Judging matters.. on a public forum.

[MGov]

1Corinthians 6:1-10 (NASB)
Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?
Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts?
Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, matters of this life?
If then you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?
I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren,
but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?
Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?
On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud, and that your brethren.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Note that I have quoted verses 1-10 for the purpose of context.

Does this BB violate the biblical principles presented in the verses quoted above, because unbelievers do visit this forum from time to time?
As usual, I am of two minds on this, but I am convinceable, and subject to change until I get to glory.

M

[Kimberley Tobin]

I'm leaving for the week and don't know if I will be able to visit this site, so without much thought (which I would like to invest a little more of...) I would like everyone to consider the following:

1)  This is not a court of law.  The case could be made that it is a court of public opinion, but noone is taking anyone to "court" on this BB.

2)  We have documented for time and eternity in the bible (no less) Paul, NAMING those who opposed the gospel of Christ.  He wrote letters documenting heresy and anything that ran contrary to the gospel of Christ, calling it "another gospel."  See the whole book of Galatians, Acts 15 and other passages (the Diotrephes passage comes to mind.)  I don't understand the "argument" for not opposing false teaching and doctrine, when the bible so clearly calls it out in numerous passages and directs us to do likewise.

I wish I had more time to address this, but I did want to weigh in on what I believe to be a crucial issue MGov has raised.

Have a great week everybody!

[Matt]

I'm leaving for the week and don't know if I will be able to visit this site, so without much thought (which I would like to invest a little more of...) I would like everyone to consider the following:

1)  This is not a court of law.  The case could be made that it is a court of public opinion, but noone is taking anyone to "court" on this BB.

2)  We have documented for time and eternity in the bible (no less) Paul, NAMING those who opposed the gospel of Christ.  He wrote letters documenting heresy and anything that ran contrary to the gospel of Christ, calling it "another gospel."  See the whole book of Galatians, Acts 15 and other passages (the Diotrephes passage comes to mind.)  I don't understand the "argument" for not opposing false teaching and doctrine, when the bible so clearly calls it out in numerous passages and directs us to do likewise.

I wish I had more time to address this, but I did want to weigh in on what I believe to be a crucial issue MGov has raised.

Have a great week everybody!

No, the passage that MGov and I have brought up refers to accusing Christian brothers outside of a church setting. This bb isn't a church, it's a public forum. That's what Paul said is to our shame. It also mentions that we are not to go before unbelievers with chuch affairs - and this bb isn't limited to believers.

[sfortescue]

As Kimberley said, the Bible is not limited to believers, and Paul's descriptions of problems in churches is open for anyone to read.

I believe that when Paul uses the expression, "I say this to your shame," he is not talking about the shame of unbelievers finding out about problems, because problems are common occurances in any group of people, but rather that their actions demonstrated their own belief that there was noone in their church who was wise enough to resolve problems.

In the present circumstance, the lack of action to resolve problems that have existed over many years acts as its own proof of the lack of a wise man among the assembly leadership.  That lack is the shame of the assembly.

Some argue that there may be a wise leader in an assembly that is far from Fullerton.  One skill that I would expect a wise leader to have is the ability to recognize another wise leader.  If this were the case, then some remote wise leader would recognize that the leader over him in the assembly power structure was not wise, and would perceive that there was a problem in the assembly.  So the wise leader in a remote place who was the closest to the realm of absense of wisdom could not be said to be blithely ignorant of the presense of a problem in the assembly, although he may not know its severity.  The wise leader who notices this problem would do some investigating to find out why the leader over him is not wise.  In the words of Verne, "Where was their sense of smell?"

[MGov]

As Kimberley said, the Bible is not limited to believers, and Paul's descriptions of problems in churches is open for anyone to read.

I believe that when Paul uses the expression, "I say this to your shame," he is not talking about the shame of unbelievers finding out about problems, because problems are common occurances in any group of people, but rather that their actions demonstrated their own belief that there was noone in their church who was wise enough to resolve problems.

I did wonder about this perspective, and you have helped to clarify it.  Thanks.

M

[Heide]

After reading this I have some questions....

The bible says render unto Cesar what is Cesar's. (Yes, my spelling is wrong...) If a man purposely avoids admitting certain income to the IRS is he held accountable by the IRS or God? Which law proceeds?

Or if a sexual predator moves into your town, he is a believer, so he says. Do you broadcast thru the church that he is a sexual predator or allow him to teach sunday school?

I know of a few workers who did not report what they received on their income tax forms.  Do you not inform your neighbor?

A funny thing about unbelievers, they see clearer at times than us believers. They can cut thru the sham. So many of my friends saw the deceit in the assembly. They couldn't believe I was so blinded by what was going on. If we as believers hold our leaders in account, shouldn't the world follow course?

Heide Johnson

[Mark Kisla]

Tax cheating amounts to $180 billion a year. The I.R.S. has a "Conscience Fund" for those who want to send in their money after having cheated the government.

According to a survey 39% of Americans will cheat on taxes.
-The Day America Told The Truth.

[Kimberley Tobin]

I'm leaving for the week and don't know if I will be able to visit this site, so without much thought (which I would like to invest a little more of...) I would like everyone to consider the following:

1)  This is not a court of law.  The case could be made that it is a court of public opinion, but noone is taking anyone to "court" on this BB.

2)  We have documented for time and eternity in the bible (no less) Paul, NAMING those who opposed the gospel of Christ.  He wrote letters documenting heresy and anything that ran contrary to the gospel of Christ, calling it "another gospel."  See the whole book of Galatians, Acts 15 and other passages (the Diotrephes passage comes to mind.)  I don't understand the "argument" for not opposing false teaching and doctrine, when the bible so clearly calls it out in numerous passages and directs us to do likewise.

I wish I had more time to address this, but I did want to weigh in on what I believe to be a crucial issue MGov has raised.

Have a great week everybody!

No, the passage that MGov and I have brought up refers to accusing Christian brothers outside of a church setting. This bb isn't a church, it's a public forum. That's what Paul said is to our shame. It also mentions that we are not to go before unbelievers with chuch affairs - and this bb isn't limited to believers.

I didn't realize that it was you MATT AND MGov that brought up this passage.  It was only posted under MGov's name.  And you are completely wrong as to the context of this passage.  It is clearly stating in this passage that Paul is discussing brethren taking brethren to "court", a court of "law", NOT discussing issues of the "church" taken before "unbelievers".  

What we are discussing on this BB is the false doctrine and abuses that were perpetrated against the Lord's people and Paul did the same in the passages above that I mentioned.  We are clearly to tell the truth and to warn people of false brethren and that is what this BB is doing.  

It does not mean that there weren't saved individuals in the assembly (even men and women who taught false teaching and perpetrated abuse).  But we are to warn people of this false doctrine in order that others are not deceived by these individuals in the future.  I believe it was the assembly's (really GG) teaching re: not discussing these kind of issues (remember we had to keep the "unity", we could not raise any question against the leadership and their "rule" or decisions) that fostered the abuses and allowed them to go on for so long.  The internet has been a wonderful tool to bring information to the public and allow men and women to validate what they were thinking about their experiences in the assembly, but for many were unable to discuss with anyone.

Matt, your thinking has been so defined by the assembly that you are not looking at the whole context of scripture or you are taking scripture out of context to arrive at your conclusions.  You really need to get into a good church with good teaching rather than the twisted theology of the assembly.