We have all kinds of new guidelines
being established for the practice of separation. Things are certainly looking a lot different
in practice than they did just a decade ago.
Biblical “fellowship” is now being defined by degrees and on levels often
without any criteria of biblical
exegesis. Theology has moved into the helter-skelter world of rationalism and
the fluid constructionism of the Post-modern
view of truth as a commodity that is constantly evolving to be relevant to the
culture in which it seeks to co-exist. We
would expect this praxis within
Liberalism. We might even expect it
within Emergent Evangelicalism with its constant quest for cultural
relevancy. We have seen this happen
within Evangelicalism as they spend more time asking questions than they do
providing answers. However, we would
expect Fundamentalists to be above such nonsense.
The guidelines and boundaries for
biblical separation are not complex issues.
We establish these guidelines and boundaries for biblical separation by
answering one simple question according to the exegesis of Ephesians 4:1-7. What
action, attitude, or false doctrine on my part will cause me to lose the
supernatural enabling of the indwelling Holy Spirit of God and break “the unity
of the Spirit”?
“1 I
therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the
vocation wherewith ye are called, 2 With all lowliness and meekness,
with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; 3 Endeavouring
to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is
one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of
all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. 7 But
unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of
Christ” (Ephesians 4:1-7).
The emphasis of this text is
basic. The tri-unity of God between the
three Persons of the Godhead is perfect.
In the tri-unity of the Godhead, there is unity in essence, doctrine,
purpose, and practice. The only time in
eternity that the tri-unity of the Godhead was ever broken was during the three
hours of darkness (Luke 23:44-47) when Jesus, the eternal Son of God incarnate,
bore the wrath of God for the “sins of the whole world” (I John 2:2). That was the true agony of the Cross and all
Persons of the Godhead suffered during those three hours due to that broken
fellowship.
Is there a practicum for separation in
Ephesians 4:1-7? I think the answer to
that question is obvious since a central purpose of the text is about “unity of
the Spirit.” The only distinction not
defined in the text is the breadth of this “unity of the Spirit.” Herein lays the difficulty in the practicum
of separation. Is the text referring to “unity
of the Spirit” within the context of all the ambiguity of Christianity? Is the text
referring to the “unity of the Spirit” within the context of individuals within
individual local churches? Or, is the
text referring merely to individual “unity of the Spirit”? Again, I think the obvious answer is
individual “unity of the Spirit.” If the
priority of my life is to pursue perfect unity with the Godhead it must be
within their own perfect unity in essence, doctrine, purpose, and practice. Therefore, my goal as a Christian is to
pursue the communicable attributes of God, the mind of God through doctrinal
purity, heart of God in loving people in the depth of self-sacrifice defined by
Christ at Calvary, and a walk that is completely separate from any degree of
worldliness and separate unto perfect righteousness. That must be my personal answer to the
question regarding what is involved in seeking “the unity of the Spirit.”
Secondly, I must take into consideration
any other partnerships I will join myself to in that pursuit of the “unity of
the Spirit.” My primary partnership in
ministry is with Jesus Christ (John 15:1-5).
Therefore, my primary responsibility in the practicum of separation is
to insure that I do nothing or align myself with anyone that might cause me to
break my “unity of the Spirit” with Jesus.
The practicum of this is found in answering the question of Amos 3:3 - “Can
two walk together, except they be agreed?”
It is a rhetorical question with an obvious answer. – no! If I join myself to another who teaches “other
doctrine” (I Timothy 1:3; heterodidaskaleo - het-er-od-id-as-kal-eh'-o), will
that cause me to break fellowship with God and lose the “unity of the Spirit”? The answer is again obvious-yes! Decisions regarding these other partnerships
must include other individuals and other associations. When there are a large number involved in
this association, such as a local church or group of local churches, there must
be consensus. If the primary
consideration is to insure that my fellowship with God is never broken, my
obvious consideration of any consensus is that it is narrowly defined, not
broadly defined. In other words, I am
not going to align myself with individuals, a local church, group of local
churches, or associations of pastors who hold to any theological positions that
I believe are unbiblical. I am not going
to risk breaking my fellowship with God over some frivolous fellowship with someone I think is leading people
astray. I am going to make sure I sound
a certain trumpet. Equally, I am going to make sure I do not sound
an uncertain trumpet (I Corinthians
14:8). God and His Word becomes my Crossing Guard when it comes to making
these kinds of fellowship decisions. I
refuse to cross until I have God’s
permission through a Scriptural mandate.
If a spiritual leader understands that
anything he does outside of the “unity of the Spirit,” or the filling of the
Spirit, is nothing more than a work of the flesh, why would he be willing to
compromise that spiritual dynamic for anything.
This is certainly true of sharing a platform at a Bible Conference with
someone who obviously is practicing things you consider to be sin. We might justify such an action if the
Conference was in the form of a debate and the individual participants are
presented as coming to represent certain defined arguments. In such a format, there is point and counter-point. I have found
these formats to be counterproductive. In other words, the sides have already been
formed and each side simply Amens the
person postulating their position. Also,
simply because one person does better in the debate does not mean that the
position he postulates is correct or his arguments valid according to
Scripture.
However, in the justification for platform fellowship with those holding
to false doctrine or involved in sinful practices, there certainly appears to
be a manifestation of misunderstanding of what is necessary to maintain
fellowship with God. The point is
simple. Can I in anyway enter into fellowship
with someone out of fellowship with God because of false doctrine, or sinful
practices, and not become out of fellowship with God myself? Answering this question becomes the crossing guard to my practice of separation. If I care about my fellowship with God, I
will be very careful how I answer that question. I certainly would lean towards taking a more stringent
position rather than a more lenient position.
This is certainly not an area for arguing for liberty when we have so much Scripture defining doctrinal parameters.
Inventing such terms as Platform Fellowship and Table Fellowship do not help in this
discussion when these practices are not really fellowship at all. I can be the friend of a heretic and have a
cup of coffee or meal with him to discuss truth without entering into any kind
of ministry partnership with him. I must
be careful that my public appearances with him are not construed as any kind of
endorsement of his views. Therefore, I
would favor meeting with such a person in the privacy of my home rather than in
public places. I want to be careful that
I never give another Christian a wrong impression. I must especially be careful about public
appearances in preaching/teaching/speaking engagements. I have made some bad decisions about such
things in the past and constantly regret them.
Christians do not understand the grief
that our broken fellowship with God causes Him.
If we did, perhaps we would give much greater consideration to the flippant
way we make ministry decisions and join hands with infidels to God’s
truths. Secondly, in an area in which
God constantly rebukes me, we would be more careful to insure we act instead of react when it comes to all decisions in life. I find myself often taking personal offense against
things I think are offensive to God. I
know He is perfectly capable of dealing with those situations Himself. Instead, I see the potential corruption of
people, and the love that God has given me for those people, reacting
protectively rather than through loving warnings. Then, I become a corruptor in a different way
than the infidels. In such reactionary
behavior, I too can grieve God.
“40 How
oft did they provoke him in the wilderness, and grieve him in the
desert! 41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the
Holy One of Israel” (Psalm 78:40-41).
“30 And
grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of
redemption. 31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and
clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: 32
And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as
God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you” (Ephesians 4:30-32).
It certainly is difficult to maintain
a balance in practice between Ephesians 4:30 and the following two verses. This is the struggle in dealing with
theological diversities. Trying to
maintain a sweet and godly spirit when discussing Bible truths with people with
which you completely disagree is very difficult. Sometimes you want to just grab them and
shake them into submission. Of course,
such actions would just drive the dissenting parties farther apart. More importantly, such actions would grieve
the Holy Spirit and cause Him to break fellowship with you. In other words, such actions would cause the
one practicing them to lose the filling of the Spirit. In such cases, a believer’s carnality corrupts
the potential for God to work supernaturally through that situation.
Then there are those that give
priority to what Ephesians 4:31-32 says without giving the priority of the text
to verse thirty. Although both aspects
must be balanced, there is a higher priority established in verse thirty. This priority removes every excuse for
compromising God’s truths or for giving a precedent for maintaining fellowship
with an infidel (unbeliever or unfaithful
believer) above our fellowship with God.
Herein there must be the most careful examination of our associations with
those holding to false doctrines. We
must carefully consider a number of things in both our association and
identification with someone we believe holds to false doctrines.
1. How will my association or
identification with someone holding to false doctrine be construed by those who
look to me for leadership?
2. Will my association or identification
with someone holding to false doctrine give an immature believer a false
impression regarding the quest for doctrinal purity?
3. Will my association or identification
with someone holding to false doctrine give an immature believer incentive to
accept the writings or statements of the person I associate with even though I
completely disagree with that associate?
4. How might my association or
identification with someone holding to false doctrine harm an immature believer?
5. What would I have to do to insure that my
leadership influence, on whatever extent my influence might exist, might not
harm another man’s ministry or lead another person astray by my association with
someone holding to false doctrines or involved in worldly practices?
I believe those in pastoral
leadership, and those holding influential positions in Christianity, ought to be
answering questions rather than raising more questions. God has appointed me His Crossing Guard only for the local church over which He has
appointed me Bishop. However, I am going
to be very careful with whom I associate lest they begin to give God’s sheep permission to walk where God has
forbidden.
“3 And
hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He
that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the
truth is not in him. 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is
the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 6 He
that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked”
(I John 2:3-6).
Anonymous comments will not be allowed.
Numerous studies and series are available free of charge for local churches at: http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/
Dr. Lance Ketchum serves the Lord as a Church Planter, Evangelist/Revivalist.
He has served the Lord for over 40 years.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment