Should Christian churches kick out people who have sex outside of marriage?
The Bible says its wrong right?
__________________ "give me a kiss to build a dream on and my imagination will thrive upon that kiss... sweetheart I ask no more than this... a kiss to build a dream on"
It's not very Christ-like behavior and I dont see the biblical justification for kicking them out of church.
If you kick people out because they break the rules then you're going to have a REAL empty church
__________________
Even Now In Heaven There Are Angels Carrying Savage Weapons
Chairs thrown and tables toppled,
Hands armed with broken bottles,
Standing no chance to win but,
We're not running, we're not running.
Black eyes, broken fingers,
Blood drips and I let it run
down my lips into my swollen gums.
When hope is non-existent,
Our instincts all scream "Run",
We never turn our backs or even bite our tongues.
Yeah, let's kick out all the people you think sin, on any level at all... that makes sense right? Because Jesus only welcomed non-sinners to God. (... sarcasm, obviously)
Fact is, the church would be kinda empty without sinners.
(Not that I think pre-marital sex is a sin. *ducks* -- but if you do, it still doesn't pan out. Church is more for sinners than it is for the pure of heart -- and even the so-called "pure of heart" sin. No sin is greater than any other, with the exception of good old blasphemy)
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"... that scripture possessed a literal and historical meaning,
but that this interpretation was only for 'simple believers of simple mind,'
those whose spiritual maturity could not grasp the Word's deeper dimensions."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
If we are not sinless, then we still have some unrepentant sin. So unless you want to just empty out the church...
__________________
.
..:
If history is to change, let it change. If the world is to be destroyed, so be it. If my fate is to die, I must simply laugh.
The past is dead. It was all just a dream...
- Magus
To help protect the sanctity of marriage, please keep all affairs heterosexual.
If no image appears, something has gone wrong. I don't know. Probably run out of squirrels.
No offense guys, but all these replies are just ridiculous. Especially the ones coming from those with Christian icons. I kind of expect them to know a little better about their own faith. But what do I expect? So called Christians who don't even know the difference between the OT and the NT. But that's another story.....
If you know your Bible at all, there are in fact precedents to discipline people by disfellowshipping from your community, association, congregation etc.
Jesus refers to it (not allowing certain people inside your home) and Paul practiced it (disfellowshipping). However, these forms of discipline are not for just anybody that sinned. Because obviously the churches would be empty.
This form of discipline is for anyone engaging in open sin, contrary to the scriptures, and refusing to repent of it. This discipline is for deliberate, habitual, unrepentant sin.
So yes, there are Biblical precedents for it. And in fact, in such communities as Jehovah's Witnesses or the Amish, you would be disfellowshipped if you refused to acknowledge your sin and turn away from it. Unrepentant fornication for them would be grounds for such an action.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by BlackSabb; 27th September 2009 at 02:54 AM.
That being said, it wouldn't make a lick of difference to me. I'm just saying. Operation on assumptions.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"... that scripture possessed a literal and historical meaning,
but that this interpretation was only for 'simple believers of simple mind,'
those whose spiritual maturity could not grasp the Word's deeper dimensions."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Maybe if people stopped obsessing over kicking people OUT of church, and rather worried more about how to make people feel accepted and supported IN church, maybe, just maybe, rates of Church attendance wouldn't be plummeting and rates of atheism wouldn't be climbing.
Working out who to exclude is NOT what Christianity is meant to be about.
That being said, it wouldn't make a lick of difference to me. I'm just saying. Operation on assumptions.
Yes, you are correct when you say that the OP didn't mention "unrepentant". However, to answer the OP's question, I had to mention that. Because "unrepentant" is the Biblical condition for a person's sin that would qualify them to be "kicked out of the church". Which is what the OP enquired about.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Yes, you are correct when you say that the OP didn't mention "unrepentant". However, to answer the OP's question, I had to mention that. Because "unrepentant" is the Biblical condition for a person's sin that would qualify them to be "kicked out of the church". Which is what the OP enquired about.
However, you didn´t have to call answers to the OP as it read "ridiculous".
__________________
Why I call myself a „non-believer“ or „atheist“:
I can´t relate to any of the god concepts I´m familiar with so far.
Either I´m not convinced by the concept, or
– although not having a problem with the worldview itself -
I see no reason to call one of its elements „God“:
There are already more precise, more common, less loaded and less likely to be misunderstood terms for these elements.
E.g. I prefer to call nature „nature“, the universe „universe“ and everything „everything“.
Linear Mode
