The whole purpose of addressing sin in our brother is to win or gain him back! Jesus himself gives directions for handling sin in our midst. In Matthew 18, Jesus said to his disciples that they must be humbled “like children” before being “greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (vss1-6). Jesus then further explained that as a shepherd would go to great lengths to recover a straying sheep, so would be the rejoicing over recovering one of his sheep who had strayed (vss.10-14).
Then, specifically, Jesus carefully outlined a protocol for his disciples how to humbly proceed in recovering a brother (or sister) who might be in sin. (1) First, go to him or her privately to enquire about the sin; (2) Second, take or three other mutually respected individuals who might further enquire about the sin and encourage repentance; (3) Finally, if he refuses to listen take the issue to the congregation— not to the elders or some “governing body”—to weigh the problem and act accordingly.
Matthew 18 15 “[1] And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. 16 “[2] But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. 17 “[3] And 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-gatherer. 18 “Truly I say to you, whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19 “Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. 20 “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, there I am in their midst.” NAS
After the “church” (congregation) makes a decision—a unanimous one or nearly so preferably—the Church is to withdraw from him their fellowship. Thenceforth the offender is to be treated “as a heathen man and a publican.” Although we could no longer have Christian fellowship with such, we would treat him as a “heathen” (Gentile) with justice and kindness and the love of pity—but not with the love of affection due to a brother in Christ. The disfellowshipped would be outside our religious and social company—as invited to the home—but not outside of our love, care and desire to help. Although not appointed to any office in the congregation, he would not be forbidden attendance at meetings. Repentance even up to the moment of the Church’s judgment is possible. To secure repentance and reform is the very object of every step of these proceedings—not his punishment. . The penalty of withdrawal of fellowship is designed to serve as a protection to the congregation to separate those who walk disorderly. But the separation is not to be esteemed a perpetual separation—but merely until the reproved one shall recognize and acknowledge his wrong and to the extent of his ability make amends.
Here is an article from the web site 2001Translation.com, which I think is very informative.
Accepting a Repentant Sinner
Here in Second Corinthians, we read how the first recorded case of official congregational discipline of a member who was guilty of serious wrongdoing, worked out. This had to do with a man in the congregation at Corinth, Greece who had taken his father’s wife as his own. As the result, Paul (at 1 Corinthians 5:11) told them to judge the matter and to remove the sinner from the congregation.
Now, in Second Corinthians, we read a follow-up letter that was likely written just a few months later, which indicates there were some positive results. So, Paul gave these recommendations (Second Corinthians 2:6, 7): ‘For, the discipline that the majority of you gave this man was sufficient. So now, kindly forgive and comfort him, that he won’t somehow be swallowed by his deep sadness.’
Notice that:
· The punishment (gr. epitimia – on/value) that was given (and which was approved by Paul) only lasted a few months
· This action apparently wasn’t supported by the whole congregation – ‘the majority (gr. pleionon – more ones) of you reached’ – but no action was recommended against those who didn’t agree with the measures
· Paul was especially concerned about the individual and wanted him to be forgiven, comforted, and shown love.
The fact is, imperfect men tend to be harsh and unloving when dealing with others who they consider to have ‘broken the rules.’ However, Paul really believed in the type of love that he wrote about at 1 Corinthians 13:1-8 (in his previous letter). So, he recommended no further restrictions and he didn’t warn against any expressions of joy when the man was welcomed back into the congregation. Yet, the offense was particularly grievous and notorious.
Notice that Paul makes no further mention of this matter thereafter. He simply concludes by saying (at 2 Corinthians 2:10, 11), ‘And when I forgive someone through you in front of the Anointed One (if I ever have anything to forgive), it is so that none are lost to the Opposer, because we know how he operates.’
So, Paul’s primary concern in this second letter was not about how to continue with correction and discipline, but with consoling the person, so he would remain steadfast in the congregation and he wouldn’t be lost to the Opposer
Thanks Bob for a wonderful contribution. The Apostle Paul could see that the sinner had fully repented. The loving discipline accomplished its purpose and the recovered one could be accepted back into fellowship and be comforted. The key here is that there was a genuine repentance of a sin of a horrendous nature. Thanks again.
It is interesting that the one “removed” is to be removed by the “congregation”, not specific elders having “authority. The Christian congregation is therefore a strong group of fellow believers with the ability to make decisions of some gravity amongst themselves, not like the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
As a young man in the Jehovah’s Witnesses, I made a very unwise decision, and left the congregation for a number of years. I underwent many troubles for my direction in life, and returned being fully repentant, and humbled. The greeting I received from the “elders” was a 5 year disfellowshipping, by which I was not allowed to speak to any fellow believer, (only elders) and I did so for 5 full years. After my reinstatment, I was so happy…then the same body of elders told me I could not have my congregation priveledges back for another 5 years. I was devastated, but stayed. It had been 20 years since my gaining of congregation priveledges, and I became so unhappy with these men, and their man-made rules that far over-reached the intent of any of the scriptures, that I just wrote a short letter of disassociation, and explained that I believed in Jesus as my savior and mediator, not some old men in New York. I have never been happier in my life. My true brothers have welcomed me into the real spiritual house of God, where forgivness and understanding, and LOVE reside. I forgive all of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, even our son, who refuses to ever speak to me, or his mother again…yes, Mary left with me. Thank you for this opportunity to share my heart with all of you, Joseph Zarola.
It is interesting that the one “removed” is to be removed by the “congregation”, not specific elders having “authority. The Christian congregation is therefore a strong group of fellow believers with the ability to make decisions of some gravity amongst themselves, not like the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
As a young man in the Jehovah’s Witnesses, I made a very unwise decision, and left the congregation for a number of years. I underwent many troubles for my direction in life, and returned being fully repentant, and humbled. The greeting I received from the “elders” was a 5 year disfellowshipping, by which I was not allowed to speak to any fellow believer, (only elders) and I did so for 5 full years. After my reinstatment, I was so happy…then the same body of elders told me I could not have my congregation priveledges back for another 5 years. I was devastated, but stayed. I had been 20 years since my gaining of congregation priveledges, and I became so unhappy with these men, and their man-made rules that far over-reached the intent of any of the scriptures, that I just wrote a short letter of disassociation, and explained that I believed in Jesus as my savior and mediator, not some old men in Ney York. I have never been happier in my life. My true brothers have welcomed me into the real spiritual house of God, where forgivness and understanding, and LOVE reside. I forgive all of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, even our son, who refuses to ever speak to me, or his mother again…yes, Mary left with me. Thank you for this opprotunity to share my heart with all of you, Joseph Zarola.