Restoration after a moral failure - Page 8

StillStanding · #71 10-07-2012, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveC519

Hello,

There is a difference between forgiveness and trust: forgiveness is freely given of God; trust must be earned. Paul said,

"Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful." (1 Cor 4:1-2 KJV)

"In this case, moreover, it is required of stewards that one be found trustworthy." (1 Cor 4:2 NASU)

When a leader is in a position of trust and they sin, if they confess their sin, God is quick to forgive and to cleanse (1Jn 1:9). However, faithfulness/trustworthiness is not something which is automatically restored when the transgression is forgiven. Trustworthiness MUST be exemplified through a consistent pattern of behavior. This is why Paul said stewards must be found faithful.

This has everything to do with "integrity": uncompromised moral character. When that character has been compromised, it must be rebuilt from scratch. Can such a leader ever be restored again to a position of trust? Perhaps, if he's demonstrated and exemplified the true fruits of repentence. And those fruits are actions born of integrity (uncompromised moral character) which ultimately earn again trust that was lost.

Well stated!

Praxeas · #72 10-07-2012, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LooneyLucy

Because I believe eventually people can be restored to ministry. Maybe not under the UPC label, but another oneness organization.

What does that have to do with you attacking others here for agreeing with you and you lying about what we said?

Jay · #73 10-07-2012, 03:23 PM

I have heard of some very conservative ministers who found another preacher or a preacher's wife to be in adultery, who quietly went to the man, reproved him, and enabled him to be restored, and might use him as a nameless example. They also kept an eye on him to catch him before he fell again, and could say that the man went on to do a good work. It is only if the sin must be confronted openly that the minister actually forfeits his position. This might actually have been the case with David. Nathan could have confronted him before all the children of Israel, but the confrontation was done in private where David could repent. Had Nathan taken him before the people, then there David would have gone beyond the place of repentance.

LooneyLucy · #74 10-07-2012, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

What does that have to do with you attacking others here for agreeing with you and you lying about what we said?

HUH?????????????? You confused, buddy.

LooneyLucy · #75 10-07-2012, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay

I have heard of some very conservative ministers who found another preacher or a preacher's wife to be in adultery, who quietly went to the man, reproved him, and enabled him to be restored, and might use him as a nameless example. They also kept an eye on him to catch him before he fell again, and could say that the man went on to do a good work. It is only if the sin must be confronted openly that the minister actually forfeits his position. This might actually have been the case with David. Nathan could have confronted him before all the children of Israel, but the confrontation was done in private where David could repent. Had Nathan taken him before the people, then there David would have gone beyond the place of repentance.

Beautiful! Because love covers a multitude of sin.

Dordrecht · #76 10-07-2012, 03:44 PM

Remember Looney Lucy, you are on a forum
where people don't consider themselves as sinners.

AreYouReady? · #77 10-07-2012, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay

I have heard of some very conservative ministers who found another preacher or a preacher's wife to be in adultery, who quietly went to the man, reproved him, and enabled him to be restored, and might use him as a nameless example. They also kept an eye on him to catch him before he fell again, and could say that the man went on to do a good work. It is only if the sin must be confronted openly that the minister actually forfeits his position. This might actually have been the case with David. Nathan could have confronted him before all the children of Israel, but the confrontation was done in private where David could repent. Had Nathan taken him before the people, then there David would have gone beyond the place of repentance.

This is what happened to my former pastor. The district superintendent and presbyter confronted him, but apparently the outcome was not as David's outcome. Apparently the problem was too deep and complicated for reconciliation/restoration.

Which still makes me wonder what that process is? I mean most churches have written procedures for everything else, why not for a restoration process?

Praxeas · #78 10-07-2012, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LooneyLucy

HUH?????????????? You confused, buddy.

ROFL..no YOU are confused.

I will repeat what I already said and what others saw too. You have been telling me and others that we said things we DID NOT SAY.

You falsely accused me of saying a person who falls should be shunned.

I challenged you to quote me but of course you ignored the challenge and when along your confused loony way

You have a pattern of doing that. Twisting what people say into something they never said or intended

That is either dishonest or delusional. Take your pick

LooneyLucy · #79 10-07-2012, 04:43 PM

[QUOTE=Dordrecht;1193642]Remember Looney Lucy, you are on a forum
where people don't consider themselves as sinners.[/QUOte

Thank you , Dord.

LooneyLucy · #80 10-07-2012, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

ROFL..no YOU are confused.

I will repeat what I already said and what others saw too. You have been telling me and others that we said things we DID NOT SAY.

You falsely accused me of saying a person who falls should be shunned.

I challenged you to quote me but of course you ignored the challenge and when along your confused loony way

You have a pattern of doing that. Twisting what people say into something they never said or intended

That is either dishonest or delusional. Take your pick

The WAY people take something said/typed is one thing. Calling them a liar is totally different. I'm certain this forum is not for calling people liars. I have a difference of opinion from you and the way you have written things and the way I take them are based on my life. Your opinions and the way you take things are based on your life.

Enough said.