Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

In this series of articles, I have been trying to call attention to the factional mindset that is sometimes creates division and dissension in the Lord’s churches. In trying to identify factionalism, I am listing several characteristics of the factional brother. Factionalism is difficult for us to identify because it flies under beautiful banners — “standing for the truth,” “defending the faith,” or “opposing liberalism.” Because none of us wishes to discourage loyalty to the truth, we sometimes are too tolerant of the factional man. By the time one recognizes the dam- age he is doing, the time may have already passed to stop his divisive ways. We hope that listing these attributes of the factional mindset will be helpful in identifying those who are dividing churches so that sinful division can be stopped.

1. The factional man has no place in his thinking for any present day issues that fall into the category of Romans 14. A factional man can usually correctly explain the meaning of Romans 14 and make correct application of the text to the issues described in Romans 14 and other New Testament issues (such as circumcision, forbidding to marry, etc.). However, he is not able to identify anything that he believes as a Romans 14 issue. Everything he believes is a matter of faith with which no one can disagree and be faithful to the Lord. Romans 14 was originally written to meet this very challenge.

2. The factional man makes every judgment decision with which he does not agree tantamount to apostasy. In areas of application, a factional brother tends to make every judgment issue a test of one’s faithfulness to God. In a case where two brethren are united on a principle of truth but disagree over whether another man is a mistaken believer or a false teacher on the same point, the factional brother’s judgment must be the correct one and all those who disagree are compromisers violating 2 John 9-11. Such a brother is willing to divide a church over his judgment about the other man because everyone who disagrees with him is a liberal apostate.

3. The factional man has trouble understanding that general authority is just as surely Bible authority for an action as is specific authority. Certainly this has been true historically. Those who created dissension in the church over multiple containers, Bible classes, and located preachers were looking for a specific example of a church having a Bible class, using multiple containers, or a preacher working with a church with elders. General authority in these areas was not judged adequate.

4. The factional man can justify sinful conduct under the banner of “standing for the truth.” Everyone would agree that such things as envying, strife, and division are works of the flesh (1 Cor. 3:3). All would agree that “hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies” are works of the flesh (Gal. 5:20). However, these sinful behaviors can be obviously practiced in the heat of pressing one’s opinion to the point of dividing the church and all of them be justified under the banner, “He was standing for the truth.” Standing for the truth does not produce sinful fruit. If strife, seditions, and heresies are occurring in the local church, those who are guilty are not “standing for the truth,” without regard to the issue before them. Where the fruit of one’s “stand for the truth” is a refusal to speak to one’s brother, driving brethren into parties, destroying elderships, destroying men’s desire to serve as elders and preachers or even be a Christian, and such like things, one can rest assured that this is not “standing for the truth.” Jesus taught that one should judge a tree by its fruits (Matt. 7:15-16). These are not the fruit that the truth produces.

5. The factional man majors in minors and is out of balance (Matt. 23:23). Regarding the Pharisees, Jesus said, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone” (Matt. 23:23). Factional men tend to develop telescopic vision — all that they see is the one issue on which they are focused. A man may be a godly brother who studies his Bible daily, has raised a godly family, serves in the local church in every capacity he can, and otherwise devotes himself to the Lord. All that the factional man sees is that he disagrees with him on this one issue, which he impatiently and dogmatically demands be resolved to his personal satisfaction. The efforts of elders, preachers, and other mature members to address the problem are ignored or belittled as “compromise.” With a bulldog mentality, the factional brother charges everyone with “sin” who does not embrace his agenda and his campaign against the brother with whom he differs. He will press that issue to the point that he runs off from the local congregation such God-fearing men. His pet opinion means more to him than his brother does, so he will sacrifice the fellowship of his brother to elevate his opinion.

6. The factional man acts morally superior. Because of his evaluation of his opinion as the test of all righteous ness, the factional man will look upon himself as morally superior to his brethren who disagree with his pet opinion. Regarding this attitude, Paul warned, “Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. And if any man think that he knoweth anything, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know” (1 Cor. 8:1-2). If such a man knew anything about the Scriptures, he would not destroy his brother for whom Christ died by his opinions. Of course, this man can rationalize what this Scripture teaches by convincing himself that his opinion is “what the Scriptures teach,” not “opinion.”

7. The factional man exalts his opinions over righteousness, peace and joy (Rom. 14:17). Paul wrote, “For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteous- ness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost” (Rom. 14:17). For the factional man, his opinion with reference to his pet theory, is worth destroying the peace and joy of the local church.

8. The factional man refuses to receive those whom God receives (3 John 9). John described the conduct of Di- otrephes saying, “I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church” (3 John 9-10). Factional men are long on emphasizing 2 John 9-11 but have virtually no understanding of the teaching of 3 John 9-10. Elsewhere Jesus said, “And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea” (Matt. 18:5-6). The offence under consideration in this text is the unwillingness to receive one of Christ’s little ones. In another text, this incident is reported:

And he took a child, and set him in the midst of them: and when he had taken him in his arms, he said unto them, Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me. And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part (Mark 9:36-40).

The sin that the disciples were guilty of was refusing to receive one of God’s children. The factional man commits this sin every time he draws a line of fellowship against one of God’s children that God has not drawn.

9. The factional man is legalistic in his approach to salvation. He believes salvation and fellowship with God and other brethren are conditioned upon perfect knowledge and obedience to a selective set of standards which he determines (selective because his own failures must be rationalized). The factional mindset makes one’s salvation conditional upon perfect understanding of and perfect obedience to everything in God’s word, ignoring the vital distinctions between matters of faith and of personal conscience, between absolute commands and relative areas of growth, between a process of rejection of truth and a process of growth and maturity, and similar truths. He may deny that he believes in perfectionism, but he surely cannot have an on-going fellowship with a sincerely mistaken brother who disagrees with him about his opinion on a particular point. Regardless of all other scriptural considerations, the mistaken brother is regarded as a false teacher who must be driven from the fellowship of the local church.

10. The factional man is self-righteous. Closely associated with the legalistic approach to salvation is his self-righteous attitude. Such a person cannot have fellow- ship with those who disagree with him about his opinion. He cannot invite such people into his home or participate in the various collective activities in the local church with one who disagrees with him about his opinion. Doing this would be tantamount to violating 2 John 9-11 in his mind. Therefore, he draws an ever-narrowing circle of people with whom he can legitimately have fellowship.

11. The factional man is inconsistent. Despite his best efforts to be consistent, the factional man cannot consistently apply his factional beliefs. Inevitably he will find a way to fellowship those involved in some mistaken beliefs but not to have fellowship with others who have other mistaken beliefs. Somehow he will rationalize in his mind the reason why he can fellowship those who are guilty of holding some wrong beliefs but cannot fellowship those who are mistaken about his pet opinion.

12. The factional man works to line people up with his view. He will work the phones or go out to lunch with various members of the church and express his concern about serious problems in the church of which he is a member. Soon he has contacted and influenced such a significant group in the local church that he has created a faction. His group is lined up against another group. He has created schism in the body of Christ that will probably lead to division.

Conclusion

A factional brother may not portray every one of these character traits and there may be other character traits that I have omitted. However, one cannot deny that, as a body of Christians, we have trouble with factionalism from time to time. We need to address the problem, in the pulpit, in Bible classes, and in journals such as this. If this series stirs others to study what the Scriptures say about the problem of factionalism and begin preaching about it, its purpose will have been served. Perhaps we can stop need- less and destructive factionalism from destroying another congregation.

A Word of Caution

Let me add an important word of caution. False teachers may quote some part of this series on factionalism out of context in an effort to find comfort for their liberal-minded departures from the truth, in a bid for peace at any price, or in an effort to counteract our past opposition to their error. In the first century, false teachers used the same tactics. Let this serve notice to those who may do so that we are as firm today in our affirmation of every truth and our denial of every false doctrine as we ever have been. We are as deter- mined now as ever before to “fight the good fight of faith,” to be “set for the defense of the gospel,” and to uproot error and bring “into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (1 Tim. 6:12; Phil. 1:17; 2 Cor. 10:5).

The point of this series is this: we are as set to defend the truth of the gospel against factionalism as much as against liberal-minded departures, or any other form of sin. “Preaching the kingdom of God” means preaching “all the counsel of God” so that we may receive “an inheritance among all them which are sanctified” (Acts 20:25-32).

By Weldon E. Warnock

Sheep need a shepherd, and, since the disciples of Jesus are sheep, they need a shepherd. Jesus said to Peter, “Feed my sheep” (John 21:17). Our Lord also said. “Other sheep I have which are not of this fold (John 10:16). Jesus is the chief shepherd (1 Pet. 5: 4). A chief shepherd implies subordinate shepherds. These shepherds are the elders of the local churches.

Paul told the Ephesian elders, “Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made ye overseers, to feed the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood” (Acts 20:28). Here, the elders are told to take heed to the flock and to feed (shepherd) the church of God. Peter, who was also an elder in the church, told fellow elders to “feed (shepherd) the flock of God among you” (1 Pet. 5:1-2).

Every congregation needs shepherds. When Paul returned on his first missionary journey, he ordained or appointed elders in every church (Acts 14:23). This was done in a matter of months after these churches were established. Churches go today for years and still no shepherds. Something is wrong, somewhere. Let us notice why churches need shepherds.

1. To lead the flock. Jesus said of the shepherd, “And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice” (John 10:41). The Lord, as a shepherd, leadeth beside the still waters (Ps. 23:2). Elders are leaders in the church. We read, “Obey them that have the rule over you” (Heb. 13:17). The word “rule” means “lead.” The New American Standard Bible renders this verse, “Obey your leaders.” Inept leaders have the flock grazing on the same barren territory forever. They never enter the green pastures. If such happens, it is by accident. Incompetent shepherds allow the church to get in the rut of just “keeping house for the Lord.”

2. Know the flock. A good shepherd knows his sheep. Jesus said, “I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine” (John 10:14). He even knows them by name. “To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out” (John 10:3).

Elders in the church must know every member. They must be aware of their weaknesses, shortcomings, strengths, and abilities. They need to know when they are absent and why they are absent. Elders must not operate as an executive board of some business, but as loving shepherds of the flock. When a sheep goes astray a good shepherd “leaves the ninety and nine in the wilderness and goes after that which is lost, until he finds it” (Luke 15:4). When a member errs from the way, elders, with a sense of urgency, must go and find them and bring them back to the safety of the fold.

3. To care for the flock. Paul wrote, stating the qualifications of elders, “For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God” (1 Tim. 3:5)? Faithfully caring for the church is acting as a good steward. Paul calls an elder “a steward of God” (Tit. 1:7). A steward is a caretaker of another’s property. The church is the possession of God. The Bible calls the church the flock of God (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:2). Peter calls the church, “God’s heritage” (1 Pet. 5:3). Hence, the church does not belong to the shepherds to lord over it, to do always as they please without ever considering the wishes of the church. The church does not belong to the preacher, or a few members in the church.

Caring for the church involves providing for the needs of the church. This would entail feeding, encouraging, and developing, both collectively and individually.

4. Watch the flock. There are always impending dangers facing the church. Elders need to be vigilant and alert, watching or guarding the flock. Paul said to the Ephesian elders, “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter among you, not sparing the flock . . . therefore watch” (Acts 20:29-31). Shepherds should know current heresies, and the trends leading in that direction. No perverter of the gospel must ever be allowed in the pulpit or in the classroom to corrupt the minds of the brethren from the simplicity that is in Christ. Factionists and trouble makers must be marked and avoided (Rom. 16:17-18; Tit. 3:10). This is why elders are to be apt to teach, holding fast the faithful word that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and convince the gainsayers (Tit. 1:9).

The author of Hebrews writes that the elders (leaders, shepherds) watch for our souls. “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief” (Heb. 13:17). When members miss services, are overcome by temptation, plan questionable marriages, attend improper places, or are filled with animosity and hostility toward others, the shepherds must deal with these things promptly, prudently, and patiently. Sheep without a shepherd are prone to be scattered about. When Jesus “saw the multitudes, he had compassion on them, because they fainted and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd” (Matt. 9:36). There are some shepherds, unfortunately, who have not the flock at heart. “Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the Lord” (Jer. 23:1).

Business Meetings as Substitutes

Business meetings of the men are sometimes substituted for shepherds (pastors) in the church. In a few places even the sisters sit in on the business meetings to help make the decisions for the church. The women take too much upon themselves when they exercise such authority (1 Tim. 2:12). And when there are men qualified to be elders, the men take too much upon themselves to use so-called business meetings as a replacement for God’s ordained plan of elders in every church.

There is nothing wrong with business meetings in the church when there are no elders. This would be a necessity to expedite the work of the church. But this arrangement should be only temporary. Of course, in a small congregation there may be no men who can qualify , and the church could go on for years without elders. But many times brethren just do not want elders, although there are two or more men who qualify. One of the basic reasons for this is so the men who don’t qualify will not have to surrender control to two or three of the men who become elders. The unqualified brethren don’t seem to mind to be a part of a group of men in business meetings who make decisions that they refuse to surrender to two or three men who are far more wise, able, and devoted to Christ.

In business meetings there are men of various ages, from perhaps a sixteen year-old to whatever. There may be new converts, those who are ignorant about the Bible, the carnal minded, the fickle, the frivolous, the extremists, and the pessimists, who may sit in these business meetings to lead the church in its great and glorious work. For example, one young, misguided brother who was taking an untenable position in a business meeting, said in response to an older brother, who had quoted a statement from the apostle Paul, “Who do you think Paul was, the Pope?” Fortunately, most business meetings have wise and level-headed brethren in them who steer them in the right direction. However, under the most favorable circumstances it is very difficult, or nearly impossible, to take care of the spiritual needs of the members of the church in these kinds of business meetings.

Brethren, God knew what he was doing when, in his wisdom, he ordained that each local congregation have shepherds. Paul left Titus in Crete that he might appoint elders in every city (Tit. 1:5). The churches in Judea had elders (Acts 11:30), the Jerusalem church is said to have elders (Acts 15:4), the churches established on Paul’s first missionary journey (Acts 14:23), the Ephesian church (Acts 20:17), the church at Philippi (Phil 1:1) and those churches to whom Peter addressed his first epistle (1 Pet. 5:1) all had elders.

Yes, the churches of our Lord need shepherds!

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr. 

“Children of light” are assigned three re- sponsibilities:

1. . . . must prove what is acceptable unto the Lord;

2. . . . must have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness;

3. . . . must reprove (ex- pose) the works of darkness.

I n the first par t of Ephesians chapter 5, the Apostle Paul contrasts the “children of light” (v. 8) with the “children of disobedience”(v.6). Light stands for all that is in harmony with God’s will, with darkness being the very opposite. “Children of light” are the same as children of obedience. “Children of disobedience” the same as children of darkness. In verses 8 through 11, “children of light” are assigned three responsibilities:

1. Children of light must prove what is acceptable unto the Lord (v. 10). There are two basic senses in which something may be proven: (1) “To establish the truth or validity of by presentation of argument or evidence” and (2) “To determine the quality of by testing; try out.” (Microsoft Bookshelf 98, Dictionary) In the first instance one proves a proposition by appealing to the objective evidence that sustains it. In spiritual matters, this evidence would be the Scriptures. In second instance, after one has proven the proposition by objective evidence, he may then “prove” its worthiness by putting it to the test in practice. It is this sense that “proving” is used in verse 10. Vincent says the meaning in this verse is that of “proving by your walk” (Word Studies of the New Testament, III:399).

“Children of light,” having already proven or established their walk to be in the light by the evidence, must now continually prove it in the second sense – experimentally by “proving (it) by (their) walk.” It is much like the old saying, “The proof of the pudding is in the eating.” Romans 12:2 suggests the same idea: “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and accept- able, and perfect, will of God.” (Italics mine, eob).

Children of light must actively and constructively prove (walk in) “what is” acceptable, not merely oppose what is not acceptable. We cannot just be “aginners” (a-gin-urs) — yes, I know that word is not in the dictionary, but it ought to be.

There are church responsibilities to meet, such as public worship (Heb. 10:25; Acts 20:7), doing one’s share of the church’s work (Eph. 4:16), and helping set in order things lacking (Tit. 1:5). There are personal responsibilities to meet, such as personal evangelism (Acts 8:4), caring for the needy (Jas. 1:27) and other daily obligations of life that must be met — such as financial obligations (Rom. 13:8; 1 Tim. 5:8; Eph. 4:28; 2 Thess. 3:10), home duties (Eph. 5:22-

6:4), civic and civil functions (Rom. 13:1-5). When we faithfully practice these things were are “proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.”

We must prove what is acceptable unto the Lord — not ourselves, not our families, not our brethren, not our neighbors, but the Lord.

2. Children of light must have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness (v. 11). Back in verse 7, Paul writes, “Be not ye therefore partakers with them”—“them” being the “children of disobedience” (v. 6). One may have fellowship with a per- son or thing by joint-participation or partnership according to the basic meaning of the word “fellowship.” Or, he may have fellowship by way of endorsement or encouragement as is suggested by the “right hand of fellowship” (Gal. 2:9).

One must have no fellowship (joint- participation or encouragement) with the children of disobedience in either moral (Eph. 5:3-5) or doctrinal darkness (2 John 9-11). As children of light, we must not fellowship false doctrine (either its teaching or practice), in or out of the church. Nor can we fellowship immorality (fornication, adultery, homosexuality, etc), either in or out of a marriage relationship.

3. Children of light must reprove (expose — New King James) the works of darkness (v. 11). Christians cannot claim faithfulness simply because they do not jointly participate with children of disobedience in their darkness, or simply because they don’t overtly endorse or encourage them in their works. We must go a step further and reprove or expose the sins for what they are. Gideon (Judg. 6) did not merely refuse to join in the idol worship of his father, nor did he simply refrain from openly encouraging his father’s idols, nor did he merely build up the Lord’s al- tar and leave his father’s idols alone. He got busy and destroyed the false gods and the means of sacrificing to them. Under the Christian dispensation we are not to destroy the physical property of those engaged in false religion and immoral practices — like those who burn church buildings or bomb abortion clinics. The Christian’s weapons are not carnal, but are spiritual “casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing ever y thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5, NK J — italics mine, eob).

Churches are not sound simply for not being direct partakers with “children of disobedience.” Often elders and other brethren will console themselves, by saying something like this, “We do not go along with that doctrine or practice and we do not endorse it in any way.” Yet, if one gets in the pulpit and really exposes the false doctrines, practices, and teachers for what they are, these same brethren act like they are sit- ting in a bed of fire ants. As long as the opposition is passive and quiet they feel comfortable because the cost of their opposition is minimal, but when it becomes active and open the stakes are raised consider- ably.

So, while they claim to not jointly participate in the matters under consideration, they do not want anything openly said against them. When a church claims to be “straight” on the issues that separate us from the denominations, the institutional issues, the marriage-divorce-remarriage issue, the progressive creation issue (the doctrine that the creation days were long periods of indefinite length or that there were long periods of indefinite length between the days, that has been floating around lately among brethren), or any other issue that is vital to the faith, it might be good to ask a few questions. If you do not participate or encourage these doctrines and those that teach them, then do you encourage the local preacher to expose them plainly for what they are? Do you allow and/or encourage your Bible classes to be used to expose them? Do you invite preachers for meetings who are known to speak kindly and plainly against these errors, exposing them in such a way that there can be no doubt what these errors are about nor any doubt where that congregation stands.

Individual Christians and churches must be busy doing those things acceptable unto the Lord. At the same, time they must refuse to partake of sinful doctrines and practices in any way. Then, they must go a step further and expose sin and error for what it is. This would not be necessary if sin always appeared to be what it really is on the surface. It must be exposed by shining the light of the gospel on it — by takage them in their works. We must go a step further and reprove or expose the sins for what they are. Gideon (Judg. 6) did not merely refuse to join in the idol worship of his father, nor did he simply refrain from openly encouraging his father’s idols, nor did he merely build up the Lord’s al- tar and leave his father’s idols alone. He got busy and destroyed the false gods and the means of sacrificing to them. Under the Christian dispensation we are not to destroy the physical property of those engaged.

When it is pointed out that certain things are not binding today, someone says, “But, it’s perpetual,” which means, it has not ceased, they say. Let’s take a look at such reasoning:

A Perpetual Sabbath

The Seventh Day Adventists tell us that the sabbath day is still binding because it is a perpetual sabbath. They will quote, “Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant” (Exod. 31:16). It is reasoned that since the sabbath is perpetual, it is like perpetual motion, never ceasing. To be consistent with this reasoning, they would have to burn incense as well, for the Scriptures say, “And when Aaron lighteth the lamps at even, he shall burn incense upon it, a perpetual incense before the Lord throughout your generations” (Exod. 30:8). These folks do not burn incense. Why not, since it is perpetual? According to Leviticus 6:20, “. . . the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a meat offering perpetual.” If perpetual means without end, why don’t folks offer meat offerings and burnt offerings today?

God Often Limits Perpetual Things

A reading of Exodus 30:8 will show that these perpetual incense and burnt offerings were to be observed “throughout your generations.” This places a time limit on these Old Testament affairs. When the nation of Israel ended, so did their law, ordinances, sabbath and all! Paul told the Romans, “For Christ is the end of the law” (Rom. 10:4). We live today under the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2; John 1:17).

The rainbow covenant was said to be perpetual. In this promise God said, “And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of the flood; neither shall there anymore be a flood to destroy the earth. And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations” (Gen. 9:11-12). This promise will continue uninterrupted as long as this earth stands. It’s perpetual until time shall be no more. Then, it will end. It’s that simple.