tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post2249468009649908921..comments2023-12-22T08:29:29.230-08:00Comments on WHAT IS TRUTH: Christians Suing Christians: Is it Biblical?Kent Brandenburghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-30416879765815485692016-03-20T08:21:02.089-07:002016-03-20T08:21:02.089-07:00Well, Brother Ross, I fear we'll see this one ...Well, Brother Ross, I fear we'll see this one differently. As to your last paragraph, the purpose of church discipline is obviously not to open the way to legal action.<br /><br />But if our church has to discipline someone, and that person in bitterness and rebellion phones me three times a night in the middle of the night, and threatens my family, I'll not hesitate to go to law with him, and that before unbelievers, and get a restraining order. And if he then comes and smashes up my car and puts stones through every window in the house, I'll not hesitate to seek both criminal and civil redress, rather than expect my family or my insurance company to absorb the cost. That person's claim to be a Christian does not buy him legal immunity.<br /><br />When someone puts himself outside the church, he puts himself outside the protection of I Corinthians 6. It is not a question of "going in between the lines and try to find a conclusion different from the one Paul draws." It is a question of being sure we are drawing the same conclusion that Paul was drawing.<br /><br />He was talking about differences between two believers who are within the church and should be expected to submit to the judgment of other believers. I Cor. 6:4-5 makes that clear. He was not talking about differences between a believer and someone whose behaviour is so far from that of a believer that they've had to be put outside the church, and whose claim to be a believer is thus necessarily very doubtful.Jon Gleasonhttp://www.mindrenewers.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-50206521488353122742016-03-15T17:10:26.273-07:002016-03-15T17:10:26.273-07:00Dear Bro Gleason,
Certainly someone who is a Morm...Dear Bro Gleason,<br /><br />Certainly someone who is a Mormon, etc. is no more a Christian than a member of ISIS, so the prohibition of 1 Corinthians 5 does not apply.<br /><br />Withdrawal of fellowship/church discipline happens to those who are brothers in Christ, 2 Thess 3:6, as well as to those who are unregenerate, 2 Cor 6:14-18. Someone who one hopes is saved but falls under church discipline is very different than a person who openly professes and defends a false gospel, such as a Mormon. I do not believe Matt 18:15ff. is denying that there are some from whom we withdraw but we count not as enemies, but admonish as a brother.<br /><br />Since Paul is so severe against suing brethren in 1 Cor 6, I do not believe that we do well to go in between the lines and try to find a conclusion different from the one that Paul draws, and Paul never says something like "put him under church discpline, then sue him blind."<br /><br />Thanks.KJB1611https://www.blogger.com/profile/09696273086955004524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-52571432367290124852016-03-15T02:18:03.322-07:002016-03-15T02:18:03.322-07:00Thank you, Brother Ross. A further followup.
The...Thank you, Brother Ross. A further followup.<br /><br />There are many people who claim to be "Christians" but they never attended a church and live completely ungodly lives. Anders Behring Breivik, who killed 77 people in Norway, claimed to be a "Christian." There is no evidence that he ever adopted anything of Christianity but the name. I presume it would be acceptable to sue someone like him.<br /><br />Then there are the cultists, who claim to be brothers. Many Mormons now say they are Christians. Then there are the Roman Catholics, who claim to be Christian brothers, or the "feel-good gospel" people like Robert Schuller, etc., or the health-wealth "gospel" people. If people like this claim to be Christian brothers but do things that would justify taking legal action against them, does their Christian claim render them immune?<br /><br />How does the person differ who made the same claim but actually came into one of our churches and disrupted it? That gives him more right to legal immunity than outsiders who never came in, but make the same claim? In light of Matthew 18, how do you justify treating such a person differently from the lost? If we are told that he is to be us as a heathen and a publican, that is to remove from him all fellowship, and all the spiritual protection of the church. <br /><br />I suggest it also removes from him all the legal protection of the church commanded in I Corinthians 6. To do otherwise, it seems to me, is to fail to obey Matthew 18, which says to treat those who have to be removed as lost people. The decision whether or not to sue such an one is the same as the decision whether or not to sue an unbeliever. Will it bring glory to God, or will it cause the name of God to be blasphemed? It becomes a matter of wisdom, but not a matter of obedience to I Corinthians 6 -- that person has removed himself from that protection.Jon Gleasonhttp://www.mindrenewers.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-27588211223337086532016-03-07T13:30:04.485-08:002016-03-07T13:30:04.485-08:00Dear Bro Gleason,
As in my response to Farmer Bro...Dear Bro Gleason,<br /><br />As in my response to Farmer Brown, this seems like practicing the between-the-lines Bible--kick him out and then sue him. If the person no longer professed to be a Christian, that might, perhaps, be different--but if he is claiming to be a brother, I don't think we get to sue him, period.<br /><br />Thanks for the question.KJB1611https://www.blogger.com/profile/09696273086955004524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-53679856856294517212016-03-07T11:53:32.245-08:002016-03-07T11:53:32.245-08:00Brother Ross, I've been meaning to get to this...Brother Ross, I've been meaning to get to this, sorry for the delay in responding.<br /><br />Does not the immediate context of I Corinthians 5 give pause here? They were told to put the guilty party out of the church, no longer to grant him the fellowship of a brother. And immediately afterwards they are told to treat brothers a certain way, with no parallel instruction not to treat non-brothers the same way.<br /><br />To me, in light of Matthew 18, another church discipline case (though for a different offense, that of wronging a brother), this can indeed permit legal action. Certainly not against one who is accepted as a brother (the passage is clear on that and thus goes beyond the local church, as you've noted).<br /><br />But if one is engaged in behaviour that forces us to place him outside the accepted brotherhood, then the protection against legal action enjoined in I Corinthians 6 is also taken from him.<br /><br />There are still the principles of I Corinthians 6. To go to court against a professing believer, even if his profession is belied by his behaviour to the extent that he has been excommunicated, is going to give blasphemers opportunity. It may not be best, for that and other reasons. It will often, at least, be unwise.<br /><br />But I do not believe I Corinthians 6 gives a clear prohibition of legal action against someone who has been excommunicated (and is to be to us as a heathen and a publican, outside the church). And it some cases, it may even be the best way to silence blasphemers.<br /><br />I would appreciate your thoughts.Jon Gleasonhttp://www.mindrenewers.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-56019833023148547282016-02-19T23:19:21.344-08:002016-02-19T23:19:21.344-08:00Dear Farmer Brown,
Thanks for the questions. I s...Dear Farmer Brown,<br /><br />Thanks for the questions. I see no exception for complex questions in 1 Corinthians 6. If some very complex law is involved, there is nothing wrong with getting someone who knows the law well to help out, preferably also someone who is a Christian. Applying the charity of 1 Corinthians 13 should make things work.KJB1611https://www.blogger.com/profile/09696273086955004524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-24369510566983945872016-02-18T08:32:01.675-08:002016-02-18T08:32:01.675-08:00Thomas or Kent (or whomever), what about complex s...Thomas or Kent (or whomever), what about complex situations? For example, a man in your church is involved in investment banking and has another brother as a client. Something in the transaction goes wrong. Now both feel as though they have been wronged.<br /><br />This would not be a criminal matter, but civil. It would also be very complex. You could have a patent or trademark dispute. Again, this would be very complex. The laws on these issues are convoluted and difficult even for a skilled attorney to comprehend. <br /><br />How would you handle something like that? In these cases, it is likely no one in either body would have the expertise to understand the matters of law. I hesitate to say the body of Christ is insufficient, in fact, that is not what I am saying. I think it is sufficient. How would you handle complex issues that require a certain expertise?Farmer Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09637851494862726991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-22114877382030075252016-02-16T18:25:00.358-08:002016-02-16T18:25:00.358-08:00Dear Anonymous,
You stated:
"There is not o...Dear Anonymous,<br /><br />You stated:<br /><br />"There is not one independent Baptist who ever practices this truth."<br /><br />So every single independent Baptist in the world has engaged in lawsuits with people outside of his church? <br /><br />Could you please tell me the name of the believer who I sued outside of my church, and the one who Pastor Brandenburg sued, Farmer Brown sued, etc.?<br /><br />Why did I write a post against suing believers if I, and every single IFB in the world, has done it?<br /><br />It is pretty clear why you did not put your name on your comment.KJB1611https://www.blogger.com/profile/09696273086955004524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-22310382403262275042016-02-16T17:27:23.580-08:002016-02-16T17:27:23.580-08:00"Therefore, the passage is not limited only t..."Therefore, the passage is not limited only to a prohibition on lawsuits with members of one's own church."<br /><br />There is not one independent Baptist who ever practices this truth.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-38280544309594694262016-02-16T17:10:13.506-08:002016-02-16T17:10:13.506-08:00Dear Farmer Brown,
I think that such a view of Ma...Dear Farmer Brown,<br /><br />I think that such a view of Matthew 18 is a "convenient" way of getting out of the command of 1 Corinthians 6. Paul didn't say, "just put the person under church discipline, and then take him to court, get his house and even the cloak off his back." Indeed, in light of the serious character of the warnings of 1 Corinthians 6, Paul would have considered failure to cease from lawsuits when warned in 1 Cor 6 a matter for church discipline. However, he never said, implied, or in any other way whatsoever said "if the person doesn't listen and we kick him out, then go ahead and sue away." This is following the between-the-lines Bible, not the real Bible.<br /><br />I believe my response above to Vic dealt with the different church question you asked.KJB1611https://www.blogger.com/profile/09696273086955004524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-1572961611506696012016-02-16T17:07:01.099-08:002016-02-16T17:07:01.099-08:00Dear Vic (comment continued),
If a court issues a...Dear Vic (comment continued),<br /><br />If a court issues an order, and the order is not explicitly contrary to Scripture (e. g., deny John 14:6; say sodomy is OK, etc.), we ought to comply with the court order, Romans 13.<br /><br />I would say that we ought to help the widow ourselves if she is being taken advantage of financially but not initiate court action. Paul in 1 Cor 6 states that it is better to be defrauded, and being defrauded, as the examples I gave in the post demonstrate, can mean very serious loss. <br /><br />If, on the other hand, her life is at stake and someone is trying to break into the house with an axe and a revolver, then the Biblical principle of defending life means that we can use the sword in self defense (although if we can flee we probably ought to flee), as can the police who we ought to call, etc. We are to allow ourselves to be defrauded, but Paul did not say we are to just get murdered without trying to stop it from happening.KJB1611https://www.blogger.com/profile/09696273086955004524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-72914772392897781592016-02-16T15:16:01.369-08:002016-02-16T15:16:01.369-08:00Dear Vic,
Thanks for the question. 1 Corinthians ...Dear Vic,<br /><br />Thanks for the question. 1 Corinthians 6 forbids a brother taking a brother to court, not just a brother in one's own church to court. Therefore, the passage is not limited only to a prohibition on lawsuits with members of one's own church.<br /><br />While it may not be as easy to get a moderator if the dispute is between two churches, since Paul said it would be better to get the least esteemed in the church rather than an unbeliever, it should be possible to find a way to resolve the situation without exposing the sins of the brethren to the scorn of the ungodly.Thross7@gmail.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16472364237836156567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-68798476034427399192016-02-12T10:15:06.050-08:002016-02-12T10:15:06.050-08:00Also, what of the argument from the text (1 Corint...Also, what of the argument from the text (1 Corinthians 6) that is only applies to brethren within a church suing other believers? The theory is this is written to the church in Corinth and is written because members of that assembly were suing each other. Therefore the prohibition was against members of the same assembly suing each other. <br /><br />According to this theory, Paul rebuked them for the internal lawsuits, but if a member of Corinth wanted to sue a member of Antioch or Damascus or Jerusalem, Paul would have been fin with that.Farmer Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09637851494862726991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-78095387621651038942016-02-12T10:07:53.976-08:002016-02-12T10:07:53.976-08:00This is interesting. What do you think of the arg...This is interesting. What do you think of the argument from Matthew 18, that after they are removed you can then sue them, as you would be able to sue a heathen? Farmer Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09637851494862726991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-32456962522046970742016-02-12T09:13:22.782-08:002016-02-12T09:13:22.782-08:00Mr. Ross,
I am very glad you wrote this article. ...Mr. Ross,<br />I am very glad you wrote this article. This issue is showing up everywhere, and I have personally seen it happening for years. <br />I have at least three distinct questions for you, and all three have been presented to me as reasons why it is Ok to take other believers to court.<br />The first is this: is 1 Cor. 6 talking to people inside a local church, or to the greater family of God? Since 1 Cor. was written to a local church, it should be understood in a local context. I have Believers cannot sue other believers in the same church, but it may be possible to sue outside your own church. Since there is no universal church, conflicts between believers from different churches may need outside expertise (most believers are not law experts) and are allowed to have outside help for a resolution. Part of the reasoning is that there is no way for a church to appoint a believer as an authoritative "judge" to which both parties must submit if they are from different churches. <br />The second question is this: if the parties refuse to submit to the church, or if at least one of the churches involved refuses to make the parties stop court action, is it better to allow the court to decide the issue so that there will be a resolution? Should a church remove a member that is refusing to stop a court action?<br />The third question is this: are you allowed to pursue someone civilly if you are trying to help a third party, like an abused person? For example, if you hear that someone calling themselves a brother is taking advantage of a widow, and you want to protect the widow, can you initiate a court action against them to protect the widow? The reasons to keep the court action civil and not criminal are mercy and restraint; that is, not wanting the abuser to get in real trouble, but just make them stop the abuse. Doesn't Isaiah 1:17 say "plead for the widow" and "plead" is a legal term?<br />I do not believe any of these reasons, but the people presenting them to me did. <br />Thanks,<br />Vic Crowne<br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-12682611716668296082016-02-12T05:52:33.662-08:002016-02-12T05:52:33.662-08:00I agree Thomas. Well stated. I agree Thomas. Well stated. d4v34xhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07346680257860879900noreply@blogger.com