I'm upset

That is rather odd....

 

Maybe the pastor is waiting for Radar to be convicted before taking take any steps. However, I think that since Radar has been arrested, he should at least be suspended from his duties and/or official positions at the church, then removed after being convicted.

I assume the pastor will counsel him and asks if he repents from what he's done. Or ask if he is trusting Christ, since we don't know if the man is saved (and it seems doubtful). Interested in other views.

 

Could you provide a link to a news source to substantiate the story? I would like to forward to a local talk show if possible.

 

never mind I found one. Actually the minister told him that he was still part of the Body of Christ

<story

 

Dont Lutherens belive that a person can lose their salvation? If killing 10 people doesnt do it, what will? I know, we must wait for the trial and not convict him yet. But it seems his whole family has already judged him guilty because they all fled the state.

 

Here is a transcript of the sermon that his minister preached? last Sunday.

BTK minister speaks

 

Found this!


Clark declined to disclose more details of his 45-minute conversation with Rader, citing confidentiality as his pastor. They spoke a day after Rader was formally charged with 10 counts of first-degree murder in the serial killings that have haunted Wichita for the past three decades. His demeanor seemed to be OK," Clark said. "He seems to be handling things as well as he can."

For now, Rader remains president of the church council _ although he will eventually have to relinquish some church leadership positions, Clark said.

<STORY>

 

oof! What a tough situation to face as a Pastor.
We should pray for Clark

 

1.)
We don't know if this guy did anything at all.
2.)
In this country you are supposed to be innocent until PROVEN guilty.
3.)
One of the pastors' jobs is to support his people in times of trouble.
4.)
We, as a body of believers, should be praying for every person involved in this ongoing tragedy.
5.)
Since WHEN do we remove a man from a position of leadership on accussation alone?

I have other problems with this thread, but will leave you with these questions.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Jim,

I believe he confessed to it. Heard it on the evening news the other night.


jman

 

According to reports, Rader has confessed to killing six people. Of course, it is possible that reports are wrong. Has Rader actually made a statement on this?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/28/national/main676805.shtml

 

Even if he's confessed, one should still await legal conviction. A confession is not official until it's accepted in court.

I think he should be suspended from any leadership duties but he should not be kicked out of the church. If he is saved, he needs to repent. If he's not saved, then he needs Christ. Either way, he and his church need prayer!

If he does not repent and nor ask forgiveness, then that brings up the issue of revoking his membership but that's between him and his church.

 

Just a suggestion -- it would help A LOT if people would put the topic in the thread so we can remember where things are. It's hard to remember that the thread on the BTK killer is called "I'm Upset." There are other threads like this and they communicate nothing, and it makes it hard on all of us to remember what they are about.

 

What would you do with someone who commits a "crime" against the church, say adultery, which is not a crime in civil society?

He can not be convicted in court for adultery, but his confession to it before the church is more than enough grounds to completely remove him from the church, as well he should be.

If he has confessed thess to his church or pastor, regardless of whether the court accepts his plea or not, the church, if it is going to uphold biblical standards and practices, has no other choice but to remove him from the membership. It has nothing to do with whether he is proven guilty in court or not.

In the same token, if he has not admitted any guilt, then the church should either wait until more evidence comes out, he admits to it, or he is found guilty in court.

Either way, his church out to convene a committee to investigate the matter independently from secular law enforcement.

 

What would you do with someone who commits a "crime" against the church, say adultery, which is not a crime in civil society?

He can not be convicted in court for adultery, but his confession to it before the church is more than enough grounds to completely remove him from the church, as well he should be.

If he has confessed thess to his church or pastor, regardless of whether the court accepts his plea or not, the church, if it is going to uphold biblical standards and practices, has no other choice but to remove him from the membership. It has nothing to do with whether he is proven guilty in court or not.

In the same token, if he has not admitted any guilt, then the church should either wait until more evidence comes out, he admits to it, or he is found guilty in court.

Either way, his church out to convene a committee to investigate the matter independently from secular law enforcement. </font>[/QUOTE]His confession was to police, not to his church. So now the ball is in the church's court -- do they go to him and ask him if he did these things? I think they should. If he says yes, then he should be given the chance to repent if he's a believer, don't you think? This would be true for any transgression, wouldn't it?

I agree the church needs to take action. But if he confesses to his pastor and/or church (guess he could write a letter to the church), and repents and asks forgiveness, do you think he should still have his membership revoked?

 

I agree with you, as stated in my other post, that he must confess to the church and/or the charges must be delivered to the church by someone whith knowledge and the validity of those claims verified or denied by the church.

It is, however, up to the church to decide how they will procees, but that is what I would be pushing for if it were my church.

If the man did commit these crimes, then he has been living in a state of sin ever sense. Even if he has repented of what he did, he was breaking the law by not turning himself in, and therefore is still committing sin.

Yes, I would vote to exclude him from membership at this time, but I would also make sure that he knows that we will continue to labor with him until such a time as he has truly repented of his deeds surrounding the murders.

From the looks of things so far, even if he has said he is sorry to his pastor, it is more than likely only the sorrow of being caught, and not the sorrow for the crime itself. I could very well be wrong, but isn't that the way most criminals are once they are caught? They are always sorry for what they did, but there is no way they would have been so sorry as to turn themselves into authorities.

I just think the safe route for the church would be to cut him off at this time.

 

&lt;snipped comments&gt;
If the man did commit these crimes, then he has been living in a state of sin ever sense. Even if he has repented of what he did, he was breaking the law by not turning himself in, and therefore is still committing sin.

Yes, I would vote to exclude him from membership at this time, but I would also make sure that he knows that we will continue to labor with him until such a time as he has truly repented of his deeds surrounding the murders.

From the looks of things so far, even if he has said he is sorry to his pastor, it is more than likely only the sorrow of being caught, and not the sorrow for the crime itself. I could very well be wrong, but isn't that the way most criminals are once they are caught? They are always sorry for what they did, but there is no way they would have been so sorry as to turn themselves into authorities.

I just think the safe route for the church would be to cut him off at this time. </font>[/QUOTE]You make some good points.

Are you talking about a process of restoration -- cutting him off and working with him to truly repent and the being restored (should he be willing and is saved)?

 

That is precisely what I am talking about.

Are we on the same page?