Posted on 09/27/2018 10:45:52 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
You don’t look behind the door unless you’ve hid there yourself once.
Just sayin’
It should be noted that Paul doesn't limit excommunication to just fornicators. Included in his list are: the covetous, idolaters, revilers, drunkards and extortioners. I wonder how many in our churches, including pastors, are covetous people and according to Paul, deserving of excommunication?
So there's no misunderstanding, I agree with Paul. The 21st century church is divided in many ways, so there's no consistency in doctrine, which included how to discipline believers. Is it the role of the Pastor to be the grand inquisitor of the flock? I don't think so. I believe the preacher preaches as he is led of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit convicts the hearer and the hearer chooses to believe or reject the Word. Now, if a Believer is openly practicing sin he should be referred to the Pastor or apply Matthew 18:16 .
That’s just the words of Paul. Not of Jesus. I’m a Christian, not a Paulian.
This is in regards to Christians who do not repent. Piper is right. If this couple doesn’t understand the importance of their testimony to a fallen world, they most likely are not Christians and their marriage ceremony is nothing more than a sham. One also has to wonder why this Christian who asked this question even be associating with this couple who are living outside marriage.
This is why the world sees no difference in Christians today because Christians are more frequently adopting the world’s standard.
There are pastors who will not preform weddings for people who are already leaving together there are other pastors that will because they are moving from sin into holiness.
I do not find this author's argument persuasive.
RE: I do not find this author’s argument persuasive.
Biblically or practically unpersuasive?
Our church won’t marry people if they are living together, so it is a non-issue for us.
So God allows you to do whatever you feel is OK?
:>)))
are we to rely on mind-reading, speculation, or direct questioning of the couple?
Yea, Jesus prob shouldn’t have gone to that party and turned water into wine, either. Too many sinners in attendance, I’m sure. (BIG EYE ROLL)
I decided long ago that I won’t attend second weddings in many cases. Amazingly few of my friends have gotten divorced so it’s not an issue.
I can only think of one of my friends who have divorced.
My parents got divorced and remarried. Both had no guests including us kids.
In my dad’s case, he was living in Florida and was a really private person.
For my mom, his kids and her kids didn’t have one weekend all summer where we were all free. In our case, our events were ones that we couldn’t change. I’ve actually never even met some of his kids but they’ve only been married fifteen years of so.
I’m just glad I’m Jewish and not so legalistic as these guys.
;-)
My turn.
RE: I decided long ago that I won’t attend second weddings in many cases.
I would plead with you to look at this on a case by case basis.
What if one spouse cheated on the other? What if one spouse was physically abusive and endangered the other spouse’s life?
What if one spouse INSISTS on a divorce despite the other not wanting a divorce?
What if one spouse abandons the family and is not heard from since?
These are cases we have to seriously consider before we tar and feather every divorcee.
So you like the part where Jesus told the adulterer: “go, and sin no more”?
Is he suggesting that we should ask our friends to tell us - CONVINCINGLY - their relationship with God and their feelings towards f@(king before we can accept a wedding invite?
Sorry, but I have a hard enough time trying to pick the beef, chicken or fish entree on my invite - picking Godly winners and losers is going a bit too far!
I disagree with Piper. For non-Christians it’s okay to attend because they don’t make such claims of faith in Christ?
But Paul said it is better to marry than to burn with passion. Paul acknowledges the power of hormones. So, if they finally decide to do the right thing and marry, then we’re supposed to punish them?
He is equating the modern cultural wedding with biblical marriage. They are not even close to the same. One is a legally recognized union which may or may not include God. One is a union that includes God.
He also wants to discipline people in the congregation who are sinning. That is fine except he is focusing on only ONE area and one that is not even on the list of the things that God says He hates. For example God says that He hates people who sow discord among brethren.
He never says that He hates people who have sex before the wedding party.
Practically while people who are living together should not be in any position of leadership in the church to attempt to "discipline" them is not realistic. Are you going to throw them out of the congregation?
It sounds like he is saying they should be "punished" by not having people attend their wedding. There are a couple of parables in the Bible about this kind of behavior. It is not considered a good thing.
Yeah right, this is sure grounded in reality. Next wedding invitation I get Im going to ask if they’ve been doing the nasty before I decide to go to the wedding.
Notice I said many cases.
My cousin cheated on her husband and got knocked up. No chance I was going to that wedding. I told her the batteries still worked on the clock I gave her for her first wedding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.