What's being taught in our churches? :(

[Dave-W]

You can forgive someone and still hold them accountable….I do not agree that even if a person does not repent to you that gives you the right not to forgive as you have said, thats WRONG.

Wait a minute. I did not say that. In fact I told Wild that exact same thing.

Did you read the article? About half way down, Juster switches gears and talks about the kind of forgiveness you (and I) are talking about. I believe his term (not in the article) is judicial forgiveness; as opposed to the transactional forgiveness he writes about first in the article.

 

[Norah63]

In many churches sin has gone away. It got swallowed up in a hyper grace message.
User friendly is the motto of congregations, looking for numbers to fill the pews.
Music and food does a pretty good job.
Sorry you have been done wrong by "pretenders". I would advise the next ones you allow in your home, visit their home first. See what it looks, and sounds like, the clues will be there.
Everyone should be accountable for their actions, that's why we have government of laws.
Forgive if you will to, but discern and learn.

 

[7angels]

i have read about how we should forgive those that hurt us. i have heard that it is unscriptural to sue christians(this is wrong thinking biblically). i read also about how church leaders are to blame and ect.

more people seem to be hurt by believers then by unbelievers. why? could it be that people hold christians to a higher standard then unbelievers? but when a christians acts just as an unbeliever it hurts the person who put their faith and hope in them. an unbelievers is expected to steal, cheat, and ect which is why they seem to go through such strict requirements in order to get anything so people can get the best unbelievers to rent too that will not destroy everything. christians who should be held to a much higher standard are making all christians look bad and this is also causing so much christian hypocrisy that people are leaving God and also not wanting to become a christian.

next subject i mean no offense but i think this is critical to say. where are you in your walk with God. some people have been christians for 50 years but are still babies in Christ. why is that? these baby christians are mostly the ones giving Christianity a bad name. i expect unchristian like behavior too a certain degree from brand new christians but not from those that have been supposedly living the christian life for a while now. how many of you hear the Spirit talking to you? some stated earlier that we should look at the fruit to see where a person is in Christ. that is correct and if you can hear the Spirit talking to you then He will not lead you astray. so why do so many terrible things happen to christians? if you listen to the Spirit then you should never go wrong with Him guiding you. unless there are lots of areas in your lives wrong you never ask for guidance. if you are not asking then you probably are not listening for guidance from the Spirit. the Spirit is talking to us 24/7 and yet how many hear Him taking that much? we get caught up in our daily lives and forget about God. it is easy to do if you are not bound and determined to take the time to spend with God.

well i ave to go

God bless

 

[Dave-W]

some people have been christians for 50 years but are still babies in Christ. why is that?

Because the church FORGOT what making disciples was all about: "Teaching them to observe ...." and not letting them get away with NOT observing.

Instead of disciples, we are making converts.

 

[imwildfire]

1. I free myself by the power of God from all bitterness, hate and vengeful motives toward the brother. I receive this ability through the meaning of the cross of Jesus.

2. I release the offender to God so that it is no longer a matter of my mental preoccupation and a hindrance to my joy in God. If the person will not be accountable to due process in the church, or due process is impossible because of the substandard situation of the church, I need not have my life ruined by another's sin.

3. I receive love and compassion for the offender. My heart and prayer for the offender is for him to be fully redeemed or restored. Therefore, in compassion, I desire that the person come to true repentance.

4. Because my heart is loving, if the person repents, I will fully receive him back in the transaction of forgiveness.

Exactly. Thank you DaveW for posting that. Because we don't use the exact same verbage, it should be obvious that's what we've been saying. Can't recall saying we're going to hang on to this and beat it into the ground and let it consume us.

We also agree with the rest of what you posted. That's only one of many Bible based studies one can find on this subject. Good place to start on one's own might be Luke 17:3 &4.

Also don't recall ever saying anything we have in our care on this earth was owned by anyone but the Lord. FYI we have always acknowledged that we are not the owners. That's quite a judgement.

We talked about this last night and this morning and we're just going to put a period on this as far as we're concerned. The story about what happened to us is an explanation of why we are asking the question posed. Lack of response pretty much tells us what the sad answer must be.

Spoke with a Bible scholar/teacher yesterday about this and in the last 40 years of teaching he has watched the churches deteriorate right before his eyes. In his case he believes "numbers" is the reason. Don't offend. Do whatever is necessary to keep the numbers up. Piece by piece, one tolerated sin after another, our churches are moving away from God. And they don't even notice. Can't say he's wrong.

 

[dragongunner]

Wait a minute. I did not say that. In fact I told Wild that exact same thing.

Did you read the article? About half way down, Juster switches gears and talks about the kind of forgiveness you (and I) are talking about. I believe his term (not in the article) is judicial forgiveness; as opposed to the transactional forgiveness he writes about first in the article.

From the article you posted, so I would think you agree with it.

"However, what if the person does not repent and has no desire to make restitution? Must we forgive anyway and act like nothing happened? I have three answers to this question. No! No! No! "

I say there is no bible for this, just because a person does not repent does not give us the right to not forgive. Perhaps you and the author see it in a different light, but I do not. We are commanded to forgive, or we will not be forgiven…..the author lost me at that point. He should stick with the scriptures. So once again, if we do not forgive, we will not be forgiven. YES, YES, YES.

 

[Norah63]

I even forgave the policeman that gave the ticket, as well as myself for speeding.
However the fine still had to be paid.
Actions means there is a price to pay for doing wrong.
God forbid that as a church we would ever slide into darkness of not seeing the difference.

 

[Jethro99]

I'm seeing a few points being discussed here..

1. The issue mentioned in the original post where people in a leadership position at a local church acted in a very unchristian like way and were seemingly unrepentant about it. That coupled with the local church's avoidance of the issue leads to the question, "Is there some deficit in our churches that causes or allows this behavior?"

2. The need for forgiveness even though that may be a very hard thing.

But, issue number #2 doesn't mean that issue #1 doesn't exist in my opinion. We shouldn't give #1 a pass by just focusing on #2.


A little more on #1.

I remember when I joined the boy scouts there was a code of conduct we were expected to follow. Things we were supposed to do or not do - and this was taught.

When I got a job there was a code of conduct I was expected to follow - and this was taught.

In my family my folks made sure I knew what the "do's" and "do nots" were.

There are do's and don'ts to being a Christian too. Sometimes our churches may not spend enough time on "the basics" for those to take hold.

 

[Dave-W]

From the article you posted, so I would think you agree with it.

"However, what if the person does not repent and has no desire to make restitution? Must we forgive anyway and act like nothing happened? I have three answers to this question. No! No! No! "

I say there is no bible for this, just because a person does not repent does not give us the right to not forgive. Perhaps you and the author see it in a different light, but I do not. We are commanded to forgive, or we will not be forgiven…..the author lost me at that point. He should stick with the scriptures. So once again, if we do not forgive, we will not be forgiven. YES, YES, YES.

Dragon - did you see this from the article?:

Don't we have to forgive? I believe there is another meaning to forgiveness which is different from the transactional meaning. This forgiveness does not restore our fellowship with the sinning brother. However, it puts our hearts right.' When we say "I forgive" in this sense, we mean the following:

1. I free myself by the power of God from all bitterness, hate and vengeful motives toward the brother. I receive this ability through the meaning of the cross of Jesus.

2. I release the offender to God so that it is no longer a matter of my mental preoccupation and a hindrance to my joy in God. If the person will not be accountable to due process in the church, or due process is impossible because of the substandard situation of the church, I need not have my life ruined by another's sin.

3. I receive love and compassion for the offender. My heart and prayer for the offender is for him to be fully redeemed or restored. Therefore, in compassion, I desire that the person come to true repentance.

4. Because my heart is loving, if the person repents, I will fully receive him back in the transaction of forgiveness.

Does that not cover your concerns?

 

[brixken7]

I am not fond of "autonomy" for congregations (and even less fond of totally independant congregations). I do know the AG likes their autonomy. But IMO the pastor that said "sue them" was biblically wrong. Suing a fellow believer is prohibited in scripture:

1 Cor 6.1 Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints?
2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts?
3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life?
4 So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?
5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren,
6 but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?
7 Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?
8 On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.

.........................

True, it's WRONG to sue a fellow believer, but are these people who don't act like fellow believers TRULY BELIEVERS?

 

[Dave-W]

True, it's WRONG to sue a fellow believer, but are these people who don't act like fellow believers TRULY BELIEVERS?

That is just it. We cannot know the state of someone else's heart. So we have to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they ARE believers.

That is where the Mattew 18 process comes in.

 

[dragongunner]

Dragon - did you see this from the article?:


Does that not cover your concerns?

No. I would like scripture, not someones opinion. Can you show me scripture that until a person repents to us its up to us "if" we should forgive them. Notice once again how he uses "IF" in regards to forgiveness and repentance.

"4. Because my heart is loving, "IF" the person repents, I will fully receive him back in the transaction of forgiveness."

vs. scripture


Matthew 6:15

15 But "IF" ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

 

[Dave-W]

The "IF" there in his point 4 is what switches the forgiveness from judicial forgiveness (without restored fellowship) to transactional forgiveness. (with restoration of fellowship)

 

[Fallior]

Luke 12:57
You actually are allowed to sue if they clearly aren't sorry and see nothing wrong, they aren't truly a fellow christian, are they? So, like with God, Justice should be served.

 

[dragongunner]

Luke 12:57
You actually are allowed to sue if they clearly aren't sorry and see nothing wrong, they aren't truly a fellow christian, are they? So, like with God, Justice should be served.

Luke 12:57

57 Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?


That scripture if you read on is talking about if your enemy is taking you to the courts to be sued. Not the other way around.


1 Corinthians 6:7

7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

What should be done when this happens among brothers for it to brought to the congregation and he who is least esteemed let him judge the matter.

 

[Devorim]

This is a serious question that's nagging at us as a Born-again Christian Senior Citizen Couple....If we take away the music, is Jesus being lifted up and is the flock being taught how a Christian lives? This is not the first time we've run into this. Improper behavior seems to be excused with the one size fits all excuse of "we're not perfect, just forgiven". There's a huge difference between mistakes and willful disobedience coupled with no repentance.

So, what's going on?

I left a holiness-Pentecostal church, after they kicked me out (for finally refusing to continue to remove my wedding band when coming to church), because of the lack of integrity. Not everyone there was like that; it was mainly many of the pastors and teachers who were decadent, and they supported those like them.

Short synopsis, in order to explain what I intend:

• In my early childhood, my pastor was supported and loved in spite of his raging from the pulpit, coddling of his family members to the specific hurt of others. In other words, the wrongs the pastor did were rights because he was the pastor.
• Another pastor caught me in a dark hallway, when I was an older teen, and kissed me like a teenage boy and got away with it because I had been taught that the wrongs the pastor did were rights because he was the pastor.
• When I was newly widowed, a pastor asked me inappropriate sexual questions about being suddenly single as a young woman and got away with it because the wrongs the pastor did were rights because he was the pastor.
• The next pastor put his hands on my breasts and got away with it because the wrongs the pastor did were rights because he was the pastor.
• Another pastor called me a liar when I went to him for counseling, after he insisted, regarding being abused, and got away with it because the wrongs the pastor did were rights because he was the pastor.

My pastors were decadent but protected by the organization. What, then, should we expect of the individuals of the congregation? Something better?When there is no integrity among the leaders, how can we expect it of those in the congregation?

BUT!

There were those held hostage by the teachings of that holiness/Pentecostal church who really had true faith -- those who really were believers! Even while staying in that organization, held by brainwashing and fear of hell fire if we left, they circumvented the "junk" of that church and lived what the Bible taught. And many of us have left.

In spite of that church, this is what we did when we were renters:
We determined that we would leave the home better than it was when we first rented. And we did it. This is the difference between putting one's trust in what the Bible teaches, not in a church or an organization. For most of us who did this, we learned it outside the auspices of the church. The church/organization could not teach this, because it didn't know it. The church/organization's main prerogative was survival of the church/organization, not the Truth, not the survival of its members.

 

[Devorim]

One more thing -- perhaps the most important! They taught that believers do not sin. As a result, they could not admit that they sinned. Therefore, they covered up their sins, leaving them unrepented. A supposed "Christian" cannot get by with that before the Almighty, the Judge, Who does not judge by the sight of His eyes nor with the hearing of His ears.

 

[Fallior]

Luke 12:57

57 Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?


That scripture if you read on is talking about if your enemy is taking you to the courts to be sued. Not the other way around.


1 Corinthians 6:7

7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

What should be done when this happens among brothers for it to brought to the congregation and he who is least esteemed let him judge the matter.

So if a person is very poor, say worst circumstances and the only money they have left is what their house is worth, and the house is destroyed somehow and you find out it happened due to your neighbor. You have no insurance and now nothing because you had no money left, what exactly do you do, let the neighbor go scott free? There must be some circumstances where God is okay with it. It is similar to you calling the police on someone, they get punished for wrong they did against you. It's justice.

 

[Dave-W]

Luke 12:57
You actually are allowed to sue if they clearly aren't sorry and see nothing wrong, they aren't truly a fellow christian, are they? So, like with God, Justice should be served.

Paul is clear in 1 Corinthians. Church leadership should make the judgment, NOT the secular court system.

Read chapter 6 again.

 

[dragongunner]

So if a person is very poor, say worst circumstances and the only money they have left is what their house is worth, and the house is destroyed somehow and you find out it happened due to your neighbor. You have no insurance and now nothing because you had no money left, what exactly do you do, let the neighbor go scott free? There must be some circumstances where God is okay with it. It is similar to you calling the police on someone, they get punished for wrong they did against you. It's justice.

Was the neighbor a christian? We are talking about taking brethren to the courts. Are we talking about a crime, the police are the ministers of the Lord executing judgement on the evil. The scriptures we are talking about do with civil actions with brethren. Lets not muddy the water with crime and lawlessness, that could be good topic for a thread if you would like to start that.