The Mote In Your Eye, Brother

We have defined that authority is present in x over y only when the redemption interval is shorter for x and the corrector x is "repentant" first, before y. It is not true by definition for a person to be corrected if they are yet at fault. We must then state that a person is not "corrected" unless they are both redeemed and saved, that is predestinated to eternal life.

If no such predestination occurs then there is no authority, but this is again, totally counter intuitive, for correction is itself correct and positive. Then it must be also pointed out that for a finite interval t2-t1 to exist for x, he must be repentant also, turning back to God. There is no requirement for x to be predestinated and saved, but there is requirement for him to be correct!

Then all those who correct others ignoring their own faults that are much greater (in their interval of redemption) are classically, without authority: not even correcting themselves beforehand (the hypocrites.) Under the freedom and redemption in the gospel, those others under condemnation of the law and not under grace have no authority to correct the truth of the gospel for points of law. (For only those under grace are free from that condemnation.)

Likewise it sticks in the craw to state that an atheist may correct the faith of a saint: but again, atheists may have an understanding that is actually correct. A saint answering God at the judgment for ignoring the correction given will not be able to state it wasn't delivered before time.

In such a case we require an interval, and in order to be correct, one must either be innocent of a fault or to have overcome it and been redeemed. Then, as we are innocent or forgiven we may put t2 = t1 so we are actually redeemed with faith on Christ, for we have repented completely - we have been corrected in our faith.

Of course, there are many faults under the law and many different ways to displease God. Hypocrisy not only enters the scene as above but by having refused correction in other faults and not just the one the hypocrite is correcting another on. I would not accept correction from a hindu when it comes to the resurrection, when I could correct him on the trinity (or the whole gospel) for example. In this fashion dialogue will never be constructive with those no ear for the spirit.

Likewise, being corrected on sins (that are clearly redeemed under grace) in the case of the saved individual that is forgiven (intervals become as zero where t2=t1) is pointless when coming from the person who struggles with any sin and that has a wide interval, since the redeemed are saved and not all that are repentant will be - their interval or broad path is too long. We then see how salvation gives the authority to correct a person on the gospel only, and not over the repentance of a matter of fault. For those that correct with a wide interval (a beam in their eyes) have no divine authority to correct one with a mote, a believer born again in Christ

Are we reducing to nothing with this argument ? That Christ gives complete forgiveness? Clearly not when forgiveness is dependent on repentance and predestination - and not on the standing of another that should be concerned of his own self.

Then, to the born again in Christ as with a mote (t2=t1) - does that entail that they have authority over all? Clearly the definition of a finer but non-zero interval stands because there is a redemption at t2... forgiveness does not entail perfection - merely that the righteousness of Christ is credited us to stand before God, we are "not without spot", although we are presented and counted as spotless. Christ's authority however, is absolute. It is His authority that grants us acceptance before God by election, and not our own.

The the authority of God is then only with those who impart the true gospel of God - and is not to correct on sins: Only the lack of belief on Christ is at issue when those that would otherwise be concluded in unbelief are under authority. There is then only the mote in the eye of Christ (not that there is any) that has authority and we may be sure by spreading the gospel that we have that authority to impart the truth to all.

Continue To Next Page

Return To Section Start

Return To Previous Page