Respect: Earning it, keeping it, getting it back?

[ken_sylvania]

Does anyone else buy into the idea of "respecting the office but not the man" ?

Makes sense when the person in office is a woman I guess.

I don't think there is any Bible backing for the idea.

Please do explain on the Bible not backing it. I'm curious on your views on this

Anyone I ever met who insisted on "respect the office but not the man" it turned out to be an excuse to "disrespect the man who holds the office."

As far as what the Bible says on the subject -
It says "Honor thy father and thy mother", not "honor the position of thy father and mother, and honor thy father and thy mother if they be worthy."
It says "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor" implying that even elders who rule poorly should be honored somewhat.
It says "Honor all men" and "Honor the king." "All men is hardly an office, so it must mean the actual people themselves are to be respected."

Ultimately though, it's impossible to prove a negative, so if you disagree with my opinion, what does the Bible say that supports the idea that it is possible to respect an office without respecting the person who holds the office? I personally don't see how it's possible - it seems like some kind of illusion that somehow I can respect the office of President of the United States while disrespecting the man who is the President.

[silentreader]

Makes sense when the person in office is a woman I guess.

I don't think there is any Bible backing for the idea.

Please do explain on the Bible not backing it. I'm curious on your views on this

Anyone I ever met who insisted on "respect the office but not the man" it turned out to be an excuse to "disrespect the man who holds the office."

As far as what the Bible says on the subject -
It says "Honor thy father and thy mother", not "honor the position of thy father and mother, and honor thy father and thy mother if they be worthy."
It says "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor" implying that even elders who rule poorly should be honored somewhat.
It says "Honor all men" and "Honor the king." "All men is hardly an office, so it must mean the actual people themselves are to be respected."

Ultimately though, it's impossible to prove a negative, so if you disagree with my opinion, what does the Bible say that supports the idea that it is possible to respect an office without respecting the person who holds the office? I personally don't see how it's possible - it seems like some kind of illusion that somehow I can respect the office of President of the United States while disrespecting the man who is the President.

Matthew 23:1-3 (ESV)
Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, 3 so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.

[Verity]

"Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law? And they that stood by said, Revilest thou God's high priest? Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people."
Acts 23:3-5 (KJV)

We are to treat with honor those in positions of authority. But we very well may not respect their person.

Many good things were said here. Are there other church groups where forgiveness is equated with trust and respect? Many, many times we were told in Eastern that we (or others) had not forgiven because boundaries were in place until there was a change in the individual. Respect and trust were forced or you could not "prove" that you had forgiven.

Examples of this were declining to do repair work for an individual who did not pay their bills (unless it was a small job that could reasonably be gifted) or not allowing children to be babysat by families that had winked at wrongdoing previously (but still being kind and visiting with them under closely monitored situations). Have any of the rest of you encountered this?

[Josh]

Yes. In the most egregious example, a man was caught in adultery and other immoral sins. I was told I hadn’t “forgiven” him if I demanded the church hold him accountable for it.

#1, he didn’t sin against me… it was a sin against his wife, against God, and against the other women/girls involved.

#2, I had searched my heart to make sure I had forgiven. I had, and now I was concerned for the man’s soul.

#3, it is actually loving and kind to hold someone accountable.

To give you an idea of how ridiculous this was, when I expressed that this gentleman wasn’t repentant since he kept in “friending” teenage girls and married women on Facebook and sending them direct messages, the response was that I wasn’t forgiving because I was holding his past against him.

What happened in the end? Eventually he left the church, continues to live in sin, and his wife eventually filed for a divorce (mostly due to financial problems).

[steve-in-kville]

Yes. In the most egregious example, a man was caught in adultery and other immoral sins. I was told I hadn’t “forgiven” him if I demanded the church hold him accountable for it.

#1, he didn’t sin against me… it was a sin against his wife, against God, and against the other women/girls involved.

#2, I had searched my heart to make sure I had forgiven. I had, and now I was concerned for the man’s soul.

#3, it is actually loving and kind to hold someone accountable.

To give you an idea of how ridiculous this was, when I expressed that this gentleman wasn’t repentant since he kept in “friending” teenage girls and married women on Facebook and sending them direct messages, the response was that I wasn’t forgiving because I was holding his past against him.

What happened in the end? Eventually he left the church, continues to live in sin, and his wife eventually filed for a divorce (mostly due to financial problems).

One word: Accountability.

[Josh]

I should add, this was in a moderate conservative church setting, so this isn’t the exclusive domain of Eastern.

[steve-in-kville]

I find it frustrating how a person commits sin and they feel they are 100% justified in not being punished or held accountable. Some years back, a man I went to church with abused a child, got caught, went to jail for a bit, got out but was on probation. He had his membership at church taken for a while, etc.

Not long after having his membership restored, another victim came forward and the church asked that they don't involve the authorities as the man "already suffered enough and paid his dues." This was a kick to the teeth for the poor victim.

[Verity]

Is a person that is unwilling to be punished or held accountable repentant?

More than one parent has told us as a couple, when they are confronted with their young person's immoral behavior "You don't know how severe the church has already been with them! They have suffered enough!" When questioned, "severe" consisted of a very vague and weak confession read by the bishop (not the offender) and being restricted one time from communion. That's it. The parents could not grasp how wrong they were being in keeping their child in bondage and darkness.

Confession is not a cure.

[steve-in-kville]

Confession is not a cure.

I was never a fan of confessions in church, or at least "forced" confessions.

[Verity]

[/quote]

I was never a fan of confessions in church, or at least "forced" confessions.
[/quote]

Similar to forced "forgiveness". Neither yield good fruit.