Wherefore rebuke them sharply!/false teachers

[God'sElectSaint]

Greetings Beloved,
Interested to hear some opinions on this. I think this is a very relevant topic seeing there is so much false teaching. I know we are to speak the truth in love but there is also some strong language in the NT about rebuking false teachers. For instance Tit 1:13, Tit 2:15. How aggressive should we be? Now I know it depends on the doctrine in question but I am mainly speaking of matters like The Gospel itself, the deity of Christ, the trinity, and even blatant violations of morality such as homosexuality being accepted. On these significantly important matters how can a man speak the truth in love and yet rebuke them sharply? I'd like to hear some opinions of pastors and layfolk alike on how you handle such a serious matter as enduring sound doctrine or rather those not enduring it.

 

[Jimmy the Greek]

In my humble opinion, the context of Titus (as one of the pastoral epistles) is the church. So also, the context of the false teaching here is related to the same. When members of the body engage in false teaching, swift rebuke is called for . . . E.g. by the elders, whose qualifications have just been discussed. Even then, speaking the truth in love is appropriate. For me, speaking the truth in love can still include rebuke.

 

[God'sElectSaint]

In my humble opinion, the context of Titus (as one of the pastoral epistles) is the church. So also, the context of the false teaching here is related to the same. When members of the body engage in false teaching, swift rebuke is called for . . . E.g. by the elders, whose qualifications have just been discussed. Even then, speaking the truth in love is appropriate. For me, speaking the truth in love can still include rebuke.

Thank you. Yes I agree that the church is the context here. I agree about rebuking in love but I admit I can get quite passionate about these matters.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

In full agreement with Jim's comment;

Paul's concern is the well-being of the flock. The sheep are prey for wolves, or would-be wolves and lions. The rebuke is sharp, not for the lasting hurt of the sheep, but to warn them severely against the soul-destroying danger that grave error leads to. Parents have a range of compliance tendency in their children. One child needs to be told but once not to cross a particular line, and he stays far from it. Another one needs a second word--a rebuke--and a forceful reminder to listen to the parental wisdom. Elders in the church should exercise discernment in how to address people and problems in their purview.

If a member will not listen to a rebuke, Tit.3:10-11 is appropriate, "As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned." This person won't listen, and is a danger to the flock. We should still love him, especially if he has professed Christ as Lord; but he's a candidate for discipline, even unto excommunication if necessary. Because that may be the last thing that will deliver him back into the safety of the church's bounds for obedience to the truth, 1Cor.5:5, 1Pet.1:22.

My neighbor isn't a Christian and not a member of my church or any church, so rebuking his bad behavior (unless he is threatening me by it) is certain to be perceived as an assertion of power. He's under the power of Satan, so he's not free to change anyway, unless convicted of sin by Holy Spirit and given the power to repent, break away from Satan, and have the life of Christ in him. My rebuke of him is pointless. He needs the law of God that simply states the fact that God commands this, and he now knows he is a lawbreaker. His conscience is presently the only alternative power in his situation.

The point being: scolding those over whom someone has no recognized authority to demand compliance is part of what has brought portions of the church into disrepute. Telling a lawless man to "back off" is an appropriate kind of rebuke that fits a situation in which a protector of self or one's obligations must assert his right over an interloper. Warning people in the congregation by describing (even publicly, as on a blog or an article) a certain outsider according to his behavior or teaching may sound like a rebuke to that person, but since it wasn't directed at him to make him feel uncomfortable, should he complain perhaps he should be invited to mind his own business.

Sometimes curiosity about why Christians would avoid sinning themselves (as they define it according to Scripture) and certain sinners-actively-sinning (as they know them) may lead to a profitable gospel conversation. Only a person who knows and admits divine law could appreciate a godly rebuke. Prv.27:6, "Faithful are the wounds of a friend."

 

[God'sElectSaint]

In full agreement with Jim's comment;

Paul's concern is the well-being of the flock. The sheep are prey for wolves, or would-be wolves and lions. The rebuke is sharp, not for the lasting hurt of the sheep, but to warn them severely against the soul-destroying danger that grave error leads to. Parents have a range of compliance tendency in their children. One child needs to be told but once not to cross a particular line, and he stays far from it. Another one needs a second word--a rebuke--and a forceful reminder to listen to the parental wisdom. Elders in the church should exercise discernment in how to address people and problems in their purview.

If a member will not listen to a rebuke, Tit.3:10-11 is appropriate, "As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned." This person won't listen, and is a danger to the flock. We should still love him, especially if he has professed Christ as Lord; but he's a candidate for discipline, even unto excommunication if necessary. Because that may be the last thing that will deliver him back into the safety of the church's bounds for obedience to the truth, 1Cor.5:5, 1Pet.1:22.

My neighbor isn't a Christian and not a member of my church or any church, so rebuking his bad behavior (unless he is threatening me by it) is certain to be perceived as an assertion of power. He's under the power of Satan, so he's not free to change anyway, unless convicted of sin by Holy Spirit and given the power to repent, break away from Satan, and have the life of Christ in him. My rebuke of him is pointless. He needs the law of God that simply states the fact that God commands this, and he now knows he is a lawbreaker. His conscience is presently the only alternative power in his situation.

The point being: scolding those over whom someone has no recognized authority to demand compliance is part of what has brought portions of the church into disrepute. Telling a lawless man to "back off" is an appropriate kind of rebuke that fits a situation in which a protector of self or one's obligations must assert his right over an interloper. Warning people in the congregation by describing (even publicly, as on a blog or an article) a certain outsider according to his behavior or teaching may sound like a rebuke to that person, but since it wasn't directed at him to make him feel uncomfortable, should he complain perhaps he should be invited to mind his own business.

Sometimes curiosity about why Christians would avoid sinning themselves (as they define it according to Scripture) and certain sinners-actively-sinning (as they know them) may lead to a profitable gospel conversation. Only a person who knows and admits divine law could appreciate a godly rebuke. Prv.27:6, "Faithful are the wounds of a friend."

Thank you Rev. Bruce. Your comment was edifying and I agree completely. I think the degree of rebuke is individually determined. Of course rebuking those outside of Christ on false doctrine is pointless. Good reference on Proverbs 27:6 that makes an excellent point. Church discipline seems to be lost these days in many congregations. Many times you get the old taken out of context "Judge not" response. I brought a rebuke to one of my fellow younger Sister's and Brother's because they were living together outside of marriage and I believe I was gentle yet stern because they were clearly involved in sexual immorality. They deemed me judgmental and I merely referenced to them 1 Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?"
1 Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. They have refused to repent and I no longer associate with them but I do pray for them and am still cordial with them.