Private property rights? - advice needed to settle a bet

RightFighter

[RightFighter]

I'm just looking for some Freeper advice to help me settle a bet with a friend. Here's the situation:

We go to a church that practices biblical church discipline. The church believes very strongly in this and takes it very seriously, especially in the case of adultery and divorce. Well, recently, we became aware that there is a couple who will soon be getting a divorce. The woman is initiating it, not for infidelity or anything like that, but simply because her husband "doesn't have the same goals" that she does, etc.. Needless to say, she's being asked to leave the church because of this. When a member is expelled like this, church members are told that we are not to fellowship with the expelled member and are simply to pray that they would repent of their sin and return to the body and that we should urge them to do so any time we see them. This is where the argument with my friend comes up.

My friend says that, because the church is regularly open to the public, he doesn't think that it has the right to tell her that she can't come to church there, and that if she wanted to continue to come there, she could do so and the church could do nothing about it.

I say that the church, as a private entity, has every right to tell someone that they are not welcome on the property, and would have the right to have someone arrested for trespassing if they failed to heed such a request.

I would hate for it to ever come to something like that, and I doubt it would, because what church member would WANT to come to a church that doesn't want them there. My friend, however, just doesn't seem to agree with the whole church discipline thing, so he's drawn a line in the sand here with this argument. Who's right??? And can any of you give me any legal case that involved a similar situation that would back it up? Sorry for this whole post, but I tend to a little bit argumentative, and the nature of my relationship with my friend is such that it would be best to clear it up once and for all.

[AppyPappy]

If it is so apparent, why can't you find it? I could just as easily say that you removed the parts of your Bible where Jesus associated with sinners and even a woman at a well. He even ate supper with the man who betrayed him. I can't imagine Him saying "Do as I say, not as I do".

When a person says to me "Look it up in the Bible", they are really saying "I have no idea what it says so do my research for me".

[Sloth]

I could just as easily say that you removed the parts of your Bible where Jesus associated with sinners and even a woman at a well.

Post 47 gives the passage where there is an EXPLICIT difference drawn between socializing with worldly sinners (like Jesus did) and socializing with a previously faithful brother in Christ who has subsequently rejected God. If you read it, there is no way an honest person could fail to see the distinction being drawn.

[CSM]

The problem, as I see it, is that in discussions such as this the real essence of the "church" is brought to light. Why is it that everyone feels comfortable judging other human beings in the name of membership. Peter may very well have been God's instrument, I am highly doubtful that the average joe Christian is God's instrument. Rather they are most likely a nosey busy body that is happy to find fault in others therefore deflecting from their own faults.

Take for instance the membership requirements that dissallow playing cards (not necessarily gambling). What would be wrong with me witnessing to a group of people involved in a euchre club? The Spirit may lead me to that opportunity, but the Baptist church would throw out my membership. How inappropriate in my mind! The most powerful weapon for a Christian is Faith, the real defender of your soul is the Holy Spirit. If you haven't experienced the defense provided by the Holy Spirit, then you have never been in the presence of pure evil! Physical exaustion can exist after a fight between a demon and your soul! No "church organization" trumps that!

[savedbygrace]

I re-read both passages before I posted to you. I am abundantly aware of their locations and their teachings.

You appear to have no understanding of this important teaching, so you misrepresent events and passages from the Bible in this regard.

Study first, then come back and we can discuss it. Right now, you're ignorant on the subject. After you're up to speed, I'll be glad to talk with you about it.

[AppyPappy]

The passage in 47 talks about working out problems between brothers, not shunning people.

[savedbygrace]

Besides, I even gave you a clue about Paul's part. It's in 1 Corinthians.

Jesus' teachings on it are in Matthew, Luke and John.

There, you do own an exhaustive Concordance, don't you?

[AppyPappy]

You appear to have no understanding of this important teaching

That's because I don't feel it is Biblical. So I have no need to understand it.

John 13 34"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

Mark 2:17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

[AppyPappy]

As I said, if you knew where it was, you would simply point it out, chapter and verse. I can do that with every important Biblical point. I don't believe something just because I THINK it is in the Bible. I can tell you where it is specifically. That's why they make search engines.

[Protagoras]

Perhaps a quote to back up your assertion? I don't think you can find one.

I wouldn't even look for one. I don't do "dueling verses". And I made no "assertion". That's why I said "I don't think it says".

Alternately you might be unable to find a verse which says that physical force should be used to keep people away from worship in a certain building.

Bible quotes aside, why is it wrong for a private group to be able to choose its members?

It's not.

Isn't this simply "freedom of association"?

Yes.

The statement I responded to had to do with the morality of physically restraining someone. With the help of armed government agents I might add.

[Protagoras]

Maybe you should read the two posts above where it is conclusively shown that the bible says exactly that for a Christian actively engaged in sin who defies the call to repent.

Maybe you should reread my posts to ascertain what I was addressing.

[AppyPappy]

BTW I think you mean this which is in 1 Cor 5

11But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

1: She is not a brother. The Greek is masculine(adelphos).
2: She does not fit the parameters of sexually immoral or a drunkard.

[Rightly Biased]

--"Unless you are Episcopalian..."--

or other religions where the hierchy will move the sinner(leader) out of the church where the sin was commited to another church to continue on.

[WestPacSailor]

or other religions where the hierchy will move the sinner(leader) out of the church where the sin was commited to another church to continue on.

My, my, my, now whatever could you possibly mean?

[Terriergal]

I dunno...

Could they possibly allow her to come to church and remove any responsibilities she has there, and people should not do anything but be polite - no engaging in conversation other than "are you ready to repent yet?"

... That would be my approach. People feel the emotional distance much more than they feel the physical distance. Even if she *is* allowed in the church, she must be held at arm's length.

Then again, if there are kids involved, they are innocent bystanders in all this and yet suffer because of the selfishness of the parents. Recently had a problem with a friend of my daughter because of this... I can't allow her to go over and stay at her friend's house because of the situation. But I can't say they can't get together especially if they are at our house. Great opportunity to show the child what a good relationship looks like.

Wish more churches were serious about church discipline.

[Rightly Biased]

I didn't want to start that war again so I left it alone...kinda...

The slippery slope was started long ago. If your foundation ain't the Rock then you'll end up in the stuff at the end of the slope.

[Terriergal]

hey come on, no Catholic picking. Other churches have their problems just like they do.

[Terriergal]

I don't recall this being a Catholic picking thread...

[Rightly Biased]

Thats why I just wanted to.....never mind I'll just stop
sorry Terriergal ;-(

[Terriergal]

Maybe by attending church, and hearing God's word that person will see that he/she is wrong and will turn from their sinful ways.

But hasn't she been doing that? I have a daughter that you can tell a thousand times something is wrong/dangerous but unless you ACT upon it and show her how life and others she cares about will hold her accountable, it won't matter how much you say it.

[Terriergal]

IMHO, withdrawing from a fellow member does not mean that you can physically keep them from coming to church as this would cause much disorder and division in the church

I agree, I think that's what I meant in my first post. Don't necessarily physically withdraw but withdraw your *fellowship* as the verse states.