DECISION-MAKING AND EDIFICATION
The same apostle also has a lot to say about argumentation and
controversy (1Ti 1:4; 6:4-5; 2Ti 2:23; Tit 3:9) arising from unsound
teaching, ideas or practices-in stark contrast to the clear Word
of God, correctly handled (2Ti 2:15)-which detract from this process
of edification.
Coming as we do from a church culture which saw so many decisions
imposed upon members of the congregation from above, it is very
easy for us here, if we are not careful, to allow the pendulum
to swing to the other extreme, namely to suppose that the Church
can be used as a tribunal to enact sundry decisions so that every
problem between brethren that remains unresolved can ultimately
be mediated by and ruled upon by the congregation as a whole.
The directions of Jesus Christ in Mt 18:15-17 have often been
seen as suggestive of just such an approach.
But what is Christ actually teaching us in these verses of Matthew
18, and how do they fit into the dynamics of conflict resolution
within the Body of the Church? Let us examine this whole issue
more closely.
REBUKING SIN
Immediately after He had expressed His Father's will that not
one of His sheep should ever be lost (Mt 18:14), Christ tells
us:
We are not here dealing with a mere disagreement in opinion
between two believers, but rather with a sin-a transgression defined
as such by Scripture. To assume that this also includes the need
to first determine whether this is in fact the case is to read
into these specific words of Christ what is not there; they stand,
as they do in Lk 17:3-4. There is a sin, and rebuke is called
for: "go and tell him his fault [the Greek is saying
"Go and convict him, convince him, rebuke, admonish him for
this by providing the evidence of the sin"]" If
we're not sure whether sin is involved, we'd better make sure
first before we embark on even this first step!
If he "listens" to you, or "hears you", Christ
tells you that you "have won your brother" (Mt 18:15).
Or, as Luke 17:3, above, puts it "if he repents, forgive
him." You have gained your brother because he has repented
of the sin, forgiveness has been extended, and reconciliation
has been effected.
Let us note also that what Christ calls "rebuke" in
Lk 17:3-4, He also describes as "going to your brother"
in Mt 18:15. While rebuking sin can indeed be quite confrontational
(Tit 1:13) [yet what if God were always to vehemently, directly
confront us with our sins?], Christ does not use the word "confrontation"
in the first instance. Let us never forget the admonition of the
apostle Paul:
The biblical principle is that two or three witnesses are required
to provide the evidence to sustain a charge of sin:
The offender is admonished and urged to reconsider his stance,
for the grievance is valid. The responses of all parties are noted
by these witnesses.
Notice the very next words of Jesus Christ in regard to this subject:
PUNISHMENT BY THE MAJORITY
The same apostle recounts the instance when Peter publicly misrepresented
himself-and, more importantly, God, and the truth of the Gospel-to
the Gentiles and where he, Paul, took him, also publicly, to task.
Are we saying that the entire Church should therefore not act
to resolve conflicts, or even that an individual's point of view
should never be articulated before the congregation of believers?
Indeed, no-simply that Mt 18:15-17 does not afford us carte blanche
rights to prevail upon the assembly of the Church in regard to
matters that do not involve clearly-delineated sin. And then,
even where explicit sin is indeed the issue, we have seen that
the Church as a whole is not involved except as the last of three
clear steps. If we seek to have the Church arbitrate on our personal
problems with each other on the basis of Christ's words in Mt
18:15-17 to seek a solution through majority consensus (which
is achieved, biblically, through the upholding of the law of God
which has been violated), are we then to also seek the imposition
of the resultant mandate to excommunicate the party unwilling
to accept this majority decision-a decision that would have been
arrived at on a basis other than upon a clear teaching of the
Law of God? For we are left with no option if we wish to adhere
to the instructions of Jesus Christ! Do we really want to revisit
past histories of unfair decisions arbitrarily imposed upon people
where the punishment ill-befitted the crime?
There are other examples of "punishment by the majority"
where internal ostracism within the Church, as opposed
to removal from the Body, was the practice enjoined upon
the congregation for dealing with unwholesome doctrine or other
behaviour contrary to godliness:
Are we mature enough to overlook some of the petty offences that
will no doubt come our way?
Let us consider some examples of this very empowerment of Christians
to make judgements on behalf of the Church.
JUDGING DISPUTES
PRINCIPLES GOVERNING CHRISTIAN CONFLICT RESOLUTION
We have been called to solve our individual problems with one
another and to co-exist peacefully in the Body of the Church.
Let us all strive to do just this and be very wary as to our motives
when we wish to refer to the Church for resolution conflicts,
petty problems or personal opinions that should be negotiated
and settled by the parties involved. Even opinions and ideas which
may seem to have scriptural merit may well prove a cause of division
when they are found wanting once subject to the Word of God, which
alone is the basis for any adjudication of issues between brethren.
And the admonitions against and the treatment of division we have
already noted.
FINAL PRINCIPLES
If we consider the recorded history of the apostolic Church, we
find examples of collective decisions which were made:
The ekklesia of God, the congregation of called-out ones, is indeed
empowered to make decisions. However, we all understand, do we
not, the greater purpose of our assembling as the Church of God?
1Co 14:26 (NIV) What then shall we say, brethren? When
you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction,
a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must
be done for the strengthening [edification] of the church.
Now we might in considering this verse quickly realise that the
participatory nature of worship here described by Paul does not
seem to quite match the culture of the Church in whose services
we presently participate-and this is another topic altogether.
The point is that our assemblage as a congregation is designed
to edify, or strengthen, us individually, and the Church
as a whole, and is something in which we all are to be involved.
The apostle Paul again makes this point in 1Co 14:1-5: whatever
is said and done in our assembling together must ultimately contribute
to the edification or building up of the Body according
to the Word of God. The Greek word used in fact gives the picture
of a house being built, step by step, each step systematically
and consistently adding to the previous one, until the building
is completed. We are all to contribute towards this edification
(1Th 5:11; Heb 3:13; 10:24).
Have we in the past read into Christ's commands in Mt 18:15-17
more than there is actually there, and as a result made certain
assumptions that may prove to have been incorrect?
Mt 18:15-17 "Moreover if your brother sins against
you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he
hears you, you have gained your brother 16 But if he will not
hear, take with you one or two more, that 'by the mouth of two
or three witnesses every word may be established.' 17 And if
he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses
even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and
a tax collector."
Let us note first of all that we are told at the outset that sin
[Gk: hamartia-the sense is that of error, offence, trespass,
or sin] is involved. Christ so states this; we do not have
to determine whether this is in fact the case. He did not say:
"If you think your brother has sinned." It is
the same Greek word for "sin" used in many other places
in the New Testament, and again by the Lord in Lk 17:3-4, where
we are told that the sinning brother is to be rebuked with the
aim of securing repentance on his part:
Lk 17:3-4 "Take heed to yourselves. If your brother
sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him 4
And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times
in a day returns to you, saying, 'I repent,' you shall forgive
him."
This is the principle also here in Mt 18:15-17.
The "against you" is lacking in some early Greek manuscripts:
even if we have not been personally sinned against, we all have
the responsibility to rebuke a sinning brother or sister (Eph
5:11) to avoid sharing in their sin (Lev 19:17; 1Ti 5:22), for
sin unchecked can contaminate the whole Church.
Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass,
you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness,
considering yourself lest you also be tempted.
Notice also, in Paul's instructions to Timothy, applicable to
us as well, that rebuke should be accompanied by other positive
actions:
2Ti 4:2 (NIV) Preach the Word; be prepared in season and
out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage--with
great patience and careful instruction.
ESTABLISHED BY WITNESSES
Going back to Mt 18:
Mt 18:16 "But if he will not hear, take with you
one or two more, that 'by the mouth of two or three witnesses
every word may be established.'"
If the sinning brother will not "hear (or listen)"-in
other words, if there is a refusal by him to repent, to be reconciled-one
or two "witnesses" are required to face him with you.
Why? To determine if your case against your sinning brother has
merit or validity? To arbitrate or mediate a resolution to this
impasse? Hardly! Their purpose, we are told, should be to "establish
every word [or "matter"-NIV]".
Dt 19:15 (NRSV) A single witness shall not suffice to convict
a person of any crime or wrongdoing in connection with any offense
that may be committed. Only on the evidence of two or three witnesses
shall a charge be sustained.
The apostle Paul required an allegation of sin against an elder
to be verified by two or three witnesses (1Ti 5:19) on the basis
of the same principle: the crime-the sin-will be corroborated
or attested to by means of this procedure. (See also Nu 35:30;
Heb 10:28.)
2Co 13:1 (NRSV) This is the third time I am coming to
you. "Any charge must be sustained by the evidence of two
or three witnesses."
Mt 18:17 "And if he refuses to hear them, tell it
to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let
him be to you like a heathen [Gentile] and a tax collector."
Still refusing to "listen"-to consider repentance and
reconciliation, the matter is brought before the entire Church-but
on the very same basis. The offender, who by now is hopefully
coming to see how serious the offence is, is to "hear"
the Church, to acknowledge his sin. As several witnesses have
attested to the sin that is involved, so does the Church as a
whole agree.
Failure to admit sin and accept reconciliation has the direst
of consequences: expulsion from the body of believers, just as
at that time Gentiles were considered outside of the body of Israel
and its blessings, enemies like the hated tax collectors who were
generally considered traitors.
Mt 18:18 "Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind
on earth will be bound [the Greek means "will have already
been bound"] in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth
will be loosed ["will have been already loosed"] in
heaven."
In other words, these matters upon which the Church acts are matters
that the Word of God has already judged, upon which the Law of
God has already ruled, and which are thus bound by it. True application
of Scripture has been violated. They are therefore not just opinions
or self-willed disputes, but involve actions taken to deal with
sin, where the verdict is rendered according to the Word of God,
and backed up by the Church!
This collective action on the part of the Church to deal with
sin was precisely what Paul had to enjoin upon the Corinthians
because they had, by failing to deal with sin according to these
principles of Mt 18:15-17, allowed the entire Church to be contaminated.
Nothing had to be argued, debated, adjudicated; rather, the law
of God had to be enforced:
1Co 5:1-5 It is actually reported that there is sexual
immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even
named among the Gentiles; that a man has his father's wife! 2
And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who
has done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For
I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already
judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed.
4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered
together [as a Church], along with my spirit, with the power of
our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 deliver such a one to Satan for the
destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved [that
is, he will hopefully have come to repentance, and have been re-admitted
to the Church] in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Paul described this collective action of the Church as a "punishment
inflicted by the majority":
2Co 2:6 (NIV) The punishment inflicted on him by the majority
is sufficient for him.
It is a "majority" not by acclamation, but rather because
of agreement about the validity of the Law of God to judge the
sin.
Gal 2:12-14 (NIV) Before certain men came from James, he
[the apostle Peter] used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they
arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles
because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision
group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that
by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw
that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel,
I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet
you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that
you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?"
Peter was guilty of being a respecter of persons, of showing partiality,
where he, who had come to so demonstrably see that "God shows
no partiality" (Acts 10:34) knew better. While this is unequivocally
a public reprimand for a public wrongdoing, on the part of an
influential leader of the apostolic Church, the principle is still
that of the first stage of Mt 18:15-17 process. It was also apostolic
teaching:
1Ti 5:20 Those [elders] who are sinning rebuke in the
presence of all, that the rest also may fear.
In similar manner, our personal failings can expose the Word of
God to contempt. The Israel of God, individually and collectively,
must never allow the Name of God to be blasphemed from within
or without the Church because of actions that are not fully in
accordance with His Word (Ro 2:24).
We might also ponder the awesome implications of the fact that
even at the historic Jerusalem Council of Acts 15, where an issue
which threatened to divide the apostolic Church was under consideration,
it was apparently the counsel and proposal of the apostle James,
empowered by the Scriptures as he summed up the liberty of the
Gentiles already evident, rather than any determination through
numbers, that set the seal on the decision that was to be forthcoming
(Acts 15:13-21). Such is the testimony of the working of the Holy
Spirit, and a pattern for conflict resolution for us to follow
today.
Ro 16:17 (NIV) I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those
who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary
to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.
OFFENCES AND DISPUTES
1Co 5:11 But now I have written to you not to keep company
with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous,
or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner;
not even to eat with such a person.
1Ti 6:3-5 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent
to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
to the doctrine which accords with godliness, 4 he is proud,
knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over
words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions,
5 useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of
the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From
such withdraw yourself.
Tit 3:10-11 (NIV) Warn a divisive person once, and then
warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with
him. 11 You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful;
he is self-condemned.
2Th 3:6,14-15 (NIV) In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,
we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother
who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received
from us.
14 If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take
special note of him [in other words, see to it that he is identified
to the Church]. Do not associate with him, in
order that he may feel ashamed [and desist from his recalcitrant
behaviour]. 15 Yet do not regard him as an enemy [in contrast
to Mt 18:17], but warn him as a brother.
We will always have our differences of opinion over "disputable
matters" (Ro 14:1, NIV), or "opinions" (Ro 14:1,
NRSV). And how easy it is to consider these opinions sacrosanct
and even rationalize principles out of them! But is the assembly
of the Church always the place to air our opinions or to seek
adjudication on our differences of opinion?
It is incumbent upon us to resolve our personal disputes with
one another, disputes which so often arise over trivial matters,
but which can so easily lead to discord, division and ill-feeling
amongst us.
Paul had to address the divisions within the Church in Corinth.
Some brethren were "for Paul", some for Apollos, or
Peter-even "for Christ"! No doubt some or all of these
factions felt that their stance was perfectly biblical. Yet Paul
did not even bother to address the merits or demerits of their
cases; instead, he stressed what was common to them all and, appealing
to them in the Name of Jesus Christ, admonished them to sort things
out:
1Co 1:10 (NIV) I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another
[literally: "speak the same thing"-an expression
taken from Greek political life which might be paraphrased "Drop
party lines"] so that there may be no divisions among
you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.
One wonders what the results would have been had Paul advocated
collective arbitration of all their differences via the whole
Church!
Pr 19:11 (NIV) A man's wisdom gives him patience; it is
to his glory to overlook an offense [Heb: "transgression,
trespass, sin"].
We might ask ourselves why is it a person's "glory"?
Perhaps because while, by the letter of the law, we are afforded
redress for even minor offences, like God we choose instead to
exercise wisdom and patience when we disregard such pettiness.
Sometimes magnanimity is not only prudent but morally elevating.
1Pe 4:8 And above all things have fervent love for one
another, for "love will cover a multitude of sins."-certainly
through the exercise of forgiveness after repentance (Jas 5:20),
but perhaps also through deferment of our right to seek redress?
COMPETENT TO JUDGE
Ps 119:165 (TEV) Those who love your law have perfect security,
and there is nothing that can make them fall.
Let us now notice how Jesus Christ concluded the section dealing
with the addressing of sin:
Mt 18:19-20 (NIV) "Again, I tell you that if two of
you on earth agree [the Greek suggests an almost melodious
harmony] about anything you ask for [according to the will
and Word of God], it will be done for you by my Father in
heaven. 20 For where two or three [such as the two or
three witnesses of v 16] come together in my name [by
Christ's authority and power, on the basis of the Word of God],
there am I with them."
Two or three truly gathered in the Name of the Son of God are
empowered not only to see to it that the Word of God and the Law
of God are established (it is only when their efforts fail that
the entire Church is involved in the issue of the sinning brother),
but also to make decisions, to reach agreement about matters
which otherwise concern the Church. In this light, let us notice
the how Paul felt about the Church in Rome:
Ro 15:14 (NIV) I myself am convinced, my brothers, that
you yourselves are full of goodness, complete in knowledge and
competent to instruct one another.
As we well understand, there is a direct spiritual continuity
between the congregation of Israel under the First Covenant and
the New Testament Church. The assembly of ancient Israel is also
called an "ekklesia" (Acts 7:38). Yet, for the most
part, what was the only matter that came before the entire assembly
of Israel? Sin, both personal and collective (see Lev 5). Mediation
for the settlement of disputes, the rendering of judgement and
the execution of justice amongst individuals and within families
was the responsibility of the elders of the nation, beginning
with the selection of the leaders over thousands, hundreds, fifties
and tens (Ex 18:17-26), "able men, such as fear God, men
of truth, hating covetousness" (Ex 18:21), and the seventy
ordained in the wilderness (Nu 11:16-17). Some examples of this
can be seen in Dt 19:11-13; 21:1-9,18-21; 22:13-21.
Do we not here have a godly principle that should be likewise
exercised by the Israel of God (Gal 6:16) to aid in the resolution
of its internal conflicts: Christian men and women of truth to
help to settle disputes in their midst?
The apostle Paul castigated the Corinthians over disputes amongst
them-apparently about property (1Co 6:7)-which individual members
had taken before heathen courts for settlement:
1Co 6:1-5 (NRSV) When any of you has a grievance against
another, do you dare to take it to court before the unrighteous,
instead of taking it before the saints [so grievances
can indeed be dealt with by the Church]? 2 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?
So the issue is not even that the Church-the ekklesia of God-is
not empowered to decide issues between believers. The question
is how?-and Paul gives us guidelines here:
3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels--to say nothing
of ordinary matters? 4 If you have ordinary cases, then, do you
appoint as judges those who have no standing in the church? 5
I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among
you wise enough to decide [NIV: "to judge a dispute"]
between one believer and another…?
We are all, are we not, to be learning to make godly judgements?
And does not all godly judgement begin with self-judgement? Are
we wise enough, mature enough, to both resolve the conflicts we
may have with each other and to be able-especially if God has
so gifted us-to help resolve issues amongst our brethren that
adversely affect the Church? In fact, we are told that God Himself
has balanced the Body of the Church to eliminate conflict that
produces discord (1Co 12:25-26. We might ponder what these verses
are telling us.).
1Pe 4:10 (NIV) Each one should use whatever gift he has
received to serve others, faithfully administering God's grace
in its various forms (See also Ro 12:6-8).
This situation here addressed by Paul could well also be an example
where the format of Mt 18:15-17, properly applied in the first
place, might have prevented such a sad state of affairs, as verse
8 tells us that their cases against each other were not even based
upon just grievances:
1Co 6:8 But you yourselves wrong and defraud--and believers
at that.
Even a "legal" victory can be a spiritual defeat:
1Co 6:7 In fact, to have lawsuits at all with one another
is already a defeat for you. Why not rather be wronged? Why not
rather be defrauded?
In his epistle to the Philippians, Paul, in similar manner, also
urges individual mediation to help resolve a disagreement between
two members of the Church. While in this case there is no mention
of any sin involved, and the apostle does not take sides in addressing
the matter, the issue was obviously serious enough to warrant
mention in this letter read to the entire congregation:
Php 4:2-3 I implore Euodia and I implore Syntyche to be
of the same mind in the Lord. 3 And I urge you also, true companion,
help these women who labored with me in the gospel, with Clement
also, and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the
Book of Life.
Paul first of all entreats each of the women separately to work
to resolve their differences "in the Lord"-for all strife
ends in submission to His will. This is the guiding principle
that leads to harmony. He then encourages others close to the
situation, like his "true companion" (his identity is
not revealed; suggestions have included Epaphroditus, Luke, or
that the Greek word used, "Syzygos", is even a personal
name), one obviously "wise enough to judge a dispute"
(1Co 6:5) to be involved in helping to promote a reconciliation
between the errant parties.
The four verses that immediately follow Paul's admonition to resolve
this dispute afford us three wonderful principles which, if kept
in mind, will help to promote harmony.
Php 4:4 Rejoice in the Lord always. Again I will say,
rejoice!
We can rejoice, even under difficult circumstances, such as when
our personal problems with one another threaten to overwhelm us,
in the knowledge that "in the Lord"-in the Word of God,
in the Church of God-is available to us the principles and means
to help resolve all matters between us.
Php 4:5 (NIV) Let your gentleness [Gk: epieikes-"yieldedness"
or "sweet reasonableness"] be evident to all.
Christian consideration for one another is to be ever present
and must be seen to be present in moments of conflict. The "wisdom
from above" (Jas 3:17) is peace-loving, gentle, willing to
yield, sincere….
Php 4:5 …The Lord is at hand.
To be sure, the Lord will soon come again, but He is also immediately
present, in the Church, and with us in the midst of our conflicts.
It is a call for us to be alert (Ro 13:11), to sort out our problems
while we can, knowing also that His nearness is a source of encouragement
and of calmness for spirits troubled and overwhelmed by the stress
of personal disagreements.
Let us note a few additional principles that are factors for consideration
when conflict needs to be addressed and resolved-principles based
for the most part on how we are admonished to deal with "one
another", to treat one another as we would also want to be
treated (Mt 7:12):
Ro 12:10 Be kindly affectionate to one another
with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one
another (NIV: "honour one another among yourselves").
And at times, as we have already noted:
1Co 12:25 that there should be no schism in the body,
but that the members should have the same care for one another.
Gal 5:13 For you, brethren, have been called to liberty;
only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through
love serve one another.
Eph 4:2 with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering,
bearing with one another in love.
Eph 4:32 And be kind to one another, tenderhearted,
forgiving one another, just as God in Christ forgave you.
Eph 5:21 submitting to one another in the fear
of God.
Col 3:13 bearing with one another, and forgiving
one another, if anyone has a complaint against another;
even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do.
1Th 5:11 Therefore comfort each other and edify one
another, just as you also are doing.
1Pe 3:8 Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion
for one another; love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be
courteous.
Ro 14:19 Therefore let us pursue the things which make
for peace and the things by which one may edify another.
Ro 15:2 Let each of us please his neighbor for his good,
leading to edification.
Jas 1:19 So then, my beloved brethren, let every man be
swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath.
1Co 6:7 Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?