Serious Disagreements
Posted by: biblenotes <biblenotes@...>
From: Martin M Overfield
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000
Serious Disagreements
It would seem to the objective observer of serious disagreements
among Christians, that we are tempted in a time of great disagreement
to doubt the motives of the one with whom we do not agree.* I have
seen this on many levels and in reference to many things.
A Christian friend of mine was recently discussing with me the idea that
it would be good for people who are strongly opinionated to properly
distinguish between their opinions and true principles. However, when he
made this statement he seemed to be implying that HE could tell the
difference between the two and that he wished that they would do the same.
My thoughts were that my friend has trouble, as many do, realizing that just
because he thinks HE understands what is principle and what is merely
opinion is no indication that they SHOULD also be able to see it. In other
words, my friend, and many others, has a tendency to classify people
negatively on the basis of their disagreement with his own views.
One preacher said it this way: "The difference between being opinionated
and being hard headed, is this: I am opinionated and YOU are hard headed."
It is so easy to label someone as "liberal", "legalist", "carnal", etc. when
he does not agree with our own view(s).
I realize that there are some disagreements that are so serious that
there is no way to reconcile the opposing views. This may even necessitate
a parting of ways -- rather the inability to work together in perfect
harmony. Let me illustrate with a Scriptural account:
"And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our
brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the LORD, and
see how they do. And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose
surname was Mark. But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who
departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder
one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren
unto the grace of God." (Acts 15:36-40)
The word for contention here means "a sharpening," hence "a sharpening
of the feeling, or action" (para, "beside," intensive, oxus, "sharp"),
denotes an incitement, a sharp contention, Acts 15:39, the effect of
irritation; elsewhere in Heb. 10:24, "provoke," unto love." (Vine's).
This is a different Greek word than that used by Paul in writing to the
carnal people at Corinth. There he used a word meaning "strife, quarrel,
especially rivalry, contention, wrangling,"(Vines). In other words, what
Paul and Barnabas had was not a "fight", but a legitimate, serious
disagreement.
I do not find anywhere that either Barnabas or Paul had a bad spirit.
It is entirely possible for two men of God to disagree very sharply and
still both be on a high plain of spiritual victory. Just because someone
disagrees with me does not make him a false brother, a carnal Christian,
an enemy of Christ, or a backslider.
They separated from a partnership in ministry. Neither of them were
considered unloving, unchristian, carnal, etc. Further note: They BOTH
continued in the work of God.
Just because the story line does not continue to follow Barnabas and
John Mark doesn't mean that they were not used of God anymore.
There are some apostles in the book of Acts about which we read very
little or nothing, even some of "the twelve" (and Barnabas was an apostle,
though not of the twelve -- see Acts 14:14). The purpose of the book of
Acts does not seem to be the giving of an entire history of the apostles,
but rather a following of the spread of the gospel of Jesus Christ, or of
the
way in which the Great Commission was carried out.
Paul and Barnabas were disagreeing on the way in which to carry on
the work of God. When they couldn't agree, neither of them feeling that he
could "compromise" what he believed was the right way to do the work,
they simply divided up the work. Barnabas and John Mark went to Cyprus,
where both of them had been involved in the work. Also, at least Barnabas
was more acquainted with the place, because he came from it. Paul and
Silas went to the part of the work into which John Mark had not gone on
the first journey.
Paul's later comments about them give no indication that he lacked
confidence in them. On the contrary, he showed respect and even admitted
John Mark's usefulness to him in the ministry (Colossians 4:10; II Timothy
4:11). Perhaps Paul had later changed his mind. Many who have a strong
personality are apparently willing to die for what they believe -- or their
opinion, but upon later reflection they become willing to reconsider. As
long as one does not stray from the Word of God in the reconsideration
this can be a very good characteristic.
Oh, how many of us have had to eat humble pie, because we later found
out that we were wrong in the position we had formerly taken. If this has
never happened to the reader, I would urge you to ask God to show you
whether you are willing to be shown that you are wrong. Those who think
that they are never wrong are more likely to be in the wrong than those who
are open to correction.
Also, there have been times in the history of the church and in our day,
that some have had a serious disagreement over important theological issues
and have had to go their separate ways. Take for instance the matter of
John Wesley's and George Whitefield's disagreement and separation:
"John Wesley and George Whitefield were good friends in their earlier years,
Wesley having begun his outdoor preaching ministry at Whitefield's
encouragement. As time went on the men disagreed, with Whitefield leaning
more heavily toward Calvinism than his younger friend's Armenianism. When
Whitefield died, Wesley was asked if he expected to see Dr. Whitefield in
heaven. In exaggerated but honest respect he answered, 'No, he'll be so
near the throne of God that men like me will never even get a glimpse of
him!' Though differing, they did not lose their sense of oneness in
Christ." **
What a spirit John Wesley had! This is an example of perfect love in
action.
No, we may not agree on some important things -- and in many cases we
cannot, dare not agree, but, we can have love and respect for those with
whom we disagree. I hope this saying is not too trite, but "We can disagree
agreeably".
* I have dealt with this subject in a little different way in the Bible Note
entitled "Seeing Eye to Eye".
** This quote taken from TWENTY-SEVEN HUNDRED-PLUS
SERMON ILLUSTRATIONS Compiled and Arranged Topically
by Duane V. Maxey (Holiness Data Ministries CD).
Yours In Christ,
Martin Overfield
Please send this Bible Note to everyone who may be interested or helped by
it. To subscribe to these FREE Bible Notes please send a blank e-mail to
[email protected]