MaxPC wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 8:33 am
Correct me if I am wrong but I think Jesus gave good instruction in Matthew 18 on how to deal with that:
15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
Yes, there's very much a pastoral component in that, it's also embedded in a fellowship, it involves careful discernment among people the church trusts. I have been through this process several times when there was overt sin in fellowships, and I think it's fundamentally important. Not just for sexual sins and the like, but also for sins of speech. And if you read the letters of Paul, we see how he applied that to various kinds of sin, often with a surprising amount of forbearance, always with a focus on who we are in Christ, why that should lead to righteous living.
We don't really have that on a public forum like this, we don't even know each other in person, we aren't a fellowship or a church. And what's especially weird is applying this teaching to people who disagree about political questions or other matters of opinion, who present facts to support other opinions, etc. Presenting a different view on political questions is not sinful or hostile. Tearing other people down is.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 9:04 am
we don't even know each other in person
It has been a while since we had a formally organized MennoMeet™ and it's difficult to arrange one when we are spread out geographically. But some people have gone out of their way to connect in person with others as they have opportunity, and I'd encourage more of that. It really does lessen hostilities when you know more about someone than the things they post here.
MaxPC wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 8:33 am
Correct me if I am wrong but I think Jesus gave good instruction in Matthew 18 on how to deal with that:
15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
Yes, there's very much a pastoral component in that, it's also embedded in a fellowship, it involves careful discernment among people the church trusts. I have been through this process several times when there was overt sin in fellowships, and I think it's fundamentally important. Not just for sexual sins and the like, but also for sins of speech. And if you read the letters of Paul, we see how he applied that to various kinds of sin, often with a surprising amount of forbearance, always with a focus on who we are in Christ, why that should lead to righteous living.
We don't really have that on a public forum like this, we don't even know each other in person, we aren't a fellowship or a church. And what's especially weird is applying this teaching to people who disagree about political questions or other matters of opinion, who present facts to support other opinions, etc. Presenting a different view on political questions is not sinful or hostile. Tearing other people down is.
I haven’t felt like differences of political opinion are worthy of being “sinful”. When it comes to the elephant in the room (abortion), I have tolerated people who for mysterious reasons are not pro-abortion, yet express opposition to Dobbs.
But I feel outright support of abortion and saying it’s a good thing in certain circumstances is sinful. (I suppose Abp. Cordileone would agree with me.)
I feel this is the same as what my stance would be on slavery. Some people opposed yet “personally” also opposed outlawing it and supported fugitive slave laws. This makes me very uncomfortable but I would hesitate to call it “sinful”.
But outright support for chattel slavery and saying it’s the “best option” in some situations? I would feel that’s sinful for a Christian and should be spoken against.
How much does "sins against thee" figure into the equation? If a sin in the church (or on Mennonet) is not against me, it is not for me to forgive it, right?
Joy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 8:36 pm
How much does "sins against thee" figure into the equation? If a sin in the church (or on Mennonet) is not against me, it is not for me to forgive it, right?
Maybe less finger pointing when answering a post. if you mention someone's name do you have to be negative when speaking about that person? You can give your answer, your thoughts, answer their questions or respond and yet not be pointing fingers, even put labels on a person. Whether you believe someone fits the label - using one can create hostility or hard feelings. It may not be easy but labels don't need to be used and pointed responses need to be thought about many times before you post- think 4, 5, 6 times maybe more when posting if you are going to be personally negative.
And in Colossians 4:6 it says-Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.
You may never change the person's mind but let's face it, people rarely change their minds from posts here.
Also- again in Colossians- 3:17a- And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus. . .
We have no idea what is in a person's heart. God only is the judge and we would be careful to remember that.
Instead of a not so nice, unkind or labeling response- respond with grace and then go quietly and pray for the person you have issue with.
It just seems people on all sides of all the issues are so quick to read and label and give responses that almost attack and we need to step back and maybe just not post that response.
QuietlyListening wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 7:44 pm
Maybe less finger pointing when answering a post. if you mention someone's name do you have to be negative when speaking about that person? You can give your answer, your thoughts, answer their questions or respond and yet not be pointing fingers, even put labels on a person. Whether you believe someone fits the label - using one can create hostility or hard feelings. It may not be easy but labels don't need to be used and pointed responses need to be thought about many times before you post- think 4, 5, 6 times maybe more when posting if you are going to be personally negative.
And in Colossians 4:6 it says-Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.
You may never change the person's mind but let's face it, people rarely change their minds from posts here.
Also- again in Colossians- 3:17a- And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus. . .
We have no idea what is in a person's heart. God only is the judge and we would be careful to remember that.
Instead of a not so nice, unkind or labeling response- respond with grace and then go quietly and pray for the person you have issue with.
It just seems people on all sides of all the issues are so quick to read and label and give responses that almost attack and we need to step back and maybe just not post that response.
I'm not in fellowship with people who claim to be Christians but support distressed children being put on puberty blockers. I wouldn't eat at the same table as that person, and I'm under no compulsion to season my speech with salt with that person.
Jesus certainly wouldn't have. I think he said something about a millstone actually.
nett wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 8:04 pm
I'm not in fellowship with people who claim to be Christians but support distressed children being put on puberty blockers. I wouldn't eat at the same table as that person, and I'm under no compulsion to season my speech with salt with that person.
Then an open internet forum may not be the right place for you. Many read that never post. It is not just the person you are going at, but other that are reading that one must consider also.
One can post a disagreement without attacking the person or what they perceive as the heart of that person. Jesus ate with the sinners and told stories to connect with their hearts. He was only confrontational with religious LEADERS.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
QuietlyListening wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 7:44 pm
Maybe less finger pointing when answering a post. if you mention someone's name do you have to be negative when speaking about that person? You can give your answer, your thoughts, answer their questions or respond and yet not be pointing fingers, even put labels on a person. Whether you believe someone fits the label - using one can create hostility or hard feelings. It may not be easy but labels don't need to be used and pointed responses need to be thought about many times before you post- think 4, 5, 6 times maybe more when posting if you are going to be personally negative.
And in Colossians 4:6 it says-Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.
You may never change the person's mind but let's face it, people rarely change their minds from posts here.
Also- again in Colossians- 3:17a- And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus. . .
We have no idea what is in a person's heart. God only is the judge and we would be careful to remember that.
Instead of a not so nice, unkind or labeling response- respond with grace and then go quietly and pray for the person you have issue with.
It just seems people on all sides of all the issues are so quick to read and label and give responses that almost attack and we need to step back and maybe just not post that response.
I'm not in fellowship with people who claim to be Christians but support distressed children being put on puberty blockers. I wouldn't eat at the same table as that person
This position fascinates me. Am I to deduct from this that before sitting down with someone in a setting where you don't know everyone (wedding, funeral, birthday party etc) to eat, that you will vet everyone's personal opinion on puberty blockers?
I'm not convinced that Jesus didn't sit down with some sinners a time or two. Just curious how one arrives there, if you care to elaborate.
