Biblical Thinking Leads to Joy in the Midst of Trials: James 1:2-4,13,14
“But we must remember, the God who bestows the same blessings on the just and the unjust, may also shower us with the same trials as well.”
I don’t know about you, but I like it both ways. I want life to go my way down here and then retire to Heaven. Hey, I’m not asking for much, cat’s have 9 lives, I only want 2. Trials are annoying, disruptive, inconvenient, and downright painful. Wouldn’t you agree with that? I hope not. If you agree with that, you are well on your way to adding more misery to your life.
James begins with the word “consider” (Ecc. 7:14), or as some commentators note: “evaluate.” The first thing you must employ in a trial is biblical reason. Emotion will be there, but it must take a back seat to reason. Specifically, biblical reason. Verses 13 and 14 (of chapter 1) used to perplex me in James’ line of thinking here and I confess that I do not entirely understand all of the implications in regard to trials, but I’m on safe ground in regard to the following: (“Let no one say when he is tempted, ‘I am being tempted by God,’ for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire”) In the beginning and midst of a trial, we will be tempted. This is clearly the context of verses 13 and 14. How will we be tempted? By desire. Whatever meaning you want to attach to desire here, the following cannot be refuted; our desires produce thoughts, and it’s not our “desire” to be in a trial. Let the warfare commence, the mind of Christ verses desire. Desire and emotions produce thoughts that “lure” us away from right thinking that leads to stability and right doing. This can clearly be seen when Satan approached Eve to do warfare with her. His goal was to change her thinking and appeal to desire. Obviously. Be sure of this, when you are in a trial, philosophies contrary to God’s word will come knocking and desire will be there waiting to help. The source of the desires James is speaking of is the “flesh” (Eph 2:3, Ro 13:14, Ga 5:16 Ga 5:17 Ga 5:24).
If you are looking to James for some deep and philosophical knowledge in regard to why bad things happen to good people, you have come to the wrong place. I can’t wait to meet James because he is a nuts and bolts guy. The last thing we need when we are in a trial is a long in-depth course in philosophy. The trials of life are no time to be figuring things out, James shows the way in no uncertain terms. Please hear me, when a friend is in a trail, do not take him, or her, a stinking book written by some big name theologian. Do your job, go to them with the mind of Christ and his compassion.
Our first thought when we find ourselves in a trial needs to be the following: “this is a good thing” (consider it ALL joy). James cushions his direct style with, “my brothers.” Before we get into the specific reason for joy stated by James, let me interject some other scripture that speaks to the why we should be thankful and joyful for trials: It is proof positive that God is working in our lives.
“If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons” (Heb 12:8).
Though this verse speaks of reproof, a reading of this verse in context reveals the very close relationship between discipline and trials (Heb 12:3-17). God is completely sovereign and always has a specific purpose in bringing events into the lives of believers and even unbelievers (Matt 5:45 1Thess 5:18 Pro 16:9). Trials exhibit God’s care for us and indicate that we belong to him. It also indicates the very working hands of God in our life. That is why 1Thess 5:18 tells us that we can be thankful in “every circumstance.” Furthermore, trials lead to comfort that equips us to help others have comfort (2Cor 1:3-7). Therefore, trials have yet another purpose of training us in order to help others.
James also cites the specific benefit of developed perseverance or steadfastness. Apparently, growing in perseverance facilitates growth in all area’s of life (“perfect and complete, lacking nothing”). There are many other elements of trials that could be gleaned but the point is this: pondering the various truths concerning what God is up to in trials should give us hope, joy, peace and assurance.
However, don’t miss what James says about being caught off guard. He says trials are of “various kinds.” Often, trials are not what we expect. Trials often come in a form or type that we would never dream could happen to us. Peter put it this way: “Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you” (1 Peter 4;12). What kind of trial could happen to me? Anything. Usually, Christians can be caught off guard by the severity of the trial (“fiery”). But we must remember, the God who bestows the same blessings on the just and the unjust, may also shower us with the same trials as well (Matt. 5:4,5 Ecc. 7:14). Being dazed and confused is not helpful in regard to sound, Christlike thinking. Sometimes, clarifying this reality is where you might have to begin.
paul
Divorce: The Ultimate “I won’t Forgive You”
It’s hard to deny and difficult to understand, but God binds relationships through agreements. This was true at the very beginning. The following is an excerpt from another post:
“God created man for the purpose of being blessed by God and bearing his image. He was to have dominion over God’s creation. He was also created for the purpose of being fruitful and multiplying. But God also put something between himself and man, a standard:
‘Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. The LORD God commanded the man, saying, ‘From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die'” (Genesis 2:15-17).
From the very beginning, the foundation of relationship between God and man was God setting the standard or structure and man following in obedience, or being faithful to God’s structure. When man did not hold to his part of the relationship, no words could adequately describe the disaster that followed. God is truly one who utilizes covenants in his relationships, and places a very high premium on them. When man failed, the foundation of the relationship was destroyed, and God chose to take action to restore the relationship. As one theologian said: “He bankrupted Heaven to do it.”
Very early and often in Scripture, God established the institution of Marriage to represent the covenant between him and his people. God chose Abraham to found a great nation of people to execute his restoration to the world. This nation, called Israel, would oversee the preservation of God’s word and his message to the world. From this nation would come the Messiah and Savior of the world. Unfortunately, Israel would fail as Adam did. Here is what God says concerning the above reality:
‘Thus says the Lord GOD to Jerusalem, ‘Your origin and your birth are from the land of the Canaanite, your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite. As for your birth, on the day you were born your navel cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water for cleansing; you were not rubbed with salt or even wrapped in cloths. No eye looked with pity on you to do any of these things for you, to have compassion on you. Rather you were thrown out into the open field, for you were abhorred on the day you were born. When I passed by you and saw you squirming in your blood, I said to you {while you were} in your blood, ‘Live!’ Yes, I said to you {while you were} in your blood, ‘Live!’ I made you numerous like plants of the field. Then you grew up, became tall and reached the age for fine ornaments; {your} breasts were formed and your hair had grown. Yet you were naked and bare. Then I passed by you and saw you, and behold, you were at the time for love; so I spread My skirt over you and covered your nakedness. I also swore to you and entered into a covenant with you so that you became Mine, declares the Lord GOD. Then I bathed you with water, washed off your blood from you and anointed you with oil. I also clothed you with embroidered cloth and put sandals of porpoise skin on your feet; and I wrapped you with fine linen and covered you with silk. I adorned you with ornaments, put bracelets on your hands and a necklace around your neck. I also put a ring in your nostril, earrings in your ears and a beautiful crown on your head. Thus you were adorned with gold and silver, and your dress was of fine linen, silk and embroidered cloth. You ate fine flour, honey and oil; so you were exceedingly beautiful and advanced to royalty'” (Ezekiel 16:3-13).
The following verses in chapter 16 describe Israel’s horrific betrayal of God’s trust. Said another way by God, he instructs the prophet Hosea to literally take a prostitute for a wife as an in your face living illustration:
When the LORD first spoke through Hosea, the LORD said to Hosea, “Go, take to yourself a wife of harlotry and {have} children of harlotry; for the land commits flagrant harlotry, forsaking the LORD” (Hosea 1:2,3).
However, here is where we begin to see that the culmination of the covenant did not, does not, and will not, depend on the performance of Israel. Hosea is instructed to go to the local auction and buy his wife back who had left him to resume her harlotry:
Then the LORD said to me, “Go again, love a woman {who} is loved by {her} husband, yet an adulteress, even as the LORD loves the son of Israel, though they turn to other gods and love raisin cakes.” So I bought her for myself for fifteen {shekels} of silver and a homer and a half of barley. Then I said to her, “You shall stay with me for many days. You shall not play the harlot, nor shall you have a man; so I will also be toward you” (Hosea 3:1-3).
It’s pretty obvious isn’t it? Hosea’s love for Gomer and God’s love for Israel didn’t depend on their performance. In the Abrahamic Covenant, God put Abraham in a deep sleep and consummated the covenant himself because it did not, could not, and would not depend on anybody but God [Genesis 15].
The concept of a marriage relationship between God and his people is replete throughout the Old Testament and int0 the New. Marriage then, at least in part, symbolizes God’s forgiveness, mercy and dedication to his covenant elect.
I have often wondered why God said he hated divorce (Malachi 16:2). I wonder, because he never specifically states why he hates divorce. However, I think we have a hint in Ephesians 5:25 where Paul instructs husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church. How did Christ love the Church? The same way he loved Israel. God’s devotion to Israel has never depended on their performance and the church is no different. Why would it be? God only brought in the Gentiles to make Israel jealous anyway (Romans 10:19, Romans 11:11). Marriage then, is symbolic of God’s forgiveness, his mercy, his covenants, and especially the gospel. God’s covenants exemplify his mercy and forgiveness.
If you know what the Scriptures teach about forgiveness, it’s not hard to understand why God hates divorce. Those who will not forgive, do not understand how much they have been forgiven. Those who will not forgive, do not see themselves in Gomer. Those who will not forgive, do not see themselves in Ezekiel 16:15-63. Christ made it clear, “For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little” (Luke 7:47). Mark 6:14 speaks of our responsibility to forgive “men” (mankind in general) in order to be forgiven by God ourselves. Luke 6:35 speaks of being kind to the wicked in order to be “sons of the Most High.” How much more towards the one whom which you share an intimate relationship ordained by God and symbolic of his gospel covenant? In the sermon on the mount, the subject of divorce among other subjects, is nestled squarely between anger and retaliation, and Christ makes it clear that just cause for divorce is very narrow indeed.
I am amazed at the flippant attitude in our culture concerning marriage, even among Christians. It’s not a party, it’s an emblem of God’s covenant faithfulness. The execution of the marriage covenant will either reject God or uphold his Glory. Divorce not only proclaims a refusal to forgive the covenant partner, it proclaims that fact publicly, and even sues for the spoils and restitution. A single divorce can produce an impressive list of things contrary to the sermon on the mount which primarily addresses relationships at many levels.
My uneducated grandmother understood all of this. She was married to my lost grandfather for 35 years. Suffice to say, she had the liberty to divorce him by biblical standards several fold. But he never wanted to loose her, that’s for sure. Well, finally, shortly before his death, he was saved. My grandmother never remarried, but God blessed her abundantly in the several years she lived afterword. By most standards in Christianity today, she would be labeled a fool, but it was never about her. Enter Brad Pitt, he is getting divorced again. Apparently, from what I am reading, another wife did not live up to his standards. Remember the woman at the well? Five husbands did not meet her standards and she gave up on marriage all together. Statistics indicate that first time marriages only have a 50/50 chance of survival whether Christian or secular. An astounding 80% of second marriages end in divorce, and the beat goes on.
At the core is an unwillingness to forgive. We understand why unbelievers can’t forgive, they have never been forgiven. What is perplexing is the wide spread acceptance among Christians of the ultimate and public statement of unforgiveness: Divorce.
paul
How To Poke God In The Eye
So whats up with “Supercessionism?” That’s the belief that God has no future for Israel, that Israel has been replaced by the Church and all the promises made to Israel transferred to the Church accordingly. The promises made to Israel for the future are massive in the Bible. The only possible way to make “Israel” the “Church” in all the hundreds of Old Testament promises to Israel is to approach the Scriptures with a particular method of interpretation that yields the result you prefer. Obviously, not a literal interpretation. The following is only one example:
“In the latter days you will understand this. At that time,” declares the LORD, “I will be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be My people” (Jere 30:24-31:1).
Or how about this:
“Thus says the LORD, Who gives the sun for light by day And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar; The LORD of hosts is His name: If this fixed order departs From before Me,” declares the LORD, “Then the offspring of Israel also will cease From being a nation before Me forever.”Thus says the LORD, “If the heavens above can be measured And the foundations of the earth searched out below, Then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel For all that they have done,” declares the LORD” (Jere 31:35-37).
Bottom line, if we can’t take that at face value, how do we even know that John 3:16 means what it says?
Furthermore, Supercessionism for the most part, comes out of Reformed Theology and to a large degree, New Covenant Theology. Both have a strong element of “election.” In the Bible, Isreal is called God’s “elect” ( Dt 7:6, Isa 45:4). They agree with everyone else being called elect in the Bible and use a literal interpretation accordingly, but when it comes to Israel, they implement the Redemptive Historical hermeneutic. This is plainly unacceptable. Also, a “new covenant” is only mentioned once in the Bible and is even set against the older covenant in the same context, but the “new covenant” is specifically promised to Israel!! GOOD GRIEF. By the way, God’s chosen people have always been Israel and will always be Israel. God told the woman at the well, “salvation is of the Jew’s.” The Church was initially a Jewish church and God had to do dramatic things to convince the Jews that he wanted the Gentiles in there (Acts Chapters 10 and 11). As a matter of fact, the baptism of the Spirit at Pentecost was a set-up to convince the Jews when the time was right (Acts 11:15-18). God only saved the Gentiles to make Israel jealous (Rom 11:13). The Gentiles are the ugly step children of salvation and it is high time reformed theologians get over it. For sobering warnings from God concerning wrong attitudes toward Israel, read Romans 11 for yourself.
I don’t know much about John Hagee, but I know he said this: “I believe all true Christians have a soft place in their hearts for Israel.” Why not? If we have God’s heart, certainly this should be true, especially if slighting the Jews is poking God in the eye. He (Hagee) also said this: “God told Abraham that he would bless those who blessed him and curse those who cursed him. If you go to a church where the leaders believe in Supercessionism, you do not go to a church that God is going to bless.” Yep, I agree. Denying what God has promised to the Jews is taking away from the word of God. In the book of Revelation, God says all of the curses in that book await those who do so. Would Supercessionism be in this category? I don’t know, but it’s kinda like what Ronald Reagan said about work: ” hard work never killed anybody, but why take the chance?”
paul
Case # 2008DR00927
“Truly, divorce must be the delight of hell and its many hordes.”
I didn’t want to just post another cliched article on Malachi 2:16 where God says “I hate divorce.” Have you ever thought of that?, God never says specifically why he hates divorce in any passage. There are no “I hate divorce because” verses. It therefore must be surmised from other related biblical topics. I was originally going to title this, “Why Does God Hate Divorce?” There is much biblical information regarding the answer, but my post is from a practical perspective. That’s where I am going to start. How practical is divorce where the rubber meets the road? And why would I start there?
Here is the reason: because I went to a class called, “Helping Children Succeed After Divorce.” It is a class that concerns “Post Parenting.” That is, effective parenting after divorce. Hmmm. Let me phrase it another way: “How to be a parent when you no longer live in the same house with the other parent.” It was required by the courts, case # 2008DR00927. The class was taught by an expert with plenty of experience in this kind of counseling. She does mediation for the courts when the attorneys have trouble working out all of the visitation details and so forth. According to the class, the relationship between the parents now needs to be strictly business and focus on what is best for the children. The class addresses the many difficulties in accomplishing this. Throughout the class, the instructor spoke of the “misery index,” or level in the midst of the process.
Things started to become apparent. First, the misery level of the initial affairs is almost unspeakable. The separation of property down to the keepsakes and that wedding ring that had been passed down from generation to generation. That house you built together, the vacation pictures. The preschool projects your proud children came running home with, revealing talents you never knew they had with the inscription, “mumy and dadi.” No wonder these are ugly affairs, you would almost have to make the other person your enemy to even be able to bear it. Then the children, deciding visitation rights and all of the agreed upon rules accordingly.
Then there is this: Divorces are almost always protracted affairs. The initial shock and awe is over with, but every month, when one spouse sits down to write the alimony check, the wounds are reopened. When job situations change for better or worse, both spouses are right back in the legal wrangling to determine new support amounts. If you are remarried and get a promotion at work, you and your spouse don’t discuss where to celebrate, you discuss how long it is going to take the X to file for increased support and how much you will be able to keep. Why celebrate at all? Furthermore, In the best of financial agreements, items fall through the cracks and the children are left to find out which parent is going to pay for the item. Then there is the whole remarriage thing and how the children handle that. This kind of stuff and a long, long list of more, goes on for years after the initial divorce. Truly, divorce must be the delight of hell and it’s many hordes.
Those who know me also know how much I enjoy asking questions. After listening to all of this damage control counseling, I asked this question: “In your experience as a post parenting counselor, have you ever seen one case where the misery index was less than the level of misery while the marriage was still intact?” Although her long pause and “deer in the headlights” look answered the question, Listen carefully to her actual answer: ” I often tell couples that divorce will not necessarily end the misery or even lesson it. Chances are, it will actually increase the misery level.” That is a profound admission. I then asked another question: “As you have said, being successful in post parenting is very difficult and requires trust, but how can there be trust when one spouse stood before witnesses and vowed to stay with that other person for ‘better or for worse’, and then didn’t do it? Secondly, if marriage counseling is easier and has fewer elements, and they were not successful there, how will they be successful in post parenting?” “For the children,” she said. Do it for the children. So then my final question: “So then, if we are really good at post parenting, we can send a message to our children that there can be a positive outcome to divorce, even though you said prior that the misery level is rarely less and usually more. If the misery level is lower in the marriage, why not rather be successful at marriage and send that message to the children instead?” She didn’t answer the question but her verbal discourse that followed was well spoken. In our society today, staying in a marriage and making it work for the sake of the children is unrealistic and archaic, but the call now by the professionals is to be successful post parents for the sake of the children. Ya, be good at that, 80% of all criminals in this country come from single parent homes.
What would the Bible say about all of the above pragmatism? well, in Psalm 15, the Holy Spirit names some attributes of the righteous. One of them is the following in verse 4: “….who keeps his oath even when it hurts”. Marriage is an oath for better or worse and sometimes it hurts to keep that oath. This is the mark of a righteous person. The Bible gives two reasons and two reasons only for divorce, fornication and abandonment by another spouse via physical departure: “But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace (ICorinthians 7:15).” One reason biblical permission is so narrow is clear, even from a practical perspective, divorce doesn’t solve anything and rarely gives God glory in any respect.
But today’s Church is pregnant with leaders who walk by sight and not by faith. I mean, look at all the “real life” cases. “Look at what a jerk that guy is, and she is such a sweet person.” Surely Paul the apostle did not mean to limit divorce to a literal physical departure! “I know, Paul was talking about a ‘departure in the persons heart’, ya, ya that’s it, it all makes sense now!” Besides, this approach often covers for the inability of leaders to take the word of God and resolve life issues. It also cuts down on all of those pesky phone calls in the middle of the night. The divorce rate in the Church is now the same as the world, and there is a reason for that. With a new wave of mysticism comes a disdain for a literal interpretation of the Bible and it’s call to duty and obedience, robbing Christians of the joy that follows.
My situation is merely case # 2008DR00927 to the county of Montgomery, it might as well be the same in the Church. No big deal. Sure, we know divorce is a public proclamation that states: “I don’t forgive you”, but Paul also said “we are called to peace,” many argue, as if peace is defined by the following issues generated by divorce and well stated by a divorce information website (see following my conclusion). Let me suggest that Paul was saying God has called us to peace as a general principle, so we shouldn’t make decisions that create turmoil when the outcome is uncertain, like say, trying to force an unbelieving spouse to stay in the marriage when they have clearly set their mind on leaving. And by the way, though the following list claims to be comprehensive, it is not even close. It does not address the broken family relationships on both sides including in-laws and all the other relatives, and many other issues.
Let me repeat this from one of my above paragraphs in closing : ” One reason biblical permission is so narrow is clear; even from a practical perspective, divorce doesn’t solve anything and rarely gives God glory in any respect.”
|
COMPREHENSIVE MARITAL SETTLEMENT ISSUES
I. PREAMBLE
A. Identification of Parties to AgreementB. Date and Place of Marriage
C. Separation Date
D. Status of Court Filings
E. Identification of Children
F. Intentions in Coming to Agreement
G. Acknowledgment of Current Employment/Income Status II. PARENTING A. Decision Making (Legal Custody) and Primary Residence B. Weekly Residential Schedule C. Holiday and Vacation Periods (overall intention)
D. Substitute Child Care Providers E. Transportation F. Prompt Exercise of Time with Child G. Right to Communicate with Child H. Fostering Affection and Respect I. Access to Information from Schools, etc. J. Parental Cooperation K. Parental Communication L. Safety and Security M. Future Conflict Resolution Process N. Future Review of Parenting Arrangements
P. Responsibility for Extracurricular Activities, Sports Equipment, Lessons, Clothes Q. Education and Other Major Expenses for Children R. Medical/Dental Insurance S. Uninsured Medical Expenses T. Life Insurance (to protect support responsibility)
U. Dependent Deduction V. Gifts to Children W. Agreement to Make a Will
|
Church Discipline Floundering
“let there be no doubt about it, church discipline is often the result of inept ‘biblical’ counsel, and as if that’s not tragic enough, the church discipline is then executed incorrectly.”
As I stated in another post: “Since I became a christian in 1983, I have seen the church move back to the practice of church discipline in a big way. After years of seeing open sin tolerated in the church [ and I was not in a liberal church ], the discovery of church discipline was an epiphany for me some 7 years after becoming a christian.” I forgot to mention how glad I was to see it make a come back, until recently. The evangelical churches attempt to bring back church discipline often looks like something out of a Keystone Cops movie, with Barney Fife directing.
Point in case, The Rebecca Hancock case http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,469928,00.html. After consuming several articles pro and con, enough facts can be ascertained to make an all too familiar judgement. Once again, a church has muffed a church discipline situation. The result? The whole messy situation is now public for the express result of a pooling of ignorance so huge in it’s proportions, that it could only be matched by the oceans and seas. I was recently put into a situation where I had to delve deep into what the Bible says concerning church discipline and I’m amazed at how wrong most churches have it. Grace Community Church in L.A. seems to cut it pretty straight, but Grace Community Church in Jacksonville Florida, Hancocks old church, well, that’s another story.
Let’s get this straight, I am not defending Hancock. Obedience to Christ is how we love him as Lord and Savior. The boy friend needs to take a back seat to Christ in her life, like yesterday. But tomorrow, the church’s elders are going to announce her sins to the church, and possibly for no good biblical reason. As stated in their letter posted by Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Church_Extortion.pdf , their premise is Matthew 18. This scripture addresses sins against other believers, not personal moral failure of the baser sort:
1 Corinthians 5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.2And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.3For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,4In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,5To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. 11But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.12For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?13But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
Let me pause here before I make my first point. As a former elder, I was involved in several situations like this, where someone submitted a letter of resignation from membership after being confronted with a church discipline issue. Another elder suggested in this situation, individuals “discipline themselves” by leaving. I scoffed at this notion and brushed it aside as a lame attempt to move on with business as usual. However, I now see some scriptural wisdom in this, especially if this is explained to the erring member accordingly. In regard to living in open sin, Paul’s concern is that the membership stop associating with this individual. The purpose of congregational involvement is to turn such a one over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, if this person is still present with the congregation. If they have already left and have been informed that they are outside the protective realm of the church, it may be a mute point. It would only be an issue if they came back for any reason in an attempt to fellowship with the congregation. Keep in mind, God disciplines some Christians living in secret sin without the congregations knowledge:
“But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep. But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged. But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world.” 1Cor 11:28-32
I also offer this practical consideration: Does good usually result from doing things without the application of biblical wisdom? It just so happens that a demand to return to a church for the purpose of making things right with the threat of public humiliation attached to the demand is considered to be extortion in some states. In Ohio for instance, preventing someone from executing a legal act by threat of bodily harm or public humiliation is considered coercion or extortion under state kidnapping laws. Leaving a church is a legal act. If Florida law is the same, these elders have put this in writing, but under the wrong premise of Matthew 18. GOOD GRIEF!!!
We must take note that 1Cor 5 is very distinct from Matt 18 for those living in fornication. The calling together of the congregation is for the purpose of exclusion and not a third exhortation to repent. In the case of Rebecca Hancock, what were they even doing in Matthew 18? Applying Matthew 18 to the situation simply created the mess that it now is. But there is yet another angle here. This lady was sharing the situation with her “mentor.” There is also an indication that it was an off and on again struggle.
1. Some part of her wanted to deal with it or she wouldn’t have shared it with her mentor.
2. She had a mentor. Usually, those who are not serious about there relationship with the Lord, don’t bother with mentors.
3. She broke off the relationship several times, but for some reason ended back in this sinful relationship.
This makes me wonder; how solid was the counsel she was getting from the mentor? let there be no doubt about it, church discipline is often the result of inept biblical counsel, and as if that’s not tragic enough, the church discipline is then executed incorrectly. Apparently, a new trend among church’s is people showing up for a counseling appointment and finding themselves in the church discipline process. People who seek out counsel and end up being disciplined is very unsettling to me for many reasons. Without a doubt, before you would move toward any kind of church discipline, you would employ Proverbs 11:14, “Where there is no guidance the people fall, but in abundance of counselors there is victory.” Before anybody who came to you for counsel ends up excommunicated, it seems that you would want to make sure a shortfall in your wisdom did not contribute accordingly.
One may also want to be cautious in regard to the fact that 1Cor 5 seems to be dealing with people who are being brazen and arrogant in their sin, as opposed to a weak believer or perhaps ignorant as well. From what can be gleaned from this account, it seems possible that Hancock was truly ignorant of the biblical ramifications. If this situation suddenly went from a counseling situation to the second step of church discipline, confusion and that feeling you get when you have been ambushed could have resulted, which is not helpful. This is certainly possible if you consider the letter she received from the elders. They do not even explain the biblical purpose for the third step of discipline, which is a third exhortation. But Paul doesn’t want the congregation hanging out with this individual according to a Matthew 18 situation. Once the fact of unrepentant fornication is established, the church is to turn the individual over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh so that they are not judged with the world. Is this the purpose?, or is it the Matthew 18 purpose? They don’t even say!, and frankly, they probably don’t even know.
The buffoonery list of inept church discipline goes on and on. For instance, imagine going to witnesses for the second step with the option of following through only if they wanted to. But yet, it’s done all the time in the third step. Listen, if you are going to “tell it to the church”, they should be educated accordingly: involvement in the third exhortation should not be optional. If it is optional, don’t tell them, and if there are stipulations, educate accordingly. If the congregation is not educated according to their practical responsibility in the matter, it is merely gossip and nothing more. Worse yet, many churches combine exhortation and excommunication in the third step, eliminating the fourth step altogether. Furthermore, it is clear from scripture that different situations warrant different discipline processes, and different treatment in the final analysis. In regard to process and final treatment, compare Matt 18:15-20, 1Tim 6:3-5, 2Jn 10, Titus 3:10, 1Tim 5:19,20, 1Cor 5:1-13, 2Thess 3:6-15, Gal 6:1. But yet, the grid of Matthew 18 is painted over everything. This is just a plain sloppy rendering of the scriptures and to the detriment of many.
I am weary of all the whining and moaning about these issues being “dragged into the public.” What do we expect? If the Church will not clean up it’s own mess, the world will be more than happy to do it for us. Many church’s had better get rid of it’s attitude that sloppy church discipline is ok because, after all, we are dealing with people who are sinning.
paul
2 comments