Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non-Nicene, non-Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Noitartst

Theology, Matthew 18:15-17, & Justice

Recommended Posts

I have been repeatedly asked to "forgive" my mother, but that does not mean I should not, or cannot punish her.  I want to follow Matthew 18 to do so, and for that I need witnesses. Many have counseled leaving, but ostracizing is supposed to only happen after she is confront Ed by witnesses.  Also, I have found no local church willing to cooperate with me.  I just don't want to judged for choosing to punish her.  I also want my theology submitted to theologian s, for judgment.  I am also doing this for stare decisis reasons, and am sick of guilt.  I can fill out more details, as needed.

Share this post


Link to post

I simply long to hear the words, "Philip, there is NO guilt in punishing, or rebuking, your mother."  That's it.  No elliptical excuses.  Just support, and solidarity.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
7 hours ago, Noitartst said:

I have been repeatedly asked to "forgive" my mother, but that does not mean I should not, or cannot punish her.  I want to follow Matthew 18 to do so, and for that I need witnesses. Many have counseled leaving, but ostracizing is supposed to only happen after she is confront Ed by witnesses.  Also, I have found no local church willing to cooperate with me.  I just don't want to judged for choosing to punish her.  I also want my theology submitted to theologian s, for judgment.  I am also doing this for stare decisis reasons, and am sick of guilt.  I can fill out more details, as needed.

What do you mean by "punish"?

Share this post


Link to post

My apologies, for not replying, sooner, friend; by that, I mean simple rebuking; recognition from observers that she is defying not just me, but God.  Jesus called for divisiveness, and I think what I am calling for, is Biblical. 

 

I am basically tired of people who are not willing to take a stand, against her.  They can criticize her politely, and I can formulate plenty of ways to speak the truth in love, but they simply don't wanna admit that she is wrong, that she defied my authority, and if they can't do that, they are blaming me, and taking my mother's side, by default.  Their rejection, and condemnation hangs off me like spit, blame, and contempt, making mercy into obligation, not choice, and the justice of Matthew 18:15-17 into revenge.  For instance, others keep saying that I should leave my family, but why?  Ostracism is the last resort, but we have yet to establish that my my mother has sinned by multiple witnesses, and if I leave in anger, it is self- condemnation, self-punishment. an act of ungodly rebellion, on my part.  

Also, check my blog at unthawedfury.wordpress.com for more info.  I just want support confronting my mother, per Matthew 18:15-17;  it should be pretty simple, and note it says this is how you handle sin, not the magnitude; it is all about how you measure.  You wanna go ticky-tack, you can, but if so, prepare to be ticky-tacked, too.  Maybe I am going ticky-tacky, but it is NOTHING I am not prepared, for.  I am doing this in good conscience, as best I can tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
2 hours ago, Noitartst said:

My apologies, for not replying, sooner, friend; by that, I mean simple rebuking; recognition from observers that she is defying not just me, but God.  Jesus called for divisiveness, and I think what I am calling for, is Biblical. 

 

I am basically tired of people who are not willing to take a stand, against her.  They can criticize her politely, and I can formulate plenty of ways to speak the truth in love, but they simply don't wanna admit that she is wrong, that she defied my authority, and if they can't do that, they are blaming me, and taking my mother's side, by default.  Their rejection, and condemnation hangs off me like spit, blame, and contempt, making mercy into obligation, not choice, and the justice of Matthew 18:15-17 into revenge.  For instance, others keep saying that I should leave my family, but why?  Ostracism is the last resort, but we have yet to establish that my my mother has sinned by multiple witnesses, and if I leave in anger, it is self- condemnation, self-punishment. an act of ungodly rebellion, on my part.  

Also, check my blog at unthawedfury.wordpress.com for more info.  I just want support confronting my mother, per Matthew 18:15-17;  it should be pretty simple, and note it says this is how you handle sin, not the magnitude; it is all about how you measure.  You wanna go ticky-tack, you can, but if so, prepare to be ticky-tacked, too.  Maybe I am going ticky-tacky, but it is NOTHING I am not prepared, for.  I am doing this in good conscience, as best I can tell.

I don't understand your situation whatsoever, I have no idea why you think you have authority over your mother, your living situation etc. You look old enough to not be living with your mom but I observe many millennials that never leave mom's and pop's basement. Again, I haven't enough info to even consider giving Godly advice.

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/11/2018 at 8:01 PM, William said:

Still there?  Did I need to give mere details?

.........................

I don't understand your situation whatsoever, I have no idea why you think you have authority over your mother, your living situation etc. You look old enough to not be living with your mom but I observe many millennials that never leave mom's and pop's basement. Again, I haven't enough info to even consider giving Godly advice.

I respect your hesitancy, and would like you to read my blog, but look.  It comes down to how I want to live, and that is the issue; I need witnesses, and am fighting for principle; I just want moral support whilst confronting her.  I have a specific interpretation of Scripture, and just want it supported.  I am grieving, fighting numbness, and am trying to follow my instincts, which involve making an example of her.  I am risking her rejection of me, and if so, so be it; to not go through this, I am committing sin.

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/5/2018 at 12:20 AM, Noitartst said:

Also, I have found no local church willing to cooperate with me.

The passage you refer to seems to presuppose that the sinner and the person sinned against are members of the same congregation.  If that isn't the case with you and your mother there is no way you can apply this to your situation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/15/2018 at 9:53 AM, theophilus said:

The passage you refer to seems to presuppose that the sinner and the person sinned against are members of the same congregation.  If that isn't the case with you and your mother there is no way you can apply this to your situation.

Yes, I suppose so...trouble is, the elders at the beginning, refused to help, and now she isn't there.  I am trying to find a way to compensate for this, but have not found it.  At essence, I fought for principles, and they were dishonored; how to

honor the principles I fought for?

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎11‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 12:35 AM, Noitartst said:

I simply long to hear the words, "Philip, there is NO guilt in punishing, or rebuking, your mother."  That's it.  No elliptical excuses.  Just support, and solidarity.

First forgiveness is an absolute must. We learn from Jesus ,," But I say unto you , Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you... Matt.5:44 . You will never have  peace in your life if you try to use your own understanding to remedy a problem . Any problem. Jesus says that if we do not forgive we will not be forgiven . Matt.5:15. As for any punishment ,deserved or not, that's God's place to render it in a way that is suitable to Him . In forgiveness lies all the answer . Trying to settle a matter on your own simply will not work .  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Topics

    • You Can Teach Theology with Picture Books

      As parents, we are our children’s first theology teachers. Like the women at the tomb on Easter morning, we run fearfully and joyfully to tell the people we love, “The tomb is empty! Christ has risen.” With hope-filled hearts, we teach our children about the living Lord. God has ordained a means for teaching our children how to love him—and not primarily by sending them to AWANA, or buying another picture Bible, or using the right curriculum. Learning about God begins with wonder, and worship is our great goal. Teaching our children theology is as simple as having conversations with God and conversations about God “when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise” (Deut. 6:7). We have conversations with God by reading his Word, giving thanks and praise, and praying to him. In our family, we have conversations about God as we go about our daily routine—sharing meals, walking outside, and perhaps most delightfully, reading books. Book Adventures Every new book is a new place, a new journey into new worlds. My husband is our courageous captain. He navigates our ship through the shining seas of Bunyan, Lewis, and Tolkien. These days, we are on an excursion in a dragon’s lair. Theology, like food, tastes better when one is hungry. Young sailors are often hungry for definitions and explanations, while being full of questions and interruptions. When our captain recently explained various heretical views of the Trinity, our living room roared with laughter. I didn’t know that was possible. Before the current days of chapter books, however, there were years of shorter adventures in picture books. These too held truths and metaphors helpful for understanding the things of God. Illustrate and Illuminate The following picture books aren’t theology books. They should be enjoyed for their clever plots and likeable characters. But they can also illustrate biblical concepts. Through conversations, these picture books may illuminate truths about God in unexpected ways. The Runaway Bunny by Margaret Wise Brown Mother bunny gives us a great picture of God’s steadfast love and faithfulness. The Lord never leaves us or forsakes us. He is faithful to pursue us when we run away. He is the fisherman who fishes for us and the “tree we come home to.” His sovereignty is like the wind that blows us where he wants us to go. The little bunny is a lot like Jonah, the runaway prophet. But unlike Jonah, we see the bunny repent. What Do You Love? by Jonathan London The question “What do you love?” echoes Jonathan Edwards’s Religious Affections. Parents can help our children to see that the child in the story loves his mommy not for “park slides and piggyback rides.” Rather, he enjoys these good things because he is with his mommy. The nature of true religion is to find our greatest happiness in Christ, not merely his gifts. Sam and Dave Dig a Hole by Sam Barnett This book hilariously illustrates double-mindedness. As Sam and Dave dig down, down into the ground they miss enormous chunks of diamonds because they keep changing their minds about which direction to dig. Let us pursue the Lord single-mindedly! The Little Mouse, the Red Ripe Strawberry, and the Big Hungry Bear by Don and Audrey Wood “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy,” or where a big hungry bear might break in and steal. Our hearts are bound up with our red ripe strawberries. I asked my children: What are your red ripe strawberries? How may we store up treasures in heaven instead? Waiting Is Not Easy by Mo Willems This book helps us think about why we need patience and serves as a lesson in eschatology for toddlers. How do we answer the question, “Mommy, when is Jesus coming again?” This humorous book gives us five surprisingly profound answers: One, a surprise is a surprise. Two, waiting is not easy. Three, it will get darker before the surprise arrives. Four, sometimes waiting feels like a waste of time. Five, it will all be worth it. Wonder at the Light Like John the Baptist, parents who have seen the light are called to be witnesses to the light. Reading with our children will not save them. But we can be the voices crying out in the wilderness, “Prepare the way of the LORD” (Isa. 40:3). We can look for clues to Christ and say, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). Learning theology begins with a sense of wonder at our risen Lord. May the families of the world fall down and worship. View the full article

      in Christian Current Events

    • How Much Theology Should Couples Agree on Before They Get Married?

      Derek Rishmawy   I'll admit, this isn't a typical question most Christian singles, or even couples, are asking. Most are still stuck on, "Wait, I'm supposed to date Christians?" That said, once you've established the importance of marrying someone who will be your partner in the faith and has the mutual goal of encouraging you in your relationship with Christ, you may start to wonder, "Well, does it really matter what kind of Christian they are? How will our theology affect the way we point each other to Christ? I mean, does it affect things if I'm a Protestant and he's a Catholic? Or what if we have different views on the end times? What about speaking in tongues? Can I date someone who 'quenches the Spirit' and thinks I worship with 'strange fire'?"   As I've thought about the issue while talking with friends, considering my own marriage, and searching through the Scriptures, I've concluded there isn't any quick, easy answer. Instead, I want to simply put forward three questions, and a couple of caveats, to help singles and couples navigate the dating and marriage decision.   Do You Agree on the Core?   This question can simply be another way of asking, "Is this person a Christian?" That said, you should definitely have some bottom-line requirements like, say, agreeing to the content of Apostle's Creed, Nicaea, Chalcedon, and so forth. Of course, the person doesn't have to be a theology expert such that he or she knows the names of these councils. But you should agree that God is triune and Christ is the God-man, that he lived, died, and rose again in history for the salvation of mankind. Also, you should make sure you both hold a fundamental commitment to the Scriptures as the final authority in these issues; that way, there's common ground for discussion and dialogue on other issues.   Beyond that, I don't think couples have to agree on every point of theology to have a solid marriage. A Calvinist and a Wesleyan (preferably of the Fred Sanders sort) could do well enough together, unless they're both super crusty about things. People with conflicting eschatologies could probably love and care for each other without an unnatural amount of friction (that is, until one of you reads the paper and decides its time to go down to the bomb shelter).   Can You Go to Church Together?   A further question to ask after the core questions is, "Can we go to church together?" Note, I don't simply mean, "Can you put up with his church?" or "Can you suck it up at hers and then podcast later?" There are going to be seasons where one of you likes your church more than the other, but the point is that worshiping and growing together in your marriage needs to happen in the church context. Going to different churches for a while during the dating process is fine, but eventually you're going to need to knit your life together in the broader church community. If you're theologically so far apart that one of you is thriving and the other is dying, that's not going to make for a healthy spiritual life and will likely lead to strife in the marriage.   Can You Raise Children Together?   The third question is one my pastor asks of couples seeking premarital counseling. Practically speaking, theology is going to play a role in the way you parent and disciple your children. For instance, right off the bat, if one of you is a credobaptist and the other is a paedobaptist, that's going to be a tough conversation when you have your first kid. My wife and I are going to have that conversation in time, because I've shifted in that area since we started dating and got married (moving from credo to paedo), but it's important for this act to not be taken unilaterally.   Theology Changes   The other thing you need to remember is that theology changes. You need to be ready. I just mentioned I've been shifting from credo- to paedobaptist over the past couple of years. That's just one of the many changes my wife and I have been navigating. The person you're dating now might have different beliefs by the time you get married. They could have shifts in theology after you're married, too. So will you. And in a lot of cases, given you're not an inspired apostle, that's a good thing. Actually, I'm convinced one of the reasons God gives you your spouse is to sharpen you, challenge you, and correct your understanding of God in light of the Word. I know I've learned from my wife and she's learned from me over the years as we've sought to submit to God's Word together.   Word to Reformed Guys   On that note, I have a special word to Reformed men—or rather, guys. A while back I wrote a joke blog on how to meet Reformed men. In the comments one fellow said he didn't mind dating a non-Reformed girl since he'd take it as a point of pride to "conquer" her theologically. Let me just say this loud and clear: This is arrogant, foolish, and must not be your attitude. Your future bride is not a notch to add on your theological belt but your sister in Christ with a mind of her own, given by her heavenly Father to be used properly, just like yours. In fact, hers might be sharper than yours. You may be a Reformed complementarian, but the command in Ephesians 5:21 says to submit to each other out of reverence for Christ, and that command isn't revoked by the next few verses, however much you think they nuance it. Yes, you are called to "wash her with the word," as Christ does the church, but I'm pretty sure that doesn't mean with a firehose of theological argument designed to cow her into mental acquiescence. Basically, treat her like a person.   If you keep these points in mind, prayerfully listen to input from trusted, believing brothers and sisters, and keep God as God in your heart (i.e., avoid the temptation to compromise because you're desperate), you should be fine.

      in Singles

    • Chief Justice John Roberts

      Chief Justice John Roberts rejects Trump plea to enforce asylum ban (The article actually reads, "Supreme Court rejects...", but I am not surprised by how the Liberals voted. It's Roberts I am concerned about.)   WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court won’t let the Trump administration begin enforcing a ban on asylum for any immigrants who illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico border. Chief Justice John Roberts joined his four more liberal colleagues Friday in ruling against the administration in the very case in which President Donald Trump had derided the “Obama judge” who first blocked the asylum policy. New Justice Brett Kavanaugh and three other conservative justices sided with the administration. There were no opinions explaining either side’s votes. The court’s order leaves in place lower court rulings that blocked Trump’s proclamation in November automatically denying asylum to people who enter the country from Mexico without going through official border crossings. Trump said he was acting in response to caravans of migrants making their way to the border. The administration had also complained that the nationwide order preventing the policy from taking effect was too broad. But the court also rejected the administration’s suggestion for narrowing it. Lee Gelernt, an American Civil Liberties Union leading the court challenge, said the high court’s decision “will save lives and keep vulnerable families and children from persecution. We are pleased the court refused to allow the administration to short-circuit the usual appellate process.” The high court action followed a ruling Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar that kept the ban on hold pending the outcome of a lawsuit challenging it. The case could take months to resolve. The ban conflicts with an immigration law that says immigrants can apply for asylum regardless of how they enter the U.S., Tigar said. In the first court ruling on the issue, Tigar said on Nov. 19 that U.S. law allows immigrants to request asylum regardless of whether they entered the country legally. The ruling prompted Trump’s criticism of Tigar as an “Obama judge” and led to an unusual public dispute between Trump and Roberts, who rebuked the president with a statement defending the judiciary’s independence. Tigar was nominated for the federal bench by President Barack Obama. https://apnews.com/1c239d63b2634f9caadd4053bae058d8  

      in Christian Current Events

    • Department of Justice Announces Bump-Stock-Type Devices Final Rule

      By R. Mitchell - The Department of Justice amended the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), clarifying that bump stocks fall within the definition of “machinegun” under federal law, as such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger. Acting Attorney General Whitaker made the following statement: “President Donald Trump is a law and order president, who has signed into law millions of dollars in funding for law enforcement officers in our schools, and under his strong leadership, the Department of Justice has prosecuted more gun criminals than ever before as we target violent criminals,” acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker said in a statement. “We are faithfully following President Trump’s leadership by making clear that bump stocks, which turn semiautomatics into machine guns, are illegal, and we will continue to take illegal guns off of our streets.” On February 20, 2018, President Trump issued a memorandum instructing the Attorney General “to dedicate all available resources to… propose for notice and comment a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machineguns.” In response to that direction the Department reviewed more than 186,000 public comments and made the decision to make clear that the term “machinegun” as used in the National Firearms Act (NFA), as amended, and Gun Control Act (GCA), as amended, includes all bump-stock-type devices that harness recoil energy to facilitate the continuous operation of a semiautomatic firearm after a single pull of the trigger. This final rule amends the regulatory definition of “machinegun” in Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), sections 447.11, 478.11, and 479.11.  The final rule amends the regulatory text by adding the following language:  “The term ‘machine gun’ includes bump-stock devices, i.e., devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semi-automatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.” Furthermore, the final rule defines “automatically” and “single function of the trigger” as those terms are used in the statutory definition of machinegun.  Specifically, “automatically” as it modifies “shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot,” means functioning as a result of a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that allows the firing of multiple rounds through the single function of the trigger; “single function of the trigger” means single pull of the trigger and analogous motions. Because the final rule clarifies that bump-stock-type devices are machineguns, the devices fall within the purview of the NFA and are subject to the restrictions of  18 U.S.C. 922(o).  As a result, persons in possession of bump-stock-type devices must divest themselves of the devices before the effective date of the final rule which is expected to be March 21, 2019.  A current possessor may destroy the device or abandon it at the nearest ATF office, but no compensation will be provided for the device.  Any method of destruction must render the device incapable of being readily restored to its intended function. Content created by Conservative Daily News is available for re-publication without charge under the Creative Commons license. Visit our syndication page for details and requirements. Department of Justice Announces Bump-Stock-Type Devices Final Rule is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

    • Is Matthew 12:40 using common idiomatic language?

      Whenever the three days and three nights of Matthew 12:40 is brought up in a "discussion" with 6th day of the week crucifixion folks, they frequently assert that it is using common Jewish idiomatic language. I wonder if anyone knows of any writing that shows an example from the first century or before regarding a period of time that is said to consist of a specific number of days and/or a specific number of nights where the period of time absolutely couldn't have included at least a part of each one of the specific number of days and at least a part of each one of the specific number of nights? If it is using common idiomatic language, there ought to be examples of that usage in order to be able to make that assertion.

      in Bible Study

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.