|
Danville Enlightener VOL. VIII, No. 46
Rodney King's Church Problem Solving MethodA brother told me the congregation with which he worships is in the throes of doctrinal problems; some want to implement unscriptural innovations, while others are resisting. There have been several heated discussions and debates. Frictions have led to factions. Basically there are two churches within one. One “church” believes that the congregation ought to be supporting human institutions. It also disapproves of practicing congregational discipline; this group also believes that one may divorce and remarry multiple times regardless of cause. The other “church” (a minority he said) rejects the support of human institutions, believes in and tries to practice congregational discipline, and believes and teaches that fornication is the only cause for divorce. Business meetings have become donnybrooks; classes digress into petty personal viewpoints with very little Bible being either respected or taught. Recently one man who has decided to “straddle” the proverbial fence said this: “These problems can easily be solved by simply agreeing to just get along and stop bickering.” Is this a scriptural approach to solving doctrinal problems within a local church? The answer is NO! While division is deplorable (Jn 17:20-21), so is compromise (2 Cor 6:14-18). This kind of “let’s just all agree to get along” is what I call the Rodney King approach to church problem solving. Now, just in case you have no clue as to whom I refer, let me brief you. In 1991 someone videotaped local thug and petty criminal Rodney King being beaten by some Los Angeles police officers. This beating was shown many times on national television leading to deadly riots, especially when the officers involved were acquitted of wrong doing. The four officers were acquitted of most criminal charges in 1992, triggering rioting in Los Angeles, and neighboring cities that left 55 people dead and caused $1 billion in property damage.
However, he continued to have run-ins with the law. In 2004, he was ordered to spend 120 days in jail and ordered into treatment after pleading guilty to driving under the influence of the drug PCP after he lost control of his SUV in 2003 and slammed into a power pole in Rialto, CA, and more recently he was shot two or three times from a distance by birdshot fired from a shotgun. During the height of tensions King trying to discourage the rioting made this observation: “Why can’t we all just get along?” Ignoring the facts of the case, King just wanted everyone to get along. Forgetting his drug use, his fleeing from the police and the acquittal of the officers, the fifty-five dead, and all the property damage – let’s just get along. I find the King approach woefully inadequate when dealing with social injustice, and I find it completely unscriptural when addressing doctrinal matters within local churches. “Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment,” (1 Cor 1:10). Notice when Paul was addressing all the doctrinal issues plaguing the Corinthian church he did not tell them: “You need to agree to just get along.” Instead Paul told them to “speak the same thing,” and be of the “same mind,” and be of the “same judgment.” This would solve the divisions among them. In order for there to be peace and unity within a local church the membership must unite upon the teaching of the Bible. All that is believed must be found in the Bible; all that is spoken must be found in the Bible. When the Bible is not consulted, believed, or taught then there can never be unity or peace. Are there opinions that Christians may hold that are not held by others? Yes! Are there differences of opinions held by Christians within the same local church? Yes! But this cannot be twisted to include doctrinal subjects. Paul discusses these matters of opinion in Romans 14. Here is Paul’s example of this: “For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him,” (Rom 14:2-3). God
has
not
regulated
whether
a
Christian
must
be
a
vegetarian
or
carnivorous.
If
one
has
the
opinion
he
should
only
eat
vegetables;
he
must
not
disrupt
the
peace
and
unity
of
a
congregation
over
his
opinion.
And
neither
can
the
man
who
is
of
the
opinion
he
can
eat
meat
disrupt
the
peace
and
unity
of
a
local
church.
It
is
true
that
in
the
matter
of
eating
or
not
eating
meat,
these
two
brothers
are
not
speaking
the
same
thing.
However,
they
are
using
the
same
standard
as
the
basis
of
their
judgment.
“He
who
eats,
eats
to
the
Lord,
for
he
gives
God
thanks;
and
he
who
does
not
eat Opinions can only be formed about a thing that God is indifferent about; things about which He has not spoken. Those things that God has revealed that we are to observe or avoid are not matters that we can relegate to opinions. The end of Rom 13 clearly indicates that Paul did not intend to include doctrinal matters in Rom 14. Consider: “Let us walk properly, as in the day, not in revelry and drunkenness, not in lewdness and lust, not in strife and envy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts,” (Rom 13:13-14). There cannot be peace and unity within a local church when some believe that fornication is the only cause for divorce (Matt 19:3-9), and others believe that there are many reasons allowing for divorce. Truth must be taught, believed, defended and those who withstand that truth are walking disorderly (2 Thess 3:6). There cannot be unity or peace within a local church with part of the membership believing that all singing is to be unaccompanied (Eph 5:19) while others believe the piano or other instruments can be or should be used. The Bible addresses this matter clearly and we do not have the liberty to form differing “opinions.” We dishonor God when we openly receive those whom God has not received (1 Jn 1:3). This might |