The Fourteenth Sunday after Trinity is September 10, 2023.

Readings for Year A can be found here, used for the Thirteenth Sunday after Trinity on September 6, 2020.

The Gospel is as follows (emphases mine):

Matthew 18:15-20

18:15 “If another member of the Church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

18:16 But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.

18:17 If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

18:18 Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

18:19 Again, truly I tell you, if two of you agree on earth about anything you ask, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven.

18:20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.”

Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.

This reading concerns church discipline, even though the Church was only in its initial stage.

Matthew Henry’s commentary states:

… it is plain that he means a Christian church, which, though not yet formed, was now in the embryo.

John MacArthur says similarly:

… it anticipates the church in its official character, its official reality from Pentecost on, but it is applied to any assembly of believers.  It’s used in the same non-technical sense it was used in Matthew 16 where Christ said, “I will build my church,” and what he meant there was not some kind of future promise simply speaking of the Pentecost and beyond; but He meant, “I will gather my redeemed people.”  Certainly, the anticipated church will be a great part of it.

Jesus said that, if another member of the church offends you, go and point out the fault when you and he/she are alone; if the member listens to you, you have regained him or her (verse 15).

Henry explains the roots for this in the Old Testament, principally Leviticus but also Proverbs:

Christ, having cautioned his disciples not to give offence, comes next to direct them what they must do in case of offences given them; which may be understood either of personal injuries, and then these directions are intended for the preserving of the peace of the church; or of public scandals, and then they are intended for the preserving of the purity and beauty of the church. Let us consider it both ways.

I. Let us apply it to the quarrels that happen, upon any account, among Christians. If thy brother trespass against thee, by grieving thy soul (1 Cor 8 12), by affronting thee, or putting contempt or abuse upon thee; if he blemish thy good name by false reports or tale-bearing; if he encroach on thy rights, or be any way injurious to thee in thy estate; if he be guilty of any of those trespasses that are specified, Lev 6 2, 3; if he transgress the laws of justice, charity, or relative duties; these are trespasses against us, and often happen among Christ’s disciples, and sometimes, for want of prudence, are of very mischievous consequence. Now observe what is the rule prescribed in this case,

1. Go, and tell him his fault between thee and him alone. Let this be compared with, and explained by, Lev 19 17, Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart; that is, “If thou hast conceived a displeasure at thy brother for any injury he hath done thee, do not suffer thy resentments to ripen into a secret malice (like a wound, which is most dangerous when it bleed inwardly), but give vent to them in a mild and grave admonition, let them so spend themselves, and they will expire the sooner; do not go and rail against him behind his back, but thou shalt not in any ways reprove him. If he has indeed done thee a considerable wrong, endeavour to make him sensible of it, but let the rebuke be private, between thee and him alone; if thou wouldest convince him, do not expose him, for that will but exasperate him, and make the reproof look like a revenge.” this agrees with Prov 25 8, 9, “Go not forth hastily to strive, but debate thy cause with thy neighbour himself, argue it calmly and amicably; and if he shall hear thee, well and good, thou hast gained thy brother, there is an end of the controversy, and it is a happy end; let no more be said of it, but let the falling out of friends be the renewing of friendship.”

MacArthur points out that the purpose is not to alienate the person guilty of the offence but to reconcile them with you, as a member of the assembly of believers:

Look at verse 15, the end of the verse.  “If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.”  There’s the purpose.  Listen, the purpose of discipline is restoration.  Restoring back to holiness.  God has always been concerned with restoration.  Proverbs 11:30, “He that winneth souls is wise.”  Maybe the element of wisdom of all is to win men back to God.  In Galatians 6, Paul says, “If a brother be overtaken in a paraptma, if you fall into sin, ye that are spiritual do,” what?  “Restore such a one.”  Restore him.  In James chapter 5, the end of the epistle, verse 19 and 20.  “Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth and one convert him or restore him or bring him back, let him know that who he converts the sinner from the error of his ways shall save a soul from death.”  You save a soul from death when you restore.

Now, this is always the goal of discipline.  The goal of discipline in the church is not to throw people out.  It’s not to embarrass them.  It’s not to be self-righteous as over against their unrighteousness.  It’s not to play God.  It’s not to exercise authority in power in some unbiblical manner.  The purpose of discipline isn’t to throw people out; it’s to bring them in.  It’s to bring them back.

MacArthur looks at the Greek word for ‘gain’:

Now, notice in verse 15, there’s an interesting word, gained.  It’s a word from the commercial world.  It’s a word of the marketplace.  It is a word used, for example, to talk about accumulating wealth.  Gain in the sense of treasure.  Gain the sense of money or goods, commodities.  And used in this connection, it sees a sinning brother then as a loss of treasure.  As a loss of something valuable.  And I would just point out to you that this in fact the heart of God that God cannot let one soul go because each is to Him a treasure.  And the church has to have that same sense as well that we can’t allow one to just float away and say well, I don’t know where they are, but I just really can’t get involved.  I think they fell into sin.  There’s a loss to us.  There’s a treasure that’s gone from us.  And when restored, we regain that wealth.  So, there’s something lost to us of value. 

No son of God, no daughter of God is valueless, worthless.  And so, when a brother or a sister sins, we’ve lost them as a treasure that’s lost to us.  And we need to bring them back, and we need to work diligently to bring them back to restore them, because they are of value to us. 

Restoration is important, because we do not want believers to drift away:

You know what happened to those people that drift on?  Guess who got them?  The enemy got them.  And we need to go and recover them.  In Galatians 6:1 it says, “Ye that are spiritual restore.”  And that word restore, katartiz, is a very interesting word.  It has the idea, basically, of repairing something to bring it back to its original condition.  It talks about mending fractured bones, replacing dislocated bones.  It is used of mending fishing nets.  It is to restore to the former condition …

That’s the goal of discipline.  It’s to see a person as a treasure.  To see the people the way God, the good shepherd sees them, who leaves the ones that are there in the fold and goes out and finds that one and brings it back because one, just one of a hundred, is a loss.  And there’s something to be given to me and to you through the love and the ministry of that person that can never be given to another.  And so, we’re in the business of recovery ... The idea is that we have a tremendous hunger for the fact that God wants His church holy, and we also put a very high value on the worth of a soul that belongs to God and one of His sheep and we have the heart of the shepherd.

Jesus then went into the steps of what to do when that member will not listen to us.

First, if the offender refuses to listen to us, then take one or two others so that every word can be corroborated by the evidence of two or three witnesses (verse 16).

Henry says:

“If he will not hear thee, if he will not own himself in a fault, nor come to an agreement, yet do not despair, but try what he will say to it, if thou take one or two or more, not only to be witnesses of what passes, but to reason the case further with him; he will be the more likely to hearken to them because they are disinterested; and if reason will rule him, the word of reason in the mouth of two or three witnesses will be better spoken to him” (Plus vident oculi quam oculus—Many eyes see more than one), “and more regarded by him, and perhaps it will influence him to acknowledge his error, and to say, I repent.“

MacArthur tells us that the concept of witnesses is in Deuteronomy:

Verse 16, “But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, in order that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.” And of course, the Jewish people knew well that God had established that law in Deuteronomy 19:15.  That all things were to be confirmed “in the mouth of two or three witnesses.”  This was for protection, so that no one was passing on slanderous information about anybody which was unconfirmed.  There had to be the affirmation of two or three witnesses.

… Take one or two more with you.  Now, this begins to put the pressure on.  You take a couple of people and the same objective in mind.  You want to gain your brother.  So you’re pursuing again.  You’re going again.  And the idea is to show him his sin, so that he really understands it or that she really understands it, and you’ve opened it up so that it’s very clear, and very obvious, and there might genuine confession, and genuine repentance, and restoration.  This is the second attack in the battle for this drifting brother or sister. 

Now why have one or two more?  Well, I think it intensifies the approach.  It multiplies the caring concern, the love, but there’s a reason even beyond that given here.  “In order that – ” here’s the purpose “ – in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.”  Very important.  Listen carefully.  These are not one or two people who saw the sin or who knew about the sin.  I don’t think that’s the intent.  They are witnesses of the confrontation who can come back and confirm the words that were spoken there.

In other words, it is really as much a protection for the one being approached as it is the one approaching.  So that when a report comes back a biased person doesn’t say, “Well, I tried to confront him, but his impenitent and his heart is hard.  And so forth, and so forth, and so forth,” as if one person could make that ultimate determination.  Especially one person who may have been sinned against and be somewhat bitter.  So to protect against that, you take one or two others who can witness the second confrontation.  And they’ll come back and report either yes, there was a heart of repentance; yes, there was a heart of confession; yes, there was a heart of turning away from sin; or no, there was not.  In other words, now you can act because you know this to be the case.  You have the witnesses to verify it beyond just the one individual. 

St Paul did this:

Has this ever occurred in the New Testament?  Is there an illustration here like there was of the first step?  Yes, I think there is.  Look at 2 Corinthians Chapter 13 …  In 2 Corinthians 13, it says, “This is the third time I am coming to you.”  Paul is writing to the Corinthians.  “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.”  Now he throws in that Deuteronomy 19:15 principle, and we know we’re in a discipline situation.  “I told you before, and tell you beforehand, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write to them who heretofore have sinned, and to all others, that, if I come again, I will not spare.”

Now, what is he saying?  You that are sinning in the Corinthian assembly, I’ve told you once.  I’ve told you twice.  It has been confirmed – verse 1 says – in the mouth of two or three witnesses.  And if I come and you still have not repented, I won’t spare the discipline.  There is an illustration where Paul calls the Corinthians to respond to the second approach to their sin, those that are sinning.

This brings us to the ultimate escalation. Jesus said that, if going with one or two witnesses does not resolve the situation, then present the issue to the church as a whole, and if the offender does not take heed at that point, treat him or her as an outcast — ‘as a Gentile and a tax collector’ (verse 17).

Henry points out St Paul’s example when dealing with sin in the Corinthian church. One took care of church matters within the congregation, not through civil courts:

This is fully explained by the apostle (1 Cor 6.), where he reproves those that went to law before the unjust, and not before the saints (v. 1), and would have the saints to judge those small matters (v. 2) that pertain to this life, v. 3. If you ask, “Who is the church that must be told?” the apostle directs there (v. 5), Is there not a wise man among you? Those of the church that are presumed to be most capable of determining such matters; and he speaks ironically, when he says (v. 4), “Set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church; those, if there be no better, those, rather than suffer an irreconcileable breach between two church members.” This rule was then in a special manner requisite, when the civil government was in the hands of such as were not only aliens, but enemies.

One could say the same of civil government these days, too.

MacArthur explains:

What happens if they don’t hear the two or three who come?  Verse 17, “If he shall neglect to hear them, tell it to the church.”  Tell it to the whole assembly.  Now this may mean a public proclamation to everybody.  It may mean that you tell enough folks representative of the church so that the word gets out that this person is sinning and not coming back, but the intention is the key here, folks.  When you tell it to the church, and certainly by now the church leadership, to some extent, are involved because the word has come back from the witnesses.

This is an impenitent person.  We must tell the church.  And so through whatever means are chosen, the church is told.  Sometimes the leaders disseminate it through the groups.  This is how we do it here.  Sometimes we may say it at a communion service.  Sometimes it may be said at a class, or a fellowship, or a Bible study, or association where the person is known.  But the statement is this:  They’re sinning.  Our brother is lost to us.  Tell it to the church for what purpose?  What is always the purpose of discipline?  Restoration.

So what do you tell the church?  Church, go after them.  An individual went, no response.  Two or three went, no response.  Now we all go. 

There is one instance in the New Testament where that did not work:

Now this isn’t the task of one person. We don’t have one person who is in charge of this. They had one person in charge of this in only one church that I know of and it was a disaster. You want to meet him? His name is Diotrephes. John wrote about him in his third epistle. He says, “I wrote to the church – ” can you imagine this? “I wrote to the church: – ” this is John the apostle “ – but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, received us not.” Now this is this guy with an amazing ego. He can’t – he won’t even receive John the apostle.

This is why everyone needs to get involved and not one, such as Diotrephes. MacArthur continues, citing St John:

“Wherefore, if I come I’ll remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content with that, neither doeth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.”  Here was a self-appointed guy throwing people out of the church.  This is not one man’s task.  This is not one man to decide this.  If we ever have to put a person out of the church – listen – if we ever have to put a person out of the church, it isn’t after one person went to them and didn’t repent.  It isn’t after two or three went and they didn’t repent.  It’s after everybody went and they didn’t repent.  So that there’s nobody calling all the shots.  We’re all out there trying to restore that person, and if they still do not respond, then the motion goes into effect.  Put them out, but not until the whole church has gone after them.

The whole church approach worked for St Paul:

Look at 2 Corinthians Chapter 2.  2 Corinthians 2:5 it says this – and I’ll read from the New American Standard.  It’s much clearer.  “But if any has caused sorrow, – ” that is, bringing sorrow to the assembly because of sin “ – he has caused sorrow not to me, but in some degree – in order not say too much – to all of you.”  Sin, he’s saying, doesn’t just affect me, it affects everybody.  And that’s again back to our point that we said you can be sinned against indirectly.  Any sin touches the whole body. 

So he says, “Look, if any has sinned, it’s not just to me, but to all of you.”  But then assumes, then, that all of the church is aware of this, and all of the church is concerned about this.  Verse 6 then, “Sufficient to such a man is this punishment which was inflicted by majority.”  In other words, apparently the whole church said, “This guy’s in sin.”  And the whole church knew, and they went after the guy, and he repented.

And so verse 7 says, “on the contrary – ” on the other hand “ – ye rather should forgive him – ” which assumes that he has repented in response to the whole church coming after him “ – and then comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with over much sorrow.”  And then he says in verse 8, “confirm your love to him.” 

Now here’s the case where the whole church knew, and the whole church went, and apparently the guy responded, and he says, “Now that he’s responded, don’t let him stay out there.  Don’t hold him at arms length and browbeat because of what he did.  You embrace him again, and you forgive him, and you love him.”

Only if the offender does not respond, does the congregation treat him as an outcast.

MacArthur explains that the harshness involved points to the recalcitrance of the offender:

But what if they don’t respond?  Then it says, step four, “Let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a tax collector.”  You say “Boy, in the New Testament, the tax collectors really take it in the neck.”  And in a sense, that’s very true.  In Israel, there was the covenant people.  And basically, a heathen was somebody outside the covenant and outcast.  It wasn’t that they didn’t want to include him, it’s just that if he wouldn’t be included, he was outside.  He couldn’t associate with them.  He didn’t assemble with them.  He didn’t worship with them.  He wasn’t a part of them.

But the other kind of outcast in many ways might even be worse, was the Jewish person who had sold himself to the Roman government to exact taxes from his own people.  He was not only an outcast by birth, he was an outcast by choice.  He had defected to the enemy.  And so, when you talk about a heathen man and a tax collector in the parlance of the time of the Lord Jesus Christ, the people would have understood him to be speaking of those outside the fellowship, outside the synagogue, outside the covenant, and that’s exactly what Jesus is intending to say.  Not that you don’t care about those people.  Matthew who wrote this passage down in this gospel was a tax collector and Jesus was in the business of saving tax collectors and sinners.

… It is simply to say that you treat them when they sin as if they were outside your fellowship. What does that mean? It means two things, and I’m going to draw this to a conclusion right here … The first thing, what happens when the whole process is unproductive? Step one, put them out. Put them out. Put them out of what? Put them out of the fellowship. Put them out of the assembly. Don’t let them associate. Don’t let them have the blessings and the benefits. Put them out.

How serious does the sin have to be? MacArthur gives us an example from Corinth:

First Corinthians Chapter 5 makes this very clear.  In the Corinthian church there was a man who was having sexual relationships with his father’s wife, his stepmother, a form of incest, abominable to God.  And instead of being brokenhearted over the incest, the people were proud about it.  Paul says, “You’re puffed up and you haven’t mourned.”  Instead of being sad, you’re glad.  You think it’s a notch in his belt to have an affair with his own stepmother.  That’s pretty sick.

He says this, verse 4, “In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of Lord Jesus Christ – ” next time you come together in your assembly, “ – deliver such a one unto Satan.”  Put him out.  And that’s why at the Lord’s Table when we come together in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the power of the Lord Jesus Christ, if a person has been resistant to all those processes, you will hear us mention their name, and we are putting them out.  No longer can they fellowship here.  No longer can they know the blessedness of God’s people, the sanctifying grace of assembly of His chosen ones if they are to live in continued sin.  You turned them out, “delivering them to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”

In other words, their spirit may be redeemed in the end.  God can hold onto the spirit, but they may have to have the destruction of that flesh, that flesh which pulls towards their sin.  Sin is of the flesh, as we’ve been seeing in Romans 6.  And that’s going to have to be devastated.  And putting them out, they may go even down further.  And you have to do it.  Verse 6 says, “because a little leaven leavens the whole lump.  Purge out, therefore, the old leaven.”  Get it out.  It’s got to be put away … 

Back to 1 Corinthians 5:9.  Paul says, “I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators.”  “And not,” he says, “not the fornicators of the world,” not the outsiders, or with covetous, extortioners, idolators, not those or he’d have to leave the world.  I’m not saying don’t meet with those people.  Don’t fellowship with those people, they need you.  “But I am writing – ” verse 11 “ – so that you not keep company if any many that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, idolator, railer, drunkard, extortioner – ” and here it comes “ – with such one no not to eat.”  Don’t have a meal with him.  That’s symbolic of fellowship, hospitality, cordiality, sociability.  None of that.

When you put a person out, you put them out.  You don’t have them over for a meal.  You don’t treat them like a brother.  You treat them like an outcast.  You put them out. 

There is another example involving Ephesus:

In 1 Timothy 1:20, Paul says, “I took Hymenaeus and Alexander and turned them over to Satan, that they might learn not to blaspheme.”  That’s remedial training.  They needed to learn.  They couldn’t do that.  They needed to get fully into the consequence of their sin.  What happens you see is when you put someone out, the sanctifying graces of God’s assembly are no longer there, and they’re left without that thing, and when they don’t have it all and they can’t get near it all, then they begin to think about how much it really meant to them.  You understand that?  But if a person can have the people of God, and the church of God, and be accepted and have his sin, too, they may continue longer in their sin.  So you say as I’ve said to people – I hate to think of all the people I’ve said it to – “You have a choice.  It’s either the world and the Devil or the people of God and God, not both.  Not both.”

There is also one involving Thessalonica:

Second Thessalonians 3:6 speaks to this same issue.  “We command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition in which he received of us.”  The word “withdraw” means “to flinch” or “avoid.”  You avoid them.  You don’t let them in your fellowship.  You don’t let them in your assembly.  You don’t let them in your communion.  You don’t let them have that sanctifying grace that comes from Christ.  Now we’re not talking about people who don’t know the Lord.  We’re not talking about outside people.  We want them to be exposed to this.  We’re talking about sinning members of the family.

Second Thessalonians 3:14, “If any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.”  Leave him to his shame.  Leave him to his sin.  God, if he belongs to Him, won’t let him go, but may have to drag him very low. 

Jesus said emphatically — ‘Truly I tell you’ — that whatever is bound (unforgiven) on earth will be bound in heaven and that whatever is loosed (forgiven) on earth will be loosed in heaven (verse 18).

Henry explains, including a proviso for those who have been expelled from their church unfairly:

First, In their sentence of suspension; Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven … Christ will not suffer his own ordinances to be trampled upon, but will say amen to the righteous sentences which the church passes on obstinate offenders … They that are shut out from the congregation of the righteous now shall not stand in it in the great day, Ps 1 5. Christ will not own those as his, nor receive them to himself, whom the church has duly delivered to Satan; but, if through error or envy the censures of the church be unjust, Christ will graciously find those who are so cast out, John 9 34, 35.

Secondly, In their sentence of absolution; Whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Note, 1. No church censures bind so fast, but that, upon the sinner’s repentance and reformation, they may and must be loosed again. Sufficient is the punishment which has attained its end, and the offender must then be forgiven and comforted, 2 Cor 2 6. There is no unpassable gulf fixed but that between hell and heaven. 2. Those who, upon their repentance, are received by the church into communion again may take the comfort of their absolution in heaven, if their hearts be upright with God. As suspension is for the terror of the obstinate, so absolution is for the encouragement of the penitent. St. Paul speaks in the person of Christ, when he saith, To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also, 2 Cor 2 10.

Then Jesus said emphatically — ‘Again, truly I tell you’ — if two of you agree on anything on earth, God will do it in heaven (verse 19).

Henry elaborates:

Apply this,

[1.] In general, to all the requests of the faithful praying seed of Jacob; they shall not seek God’s face in vain. Many promises we have in scripture of a gracious answer to the prayers of faith, but this gives a particular encouragement to the joint-prayer; “the requests which two of you agree in, much more which many agree in.” No law of heaven limits the number of petitioners. Note, Christ has been pleased to put an honour upon, and to allow a special efficacy in, the joint-prayers of the faithful, and the common supplications they make to God. If they join in the same prayer, if they meet by appointment to come together to the throne of grace on some special errand, or, though at a distance, agree in some particular matter of prayer, they shall speed well. Besides the general regard God has to the prayers of the saints, he is particularly pleased with their union and communion in those prayers. See 2 Chron 5 13; Acts 4 31.

[2.] In particular, to those requests that are put up to God about binding and loosing; to which this promise seems more especially to refer. Observe, First, That the power of church discipline is not here lodged in the hand of a single person, but two, at least, are supposed to be concerned in it. When the incestuous Corinthian was to be cast out, the church was gathered together (1 Cor 5 4), and it was a punishment inflicted of many, 2 Cor 2 6. In an affair of such importance, two are better than one, and in the multitude of counsellors there is safety. Secondly, It is good to see those who have the management of church discipline, agreeing in it. Heats and animosities, among those whose work it is to remove offences, will be the greatest offence of all. Thirdly, Prayer must evermore go along with church discipline. Pass no sentence, which you cannot in faith ask God to confirm. The binding and loosing spoken of (ch. 16 19) was done by preaching, this by praying. Thus the whole power of gospel ministers is resolved into the word and prayer, to which they must wholly give themselves. He doth not say, “If you shall agree to sentence and decree a thing, it shall be done” (as if ministers were judges and lords); but, “If you agree to ask it of God, from him you shall obtain it.” Prayer must go along with all our endeavours for the conversion of sinners; see Jas 5 16. Fourthly, The unanimous petitions of the church of God, for the ratification of their just censures, shall be heard in heaven, and obtain an answer; “It shall be done, it shall be bound and loosed in heaven; God will set his fiat to the appeals and applications you make to him.” If Christ (who here speaks as one having authority) say, “It shall be done,” we may be assured that it is done, though we see not the effect in the way that we look for it. God doth especially own and accept us, when we are praying for those that have offended him and us. The Lord turned the captivity of Job, not when he prayed for himself, but when he prayed for his friends who had trespassed against him.

Jesus ended His discourse by saying, ‘For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them’ (verse 20).

That does not mean that God is not present with us individually. This has to do with the previous verses on church discipline.

MacArthur explains:

Not only does the Father in heaven act with us, but the Son on earth acts with us.  This is a dual divine authority.  The Son on earth acts with us, verse 20.  And here’s another verse that gets terribly misapplied.  “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”  Now you’ve probably heard that with a dozen prayer meetings you’ve been at.  If we can just get two or three people together, God will be there.  Listen, if you’ve just got one person, God’s there, right?  I used to worry about that when I was a kid because I heard some people preach on that sermon.  “Where two or three are gathered together there am I in the midst.”  And I thought, well, what happens when one person prays?

You see, that isn’t what that’s talking about.  What are the two or three in this context?  Two or three what?  Two or three witnesses in the discipline.  You see that’s why it’s so important to teach the flow of the Scripture.  Two or three witnesses, when you gather in my name, what does that mean?  To do My works, Jesus says.  What’s Your work?  I’m moving among the church.  And when you gather together in My name to reflect My character and My will, there am I in the midst of that.

Isn’t that a great confidence?  Not only is heaven acting,  is the Father acting in heaven with us, but the Son is there on earth with us.  Never are you more fulfilling the will of God and the work of the Son than when you’re acting in the purging and the purifying of His own church.  We all have to be a part of that, beloved, ministers of holiness.

In closing, just a word about the victim in this.  We really need to bring that brother back or that sister back, don’t we?  You can’t just let them go.  You can’t.  They need to be brought back. 

Also:

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German theologian of rather liberal persuasion, lived through some of the terrors of Nazi Germany.  He wrote a little book that I read many years ago as a seminary student called Life Together.  In it are some very profound thoughts that might help us with what we’re looking at.  Listen to what he says.

“Sin demands to have a man by himself.  It withdraws him from the community.  The more isolated a person is, the more destructive will be the power of sin over him.  And the more deeply he becomes involved in it, the more disastrous is his isolation.  Sin wants to remain unknown.  It shuns the light.  In the darkness of the unexpressed it poisons the whole being of a person.  This can happen even in the midst of a pious community. 

“In confession, the light of the gospel breaks into the darkness and seclusion of the heart.  The sin is brought into the light.  The unexpressed is openly spoken and acknowledged.  All that is secret and hidden is made manifest.  It is a hard struggle until the sin is openly admitted, but God breaks gates of brass and bars of iron.”  Psalm 107:16.

Listen to this.  “Since the confession of sin is made the presence of a Christian brother, the last stronghold of self justification is abandoned.  The sinner surrenders.  He gives up all his evil.  He gives his heart to God.  He finds the forgiveness of all his sin and the fellowship of Jesus Christ and his brother.  The expressed acknowledged sin has lost all its power.  It has been revealed and judged as sin.  It can no longer tear the fellowship asunder. 

“Now the fellowship bears the sin of the brother.  He is no longer alone with his evil for he has cast off his sin in confession and it handed it over to God.  It has been taken away from him.  Now he stands in the fellowship of sinners who live by the grace of God and the cross of Jesus Christ.  The sin concealed separated him from the fellowship, made all his apparent fellowship a sham.  The sin confessed has helped him to find true fellowship with the brethren in Jesus Christ.”

What a ministry, the ministry of restoring the sinning brother.  It is the key to purity of the church.  It is the key to revival of the church, the renewal of the church, and the reaching of the world through a renewed church.  We must hear these words of our Lord. 

MacArthur tells us how and when church discipline largely stopped. It was in the 19th century, when Finney, the founder of modern evangelicalism based on sentimentality, came to the fore:

Tolerant kind of sentimentalism is never going to renew the church and all the message of love, love, love, you know, isn’t going to do that.

You know, you can go back to the great awakening in the 1700s, particularly under the ministry of Jonathan Edwards, and you will find characteristic of the revival – the first great awakening was a great revival – and every other revival, whether biblical or after biblical times, and you will find that two things characterize those revivals, including the great awakening in 1700s.  One was a powerful preaching on the holiness of God, and two was powerful preaching on the sinfulness of sin.  In fact, invitations hadn’t even been invented in the time of Jonathan Edwards.  They didn’t come until Finney later, and I don’t think we have a great sense of debt to what Finney did in sort of manipulating people through his invitation system.

But in Edwards’ time they said that he preached, and he would preach on the holiness of God and the sinfulness of sin, and not only did not have to invite people to do anything, but in the middle of his sermons people would be screaming and crying for him to stop because they’d be under so much conviction.  And a real revival happened.  Now, it may have had some excesses and maybe it was a little too harsh and some extremes, and there was a move away as you go from the 18th Century into the 19th Century, there was a drift away from the firmness and the rigidity and the power of preaching about the holiness of God and the sinfulness of sin.  And people began to talk more about love, and they began to sort of want to mitigate that, and sort of ease off of that because they feared some of the extremes.

Richard Lovelace from Gordon-Conwell writes, “The whole church was avoiding the biblical portrait of the sovereign and holy God who was angry with the wicked every day and whose anger remains upon those who will not receive His Son.  Walling off this image into an unvisited corner of its consciousness, the church substituted a new God who was the projection of grandmotherly kindness, mixed with a gentleness and winsomeness of a Jesus who hardly needed to die for our sins.  And many American congregations were, in effect, paying their ministers to protect them from the real God.” 

And then He insightfully says, “It is partially responsible not only for the general spiritual collapse of the church in this century, but also for a great deal of evangelistic weakness.  For in a world in which the sovereign holy God regularly employs plagues, famines, wars, disease, and death as instruments to punish sin and bring mankind to repentance, the idolatrous image of God as pure benevolence and love cannot really be believed, let alone feared and worshiped in the manner prescribed by both the Old Testament and New Testament.”

Now what he’s saying is this.  When you just have this sort of sentimental view of love, one, it’ll never renew the church, because it never really causes people to face their sin.  It’ll never really renew the church.  Two, it’ll never evangelize, and that is the worst delusion of all.  People think if you just talk about love, and God’s love, and how God loves everybody, you’re going to evangelize.  But apologetically, you have a tremendous problem, because on the one hand, you’re proclaiming a God who is all love, and then on the other hand, you are stuck trying to define to people how such a God can allow plagues, and disease, and disaster, and war, and famine, and horror to exist.

And that is why we must proclaim a holy God who has a holy hatred of sin so that all of that stuff makes sense.  Do you understand?  And unless the church comes back to a message of the holiness of God and the sinfulness of sin, it will never be renewed, and its evangelism will be shallow, and ineffective, and unable to explain what is patently obvious.  To an unbeliever who hears only a message of love how can a loving God allow what He allows?  Removing God’s holy hatred of sin literally emasculates the church and hinders rather than helps evangelism.