07-08-2008, 11:18 AM
Good morning everyone ... :hibye: ( i had to edit in a paragraph I somehow deleted when I was copying it from the top to make a comment on ... it is in now ... )
I have been doing a wee bit of reading (emphasis on the 'wee') and was quite taken aback at the reasoning on this subheading in the new book ... 'Keep Yourself In God's Love' ...
Maybe I am misreading it ... but it seems to me that the reasoning is quite flawed ...? :shocked::huh::scratchhead:
Maybe some comments might be good on this subheading to help our brothers and sisters? :post: :love:
I will type out the subheading ... I don't have a scanner to scan in it ... maybe I can get hubby to do it later or someone else can so that people may know it is quoted correctly and in its entirety so as to not misrepresent what they are saying ... :giverose:
Resolving Disputes in Business Matters
As recorded at 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, the apostle Paul discussed lawsuits between fellow believers. He expressed dismay that some Christians in Corinth would "dare to go to court before unrighteous men." (Verse 1) Paul gave strong reasons why Christians should not sue one another in secular courts but rather settle disputes within the congregation setting. Let us consider some of the reasons for this inspired counsel and then touch on a few situations not necessarily covered by this directive.
If we have a business dispute with a fellow believer, we would first of all seek to handle matters Jehovah's way, not our own. (Proverbs 14:12) As Jesus showed, it is best to settle a disagreement quickly before it escalates into a major issue. (Matthew 5:23-26) Sadly, though, some Christians become overly contentious, even taking disputes into secular courts. Paul said: "It mean altogether a defeat for you that you are having lawsuits with one another." Why? A key reason is that such proceedings may well reflect poorly on the good name of the congregation and the God we worship. We therefore take to heart Paul's question: "Why do you not rather let yourselves be wronged?" -Verse 7.
Paul also reasoned that God has given the congregation a fine arrangement for settling many disputes. The elders are Christian men made wise by their knowledge of Scriptural truths, and Paul says that they are "able to judge between ... brothers" when it comes to "matters of this life." (Verses 3-5) Jesus showed that disputes involving serious wrongs, such as slander and fraud, should be settled according to a three-step process: first, endeavoring to settle the matter privately between those involved; second, if the initial step fails, bringing along a witness or two; and third, if the preceding step fails, taking the matter to the congregation as represented by the elders.- Matthew 18:15-17.
Of course, Christian elders are not necessarily lawyers or businessmen and do not need to act as such. They do not set the terms for settling business disputes between brothers. Rather, they seek to help all parties involved to apply the Scriptures and agree on an amicable resolution. In complex cases, they may wish to consult with the circuit overseer or the branch office of Jehovah's Witnesses. However, there are situations that lie outside the realm covered by Paul's counsel. What are some of these?
In some cases, a lawsuit may be a simple formality or a legal necessity in pursuing unselfish and peaceful ends. For instance, a lawsuit may be the only mechanism available in getting a divorce decree, acquiring custody of a child, determining alimony payments, obtaining insurance compensation, being listed among creditors in a bankruptcy proceeding, and probating wills. There are also cases in which a brother might feel compelled to countersue in order to protect himself in a lawsuit.*
If such lawsuits are pursued without a spirit of contention, they may not violate the spirit of Paul's inspired counsel.# Nonetheless, a Christian's priority should be the sanctification of Jehovah's name and the peace and unity of the congregation. Christ's followers are marked first and foremost by their love, and "love ... does not look for its own interests."- 1Corinthians 13:4,5; John 13:34,35.
*In rare instance, one Christian might commit a serious crime against another - such as rape, assault, murder, or major theft. In such cases, it would not be unchristian to report the matter to the authorities, even though doing so might result in a court case or a criminal trial.
#For further information, please see The Watchtower, March 15, 1997, pages 17-22, and October 15, 1991, pages 25-8.
Okee dokee as our dear sis 'eyes and ears' would say ... :D
I thought I would try to make some comments on the paragraphs above and see what ya'll think ...? :love:
As recorded at 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, the apostle Paul discussed lawsuits between fellow believers. He expressed dismay that some Christians in Corinth would "dare to go to court before unrighteous men." (Verse 1) Paul gave strong reasons why Christians should not sue one another in secular courts but rather settle disputes within the congregation setting. Let us consider some of the reasons for this inspired counsel and then touch on a few situations not necessarily covered by this directive.
Now, in trying to look closer at the words of 1Cor. 6:1 I decided to look up the Greek wording and try to get in mind the context of the setting being spoken of ...
1Cor. 6:1 ...
(ASV) Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?
(BBE) How is it, that if any one of you has a cause at law against another, he takes it before a Gentile judge and not before the saints?
Now, when I looked up the word for 'having a matter against' I was a bit surprised as to the meaning of it and it perhaps sheds a little bit of added information to what Paul was speaking about perhaps? :blush:
pragma prag'-mah
From G4238; a deed; by implication an affair; by extension an object (material): - business, matter, thing, work.
(4238) prassō pras'-so
A primary verb; to “practiseâ€, that is, perform repeatedly or habitually (thus differing from G4160, which properly refers to a single act);
So, it would appear that perhaps the brothers at that time were MAKING A HABIT of taking their brother to court for every LITTLE thing as well as BIG things, thus clearly showing that they did not understand the teachings of our Lord in how to deal with matters between brothers. :(
Indeed there ARE some things (hopefully most) of which we can and should deal BETWEEN BROTHERS (hopefully never involving the elders at all as mature Christians should be able to handle their affairs as brother and sister) in the spirit of love and the goal of 'gaining' and preserving our brotherly affection for one another. :heartbeat::friends:
If we have a business dispute with a fellow believer, we would first of all seek to handle matters Jehovah's way, not our own. (Proverbs 14:12) As Jesus showed, it is best to settle a disagreement quickly before it escalates into a major issue. (Matthew 5:23-26) Sadly, though, some Christians become overly contentious, even taking disputes into secular courts. Paul said: "It means altogether a defeat for you that you are having lawsuits with one another." Why? A key reason is that such proceedings may well reflect poorly on the good name of the congregation and the God we worship. We therefore take to heart Paul's question: "Why do you not rather let yourselves be wronged?" -Verse 7.
Now when I read this over it seems to me that they are 'perhaps' trying to take TWO separate things and blend them into ONE ...? :dontknow:
A 'business dispute' would be dealing in LEGAL matters wouldn't it and not just a 'disagreement' between brothers :readthis: (although a 'disagreement' could also arise if the brothers didn't agree on a particular aspect of their business, hence the importance of well thought out and specific CONTRACTS) ;)
Just because a brother 'takes another to court' does that necessarily mean they are 'contentious' or don't want to work things out ...? :dontknow:
Sometimes there are LEGITIMATE business reasons why it must be so. Sometimes having an arbitrator can be a big help ... someone who isn't connected to the situation and has the BUSINESS KNOWLEDGE to HELP them come to a resolution.
To have the attitude of 'just letting ourselves be wronged' in serious BUSINESS things would go AGAINST Scriptural counsel IMHO ... for how would doing so help our brother or sister realize their mistake or conduct ...? If we keep letting things go would they not continue practicing something that is not in harmony with God's principles or legal things and thus opening up the way to hurt others? :dontknow:
Paul also reasoned that God has given the congregation a fine arrangement for settling many disputes. The elders are Christian men made wise by their knowledge of Scriptural truths, and Paul says that they are "able to judge between ... brothers" when it comes to "matters of this life." (Verses 3-5) Jesus showed that disputes involving serious wrongs, such as slander and fraud, should be settled according to a three-step process: first, endeavoring to settle the matter privately between those involved; second, if the initial step fails, bringing along a witness or two; and third, if the preceding step fails, taking the matter to the congregation as represented by the elders.- Matthew 18:15-17.
Indeed I agree that Jehovah and Jesus have given us a fine arrangement for settling matters ... :read::thumbup:
And indeed, when problems arise where we find ourselves at 'odds' with our brothers :(:angry: then may we take this admonition to heart ... :heartbeat: and seek to regain peaceful relationships with one another! :peace::hug:
In reading over the verses in 1Cor. 6:3-5 I had a question (3) but that is for another thread ... ;)
However, again, do we not have to keep in mind what was happening at that time? Was Paul not giving this counsel because of the FRIVOLOUS lawsuits our brothers were bringing against one another?
So, to use the Scripture in Matt. 18 to speak about 'serious wrongs' is perhaps NOT strictly speaking, a 'guide' by which to measure his words? :dontknow:
Being raised as a witness this scripture has always been applied to 'slander and fraud' ... but now I am really not so sure ...? Where does it say that? Is it not speaking about WHATEVER SIN our brother does against us? Thus perhaps speaking more about CONDUCT that would go against Scripture and Godly principles? (Of course that is not to say that having a business problem wouldn't be because of them not following a Scriptural course ... but how many brothers and sisters have backgrounds in legal matters so as to know how to fix them ... thus making them vulnerable to the one who is in the wrong or out to defraud ... assuming, of course, they are doing so deliberately ... and thus having someone acting on their behalf so as to not be swindled or taken advantage of would be ok wouldn't it ...?) :dontknow:
And regardless of the fact that the society has said 'there are no animalistic people in Jehovah's organization' ... I would sadly like to differ on this false and misleading statement ... :(
Of course, Christian elders are not necessarily lawyers or businessmen and do not need to act as such. They do not set the terms for settling business disputes between brothers. Rather, they seek to help all parties involved to apply the Scriptures and agree on an amicable resolution. In complex cases, they may wish to consult with the circuit overseer or the branch office of Jehovah's Witnesses. However, there are situations that lie outside the realm covered by Paul's counsel. What are some of these?
So one could ask ... why go to them then? Could not 'any' who is 'spiritual' help out ... especially if they ARE 'businessmen' or 'lawyers' ... wouldn't that make more sense somehow? Why is necessary to go the 'circuit overseer or branch office for 'consultation' ... how many circuit overseers would have 'business experience' so as to 'consult' with are they not primarily there for service...? and if they are not to be around for long (if that is true) then I guess they won't be an option anyway ...
In some cases, a lawsuit may be a simple formality or a legal necessity in pursuing unselfish and peaceful ends. For instance, a lawsuit may be the only mechanism available in getting a divorce decree, acquiring custody of a child, determining alimony payments, obtaining insurance compensation, being listed among creditors in a bankruptcy proceeding, and probating wills. There are also cases in which a brother might feel compelled to countersue in order to protect himself in a lawsuit.*
I was glad to see this added ... for it shows that they are aware that there are indeed times when it is RIGHT to go to court and that the 'reproach on the congregation' doesn't seem to come into it ... ;):whistle:
If such lawsuits are pursued without a spirit of contention, they may not violate the spirit of Paul's inspired counsel.# Nonetheless, a Christian's priority should be the sanctification of Jehovah's name and the peace and unity of the congregation. Christ's followers are marked first and foremost by their love, and "love ... does not look for its own interests."- 1Corinthians 13:4,5; John 13:34,35.
Now, when I read this I couldn't help but think that when it comes to 'cutody battles' seldom is this accomplished without a 'spirit of contention' by one or both parties ... if a divorce is being handled ... seldom it is done with an 'I love you' attitude and so on ... but perhaps I am just being picky here? :blush:
For example, I know of one situation where a sister hit another sister (cars involved not physical ... :whistle: ) and the sister that was hit and had her car damaged sued the insurance company for damages. The sister who was being 'sued' was so angry at the other sister for suing HER (she couldn't seem to understand that it was the INSURANCE company being sued not her personally) and why didn't she just 'let herself be wronged' (hmm :huh: sound familiar at how our brothers reason in light of the above scripture?) and show 'love' to her by not suing her and reasoning on the fact that we 'shouldn't take our brothers to court' that she wouldn't speak to her for YEARS! :shocked::(
To me, this experience, shows the IMPORTANCE of seeking to understand as well as we can exactly what is being spoken of by Paul and how we would apply it today.
*In rare instances, one Christian might commit a serious crime against another - such as rape, assault, murder, or major theft. In such cases, it would not be unchristian to report the matter to the authorities, even though doing so might result in a court case or a criminal trial.
Now while I was glad that they were so kind to add this in a footnote ... although what most of them have to do with BUSINESS matters I don't know ... :shocked::huh::dontknow: I was kind of curious as to why they might have left out CHILD ABUSE in the list??!! :confused::shocked:
I also noted that 'MAJOR theft' was okay ... but what is 'MAJOR theft' ... to someone who has VERY LITTLE a hundred or five hundred dollars is MAJOR ... and if that hundred means them losing out on something that they NEED (to make a payment on something or to lose their business or whatever) then who is to make the 'judgment call' on what is considered 'major' ...?
Faithful in LITTLE faithful in MUCH ... UNfaithful in LITTLE UNfaithful in much ... :read:
Yes, if it doesn't hurt us or our family 'letting ourselves be wronged' may be an option ... but in my heart of hearts I cannot see that always letting this be the case (it was my mantra growing up by my parents ... saying I was sorry all the time for things done against me and so on) is necessarily good for the person who is doing the 'wrong' ... :( but that is just my 'imperfect reasoning' on it I know ... :redface:
#For further information, please see The Watchtower, March 15, 1997, pages 17-22, and October 15, 1991, pages 25-8.
I didn't take the time to look up these extra articles ... :blush:
So, when I finished these paragraphs in light of the name of the subheading, I couldn't help but think that 'business matters' is a trifle misleading ...
Also, in my 'cynicism' :thinking: and 'questioning' (rebellious I know ;) ) I also couldn't help but wonder if this was written in such a way so as to slyly discourage anyone from taking their brothers to court for MOST reasons ... as they most certainly wouldn't want to be accused or thought of has bring 'reproach upon JEHOVAH ... nor HIS congregation ... nor cause peace and unity to be called into question or be disrupted.
Anyway, that is my thoughts ... :giverose:
Luv as always ... BR :sheepy: :bouncyhearts:
I have been doing a wee bit of reading (emphasis on the 'wee') and was quite taken aback at the reasoning on this subheading in the new book ... 'Keep Yourself In God's Love' ...
Maybe I am misreading it ... but it seems to me that the reasoning is quite flawed ...? :shocked::huh::scratchhead:
Maybe some comments might be good on this subheading to help our brothers and sisters? :post: :love:
I will type out the subheading ... I don't have a scanner to scan in it ... maybe I can get hubby to do it later or someone else can so that people may know it is quoted correctly and in its entirety so as to not misrepresent what they are saying ... :giverose:
Resolving Disputes in Business Matters
As recorded at 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, the apostle Paul discussed lawsuits between fellow believers. He expressed dismay that some Christians in Corinth would "dare to go to court before unrighteous men." (Verse 1) Paul gave strong reasons why Christians should not sue one another in secular courts but rather settle disputes within the congregation setting. Let us consider some of the reasons for this inspired counsel and then touch on a few situations not necessarily covered by this directive.
If we have a business dispute with a fellow believer, we would first of all seek to handle matters Jehovah's way, not our own. (Proverbs 14:12) As Jesus showed, it is best to settle a disagreement quickly before it escalates into a major issue. (Matthew 5:23-26) Sadly, though, some Christians become overly contentious, even taking disputes into secular courts. Paul said: "It mean altogether a defeat for you that you are having lawsuits with one another." Why? A key reason is that such proceedings may well reflect poorly on the good name of the congregation and the God we worship. We therefore take to heart Paul's question: "Why do you not rather let yourselves be wronged?" -Verse 7.
Paul also reasoned that God has given the congregation a fine arrangement for settling many disputes. The elders are Christian men made wise by their knowledge of Scriptural truths, and Paul says that they are "able to judge between ... brothers" when it comes to "matters of this life." (Verses 3-5) Jesus showed that disputes involving serious wrongs, such as slander and fraud, should be settled according to a three-step process: first, endeavoring to settle the matter privately between those involved; second, if the initial step fails, bringing along a witness or two; and third, if the preceding step fails, taking the matter to the congregation as represented by the elders.- Matthew 18:15-17.
Of course, Christian elders are not necessarily lawyers or businessmen and do not need to act as such. They do not set the terms for settling business disputes between brothers. Rather, they seek to help all parties involved to apply the Scriptures and agree on an amicable resolution. In complex cases, they may wish to consult with the circuit overseer or the branch office of Jehovah's Witnesses. However, there are situations that lie outside the realm covered by Paul's counsel. What are some of these?
In some cases, a lawsuit may be a simple formality or a legal necessity in pursuing unselfish and peaceful ends. For instance, a lawsuit may be the only mechanism available in getting a divorce decree, acquiring custody of a child, determining alimony payments, obtaining insurance compensation, being listed among creditors in a bankruptcy proceeding, and probating wills. There are also cases in which a brother might feel compelled to countersue in order to protect himself in a lawsuit.*
If such lawsuits are pursued without a spirit of contention, they may not violate the spirit of Paul's inspired counsel.# Nonetheless, a Christian's priority should be the sanctification of Jehovah's name and the peace and unity of the congregation. Christ's followers are marked first and foremost by their love, and "love ... does not look for its own interests."- 1Corinthians 13:4,5; John 13:34,35.
*In rare instance, one Christian might commit a serious crime against another - such as rape, assault, murder, or major theft. In such cases, it would not be unchristian to report the matter to the authorities, even though doing so might result in a court case or a criminal trial.
#For further information, please see The Watchtower, March 15, 1997, pages 17-22, and October 15, 1991, pages 25-8.
Okee dokee as our dear sis 'eyes and ears' would say ... :D
I thought I would try to make some comments on the paragraphs above and see what ya'll think ...? :love:
As recorded at 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, the apostle Paul discussed lawsuits between fellow believers. He expressed dismay that some Christians in Corinth would "dare to go to court before unrighteous men." (Verse 1) Paul gave strong reasons why Christians should not sue one another in secular courts but rather settle disputes within the congregation setting. Let us consider some of the reasons for this inspired counsel and then touch on a few situations not necessarily covered by this directive.
Now, in trying to look closer at the words of 1Cor. 6:1 I decided to look up the Greek wording and try to get in mind the context of the setting being spoken of ...
1Cor. 6:1 ...
(ASV) Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?
(BBE) How is it, that if any one of you has a cause at law against another, he takes it before a Gentile judge and not before the saints?
Now, when I looked up the word for 'having a matter against' I was a bit surprised as to the meaning of it and it perhaps sheds a little bit of added information to what Paul was speaking about perhaps? :blush:
pragma prag'-mah
From G4238; a deed; by implication an affair; by extension an object (material): - business, matter, thing, work.
(4238) prassō pras'-so
A primary verb; to “practiseâ€, that is, perform repeatedly or habitually (thus differing from G4160, which properly refers to a single act);
So, it would appear that perhaps the brothers at that time were MAKING A HABIT of taking their brother to court for every LITTLE thing as well as BIG things, thus clearly showing that they did not understand the teachings of our Lord in how to deal with matters between brothers. :(
Indeed there ARE some things (hopefully most) of which we can and should deal BETWEEN BROTHERS (hopefully never involving the elders at all as mature Christians should be able to handle their affairs as brother and sister) in the spirit of love and the goal of 'gaining' and preserving our brotherly affection for one another. :heartbeat::friends:
If we have a business dispute with a fellow believer, we would first of all seek to handle matters Jehovah's way, not our own. (Proverbs 14:12) As Jesus showed, it is best to settle a disagreement quickly before it escalates into a major issue. (Matthew 5:23-26) Sadly, though, some Christians become overly contentious, even taking disputes into secular courts. Paul said: "It means altogether a defeat for you that you are having lawsuits with one another." Why? A key reason is that such proceedings may well reflect poorly on the good name of the congregation and the God we worship. We therefore take to heart Paul's question: "Why do you not rather let yourselves be wronged?" -Verse 7.
Now when I read this over it seems to me that they are 'perhaps' trying to take TWO separate things and blend them into ONE ...? :dontknow:
A 'business dispute' would be dealing in LEGAL matters wouldn't it and not just a 'disagreement' between brothers :readthis: (although a 'disagreement' could also arise if the brothers didn't agree on a particular aspect of their business, hence the importance of well thought out and specific CONTRACTS) ;)
Just because a brother 'takes another to court' does that necessarily mean they are 'contentious' or don't want to work things out ...? :dontknow:
Sometimes there are LEGITIMATE business reasons why it must be so. Sometimes having an arbitrator can be a big help ... someone who isn't connected to the situation and has the BUSINESS KNOWLEDGE to HELP them come to a resolution.
To have the attitude of 'just letting ourselves be wronged' in serious BUSINESS things would go AGAINST Scriptural counsel IMHO ... for how would doing so help our brother or sister realize their mistake or conduct ...? If we keep letting things go would they not continue practicing something that is not in harmony with God's principles or legal things and thus opening up the way to hurt others? :dontknow:
Paul also reasoned that God has given the congregation a fine arrangement for settling many disputes. The elders are Christian men made wise by their knowledge of Scriptural truths, and Paul says that they are "able to judge between ... brothers" when it comes to "matters of this life." (Verses 3-5) Jesus showed that disputes involving serious wrongs, such as slander and fraud, should be settled according to a three-step process: first, endeavoring to settle the matter privately between those involved; second, if the initial step fails, bringing along a witness or two; and third, if the preceding step fails, taking the matter to the congregation as represented by the elders.- Matthew 18:15-17.
Indeed I agree that Jehovah and Jesus have given us a fine arrangement for settling matters ... :read::thumbup:
And indeed, when problems arise where we find ourselves at 'odds' with our brothers :(:angry: then may we take this admonition to heart ... :heartbeat: and seek to regain peaceful relationships with one another! :peace::hug:
In reading over the verses in 1Cor. 6:3-5 I had a question (3) but that is for another thread ... ;)
However, again, do we not have to keep in mind what was happening at that time? Was Paul not giving this counsel because of the FRIVOLOUS lawsuits our brothers were bringing against one another?
So, to use the Scripture in Matt. 18 to speak about 'serious wrongs' is perhaps NOT strictly speaking, a 'guide' by which to measure his words? :dontknow:
Being raised as a witness this scripture has always been applied to 'slander and fraud' ... but now I am really not so sure ...? Where does it say that? Is it not speaking about WHATEVER SIN our brother does against us? Thus perhaps speaking more about CONDUCT that would go against Scripture and Godly principles? (Of course that is not to say that having a business problem wouldn't be because of them not following a Scriptural course ... but how many brothers and sisters have backgrounds in legal matters so as to know how to fix them ... thus making them vulnerable to the one who is in the wrong or out to defraud ... assuming, of course, they are doing so deliberately ... and thus having someone acting on their behalf so as to not be swindled or taken advantage of would be ok wouldn't it ...?) :dontknow:
And regardless of the fact that the society has said 'there are no animalistic people in Jehovah's organization' ... I would sadly like to differ on this false and misleading statement ... :(
Of course, Christian elders are not necessarily lawyers or businessmen and do not need to act as such. They do not set the terms for settling business disputes between brothers. Rather, they seek to help all parties involved to apply the Scriptures and agree on an amicable resolution. In complex cases, they may wish to consult with the circuit overseer or the branch office of Jehovah's Witnesses. However, there are situations that lie outside the realm covered by Paul's counsel. What are some of these?
So one could ask ... why go to them then? Could not 'any' who is 'spiritual' help out ... especially if they ARE 'businessmen' or 'lawyers' ... wouldn't that make more sense somehow? Why is necessary to go the 'circuit overseer or branch office for 'consultation' ... how many circuit overseers would have 'business experience' so as to 'consult' with are they not primarily there for service...? and if they are not to be around for long (if that is true) then I guess they won't be an option anyway ...
In some cases, a lawsuit may be a simple formality or a legal necessity in pursuing unselfish and peaceful ends. For instance, a lawsuit may be the only mechanism available in getting a divorce decree, acquiring custody of a child, determining alimony payments, obtaining insurance compensation, being listed among creditors in a bankruptcy proceeding, and probating wills. There are also cases in which a brother might feel compelled to countersue in order to protect himself in a lawsuit.*
I was glad to see this added ... for it shows that they are aware that there are indeed times when it is RIGHT to go to court and that the 'reproach on the congregation' doesn't seem to come into it ... ;):whistle:
If such lawsuits are pursued without a spirit of contention, they may not violate the spirit of Paul's inspired counsel.# Nonetheless, a Christian's priority should be the sanctification of Jehovah's name and the peace and unity of the congregation. Christ's followers are marked first and foremost by their love, and "love ... does not look for its own interests."- 1Corinthians 13:4,5; John 13:34,35.
Now, when I read this I couldn't help but think that when it comes to 'cutody battles' seldom is this accomplished without a 'spirit of contention' by one or both parties ... if a divorce is being handled ... seldom it is done with an 'I love you' attitude and so on ... but perhaps I am just being picky here? :blush:
For example, I know of one situation where a sister hit another sister (cars involved not physical ... :whistle: ) and the sister that was hit and had her car damaged sued the insurance company for damages. The sister who was being 'sued' was so angry at the other sister for suing HER (she couldn't seem to understand that it was the INSURANCE company being sued not her personally) and why didn't she just 'let herself be wronged' (hmm :huh: sound familiar at how our brothers reason in light of the above scripture?) and show 'love' to her by not suing her and reasoning on the fact that we 'shouldn't take our brothers to court' that she wouldn't speak to her for YEARS! :shocked::(
To me, this experience, shows the IMPORTANCE of seeking to understand as well as we can exactly what is being spoken of by Paul and how we would apply it today.
*In rare instances, one Christian might commit a serious crime against another - such as rape, assault, murder, or major theft. In such cases, it would not be unchristian to report the matter to the authorities, even though doing so might result in a court case or a criminal trial.
Now while I was glad that they were so kind to add this in a footnote ... although what most of them have to do with BUSINESS matters I don't know ... :shocked::huh::dontknow: I was kind of curious as to why they might have left out CHILD ABUSE in the list??!! :confused::shocked:
I also noted that 'MAJOR theft' was okay ... but what is 'MAJOR theft' ... to someone who has VERY LITTLE a hundred or five hundred dollars is MAJOR ... and if that hundred means them losing out on something that they NEED (to make a payment on something or to lose their business or whatever) then who is to make the 'judgment call' on what is considered 'major' ...?
Faithful in LITTLE faithful in MUCH ... UNfaithful in LITTLE UNfaithful in much ... :read:
Yes, if it doesn't hurt us or our family 'letting ourselves be wronged' may be an option ... but in my heart of hearts I cannot see that always letting this be the case (it was my mantra growing up by my parents ... saying I was sorry all the time for things done against me and so on) is necessarily good for the person who is doing the 'wrong' ... :( but that is just my 'imperfect reasoning' on it I know ... :redface:
#For further information, please see The Watchtower, March 15, 1997, pages 17-22, and October 15, 1991, pages 25-8.
I didn't take the time to look up these extra articles ... :blush:
So, when I finished these paragraphs in light of the name of the subheading, I couldn't help but think that 'business matters' is a trifle misleading ...
Also, in my 'cynicism' :thinking: and 'questioning' (rebellious I know ;) ) I also couldn't help but wonder if this was written in such a way so as to slyly discourage anyone from taking their brothers to court for MOST reasons ... as they most certainly wouldn't want to be accused or thought of has bring 'reproach upon JEHOVAH ... nor HIS congregation ... nor cause peace and unity to be called into question or be disrupted.
Anyway, that is my thoughts ... :giverose:
Luv as always ... BR :sheepy: :bouncyhearts: