Certainty is a bill of goods that you were sold about the future, after you die, because that is what we come seeking, isn't it? Sellers arise to serve buyers, and you find what you seek.
For someone who is big into questions and uncertainty, you seem very certain that I am wrong and you are right when you dont really know me or the specifics of what I believe. If you are using the generic "you" here as to imply some other group you have in mind, I think you should be specific about who these people are and their specific beliefs you disagree with. It seems pretty clear to me that there is a resurrection and that a judgment follows that resurrection. There is much more to "heaven" than how we treat our moms. I dont want this to get all wrapped up in semantics, but I think its clear that "heaven" as most use it today is in reference to the reward of the righteous after the resurrection. So lets just focus on the intent here and not lose the forest for the trees.
To speak to your point, these sound great, and you exhibit much grace imo, but i would direct you to reflect upon how you were "saved," and how you came to study the Bible, that being with the preconceptions installed by your tutors. Iow almost immediately you were assured that you had escaped the fires of hell after you die, and that you were now saved, once saved always saved, and nothing you could do would ever be good enough for Jesus. No works required. And there is certainly a way to justify this pov with Scripture, if one stops reading where they are directed to stop. But i'm sure you are familiar with the multiple passages that destroy this notion, although i am not interested in another faith/works argument.
Again, this is a tremendous amount of assumption on your part. First, I do not accept the "once saved always saved" doctrine. Second, I have had dozens of tutors and not all of them agreed. Third, most of my "tutors" taught me to read the Bible in context and draw conclusions based on the author's original intent, and not based on some baseline systematic theology. Let me just assure you that I do not believe in a cognitive-only understanding of "faith" that is void of response or works. Of course faith responds with works. However, it is essential to get the horse before the cart. Faith comes first. Otherwise, our works are a means of earning favor before God which nullifies the work of the cross and the righteousness of Christ. The NT is pretty clear on that fact.
You bet. But just read the whole chapter, or what i have here, and then describe this treatment of the outcast again for me, if you would. I will not ask this again, ok? Describe this treatment, and then let's let the chips fall.
Very well. Let's look.
“At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” He called a little child and had him stand among them. And he said: “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. “And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me. But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
Here, the "outcast" person (I prefer the term for "unrepentant deceiver" for the sake of this context) is drowned in the depths of the sea (doesn't really sound like Jesus is trying to translate a harsh OT law into grace...unless you have a very strange understanding of grace). Anyway, let us continue...
“Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come! If your hand or your foot causes you to sin cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell. “See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven. “What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost.
Here the "outcast/unrepentant deceiver" is warned. Jesus says "Woe" to them. Sin must come, but woe to those poor folks who deceive and mislead God's precious children. In fact, Jesus is so serious about this that he says it is better that we lop off our hands or gouge out our eyes rather than allow them to mislead little children and cause them to sin. Why is this? Because God loves them and their angels always see the face of the Father...and the Father is more concerned about one of those children who might be led astray by a deceiver than he is the whole company of the righteous. Again, this is a WARNING to the unrepentant/deceivers. It seems very clear to me.
“If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony 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, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. “I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. “Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them.”
Here, the "unrepentant" happens to be a "brother" (adelphos) is warned that Jesus is with the body of believers when they rally together against one who is sinning and mistreating other believers in the Church. Moreover, Jesus encourages such people to be cast out and assures them that if the church agree on such matters, God's actions in heaven will back their earthly judgment. In other words, if you cast them out of the physical gathering, rest assured that God is making a spiritual judgment on such a person as well. Pretty harsh words. Not really about grace. So here we see three distinct teachings that all focus on judgment. Jesus often speaks in lessons or parables of three when making a point.
Now, Jesus is asked a question. The question is based on Jesus message that "if they listen, you have won your brother." The teaching is clear what should happen if they do not listen...you cast them out. But Peter wants to know, "Ok, so they listen....and I have won them back. What if they do it again? What if they do it 7.times!? Do I draw the line at 7 times? (Peter seems to think he is being exceptionally gracious here).
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times. “Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him. Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt. “The servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go. “But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded. “His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’ “But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened. “Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed. “This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”” (Matthew 18:1–35, NIV84)
Jesus' response of grace is shocking. If the brother listens, you forgive them EVERY time. He follows this shocking response with a story of a man who is unwilling to give grace to one who is repentant and seeking mercy. AGAIN, pay attention to the instructions. The first three lessons were not about repentant people who are seeking mercy. They are about unrepentant deceivers who lead the children astray. God's wrath burns hot against such people and the Church should not tolerate such behaviors. However, they they repent and seek mercy, Jesus is also adamant that such people should always get mercy. In fact, if someone refuses to give mercy, they are treated in the same manner as the wicked person who was unrepentant. Thus, the "outcast" in this last instance is the one who refuses to show mercy to the repentant.
Personally, I think this is a very simple flow of thought. You know, I think its never a bad thing to question a common understanding of a passage. Yet, one needs to do so with caution. When you have an interpretation that flies in the face of millions of scholars throughout Christian history, you should proabably have a pretty good rationale for disagreeing. So far, I haven't really seen much rationale on your part other than assuming evil motives on behalf of church leaders who merely want to control and oppress others. As I said before, show me in the text. Suggesting people have evil motives for their interpretations and that I have no critical thinking skills of my own but have merely swallowed what I have been taught is a bit insulting. Im trying to show you why I believe what I do, and I have yet to appeal to a "tutor" or commentary. I have only appealed to the text. I dont know how you can keep insinuating that I am merely a puppet and have no thoughts of my own.
If you can't understand that "Truly" and especially "For..." make a sentence primary rather than subordinate, then i agree, there is really nowhere else one needs to go. Except maybe an English teacher or something. Which might come off as flip, but i don't mean that. If no mention of church admin existed, "For wherever two or three gather in My Name" would still obtain. That (church admin) is because of this (For wherever). And you are just convinced that it is the other way around. Btw is the Bible the Word, as far as you are concerned? Ty.
Look, I understand both English and the Koine Greek. I assure you I know how these phrases operate. Let me "break it down Barney style"...as they say. I'll use the Koine Greek to help you along because it is clearer in the original language...
----“Ἐὰν δὲ ἁμαρτήσῃ [εἰς σὲ] ὁ ἀδελφός σου, ὕπαγε ἔλεγξον αὐτὸν μεταξὺ σοῦ καὶ αὐτοῦ μόνου. ἐάν σου ἀκούσῃ, ἐκέρδησας τὸν ἀδελφόν σου·
----ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἀκούσῃ, παράλαβε μετὰ σοῦ ἔτι ἕνα ἢ δύο, ἵνα ἐπὶ στόματος δύο μαρτύρων ἢ τριῶν σταθῇ πᾶν ῥῆμα·
----ἐὰν δὲ παρακούσῃ αὐτῶν, εἰπὲ τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ·
----ἐὰν δὲ καὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας παρακούσῃ, ἔστω σοι ὥσπερ ὁ ἐθνικὸς καὶ ὁ τελώνης.
***********Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν· ὅσα ἐὰν δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται δεδεμένα ἐν οὐρανῷ, καὶ ὅσα ἐὰν λύσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται λελυμένα ἐν οὐρανῷ.
***********Πάλιν [ἀμὴν] λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν δύο συμφωνήσωσιν ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς περὶ παντὸς πράγματος οὗ ἐὰν αἰτήσωνται, γενήσεται αὐτοῖς παρὰ τοῦ πατρός μου τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς. οὗ γάρ εἰσιν δύο ἢ τρεῖς συνηγμένοι εἰς τὸ ἐμὸν ὄνομα, ἐκεῖ εἰμι ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῶν.” (Matthew 18:15–20, NA27)
First, notice the "Ean de" clauses that begin the first four thoughts. Ean de can be translated, "But if..." Notice the first line is verse 15. This connects verse 15 with the previous section with the teaching about those who lead little ones in the sin are in a world of hurt because God is jealous for each one. So, the idea is basically, "Woe to those who lead these little ones into sin. They are in a heap of trouble because God loves the little ones......but if a bother sins against you..." The teachings are linked. That is important to recognize.
Second, the "Ean de" are conditional statements. "But if a brother sins against you.......but if he will not listen [to you]....but if he refuses to hear them [the two or three}...but if also he refuses to hear the church...;treat them as the pagan and tax collector." We see a very easy to follow series of conditions that lead to greater severity or refusal to listen....in fact it goes from will not hear to refuses to hear indicating a very willful and deliberate sinful behavior.
Then we get to the concluding statements based on the conditional statements prior:
'But if..."
"but if..."
"but if..."
"but if..."
"Amen, Amen, I say to you...."
"Again, amen, I say to you..."
So, as you can see from the flow here, we have a series of conditions based on the previous teaching about God's judgment on those who lead little ones astray. If that person happens to be a believer...do this.....if they dont respond...do this...if they still refuse to hear, treat them this way. Why? Because I truly tell you that if two or three of you bound something on earth, it will be bound in heaven. Again, I truly tell you that if you agree on earth about anything it will be done for you in heaven.
Third, we get to the "For" statement you are all lathered up about. As you can see from the structure of the Greek, the "For" statement is a supporting rationale for Jesus' grand conclusion that if what they do on earth is reflected in heaven...and that is because where two or three are present, Jesus is with them. The point here is that Jesus is saying, God is serious about sin, and you can rest assured that when two or three of you agree on a discipline issue like this that heaven will agree with you....
because Jesus, himself, will actually be with you in your decision to send them out.
In sum, the "For" statement is the final concluding rationale for the authority given to them in such matters. So, the overall flow is something like this. Be like little children because these are the ones God adores and inherit the Kingdom. Woe to those who cause a little one who believe in me to sin. Why? Because God loves each little one more than you can imagine. In fact, he cares more about the one being led astray than the 99 who arent. That's how much each one matters. Again, woe to those who bring sin into the world and lead children astray. Its better to cut off your hand or gouge out your eye than allow them to indulge in sin. But if a brother is sinning against you....do this to win him back. If he wont listen...do this. If he still wont listen...treat him this way. And when you treat him that way, know this....heaven has your back. In fact, what you bind on earth is bound in heaven. Because when you make this decision, the authority and presence of Jesus Christ is with you.
Anyway, sorry I can't get to the rest....that's probably way too much for now :)
