A Touchy Subject

One of the most controversial responsibilities that we face as the Church is the task of administering discipline. Some say the idea is archaic while others won’t take part with an assembly that doesn’t demand strict adherence. There are presently many efforts under way to pressure the Church to fellowship actively practicing homosexuals and there are numerous arguments in favor of doing so. I’m not sure if you’ve noticed but I take great pains to avoid pointing out anyone’s sin, as I believe that is not my place. You may also have noticed that I am very devoted to an ecumenical fellowship. I am offering my thoughts here in order to explain my beliefs concerning Church discipline in the hope that my position will not cause a division with my brethren who don’t share in my understanding.

Zeke at One for Truth first personally confronted me on this subject and we exchanged several Emails. Zeke and I fall at the extreme ends of this conflict but we have never let that interfere with our love, fellowship or respect for one another. I hope and pray that I can maintain my relationships will all my brethren who oppose my position. I felt that the exchange between Zeke and I clearly illustrates our opposing views and he was kind enough to give me permission to publish them here. I have debated for some time whether or not to address this but recent events seem to be pressing me to state my position.

The exchange began with a comment I had posted on Zeke’s blog. I have replaced his real name with his blogger pseudonym. Please feel welcome to challenge my thinking but I am only persuaded with scripture. If you do not believe the scripture is clear on this subject then feel welcome to offer your doubts. If you simply reject the scripture you are welcome to post your opinion but I cannot engage it. I intend to use your comments as the basis for future articles on Church discipline.


Kc wrote:

I suspect my previous comment taken alone could cause serious harm. By “this grace” I was referring to the implication that we as believers should overlook any sinful practice, meaning an unrepentant habitual sin willfully committed and defended as just by a professing believer. I know those who have read my writing are aware that I believe the grace of God, which is through faith in Jesus Christ, is more than sufficient to redeem even the vilest of sinners including child pornographers and me.I honestly strive to judge no one but myself and to that end my question persist. I am seeking your understanding of the scripture for our edification, not for the judgment of others however since it is off topic I will withdraw it here. Zeke I apologize for steering discussion away from your selected subject.

--
Posted by Kc to One For Truth at 10/18/2005 02:27:03 PM

From: Zeke

Kc, maybe I’ll just reply directly then. The scripture in 1st Corinthians where Paul lists those who are wicked (see chap 5): “sexually immoral,” “greedy,” “idolater and slanderer,” “drunkard or a swindler,” to which Paul adds to the list in chap 6: adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexual offenders, and thieves. Two issues arise out of this list: 1) who among us is free from sin of the heart and mind of all these sins? Not all but one or two, but all of them. 2) I have found in my research (and as a writer posted in this thread) that the original Greek for “homosexual offenders” is arsenokoitai, for which there is no clear translation. To assume that Paul meant all those who engage in gay sex may not be justified. It could well have applied to activities more specific and exploitative. See http://catalystresources.org/issues/222dodd.html. My point with gays is that it is not such a cut-and-dry case Biblically as a straightforward reading of Scripture would suggest as to what we are supposed to do with gay believers. Not with whether or not gay sex is sinful, which I think actually is pretty clear in that the only form of sanctioned sex, reading Jesus and Paul, is between a previously unmarried man and woman or a widowed man and woman. My conviction is that we enter into fellowship with them and allow the grace of God to prevail. Certainly, the course of the evangelical church has been just mad in my opinion. Destructive and reckless.

Casey wrote:

Zeke, thanks for the response and for sharing your understanding. With respect to 1 Corinthians 5 I'm concerned that if I strain at the specifics as to who Paul was referring to that I'll become legalistic in my approach when my heart tells me that what Paul was teaching is critical to the welfare of the Church. I do not find that he intended this toward an erring brother but to those who are persistent.
Plainly put I'm asking this; do you understand the scripture to teach any Church discipline at all?

From: Zeke

Of course, Casey... I just think that there is enough room for doubt with regard to sexually active gays as to whether we are commanded to exclude them from communion that I think the appropriate response is to engage and fellowship with them. Not to claim that there is no sin in it, but to fellowship with them as we would with divorcees and others who are struggling with other issues but sincerely seeking Christ. Obviously, child pornographers should be turned into the police let alone excluded from the communion table. That's a given.

Casey wrote:

Zeke thanks again. Then it comes down to defining "who" and "when" as opposed to "if". As I said before I honestly believe that is a personal matter in that we each have to answer to God for our decision. With respect to the determination of "who" we seem to agree concerning a child pornographer but again it seems you consider divorce and remarriage categorically similar to the act of homosexuality and in that we differ. I believe my reasoning varies because of my perception that divorce and remarriage are each singular acts and not persistent or reoccurring. In that light I can understand the struggle, as for myself it's settled by virtue of my own understanding of Romans 1.

I would appreciate knowing your conclusions on this. For the record was it not for my understanding of the scripture (not meaning my vast knowledge but my interpretation) I really would prefer to fellowship with all believers. That is much more in line with the desire of my heart. I am also very sympathetic to the plight of anyone overtaken in a fault as I find myself there more often than I wish. ;-)

From: Zeke

Yeah, that's the whole point. Why not assume, so that you can better understand them, that gay believers can be sincere and worthy of fellowship with? Why not trust God and grace on this issue?


Casey wrote:

Zeke,

I have studied and considered their plight. I cannot be empathetic but I assure you I am sympathetic, not only to them, but also to others who have deviant desires. My decision is not by virtue of any homophobia based on fear. It is by faith based on my understanding of scripture with particular emphasis on repentance, grace and judgment.

If I allow myself to become the judge of what is moral for others I open myself to the judgment of men. We will be judged as we judge. If I accept the judgment of God concerning this activity I am judged of God. While I agree that all immoral behavior is not clearly defined in scripture, the homosexual act is eluded to numerous times and specifically and clearly condemned in Romans 1. If I then give grace to any who openly defy God then I become their judge and a god to myself. Let them rather seek the grace of God, which is sufficient for their sin.

God requires repentance to obtain mercy and escape judgment. Repentance is not an act to itself, but is a change of heart, mind and will; in essence it is a new attitude. This attitude is reflected in the life of a believer by their behavior and they no longer seek to justify their sin but will strive to avoid it.

If one would then continue to justify their sin it is apparent they are unrepentant and their argument is with God, not me. I cannot justify myself, let alone them. As for me I must follow my conscience as His Spirit guides me in accordance with my understanding of His will in my life.

I have shared my understanding not to convince you to do as I do, but to help you understand why I do as I do. I do not condemn you in your search. I commend you. My real concern is involves the necessity of Church discipline and the way it is applied as many today seem to use it to establish their will by their own judgment in either condemning or allowing in the things they desire.

I very much appreciate the dialog and I do encourage you in your study.

Casey