How to Recognize A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

General Faith
41

You’re right that knowing Jesus is not sentimental. Scripture defines it. Jesus says love shows up as obedience ~John 14:15. John says if a man claims to know Him but won’t obey, he’s lying ~1 John 2:4. On that, there’s no daylight between us.

Here’s where the trouble comes in. You keep treating clarity as arrogance and conviction as narrowness. Scripture never does that. God didn’t give His Word to be managed by interpretive tension. He gave it to be obeyed. “The commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes” ~Psalm 19:8. Light doesn’t confuse. It exposes.

Yes, Scripture speaks of union with Christ. “Christ liveth in me” ~Galatians 2:20. Yes, it speaks of knowing Him personally ~John 17:3. But that relationship is never loose, private, or undefined. It is cross-shaped, repentance-driven, and submission-bound. “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily” ~Luke 9:23. No cross, no following. No obedience, no knowing.

The danger is not Greek verbs or study tools. The danger is letting them soften what God spoke plainly. When obedience becomes one option among many, the edge of the gospel is gone. Scripture doesn’t ask us to explore possibilities. It commands us to submit. “Do not go beyond what is written” ~1 Corinthians 4:6.

This isn’t about winning arguments. It’s about fearing God. Truth is not flexible. Sin is not subjective. And Jesus is not known apart from obedience to His words. That’s not dogmatism. That’s biblical Christianity.

42

I fully agree with you, and for the record I have said nothing even remotely resembling what you are accusing me of here, especially on a public forum @bdavidc, so the charge itself collapses under its own weight.

By twisting my words and labeling me a false teacher, you are actually proving my point, the biblical point, while being unable or unwilling to see it, because misrepresentation is not refutation and accusation is not exegesis.

If you can show me my errors from the text, I will correct them immediately, without delay, without defensiveness, because Scripture governs me, not pride.

What I will not accept is deviousness, pulling fragments from my posts, stripping them of context, reshaping them to fit a narrative, and then retreating behind the claim that this is not about winning arguments, because that posture contradicts the method being used.

You have yet to demonstrate any error I have made concerning the gospel itself, and the real issue seems obvious, I am not afraid to be Berean, to go to the Greek, the Hebrew, the Latin, the Early Church Fathers, and nowhere in doing so do I soften the imperatives of Christ Jesus or dilute His commands, assuming you even understands what an imperative is.

“If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow Me” ~Luke 9:23, which contains three imperatives in plain sight, deny, take up, follow, and Scripture is unambiguous here, no cross means no following, no obedience means no knowing.

So yes, you are correct about the grammar, there are three imperatives in that verse, and they stand whether we like them or not.

Thank you as well for slamming the door of your forum in my face today, banning me under the label false teacher, not because of demonstrated doctrinal error, but because Scripture was allowed to speak without being filtered through preference or fear.

So I will leave this where it stands, the question is no longer about me, but about what you are actually seeking, truth governed by the Word, or control governed by accusation.

J.

1 Like
43

The issue here has never been about whether Scripture has imperatives. We both affirm that it does. Luke 9:23 says exactly what it says. That’s settled.

The issue is how you consistently deal with Scripture in the give and take of discussion. When the plain force of a passage is pressed, you repeatedly deflect the conversation away from the text itself and into outside authorities, linguistic systems, historical frameworks, or extra-biblical sources. That is not how Scripture defines being a Berean. The Bereans were commended because they searched the Scriptures to see whether those things were so ~Acts 17:11. Scripture was the court of appeal, not Scripture plus.

This is not a dispute about Greek versus English or study versus ignorance. It is about authority. God’s Word does not need to be softened, reframed, or qualified by outside systems in order to bind the conscience. “The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul” ~Psalm 19:7. When tools begin to explain away the plain sense of the text, the tools have become the authority. I have said this to you many, many times and you don’t listen.

That is the concern being raised. Not that you deny Christ’s commands, but that you consistently deflect from their binding clarity by appealing elsewhere. Pointing that out is not twisting your words. It is addressing a pattern that keeps surfacing in this exchange. The Bible does not define a false teacher only as someone who denies Scripture outright. It also includes those who distort, soften, or redirect the plain meaning of what God has already said.

If you want to continue the discussion, keep it anchored in Scripture itself. Not Scripture supplemented. “Do not go beyond what is written” ~1 Corinthians 4:6. That’s the issue.

Let’s get one thing straight and lay it to rest: You are not banned on BTF. I even responded to your comments. I thought you were someone else, but realized who you were and removed the ban. You are welcome to join us there as long as you abide by the rules and use only scripture and not man’s opinions.

44

If you are all enjoying this back and forth, so be it. Otherwise I think it might be time to move on.

1 Like
45

@Bestill Silence in the face of God’s Word being changed, watered down or twisted in a public Christian forum is not humility, it’s laziness. We are told to ~Jude 1:3. We aren’t given that command because bad guys will always reject the truth outright. They can warp it too.

The danger is never limited to the one speaking. Scripture warns that false teaching spreads and leads others astray. Paul said grievous wolves would enter in, not sparing the flock ~Acts 20:29–30. That means there are always listeners watching, learning, and being shaped by what is said, even if they never speak up.

Publicly pointing out error is not about “winning” arguments or getting your “win” sticker. It’s about protecting the Word of God and those too naïve to know what they lack in knowledge. Paul told Timothy to preach the word, reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and doctrine ~2 Timothy 4:2. He included correct, reprove and rebuke in that verse for a reason.

Christianity doesn’t compel us to tolerate sin. It commands us to contend for the faith. And standing your ground on the black and white words of Scripture is the furthest thing from being divisive. It’s being faithful.

It is not your place to tell someone to stop obeying Scripture. We are commanded to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints ~Jude 1:3, especially when God’s Word is being altered or redirected in a public Christian forum.

If you wish to disengage personally, you are free to do so. But you do not get to police faithfulness or redefine obedience as troublemaking. Truth does not become optional because people grow tired of hearing it.

If you think I have said something contrary to what Scripture says then show me from Scripture. I will answer to the Word of God just like anyone else would. But telling someone to stop contending for the truth is not answering biblically. Let the Scripture be the standard and final authority ~Acts 17:11 ~1 Corinthians 4:6.

If you are not a moderator of this forum, then let the moderators handle it.

1 Like
46

Is that what you think I’m doing? I thought my comment was gentle. It’s difficult to know how people will understand what’s been said. So much is lost in communicating with just words. No body language. No tone of voice. No facial expressions to go by. Just words, and in reading these back and forth comments I don’t see much grace or love or unity of the Spirit. Perhaps its just me, but I see right fighting, a lot of Scripture quotes and accusations. It reminds me of the Pharisees and Sadducees arguing over whether there is life after death. Such conversations tend to plant the opposer more firmly into their own argument instead of winning them over to yours. I’m not talking about you specifically, but to the overall conversation.

There is a lot of knowledge of God’s word here. And by the choice of language, some of you write way above my head. Why they didn’t choose to use simpler and more understandable language that most can understand is a confusing puzzle.

We think differently and we’re looking for different things. I have disengaged, but this showed up in my email and I thought it deserved an answer.

2 Likes
47

@Bestill

I have to agree with you here, my wife was a simple woman, childlike in her faith in our Lord Christ Jesus, and Luke 6 was the pattern that governed her life, though I did not understand that at the time and only see it clearly now.

Because of that, I owe you a sincere apology for having come down hard on you.

Act 18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
Act 18:25 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.
Act 18:26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.
Act 18:27 And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, when he was come, helped them much which had believed through grace:
Act 18:28 For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.

Act 18:24 Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent and cultured man, and well versed in the [Hebrew] Scriptures.
Act 18:25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and being spiritually impassioned, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things about Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John;
Act 18:26 and he began to speak boldly and fearlessly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained more accurately to him the way of God [and the full story of the life of Christ].
Act 18:27 And when Apollos wanted to go across to Achaia (southern Greece), the brothers encouraged him and wrote to the disciples, [urging them] to welcome him gladly. When he arrived, he was a great help to those who, through grace, had believed and had followed Jesus as Lord and Savior,
Act 18:28 for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public discussions, proving by the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed).
-AMP

Shalom.

J.

48

Whatever you said didn’t hurt me and I’m thankful for the apology. More for your sake than my sake because I didn’t read what you are apologizing for. There’s not much point in going back to read it now.

I’m not sure what these particular Scripture verses have to do with anything here. By them you are trying to tell me something. I’ll listen if you want to explain. Thank you for your response. It was so good of you and much appreciated!

1 Like
49

I just want to say that I truly appreciate you and your contributions, sorella, sister, because your interaction with @bdavidc taught me a valuable lesson, one that genuinely resonated within my spirit and stayed with me.

Please do not worry about the Apollos passage I shared earlier, because if I were to exegete it and explain my thoughts fully, it might come across as overly scholarly, since I have a deep love for exegetical study and I know not everyone is inclined to engage Scripture in that way.

Shalom to you and your family.

J.

1 Like
50

Jesus’ warning in Matthew 7 is not about catching a believer in a moment of weakness or pointing out the normal struggles every Christian faces. When He speaks of “bad fruit,” He is talking about the consistent product of a person’s life, doctrine, and influence — what flows out of them over time, not a single failure or mistake.

In Scripture, fruit always refers to what is produced from the nature of the tree itself (Matthew 7:17–18). A good tree may stumble, but it does not continually produce corruption. A bad tree may appear spiritual outwardly — gifted, eloquent, active in ministry — yet inwardly its nature is unregenerate, self-seeking, or deceptive. That inward reality eventually shows itself.

“Bad fruit” includes false doctrine that twists the gospel, minimizes repentance, denies the power of godliness, or shifts the focus from Christ to self (2 Peter 2:1–3, Galatians 1:6–9). It also includes character marked by pride, manipulation, greed, control, immorality, or a pattern of hypocrisy (Matthew 23, Jude 1:12–16). Wolves feed on sheep — meaning they use people spiritually for gain, influence, money, or ego rather than serving them sacrificially as Christ does (John 10:12–13).

Jesus is clear that some false prophets will look extremely convincing. They may prophesy, cast out devils, and do many “wonderful works” in His name (Matthew 7:22). Yet He still calls them workers of iniquity because their lives were not submitted to God’s will. Their fruit was not obedience, humility, holiness, and truth — but lawlessness beneath religious activity.

So how do we recognize it, especially in leaders?

Not by perfection — but by pattern.

Ask:
• Does their teaching line up with the whole counsel of Scripture, or does it consistently bend verses to fit an agenda?
• Do they point people toward repentance, obedience, and Christ — or toward comfort, self-promotion, and shallow faith?
• Over time, do they demonstrate humility, accountability, and love for people — or control, defensiveness, and self-exaltation?
• Are people growing spiritually under their influence, or becoming confused, dependent, and spiritually stagnant?

The fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23) is the clearest contrast: love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, and self-control. Where the Spirit truly rules a life, these qualities increasingly appear.

In short, everyone sins — but false prophets live from a false root. Their lives consistently produce deception, pride, misuse of authority, and spiritual harm, even if wrapped in religious language and activity.

Jesus wasn’t calling us to be suspicious of every failure in others. He was calling us to be discerning of consistent spiritual character and doctrine.

Bad fruit isn’t an occasional fall.
Bad fruit is a life that repeatedly produces what contradicts the nature of Christ — while claiming His name.

That’s why discernment takes time, Scripture, and the leading of the Holy Spirit — not quick judgments.

“By their fruits ye shall know them.”

51

Amen, well said.

“Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad, for the tree is known by its fruit. You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.

The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” Matthew 12:33-37

Peter

1 Like