No SA, I wasn't addressing you per se. But thank you for your post. But what about Matt 18:15-18? Is that part of the NC?
Disfellowshipping = Capital Punishment (death) under the Law
What about Matt 18:15-18? Is that part of NC?
I started to respond, dear Freydo (again, peace to you!), but my Lord has directed me to ask you: Is it? What is YOUR response?
Again, I bid you peace!
Your servant and a slave of Christ,
I'm not sure? That's why I'm asking questions about how things are to be dealt with in luv. If one is supposed to speak to the congregation, what are they supposed to do?
If one is supposed to speak to the congregation, what are they supposed to do?
How do you mean, exactly, dear Freydo (again, peace to you!)? What is the congregation "supposed" to do? I believe the answer is there, as well: treat them "as the tax collectors." May I ask you: how are we to treat "tax collectors"? How did my Lord treat them? (Shelby whispers, "Matthew was a tax collector"...)
Again, peace to you!
A slave of Christ,
The problem though is when there is serious damage that is not specifically spelled out. In the case of pedophiles for example, it would seem rather absurd to go to an individual and say, "You molested my daughter. Do you repent?" And then they say "yes" and you say "Well no harm done. All's forgiven." Right? I don't think so. I'm just asking how these things should be handled in what's not only luving, but also fair and just, under the NC that is rather short on specifics. Under the Law, judges were to thoroughly investigate serious matters brought to their attention. Now as Paul said,
1 Corinthians 6:3 - "Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!" and Yahushua,
Matthew 7:14 - "But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
So what's the luving NC all about in matters of judgement?
The problem though is when there is serious damage that is not specifically spelled out.
It's spelled out, dear Freydo (may you have peace): it's up to the family.
In the case of pedophiles for example, it would seem rather absurd to go to an individual and say, "You molested my daughter. Do you repent?" And then they say "yes" and you say "Well no harm done. All's forgiven." Right? I don't think so.
I guess if whether the person "repents" is an issue, yes, that would be kind of absurd. I mean, just saying so doesn't make it so. And not saying so doesn't not make it so. You know? The "law," however, would be that it's up to the family, repentance aside. Under the Law Covenant, repentance didn't necessarily forestall judgment... and execution of such judgment. It would be mercy shown in the face of such repentance. But mercy doesn't require that repentance BE shown, or even present. Because mercy... triumphs over judgment.
I'm just asking how these things should be handled in what's not only luving, but also fair and just
And here's the disconnect: what is "just" and "fair"... is NOT always loving; however, love... is always just and fair. It is to the family showing mercy because... it is THEIR choice. Along with the victim, they were the ones wronged. If, then, they CHOOSE mercy, then justice has been served. What would be UNJUST would be for someone... absolutely uninvolved and unrelated... to come in and tell them what they MUST do... or even worse, take the matter out of their hands altogether. That person can tell them what they CAN do (i.e., avenge or forgive), but for justice to be served, that would be all.
under the NC that is rather short on specifics.
The NC is not short on specifics; it is, rather, contradictory. Why? Because you have Paul... acting as an "authority"... which "authority" MANY people erroneously accept and follow... and you have Christ... who such folks SHOULD be following, because HE is the Leader, not Paul. Which is why Paul and the 12 had major differences, including some that caused great division between them. They had walked with my Lord and so knew FROM HIS MOUTH what he taught. Paul, a former Pharisee, very often entwined his pharasaic and "lawerly" opinions into what he taught. For example, HE said to the Body of Christ in Corinth that they were to "judge those on the inside." Christ, however, said "STOP judging" and the 12 knew this. They tried to tell Paul but he rejected that... and them for that. The result almost destroyed the Corinthian congregation! But Paul learned that we ARE to stop judging, as shown in his third letter to those... and to the Body of Christ in Rome to whom he wrote, a year later, "Let us not go on judging one another any longer".
Paul also said "lawerly" things like "I do not allow a woman to speak publicly," and "Let the women learn at home from their husbands." The WTBTS (and others, I am sure) try to validate this position by referring to the Law Covenant. The LC, however, never stated or taught such a thing. Nor did Paul say it did. When he wrote "according to the [L]aw," he was referring to ROMAN law at the time. The capital "L" was added by those who want to push this false teachin! Under that government, women could not speak/teach in public places and doing so put the early congregation members in GREAT danger! So, the husbands would go out to the synagogues (public places to talk about the Law, etc.) and then bring the information back to their wives.
Under the Law, judges were to thoroughly investigate serious matters brought to their attention.
Such judging meant finding that the one accused had actually done the deed; however, AFTERWARD there is a "sentence", yes, that can be carried out? In which case the family could CHOOSE mercy, regardless of whether the perp was repentant. Which is about THEM, not the perp. They could CHOOSE love... over the transgression (they could also choose to support/carry out the decision, without being judged themselves). Going up to someone and asking if they are repentant, then basing what you do next on that, however... is not mercy. And it certainly isn't love. LOVE... does not "keep account" of injury, so repentance is irrelevant. Love... COVERS... the transgression, not worries about the perp's feelings... or lack thereof... about what he/she did.
Now as Paul said, 1 Corinthians 6:3 - "Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!"
Okay, now we're back to the NC... and, again, this is Paul, not Christ. Again, a year later, Paul said to the Romans: "Let us NOT go on judging one another ANY LONGER." Why don't folks get this? Because of the very "clever" order in which the Bible is canonized: there, Paul's letter to the Romans comes BEFORE his to the Corinthians, giving the impression that although Christ had said to STOP judging, which he appeared to corroborate when addressing the Romans... that later CHANGED so that judging WAS right (as he told the Corinthians).
But the TRUTH... is that the letter to the Romans... and thus, the admonition to not judge any longer... came AFTER his erroneous direction to the Corinthians TO judge [those on the inside].
and Yahushua, Matthew 7:14 - "But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
I am not sure why you've included this statement by my Lord. Can you clarify, please? Thank you!
So what's the luving NC all about in matters of judgement?
It is summed up in my Lord's word: STOP judging, for which the SAME judgment that YOU judge... you will BE judged." Meaning, if you judge others as to their sins... whether on the "inside" OR on the outside... you will be judged for yours. The only way that you will NOT be judged for your sins, is if said sins have a "covering"... are "blotted" out. That only occurs if you are "in union" with Christ, by means of his flesh and blood... which flesh grants you life and which blood "covers"... or "blots out" the "stain" on you that is "sin."
You CANNOT, however, be "in union" with Christ... and not follow his commandments, including (1) stop judging, (2) all things you want men to do to you, etc., (3) love one another, (4) love your neighbor, etc. As he said, "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord," and yet do not do the things I say?"
I get it, dear Fredyo - we live in world where many things happen and we want "justice." We want things to be "fair." We want things "made right." The Most Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies, gets that, too. What we DON'T get... and what Christ tried... and still tries... to TEACH us... is that vengeance does not belong to us. By his very life in the flesh he taught us that lesson. He was without sin AND the Son of God... and so had EVERY right to judge, condemn, sentence, and even carry out such sentences. Particularly against those who (1) bore false witness against him, and (2) murdered him. Yet, he did not. Even at the last, he asked that they be forgiven.
And prior to that he said, "The Son of Man judges NO ONE." He quoted that, "Vengeance belongs to God." He said, "LOVE your enemies... and PRAY for those persecuting you." And all other manner of things that support these.
I get it, dear one, that not all will be able to live by this kind of thinking. Not all is expected to; however, those who profess to be in union with Christ... MUST. Otherwise, the invalide the very "union" they profess. And if such ones are to treat their enemies such, how much MORE so those they call "brother."
I hope I have answered your questions; however, you ALWAYS have the option... and freedom... to go to the very One who has taught and shown ME all of these things, the Holy One of Israel and Holy Spirit, my Lord and master, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH, who is the Son and Christ of the Most Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies. He is alive... exerts power... and can discern the thoughts of the heart. You don't have to be articulate; indeed, even if YOU don't know what to say/ask... your spirit will plead FOR you. If you approach and ask... in faith.
Again, I bid you peace!
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,