Reintegrating Shards

If God’s people would, please
take your Bibles and turn to 1 Corinthians. 1 Corinthians,
we’re in chapter 1. Now here in this letter, as you
know, Paul will address the unseemly divisions that were threatening
this little church. He’ll address the discipline
issues, the heathen practices that were corrupting the purity
of Christ’s church, the sinful conduct of believers that was
basically being lived out in full view of unbelievers, idolatry
and lawsuits and matters more internal to the church, chaos
over their God-given gifts, and even gluttonous disregard of
others at the Lord’s table. The situation before them called
for the rare wisdom that could deliver a sharp rebuke, coupled
with the unambiguous teaching that would liberate this church
from the tentacles of sure ruin. The reasons for this epistle
by now are obvious. There are significant sin issues
in the Corinthian church that are becoming even commonplace.
The church itself also had substantial doctrinal questions. And in this
once promising little church, there is division and turmoil,
sinful behavior. And so Paul cannot, visit this
church just now, but he has an overwhelming cause to write them. And it’s really an all-out, last-ditch,
no-holds-barred effort to correct their behavior and restore unity, a unity that has all but been
destroyed. It’s now or never. for Paul and
for the Corinthian church. And with the formalities of verses
one through nine behind him, Paul now begins to express his
most significant concern, the devastating rift within this
little church. If you would, I want to focus
on verses 10 through 12 this morning, just verses 10 through
12 of chapter one. Now I exhort you, brethren, by
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there
be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in
the same mind and in the same judgment. For I have been informed
concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there
are quarrels among you. Now I mean this. that each one
of you is saying, I am of Paul and I am of Apollos and I of
Cephas and I of Christ. Paul had received news. It started slowly, as you know,
news of the division that existed in his tiny church. And now he
knows that the division is real and it’s significant. It’s devastating. I would liken it to the destruction
of a fragile and infinitely valuable dish or vessel. And what Paul
is engaged in as he opens up the really significant portion
of this letter What he’s engaged in is trying to piece back together
this valuable treasure. I’ve called it reintegrating
shards because that’s really all that’s left. The division
already exists on many fronts. And so Paul finds himself in
the midst of restoring a priceless treasure in the local church. And I see three facets. to this
process, we come to the first, the rebuke of factiousness in
this divine exhortation to unity. Look, if you would, at verse
10. I exhort you, brethren. With the formalities behind him,
the greetings in verses one through three, and the expression of
gratitude in verses four through nine, Paul initiates the great
purpose of this letter to address the sin issues that were present
in the Corinthian church. And it’s not as if Paul hides
his intentions. He tells them that he exhorts
them. The word to exhort has a wide
ranging connotation driven by the context a lot of times. It can refer to an appeal, it
can be translated to admonish, exhort, to cheer, to encourage,
to comfort. The Greek word can be translated
to any number of words, exhort, rebuke, comfort. And as I said, the context determines
the precise flavoring of this word. In its most basic meaning,
It literally means to call someone to your side or to come alongside
someone. And you know this word because
it’s the word paraclete or parakaleo, the called alongside one, the
Holy Spirit, the comforter. And so the verb form can really
mean to come alongside someone for the purposes of encouraging
them, but it can also mean, depending on the context, to plead or even
to exhort someone. And so here in this particular
context, it clearly has the connotation to exhort, to stir the Corinthian
church to a change of mind from their improper attitudes to behaviors,
to those attitudes and behaviors that would be truly God honoring. And still the apostles name for
them is brethren. It is a gracious and affectionate
way for him to soften the admonition. Paul knows very well how strong,
how direct How difficult it is going to be to even read this
letter. But you know, Paul provides even
greater detail to this exhortation. Look at verse 10. Now I exhort
you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. That little phrase is in keeping
with the already established pattern of the first nine verses. Nine times in those nine verses,
Jesus is mentioned. And that affords a smooth and
swift transition to this very pointed address of the church. Look back, if you would, at verse
one of chapter one. Paul says that he was called
as an apostle of Jesus Christ. In verse two, he speaks to those
who have been sanctified, set apart in Christ Jesus. He speaks of those as those who
call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ near the end of
that verse. In verse three, he blesses them
and wishes them grace and peace from God our Father and the Lord
Jesus Christ. He mentions Christ a fifth time
in verse four, when he thanks them, thanks God for the grace
that was plainly evident in Christ Jesus. In verse six, he addresses
Christ again, the testimony concerning Christ being developed in the
Corinthian church. believers. In verse 7, he mentions
Christ again in context with the revelation of Christ. In
verse 8, he mentions him again in the day of glorification in
the Lord Jesus Christ. And then again, he says in verse
9, God is faithful. Through whom you were called
into fellowship with his son, Jesus Christ, our Lord. But it’s
not just a smooth transition. It’s not just a passing mention
of Christ in order to fulfill having Christ mentioned in each
of the first 10 verses. It’s intentional. The mention
here in verse 10 builds upon everything said in the first
nine verses. Paul’s calling as an apostle,
the Corinthian sanctification, the grace that Paul asks for
in addition to the grace that was already granted them. And so the mere mention of the
Lord Jesus Christ in verse 10 only serves to strengthen Paul’s
exhortation here without another word. This would be an exhortation
to unity for this church. This ought to have elicited positive
sentiments in them to peacefully yield themselves to Christ as
Lord. This is no passing thought uttered
by a fellow believer, nor is it merely a strong admonition
by a God-sent apostle. These are words that bear the
very authority of Jesus Christ himself. When Paul utters this
plea in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, he invokes everything
that Jesus is and all for which he stands. This provided the
Corinthian church an immediate accountability before their savior.
This would have been to them and to us an immediate reminder
that they were part of that one body of Christ. That one body
of Christ about which Paul teaches in his epistle to the Ephesians.
Ephesians 1.22 says he mentions the church which is his body. He mentions it again in chapter
five, verse 28 through 30, the church members of his body. This church, these believers,
were not to be functioning as so many individuals, or even
as so many little factions. They were to be functioning as
one body. the spiritual body of the Lord
Jesus Christ. We are called into fellowship
with Christ corporately, literally as a body of believers, not as
multiplied, factious elements, individuals, individuals and
divisions. Christ is the head of one spiritual
body, not many. I remember one very poignant
example of the absurdity of a divided body. There was this lady in
one of our previous ministries, and she had become quite critical
and nasty, gossiping, slandering, backbiting. And another brother,
without any knowledge of any of this, extended her the offer
to sing in the worship service. You can imagine my shock that
not only did she stand up to sing, but she stood up to sing. How beautiful is the body of
Christ? I wondered if the irony of that
disparity, that division was completely lost on her, called
to one body. And that’s Paul’s concern here
with the Corinthians. They were called to be one body
in Christ, but they were even at that moment endeavoring to
dismember that body. And so Paul issues here a call
to unity. And in this initial call to unity
in verse 10, there are three elements to this divine exhortation
to unity. This comes from Christ himself. And the first element of this
divine exhortation is doctrinal unity. Look at verse 10. Now,
I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that you all agree. Now, on this particular word,
we get more than enough help because of how plentifully this
word is used in Scripture. It’s used more than thirteen
hundred times in the New Testament. The word just means to say or
to speak. And yet Paul is clearly referring
to something more than just mindlessly echoing one another’s thoughts
here. To speak the same thing in relative
agreement with one another. And I would say here that that
means doctrinally. By saying or speaking the same
thing, Paul intends here that there will be unity of thought
and teaching. To be in relative unity, not
an airtight precision without any breathing room or room for
a variance of opinion, especially on secondary matters. but general,
brotherly, gracious agreement on the great portion of doctrine. Paul, in writing to the Philippian
church, urged them likewise. You know the passage in chapter
2, Therefore, if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there
is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the
Spirit, any affection and compassion, make my joy complete by being
of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit,
intent on one purpose. You see, to speak differently
in this context, to be in disharmony on key points of doctrine can
lead to contention and even strife and ultimately sinful division.
And so what Paul is arguing for here is harmonious speech, especially
with regard to professed beliefs. This is one of the reasons that
the church has historically held to creeds and confessions and
doctrinal statements. Churches don’t have to constantly
reinvent the wheel. They can interact and rest upon
the historic faith of Christianity as expressed in these basic statements
and documents. Paul is calling on the Corinthians
to have one mind on the teachings of Scripture. And that often
involves a process, doesn’t it? A process of thinking and studying
and debating and dialogue and formulation, finally arriving
at a doctoral position oriented in Scripture on which the church
can rest. There’s a second element to this
divine exhortation to unity, however. Not just doctrinal unity,
but look at verse 10. It’s the absence of faction. Now I exhort you, brethren, by
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there
be no division among you. This second aspect of Paul’s
exhortation to unity here in verse 10 is plainly our Greek
lesson for the day. And it centers around this little
word translated divisions here in our English versions. That word translated divisions
in the Greek is the word schisma. You heard it correctly. You guessed
it. It’s that word from where we get our word, schism, split,
rift, division. This was the very ugly news,
of course, that Paul had been hearing for months about the
Corinthian church. And this particular mention of
this issue has the sad notoriety in scripture of being the first
time in all of Paul’s churches that a rift was mentioned, that
division had to be dealt with. And so such news to Paul was
heartbreaking and gave him a grave concern. This is a graphic word that allows
for no misunderstanding It’s the same word that Jesus uses
in Matthew chapter nine about garments. No one puts a patch
of unshrunk cloth on an old garment for the patch pulls away from
the garment and a worse tear results. The Apostle John uses
the same word numerous times to speak of the division that
existed in the crowds because of what Christ was teaching.
John 7, John 9, John 10. And so here what Paul tells the
Corinthians with anguish of heart is that they are tearing at the
very fabric of Christ’s church. And in the case of the Corinthian
church, the divisions, the schisms that had developed had developed
upon many fault lines, not just one. There were not only these
initial divisions over personalities, which Paul will deal with first,
but there were differences of opinion about moral issues. Chapter five. There were these
legal issues that had come up in the church that even led to
lawsuits between one another in heathen courts. Chapter six. There was an almost chaotic debate
going on over marital issues, singleness, marital relations,
divorce. Chapter seven. There were significantly
different perspectives among these believers about Paul and
his convictions and practices. Chapter 9. There was this selfish
abuse of common courtesy that was connected with, of all things,
the Lord’s table. Chapter 11. There was this ongoing
and rancorous dispute about the use of spiritual gifts, chapter
12 through 14, and even a lack of oneness, unity over the glorious
doctrine of the resurrection, chapter 15. Such divisions cannot
be allowed in Christ’s church. The situation must be addressed
and such potential divisions mended, restored, at once. And yet there’s a third element
to this divine exhortation to unity. Not only should there
be a lack of division, a lack of schisms, not only should there
be doctrinal unity, but Paul urges thirdly, there should be
a single-mindedness in the church. Look at verse 10 again. Now I
exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but
that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same
judgment. And finally, this third element. is that they be made complete,
and that in two different ways. When Paul expresses his desire
for completeness here, he uses a very frequently used word in
the New Testament. It’s a meaningful word. It’s
the Greek word katartizo. The gospel writers use it when
they capture that scene, remember, of the soon to be called disciples
sitting by the sea, mending their nets. That’s our word. Jesus himself used it to speak
of a student who was fully trained. When Paul uses the word, it varies
in significance from prepared to restored. But there is a reparative
aspect to this word. And we know already how much
the Corinthian church needed to be repaired, mended, restored. And so it has this sense of mending
or repairing something that has been damaged or broken. In the
case of torn nets, they were mended. If a man broke his leg,
the surgeon would speak of it using this same word. But the
word isn’t just about nets or bones. In Galatians, Paul uses
this same word to speak of restoring. a sinning wayward brother. But in the case of a church,
Paul says that they were to be made complete again, indicating
that they were currently apart. The church had been destroyed.
And this is why the King James renders this word perfectly joined
together. Mend it again. The image that
comes to my mind is from when I was early in college. I worked
for a very short time at a stained glass company. And when you were right down
on top of a project on which you were working, or if you were
looking at a loose collection of the individual pieces, it
didn’t look like anything, just beautifully colored glass. But
once those pieces were arranged and you stepped back, a beautiful
image began to appear. This is precisely what Paul is
telling the Corinthians. Right now, they are nothing more
than a jumbled box of pieces. They need to be restored. They
need to be put back together. They need to be made complete. And he says in two particulars,
in the same mind and in the same judgment. You say, what’s the
difference? It’s very subtle. Regarding the
first word mind, that word can be used to refer to either the
brain itself, the organ which perceives and processes the intellect,
if you want to go that way, Or it can refer to the result of
those processes, like when we say, I have a good mind to blank,
as in mindset. But Paul isn’t talking about
the brain itself or its decisions here. He’s talking about the
positions to which a person or to which a group comes. They needed to have one mind. And the second word is not that
much different. When he says the same judgment,
this word can refer to an individual’s opinion or to an opinion that
someone chooses, but here it is much more than a one-time
decision at which an individual arrives. I would even call that
the guiding principle. that they were single-minded
in their approach to God’s use of them as a church. Paul is involved in reintegrating
shards, restoring this once valuable treasure. And he addresses not
only the rebuke of factiousness, this divine exhortation to unity,
but the second portion is a verification of that factiousness. Look at
verse 11. For I have been informed concerning
you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there are quarrels
among you. Paul provides the reason for
this sudden exhortation. that he had been informed. Someone has come to him with
information, the secret is out, and this information was not
provided to Paul in confidence. Paul identifies his source. And so there can be no dispute,
no doubt at all, as to whether or not he has accurate information. He cites both the source and
the report. I have been informed concerning
you by Chloe’s people.” Gulp. They must have thought, uh-oh,
he knows. But as for this source, Chloe,
There’s nothing else but intrigue and mystery around her. Paul
cites her people as the source of this news that he had received.
Not another tidbit of information is provided about her. It’s generally
believed that she must have been a sister in Christ whom Paul
likely knew from his time there in Corinth. But there are more
questions about Chloe than answers. Her people, her motives, her
report. She may or may not have been
a sister in Christ. She may or may not have been
from Corinth. She may or may not have been
from Ephesus with family or friends that traveled to her with news
from Corinth. If from Corinth, she may or may
not have sent this little delegation. They may very well have taken
matters into their own hands. Maybe they were even those from
her camp in the church. She may or may not have chosen
a side. She may or may not have even
gossiped in sharing this news with Paul. She may or may not
have even known about the informants themselves. But the fact that
Paul mentions her by name and that her people provided Paul
with significant and, mind you, undisputed news from Corinth
makes a good case for Chloe being a believer who was associated
with the Corinthian church. That’s conjecture. Regardless,
her people, whether her family or her servants or those in her
camp, provide some very distressing news about this little church.
There may have been more to this report from Chloe’s people, sin issues in the church, but
we do know that they provide provided a report on this one
ugly thing, the disunity that existed in this church. And it’s
entirely possible that Chloe and her people had taken up one
of the sides, whether she was completely independent or fully
engaged in one of the factions, we don’t know. The bottom line
was that there was disunity in the church of Corinth. And that
it was so bad that some people associated with this mysterious
Chloe believed that they had to inform the planter of this
church. Factions had formed. Sides were
being taken. Lines were being drawn. They
must inform Paul. This little word informed is
not as nefarious as it may sound to our ears in the context. as if these were so many little
tattletales with this report. We don’t know what their motive
was. The word literally means to clarify. And if you think
about it, that’s exactly what their report did. We recall that
Paul had received troubling information from Corinth very slowly, piecemeal. This word becomes very appropriate
in that context because the news that they brought clarified everything. It confirmed what Paul had already
heard, and now he had to act upon it. This word is even used
of God identifying the true nature of our work, that our work in
chapter 3 of this epistle will be revealed. Everybody will be informed about
the nature of our work It’s used of good reports in scripture
Colossians 1 8 that he has informed us of your love in the spirit.
It’s not a dirty word This is not a back-alley whisper What they revealed must have
been just heartbreaking to Paul I And it really can be reduced
down to one little word in the Greek, the little word eros,
strife. This word describes one of the
saddest, most destructive scenarios in all of scripture. Wrangling,
contention, bitter discord, that unloving demeanor that produces
unproductive quarrels, We’ve encountered this word in the
past. Most recently in our study of the Epistle of James, remember
the weather reports? I suggested that you could look
at some of these episodes almost like our modern day weather reports. And so when Paul was writing
to the Philippians, I suggested that it was a potential. The
storm was still developing, but it was a potential tropical storm. Because Paul says it like this,
some to be sure are preaching Christ even from envy and strife,
but some also from goodwill. The storm hadn’t really formed,
it hadn’t done any real damage yet. When he writes to the Corinthians
in his second epistle, This is a forecast of a category five. Paul was so fearful to even go
to Corinth because of what he might find there. I’m afraid
that perhaps when I come I may find you to be not what I wish.
That there will be strife, jealousy, angry tempers, disputes, and
so on. This was a hurricane that was
in full destruction mode in the Corinthian church. In Galatia,
it’s not a weather report, it’s not a forecast, it’s the aftermath. It’s one of those reporters standing
around all the destroyed buildings, talking into his microphone,
telling you what horror and destruction he sees. I would call that a
review in Galatians chapter five. immorality, impurity, sensuality,
idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy. And so if I
were to give you a weather report, a forecast for Corinth, I would
say that sadly this is shaping up easily to be a category five
event. The news of their strife is already
spread far and wide. Their acrimony is no longer even
tied to a single subject. Their bitter attitude has spread
now to other questions, and Paul sees the dark and ominous clouds
bearing down on this once promising work without intervention. Not just Paul’s intervention,
but without divine intervention, this church will surely be decimated. And the noble cause of the gospel
will suffer. And so Paul comes in his process
of restoring this priceless treasure, not only the rebuke of factiousness
and the verification of factiousness, but the particulars of this factiousness. Look, if you would, at verse
12. Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, I am of
Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas and I of Christ. The acknowledgement of this news.
Had to have pained Paul greatly. To think that this little church.
which he had the privilege of establishing is now dividing
in part over him? It must have torn at his heart
to even hear this. I appreciated the commentary,
the observation rather of one commentary who noted that there
seems to be an intentional display here of humility by Paul. because
there’s an ascending scale as Paul lists these names. Even though he cites his own
name first, he’s actually at the bottom of the list. Paul,
Apollos, Peter, and then Christ. Apollos, We met him in our consideration
of Acts chapter 18, and we noted there that Luke told us seven
important things about this man. He was a gifted man. We were
introduced to him as a flawless product of that great academic
city, Alexandria. He was an eloquent, articulate
man, Luke tells us, a man with the rare gift of learning coupled
with the even more rare gift of teaching. He was not only
a gifted man, he was a man of the word. He knew the scriptures.
He was mighty in the scriptures, the Old Testament. He knew his
Bible and he understood God’s plan of redemption. He was a
trained man. He had been formally trained,
instructed. He was a passionate man, a man
of strong conviction. Luke says he was fervent in spirit. He was passionate about what
he believed. and eager that others might know.
He was a biblical man. He was teaching accurately the
things concerning Jesus. He was a man of biblical integrity. He didn’t adulterate God’s message.
He didn’t add to it. He didn’t take away. And he was
an obedient man. He was a doer speaking out boldly
in the synagogue. He was willing to open his mouth
and declare what he knew. And we saw that perhaps the best
quality of all that he was a teachable man. When Aquila and Priscilla
detected an incompleteness in his message, his doctrine, they
corrected him and he received it. He was more than willing
to have the holes of his theology filled. And you know what? We know something
else about this man now. He’s such a man of integrity
that when this personality cult begins to develop, it seems very
clear that he wanted no part of it. We discovered that when
Paul finally gets the opportunity to write to the Corinthian church,
Apollos is there with him. Whether he came with a delegation
from Corinth, we don’t know, but he’s there with Paul as Paul
writes this very letter. Even as Paul is rebuking and
shaming the very idea of division based on personalities, he has
been faithfully serving in Corinth all the while beset by this church’s
factiousness, and he wants no part of it. And there are two other figures
in this foursome of figureheads, I of Cephas. We don’t know if
or whether Peter ever visited Corinth. Most naturally, the
Jewish portion of that church might have latched on to Peter
since initially he seemed to be the most vulnerable to Judaistic
doctrine. Peter was known to be the apostle
to the Jews, even as Paul was known as the apostle to the Gentiles. That alone would easily set up
for a factious contention. And then, the most alarming name
on this short list of personalities, that of Christ, I of Christ. And perhaps you’re like me. It
seems as if this would be the choice of purists in the group,
right? I am of Christ. In their attempt,
however, to chide others for their partisanship, they stumbled
into their own sinful version of it by initiating a faction
in the name of Christ. Such a tactic would make no sense
at all. To create a faction in order
to rebuke a faction is, at the end of the day, factious. And that itself would be the
peak of pride, to claim Christ as the head of your own party. So what do we do with all this? You don’t have to have known
me for very long to have heard me cite this verse, verse 10,
as one of the most profoundly influential verses in my Christian
life. May I share with you in closing
how that happened? When I was young in the Lord,
very young, maybe two years a Christian, I got a lot of my instruction
from the Christian radio. And there was this one guy that
I listened to occasionally. He called himself the Bible Answer
Man. His name was Walter Martin. Well,
as I said, I listened to him occasionally and I heard him
say something one day that really caught my attention. He was promoting
this hearty discussion on apologetics, and he said this, if two people
agree on everything, one of them isn’t thinking. I thought, you know, that’s really
good, so I wrote it down. The sentence really seemed to
promote deep thinking, not just taking things for granted, but
being a good Berean, that kind of thing. And for years, I began to live
like that, questioning everything, looking at ideas and claims and
statements and arguments, all with a critical eye, finding
some way or something with which to disagree with whoever was
talking or teaching. That whole approach was fed by
pride. But I really thought that I was
doing as I should, thinking and questioning and examining and
scrutinizing and even doubting anything and everything that
was presented. That approach lasted for years, several years
until I read and really understood this verse. Now, I exhort you,
brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all
agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made
complete in the same mind and in the same judgment. And I have
to say that reading and coming to grips with that verse was
life changing. That one little verse came at
just the right time in my life. Because you see, I had begun
to dislike the critical spirit that I had developed. And there
was something else that I began to dislike. It was that rather
soft and wimpy, wishy-washy tendency that people have just to end
a discussion by smiling and saying, let’s just agree to disagree. It became the regular refrain
for any discussion in which there was not easy and immediate consensus. But this verse revealed that
the goal in spiritual discussion is not simply to bring an end
to dialogue. The goal of spiritual, theological,
doctrinal dialogue ought to be peaceable consensus about thought
and doctrine, unity, single-mindedness. You see, with the old way, Walter
Martin’s one of them isn’t thinking way. Nobody really ever had to
dig in and present their argument with excellence and clarity.
Let’s just agree to disagree. Nobody even really needed to
listen to anyone else’s thoughts or positions. Let’s just agree
to disagree. Nobody had to really think. Let’s
just agree to disagree. That exit phrase began to echo
in my brain as a feeble and frustrating mantra. It was a backdoor escape
that never demanded or encouraged someone else to think, let alone
change. After all, I thought, if what someone believes cannot
stand up to some brotherly scrutiny, then it isn’t a very sound conviction,
is it? And so I made some significant
adjustments in my life. First, I guess I stopped considering
Walter Martin as the Bible answer man. That was a good first step.
He was a man, and perhaps even a godly and learned man, but
so was I. And so I rewrote Walter Martin’s
little saying. My version goes like this. If
two people don’t agree on everything, maybe neither of them are thinking. And I also made a concerted effort
to stop saying, let’s agree to disagree. I started listening. I started thinking. I started
arguing, not just bickering, but gracious, brotherly argumentation
oriented in the scriptures. I started defending. I started
thinking and encouraging others to think as well. And if you
know me, I hope you have found this to be true. It never surprises me. to come
across a brother with whom I disagree? In the grand scope of biblical
teaching, it is silly to think that any two people would have
identical views on every point of scripture. But I’m not threatened
by that diversity. I see those occasions as opportunity,
an opportunity to learn something, an opportunity to express my
own convictions, an opportunity to think and dialogue and possibly
even arrive at a consensus, a peaceable consensus with a brother in Christ. And I’ve learned. The two brothers
ought to be able to articulate each other’s position as well
as they are able to articulate their own. Because usually, we have a convenient
caricature of what our brother believes, don’t we? I routinely
employ a strategy in counseling, especially marriage counseling,
I just ask the one party to repeat what the other person just said. And in most cases, they can’t
do it. They can’t do it because they
were not, are not listening. And so, for what is now the better
part of my life, these last 35 years, I have learned and grown
and thought and changed. Haven’t you? Isn’t that how all of us came
to the convictions that we now so humbly own? Our view of Christ, our view
of scripture, our view of the church, our view of the doctrines
of God’s sovereign grace. And even still, there are great
subjects with which I frequently find opportunity for lively and
enriching discussion. Covenant theology. the frequency
of the celebration of the Lord’s table, eschatology, millenniums
and raptures, worship music, choruses versus hymns, drums,
or no. And on and on and on it goes,
peaceably. But I no longer see those things
as taboo. or threatening, and I certainly
don’t see them as necessary points of departure from a brother,
or a demand for a cowardly departure, let’s agree to disagree. I see
differences of opinion, differences of opinion and conviction on
spiritual matters as an opportunity. Because as is almost always the
case, both positions cannot be right. Arguments must be presented,
minds must be engaged, ideals must be challenged, and something
has to give. Convictions must either be strengthened
or abandoned. A humble submission to God’s
word must win the day. Would you humble yourself before
him? Our merciful King, we thank you
for these words. As we opened it, we might have
thought that they were for the Corinthians, and they were, but
they are also for us. Lord God, would you examine our
hearts and cultivate in us a new mind, a new way of thinking. A single mindedness of purpose. That seeks to know our brother
and walk with our brother deeply and intimately. Lord, we do pray
that you would protect and even build the unity of this church. We desire. to glorify you not
only in what we do, we desire to glorify you in what and how
we think. Be glorified, we pray, Lord.
It’s in Jesus’ name that we pray.