Church Discipline

Gentlepeople, you are beginning to demonstrate why biblical discipline isn't working in the modern church. Too many brilliant monkies in the zoo.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Now hold on right there Brother!

I should have reported your insidious remarks!

I made no "strawman neither am I "self-righteous". I am neither mean spirited, well, except when my childen make me be mean. but then being their daddy only makes me out to be mean, it's rather tough-love.

I had not EVER come across as if the situation demands punitve action, but merely disciplinary corrective intentions.

What I have read is this woman threw off on the church and decided to remain in the sin of which they adressed, biblically addressed.

As far as I have seen no one has "put sins on a pedastal", yet I have seen where the humility and brokeness on the behalf of the elders of the church is very present. Have you even read their letter to her?

You're responding to everyone the way you have and now you ask something like this???

Gee, Brother, you sounded so well informed before this. And YOU accuse others of being "mean-spirited"?:tongue3:

 

OK, "chee..ta".

Church discipline has worked when it was handled the way this has been handled: stripper / missionary kid refused to attend her dismissal from the role, had child out of wedlock, spent a few years with no real family fellowship, came crying back and apologized, is now faithful to her local church living for Jesus!

Deacon had an affair with one of his deaf SS students, left wife, wife had affair, husband and the wife the student got back together/ living for Jesus. Deacon of the church "repented" admitting his sin, the entire church came together and hugged his neck forgiving him BEFORE any evidence of repentence was given, he is still in sin with another member of that church who has also followed the steps of this woman in her leaving, she has been removed from the role and made many people upset when the pastor sent her away for her refusal to repent.

These three are still in sin, the first is in church after the church handled it Biblically.

Now who is it YOU'RE accusing, JIM?:praying:

 

Not accusing anyone per se....Just that we can't agree amongst ourselves on so much and we want to counsel others. I am prolly as guilty as any..always remember,,one finger pointing out, three coming back and the thumb up to God.

That's all I am saying, mate.

Cheers,

Jim

 

You have lost it. The post you quoted was not even addressed to you. Either you are trolling or playing a game. Done with this thread.

 

You just lied, again. Good you're "done", but what a joke!

 

posted in error

 

In a public forum you can respond to any post on any thread, whether it is addressed to you or not.

 

Really, I did not know that. Of course, it also includes the ability to give an intelligent response.

 

Thank you both. I was worried about this thread for a while.

First, the woman is clearly wrong, and is clearly subject to church discipline. I might quibble with the methodology in this case a little, but the first two steps are clearly Biblical.

But at that point the woman resigned her membership, both verbally and in writing. The primary purpose of church discipline is to protect the flock. This principle is embedded in the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation. A secondary purpose is to aid the offender in repentance and hopefully restore the member back into fellowship, both with God and the local church. When the member resigned after application of the first two steps, the flock was secured, fellowship was broken, and the discipline matter was over. It's unfortunate and sad that the member chose not to repent, that is always ideal, but the discipline worked exactly as it is supposed to work.

Yet for some reason the elders of the church refuse to close the matter and insists on carrying out the third step tomorrow. But they have no authority to do so. The idea that a church member can't resign their membership without permission from the church is ludicrous. That must be some kind of passed-down, legalistic, Baptist dogma. What the elders are gonna do tomorrow is unbiblical and detrimental to the cause of Christ, at the very least. It could be that they themselves are in sin for adding to the Word of God what is not there. What could have been a learning experience for the church members and a witness to the world has turned into yet another case of Christians doing it to ourselves, all to the glory of our enemy.

Yes, at this point they should have been loving her as they would an unbeliever, not having a public crucifixion of a former member.

That is a judgment call, IMHO, as to what, if anything, is said before the congregation. But this case is an easy call. It should be made clear, just as you said.

That is in agreement with the spirit of the discipline, which is in the past since it ended with the member's resignation. But that is far different thing than carrying out a public discipline of a former member, which the local church has no Biblical authority to do.

:jesus:

 

When did she resign? By her leaving? If her leaving causes her resignation this places things on a world's level in the area of authority placing the individual over the local assembly.

Sure, she can leave, but for her to remain submissive to the Spirit's leading she must join another church of likeminded believers, else she is in rebellion.

Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft/ sin has never had any authority over God's Institution/ The Church.

 

Sorry, but I have very little clue as to what you just said.

She resigned by sending in a letter. If she resigned verbally, maybe that was enough, but it's not the point.

I have no idea what that means. Please explain. It doesn't sound like anything I addressed.

I don't understand what you're driving at here, either. Please explain.

:praying:

 

I have not read the whole thread, so someone else may have already said some of these things, and if so I apoligize for redundancy.

The woman is in her sin, and apparently refuses to part from it.

I see we all have sins we hold on to, the question is do we recognize that, and pray to God for the strength to repent and forsake them, or do we stand in denial of our sin, and refuse to repent of it, or do we throw ourselves upon the mercy of God and pray for his forgiveness?

As for the church. I think their heart and motivation are in the right place, but their scriptural foundation is lacking.


They, have already tried rebuking this woman, scripturally, and she has refused. So be it.

The scriptures provide a solution, and it is not public humiliation.

1Cor.5
[1] It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
[2] And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
[3] For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
[4] In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
[5] To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
[6] Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
[7] Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
[8] Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
[9] I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
[10] Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
[11] But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
[12] For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
[13] But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.


They tried to rebuke her, and from her responce it sounds much like she is held captive as the scriptures speak of in

2Tim.3
[1] This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
[2] For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
[3] Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
[4] Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
[5] Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
[6] For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
[7] Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
[8] Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
[9] But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.
[10] But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,
[11] Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.
[12] Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
[13] But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
[14] But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
[15] And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
[17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

They have done more than they are told to by the scriptures, what they are doing now by continuing to persue this is to further damage the credibility of the church.

in trying to keep things in the church they have fallen in the snare of the enemy and now this is public matter, and for the heathen no less, who I am sure will have a field day with this.

Both parties are wrong, and should let the issue drop, and really follow what the scriptures say.

I realize the woman ,and her boyfriend now that they have been provoked will likely keep pushing but this church needs to drop it , and let her continue in her sin as she has been warned, hopefully she will be burned by her sin before its too late ,and repent, but as it stands this brewing situation, will drive more from the church than it draws to it.

Don't get me wrong , it is a sin, and she should be rebuked, but when she chose to forsake Christ for sin, then the church should have dropped it, and allowed her sin to find her out. period. This should be nipped in the bud asap before the lost have a field day with it.

 

Remember, she sought help from the church. It was her church counselor's betrayal and a busybody churchlady's stalking that drove her away.

 

She wasn't seeking help from anyone when she told that woman she was living with a man, if she wanted help she'd have kicked him out by now. Nowhere in he article does it say she was looking for help.

A person can not just leave a church every time they are called on living their sinful lifestyle, this isn't biblical, the relationship with God can not be restored this way, and the church is responsible to God.

 

Why not use what you are really saying? Why "substitute?"

And our goal is redemption. Will calling her names somehow make the process more valid, or might it cause it more difficulty?

Speak the truth in love.

 

Florida Times-Union
"Just before the divorce was finalized a few months ago, she began dating a man and confided to a woman at church who she went to for "guidance, assistance and counsel." But that woman told church officials, Hancock said.
One Sunday in October, her confidant hugged her and led her to a meeting with some of the church's female members.
"They all went after me," Hancock said. "One of the ladies said, 'I know you haven't come home at night because I was at your house and I saw you not come home.'
"It was so devastating. ... I thought the people who cared for me were in this room.""

 

Uh, OK, but I simply addressed her resigning.

Can you show me where it has ever been accepted a resignation from membership?

The church should accept her "resignation" as evidence of her refusal to repent and thus bringing on thier due action to publicly remove her from their church role. It is not under her authority to remove herself else she is usurping authority over the church in its automony.

People take church membership too lightly as evidenced in this thread. Too often people think the church is a public domain when it is an institution of God, not man's.

 

You are placing yourself in a judgement role which I don't think you are qualified to do this. This example is obviously one-sided.

She should have considerd what her revealing her sin might subject her to. God is not mocked, so why should this woman be allowed to mock the church?

I said this before, her actions are demonic. I cannot speak on behalf of members actions but only on the behalf of the church's responsibility to cleanse itsself.

If she really wanted help, she should have accepted what they said, but it seems more like she wanted them to agree with her actions. this would indicate her demanding the church bow to her wishes and her not being accountable.

Now, if I were the pastor? I would take action by simply addressing the congregation that she was in sin, she has left of her own accord, we had removed her from the role and any fellwoship would be frowned upon except as to restore her.

Case closed and no further mention will be tolerated unless she came to a place of repentence.

I would be open at any time to counsel with her and NOT without my wife being present. She could no longer enjoy any of member's privileges although she is welcomed to attend and get the devil preached out of her!

But do let me be pefectly clear, I, in NO WAY would go "after" her as these "axe-grinding" preachers are so guilty of today! I would follow the Spirit's leading and not my flesh!