|
|
|
"Should A Christmas Tree
Be Put In The Church Building?" Is There Any Scriptural Reason For Which Matthew 18 Can Be Bypassed Before Withdrawing From A Brother Or Sister? Harrell Davidson |
Question One: A sister from California writes asking about having a Christmas tree in the church building. She described herself as being 80 years young and had never seen a Christmas tree in the church building, but now she says they had one last year. She opined that she was looking for another place to go and worship though someone had asked here to stay, but she said, "I feel guilty." Dear sister, we would feel guilty also. The very first thing that is lacking is respect for the authority of the Word of God. Paul said, "And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him" (Colossians 3:17). There is not one approved example nor is there a command to have a Christmas tree in the church building. It is obvious that someone supposes that December 25th is Christ's birthday which is also incorrect. Secondly, the apostle of love wrote, "All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death" "(1 John 5:17). It cannot be righteous to have such a tree for righteousness is doing that which is right. The tree misses out on every account. James said, "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin" (James 4:17). This verse shows why you "feel guilty" because you know that you cannot worship here in good faith. While it might be difficult, we would look for a scriptural place to worship. Christmas trees in church buildings are brought over from denominational institutions. Question Two: Another question we have from our website asks. "My question relates to church discipline. In this day and age it seems like most congregations shy away from church discipline. However, in some situations congregations swing the other way. I would like to know if Matthew 18:15-17 establish a singular Scriptural pattern to be followed for church discipline with the final step being a withdrawal for the purposes of correction? In other words, is there any Scriptural reason for which Matthew 18 can be bypassed before withdrawing from a brother or sister?" The querist then gives several passages regarding withdrawing fellowship. Matthew 18:15-17 is clearly a passage that is the procedure that is to be followed in private personal sin, thus, it may be passed by if the sin is one of a public nature. Matthew 18 is to be a one on one basis and no other. If there is no repentance then witnesses are to be taken and finally take the matter to the entire congregation if no repentance is forthcoming. Titus 3:10 says for us to reject a "heretick" after the first and second admonition. When elders lead a congregation in disciplining an individual they may have studied with and prayed for such an one a dozen times — not two or three. It is up to the individual eldership or congregation as to the procedure. We do not have Matthew 18 as a set order to follow except in private sin. Obviously, we believe that an individual who is living in open sin and rebellion should be withdrawn from as the Scriptures indicate (cf. 2 Thessalonians 3:6), but how each congregation does so is up to that congregation. There are some precautionary procedures that we need to use that we do not have the space to cover with this brief answer. The greatest problem we face in this regard is that there is a lack of discipline in the Lord's church today. Thanks for the questions. |