Nazarene Space


International Nazarene Beit Din
Rules Not Guilty on Charges against Lew White
December 5th 2010


“Bob Field and many others that work on [his] team" have brought the following charges against Lew White:

1.) SELLING THE WORD FOR PROFIT
Exo 18:21; Lev 25:35; Eze 18:4-13; Eze 22:12-16; Joh 2:14-16

2.) BREAKING THE SABBATH
Exo 20:8-10; Deut 5:12-14

3.) PROMOTION OF IDOLS, INCENSE, DRUG PARAPHERNALIA & ROCK MUSIC
Idols: Exo 20:4-6; Deut 4:23-25; Deut 7:26; 1 John 5:21

Incense and Pharmakeia: Exo 30:9; Num 16:35,40; Gal 5:19
-20; Rev 9:21, Rev 21:8; Rev 22:15

Rock Music: No direct Torah Command against it, but many
Scriptures collectively condemn everything rock music
involves.

4.) USING EVIL MEANS FOR GOOD
Deut 23:18; Mal 2:17; 2Co 6:14; Jam 3:11

The International Nazarene Beit Din has examined in depth the case which this
accuser(s) have brought against Lew White. We have also examined in depth Lew
White's defense. The International Nazarene Beit Din makes the following conclusions:

First of all the Nazarene halacha requires that a matter with which a person is
charged with be a "sin" (Mt. 18:15) and sin is defined as "transgression of the
Torah" (1Jn. 3:4).

Secondly by Nazarene halacha, in order to have standing to bring a charge
against another, one must be the victim of their sin (Mt. 18:15).

On the charge of "SELLING THE WORD FOR PROFIT":

The Beit Din finds no Torah command anywhere, including the passages given by
the accuser, which forbid the selling of Scriptures or Scriptural teachings for
a profit. The accuser has failed to demonstrate that the Torah forbids "selling
the word for profit". The passages cited by the accuser (Exo 18:21; Lev 25:35;
Eze 18:4-13; Eze 22:12-16; Joh 2:14-16) do not state that one may not sell the
word for a profit.

But what if one shall say:

Buy the truth, and sell it not;
also wisdom, instruction and understanding.
(Prov. 23:23)

This passage is often quoted to "prove" that Bibles and theological books,
tapes, DVDs etc. should be given away for free and never sold.

The passage does not specify any given type of truth. If we interpret it to mean
that we should not sell Bibles and theological books, it would also forbid
selling books containing any other truth. Books on
mathematics, physics and truthful history would also be covered. Yet those who
wrongly interpret the passage do not say that Math teachers should work for
free.

So what does the passage mean? The passage is saying that "truth" should be
treated as a commodity that we are only in the market to
buy (obtain) and never in the market to sell (let go of).

In fact Scripture tells us plainly that those who labor in the Word as "worthy
of their hire". Teachers of Scripture truth are NOT slaves, they are as entitled
to be paid for their time, effort, labor, service and productions as anyone
else.

But again what if one shall say:

or nothing you have received,
for nothing you will give.
(Mt. 10:8)

Sadly for years this passage has been quoted out of context and misused by many
to "prove" that those in the ministry should not receive community support for
our efforts.

In fact the verse in question is, in context, saying exactly the opposite of
what these people represent it as saying.

Actually, Yeshua in the next few verses following this statement instructs his
talmidim to request and subsist on community support:

Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor lesser coin in your belts. Pack not for
the journey, either two coats, or sandals, or a staff, for the laborer is worthy
of his food. And into whatever city or town you will enter, enquire who in it is
honorable, and there abide until you go out from there."
(Mt. 10:9-11)

Some light on this text may be acquired by examining a statement by Josephus
concerning the first century Essene sect of Judaism:

...and if any of their sect come from other places,
what they have lies open for them, just as if it were their own;
and they go into such as they never knew before,
as if they had been ever so long acquainted with them.
For which reason they carry nothing with them
when they travel into remote parts,
though still they take their weapons with them, for fear
of thieves. Accordingly
there is, in every city where they live,
one appointed particularly to take care of strangers,
and provide garments and other necessaries for them.
(Josephus; Wars 2:8:4)

Yeshua's talmidim had for the most part, come from an Essene back ground. It
would appear that they were therefore able to travel within Essene circles from
town to town without having to carry additional supplies.

Yeshua felt that his twelve were entitled to be supported by the community.
Yeshua drives the point home saying "the laborer is worthy of his food." A
saying which Paul later cites to prove that "those who labor in the word and its
teaching" are worthy of "double honor" which in context seems to indicate that
they have the right, like any other laborer, to expect to be paid for their work
in the ministry. In fact he even quoted this statement by Yeshua (Mt. 10:10) to
support the point:

Those elders who conduct themselves well
should be esteemed worthy of double honor,
especially those who labor in the word and
in teaching, For the Scripture says that
`you should not muzzle the ox, while threshing,' (Deut. 25:4)
and `the laborer is worthy of his wage." (Mt. 10:10)
(1Tim. 5:17-18)

Paul also expands on this thought in 1Cor. 9:6-14:

Also, I only, and Bar Nabba, have we not the power not to work?
Who is this who labors in the service (ministry) by the
expanse of his nefesh?
Or who is he who plants a vineyard and from its fruit does not eat?
Or who is he who tends the flock and from the milk of his
flock does not eat?
Do I say these [things] as a son of man?
Behold, the Torah also said these [things]. For it is
written in the Torah of Moshe,
`You shall not muzzle the ox that threshes.' (Deut. 25:4)
It is a concern to Eloah about oxen? But, it is known
that because of us he said [it] and because of us it was written, because it is
a need [that] the plowman plow unto hope and he who threshes, unto the hope of
the harvest. If we have sown spiritual [things] among you, is it a great [thing]
if we reap
[things] of the flesh from you? … those who labor [in]
the Beit Kodesh [the Temple] are sustained from the Beit Kodesh and those who
labor for the alter have a portion with the alter?
So also, our Adon commanded that those who are proclaiming his goodnews should
live from his goodnews."
(1Cor. 9:6-14)

Certainly the context of Yeshua's statement "for nothing you have received, for
nothing you will give." (Mt. 10:8) was that of a society in which all things
were held in common and each person's needs were taken care of by that community
(Mt. 10:9-11 and Acts 2:44 & 4:32) but we do not live in such a society, and so
citing Mt. 10:8 to those in the ministry today, is akin to asking us to make
bricks without straw.

To the contrary Paul quotes the verse shortly afterward (10:10) to reach a
principle by which those who are proclaiming his goodnews
should be supported for doing so, just as those who labor in the Temple and for
the alter are supported for doing so. In other words, Paul draws a midrash from
the fact that Levites and Priests received tithes and offerings to teach a
principle that "those who labor in the word and teach" should be supported with
tithes and offerings.

The International Nazarene Beit Din finds that "selling the Word for profit" is
not a transgression of the Torah, and therefore not a "sin". This charge is
therefore dismissed.

On the charge of "BREAKING THE SABBATH" the International Nazarene Beit Din
finds that the fact that Lew White's business partner insists on working on the
Sabbath in a business which Lew does not have controlling interest in, does not
constitute "breaking the sabbath". Moreover the accuser(s) have not shown that,
had Lew White broken the Sabbath" that they are in any way victims of that sin,
and therefore they would be without standing to bring such a charge. A charge
of breaking the sabbath would normally originate from the leadership through the
Beit Din itself.

On the charge of "PROMOTION OF IDOLS" the accuser(s) have cited only passages
against idolatry itself, not the promotion of idols. However the Beit Din will
acknowledge

that Deut. 13 would also forbid the promotion of Torah transgression. The
accuser(s) however have failed to show that Lew White has promoted any act of
idolatry. Moreover accusers have failed to show that had Lew White been guilty
on this charge, that accuser(s) would have had status as victims of this sin,
thus they would not have had standing to bring the charge. A charge of
promoting idols would normally originate from the leadership through the Beit
Din itself.

On the charge of "PROMOTION OF... INCENSE" accusers cite Exo 30:9; Num 16:35,40.
These passages only forbid the offering of strange incense before YHWH in the
Temple.

The accuser(s) have failed to show that the Torah makes a general prohibition
against the promotion of incense in general.

On the charge of PROMOTION OF... DRUG PARAPHERNALIA accusers found themselves
unable to cite any Torah passage to support this charge and so switched this
charge in their body to "Pharmakeia". The word
"Pharmakeia" is a Greek word not found in the Torah. Instead accusers cited
passages from the Ketuvim Netzarm which in their Greek translations, condemn
"Pharmakeia" (Gal 5:19-20; Rev 9:21, Rev 21:8; Rev 22:15). Where the Greek has
PHARMAKEIA in these verses the Aramaic has various forms of CHARASHUTA
"sorcery". "Pharmakeia"
refers to forms of sorcery that involved the use of drugs (potions). There is
some question as to whether the Aramaic CHARSHUTA has this same connotation. In
any case neither Paul nor Yochanan could create new Torah, so they could only
have refereed back to a practice forbidden by Torah. This would therefore
reference the following from the Torah:

10: There shall not be found among you any one that
maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire,
or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an
enchanter, or a witch,
11: Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits,
or a wizard, or a necromancer.
12: For all that do these things are an abomination unto
the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy
God doth drive them out from before thee.
(Deut. 18:10-12 KJV)

one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire,
or that useth divination,
or an observer of times,
or an enchanter,
or a witch,
Or a charmer,
or a consulter with familiar spirits,
or a wizard,
or a necromancer.

One that uses divination, literally "divines divination"

KOSEM K'SAMIM

"Observer of times" M'ONEN from the Hebrew word for "cloud" refers to one who
reads the future in the shapes of clouds.

"Enchanter" NAWCHASH from Hebrew: NAWCHAWSH meaning

"serpent". One who performs "magic" through consulting the Serpent HA-SATAN.

"Witch" KASHAF (also in Ex. 22:18) one whose "spells" were the result of prayers
articulated to false gods.

"Charmer" KHOVER one who cast spells by tying magic knots.

"Consulter with familiar spirits" SHAUL OV one who asks questions of the python.

"Wizards" YIDONI literally "knower" always used to refers to followers of false
gods.

"necromancer" DORESH HA-M'TIM literally "interrogator of the dead".

In the end the Beit Din concludes that the Torah transgression referenced in the
word "Pharmikia" is an act of sorcery, with the use of drugs or potions being
just part of that sorcery.

We find that the accuser(s) have failed to show that Lew White has promoted any
act of sorcery as forbidden by the Torah. We also find that the accuser(s) have
failed to show that even had Lew White been guilty of "Pharmikia" that they
would have the victim status needed to bring the charge themselves.

On the charge of "PROMOTION OF... ROCK MUSIC" accusers themselves have admitted
that there is "[n]o direct Torah Command against it." We find the blanket
statement "many Scriptures collectively condemn everything rock music involves"
to be to far reaching and without merit.

On the charge of "USING EVIL MEANS FOR GOOD" we find that this charge stands or
falls upon the other charges.

In conclusion we the International Nazarene Beit Din find Lew White NOT GUILTY
on all charges brought by “Bob Field and many others that work on [his] team"

Further more we find that “Bob Field and many others that work on [his] team" have failed to show that they even have the victim status required in order for them to bring charges against Lew White in the first place.

Finally we find “Bob Field and many others that work on [his] team" guilty of Lashon HaRa (Wicked Speech) and Motzi Shem Ra (Slander).

--------------------------------------------------------------


Views: 912

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

In this post, I address your victim-centric approach, and an aspect of the investigation.

I see YOUR point about personal victims handling things according to Matthew 18, etc., and ultimately going to a sanhedrin or equivalent.

But you have failed to cover the case of OPEN sin.

I don't think you get it. Open sin must have an open response. This is so abundantly clear fom Scripture. It has nothing to do with finding a victim before open push-back swings into gear. You cannot wrap open evil within the shroud of private offense (which, of necessity, demands private resolution first).

How many open sins must I cite from The Scripture, featuring an open rebuke, until you *get it*?

Pro 27:5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.

Moses told Israel several times that it was for their benefit that he was openly rebuked. Paul recapitualtes this when instructing Timothy to rebuke elders openly, so that the others would fear.

Lew White promotes himself as a teacher. He has published much literature openly rebuking the open sins of others. Now he requires a victim and special handling.

Your credibility is shrinking fast on this one. Your little faceless Beit Din carries no sway in the court of public opinion among the saints, where reputations are forged based on facts established by 2 or more witnesses.

One more thing: If you have not personally been to Lew White's head shop, you should be ashamed of yourself for rendering an opinion.

Idea: Make a surprise visit, and see first hand. I have a second witness to the evils I saw.




James Trimm said:
Well you did take the correct first step... bring it to Lew. So now what would you have Lew do?
He has non-controlling interest in the store (meaning he does not control it).
He cannot legally walk away without paying of the large store debt (which he does not have).
He has had his interest in the store for sale since 1991, but has found no buyers).
Lew concludes that whether he likes it or not, YHWH wants him in that store witnessing to "Hippies".



Michael A. Banak said:
PS: I have been to Lew White's store 3 times, each time to tell him directly of his error. All 3 times he was out. The happy, light-enhanced photos on his WEB page in no way conveys the dark evil spirit immediately discerned upon entering the place. There is much in the photo collection that you do not see.

I am willing to give Lew time to repent and rebuild, but for him to publish religious literature at the same time ... it is high-handed hypocrisy.

If a spouse is unsaved, they are still sanctified by the believing spouse. But this does not extend to an unsaved business partner.

1Co 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the assembly of Elohim:
In this post, I address the assertion of non-controlling interest.

Question: Who *does* control that store? The arrangement is 50/50. If Lew's part is non controlling, and his partner are equal, then do neither of them have controlling interest? So, who is running this place? Is this joint on autopilot?

Truth is, Lew has a LOT OF CONTROL. It is shared equally with his partner, and they must agree to something before it happens. This includes offensive sale items and Sabbath hours.

Owing to Lew's debt burden, the Torah principle of debt cancellation seems reasonable in this case. The closest we can come to that is bankruptcy.

I honestly do not care how Lew handles his affairs. But he presumes to be a teacher of righteousness. Until he finds closure on this noose around his neck, I consider his paste-and-scissors reasearch to be of little value.
You miss the point, the store was first opened BEFORE Lew was a believe. You are right about one thing, they must both agree before any CHANGES can be. That means they must both agree to withdraw items form the store that were previously on sale, or to change the hours and close on Sabbath.





Michael A. Banak said:
In this post, I address the assertion of non-controlling interest.

Question: Who *does* control that store? The arrangement is 50/50. If Lew's part is non controlling, and his partner are equal, then do neither of them have controlling interest? So, who is running this place? Is this joint on autopilot?

Truth is, Lew has a LOT OF CONTROL. It is shared equally with his partner, and they must agree to something before it happens. This includes offensive sale items and Sabbath hours.

Owing to Lew's debt burden, the Torah principle of debt cancellation seems reasonable in this case. The closest we can come to that is bankruptcy.

I honestly do not care how Lew handles his affairs. But he presumes to be a teacher of righteousness. Until he finds closure on this noose around his neck, I consider his paste-and-scissors reasearch to be of little value.
The International Nazarene Beit Din is NOT facless:

http://nazarenespace.ning.com/group/virtualchamberofhewnstone

Open rebuke FOLLOWS a Matthew 18 process. Mr. Fields himself ADMITS that his rebuke is supposedly in keeping with the Matthew 18 process. The top of his website says:

"LEW WHITE HAS BEEN CONFRONTED OVER THE FOLLOWING ISSUES IN THIS DOCUMENT
FROM THIS TEAM AND OTHERS OVER THE YEARS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MATTHEW 18:15-17
AND CONTINUES WITH NO REPENTANCE."

The fact is that Matthew 18:15 requires this process to begin only when someone has "sinned against you" . And Mr. Fields admits that Matt. 18:15 is directly applicable to his "attack" (his own word).



Michael A. Banak said:
In this post, I address your victim-centric approach, and an aspect of the investigation.

I see YOUR point about personal victims handling things according to Matthew 18, etc., and ultimately going to a sanhedrin or equivalent.

But you have failed to cover the case of OPEN sin.

I don't think you get it. Open sin must have an open response. This is so abundantly clear fom Scripture. It has nothing to do with finding a victim before open push-back swings into gear. You cannot wrap open evil within the shroud of private offense (which, of necessity, demands private resolution first).

How many open sins must I cite from The Scripture, featuring an open rebuke, until you *get it*?

Pro 27:5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.

Moses told Israel several times that it was for their benefit that he was openly rebuked. Paul recapitualtes this when instructing Timothy to rebuke elders openly, so that the others would fear.

Lew White promotes himself as a teacher. He has published much literature openly rebuking the open sins of others. Now he requires a victim and special handling.

Your credibility is shrinking fast on this one. Your little faceless Beit Din carries no sway in the court of public opinion among the saints, where reputations are forged based on facts established by 2 or more witnesses.

One more thing: If you have not personally been to Lew White's head shop, you should be ashamed of yourself for rendering an opinion.

Idea: Make a surprise visit, and see first hand. I have a second witness to the evils I saw.




James Trimm said:
Well you did take the correct first step... bring it to Lew. So now what would you have Lew do?
He has non-controlling interest in the store (meaning he does not control it).
He cannot legally walk away without paying of the large store debt (which he does not have).
He has had his interest in the store for sale since 1991, but has found no buyers).
Lew concludes that whether he likes it or not, YHWH wants him in that store witnessing to "Hippies".



Michael A. Banak said:
PS: I have been to Lew White's store 3 times, each time to tell him directly of his error. All 3 times he was out. The happy, light-enhanced photos on his WEB page in no way conveys the dark evil spirit immediately discerned upon entering the place. There is much in the photo collection that you do not see.

I am willing to give Lew time to repent and rebuild, but for him to publish religious literature at the same time ... it is high-handed hypocrisy.

If a spouse is unsaved, they are still sanctified by the believing spouse. But this does not extend to an unsaved business partner.

1Co 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the assembly of Elohim:
Shalom Beit Din, and all that have been a part of this hateful attack against me:
I forgive the attackers, and have not brought their names before anyone publicly. As we forgive, we will be forgiven; as we judge others, we will be judged. When we are healed, we should thank and praise Yahuah for His kindness. In like manner, I wish to thank Yahusha living in all of you that participated in this, understanding that I was placed in this place of great darkness for such a time as this, that I became as one of them in order that some might be saved.

1Co 9:19 "For though I am free from all, I made myself a servant to all, in order to win more,
1Co 9:20 and to the Yehuḏim I became as a Yehuḏite, that I might win Yehuḏim; to those who are under Torah, as under Torah, so as to win those who are under Torah;
1Co 9:21 to those without Torah, as without Torah – not being without Torah toward Elohim, but under Torah of Messiah – so as to win those who are without Torah.
1Co 9:22 To the weak I became as weak, so as to win the weak. To all men I have become all, so as to save some, by all means.
1Co 9:23 And I do this because of the Good News, so as to become a fellow-partaker with it."

Love is the lesson we are learning, and without it nothing else matters.
Love = good; hate = evil
Peace & Love to all, friend or foe,
brother Lew
True, for the record, we retrieved the attackers name from mass emails the attacker himself had sent to the public, Lew did not provide it to us. We however have no problem making it public, because the accuser has made it public in these mass emails.



Lew White said:
Shalom Beit Din, and all that have been a part of this hateful attack against me:
I forgive the attackers, and have not brought their names before anyone publicly. As we forgive, we will be forgiven; as we judge others, we will be judged. When we are healed, we should thank and praise Yahuah for His kindness. In like manner, I wish to thank Yahusha living in all of you that participated in this, understanding that I was placed in this place of great darkness for such a time as this, that I became as one of them in order that some might be saved.

1Co 9:19 "For though I am free from all, I made myself a servant to all, in order to win more,
1Co 9:20 and to the Yehuḏim I became as a Yehuḏite, that I might win Yehuḏim; to those who are under Torah, as under Torah, so as to win those who are under Torah;
1Co 9:21 to those without Torah, as without Torah – not being without Torah toward Elohim, but under Torah of Messiah – so as to win those who are without Torah.
1Co 9:22 To the weak I became as weak, so as to win the weak. To all men I have become all, so as to save some, by all means.
1Co 9:23 And I do this because of the Good News, so as to become a fellow-partaker with it."

Love is the lesson we are learning, and without it nothing else matters.
Love = good; hate = evil
Peace & Love to all, friend or foe,
brother Lew
You have correctly discerned the "photo shopping" of the property. From 2005 to 2006 there was an on-line games place on the first floor. When they made it into a bar, the renter's lease was cancelled and they were forced to move out. 6 months later they went bankrupt. After being empty for a number of years, Torah Institute moved into the first floor with their bookstore and their meetings.
Anyone who is finanacially supporting the Institute is helping to keep the lights and heat on,insurance, pay for supplies, printing, helping to cover the expense of maintaining two websites - one that is totally for information for all to read, the other that is not only a shopping cart to purchase books, but also free downloads and the ability to order free DVD's
Lew and his wife (me) do not take a salary or any compensation for the endless hours we work. I work from 9 a.m. till 9 and sometimes 10 at night. No pay. We live off of Lew's income. and most of that goes to paying the mortgage, taxes, insurance. The expenses are endless.
We have people that walk into Torah Institute, people with families that are finding truth. We have a library set up for people to borrow books and material. We give them DVD's and articles. All these things are in place because there are considerate, concerned people who love the work of Yahusha.
Torah Institute is located less than a mile from the biggest mega Christian Ch-rch in Louisville,KY. No wonder the enemy is trying to steal, kill and destroy.

I'm not equipped to respond to all these posts, As a woman I feel I can only testify to what is actually going on.
Neither I nor Lew have the time to be tied up in defending ourselves - the demand is too great. The need for us to spread the Truth is too great for us to tarry. Yahusha Himself said He would defend you when you are called before the courts. I thank the brethern that are correctly discerning the Word of Yahuah. Shalom


Ya'akov ben Shalom said:
I have a few questions. I saw the website in question and the one thing there that did raise an eyebrow was the alleged photo shopping of the property on which his institute resides. The signs appear to have been altered.I would like Mr.White to address that if he could. Also, would not the "victims" in this situation be anyone who financially supported the organization? I'm not trying to prolong this issue, but this seems to me to be two issues not adequately addressed.
Thank you for your response Mrs. White. : )
I expect a tsunami of response to this post-up. Give me a chance. This will be good.

My apologies if others have issued this point, but Lew's operation stands in violation of the 3rd commandant. Please do not waste our time with narrow definitions and striving of words in this regard. For dope-heads going to his head shop, the message is unmistakable: You can have your statues of angels (i.e., Nike), drug and smoking paraphernalia, album covers with nude people on them, and freaky religious posters of Jesus Christ ... and you can still have YHWH.

Remember, I have been there 3 times. There is something wrong with that picture, and you know it.

In as much as Yahshua reaps where he does not sow, please do not waste my time with stories of how people "found the truth" through this weird, odd-ball operation. If that's the game Lew plays, then mainstream Christianity is vindicated, and Lew's publications are meaningless. For much good and much truth has also come through mainstream Christianity.

Lew is in deep trouble. If he and his wife have no time to respond responsibly to these charges, then they have *even less time* to be running this wicked headshop.

I have tracked open, internet news on the shop for some time. That business is headed into an even deeper tailspin. There is no way out. I see this recent whitewash on the part of the Beit Din to be lateral arabesque of sorts for Lew, framed to portray him as victim. Suddenly, he has transitioned to offending hypocrite to victim. When the dust settles, and this blows over, maybe people will just accept Lew's continuing compromise.

YOUR ENTIRE APPROACH TO THIS CANARD IS WRONG.

Lew is in trouble and needs help. And vain vindication will not do.

If Lew admits that he is in sin, I will fast and pray with him for a way out. I hate fasting. It wreaks havoc on my system (I am otherwise very healthy, praise Yahweh). But I am willing to go knuckles-down if he admits he is in sin.

BUT, if Lew clings to this open shame to The Most Holy Name, then I will just jeer from the sidelines, as a means of protecting others.

It seems that James Trim has forgotten the power of Elohim. Otherwise he would have recommended an open call for fasting and prayer on Lew's behalf a long time ago. Unfortunately to do that, Lew would have to admit wrong doing, and the color of legitimacy offered by the “Beit Din” would lose ground.

You have a problem with Christianity? They know a lot more than you realize. They have a saying: "Pride accepts help, but never surrender." This rhymes with "Pride goes before a fall."

This is your chance, Lew! Come clean, Lew, and let the battle for your soul begin!

Serious agape,
Michael A. Banak
I think it would be better if you demonstrated a "here's proof he's in sin" rather than just saying he's in sin. And perhaps it would be better addressed by doing an appeal to the Beit Din or an appeal to nazarenespace members. To just make claims without citing evidence is not good, and damages the name of others unfairly. If what you say is true, then repentance is needed to be had, but you have not yet shown that it is true, so until then, unless you are presenting something with evidence in a clear and organized fashion, please be respectful in not saying anything. State your process as to why you believe he is in sin, dont just say he is without providing us a full exhaustive explanation of the evidence. Thank you.

-Anayahu
like, for one things, pictures would be a good thing. or something that demonstrates to us what you are observing. or to clearly explain how what you see is wrong, because i'm a little confused about the whole thing. If Lew has no say in what is being sold, how can he be accountable?
OK first of all you must have misunderstood the whole thing about the photos. Go back and reread.

As for the rest, you make one witness, and you should take it to Lew personally.

As for the Beit Din Ruling, it speaks for itself, the accuser himself began his attack by claiming a Matthew 18 process, so one cannot say that the Matthew 18 requirements do not apply

I am now going to close discussion on this thread.



Michael A. Banak said:
I expect a tsunami of response to this post-up. Give me a chance. This will be good.

My apologies if others have issued this point, but Lew's operation stands in violation of the 3rd commandant. Please do not waste our time with narrow definitions and striving of words in this regard. For dope-heads going to his head shop, the message is unmistakable: You can have your statues of angels (i.e., Nike), drug and smoking paraphernalia, album covers with nude people on them, and freaky religious posters of Jesus Christ ... and you can still have YHWH.

Remember, I have been there 3 times. There is something wrong with that picture, and you know it.

In as much as Yahshua reaps where he does not sow, please do not waste my time with stories of how people "found the truth" through this weird, odd-ball operation. If that's the game Lew plays, then mainstream Christianity is vindicated, and Lew's publications are meaningless. For much good and much truth has also come through mainstream Christianity.

Lew is in deep trouble. If he and his wife have no time to respond responsibly to these charges, then they have *even less time* to be running this wicked headshop.

I have tracked open, internet news on the shop for some time. That business is headed into an even deeper tailspin. There is no way out. I see this recent whitewash on the part of the Beit Din to be lateral arabesque of sorts for Lew, framed to portray him as victim. Suddenly, he has transitioned to offending hypocrite to victim. When the dust settles, and this blows over, maybe people will just accept Lew's continuing compromise.

YOUR ENTIRE APPROACH TO THIS CANARD IS WRONG.

Lew is in trouble and needs help. And vain vindication will not do.

If Lew admits that he is in sin, I will fast and pray with him for a way out. I hate fasting. It wreaks havoc on my system (I am otherwise very healthy, praise Yahweh). But I am willing to go knuckles-down if he admits he is in sin.

BUT, if Lew clings to this open shame to The Most Holy Name, then I will just jeer from the sidelines, as a means of protecting others.

It seems that James Trim has forgotten the power of Elohim. Otherwise he would have recommended an open call for fasting and prayer on Lew's behalf a long time ago. Unfortunately to do that, Lew would have to admit wrong doing, and the color of legitimacy offered by the “Beit Din” would lose ground.

You have a problem with Christianity? They know a lot more than you realize. They have a saying: "Pride accepts help, but never surrender." This rhymes with "Pride goes before a fall."

This is your chance, Lew! Come clean, Lew, and let the battle for your soul begin!

Serious agape,
Michael A. Banak

RSS

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service