Church Membership

And the church we had attended lost most of
its people in one year, with myself being kicked
out in the middle and my husband being one of
the last to leave. From a congregation of @
200+ on Sunday mornings, they went down to
about 50, maximum, with all of us leaving
individually and none of us endinng up in the
same places. We didn't even converse or
advise one another to leave, lest any of us be
accused of tearing the church up.

Oh, take that back. I did tell my daughter I
wished she and her family would also leave,
but they are still there.

[ August 19, 2002, 02:09 AM: Message edited by: Abiyah ]

The important aspect here is COMMUNICATIONSomeone mentioned there being two sides, which is very true. We have people leave, tell their side; other people believe their story, but fail to come to our pastor for his side!

When a person or family desires to unite with a different church there must be communication to find why they departed from their previous church. There may be a legimate reason. This is a responsiblity some pastors avoid, fear of confrontation, desire for numbers, or lack of understanding of resposbilities of a pastor.

Gentlemen the office of pastor is not a joy ride, but a grave spiritual responsibility not to be shoved off on a committee. I have personally met too many men who take the office of pastor way too lightly.

Hebrews 13:17 (KJV)
17Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

we don't have membership roles in our church.
But the person would not be allowed to vote in our church because they would be under church watch.

In response to those who had to face a difficult separation from a church, I am sorry.
The statement still stands however, the standard cannot be governed by the exceptional.

The point is simply this, a church has a responsiblity by God to ensure that the membership maintain a higher standard of living and lifestyle than that of the world. We are called to be holy and separate. How can a church simply accept someone into thier body without first examining that individual at least to some degree. A few simple questions would suffice.

If the candidates for membership were disciplined from another church because of sin, then they should not be allowed to join a church until repentance and reconcilliation is made with their former church.

There is no exceptions to this - it is the ONLY biblical way of conducting entrance into membership.

Otherwise we undermine the authority given by God to His churches to hold people accountable for thier actions. Church discipline, as difficult as it is, holds a vital role in the lives of us all as Christians.

Originally posted by A voice crying in the wilderness:
In response to those who had to face a difficult separation from a church, I am sorry.
The statement still stands however, the standard cannot be governed by the exceptional.

The point is simply this, a church has a responsiblity by God to ensure that the membership maintain a higher standard of living and lifestyle than that of the world. We are called to be holy and separate. How can a church simply accept someone into thier body without first examining that individual at least to some degree. A few simple questions would suffice.

If the candidates for membership were disciplined from another church because of sin, then they should not be allowed to join a church until repentance and reconcilliation is made with their former church.

There is no exceptions to this - it is the ONLY biblical way of conducting entrance into membership.

Otherwise we undermine the authority given by God to His churches to hold people accountable for thier actions. Church discipline, as difficult as it is, holds a vital role in the lives of us all as Christians.

Click to expand...

Ah! I see more clearly what you are saying.
When applied to either myself or my husband,
this was done, now that I think about it. I had
been attending my present place of worship
for a number of years while being a member
of the church that excommunicated me. Not
only did my pastors know me, then, but they
also knew the church and the pastor that had
excommunicated me.

My present pastors had tried to buy their
building, but I heard the old pastor tell some-
one that the building would not last through
the next earthquake. He did not know I was in
the building, but I heard and passed this news
on to one of my present pastors. As a result
of this, and other things, the deal fell through.

So my pastors and others in my present place
of worship knew me not only because of my
long attendance there, but they knew me
because of this incident.

As far as my husband, he was asked all the
questions and voted in by his church.

[ August 25, 2002, 09:16 PM: Message edited by: Abiyah ]

Because my husband is a pastor, I have seen first hand why it is so important to have a thorough discussion with anyone who is interested in joining the church. I believe some people would be suprised at the path of destruction some people have left behind them. Most of those kind try to join by 'statement of faith,' because they know that their former church will not give a good recommendation.

Also, some of the potential members may have questions for a pastor that may affect their decision to join the church. On either end, it is best to communicate before anyone becomes a new member.

The doors to Christ’s Church were opened through his death on the cross over two thousand years ago. Who closed them? Who has the right to close them? Who is powerful enough to open them? If we cannot open them, what right do we have to attempt to close them?

If Christ was willing to go to their house, do you not think that he would invite them into his house?

People that turn to the church usually fall off bar stools, they trade in the high of drugs for the high of praising Christ.

In any church in which I am a member, if they do not take sinners; I’m out the door. I say, let he that is without sin, cast the first vote.

Accept all who will come, only then is there a reason to preach God’s word every Sunday. Let the sinner in, and let the edification begin..

How can we help them if we won't let them in?

Could Moses join your church? Murderer
How about David? Murderer/Adulterer
Paul, Persecuter of Christians.
Abraham, Liar.
Jacob, deceiver.
Matthew, publican

[ August 26, 2002, 09:25 PM: Message edited by: Chappie ]

My friend I am in no way suggesting that sinners not be allowed into the church, without a doubt we are all qualified sinners. Before and after membership. If that were the case, every church would be empty.

I feel as though you have truly missed the point.

I am sorry that you seem to have taken our discussion out of context. We we're discussing the necessity of discipline in the Lord's churches, and how it relates to church membership.

Maybe you have never studied the topic. If you'd like some scripture to study, you might start with 1 Corinthians 5, and then go to Matthew 18.

[ August 26, 2002, 11:22 PM: Message edited by: A voice crying in the wilderness ]

Originally posted by A voice crying in the wilderness:
My friend I am in no way suggesting that sinners not be allowed into the church, without a doubt we are all qualified sinners. Before and after membership. If that were the case, every church would be empty.

I feel as though you have truly missed the point.

I am sorry that you seem to have taken our discussion out of context. We we're discussing the necessity of discipline in the Lord's churches, and how it relates to church membership.

Maybe you have never studied the topic. If you'd like some scripture to study, you might start with 1 Corinthians 5, and then go to Matthew 18.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I have misunderstood; as it certainly would not be the first time. I will take a look at the passages that you mentioned. Yet uninformed, I would ask; do they not deal with persons that are already a member of the church.

My mistake was believing that admission of members was being discussed rather than discipline..

Forgive me if I have offended...

[ August 27, 2002, 01:42 AM: Message edited by: Chappie ]

Perhaps I have misunderstood; as it certainly would not be the first time. I will take a look at the passages that you mentioned. Yet uninformed, I would ask; do they not deal with persons that are already a member of the church.

My mistake was believing that admission of members was being discussed rather than discipline..

Forgive me if I have offended...

Click to expand...

No offense. I believe the question was in reference to our church, and the answer is yes. We do follow the sciptural requirements, ( and just recently in fact had to do just that ) when a member of the church gets involved in gross sin that brings a reproach upon themselves, their family, and the church - and it becomes public knowledge, they are disciplined ( according to the scriptural procedure ).

The intention of discipline is to bring a member to repentance, at which time they would be forgiven. If there is no public confession and repentance then they are removed from the church role.

This is not a pleasant thing by any means, and thankfully not something that is common place, at least in our church, but it is a reality.

Obviously you can see how that there would be direct implications towards a new member candidate.

Originally posted by A voice crying in the wilderness:

The intention of discipline is to bring a member to repentance, at which time they would be forgiven. If there is no public confession and repentance then they are removed from the church role.

QB]

Click to expand...

Hello Voice,
Is this repentance and forgivness to and from God or the church membership,or both? Thanks.

I have read the posts in this thread, and I believe that I understand what is being discussed and the direction in which things are flowing.

Yet, it is not my desire to offend anyone. Still I must say that we place ourselves in a very precarious position when we set ourselves judge over who should be able to join a church. I believe that the doors to “Christ’s” church must remain open to even the worst of sinners.

I believe that one should be expelled or disciplined for unchristian conduct, but only after they have been admonished first by one, and then in the face of two or three.

When we judge a person by a letter that is derogatory from a previous church, we assume that the church was right and this person’s position is totally without merit. Surely, we should on occasion rely on letters of membership, but only to forewarn us of potential behavior. Not to prevent a person from becoming a member.

Saul of Tarsus would surely have been rejected by most admissions criteria of today, yet within a period of days if not months he went from persecutor of the church to an apostle chosen by God. Tis a serious thing to reject a person at the front door to Christ’s church.

I was told a story about a Pastor that taught on this very thing. He was pastor of a very affluent church in a nice neighborhood. The Sunday of his message, he dressed himself up in old clothes, dirtied himself up a bit; and stood at the front door of the church.

Members of the church treated him with disrespect, said things to him that were hurtful and unnecessary. A few members even offered him money to leave. They finally got security to remove him from in front of the church.

Things proceeded from that point as usual, well that is until it was time for the message. When it was time for the pastor to come out, out walked this nasty, untidy person that had been out in front of the church.
Someone called for security, but security told them that everything was OK. So up to the podium steps this ungodly, un-kept looking person, and he begins to speak. And as he is speaking, he begins to take off an old dirty hat; he took off an old dirty shirt that revealed the collar of a minister. He took a towel and began to wipe the dirt from his face and arrange his hair, only then did people begin to recognize him.

He was their pastor. When we try to keep the untidy element out, pride walks in.
May God bless you all.

Hello Voice,
Is this repentance and forgivness to and from God or the church membership,or both? Thanks.

Click to expand...

Obviously the repentance and forgiveness are directed and recieved from God, but let me ask you this, when you publically bring a reproach upon Christ do you not also bring a reproach upon His church.

Take a child who carries his parents last name, when that child does something shameful in public doesn't he/she bring a reproach not only upon His parents, but also upon all those in the family that also carry the name?

Consequently when a christian sins against God in this fashion, he/she also sins against his/her brethren. So yes to some extent, there is a forgiveness that is sought from the church.

The answer is both.

I would be shocked if this is a concept that is foreign to anyone on this board, and particularly in this forum.

To Chappie: I believe it would be truly in your best interest to study this topic with more depth.

If you read 1 Corinthians five, we find a man, a member of the church, involved in gross immoral sexual conduct. He was involved sexually with his mother-in-law. Paul's instruction for the church was to have that man removed.
5:13 ...put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

The purpose of this was to protect the rest of the congregation from being influenced by his sin. And to help to bring him to repentace, restoring his fellowship with God.

If you study the book of 2 Corinthians the man did repent and was re-instated into the church membership.

Now was the discipline effective... I think yes.

Let us just suppose that after he was disciplined he went down the road and decided to join the first church he came to, and they did not examine his circumstances and just said, come on in.

Would that be what God would want them to do?...
Without a doubt - NO. That would circumvent the whole purpose of His discipline making it null and void.

I am saddened to see the kind of responses that I have received for simply voicing one of the most distictive features of what it means to be a Baptist. God has called us to holy and separated living. And the one of His means to seeing that that is accomplished is though the accountability found in membership of His churches.

I pray that all who take issue with my words will test them against the scriptural precedence before they voice ignorant and unnecessary objections.

I assure you that what I have been voicing is both Bible and Baptist.

But I'm just a voice....

Originally posted by A voice crying in the wilderness:

I pray that all who take issue with my words will test them against the scriptural precedence before they voice ignorant and unnecessary objections.

I assure you that what I have been voicing is both Bible and Baptist.

QB]

Click to expand...

Whoa Voice, All Chappie did was voice his opinion which I believe can be backed up scripturally. All I did was ask a question of you for clarification, without posting an opinion. I dont think either post contained any "ignorant and unnecessary objections" to your judgement and interpretation of Gods word.You do bring up some issues that I am curious about and I may start another thread on those as this is not the thread or forum for those discussions.

This brings up the problem of local mega-churches that don't even have membership roles. They loose the ability to effectivly discipline their flock.

(Just this past Sunday I was "volunteered" to begin an examination of our membership policies and revise a process that is currently very lax. This thread is a great place to start. I'd appreciate any policies you have that other baptist churches have that they feel are especially effective).

Originally posted by A voice crying in the wilderness:

To Chappie: I believe it would be truly in your best interest to study this topic with more depth.

Click to expand...

Study is always a good idea.

If you read 1 Corinthians five, we find a man, a member of the church, involved in gross immoral sexual conduct. He was involved sexually with his mother-in-law. Paul's instruction for the church was to have that man removed.
5:13 ...put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Click to expand...

To be removed from one church is one thing, to be prevented from joining another local church is another. (As a public, non-profit; it would be interesting to see your By-laws)

The purpose of this was to protect the rest of the congregation from being influenced by his sin. And to help to bring him to repentace, restoring his fellowship with God.

If you study the book of 2 Corinthians the man did repent and was re-instated into the church membership.

Now was the discipline effective... I think yes.

Click to expand...

You cannot discipline or recover one to Christ concerning sinful behavior that you stop at the front door.

Let us just suppose that after he was disciplined he went down the road and decided to join the first church he came to, and they did not examine his circumstances and just said, come on in.

Would that be what God would want them to do?...
Without a doubt - NO. That would circumvent the whole purpose of His discipline making it null and void.

Click to expand...

Even if one is banned from one church, the hand of reconciliation must remain actively extended through other churches that claim Christ as their author: Lest we toss that person irretrieveably into Satan's hands.

I did not say do not examine circumstances, yet i firmly believe that past circumstances should not prevent one from joining a church. They should serve as a source of admonition to help forewarn and curtail future behavior. As bad as past circumstances can be, how often are we admonished to forgive.

I am saddened to see the kind of responses that I have received for simply voicing one of the most distictive features of what it means to be a Baptist. God has called us to holy and separated living. And the one of His means to seeing that that is accomplished is though the accountability found in membership of His churches.

Click to expand...

We are soldiers in the army of the Lord. Our fight is not bound within Church walls. When we seperate ourselves from effective wittnessing by hiding and trying to look holy behind four walls, we fool no one. Our protection is not in keeping sinners out, put on the whole armour of God.

I pray that all who take issue with my words will test them against the scriptural precedence before they voice ignorant and unnecessary objections.

I assure you that what I have been voicing is both Bible and Baptist.

But I'm just a voice....

Click to expand...

Sorry that you feel that an opinion that differs from your own renders one ignorant. Yet you are correct, i am ignorant of all things save Christ, and christ crucefied.

May God bless and keep you. Sorry to have offended you.

[ August 29, 2002, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: Chappie ]

Even if one is banned from one church, the hand of reconciliation must remain actively extended through other churches that claim Christ as their author: Lest we toss that person irretrieveably into Satan's hands.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what we are told to do in scripture, hand them over to Satan.

I see that you have NOT read your homework assignment, let me go back and say again...
PLEASE STUDY 1 CORINTHIANS 5 BEFORE YOU MAKE ANY FURTHER RESPONSES TO THIS THREAD.

Then and only then if you would like to discuss the interpretation of scripture will I respond to any more of your opinions.

1 Corinthians 5:3-5
For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Whoa Voice, All Chappie did was voice his opinion which I believe can be backed up scripturally. All I did was ask a question of you for clarification, without posting an opinion. I dont think either post contained any "ignorant and unnecessary objections" to your judgement and interpretation of Gods word.You do bring up some issues that I am curious about and I may start another thread on those as this is not the thread or forum for those discussions.

Click to expand...

I assure you that I intended no offense with my statment. But Chappie's last response only clarifies exactly why I said what I did.

The problem with some of the posts on this board is that people are so quick to post an ... as you put it, opinion, without any knowlege of what the Bible actually says about a subject. What I am posting is not an opinion but an interpretation of scripture.

There are some things that are not up for discussion. If you have no knowledge of a subject, I don't think one ought to pretend that one does.

If someone genuinely has a desire to learn something, that is altogether different. I have no objections to sharing truth from scripture.

But before anyone jumps on and tries to imply that I sound highminded or like some authority, I'll be the first to admit, I'm not. Brethren I have much to learn myself, and don't pretend to have it all figured out.

But we cannot intelligently discuss Bible if we are all not familiar with what the Bible says.

[ August 29, 2002, 05:43 PM: Message edited by: A voice crying in the wilderness ]

Voice,

There are some here who only listen to opinions, ignoring the only authority....God's Word.

You posted what the Bible teaches, they rejected it, what use is further discussion?

What does the Bible say if they reject the Word?

Titus 3
10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;


Pretty strong, but it is in the book!!!

While I really appreciate all of the Scritures and
opinions here, I think that the following must
also be considered: Was the person's action,
which caused excommunication to be done
or to be considered, against the Bible, speci-
fically, or against church rules? If the infrac-
tion was against the Bible, and all Sscriipture
has been followed, excommunication for the
protection of the believing community is not
only in order, but it is necessary. If, however,
the infraction was against the believing com-
munity's rules, no matter how that community
may base these rules on some nameable
Bible passage, if it is not written out specific-
ally in the Bible, excommunication is Wrong,
Wrong, Wrong! And a derrogatory letter to the
person's new pastor adds to the first sin.

This subject came up at Bible study last night.
In the Bible study, we were reminded that we,
as a community, are not to even EAT with
such persons as those excommunicated,
because excommunication is to be used to
draw the person back into commmunity by
helping them to understand what they are
missing by not being under its "umbrella."
Allowing them to come to the community's
dinners and get-togethers, then is not
acceptable.

As we talked, I asked, then, what I was to do,
because I still love the people at the church
that excommunicated me; am I, then, not to
eat with them when invited to be with an
obvious church group? The pastor asked me
to state the reason I was booted. I said, "For
refusing to continue to remove my wedding
band when entering the church." He said that
since that was a church rule, not in the Bible,
I was to eat with them as I choose. However,
he stated very clearly that if I were to go back
to that church, I would have to remove my wed-
ding band to reenter their community.

I can understand that, but, as I told him last
night, I have no intention of removing my wed-
ding band for them nor of trying to repatriate
myself to their church. Period.

Let’s just suppose that that same person was disciplined by the Corinthian church and then took a flight to Nebraska. The Corinthians couldn’t follow the disciplined believer everywhere, but God can. It has been said here in different words, “Discipline isn’t a wholly human endeavor”.

Perhaps there can be some information sharing among some churches, but certainly with today’s complex denominational variations it would not be entirely possible to notify them all. In fact, I’m sure some wouldn’t be open to listening to the information.

In my experience, our church has extremely rarely ever been asked about a former members status upon leaving. I don’t believe we ourselves have ever made it a point to send for references. (right?/wrong? – certainly needs changing!).

Effective Church discipline must be carried on within the confines of the local church body and perhaps a limited geographic area. This communication of status sharing among surrounding churches should be communicated to the members upon joining the church. Consent should be obtained upon membership during instruction on discipline so everyone is aware.
However, legally once a person has resigned their membership the church, if communication continues the leadership can be held libel for slander. Church discipline can only be done with church members, (therefore the importance of membership). If a regular attendee (but not a member) sins, the church cannot perform complete church discipline because the person is not within membership; notifying membership becomes slander and leaves the church open to legal action.

Church discipline is never easy! It’s not as easily done as it is spoken about. Let me tell you, church discipline places a great burden upon leadership. Continual prayer and individual humility are essential!

Complications do develop. The person needing discipline may resist a private meeting or (private confrontation), they may write a letter of resignation and becoming unavailable and go into hiding. In a case like this our church leadership (counsel) confronted the individual in a public church gathering (witnessing counsel-Matt. 18:16)and spoke to him in a sheltered area out of hearing from others and confronted him with his sins, encouraged repentance, and when this was not accepted we told him he was excluded from our church property, our meetings, our support groups etc (responsible discipline), we said he was not to contact leaders of the church except in the case of earnest repentance (prayerful confession)where he may contact our senior Pastor. This was not about a church rule (Non-judgmental standards) that were broken, the disciplined brother was making threats against other members in the church after a misunderstanding developed.