My brother phillyflash (Phil Naessens) and I have a small disagreement, but my discussion with Phil is not what this post is about. I only mention it, because I’m going to cite quotes from Richard Abanes, that are in a post made by my brother Phil/phillyflash. Phillyflash feels both Richard Abanes and Ken Silva have done wrong and both violated Matthew 18. I disagree, because it was Richard Abanes who sought a very public action be taken against Ken Sliva by Ken’s former web host. Ken’s blog was shut down after Richard Abanes objected to THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT OF KEN’S FORMER WEB HOST about a page on Ken’s blog. Richard Abanes did not talk to Ken in private about it, Richard Abanes did not have 1 or 2 (Christian) witnesses address Ken with him, Richard Abanes did not even take his gripe to the church. Richard Abanes went straight to the legal department of a web host, to seek to have material removed from a blog, that he disagreed with. For background see these prior posts:

• One More Reason I’ll Never Purchase a Book by Richard Abanes! He’s Had Apprising.org Shut Down, for Calling Out His Running Cover for Rick Warren. (*Updated*)
• While The Blogosphere Was Supposed To Be a Haven Of Freedom, Where Each Can Speak Freely On Their Own Blog. Some Wish To Deny Some Bloggers The Privilege.

My disagreement with Phillyflash is not a big deal to me. He’s my brother in Christ, we disagree, but he’s always welcome around these parts. This is about Richard Abanes (RA) and it is clear to me that RA totally violated 1 Corinthians 6 and Matthew 18. Because RA ran to the legal department of a web host over an issue he had with Ken Silva’s material.

So I’m going to cite a couple of statements from Phillyflash’s blog post, where RA displays his delusion. RA went there to answer some questions and his answers make his delusion very evident.

In this comment RA says:

…
RA: Well, first of all, writing an ISP is neither a sin, nor a “crime.”

NOTHING in the Bible prohibits my having contacted an ISP to alert them to what I felt was someone’s violation of their TOS. That is against neither Matt. 18, nor 1 Cor. 6. And it is tragic to me that Christians have gotten to a place where they are hiding behind scriptures, abusing them and twisting them, to make sure they are not accountable — and can go on the internet to say/do whatever they want to do. That is tragic.

Moreover, if what I did was indeed a private “sin/crime,” then it is Silva who violated Matthew 18, which does indeed cover any PRIVATE sin that someone feels has been committed against them by a brother. My alleged “sin” was obviously private (i.e., complaining to Silva’s ISP). But instead of going to me privately, Pastor Ken Silva skipped steps #1 and #2 of Matthew 18 and took it not only to the church, but to the entire world—creating an internet circus of hate, anger, bitterness, judgment, condemnation, arguments, and church division. Now what say you?
…

I say RA is deluded!

RA contacted the LEGAL department of an ISP. RA desired a PUBLIC resolution to something he felt Ken did wrong, by trying to take it to the web host instead of Ken, for removal of material. Never does RA say he was wrong, on the contrary, he says everything he did was right. Then after the very PUBLIC loss of Ken’s blog, RA claims Ken is at fault for telling what was already a very public matter. And beforehand, when Ken’s site was about to be shut down, Ken told everyone what was happening, because it was RA, not Ken who showed no regard for scripture. Ken was not wrong to let readers know his blog was about to be shut down and the reason why. RA feels his actions were “private”, that is not true, his actions and his desired resolution were very open and public, he did not go to Ken Silva directly. He didn’t do anything mentioned in Matthew 18, he ran to a legal department in violation of 1 Corinthians 6 from the start! RA ran to a group that does not profess Christ and is all about legal matters, the legal department of Ken’s former web host. RA sought outsider’s aid and complained to them, while Ken Silva simply informed his blog readers beforehand and afterward told members of the church via communication outlets seen and heard by saints (Crosstalk, his blog, etc.). Ken may have contacted the world at large (I don’t know, maybe Ken called the USAToday too), but if Ken contacted the world at large, it was only after the world at large was denied access to his blog, because of actions initiated by RA.

Regarding this being handled as a matter between saints, here is what RA said to Phil, in response to a question to him. I’m really glad Phil got this from RA.

…
Phil: I would be curious if either of them believe each other are of the “elect” and how that possible belief played a part in all of this…..

RA: I have no idea whether Silva is elect or not. It had no bearing on my actions.
…

So RA says himself, that he never considered this as a dealing between saints, that should be handled as Christ commanded and it never had any bearing on his actions.

RA continues to prove by his own words, that his “Purpose Driven” mind has no real regard for scripture.

RA acts like he’s willing to talk to Ken Silva. Well RA KNOWS that Ken can be reached through his blog at Apprising.org. RA could use the contact page there, to apologize to Ken for all the trouble he’s caused Ken by wrongly crying to the legal department of a web host. Instead, RA ducks, spins and asserts he does no wrong.

(As I’ve mentioned in earlier posts, Richard Abanes has shown himself to be leaven. As a contentious man who shows no regard for truth of scripture in his dealings. So I don’t give him space to comment here, 1 Corinthians 5)