Let's take just the briefest break from looking at Mary in the Bible, and venture on over once more to the False Witness Union. They have evidently seen, and responded, to my letter...and I wish I could say that the results surprised me somewhat. Alas, they did not. But I feel I should mention that I had earnestly hoped to feel at least a measure of surprise, as much as I had earnestly hoped to find people genuinely concerned not only about the Great Commission -- to which all Christians are called -- but also about things like seeking out the lost lambs, and the exhortation in 1 John 5 to correct those brothers and sisters in Christ whom we believe have fallen into error.

My letter ended with a fairly simple question:

This letter, then, stands as an open invitation from myself to the various members of the CWU who have a passion for evangelism. Obviously, they feel that the CU is peopled with lost, misguided Christians...which would make for a great opportunity for evangelism, would it not? Does not Christ desire the lost lambs to be returned to the fold?

Or is it more important, and more entertaining, to muse about how quickly a thread that has denegerated into a shouting match was locked? Is it more fun to plot occasions of spamming? To test the patience of moderators? To drive an even bigger wedge between people who are likely hurting, in many terrible and intrinsic ways, and the love of Christ?

Just for the sake of providing some evidence for what I say, let's examine the latest "evangelistic" effort that is underway. The discussion about the existence of good and evil begins well enough, but by the time it gets to its 8th page (which, it should be noted, it reached rather quickly -- within 2 hours, in fact) there is already a shouting match beginning to emerge...people are at loggerheads. By the end, it's essentially devolved into a back and forth game of "you said; no you said" and "you're wrong; no you're wrong."

I'm not sure how gainsaying and causing people to talk past each other, rather than listen to each other, serves or gives glory to Christ. If someone can enlighten me as to how, the comments form is always open.

But let's examine the responses to my letter, shall we? I addressed the initial response to it in this blog post, so we'll avoid needless duplication and move on to the next response, which (incidentally) seems to be the only voice of reason in the mix.

He does have a point about most of us not posting on the CU. Aren't they worth our time as well?

This was my only point.

Pace Londo Molari, I was there when the BBU formed, and I watched very closely when the CWU formed. I get that these two unions were basically founded by people who, for one reason or another, were disgruntled about the Christian Union -- they'd had falling outs with the members and/or the leadership there, or (as was the case for me) had been (automatically*) booted out in the aftermath of a particularly nasty, heavily moderated debate.

But equally: who cares? I was bitter toward the CU, and they welcomed me back. Others have likewise returned, and been welcomed back. That's not to say that we all agree -- but then, there are something like 30,000 Christian denominations. If you put two Christians of the same denomination (or non-denomination) in the same room for a long enough period, they'll probably find some point of theology about which they disagree. Historically, the Church has proven adept at nearly tearing itself apart over individual vowels in the middle of words. It's only natural that if you have an internet forum open to all Christians, you'll see discussions emerge there in which people disagree.

The Internet is not an echo chamber. Neither is the CU. Nor could it be, unless the leader and officers were willing to be heavily (read: unreasonably) restrictive about who can join. As it is, though, we're not; if you apply, we'll let you in (unless the Admin panel throws some kind of error at us, such as a "too many unions" warning). We don't do background checks!

I can't join the CWU. I don't conform to every tenet of their statement of faith -- specifically, I don't think the Earth is only 6,000 years old, and I don't accept a 66-book canon as being the complete canon of Scripture. I've tried to join the CWU at least half a dozen times, and kept getting rejected. Finally, I asked the union leader directly if I was being specifically disallowed from joining.

His answer: Yes.

Anyhow, let's work our way back to the point, O Reader. The CWU, like the BBU before it, emerged out of disagreements between the founding members of both unions and some people in the CU (not all of whom have posted there in recent weeks). When the members of the CWU deign to discuss the CU, the general conclusion seems to be that it is principally peopled with liberal/lapsed/marginal Christians, along with a few "true believers" who are quickly shouted down if they say anything out of line.

Which is kind of funny, given the "warm" reception a Mormon just got in the CWU "welcome" thread.

And as I noted, it is true that not everyone on the CU agrees with what anyone else might say. But again...there are 30,000 Christian denominations. The Church didn't get to that point because we all agree with each other at every turn.

And at the end of the day, the issue I was raising, which one person on the CWU actually noticed, comes down to 1 John 5:16-17

[16] If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that.
[17] All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.

If the members of the CWU a) honestly believe John, and b) honestly believe that even a minority of the members of the CU are lost/misguided/lapsed in Christ, they are obligated to speak out against that directly, for if any sin is mortal, surely the rejection of Christ is it, is it not?

Apparently, for noting as much, I have "motives":

If you cannot see his through his motives as to why he wants members from other Christian unions, specifically this union, to post on the CU, you have less discernment than I thought you had.

Notice what has happened here. The poster of this statement actually commits two separate acts of ad hominem -- one against me, and one against the person who suggested that there might be something to the question I had posed (as noted above).

It gets better:

Do you really think that he, as prideful as he is, is really serious when he uses the false premise, he created, that the CU needs evangelizing? If he really believes that then I ask, why doesn't he do it hinself since he is an officer of that union? If he was serious and that was a valid concern of his, don't you think he would be the first to put forth that effort? It it quite obvious that he is just using that false premise to bait the undiscerning.

Have you forgotten the threads he deleted on the BBU when he disagree with the content?

I deleted those threads because a) they were becoming an occasion of sin, having devolved into a shouting match, and because b) the union leader had asked me to resign so as to bring another user back into the fold (the other user in question had resigned in protest after being moderated for making a blood libel against Catholics).

So I decided to pack up and leave. End of story. In a surprising act of false witness, the poster of the above message forgets that the only threads I deleted were the ones that I, myself, started.

More to the point, though, the issue at hand is not whether I think the CU is in need of evangelizing. The issue is that there are members of the CWU who believe that the CU has fallen away from Christ, which they must certainly confess counts as a mortal sin, if in fact it is true. My point is that if they believe this -- regardless of what I believe -- they are obligated to speak to us and to correct us.

Just as I would do, if I thought the CU had indeed fallen away from Christ. I don't, of course, but so what? The issue is not what I think; the issue is what the members of the CWU think.

One final comment exists that I would like to address:

The ironic thing is that for all of his complaining and demeaning of our efforts to spread the Gospel and the truth of God's Word, to the lost on the OT threads, I have yet to ever see him ONCE, even ONCE, spreading the Gospel.

* evidently, there's a three-strike rule built into the GS forum architecture; the moderators were very apologetic when I was auto-booted from the union.