Use (application) of Mathew 18:15-17

[Srecko Sostar]

In the religious explanation of what is sin and how to deal with the person who makes the wrong things, the application of Jesus' words within the JW Church says that "minor" sins should be solved between the parties involved, but "greater" sins need to be reported to the elders at the assembly/congregation. This is the official WTJWORG doctrine.

The first dilemma that we are immediately noticed in the theological approach to these biblical paragraphs is seen in the unfounded separation of a certain human act into a small aka minor sin versus great aka big sin. WTJWORG had made a list of sins that were put in to two category by its nature; minor sins and gross sins. And of course there is third element in this issue of sins, and that is when something is questionable to such extension, that at very moment no one of Bible Scholars inside WTJWORG doesn't know the right answer, and as solution such issue is putted into so called "gray zone". 

If we agree in idea how Jesus Teaching/s is/are Sufficient for all "dilemmas" we might have in life than we can see from this Bible verses as follow:

¹⁵ “If your brother or sister^[b] sins,^[c] go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. ¹⁶ But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’^[d] 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector. - NIV

¹⁵  “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go and reveal his fault* between you and him alone.n If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.o ¹⁶  But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, so that on the testimony* of two or three witnesses every matter* may be established.*p ¹⁷  If he does not listen* to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen* even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nationsq and as a tax collector.r - NWT

1) Jesus not have a list of sins, either not making categorization of sins into minor, middle, gross, and so on. 

2) All sins have to be resolved firstly between involved parties (in our days this have to be viewed from other angles in cases of child molestation, for example)

3) Because there is no list of sins: What is viewed as sin in your eyes perhaps is not also a sin in the eyes of your neighbor. So, this first approach to other person may help to established some mutual foundation on someones act. 

4) Speaking about unresolved problem in a wider circle of people can be helpful if involved persons are in capacity to be involved in discussion. Word "witnesses" here refers of people who are able to testify about all what was said between you and him/her, you two who have problem. These are not witnesses of "wrongdoing".   

5) Making issue public is third step here. Public. Congregation is that public, not 1,2 or 3 elders. In front all congregation. 

6) If things are not resolved and you as plaintiff, claimant are not sattisfaied, or if whole congregation is against "sinner", how such person have to be treated? As man of nation and tax collector. How Jesus treated men of nation and tax collectors? Answer is clear to me. Is it to you?  

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Yes ...

It's quite clear to anyone not agenda driven to do otherwise.

[JOHN BUTLER]

But of course the GB and it's Org do not live by the scriptures. Hence they now have big problems. 

[Srecko Sostar]

Open question for those, as Billy, who disagree with said opinion and understanding on Mathew 18 verses:

Which one is minor, which one is gross?

 Eating forbidden fruit from the tree in the garden? Killing a man? Adultery with a woman or a man? Idolatry? Put people in various sort of slavery? Manipulation with thoughts and emotions of people?     Lying? Overeating? Insincerity? Pride? Stealing? Hate? Unfriendliness? Over drinking? Selfishness?

What of this would you as JW member report to elders? :))

 

 

 

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

Well the scripture says speak to the congregation. But if a brother or sister did speak to the congregation they would be accused of 'causing a division in the congregation' 

And even when a person is disfellowshipped the reason is not given, it's kept hidden from the congregation..

Makes is soooo easy for them to disfellowship people easily for no scriptural reason.  Just the way one Elder threatened me. 

There are so many scriptures that prove that the GB and it's Org do not serve God through Christ. 

 

[Srecko Sostar]

9 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Well the scripture says speak to the congregation. But if a brother or sister did speak to the congregation they would be accused of 'causing a division in the congregation' 

Of course that problem is sensible in every way and angle.

For example: I get drunken (to what level drunk?), once or in few occasion. And others witnessed to that. And because it is easier, they comment that in their group and rumors start. Let say, one of them decide to report my behavior to elders because he is "righteous one" and his conscience not allowed any more to see me in congregation having public talk, with knowledge i love to drink. After that elders decide to speak with me. 

Now you have this position. Elders and few of others know about your "problem". How you look like in their eyes? Let say how only 2 elders know that and few witness of my drinking, and perhaps few more because people love to talk. Well, one part of congregation already know something about me. And they take some position about me in that sense. 

If whole congregation get to know about me and my drinking, what is difference? Number, only that. 

What is important, is not the number of those who know or not know about my drinking. Important is, what congregants would, will thinking and feeling for me after introducing, knowing me in this way. Real "division" inside congregation would come not because of public knowledge what i have done, but because of "division" inside people hearts and minds, who will be able or not be able to endure, bear with - not me - but with themselves, with own hearts and perceptions about life and all inside them and around them. "Spiritual Paradise" would collapsed.  An unrealistic, distorted picture of "reality" would have to come to an end. 

Love your imperfect neighbor, even love your enemy, love your fallen brother is at stake - not artificial unity of congregation!   

:))

[Space Merchant]

quote

---

Within Christianity, there tend to be three major views of the place of excommunication:

[1] We shouldn’t excommunicate anyone, because it’s not merciful.
[2] We should excommunicate, because we want to purify the Church of the damned.
[3] We should excommunicate, because it’s merciful to sinners.

So which of these views is the one endorsed by Scripture? Number three. In fact, the first two are rejected outright within the Bible itself.

To those who fall into the first camp, who reject the place of excommunication within New Testament Christianity, I would point you to Jesus’ words in Matthew 18:15-18,

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. 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. 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. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Jesus is solemnly entrusting the Church with the power to bind and loosen, and this is closely tied with the Church’s ability to excommunicate unrepentant sinners. And it’s more than just an ability. Jesus actually instructs it as the appropriate course of action to be taken in the case of certain unrepentant sinners. They are be ostracized, in the way that the Jews of the time treated Gentiles and tax collectors.

St. Paul, writing in Romans 16:17, similarly instructs: “I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.”

So excommunication is Biblical, but it’s easy to understand why some people are uncomfortable with it, and find it contrary to mercy. After all, some of the noisiest defenders of excommunication defend it for the wrong reasons. As Rex Edwards of Columbia Union College wrote back in 1976:

EXCOMMUNICATION has been regarded by ecclesiastics as the ultimate disciplinary measure. As a “weapon” it has been conspicuous for its abuse. It has been employed as a penalty, often plunging the defendent into a situation of abysmal irreversibility. Luther in his “Discussion of Confession” emphasizes the punitive aspect of excommunication, while Calvin declares it to be a public ecclesiastical censure for the purpose of purification.

But excommunication isn’t treated as punitive in Scripture, and the idea that we are the ones who will purify the Church is actually an idea condemned by Jesus in Matthew 13:24-29,

Another parable he put before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field; but while men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the householder came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then has it weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ But he said, ‘No; lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’”

So the servants of the Lord want to go and try to purify His Kingdom by separating out the wicked from the righteous, but Jesus stops them from doing so, since their attempts to do so would surely result in unjustly condemning the righteous. Instead, He tells them to let the weeds grow alongside the wheat until the harvest. When the Disciples ask what this means, He explains (Mt. 13:40-43):

Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the close of the age. The Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

So it’s the job of the angels, not us, to purify the Church. And they’re going to do it at the Last Judgment, not now. In other words, the entire Protestant attempt to create a holy Church by creating a Church of only the righteous, of only the saved, failed from the start because Christ told them not to do it.

All of this is to say that creating a “wheat-only” Church isn’t why we excommunicate. And yet, we are to excommunicate. So if that isn’t the reason, what is?

For the good of sinners.

Scripture is quite clear on this. When St. Paul writes the Church in Corinth, he’s aghast that they are letting a man openly engage in a sexual relationship with his other stepmom. In fact, they had become proud of what they apparently thought of as their tolerance and mercy. St. Paul rebukes them for this, writing (1 Corinthians 5:1-5):

It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that is not found even among pagans; for a man is living with his father’s wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.

For though absent in body I am present in spirit, and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment in the name of the Lord Jesus on the man who has done such a thing. When you are assembled, and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

He goes on to issue a general call for excommunication (1 Corinthians 5:9-13):

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with immoral men; not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy and robbers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Drive out the wicked person from among you.”

So St. Paul clearly doesn’t fall into the “don’t excommunicate” camp, and he’s not impressed with the false tolerance of those who do.

But notice why he calls for the man’s excommunication. He orders him to be delivered to Satan “that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” In other words, you publicly condemn the man for the same reason you would tell a student that he’s failing: not to write him off, but to let him know that he needs to get his act together while there’s still time. Better to be condemned now and repent, than to be indulged in your sins now and condemned at the Last Judgment.

And note well, St. Paul’s tough love worked. Or at least, so it seems from his follow-up letter to the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 2:5-11):

If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you to some extent—not to put it too severely. The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him. Another reason I wrote you was to see if you would stand the test and be obedient in everything. Anyone you forgive, I also forgive. And what I have forgiven—if there was anything to forgive—I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.

There’s a time to shame the sinning man, and there’s a time to comfort him so he isn’t overwhelmed by his shame and sorrow. In other words, the excommunication was medicinal, it was for his good. Rather than looking on the sinning man as an enemy of the Church, Paul looked on him as an erring brother who needed to be rebuked to be brought back in line.

And Paul lays this model of Church discipline out succinctly in 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14-15:

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. […] If any one refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not look on him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.

That’s a perfectly clear endorsement of the third of the three ways that I laid out above: excommunicate, but out of love, not an attempt to create a perfectly-pure Church.

So there it is: the basic case for why we should (and why we shouldn’t) excommunication.

---

end quote

[Srecko Sostar]

5 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Keep in mind what the context is: If Your Brother Sins Against You

Partially you are right, .......BUT do not forget fact that eliminate your logic.

All sin against God are also sin against all things what God has created (in this case your brother). 

All sin against things what God has created (in this case your brother) is also sin against God. 

Because God created your brother/neighbor, He as his Creator is also sad, injured, stricken with injustice act you done against your neighbor or brother.   

So, all "general" sins are sins against God. All "personal" sins are sins against God too. I made two terminology ("general" and "personal" sins) because of for your way of thinking. Sins are sins no mater who doing it or to whom is directed. God is Judge for all sins of all people, not just for your JW brother. 

Jesus' teachings are possible to using in every religion and in every society, not only inside JW congregation. By that, i think, have an opinion, how God will not measure JW sins in different way than sins from Catholics, Mormons or Atheists. :)))

[Srecko Sostar]

6 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

You cannot state how Matthew 18 would be applied by your standard without understanding the REST of scripture.

When wise man asked Jesus what is the greatest  God's Command, Jesus not say what He say (Love God and Love Neighbor) and than continue to talking another few hours to talking about CONTEXT from Hebrew Scriptures.    

YOU DO NOT NEED MORE of CONTEXT THAN IT IS GIVEN BY JESUS' WORDS --- LOVE GOD, LOVE NEIGHBOR. 

Scribes and Pharisees would like some more explanations and context, as in question, "Who is my neighbor?"

AND LITTLE REMINDER FOR YOU DEAR BILLY. JESUS VERY WELL EXPLAINED WHO IS YOUR NEIGHBOR. This is not only your JW brother from congregation. 

Same is with Mathew 18. If Jesus personal words inspired by JHVH need more "context and understanding from the REST of Scripture" .... than i can't do nothing more for you :)) 

[Srecko Sostar]

6 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Exactly how the Watchtower views are with certain things, while spiritual matters can be taken care of by the Elders through wisdom and discernment.The leaked BOE letters are a testament to that.

Some JW people say how leaked BOE letters are apostate's fraud, are not true and that are falsification ?! 

So, whom we shall trust now? To leaked BOE letters or to your statement how exactly these leaked BOE letters are testament to prove something? 

Are you able to provide ORIGINAL BOE letters for purpose to resolve this dilemma?

[Srecko Sostar]

10 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

That's why wisdom is a good policy. That way, you should be able to see the fake ones from the real ones.

Of course, your idea is very good, but you know very well, as me too, what Bible say about Human Wisdom :))) 

[Srecko Sostar]

10 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Wrong again. What I'm referring to is the degree of sin. You keep wanting it all to mean the same when there is a level when it comes to culpability. In this case, your ideology is no different than Johns. That's why you both agree on an erred perception.

No, Billy. Sin is sin. Only consequences/aftermath/aftereffects of particular sin/crime are DIFFERENT.