Depends on whether you insist they be what our judicial system would call
'eye witnesses'.

So I think they play both roles, for a single purpose.  To corroborate and
establish credence for the accusation, making sure it's legitimate.
But it doesn't seem they necessarily be 'eye-witnesses' of a particular
event.

If that were the requirement, many heinous sins could not be dealt with by
the church.
Our local community had a very large church with a fairly famous pastor come
under accusation of inappropriate sexual touching.  As things unfolded,
numerous people came forward with stories spreading over a decade or more.
The elders of that church tried to dismiss it on the grounds that though
there were numerous accusations of a similar sin, there were no independent
witnesses for any particular incident.  Each of the offended stood alone
without eye-witnesses to corroborate the particular offense against them.

You can imagine the mess that turned into (it made national news). And why
their interpretation was flawed.







-----Original Message-----
From: hircock [mailto:hircock@...] 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 1:23 AM
To: soundofgrace@...
Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Matthew 18:15-17


I mainly lurk, and that not too well, so please excuse me if this has
already been raised under this thread.

Who are the 2 or 3 taken along in verse 16 and, especially, to what are they
witnesses?

I have generally heard them described as witnesses to the confrontation
between accuser and accused. Doesn't the reference to Dt.19:15 (and paralel
instruction regarding elders in 1Tim.5:19) rather suggest that they should
be witnesses to the alleged offence?

David.

--
Read the Sound of Grace pages at
http://www.soundofgrace.com

To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...

To view our online archive go to our web page at
http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace