Shunning.

[GingerBeer]

Changing a theological view or teaching is not being discussed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 5. He's addressing immorality.

So if one has a church member or family member who is unrepentant of their sin, then Matthew 18:15-18 applies. When one is repentant of said sin then we are to restore them to the fellowship as in Galatians 6:1-2

What do you think ought to happen if a Christian changed their mind about believing the Incarnation or rejected Sola Scriptura?

 

[Gideons300]

For the reasons you've given No the bible doesnot teach 'shunning'.

The passage you've quoted is about gross physical sins and about those who have been challenged about their behaviour and have not tried to change.

The biblical practice is for a 'sinner' to be talked to by someone, then for the leadership to talk several times with the 'sinner', if there is no change then it is brought before the church and they are formally excluded from taking communion, they may attend church.

For them to be excluded from attending church there rejection of a christian life style would have to be blatent, as in the quote.

There are no grounds for shunning someone just because they are YEC or reject KJ only, are pedo baptists, etc

It is an abuse if it happens because of devorce, living together, or being sent to prison.

Just out of curiosity. Is living together outside of marriage not sexual immorality?

 

[wonderkins]

The bible can be a mixed feast with good things and horrible things in it. I think that Christians try very hard to read it in an exclusively good light as much as they can. Some advice in scripture is fairly bad advice when applied to situations today. So the scriptures that deal with shunning are also mixed and some are good and pastoral while others seem harsh.

Are you saying that God gave us bad advice in the Bible? It is the very word of God.

Can you give an example?

 

[GingerBeer]

Are you saying that God gave us bad advice in the Bible? It is the very word of God.

Can you give an example?

Okay, I can give examples but will you explain them away?

I came to cast fire on the earth, and would that it were already kindled! I have a baptism to be baptised with, and how great is my distress until it is accomplished! Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. For from now on in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law. (Luke 12:49-53)​

If you come to Christ with the intention of having division and turning against mother, father, sister, or brother who have not come to Christ then is that a good thing or not?

 

[redleghunter]

What do you think ought to happen if a Christian changed their mind about believing the Incarnation or rejected Sola Scriptura?

Shunning would not be a consideration.

If it is the Incarnation then a pastor should ask the church member why they would deny the deity of Christ and that such is a foundation of the Christian church.

Sola Scriptura? The first step is ask their understanding of the doctrine. If they don't see the Scriptures as the only infallible authority to test truth claims, I would ask what other sources of infallible authority they are drawing their truth from. It would not be a shunning but a discussion.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

I actually somewhat disagree with some posting here. If we assume your relatives have been engaging in various sin like what the epistles deal with immorality etc. and they have been warned, and eventually excommunicated, and are from the same Church Body/Confession/ Apostolic See/Communion then there are a number of passages that would indicate that shunning is actually something the Bible advocates till they repent. Here is one to start with

2 John 1:11
11Whoever greets such a person shares in his evil deeds.


But since this is an extreme measure especially in our culture etc. before you do something like that you should consult your pastor, priest, bishop etc. and get their guidance.

 

[wonderkins]

Okay, I can give examples but will you explain them away?

I came to cast fire on the earth, and would that it were already kindled! I have a baptism to be baptised with, and how great is my distress until it is accomplished! Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. For from now on in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law. (Luke 12:49-53)​

If you come to Christ with the intention of having division and turning against mother, father, sister, or brother who have not come to Christ then is that a good thing or not?

Well my response would be that that verse is not instructional. Nor is it advice. It is matter of fact.

Jesus is just speaking of the division the gospel causes because of the unbelievers hatred of it. I think you can easily see that in the world.

 

[GingerBeer]

Well my response would be that that verse is not instructional. Nor is it advice. It is matter of fact.

Jesus is just speaking of the division the gospel causes because of the unbelievers hatred of it. I think you can easily see that in the world.

People take verses and apply them to situations that they think the verses may address and it does not always matter what the context for the verse may be it doesn't stop them being applied.

I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control. (I Timothy 2:8-15)​

Here a passage with several things presented that are sometimes taken as advisory and applicable to women, especially, in church.

 

[aiki]

Does the bible teach shunning of friends and family whenever they change their mind about any belief taught in your church?

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. Purge the evil person from among you. (I Corinthians 5:9-13)

Some use the above passage as justification for shunning.

What do you think the passage is commanding of believers, if not something like shunning? Is there some better way to interpret what Paul writes here? He certainly engaged in some shunning when he ordered the casting out of the sinning brother from the Corinthian church! Was he wrong to do so? What do you do with Paul's observation that a "little leaven leavens the whole lump" which he makes in the same chapter from which your quotation above is derived?

 

[Halbhh]

Does the bible teach shunning of friends and family whenever they change their mind about any belief taught in your church?

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. Purge the evil person from among you. (I Corinthians 5:9-13)

Some use the above passage as justification for shunning.

No, definitely not. Paul's meaning seems pretty clear -- those that continue (thus without repenting) in serious sins he lists there. It's a list like that in 1 Cor 6:9-10, the list of serious sins that would prevent entering the Life to come. Further, when someone is unconverted (as evidenced by such), it's not precisely shunning we should do, but rather we are saying 'don't come to church service if you persist in being unrepentant of major sin', which isn't shunning at all, because you can still contact them and testify to them, and help them learn the gospel (which sometimes they simply don't yet really know correctly).

 

[wonderkins]

People take verses and apply them to situations that they think the verses may address and it does not always matter what the context for the verse may be it doesn't stop them being applied.

I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control. (I Timothy 2:8-15)​

Here a passage with several things presented that are sometimes taken as advisory and applicable to women, especially, in church.

So how do you take my response? Just by the way the verse was written you can tell it's not instructional.

I do agree that many people misuse scriptures. How is your second example bad advice? What is the context? It's not cultural. He goes back to Adam and Eve. It's general, meaning it applies to everyone.

 

[worshipjunkie]

Was it one of the churches connected with that French Archbishop who objected to John XXIII and the Second Vatican council?

Yes. They're still friends with my ex, though, who also left the church. So I don't know.

 

[worshipjunkie]

Wait. You were not kicked out? You left? Made new friends elsewhere? Had you stayed what might have been different?

It's a little complicated, but one of the main reasons I left was that I stopped driving and the church was a 30 minute drive from where I was. The public transportation wouldn't get me out there. And they knew that. I am 100% sure of that. Now, doctrinally, I've changed and I wouldn't go back, but there was a long time that I gladly would have gone if I could have got out there.
Since I left, I ran into other people who went there and said once they started questioning and/or left, they lost their friendships. It's hard to say how much is deliberate and how much is just life. That's just my only experience with anything like shunning.

 

[GingerBeer]

What do you think the passage is commanding of believers, if not something like shunning?

I think it is proposing something like shunning and I think it is bad advice. Shunning is cruel. When religion makes you do bad things then the religion is probably a bad religion.

Is there some better way to interpret what Paul writes here? He certainly engaged in some shunning when he ordered the casting out of the sinning brother from the Corinthian church! Was he wrong to do so? What do you do with Paul's observation that a "little leaven leavens the whole lump" which he makes in the same chapter from which your quotation above is derived?

 

[GingerBeer]

So how do you take my response? Just by the way the verse was written you can tell it's not instructional.

I do agree that many people misuse scriptures. How is your second example bad advice? What is the context? It's not cultural. He goes back to Adam and Eve. It's general, meaning it applies to everyone.

Do you expect women to be silent in church?

 

[aiki]

I think it is proposing something like shunning and I think it is bad advice. Shunning is cruel. When religion makes you do bad things then the religion is probably a bad religion.

Interesting. So, I take it you don't see the Bible as a divinely-inspired text, serving the purposes which Paul outlined to Timothy in 2 Timothy 3:16-17?

On what basis do you decide that shunning is "cruel" or a "bad thing"? Against what standard are you making this assessment? If one is going to call a line crooked, one must have some idea of a straight line against which to compare it. Since, apparently, the Bible isn't the place from which you derive your "straight line," what is?

 

[Christopher0121]

I believe Paul's point was that we shouldn't shun "unbelievers", else we'd need to leave this world. However, Paul plainly writes:

"But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one." - I Corinthians 5:11 (ESV)

​

Paul is telling the church that if a member ("brother") is engaging in continued and willful sinful rebellion in the areas of sexual immorality, greed, idolatry, reviling, drunkenness, or is a swindler after confrontation, correction, and counseling... we shouldn't eat (fellowship) with such a one.

Now, it is important to realize that when this was written churches didn't gather as so many churches do today. They didn't have church buildings with a steeple, parking lot, pews, offices, air conditioning, and a sign outside. They primarily met in homes. They gathered around the table to eat the Lord's Supper The meal and fellowship was organic and natural, Scripture was taught and discussed. Prayers were requested and given. Songs and hymns were sung. To be excluded from the meal, was to be excluded from fellowship.

But I would like to emphasize, this was only applicable to willful, continued, rebellion and the areas of sin noted. If the "sinner" (or guilty party) was open to counsel and correction there was no need to excommunicate or shun the individual.

The purpose was to shun the individual to bring them to the realization that they are cut off in order to inspire repentance. Upon repentance, the shunned one was to be lovingly welcomed back into fellowship.

At least, this is my understanding.

 

[chevyontheriver]

It's a little complicated, but one of the main reasons I left was that I stopped driving and the church was a 30 minute drive from where I was. The public transportation wouldn't get me out there. And they knew that. I am 100% sure of that. Now, doctrinally, I've changed and I wouldn't go back, but there was a long time that I gladly would have gone if I could have got out there.
Since I left, I ran into other people who went there and said once they started questioning and/or left, they lost their friendships. It's hard to say how much is deliberate and how much is just life. That's just my only experience with anything like shunning.

We only know one person from my old parish that still goes there. It is a campus ministry sort of place and we're no longer of that age. But I have kept up with four families of people who we met there. It was a deliberate thing to do so. Otherwise drift is to be expected.

 

[wonderkins]

Do you expect women to be silent in church?

How does Paul regard women in the church? Very highly. You can easily find examples of that. So it would be a bit confusing if he was tearing down women somewhere else.

In the scriptures you provided, he's speaking in the context of teaching, correct? He's saying that women are not to teach men in a congregational setting.

I personally will not go to a church with a woman as a pastor. Not because I think women are inferior; they are not. But because that's what the Bible teaches.

That does not mean I can't read writings and learn something from women I think women add much value to a church in the biblical context.

I don't know if you're a Christian, but seems like you're simply taking small batches of verses to try and discredit the Bible by ignoring the context of those verses.

 

[GingerBeer]

Interesting. So, I take it you don't see the Bible as a divinely-inspired text, serving the purposes which Paul outlined to Timothy in 2 Timothy 3:16-17?

I do think of scripture as inspired.

On what basis do you decide that shunning is "cruel" or a "bad thing"?

It's bad and cruel on the basis of morality and decency. Asking a parent to shun a child or a brother/sister to shun a sibling is advocating family breakup. If religion does that then it is bad religion. If some family members decide they cannot tolerate having a Christian in their midst then that is a different thing but when the Christians shun family members who have left the "faith" - perhaps to follow Christ in a different denomination - then the "faith" is bad.

Against what standard are you making this assessment? If one is going to call a line crooked, one must have some idea of a straight line against which to compare it. Since, apparently, the Bible isn't the place from which you derive your "straight line," what is?