How do you guys do this?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
G

GaryA

Guest
#81
#81
1 Corinthians 6:

[SUP]1[/SUP] Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? [SUP]2[/SUP] Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? [SUP]3[/SUP] Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? [SUP]4[/SUP] If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. [SUP]5[/SUP] I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? [SUP]6[/SUP] But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. [SUP]7[/SUP] Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? [SUP]8[/SUP] Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.


I believe that there are two "main points" that Paul is making here:

~ Those in the Church should not be going outside of the Church to "solve" disputes / problems between its members. It is a shame for any saint to place their "concerns" in the hands of anyone who is not a saint. It is a shame for a saint to voluntarily place themselves under the judgment of anyone who is not a saint. It is a shame if saints cannot "solve" their own disputes / problems themselves.

~ Even the "least" of those in the Church should be able to judge matters [ of this life ]. It is a shame if all ( each and every one ) who are in the Church are not able to judge matters [ of this life ].

Verse 4 is a statement, not a question. It is a "suggestive" command. ( And, yes - perhaps a bit sarcastic? ) It is making the point that - the "least esteemed in the church" would / should judge well matters [ of this life ] - and that, none should be afraid of their judgment ( Because, their 'discipleship' / 'training' / [ spiritual ] 'maturity' should not be any different than - and "just as good as" - any of the "most esteemed in the church" - i.e., they should be "just as able as anyone" to judge matters [ of this life ]. )

By telling them to set the "least esteemed in the church" as judges, Paul is reinforcing the foundational 'tenant' of doctrine that - if properly and faithfully followed - prevents "off-balance" leadership within the Church. ( Which happens when the "most esteemed in the church" are "lifted up" while the "least esteemed in the church" are "lowered" or ignored. )

:)
 
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
#82
#82
I am convinced we all just talk to ourselves here dont yall?

LOL!
 
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
#83
#83
GaryA said:
1 Corinthians 6:

[SUP]1[/SUP] Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? [SUP]2[/SUP] Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? [SUP]3[/SUP] Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? [SUP]4[/SUP] If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. [SUP]5[/SUP] I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? [SUP]6[/SUP] But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. [SUP]7[/SUP] Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? [SUP]8[/SUP] Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.


I believe that there are two "main points" that Paul is making here:

~ Those in the Church should not be going outside of the Church to "solve" disputes / problems between its members. It is a shame for any saint to place their "concerns" in the hands of anyone who is not a saint. It is a shame for a saint to voluntarily place themselves under the judgment of anyone who is not a saint. It is a shame if saints cannot "solve" their own disputes / problems themselves.

~ Even the "least" of those in the Church should be able to judge matters [ of this life ]. It is a shame if all ( each and every one ) who are in the Church are not able to judge matters [ of this life ].

Verse 4 is a statement, not a question. It is a "suggestive" command. ( And, yes - perhaps a bit sarcastic? ) It is making the point that - the "least esteemed in the church" would / should judge well matters [ of this life ] - and that, none should be afraid of their judgment ( Because, their 'discipleship' / 'training' / [ spiritual ] 'maturity' should not be any different than - and "just as good as" - any of the "most esteemed in the church" - i.e., they should be "just as able as anyone" to judge matters [ of this life ]. )

By telling them to set the "least esteemed in the church" as judges, Paul is reinforcing the foundational 'tenant' of doctrine that - if properly and faithfully followed - prevents "off-balance" leadership within the Church. ( Which happens when the "most esteemed in the church" are "lifted up" while the "least esteemed in the church" are "lowered" or ignored. )

:)
Click to expand...
Thats what I thought, although any correction doesnt seem to change anything in the overall picture.
 
G

GaryA

Guest
#84
#84
DesiredHaven said:
Thats what I thought, although any correction doesnt seem to change anything in the overall picture.
Click to expand...
The problem with the "big picture" is that the 'Church' today does not "operate" [ quite ] like the 1st century 'Church'. The "leadership structure" is actually different ( somewhat by necessity? ); however, it is still different...

EDIT: Most often, there is too much "headship" in people - and, not enough in Christ...

:)
 
Last edited:
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
#85
#85
GaryA said:
The problem with the "big picture" is that the 'Church' today does not "operate" [ quite ] like the 1st century 'Church'. The "leadership structure" is actually different ( somewhat by necessity? ); however, it is still different...

EDIT: Most often, there is too much "headship" in people - and, not enough in Christ...

:)
Click to expand...
Christ is the head, so wouldnt too much headship in them be as Christ in them??
 
G

GaryA

Guest
#86
#86
DesiredHaven said:
Christ is the head, so wouldnt too much headship in them be as Christ in them??
Click to expand...
The phrase "too much headship" means "more headship than there should be"...

By that, I mean - too much headship in the [ fallible ] person than in [ infallible ] Christ. In other words, actual headship of a church ( please understand the definition ) should not be allowed to be assumed by a person -- all should be taught and encouraged to submit to Christ - not the paster, etc. Proper leadership in a church does not "usurp" the proper place of Christ over the church. It leads - leads by example, leads by proper preaching and teaching of the Word, etc. - without "taking command" of / over the church.

EDIT: The leadership of a church by no means is guaranteed to have Christ... ;)

( have - "be [ fully ] aligned with and under the direction of" )

:)
 
Last edited:
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
#87
#87
GaryA said:
The phrase "too much headship" means "more headship than there should be"...

By that, I mean - too much headship in the [ fallible ] person than in [ infallible ] Christ. In other words, actual headship of a church ( please understand the definition ) should not be allowed to be assumed by a person -- all should be taught and encouraged to submit to Christ - not the paster, etc. Proper leadership in a church does not "usurp" the proper place of Christ over the church. It leads - leads by example, leads by proper preaching and teaching of the Word, etc. - without "taking command" of / over the church.

EDIT: The leadership of a church by no means is guaranteed to have Christ... ;)

( have - "be [ fully ] aligned with and under the direction of" )

:)
Click to expand...
Gotcha thanks. Yeah, probably not holding to the head (and His preeminence) but rather preferring the preeminence of that headship as was Diotrephes or something.
 
G

GaryA

Guest
#88
#88
DesiredHaven said:
Gotcha thanks. Yeah, probably not holding to the head (and His preeminence) but rather preferring the preeminence of that headship as was Diotrephes or something.
Click to expand...
What you have to understand is -- what was the "norm" in the 1st century - every member of a church being "full of the Holy Ghost" and the Lord Jesus Christ ( not saying that every member was - just that it was the "norm" - i.e., most were ) - is not the "norm" today ( not even close ).

If you were to ask the "most esteemed in the church" today, the question:

"Would you be willing to submit yourself to the judgment ( decision ) of the "least esteemed in the church" ( to solve a conflict )?

- the answer would very likely be:

"No way!"

UNLESS -- ALL of those in that church were considered to be "full of the Holy Ghost" and the Lord Jesus Christ - because they were ALL properly discipled and taught - and known to be [ spiritually ] mature enough to do so -- and "could be trusted" to "handle" the conflict resolution with wisdom...

-- which is virtually - if not actually - nonexistant today.

:)
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#89
#89
DesiredHaven said:
Like how are they which are the least esteemed in your church chosen, and set to judge (between the brethren) and in
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point Paul was making, somewhat ironically, even sarcastically. Read it in the NASB. I think it makes much more sense.

1 Corinthians 6, NASB
4 So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?​

Paul is asking, again ironically or sarcastically, "Do you let the local courts run your church?" The church doesn't appoint anyone other than the already established pastors and elders/deacons to hear a dispute between members.
 
Last edited:
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
#90
#90
Alrighty brethren the verse has been corrected and then reposted and it looks like (up to this page) no one is reading back and therefore posting both the same error (supposedly) but also any corrections that have been made and I will skip out on repeating the thread, so this thread is up for the taking I am finished on it

Have fun
 
J

JesusistheChrist

Guest
#91
#91
Viligant_Warrior said:
I think you missed the point Paul was making, somewhat ironically, even sarcastically. Read it in the NASB. I think it makes much more sense.
1 Corinthians 6, NASB
4 So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?​

Paul is asking, again ironically or sarcastically, "Do you let the local courts run your church?" The church doesn't appoint anyone other than the already established pastors and elders/deacons to hear a dispute between members.
[/SIZE]
Click to expand...
Even in the NASB translation, Paul was obviously rebuking them for not being able to judge these matters themselves within the church:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6&version=NASB

1 Corinthians 6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Lawsuits Discouraged

6 Does any one of you, when he has a [SUP][a][/SUP]case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the [SUP][b][/SUP]saints? [SUP]2 [/SUP]Or do you not know that the [SUP][c][/SUP]saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to [SUP][d][/SUP]constitute the smallest law courts? [SUP]3 [/SUP]Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? [SUP]4 [/SUP]So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, [SUP][e][/SUP]do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? [SUP]5 [/SUP]I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, [SUP]6 [/SUP]but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#92
#92
JesusistheChrist said:
Even in the NASB translation, Paul was obviously rebuking them for not being able to judge these matters themselves within the church:
Click to expand...
Agreed. However, the OP was seeking to understand how the local church appoints the "lesser" members to make judgment between two fellow members. That's not what Paul is talking about, but the KJV confuses the issue with an awkward translation.
 
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#93
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#93
Viligant_Warrior said:
Agreed. However, the OP was seeking to understand how the local church appoints the "lesser" members to make judgment between two fellow members. That's not what Paul is talking about, but the KJV confuses the issue with an awkward translation.
Click to expand...
That's sure nothing new......
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#94
#94
Willie-T said:
That's sure nothing new......
Click to expand...
Nope. The father we get from it's publication date, the less sense it makes to the modern English speaker, too.

The "clicks" in my mind's ear sound like thousands of TVs being turned off as I join yet another collection of "Ignore" lists.


 
J

JesusistheChrist

Guest
#95
#95
Viligant_Warrior said:
Agreed. However, the OP was seeking to understand how the local church appoints the "lesser" members to make judgment between two fellow members. That's not what Paul is talking about, but the KJV confuses the issue with an awkward translation.
Click to expand...
Do you have any proof that it is indeed an "an awkward translation"? There are other translations which translate it similarly...how do you know which is correct? I'm just asking.
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#96
#96
JesusistheChrist said:
Do you have any proof that it is indeed an "an awkward translation"? There are other translations which translate it similarly...how do you know which is correct? I'm just asking.
Click to expand...
Like I suggested to the OP, compare her posting of the KJV, and my posting of the NASB.

1 Corinthians 6, KJV
4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.​

1 Corinthians 6, NASB
4 I So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?.​

It's obvious. Paul was not talking about anyone being "less esteemed" in the church. He was talking about people who are "of not account in the church" -- the local courts -- having a say in running the church.
 
Last edited:
J

JesusistheChrist

Guest
#97
#97
Viligant_Warrior said:
Like I suggested to the OP, compare her posting of the KJV, and my posting of the NASB. It's obvious.
Click to expand...
It's obvious that they differ, but that doesn't prove which one is correct. How do you know which one is correct? That is what I'm asking.
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#98
#98
JesusistheChrist said:
It's obvious that they differ, but that doesn't prove which one is correct. How do you know which one is correct? That is what I'm asking.
Click to expand...
Can you think of any principle stated elsewhere in the Bible that gives authority to the "less esteemed" to make judgment for or against anyone considered their brothers/sisters in Christ? Let me help: There is no such principle.

The way the NASB reads, it is clear -- Paul is telling them throughout this passage, we will judge angels, so why do we go to the local courts to sue one another? The KJV/s rendering is, to be solicitous, awkward. To be frank, it is just plain wrong.

The reason it is clear in the NASB is because it is compiled for a far greater number of manuscripts, thus reducing/eliminating copying errors that were common to the set of manuscripts used by the KJV scholars. They did an excellent job. But they didn't have enough to work with.
 
MarcR

MarcR

Senior Member
#99
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
#99
Viligant_Warrior said:
I think you missed the point Paul was making, somewhat ironically, even sarcastically. Read it in the NASB. I think it makes much more sense.
1 Corinthians 6, NASB
4 So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?​

Paul is asking, again ironically or sarcastically, "Do you let the local courts run your church?" The church doesn't appoint anyone other than the already established pastors and elders/deacons to hear a dispute between members.
[/SIZE]
Click to expand...
I think your comments are well founded; however the fact remains that few if any Churches practice either Biblical Church discipline or Biblical conflict resolution.

If Biblical conflict resolution were practiced, each party to a dispute would ask an equal number of church members to mediate the dispute and the pastor would moderate with only a tie breaker vote.
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#100
#100
MarcR said:
I think your comments are well founded; however the fact remains that few if any Churches practice either Biblical Church discipline or Biblical conflict resolution.
Click to expand...
I haven't been to every church, so I can't say for sure whether that statement is accurate or not. I know my church does. I know every SBC church I've been a member of since my salvation March 3, 1993, has practiced proper church discipline.

I've been a part or have knowledge of several other churches that do so, both here in the KC metro area, and in Colorado Springs where I lived for a few years.

Nonetheless, the OP's question is about settling disputes between brothers/sisters in Christ, and that is the proper purview of all members, but ultimately must rest with the pastors and elders/deacons, should it be necessary to take it that far. Matthew 18:15-20. Most people stop at v. 17, but that's a mistake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.