I want to know what everyone thinks about pastors and or the church sitting members down from their works in the church. what about the member who isnt all the way delivered and is in some part of ministry or leadership should the church sit him or her down until they are delivered even if God called them?

Views: 51

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

In Matthew 18:15-17, Jesus gave us instructions on how the church should respond when someone within the church persists in living like an unbeliever. We read of a specific case of this in 1 Corinthians 5 and how the Apostle Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, instructed the Christians in the church at Corinth to handle it. In verses 11-13 Paul says, "But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner-not even to eat with such a person. For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges. Therefore 'put away from yourselves the evil person.'"There was a sexually immoral man in this church. Was Paul simply telling them not to let this man come to church with them because he was acting like an unbeliever instead of a Christian? No, he couldn't have meant that, for we know from other places in this letter (cf. 14:24-25) that unbelievers were welcome to attend church meetings. Even when they obeyed Paul's instructions to "put away from yourselves the evil person" and considered the man an unbeliever, they would have allowed (even welcomed) him to come and sit under the preaching of God's Word like any other person in town. So in what sense would they have "put away" ("remove"-NASB, "expel"-NIV) this man?
The best way of explaining how they would have "put away" this man is to understand that they removed him from the membership of the church and generally stopped associating with him outside the church meetings.Notice that Paul refers to those who are "inside" and to those who are "outside." Outside of what? As we've noted, anyone could attend their meetings. This kind of language can only refer to a definite church membership of converted people. For what authority does a group have to remove someone who is already "outside" and not a member of the group? You can't fire someone who doesn't work for you. You can't vote in your country to remove a government official elected by another country. You can't appeal to a court to discipline someone who isn't within its jurisdiction. In the same way, you can't formally discipline someone who is in an informal relationship with you; you have no authority to do so. These people in Corinth had voluntarily committed themselves to a formal relationship and they knew who official members of the church were and who were "outside."
Church discipline must be done by the "church" (Matthew 18:17) and occur "when you are gathered together" (1 Corinthians 5:4). Who is to gather together? How do you know who the "church" is? How do you determine who does and does not have the right to speak and vote on such matters? Does the person subject to discipline have the liberty to bring in his extended family or coworkers who have never been to the church, or even people off the street, and expect them to be given an equal say with those who have been faithful to the church for years? No? Why not? Do you exclude them from involvement because they've never been part of the church? Then what about the person who attended once five years ago? Or those who came at Easter and Christmas last year? Or those who regularly watch the church services on television or listen to them on the radio, and perhaps even send money, but never enter the building? Or those from distant cities who visit several times each year because of family members in the church? Obviously, Biblical church discipline must be limited to a specific group and that must mean the church members.In Matthew 18:15-17, Jesus set up an accountability system. When a professing believer starts living like an unbeliever, those in the church who know about it are to confront him about his sin. First, one is to go to this person, and then, if he will not listen, the one is to bring one or two others along for a second conversation. The goal is to restore him back to full fellowship with the Lord and his fellow believers. If he persistently and unrepentantly refuses to return to the Lord, the final step is to report the matter to the church. Then everyone in the church has the chance to win the person back. And if he continues in his sin, the church is to withdraw fellowship from him as the final means of showing him his need to repent.

If you aren't part of the church, they have no authority over you and cannot do what Jesus said to do. Unless you join the church, your independence places you outside the way Jesus wants things to happen. Incidentally, when Jesus says in verse 17 to bring this matter "to the church," how do you know who should be notified (and who should not be) unless there is a formally recognized membership?

Related to this idea of spiritual authority, recall Hebrews 13:17, this scripture tells us to obey the leaders of the church and submit to them because they keep watch over our souls. The leaders of the church are to "watch over" you by providing spiritual protection for you and caring about your growth in Christ. You place yourself outside that spiritual watchcare unless you are part of the local church.
Yes, any person who is responsible for the spiritual health and welfare of a flock has the authority (permission) by God to segregate (sit down) an individual who could possibly do irrepairable harm to the entire flock. It is not what is done, but how it is usually done which makes it appear to be vindictive instead of rehabilitative.

Unfortunately, the 21st century Christian would probably just go shopping for another church, instead of staying and maturing spiritually. If it is done in love, the person will come out stronger in the faith.
Any one in leadership that is not walking in holiness and have not been set free should not be serving because it can affect the flow of the holy spirit in the church and hinder the move of god so yes they should be set down.
I think if its a laymember then it makes a very big difference. Because if you were a leader you should be free from openly sinning before the congregation even though you may have some things in your life thats not pleasing to God. We all have something but that doesn't mean you have to display it openly or what not. Even though you shouldn't try to hide things but you shouldn't flaunt it before the people. Thats why its best as Pastors to pray over your leaders and to keep them before God so that you can know what they are doing in that secret closet and you wont have to worry about it getting all over the church and your job is to pray for them. Even Pastors, Bishops, or whatever live totally holy lives. We are all striving to be holy because scripture says that Jesus is the one true holy one. So i think you should sit them down if they act as if what they are doing is okay and they aren't correcting it then Yes. And some things a precher just should have no business doing at all which i would resort to sitting them down. Being a preacher people expect more out of you so you have to live up to that standard as a man or woman of God

RSS

© 2021   Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service