1 Tim 5:8 - Question

Quick thot:
The verse is found in 1 Timothy 5:20,
...the context refers to elders.


"Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.
Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning.
(1 Timothy 5:19,20 NAS).

Rob

 

Yeah.What happened to the part about going privately first?

 

Galatians 6:1-5 is well worth memorizing!

"Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted. Bear one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. But each one must examine his own work, and then he will have reason for boasting in regard to himself alone, and not in regard to another. For each one will bear his own load. (NAS bolding added)

Reminds one of Jesus and the woman caught in sin, doesn't it?

The key here is gentleness, it's also expressed in 2 Timothy.

“…preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. 2 Timothy 4:2 NAS

Rob

 

So, if an elder continues in sin, who is to "rebuke [him] in the presence of all"? </font>[/QUOTE]I think another elder is to give the rebuke. This assumes a plurality of elders is present. If you just have one elder in a church, obviously this step becomes a bit more tricky.

 

Matthew 18:17
…If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church;
There is a bit of a dilemma involved with applying church discipline today. Most congregations are composed of members, frequent attenders, casual attenders and visitors.

Telling it to “the church” would involve only the members of the congregation.
To extend the notification to the others may involve the church in a libelous action lawsuit. Church members should be aware that they are holding privileged confidential information.

Interestingly enough, in today’s American culture most people caught in sin will often remove themselves from fellowship after being confronted with the sin by a few witnesses.
After a "self-removal" should we still notify the congregation???

There are a number of different issues here.
1. Have you biblically confronted the person (using Matthew 18 principles)?
2. What is the sin? Does every sinful act need to be brought before the congregation?
3. How quickly do we reveal the sinful behavior? Have we given the person enough time to come to repentance?
4. What are we hoping to achieve? Repentance and restoration of the sinner, or fear of revealing sin within the congregation?
5. Have we examined ourselves to find our real motivation? Would revealing the sin before the congregation serve to strengthen OUR position? Some people grandstand in congregational meetings just to get their time in the limelight.
6. Have you prayed about the situation and asked for wisdom?

Rob

 

You bring up a good point here.

I suspect, though, that there's an imlication in this verse that there has been due diligence in the matter. In other words, that there has been an attempt to be assured that the accused is indeed liable beyond a resonable doubt or preponderance of the evidence at hand. Lacking that, simply "telling it to the church" results in rumor and gossip, which are, of course, scripturally forbidden. And when is this supposed to happen? During the worship hour? Printed in teh bulleting? Doubtful. Again, the implication is that, if the church needs to be involved, then the matter should still remain within the church itself, not just "blabbed" for all the world to hear.

I don't think so. At that point, it's a closed issue. talking about it at that point can be, once again, a matter of rumor and gossip, since the reason for telling it is now absent. Further, the confrontee is not there to defend themselves.

 

I believe we should view this within the context of verses 19, ending at 23 to know to whom these instructions are given, and what is to be done by one holding such office, regardless if any one is embarrassed, or felt put upon unjustly. We are to know what is right for us to do in our every day lives also. His Word is sharper than any two edged sword.

I Timothy 5:17-23, ”19. Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. 20. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that
thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure. 23. Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.”

One above: The Who is answered and the “When “should it be done” is upon notice of the witnesses. Against and elder, “only after two or three witnesses”. This I believe today should include the Preacher, Deacons, Teachers, and Missionaries. The Evangelist should not escape, and we see this “Rule” Paul invokes is even understood by those in and out of Christ, e.g. Swaggart, Baker and others. The “hypocrite” is to be exposed to all. The sad part about it today, is so many believe things to be sin that are not sins, but those that are need to be brought to light.

Two - “Should this ever be done?” Yes, every time it happens, in season and out of season, II Timothy 4:2.

Three - “How bad should the sin be”? A sin that is a sin is a bad sin, or a sin that hurts the cause of Christ. Paul did not hesitate to call into question the sin of Peter, which hurt the cause of Christ – Galatians 2. This sin even affected Barnabas. Paul says he did it before them all. Why? For the very purpose that he says in I Timothy, viz. “rebuke before all, that others also may fear”. James, and all others involved feared for they knew Paul was right in pointing out the hypocrisy shown in Peter.

I included verse 23 into the discussion for I believe Paul included it here for a purpose. He says to keep “thyself pure”, as he speaks to Timothy. How many in the Baptist church, or those outside of church, point to those of belief that “sin”, that sin to dare drink wine with their meal/s, or to settle the stomach in time of need for they had to “put someone in their place”. Timothy understands Paul to mean what he says. Start drinking “wine for your stomach’s sake”. I drink it Paul is telling him; Jesus drank it. We have the hardest jobs of all. The Word tells men what they can do, and what they shouldn’t do, so we need this to settle our nerves. We are only human after all. But pity those that believe they can drink and continue to drink until they become drunk. That is sin of “gluttony”, just as in overeating. Why? We do it for Self.

When we “chastise those of us who need chastising before all the church”, our stomachs will be upset, but it is necessary we do this. Why? One holding high office in the church presenting piety, or teaching godliness, but is living in sin should be rebuked “in front of them all”, to put the fear of God into that person, and all those present. This takes “guts”, “fortitude”, and understanding of God’s Word. He will “spew those out of His mouth that will not stand for Him”.

Do we know why Paul is looked upon by so many as “contentious”, doubted, except when agreeing with him? He (and those) is debunked for being the one that carried the burden of presenting the “dispensational” gospel of Christ, in this dispensation to the world. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house,” Why is George Bush our President so hated so today? He dared mention the Words Jesus Christ. Mention God and everybody is all lovey-dovey, but the "wrath of the world will fall on you" when you mention our Lord Jesus Christ. Acts 16:31.

[/b]Four - “How frequent should the sin be”?[/b] Once is enough. The fire gets hotter however as it is stoked. This one that is “reprimanded”, if saved, has a chance to loose only one (or a small portion) work at our “rewards” ceremony. But keep that sin up, or others also, and all the their good works will go up in smoke. Christian faith, ituttut

[ October 21, 2005, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: ituttut ]

 

The verse refers to elders who continue to sin. It assumes a plurality of elders that are rebuking another elder.

I think the point is that if the elders have reliable evidence that another elder has sinned, they should not try to hide it from the congregation. The rebuke must be public so all will "fear". Church discipline applies to all. They must not "play favorites" with church discipline.

How bad a sin should it be? How much damage, or potential damage to the cause of Christ will it cause?

 

Some years ago when I was pastoring a church, I learned that there was some gossiping going around. I investigated the matter, learned who was doing some of the worst of it, and the following Sunday I preached on the subject of gossip. During my sermon, I addressed those guilty parties one at a time by name. The whole congregation turned white with fear that their name would be next. And that took care of the problem once and for all.