Should have claimed it was the holy ghost.

[dgs49]

"She is suing the college for privacy invasion, unlawful prohibition of legal activities and Family Medical Leave Act violations."

Presumably a couple details were left out.

So she's a student advisor at a Christian college, but she presumes that the school won't care that she lives and acts like what they would clearly consider a "slut."

A real "victim."

[Scooter]

Having coffee and doughnuts with a co-worker makes her a "slut"?

Would tea and crumpets have been ok?

[Lord Jim]

the school won't care that she lives and acts like what they would clearly consider a "slut."

Well Dave, unless they are a particularly vicious and nasty sect, presumably they would consider her a "sinner" rather than a "slut"....

[Scooter]

And Dave wonders why people are so down on the Roman Catholic Church, when they have him as an example of how a typical Catholic thinks.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Having coffee and doughnuts with a co-worker makes her a "slut"?

Would tea and crumpets have been ok?

Well yeah, a nice bit of crumpet would probably qualify...

oh...

I see

[Gob]

Well yeah, a nice bit of crumpet would probably qualify...

oh...

I see

[dgs49]

Sinners are people who sin, that is to say, everybody.

To be a "sinner" means that you are trying to be good, but you occasionally fail.

To be living with someone is in essence denying that your behavior is sinful. A person in that situation cannot be forgiven because there is no remorse, no repentance, and no resolution to "sin no more." Indeed, it is a manifestion of an intention to continue the sin indefinitely.

But of course I wouldn't expect this crowd to understand such distinctions. How can you offend God if you ARE God?

[Big RR]

Remorse? Who are you to judge and condemn someopne else's behavior? Why do you see the mote in your brother's eye and not the log in your own? Forgiveness is the province of god, not man, just as condemnation is. If you wish to sit in judgment, I guess there is nothing I can do about it, but let's not try to confuse the issue by saying others consider themselves god, when you choose to place yourself in the position of the almighty. Unless you have the ability to see directly into the hearts of your fellow man and know what remorse or anything else resides there.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Well Big RR - an interesting set of questions that we discussed last night at cell group (not the prison kind - that's next Tuesday!). It's noted that we say "She showed excellent judgement" and don't find anything wrong with the word - but as soon as there's an issue such as "x is not good", all of a sudden 'judgement' is a bad word, bad!

1Cor5:9-13 - Paul warns Christians not to associate with immoral men - but he explains that is not a reference to unbelievers. He's saying that if a so-called Christian is guilty of any number of awful things (all of which involve hypocrisy of course) their behaviour must be judged as wrongful - there is no other way to provide correction if one is to follow Jesus' recommended action Matt 18:12-17. Paul says "What have I to do with judging those outside the church? That's God's job". Galatians 6:1 emphasises that a believer detected in transgression should be restored in a spirit of gentleness. To detect a transgression judgement is needed - not condemnation but discernment, correctly identifying right and wrong... but be careful you don't fall into the same temptation yourself says Paul

In no case is the person to be judged - it is the behaviour which should call forth a biblical response (i.e. judging using the standard by which we hope to be judged). That response is best expressed as something like: "No I'm not judging you. I am thinking through the consequences of your action and in my judgement based upon........ this is not the best way to go." It's especially valid I think if one has made the same error and experienced the consequences.

But Matthew 18:12-17 requires a little more thought. Jesus says that if the guilty party does not respond to a quiet individual approach, nor to the same with a couple of witnesses, nor to the entire church* - then we should treat that believer as if he/she were a pagan or a tax-collector..... but how did Jesus treat pagans and tax-collectors? Why with grace and forgiveness and with gentle correction to bring them back to God - not with condemnation, dgs49..

So as ever I agree with your judgement that people shouldn't judge in the sense that is reserved for God (i.e. the heart and remorse and so on); dgs49 is not right to say "cannot be forgiven" and so on. But I disagree if you judge that Christians are not to judge the difference between right and wrong actions within the church using the standards given by God and by Christ.

"Forgiveness is the province of god, not man" is not quite what you meant, I think. Jesus taught his disciples to pray saying "Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" (or trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us). And see Luke 17:4, Mark 11:25 - very exacting. We of course cannot forgive sins against God - that's His job - nor can we (as you put it) condemn the person - also His job.

And I certainly reject any notion (which you may not have intended) that the good news of salvation may not be given to non-believers because it involves judging (discerning, advising) that they are headed in the wrong eternal direction.

Meade

*"church" - the word ἐκκλησία / ekklēsia actually carried the meaning "assembly, convened as a council to deliberate" in its wider Greek use when Jesus said those words. KJV liked "church" rather anachronistically because it assumes a christianity that did not exist at that point