Thank you. I have skill and training in law and church governance and thus have been involved in dealing with many conflicts between a church member against another member, a member against the church or its officers, and the church against one of its members, I have never seen a case where all these scritures were followed. Whether it is a lack of standing issue, inadmissable hearsay, insufficient evidence, inapropriate remedies, or other issues, people are people and tend to do what they want to do and then pick a verse to support their position. Law is like when one charges another and looks for a law to support them. The principles you cite are used daily in our courts but with strict definitions, limits, rights of reconsideration, and appeal with either affirmation or reversal. Great job. I hope others can learn from your insights and bridle their conflicts.
We experienced this in 2 churches! We were trying to report the problematic leadership behavior to a head pastor and we were accused of incorrectly following the Matthew 18 procedure. It totally muddied the waters and put the focus on us. We became the sinners for reporting the sin. One of these churches actually teaches that someone sexually abused by someone in the church needs to confront their abuser face to face using Matthew 18. Shouldn't that be the choice of the victim?! Also, the police should be called first.
@@ApplyGodsWordcomMarkBallenger So the government of one of these churches is finally letting us write a letter explaining what happened and they say they will take our charges "very seriously." But they also say that "you must offer clear and substantiated facts that can be corroborated by a third party. This is in accordance with 1 Timothy 5:19, where Paul instructed elders not to admit a charge against a fellow elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses." So am I not allowed to mention any (spiritually, psychologically and emotionally) abusive words that a leader said to me one-on-one because no one else heard it? I'm confused because abusive people don't usually abuse in front of witnesses.
My Aunt went through this around three months ago. Nothing was resolved. She went before the Church/Pastor to get answers and was totally shaded. I felt it was very hypocritical, rude. I spoke with her about it and suggested to give it to God and find a Church that is mature. Did I give the wrong advice about finding a different Church? My Aunt feels hurt, deceived, undignified.
Tanya Stevens sadly church conflict is too common. What's worse is how the conflicts are often handled. It's not wrong to go to a new church if she presented her concerns and she felt they were not addressed. If she just left without saying anything that would be different
I vote against every form of misuse of matthew 18:15-20 in the name and by the blood of Jesus Christ at the foot of the cross of Calvary, amen and hallelujah! Annelies Bakker, the Netherlands.
The context of Matthew 18:15-20 is… verses 1-14 and 21-35. 15-20 are part of a lamb recovery process. Verses 1-5: physical child presented and then a spiritual comparison is drawn. Verses 6-9: a physical punishment for abuse, followed by another spiritual analogy of how to deal with abuse by a member of the body of Christ. The discussion thus far has been about about abuse so severe that it warrants physical or spiritual death. What happens to the lamb that was abused? Pain, fear, confusion, distrust, flight… They run, become lost, in need of recovery and need restoration. Verses 10-11: Lost lambs, angels pleading their case, declaration of Jesus intent to seek (recover) and save (restore). Verses 12-13: recovery operations to find and bring the lamb to safety. Verses 14-20: restoration of a damaged, wounded lamb. Verses 21-35: Jesus doubling down on how serious the whole forgiveness piece is when restoring the lamb. As a matter of fact, the consequences of failing to extend that forgiveness is the same as the guy who committed the crime in the first place. (Compare verses 7-9 to 34-35.) That is how I see the context. Thank you for sharing the word of God. Blessings to you all. th-cam.com/video/Vfl43srA3wM/w-d-xo.html
I explained that I was offended by husband based upon things he said that caused a rift in our relationship. Our counselor is taking us through taking the log in our own eye instead of addressing how I’ve been offended and following the Matthew 18 passage. Should that be the direction we take this?
I don't know exactly, but to help, I'm learning that often times focusing on ourselves and taking responsibility for our actions makes sure our hearts are in the right place before we engage others in conflict. If we don't have a Godly perspective, it's hard to appropriately and kindly reprove your husband, and is tempting to approach him out of hurt and offense, not love and desire for the relationship to be restored. I'm learning more and more about this and hope it can help you! (Read "The Excellent Wife" by Martha Peace for more great content!)
I think your pastor is right. Matthew 18 is for church discipline and sin. He can’t pursue your husband and throw him out of the church unless he’s in gross unrepentant sin. If he only hurt your feelings and apologized but it caused a rift, that’s different
Imagine if the USA had 37 different Supreme Courts, each claiming that their particular style of interpretation of the law is the best. Total disaster.
Thank you. When it says go to the church, my understanding from study and looking at church history is this: the person has now been corrected and person refuses to repent. They bring it to the church leadership who validates the wrongdoing. Its verified, and then the sinning brother or sister is called to repent by church leadership. If he or she doesn't they are then basically excommunicated. Would you agree?
Very helpful, I didn’t understand this when it was first sermonized in church I was like this sounds a lot like shunning and not forgiving someone if they don’t comply 😂 I was like wait that doesn’t sound like Jesus at all! It sounds like it’s misapplied a lot sadly
How can you read Matthew 18, 15-21 and not understand that there is only one Church? Makes no sense to tell someone to "take a conflict to the church" if there are 85 different denominations that can resolve the conflict in different ways.
Would it be appropriate to use matt 18 if a leader in training publically offends a pastor? And is it appropriate to skip over one of these 3 steps in order to address a matter?
You should understand what “witnesses” actually means in this topic. Ask yourself what a witness is. The “witnesses” actually have to witness the sin committed against the accuser. If there were no witnesses, this would allow for an array of false accusations against anyone in the church. Jesus had a lot of sayings he based off of the Old Testament scripture. If you read the Book of Deuteronomy, you will see what Jesus is basing his command on. Why would you say it’s ok to skip the first step? You don’t have enough wisdom to know if a brother has offended you?
This all seems like your pandering to people who don't want to stand firm in their beliefs and face a brother or sister with a problem. Ive heard a few people tell me that Matthew 18:15 is not for all types of sin, but the fact is that it is the only respectful way to approach sin. Every person who has ever told me that Matt 18:15 does not apply, has no answer to give me when I ask them if they can prove that with scripture. Ive been studying this allot lately and so far I've been steadily affirmed that mat 18:15 is how all sin should be handled. If anyone can show me in scripture a situation where a different model was applied please do, because I'm trying to learn. God has not put us here to be weak and fearful. Grow a pair and talk to those who offend you and live in sin.
I listened and believe that you are mistaken. Sin impacts the entire body of Christ. An example is a man abandoning his wife. Sin. The body should address this using Matthew 18. If he does not repent he does not continue in fellowship. Forgiveness is separate from restored fellowship. Forgiveness has nothing to do with a person acknowledging the damage done. Forgiveness is between God and the person harmed alone.
While the example you cite might be an example where Matthew 18 is appropriate, making a survivor of abuse address her predator one-on-one, for example, would be an absolute misuse of Matthew 18. Or having a congregant be the one to address a church employee's abuse of power.
![[ENGSUB] UNPRODUCTIVE DAY ใช้ชีวิต (เปื่อยๆ) ด้วยกัน 1 วัน! | OUROAD CLOSEFRiEND SS2 EP.9](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pyYKZ3kra9w/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you. I have skill and training in law and church governance and thus have been involved in dealing with many conflicts between a church member against another member, a member against the church or its officers, and the church against one of its members, I have never seen a case where all these scritures were followed. Whether it is a lack of standing issue, inadmissable hearsay, insufficient evidence, inapropriate remedies, or other issues, people are people and tend to do what they want to do and then pick a verse to support their position. Law is like when one charges another and looks for a law to support them. The principles you cite are used daily in our courts but with strict definitions, limits, rights of reconsideration, and appeal with either affirmation or reversal. Great job. I hope others can learn from your insights and bridle their conflicts.
I am an ELCA Lutheran from South Carolina. Today (September 6, Pentecost 14), this was our Gospel of the Day.
We experienced this in 2 churches! We were trying to report the problematic leadership behavior to a head pastor and we were accused of incorrectly following the Matthew 18 procedure. It totally muddied the waters and put the focus on us. We became the sinners for reporting the sin. One of these churches actually teaches that someone sexually abused by someone in the church needs to confront their abuser face to face using Matthew 18. Shouldn't that be the choice of the victim?! Also, the police should be called first.
That's terrible! It's so sad that so many people misuse this verse to deflect blame when someone does evil things. Sad...
@@ApplyGodsWordcomMarkBallenger So the government of one of these churches is finally letting us write a letter explaining what happened and they say they will take our charges "very seriously." But they also say that "you must offer clear and substantiated facts that can be corroborated by a third party. This is in accordance with 1 Timothy 5:19, where Paul instructed elders not to admit a charge against a fellow elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses." So am I not allowed to mention any (spiritually, psychologically and emotionally) abusive words that a leader said to me one-on-one because no one else heard it? I'm confused because abusive people don't usually abuse in front of witnesses.
Thanks so much and I definitely won't be a stranger.
God bless 🙏
God bless you too Ruby!
My Aunt went through this around three months ago.
Nothing was resolved.
She went before the Church/Pastor to get answers and was totally shaded.
I felt it was very hypocritical, rude.
I spoke with her about it and suggested to give it to God and find a Church that is mature.
Did I give the wrong advice about finding a different Church?
My Aunt feels hurt, deceived, undignified.
Tanya Stevens sadly church conflict is too common. What's worse is how the conflicts are often handled. It's not wrong to go to a new church if she presented her concerns and she felt they were not addressed. If she just left without saying anything that would be different
Great video, something I believe all Christians need to hear.
Eddie Cox thx!
I vote against every form of misuse of matthew 18:15-20 in the name and by the blood of Jesus Christ at the foot of the cross of Calvary, amen and hallelujah! Annelies Bakker, the Netherlands.
God bless
Against you is not even in a lot of the original texts. A lot of the texts say if your brother sins go and tell him his fault.
The context of Matthew 18:15-20 is… verses 1-14 and 21-35. 15-20 are part of a lamb recovery process.
Verses 1-5: physical child presented and then a spiritual comparison is drawn.
Verses 6-9: a physical punishment for abuse, followed by another spiritual analogy of how to deal with abuse by a member of the body of Christ.
The discussion thus far has been about about abuse so severe that it warrants physical or spiritual death. What happens to the lamb that was abused? Pain, fear, confusion, distrust, flight… They run, become lost, in need of recovery and need restoration.
Verses 10-11: Lost lambs, angels pleading their case, declaration of Jesus intent to seek (recover) and save (restore).
Verses 12-13: recovery operations to find and bring the lamb to safety.
Verses 14-20: restoration of a damaged, wounded lamb.
Verses 21-35: Jesus doubling down on how serious the whole forgiveness piece is when restoring the lamb. As a matter of fact, the consequences of failing to extend that forgiveness is the same as the guy who committed the crime in the first place. (Compare verses 7-9 to 34-35.)
That is how I see the context.
Thank you for sharing the word of God. Blessings to you all.
th-cam.com/video/Vfl43srA3wM/w-d-xo.html
The YOU was added in at a later date, it is not present in the Greek.
Hi I want to thank you for your valuable teachings.
I explained that I was offended by husband based upon things he said that caused a rift in our relationship. Our counselor is taking us through taking the log in our own eye instead of addressing how I’ve been offended and following the Matthew 18 passage. Should that be the direction we take this?
I don't know exactly, but to help, I'm learning that often times focusing on ourselves and taking responsibility for our actions makes sure our hearts are in the right place before we engage others in conflict. If we don't have a Godly perspective, it's hard to appropriately and kindly reprove your husband, and is tempting to approach him out of hurt and offense, not love and desire for the relationship to be restored. I'm learning more and more about this and hope it can help you! (Read "The Excellent Wife" by Martha Peace for more great content!)
I think your pastor is right. Matthew 18 is for church discipline and sin. He can’t pursue your husband and throw him out of the church unless he’s in gross unrepentant sin. If he only hurt your feelings and apologized but it caused a rift, that’s different
Imagine if the USA had 37 different Supreme Courts, each claiming that their particular style of interpretation of the law is the best. Total disaster.
Thank you. When it says go to the church, my understanding from study and looking at church history is this: the person has now been corrected and person refuses to repent. They bring it to the church leadership who validates the wrongdoing. Its verified, and then the sinning brother or sister is called to repent by church leadership. If he or she doesn't they are then basically excommunicated.
Would you agree?
Thank you!
Tanya Stevens sure!
Very helpful, I didn’t understand this when it was first sermonized in church I was like this sounds a lot like shunning and not forgiving someone if they don’t comply 😂
I was like wait that doesn’t sound like Jesus at all! It sounds like it’s misapplied a lot sadly
Watermark Church in Dallas TX abuses Matthew 18!
Wow ok. I'm in a situation where I will be literally doing this tonight.
How can you read Matthew 18, 15-21 and not understand that there is only one Church? Makes no sense to tell someone to "take a conflict to the church" if there are 85 different denominations that can resolve the conflict in different ways.
Mathew 6: 6 forgive us as v have forgiven r debtors
how much v forgive that much only God will forgive us verses 14,15
Do you have 4 books of sermons on Romans by Martin Lloyd Jones?
Would it be appropriate to use matt 18 if a leader in training publically offends a pastor? And is it appropriate to skip over one of these 3 steps in order to address a matter?
Amen!
GohanGodmayanGoku 18:15...saga 26..
You should understand what “witnesses” actually means in this topic. Ask yourself what a witness is. The “witnesses” actually have to witness the sin committed against the accuser. If there were no witnesses, this would allow for an array of false accusations against anyone in the church.
Jesus had a lot of sayings he based off of the Old Testament scripture. If you read the Book of Deuteronomy, you will see what Jesus is basing his command on.
Why would you say it’s ok to skip the first step? You don’t have enough wisdom to know if a brother has offended you?
This all seems like your pandering to people who don't want to stand firm in their beliefs and face a brother or sister with a problem. Ive heard a few people tell me that Matthew 18:15 is not for all types of sin, but the fact is that it is the only respectful way to approach sin. Every person who has ever told me that Matt 18:15 does not apply, has no answer to give me when I ask them if they can prove that with scripture. Ive been studying this allot lately and so far I've been steadily affirmed that mat 18:15 is how all sin should be handled. If anyone can show me in scripture a situation where a different model was applied please do, because I'm trying to learn. God has not put us here to be weak and fearful. Grow a pair and talk to those who offend you and live in sin.
I listened and believe that you are mistaken. Sin impacts the entire body of Christ. An example is a man abandoning his wife. Sin. The body should address this using Matthew 18. If he does not repent he does not continue in fellowship. Forgiveness is separate from restored fellowship. Forgiveness has nothing to do with a person acknowledging the damage done. Forgiveness is between God and the person harmed alone.
While the example you cite might be an example where Matthew 18 is appropriate, making a survivor of abuse address her predator one-on-one, for example, would be an absolute misuse of Matthew 18. Or having a congregant be the one to address a church employee's abuse of power.
@louieduvall4298 living with someone and not being married is fornication. You did the right thing.
Thank you!