PDA

View Full Version : Lawsuits are not compatible with christianity



arunangelo
Mar 25th 2008, 03:16 AM
Lawsuits are not compatible with christianity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God forgave us, not merely by forgetting or forgoing the offenses we have committed against Him, but also by sacrificing His life, in order to compensate for the offenses we committed against Him (Matthew 26:27-28). Forgiveness, therefore, is, not only to forget and forgo what our offenders have done to us, but also to bring healing to our offenders and compensate for the offenses they committed against us by our prayers and sacrifices.
The scriptures are very clear about forgiveness and mercy. It tells us to be merciful, just as our Father is merciful (Luke. 6:36) and forgive others of their transgressions against us (Eph 4:32). In James 2:13 we are told that mercy is above law. In Matt. 6:14-15 we are told that we would not be forgiven if we do not forgive others. In the Lord's Prayer (Luke 6:12) we ask God to forgive us the way we forgive others. In Luke 17:4 Jesus tells us that we must forgive others repeatedly. In Luke 6:27-36 Jesus tells us to love our enemy, pray for them, do good for them, if someone takes our coat, give them our shirt as well, offer the other cheek if someone slaps us on one, lend and do not expect it back and be merciful like our heavenly Father. In Romans 12: 17-21 Paul tells us to not pay evil with evil, never take revenge, feed our enemy, not allow evil to defeat us and to over come evil with good. He further tells us in 1Cor. 6:7 that a legal dispute is a sign of our complete failure; and that it is better to be wronged or robbed than to wrong others or rob them.

Naphal
Mar 25th 2008, 05:15 AM
Lawsuits are not compatible with christianity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God forgave us, not merely by forgetting or forgoing the offenses we have committed against Him, but also by sacrificing His life, in order to compensate for the offenses we committed against Him (Matthew 26:27-28). Forgiveness, therefore, is, not only to forget and forgo what our offenders have done to us, but also to bring healing to our offenders and compensate for the offenses they committed against us by our prayers and sacrifices.
The scriptures are very clear about forgiveness and mercy. It tells us to be merciful, just as our Father is merciful (Luke. 6:36) and forgive others of their transgressions against us (Eph 4:32). In James 2:13 we are told that mercy is above law. In Matt. 6:14-15 we are told that we would not be forgiven if we do not forgive others. In the Lord's Prayer (Luke 6:12) we ask God to forgive us the way we forgive others. In Luke 17:4 Jesus tells us that we must forgive others repeatedly. In Luke 6:27-36 Jesus tells us to love our enemy, pray for them, do good for them, if someone takes our coat, give them our shirt as well, offer the other cheek if someone slaps us on one, lend and do not expect it back and be merciful like our heavenly Father. In Romans 12: 17-21 Paul tells us to not pay evil with evil, never take revenge, feed our enemy, not allow evil to defeat us and to over come evil with good. He further tells us in 1Cor. 6:7 that a legal dispute is a sign of our complete failure; and that it is better to be wronged or robbed than to wrong others or rob them.




Deuteronomy 17:8 If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy within thy gates: then shalt thou arise, and get thee up into the place which the LORD thy God shall choose;
Deuteronomy 17:9 And thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days, and enquire; and they shall shew thee the sentence of judgment:
Deuteronomy 17:10 And thou shalt do according to the sentence, which they of that place which the LORD shall choose shall shew thee; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee:

There is nothing wrong with going to a court which abides by the laws of God. Americas court system isn't perfect but it is based on the ten commandments and the commandments used to be in the courts...only recently has it been shunned and removed.

Paul speaks against going to judges and courts run by complete strangers. That is a shame but if something cannot be worked out privately then Christians should take it to court in the American judicial system.

ProjectPeter
Mar 25th 2008, 02:18 PM
Yeah but then one has to ponder how suing someone is in line of forgiving another. But I'll say this... if you are getting just compensation for a loss from a company that you pay such as insurance etc... then that is owed you. If you are suing Bob Schmucky because his kid (neighbors) broke your window with the baseball... you need to rethink that stuff.

Naphal
Mar 26th 2008, 03:43 AM
Yeah but then one has to ponder how suing someone is in line of forgiving another. But I'll say this... if you are getting just compensation for a loss from a company that you pay such as insurance etc... then that is owed you. If you are suing Bob Schmucky because his kid (neighbors) broke your window with the baseball... you need to rethink that stuff.

If Bob is a Christian then he should pay for the window. If he refuses then the two should go to a mutual friend or Pastor...if it isn't resolved then you go to court.

Now if Bob apologizes but cannot pay for it because his wife has cancer and he can't afford it, then he should offer to help with his labor and you should pay for the parts.

Tanya~
Mar 26th 2008, 05:16 AM
1 Cor 6:1-11

Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? 2 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? 4 If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge? 5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren? 6 But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers!

7 Now therefore, it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated? 8 No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to your brethren! 9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
NKJV

Mograce2U
Mar 26th 2008, 05:37 AM
I see no problem in going to court to determine if what I have purchased is within my rights to recover. I am thinking insurance or perhaps tax matters here. But when it comes to a personal confrontation with either a brother or a neighbor, I have no problem letting him have what he desires. Which is not to say that I wouldn't present my point of view, only that I would not persue it. I prefer to let greed do its work in the conscience of the one who is motivated by such things. And letting him win easily is the best way to see that happen. Those firey coals of guilt will be on his head not mine. And he is not likely to forget that I chose to not fight him. If people never see that there is another standard to live by, how will they ever become curious enough to desire it? And if he was my neighbor, I would make it a point to harbor no ill feelings toward him. The world expects one to lie and cheat and steal to get what they want. It can only amaze them when we do not respond in kind. And whether or not I am thought a fool, doesn't concern me one bit. And that is because I answer to a higher Authority than they do. So anything I can do to show them that is a good thing. Honesty, integrity, grace and mercy is what the world knows nothing about; and God would have us show them that these things exist - so that they might want it too.

ProjectPeter
Mar 26th 2008, 01:39 PM
If Bob is a Christian then he should pay for the window. If he refuses then the two should go to a mutual friend or Pastor...if it isn't resolved then you go to court.

Now if Bob apologizes but cannot pay for it because his wife has cancer and he can't afford it, then he should offer to help with his labor and you should pay for the parts.
There are always ways to work things out generally... even if not a Christian neighbor. But then there's always that catch-all... even if there isn't... why not rather be wronged and drive on not fretting over it. :lol:

Buck shot
Mar 26th 2008, 02:02 PM
I've been setting here for the last little while running scenarios through my thick head and I cannot think of anything I could feel okay before God about taking someone to court over. I believe He is pretty clear that we should not dwell on the things of this world. Everything I have was given by Him and He will always make sure my family and I have what we need.

I have been in several courts over job related instances because of my secular position and the boards I have sat on and money never solves the real problem. :( The folks that I know whom have recieved settlements went down very rough roads after recieving more money than they had ever had. The end result was usually worse than the beginning. :cry:

Mograce2U
Mar 26th 2008, 04:14 PM
Yet when Paul was falsely charged, he appealed to Ceasar. The difference being, that he did not expect to be set free. Rather it seems to me it was their guilt that was being set in place.

Two times when I was called to jury duty (but not selected), I was able to change the outcome. Once because of the answers I gave to the questions they asked me in open court - the case was dropped. And the other time as an alternate, I befriended one of the jurors and pointed out that the evidence presented did not support the charge, and they acquitted him instead, whereas before they were going off their feelings about him.

My point? Court is a great place to give a testimony and work justice.

Buck shot
Mar 26th 2008, 04:19 PM
Yet when Paul was falsely charged, he appealed to Ceasar. The difference being, that he did not expect to be set free. Rather it seems to me it was their guilt that was being set in place.

Paul was also getting the highest platform in the known world to deliver the Gospel! :pp:pp:pp

Mograce2U
Mar 26th 2008, 04:25 PM
And that gospel can be revealed in many ways!

Naphal
Mar 27th 2008, 12:50 AM
There are always ways to work things out generally... even if not a Christian neighbor. But then there's always that catch-all... even if there isn't... why not rather be wronged and drive on not fretting over it. :lol:

To what extent tho? What if your neighbors son steals your car and it's gone? Should you not call the police?

Naphal
Mar 27th 2008, 12:52 AM
Luke 18:2 Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man:
Luke 18:3 And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.
Luke 18:4 And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man;
Luke 18:5 Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.
Luke 18:6 And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.
Luke 18:7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?

ProjectPeter
Mar 27th 2008, 02:04 AM
To what extent tho? What if your neighbors son steals your car and it's gone? Should you not call the police?
Sure... he has broken the law and there is a price for that. Not talking criminal action here... talking law suits. ;)

FaithfulSheep
Mar 27th 2008, 02:09 AM
These petty lawsuits that are running rampant in this country are absolutely ridiculous. I'm suing you because you gave me a cup of coffee and I spilled it on myself and suffered burns. Of course you have burns. It's COFFEE! It's supposed to be hot. :rolleyes:

But on the other hand, if I go to the hospital to have my tonsils taken out and when I awake I still have my tonsils but only 1 leg... :hmm:

ProjectPeter
Mar 27th 2008, 02:11 AM
These petty lawsuits that are running rampant in this country are absolutely ridiculous. I'm suing you because you gave me a cup of coffee and I spilled it on myself and suffered burns. Of course you have burns. It's COFFEE! It's supposed to be hot. :rolleyes:

But on the other hand, if I go to the hospital to have my tonsils taken out and when I awake I still have my tonsils but only 1 leg... :hmm:
You are a one legged woman with a sore throat!!! :lol:

FaithfulSheep
Mar 27th 2008, 02:12 AM
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

***Must find towel to clean drink off monitor. ***

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Naphal
Mar 27th 2008, 02:14 AM
Sure... he has broken the law and there is a price for that. Not talking criminal action here... talking law suits. ;)

It is very common for one to need to sue in criminal cases. If we take some of the verses literally, we shouldnt have anything to do with judges or courts at all. I believe that wasn't the meaning but that the Christians there could not solve anything between themselves and relied solely on unchristian courts. Paul wasnt saying there aren't times when we need to have a legal judge of the land to intervene IMO.

Naphal
Mar 27th 2008, 02:15 AM
These petty lawsuits that are running rampant in this country are absolutely ridiculous. I'm suing you because you gave me a cup of coffee and I spilled it on myself and suffered burns. Of course you have burns. It's COFFEE! It's supposed to be hot. :rolleyes:

But on the other hand, if I go to the hospital to have my tonsils taken out and when I awake I still have my tonsils but only 1 leg... :hmm:



Exactly! Thanks...plus, I am suing you for posting this great post....sorry.

ProjectPeter
Mar 27th 2008, 02:19 AM
It is very common for one to need to sue in criminal cases. If we take some of the verses literally, we shouldnt have anything to do with judges or courts at all. I believe that wasn't the meaning but that the Christians there could not solve anything between themselves and relied solely on unchristian courts. Paul wasnt saying there aren't times when we need to have a legal judge of the land to intervene IMO.
I already said that. There will be times no doubt and especially the way society works today. Shoot man... you wreck your car now and you'll often battle with the insurance company that you've been giving boat loads of money to for the last many years. :lol:

But we must keep in mind (and yes it is to be taken literal) that Paul is talking about believers suing believers. And Paul literally said look... even if you are getting hosed then why not just get hosed, take two salt tablets and drive on (my paraphrase of course). It's a hard thing I suppose but there is no way one shouldn't take it very literal.

Naphal
Mar 27th 2008, 02:28 AM
I already said that. There will be times no doubt and especially the way society works today. Shoot man... you wreck your car now and you'll often battle with the insurance company that you've been giving boat loads of money to for the last many years. :lol:

But we must keep in mind (and yes it is to be taken literal) that Paul is talking about believers suing believers. And Paul literally said look... even if you are getting hosed then why not just get hosed, take two salt tablets and drive on (my paraphrase of course). It's a hard thing I suppose but there is no way one shouldn't take it very literal.


Paul as you know was writing his own personal letters to people. He was speaking about a specific thing that was happening that he believed and knew to be wrong. I don't think we can move that and make it a rule for everything. i believe it was probably more along the lines of smaller petty things...and a sue-happy mentality that they had.

Ten years ago I backed up and BARELY bumped into a man's front bumper. No damage at all. It was nothing at all, and he was a Christian but he insisted on having police come but he had no cell phone so he made his elderly mother walk 2 miles to a payphone in the rain! In the end he got 300.00 for absolutely nothing. If it was reversed I'd have said, "no problem, all is fine".

Now, if there was damage then I would have paid or called my insurance etc.

I think Paul was talking about instances like the one above.

ProjectPeter
Mar 27th 2008, 02:51 AM
Paul as you know was writing his own personal letters to people. He was speaking about a specific thing that was happening that he believed and knew to be wrong. I don't think we can move that and make it a rule for everything. i believe it was probably more along the lines of smaller petty things...and a sue-happy mentality that they had.

Ten years ago I backed up and BARELY bumped into a man's front bumper. No damage at all. It was nothing at all, and he was a Christian but he insisted on having police come but he had no cell phone so he made his elderly mother walk 2 miles to a payphone in the rain! In the end he got 300.00 for absolutely nothing. If it was reversed I'd have said, "no problem, all is fine".

Now, if there was damage then I would have paid or called my insurance etc.

I think Paul was talking about instances like the one above.
That would certainly qualify I figure.

pnewton
Mar 27th 2008, 04:08 PM
Paul specifies that the cases he is talking about are between one another. Besides there are many other issues, like his admonition against greed, to consider. I believe the need for real lawsuits are few and far between. If everyone adhered to the gospel's teachings, the "A" section of the yellow pages would be thinner.

IPet2_9
Mar 27th 2008, 04:16 PM
My read is that lawsuits *against other Christians* is not compatible with Scripture. We should not be using a heathen court system to settle disputes with each other. However, that doesn't mean we should just drop the matter; it means there has to be a means of arbitration within the Church. There is a Scriptural precedent for that. In fact, an entire book of the Bible was named after just that: Judges.

My heart's Desire
Mar 27th 2008, 05:06 PM
There probably were some smaller Courts, but could you imagine Christians going to court against each other say before the Sanhendrin or the Jewish Courts of that day?

9Marksfan
Apr 3rd 2008, 12:27 PM
This is a really interesting issue - or two, really. Christians should not take their disputes with other Christians to secular courts - bit of a no-brainer if we look at 1 Cor 6.

But with non-Christians, it's much harder.

What if some people owed me a whole lot of money for work I'd done for them - and on top of that had STOLEN money from me worth twice that amount? All that money is rightfully mine - but should I insist on getting it?

And what if I find myself without work and the means to provide for my family and NEED that money for that purpose (to stay out of debt - Rom 13:8)? Is NOT suing these people a denial of the faith in terms of 1 Tim 5:8, if there is no other legitimate means for me to provide for my family?

And the rule of law is a good thing, as God has set it up for the blessing of society (Rom 13, 1 Tim 2) - like Paul, I have rights as a citizen that I am presumably free to invoke - but should I?

Let's keep this thread going!

Naphal
Apr 3rd 2008, 08:24 PM
This is a really interesting issue - or two, really. Christians should not take their disputes with other Christians to secular courts - bit of a no-brainer if we look at 1 Cor 6.

I don't think it's that simple. I think two Christians should be able to work out minor to semi minor issues outside of court but there are serious legal ramifications for more serious issues. We live in a country of laws and regulations, which I believe was founded by Christians, so I don't feel our courts are secular per se'. But, property issues and taxes and anything related to crimes need the involvement of the law and courts and lawyers. I am pretty sure Paul was speaking of lesser matters that the early Christians bickered over and had non-Christians solve for them.

My heart's Desire
Apr 3rd 2008, 09:28 PM
But with non-Christians, it's much harder.

What if some people owed me a whole lot of money for work I'd done for them - and on top of that had STOLEN money from me worth twice that amount? All that money is rightfully mine - but should I insist on getting it?

And what if I find myself without work and the means to provide for my family and NEED that money for that purpose (to stay out of debt - Rom 13:8)? Is NOT suing these people a denial of the faith in terms of 1 Tim 5:8, if there is no other legitimate means for me to provide for my family?

And the rule of law is a good thing, as God has set it up for the blessing of society (Rom 13, 1 Tim 2) - like Paul, I have rights as a citizen that I am presumably free to invoke - but should I?

Let's keep this thread going!
In a case as this, I'd say "go to court" for only what is owed. As you know, people now want damages, pain and suffering and a slew of other things added to what they go to court for.
I can't help but believe that the Lord would not have a problem with the "what you are owed" part but no more.
If per chance, one sought to accept the loss though, I believe the Lord would bless the person for that.

My heart's Desire
Apr 3rd 2008, 09:33 PM
. But, property issues and taxes and anything related to crimes need the involvement of the law and courts and lawyers. I am pretty sure Paul was speaking of lesser matters that the early Christians bickered over and had non-Christians solve for them.
I'll almost agree with this too. Those are things that would almost require a court or at the least a mediator.

ProjectPeter
Apr 3rd 2008, 11:17 PM
But then that begs the same question that Paul asked... "why not rather be wronged?"

Naphal
Apr 4th 2008, 01:43 AM
But then that begs the same question that Paul asked... "why not rather be wronged?"

For smaller matters I think we can take a loss on for the sake of peace within the body but I am certain Paul wasn't speaking of very major or serious issues.

Lets say the neighbors kid tosses a rock a makes the tiniest little nick on your paint. You don't use him over this, you work it out privately and if he doesn't care or won't talk about it then you walk away in peace. Even if the offense was greater you can still not worry over it. But if he burns your house down and won't take care of it then you have every right to go to court I believe.

IPet2_9
Apr 4th 2008, 03:19 AM
If a Christian burns down your house, legally speaking I think the right procedure is to follow Matthew 18, which ultimately culminates in expelling the offender from the Church. Then you could go after him in court. Easier said than done, though. Hopefully, it would never come to expelling the person from the Church in the first place.

Naphal
Apr 4th 2008, 03:48 AM
Co 6:1 When one of you has a complaint against another, do you take your complaint to a court of sinners? Or do you take it to God's people?
1Co 6:2 Don't you know that God's people will judge the world? And if you are going to judge the world, can't you settle small problems?
1Co 6:3 Don't you know that we will judge angels? And if that is so, we can surely judge everyday matters.
1Co 6:4 Why do you take everyday complaints to judges who are not respected by the church?
1Co 6:5 I say this to your shame. Aren't any of you wise enough to act as a judge between one follower and another?
1Co 6:6 Why should one of you take another to be tried by unbelievers?
1Co 6:7 When one of you takes another to court, all of you lose. It would be better to let yourselves be cheated and robbed.
1Co 6:8 But instead, you cheat and rob other followers.

ProjectPeter
Apr 4th 2008, 12:39 PM
Think of it though... why not just let yourself be robbed and cheated? We can put price tags on what we think is the amount that makes it right to sue... but did Paul really leave us that leeway.

Naphal
Apr 4th 2008, 12:52 PM
Think of it though... why not just let yourself be robbed and cheated?

It is better to be robbed and cheated than to cheat and rob but seeking justice doesn't always equal cheating and robbing other Christians. I think when you go to court as a last resort is not robbing or cheating anyone. I think it is, when a Christian takes another to court without trying to resolve the matter beforehand.

ProjectPeter
Apr 4th 2008, 12:56 PM
But that wasn't the point Paul made at all. Paul said it is better to be hosed than to take it to the unbelieving court folk etc.

Now.. keep in mind that we're talking two believers here. If it is an unbeliever then there is nothing you could settle amongst the gathering of saints.

Naphal
Apr 4th 2008, 01:08 PM
But that wasn't the point Paul made at all. Paul said it is better to be hosed than to take it to the unbelieving court folk etc.

True enough but on what level of an issue is where we might disagree. I envision a smaller "hosing" than you might.

Tanya~
Apr 4th 2008, 02:01 PM
Matt 5
38 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. 40 If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. 41 And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.
NKJV

ProjectPeter
Apr 4th 2008, 02:03 PM
True enough but on what level of an issue is where we might disagree. I envision a smaller "hosing" than you might.
My point though... size isn't covered and Paul didn't tell us to measure the loss and then decide. He said "why not just get hosed". My paraphrase of course but that's pretty solid and doesn't leave us much wiggle room.

ProjectPeter
Apr 4th 2008, 02:05 PM
Matt 5
38 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. 40 If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. 41 And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.
NKJV
That's exactly the other passage I was thinking of too. It's pretty clear here the teaching of Christ and how Paul understood that teaching as well. Stuff is just stuff... nothing but a thing. We can't let stuff be the reason the body of Christ suffers and suing another Christian over stuff... doesn't paint a good picture at all of Christianity.

VerticalReality
Apr 4th 2008, 02:10 PM
The thing about "stuff" is that it doesn't belong to us anyway. Anything we have belongs to God, so a person doesn't steal from us. They are stealing from God. So why should we try to avenge or repay when it is God's matter to settle?

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 12:00 AM
My point though... size isn't covered and Paul didn't tell us to measure the loss and then decide. He said "why not just get hosed". My paraphrase of course but that's pretty solid and doesn't leave us much wiggle room.


We have to remember that Paul was speaking of actual events when he made the statement rather than speaking in complete generalities. Besides, he only said it's better to "get hosed" be a Christian rather than "hose" a Christian. That doesn't apply to all fair lawsuits IMO.

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 12:13 AM
That's exactly the other passage I was thinking of too. It's pretty clear here the teaching of Christ and how Paul understood that teaching as well. Stuff is just stuff... nothing but a thing. We can't let stuff be the reason the body of Christ suffers and suing another Christian over stuff... doesn't paint a good picture at all of Christianity.

Lets keep in mind Paul didn't say we shouldn't have disputes with other Christians, only that we should be able to solve it among ourselves rather than going to unbelievers to help us. It was ok to "sue" within the church using one of the saints as a judge etc.



1 Corinthians 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

ProjectPeter
Apr 5th 2008, 01:47 AM
Lets keep in mind Paul didn't say we shouldn't have disputes with other Christians, only that we should be able to solve it among ourselves rather than going to unbelievers to help us. It was ok to "sue" within the church using one of the saints as a judge etc.



1 Corinthians 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
That was my point so not sure you don't see that I had kept that in mind. But keep in mind too the teaching of Jesus... it's just stuff. Don't sweat the stuff. ;)

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 01:57 AM
That was my point so not sure you don't see that I had kept that in mind. But keep in mind too the teaching of Jesus... it's just stuff. Don't sweat the stuff. ;)

Sure but lawsuits aren't always over literal stuff. There are non property related things to be considered.

The people Paul was speaking to were suing each other in the courts of unbelievers and not taking the issues to the other saints to have them render judgement privately. I believe that is wrong and it would be better to be wronged than to commit that wrong against another. But, if a Christian refuses to submit to the judgement of a fair and impartial Christian/Christians then can we not take the matter to a United States court since it is not we that were in the wrong but the other Christian that refused to submit to Christian judgement?

ProjectPeter
Apr 5th 2008, 02:08 AM
Sure but lawsuits aren't always over literal stuff. There are non property related things to be considered.

The people Paul was speaking to were suing each other in the courts of unbelievers and not taking the issues to the other saints to have them render judgement privately. I believe that is wrong and it would be better to be wronged than to commit that wrong against another. But, if a Christian refuses to submit to the judgement of a fair and impartial Christian/Christians then can we not take the matter to a United States court since it is not we that were in the wrong but the other Christian that refused to submit to Christian judgement?
Again... why not rather be wronged?

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 02:11 AM
My point though... size isn't covered and Paul didn't tell us to measure the loss and then decide.

Just a few comments from people that I was reading:


Gill

1Co 6:4 - If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life,.... Not judgements relating to life and death, for these were not in the power of a Jewish sanhedrim now, and much less of a Christian community, but were wholly in the power of the Roman magistrates; but judgments relating to the common affairs of life, or what the Jews call דיני ממונות, "pecuniary judgments" (b), in distinction from דיני נפשות, "judgments of souls", or capital ones. The Jews say (c),


Matthew Henry:

Here is at least an intimation that they went to law for trivial matters, things of little value; for the apostle blames them that they did not suffer wrong rather than go to law (1Co_6:7), which must be understood of matters not very important. In matters of great damage to ourselves or families, we may use lawful means to right ourselves. We are not bound to sit down and suffer the injury tamely, without stirring for our own relief; but, in matters of small consequence, it is better to put up with the wrong. Christians should be of a forgiving temper. And it is more for their ease and honour to suffer small injuries and inconveniences than seem to be contentious.

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 02:16 AM
Again... why not rather be wronged?

Because it's wrong? Surely there are things we can turn a cheek to but I don't believe we are to be doormats either. I agree with the comments of the two people I just posted.

Even Paul believed we could seek justice rather than be wronged if we do it in the proper fashion which is to have the saints judge it. He only said it's better to be wronged than to wrong someone. He didn't say we should never seek justice and always be wronged by our Brothers.

ProjectPeter
Apr 5th 2008, 02:22 AM
Because it's wrong? Surely there are things we can turn a cheek to but I don't believe we are to be doormats either. I agree with the comments of the two people I just posted.

Even Paul believed we could seek justice rather than be wronged if we do it in the proper fashion which is to have the saints judge it. He only said it's better to be wronged than to wrong someone. He didn't say we should never seek justice and always be wronged by our Brothers.
I can't argue what folks opinion is because it is your opinion. What I can tell you is the words of Paul... why not rather be wronged. He didn't leave any wiggle room there really although folks want to make wiggle room anyway. But to hold true to what he said... it really is as simple as "why not rather be wronged?"

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 02:29 AM
I can't argue what folks opinion is because it is your opinion. What I can tell you is the words of Paul... why not rather be wronged. He didn't leave any wiggle room there really although folks want to make wiggle room anyway. But to hold true to what he said... it really is as simple as "why not rather be wronged?"

I disagree. He only said it's better to be wronged than to wrong someone in the way they were doing. He did not speak against seeking justice within the Church and by the Church.


1 Corinthians 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

Why go to the unjust rather than the just in order to solve disputes?

1 Corinthians 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
1 Corinthians 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
1 Corinthians 6:4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.

The saints can make judgements and settle these matters for you, even the least esteemed Christian can do this.


1 Corinthians 6:5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
1 Corinthians 6:6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
1 Corinthians 6:7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

But instead of having a saint judge you go to the unjust and that is wrong. Why not just take the wrong rather than do this shameful thing?

It's far more than just that last verse. You can "sue" within the church if you wish you just shouldn't take it to unbelievers.

Owen
Apr 5th 2008, 02:32 AM
I disagree. He only said it's better to be wronged than to wrong someone in the way they were doing. He did not speak against seeking justice within the Church and by the Church.


1 Corinthians 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

Why go to the unjust rather than the just in order to solve disputes?

1 Corinthians 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
1 Corinthians 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
1 Corinthians 6:4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.

The saints can make judgements and settle these matters for you, even the least esteemed Christian can do this.


1 Corinthians 6:5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
1 Corinthians 6:6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
1 Corinthians 6:7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

But instead of having a saint judge you go to the unjust and that is wrong. Why not just take the wrong rather than do this shameful thing?

It's far more than just that last verse. You can "sue" within the church if you wish you just shouldn't take it to unbelievers.

Here is the question. When you seek justice for yourself, can you be sure that you are going to ask for what is truly just or being emotionally involved are you going to ask for what is more than what God would do? Are you capable of discerning what justice God would specifically give, which he will in the end, or would it be based on your own felt need for justice?

And won't all justice be given in the end by God? If so, why take matters in your own hand?

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 02:43 AM
Here is the question. When you seek justice for yourself, can you be sure that you are going to ask for what is truly just or being emotionally involved are you going to ask for what is more than what God would do? Are you capable of discerning what justice God would specifically give, which he will in the end, or would it be based on your own felt need for justice?

And won't all justice be given in the end by God? If so, why take matters in your own hand?

This is why you involve the saints to judge. As Paul says, the saints will even judge angels so they are capable of judging these matters. That's one of his main points.

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 02:48 AM
But are the saints judging yet?

Of course or else Paul's advice would not have made sense:


1 Corinthians 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
1 Corinthians 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
1 Corinthians 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
1 Corinthians 6:4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.

He is calling Christians in the church saints and when we have a matter against another we should go to them to have them judge.

My heart's Desire
Apr 5th 2008, 05:08 AM
But that wasn't the point Paul made at all. Paul said it is better to be hosed than to take it to the unbelieving court folk etc.

Now.. keep in mind that we're talking two believers here. If it is an unbeliever then there is nothing you could settle amongst the gathering of saints.
My reply was about should a believer go to an outside Court (not neccessily against another believer). I think yes!

For believer to believer I also agree what you've said but unfortunately do we today have many churches that will take on these kinds of responsiblities, I mean honestly? Do you think? Especially if it is very serious?
I truly think though that Paul was sincerely believing that if they took their disagreements to the Church that in Christian faith it would all work out believing perhaps they would remember the love of Christ and that all would end up doing what was right even to the point of the matter being ended because one of the parties backed down and in your words, choose to be hosed for the sake of Christ.
I have heard at least one teacher giving advice about these things that the parties should go to their Pastor first and see if it could be worked out within the Church.

ProjectPeter
Apr 5th 2008, 11:54 AM
I disagree. He only said it's better to be wronged than to wrong someone in the way they were doing. He did not speak against seeking justice within the Church and by the Church.


1 Corinthians 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

Why go to the unjust rather than the just in order to solve disputes?

1 Corinthians 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
1 Corinthians 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
1 Corinthians 6:4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.

The saints can make judgements and settle these matters for you, even the least esteemed Christian can do this.


1 Corinthians 6:5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
1 Corinthians 6:6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
1 Corinthians 6:7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

But instead of having a saint judge you go to the unjust and that is wrong. Why not just take the wrong rather than do this shameful thing?

It's far more than just that last verse. You can "sue" within the church if you wish you just shouldn't take it to unbelievers.
No one is talking about not taking something before the saints Naphal. It is about lawsuits in court... that is what the thread is about. There is a procedure that Christ laid out. Privately... with a couple of others... the body. Nothing wrong with that. Never said anything contrary to that at all.

ProjectPeter
Apr 5th 2008, 11:58 AM
My reply was about should a believer go to an outside Court (not neccessily against another believer). I think yes!

For believer to believer I also agree what you've said but unfortunately do we today have many churches that will take on these kinds of responsiblities, I mean honestly? Do you think? Especially if it is very serious?
I truly think though that Paul was sincerely believing that if they took their disagreements to the Church that in Christian faith it would all work out believing perhaps they would remember the love of Christ and that all would end up doing what was right even to the point of the matter being ended because one of the parties backed down and in your words, choose to be hosed for the sake of Christ.
I have heard at least one teacher giving advice about these things that the parties should go to their Pastor first and see if it could be worked out within the Church.
It doesn't matter whether churches are doing this today in all honesty. Churches aren't doing a lot of things they probably ought be doing... but none of that changes the rightness or wrongness of something. Scripture is what it is and just because the churches aren't following Scripture doesn't give us as Christians an out to do differently than what Scripture says. If the church won't do it... then apply the "why not be wronged" and let God deal with matters His way.

And I am talking specifically about believers and believers. Unbelievers... there I would apply Jesus' teaching on give them your cloak also. ;)

ProjectPeter
Apr 5th 2008, 12:01 PM
And everyone keep in mind... with this sort of thing I am speaking about stuff. Like I said earlier... there are issues such as insurance claims and whatnot that you have paid for and when the companies hem and haw... you at times have to go certain routes. Not talking about things like the ACLJ and whatnot suing on behalf of a student so that they can exercise their right to pray in school... etc. THere are some things when legal recourse is all that we have.

IPet2_9
Apr 5th 2008, 04:32 PM
Our church had to do that. We had mold, the insurance company flaked out. It was a 6-digit sum of money. We sued and won.

Matthew
Apr 5th 2008, 09:00 PM
Ideally Christians would be able to settle disputes amongst themselves. All too often we can't though. As for why not rather be wronged...because some things are too serious. While it's easy to turn on Judge Judy and think that the people should let those things slide, that's not how many cases are. People lose loved ones. They lose their livelihoods. They become permanently disabled. These are huge issues that change people's lives. If Christians want to rely on the church to settle these matters then that is fine. Christians should NOT feel guilty about using the judicial system to seek justice though. Let's keep in mind that we are judged by our peers. Undoubtedly there may be people on a jury who are not Christians, but more than likely there will be Christians as well.

As for the McDonald's coffee case, here's an article that gives the rest of the story.

http://www.thehoustonlawyer.com/aa_july07/page24.htm

Brother Mark
Apr 5th 2008, 09:07 PM
And everyone keep in mind... with this sort of thing I am speaking about stuff. Like I said earlier... there are issues such as insurance claims and whatnot that you have paid for and when the companies hem and haw... you at times have to go certain routes. Not talking about things like the ACLJ and whatnot suing on behalf of a student so that they can exercise their right to pray in school... etc. THere are some things when legal recourse is all that we have.

Aye! Often in such things as lawsuits, it's about authority. With Christians, we let the church handle it and we "take up our cross". But with unbelievers, there is no church that they will submit to for judgment. Their authority is the government. That is when we use government for lawsuits. However, as you have mentioned before, nothing wrong with giving someone your cloak. As we understand authority and the role it plays, it is easier to understand the verses regarding lawsuits.

Naphal
Apr 5th 2008, 09:57 PM
And everyone keep in mind... with this sort of thing I am speaking about stuff. Like I said earlier... there are issues such as insurance claims and whatnot that you have paid for and when the companies hem and haw... you at times have to go certain routes. Not talking about things like the ACLJ and whatnot suing on behalf of a student so that they can exercise their right to pray in school... etc. THere are some things when legal recourse is all that we have.

If I may, what about what you said about just accepting being wronged by these parties?

ProjectPeter
Apr 6th 2008, 12:12 AM
If I may, what about what you said about just accepting being wronged by these parties?
One could certainly exercise that option. My point with that though was that it was a paid service and insurance companies and such often sue on your stead. There are times when stuff like that happens between insurance companies and the like. Labor disputes and such can have you before an arbitrator of judge etc. Things such as that you are almost obligated to deal with.

Keep in mind too... not a lot of Christian insurance companies and such out there either. ;) You cannot apply biblical principles to unbelievers nor expect them to follow those principles. They aren't going to.

IPet2_9
Apr 6th 2008, 02:02 AM
Since ProjectPeter's in Atlanta (the great home of Coca Cola), that reminds me: I think we should sue Coke Zero. For taste infringement.

ProjectPeter
Apr 6th 2008, 02:16 AM
Since ProjectPeter's in Atlanta (the great home of Coca Cola), that reminds me: I think we should sue Coke Zero. For taste infringement.
I'd have a hard time arguing with you on that one. ;)