grudges against the churches

[OneLight]

I can understand the churches position about the baby shower.  Had it been my church, when I was still a Pastor, I would have been more than happy to accept that this girl made a mistake, and if she repented of her sin, fully accept her as a member in good standing, but to allow a baby shower would not be right.  There should be a distinction when it comes to a baby conceived by a married couple as opposed to an illegitimate child.  You say the family was shunned.  How so?  Just refusing to go along with them is not the same thing as shunning them. 

 

I think a compromise might have been that individuals in the church give gifts to her outside of a formal baby shower, as it is in their heart to do.  If the parents want to give her a baby shower, they should do so outside the church.  I agree with the church with regard to the shower, but I don't have enough information to know how I feel about the accusation they shunned the parents.

 

They were shunned a large segment of the congregation.  The family would sit alone at pot lucks, I watched a different family get up an move to a different pew when this family sat down for Sunday service.  They were no longer invited to lunch after church with the group that they used to eat with.

 

As for the distinction when it comes to a baby conceived by a married couple as opposed to an illegitimate child, does that hold true after the baby is born?  Should the church treat the child differently?

I see judgment on those you watched without you telling us what you did to make them feel welcomed. Did you get up and sit next to them or ask them to join you? Did you ask them to join you and sit with you at these potlucks? What did you do to love them as you love yourself?

[OneLight]

Here is what I posted...A teenage mother and her family being driven from a church for wanting to hold a baby shower for the girl.  Yes, the teen girl made a mistake but she didn't make it worse by killing her baby.  The family wanted to give her a baby shower at the church like we had done for countless others mothers to be.   They were told that was not allowed because it would be seen as approving of pre-marital sex.   When the family tried to change the leaders mind they were shunned and ended up leaving the church.   There was no love of Jesus in this group, only the love of appearances.

 

Where in this is anything about praising fornication?  Where is anything in this about praise at all?  This was about supporting someone that made a mistake, repented and was trying to do the right thing.  If a church cannot show love to such a person, what is the point of that church?

Perhaps you should of stated that the pregnant woman had repented from her sins in the first post that you copied? That would of given the situation a different light. By eliminating that fact, it is no wonder why people rejected your question. God does not reward sin, but He does turn sinful pasts into His glory if the person repents.

As for the church, we don't know all that was said or discussed, so we have no right saying it s right or wrong.

 

Somethings seem so obvious that I didn't think they needed to be put into words.  A few people that responded in that thread seemed to get it and disagreed with the response from the church instead of applauding it like others.

No, it was not obvious. Because a few "guessed" it does not mean it is clear. When you describe something, the picture we get is what you give. No more, no less. Anything else beyond your words are only assumptions. Assumptions often causes strife, so I don't like to assume.

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

I can understand the churches position about the baby shower.  Had it been my church, when I was still a Pastor, I would have been more than happy to accept that this girl made a mistake, and if she repented of her sin, fully accept her as a member in good standing, but to allow a baby shower would not be right.  There should be a distinction when it comes to a baby conceived by a married couple as opposed to an illegitimate child.  You say the family was shunned.  How so?  Just refusing to go along with them is not the same thing as shunning them. 

 

I think a compromise might have been that individuals in the church give gifts to her outside of a formal baby shower, as it is in their heart to do.  If the parents want to give her a baby shower, they should do so outside the church.  I agree with the church with regard to the shower, but I don't have enough information to know how I feel about the accusation they shunned the parents.

 

They were shunned a large segment of the congregation.  The family would sit alone at pot lucks, I watched a different family get up an move to a different pew when this family sat down for Sunday service.  They were no longer invited to lunch after church with the group that they used to eat with.

 

As for the distinction when it comes to a baby conceived by a married couple as opposed to an illegitimate child, does that hold true after the baby is born?  Should the church treat the child differently?

 

I see judgment on those you watched without you telling us what you did to make them feel welcomed. Did you get up and sit next to them or ask them to join you? Did you ask them to join you and sit with you at these potlucks? What did you do to love them as you love yourself?

 

 

I did all I could to make them fell like they still belonged, I did go out of my way to sit with them at pot lucks and at services.  I spoke out in their defense and was taken aside and asked if I was the father of the baby as that was the only reason these people could fathom that I would support them.  The topic came to a head a business meeting,  I argued that the baby did nothing wrong and should not be punished for a mistake by the mother, a mistake the mother repeated for.  I was told that to treat the baby like the baby of a married couple would be to show approval of the actions of the mother.  I honestly believe that if we had been living 100 years earlier that both mother and baby would have been marked with a bit red A and driven out with sticks and pitch forks.

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

I can understand the churches position about the baby shower.  Had it been my church, when I was still a Pastor, I would have been more than happy to accept that this girl made a mistake, and if she repented of her sin, fully accept her as a member in good standing, but to allow a baby shower would not be right.  There should be a distinction when it comes to a baby conceived by a married couple as opposed to an illegitimate child.  You say the family was shunned.  How so?  Just refusing to go along with them is not the same thing as shunning them. 

 

I think a compromise might have been that individuals in the church give gifts to her outside of a formal baby shower, as it is in their heart to do.  If the parents want to give her a baby shower, they should do so outside the church.  I agree with the church with regard to the shower, but I don't have enough information to know how I feel about the accusation they shunned the parents.

 

They were shunned a large segment of the congregation.  The family would sit alone at pot lucks, I watched a different family get up an move to a different pew when this family sat down for Sunday service.  They were no longer invited to lunch after church with the group that they used to eat with.

 

As for the distinction when it comes to a baby conceived by a married couple as opposed to an illegitimate child, does that hold true after the baby is born?  Should the church treat the child differently?

I see judgment on those you watched without you telling us what you did to make them feel welcomed. Did you get up and sit next to them or ask them to join you? Did you ask them to join you and sit with you at these potlucks? What did you do to love them as you love yourself?

 

I did all I could to make them fell like they still belonged, I did go out of my way to sit with them at pot lucks and at services.  I spoke out in their defense and was taken aside and asked if I was the father of the baby as that was the only reason these people could fathom that I would support them.  The topic came to a head a business meeting,  I argued that the baby did nothing wrong and should not be punished for a mistake by the mother, a mistake the mother repeated for.  I was told that to treat the baby like the baby of a married couple would be to show approval of the actions of the mother.  I honestly believe that if we had been living 100 years earlier that both mother and baby would have been marked with a bit red A and driven out with sticks and pitch forks.

I thought the whole idea of one who was a bastard went back further without so much, like here...

Duet 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

[LookingForAnswers]

 

I thought the whole idea of one who was a bastard went back further without so much, like here...

Duet 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

 

 

Are you saying that this baby, and the next 10 generations should be banned from church? 

[Guest shiloh357]

I thought the whole idea of one who was a bastard went back further without so much, like here...

Duet 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

 

This is not about caring for a baby  or anything like that.  The issue with the Baby is being used as a pretext for condemning every single church and pretending that every single church out there is uncaring, uncompassionate and self righteous.  Don't be fooled.   I have NEVER been in a church where families with illegitimate children were excoriated or kicked out or discriminated against.  

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

I thought the whole idea of one who was a bastard went back further without so much, like here...

Duet 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

 

Are you saying that this baby, and the next 10 generations should be banned from church?

Where did I say anything like that? You said something about this happening a hundred years ago and what might be as it shows back at that time, and I said I thought it went farther back then just a hundred years ago in things similar.

Unless you feel it is not as far back (depending on your dating of the book) that I don't know.

And when I quote scripture that's not me speaking and saying anything really.

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

I thought the whole idea of one who was a bastard went back further without so much, like here...

Duet 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

This is not about caring for a baby  or anything like that.  The issue with the Baby is being used as a pretext for condemning every single church and pretending that every single church out there is uncaring, uncompassionate and self righteous.  Don't be fooled.   I have NEVER been in a church where families with illegitimate children were excoriated or kicked out or discriminated against.

Yeah I know its not about "caring about a baby".

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

I thought the whole idea of one who was a bastard went back further without so much, like here...

Duet 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

This is not about caring for a baby  or anything like that.  The issue with the Baby is being used as a pretext for condemning every single church and pretending that every single church out there is uncaring, uncompassionate and self righteous.  Don't be fooled.   I have NEVER been in a church where families with illegitimate children were excoriated or kicked out or discriminated against.

 

Yeah I know its not about "caring about a baby".

 

No, what I am saying is that these rants about churches and this incident with the family with the illegimate child is a pretense and a platform used to smear churches, and is not motivated by a real care for this family or their child. 

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

I thought the whole idea of one who was a bastard went back further without so much, like here...

Duet 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

 

Are you saying that this baby, and the next 10 generations should be banned from church?

 

Where did I say anything like that? You said something about this happening a hundred years ago and what might be as it shows back at that time, and I said I thought it went farther back then just a hundred years ago in things similar.

Unless you feel it is not as far back (depending on your dating of the book) that I don't know.

And when I quote scripture that's not me speaking and saying anything really.

 

 

That is what the verse you posted said, that was part of the Old Testament Law and would have been the fate of the child in the time of Moses.  By posting the verse I assumed you were saying that should be the fate of this child.