churches in question, we had no business calling those churches to repent.

Now that one of their favorite polemicists is saying it, will they ask him the same questions and "cut ties" with him, dissociating from The American Vision?

Time will tell. But it would appear that time is running out for these guys' point of view. More and more people are seeing that their ecclesiolatry just won't cut it when virtually nobody is actually living for Jesus.

The "Herald" Society

I keep hearing people use the word "herald". And they apply it to someone who goes to a building every single Sunday and lectures the same people over and over again about things that in many ways they should already know and be learning themselves (and teaching others [Heb 5:12]).

That's not what a herald is, folks. A herald goes forth from the King, bearing the King's message, and he gives it to ALL the King's subjects. He doesn't put out a sign, "Come hear the King's message. Once a week, for 30 minutes. Only inside this building. You know, if you want to," and then wait for the King's rebellious subjects to come to him.

There's a name for someone who lectures to a small subset of the King's subjects over and over again at a set time and place, but it's not a "herald".

I must admit that it is hard to see friends and acquaintances post and repost notifications about "Herald" Society get-togethers as if these were beneficial to the kingdom of God. I truly believe that there is a lot more bad than good about such things. Most of the reason why I think this centers around the hypocrisy that is more than evident in so many of the dealings of these men.

Take the "H"S meeting currently underway in Milton, FL as an example. As part of the buildup leading to this event, Tony Miano among others have put out some material encouraging people to attend. As this remains a topic of interest to me, I have followed some of that material, partly to see whether the "H"S has learned from previous errors which I have personally documented. To be more specific, the errors center around such things as

• forming a parachurch ministry, all the while decrying parachurch ministries.
• using the word "Herald" in the title of the society, all the while intentionally not doing the things that heralds do.
• using the word "Herald" in the title of the society and saying stuff like "No king but Christ", all the while putting obstacles in the way of those who desire to obey the Great Commission (like women for example) and doing all they can to force potential actual heralds to get permission from someone who acts like a king in demanding that people submit to his own rule before the herald obeys the actual King.
• teaching the sufficiency of Scripture, all the while imposing extrabiblical traditions on others, such as "the call to preach", requiring that men "be called" before they are permitted to engage in open-air preaching (OAP). 
• trumpeting the importance of the local church, all the while actually negating its importance (see more on that below).
• calling people to waste time and money that could have been put to use in their own localities, and in exchange giving them something (a series of lectures) that could easily have been communicated by an iTunes podcast.
• teaching Calvinist (and frequently cessationist) doctrine, all the while pushing a view of sanctification that I can only describe as charismatic Wesleyan, in that the "call to preach" maps quite well onto the "second blessing" that in other circles might be thought of as the "baptism of the Holy Spirit".

All of this is hypocrisy, but let's focus on that last item for a moment. The funny thing about it is that in charismatic theology, this "second blessing", this "baptism in the Holy Spirit", is usually pretty objectively verifiable - does the allegedly secondly-blessed person speak in tongues? If yes, they figure that the person has been baptised in the Holy Spirit.
And even leaving aside the fact that such a thing as the "call to preach" is not Scriptural, like at all, how do you figure out whether someone has received that particular second blessing? I keep asking the question. The most common answer would seem to be something like "the elders of your church tell you".

Which leads me to a video hyping the "H"S that Tony Miano put out, in which he reiterates some of the things he and Jeff Rose discussed in a recent podcast and in which he expresses more of this typical "H"S hypocrisy. Note that:

• attendees will listen to lectures for 20 hours, in 3 days. That's almost 7 hours of lecture per day, all in the name of "equipping". (As if anyone can remember a significant % of that amount of lecturing.)
• we should not expect a "caste system". And yet:
  --speakers speak from an elevated stage, from a thing called a "pulpit".
  --the centerpiece of the event is listening to these exalted figures.
  --the main attraction is the names they were able to attract to speak - James White, Earl Blackburn, etc.
  --there will be those who are "called to OAP" and those who aren't.
  --anyone can listen to lectures but only the "called" few get to put it into practice in the primary way that Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles did.
• Miano says that "speakers will speak of their love for the church, love for the bride of Christ, and love for reaching the lost with the Gospel". And I guess they'll demonstrate that by not modeling how the bride of Christ ought to be living, by implying very strongly that the mission of the church is to sit down, shaddup, and listen to Great Men talk, and by not even trying to reach the lost with the Gospel, because...
• there won't be any organised outreach to the lost during the entire duration of the "H"S meeting.
  Miano says, "don't expect a pep rally for OAP. Don't expect a lot of time on the streets. We want to focus on teaching, prayer, worship, the edification of pastors and their churches, and encouraging the bride of Christ to lift up the Gospel."
  So they're going to do that by not spending time on the streets, and by not proclaiming the Gospel, and by staying behind the walls of a church building, in a different city, just like most everyone does when they're at their own church. By not heralding.
  And then when, at the 6-minute mark of the video, Miano exhorts his listeners that "it is time for Christians to get out of the Christian bubble", the irony is intolerable.
• the excuse given for not modeling or training in OAP is because "that's the responsibility of the local church."
  --But teaching theology isn't?
  --People can't sit in pews at their own churches?
  --Wouldn't it be better to spend the time that attendees spent traveling and pew-sitting at the "H"S in deepening relationships at the attendees' own local churches?
  Wouldn't it also be better to put the traveling and lodging money the attendees used for the "H"S event to use at their own local church? Isn't the "H"S actually working opposite to its stated desires?
  --It's not the responsibility of each local church to teach about the Bible and talk about love for the church, bride of Christ, and reaching the lost with the Gospel?
  --It never occurs to the "H"S organisers that most pastors wouldn't have any idea how to train anyone in evangelism, let alone OAP?
  --Or that saying "only called people should OAP" gives a convenient out to anyone who has ulterior motives in not challenging fear or incurring the anger, slander, and scorn of worldly people?

All these things considered, it is entirely unclear why anyone thinks that putting together a "H"S event is a good idea. It is even less clear why anyone would want to attend, apart from the proffered opportunity to, I'm sorry to say it like this but I believe it is largely true, listen to heroes, Great Men, talk from an elevated position so they can consume more information. Because many think to at least some extent that their closeness to God is necessarily directly proportional to how much theology they know.


It seems like a far better name for the Herald Society would be the Pew-Sitter Society. They model during their meetings what they actually want Christians to be when they go back to their own communities and churches - pew-sitters until someone in a more elevated ecclesiastical position gives them permission to go love their neighbor and obey the King.

Millstones

A fellow abolitionist is struggling a bit with the implications of following Jesus and preferring His kingdom over the kingdoms of men, and what it might look like if "elders" in their church should come out in opposition to activities that glorify Jesus in this dark society. Part of the controversy centers around the extrabiblical idea, based solely in traditions of men and therefore falling under the category of millstones tied around necks (Luke 17:2), or heavy burdens tied on shoulders (Matthew 23:4), traditions that make void the Word of God (Mark 7:1-13), that a local church must "send out" or "authorise" the Christian to go obey Jesus.

One excuse they give is expressed this way:
They don't like the idea of a guy who's a lone ranger type out yelling heresy on a street corner.

I have a few reactions to the sentiment they are expressing:

1) Being "sent" or part of a local church doesn't fix that problem. It might help, maybe. Just depends on a case by case basis. But you know what else might help maybe on a case by case basis? One on one taking the corner screamer to the Word of God. If his heart is humble and pliable before God, he'll submit to what the Scripture says. If it's not, the whole church and all the elders in the world won't change his mind and conduct.

2) Would that there were more people willing to stand on a corner and preach, not fewer. Many "elders" want a kabal in which they are some of the few members who get to "preach" (when in fact preaching, biblically speaking, is not what they do. Rather, it's what WE do when we are out in the culture.)


3) I don't see a whole lot of "elders" putting hard and serious thought into what they did and/or are doing to make their church an uncomfortable haven for someone who at the moment is a lone ranger. It may be that this lone ranger preacher holds to heresy and/or is in personal sin. Or it may be that he can't find a church that is being faithful to the Word of God.
It's easy for an "elder" to blame the evangelist guy. It's easy to hate on such a man anyway. He's a radical. He upsets people. He causes bad press to come to the conservative churches of his area.

4) If they're so concerned about that situation, the answer is not to stop people from going out. One possible good answer is to go out with them and help them, guide them. Mr. Elder, if your experience and biblical knowledge and wisdom are so vast, put them to use in something worthwhile (for a change) and help hone and sharpen this person whose zeal will help hone and sharpen you in a way that you need to be honed and sharpened.

"Local church abandoners"

I get pretty disgusted when I hear people say stuff like "nomad" or "local church abandoners", implying that those people's lack of church membership is THE REASON they behave/speak badly.
It's not helpful for a number of reasons.
-There are tons of people who ARE church members who behave/speak badly.
-There are tons of pastors who behave/speak badly.
-There are even more plentiful church members and pastors who don't do ANYthing.
-It may be that the people who lack church membership were mistreated by a church and haven't found another.
-Or it may be that those people haven't found a decent church anywhere, ever.
-Or it may be that those people wanted to practice vital Christianity and tried as a result to get others in their church to practice it with them, which threatened the leadership and ended with their being pushed out the door.
-But that allows "church people" to wave their hands and dismiss anything the church-less person might say. "Well, he's just a nomad." "Wait, you don't have a pastor? Go get one, then come back and talk to me". This is the genetic fallacy in practice.
-Thus "local church membership" becomes a shibboleth. (And "under the authority of a local church" even more so.)
-To say nothing of people like several with whom I've interacted on this very blog, who behave/speak like Pharisees AND are "under the authority of a local church/pastor", which gives them covering in the eyes of many to behave/speak like a Pharisee even though their elders are actually not necessarily OK with their behavior or speech all that much but don't concern themselves enough with their actual spiritual life to intervene. And I bet churches like that are pretty numerous. I myself have been part of several.

In which my tweet about the Herald Society is vindicated

On my "to listen to occasionally" list of podcasts is Tony Miano's "Cross Encounters". I can't remember which episode it was, but some time before the November 2014 Herald Society conference, he spent some time hyping the conference and encouraging listeners to attend. My interest was piqued when he specifically stated that this year's HS conference would not feature very much street evangelism or open air preaching (OAP), but would rather focus on sermons wherein the conference attendees would sit and listen to someone talk from the stage.

This struck me as a bizarre waste of time and energy - could not sermons like these be recorded beforehand, or preached lectured at one's own church or something in some sort of collaborative effort, and later made available for download to whoever wanted them? The whole point of calling your conference the Herald Society would seem to be to get heralds together. You get however many dozens of people interested in OAP, doesn't it make a ton of sense to actually go out and herald the Gospel all over the place?

If an OAPreacher is a candle illuminating darkness within our culture, what happens when you get 50 of those candles together in one place? That much more brightness and illumination, right? So when we read things like Matthew 5...

14“You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; 15nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16“Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.

...wouldn't it be a good idea to go ahead and shine that bright light to those who are in darkness? How is it a good idea to take that light, all those OAPreachers, and hide them behind the walls of a building, using all their time to preach around 20 (probably pretty lengthy) sermons in 2 1/2 days?

Refreshing

It's not often that the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy (Luke 12:1), is so obviously displayed as it was here recently.
Thankfully, abolitionists' attendance of Bellevue Baptist Church on Sunday caused something of a stir, which is one of the things we were hoping for. That the hearts of Pharisees revealed themselves afterward is a bonus.
Consider:

@Fred_Butler @fbc_jd If they're protesting a church that preaches the authentic gospel, then they are wrong to protest.
— Tony Miano (@TonyMiano) November 2, 2014

@Fred_Butler @fbc_jd 150 years ago, it was John Brown. 30 years ago it was Operation Rescue. Today, it's AHA. Same song, different band.
— Tony Miano (@TonyMiano) November 5, 2014

@ABereanOne @fbc_jd @TonyMiano Crickets are a good thing. There's nothing to reconcile, b/c there was no unity to begin with.
— Fred Butler (@Fred_Butler) November 6, 2014

Even through the cold, cruel screen through which you view these words, you can feel the flow of love and warmth, the Christian charity.

Forget all the times we have repeatedly rejected the word "protest" with respect to the Church Repent project. Forget the fact that all we did was attend the service quietly and then afterwards offer pamphlets to people, then when security stepped in and, in a break from their normal pattern, pushed everyone out of the auditorium and called the cops to make us leave even though a simple request would have sufficed, we merely sang "Amazing Grace" and then left. Forget that if we had been there to protest, there would have been zero doubt that we were there to protest! Forget the fact that abolitionists specifically and explicitly reject violence, whereas John Brown didn't. And forget the fact that OR wasn't violent either, and yet Butler's and Miano's pastor looked the other way while a member of his church sent sheriff's deputies to beat the tar out of and break bones of OR volunteers.

Fred Butler did us all the favor of stripping the niceties from this debate. Tony Miano and his acolytes love to talk about "unity in the Gospel", and Butler and others will say the same when they don't dislike you enough. They'll even reach across denominational lines and make sure everyone knows that Presbyterians, Lutherans, Arminians, and such are their brothers in Christ, because we all hold to the same Gospel. But poke at one of their sacred cows - the institutional church structure - and suddenly the false veneer vanishes.

Apparently to them, location matters. You can criticise Bellevue Baptist pastor Steve Gaines all you want for his arch-anti-Calvinism and his crazy support for altar calls and sinner's prayers, as long as you do it from afar. Dare to defile the sacred ground of the church building and suggest that maybe there are false converts inside its walls and that maybe something ought to be done about that, and these Gatekeepers of Evangelical Purity will make sure your backside is smarting.

The Gospel we preach is not fundamentally different. Miano professes faith in the Gospel, and I believe the Gospel. I think there's more unity in the Gospel than these men do. Butler thinks there was no unity to begin with.

But many Pharisees can profess the Gospel quite well. That's part of their charm. It's by their fruits you will know them. Though it may hurt a bit to see people we may admire reveal the sin in their hearts, let it be a helpful reminder that we are not to put our trust in men.

Leaven of the Pharisees - "authority" "sending you out"

A faithful abolitionist and his family sacrificed of his time and energy to warn and preach the truth and the Gospel to attendees of a recent event in his area put on by a Word of Faith heretic.

He then posted some pictures and stories about his experience on Facebook. The following conversation ensued.


Pharisee Disciple: Hmmmm. Still trying to discern the motive here. Are y'all sent out there by a local pastor or any church government or authority?
September 7 at 9:23am

The Abolitionist In Question: The motive is love for God's Church. There are probably some sheep that are going in there that have ears to hear. We are there for them.
As far as being sent: we have King Jesus and all of His commands as authority enough as our dispatch orders.
#ChurchRepent
September 7 at 9:51am

A Former Abolitionist Who Has Ingested the Leaven of the Pharisees: His commands are to love one another assuming we are part of a governing body that He established.
Yesterday at 1:26am

Me: All believers are sent out by the authority of Jesus Christ. No other authority or sending is necessary.
A better question is: Why weren't other Christians and churches out there doing the same?
23 hours ago

Me: Where does the NT say anything about a GOVERNING body?
23 hours ago

AHA Blog: Loving the Church - An Initial Reply to Justin Edwards

If the past is any indication, this will engender some whining on Facebook and zero substantive responses.
http://blog.abolishhumanabortion.com/2014/05/loving-church-initial-reply-to-justin.html

Lemme talk to your elders!

I'd like to call attention to a pattern that I've seen for a while among many in Reformedigelical circles. I've indirectly alluded to it before, such as in my review of Tony Miano's Should She Preach?.
Many in Reformed circles these days default to some variation of "Are you a member of a church? What do your elders think of what you just said?" in Internet encounters, and at times the questioner even demands the name and contact information of the interlocutor's elders so as to circumvent the issue under debate, to contact the elders directly, rather than dealing with the interlocutor himself. This turn of events is quite unhelpful, is intellectually dishonest, and displays a very unhealthy view of elder authority. Let me provide two examples of what I mean below the fold.

A public call to repentance of calling people to repent publicly

I'm not sure how this makes much sense. I'm not sure how deeply the author (either Marcus Pittman or Jon Speed) thought about the statement. I'm not sure how deep runs the foolishness, but I know that after months and months of plumbing the depths, we haven't found the bottom yet.

Now we're deleting comments. We have received your response, AHA leaders. We urge you to repent of "Church Repent." When you have done that and are in good standing with your respective local churches...we will talk. Until then...please take the hint and stop commenting here.

(source) (screenshot)

So, let me get this straight. This is a public statement, made by one professing Christian who is a member of a different local church than the persons the author is addressing, to other professing Christians, calling them to repent of and stop calling members of a different local church than the persons the author is addressing to repentance over perceived sin.

In other words, they're publicly calling me to repent of publicly calling people to repent.

Sometimes...just, what do you say anymore?

Really, since that statement makes no sense, Christians who love God with all their mind should publicly call the Gospel Spam guys to repent of publicly calling to repentance Christians who publicly call professing Christians to repentance.

Why Damon Rambo is Acting Like a Pharisee

---------------------------
UPDATE, 10 March 2017: 
Damon Rambo has made a public statement that looks mostly like repentance, so let's be gracious and give him credit for it. Combined with the fact that he has deleted the posts on his blog to which my own blogposts refer, I am noting the facts here in this update so that all may be informed of the current situation. Note that he has not taken down any comments on other blogs such as Gospel Spam, which probably means he has not done as rigorous and thorough a job of scrubbing his slanderous and wicked comments as I would ask if I had opportunity. Thus, my own posts will remain public and all links will point to Archive.org records of his posts until further notice. 
---------------------------

So Damon Rambo wonders why I deploy the "P" word regarding him.

What sort of extra-biblical, fundamentalist, outlandish rule have I invented? I dared to say that all Christians should be a part of a church, with a recognized membership, and at least one proper recognized and called pastor/elder. I have insisted that those who refuse the local church and its discipleship, fellowship and authority, are living in sin.

But that's not the problem here. He has misunderstood the objection. Let me try to clarify.

Here is his exact quote from before:

Such people are in grievous sin, and until that sin is repented of, further fellowship, discussion, and hashing out of differences cannot be had. Those who deliberately reject the visible expression of Christ's Bride must be excommunicated from any secondary fellowship, until such time as the Lord brings them to repentance.

Emphasis mine.
Look, I disagree that the people in question are in sin. Is Rambo willing to list postmillennialists, continuationists, Presbyterians, or Arminians as being in sin? Maybe he does; I'm just asking. Is he willing to say the same thing about them? Will he excommunicate Marcus Pittman for being Presbyterian and postmillennial? That's two areas in which Rambo disagrees with him.
If not, is he being consistent? What in the Scripture leads him to the conclusion that not having elders at one's church for the moment is something for which we should consider the offender damned and heretical? That's what excommunication is for, after all. It's way past saying "I disagree". We know Rambo disagrees. Disagreements happen all over the place about all sorts of issues. But we are not to excommunicate for minor issues. What is his argument that this differing ecclesiology jumps over the heresy fence? He didn't give one. But the thing is, if you're going to kick professing brethren out and deny them your fellowship, you need to have an argument.

That's why Rambo is a Pharisee - he is imposing this small issue on the conscience of other believers without the benefit of an argument, and in fact directly against what the New Testament teaches.
Who appointed Martin Luther? Zwingli? Calvin? Did they have elders?
Athanasius was removed from his bishopric several times and exiled, yet came back. Does Rambo have some evidence that another elder came alongside and re-appointed him? Does excommunication not mean anything? If church structures are only to be followed in some cases, where is Rambo's definition and explanation?
Acts 11:19-25 - Barnabas goes and helps preach the Gospel in Antioch, and yet doesn't stay to establish elders. Rather, he leaves to look for Paul. And yet there comes to be a church in Antioch (as soon as Acts 15:30). How?
Acts 13:44-52 - Paul and Barnabas are driven out of Pisidian Antioch after only about a week.
According to the qualifications for elders in Titus 1 and 1 Timothy 3, an elder can't be a new convert. I suppose we are to assume that no church existed in Pisidian Antioch at that time? Just... a ragtag bunch of people who loved Jesus?
Acts 17:32-18:1 - Paul sees converts in Athens but doesn't stay to train any elders.
The Epistle to Titus - Paul sends Titus to Crete to appoint elders in all the churches. There were churches there. They didn't have elders. Titus was supposed to appoint some. In the churches that already existed. Even though they didn't have elders at the time.

So that is what Rambo has done to deserve the label "Pharisee".

A few more comments on his article:
Its (sic) hard to throw people out of a group (1 Corinthians 5, Matthew 18) that is just a bunch of people hanging out in a field

1) Elders are not mentioned or even implied to be involved in any special or necessary sense in either of these passages.
2) How did Rambo get from the fact that this one local church in question doesn't have elders at the moment to "just a bunch of people hanging out in a field"? He does not inform us.


Wielding the story of the Good Samaritan like a club, the leadership of AHA insist that they are right, others are wrong...which they wield clumsily like a child swinging a sword

1) But is not Rambo "wielding" the NT passages about elders "like a club" or "like a sword"? Why is it so bad to try to persuade others, or defend one's church against divisive criticisms like that in which Rambo has heartily participated in recent months?
2) Of course we think we are right. Yet we remain open to biblical correction. Does Rambo think we ought to hold to positions we think are wrong? I don't understand the problem here.
3) Are these the words of someone who put a great deal of thought into his article?


any church that does not do exactly what they say in regards to abortion are in sinful rebellion and in need of repentance...ONLY abortion ministry matters

1) This is mistaken on his part. He does not understand the ideology, and I suspect it is b/c he has not done his homework.
2) Is it not true to say that any church that does not do exactly what Rambo says in regards to elder rule is in sinful rebellion and in need of repentance, in his mind?
3) Yet have abolitionists excommunicated anyone in that situation? No. Has Rambo, for his part? Yes.


Abolish Human Abortion calls out, pickets, and dare I say ATTACKS...pro-life churches

1) I don't know why Rambo is defending LifeChurch.tv.
2) It would be nice if he would explain how calls to repentance and exhortation are "attacks". Is this not merely his prejudiced language?


(Perhaps in order to stay in AHA's good graces, you need to purchase their materials? Just asking).

Accusations unbecoming of a pastor. Very unfair of him to say such a thing.


The abolitionist who gets in his car and drives two hours, past stranded motorists, nursing homes full of elderly patients

1) Rambo mistakenly believes that abolitionists think that going to the abortion mill is the way abortion is to be abolished. He is mistaken. It's probably because, again, he is ignorant. Sadly, he seems unwilling to learn what we actually believe.
2) Is it legal and culturally accepted to murder stranded motorists and nursing home residents en masse? Are 3500 of those kinds of people being murdered by their mothers and fathers every day?
3) For my part, if I were on my way to the abortuary and saw a stranded motorist, I would stop to help. Is Rambo being charitable and fair here?


There is only one litmus test for the health of a church, and that is the Gospel.

Preaching the correct Gospel correctly is a necessary condition for a healthy church but it is far from the sole sufficient condition. Holy living, non-heretical views on the Trinity and Christology, pastors that don't fleece the flock and such... these kinds of things also have a very large impact on the health of a church.


you understand that ANY proclamation of the Gospel is a blow against abortion

Agreed. Which is why we wish Rambo would turn his critical attention to the vastly compromised pro-life movement, who show that they do not agree with this statement with every action they take.


Not the Gospel plus abortion ministry done in accordance with AHA's extrabiblical requirements.

Another unfair characterisation of abolitionists' views.


And the Gospel is to be ministered through the local Church.

1) What does this mean?
2) I suspect we will wait in vain for him to argue for whatever his position means from Scripture.

Abolitionist ecclesiology

It should be noted that not all abolitionists agree on EVERY SINGLE FINE POINT of ecclesiology.
Kinda like single-pastor Baptists don't agree with plural-elder Baptists don't agree with Presbyterians, etc. Yet somehow the two latter groups work closely, make documentaries, street preach together and all that kind of stuff. Hmmm. Why are Damon Rambo and his friends so quick to dissociate from abolitionists?

Abolitionists do tend closely to one ecclesiological point, however - we reject quasi-papism such as the type that Speed, Pittman, Miano, and Rambo represent. Take that to the bank.

Damon Rambo makes more of a hash of Scripture

---------------------------
UPDATE, 10 March 2017: 
Damon Rambo has made a public statement that looks mostly like repentance, so let's be gracious and give him credit for it. Combined with the fact that he has deleted the posts on his blog to which my own blogposts refer, I am noting the facts here in this update so that all may be informed of the current situation. Note that he has not taken down any comments on other blogs such as Gospel Spam, which probably means he has not done as rigorous and thorough a job of scrubbing his slanderous and wicked comments as I would ask if I had opportunity. Thus, my own posts will remain public and all links will point to Archive.org records of his posts until further notice. 
---------------------------

Damon Rambo, a pastor in Texas whom we've seen before around here, decided to add his ever so helpful thoughts to the comment box of Tony Miano's hit piece at Gospel Spam. It would appear that the "Angry Pastor" not only pastors angry, but blogs angry too.

I am not sure why Tony "exited the conversation" but I can say for myself that the first question out of my mouth would have been "Are you preaching under the accountability of a local church, with established elder(s) and a recognized membership." If he said "no," the conversation would have ended right there. Such people are in grievous sin, and until that sin is repented of, further fellowship, discussion, and hashing out of differences cannot be had. Those who deliberately reject the visible expression of Christ's Bride must be excommunicated from any secondary fellowship, until such time as the Lord brings them to repentance.

To give a little background as to what he means, a few good brothers in the Lord have attempted to kick-start reconciliation talks between the Babies Are Murdered Here / Street Preacher Guild / Gospel Spam / quasi-papist / anti-Church Repent and therefore pro-Church Apathy / Pharisee crowd, among whom Rambo evidently prefers to be numbered, and abolitionists against whom the aforementioned Pharisees have sinned in numerous ways. I was party to one of these attempts; the brother started a group Facebook chat which included three abolitionists and three anti-abolitionist antagonists, and posted therein an impassioned plea for a beginning to reconciliation and cessation of social media hostilities. Marcus Pittman left the chat within thirty seconds of the appearance of the chat. Tony Miano exited a couple of minutes later after stating to the organiser of the chat that he'd talk to him privately.

 

Anyway, from the screenshots and the way that the various sides are talking, it should be clear to any objective observer who is open to God-honoring reconciliation and who is not, who wants to engage in serious discussion exposed to the light of truth, and who wants to cut off discussion and debate.

Damon Rambo, according to his own words here, is another Pharisee who would impose an extra-biblical standard upon others. Here, he lets us know in no uncertain terms that he would have excommunicated Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli, as well as any believers who dared to speak the Gospel to someone else before the apostles appointed elders in their local church in Acts 11:19-25, Acts 13:44-52, and Acts 17:32-18:1, to say nothing of Philip the evangelist who was just sort of wandering around when the Holy Spirit directed him to evangelise the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8, to say still less of the eunuch himself when he went back to his homeland and shared the Gospel with people there. If only Rambo had been around back then! The NT church would have been so much better organised and godly.

As a matter of fact, Toby's church is between elders at the moment. Rambo doesn't know the history of the church, doesn't know what they think about elders or whether they want elders. Why? Because he hasn't even cared enough to ask. He prefers to lob his tirades from afar, uncaring of the effect his dismissal has on the reader. This is not conduct conducive to demonstrating the NT qualifications of elder. Would the Apostle Paul be OK with blogging under the title "The Angry Pastor" or "The Angry Apostle"? Why doesn't 2 Timothy 4:1-2 read like the following?

I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be angry in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great anger and hot-temperedness.

I feel genuinely sorry for the congregation at his church, but then again, his expressions are probably not nearly as evil in person as they are online. It's a learned skill, to be sure. One would think a pastor could manage it. But in my experience, churches usually deserve the kind of pastor they have, which is also a pretty sad thing.

He also speaks out of ignorance when he implies that Toby's church lacks recognised membership. He doesn't know that either. He has no idea what sort of accountability structures are in place there. Notice that to him, "under the accountability of a local church" is code for "elders". When these men say "submitted to the authority of a local church" or something similar, what they have in mind is one or more elders who do what the Lord Jesus and the Apostle Peter said they should not do - lord it over their people.

I find it quite interesting that Rambo, as a Baptist, thinks that dissent from his preferred ecclesiology is "grievous sin", for which one ought to be excommunicated and for which reason one ought not to cooperate on any level of Christian service or ministry. Why doesn't he say the same things about Marcus Pittman, a Presbyterian, again? Where is the consistency?

Who said anything about Toby or any abolitionist "deliberately reject(ing) the visible expression of Christ's Bride"? Does he think that Toby is not a member of his church? What does he know about that church? He doesn't know anything. Apparently, dissent from his preferred ecclesiology is equivalent to deliberate rejection of Christ's Bride. Needless to say, this is an enormous accusation. Can Rambo substantiate it from Scripture? He hasn't yet. Can he show that holding to a differing ecclesiology merits the same treatment as one would show to a material heretic and an unrepentant sexually immoral professing brother? If he can't (and let's be clear - he can't), is Damon Rambo not acting as a Pharisee?

Philippians 1:12-18 -

Now I want you to know, brethren, that my circumstances have turned out for the greater progress of the gospel, so that my imprisonment in the cause of Christ has become well known throughout the whole praetorian guard and to everyone else, and that most of the brethren, trusting in the Lord because of my imprisonment, have far more courage to speak the word of God without fear. Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice.

The false ecclesiology of Gospel Spam

...as represented by one Larry Bray, a contributor to the Gospel Spam blog.
See if you can count how many challenges and rebuttals he leaves unanswered or simply dismisses and ignores. This is the prevalent attitude with these quasi-papists.

• Larry Bray Toby Harmon, you go out preaching the gospel....and yet you are not an Elder...please show me in Scripture where someone other than an Elder is called to preach.

  March 27 at 12:32pm · Like
• 

  Larry Bray If God has appointed Elders for His Church...and if Elders are to "oversee" the things of the Church, then how can you justify not having Elders in your church?

  March 27 at 12:34pm · Like
• 

  Venchenza Settles Hey Larry Bray, I'm out at the mills sharing the Gospel with women who came to kill their child. Because I'm not an elder (which is not biblical in anyway shape or form....) does that mean I shouldn't be doing that? I'm asking...

  March 27 at 12:35pm · Like · 1
• 

  Larry Bray The great commission was not given to the general disciples of Christ but to the Apostles only. This is evidence enough that all Christians are not called to preach.

  March 27 at 12:35pm · Like
• 

  Larry Bray Venchenza Settles, all are called to share the Gospel, but that is much different from preaching.

  March 27 at 12:35pm · Like
• 

  Rho Logy Larry Bray,
  
  With all due respect, brother, please let me correct these things.
  
  \\Scripture says that we ought not cease from preaching: Act 5:42 And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they did not cease teaching and preaching that the Christ is Jesus.\\
  
  Citing what happenED in Acts as a prescription for today is an exegetical fallacy.
  
  \\Toby's church says that they have no Elders or Deacons:\\
  
  They don't have one NOW. They DID until that elder admitted he was unfit and left the church.
  There were three churches and other examples in Acts that didn't have elders, too.
  
  \\Scripture says that we are to have elders in every church:
  Tit 1:5 This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you--\\
  
  But don't you see that you need to prove that Paul meant to talk to everyone and not just Titus in that?
  
  \\A true Church has historically been defined as one that\\
  
  With all due respect, was the church at Laodicaea a true or false church?
  Why does Jesus call them a true church?
  Also, push back 500 years - someone could have told Martin Luther that "A true Church has historically been defined as one that submits to the Pope" or something.
  
  \\It is impossible to rightly preach the word if they have no sermons and no Elders to preach.\\
  
  But how do you know that?
  
  \\It is impossible to rightly carry out discipline when there is no ecclesiastical authority invested in the Elders.\\
  
  Elders are mentioned ZERO times in all of the NT's church discipline passages.
  ZERO.
  
  \\And it is impossible to rightly administer the sacraments apart from Elders administering them.\\
  
  Please demonstrate from the NT that the sacraments were ONLY administered by elders.
  Why did Philip baptise the eunuch in Acts 8? He was a proto-deacon.
  
  \\The great commission was not given to the general disciples of Christ but to the Apostles only. This is evidence enough that all Christians are not called to preach.\\
  
  That is not true.
  Look at Luke 24. It was more than the apostles.
  Acts 1 - same deal.
  Also, the apostles are all dead. You don't believe in apostolic succession, do you?
  
  \\This is evidence enough that all Christians are not called to preach.\\
  
  What does "called" mean, here, and what NT passages use that language that way?

  March 27 at 12:38pm · Like · 1

  
  

First Blood

---------------------------
UPDATE, 10 March 2017: 
Damon Rambo has made a public statement that looks mostly like repentance, so let's be gracious and give him credit for it. Combined with the fact that he has deleted the posts on his blog to which my own blogposts refer, I am noting the facts here in this update so that all may be informed of the current situation. Note that he has not taken down any comments on other blogs such as Gospel Spam, which probably means he has not done as rigorous and thorough a job of scrubbing his slanderous and wicked comments as I would ask if I had opportunity. Thus, my own posts will remain public and all links will point to Archive.org records of his posts until further notice. 
---------------------------

Damon Rambo is certainly doing his part to live out the title of his blog ("The Angry Pastor Blog"). The target of a recent hatchet job based almost entirely on ignorance, hearsay, unrighteous judgment, and poor reading comprehension is Abolish Human Abortion.

Apparently we're "rogue evangelists" and other unsavory labels.

The conversation continues in his combox, but I'll reproduce below the fold the comments so far, minus a string he deleted, which he says he did because they were redundant, which is not true of all of the content, but we can give him the benefit of the doubt if he leaves the other comments unmolested.

BAMH

Please see here the notes concerning the ongoing hypocrisy of Marcus Pittman, Jon Speed, and the Babies Are Murdered Here group.

"Where is the church?"

There are those who oppose the ChurchRepent project, such as those men behind "Babies Are Murdered Here". In the first part of the trailer, you can see one of them preaching "I'm talking about the church! Where  is the church?" I guess he's  just like "Where is the church? What? They don't want to do anything? OK, never mind!"

We actually want to love the churches of America, however, and plead with them to repent if they are in sin. Turns out that they are, by and large. So, the loving thing to do would be to go to them and show them enough love to try to turn them to holiness, to the graces and blessings of Jesus Christ. If they resist at first, we're still willing to try to help.  The men of BAMH and those who agree with them want, I guess, to retreat and just do their own thing at that point, and chuck mud at those more loving than they.

I posted this video from the admin account at the Abolish Human Abortion FB page and a pastor started to engage on it. The discussion that followed is instructive, so I reproduce it here.

• Jeremy Lundmark If I may, and I don't have to, Jon Speed is a pastor... and has the authority to call upon his church to move in this area and has every right (biblically) to point to the rest of the church's apathy to bring his church under conviction in this area.AHA has no such authority. If AHA members want to connect to local assemblies, become members, and call their fellow brothers and sisters to repentance in that local assembly... fine... but you have no authority over the local church.
  
  If the AHA can provide Scripture that demonstrates that the church and it's leadership should be submitted to an organization called "AHA" then by all means we'll submit. Until then, I believe the Scriptures still say that believers are to be under the authority of a local assembly and its leadership. For better for worse, that's what Christ has ordained... not the "AHA" or any other "parachurch" organization.

  16 hours ago · Like · 4
• 

  Abolish Human Abortion It is not at all about authority or submitting. It is about following the two greatest commandments. Love God, love neighbor. Are we not allowed to proclaim the message of Christ himself to anyone and everyone?

  16 hours ago via mobile · Like · 3
• 

  Rho Logy \\has the authority to call upon his church\\
  
  Biblically speaking, Pastor =/= priest. Pastors have authority insofar as they accurately teach the Word of God. He has authority to call his church to obey Jesus. If he's wrong, his authority is irrelevant 'cause he doesn't have any.
  
  \\AHA has no such authority\\
  
  http://churchrepent.com/objection-4
  
  \\ If AHA members want to connect to local assemblies, become members, and call their fellow brothers and sisters to repentance in that local assembly... fine... but you have no authority over the local church. \\
  
  You are why we created www.churchrepent.com I pray you'll read and be edified. I am being 100% sincere.
  
  \\If the AHA can provide Scripture that demonstrates that the church and it's leadership should be submitted to an organization called "AHA"\\
  
  You've got us all wrong. Read our website.
  
  \\ I believe the Scriptures still say that believers are to be under the authority of a local assembly and its leadership. \\
  
  We've never denied that.
  
  \\For better for worse, that's what Christ has ordained... not the "AHA" or any other "parachurch" organization.\\
  
  http://churchrepent.com/objection-7
  

  
  

  
  

  16 hours ago · Like · 4 ·
  
• 

  Zandra Abolitionist Westchurch I'll add that certain people are more concerned about their "image" than doing God's work. I'll be happy to spell it out, if need be.

  16 hours ago · Like · 3
• 

  Christina Harrhof Our clinic escorts have mentioned in a post that they are aware of at least one of these pages. It sure would be nice if all disagreements could be taken privately, instead of battled out in front of unbelievers. Just a thought.

  16 hours ago · Like · 1
• 

  Casie Kyle Death escorts opinions shouldn't matter. They participate in murder after all. Just my opinion.

  16 hours ago via mobile · Like
• 

  Christina Harrhof Yes, Casie Kyle, I don't have a high view of the escort's opinions either; however, I was just using them as an example of all the unbelievers who are watching these pages -- some of whom we are personally evangelizing. I'm not sure if it reflects well on believers as a whole to have so many public squabbles -- although I agree with some of the concerns presented and think it is good and right to discuss them privately.

  16 hours ago · Like
• 

  Jeremy Lundmark "Are we not allowed to proclaim the message of Christ himself to anyone and everyone?"
  
  You can... but in order to be consistent (ie Biblical) you're supposed to submitted to a local assembly that has an authority structure of some kind. If your in an organization that is telling your church what to do... you're not submitting to the authority that the Scriptures call you to submit to (we call that a catch-22)
  
  @Rho- I may have you all wrong... but AHA is all wrong to grab a 5 second clip, and say a man is on board with something, when in fact he has explicitly stated numerous times... that he is not. That's lying first, undermining a brother, second, and making a mockery of an established Church's leader who, in fact, does what you guys do, third. So, whatever AHA is doing, what it has done here is deplorable and self defeating.
  
  You're correct that I don't know much about AHA, in fact I've only encountered it in conjunction with Babies are Murdered here. The reason I don't align with either, yet, is because of this very issue. If there is no respect at all for church authority, I'll have nothing to do with it. That goes for Bible Colleges, Missions agencies, and the like.
  
  All of these organizations are finished if they detach themselves from the local assembly, or worse, tell themselves they have authority over the local church. As a pastor of a local church myself, it took me a long time to learn that Christ wants to accomplish his purposes through his church... not through parachurch organizations. Insofar as AHA is connected to local assemblies it will thrive... if it detaches... it may accomplish a purpose... maybe even a good purpose... but it won't be God's purpose.
  
  I would prefer to see AHA and BAMH close down, and be run from a local assembly. Not sure why either of these organizations exist separate from the local church. Not my place to judge... I ran a parachurch organization for 3 years and closed it down for this very reason. God will get his glory, through his church... how that plays out... We'll watch and see.

  16 hours ago · Like · 2
• 

  Luis Fernando Zapata God can used anything or any one to rebuke his church.Numbers 22:28 And Jehovah opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?

  16 hours ago · Like · 2
• 

  Abolish Human Abortion Jeremy Lundmark, you don't understand us enough to be a critic of us.
  
  We have stated a million times that all we want to do is spread an ideology of abolition and that each local abolitionist society is to be autonomous from AHA (only unified in ideology) and under the authority of their local leaders who are active members of local bodies with pastors, evangelists, teachers, preachers, etc etc etc.
  
  AHA also has stated many times that we should not have to exist and that our primary interest is to see the abolitionist movement led by local church bodies and pastors. Please read the website, church repent.com

  13 hours ago · Like · 4
• 

  Casie Kyle If they are not against us, they are for us. Paraphrase of what Jesus said to the apostles about another guy.

  13 hours ago via mobile · Like
• 

  Abolish Human Abortion // I would prefer to see AHA...close down.//
  
  Wow us too! I think it was said several times at our conference this weekend. We want to see the Church (the Bride of Christ, the invisible Church which you are conflating as the visible local institutions we call churches) step up and lead the charge to abolish human abortion. They are not doing so and seem to be content with not doing so. Hence why we stood sat for long hours in hard pews the last couple days and all have sunburns today from being out pleading with them to do so. Right on! We hope the church will do this and we are pledging to help them.

  13 hours ago via mobile · Like · 2
• 

  Jeremy Lundmark //I think it was said several times at our conference this weekend. We want to see the Church step up and lead the charge to abolish human abortion.//
  
  So... close it. If that's what you guys want... file for dissolution.
  
  //We have stated a million times that all we want to do is spread an ideology of abolition//
  
  That's your mission, not the mission of the church. We're called to make disciples of Christ... not abolitionists.
  
  //AHA also has stated many times that we should not have to exist and that our primary interest is to see the abolitionist movement led by local church bodies and pastors... Right on! We hope the church will do this and we are pledging to help them.//
  
  O.k. If any of that is true... dissolve AHA. It's a simple form of dissolution you file to the state. Call on those who are a part of your organization/ministry to go and do what their doing in and through their local churches.
  
  What boggles my mind about groups like yours (which I've been a part of before just with different causes) is that you all consolidate together to lament the failures of the local church... which you're supposed to be active in and a part of. If the local church is failing on this front... your to blame because you're a part of it.
  
  //the invisible Church which you are conflating as the visible local institutions we call churches//
  
  The Bible speaks of no such thing as the "invisible" church. An invisible church is a non-existent church. Every believer is visible, and is expected by Scripture to be under the authority, or a part of the authority, of a visible local assembly.

  12 hours ago · Edited · Like
• 

  Jeremy Lundmark One final note...
  
  None of this justifies AHA's initial post here on an individual brother and pastor of a local assembly. I'm not sure on what grounds AHA (in it's seemingly harmless desire to create abolitionists and respect the authority of the church) it misrepresents and mocks a fellow brother and a pastor.
  
  I don't need to know much about the organization to know, that if it says it respects leaders, and then disrespects one... that it's playing games.

  12 hours ago · Edited · Like
• 

  Jeremy Lundmark @Luis... just saw your comment. God can do anything... that doesn't mean he's doing everything you think he is.

  12 hours ago · Like
• 

  Jeremy Lundmark Out of Curiosity... how many churches would you guys say are represented under the AHA banner? Why don't all of those churches come together and call on the rest of the church to take a stand on the abortion issue. At least then the authority structure would be Biblical.
  
  If I did everything every parachurch organization wanted me to do... I'd never have time to do what God has called me to do.

  12 hours ago · Like
• 

  Abolish Human Abortion Jeremy Lundmark, we don't see loving our neighbors as something that a para-ministry is supposed to do and that only some church bodies do.
  
  You really need to read up on what it is that we actually think, say, and do. Take the plank out of your eye, read our website, and then, if you see any specks, we will gladly let you remove them.

  11 hours ago · Like · 2
• 

  Luis Fernando Zapata Most of the churches forgot that the body of chirst is a body composed with many members not 2 or three there is apostles prophets evangelist pastor and teachers to building the church, and one gift that men can't control is the gift of prophecy, when the others ministries got loss them God bring for this, don't forget what HE SAID MY THOUGH ARE NOT YOUR THOUGHS.

  3 hours ago via mobile · Like
• 

  Rho Logy Jeremy Lundmark
  
  Hi Jeremy,
  
  First of all, I want to say that I am glad to see you thinking about all this stuff. You are the kind of guy whom God will use to abolish human abortion. You are a pastor. Get your church involved in getting other churches involved, is my encouragement. I do have a few responses to some comments you've made, though.
  
  \\If that's what you guys want... file for dissolution.\\
  
  We wish we could. Not yet, though - there is far too much apathy in the American church to do that. If churches are not rising up to do the work, individual believers must do so. It's far better than leaving the work undone just b/c you don't think that we have a "biblical authority structure".
  Thing is, you can't demonstrate that the authority structure you think is biblical is actually biblical. I challenge you to do so. Show us all where the Scripture says:
  1) "laymen" can't rebuke pastors when they are in sin
  2) one has to be ordained by one's elders to call out sin in others when it is clearly observed.
  Good luck!
  
  \\We're called to make disciples of Christ... not abolitionists.\\
  
  You're creating a dichotomy where none exists. It's probably b/c you don't actually understand our ideology. i encourage you to do some more reading.
  http://blog.abolishhumanabortion.com/2013/05/a-response-to-babies-are-murdered-here.html
  http://blog.abolishhumanabortion.com/search/label/Michael%20Coughlin
  http://blog.abolishhumanabortion.com/search/label/Ed%20Dingess
  
  \\ in and through their local churches.\\
  
  We *are* doing that. And we are *also* calling on other local churches to repent of their apathy and lead the way so that AHA can dissolve.
  
  \\ groups like yours (which I've been a part of before just with different causes)\\
  
  No disrespect intended, but you show little indication you understand our ideology, so I don't know that you are in a position to say that you've been in groups like us before.
  
  \\lament the failures of the local church... which you're supposed to be active in and a part of\\
  
  1) We're doing more than lamenting those failures. We're doing something about them.
  2) We ARE active in local churches.
  
  \\ If the local church is failing on this front... your to blame because you're a part of it. \\
  
  And we are repenting of that and trying to bear fruit in keeping with repentance. You're throwing dirt on our fire when you should be rising up yourself and examining yourself for apathy.
  Notice that I'm not accusing you, but you are accusing us. I am inviting you to examine yourself. You're wrongly pretending you've already examined us a lot.
  
  \\The Bible speaks of no such thing as the "invisible" church. \\
  
  It teaches the concept. Just like the Bible speaks of no such thing as the "visible" church. The words "visible church" do not appear in the Bible.
  The *concept* is taught.
  What church was Martin Luther a part of in 1520?
  
  \\ An invisible church is a non-existent church.\\
  
  This would seem to be an attempt at a pithy one-liner, but it misses the point. The invisible church is all the redeemed of Jesus.
  
  \\Every believer is visible\\
  
  You mean you see like images of crosses on the foreheads of believers, or halos or something? What do you mean?
  
  \\is expected by Scripture to be under the authority, or a part of the authority, of a visible local assembly.\\
  
  Yes, of course. We don't disagree. We do want to qualify the terminology, however. "Authority" in this case doesn't mean that the pastor is above examination by God's Word, nor infallible. Pastors have no authority unless they teach the Word of God. So saying "authority" is really a buzzword in modern Reformedigelicalism, and it needs to be much better understood biblically. Right now it's largely understood in the context of human tradition.
  
  \\None of this justifies AHA's initial post here on an individual brother and pastor of a local assembly\\
  
  You think he's a brother. We have our doubts, given his behavior.
  You also seem to think that it's better to criticise someone who has called out sinful behavior in a professing brother. You should check that in the SCripture again. It's loving to try to restore a sinning brother to the truth, to follow Jesus without sin.
  You, by coddling him and pretending his sin doesn't exist, are actually the one treating him in an unloving way. He needs to repent.
  
  \\ it misrepresents and mocks a fellow brother and a pastor.\\
  
  How precisely did we misrep or mock him? We're just quoting him.
  
  \\how many churches would you guys say are represented under the AHA banner? \\
  
  I don't know what "the AHA banner" means.
  
  \\Why don't all of those churches come together and call on the rest of the church to take a stand on the abortion issue.\\
  
  We would love it if yours would be the first. And I'm being 100% sincere. Until that happens, our role is necessary.
  
  \\At least then the authority structure would be Biblical.\\
  
  Flesh this out with Scripture. What are you talking about? Where does the Scripture talk about individual local churches joining together and what the authority structure in that case looks like and what it's supposed to look like?
  
  \\If I did everything every parachurch organization wanted me to do... I'd never have time to do what God has called me to do.\\
  
  Do what the BIble says, then, and forget "parachurch orgs".
  http://churchrepent.com/child-sacrifice/
  
  Don't hide behind "authority" like a Pope.