Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1
.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by South of I 90
Good post CC  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Epley
This is just good common sense.
|
It’s a big spin on what I wrote and responded to (posted below) that hasn’t been answered by CC1.
REPOST of
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaotic_resolve
.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CC1
I just get frustrated with those among us who pass off repeated massive moral failures as something we should just ignore.
|
I'm not saying to ignore it. I'm saying once it's been repented of and in the past ---- leave it there. That's all. What good does it do to bring up things from the past? Nothing. It does no good whatsoever. It only causes harm.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CC1
You have done the exact things in your posts you accuse me of. None of my statements ever condemmed Michael English to hell. I said I hope he has sincerely straigtened out,etc.
|
I apologize if I've taken what you've written wrongly. I never thought you were condemning him to hell; but my contention was with the bringing up the past as though it's not been forgiven.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CC1
Let me ask you a hypothetical question to test your seeming position that no matter what the nature and magnitude of repeated moral failures are we should still treat a person as if they never happened (or never repeatedly kept on happening);
If a pedophile sex offender prays through and gets saved do you treat him exactly as you would any other person praying through? Do you allow him to teach Sunday School? Do you allow him around children unsupervised? Is there at least any period of time where you would want to observe that he indeed has changed?
|
I disagree with the premise of the question. I also disagree that I've insinuated that we should treat them as though nothing happened. Of course something happened and needs to be addressed. Again, what I'm more concerned and take issue with is dredging up the past once it's been repented of and put under the blood.
The scenario described above is no where near what we've been discussing with adultery and drugs. I will answer the question though, since it bugs me when I ask a question and it doesn't get answered . . . *grin* . . .
To your description, no he wouldn't teach Sunday School. And I likely wouldn't allow him unsupervised around children. However, I would allow him in other areas of ministry and I would not, if he truly repented . . . I would not bring his past up against him. I would do all I could to help ensure that he was able to get victory over the sin, deliverance from that spirit and that he live a productive Christian life.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CC1
The point you miss about people like ME is that there is a price to pay for your sin. God forgives you but the sin has consequences. In the case of fornication or adultery many times the consequence is a child. God forgives the sexual sin but that child is the result of that sin and must be dealt with as a responsibility for the parties involved. Doesn't mean God has forgiven any less or that the person is any less saved.
|
I understand there's a price to pay. We're in agreement that yes, there is a terrible price to pay. However, where I would disagree with you is to whom or how the price is paid. We're not his judge. He doesn't answer to us, but to God. He's paid a price . . . an incredible price. Would you agree that he's paid a terrible price as consequences of his actions? He's lost his credibility, his fortune, fame, family, integrity. What more would you have him do? What more would he have to go through in order for you to say, okay, you've paid enough for your sins?
God's forgiven him, and yes even with the forgiveness there's still consequences. However, those consequences shouldn't be in the form of other Christians reminding them of the past.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CC1
Just because they are forigven and other christians ought to believe and accept that is not the same as saying that other christians should act as if nothing ever happened and keep on supporting their careers or ministries.
That is the only point I made. You are the one misconstruing things by insinuating I am somehow being unfair or mean to ME or not accepting his position in Christ.
|
Again, we don't act as though nothing happened. However, once the past is repented of, it's over. God's forgotten it, it's been washed in His blood, let it stay in the past.
I don't mean to insinuate that you're being unfair by not accepting him. I just don't like the digging up of the past as though it's the present and will be the future.
Quote:
|
I think one of the worst things in the world is for high profile people in Christianity to have major moral failures and people to just act like it never happened as your posts suggest to me.
|
I'll have to agree and disagree here. *grin* I agree that it's a terrible thing for a Christian to have a moral failure...but not the worst thing in the world. I disagree that I'm insinuat[ing] that we act as though nothing happened. If you'd like and it would please the people, put the sinner in "time out." But again, leave the past alone.
Bottom line points:
- Sin is sin...
- Sin separates people from God...
- God hates sin...
- God loves people...
- Repentance bridges the "sin chasm" between God and man...
- God forgives...
- God restores...
- God forgets...
- The past is the past and can never be changed...
- Bringing up the past only causes harm, never good...
- We should do all we can to help the fallen, regardless of the number of failures...
Don't ya just love the way this works? 
Linear Mode
