Business Dilemma

Right & Wrong
User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Business Dilemma

Post by Homer » Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:01 am

Dizerner wrote:
I used to think Jesus, in preaching to turn the other cheek, go the extra mile or give to the one who asks, was preaching a doormat righteousness, where we let people take advantage of us. But I realized one day that wasn't the case, he was merely addressing our own selfish internal attitudes that only consider how something effects us. If we are a doormat to people, we often hurt their character by reinforcing bad behavior, and thus being a doormat can be a self-centered thing, because you prefer not hurting someone over doing what would help them, and being passive over being active. It's like spoiling a child by lack of discipline or giving them everything they want, might seem like love, but it's only encouraging selfishness in both the parent (who feels good about it) and the child (who ends up without discipline or charity).
In my remarks I was not advocating being a doormat, and the dire straights of the situation for "A" were unknown until Brenden's last post. I still stand by my previous post. There are occasions when certain actions to right a wrong are permissible and there are others when, for the sake of Christ, it is best to suffer loss and we do indeed need to turn the other cheek, as Paul pointed out:

1 Corinthians 6:7 (NASB)

7. Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?


I am not saying that what Paul wrote exactly fits the case but there is a principle there that must be considered: What is best for Christ's sake should come first. And as I also pointed out, it may be wise to get a third party involved:

Galatians 6:1 (NASB)
6. Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted.

The third party may or may not be appropriate as the first step; ideally "A" should discuss the problem with "B" first, but if "A" feels he might get angry or not have patience someone "who is spiritual" could be involved. We are dealing with a "babe" in Christ.

And I am not saying "A" is not spiritual.

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Business Dilemma

Post by TheEditor » Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:34 am

Hi Homer,

"A" admits to having a tendency to allow things to get to a point where his anger finally gives him the needed impetus to say something--not always ideal. However, the main problem really boils down to "A"'s not being convinced that "B" is really a "babe" in Christ at all. "B" is trying to do benevolent acts for the "Church" (corporate), but this generous gift in "B" existed before baptism and would be in his character without it. That's what makes this so challenging. If "A" were convinced there were genuine conversion, then it would be a small matter to simply discuss the issue in light of Scriptural principles. As it stands, that may not work. And yet, "A" sees this new phase in "B"s life to be at least be better than his previous one.

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
backwoodsman
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:32 am
Location: Not quite at the ends of the earth, but you can see it from here.

Re: Business Dilemma

Post by backwoodsman » Tue Jul 28, 2015 11:57 am

TheEditor wrote:If "A" were convinced there were genuine conversion, then it would be a small matter to simply discuss the issue in light of Scriptural principles. As it stands, that may not work.
It seems to me it will work, one way or the other (assuming it's done in love rather than anger). The result will be either (1) "B" will come to understand Scriptural principles a little better and realize he needs to bring his life and actions into compliance with them; or (2) there will no longer be any doubt whether there was a genuine conversion. It's a win-win, really, although obviously case 1 is preferable; but in case "B"'s conversion isn't genuine, the sooner everyone (or at least "A" and "B") know(s) that, the better.

dizerner

Re: Business Dilemma

Post by dizerner » Tue Jul 28, 2015 1:44 pm

Homer wrote:There are occasions when certain actions to right a wrong are permissible and there are others when, for the sake of Christ, it is best to suffer loss and we do indeed need to turn the other cheek, as Paul pointed out:

1 Corinthians 6:7 (NASB)

7. Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?
But Paul's point here was this:

2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, matters of this life? 4 If then you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? (1Co 6:2-4 NAS)

Not to go to a secular court. In other words, Paul says, if you are not competent enough to settle the matter within your own community, going the path of a secular lawsuit is worse than letting yourself be wronged (among believers).

Your point of gentleness stands however.

Post Reply

Return to “Ethics”