The Problem With Using Matthew 18 as a Passage on Church Discipline

The Jones

2 years ago

1. The Traditional Way that Evangelical Churches Exercise Church Discipline

If you want and example of this, we can go to a flagship church of American Evangelicalism. One such pillar is John MacArthur, lead pastor of Grace Church in Sun Valley, California.

John MacArthur joined Grace Church as pastor in 1969. When he was there – in the height of the Jesus People Movement – the church doubled every two years until it became the evangelical powerhouse that it is today. In American Evangelicalism, John MacArthur is a big name and in charge of a big church. Here is how their church describes the church discipline process:

In Matthew 18:15-17, Jesus sets forth the four-step process of church discipline: (1) tell him his sin alone; (2) take some witnesses; (3) tell the church; and (4) treat him as an outsider.

Step One (Matt. 18:15). The process of church discipline begins on an individual level. Jesus said, “And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private” (v. 15a). Here, an individual believer is to go to a sinning brother privately and confront him in a spirit of humility and gentleness. This confrontation involves clearly exposing his sin so that he is aware of it and calling him to repentance. If the sinning brother repents in response to the private confrontation, that brother is forgiven and restored (v. 15b).

Step Two (Matt. 18:16). If the sinning brother refuses to listen to the one who has rebuked him privately, the next step in the discipline process is to take one or two more believers along to confront him again (v. 16a). The purpose of taking other believers is so that “by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed” (v. 16b). In other words, the witnesses are present not only to confirm that the sin was committed but, in addition, to confirm that the sinning brother was properly rebuked and that he has or has not repented.

The presence of additional witnesses is as much a protection for the one being approached as it is for the one approaching. After all, a biased person could erroneously say, “Well, I tried to confront him, but he’s impenitent.” It would be presumptuous to think that one person could make that ultimate determination, especially if he was the one who had been sinned against. The witnesses need to confirm whether there is a heart of repentance or one of indifference or rejection. Such a report provides the basis for further action because the situation has been verified beyond the report of one individual.

At this point, it should be hoped that the one or two who are brought along to confront the sinner will not have to become public witnesses against him before the rest of the church. Ideally, their added rebuke will be sufficient to induce a change of heart in the offending brother that the initial rebuke did not cause. If this change of heart does occur, that brother is forgiven and restored, and the matter is dropped.

Step Three (Matt. 18:17a). If the sinning brother refuses to listen and respond to the confrontation of the witnesses after a period of time, those witnesses are then to tell it to the church (v. 17a). This is most appropriately done by bringing the matter to the attention of the elders, who in turn oversee its communication to the assembly as a whole.

How long should the witnesses continue to call the person to repentance before telling the church? The elders at Grace Community Church avoid carrying out the third or fourth stage of church discipline until they are absolutely certain that the erring believer has truly sinned, or is continuing to sin, and that he has refused to repent when appropriately confronted. The elders will routinely send a letter by registered mail warning the individual that the third (or fourth) step of discipline will be taken if they have not received word of repentance by a specific date. When this date has passed, the person’s sin and refusal to repent are made known publicly, either before the entire assembly during a Communion service or through a fellowship group in which the person is known.

It has been the custom at Grace Community Church, upon enacting this third step, to clearly indicate to the congregation that they are to pursue the person aggressively and plead with him to repent before the fourth step becomes necessary. That crucial and potent procedure often draws the sinner to repentance and obedience. If repentance does take place, the sinning believer is forgiven and restored.

Step Four (Matt. 18:17b). The fourth and final step in the process of church discipline is ostracism. If a sinning believer refuses to listen even to the church, he is to be ostracized from the fellowship. Jesus said, “let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer” (v. 17b). The term “Gentile” was primarily used of non-Jews who held to their traditional paganism and had no part in the covenant, worship, or social life of the Jews. On the other hand, a “tax-gatherer” was an outcast from the Jews by choice, having become a traitor to his own people. Jesus’ use of these terms doesn’t mean that the church is to treat these people badly. It simply means that when a professing believer refuses to repent, the church is to treat him as if he were outside of the fellowship. They are not to let him associate and participate in the blessings and benefits of the Christian assembly.

When a man in the Corinthian church refused to forsake an incestuous relationship with his stepmother, the apostle Paul commanded that the man be removed from their midst (1 Cor. 5:13). The believers there were not even to share a meal with him (1 Cor. 5:11), for dining with someone was symbolic of a hospitable and cordial fellowship. The one who is persistently unrepentant is to be totally ostracized from the fellowship of the church and treated like an outcast, not a brother.

As far as the welfare of the church is concerned, the purpose of putting the brother out is to protect the purity of the fellowship (1 Cor. 5:6), to warn the assembly of the seriousness of sin (1 Tim. 5:20), and to give a testimony of righteousness to a watching world. But as far as the welfare of the brother himself is concerned, the purpose of the ostracism is not to punish but to awaken, and it must therefore be done in humble love and never in a spirit of self-righteous superiority (2 Thess. 3:15).

When a church has done everything it can to bring a sinning member back to purity of life but is unsuccessful, that individual is to be left to his sin and his shame. If he is truly a Christian, God will not cast him away, but He may allow him to sink still deeper before he becomes desperate enough to turn from his sin.

The command not to have fellowship or even social contact with the unrepentant brother does not exclude all contact. When there is an opportunity to admonish him and try to call him back, the opportunity should be taken. In fact, such opportunities should be sought. But the contact should be for the purpose of admonishment and restoration and no other.
Grace Church, Church Discipline, Available online at: https://www.gracechurch.org/about/distinctives/church-discipline

That was taken directly from their website, and is adapted from a book that John MacArthur wrote. Many American Evangelical churches have the same type of process. For example, here is an article from Johnathan Leeman on The Gospel Coalition website. The Gospel Coalition is a para-church organization spanning many evangelical denominations that have combined resources to spread the gospel. This organization, and many other like it, constitute what many often call “Big Eva.” Every big name in American Evangelicalism in the past 20 years has at some point been associated with The Gospel Coalition.

These churches have this process because they desire to be faithful to what the Bible teaches about how churches should be governed. For this reason, they institute church discipline in the way the Bible says. But for some reason, they’re doing it according to Matthew 18.

What I argue here is that the Bible does NOT say to institute church discipline in this way. Instead, I argue that the Bible actually commands that churches institute church discipline in a completely different way. But let’s break down what was explained there, including the scriptural basis for the process.

2. The Lack of Scriptural Basis for Matthew 18 as a Discipline Process

As you can see above, there are scriptural citations for this process. The main one is Matthew 18:

“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
Matthew 18:15-17, ESV

However, another big source is 1 Corinthians 5. This does a great deal of heavy lifting, so let’s look at that passage:

It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father’s wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.

For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing. When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.

Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
1 Corinthians 5:1-13, ESV

So, that’s pretty powerful, and it’s a clear call to church discipline. That is clear. However, notice the process that Paul mandates:

It has been reported that a man is intimate with his father’s wife (either his mother or step-mother)
Next time the church is assembled, expel this person from membership
Do not even socially associate with this person

But notice what 1 Corinthians 5 does not do: It doesn’t follow that Matthew 18 process. Isn’t that strange?

But it doesn’t stop there. You see, while that was Paul telling the Corinthian church what to do, there actually is an account of a case of church discipline overseen by the apostles themselves. This is what we read:

Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common. And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. Thus Joseph, who was also called by the apostles Barnabas (which means son of encouragement), a Levite, a native of Cyprus, sold a field that belonged to him and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’ feet.

But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, and with his wife’s knowledge he kept back for himself some of the proceeds and brought only a part of it and laid it at the apostles’ feet. But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back for yourself part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? Why is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to man but to God.” When Ananias heard these words, he fell down and breathed his last. And great fear came upon all who heard of it. The young men rose and wrapped him up and carried him out and buried him.

After an interval of about three hours his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. And Peter said to her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for so much.” And she said, “Yes, for so much.” But Peter said to her, “How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord? Behold, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” Immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. When the young men came in they found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. And great fear came upon the whole church and upon all who heard of these things.
Acts 4:32-Acts 5:11, ESV

Looking at this passage, we can see what is going on. Everyone in the early church was holding their belongings in common. They were selling to their possessions and giving those possessions to the poor so that no one was in need.

However, in the midst of that activity, Ananias and Sapphira sell land, presumably getting a large pay-out. But rather than give everything, they only give part of it. Most treatments of this event in sermons tend to keep their exploration in Acts 5, looking at this as a situation where two people were trying to LOOK more pious than they actually were. However, when you attach this to Acts 4, you also realize that Ananias and Sapphira were also joining themselves in a system that provided to each as their needs required. Therefore, this is not only a case of reputational dishonesty. It is also a case of actual theft. It’s like cheating on your taxes to get money that does not belong to you. This theft ends in a death inflicted by God himself, after being decided before the church. .

But when this theft is discovered, notice something curious:

The church does not follow the Matthew 18 process.

When did they go to them privately? When did they take two witnesses? Why didn’t they “treat them like an outsider” when they refused to repent before the church? Why did God kill them? Great questions which we will cover later.

As for now, it is worth noting that there is little to no textual evidence that the Matthew 18 process is for church discipline. The passage stands or falls on its own.

3. The Flaws of Using Matthew 18 as a Passage About Church Discipline

In addition to being a Christian, I am also a litigation attorney. As such, I have a front row seat to some rather crazy disputes between a variety of different people, both Christian and non-Christian. In good scenarios, I have clients who were legitimately wronged, and I am able to obtain a just result from a court or arbitrator that restores that client to his former position. In bad scenarios, I can put my client’s case forward with the strongest possible argument, but the result is not be satisfactory. Perhaps a witness will not say what we believed they would say. Perhaps a judge does not view the evidence correctly or how we thought, or perhaps a preliminary legal question cuts our case off at the knees.

However, the worst situations are when your case has progressed all the way to trial, you are sitting before the judge with your client at your side, and then in response to something a witness says, your client leans over and whispers something in your ear. After hearing what your client says, you realize, “Huh? Why didn’t he tell me that before? Wait, if that’s true, then…. that means…. Oh crap…. We’re the bad guys here.”

It doesn’t happen often, but yes, that has happened to me. One unknown and seemingly irrelevant fact can turn an entire situation completely on its head. That’s the reason trials exist.

With that being the case, notice what is ASSUMED in the Matthew 18 process:

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

In this case, it is ASSUMED that the person actually is in sin. And if you “assume” something in a church discipline matter, you “arbitrarily state [that] someone unrighteously made [an] ethical decision.” That is not a good thing to do. Because notice what is also missing from the Matthew 18 process:

THERE IS NO OPPORTUNITY FOR THE OTHER PERSON TO PRESENT THEIR SIDE OF THE STORY

Read the discipline process of Grace Church and look at the opportunities that the other person has available to them in order to get out of trouble in each of the four steps:

“If the sinning brother repents in response to the private confrontation, that brother is forgiven and restored”
“The witnesses need to confirm whether there is a heart of repentance or one of indifference or rejection”
“The elders will routinely send a letter by registered mail warning the individual that the third (or fourth) step of discipline will be taken if they have not received word of repentance by a specific date.”
“The one who is persistently unrepentant is to be totally ostracized from the fellowship of the church and treated like an outcast, not a brother.”

In other words, there is only one way to get out of this trouble. You must agree with those who are accusing you and “repent.”

In other words, the process assumes that the people making the accusation have the correct information, that no one has lied to them about the accused person, and that their interpretation of the facts is correct. There is no opportunity for the accused person to explain that the accuser is wrong. There is no opportunity for the accused person to explain to the elders that someone is lying to them.

Worst of all, any resistance to the understanding the elders had at the beginning is – by definition – being “unrepentant.” And there is no procedural option for the elders to be objectively or subjectively wrong.

In a perfect world, this openness to being wrong would be baked into the cake of any church body seeking to institute discipline. However, we do not live in a perfect world. As such, Matthew 18 is a dangerous section of scripture to use as a process for church discipline.

Even in the halls of American Evangelicalism, the danger of Matthew 18 as a pattern of church discipline has been recognized. For example, in an article for The Gospel Coalition that you can read by clicking here, a pastor explains 5 situations when Matthew 18 does not apply as a disciplinary process. Those situations are:

Engaging with ideas in the Public Square
Dealing with public, known sin by a member of your church
Dealing with public, declared heresy by a member of your church
Mediating disputes within a church staff over resources or volunteers
Bringing charges against an elder or pastor for sexual misconduct

What is unique about these? I don’t know. The article has a lot of hemming and hawing over why Matthew 18 does not apply in certain situations, such as when an allegation of sexual misconduct is “credible,” at which point it is “to be handled by the Board of Elders with appropriate dispatch and severity.” However, even there, there is no process to see if the “credible” allegation is “actually true.” As such, this is a really strange and dangerous feature in the world of American Evangelicalism.

What is also quite frightening is that the apostle Paul makes the point in 1 Timothy 5 about bringing a charge against an elder of the church:

Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses.
1 Timothy 5:19, ESV

As such, there is some procedural guarantee for elders of the church. I have been involved with many churches that quote this verse to protect their leaders. However, what many churches ignore is that the same guarantee is given for ordinary church members in a different letter from Paul. After speaking about church discipline in 2 Corinthians 12, Paul gives the following guarantee:

This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
2 Corinthians 13:1, ESV

While I can only speak from personal experience. Every American Evangelical church that uses Matthew 18 quotes 1 Timothy 5:19 in their church discipline policies and procedures, but not 2 Corinthians 13:1. That’s downright scary when you think about it.

4. The Real Biblical Passages On Church Discipline

As such, Matthew 18 is not a good passage for a process of church discipline. However, church discipline IS something that should be done. Paul clearly commands that when individuals who claim to be a part of the church are acting in a manner that is absolutely and clearly forbidden by scripture, we are to “expel the immoral brother.” The question, however, is what process should be followed to do this.

The answer is quite simple. Look above at those two quotes from Paul. What is Paul referencing? Almost the only thing Paul ever references is the answer: THE OLD TESTAMENT. This rule about two or three witnesses comes from Deuteronomy. It is the standard of justice that God commands to be followed in the courts of Israel. Here is the source for that rule in its original context:

“A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established. If a malicious witness arises to accuse a person of wrongdoing, then both parties to the dispute shall appear before the Lord, before the priests and the judges who are in office in those days. The judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. And the rest shall hear and fear, and shall never again commit any such evil among you. Your eye shall not pity. It shall be life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
Deuteronomy 19:15-21, ESV

We also have other portions of scripture that speak to the requirements of justice in Israel:

You shall not spread a false [empty] report. You shall not join hands with a wicked man to be a malicious witness. You shall not fall in with the many to do evil, nor shall you bear witness in a lawsuit, siding with the many, so as to pervert justice, nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his lawsuit.

“If you meet your enemy’s ox or his donkey going astray, you shall bring it back to him. If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying down under its burden, you shall refrain from leaving him with it; you shall rescue it with him.

“You shall not pervert the justice due to your poor in his lawsuit. Keep far from a false [deceptive] charge, and do not kill the innocent and righteous, for I will not acquit the wicked. And you shall take no bribe, for a bribe blinds the clear-sighted and subverts the cause of those who are in the right.

“You shall not oppress a sojourner. You know the heart of a sojourner, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.
Exodus 23:1-9, ESV

These give some very important rules. You need at least two witneses for ANYTHING and judges must inquire diligently to come to a decision. But at this point, we need to talk about “witnesses” and “judges.” Doesn’t this prevent any decision in a majority of cases? Not at all.

A judge is someone who hears witnesses, determines credibility, inquires into the facts, and comes to a decision. A judge can be an actual judge in a courtroom, but a judge can also be a juror, pastor, elder, parent, friend, or employer. In the context of discipline at a church like Grace Church described above, the elders would be judges, and the congregation would be judges after being informed of the charges by the elders. That’s because both required to come to a decision before someone can be removed from the church as an act of discipline.

Additionally, a witness is someone (or something) that provides evidence. If a witness is an “actual person,” then the person must have actually witnessed something to be a witness. A witness can be a video, a signed contract, an email, a photograph, a physical injury, a dead body, or even an inanimate object like a broken window, paint chips, or a damaged car bumper. In modern legal systems, it is not a requirement that two “actual people” establish a charge, but in every case, at least two “witnesses,” as described above, would be required to establish anything.

For this reason, the biblical requirement of “two or three witnesses” should not be seen as some unique process in church discipline. Instead, the requirement for two or three witnesses is a basic requirement for ordinary justice. In the same way, the inquiry of the “judges” is a basic requirement for ordinary justice in any situation.

We also have other portions of scripture that speak to the requirements of justice in Israel, which are equally applicable in our ordinary lives:

“You shall not spread a false [empty] report. You shall not join hands with a wicked man to be a malicious witness. You shall not fall in with the many to do evil, nor shall you bear witness in a lawsuit, siding with the many, so as to pervert justice, nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his lawsuit.

“If you meet your enemy’s ox or his donkey going astray, you shall bring it back to him. If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying down under its burden, you shall refrain from leaving him with it; you shall rescue it with him.

“You shall not pervert the justice due to your poor in his lawsuit. Keep far from a false [deceptive] charge, and do not kill the innocent and righteous, for I will not acquit the wicked. And you shall take no bribe, for a bribe blinds the clear-sighted and subverts the cause of those who are in the right.

“You shall not oppress a sojourner. You know the heart of a sojourner, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.
Exodus 23:1-9, ESV

The word “false” is used twice in this passage, but the Hebrew word is different in each.

In the first case, the Hebrew word is “shav” and refers to something that is “empty” or “vanity.” In other words, this is an unsupported allegation. It doesn’t say to IGNORE an unsupported allegation, but it does say that you shouldn’t spread it. In our modern world, this is why grand jury matters are secret.
In the second case, the Hebrew word is “sheqer” and refers to “deception” or “deceit.” In other words, this is something that is definitely not true. Unlike the “empty” charge, this one is to be actively avoided.

Then, the passage seems to randomly mentions an ox or donkey going astray, but in context, this can be understood as applying to the courtroom context as well. The idea is about not taking advantage of unintended or truly random circumstances. For example, if a witness in a courtroom accidentally gives the wrong name or the wrong date for something really important – and the other side knows that the nervous witness actually knows the answer – the proper thing to do is to correct the record, and give the party the fact rather than take advantage of the situation.

There are then quite ordinary appeals to equal justice under the law and a hatred of bribes. Of course, they’re only ordinary to us because of the cultural inheritance that we have received. These are not at all ordinary to human nature. There is also an admonition against siding with the poor just because you feel sorry for them.

THAT is the process that Paul references when telling churches to institute church discipline.

And sure enough, when you look at the example of Ananias and Sapphira, that’s exactly what is done. Peter is sitting as “judge” and the judges inquire diligently, letting the other side tell his side of the story.

That is the process for church discipline in the Bible. And there NEEDS to be a process for church discipline, because the Bible makes this need clear:

The one who states his case first seems right,
until the other comes and examines him.
Proverbs 18:17, ESV

Helpful Update: Another thing to remember in the judicial system of Israel is the concept of a “city of refuge.” These cities are described in detail in Numbers 35. This is a place where someone who accidentally killed someone can go and live in protection. If a charge of intentional murder is brought against the man, then he can be brought out of the city of refuge and condemned, but only on the evidence of multiple witnesses. This gives an important principle:

How many witnesses do you need to condemn someone: At least two.

How many witnesses do you need to offer protection to someone: Technically, none.

So if anyone is worried that this requirement of “two to three witnesses” for charges of wrongdoing will leave vulnerable people exposed, that is silly. Let’s take a real-world hypothetical example. If a husband is accused by a wife of physical, mental, or emotional abuse, the Bible requires zero witnesses to offer that woman assistance. But the Bible does require at least two witnesses to consider the husband guilty of abuse.

5. How Other Theologically Evangelical Churches Handle Church Discipline

The Matthew 18 process is not the ONLY method of church discipline in Evangelical churches. Instead, it only appears (to me at least) to be associated with those churches that came out of the Jesus People Movement in the 1960s and 1970s.

There are other processes that exist in evangelical churches that are NOT a part of the Jesus People Movement. These churches sometimes reference Matthew 18, but also require that an accused person receive A TRIAL.

For instance, as mentioned above, John Wesley was an “evangelical” leader who founded the Methodist church. The Methodists have a “book of discipline,” which covers all of the governance matters of the United Methodist Church, including “church discipline,” and it is available for free online, which you can access here. When it comes to disciplining a member, it references something that Matthew 18 does note. It requires a TRIAL with procedural guarantees. The sections dealing with “Investigations, Trials, and Appeals” cover several pages and include the following sub-sections in Sec. 2701. on page 784:

Preamble and Purpose
Rights of the Complaintant (the person filing the complaint)
1. Right to be Heard
2. Right to Notice of Hearings
3. Right to be Accompanied
4. Right to be Informed of Resolution
Rights of the Respondent
1. Right to Be Heard
2. Right to Notice of Hearings
3. Right to Be Accompanied
4. Right Against Double Jeopardy
5. Right to Access to Records
Rights of the Church
1. Right to Be Heard
Process and Procedure
1. Failure to Appear or Respond
2. Communications
3. Healing
4. Immunity of Participants
5. A Just Resolution in Judicial Proceedings

It goes on for pages and pages and pages, including “chargeable offenses” and all other sorts of matters.

While some in American Evangelical church may think that this is a high church red-tape for church matters, I will return to the words of the apostle Paul:

Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!
1 Corinthians 6:2-3, ESV

Why WOULDN’T we have processes to protect all parties in church discipline situations? One answer for Baptists is that it is the congregation that decides things, not the “hierarchy” of the church. They don’t have the time to institute cases of church discipline in members meetings. They have lots of business to attend to.

Well, that’s fine. You don’t need a church hierarchy to rule over matters in the church. In that case, be like the Reformed Church of America, which also has a Book of Order, available here. It uses a “judicatory” which is defined as follows:

judicatory. A governmental unit that exercises power to act in matters of discipline within the church. “The board of elders, the classis, the regional synod, and the General Synod exercise judicial as well as legislative powers.” An assembly becomes a judicatory when it enters into judicial proceedings.

You can also follow the procedures of the Presbyterian Church (USA), which in its own Book of Order (available here), it gives the procedures for a trial.

But of course, if Baptists want to REALLY be Baptist, there is nothing magical about the group of people exercising the authority of judge. If Baptists want to invoke the “priesthood of all believers,” then they could simply pick a “church jury” through a pre-determined process to hear any case, and decide the merits.

It’s not hard. The point here isn’t that there is a set biblical formula to exercise discipline. Instead, the point is that there needs to be some process with procedural guarantees beyond what is in Matthew 18, because THE BIBLE REQUIRES that processes beyond Matthew 18 be followed.

6. What Matthew 18 Is Really About

Since I’ve thoroughly obliterated Matthew 18 as a procedure for church discipline, the question then becomes the following:

WHAT IS MATTHEW 18 ACTUALLY ABOUT?

And the answer is quite clear. Matthew 18 is about disputes between individual Christians and the FORGIVENESS that should follow. For example, look at the context of Matthew 18. Read the entire chapter:

At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

“Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

“Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes! And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire.

“See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven. What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray? And if he finds it, truly, I say to you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray. So it is not the will of my Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.

“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often will my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy-seven times.

“Therefore the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants. When he began to settle, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. And since he could not pay, his master ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made. So the servant fell on his knees, imploring him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’ And out of pity for him, the master of that servant released him and forgave him the debt. But when that same servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii, and seizing him, he began to choke him, saying, ‘Pay what you owe.’ So his fellow servant fell down and pleaded with him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’ He refused and went and put him in prison until he should pay the debt. When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their master all that had taken place. Then his master summoned him and said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. And should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers, until he should pay all his debt. So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.”
Matthew 18:1-35, ESV

Notice the flow of this chapter:

Matthew 18:1-4 is where Jesus says those who humble themselves will be the greatest.
Matthew 18:5-6 is where Jesus says it is horrible to cause someone to sin.
Matthew 18:7-9 is where Jesus says if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out.
Matthew 18:10-14 is the parable of the lost sheep, where a sheep who “goes astray” is brought back, and he concludes by saying it is not the desire of the Father than any should perish.
Matthew 18:15-20 is the part that is supposed to be about church discipline, and the process ends with treating someone like “a gentile and a tax collector.”
Matthew 18:21-22 is where Peter – in light of the previous thing Jesus said – asks Jesus how many times he is supposed to FORGIVE someone who SINS AGAINST HIM (per Matthew 18:15). And Jesus’s answer is seventy times seven” or “don’t even bother counting.”
Matthew 18:23-35 is the parable of the unforgiving servant.

Importantly, look at the connection between what Jesus says in the “church discipline” seciton and what Peter says at the beginning of the parable of the unforgiving servant:

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often will my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?”

The context of this Matthew 18 passage makes the answer about its meaning abundantly clear:

THE PASSAGE IN MATTHEW 18 IS ABOUT FORGIVENESS BETWEEN BELIEVERS, NOT ABOUT DISCIPLINE IN THE CHURCH.

But in contrast to this, look at what Grace Church’s “Church Discipline” says about the command to treat someone like a gentile or tax collector:

The term “Gentile” was primarily used of non-Jews who held to their traditional paganism and had no part in the covenant, worship, or social life of the Jews. On the other hand, a “tax-gatherer” was an outcast from the Jews by choice, having become a traitor to his own people. Jesus’ use of these terms doesn’t mean that the church is to treat these people badly. It simply means that when a professing believer refuses to repent, the church is to treat him as if he were outside of the fellowship. They are not to let him associate and participate in the blessings and benefits of the Christian assembly.
Grace Church, Church Discipline, Available online at: https://www.gracechurch.org/about/distinctives/church-discipline

There is a problem with this interpretation, the Problem is what Jesus does with sinners and “tax-collectors”:

Now the tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him. And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.”

So he told them this parable: “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it? And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.’ Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.
Luke 15:1-7, ESV

Do you see how Jesus eating with sinners and tax collectors is a big problem for the Matthew 18 process of discipline? How is it that 1 Corinthians 5 requires that we not even “eat with” someone that needs to be disciplined by the church, but Jesus “eats with” the example population of people that supposedly go through church discipline. Am I the only one noticing this?

crazy pills

Instead of this crazy idea of matching Matthew 18 to 1 Corinthians 5 to produce the “Matthew 18 process of discipline,” there is another easy solution. First, Matthew 18 is about FORGIVENESS and, most importantly:

GENTILES AND TAX COLLECTORS ARE PEOPLE FROM WHOM YOU SHOULD NOT EXPECT AN APOLOGY.

THAT is what is supposed to be done at the Matthew 18 process. You “get over it.”

And wouldn’t you know it? We actually have an example of the last step of the Matthew 18 process being described in the text of scripture. Notice what Paul asks for the ENTIRE CHURCH to come together to accomplish in his letter to the Philippians:

Therefore, my brothers, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved.

I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the Lord. Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.

Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice. Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand; do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
Philippians 4:1-7, ESV

THAT is the Matthew 18 process in action. Doesn’t that make so much more sense?

7. Where Did We Get The Idea That Matthew 18 Is About Discipline?

***NOTE: This Section has been updated due to reader feedback***

So, where did American Evangelical churches coming out of the Jesus People Movement get the idea that Matthew 18 is a passage about Church Discipline? I do not actually know how all of these otherwise good churches, firmly faithful to the teaching of scripture got this one issue so wrong. However, I do have a suspicion. I blame two things:

The growth of Matthew 18 in Protestant confessions and governance.
The Jesus People Movement’s commitment destroy any previous tradition that does not match the teachings of the Bible.
The New International Version Bible translation, released in 1973.

Let’s Explore along those lines.

The Traditional Practice of Church Governance in Baptist churches

The earliest connection I can find of church discipline to Matthew 18 occurs in The First Confession of Basel in 1534, which you can read here. In this confession made during the Reformation (keep in mind, the Diet of Worms, where Martin Luther was tried, only occurred in 1521). It stated the following regarding “Church Discipline”:

VII. CONCERNING THE USE OF EXCOMMUNICATION
Because weeds are mixed with the Church of Christ, Christ has given His Church authority to excommunicate such weeds when they show themselves by intolerable crimes and sins against the commandment of the Lord, in order that as much as possible the Church may keep her appearance unspotted. This is the reason we use excommunication in the Church.16
But the Christian Church excommunicates solely for the sake of the reclamation of offenders, and consequently it gladly receives them again after they have put away their scandalous life and have improved.17

The citations for the 16 and 17 footnotes are as follows:

16 Matt. 18:15 If.; I Cor. 5:3 ff.; II Thess. 3:6, 14; I Tim. 1:19 f.
17 11 Cor. 2:6 ff.; I Tim. 1:20.

Notably, only Matthew 18:15 is included here, which says the following:

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
Matthew 18:15, ESV

Considering the context, it seems that the point at issue was whether the Catholic Church could exclude someone from the grace of God through a church edict from the Pope. As all protestants will agree, the answer is “No.” As such, in the midst of citations about not associating with sinful members of the church, there are also citations (like Matthew 18:15) about the restoration of the church body.

Along those lines, there is a French Confession of Faith of 1559, which notes the following about “excommunication”:

XXXIII. However, we reject all human inventions, and all laws which men may introduce under the pretense of serving God, by which they wish to bind consciences ; and we receive only that which conduces to concord and holds all in obedience, from the greatest to the least. In this we must follow that which the Lord Jesus Christ declared as to excommunication, which we approve and confess to be necessary with all its antecedents and consequences.

That seems to be a reference to Matthew 18, although there is no citation, and it deals with “excommunication,” and not necessarily what protestants would call “discipline.”

The biggest connection to Matthew 18 to church discipline is the London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689, which cites to Matthew 18 in several places in Chapter 26:

5. In the execution of this power wherewith he is so intrusted, the Lord Jesus calls out of the world unto himself, through the ministry of his word, by his Spirit, those that are given unto him by his Father, 9 that they may walk before him in all the ways of obedience, which he prescribes to them in his word. 10 Those thus called, he commands to walk together in particular societies, or churches, for their mutual edification, and the due performance of that public worship, which he requires of them in the world. 11

[Footnotes: 9. John 10:16; John 12:32 10. Matthew 28:20 11. Matthew 18:15-20]

. . .

7. To each of these churches therefore gathered, according to his mind declared in his word, he has given all that power and authority, which is in any way needful for their carrying on that order in worship and discipline, which he has instituted for them to observe; with commands and rules for the due and right exerting, and executing of that power. 14

[Footnotes: 14. Matthew 18:17-18; 1 Corinthians 5:4-5, 5:13, 2 Corinthians 2:6-8]

However, this connection does not exist in The Scots Confession of Faith of 1560 or the Westminister Confession of Faith of 1646. The The Scots Confession of Faith of 1560 does not make the connection to Matthew 18, though it does note the need for two to three witnesses in chapter 18.

However, the biggest practice of “Matthew 18 discipline” existed in Baptist churches in America. Here is what an article from the Baptist Press describes about church discipline in the 1700s:

Prior to the last century, Baptists “practiced church discipline on a large scale” and regarded the practice as a normal part of church life, according to church history professor Greg Wills.

. . .

Baptists generally exercised discipline at monthly Saturday conference meetings, Wills noted. At such meetings church members accused offenders of specific sins. The accused usually confessed guilt. But when the accused either denied guilt or was absent, the church appointed a committee to investigate the matter. The committee reported its findings at a subsequent meeting and recommended a verdict and sentence. The members then voted on the verdict and the penalty if the offender was found guilty.

Churches generally imposed either admonition or excommunication on offenders who were found guilty, Wills noted. Many excommunicated members maintained their piety and were eventually restored to church membership, he wrote, noting that Baptists followed the process outlined in Matthew 18 for church discipline.

. . .

Several documents from past generations of Baptists confirm that discipline was the norm among Baptists in general and Southern Baptists in particular through the 19th century.

“A Summary of Church Discipline,” written by the Charleston Baptist Association in 1774, argues that the Bible prescribes three “censures” for “rebellious and unworthy members” — rebuke or admonition, suspension and excommunication. The various censures should be applied depending on the severity of an offense, according to the document.
David Roach, Baptist Press, “Baptist history evidences church discipline” – https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/baptist-history-evidences-church-discipline/

As such, we can see that there were some additional steps to the “Matthew 18 process.” There was an investigatory committee. After the investigatory committee, there was yet another meeting and a vote. Further, the option was not a one-size-fits all for “guilty” verdicts. Instead, there was “admonition” or “excommunication” in one accounting and “rebuke” or “admonition” or “suspension” or “excommunication” in another. As such, this is quite different than what we see in the Grace Church example above.

Notably, about half of the charges resulted in “not guilty.” That’s also strange. But things have changed since then.

The Jesus People Movement’s Spread Across Denominational Lines

Second, building on this American Baptist history, the Jesus People Movement had a big effect too. Baptists are fiercely independent, but the history of the Jesus People Movement involves many people who bucked MANY previous trends. These people often did not go to their parents churches, even if those churches were theologically “evangelical.” Instead, they created their own “independent Bible churches” to be as radically faithful as their hearts told them to be. This is where I start to see the codification of “Matthew 18” as the sole process for church discipline, tying it closely to 1 Corinthians 5.

The reason for bringing this reference to Matthew 18 to a doctrine of Matthew 18 is easy to understand in the context of the time. These people went all out – sometimes admirably so. These are the people who willingly got arrested in the 1970s to protest the legalization of abortion with Roe v. Wade. These are the people who started the homeschooling movement back when it was LITERALLY ILLEGAL. These are the people who got politically active with Ronald Reagan and created the moral majority in the 1990s. These are the people who started Christian universities and filed lawsuits to fight for the rights of Christians to live out their faith. These are the people behind LOTS of new trends in American Christianity that were strange even among American Christians.

In other words, what the hippies were to non-Christians, the Jesus People were to Christians. In other words, if these people didn’t see or understand the practice of “an investigatory committee” in a Baptist church discipline setting, the idea of “but this is how it’s always been done” is not a convincing argument.

The NIV Bible’s Influence on Church Discipline

Finally, and most importantly, it is hard to overstate the influence of the New International Version of the Bible. Except for the King James Version (which literally defined the English language as we know it), the New International Version is the most popular and prolific English Bible translation in American Christianity.

Personally, I am partial to the ESV in quotations on this blog, because its translation practice attempts to use “word for word” and consistent translations of Greek and Hebrew words into corresponding English words. The NIV, in contrast, follows a phrase for phrase or “idea for idea” method of translation, but I prefer the “word for word.” However, despite that preference, I can’t help but notice that my memory of certain Bible verses is defined by the easy and elegant flow of the NIV. It’s an elegant translation.

According to Wikipedia and a 2014 study from Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis that you can access by clicking here, these are the percentages of bible translations being read by American Christians:

King James Version (55%)
New International Version (19%)
New Revised Standard Version (7%)
New American Bible (6%)
The Living Bible (5%)
All other translations (8%)

This is especially impressive when you realize that the King James Version, published in 1611, literally defined the English language as we know it and is essentially equivalent to the works of Shakespeare. Meanwhile, the New International Version was first published in 1973.

And look how the New International Version compares to other translations in the first sentence of that section of Matthew 18:

1611 KJV: Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee. . .
1905 ASV: And if thy brother sin against thee. . .
1946 RSV: If your brother sins against you. . .
1960 NASB: Now if your brother sins. . .
1969 NIV: If your brother or sister sins. . .
1969 NLV: If your brother sins against you. . .
1982 NKJV: Moreover if your brother sins against you. . .
2001 ESV: If your brother sins against you. . .
2011 CSB: If your brother sins against you. . .

Do you see that? Because some older Greek manuscripts of Matthew do not have the two Greek words “εἰς σὲ” or “against you,” the NIV and NASB decided not to include it in that verse. Notably, however, the question of Peter does include that idea, so the context still points to the idea that Jesus is dealing with sins “against you” and not sins in general:

Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?”
Matthew 18:21, NIV

However, the real reason I blame the NIV is the heading that the NIV decided to put over this section of scripture:

You should remember that the headings in your Bible are NOT a part of scripture. And even this heading did not last long. For example, I went back to my Student Bible, published in 1996 with updated NIV text, and look what it says:

In other words, they completely reversed themselves on both the text of scripture and how that scripture is summarized in the heading.

The reason for this reversal was explained in a 1983 letter that appears in the introduction to this Bible, available in full online at this link. It says the following in the relevant part:

There is a sense in which the work of translation is never wholly finished. This applies to all great literature and uniquely so to the Bible. In 1973 the New Testament in the New International Version was published. Since then, suggestions for corrections and revisions have been received from various sources. The Committee on Bible Translation carefully considered the suggestions and adopted a number of them. These were incorporated in the first printing of the entire Bible in 1978. Additional revisions were made by the Committee on Bible Translation in 1983 and appear in printings after that date.
Letter from The Committee on Bible Translation, June 1978, Revised August 1983.

Applied to the section above regarding “Discipline in the Church,” I think that is one big “Oops…” from the translators of the NIV.

And the “Oops…” that comes from this passage is not just one of changing the text of the NIV between 1973 and 1983. Instead, it has real world consequences. In the independent Bible church I grew up in, a matter of church discipline – involving very complex and difficult person issues – literally split the church.

If your church is being run by wise people, perhaps the sensible principles of the Old Testament will be applied, even in an organization that follows “Matthew 18.” However, that’s a thin level of protection. And without the guarantees of cross-examination, diligent inquiry by judges, and an opportunity to be heard, churches can ruin lives.

I have seen this damaging process play out in other churches I have attended. I have seen simple voice votes on complex situations remove members from churches. I have seen accusers allowed to speak against a person in front of the entire church body without the accused person being allowed to speak. I have seen church leaders institute discipline, only later learning that they were completely wrong for doing so. I have seen the “shunning” idea applied under the guise of Matthew 18. I don’t know if I’ve “seen it all,” but I have certainly seen a lot.

And from what I’ve seen and read, I know that using Matthew 18 as a treatise on church discipline is a bad application of bad theology from a poorly translated section of the Bible.

CONCLUSION

As I hope I have made clear, Matthew 18 is a process for an individual Christian to go to another individual Christian to seek reconciliation, so that the church can be unified. Jesus instructs us on the following steps:

Go to the person privately
Bring a friend and go to the person privately to try to bolster your case
Go to the church and seek to get some restoration
If that fails, just get over it and don’t expect an apology, and remember how much Christ has forgiven you, even when you did not apologize or did not see your own wrong.

Importantly, this is NOT about Church discipline. Instead, Paul invokes the requirements of the Old Testament legal process to establish charges. That is what governs Church Discipline.

Therefore, the Church Discipline mandated by 1 Corinthians 5 involves the biblical principles of judicial processes that are described in the Bible. A few of those principles and requirements are as follows:

A charge should be brought and remain confidential until it has evidentiary support. (Exodus 23:1)
The charge brought against the person should be specific. (See Acts 5:1-11)
The accused person should have a hearing on the charge. (See Acts 5:1-11, Proverbs 18:17)
Multiple witnesses are required to admit, uphold, or seriously consider ANY charge. (See Deuteronomy 19:15, 2 Corinthians 13:1, 1 Timothy 5:19)
Cross-examination is required to test credibility. (Deuteronomy 19:18, Proverbs 18:17)
Both sides should be heard. (See Acts 5:1-11)
Those sitting as judges should consider the possibility of deceit or otherwise false witnesses. (Deuteronomy 19:16-20)
No judge should give into “peer pressure” in rendering judgment. (Exodus 23:2)
The “power dynamic” concept (popular these days) is disfavored by scripture. (Exodus 23:3)
The “reasonableness” of the church in this process should be easily recognizable. (Philippians 4:5)

So, to all of my “Jesus People Movement” brothers: Discipline is important and commanded by scripture. But we need to stop this Matthew 18 discipline thing, because it’s both unbiblical and bonkers. The Bible demands it.