"That's not Christian!"

[Josh]

Jesus called people broods of vipers. His speech to the Pharisees sure didn’t seem like he considered them sincere followers.

[MaxPC]

Jesus called people broods of vipers. His speech to the Pharisees sure didn’t seem like he considered them sincere followers.

Quite true; He applied epithets to malicious non-believers. Those who twisted Scripture for their own gain in power and money.

Yet for His disciples and followers among themselves, He gave us the instructions in Matthew 18.

[AnthonyMartin]

Jesus called people broods of vipers. His speech to the Pharisees sure didn’t seem like he considered them sincere followers.

Quite true; He applied epithets to malicious non-believers. Those who twisted Scripture for their own gain in power and money.

Yet for His disciples and followers among themselves, He gave us the instructions in Matthew 18.

Is Matthew 18 a guide for church standard enforcement? I always thought that was about processing direct offenses, hurts, and forgiveness.

Direct communication is certainly a good guide for personal relations, but the way I’ve seen most use it to reinforce covering size, shorts on men, skirt length, etc…, has seems to be proof texting at best and heresy at worst.

[MaxPC]

Jesus called people broods of vipers. His speech to the Pharisees sure didn’t seem like he considered them sincere followers.

Quite true; He applied epithets to malicious non-believers. Those who twisted Scripture for their own gain in power and money.

Yet for His disciples and followers among themselves, He gave us the instructions in Matthew 18.

Is Matthew 18 a guide for church standard enforcement? I always thought that was about processing direct offenses, hurts, and forgiveness.

Direct communication is certainly a good guide for personal relations, but the way I’ve seen most use it to reinforce covering size, shorts on men, skirt length, etc…, has seems to be proof texting at best and heresy at worst.

Anthony, from that which I have seen and heard on this forum, each fellowship in Anabaptist World may or may not implement Matthew 18. The mileage on the interpretation and praxis of that chapter varies greatly from one fellowship to the next. In Catholic World, we love our "set procedures" but there are also differing interpretations and praxis to the rules and even one parish to the next, one diocese to the next will spin it differently.

As for me and my personal application, I take Jesus at His word. At the end of the day, I will stand before the Lord and be accountable for those things for which I personally am responsible; I will not be held accountable for choices made by other adults unless those actions are criminal or abusive and I supported that behavior. Of course, I will charitably let the adult know I do not support that behavior, give my reasons, then watch and pray.

[steve-in-kville]

Is Matthew 18 a guide for church standard enforcement? I always thought that was about processing direct offenses, hurts, and forgiveness.

Direct communication is certainly a good guide for personal relations, but the way I’ve seen most use it to reinforce covering size, shorts on men, skirt length, etc…, has seems to be proof texting at best and heresy at worst.

If Matthew 18 was used like it was intended, our ministry leaders would run out of things to do We are too quick to rat someone out, cause all manner of hard feelings, then to go work something out.