New Testament CHURCH GOVERNMENT #8---- DISFELLOWSHIP #2

New Testament CHURCH GOVERNMENT #8

DISFELLOWSHIP !!                                                 PART 2                                                     by                                             Keith Hunt                   DID PAUL CONTRADICT CHRIST?      A Christian is told by Paul not to "keep company........NO, NOT TO EAT WITH" a brother who is a fornicator, covetous, idolater, railer, drunkard, extortioner - 1 Cor. 5: 11. We have discussed earlier the type of person who would be doing these things (a person who practices openly, as a way of life with no remorse or sorrow or attempt to overcome these practices) and that the church may have no choice but to dis- fellowship them. Yet, is Paul saying here that the church brethren should not attempt to bring this person back to Christ and Godliness - that they should never speak to or write to such a person in Christian love and concern?      Let's look at what Paul said. He told the brethren "not to keep company" but he did NOT SAY, "Do not keep company  and  NEVER SPEAK to such brothers." He did not say, "NEVER  WRITE to them." He did not say, "You must leave them alone -  neither write or speak  to them, even in an attempt to win them  back to Christ."        OF COURSE HE DID NOT SAY THESE THINGS to the  Corinthians, because Paul KNEW we should endeavour to restore  such persons to the brotherhood of Christ. He wrote so, as we have  seen in Galatians 6:1 and 2 Thes. 3: 6, 11, 14-15. The apostle James  also taught this truth (James 5:19, 20).      Paul did not contradict James or Christ.      Paul was telling the Corinthian Christians that they should not have CLOSE FAMILIAR contact with such people. They were  no longer to be BUDDY - BUDDIES. They were not to associate with them as they once did. They were not to SOCIALIZE with them - attend parties, cookouts, weekend campouts, backyard barbecues. The church was to censure them from its social functions, picnics, dances, and feasts.      BUT NOWHERE in this verse or any other writings of Paul, does he teach that the church is to treat these brothers or sisters as ENEMIES - which must be shunned and never spoken to.      On the contrary, Paul taught Christian brethren to try to win back the wayward brother, just as James taught, just as Christ taught in the parable of the Lost Sheep. And just as God inspired Ezekiel to write to the shepherds of Israel (Ezek. 34).      To DO THIS will necessitate, AT TIMES, a certain amount of speaking to, or writing to, the brother you want to see back in the fold and true way of the Lord.      ROMANS 16:17-18      Paul says to MARK those which cause the church troubles and avoid them.  The Greek word for "mark" simply means - regard, consider, take heed, look at. It is the same Greek word used in Phil. 3: 17, where Paul tells us to MARK those who follow Christ and use them as your example. The Greek word itself does NOT  mean "disfellowship."      Paul does say to AVOID them.      But HOW?      This instruction by Paul can be rightly taken in TWO ways.   1. Censorship WITHIN the church. Such troublemakers you will soon discern by their spirit of dissension and division in conversations and life style. They will be ever trying to divide and destroy unity. From such Paul says WITHDRAW - stay out of their way, do not be a buddy-buddy of theirs. Then, God willing, they may come to see the error of their tongue and ways. Kind loving correction will often solve the problem as others withdraw from them.  2.  Censorship OUTSIDE the church. The problem these troublemakers bring may become so large and offensive to all the members of the church that they may have (in order not to fall into confusion and disarray) no choice but to put these people out of its fellowship. If this be the case, then we are to avoid them as previously stated under 1 Cor. 5: 11. But using love, endeavour to bring them to the unity that is in Christ.      If the number 2 way be the only course of action left for the church, HOW is it to be done?      We have already seen Christ's instruction in Mat. 18. Does Paul here say any differently? Does Paul here give the local minister - one man - as many congregations only have one minister or Elder - the right and authority to disfellowship these persons? Does Paul say it is only the elders (plural) who have this right? Did he say Peter or James or some HEAD apostle (who claims headship and/or is put as head by others) only had this authority?      Let us notice carefully what Paul said:      "Now I beseech YOU, BRETHREN. Mark them...." (verse 17).      He did NOT say: "I beseech you, minister" or "I beseech you, elders" or "I beseech you head elder."      He said: ".....You, BRETHREN."      Yes, he addressed ALL the brethren to whom he was writing. We read in chapter one, verse 7, that Paul was writing to ALL the Christians at Rome; and he says this MARKING of certain ones  must be done by all.      The word of God does not contradict itself. Paul does not oppose what Christ taught. If these verses are used to say we must disfellowship those who cause divisions and walk contrary to Christ, then it must be the BRETHREN (THE MAJORITY  DECISION OF THE CHURCH CONCERNED) WHO ARE TO  EXERCISE THIS CENSORSHIP!      Not one man!  Not one minister or elder!  Not even a collection of elders!  It is the church as a WHOLE that have this authority!      This is clearly what Christ taught, and this is what Paul taught!      1 COR.16:22 "IF ANY MAN LOVE NOT THE LORD  JESUS CHRIST LET HIM BE ANATHEMA MARANATHA."      The Greek word for ANATHEMA is, as Strong's Concordance says: "a (religious) ban or (concr.) excommunication (thing or person) :- accursed, anathema, curse, x great."      The LIVING BIBLE translates: ".....That person is cursed...."   The RSV says: ".....Let him be accursed...."     The MODERN LANGUAGE renders it:  ".....He shall be accursed...."      The one Greek word for the English "Let him be" is in the PRESENT IMPERATIVE tense.        The present tense denotes action now going on or a state now existing.  The imperative denotes the mood of a verb that expresses a command, request, or advice.      The Greek word is in the command, request or advice mood, and in the present (not past or future) continuous tense.      How we translate the Greek word "anathema" will give us a few alternatives as to how to understand what Paul is saying. If we translate it as ACCURSED or CURSED, then we go with how the LIVING BIBLE renders it: "....that person IS cursed."      Paul is giving advice. Those who do not love Christ are NOW presently under a curse. To love Christ is to accept Him as your saviour and keep His commandments. Then we are not under the penalty of the law - death. We are not cursed to die as sinners, but free from death to life. Those who do not love Christ (and His word) are presently under a curse of death until they repent of their sins and accept Christ as their saviour.       Those who once loved Christ but have made shipwreck their faith, who now no longer love Jesus and His way of life, are again presently cursed by the penalty of sin - death.       Paul is thus advising them that LOVE is the important thing. To love Christ is to love what He taught, to love to obey  Him, to love to serve Him, love to follow in His steps. As Paul had already said in chapter 13, though a person has great gifts and deeds, if he did not have love it was to no avail. His gifts and deeds would not save him without love. A true sincere humble attitude and motivation towards Christ, and loving concern for fellow man, is an essential for not being under the curse of death.      If we translate "anathema" as meaning BAN or EXCOMM- UNICATE, then we stay with the KJV of "Let him be (advice,  command - now be, present action) anathema (banned,  excommunicated).      So then we have another verse which would teach that the church has power to censure certain individuals.       But nothing in this verse gives ONE man this right or authority, not even a group of  elders.      Nothing contradicts what Christ taught in Matthew 18: 15-17 (or anything else Paul wrote)  that the CHURCH (the collective members as a whole) ONLY HAVE THIS POWER.      Who would be the ones so censured? Why, only those who do not love Christ. The expression "love not" is in the present tense. Paul is talking about persons who LOVE NOT Jesus as a present continuous way of life. We have already seen the types of persons and life styles that could come under "not loving the Lord Jesus Christ."      Paul finishes by saying "Maranatha" - which is a Syriac phrase, and signifies "THE LORD COMETH."      The very Lord they do not love, is coming - coming to execute judgment, and to say to the wicked, those who will not repent: "Depart from me you workers of iniquity."  For if you never come to love Christ you must be censured to the eternal curse of eternal death.      GAL. 5: 10, 12. "HE THAT TROUBLES YOU SHALL BEAR  HIS JUDGMENT, whosoever he be ...... I would they were even  cut off which trouble you."      Is there anything in these verses that gives ONE minister, or a group of ministers, the power to excommunicate? Does Paul say: "These troublemakers I will PERSONALLY disfellowship"  or "When I find out who these people are that trouble you, I will put them out of the church" or "Find out who these persons are and have your Elder/s disfellowship them." ?      No!  There is nothing said to contradict what has been already said by Jesus, that only the CHURCH as a whole has the authority to disfellowship anyone. Paul did not even know WHO these troublemakers were. He said they would bear their punishment, "WHOSOEVER he be."  And verse 12 should be better translated from the Greek to read: "I wish those who unsettle and confuse you would (go all the way and) CUT THEMSELVES OFF"(Amplified Bible).      The INTERLINEAR GREEK-ENGLISH also gives the sense as  Paul WISHING that these troublemakers would cut THEMSELVES  OFF. See also the PHILLIPS translation.      If you wanted to stay with the translation of the KJV, at best, Paul is only giving the churches of Galatia (the book was written to churches of Galatia - chapter 1:2), his WISHES, his desires, his advice - that the churches themselves would bear the responsibility of ACTION.       This is the understanding taken by most Bible commentaries.      1 THES. 5:14. "NOW WE EXHORT YOU, BRETHREN,  WARN THEM THAT ARE UNRULY..."      Here Paul and others (now WE exhort)  did not immediately cast out those who were unruly, but told the brethren to warn them. Paul obviously did not take it upon himself. He probably did not even know who these unruly people were. He gave the BRETHREN the power to warn them, which is exactly what Jesus Christ Himself taught, as recorded in Matthew 18: 17.      TITUS 3: 10, 11. "A MAN THAT IS AN HERETIC AFTER  THE FIRST AND SECOND ADMONITION, REJECT;  knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth, being  condemned of himself."      The Greek for "heretic" used here denotes "to take for oneself, a schismatic" (see Strong's Concordance). A person then who causes DIVISION, who has a mind set on dividing, whose purpose and aim is to divide and conquer. The Greek for "subverted" is correctly translated PERVERT.  The Greek word  for "sinneth" is in the present tense.      The men (could be a Christian brother or could be just an outsider wanting to cause trouble) here spoken of are HABITUAL sinners. They live a life style of this sin. They are perverted as a present continuous action in this sin. What is their sin? Why, constantly working to disunite and divide the church.      These verses and Romans 16: 17-18 are related.        Notice!  Paul is teaching Titus exactly the same thing as Christ taught His disciples - one admonition, two admonitions, third admonition (by the whole church - Mat. 18: 17) - reject.      There is no conflict between Paul and Christ - only HARMONY!      1 TIM. 6: 3-5. "IF ANY MAN TEACH OTHERWISE, AND  consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus  Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to Godliness, he is  proud - knowing nothing - but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof comes envy, strife, railings, evil surmising, perverse disputing of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is Godliness. FROM SUCH WITHDRAW YOURSELF."      It should be evident from the plain language Paul uses here as to the character and lifestyle of the people here described. It does NOT describe a person who loves God and his fellow man with sincerity and humility, but has a few differences of opinion on church administration, policy or understanding of some Bible verses.            The person Paul describes is DESTITUTE OF THE TRUTH!  These refuse God's word and will not live by it!      What does Paul say to Timothy (a minister of God)?  Does he tell him to use his PERSONAL authority to cast them out of the church - to disfellowship them?  Does Paul instruct Timothy to get some other ministers and together censure these people?   Does he tell Timothy to go to a higher ranking elder (maybe Peter, James, or Paul himself) with their names and evil deeds, and obtain authority from them to excommunicate these fellows?      No!  He tells Timothy none of these things.  He does tell him to do a PERSONAL thing, something all true followers of Christ should do.  When confronted with these types of individuals - FROM SUCH WITHDRAW YOURSELF!  Do not  be a buddy of theirs.  Stay out of their way.  Don't be a close  friend of such persons.      Such people here described by Paul to Timothy may very well come under the verses of Romans 16: 17-18 and Titus 3: 10, 11.   And so the instructions of Matthew 18: 15- 17 would need apply.      1 TIM. 5: 19, 20. "AGAINST AN ELDER RECEIVE NOT AN  ACCUSATION, BUT BEFORE TWO OR THREE WITNESSES.  THEM THAT SIN REBUKE BEFORE ALL, THAT OTHERS  ALSO MAY FEAR."      If Timothy did not have any PERSONAL power to disfellowship anyone, then what authority did he have in regard to other ministers  or elders?      The letters to Timothy are known as PASTORAL letters - instructions to a minister or elder.      It is evident from these verses that an elder can act as a mediator between problems within the eldership itself and that of the membership of the church.      Paul was instructed by Christ. He knew the teachings of Jesus as given in Mat. 18: 15-17. Paul would have instructed Timothy likewise. If a minister had aught against another minister he should go to him alone and try to solve the problem. If that doesn't work, then two or three can go together to the one involved in the dispute. Now, if no satisfaction can be reached between these ministers, then Paul would ADD ONE  MORE STEP to be taken in eldership problems: bring in a  MEDIATOR.  Paul is instructing Timothy that he should not be  a mediator in eldership problems until the first TWO STEPS  of Matthew 18 have been taken.      If it is a member of the church having a problem with an elder, then the same rule of Matthew 18 still applies - personal talk first to try and solve the problem, then if not rectified, two or three go to the elder involved. If still no satisfaction, then another elder/s brought in to mediate.       If the Elder is in the wrong, does Paul then say Timothy had the power to "disfellowship" or "cast out" or "excommunicate" these sinning ministers?  No!  All the PERSONAL authority that Timothy is given is to REBUKE the sinning minister before all - to rebuke those who are clearly to be blamed and will not repent. This is the power that is given to the servants of God - a power that Paul himself had to use against Peter when Peter was clearly and obviously in the wrong for racial prejudice at one time in his life (see Gal. 2: 11-14).      If the Elder would continue in the sin with no repentance then the final actions of Mat. 18 would need be applied by the whole church - disfellowship.      Nothing here in 1 Tim 5. gives any minister the personal power to mark and disfellowship another minister.      1 TIM. 1: 19-20. "Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme."      Here at last (some will say) we have a passage which says Paul himself PERSONALLY marked and cast out of the church two individuals.      If this is so, then truly we have found a contradiction in the scriptures. But Christ said the scriptures CAN NOT BE  BROKEN! God does not contradict Himself!  So let us carefully and humbly search for the truth as to what Paul is saying here. Remember also what Peter said about some of the writings of Paul (2 Peter 3:16).      Paul is talking in verse 19 about individuals who have CAST OFF or REJECTED (as the Greek word for "having put away" signifies) THE faith (the word "the" is in the original Greek, see the Greek-English NT by Berry).  They had turned away from Christ, from following in His steps. These two named individuals had made ship wreck their faith in Christ.  The tense for the Greek word translated in English as "have made shipwreck" is in the AORIST INDICATIVE, which signifies an action taken in the PAST.      Paul says SOME (even more than those named) - indicating that they, of their OWN will and determination, have already (at some point in the past) cast away the faith - no longer walking with Christ. Paul does not say that he himself cast away their faith by putting them out of the church.  He does not say that he "marked" and disfellowshipped them and by so doing has caused their faith to be broken and rejected. After all, can ANY MAN by his decree nullify your faith - claim you are no longer a child of God?  Or is it YOU ONLY, by your own mind and life, who can terminate your relationship with God and Christ?      These people of their OWN SELVES - their own deliberate, willful determination, decided to turn the other way and no longer follow the faith of Jesus. They were not "put out" by some MAN. They turned away from Christ by their OWN choosing.      The MATTHEW HENRY COMMENTARY says: "As for those  who had made shipwreck of the faith - he specifies two.....who had  made a profession of the Christian religion, but had quitted that profession."      Now let us study verse 20.       Paul singles out two individuals who had quit the faith. As this letter is written to a minister, it would not be wrong to deduct that the two men named were also ministers, and were well known by Paul and Timothy, hence he mentions them by name.      The Greek for "I have delivered" is in the first person singular aorist indicative. Here is what the ANALYTICAL GREEK LEXICON says about the aorist tense: "The Aorist is strictly the expression of a momentary or transient single action.....and in the indicative mood it ordinarily signifies past time. It is, however, used of a prolonged action, if there is no positive need to make a direct expression of the circumstance. It is thus of constant use in the narrative of past transactions."      We could paraphrase this statement by Paul to read:      "I personally on an occasion in the past delivered them over to Satan."      The tense of the word is a single action done in the past. But what about the MEANING of this Greek word?       Strong's Concordance says: "To surrender, yield up, entrust, transmit, betray, bring forth, cast, commit, deliver, give, hazard, put in prison, recommend."      Matthew Henry comments: "Paul had delivered them to Satan, and DECLARED them to belong to the Kingdom of Satan."      Paraphrased, we could render this: "Whom I have entrusted, committed - RECOMMENDED to Satan."      Does this action of Paul - recommending someone to the power of Satan, seem UN-Christian? We must remember that God does chasten every son He loves (Heb. 12: 3- 11). And He may, if He chooses, use the power of  the Satanic world to fulfil His purpose. God did use and allow Satan to bring much trouble on Job in order to humble him to real repentance.      Paul is not out of order in asking God to deliver these two men (he knew as one time servants in the work of the Lord) over to Satan and his power. Why?  Paul goes on to tell us: "That they may be DISCIPLINED (as the Greek is better translated) not to blaspheme."      He wanted them to come back to the faith - to repent - to walk again with God.  So, even in this Paul shows CONCERN and LOVE.      Paul knew and obeyed the teaching of Christ, to LOVE your enemies, PRAY for and do GOOD to those who persecute, despitefully use, and hate you. Paul prayed now that these two men who had left the faith and were now a part of Satan's world, would be disciplined by the evil that Satan could bring upon them so they would again be restored - converted back to God and the faith of Christ. A HUMAN MAN - HEAD AND DECISION  MAKER OF THE CHURCH?      Some teach that Peter was made head of the church by Christ. Others say that the true church today is headed by one man who is able to make binding decisions, even to the casting out of the church those he will.      Those who teach this idea use Matthew 16: 18-19 to give proof to the supremacy of ONE authoritarian man as head of the church.      But what is the real truth?  Let us examine these verses very closely.      Jesus said: "And I say unto you, that you are Peter (Greek word - petros; meaning a "stone"), and upon this rock (Greek word - petra; meaning a "ledge" or "shelf of rock" or "huge boulder") I will build my church (Mat.16:18).      Now, since some claim that the rock on which the church was founded refers to Peter - and not Christ - notice the true meaning, as originally written by Matthew in the Greek language.       Peter was also called Cephas (Greek Kephas - from the Aramaic Kepha).  In John 1:40-42 it is related how Andrew (Simon Peter's brother) found Peter and brought him to Jesus.      "And when Jesus beheld him he said: You are Simon, the son of Jona. You shall be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, a stone" (verse 42).      The English word "stone" is translated from the Greek word petros, meaning a single stone or loose stone. Also the Greek word "kephas" means such a stone, and Jesus used it when referring to a human man - Peter.      But when Jesus said: "upon this rock I will build my church" the Greek word, as written by Matthew, was neither kephas or petros, but P E T R A - which means a LARGE MASSIVE ROCK!      The Greek PETRA can not mean the human Peter, but the glorified Christ!  Speaking of the Israelites under Moses in the wilderness, Paul wrote: "....For they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them; and THAT ROCK WAS CHRIST" (1 Cor. 10: 4).      The church is described in Ephesians 2: 20 as "being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (including Old Testament prophets), JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF BEING THE  CHIEF CORNERSTONE."      Here Christ is plainly said to be the chief, or the HEAD!      The real foundation of the church is Christ. "For other foundations can no man lay than that is laid, which is JESUS CHRIST" (1 Cor. 3: 11).      He is shown in Revelation 1: 13, 18, to be the living HEAD, spiritually in the midst of the church.      Read it also in Eph. 5: 23; 4:15; 1:22-23; Col. 1: 18,19; 2: 19.      IT is also true that at the beginning of the Christian church, Peter was indeed a leading apostle, maybe the apostle that did  Most off the leading, so in that sense Jesus did at first build the Church on the leadership of Peter. But within a relatively short time that was not the case. When Paul came into the Christian Ministry he soon made it clear he took a back seat to no human man. That is shown in the epistle to the Galatians.      Now, what about Peter being given the power to make BINDING DECISIONS for the church?  Was he given authority to decide DOCTRINE - the change of doctrine - make binding decisions as to what the church members were to read, who to listen to, who was to be IN the church or who was to be CAST out?      The AMPLIFIED BIBLE translates Matthew 16: 19 as follows:      "I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind (that is, declare to be improper, and unlawful) - on earth MUST BE ALREADY BOUND IN HEAVEN; and  whatever you loose on earth (declare lawful) MUST BE WHAT  IS ALREADY LOOSED IN HEAVEN" (emphasis mine).      A footnote gives you the reason why the compilers of the Amplified Bible so translates verse 19.  "Williams: 'perfect passive participle; so things in a state of having been already forbidden (or permitted)."      The ANALYTICAL GREEK LEXICON says this: "The  PERFECT conveys the double notion of an action terminated  in the past time, and of its effects existing in the present."      So, contrary to popular teaching, Christ was NOT telling Peter that he would be the head of the church with power to decide great issues and make binding proclamations on the brethren, BUT that HE, Christ, would be the foundation and  head of the church, and that Peter or any other disciple, minister, elder, apostle, prophet, teacher, could only bind or unbind on the brethren that which God had already declared to be lawful  or unlawful.        And how can anyone know what God has made lawful or not?  Why, only by a study of God's revelation to man - the BIBLE!      God does not leave man to decide for himself what is right or what is wrong, what are the true doctrines of God, what practices and customs to observe. What is SIN, and what is RIGHTEOUSNESS. He does not leave mankind without instruction  on the LARGE, IMPORTANT issues of life.  Such doctrines as  "church government" or the doctrine about "church disfellowshipping"   and how to settle disputes among brethren are all plainly revealed to us in the word of truth - the Bible.      Man, woman, elders, deacons, can only search the scriptures to find out what God has already laid down as to the truth of the matter on these and other subjects that are given to us to understand.      Christ was telling Peter that he did NOT have the authority to rule the church with an iron hand or bind things of his OWN choosing on the people of God.      CAN A GROUP OF MINISTERS MAKE BINDING DECISION?            If ONE man was not given this power to make binding decisions, then surely a GROUP of God's servants can do so, is what some will argue, giving Matthew 18: 18 as proof.  And so the Roman Catholic church has, to name one organization, used this teaching to establish Sunday, the first day of the week, in place of the 7th.  Also , it has been used to establish Christ-mass, Easter, and other festivals from paganism, to dogmatize celibacy, to prohibit the use of contraceptives in marriage, and other doctrines.      Can a group of men therefore decide to ADD to doctrine, change doctrine, or make up doctrines and BIND THEM on the rest of the church?  Can a group of ministers get together and decide WHO can be in the church or who they can throw  out? Can some  elders decide to disfellowship another elder?      The AMPLIFIED BIBLE translates Matthew 18:18 as:      "Truly, I tell you, whatever you forbid and declare to be improper and unlawful on earth must be what is already forbidden in Heaven; and whatever you permit and declare proper and lawful on earth must be already permitted in Heaven."      The GREEK TENSE is again perfect passive - just as in chapter 16: 19.      Surely, there are many decisions to be made as far as administration, evangelism, spreading of the gospel via print and TV etc., youth activities, church socials, office supplies, and other day to day things in the life of a church. BUT binding laws can only come from God - for only God is the lawgiver - James 4:12.      All that man can do is humbly and diligently search the word of the Lord to find what He has made lawful or unlawful.            There is a certain area where elders do have some authority regarding people and sins.       After Jesus was resurrected He appeared to His disciples and in the context of the Holy Spirit, He said to them: "Whose soever sins you remit, they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins you retain they are retained" (John 20: 23).      One clear area God's servants must use this power and judgment is when an elder is counselling someone for baptism. Room does not permit me to go into this subject of water baptism here, needless to say it is a very important topic in the New Testament. I have written on it in detail for those who want to request the study.      Water Baptism is a serious undertaking, with great spiritual meaning. A minister/saint must be sure (as sure as an elder/saint can be with the Spirit of God, allowing that he is still human and can not see the depths of the heart) the person requesting baptism is in an attitude of repentance and wanting to turn away from sin.  Usually through a number of counselling sessions an elder or elders or saints can ascertain if someone is ready to truly yield and follow in the steps of Christ.      I have known some situations where the person was wanting baptism only because their friend was going to be baptized, or their mate was ready for baptism but they were not really repentant or wanting to forsake sin. So the elders/saints refused to baptize them, and in so doing their sins were retained until they fully came to know what accepting Christ as their personal saviour was in truth and righteousness.      There are, now and again, circumstances where an individual comes in contact with the church, wants some of the things that the church can offer, desires to have some of the great blessings and gifts that come by being a true member of the true church, yet their attitude of heart is FAR from the true God and His way of life. Elders will often be able to see the truth of the matter and may have to finally rebuke or correct such an attitude in those persons.      We have an example in the NT during the life of the apostles Peter and John. It is found in Acts chapter 8, and beginning with verse 14.      Let me comment on verse 13 first.  Simon it is said "believed" and was "baptized." His real deep attitude of heart was soon to be manifested. The leaders and elders in the church are human, and can from time to time be fooled by some people who look and sound and act for a while as if they are truly converted. But time and situations prove otherwise.      Simon became a follower of "the work." Looking and  wondering at all the things being done - the miracles and signs.      Now starting in verse 14, Simon begins to see one way in which people receive the Holy Spirit.      He offers the apostles money to buy this gift of being able to give the Spirit to others. His attitude was ALL WRONG! He wanted to use the Holy Spirit for his own ends, to feather his own nest and fame. Peter could see through Simon's glass house and paper walls.       Look at the words from Peter, verses 20 through to 23!      Simon's heart was FAR from the righteousness and purity of God. Peter could see it and responded accordingly. Simon's sins were RETAINED, and could only be blotted out from the record  by true humble repentance.      So, the servant's of the Lord do have some power, some authority, when it comes to sin, but this is a separate and different subject than the topic we are studying in this exposition.      Nothing is stated in Acts 8 that Simon was disfellowshipped by Peter or John, both of them or any group of persons. Peter tells Simon his sin and admonishes him to repent. We are given no further information about Simon, his attitude after this incident - nothing -  the NT is silent on the matter.      The elders of the church do have some authority in matters of sin as we have seen. They also have authority in some other areas. Please read Matthew the 10th  chapter and Luke  chapter 10.      You will find the disciples called and sent forth to preach and teach the word of God given authority or power over a  number of things, but not one or a collection of them as leaders  and elders, are given power/authority to cast out of the church anyone - to disfellowship!      As stated before in this study, the elders are PART OF the church, but are NOT "the church" that Jesus said only had the power to disfellowship (Mat.18: 17). The elders can be part of the body of believers, part of the process, leading to someone being disfellowshipped, but only a part, not the whole.                    A SERIOUS MATTER      For the church to disfellowship anyone is a serious undertaking. It should be done only when all else has failed, and they had better make sure, with fear and trembling, that God's word justifies their decision. For the Eternal God will ".....have judgment without mercy, that has shown no mercy; and mercy rejoices against judgment" (James 2:13). So the church had better speak and DO as, ".....They that shall be judged by the law of liberty" (James 2:12).      The Church of God should be filled with the fruits of God's Spirit, which are: "....LOVE, joy (gladness), peace, PATIENCE (an even temper, forbearance), kindness, goodness, self-control (self-restraint, continence)......" (Galatians 5:22,23, Amplified Bible).      Let us show love, patience, tolerance, to our fellow man. Let us give the "benefit of the doubt" to our brother.       For love, ".....is not easily provoked, thinks no evil....." and ".....is ready to believe the best of every person...." (KJV and Amplified Bible - 1 Cor. 13: 5, 7).      Let the members of the Church of God get on their knees,  and pray that the church will never have to exercise its power  and authority to disfellowship anyone!                     .................... Written first in 1980. Slightly revised in 1995.       Footnote      It was after the first writing of this study that I became personally familiar with a number of church organizations that employed in practice the truths given in the word of the Lord regarding the doctrine of disfellowshipping an unrepentant sinner. One such church organization was the Seventh Day Adventist church. In learning from them how they went about applying Matthew 18: 15-17, I was pleasantly surprised to find it was as written in this study of mine.      The eventual decision to disfellowship a person from their church is made by the WHOLE membership of that particular congregation involved. Only the actual members of that congregation have voting power - no outside members of another congregation, no visiting members from another congregation, can participate in the judging and decision.      Such an event is very rare in the SDA churches, and is taken very seriously, with much soul searching, deep sorrow, with spiritual pain and even heartfelt literal crying on the part of many. It brings the whole congregation very close together in humility.