One netfriend wrote:

Mark these messages, as we are commanded to admonish a heretic twice and then reject him. Give him another try or two, and then plonk him. It’s what everyone else does, and it is wonderful in my opinion.

Another responded:

I have been through this several times with other brothers and sisters in the Lord, but not you, so let me tell you why I disagree with this particular application of that passage:

1.) It doesn’t appear to be the historical reaction of the Church to heretics unless we’re counting things like the Inquisition. For example, the Arian heresy existed within the Ante-Nicene Church for well over a hundred years, and was written against all during that time by leaders of the Church. In fact, most of the major heresies lasted for decades, if not centuries, and none of them were successfully combated by silence.

2.) In answering any heretic in a public forum, such as this, we are not merely responding to the individual, but to the heresy they represent, contrasting it to the truth of the faith once delivered to the saints. This *must* continue so long as the heresy does, without regard to what any particular heretic does or doesn’t do.

3.) Liberal Christianity is *the* heresy of our age. And it’s strength is in the fact that it attacks traditional Christianity on so many fronts at once. It’s weaknesses include an inconsistent set of spiritual principles, which are slowly killing it from within…very slowly. I believe that any Christian with the ability to demonstrate these inconsistencies as they appear in the posts of liberals, only aids the earlier demise of this heresy, so long as it is done with as much civility as possible.

4.) Plonking heretics on a Christian newsgroup only serves to help cede yet another public forum of ideas to the father of lies. I may not be able to do much in the public arena to combat a “Christianized” humanism, but a newsgroup is still one of the few places on this earth where I can make my defense of the Truth visible. So I believe that if I’m going to be here at all, I have a certain responsibility to that Truth, and that responsibility includes professing and defending it against attack, be that attack vitriolic or sanguine.

Now, having said all that, I’d like to say a word or two about the inherent dangers in doing this. The most important one by far, in my humble opinion, is the very nature of this medium: the back and forth argumentation that is unavoidable. What we need be ever vigilant of in this endeavor is not allowing ourselves to be pushed into overstating any doctrine of the Christian faith. This can be very hard to avoid unless one has a very good understanding of traditional Christian doctrine, where, *exactly* it comes from, how it fits within overall evangelical theology…in short, understand *specifically* (as opposed to generally), why we believe what we believe. Not all evangelical Christians (or any other brand of fundamentalists)

really have this understanding. Since this kind of understanding isn’t necessary for salvation, I’m not criticizing these folks in this. I’m only pointing out that not all of us feel a specific calling to an apologetics ministry. And if we don’t believe that the Lord has called us into a ministry, the wise Christian stays out of it!

To summarize here… if you (or anyone else) feel led of the Lord to plonk those heretics and skeptics you find on this newsgroup (and there are scads of them!), you certainly have my blessing. I just wanted you to know why I won’t be following your advice.

God bless