is testimony important

Testimony is everything. The testimony is indicative of the faith of the individual. One goes with the other, in my opinion.

On church membership, that is up to the congregation, but as leader, my advice would be against membership, and specifically against leadership in any form.

Cheers,

Jim

 

In my church they have the ironclad rule, that to be allowed to fulfill any leadership function for the church you must never have been officially disciplined by the churchelders.
My church also has the ironclad rule that anybody officially involved in soulwinning for the church must never have been officially disciplined by the churchelders.
Both rules apply to both volunteers and professionals.
Those rules almost cost the headpastor his job when the baseless rumour sprang up that we were having an affair.
Still speaking as the undisputed recordholder in our churches history in getting officially charged with rules violations (7 times in 35 years), they are basically good rules.

 

Preacherchris, define "failed morally". Are we talking cheating on his taxes? Using the Lord's name in vain? Adultery?

Mioque, I'm curious, were those who were engaging in rumor and gossip ever disciplined? Many have complained that church discipline is quite selective and typically subjective, and is more likened to witch hunts.

 

"I'm curious, were those who were engaging in rumor and gossip ever disciplined?"
''
Ofcourse not. We however both got chewed out for: "Engaging in behaviour that although harmless in itself, caused reasonable suspiscion."

 

Under those circumstances, he wouldnt be a member of my church, period, end of discussion. So, the answer would be no way, no how, never. The adultery while quite serious, might be forgiven, given enough time and IF he proved himself faithful thereafter, but inappropriate touching of children is an absolute bar in my mind.

 

I agree with Jeff.

 

I agree also. I hope this creep is on the Registered Sex Offenders list. Everyone needs to know what he has done in order to protect their children.

 

Based on the second moral failure alone, he should never have any sort of leadership position in the church. Never.

 

After his touching a child, NO WAY, NO HOW, unless Christ himself descended and explicitly told me otherwise, would I allow him to be in ANY position of leadership.

 

touching a child? Not only is that grounds for denial of a position in the Church but I also believe that to be (as the Bible teaches) grounds for public execution.

 

Would it make any difference in theory if he had been 18 and the child had been 16?
It is interesting that adultery and potentially ripping apart a family is more "forgivable" in the minds of many.
I'm not expressing an opinion, merely noting that we are more used to some sins than others.

Karen

 

actually I believe that adultery should be punishable to death as the Bible states also. This is just a personal conviction though.

A good Bible study one day would be to look up all things in the Law that were punishable by death, including homosexuality, adultery, rape & murder. it is interesting to see the things that God will absolutely not allow to be tolerated in his rule.

 

and as for the what if the boy was of age and the girl almost of age... By law this would put the boy in jail for stautory rape. We had a boy go to jail here in Augusta for ten years because of such, he was nineteen and the girl was sixteen or seventeen. I looked into her punishment and she is grounded severely for a few weeks by her parents. I personally think that the boy got way too harsh a sentence BUT I also think that the girl should have gotten a little jail time also, after all she is NOT innocent or at an age that is impressionable. She made a conscious choice knowing the consequences.

 

Jesus would disagree with you, as demonstrated with the stoning of the adulterous woman.

 

I doubt that Jesus' teachings on forgiveness negates punishment altogether. I must forgive the theif but the law still says that he must go to jail!

Remember that this woman was wrongfully brought to face her punishment. First Jesus was not the sanhedrin which is where the woman was supposed to be brought. Second. the torah says that the man must be broughtto stand trial with her, no man was present. Jesus forgave and will forgive all who repent but sometimes criminals still must face the charges of their crime. And since Jesus wrote the laws of capital punishment, I doubt that he would disagree with his own word since these moral laws, at least on the level of murder in america, still exist.

 

forgiving a man's sins and turing your back to those sins are two different things.

 

Not a good idea.