Ok, I'm tired of this!!

Discussion in 'Family, Relationships, and Single Life' started by Gio, Aug 5, 2017.

  1. Rexlion

    Rexlion Active Member

    Posts:
    143
    Likes Received:
    55
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    Thank you for that reply. Personally, I would be very forthright and tell them that adultery is clearly a sin in God's eyes, and that Jesus even said it was just as bad to lust after a woman who is not your wife. After all, we are counseled to imitate Christ, and I just can't see Jesus "beating around the bush" and using man's reasoning to dissuade someone from sinning. I do see Jesus in the Bible telling people, "Woe to you" for doing what you're doing.

    In an earlier post you mentioned Matthew 7:5.
    Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
    Mat 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
    Mat 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
    Mat 7:4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
    Mat 7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

    Matthew Henry's Commentary has this to say: "Because we must not judge others, which is a great sin, it does not therefore follow that we must not reprove others, which is a great duty, and may be a means of saving a soul from death; however, it will be a means of saving our souls from sharing in their guilt." Although Jesus said not to judge other people, and He also said that some people need to take care of their own faults rather than be critical of others' faults (as the Pharisees were critical judgmental of Jesus and His disciples while they would not correct their own haughtiness, hypocrisy, sense of superiority, and self-righteous attitudes). Yet Jesus also left room in verse 5 for reproving; those who have 'cast the beam out' of their own eye are qualified to help others see the splinters in their own eyes.

    Even though we never want to be haughty or to think ourselves better than the other person, we have a moral obligation to lead them (with love) toward a more correct understanding of God's will concerning sinfulness.
    Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
    Restoration requires helping the person see the error of his ways. It's like the 12-step program for alcoholics: the alcoholic must first recognize and admit to himself that he is an alcoholic, before he can proceed further toward recovery. Likewise, the sinner must first recognize his sin as sin, before he can take any steps to put away sinfulness. And the Word of God, quickened by the Holy Spirit, is the most convicting information one can (and should) share to help the person take that critical first step.

    When we do this, have we thereby judged the person? Not at all. Have we judged the sin and reproved the person? Yes, we have.

    I should add that the scenario I posed is not the same thing as someone walking up to another person out of the blue and criticizing them in a self-righteous (non-loving) manner. Like, "I hear you're an adulterer (or gay, or whatever)! You'd better get right with God, or you're going to hell!" :thumbsdown::zipped:
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2019
    anglican74 likes this.
  2. Tiffy

    Tiffy Active Member

    Posts:
    455
    Likes Received:
    135
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    I think there is a difference between 'discernment' concerning the behaviour of another, and discriminiation or 'sentencing'. We are called upon to evaluate a persons works by using 'true judgment'. This means acting as a 'jury' would, in trying to decide guilt or innocence. We are not, as individuals called upon to 'sentence' people, as a judge would, when a jury has returned a guilty verdict. To sentence people 'prejudicially' is not the act of a true disciple of Christ. Therefore 'racist', 'ethnic', 'class', 'colour', 'religious' etc. prejudices are judgmental in the negative sense that Jesus forbade. Whereas considered assessment of a person's conduct and character are not only 'permissable' but actually required of us by our Master. "By their fruits you shall know them", he said.
    .
     
    Theistgal likes this.
  3. JoeLaughon

    JoeLaughon Active Member Anglican

    Posts:
    234
    Likes Received:
    159
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Reformed High Anglican
    You are finding distinctions that are simply not there.

    "As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear."

    This would require a judgement on what sin is and if it has been committed.

    Ephesians 5:11
    Have no fellowship with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

    The notion that Christians may not call sin a sin is so entirely novel and absurd it's hard to see where one can even start. The rest of your post is a description of the order of discipline in the Church and is entirely within what I said. As far as "thought police" that doesn't really answer my post at all.
     
    dariakus, antiquarian and anglican74 like this.
  4. anglican74

    anglican74 Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    765
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    What is the difference?

    We are called by Scripture to pass a sentence on heretics, Tiffy, I don't know what you are talking about? ALso the Anglican tradition is pretty straightforward with ecclesiastical courts, so unless you are willing to condemn all of Anglicanism, I just don't know what you are saying here
     
    JoeLaughon likes this.
  5. Tiffy

    Tiffy Active Member

    Posts:
    455
    Likes Received:
    135
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    I thought I had gone on to explain that in the text which followed the sentence quoted. Perhaps my explanation lacked clarity or perhaps my text wasn't read that far.
    .
     
  6. Rexlion

    Rexlion Active Member

    Posts:
    143
    Likes Received:
    55
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    If a person openly admits that he engages in homosexual behavior, he is engaging in sin. As Christians, we should have no qualms about calling it "sinful behavior." We should warn the individual of the spiritual peril involved in refusal to judge himself. This does not mean that we judge the person, but we address the behavior.

    Likewise, if a person openly admits that he follows the Quran and worships Allah, we should have no hesitation about addressing that person's spiritual need to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and to reject the false god Allah. Again, we do not judge the individual, but we address false beliefs which would lead him to eternal suffering; we do this out of love and compassion for him, because (like Jesus) we are "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." Such counsel is not based upon "religious prejudice" but upon spiritual reality. I hope no one here is inclined to disagree with Jesus Christ when He said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life; no one cometh unto the Father but by Me" (John 14:6).
     
    Shaun, dariakus and JoeLaughon like this.

Share This Page