|
|
|
|
|
Contents of Fellowship: WE ARE NOT TO HAVE FELLOWSHIP WITH SIN BEWARE THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES WE ARE NOT TO HAVE FELLOWSHIP WITH SIN by: Joe R. Price Fellowship implies common interests and describes mutual agreement. It is to participate together toward common interests or goals. In this light, husbands and wives enjoy "fellowship" in the oneness of marriage (Gen. 2:24). The church and Christ are "one" and Christians have fellowship with Christ as they keep His commandments (Eph. 5:31-32; 1 Cor. 1:9; Jno. 14:21-23). Only if we walk in the light of truth are we assured of being in fellowship with God (1 Jno. 1:1-7). To go beyond the doctrine of Christ forfeits one's fellowship with the Father and Son. Consequently, our fellowship with that person is restricted (2 Jno. 9-11). We are commanded to not have fellowship with darkness and its works, but to instead reprove them (Eph. 5:11; 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1). Over the past several years some brethren have made a defense of having fellowship with false teachers and others whose lives violate scripture. Clarity of the Bible subject and the honesty of the person's heart have been advocated as the defining marks upon which fellowship can be had. Pleas of "tolerance" and "acceptance" toward false teaching and practice on "matters of serious moral and doctrinal import" are becoming more vocal. The mistaken notion is being advanced that Romans 14 instructs us to "receive" brethren with doctrinal and/or moral deviations. We are being told that if we can judge a brother to be honest in heart (he has a good conscience) and we judge that the clarity of the Bible teaching in question is sufficiently lacking, we have a basis for maintaining fellowship over differences of faith (please note the completely subjective, human judging processes being advocated in this approach to fellowship - jrp). This is an abuse and misapplication of Romans 14. The context of Romans 14 establishes its arena of application to be matters which are indifferent before God (i.e., the eating of meats, the observing of days). In such things we are to "receive" and not to condemn each other, since God receives both parties (v. 1-4). When matters of opinion and moral indifference are handled as outlined in Romans 14:1-15:7, peace among brethren results. The body of Christ will be edified and Christ is glorified. It is a gigantic and unscriptural step to go from these inspired guidelines about fellowship pertaining to morally and doctrinally indifferent issues and start applying Romans 14 to topics which do have moral and doctrinal import. For instance, the religious homosexual has long appealed to Romans 14 as justification for receiving him into the fellowship of the church since "God hath received him" (cf. Rom. 14:3). The denominations race to Romans 14 to justify a multitude of doctrinal differences. Yet they maintain fellowship among themselves where obvious doctrinal (and sometimes even moral) differences exist due to a misunderstanding and misapplication of Romans 14. Now, brethren are using the same reasoning. Fellowship with brethren who are teaching and promoting doctrinal and moral error is being justified on the basis of Romans 14! (Some examples are marriage, divorce and remarriage, institutionalism, the social gospel, women preachers). Will we never learn? Will we be slow of heart to believe what the Bible teaches about fellowship with sin? Read 1 John 1:1-7, Ephesians 5:7-11, 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1, 2 John 9-11 and Romans 14 again. Fellowship with sin and error is forbidden. But Romans 14 encourages fellowship among those who differ. Unless we are ready to pit scripture against itself we must acknowledge two different areas of application for these passages: one in which doctrinal and moral error cannot be fellowshipped (matters of revealed faith), and one in which differences are allowed (matters of indifference). We must not try to accommodate or tolerate error and sin. It costs us our fellowship with God and with His people. Top of Page Return to Articles by: Joe R. Price Charles Swindoll wants to expose what he calls "grace killers." He says the "grace killer" acts in ways which destroy grace. According to Swindoll, if you want to be a grace killer, do this: "...leave no room for any gray areas. Everything is either black or white, right or wrong. And as a result, the leader maintains strict control over the followers. Fellowship is based on whether there is full agreement. Herein lies the tragedy. This self-righteous, rigid standard becomes more important than relationships with individuals. We first check out where people stand on the issues, and then we determine whether we will spend much time with them. The bottom line is this: We want to be right (as we see it, of course) more than we want to love our neighbor as ourselves. At that point our personal preferences eclipse any evidence of love. I am of the firm conviction that where grace exists, so must various areas of gray." (THE GRACE AWAKENING, Charles R. Swindoll, 52-53) This excerpt should especially concern us because some brethren are duplicating this argument as they attempt to convince us that unity in doctrinal diversity is not only allowed, but endorsed by God. Brethren are being convinced that when it comes to so-called "less clear, more difficult" passages and doctrines in the New Testament, we should content ourselves with saying "this is what I believe to be the truth" rather than boldly proclaiming from God's word, "this is the truth" (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 4:2). Compare this with the bold preaching of the gospel of Christ in New Testament times: Acts 4:13, 29, 31; 9:29; 13:46; 14:3; 18:26; 19:8; Eph. 6:19-20; Phil. 1:14; 1 Thess. 2:2. Which of these approaches to gospel preaching is bold, and which is not? (cf. 2 Tim. 1:7-10) Some despise their brethren for boldly preaching God's word on "difficult" doctrinal subjects. They make statements like: "Who are you to think that you have arrived at the final, definitive truth on this subject?" "Do you have 100% perfect knowledge?" Boldness is disparaged while uncertainty is exalted (whether intentionally or not). This should not be so! "These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee." (Titus 2:15). We must appeal to the authority of Christ, revealed in the New Testament, as the basis for our boldness of faith and its confident proclamation. Brethren who appeal to and apply 2 John 9-11 to difficult doctrinal subjects (such as marriage, divorce and remarriage) are accused of being intolerant, church-splitters and grace killers. Such accusations can and must be answered from God's word. "Everything is either black or white, right or wrong." Please tell us dear brother, you who would allow gray areas in the revelation of the gospel of grace, wherein is the "gray" area? Romans 14 teaches liberty in the area of personally indifferent matters before God - matters which are morally neutral in God's sight (Rom. 14:3-5, 14, 18, 20, 22; cf. 1 Cor. 8:8). Therefore, we are not to dispute over these sorts of doubtful things, but receive one another (14:1, 13; 15:7). A close study of Romans 14:1-15:7 teaches us not to use this passage to justify ongoing fellowship with doctrinal error or moral sins. 2 John 9-11 establishes that fact, and it is not in conflict with Romans 14. So please tell us, what is the "black and white" of the gospel, and what are the "gray areas of divine revelation?" This is the language of Ashdod -- the vernacular of modern-day Calvinism. "Fellowship is based on whether there is full agreement." We are taught to agree with the apostles of Christ to have fellowship with God (read 1 Jn. 1:1-4; 4:1-6). Men may agree and still not have God (if their agreement is error which goes beyond the doctrine of Christ). Such do "not have God" (2 Jn. 9). You see, kind brother, we must agree with Christ first, before agreement between ourselves means anything. Fellowship with brethren is based upon each other being in fellowship with God (1 Jn. 1:9). By appealing to 2 John 9 and the "doctrine of Christ" as our absolute guide for fellowship with God and brethren, we are being accused of demanding perfect knowledge. Such is a misleading and inaccurate charge. God expects every Christian to mature and abound in our knowledge and discernment (Phil. 1:9-10). The babe in Christ, who is indeed in fellowship with God, is far from possessing a mature knowledge (1 Pet. 2:1-3). But notice please, that the babe in Christ can and must put away sin to have fellowship with God and to grow to maturity (1 Pet. 2:1-2). Every Christian is expected to grow in knowledge, thus helping us on to maturity (Eph. 4:11-16; Heb. 5:11-6:3). It continues to be true that "you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Jn. 8:32). Dear brother, if you disagree with the above teaching, be so kind as to tell us on which teachings of Christ we may disagree with the Bible and still have fellowship with Christ? Calvinism is raising its ugly head among us. "This self-righteous, rigid standard becomes more important than relationships with individuals." The standard which is most important to the Christian is the word of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17; Col. 3:17). As noted above, relationships with men may exist which do not have God's approval (2 John 10-11; Eph. 5:8-11). God's standard of truth is set in place for our protection against sin and to afford us the proper relationships with men and women of like faith. Appealing only to the doctrine of Christ to approve our fellowship is not "self-righteous," it is safe (cf. Phil. 3:1; 2 Pet. 1:12-15). The Calvinist does not like absolute, abiding truth (Matt. 7:21-23; Gal. 1:6-9; 1 Pet. 1:22-25). Do you? "We first check out where people stand on the issues..." Are we not under divine command to do exactly that? "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him, for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds." (2 John 10-11; cf. 1 Cor. 1:11-13; 3 John 4, 11) "...Where grace exists, so must various areas of gray." The Calvinist (i.e., Charles Swindoll) believes that grace allows us to tolerate doctrinal differences (Ibid., 231-233). And, so do some brethren. Therefore, when we appeal to absolute truth as the pattern we must apply and follow in our teachings and our lives, these brethren object. But they cannot have it both ways. If there is an absolute standard of truth, it is consistent with grace (Acts 20:24, 32; Titus 2:11-14). If grace says "be tolerant with doctrinal differences," then there cannot be an absolute standard of truth. Which will it be, brethren? The Calvinist has already told us his position. He denies doctrinal absolutes. To him, if we call for doctrinal absolutes we are "grace killers." Will you follow his steps, or the footsteps of our Savior (1 Jn. 2:5-6; Gal. 1:10)? Top of Page Return to Articles BEWARE THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES by: Joe R. Price In ancient Greece and Rome, a stage-actor was known as a "hypocrite" (the word primarily denoting "one who answers"). It was customary for Greek and Roman actors to speak in large masks with mechanical devices for augmenting the force of the voice. These masks made their voices seem to be louder than they actually were. So, the word was eventually used to describe someone who gave himself out to be something he was not, a dissembler or hypocrite (W. E. VINE, II:242). Hypocrisy is pretense, play-acting. While pretence on the stage may be harmless enough, it is another matter when it comes to the moral and spiritual realm. Did you know that every time the word "hypocrite" is found in the New Testament, it is used by the Lord Himself? In Matthew 23:3, His description of the scribes and Pharisees aptly defines hypocrisy: "they say and do not." They were religious pretenders. Jesus emphatically condemned hypocrisy. In Luke 12:1, Jesus said to His disciples: "Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy." According to Matthew 16:12, their teaching contributed to their hypocrisy. Undoubtedly, whenever they elevated their traditions to a status above the word of God, their hypocrisy was showing through (Matthew 15:3-9). You see, while they "transgress(ed) the commandment of God because of their tradition" (Matthew 15:3), they continued setting themselves forth as obedient to God! Jesus pronounces destruction upon the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23. Using it and other scriptures, please think with me about some of the characteristics of hypocrisy. These should help us to identify, repent of and avoid this dreadful sin in our lives.
by: Joe R. Price Testing doctrine is very important to every person who is interested in living by the truth of God. Truth must be known in order to be lived (cf. John 8:31-32). But, to know truth we must be willing to test what is offered to us as truth in order to determine if it is, in fact, the truth of God. The Bible teaches us to prove all things so that we may hold fast to what is good and abstain from every form of evil (1 Thessalonians 5:21-22). We should pray to abound in knowledge and discernment so that we can distinguish between what is right and what is wrong (Philippians 1:9-10). "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1). Every preacher or teacher should be willing to have his teaching examined for its accuracy (1 Timothy 4:16). Unfortunately, such is not always the case. Many people who want to live in the truth have not properly tested the doctrine they accept. Some of them test doctrine to see whether it is true by how it makes them feel (Proverbs 14:12). Others, use tradition to determine right and wrong (Matthew 15:1-3). Still others determine the validity of doctrine on the basis of human wisdom and philosophy (1 Corinthians 1:21; Colossians 2:8). Some base truth upon whether the doctrine in question is popular (Galatians 1:10). Some expect to receive a "prompting in the heart" telling them whether something is truth or error. Their eyes have been blinded so that they cannot see the light of the gospel (2 Corinthians 4:3-4). In contrast, here are biblical ways to test the accuracy of doctrine:
Jesus warned us against false prophets in Matthew 7:15-23. Please read this passage carefully. The standard we must use when testing prophets (teachers, preachers, etc.) is the will of the Father - the gospel (v. 21). It is the standard that measures every man. Everyone who does not conform to it will be rejected by Jesus (v. 23). The "fruit" the prophet bears must harmonize with the Father's will, the gospel (v. 16-20). Don't accept man's word as truth - test it with God's word! (Galatians 1:6-10) Top of Page Return to Articles
Designed by: Chuck Sibbing |
|
"All material on this web site is written by
Joe R. Price,
unless otherwise noted." |
Fellowship
