Standing firm on Titus/1 Cor verses

How was that for not using a poster's name, but getting his attention? :smilewinkgrin:

SFIC, since the thread in the news forum was shut down (without prejudice) I figured we could take it here.

When talking about Bob Grey, you questioned the verses concerning restoration of a brother taken in a fault.

I responded by posting the verses from Titus and 1 Cor. about rejecting a heretic after the second admonition, which I believe applies to those who are taken into gross sins/false teachings.

You then stated that you do not believe Grey fit the criteria in those verses for a heretic, as he did not purposely attempt to cause division in the church. You also said that you do not believe that the verses in Titus refer to believers.

Now for my reply. :type:

1. Statement: Titus is not referring to believers.

My belief: statement is false.

I don't believe a man can be a heretic without being a believer, else what would we accomplish with our evangelism? Are we to mark and reject all of the unbelievers who have heard of Christ and not yet believed? The administration of church discipline is always towards believers, not the unsaved.

2. I also offer to you these verses: [FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

I believe they blend with the verses in 1 Cor. and in Titus.

Grey was approached concerning his sin on more than one occasion, yet continued in it.
Whether or not he meant to cause division, it caused it. There are those who purposely cause it, but the intention is not the issue. The question is whether or not division has been caused.
Repeated sin cause strife. Strife causes division.

Continuing in a position of leadership while being taken in a gross fault goes against Bible doctrine.

Continuing in sin after being faced with it goes against doctrine.

To harm someone and not make up for it goes agasint the Bible.

To disobey those in authority (the laws of the land) and commit a crime goes against the teachings of Christ.

This repeated sin was clearly wrong, clearly violated doctrine, and clearly was and is divisive.

3. You quoted Galations 6:1
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

Murder and sexually molesting little children don't fall under "faults." A fault is something such as selfishness, a quick temper, or lack of charity. Merriam Webster defines a fault as "a moral weakness less serious than a vice."

That's my take on things so far. I look forward to your continued input. I am not standing firm on my definition/ideas of a heretic. I do believe it to be correct based on what I have looked at so far, but there's room for persuasion as it's not something I've studied in depth, and I'm sure there are people here who have.
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]



[/FONT]

 

Bump, since I see you're online and we both posted at the same time.

 

The thread could actually be addressed without even using his name, as I'm more interested in knowing the proper process than in this particular situation. We can make it all hypothetical.

As far as this situation, yes, there have been reports which suggest Grey was confronted about this by Messer and by another member. There are first hand accounts about it posted on another forum that say the same. A story from one of the victims speaks of the parents having confronted Grey.

Here are some links:

Not on news, but person stating personal knowledge:

http://www.fundamentalforums.com/showpost.php?p=88734&postcount=52

http://www.news4jax.com/news/9269585/detail.html

 

I'm not able to answer all of the questions you ask. I seem to recall reading that the police do indeed have the letter with Messer's sig, but I would have to go through all the news reports again to find the exact one. I'll let you have that pleasure instead of me. :laugh:

As far as repentence, if this man truly did what was said, no he did not repent. Repentance would have included apologies to the victims and attempts to ammend for any harms done. It would have included removing himself from being around children. It would not have included continuing in a position of authority, even if it was in another country. Repentence would have included stopping the behavior, yet it reportedly continued over a number of years.

Lynch mob? If we had such things, we wouldn't have such perverts.

 

No longer given in to fleshly perversions?
Did you just call him a previous pervert, and without proof? :saint:

As I've already stated, repentence includes making ammends towards those you've injured. It also includes admitting your sins and taking the punishments rendered on earth for them. Christ died for our sins against God, but we will always still owe a debt to our fellow man when we break the laws of the land. That debt has not been paid.

So we must assume that true repentence has not taken place, and that we are still obligated to shun the man.

I cannot murder a rape a person, especially a child, repent to God, and then never report myself to the authorities and claim that you owe me fellowship and to treat me as if I'd never committed that sin. It would be more than wrong of me to expect you to so, and it would be reckless of you to allow me back into fellowship after I'd done such a thing and not made it right to the families or paid my debt to society.
Even under the law, which was a shadow of things to come, the Israelites were not told to make such and such sacrifice to cover damage they had done. If you got mad and killed a man's cow, you replaced his cow and his inconveniences. Your sin against God (anger) was covered by Christ. He isn't going to come down and replace the cow though. That's the job of the truly repentent sinner.

AVL, I was also hoping to take phase Gray out of the equation and deal with the process itself of restoration, repentence, what it entails, etc..

Hopefully we can start doing that at this point in the thread.

 

Excuse me? IFB is MY own. God's people are God's people, and I take offense to you slashing a whole group of them as "their own". We're just as much a part of Christianity as "your own", which is not YOUR own, but OUR own. IFB's are no less Christian than whatever grouping of Christianity your church is labelled as.

 

OH! LOL
Well...goodness.
Hi Tony from Arizona.
I've always assumed you were AVL. I don't know why.
Now I'm gonna have to go check and make sure which Tony is the one who writes.
I'm confused way too easily...

 

Restitution? He died a torturous death. Paying with your life for the sins committed is about as restitutive as one can get.

Well lookie there, I made a new word!