Posted on 08/18/2003 7:56:04 AM PDT by 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.
Do you consider Paul, Peter, and James as "later apostles?" Are you rejecting the all but the Gospels in the New Testament? I am just curious how wide a net you cast over "all teachings."
I don't, I just hope.
So9
They would need a good reason that would be acceptable anyplace else. Disrupting services would be a good reason. Whether someone merely being there is disruptive is doubtful.
I will only ask you to consider this: the first scriptural example of everything we've been discussing in this thread: please review Acts 5:1-10. In here we find Peter being God's instrument to apply discipline to two church members who blatently lied to God. It is the Holy Spirit Himself who opted for the ultimate punishment for that sin: the killing of Annanias and his wife.
We are under authority: God defined some of that authorithy structure in 1 Timothy -- pastors and elders. These people are ordained for God's service and must yield themselves to the wisdom granted by the Holy Spirit. They don't go off willy-nilly and try to engage in witch hunts. That is absolutely wrong! We've all been given the Spirit as beleivers. Pleae don't think that this isn't part of the equation.
Which, while true, doesn't make it morally right to physically bar a sinner from attending worship. I don't think it says that in the bible. So I don't think the bible is fairly clear on that.
Which has nothing to do with the question. Certainly anyone who brought a trombone to church to play during the sermon could morally be removed from private property.
Yes, that is exactly correct. This country pays for your property's defense, communications, power, transportation, sanitation and emergency services. Thus, there is a tab that MUST be payed. For a church to insist on a 'tax-exempt' status, it must (IMHO) show that it is providing for the public a service (no pun intended). If the church does not provide a service to the community, there is no reason for the church to receive the civic services it shares in, in the tax-exempt state. If that is the case, (again, IMHO) it should be treated as private property, and subject to taxes as any privately owned property would.
If you disagree, and refuse to pay your property taxes, and you will soon find that the gov't will seize your property. So, again, yes indeedie ... the US Gov't 'owns' your property, and you buy it back every year when you pay your property taxes.
If, after being told to leave, the person remains on property it is a class B misdemeanor offense of criminal trespass. If that person is armed with a weapon of deadly force then that person commits a class A misdemeanor of criminal trespass
Perhaps a quote to back up your assertion? I don't think you can find one.
Bible quotes aside, why is it wrong for a private group to be able to choose its members? Isn't this simply "freedom of association"?
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.
That is a different situation from someone who is not a Christian.
Also, Jesus taught about this. Some have cut that part of the Gospels out of the Bible, though, so it's not surprising so many comments on this thread are against the idea.
After you study this some more, if you really can't find what Jesus and Paul said about it, write back.
1st things 1st.
How much is the bet and what percentage of it are you willing to part with for the correct answer that will win it for you?
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.