Featured Tullian Tchividjian Back in Active Ministry

Correct...as long as it increases the attendance numbers hirelings will take in adulterers.

 

You assume too much to deny repentance on his part. You have no way to know that. That he has gone to another Church is not all that surprising, but, that he still desires to be in Church says quite a lot to me.

As to whether there is true repentance and a desire to maintain fellowship, rather than seeking another position whereby he might satisfy a desire to be in such a position, as I said early on...time will tell.

And the truth is...you have expressed no concern, at all...for him.

As for this...

...you said it, not I.


God bless.

 

And you know this is the case with this fellow?

I would think attendance at his former fellowship would be pretty tough, so it is not that surprising that he would go elsewhere.

Time will tell, and it would seem to me that as the Body our primary concern would be to see a fallen brother restored, rather than throwing the Book at him.


God bless.

 

So now the Church that has taken him in is condemned in your eyes as well?


God bless.

 

From what I read he is not back in ministry, he is simply doing staff work, which should not be equaled to a teaching/preaching ministry (in the perspective of role, not worth, that is).

Would you be happier if the man had walked away from fellowship, expressed he had denounced Christ, and never returned to the Body?

You mean it is a Church not concerned with how you have interpreted the Word of God.

There is good reason for this Church to do the opposite of what some of you are doing, that is...have a concern for the welfare of this man. Instead of thinking the worse, would it be so hard to think that this man has repented? Is it so unbelievable that God is managing this affair (no pun intended)?

We will not know, perhaps for years, exactly what the truth is. Time will tell. To jump to conclusions and to disregard very clear Scripture in regards to those who are fallen is, in my view, an unbalanced approach to this issue. The fact that it is in the media spotlight throws it into more confusion, because we are prone to be defensive when the name of Christ is dishonored, and that is understandable.

My only point in this thread is that we should not be hasty to judge this man without heeding the Word of God in relation to ourselves.


Matthew 7:2

King James Version (KJV)

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.



It astounds me how one can preach a Gospel that shows the mercies of God to unbelievers, yet for them the same God stands at the ready with a baseball bat to strike down those who sin after conversion.

Again, time will tell, and for my part I will simply wait to see how this plays out. I will pray for this man and the restoration of his walk with Christ, his family, and hope that out of this God will bring a harvest of good from the evil that has been committed. We do not know, as I said before, the positive impact this event will have on others. Perhaps one (or many) contemplating adultery will recognize the evil and stay a steady course.

Who knows, for this is mostly speculation on our parts. We can't assume to know this man's heart or...God's involvement and exactly how He is working this. What we do know is that God can not only show mercy upon a sinning Christian, though He chastise them, but He can restore them. And He has already told us that He restores...

...through us.


God bless.

 

No, it's not, and while some may disagree with that, to put a staff position into a category of "ministering" is ridiculous.

That is what we call service, something expected of all believers, whether they have sinned or not.

And I would like anyone here who has not sinned to raise their hand at this time.

Is the fact that this man committed the physical act of adultery worse than the preacher that has lusted in his heart after a woman? Do you think there is no Pastor or Sunday School teacher that has done that? So should we put them under a spotlight and beat them with rubber hoses until they confess, so we can make sure we don't have any adulterers in the pulpits across America and the world?

If you need a passage to illustrate the difference between ministering the Word of God and service, here you go:


Acts 6

King James Version (KJV)

1 And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.

2 Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables.

3 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.


They seemed to see a difference.

And I include v.3 with the purpose of emphasizing that I am not saying this man should be placed back in a position of leadership, though what God may decide in the future is up to Him. As with the examples of Paul , John Mark, and Peter, the point is that even those who have committed grievous sin have gone on to do great works for the Lord.

And it is just my guess that the forgiveness, compassion, mercy, and ministering of a restorative and loving fellowship...

...played a key role in their restoration.

Who said that?

It is too early for us to know what is going to happen. The man may not even be saved, and this event may be the very thing that brings conversion.

But what is in view is our reaction to it, and frankly I see a spirit of condemnation that more resembles the hatred of the Pharisees, who also felt justified in railing against sinners...than the compassion that should be held by those who have a better understanding of sin and how Satan destroys lives through temptation.

I will say that there is a difference between those who serve on staff, deacons, for example, or treasurers, than those called of God to minister the New Covenant. And I think there are too many who fail to distinguish that difference and it leads to a false conclusion as to what our roles as Christians should be, and what our service to Christ should be. One might think that performing those roles relieves them of the obligation to study and to witness. But our foremost calling, and that's all of us, is to minister the Gospel, whether we be in active "ministry" or not.

This man has made a mess of things, for himself and many others, but, that doesn't mean we respond in Pharisaical fashion. I think patience is necessary, and at the very least we should pray for the man.

Of course. But what happens after that depends specifically on his response to that discipline. I don't think that because he has joined another Church this shows he is unrepentant. That is speculation and in my opinion over-stepping the bounds of what we, as outsiders and not privy to all aspects and details...should assume. Any judgment made, or any conclusion, apart from all relevant data is worthless.

You assume too much. You cannot possibly know this man's heart.

Not only that, but you condemn the fellowship that has taken him in.

The statement from that Church displays a sober dealing with the issue in my opinion. And the fact is...they're the ones that have this issue to handle now. So give it time and let's see what happens. It may be glorious, it may be disastrous, but at least we should wait to see.

Takes two to tango, and we might, if we include Satan...say three.

No man, no woman...stands above temptation. And if I remember correctly, the wife also committed adultery.

Now let me ask you this: have you, since you were married...obeyed the Word of God flawlessly? If so...bravo! If not...was the transgression on your part just a small infraction? Something that God overlooks because, after all, not all sin is the same?

Who knows? Time will tell.

I have enough confidence in God, as well as the Record of Scripture to validate His Sovereignty in affairs like these, to know He can bring beauty from ashes. That He can take sinful men like Abraham, Moses, David, Paul, Peter, John Mark, and...me, lol, and use them for His purposes, rather than the purposes we once served.


God bless.

 

Repentance and forgiveness are two completely different matters.

There is a certain cleansing that goes along with repentance. Cleansing takes time, energy, and is not private.

A person who had sullied their testimony, must undergo the cleansing process that those both within and without the body see first hand the results of making clean.

As it stands, moving geographically is not cleansing. It is avoidance.

The unclean person will fail, again, if not overtly, at least inwardly which will manifest outwardly, again.

Until the people of the impacted fellowship and the authorities, of which that group has submitted, have publicly acknowledged the cleansing process and that healing have been complete not just in that person, but in all touched by the offense, the offender shouldn't expect the be given the spiritual or even physical authority over anyone, not even trash pick up of the assembly.

That another fellowship not only welcomes, but publicly praises the addition to the staff of such a person is unwise.

Were I a member, I would seek the removal of either that person, or remove myself from that fellowship, and I would not go quietly. The fellowship invited and accepted what was unclean to have authority over them.

If I were on staff, I would immediately call for a meeting of that church's authorities and express that they have sinned. If there were not immediate changes made, I would not let the sun go down without disassociating from them and dusting off my feet.

This may sound harsh, but I have personal experience with churches in these type of situations. The unclean do not make the clean nor is there the ability of the unclean to clean.

 

I keep seeing his defenders say that his Biblical qualifications or lack there of don't matter since he is not in a teaching role, but that is not Biblical either. The Deacons or "table servers" had to meet qualifications as well.

Acts 6:2-3

2*And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables.*3*Therefore, brothers,*pick out from among you seven men*of good repute, *full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty.*

8*Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued,[c]*not addicted to much wine,*not greedy for dishonest gain.9*They must*hold the mystery of the faith with*a clear conscience.*10*And*let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless.*11*Their wives likewise must[d]be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded,*faithful in all things.*12*Let deacons each be*the husband of one wife,managing their children and their own households well.*13*For*those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.

No matter how you slice it he has no business being put in any kind of church leadership role less then a month after filing for divorce.

And this church had no business hiring him and putting up a glowing bio about him less then a month after filing for divorce.

 

No-one is arguing that. But that you place custodial duties on a par with preaching the Gospel is quite disturbing. And it illustrates what I said earlier about this, and I view it as a failure to recognize the priority of the Gospel in the Body of Christ.

They are not on a par.

But his ministry as custodian is not to be confused with the ministry of ministering to people. Those are two separate services. It is illustrated by Stephen going from serving tables to preaching the Gospel and dying for it. No-one would have killed Stephen for serving tables.

I am simply flabbergasted, lol.

Not sure how to reply to such a statement.

That is commendable, however, should the Gospel cease there would be no reason to answer the phones, vacuum the carpets, and mow the grass.

So let me ask you this, if we have all of these members serving yet the Pastor is teaching heresy, should that fellowship continue?

Commendable, yet irrelevant to the focus.

This assumes that none of you ever sin. Again, I would remind you that sin is sin, and that all Christians sin to some degree or another. When we categorize we are simply rationalizing sin, and that is not a good idea. We should be as sorrowful over the slightest sin as we are over the more egregious.

To say that certain sins qualify for the removal from service and others do not is not a proper Biblical perspective of sin, so the primary point I am making is not that we should discount the grievous sin this man has committed, but rather not to dismiss the serious nature of all sin to which we are all susceptible to.

Sometimes excommunication is necessary, and either the original fellowship of this body has done that or it is self-imposed. It is speculated that he simply moved to another "target," but I would mention that this was secret sin, not a matter of the man openly bilking the Church or something along those lines. He never, I am sure, expected this to come to light, but it has, and I am not surprised he has changed fellowships.

If he has received the same reaction there that he has here...go figure.

Haven't I said just that?

Speculation on your part. You cannot possibly know what is going on with this man or all involved.

I don't see that. I see an opportunity where he can find restoration to fellowship with Christ and the Body. We will have to wait and see if he has repented, and until then, the best thing is to leave this in the hands of God and see how it unfolds.


God bless.

 

Is this going to set a precedent for the Whole of The PCA? Tell you why I'm asking.....I've got two PCA churches in my area. One of the pastors has told me point blank that doctrine will not be taught. I see them gravitating to a more liberal easy going stance in their scriptural delivery. The other pastor, tells me anyway that they will hold to doctrine. The 2nd guy is the ones church I've been attending. Now if they morph into PC USA apostate types, I don't want to be there. Any insight?

 

But from a Biblical perspective they usually go hand in hand, and are expected from...

...all parties.

Agreed, but let's not forget our responsibility to temper judgment with mercy.

For myself, it raises a certain amount of fear when I hear of something like this because I know that this is something that, lest we are vigilant...can happen to anyone. And I think that for people who are positions of leadership in the Body, temptation is higher due to the fact that some people will idolize their leaders.

The bottom line is I think many are jumping the gun and not giving the time necessary for chance of restoration and forgetting that forgiveness is commanded, not a suggestion for the Body of Christ.

Biblically speaking his home church has followed what I think is a proper procedure. As to his new church, they have taken on a responsibility which could either be motivated by right or wrong reasons.

But we will have to wait and see.

It's not?

When is the last time you openly confessed your sin before your congregation?

Sorry, but this man's sin is first and foremost between him and God. The reality must be internal and frankly, seeing the reaction of some here, it is likely that his moving was of necessity. You can't understand how ashamed this man should feel, and how that would lead to a new fellowship?

Speculation and hasty judgment on your part, as far as I am concerned.

So once a man fails all hope is lost?

That's bad news for all of us.

Could you present a Scriptural presentation that we might know this to be Biblical truth and a Christian Doctrine?

Oh, so it is not until they decide this man has sufficiently repented he is to be treated as a villain?

Exactly what kind of forgiveness is it that you speak about?

That is possible, as motivations may be wrong, however, it is equally true that they may be showing wisdom and at the least may be exercising the very mercy towards restoration that some of us see taught in Scripture.

Time will tell.

Just not true, he has not been placed in a position of authority. Let's keep the facts straight and perhaps we might better understand the situation.

And that would be your choice.

Of course, you may find yourself in violation of Scripture:


Hebrews 13:17

King James Version (KJV)

17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.


Just for the record, I have run into "staff" which has expressed a disrespectful and domineering attitude towards Pastors, which should not be the case. As far as I am concerned, there is an authority granted to Pastors which is commanded to be obeyed by God, and those who sit on councils and think they are going to "set the Pastor straight" sin against God. Now you take that sin and compare it to adultery...are you going to say one is worse than the other?

You're right...it does sound harsh, as well as unloving.

I am sure the world agrees with you...burn this fellow at the stake.

And you let your personal experience determine your view, apparently.

Not even sure what that is supposed to mean.

But, there is a God in Heaven who has a track record throughout the history of man of making the unclean...clean. And using lesser vessels.

But if one is looking to the Church to handle this situation, and that is what appears to be the theme of some of these responses, then you will likely get the results such action necessitates, and restoration is likely not to be forthcoming.


God bless.

 

What doctrine are you talking about?


God bless.

 

Completely irrelevant and ignoring that which is relevant.

First, the point was that equating serving tables with ministering the Word of God is a mistake, and one which is why we have so many who are Churchians, rather than what they are supposed to be...Christian.

Secondly, it has been made clear the man is not in a leadership position, which makes moot your statement.

Third, it ignores the underlying theme of restoration, which makes this view unbalanced and unbiblical.

Fourth, it ignores the fact that there is Biblical precedent for men being used even after egregious sin, which shows that while men (and women) may throw those who fall to the lions...God does not.

It is a proof-texting to support a condemning spirit which is no different than what we see in the Pharisees of Christ's Day.

It is too soon to be casting judgment, it will take time to see how this works out for this man and his family, who are the real characters in this drama. The impact on the congregation, while difficult, should not shake the foundations of their faith...

...if they understand man's weakness.


God bless.

 

And by the way, I would remind you every congregation is different, so while they are a unified group, we can't expect that the leadership is completely in agreement on all points in every fellowship. This would depend in large part on the doctrine of the Pastor and his teaching/preaching ministry.

A number of groups have, in recent years...begun turning liberal in their practice, when we compare them to some of the great preachers of the Presbyterian Church of old.

But isn't that sadly true of most?


God bless.