God’s disunited Kingdom

We have been equipped to get along with each other, so what went wrong?

Here is what we should strive for, that God has provided for us: “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one – I in them and you in me – so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.” John 17:20-23 Yet we don’t see the outworking of this majestic prayer and we ask why?

In the words of David Pawson, “there are some things which God will do and some things which we must do“. In order to experience the kind of unity Jesus prayed for, there are things which we really must do. He has already established unity, we need to heed the words of Ephesians 4:1-6 to ‘keep’ that unity; we don’t have any remit to create it, just to eagerly nurture it.

I don’t believe this unity is about singing the same songs and having joint meetings, though these can be good. As a vibrant life of faith became reduced to weekly meetings, worship services understandably became our framework for unity. However I don’t believe this is what is the focus of the prayer “they may be one as we are one – I in them and you in me – so that they may be brought to complete unity”. To me this implies a heart level depth of oneness which few of us have yet experienced but must be possible – Jesus prayed it.

Tribalism!

Watching the Brexit debates over the last 5 years you could get the impression that ‘Tribalism’ is evil but I would suggest that from the beginning God intended tribes. He is the originator of the family (Ephesians 3:15) and one day will receive worship from every tribe (Revelation 7:9). He planned society to be made up from families, tribes and nations. He has also hardwired us with mechanisms to bond into tribes. We are designed to be tightly bonded to each other. The strength of these bonds vary but if you’re not convinced, try to remember a time when you were deeply embarrassed or ashamed. Sadly the threat of shame has been often used (not always intentionally) as a control mechanism even within the church but that is another story. Ideally my bond with my family and tribe should pale into insignificance compared to my bond with God through Jesus (Luke 14:26) but sadly this is often not the case. If it were then many of our conflicts would be resolved easily.

In the west especially we define these ‘in-groups’ and ‘out-groups’ by any number of arbitrary variables; school, fashion, sexuality, wealth etc. In the church, since the early ingestion of Greek philosophy, when knowledge became such an idol, we have grouped ourselves around common beliefs, what we think – our beliefs and creeds. If belief or creed defines the line between me and my brother it can easily breed hostility, anger and defensiveness because he is no longer seen as my brother but in the ‘other’ group. It can result in the very ‘natural’ responses we associate with conflict (including the ‘flight, flight or freeze’ responses). The easiest way to cope with any cognitive dissonance arising from a realisation that I should not feel this way towards a brother is to assume he isn’t a brother i.e. he’s not ‘in’ and if he’s ‘outside’ it changes everything.

This also highlights one of the negative results of denominations. Often to be ordained in a particular denomination a minister must adhere to their basic tenets which often include (in my humble opinion) a mixture of essential and disputable issues. So for example to be a minister in a reformed Calvinist tradition one must believe the 5 points of Calvinism, (TULIP). It then follows that Christians taught by this minister will generally continue to promulgate all 5 points. I believe this was addressed by Paul in 1 Cor 3:4 “For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere human beings? ” May I add “I follow Calvin”, “I follow Luther” – I believe these guys had a lot of very good things to say but I’m not convinced they had all the truth. In certain issues I’m sure they were mistaken but that does not stop them being brothers. Many have heard of the disputes between the Arminian Wesley and the Calvinist Whitfield. Both extremely gifted men who brought thousands into the Kingdom yet a totally different understanding of whether salvation could be lost. Could they both be right I wonder?

So getting back to the families and tribes God designed, how are they defined? People were either born into the family (and tribe) or joined the family by covenant; I would suggest this is by Blood or Covenant, which of course is the basis of Christian unity.

But what of deception?

Jesus warns us about false prophets and that deception will increase as this age comes to a close (Matthew 24:11, 24; Mark 13:5) which means we have to learn how to distinguish truth from error as a matter of priority. But the last thing we need to do is to fall into the trap of submitting to ‘doctrine police’. There are websites available which list those preachers they consider to be false preachers. I believe these to be incredibly harmful to the body for a couple of reasons. Firstly, they are influenced by Hellenistic dualism whereby someone is either right or wrong, black or white, leaving no room to bring genuine discernment to individual issues or indeed growth and change.

Secondly because it reinforces the malaise in the church of abrogating individual responsibility to know the scriptures (1 John 2:19-22). A much better approach is to teach the truth which automatically highlights error. It’s an old adage that the best way to notice a forged bank note is to be thoroughly acquainted with the genuine. I wonder if the reason why deception will be so rife in the end times is that fewer of us will know the scriptures for ourselves but tend to rely on the current ‘guru’. Good teachers always encourage us towards digging into scripture for ourselves and not simply imparting knowledge.

“Discernment is not knowing the difference between right and wrong, it is knowing the difference between right and almost right.” Charles Spurgeon

As an ocean sailor I am very aware of the effect a small course error can have over many miles, I think Paul’s instruction to Timothy reflected this (1 Timothy 4:16). We therefore need to both hone our deception radar and also get wisdom for how to deal with it, without causing division over disputable matters.

Occasionally I’ve come across people with a ‘gift of discernment’ which turned out to be a cover for criticism and gossip. Equally harmful however were those who put up with anything for fear of offending. Wouldn’t it be great if there were a flow chart against which we could assess ideas and doctrines?

I believe there are questions we can ask but there really is no substitute for immersing ourselves in the truth. Sadly it’s not as simple as knowing scripture (the Pharisees did that), we also need to be in deep union with the Spirit of Truth remembering that these two are always in full agreement. I also suspect that discernment is a corporate matter and that we need deep, genuine, accountable relationships in which to explore these issues (Proverbs 15:22).

Moving into unity?

I would suggest in the area of true vs false doctrine, we make a distinction between false teaching (1 Timothy 1:3-5) and false teachers (Matthew 7:17, 2 Peter 2:1).

I’ve changed quite a few of my ideas over the last 45 years, I don’t believe it made me a false teacher but fortunately over time the Lord has graciously led me into truth. A good example might be Derek Prince who has been an amazing gift to the church but for a few years taught some very harmful concepts about leadership and spiritual covering which came to be known as ‘heavy shepherding’. He later realised his error and repented. However, during that season some would have condemned him as a false prophet and disregarded everything he said.

A possible way forwards is to ponder the following questions:

Am I in the Spirit?

It’s those who are led by the Spirit who are more likely to come up with the correct assessments (Romans 8:14). I suggest this is the reflective stage outlined in Matthew 7:1-5. It’s not that we are not to judge (1 Corinthians 5:12-13) but that we need to position ourselves correctly before we do so and to make sure, as best as we are able, that we don’t have any ‘planks’ restricting our vision. So how do we test if we are in the flesh or in the spirit (2 Corinthians 13:5)? This has to be done prayerfully, in close communion with Holy Spirit; if I feel any disconnection with Him then my priority is to reconnect in repentance. There are often signs that I am in the flesh; a fleshy response to conflict can include fear, anger, wanting to show the other up. Galatians 5:19-23 gives us a few guidelines as to how we should and shouldn’t be.

Is this teaching consistent with the nature and character of God as revealed in scripture? It is easy to focus on the more ‘comfortable’ facets of God’s character such as His amazing love for us while ignoring His majesty, wrath and justice.

Is this teaching consistent with whole of Scripture? Some teaching emphasises just certain passages while minimising or ignoring others. Does it seem to fit some and not others?

Is this teaching consistent with spiritual growth and holiness? What are the implications for me, for us, for the Kingdom? Does it lead towards genuine holiness and persevering fruit? What might be the best outcome/worst outcome?

Finally, don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. I can think of a few big named teachers who have a great revelation of partial Truth, or rather the truth which has been revealed in them is incomplete in terms of the whole counsel of God. I can think of one such very famous American teacher who has a terrific handle on the Father’s love for us, but I think his escatology is way off. So, using the test above his teaching encourages believers to delve deeper into Father’s love but does not prepare them for increasingly hard times ahead.