Chapter Nine --------------------------------------------------------------------- Feedback Box:

"Not Even False Doctrines Excuse Separation"

God doesn't give us permission to abandon Christians whose hearts love God, just because their brains are confused by "false doctrines". Doctrines which keep Christians separated from other Christians can't be very good. The time for separation is when "deceivers" preach wrong doctrines even though they know better.

NO EXCUSE FOR BREAKING AWAY FROM THE LOCAL CHURCH, NOT EVEN TO ESCAPE WRONG TEACHING!

(Especially when a group obeys 1 Corinthians 14, so that you can immediately correct any "wrong teaching" you are able to discern!)

This section expands on "Doctrinal Differences", #4 above, as an inadequate excuse for denominations.

Nee, page 95-7: "The question naturally arises, if the spiritual life of a local (not denominational) church is very low, can a few of the more spiritual members not gather together and form another assembly? The answer from the Word of God is emphatically, No! God's Word only warrants the establishment of churches on local ground. Even lack of spirituality is no adequate reason for dividing the church. Should local methods, government, and organization be far from ideal, that still constitutes no reason for division. Even wrong teaching (2 John 9 excepted) is no ground for those who know better to form a separate church. ...To leave a sect (denomination) is justifiable, but to leave a church -- whether on account of unspirituality, wrong doctrine, or bad organization -- is utterly unjustifiable. If you leave the local church and form a separate assembly, you may have greater spirituality, purer teaching, and better government; but you have no church; you have only a sect. ...(Revelation 2 and 3 told the people in the faulty churches to be overcomers, not to leave.) ...Those stronger members should remain in that church as overcomers, seeking to help their weaker brothers and sisters, and claiming the situation there for the Lord. Oh, how prone we are to despise the believers we consider inferior to us, and how we delight to associate with those whose fellowship we find specially congenial. Pride of heart, and a selfish enjoyment in spiritual things...sectarianism...a grief of heart to the Lord."

Strong words. But what did he mean when he said 2 John 9 is an exception?

2 John 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. 10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed: 11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

THE PROBLEM

Well, if you are trying to make the case that it is wrong to leave an otherwise ideal, "local church", that is, comprising all the Christians of a city, as the Bible directs, just because they have wrong doctrines; but then you say "unless, of course, those wrong doctrines aren't 'the doctrine of Christ'", why, you have just created a loophole large enough for a fleet of river barges to float through sideways! Surely sprinkling is not "the doctrine of Christ"! True Christians immerse! Surely baptising in the wrong Name is not "the doctrine of Christ"! True Christians baptize "In the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ!" Surely worshipping on the wrong day, having communion the wrong number of times, jumping up and down, or shouting too loud, are not "the doctrine of Christ"! etc, etc, etc! So we must not receive any of those other denominations into our "house" of worship, lest we be "partaker of their evil deeds"!

Our problem is that we insist upon a simplistic oral test so that we can tell who to reject just by asking a few simple questions. And just when we get all settled in to a couple of million great tests, or whatever number of denominations there are, along comes God's Word and says we are supposed to take into account how people live! That's not very convenient! How are you going to judge how people live with a few simple questions?! Huh?! Why, to do that, you almost have to get to know people! How ya gonna do that, in a "church"? Why, to get to know people, you almost have to have interaction with them. How ya gonna do that in a "church"? That's an awful lot of work in order to reject people! I'll take "a few simplistic questions" any time.

Is there a middle ground? Must we take either Nee's nearly absolute inclusive position that no wrong doctrine is wrong enough to justify our abandoning its followers, or the traditional divisive position that any wrong doctrine is wrong enough to justify our abandoning its followers? Is there a standard by which we can say such and such a doctrine is bad enough to justify division, but that another doctrine is not?

Limits to Tolerance

Let us repeat: when we propose fellowship with believers who have imperfect doctrines, that does not mean we tolerate deception. We aren't talking about tolerance of bad doctrine. Just because we stay in fellowship with theological pygmies, doesn't mean we forfeit the opportunity to witness to them. Just the opposite. We preserve our opportunity to witness to them. We needn't even be polite to them at all, where politeness demands withholding the truth. We can still prefer to save the lost than be polite to them, if they force us to choose.

Let us also understand: if we conclude that no doctrine is wrong enough to justify categorically shunning its adherants, that doesn't mean we agree to tolerate error from people who should know better. 95% of Bible-believing, regular-attendance church-goers have not yet read the Bible even one time through. How accurate can their doctrines be? Do we need to tolerate error from people who not only do not know the Truth, but who refuse to read it? After we witness to them, and sow seeds, (Matthew 13) and fertilize them, and give them time to grow, (Luke 13:6-9) and they still refuse to sprout, then we can reject them, by the Due Process provided in Matthew 18:15-17.

If we conclude that no doctrine is wrong enough to justify categorically shunning its adherants, all we will mean is that we don't look at a field not bearing fruit, and say, "we're not going to work in there because it is not already bearing fruit". We are not going to look at another vast group of Christians, claimed by some denomination as its members, and resolve never to communicate with them because they have not already purified their doctrines, before we have witnessed to them! After we witness to them, then if their stubbornness about clinging to their old, familiar errors is serious enough to betray lack of love for truth, or for Jesus, then we might have grounds for concluding they don't have the Spirit of Christ whom they profess.

Just because we fellowship with Believers, in whom is the Spirit of Christ, despite their imperfect doctrines, that doesn't mean we must fellowship with people in rebellion against God.

What 2 John 9 Does NOT Say

2 John 9-11 doesn't say a word about having nothing to do with people who don't agree with OUR doctrines. We flatter ourselves to say our doctrines, which we use for the actual purpose of separating ourselves from Christians with competing doctrines, are the Doctrine of Christ! Christ prayed:

John 17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

2 John 9 does not say "Whosoever agreeth not with the doctrine of Christ, hath not God...receive him not...". 2 John 9 does not say "Whosoever giveth not the Official Answer when you ask him a Doctrine Test Question, hath not God."

How can these verses refer to mere intellectual affirmation of the doctrines of any modern denomination, when the doctrine of the New Testament prohibits denominations?!

To "abide in the doctrine of Christ" is a far stronger statement than to merely intellectually agree with them! It is even stronger than living by them. We are talking about living IN Jesus' teachings. They are our home.

This point is confirmed as we study the Greek.

2 John 9 Whosoever transgresseth, {"To go past or pass over without touching a thing...to abandon a trust"} and abideth {"to continue to be present...last, endure...survive, live...not to become different...to wait for} not in the doctrine {"teaching, doctrine, instruction"} of Christ, hath not God.

In other words, this verse is not talking about mere intellectual or oral affirmation of Jesus' teachings at all. It is describing people who do not, in the words of Romans 8:9, "have the Spirit of Christ". It is about people who hate Jesus, and us too; for if they loved us, they would love Jesus, and they would keep his commandments, 1 John 5:2-3. Neither do they know Jesus, for if they did, they would keep His commandments, 1 John 2:3. Because Jesus doesn't know them, they will not enter Heaven, Matthew 7:23. (Remember that "know", in the Bible, means a relationship of ultimate intimacy, such that "children", or, metaphorically, fruits, are produced.)

In verse 10, What sort of "bringing" is John talking about when he says "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine?" John is not talking about mere verbal or written presentation of an intellectual formulation or theology. He is using words which describe living for Jesus so fully that we give birth to the Seed which He has Sown in us. Pherei, the Greek word which KJV translates "bring", is defined as "carry...move by bearing...with the suggestion of force or speed...of a gust of wind, to rush; of the mind, to be moved inwardly, be prompted...to endure the rigor of a thing, to bear patiently one's conduct...apply...to bear ie. bring forth, produce."

2 John 10 If there come any {Gr. whoever or whatever} unto you, and bring {Gr. bring forth, reproduce} not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed:

So we are definitely not talking about mere verbal or written presentation of an intellectual formulation or theology. Not that words are unimportant, Matthew 12:34-37, James 3:2-13! But words are not the only thing that is important.

Perhaps you can now see that 2 John 9-10 is not talking about the folks in other denominations who, you know very well, really do love Jesus, despite their wrong doctrines. 2 John 9-11 is talking about the folks in your own denomination who, you know very well, really don't love, or obey, or "have the Spririt of" Jesus Christ, regardless of their superior doctrines!

It turns out that 2 John 9-11 is not, at all, an exception to Nee's teaching that "Even wrong teaching (2 John 9 excepted) is no ground for those who know better to form a separate church."

There really is no exception. The worse a teaching is, the more we need to remain in fellowship with the poor saved but confused souls who believe it, so we can help them.

Not that they will necessarily let us help them for long. In fact, disassociating ourselves from those who disagree with us may be motivated by the fear of the embarrassment of having them throw us out first. Actually, there need never be any fear that continuing to associate with rebels against God will somehow "validate" them, either in their own eyes or in the eyes of our "weak brethren", 1 Corinthians 8:12. That is, not as long as we continue to witness to the Truth. One of four things will happen, and surprisingly quickly: (1) they will convert in accordance with the Truth we preach, (2) we will correct our own errors through the educational experience of interaction, (3) they will stomp out in fury, or (4) they will throw us out. Therefore there is no need to be in a hurry to leave people who need our witness. Let us stay as long as we can help, and let them decide when we part.

Of course, if we slack off our witnessing, we will validate them, our Sword of Truth will get rusty, and we will get along with them just fine.

In a "church" where only one man does virtually all the witnessing, and that one man isn't us, then the only thing we can do about spiritual error is leave. But it is not God's will to submit to the censorship of such a "church", and it is not God's will to leave Brothers who need our witness.

WHO WE SHOULD SHUN.

Then who are we supposed to shun, verse 10-11, if not the followers of imperfect doctrines? Who should we stop calling "brothers"? Who should we stop being polite to? Who should we shun so utterly that we don't even say "Good afternoon" to them, when they come to visit our church? If not the followers of impure doctrines?

("Biddeth", KJV, comes from "tell" in Greek; "Godspeed" comes from a form of the Greek for "Grace", used not only to mean "Grace" in a profound sense, but also for routine salutations, just like our saying "Good Morning".)

How much does 2 John tell us about who we are supposed to shun? Do we shun all who have not the Spirit of Christ? That would prevent us from witnessing to the unsaved! Do we shun those who call themselves Christians, who do not know Christ? How quickly do we cut down fig trees which do not bear fruit?

2 John 10 If there come ANY unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed:

"Any" comes from two Greek words. One means "whoever or whatever". The other is a pronoun referring to something specified elsewhere; it can be translated "a certain one". So is anyone specified elsewhere? Yes. Verses 9-11 continue the subject introduced in verse 7, which talks about "deceivers", and "antichrist".

Verse 7 identifies deceivers by their words.

Verse 8 warns us to watch out for them.

Verse 9 identifies deceivers by their actions.

Verse 10 tells us to shun them.

2 John 7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. 10. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed: 11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

It is "deceivers" we are to shun. Not ordinary unsaved people whose ignorance is sincere. 1 Corinthians 14:23 even invites the unsaved to church! The Greek word for deceivers, planos, means "...misleading, leading into error, tramp, imposter, corrupter, deceiver." John is talking about liars who deliberately deceive. John is not talking about sincere ignorance.

Many bristle at the very suggestion that some people are "sincerely ignorant". They fear it will be suggested that we may leave them in their ignorance and they will still go to Heaven, as long as they are "sincere". Of course that is a deadly gamble, and of course this whole book pushes more interaction with the unsaved as well as the saved, not less.

But these, who profess indignation at the concept of "sincere ignorance", are hypocrites. These same people will leave the "sincerely ignorant" in their ignorance, on their path to Hell, on the excuse that they must shun them because they don't hold to "the doctrine of Christ"!

There is such a thing as sincere ignorance, and the value of distinguishing between it and insincere, stubborn, calculated ignorance, is to discern who we should help, and who we should shun.

Why shun one group of sinners and not another, just on the basis of their sincerity? It's like freely fellowshipping with Russian civilians; but Russian spies, we avoid as much as we can. Satan's fools, or victims, we try to rescue; Satan's spies, or agents, we try to protect ourselves from. Not that we do not pray for them, too, but the best way to rescue them may be to shun them, 1 Corinthians 5:5.

Thus it is not a man's doctrines, alone, which tell us whether to embrace him or shun him. A man may have brilliant doctrines and yet be an agent of Satan, so that we must shun him. A man may have the sorriest doctrines in town and yet love Jesus, and long to learn God's Word, so we must joyfully help him! It is a man's heart, alone, which tells us whether to embrace or shun him. It is whether a man has the Spirit of Christ, alone, which tells us whether to count him as a Brother.

Most of Christendom today takes the doctrines of the denomination affirmed by a man as the sole basis for deciding whether to embrace or shun him. Instead, let us regard doctrines as but one piece of evidence of a man's heart, which we consider along with his intelligence and the information available to him.

Not that we should consider bad doctrines benign, or stand idly by while a sincere brother wallows in them. Doctrines really are important.

Matthew 12:34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. 35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. 36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

James 3:2 For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same [is] a perfect man, [and] able also to bridle the whole body. 3 Behold, we put bits in the horses' mouths, that they may obey us; and we turn about their whole body. 4 Behold also the ships, which though [they be] so great, and [are] driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth. 5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter (Gr. wood) a little fire kindleth! 6 And the tongue [is] a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course (Gr. wheel) of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. 7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: 8 But the tongue can no man tame; [it is] an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. 9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. 10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. 11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place (Gr: hole) sweet [water] and bitter? 12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so [can] no fountain both yield salt water and fresh. 13. Who [is] a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.

But words aren't always a window to the soul:

Matthew 21:28 But what think ye? A [certain] man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard. 29 He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went. 30 And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I [go], sir: and went not. 31 Whether of them twain did the will of [his] father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

In other words, 1 Corinthians 4:5 says "Don't sentence anybody before the Lord comes to (1) expose ignorance, and (2) reveal motives and intentions. Then each of us will receive credit from God." Although there is truth in this as a general statement, the context (the first four entire chapters of 1 Corinthians -- see Chapter 8) is about choosing church leaders to glorify. Verse 5 simply says don't get so caught up in what a great guy your hero is, or how sorry another poor slob is, until the Judgment where God exposes hearts. If we are warned that we lack the discernment to choose the best of human leaders, then by extension, we lack the discernment to choose the best of the denominations which those leaders founded.

Not that some denominations aren't better than others. They are. No less a teacher than Jesus Christ was claimed as the Founding Father of one of the Corinthians' intended denominations!

1 Corinthians 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

Surely Jesus' doctrines are superior to Apollos' doctrines! But Jesus' doctrines (teachings) certainly don't allow Christians to split over theology. So in order to make Jesus' teachings the hub of a denomination, His teachings had to first be perverted.

Doctrines which keep Christians separated from other Christians can't be very good.

The point is that NO doctrines are "good enough" to justify division of the Church! Even Paul became, without his consent, the hub of one of the Corinthian denominations. Paul said that was wrong! Why? Because he thought his doctrines were imperfect? I don't think so:

1 Corinthians 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

Paul had asked rhetorically, "Is Christ divided?" That was supposed to be a stupid question. "Of course not", was supposed to have been the correct answer. I wonder if Paul had any idea how many generations of Christians would shout their reply, "Yes! Let's split again! And again and again!"?

Jesus had said:

Matthew 12:25 ...Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

Let's look at the amazing immediate context of 1 Corinthians 4:5. The verse, out of context, generally applies to anyone we judge. But verse 6 specifically applies verse 5 to the "judgment" that idolizes one certain hero above others. This passage does not say we should not, as a group, discern sin and take action to correct it, but rather that our judgment is erroneous if it concludes some of us are superior to others of us, verse 7.

1 Corinthians 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. 2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. 3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. 4 For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. 5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God. 6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and [to] Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think [of men] above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another. 7 For who maketh thee to differ [from another]? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive [it], why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received [it]?

Words may be usually a clear window to the Heart, but the contents of the Heart is our criteria for fellowship.

If the heart contains the Spirit of Christ, its owner is our brother. Regardless of his words. Discerning it may not be simple, but it is not utterly impossible. Especially if we conduct Church the way 1 Corinthians 14 provides, with genuine fellowship and interaction; discerning hearts will become a lot easier than it is now.

Judging by words alone may be easiest, but it is not accurate. Jesus provides other tests:

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. 21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. 35 By this shall all [men] know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

This verse doesn't champion the existence of denominations very well. But how will the world discern our love for one another? By seeing how quickly we can throw out people who don't think exactly like us? By watching us throw out everybody who doesn't agree with us -- who challenges us? No: how about, by seeing how patient we can be with brothers poles apart from us?

Matthew 5:46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more [than others]? do not even the publicans so? 48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

WHAT ABOUT FALSE DOCTRINES?

Did you know the phrase "false doctrines" has been censored out of the Bible? What happened to it?! I looked all over my computer for it! I KNOW it used to be there! "False teachings" isn't in there, either! There are false witnesses, false prophets, false brethren, false apostles, false accusers, false teachers. In other words, these phrases put emphasis on discerning false people, but not on false intellectual concepts, or ideas. This is consistent with God's criteria for church "membership" being whether one has the Spirit of Christ, not whether one has particular intellectual concepts.

OTHER PASSAGES WHICH CONDEMN DIVISION YET WHICH HAVE BEEN TWISTED TO JUSTIFY DIVISION ("SEPARATION")

1 Corinthians 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

"That ye all speak the same thing", v. 10, is a verse I hear quoted to justify separating from Christians who "don't speak the same thing" as we do! Or whom we don't agree with! Yet here it is, in a context, starting with "that there be no divisions among you", which defines it as meaning we should never separate from each other just because our personalities clash!!!

Many have assumed "the same thing" refers to a package of doctrines, an interpretation which makes this verse all about a fellowship of intellectuals who judge unity by what they intellectually perceive and abstractly affirm. (See next section, "Doctrines: Playground of Intellectuals")

So our ideal congregation is one which has been intellectually cloned, on spiritual matters. It is assumed that "let there be no divisions among you" should be interpreted in the context of intellectual cloning, so that the "divisions" we are never to have are in the doctrines of those we allow to associate with us. But of course this assumption requires us to have more divisions, in order that all the divided up little pieces of The Church will have no divisions in them. Then along comes "that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment", which, interpreted by the intellectual cloning scenario, obviously means all our thoughts are supposed to be exactly the same, which of course requires throwing out anyone left who disagrees, or else leaving, ourselves, groups we don't agree with.

All this starts with our interpretation of "the same thing". But it turns out this phrase cannot possibly mean "doctrines".

It turns out that "the same thing" is the KJV translation of Gr. "autos", which literally means him. True, KJV translates "autos" as "same" 85 times in the NT, [only here is it "same thing"] and most of the time that makes a lot better sense than translating it "him"; and even in this verse, translating it as "the same thing" is a logical choice, in light of prevailing preconceptions.

But KJV translates "autos" as him 1947 times, as them 1148 times, as her 195 times, as it 152 times, and in a variety of other ways 1712 times, for a total of the 5118 times "autos" is in the New Testament. In other words, "autos" is a pronoun, (him, them, her, or it) 3442 of 5118 times, and as "same" only 85 times. So if there is a context where "Him" makes as much sense as "same thing", the Greek dictionary shoves us towards "Him". Turns out "Him" makes a lot of sense in this context:

"Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak HIM, [that ye speak His words, that ye speak of Him, for Him, etc.] and that there be no divisions among you;..."

What does it mean to "beseech you...by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"? My Logos Greek lexicon defines "name": "...the name is used for everything which the name covers, everything the thought or feeling of which is aroused in the mind by mentioning, hearing, remembering the name...."

In other words, Paul is begging us to remember everything we know about Jesus, to honor all Jesus has done for us, to receive Jesus' Grace by His Blood, to accept Jesus' Lordship, to remember verses like John 13:34-35, 15:12-13, 17, 17:11, 20-23, etc, and then to let all these things pour out of our mouths!

If we do this, we will not divide ourselves!

If we do this, we will all be grafted into the same Mind! The Mind of Christ! Not our OWN minds! Paul didn't care about whether our OWN minds were clones of EACH OTHER! Paul wanted our minds to become like Christ's!

You say "but how can sprinklers and dunkers, meat eaters and vegetarians, Sabbatarians and "Lord's Day" worshippers, etc., ever "fit together" in the same assembly?" But if we do this, if we "speak Him", our judgments, our opinions, our purposes, our understanding of what we ought to do, will "fit together" far better than if we continue to not do this!

1 Corinthians 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

Doctrines: Playground of Intellectuals

Average Christians would probably not describe their doctrines as "intellectually perceived and abstractly affirmed". "Intellectual" is a dirty word among Christians. Calling a Christian an "intellectual", in many circles, is like calling him an atheist.

Not because the word "intellectual" itself is inappropriate. But because, like the word "love" which has been redefined to mean "promiscuity", "intellectual" has been redefined to mean very stupid people. Some of the very densest people in the world, people so ignorant that they can't even comprehend that Jesus is Lord, have so twisted the definition of "intellectual" as to make the word refer to, of all people, themselves! And the rest of our culture has let them get away with it! Instead of mocking them for their idiotic use of the word "intellectual", the approach of Christians in our culture has been to accept their redefinition and then complete their transformation of the word by turning it into an insult.

Another characteristic of the idiots who typically like to label themselves "intellectuals" is that they actually seem to have the mental equipment to know better. That is, they are typically not so extremely retarded that they don't know how to read. Not only are they capable of reading the Gospel all by themselves, but many of them actually have. And yet they still don't believe it!

I say "typically", because of course there are exceptions. But the tendency that has given the word "intellectuals" a bad name is for these people to want to call themselves "intellectuals", not as much because they think they have a high IQ, as because they place their trust in their intelligence rather than in Christ. As if to say "we are too good to submit to God." Or "We don't need God to guide our paths. We are smart enough to figure out how to live ourselves."

In other words, they have deceived themselves. They have consciously "hardened their heart". These are the qualifications of the "deceivers" warned about in 2 John 7, which 2 John 9 tells us to "avoid". This is the "wisdom of the world" which 1 Corinthians 3:19 says is utterly "foolish".

But the related word "intelligent" still has not been so perverted. So it is useful for our purpose to reclaim the word "intellectual", a form of the word "intelligence", meaning the personification of intelligence in a person. The fact is that faith in Christ is intelligent. Disbelief is stupid. Christians are, in the most accurate sense, the "intellectuals" of the world.

That caveat out of the way, it is important to beware of falling into the same misuse of our intelligence that we condemn in the idiots we have been complaining about. In other words, let us not be hypocrites, condemning others while congratulating ourselves for the same actions.

Is our trust in our wonderfully intelligent discernment about doctrines, or is it in Christ who gave us our intelligence?

The familiar Romans 10:9 tries to get us our brains and our hearts working as a team:

Romans 10:9 ...if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

How could "heart belief" like this, (that is, a belief in so transforming a fact as the Resurrection, in the very heart, or center, of our being), be a mere oral affirmation of an abstract fact, without transforming our emotions, our attitudes, our perceptions, and our actions?

But this is not how I see "church doctrines" treated. I see "church doctrines" treated as, well, verbal formulas to be intellectually affirmed, without any expectation that they transform our actions, or anything else about us. In fact, beliefs about how individuals ought to act (fornication, abortion, etc.) are ordinarily excluded from a denomination's formal doctrines!

We typically judge entire denominations full of people by the doctrines printed in the denominational literature, without ever actually personally meeting members of the denomination, much less learning how they behave. (Denominations are also forged from rituals, such as how often to have the Lord's Supper, or how much water to use while baptizing.)

This is a very different thing than perceiving each individual's core beliefs, that is, the beliefs at each individual's heart, or center, which drive that person, which motivate that person.

We like to assume the doctrines of one's denominations are one's "heart beliefs", but that is seldom true, for two reasons:

(1) Many Christians are not fully settled into any denomination. They pick the least disagreeble one, because they have to pick something in order to go to church at all; but there is usually a little bit of "shopping around" still going on. Most people switch denominations a few times during their lives. Not as often as they switch spouses, but more often than they switch political parties.

(2) Many doctrines are so technical that they don't even seem relevant to how we live.

(3) Those who have yet to switch denominations may never have appreciated the significance of their own doctrines, because they have not studied other doctrines to see how such ideas can become twisted.

The "shopping around" problem disappears, by the way, when there is only one church in town, with every theology scrutinized, and no pressure on anyone to walk away from error because that is the only way anyone is permitted to "take a stand" for the truth.

RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH

Here's another passage quoted to justify schisms:

2 Timothy 2:14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. 15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

How is this passage bent to the purpose of schisms? By defining "rightly dividing the word of truth" as the exclusive province of one's own denomination.

"Profit" is defined as "fit for use; useful". How many doctrines which divide churches have no practical application to how we live?! That is, other than to divide us contrary to the will of God!

Look at what God says is the attitude in people who suffer exposure to this schismatic talk: they lose their sense of consecration! "Subverting" means "overthrow, destruction of cities, metaphorically of the extinction of a spirit of consecration". How consecrated can you feel while you are listening to your pastor tell how another denomination is going to hell while yours will look down upon them from heaven? What humility do you feel?

FROM SUCH WITHDRAW THYSELF -- Another Excuse for Denominations

Here's a verse used to justify splitting churches and keeping split churches split:

1 Timothy 6:2 ...These things teach and exhort. 3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

"...and consent not to wholesome words", verse 3, might seem to mean others must intellectually affirm "wholesome words", which might seem to mean "correct doctrines". In other words, "If any man does not agree with correct doctrines...from such withdraw thyself." That seems to be the traditional reasoning for how this verse justifies denominations.

But why do we assume "wholesome words" refers to the doctrines of men? What words could be more wholesome than the Word of God?

Moreover, the Greek word translated "consent" (KJV) is defined "draw near to" as well as "assent". This is stronger than mere intellectual affirmation. When we "draw near to" "wholesome words" the picture is of loving the words, and living by them.

"Doctrine" (1 Timothy 6:3) means "teaching". What is "the doctrine according to godliness"? How about the teachings of Jesus? Did He teach us to separate from one another when our intellectual doctrines differ?

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are....20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Here's a simple test question: is your personal theology identical, in every detail, with the theology of God? (Gr: The Theos)

"Well, no, of course not. I'm human. I don't understand everything God understands."

OK, then a followup question: is there a greater gap between your theology and the theology of the denomination down the street?

"Er, well, I'm not sure. They're pretty different, sprinkling rather than dunking, and all. But I guess maybe there might be some discrepancy in my own theology, that I don't know about, which, compared with God's theology, might possibly be almost that serious."

Hmmm. Well, did you notice that Jesus prayed as if it were possible for you to be as "one" with Jesus and God as Jesus and God are already "one"? Now if it is possible for you, with your vast doctrinal deficiencies compared with God, to be "one" with God, wouldn't it theoretically be possible for you, and your brother from the denomination down the street, with your relatively insignificant doctrinal discrepancies, to be "one" with each other?

Back to 1 Timothy 6:

Verse 4, "doting" describes obsession. "to be sick, metaph. of any ailment of the mind, to be taken with such an interest in a thing as amounts to a disease, to have a morbid fondness for". "Questions" means "inquiry, debate, matter of controversy". "Strifes of words" means "to contend about words, to wrangle about empty and trifling matters". "Railings" comes from the Greek word "blasphemia", which KJV translates "blasphemy" 16 of the 19 times God wrote it in the NT. It means "slander, detraction, speech injurious, to another's good name; impious and reproachful speech injurious to divine majesty". Pretty good description of how members of denominations speak of members of other denominations, isn't it?

Verse 5, "perverse disputings" comes from the Greek word "paradiatribe". The English "diatribe" means a long, tedious, tiresome lecture. The Greek word is defined as: "useless occupation, empty business, misemployment".

In other words, this passage, oft quoted to justify schisms, actually means it is those who do not live by Jesus' commandments, which is evidenced by stirring up the kinds of arguments which split churches, whom we should avoid:

1 Timothy 6:2 ...These things teach and exhort. 3 If any man teach otherwise, and [does not draw near] to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the [teaching] which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but [has a sick obsession with] [controversies] and [arguments about nothing], whereof cometh envy, strife, [humiliation], evil surmisings, 5 [Mischief and missed callings] of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

It appears this verse, too, counsels separation from people whose hearts are far from God, not people whose hearts are right but whose words and intellects appear to be in error!

We are supposed to "withdraw" ourselves (v. 5) from those who stir up arguments over nothing which cause "strife". Why? Is it because there may be folks in the next denomination who are going to Heaven but we don't agree with them, so we should not fellowship with them? No. We are supposed to "withdraw" ourselves for two reasons: because there are "deceivers" who are not going to Heaven -- they are far from the Words of Christ -- they do not "have the Spirit of Christ", which is reason enough by itself for not fellowshipping with them; and also because they are sowing division. If they were ordinary sinners in need of the Gospel, we could go have dinner with them, and witness to them, and live among them. But when they are not only unsaved sinners, but they are deliberately and maliciously upsetting the very fellowship upon which we feed, we had better withdraw ourselves. We can risk our lives to save a sinner; but when time with that wolf gives him access to our entire flock of vulnerable sheep, we let him alone.

Challenge!

Think about the intellectual "doctrines" which divide Christians today. Are they the very "questions and strifes of words", arguments about nothing, of which Paul tells men of good hearts to steer clear?

You say "but the doctrines over which MY denomination split away from other churches is important enough to God to justify splitting!" You can say it, and it might be hard for me to disprove it. But what if you had to prove your doctrines are important enough to torpedo the unity Jesus prayed for? Important enough to nullify the "hate" God has for the "discord" which gave birth to your denomination?

Proverbs 6:16 These six [things] doth the LORD hate: ...19 he that soweth discord among brethren.

Could you do it? Could you prove it to God? Beware! Do not harden your heart! Or you may one Day face that challenge!

Chapter 10 "God Invites Everyone to the Feast"

Feedback Box Got feedback? Send it, along with name or url of the article, and a little of the text on either side of where your comment belongs, so I know what you are responding to, and I'll post your response. I might even place it right smack dab in the article! (If you don't want your email posted, SAY SO!)