the Humanity of Jesus

PsyOps

Pixelated
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at.

Your claim was that Jesus established the CC when he charged Peter as the "rock" of His church. Jesus established His church but it was not the CC. It was called the Way. There is no mention of the Catholic church in the bible. The CC did not become the CC until sometime after the rule of Constantine. He lived some 270 years after Christ died.

If you were to say Jesus, through his charge to establish His church (or churhces) then I will buy that. If you read in Revelation there are 7 Churches: in Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.

I have run into Catholic after Catholic that runs this around to "The Catholic Church is the only one true church of Christ. If you are not part of it you are not saved". This is completely false. Just as Jesus proclaimed salvation for the Jews, it was also for the Gentiles. He did not say "...first for the Jew, then for the Catholic".
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Oh yeah, I can explain this...although I will point out that the burden of proof is on you to cite the source of your claims in the case of the former accusation, and in the latter, you need to be sure you are citing accurate sources of information.
To the question of "Mixed Marriage", from the Catechism of the Catholic Church
A case of marriage with disparity of cult (between a Catholic and a nonbaptized person) requires even greater circumspection.
:


1633 In many countries the situation of a mixed marriage (marriage between a Catholic and a baptized non-Catholic) often arises. It requires particular attention on the part of couples and their pastors.1634 Difference of confession between the spouses does not constitute an insurmountable obstacle for marriage,

So, in spite of what you've been told by others, you have the actual teaching of the CC before you.

To the 2nd question
The necessity of faith

161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation.42 "Since "without faith it is impossible to please [God]" and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life 'But he who endures to the end.'"43

And to the two quotes, Augustine, while a saint, and Fulgentius, who I've never heard of, does not speak or write infallibly on the doctrines of the Catholic church. So, while those quotes are a great source of fanning the flames of division, they are not to be taken as Church doctrine.
The Bible? Please identify the source of your information. I'm pretty certain I posted an answer to this question on this forum (or maybe it was another forum) before. The CC does not dictate which Bibles we are to use, although a Catholic would want to make sure that the Bible they are using is complete. I'll see if I can find my earlier citation.
So now I have a question for you. Are you going to continue to believe those erroneous ideas that you asked about, or do you have the clarification you need to correct any more anti-Catholic statements that others may make?

Do you want me to introduce you friends of mine that I know that were excommuncited because they married someone that was not Catholic? This is not an accusation, it's a fact and I'm not fond being demanded to explain such things I have personally experienced. I'm not implying this is practiced the entire CC. But it is practiced. And for the sake of my argument within the Christian faith the term "excommunication" is indigenous to the CC.
 
Last edited:

Bustem' Down

Give Peas a Chance
Do you want me to introduce you frields of mine that I know that were excommuncited because they married someone that was not Catholic? This is not an accusation, it's a fact and I'm not fond being demanded to explain such things I have personally experienced. I'm not implying this is practiced the entire CC. But it is practiced. And for the sake of my argument within the Christian faith the term "excommunication" is indigenous to the CC.

No, The Mormon church does excommunications also.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
So now I have a question for you. Are you going to continue to believe those erroneous ideas that you asked about, or do you have the clarification you need to correct any more anti-Catholic statements that others may make?

Okay, let me make something perfectly clear here... I did not enter into this discussion with the intent of voicing my disagreements with the CC. I am not anti-Catholic. My feelings towards the CC are not anti-Catholic. I simply have some fundamental disagreements with how the CC practices their faith, just as I have disagreements with how The Church of Christ or Presbyterians or Baptists cling to certain practices. I see stark similarities between what is happening to the Church (the entire body of the Church of Jesus Christ) today and the church of the days of Jesus. Jesus was extremely critical of the religious leaders of the day for their move away from God and toward their own power and dominion of their followers.

These criticisms by no means assumes what’s in someone’s heart or questions their relationship with God. I am not entitled to make such judgments. But I think I am entitled to question how a church runs their practices.

I apologize for coming off as anti-anything.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
No, The Mormon church does excommunications also.

My point is, the practice of excommunication was born out of the Catholic Church.

True story... When I lived in FL there was a rather large church down the road ("The Church of Jesus Christ" it was called). It was a proper church where everyone came in dressed in nice dresses and suits. Big money people. A destitute man came in dressed in tattered clothes. He sat down quietly in the back. He wasn’t looking for anything; no money or food or a hand out. He wanted to find God. When some of the people saw him there they demanded he leave. He was escorted out by their security people. This was reported in the local newspaper and people started protesting against the church; and rightfully so. They showed they are intolerant to anything that doesn’t live up to some superficial standard. The big question never got considered: WWJD. This is prevalent in many of our churches today.

This was a form of excommunication. So I realize it exists in other churches.
 

Bustem' Down

Give Peas a Chance
My point is, the practice of excommunication was born out of the Catholic Church.

Well, it's just a form of control. Religion would be hard pressed to get followers if there wasn't a way to control them, excommunication fills that gap, if you don't do as we say, you don't go to heaven.
 

libby

New Member
Do you want me to introduce you frields of mine that I know that were excommuncited because they married someone that was not Catholic? This is not an accusation, it's a fact and I'm not fond being demanded to explain such things I have personally experienced. I'm not implying this is practiced the entire CC. But it is practiced. And for the sake of my argument within the Christian faith the term "excommunication" is indigenous to the CC.

I have no problem accepting that your friends have said that they were "excommunicated", I just think they have misunderstood something. Show them the Catechism, tell them to show whoever told them they were excommunicated the Catechism. Someone has made a mistake unless there is more to the story.
You are not fond of having to explain personal experiences, but I'm not fond of seeing my faith disparaged by people who make false claims about what it teaches based on a friend who had a cousin who's mother-in-law said blah, blah, blah.
"Excommunication (Latin ex, out of, and communio or communicatio, communion -- exclusion from the communion), the principal and severest censure, is a medicinal, spiritual penalty that deprives the guilty Christian of all participation in the common blessings of ecclesiastical society. Being a penalty, it supposes guilt; and being the most serious penalty that the Church can inflict, it naturally supposes a very grave offence. It is also a medicinal rather than a vindictive penalty, being intended, not so much to punish the culprit, as to correct him and bring him back to the path of righteousness. It necessarily, therefore, contemplates the future, either to prevent the recurrence of certain culpable acts that have grievous external consequences, or, more especially, to induce the delinquent to satisfy the obligations incurred by his offence. Its object and its effect are loss of communion, i.e. of the spiritual benefits shared by all the members of Christian society; hence, it can affect only those who by baptism have been admitted to that society. Undoubtedly there can and do exist other penal measures which entail the loss of certain fixed rights; among them are other censures, e.g. suspension for clerics, interdict for clerics and laymen, irregularity ex delicto, etc. Excommunication, however, is clearly distinguished from these penalties in that it is the privation of all rights resulting from the social status of the Christian as such. The excommunicated person, it is true, does not cease to be a Christian, since his baptism can never be effaced; he can, however, be considered as an exile from Christian society and as non-existent, for a time at least, in the sight of ecclesiastical authority. But such exile can have an end (and the Church desires it), as soon as the offender has given suitable satisfaction. Meanwhile, his status before the Church is that of a stranger. He may not participate in public worship nor receive the Body of Christ or any of the sacraments. Moreover, if he be a cleric, he is forbidden to administer a sacred rite or to exercise an act of spiritual authority. " NEW ADVENT: Home


As I pointed out to Starman, Trinity is not in the Bible, none of the books/letters in the Bible tell us which books/letters are supposed to be in the Bible. I'm pretty sure you're not going to find "incarnation" in there, either, so that "Catholic Church" is not written in the word is irrelevant.
The "Catholic after Catholic" that you have run into need to be corrected. You have it straight out of the Catechism, period, and no matter how many individual Catholics tell you otherwise, no matter how many times you want to jump up and down making this claim, it is not and will not be the teaching of the Church.
Never on this forum have I said about another faith, "The (insert denomination name here) church teaches...." yet quite regularly people are perfectly comfortable making statements about my Church's teachings, and I don't think any of those claims have once been right!
 

libby

New Member
Okay, let me make something perfectly clear here... I did not enter into this discussion with the intent of voicing my disagreements with the CC. I am not anti-Catholic. My feelings towards the CC are not anti-Catholic. I simply have some fundamental disagreements with how the CC practices their faith, just as I have disagreements with how The Church of Christ or Presbyterians or Baptists cling to certain practices. I see stark similarities between what is happening to the Church (the entire body of the Church of Jesus Christ) today and the church of the days of Jesus. Jesus was extremely critical of the religious leaders of the day for their move away from God and toward their own power and dominion of their followers.

These criticisms by no means assumes what’s in someone’s heart or questions their relationship with God. I am not entitled to make such judgments. But I think I am entitled to question how a church runs their practices.

I apologize for coming off as anti-anything.


I was probably writing my last post when you were posting this. I have no problem with someone asking if what they have heard is true regarding CC teachings/doctrines.
 

libby

New Member
My point is, the practice of excommunication was born out of the Catholic Church.

True story... When I lived in FL there was a rather large church down the road ("The Church of Jesus Christ" it was called). It was a proper church where everyone came in dressed in nice dresses and suits. Big money people. A destitute man came in dressed in tattered clothes. He sat down quietly in the back. He wasn’t looking for anything; no money or food or a hand out. He wanted to find God. When some of the people saw him there they demanded he leave. He was escorted out by their security people. This was reported in the local newspaper and people started protesting against the church; and rightfully so. They showed they are intolerant to anything that doesn’t live up to some superficial standard. The big question never got considered: WWJD. This is prevalent in many of our churches today.

This was a form of excommunication. So I realize it exists in other churches.

Are you saying that this church was a Catholic Church?
 

Starman3000m

New Member
Are you saying that this church was a Catholic Church?

libby, here is a story about how my parents (former Catholics) were literally run out of town when they became Evangelical Christians.

It happened in the early 1930s when my parents lived in a small community that was nearly all Catholic. Being raised to follow the Catholic doctrine, my parents faithfully followed the traditions and rituals that the local priest presented with the mandate that the parishioners were forbidden to read the Bible on their own. The parishioners were told that only the priest had the authority to convey the message of the church to the people and no one else. This went on for sometime until an Evangelical missionary knocked on the door of my parents home and began to share the word of God from the Holy Bible.

My parents did not own a Bible and the missionary gave one to them and then left. As my dad began to read the Bible it fascinated him so much that he could not put it down and just kept reading as much as he could. When dad read into the New Testament, he began to see many things that the Catholic church did not teach at all and especially some things that were contrary to what the local priest had been telling the parishioners.

Long story short, my dad began to question what the local priest was teaching and through a Divine Spiritual awakening, my dad became a born-again believer in The Lord Jesus. Mom converted a short time later and when both stopped attending the Catholic church their "friends" and even the priest began to shun them. Rocks were thrown at my parents home (with the priest's "blessing") and it was made very evident that they were no longer welcome to remain in that community.

My parents were forced to move away because of the pressure and animosity that the parishioners had against them. Dad moved the family to a small town in Wyoming where he found work and began a small Evangelical ministry. He was not an "ordained" minister but read his Bible faithfully and conveyed messages to those who came to hear him speak. The congregation grew and many people became born again believers through the ministry for which he gave glory to God. The unique thing is that dad never asked anyone for "tithes and offerings" nor did he expect it as most people were just making it by in those days. Dad worked right alongside those who attended his church and shared with them about the richest and most valuable thing one could ever find and that is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ the Divine Son of God.

Dad died when I was eight years old but to this day I still remember him getting on his knees every night before bedtime and praying to God. Many times I would kneel beside him and somehow I knew that dad was talking with God.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Are you saying that this church was a Catholic Church?

No.

Actually I misstated that. I meant to write: The Church of Christ, not The Church of Jesus Christ. They are a very charismatic non-denominational church that believes in speaking in tongues and prophesy, etc… A very Acts-based belief. Not to be confused with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
 
Last edited:

Marie

New Member
We'll definitely disagree on this one Marie but I never used ANY of the verses that you quote here. I used Deuteronomy 1 v 39 & Isaiah 7 v 15. You have seriously missed the fact that each of these people spoken about in these verses, lived to get old enough to do evil. Except David & Bathsheba's baby which God took home to Heaven. Did David go to Hell? No. He was "a man after God's own heart" and he said "I will go to him". Where was he going? To Heaven of course. What happens to a baby if it dies in it's Mom or within the first few years of it's life Marie? I'm going out for the night, I'll answer your response tomorrow.:yay:

Ok Not sure what we disagree on here but if I am reading this correctly its the age of accountability.
This is not doctrine, nor escential doctrine so it would be ok to disagree onm this issue.

These two verses are the verses I hear over and over by those trying to build a case for the age of accountability. You said that you use two others.

2Sa 12:23 But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me."

Act 11:14 he will declare to you a message by which you will be saved, you and all your household.'

Now I cant argue their case for them since I dont believe it but the thought was that since Daivd said he would see the child it meant it was automatically going to heaven.
The other verse they say since we have no idea of any of the ages of his household its assumed there where childern so they would be included.

Here's the problem first it's not stated anywhere clearly that there is an age.
What is it 7,13 or when they know right from wrong?
Second you would have to assume every child that dies is elect or predestined for salvation thats a huge leap.
Thirdly if you believe its somehow imputed from the parents spirtual condition
it takes away the individuals need for repentance and faith.

As for the unborn, they are just that unborn so there not part of this.
Do I personally believe that God has some unreveiled plan for those wih mental disabilities or infants? Yea but I cant give anyone that hope because I just dont see it in scripture and its condratictory to what were are told.
I think its vitial that parents teach their childern about Christ and the bible from as early as possible and not rely on something thats not clearly stated in scripture.

One last thing we need to consider if God has placed the Moral law within each and everyone of us, we know the differnce between right and wrong already. As soon as a child is able to understand the spoken word they know that no means no, but yet it will persists to get its own way.


 

libby

New Member
libby, here is a story about how my parents (former Catholics) were literally run out of town when they became Evangelical Christians.

It happened in the early 1930s when my parents lived in a small community that was nearly all Catholic. Being raised to follow the Catholic doctrine, my parents faithfully followed the traditions and rituals that the local priest presented with the mandate that the parishioners were forbidden to read the Bible on their own. The parishioners were told that only the priest had the authority to convey the message of the church to the people and no one else. This went on for sometime until an Evangelical missionary knocked on the door of my parents home and began to share the word of God from the Holy Bible.

My parents did not own a Bible and the missionary gave one to them and then left. As my dad began to read the Bible it fascinated him so much that he could not put it down and just kept reading as much as he could. When dad read into the New Testament, he began to see many things that the Catholic church did not teach at all and especially some things that were contrary to what the local priest had been telling the parishioners.

Long story short, my dad began to question what the local priest was teaching and through a Divine Spiritual awakening, my dad became a born-again believer in The Lord Jesus. Mom converted a short time later and when both stopped attending the Catholic church their "friends" and even the priest began to shun them. Rocks were thrown at my parents home (with the priest's "blessing") and it was made very evident that they were no longer welcome to remain in that community.

My parents were forced to move away because of the pressure and animosity that the parishioners had against them. Dad moved the family to a small town in Wyoming where he found work and began a small Evangelical ministry. He was not an "ordained" minister but read his Bible faithfully and conveyed messages to those who came to hear him speak. The congregation grew and many people became born again believers through the ministry for which he gave glory to God. The unique thing is that dad never asked anyone for "tithes and offerings" nor did he expect it as most people were just making it by in those days. Dad worked right alongside those who attended his church and shared with them about the richest and most valuable thing one could ever find and that is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ the Divine Son of God.

Dad died when I was eight years old but to this day I still remember him getting on his knees every night before bedtime and praying to God. Many times I would kneel beside him and somehow I knew that dad was talking with God.

Y'know Starman, stories like this abound everywhere and I hope you didn't mean to imply that such behavior would be exclusive to Catholics.
Rob Evans a.k.a. The Donut Man has given testimony on his conversion to Catholicism after 30 +/- years as a Bible Christian. Late For Supper
Something that he noted when I heard him speaking his testimony, although I didn't find it at first glance at his website, was that he was kicked out of his Bible church because he liked to drink wine. He was told by the pastor that drinking and Christianity were incompatible and he was not welcome if he was going to insist on drinking.
So, while the story of your parents' experience is regretable, it is not appropriate to base the truth of a church's doctrine on the behaviors of some individuals.
 

Starman3000m

New Member
Y'know Starman, stories like this abound everywhere and I hope you didn't mean to imply that such behavior would be exclusive to Catholics.
Rob Evans a.k.a. The Donut Man has given testimony on his conversion to Catholicism after 30 +/- years as a Bible Christian. Late For Supper
Something that he noted when I heard him speaking his testimony, although I didn't find it at first glance at his website, was that he was kicked out of his Bible church because he liked to drink wine. He was told by the pastor that drinking and Christianity were incompatible and he was not welcome if he was going to insist on drinking.
So, while the story of your parents' experience is regretable, it is not appropriate to base the truth of a church's doctrine on the behaviors of some individuals.

Hi libby,

Do you know Rob Evans' complete story? Did he go to church with alcohol on his breath? Did he show up to services a bit tipsy? Did he actually say?

Yes, indeed there are many Evangelical/Bible churches who insist that drinking is a form of worldly pleasure and should not be indulged in. Admittedly, I have a glass of wine or two with a restaurant meal on occasion but there are limits that must be considered. Was Mr. Evans just a regular church member or was he a church leader at the time he was asked to leave his church?

I realize that the Catholic Church accepts drinking wine, and some priests have become alcoholics and even given liturgy while under the influence. I know because my boss was a former altar boy and had many bad experiences that caused him to leave the Catholic Church. I see excess drunkeness at local fairs sponsored by the Catholic Church and the church is the one that has the beer and wine booths set up! Do you find that acceptable, libby, and would you find that an exemplary way for a church leader to show people how to serve God?

The difference between Rob Evans' experience and that of my parents is that Rob Evans was asked to leave because of his inability to follow a church regulation pertaining to drinking.
On the other hand, my parents had willingly withdrawn from a Catholic church whose doctrine disagreed with the New Testament teachings and for that they were forced to leave their community by members of the local parish.

The Holy Bible has instructions of how members and church leaders of all positions are responsible for setting the example to the flock of living a life that is pleasing to God.

See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise,
Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is.
And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; (Ephesians 5:15-18)


1 Timothy, Chapter 3 verses:

1: This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2: A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3: Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4: One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5: (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
6: Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
7: Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
8: Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
9: Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
10: And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.
11: Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.
12: Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
13: For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

libby, this is not to judge an individual who drinks in moderation but to state that the Holy Bible makes the suggestion that it is best not get carried away with drunkeness. As for church leaders, it is suggested that they not be given over to strong drink at all.

(1 Corinthians 5:11-13) (1 Corinthians 6:9-11) (Galatians 5:19-26)
 
Last edited:

ItalianScallion

Harley Rider
Ok Not sure what we disagree on here but if I am reading this correctly its the age of accountability.
This is not doctrine, nor escential doctrine so it would be ok to disagree onm this issue.
I agree.
Marie said:
Here's the problem first it's not stated anywhere clearly that there is an age. What is it 7,13 or when they know right from wrong?
That's right, the Bible doesn't mention a specific age since it is different for each of us, but it does mention a "time when a child knows enough to CHOOSE right from wrong" even though (and I agree here) God's laws are written on their hearts. The Gospels mention that we're accountable for how much (truth) we've been given or exposed to.
Marie said:
....you would have to assume every child that dies is elect or predestined for salvation thats a huge leap.
That's Calvinism and I don't follow that. Any child that dies before they become "accountable", has no reason NOT to go to heaven. Someone once asked me: "if Hitler had died as a baby and hadn't lived to do the things that he did, would he have gone to heaven?" I said: If he hadn't yet become accountable to God, he surely wouldn't have lived to do the evil things he did, so the question really isn't relevant. God doesn't pick whom He wants to get to Heaven and whom He wants to be lost (2 Peter 3 v 9). He knows who will be saved and who won't and He chooses them from His foreknowledge.
Marie said:
One last thing we need to consider if God has placed the Moral law within each and everyone of us, we know the differnce between right and wrong already. As soon as a child is able to understand the spoken word they know that no means no, but yet it will persists to get its own way.
Right, but do they know it is a sin and do they know who Jesus is yet? These are all factors to be considered. Thanks for your responses Marie.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
That's right, the Bible doesn't mention a specific age since it is different for each of us, but it does mention a "time when a child knows enough to CHOOSE right from wrong" even though (and I agree here) God's laws are written on their hearts. The Gospels mention that we're accountable for how much (truth) we've been given or exposed to.

That's Calvinism and I don't follow that. Any child that dies before they become "accountable", has no reason NOT to go to heaven. Someone once asked me: "if Hitler had died as a baby and hadn't lived to do the things that he did, would he have gone to heaven?" I said: If he hadn't yet become accountable to God, he surely wouldn't have lived to do the evil things he did, so the question really isn't relevant. God doesn't pick whom He wants to get to Heaven and whom He wants to be lost (2 Peter 3 v 9). He knows who will be saved and who won't and He chooses them from His foreknowledge.

A child, even at the age of two knows whether they are doing right or wrong to a certain extent. They have already learned that there are certain consequences for disobedience. But what they haven't learned is salvation and how their actions play into this.

What bothers me about this kind of discussion is how we, even as Christians, try to judge whether someone is saved or not based on certain criteria: age, actions, which church you beling to, what version of bible you read, etc... I think it makes for interesting conversation but we all know that only God makes this decision. No one knows what's in someone's heart except God. Hitler claimed he was a believer in Christ. Will he live in paradise with the rest that are saved? Only God knows.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Did it start in the Catholic church? Paul spoke of it in 1 Corinthians 5 v 5 & 1 Timothy 1 v 20.

I don't intepret these verses as excommunications. I interpret them as means of spiritual correction. If you notice both are in the context of their spirit being saved. Excommunication from the Catholic Church is a fall from grace and a loss of salvation (from the CC's point of view).
 

Marie

New Member
What bothers me about this kind of discussion is how we, even as Christians, try to judge whether someone is saved or not based on certain criteria: age, actions, which church you beling to, what version of bible you read, etc... I think it makes for interesting conversation but we all know that only God makes this decision. No one knows what's in someone's heart except God.
Well this was a friendly, civial conversation, It is interesting though, and theology is important and getting taught less and less in the church. Your right only God knows. Regardlesss of theology, I am sure heaven will have a small mixture.
 

Marie

New Member
I don't intepret these verses as excommunications. I interpret them as means of spiritual correction. If you notice both are in the context of their spirit being saved. Excommunication from the Catholic Church is a fall from grace and a loss of salvation (from the CC's point of view).

Loosing ones salavtion how does that work? Gods not an indian giver. Grace is a gift from God.
Your either saved or your not. Those who backslide for more than a short season propably never slide forward in the first place.
Excummioncation is Biblical (practiced by the first church)
<DIR>1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
"Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them" (Romans 16:17).
"Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us" (2 Thessalonians 3:6).
</DIR>
but not indefintly providing there is repentace. It's the highest form of church disclipe, but I have heard examples where one man has taken it on himself to implement which is not Biblical.
 
Top