Preface To The Second Printing
1. Must God Plead With God?
   
2. How The Spirit Leads
   
3. Physical Reinforcements of Faith
   
4. Jesus' Physical and Spiritual Death
   
5. Is There Merit in Pain?
   
6. The Six Days of Creation
   
7. Adding Guilt to Anxiety
   
8. Wine and The Disciple
   
9. Revolution or Evolution
   
10. I Am That Disciple
    
11. When People Disagree
    
12. Is Unity Based Upon Seven Doctrines?
    
13. Our Seven Sacraments
    
14. Instrumental Music
    
15. The Mood of Worship
    
16. Justified Then Sanctified
    
17. Is Christian Our Name?
    
18. The Lord's Table
    
19. Righteousness That Exceeds
    
20. Neither Destroyed Nor Nailed To The Cross
    
21. The Right of Self-Protection
    
22. A Tree of Error
    
23. God is Limited
    
24. You Are Here
    
25. God is In Charge
    
26. Hook's Points
    
27. Lamentations of A Mediocre Preacher
    

WHEN PEOPLE DISAGREE

(Published in ONE BODY, Vol. 1, No. 2, Nov. 1984 by College Press, and mailed to ministers of the Restoration Movement heritage.)

Our favorite clichés and expressions are repeated because they seem to be such clear presentations of truth. One of my assertions repeated so often and with such confidence goes like this: When two people disagree on something, one may be right and the other wrong, or they may both be wrong, but both certainly cannot be right.

But how wrong I was! Legally, both could not be right. I was a legalist. Paul declared that believers may disagree on meats and days and both be right. God welcomes and upholds both and makes them to stand (Rom. 14:1­4).

Total agreement on all points is improbable, if not impossible. It is not so much a matter of when or if people disagree as it is a recognition of the fact that we all differ. How may differing people live in accord? Although that question may seem to hold a contradiction, the Scriptures encourage the practice. Let us review some helpful Scriptural examples of how harmony was produced or maintained in spite of disagreements.

Congregational Disagreement

There was disagreement about how a work was being done in the very first congregation. This was not a doctrinal issue, but discrimination was being charged in their caring for the widows (Acts 6). Any suspicion about the integrity of the apostles was erased by the respect and trust they showed toward the ones who brought the complaint. The apostles did not become defensive in protecting their pride or position. They did not make an issue out of it and let it develop into a power struggle. They simply turned the distribution program over to those who brought this just complaint. It was settled peacefully and beautifully, and we hear no more about it. Will not a similar loving spirit work today also in helping to work together in spite of disagreements?

Personal Dispute

Paul and Barnabas had a "sharp contention" concerning Mark (Acts 1 5:36f) . Here were personality clashes and difference in judgment with no doctrinal matter involved. Although they disagreed, they still loved, accepted, and respected each other. They could have felt compelled to demonstrate that saints can always get along together, and have made their tour together. But that could easily have made them miserable and ineffective and not really have proved their point. They were wise enough to put some distance between themselves so each could work more effectively. They did not let their difference be a cause of distrust, suspicion, disfellowship, or a campaign of slander against each other.

We need not serve in the same programs, congregations, or "brotherhoods" (a euphemism for "sects"!) in order to be in fellowship. Our fellowship is in Christ, not programs and congregations. Persons in the same congregation hold differing convictions and clash in personalities. They can be in harmony or disunited according to their spirit. A sectarian spirit may prevail between them in the same congregation, while an irenic spirit may cement the fellowship with those in other congregations even though they "rub us the wrong way."

Doctrinal Differences

Now we come to the conditions of salvation, a doctrinal issue of greatest importance. "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved" (Acts 15:1). A conference met in Jerusalem to determine if this doctrinal conviction could be bound as a part of the Gospel. The Gospel must not be compromised, for it is the message of salvation.

The conference rendered the verdict that nothing of the Law of Moses could be bound as a condition of salvation. However, this conclusion by no means hinted that the Jewish disciples would discontinue circumcision and other ordinances of the Law. Judean believers continued to keep the Law (Acts 21:17­26).

Convictions about rituals, methods, and theories were not a basis or condition of becoming a disciple as long as they obeyed the Gospel. There is not even an example of an explanation of the meaning of baptism being made to the candidate. It was explained to disciples later (Rom. 6:3f; Col. 2:1 if). These different convictions and practices of the Jewish and Gentile saints were not allowed to hinder their acceptance and fellowship in Christ.

Personal Scruples

In this last segment, we will consider differing convictions and practices relating to our lives as disciples. Whereas, the Gospel is the faith, these scruples are matters of faith, such as are discussed by Paul in Romans 14. Their disagreement was about eating foods and observing days. Ours will be other issues of like principle.

Paul calls upon disagreeing parties, not to make forced conformity, but to accept and respect each other. The meat eater must not despise, disdain, or look down his nose at the scrupulous vegetarian, and the vegetarian must not condemn the meat eater. We have not learned that lesson yet, for the more cautious brother condemns the more accepting brother, and, although the more liberal does not condemn the more conservative, he looks condescendingly and impatiently upon him. If this spirit prevails, then both are wrong, not because of differing convictions, but because of lack of love and respect for each other as brothers.

Paul tantalizes the legalist by not telling which side was right in the matter of eating foods and keeping days! Instead, he shames us, "Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Master is able to make him stand." On both sides of the issues people were serving and honoring the Lord sincerely. Let the Lord accept or reject. "Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? Each of us shall give account of himself to God" (Rom. 14:10f). Fellowship must not be endangered by our efforts to decide or bind scruples.

Our sustained fellowship is not based on conformity, uniformity of convictions, or having all the right answers. It is based on being in Christ and our accepting one another as Christ accepts us. He accepted, and continues to accept, us while we are unloving, ignorant, misdirected, and immature sinners. Likewise, we must accept each other.

A disciple forfeits his fellowship only (a) when he denies any element of the Gospel, for that denies His saving power; (b) when he becomes impenitent and hardened in immoral conduct, and/or (c) when he develops a factious spirit.

No inspired writer advises disciples to leave a congregation, even the problem­filled churches in Corinth and Laodicea, in order to start a "true" or ''loyal" church. They were called upon to reform, and that must be constant in each and every congregation. The Ephesians did not feel compelled to denounce or to disfellowship Corinth or Laodicea, as though one church can disfellowship another.

You are not held accountable for the sins of your brother if you disavow his sins. He cannot violate your conscience, for only you can do that.

Do different convictions and practices matter at all? Some, like circumcision, days, and meats do not, unless we try to bind our scruples about them on others. Some may be sinful, though their status is debated by sincere and studious saints. Different convictions on debatable issues may be held without disrupting fellowship. Each person answers only to his own conscience and to God. We are forbidden to judge our brother in this area.

May, or should, one discuss his convictions with another with whom he disagrees? Certainly! It becomes imperative to do so if he considers it to be life­threatening. But he must do this with love and respect without condemning his brother. We are not called upon to violate our convictions, but we are obligated to let others live by their own convictions even as we live by ours.

We can disagree without being sectarian. We may also meet and work separately while still recognizing brotherhood and oneness in the body of Christ. Sectarianism is a spirit, an attitude, which allows us to judge and condemn. We all disagree with other persons in our local fellowships without becoming judgmental and divisive. Why can't we extend that fellowship out beyond our own assemblies and buildings to others in Christ with whom we hold disagreements?

Even though other brothers are in error in some matters, we must not reject them, for the only brothers we have are brothers in error!