Church Discipline

Yes. It's possible the Cop is saved, I almost edited that part to reflect that.

It is also possible the guy is innocent, yet you already found him guilty.

So we're even :saint:

 

I haven't found him guilty, the Vice Squad found him guilty. Whether entrapment or not, he was drawn away of his own lust and enticed.

Had he not fell for a lure, he would not have been arrested.

 

We do the same thing Ann. Better to be safe than sorry :saint:

 

God will not let a church grow spiritually that is not obedient to His Word.

To allow one with such an nature to remain among the congregation would be allowing 'sin in the camp.' Achan was killed for hiding sin in the camp.

God's house is a house of prayer, not a den of thieves. Jesus said if they don't repent, take it before the congregation. Paul said put such an one out from among you.

Yet the church today seems to want to disregard the Word of God and obey the flesh.

God cannot bless with sin in the camp.

 

No one has found him guilty yet, the trial is still in progress.

I am remembering why I never wanted to go to church in the first place. Christians are often so naive. Not you personally, in general. It's scary.

The guy is expected to DO WHAT HE DID. The VIce Squad WANT these results, and set him up to obtain only these results. It is the Vice Squad. Anything less is a failure.
If they keep setting people up, and the innocent people don't comply, it hurts some people's jobs. They must bring in the $$ (convictions) to pay their salary, thus feed their family. This is HOW the VICE SQUAD operates.

They knew his weakness, his past conviction, and deliberately tried to bring it fourth when in real life, he is likely not a danger. I doubt he did ANYTHING at all yet by the time the sleeping tiger is after you, they will get you no matter what.

I bet....The truth is... it's likely this town doesn't need a vice squad, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to incite lustful desires in a small town guy in this manner. There clearly isn't enough crime to pay their salaries or this set up wouldn't have occurred in the first place.


The fact is, by the time a grown man flashes another grown man to get him flash him right back, there is NO victim anyway. So who cares if he did flash the Cop back. It is a consentual act between consenting adults. The Cop is MORE at fault for lighting the match in the first place. Again, I believe he was framed, just playing devils advocate here. It appears he didn't do anything wrong.

We want criminals whom are victimizing us against our will in jail.

 

If my statement

causes you to think I am naive, you are sadly mistaken. My statement is based on direct Scripture.

James 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

The lust was already there in his heart.

Joe, you need to study the Word of God before calling Christian's naive.

 

"Christians are often so naive. Not you personally, in general. It's scary"

This is my quote SFIC. And yes, they are a more naive bunch imo. They shoot and kill their own too often.

SFIC, you do not know he has lust in his heart, so don't quote a bible verse as if you do. You need to study the Word of God

You are judging a brother, and likely falsely accusing him.

 

Actually, Joe, that was your quote after you edited it. I had already copied the original quote and was replying to that. Your original quote clearly was implying I was naive for showing what Scripture teaches. That one is tempted only when drawn away of one's own lusts and enticed.

Had the lust not already been there, the Vice Squad would not have been able to tempt him.

Christians are not to be naive. Scripture declares we should be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.

 

Talk about jumping to conclusions. How do you know they set him up? How do you know they were targeting him? You've tried to turn this into an indictment of a police officer rather than what this thread is about: the issue of church discipline.

I think you need to go through the process talked about by Jesus.

 

Well, you must have been pretty quick at the finger. I edited it soon afterwards :saint: and before I read your post.

 

You need to re- read my post. Please note the bolded, I was playing devils advocate. This is what I said in my post. Either way, something is not right.

If he is innocent, where do you see a need for church discipline?

 

God's Word states we cannot eat at the Lord's table and drink of the devil's cup. Christian's should not be playing the devil's advocate.

 

1 Corinthians 8:13*
13Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall.
Romans 14:13*Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way

We do not set each other up to fail.

It's possible that the Vice Squad was just walking down the street and this guy decided to flash them. But imo, it's more likely he was set up. Instigated.

This goes against scripture and should not be supported, especially at a brothers expense. The evidence needs to be clearly examined, not false assumptions based upon our own biases.

To my knowledge, I am not aware of church discipline being called for in this situation.

 

Matthew 18 Applies Only When Two Conditions Exist

A. *Matthew 18 applies when unrepentant sin is involved. The passage begins with the conditional statement, “if your brother sins against you....” *This passage is referring to cases where clearly identifiable wrongdoing against another in the church is involved.
B. *Matthew 18 applies when there are at least two or three witnesses of the sin. Otherwise, the sin do not exist, the process cannot move forward.
Deuteronomy 19:15
A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established.
Numbers 35:30
If anyone kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the evidence of witnesses. But no person shall be put to death on the testimony of one witness.

1. Since the accused is spending a huge amount of money to appeal the conviction upon the bases of "entrapment" there is clearly SOLID basis there of his innocence. Very few people would throw out $$ on an appeals process they couldn't win.
2. The Cop is from the Vice Squad. A group well know for setting up sting operations, holding the persons past sins hostage (using their background against them) while trying to bring them fourth to gain conviction.
3. This exact situation happened before, a very humilating circumstance, yet your brother told you the truth.

If the Brothers involved in this incident will apologize to this man, repent of their own sin in breaking God's commands (Exodus 20:16"You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor. Psalm 11:7) then you may be able to restore credibility with this brother.

The Godly way to learn if this man flashed anyone, and why he did it is to be a real brother in Christ. If it's true, and he did this, especially knowing his past, then he needs to repent.

When Christians blindly jump ship to shoot their own in the worst possible time, while they are already wounded, you have to wonder if they are true Christians. Obviously, that is much worse than flashing someone who instigated it.

I would be very cautious in continuing to attend this "Christian" church if the Pastor and Elders/Deacons endorsed this. This is my last post.

 

AMEN!!!


Advocating the devil is completely in totallly disregard for God.

I find that Christians who seem to think they can "play the devil's advocate" are usually wrong in their assumptions being divided, rather than being stedfast and unmovable.

 

Total conjecture there.:laugh:

 

:BangHead:

I never cease to be astounded by the way that some around misunderstand common English words and expressions, then condemn others based on their ignorance.

Devil's advocate - In common parlance, a devil's advocate is someone who takes a position for the sake of argument. This process can be used to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure.

Do you realize that "deviled eggs" are not eggs that the devil has possessed, but are actually hardboiled eggs, divided longways and have their yolks replaced by a tasty mixture of cooked yolk, mustard, mayo, chopped pickles and maybe a dash of white vinegar?

Do you ban deviled eggs from church fellowships? What about deviled ham?

Wow.

 

The devil's advocate argues the point and counterpoint from the devil's perspective, go figure.

We don't have deviled eggs at our church socials but we do have angel-spiced eggs in their place.

We believe everything the devil has tried to put into place should be replaced with things that bring attention and Glory to the Lord, don't you?

I don't misunderstand the expression nor it's intended purpose, as a born again child of God I find it hard to argue from the three pronged fasle trinity, two-pointed intellectual and often contradictory standpoints, red-hot faced debator, with a hook in it's tail to ensnare those as he flees, devil!

 

I agree.:thumbs: