Sermon Tone Analysis

Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.

But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.

Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ.

The Ministry of Restoration is committed to the Body of Christ.

This vital ministry is far too important to be entrusted to one particular group or individual within the church, so it is given to the entire community of faith.

Pastors may neglect it.

Deacons may ignore it.

The church, however, must practise the ministry of mending broken brothers.

Perhaps you have noticed that Paul seldom addressed church leaders when he wrote.

Usually he addressed his letters to a particular church, or in those few instances where he wrote to the churches situated within a particular region he would address the missive in collective fashion.

Though interspersed among the teachings presented within his letters are instructions directed specifically to elders, his instructions are in the main addressed to the entire assembly.

The impact of this observation is to emphasise that whatever the Apostle had to say was intended to be accepted as binding upon each individual Christian.

All Christians are responsible to know the Word and the will of God, whether speaking of individual responsibilities or speaking of responsibilities imposed on elders.

There are no secret teachings hidden within the New Testament.

This point merits emphasis through repetition to ensure that we grasp it thoroughly.

There are no secret teachings among the pages of the New Testament.

God has spoken openly so that everyone would bear equal responsibility before Him for the knowledge communicated.

This is not to say that every Christian bears equal responsibility to implement a particular teaching, but it is to acknowledge that each member is responsible to know the teachings of the Word and each is responsible to hold one another accountable for those truths.

Thus it is that the ministry of restoration is the responsibility of the entire congregation.

Each member of the church bears responsibility before God to mend those who are broken.

Collectively, whatever we do as a congregation to heal the hurting among us is a reflection of the acceptance of individual responsibility for mending the broken among us.

Join me in learning of the ministry of mending broken brothers.

The Ministry of Restoration* **— */Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently/.

Galatians is addressed to the churches situated within the Province of Galatia [see *Galatians 1:2*].

Paul stresses one great truth in the brief instructions found in the text for our study this day—we are each responsible for others.

Refusal to accept this responsibility is rather dramatic evidence that an individual is not spiritual.

The concept that the church is an organisation appears to be the prevailing view among the churches of this day.

The church is viewed much the same as any social organisation or fraternal club.

The concept bears on the point immediately before us in the perception that the way to join the church is through sitting through a membership class and then making formal application which is approved by an official board.

Such a concept fails the test of witness by the Word of God.

Where within the Word of God does one find a board?

The only boards to be discovered in the Word of God were flotsam and jetsam awash upon the sea following a shipwreck [*Acts 27:44*].

Not one membership class is to be discovered in the Word of God.

Not one instance of formal application for membership occurs in the entirety of the Word of God.

The definitive passage for this point must yet be *Acts 2:41*.

This is the divine record of the first intake of members into the Jerusalem church following the descent of the Holy Spirit.

/Those who accepted [Peter’s] message were baptised, and about three thousand were added to their number that day/.

Membership classes as a requirement for addition to the church is a human invention designed to support our models of church polity.

Applications for membership and the need for approval by a board are human inventions required by political models of churches which are unsupported by the Word of God.

Measures such as these are required when we adopt the political model advocated by the world instead of receiving the biblical concept of  the church as a living Body.

Under the biblical view those added to the church are responsible to the church to invest their gifts and lives in that Body to which they are added.

Instead of accountability to the rules of a board, those who are part of the Body bear accountability to one another.

Let me restate the proposition.

If the church is a political entity—solely or primarily—membership classes and formal applications will be required for admission to the assembly.

If, on the other hand, the church is a living organisation, God adds those members to the Body as He pleases and those so added are responsible to submit themselves to the greater assembly.

Consequently, in the political model accountability is to the board which admits or oversees membership and such accountability is likely to be sporadic and~/or casual in administration.

If, on the other hand, the church is a living entity—a spiritual Body—accountability is immediate and ongoing.

Discipline in the case of the political model falls under the purview of a hierarchy or oligarchy (in this case a board or committee or even the pastoral staff).

In the case of the biblical model discipline becomes the responsibility of the entire Body.

The importance of this particular point will become apparent as we continue our study of the text underlying the message this day.

The message seeks to present the ministry of reconciliation as a ministry for which the entire congregation bears responsibility, but we must move beyond the political model to reinstate the biblical model in order to fully appreciate this particular ministry of the Body.

Some may argue that since we must meet the laws of the province or of the nation that we are compelled to adopt the political model, but as a church of the Lord Jesus our first loyalty is to Him and to the Word which He has given.

Fortunately, because we are situated on Canadian soil we are not compelled to violate our conscience in order to fulfil the will of God as revealed in His Word.

However, we must consider the consequences of adopting either the political model or the biblical model especially as it relates to the ministry of restoration.

The political model can only seek to coerce or exclude, whereas the biblical model seeks to restore.

It is this latter concept which becomes our focus as we consider the passage before us.

Church discipline at its heart seeks restoration instead of punishment.

The church cannot punish a member; the church must make every effort to restore errant members.

Only when restoration efforts have failed may errant individuals be considered to have demonstrated their lack of relationship to the Body and henceforth be considered to be pretenders and not fellow saints.

I recognise that the Greek word ejpitimiva, translated /punishment/ in most translations, occurs in *2 Corinthians 2:6*.

Never does the church exhibit a more godly mind than when disciplining the errant.

This is chastisement which holds out hope of restoring a fallen saint to a life of godly usefulness, a most divine precept.

In submission to Christ the church is to endeavour to seek reconciliation of wayward sheep.

The church must always seek restoration of fallen members.

When the church ceases to seek restoration, it ceases to be spiritual.

Do listen to this passage from the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.

/EpitimaŒoµ/ corresponds to the twofold sense of /timaŒoµ/, “to award honour or blame,” and comes into use for “to blame,” “to reprove.”

In the Septuagint it is applied especially to God’s rebuke (cf.

*Job 26:11*; *2 Samuel 22:16*; *Psalm 106:9*; *119:21*).

In a limited way it is also used for human rebuke (*Genesis 37:10*; *Ruth 2:16*), but human reproof is often held to be presumptuous, and only judicial, pastoral, or fraternal rebuke is commended.

The New Testament follows the Septuagint in treating human rebuke with great reserve.

Thus the disciples are over hasty with their rebuke in *Mark 10:13*, the crowd in *Mark 10:48*, and Peter in *Matthew 16:22* (Jesus here responds with his own legitimate rebuke).

The only acceptable rebuke is that of humility.

Thus one of the crucified thieves rebukes the other in *Luke 23:41*, and one believer may rebuke another if it is done in a spirit of forgiveness (*Luke 17:3*).

Rebuke is especially a responsibility of pastoral oversight in *2 Timothy 4:2*.

The New Testament also follows the Septuagint in regarding rebuke as essentially a prerogative of divine lordship.

Only God may rightly rebuke the devil (*Jude 9*).

Jesus plainly has the right of rebuke (*Mark 8:33*; *Luke 9:55*; *19:39-40*).

In *Mark 8:30 */epitimaŒn/ is used to show how strict is his charge to the disciples not to disclose his messiahship at this point.

The same term is one of lordship when he commands the demons to keep silence in *Mark 3:12*.

He displays a similar power when he rebukes and expels the unclean spirit in *Mark 9:25*, when he rebukes the fever of Simon’s mother-in-law in *Luke 4:39*, and when he rebukes even the elemental forces of nature in *Mark 4:39*.

His unconditional divine power and prerogative are clearly and forcefully revealed in his /epitimaŒn./

*/EpitiméŒa/* occurs in the New Testament only in *2 Corinthians 2:6* as a technical term in congregational discipline for the church’s “punishment” or “censure.”[1]

With this thought firmly in mind I invite you to explore the verses of our text together with me.

Paul deals with a hypothetical case of a Christian who is caught* *(prolhmfqh`~/µ) /in a sin/*, *or better, is *caught by a sin*.

The imagery this word created in the mind of Paul’s first readers would be that of someone running from sin but sin, being faster, overtakes and catches him.

It is important that you understand that this is not an instance of presumptuous sin, but rather this is a case of an individual who makes a misstep.

They are endeavouring to live according to the Faith, but they stumble—they make a mistake which can only be viewed as sin.

They were snared through their own lack of caution.

Perhaps in their weakness or in the heat of a moment they make a decision which results in sin.

This is not an excuse for or a concession to sin, but it is rather recognition of the subtle nature of our adversary and recognition of our own weakness.

Two passages show how the legalists responded to such sin.

Listen first to *John 8:3-5*.

/The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery.

They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery.

In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women.

Now what do you say?”/

In this passage we read of an incident when a woman was actually caught in the very act of adultery.

Why the man wasn’t also seized is left to speculation.

In any case, the Pharisees, together with the Teachers of the Law, drag this hapless woman before Jesus and insist that He make a pronouncement declaring either her guilt or her innocence.