Should people living in sin be rejected from the church

[Grip Docility]

Paul's teaching is not written in the OT and Jesus didn't teach it either.



Saul came into the picture 50 years after Jesus resurrection and Luke 70 years after.

Neither Paul nor Luke ever knew Jesus...never met him. Jesus was LONG gone before either came into the picture.

Jesus only had 12 apostles, NOT 13. The apostles were witnesses of Jesus' ministry. But even if Jesus were to have a 13th apostle, it would have most certainly been Lazarus.

But if you don't believe me, where is the ONLY place in the entire NT that Paul claims to be an apostle?

Here it is...

Acts 9:17 Greek Text Analysis

Luke didn't even know Saul until much later when he changed his name to Paul. So if Luke isn't the eyewitness recording this event...who is?

Acts 9:7 Greek Text Analysis

= His men hear the voice, but don't see the light.

Acts 22:9 Greek Text Analysis

= His men did not hear the voice, but they see the light. 100% opposite story now. This is Saul bearing witness to the event to a group of people.

Acts 26:14 Greek Text Analysis

= Bearing witness to Agrippa, the story changes again and now everybody falls down and a new claim is made...

Acts 26:16 Greek Text Analysis

= And then doesn't send him to Damascus...

Acts 26:17 Greek Text Analysis

= No mention of blindness and no mention of his men seeing or hearing anything....

Paul's story changed at least 4 times, that's not testimony of someone that speaks the truth. But this testimony is critical to Paul claiming that he's an Apostle, without it Paul's claims are his own and are not supported by any other texts in the NT. No witnesses, no supporting texts = hearsay.

Acts was written with an anonymous author and it's been proven that Luke didn't record this book. So who is the only person present in the above instance?

Oops... actually Jesus Lost a disciple... (Judas)... and said so in prayer...

Are you certain the disciples casting Lots was God’s plan to choose His 12th disciple... that became the Gentile Ambassador ... while Peter was the Diasporas Ambassador?

Ahem... Acts 1:26...

And yet... Jesus had commanded them to “wait” for the “comforter”... (Pentecost)

Are you certain you don’t see the John 6:63 of the matter?

 

[Shek]

Are you certain the disciples casting Lots was God’s plan to choose His 12th disciple

Not very many Christians know this and I only discovered within the last year or so, but Moses either predicted or Yahweh told him of someone that would come in the future and attempt (or succeed) to alter the law in the Torah.

Accuracy of The Torah Text | Bible

"Before his death, Moses wrote 13 Torah Scrolls. Twelve of these were distributed to each of the 12 Tribes. The 13th was placed in the Ark of the Covenant (with the Tablets). If anyone would come and attempt to rewrite or falsify the Torah, the one in the Ark would “testify” against him. (Likewise, if he had access to the scroll in the Ark and tried to falsify it, the distributed copies would “testify” against him.)"

Which NT author taught that Christians are no longer under the Law written in the Torah?

The 13th apostle.....whoops!

NOBODY has the authority to alter God's laws or anything written Torah.

 

[Grip Docility]

Not very many Christians know this and I only discovered within the last year or so, but Moses either predicted or Yahweh told him of someone that would come in the future and attempt (or succeed) to alter the law in the Torah.

Accuracy of The Torah Text | Bible

"Before his death, Moses wrote 13 Torah Scrolls. Twelve of these were distributed to each of the 12 Tribes. The 13th was placed in the Ark of the Covenant (with the Tablets). If anyone would come and attempt to rewrite or falsify the Torah, the one in the Ark would “testify” against him. (Likewise, if he had access to the scroll in the Ark and tried to falsify it, the distributed copies would “testify” against him.)"

Which NT author taught that Christians are no longer under the Law written in the Torah?

The 13th apostle.....whoops!

NOBODY has the authority to alter God's laws or anything written Torah.

God had (has) the authority to Fulfill His Law... for all humanity... did so and John is unapologetic about the matter...

PS... If you think you keep the Law unto salvation... which (the Law) is complete and unbreakable... Deuteronomy 31:26 ... you are deceiving yourself.

Happy Bible Chopping...

Better throw Song of Solomon out... that one is explicit...

Also... the ... shhhhh... not many people know this but is a good way to start up a heretical cult..,

Good luck with that!

PS... the Teachers of the Law were the Spiritually blind ones... predominantly... that failed and railed against Jesus...

Forgive my candidness... but this is where I point out that you are a little nutters and make it clear that I know you enjoy sowing to your flesh...

Toodles...

-Grip Out

 

[Episaw]

I was in a discussion today and was shocked to hear that some people think that people who are living in sin should not be allowed to attend their church. This truly breaks my heart to hear this. The discussion was using an example of two people who are living together but aren’t married. What are your thoughts?

Here is a true story from David Pawson whilst he was the leader at Farnborough Baptist Church.

The lady that owned the local betting shop was converted and started to attend his church. A few months later one of his congregation approached him and said shouldn't he tell the lady to sell the betting shop. His answer was no.

"And why not," asked the member.

David said the Holy Spirit was quite able to do his own work.

A few months later the lady who owned the shop told David that she had sold it as it no longer seemed right for her to own it.

 

[Shek]

Good luck with that!

You obviously didn't know about it otherwise you wouldn't be rudely criticizing it.

So you think that God's law is heretical?

Why am I not surprised?

 

[Grip Docility]

You obviously didn't know about it otherwise you wouldn't be rudely criticizing it.

So you think that God's law is heretical?

Why am I not surprised?

Good twisting of my words...

Who taught you to lie like that?

Spoiler... you’re jacked into their teachings.

 

[Dr Bruce Atkinson]

What place is there in the church for unrepentant sinners?

As it has been said, the Church is to be a hospital for the sick (sinners), not a country club for saints.
But how we deal with unrepentant sinners is important.... caring, empathic, but always seeking their conviction of sin, repentance, and faith. Never looking the other way from their sinful lifestyles, but reminding them of their self-destructive path. God is not against them for sin, He is for them and against sin... because sin by definition destroys His beloved creatures.

 

[Episaw]

The congregation I attended in high school never once had communion. At that point it had been in existence for about a decade.

What good does "denying communion" do in such a congregation?

Rather a childish approach I would say.

 

[Shek]

PS... If you think you keep the Law unto salvation... which (the Law) is complete and unbreakable... Deuteronomy 31:26 ... you are deceiving yourself.

Good twisting of my words...

You hung yourself ....with your own words.

 

[Grip Docility]

You hung yourself ....with your own words.

You lead people away from JESUS CHRIST and towards selfish concern of Stone Condemnation that only ONE can and could follow without condemning others!!!

He also took their condemnation!

Why did Jesus come and die, then ressurect?

You are a thief and a robber!

You genuinely worship yourself and a Law that only God can fully fulfill anyhow...

No, sir... Have some more rope.

John 5:39-40

And yet you do not follow HIM!

 

[SteveIndy]

I was in a discussion today and was shocked to hear that some people think that people who are living in sin should not be allowed to attend their church. This truly breaks my heart to hear this. The discussion was using an example of two people who are living together but aren’t married. What are your thoughts?

You were no doubt shocked to hear that because it is so rare that Church discipline is enforced. Your problem is not with this other person it is with the Apostle Paul. The primitive Church for the first 300 years operated under these guidelines but since that time it has become rare. Although the Anabaptist did reinstate Church discipline. Once these people have been warned a couple of times they should be rejected until they repent. Sin today is accepted as normal.

 

[Jon Osterman]

If any individual member of the church were empowered to expel an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation, that would be wrong in the opinion of most Christian people.

However, it is the church itself that is making such a decision.

This changes the situation completely and eliminates the “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone“ line of argument.

Utter rubbish. The woman being stoned wasn't being stoned by an "individual member". She was being stoned by the community as a group. The group had made the decision to stone her and though Jesus acknowledged her sin, we are not worthy to dish out punishment. It is our responsibilty individually to treat one another with love.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

In my opinion it shouldn’t matter either way. The example was a couple living together unmarried. Some people believe they should not be permitted to attend the church. Now if the person is causing a disruption then perhaps if they are told to stop and continue then I could see asking them not to attend until they can behave. Or if someone was selling drugs or something like that I could definitely see asking them not to return until they have stopped selling drugs. But a couple living together is not distructive to the rest of the congregation so I don’t think they should be rejected by the church.

So now you are deciding on your own, the guy selling drugs no good, but the unmarried couple, no problem.

When I was a new Christian, I too lived with my now wife unmarried. The pastor pulled us both aside, counciled us, showed us where we were sinning and then gave us an ultimatum. Basically he gave us the choice, repent and make things right with the Lord or we would not be attending any longer. At the time I was immediately offended and upset. The more I prayed about it and read the scriptures he gave I saw I was in error. We got married, we repented and I thank that man of God to this day for showing me what was right and putting his foot down. What seems to elude you is if for example we were allowed to stay and we had no intention of repenting others in the church who knew us would say, hey they live unmarried so you know what I guess it is no big deal for me to smoke some weed, or for another might say I can have all the girlfriends I want and have sex with all of them. There is either a biblical standard or there is not.

Now you started this thread based on the other and I think you have presented this out of context from the previous conversation were you were so surprised. Others should know, the context was unrepentant homosexuals being allowed to stay in the church and the pastor was doing nothing about. That is both unbiblical and dangerous to others souls. If you are as mature as you claim, you should realize the implications are greater than your personal bias or opinions. God Bless

 

[aiki]

It strikes me powerfully how... peculiar much of the thinking in this thread has been. "You ought not to be critical of the sin of others," the thinking of some goes, "because you aren't perfect yourself! Only a self-righteous boob would think the Church should be a holy, righteous community of people." In this line of thinking, holiness is sacrificed on the altar of tolerance and "love." But tolerance and love without holiness is not godly, but worldly; we don't ever read in Scripture that godly love exists apart from holiness and righteousness. We certainly don't read in the Bible that believers ought to accommodate wickedness! Instead, we read,

1 Corinthians 13:5-6
5 ...(love) thinks no evil;
6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth;

Ephesians 5:11
11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.

Then, too, there is a glaring hypocrisy on the part of those who are critical of those who are critical. It seems entirely lost on some that when they say, "Get off your high horse, you who would condemn sin in another!" they are doing the very thing they are demanding the other person cease to do! This hypocrisy aside, it is impossible to be personally holy and to achieve a corporate holiness in the Church without judgment and criticism of sin. Sin, though, is found only in people and so, inevitably, if the Church is to be holy, the sin of those within the Church must be confronted. We see a very dramatic example of this in Peter's confronting of lying Ananias and his wife Sapphira. (Acts 5) Paul also aggressively confronts a sinning believer in the Corinthian church (1 Corinthian 5). In both cases, confronting the individual about their sin had the effect of challenging the Church corporately and provoking it toward greater sanctification.

Am I suggesting that the Church withdraw entirely from the lost? Of course not. We are all to be salt and light to the lost. But we don't do that primarily (or, really, at all) in a Sunday morning worship service. To quote Paul yet again:

2 Corinthians 6:14-17
14 ...For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?
15 And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever?
16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people."
17 Therefore "Come out from among them And be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, And I will receive you."

Bring the lost to Christ and then have them attend and participate in a worship service. Trying to mix light and dark, believer and unbelievers, has produced the worldly, carnal and spiritually malnourished mess called the seeker-sensitive "worship" service.

 

[Shek]

So you know better than 2000 years+ worth of Holy Spirit inspired believers?

In case you weren't already aware?

Biblical manuscript - Wikipedia

Jesus was resurrected in 30 - 33CE.

The largest majority if the Greek NT texts are dated 200 - 400CE.

There are no original manuscripts in existence, none have ever been found. But it's speculated that the NT was completed in 100CE....though nobody knows for sure when.

Every NT that's ever been published in founded on these Greek texts, which are actually copies of other copies of unknown origin and written by an unidentified Greco-Roman copywriter.

Early Christianity - Wikipedia

"The early Gospel message was spread orally, probably in Aramaic."

Split of early Christianity and Judaism - Wikipedia

"While it is commonly believed that Paul the Apostle established a primarily Gentile church within his lifetime, it took centuries for a complete break with Judaism to manifest, and the relationship between Paul and Second Temple Judaism is still disputed with a wide range of views."

Early followers of Jesus' teaching were Jews and proselytes whom all practiced Judaism which included observance of the commandments and Jewish tradition.

The Christianity that we all know of today didn't fully form until the 4th century.

First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Utter rubbish. The woman being stoned wasn't being stoned by an "individual member". She was being stoned by the community as a group. The group had made the decision to stone her and though Jesus acknowledged her sin, we are not worthy to dish out punishment. It is our responsibilty individually to treat one another with love.

There is more to that story than meets the eye. According to the LAW both the man and the woman were to be stoned. Yet the bible says they only brought the woman. Jesus knew the whole thing was a set up. Now that does not mean she was not a prostitute, she obviously repented because the bible tells us that she did. But one thing is clear, Jesus knows the law better than them and he knew their hearts....this was not the first time they tried to set him up, nor the last.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

It's this sort of thinking that keeps the Church spiritually weak, and compromised, and carnal. The Church is to be a community of righteous, holy people, not a haven for those who've resigned themselves to a life of sin.

It is the fruit of the already compromised carnal lukewarm counterfeit church... False love, false grace, and a wide gate to hell.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

No they should not be kicked out, however they should be warned on the consequences of their sins in private if they claim they are Christian and be not allowed to have leadership positions within the church.

Kicking them out is the warning if they remain unrepentant. Leadership position...smh

 

[Jon Osterman]

It's this sort of thinking that keeps the Church spiritually weak, and compromised, and carnal. The Church is to be a community of righteous, holy people, not a haven for those who've resigned themselves to a life of sin.

On the contrary, it is your rejection of sinners that is making the church weak. You should try to be spiritually strong enough to win the hearts of sinners by showing them Jesus' love.

I have seen this time and time again at my church. A wounded damaged sinner comes to us, and is disruptive, aggressive, rude and full of unrepentant sin. We welcome them in, and contrary to damaging our community it focusses our love. They resist, we pray, and eventually the sinner breaks down in tears one day and accepts Jesus as his saviour. Jesus' love is tranformational, and we should be doing all we can to enable that transformation.

 

[Grip Docility]

On the contrary, it is your rejection of sinners that is making the church weak. You should try to be spiritually strong enough to win the hearts of sinners by showing them Jesus' love.

I have seen this time and time again at my church. A wounded damaged sinner comes to us, and is disruptive, aggressive, rude and full of unrepentant sin. We welcome them in, and contrary to damaging our community it focusses our love. They resist, we pray, and eventually the sinner breaks down in tears one day and accepts Jesus as his saviour. Jesus' love is tranformational, and we should be doing all we can to enable that transformation.

All Love, Grace and Blessings in Christ Jesus to you!!!!

Amen!!! Amen!!!! Amen!!!!