Two things about this post:
1) by now you probably feel picked on, and that is not my intent in the slightest.
2) the post is long, but the items do need addressed. Perhaps others could cull down the responses more effectively. That is my weakness.
But from a Biblical perspective they usually go hand in hand, and are expected from...
...all parties.
Where are the FRUITS of repentance brought when one flees the scene of the crime?
The bottom line is I think many are jumping the gun and not giving the time necessary for chance of restoration and forgetting that forgiveness is commanded, not a suggestion for the Body of Christ.
Biblically speaking his home church has followed what I think is a proper procedure. As to his new church, they have taken on a responsibility which could either be motivated by right or wrong reasons.
It remains with his HOME church to which he must be responsible to demonstrate the fruits of repentance. That cannot be done from a different or remote geographical place, nor is it the right and responsibility of any member or staff of "his new church" to take on such responsibility.
To focus solely upon a single person rather than taking into account that there are a vast number of lives impacted by what this man did and is doing is a part of the epic.
When is the last time you openly confessed your sin before your congregation?
This is a completely irrelevant and irresponsible question for you to ask. Is it not true that many who ask this type of question would have a history in their own life of moral failure?
I recall that this type of question was asked in IFB circles when some staff member had moral failure and the folks were being persuaded to accept the situation, move on with their lives, ....
Sorry, but this man's sin is first and foremost between him and God.
Here you are WRONG!!!!!!
Christ said, “Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering."
One CANNOT expect the blessing and offerings to God be acceptable from a person who had denied Christ before the assembly by living a lie.
He should FIRST go to the offended, deal with the situation, and because it is in the public eye, publicize the results.
THEN and ONLY then he MIGHT present his "reasonable service" offering before God.
The reality must be internal and frankly, seeing the reaction of some here, it is likely that his moving was of necessity. You can't understand how ashamed this man should feel, and how that would lead to a new fellowship?
Again, this is wrong thinking.
The reality isn't "internal" it is both internal and external living resulting from internal wrong thinking. Lust planted the seed of sin that in the end brought death to his servitude of teaching and preaching.
What I do or do not understand is not in your discernment.
However, I do know the Lord Jesus Christ. And I can tell you than no "internal forgiveness" will take place without the offended parties becoming reconciled.
If the man, the original assembly, the former wife, the children... are not brought fruits of repentance, there will be no forgiveness, either external or internal.
So once a man fails all hope is lost?
Go back and re-read what was posted. There were qualifications stated
Oh, so it is not until they decide this man has sufficiently repented he is to be treated as a villain?
Paul states:
"But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God."
It isn't a matter of us showing he is not a vial person. He has already shown that as fact.
What is not evident is fruits of repentance that remove him from the judgment Scriptures place upon him.
Because we stay with Scriptures and not with our feelings, it may seem harsh, but that is the only gauge give by God to us.
Just not true, he has not been placed in a position of authority. Let's keep the facts straight and perhaps we might better understand the situation.
A church does not welcome a "new staff member" that has no authority. "Let's keep the fact straight" so we might "better understand the situation."
Just for the record, I have run into "staff" which has expressed a disrespectful and domineering attitude towards Pastors, which should not be the case. As far as I am concerned, there is an authority granted to Pastors which is commanded to be obeyed by God, and those who sit on councils and think they are going to "set the Pastor straight" sin against God. Now you take that sin and compare it to adultery...are you going to say one is worse than the other?
No PASTOR rules over the congregation.
The pastor is to guide as a shepherd
Christ's flock. They are NOT the pastor's sheep, nor does he have authority over the sheep. He is to "preach the word" and he may need to bring matters of discipline before the congregation. However, NOWHERE in Scriptures is the pastor even hinted at being the supreme rule over the building and grounds or the people.
Because your view is that the senior pastor is to be obeyed as if they speak for God, it may skew your thinking.
I will say this. A staff member who does not follow the Scriptures will not remain on staff. If a senior pastor finds a staff member not following Scriptures, that person is to be confronted by at least two others, and either changes in thinking and acting are made, or that man is dismissed by the actions of the assembly. This goes for "councils" also.
The Scriptures are to be followed, not the person, and certainly not the councils.
And you let your personal experience determine your view, apparently.
If my views are not Scriptural, then show me by Scriptures where they are wrong.
If by Scriptures I am incorrect, I will most certainly recant.
But, there is a God in Heaven who has a track record throughout the history of man of making the unclean...clean. And using lesser vessels.
But there is NO track record for human kind of that ability. At best all schemes of human generated ability fail because they are built upon frailty.
What this person is doing may seem right in some eyes (moving geographically, getting away from scorn and rebuke by others...), but it is not.
But if one is looking to the Church to handle this situation, and that is what appears to be the theme of some of these responses, then you will likely get the results such action necessitates, and restoration is likely not to be forthcoming.
There will be no true restoration with out the church that was offended and the hurt dealt to the original family(ies) being resolved - and that resolution publicized so that any future inquiry can be shown to be resolved by all effected.
