Why The Church Is Divided

Source




This is a subject I have very much wanted to address of late seeing as there continues to be so much division, even in the watching community. It shouldn't be this way. Those of us who have a genuine saving faith in Christ should be unified even if we disagree on the details. Don't get me wrong, there is a time and place for godly division, but I see many Believers dividing for the wrong reasons.



Martin Luther, John Calvin, Jacobus Arminius, John Wesley: each were godly men who loved the Lord Jesus Christ. When you read their writings you will notice that their intention was to bring Scriptural clarity and reform the Church, not necessarily to break from it entirely. Yet their followers became so enraptured with their perceived gnosis that they divided themselves into groups, breaking fellowship: "I follow Luther," and another, "I follow Wesley." What, after all, is Calvin? And what is Arminius? Only servants, through whom you came to believe.

Brothers and sisters, it should not be this way. Do you want to know why Christianity has more divisions than any other religion? The first reason is because it is the only true religion. The enemy knows this Scripture well: "If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand." This is the very reason why you don't see the enemy attempting to create more divisions within Judaism, Buddhism, or Islam. They each have only a handful of sects. They pose no threat to the enemy's plans. Yet Christianity is the genuine article and so it will expectedly be counterfeited the most. You never counterfeit fake currency.

The Apostle Paul warned against doctrinal and semantic quarreling and argumentative behavior amongst Believers, yet I see far too much of this behavior from Believers in comments, forums, and churches:



And again...




And also...



Paul doesn't tell us not to study or teach doctrines, words, genealogies, and so forth, but simply not to quarrel about them. If you can have a civil and loving conversation with a fellow Believer about a difference of opinion then you probably should, but once it becomes an argument you need to be introspective and decide if you are helping or hurting the cause of Christ by continuing the argument. Agreeing to disagree lovingly is an ability that Christians seem to have lost and I would encourage all of us (myself included) to strive to get that ability back.

Let us not be divided. We share One Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one vital mission: to reach the lost with the Gospel of Grace before the clock strikes midnight. Christians are spending so much time bickering and playing defense when the godly expectation is that we would arm ourselves for battle and storm the gates of hell.



When To Divide




Through my study of Scripture and learning from other great men of faith I can only find three legitimate reasons for division:

1. Defending the nature of God. We worship YHWH, the God of Israel. As the Scriptures and two millennia of revelation and Christian scholarship clearly show, He is One God subsisting in three Persons and Jesus is fully God. A hundred Scriptures and a myriad of scholarly and scientific discoveries confirm this truth. There will be no compromise whatsoever because any compromise could very well mean that you are worshiping a God other than YHWH and only YHWH can save.

2. Preserving the Gospel. Christ died for all of our sins, was buried, and literally rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Romans 10:1-13). Christ is the Anointed One of God and the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5). He is the only way to Heaven (John 14:6, Acts 4:12). The legalists and lawless alike reject the Atonement and therefore the Gospel, which is the only message by which anyone can be saved. Legalists preach law without grace and the lawless preach grace without faith.

3. Dealing with unrepentant sin. To understand this category you need to first have a good foundation in regards to repentance. The Greek word for "repentance" is metanoia, which means a change of heart or mind, change of conviction, or conversion. Legalists have twisted and added meaning to this word and in so doing have returned to the law and fallen from grace (Galatians 5:4). Biblical repentance is first and foremost changing your mind and believing in Christ for salvation. If you read through the book of Acts you'll find that the evangelistic methods employed by the Apostles were very different from the "turn or burn" street preachers who condemn unbelievers and Believers alike, for sin. Street preaching is great, but not if you're self-righteous and think the Gospel is too good to be true - in that case it's deadly.

Once that foundation is laid, we can differentiate between two categories of people who are unrepentant in regards to sin: the saved and the unsaved. All Believers are saved through faith (John 5:24, 6:37-39, 10:28-29, 17:9-12, Romans 4:5, 6:23, 8:38-39, Ephesians 1:13, 4:30, Philippians 1:6, Hebrews 7:25, 10:14, 1 Peter 1:4-5), but some are more carnal than others. Some will produce no works and obtain no rewards, but yet be saved (Romans 4:5, 1 Corinthians 3:11-15). Others continue to believe, but have drifted into habitual sin and will experience temporal destruction until they repent (1 Corinthians 5:5, 1 Timothy 1:20, 1 John 5:16-17).

It's also important to differentiate between the general repentance of sin that all Believers have by humbling themselves and acknowledging that they are sinners in need of a Savior (Luke 15:21, 18:13, 1 John 1:9) and the repentance of specific sins that all Believers continue to struggle with. The former general repentance is necessary for salvation because it is synonymous with believing the Gospel. Carnal or cultural Christians who have never humbly acknowledged their sinfulness and need for Christ should be weary because they may never have understood or believed the Gospel. On the other hand, every Believer who has ever lived, Peter and Paul included, continued to struggle with the flesh and had to repeatedly and continually repent, not for salvation, but for fellowship and in response to God's loving discipline (Romans 7:7-25, 2 Corinthians 12:7-9, James 3:2, 1 John 1:8-2:1). Sinless perfection happens upon glorification in Heaven (1 Corinthians 15:50-57, Colossians 3:4, 1 John 3:2) not here on earth. Legalists who tell you otherwise have deceived themselves and are practicing falsehood.

So division is necessary when someone claims to be a Christian, but has clearly never repented (changed their mind) and believed the Gospel. Their rotten fruit is evident either by their sins of legalism or lawlessness.

In the second scenario where a genuine Believer is struggling with sin, division may also be necessary. If they are broken over their sin and ask for forgiveness then you should forgive them (Matthew 18:21-22, 18:35). When there is genuine repentance then fellowship isn't broken. If you've been in Christian community for any length of time you'll realize that forgiveness and reconciliation are a normal part of life. We can't condemn and isolate ourselves from one another every time someone sins or else Christian community would not be possible. Legalists isolate themselves and pride themselves on their supposedly superior morals and gnosis, but we know we are all broken and desperately in need of Christ.

However, if you lovingly rebuke a sinning brother and they do not change their mind then winsomely, lovingly rebuke them again, when necessary by taking another Believer along with you or bringing the issue before the Church. If unrepentance continues then have nothing to do with him (Matthew 18:16-17, Titus 3:10), but if he returns to you in repentance then receive them in love (Luke 15:11-32, Philemon 1:15-18).

If you are causing divisions in the Church for some reason other than the above three reasons, you might need to seriously consider if it is you that Paul speaks of in Romans 16:17 and Titus 3:10.



When To Unite: A Theology Of Everything




Have you heard of the theory of everything? It is the most sought after prize in physics: the discovery of a single, unifying framework that can accurately explain the underlying reality of the physical universe - specifically a theory that can unify the seemingly incompatible theories of general relativity and quantum field theory.

Theology, like physics, seeks a similar prize: a theology of everything. There are many competing theories: Calvinism and Arminianism, faith and works, eternal security and conditional salvation, Conditionalism and Naturalism, pre-trib and post-trib, and on and on and on. Systematic theologians often, but not always, argue their side in a vacuum and therein lies the problem.

A quick Google search can find you exactly what you want to hear. If you're a Calvinist then you can find dozens of articles listing out dozens of verses that would seem to make Calvinism a sure thing. But wait, a slight change in search terms and you can find articles that list out verses that seem to say just the opposite.



We are so uncomfortable with mystery and tension that we find the answer most suitable and stick to that no matter what someone else says (2 Timothy 4:3). The truth of the matter is that there really is doctrinal and theological tension in the Bible on a number of issues. The person who thinks they've figured it all out has been deceived. The more we study the more we learn, but we won't understand all of God's truth until glory:



So when it comes down to it, as stated earlier, there are three absolute truths in Scripture on which we can never under any circumstances compromise: 1. the nature of God, 2. The truth of the Gospel, and 3. the nature of sin. We have to remember that it is Christ Himself (through faith) who gives us life, not the Scriptures (John 5:39-40). But how do we handle everything else? Three verses give us the answer:




And...




And also...




So how do we handle the non-essentials? The answer: by trusting that what God says is true. All of it. My systematic theology is that God's Word is literally true and He does not lie (John 17:17, Numbers 23:19). That's it. There are no qualifiers. I said at the beginning of this article that the first reason Christianity is divided is because the enemy is putting forth his best efforts to divide it. The second reason is because Christians are not trusting what the Scriptures plainly say. I firmly believe that you can attribute the vast majority of divisions to textual liberality, but there are a few exceptions that I'll explain later.

The practical application of this method of reading the Scriptures is twofold:

1. What a particular passage or verse says is literally true, unless another passage or verse clarifies that what was written was a parable, symbol, or idiom, in which case the clarifying Scripture stands.


2. If the prima facie reading of different Scriptures appears to cause a contradiction then one of the two passages has an alternative literal meaning.

I'll explain how I apply this method to the faith vs works debate. Let's take the books of Romans, Philippians, and James for example. Legalists often offer up James 2 and Philippians 2:12 as chief proof-texts of their beliefs:




The Roman Catholic Church has heavily relied on this Scripture to defend their decision in the sixth session of the Council of Trent that condemns those who believe in sola fide (faith alone) and separated from its context and other Scriptures it would seem to back their decision. The problem is that other Scriptures state emphatically the exact opposite such as Ephesians 2:8-9, Galatians 2:16, Romans 3:28, and Romans 4:5:



If you then try to mix faith and works in some way you end up with a mess and fall from grace:



And...



We have a problem. There is a seeming contradiction between James 2:24 and Romans 4:5. The legalist errs by reading James 2:24 in a vacuum and ignoring Romans 4:5, but others err by ignoring James 2:24. What gives?

We have to ask ourselves if one of the two Scriptures has another clarifying Scripture or if it can be read literally in another light. The words and context of Romans 4:5 give us no room to maneuver, but James 2:24 does. The first reason is that James 2:24 itself does not specify if the justification is before God, before man, or before oneself. Either interpretation would allow for a literal reading of the text. The second reason is that James 2:14 clarifies how we should understand James 2:24:


This verse is James' opening statement in his discourse on faith and works and we learn that the object of his attack is not a genuine saving faith apart from works, but the claim to have faith when one's works are evidence the claim is false. The Greek word legē ("says") is the key here for without it the verse would be translated "...if someone has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?" According to many other Scriptures the answer would be an emphatic, "Yes!" (John 3:18, 5:24, Acts 10:43, 13:39, 15:11, Romans 3:28, 4:5, 9:30, Galatians 2:21, 3:11, 5:6, Ephesians 2:8-9, and many more).

So what we learn is that legalists are actually not reading the Scriptures literally enough for a literal reading of James 2:24 in light of James 2:14 would convey the idea that the justification spoken of here is not a justification before God, but before oneself or other men - a justification of the claim to have faith.

To wrap up this example, let's look at the other oft-cited verse in the debate, which is Philippians 2:12:


We were born fleshly and all too often we let our emotions control us, but God's Word tells us that "the heart is deceitful above all things" (Jeremiah 17:9) and so we must not read into Scripture our emotional response to it, but instead read it from the conviction of faith and a sound mind. God's Word is truth, but our feelings about it are often not. As a person who struggled with fear and despair I would latch on to verses like this at the expense of dozens, even hundreds of other verses that would otherwise give assurance of salvation, but again, they are all true. So the key to Philippians 2:12, like the rest of Scripture, is simply to believe what it says. It does not say "earn your own salvation," it says "work out [plural] your own [plural] salvation." The pronoun heautōn ("your own") and the verb katergazesthe ("work out") are both in the plural and so the idea is conveyed to the collective Christian community rather than the individual Christian. In other words, let the collective strive for or work to accomplish the practical implications of salvation (you can read more about this here). Words matter and the Christian who says otherwise is not fully trusting God's Word.

So how does this theology of everything affect the various theological debates?

Calvinism versus Arminianism: The same Word that says "the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart" (Exodus 9:12) also says "Pharaoh hardened his heart" (Exodus 8:32). Both Scriptures are true. God is completely sovereign (Acts 17:26, Romans 9:14-24) yet real human free will exists (Deuteronomy 30:19, Joshua 24:15, Proverbs 16:9, Ezekiel 18:30-32, John 17:17, Galatians 5:13, 2 Peter 3:9, Revelation 3:20). I say both are true. Why can't Almighty God create a universe in which He is completely sovereign and Believers are predestined (Romans 8:29) yet humans also have real free will? Suggesting that He can't create a universe like that would be to say not all things are possible with Him (Matthew 19:26).

Limited versus Unlimited Atonement: The death of Christ was a single sacrifice made for all, both Believers and unbelievers (Hebrews 10:12, 1 Timothy 4:10, 1 John 2:2, 4:14), so in this sense I cannot square some interpretations of the Calvinist doctrine of limited atonement with the Bible, but I realize some Calvinists like R.C. Sproul recognize the Scriptural deficiency here and agree that "limited atonement" is a misleading belief. In my view, when we accept all of the relevant Scriptures rather than reading some in a vacuum, a distinction is made between the Atonement itself and receiving the Atonement. The Atonement itself quite literally paid for the sins of everyone who ever lived, yet it is a gift that must be received by faith (Romans 6:23, Ephesians 2:8) and if it is rejected it has no effect. Yet in some sense Believers were predestined (Romans 8:29), so like the previous debate, I say both are true.

Eternal Security versus Conditional Salvation: There is clearly one condition for salvation, which is a present active tense genuine saving faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ (John 3:18, 3:36, Romans 10:4, 9, 11, 1 Corinthians 15:2, Galatians 2:16), so on the one hand salvation is conditional. On the other hand, a myriad of Scriptures are evidence of eternal security (John 5:24, 6:37-39, 10:28-29, 17:9-12, Romans 4:5, 6:23, 8:38-39, Ephesians 1:13, 4:30, Philippians 1:6, Hebrews 7:25, 10:14, 1 Peter 1:4-5). Once again, both are true. I've seen so many one-sided websites and articles that list out every conceivable verse for one side or the other, but gloss over the literally dozens of other Scriptures that the other side uses! One side in this debate in particular condemns the other side relentlessly, but both present solid Scriptures. Brothers and sisters, love one another.

Pre-Trib versus Post-Trib: If I had a dollar for every time someone told me that the rapture is not in the Bible I would be a rich man (well maybe not rich, but I could buy one really fancy dinner). It clearly is (John 14:2-3, 1 Thessalonians 4:17, Revelation 12:5) unless you want to argue that verses like 1 Thessalonians 4:17 don't mean what they plainly say. The post-trib proof-text is Matthew 24:29-31 ("after the tribulation of those days... they will gather his elect"). People cite that Scripture to me as evidence against a pre-tribulational rapture quite often, but I have to kindly remind them that pre-tribbers also believe in a post-tribulational resurrection and gathering of saints (martyred Tribulation Saints, the remaining Jewish remnant, and living Tribulation Saints if any - see Daniel 12:12-13, Revelation 12:17, 20:4-5). Again, Scriptures don't exist in a vacuum - it's like the Christians who only read the red letters. God's Word is truth - all of it. I see no way around a pre-trib rapture, it just is what it is (Isaiah 26:19-21, Luke 21:36, John 14:2-3, Revelation 3:10, 4:1, 12:5), but as mentioned above, there is also a post-trib rapture of sorts, so in a sense they are both true.

In summary, there are bits of Scriptural truth in all of the above beliefs, but God and His Word are bigger than all of them. So long as these differences of interpretation don't drift into one of the three categories in the previous section, we need to remain united in love and humbly recognize that not one of us have all of the details figured out. Focusing on certain Scriptures while ignoring others is why we have division. Let us love one another despite our differences because in the end, our love will count more than our gnosis. It is love that is the mark of a true Christian, not his intellect or biblical expertise.




Internet Christianity is failing in the mission and defiling the testimony because we are continually bickering with one another and priding ourselves on what we think we know better than the next guy. I may disagree with other Christians on many things, but I am called to pursue them in love in order that the world might believe that Jesus is the Messiah (John 17:20-23).



A Big God




The Scriptures reveal the mind of Almighty God and His ways are so much higher than our ways (Isaiah 55:8-9, Job 11:7, 36:26). His Word is perfect and true and so we must first and foremost trust what it literally says as much as we possibly can. Our quarrels and divisions are usually caused by some lack of faith in God or His Word because whatever is not of faith is sin (Romans 14:23).

Too many of us read the Bible like it's a step-by-step IKEA manual, when in reality it is so much more. All too often we think God is just two or three dimensional, which is why doctrines like sovereignty and free will cause so many arguments. Each side fails to see the truth of the other. Our God is a big God. God isn't two or three dimensional - He is a hyperdimensional super-being. Nothing is impossible for Him. We have only scratched the surface of the truth of God, but insofar as He has revealed Himself through His Word we need to trust what He has revealed.

The Bible itself is multi-dimensional. It has layer upon layer upon layer. There are a number of prophecies that have already been fulfilled multiple times yet we isolate Scriptures and treat them like they exist in a vacuum and can have only one application. If you've been reading our articles for any length of time then you've probably picked up on the fact that the Bible is filled with shadows, types, numbers, unexpected connections, and mysteries. It's a treasure trove that's waiting for the faithful and humble of heart to discover (Psalm 138:6, Proverbs 25:2, 29:23, Matthew 11:25), but you must first accept what it says on its own terms.

Lastly, I must fundamentally disagree with labels like "Calvinist" or "Baptist" or "Fundamentalist", which serve only to divide the One invisible Body of Christ:



There are only three legitimate reasons for division within Christianity: defending the nature of God, preserving the Gospel, and dealing with unrepentant sin, but the majority of divisions appear to be over the non-essentials accompanied by endless quarreling and lack of humility. As the precious Body which God bought with His own blood (Acts 20:28), we must do better. Love one another: