May you have peace! I would like to respond, if I may. Thank you!
How do we know how far the 1st century Christians took excommunication back then?
1st century christians did not excommunicate. Paul did try to start that practice... as well as "marking,"... but neither were received by the 12. In fact, Paul's attempt in the Corinthian congregation almost destroyed that congregation. His admonishment at 1 Corinthians 5:9, 10 literally divided the congregation and caused a rift between him and the 12 that lasted 14 years.
As far as the Anti-Christ goes, Christians would not receive them into there homes.
This was not for spiritual reasons, though, so much as it was for SAFETY reasons. The Jews were seeking to silence christians and one way of doing this was to "bear false witness" against them to the Romans, who had no problem using them [christians] for sport (i.e., including feeding to the lions). Since one could only say, "JahEshua is Lord," by means of holy spirit, if such one DIDN'T bring the proper greeting or "healthful teachings" about the Christ... one was understandably suspect a the safety of the entire congregation could have been jeopardized.
However, in the case of the person who had relations with his father’s wife in Cor, was he allowed to say a greeting with the other members?
Did "mix in company with" mean he wasn't allowed at the meetings, or that they weren't supposed to talk with him at all?
Paul TRIED to get the congregation to excommunicate this man; however, while some would not greet him, not all of the congregation agreed, and certainly the 12 did not. This is because Christ never taught such a thing; rather, he taught that they should FORGIVE each one his/her trespasses. In addition, when the Pharisees excommunicated (expelled/disfellowshipped) a blind man, he personally went after such man.
After how long was the excommunication ban lifted? Was he even repentant when the ban was lifted?
It never took effect. Although Paul, a former Pharisee, tried in his 2 nd letter to the Corinthians (1st Corinthians is Paul's 2nd letter - 1 Corinhians 5:9) to have it done, it caused SO much controversy in the congregation that he changed his position in his 3 rd letter (2 nd Corinthians is Paul's 3rd letter - 2 Corithians 13:1, 2 - was written shortly after the second letter). This was because many in the congregation… and the apostles… were of the mind that nothing more than a rebuke by the congregation was needed, because that's what the Christ taught. (Matthew 18:17). However, rather than the congregation being built UP… it was being torn apart directly because of Paul’s admonition. Paul, therefore, had to reverse his former position… which he did… or be held responsible for “stumbling” members of the Body of Christ and destroying a congregation. (2 Corinthians 2:6-8, 10).
Also, it seems that the entire congregation made the judicial decisions. On what scriptural basis does JWs form a committee instead of the entire congregation?
There is NO “scriptural” basis. The procedure under the NEW Covenant, as set forth by Christ, is recorded at Matthew 18:15-17. However, even if the matter should get to the congregation level and still not be resolved, the person only becomes “like the tax collectors” and so is still entitled to love, mercy, and forgiveness… as an “enemy.” Matthew 5:44-46
The WTBTS, however, uses Paul’s words recorded at 1 Corinthians 5:12, 13, as their “basis,” which admonition was totally incorrect, as Paul himself latter admits by his words at 2 Corinthians 2:1-10 and Romans 2:1; 14:1. Most people don’t realize it, because of where it is located in the Bible canon (after Romans), but the letter to the Romans was actually written AFTER those to the Corinthians. It is placed where it is… to mislead. Putting Romans first gives the impression that Paul changed his position from NOT judging TO judging. It was just the opposite.
If excommunication is used in the scriptures, would we not be getting the scriptures principles if we then didn't pass the same judgment on a
murderer or rapist? And then, if judgment was passed on them, where would a line be drawn? Which sins would be fall under the
excommunication rule?
There are none that fall under such a line. Even Christ did not condemn the murderer on the pole next to him, but forgave him for his faith. Nor did he condemn those who were “condemned” under the law (i.e., the woman caught in the act of adultery, the woman with the flow of blood, those with demons, etc.). He didn’t judge such ones… neither are we to judge ANYONE. My Lord hung out with “sinners.”
Does that mean we are to do nothing about “blasphemers”? We are not. Such ones are left to God; He will judge… and if He chooses… condemn them. We would do good to not hang around them so much; however, if we saw them “in need” and we had the means to meet those needs, we cannot shut the door of our tender compassions upon them. Otherwise, we are in fact judging.
What about “criminals”? Same thing except such ones have the world to judge them. Since they are breaking “Caesar’s” laws… they have put themselves in line with and thus are subject to “Caesar’s” judgments and condmenation. “Caesar” retains the right TO judge and condemn them… as far as this life is concerned.
And if sin is breaking a law according to the scriptures, which law shows the sins we are to stay away from - Noahs law or the Mosaic one?
It really depends on which “law” you “live” by. If you are under the law of Noah or Moses, then it the features of those laws that you must adhere to. Keep in mind, however, whatever Law you are live by… you are under ALL of it; you cannot live by part of it and disregard another part of it. For example, if you are under the Law of Moses, not only cannot you not commit adultery or covet… you cannot eat ham. You cannot eat shrimp. You cannot pierce your ears. You cannot have a tattoo.
There is another Law, however: the Law mediated by Christ, the NEW Covenant… which is the law… of love. THAT Law says “love covers a multitude of transgressions,” and so, if YOU love… if YOU forgive… if YOU show mercy… if YOU release… you will BE loved… you will BE forgiven… you will be SHOWN mercy… and you will BE released. It says that if YOU judge… you will BE judged… and if you do NOT judge… you won’t BE judged.
For ME… this is the EASIER of the three… and fulfillment of the second. IF you love God… you won’t profane His name. You won’t HAVE any other gods before Him. You won’t MAKE a graven image and call it God. You won’t commit adultery. IF you love your neighbor… you won’t covet his ox… or his wife… or his maidservant. IF you love your brother, you won’t bear false witness against him/her. IF you love even your enemies… you won’t murder anyone.
However, under the NEW Covenant… if you DO commit any of these things… IT CAN BE FORGIVEN you. Unlike under the OLD Covenant (Law of Moses).
Given the features of the Old Covenant and the New Covenant… I can’t see any choice but the New. It requires nothing more of me than love… and faith. True, I have to DEMONSTRATE that love… and EXERCISE that faith… but even those things are not burdensome. For Christ’s yoke is kindly… and his yoke is light.
I hope this helps, dear Cognac, and please forgive my caps at the end. I grew tired of trying to format as the forum just doesn't like it much.
Again, I bid you peace.
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,
SA
