Would you date a Christian that doesn't go to church?

[RileyG]

The reason I was asking is because I personally find celibacy intolerable. When I say I prefer death over celibacy, I'm not kidding. I don't do celibacy, and that is that. That's just me, you don't have to agree with this. It's your decision so long as nobody is forcing you into it.

I must admit it irritates me a bit when believers speak of celibacy as if there's something holy or special about it. Celibacy is a lifestyle choice, nothing more.

Edit: That issue also came up as I was going through my divorce. I had people telling me that according to 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 I had two options: either get back with my ex-wife or be celibate. Aside from being a misapplication of Scripture, I considered neither option acceptable.

I agree being celibate is a choice. Just like being in a relationship or not being celibate is a choice IMHO. From my perspective, it's been joyful being single.

God's blessings upon you as you look towards the future.

 

[Niels]

There would be some trade-offs, that's for sure. Would they be for the better? I'm not so certain of that.

My concern is that I don't believe you would solve the "Sunday Christian" problem. I believe you would aggravate it. You would have people constantly putting up a pious front to others on all days of the week and not just Sunday. An environment where people are constantly worried about appearances is one where evil can flourish for a long time.

Maybe. Though I'd like to think that others would get to see their true colors, and adjust expectations accordingly. It's probably harder to keep up a facade all day every day than just once or twice a week.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I assure you: God didn't fail me and His Word didn't fail me. Those Church elders failed me, and they failed God too. Those moralistic "Christians" with their legalism and false sense of piety also failed me - and failed God.

A Saturday afternoon service actually does sound quite appealing. I may even consult the Meetup groups for a non-traditional format. Whatever the format, either they will have me as a brother or they will not have me at all. I've had enough nonsense for one lifetime. And I will have no patience for mindless legalism of any kind.

If you found me a bit uncharitable towards other believers, then this may help you understand. When I contacted other Christians I fellowshipped with back when I lived in California, the empty platitudes and admonitions I got gave me the sense that I would not be fully welcomed as a brother like I once was. They too let me down. Maybe they watched too many Hallmark Channel movies or something.

I don't expect perfection, but I do expect other believers to not tolerate abusive and immoral individuals in their midst. In 1 Corinthians 5:1-5, Paul tells the Corinthian church elders to take out the trash. I have no patience for people who make excuses for abuse - in fact I treat them as no different from the abusers themselves.

Less so about me personally, but when I was a kid my family attended a church that had a rather unhealthy, I'd call it quite toxic, way of handling "discipline", and my mom became a victim of a highly unethical elder's own sinful indiscretions. Namely, my mom was good friends with the wife of one of the elders, it turned out that elder was having an affair with another woman and wanted to leave his wife for his mistress. The lie he told, so that he wouldn't have his reputation injured (he was also a major business owner in our town and the church was the largest in the area) was that his wife and my mom had been involved in a same-sex affair. In spite of the fact that my mom had been a member of the church for years, she was in the choir, and other factors once the elder made his charge the rest of the board of elders took his word as gospel. My mom was effectively called to come before the board of elders and was given an inquisition style interrogation where her guilt was already assumed and her only choice was to repent or be forced to leave. She was willing to swallow her pride in order to protect my dad, me, and my brother and to satisfy the board of elders; but what she refused to do was what they asked her to do next: To stand in front of the entire congregation (two services, each with over a thousand people in attendance) and publicly shame herself. Because she refused to publicly shame and humiliate herself in front of the church, my entire family was kicked out, effectively excommunicated and shunned. People whom my mom had been friends with since she was a child turned their backs on her.

I grew up having random strangers come up to me when they found out who my parents were just to tell me they were "so sorry" that my mom was a "marriage-destroying lesbian harlot". Even after my mom got cancer and passed away, I had people coming up to me not to tell me they empathized with my loss of my mom, but that they were so sorry that my mom was an evil lesbian.

I mention that only to say that I share your sentiment about the problems of "discipleship" being abused, and the moralistic and legalistic methods of some, or even many, churches.

I consider myself incredibly blessed that, since then, I have been part of church communities which are warm, welcoming, and healthy. And these experiences have been a major influence in the kinds of expectations I have for a church. For example, I am quite uncomfortable with large churches. While "large" might be subjective, for me, more than 100-150 people is too big.

As an aside on the matter of large churches, several years ago I read about studies on primate social structures compared to brain size and complexity. Basically, if one were to compare our brain size to chimpanzees and other apes and look at the size of their social groupings, we find that the upper limit for a meaningfully cohesive human community is about 150-200 people. Basically, that's about as many people as our brains can handle in a meaningful way, and that largely pans out when we look at those human societies that build more close-knit communities, such as the Amish, or traditional tribal people groups. I think this might also help explain why many of us living in the modern day though we are surrounded by literally thousands, even tens or hundreds of thousands or even millions of other people, have a sense of deep loneliness in the midst of so many others. To put it another way, human beings need the village. We're pretty aimless and in pain without community.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Saucy]

I don't think I would. I mean, I think the church is important. It was designed by Jesus and the bible even says not to forsake assembling together. The person I will want to marry would be a churchgoer. It would be very important in her life. We would have our own bible studies and prayer time, but also assemble with our brothers and sisters in the Lord. Also, it will be a special thing to raise our kids in the church. I'd rather be single than be with someone who didn't think church was important.

 

[ZephBonkerer]

Less so about me personally, but when I was a kid my family attended a church that had a rather unhealthy, I'd call it quite toxic, way of handling "discipline", and my mom became a victim of a highly unethical elder's own sinful indiscretions. Namely, my mom was good friends with the wife of one of the elders, it turned out that elder was having an affair with another woman and wanted to leave his wife for his mistress. The lie he told, so that he wouldn't have his reputation injured (he was also a major business owner in our town and the church was the largest in the area) was that his wife and my mom had been involved in a same-sex affair. In spite of the fact that my mom had been a member of the church for years, she was in the choir, and other factors once the elder made his charge the rest of the board of elders took his word as gospel. My mom was effectively called to come before the board of elders and was given an inquisition style interrogation where her guilt was already assumed and her only choice was to repent or be forced to leave. She was willing to swallow her pride in order to protect my dad, me, and my brother and to satisfy the board of elders; but what she refused to do was what they asked her to do next: To stand in front of the entire congregation (two services, each with over a thousand people in attendance) and publicly shame herself. Because she refused to publicly shame and humiliate herself in front of the church, my entire family was kicked out, effectively excommunicated and shunned. People whom my mom had been friends with since she was a child turned their backs on her.

I grew up having random strangers come up to me when they found out who my parents were just to tell me they were "so sorry" that my mom was a "marriage-destroying lesbian harlot". Even after my mom got cancer and passed away, I had people coming up to me not to tell me they empathized with my loss of my mom, but that they were so sorry that my mom was an evil lesbian.

It sounds like this happened some time ago. Was this elder's misdeeds eventually exposed? The church assembly you described sounds a bit like a cult of personality. You had an elder who could do no wrong in the eyes of the other leadership.

They pronounced your mother guilty, and based on what? Based on the testimony of a single individual who also happened to have had a conflict of interest brought about by his own wicked conduct?

People like that blaspheme when they honor God with their lips.

 

[ViaCrucis]

It sounds like this happened some time ago.

I was only a child when it happened, I was eight. I'm forty now.

Was this elder's misdeeds eventually exposed?

As far as I know, no. Nothing came of it. The last I heard of anything he was still serving as an elder and that was less than a decade ago, My mom died from cancer when I was in high school, and even into my early 20's I had people from that church approaching me to talk about how bad my mom was.

The church assembly you described sounds a bit like a cult of personality.

It was a non-denominational church that followed a church polity where a board of lay-elders were in control of basically everything, the pastor had very little input or say about the goings-on of the church.

You had an elder who could do no wrong in the eyes of the other leadership.

It was a bit of an old boys club.

They pronounced your mother guilty, and based on what? Based on the testimony of a single individual who also happened to have had a conflict of interest brought about by his own wicked conduct?

Yep.

People like that blaspheme when they honor God with their lips.

Unfortunately there's a lot of that going on in the Christian world.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ZephBonkerer]

As far as I know, no. Nothing came of it. The last I heard of anything he was still serving as an elder and that was less than a decade ago, My mom died from cancer when I was in high school, and even into my early 20's I had people from that church approaching me to talk about how bad my mom was.

Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I'm inclined to suspect these people were not ignorant of the truth. They simply chose to believe a lie for whatever reason - they preferred the narrative offered by the elders. There's simply no excuse for spreading slander - especially when the evidence is so lacking. I wouldn't tolerate such people in my presence if I were you.

Does anyone with an IQ above 80 not understand that you simply don't take an accusation from a single person at face value without some compelling evidence to support it? I don't know if these people even demanded such evidence. No excuse at all for these people.

The likes of Judas Iscariot will always be among us, unfortunately. While not every true believer would agree with me on this one, I have no qualms about cursing out such people to their face. I don't even recognize it as sin. These people spread slander, lie, blaspheme, verbally abuse others and yet they have the audacity to think of their speech as pure because they never utter certain 4-letter words. What hypocrisy!

It was a non-denominational church that followed a church polity where a board of lay-elders were in control of basically everything, the pastor had very little input or say about the goings-on of the church.

It was a bit of an old boys club.

All kinds of evil can flourish where there is unaccountable leadership.

 

[ThisIsMe123]

Less so about me personally, but when I was a kid my family attended a church that had a rather unhealthy, I'd call it quite toxic, way of handling "discipline", and my mom became a victim of a highly unethical elder's own sinful indiscretions. Namely, my mom was good friends with the wife of one of the elders, it turned out that elder was having an affair with another woman and wanted to leave his wife for his mistress. The lie he told, so that he wouldn't have his reputation injured (he was also a major business owner in our town and the church was the largest in the area) was that his wife and my mom had been involved in a same-sex affair. In spite of the fact that my mom had been a member of the church for years, she was in the choir, and other factors once the elder made his charge the rest of the board of elders took his word as gospel. My mom was effectively called to come before the board of elders and was given an inquisition style interrogation where her guilt was already assumed and her only choice was to repent or be forced to leave. She was willing to swallow her pride in order to protect my dad, me, and my brother and to satisfy the board of elders; but what she refused to do was what they asked her to do next: To stand in front of the entire congregation (two services, each with over a thousand people in attendance) and publicly shame herself. Because she refused to publicly shame and humiliate herself in front of the church, my entire family was kicked out, effectively excommunicated and shunned. People whom my mom had been friends with since she was a child turned their backs on her.

I grew up having random strangers come up to me when they found out who my parents were just to tell me they were "so sorry" that my mom was a "marriage-destroying lesbian harlot". Even after my mom got cancer and passed away, I had people coming up to me not to tell me they empathized with my loss of my mom, but that they were so sorry that my mom was an evil lesbian.

I mention that only to say that I share your sentiment about the problems of "discipleship" being abused, and the moralistic and legalistic methods of some, or even many, churches.

I consider myself incredibly blessed that, since then, I have been part of church communities which are warm, welcoming, and healthy. And these experiences have been a major influence in the kinds of expectations I have for a church. For example, I am quite uncomfortable with large churches. While "large" might be subjective, for me, more than 100-150 people is too big.

As an aside on the matter of large churches, several years ago I read about studies on primate social structures compared to brain size and complexity. Basically, if one were to compare our brain size to chimpanzees and other apes and look at the size of their social groupings, we find that the upper limit for a meaningfully cohesive human community is about 150-200 people. Basically, that's about as many people as our brains can handle in a meaningful way, and that largely pans out when we look at those human societies that build more close-knit communities, such as the Amish, or traditional tribal people groups. I think this might also help explain why many of us living in the modern day though we are surrounded by literally thousands, even tens or hundreds of thousands or even millions of other people, have a sense of deep loneliness in the midst of so many others. To put it another way, human beings need the village. We're pretty aimless and in pain without community.

-CryptoLutheran

Wait a minute....wait a minute, this STILL can happen these days?!

 

[Niels]

Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I'm inclined to suspect these people were not ignorant of the truth. They simply chose to believe a lie for whatever reason - they preferred the narrative offered by the elders. There's simply no excuse for spreading slander - especially when the evidence is so lacking. I wouldn't tolerate such people in my presence if I were you.

Does anyone with an IQ above 80 not understand that you simply don't take an accusation from a single person at face value without some compelling evidence to support it? I don't know if these people even demanded such evidence. No excuse at all for these people.

The likes of Judas Iscariot will always be among us, unfortunately. While not every true believer would agree with me on this one, I have no qualms about cursing out such people to their face. I don't even recognize it as sin. These people spread slander, lie, blaspheme, verbally abuse others and yet they have the audacity to think of their speech as pure because they never utter certain 4-letter words. What hypocrisy!

All kinds of evil can flourish where there is unaccountable leadership.

Reading between the lines a little, it sounds like social pressure was a factor. The other elders, and perhaps most of the congregation itself, apparently wanted to remain in the good graces of such an illustrious person. Doing so may have meant capitulating and agreeing with whatever they said. Even if they knew better. That sort of behavior rubs me the wrong way, and what I was getting at when I mentioned overbearing leadership in a previous post. It sounds like people felt they had little choice.

As a child, he presumably didn't have a say in the matter, but I agree that we shouldn't tolerate such behavior either. Life is short and every day is a gift. The Christian model of leadership is one of servitude as modeled by Jesus. He even washed his disciples' feet. That's how we're supposed to treat each other. Especially those who find themselves in leadership roles. They are servants first and foremost. Worldly people clamor for religious power, manipulate, and regard others as beneath them. Godly people don't do that, regardless of whatever official title or position they hold. And if they fall into a worldly pattern, they themselves should repent and change their ways. Not that it's good to be obsequious either. We should have the personal strength and fortitude to stand with the truth. To outwit the power-mongers by being "Wise as serpents and innocent as doves". Regardless, it sounds like that church had trouble with discernment.

For the record, I don't necessarily have a problem with various models of church leadership. Even if I personally prefer a more minimalist approach, leadership structures often arise out of necessity. Many even contain checks and balances to hopefully prevent things like what he described from happening. Non-denominational churches may be more susceptible as they tend to be newer and may not always have such safeguards in place.

 

[ZephBonkerer]

Reading between the lines a little, it sounds like social pressure was a factor. The other elders, and perhaps most of the congregation itself, apparently wanted to remain in the good graces of such an illustrious person. Doing so may have meant capitulating and agreeing with whatever they said. Even if they knew better. That sort of behavior rubs me the wrong way, and what I was getting at when I mentioned overbearing leadership in a previous post. It sounds like people felt they had little choice.

There's a word for that kind of behavior: cowardice.

Worldly people clamor for religious power, manipulate, and regard others as beneath them. Godly people don't do that, regardless of whatever official title or position they hold. And if they fall into a worldly pattern, they themselves should repent and change their ways.

The Word describes such people as "shepherds who feed only themselves". The problem in such cases isn't the structure per se - though they can be flawed. You can have power, but that is no excuse to abuse it.

Here you had an elder who was engaged in clearly immoral behavior and spread an outrageous lie to hide his evil deeds. He had to have known that his flunkies would have circled the wagons and covered for him. He also had to have known that no one in his inner circle would be inclined to ask certain questions that would have exposed the whole charade. Or that if someone did start asking questions, then he would have the wherewithal to suppress or shut out any further inquiry.

As far as I'm concerned, all of them are corrupt. I would rather be excommunicated from such an assembly than to be associated with them in any way.

 

[Niels]

There's a word for that kind of behavior: cowardice.

Agreed. It's their responsibility to stand up for the truth and not capitulate. I'm mostly talking about other elders and the congregation. The victim should maintain their innocence. They're not the one to blame for this.

The Word describes such people as "shepherds who feed only themselves". The problem in such cases isn't the structure per se - though they can be flawed. You can have power, but that is no excuse to abuse it.

Here you had an elder who was engaged in clearly immoral behavior and spread an outrageous lie to hide his evil deeds. He had to have known that his flunkies would have circled the wagons and covered for him. He also had to have known that no one in his inner circle would be inclined to ask certain questions that would have exposed the whole charade. Or that if someone did start asking questions, then he would have the wherewithal to suppress or shut out any further inquiry.

As far as I'm concerned, all of them are corrupt. I would rather be excommunicated from such an assembly than to be associated with them in any way.

Unfit for their roles, that's for sure. Nobody should put up with that kind of abuse. Try to change the church culture or leave. Nothing is hidden from God. It's more important to be right with Him than to follow a herd that's running off a cliff.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I'm inclined to suspect these people were not ignorant of the truth. They simply chose to believe a lie for whatever reason - they preferred the narrative offered by the elders. There's simply no excuse for spreading slander - especially when the evidence is so lacking. I wouldn't tolerate such people in my presence if I were you.

Does anyone with an IQ above 80 not understand that you simply don't take an accusation from a single person at face value without some compelling evidence to support it? I don't know if these people even demanded such evidence. No excuse at all for these people.

The likes of Judas Iscariot will always be among us, unfortunately. While not every true believer would agree with me on this one, I have no qualms about cursing out such people to their face. I don't even recognize it as sin. These people spread slander, lie, blaspheme, verbally abuse others and yet they have the audacity to think of their speech as pure because they never utter certain 4-letter words. What hypocrisy!



All kinds of evil can flourish where there is unaccountable leadership.

One of the things I have truly appreciated about the Lutheran tradition since I became Lutheran is that in Lutheranism a core part of the pastoral calling is an understanding that the pastor is a servant who bears the sacred ministry by the consent of the Church, of the Christian Faithful, and thus is called by and can be dismissed by the Faithful if they fail to uphold their committments. A church, a local church, is a flock with a pastor; rather than a pastor who has a flock. That means I worship at Emmanuel Lutheran, I don't worship at Pastor Bob's church. Congregational lay leadership is also secretarial and ministerial. The term leadership therefore means not certain persons which are over the church, but rather under it. At the end of the day it is the congregation that runs things, and it is by our consent that Pastor is pastor here as Christ's under-shepherd to guide, teach, preach, and administer God's gifts of Word and Sacrament through which God is powerful and active accomplishing His good work in us. The Table belongs to Christ, the pulpit belongs to Christ, this is Christ's Church.

I can't do super large churches, or churches which aren't transparent about how money is spent, or churches where preacher celebrity is a thing, or where power is lorded over people coercing, manipulating, and abusing Christ's people. I've experienced those things, I've seen what they do and how they hurt people. Toxic religion is a serious problem, and is why the Church must remember her first love, Christ, and put Him above all things.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ThisIsMe123]

From reading this, I think this is why some Christians leave these kinds of churches, and seeks one out where you can slip in for an hour, then slip out...going unnoticed.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Wait a minute....wait a minute, this STILL can happen these days?!

I mean this was over 30 years ago, but yeah. Concerning this particular church my family's story is just one of many. I came to know other people with their own stories of abuse from that church. But I can also say that I've heard of far worse things happening in some churches. So I don't consider what happened to my mom to be one of the worst things a bad church can do, but it is an example of what happens when churches are failing.

I believe strongly that the modern western Church, or at least certainly the American Church but I doubt it's just the American Church, is in need of reformation. Some argue "we need revival", but I think what is needed is a reformation. In a lot of ways the modern broadly Protestant churches today are mirroring the corruption we saw in the 16th century, and in some cases exceeds the corruption of those times.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[linux.poet]

@ViaCrucis

When a wrong is concealed, it is our duty as Christians to expose it to the light and bring wrongdoers to justice:

11 Do not participate in the useless deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them; 12 for it is disgraceful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret. 13 But all things become visible when they are exposed by the light, for everything that becomes visible is light.

While the truth should be spoken in love, love is not a pushover. Every time a slanderer comes to you with a lie, the truth should be told.

Now I don't blame an 8-year-old child for being scared into silence and not knowing this scripture above. But if you have an opportunity to tell the truth now, I advise you to take advantage of it.

 

[ViaCrucis]

@ViaCrucis

When a wrong is concealed, it is our duty as Christians to expose it to the light and bring wrongdoers to justice:



While the truth should be spoken in love, love is not a pushover. Every time a slanderer comes to you with a lie, the truth should be told.

Now I don't blame an 8-year-old child for being scared into silence and not knowing this scripture above. But if you have an opportunity to tell the truth now, I advise you to take advantage of it.

Even when I was younger nearly every friend I had in high school whose family was still part of that church knew my family's story and I wasn't shy or quiet about these things. As an adult I wasn't shy either. But people frequently believe what they want to believe, and people choose to conduct themselves in such a way as to not risk losing position and reputation. We became pariahs, and if you don't want to become one too then don't associate with the pariahs. I don't hold grudges, but I'm keenly aware of how things are in the world.

This is a fallen, broken world in which justice almost never prevails, that's simply the way of things. The Church should be markedly different than the ways of the world, but wherever there are sinners there will be the desire to satisfy the passions and lusts of the flesh. And when a church has absolutely no oversight, or where there is apathy toward grace, expect to find a lot of problems.

Which, again, is why I have taken solace in a traditional church body which does have oversight and a firm commitment to the preaching of grace. In the Lutheran tradition private confession is available for those who desire it, but it exists specifically and solely for the purpose of soothing the conscience with the Gospel. If I called up my pastor and said, "There are some things gnawing at me that I'd like to get off my chest" he'd schedule and apt where I could come into his office, talk about it, he'd ask if I'm sorry for my sins and then declare the forgiveness of my sins on account of God's grace and Christ's once and perfect work on the cross (i.e. Holy Absolution). If I am repentant, God knows my heart already, the Law has already efficaciously driven me to repentance, and so what I need to hear isn't shame and condemnation, but the reminder that God loves me and forgives me on Christ's account. Further, part of the pastoral vow and comittment is that whatever is said in the privacy of confession is, in fact, private--it's between the repentant and God, the pastor's job is solely there to minister with God's word. Everything else, such as making amends with someone I've hurt, becomes a matter between me and that person, my sins are already forgiven by God but restoring an injured relationship between two people takes work, work also that is grounded in the mercy of God and our love for one another as God's children in Christ. If I am repentant, then--obviously--I should desire to fix things with the other person; just as if I had stolen something I should return it. That's just common sense.

I offer this as an example that is rather drastically at odds with the practice of shaming and public humliation. The difference is between the use of public shame to manipulate and coerce and subject; and the power of the Gospel to heal, restore, and comfort the broken.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[linux.poet]

Even when I was younger nearly every friend I had in high school whose family was still part of that church knew my family's story and I wasn't shy or quiet about these things. As an adult I wasn't shy either. But people frequently believe what they want to believe, and people choose to conduct themselves in such a way as to not risk losing position and reputation. We became pariahs, and if you don't want to become one too then don't associate with the pariahs. I don't hold grudges, but I'm keenly aware of how things are in the world.

No worries then. It just wasn't clear from your previous posts that you had spoken out against the slander; thank you for clarifying. If the truth was proclaimed from the housetops and nobody was willing to believe it, that is on those with closed ears.

My father slandered me and my mother in my church for several years, and me and my mom spoke out against it and were granted a victory in the end. But I understand not all churches grant such justice. May the Lord punish this wicked man for his misdeeds, so that all who see it may come to believe the truth about your family.

 

[ViaCrucis]

No worries then. It just wasn't clear from your previous posts that you had spoken out against the slander; thank you for clarifying. If the truth was proclaimed from the housetops and nobody was willing to believe it, that is on those with closed ears.

My father slandered me and my mother in my church for several years, and me and my mom spoke out against it and were granted a victory in the end. But I understand not all churches grant such justice. May the Lord punish this wicked man for his misdeeds, so that all who see it may come to believe the truth about your family.

Rather than punishment, my hope and prayer is he finds peace and repentance. Everything will be sorted out on the Last Day. It is not the will of God to punish, but to restore, saying He desires the repentance of all. In the meantime, it's my sins that I need to be concerned with.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[linux.poet]

Rather than punishment, my hope and prayer is he finds peace and repentance. Everything will be sorted out on the Last Day.

As you hope and pray, my friend. You have a bigger heart than me, and may the Lord bless you for it.

If I am repentant, God knows my heart already, the Law has already efficaciously driven me to repentance, and so what I need to hear isn't shame and condemnation, but the reminder that God loves me and forgives me on Christ's account. Further, part of the pastoral vow and comittment is that whatever is said in the privacy of confession is, in fact, private--it's between the repentant and God, the pastor's job is solely there to minister with God's word. Everything else, such as making amends with someone I've hurt, becomes a matter between me and that person, my sins are already forgiven by God but restoring an injured relationship between two people takes work, work also that is grounded in the mercy of God and our love for one another as God's children in Christ. If I am repentant, then--obviously--I should desire to fix things with the other person; just as if I had stolen something I should return it. That's just common sense.

I offer this as an example that is rather drastically at odds with the practice of shaming and public humliation. The difference is between the use of public shame to manipulate and coerce and subject; and the power of the Gospel to heal, restore, and comfort the broken.

I agree with this. Satan is the accuser who uses shame to destroy and discredit followers of Christ. We should leave no room for him to reproach others for their weaknesses, and instead leave room for struggling sinners to find truth and healing.

 

[ZephBonkerer]

I would not rule out pursuing a relationship with a woman who attends a manmade denominational building, however it is hardly any way to grow by remaining with such establishments. They virtually all keep the pagan holidays, which is ‘strange fire’ to God. They have other sinful practices as well..politics, sports, fleshly music with emotional appeal, immodestly dressed feminist women; femininized men in tight womanly clothing. I say this not to be unkind or pharasitcal, but it is the truth and people need to wake up.

With all due respect, while I don't mean to come down too hard on you (really, I don't), there are some things I must say regarding this. Attitudes like this have made me reluctant to associate with other Christians.

"... keep the pagan holidays, which is ‘strange fire’ to God."
I presume this means it's a sin to wear a costume on the last day of October, or hunt for colorful eggs in Spring. Where in Scripture is that written? I have a hard time seeing any sin in these activities.

"... immodestly dressed feminist women; femininized men in tight womanly clothing... "
Who made you the Fashion Police? There are far more heinous crimes a woman can commit than to show up in public wearing a halter top and short skirt. A lady can never be modest enough for these people. Where in Scripture does it say it's a sin to dress this way?

"They have other sinful practices as well..politics, sports, fleshly music with emotional appeal..."
So it's a sin to watch a ball game, listen to secular music, or discuss the circus with elephants and donkeys? Says who? The Pet Shop Boys? Your beginning to sound like them with their song "It's a Sin", circa 1987. What isn't a sin to you?

"I say this not to be unkind or pharasitcal, but it is the truth and people need to wake up."
No, it is not the truth. You are condemning activities and things as sin without any real basis in the Scriptures or common horse sense for doing so. That kind of legalism not only irritates me, it discredits the Faith as a whole.

I do not recognize any of the activities you mentioned as sin.