"Matthew Eighteen": A Viable Contention
Where Principles of the Gospel are Concerned?
by Debra Bouey
Introduction
With the advent of mass media there has
been an explosion over the airwaves of preachers and teachers.
Radio and television shows provide a platform which reaches
thousands and thousands of people daily. Often, less than orthodox
teachings proceed from some of these electronic pulpits. When
Biblical apologists comment publicly on these aberrant, sometimes
heretical, teachings, the principals involved, and their supporters,
quickly and repeatedly raise the "Matthew 18 Argument", contending
that the "brother" [or, as the case may be, "sister"] should
have been approached privately, "according to Matthew 18".
To that end, it seems judicious to examine the passages in
Matthew 18 in light of the whole counsel of Scripture. Is Matthew
18 a valid contention in these instances? Let us go to God's
Word and see.
The Passages at Issue -- Matthew 18:15-17:
[15] And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private;
if he listens to you, you have won your brother. [16] But
if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you,
so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact
may be confirmed. [17] And if he refuses to listen to them,
tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to
the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer.
[NASB]
[15] Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee,
go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if
he shall hear thee, thou hast gained Thy brother. [16] But
if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two
more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word
may be established. [17] And if he shall neglect to hear
them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear
the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a
publican. [KJV]
[15] If your brother sins against you, go and show him his
fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you,
you have won your brother over. [16] But if he will not listen,
take one or two others along, so that every matter may be
established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. [17]
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and
if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as
you would a pagan or a tax collector. [NIV]
Here, in these passages, Jesus sets the standard by which
we, as Christians, are to deal with those who sin against us
individually. These verses relate specifically to sins committed
between individual believers. Jesus is telling us how the conflicts
between individual believers are to be resolved so that the
believers may be reconciled with one another, alleviating strife
and dissension. As Matthew 18:35 tells us, we are to forgive
one another from the heart and that forgiveness is not contingent
upon whether or not the believer who has wronged us either
apologizes or makes amends -- we are to forgive unconditionally,
as we have been forgiven.. In the matter of strife and wrongdoing
between individual Christians, a plenarily inspired Paul elaborates
further in I Corinthians 5:12-6:7:
[12] For what have I to do with judging outsiders?
Do you not judge those who are within the church? [13] But
those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from
among yourselves. [6:1] Does any one of you, when he has a
case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous,
and not before the saints? [2] Or do you not know that the
saints will judge the world? And if the world is judged by
you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts?
[3] Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more,
matters of this life? [4] If then you have law courts dealing
with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who
are of no account in the church? [5] I say this to your shame.
Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will
be able to decide between his brethren, [6] but brother goes
to law with brother, and that before unbelievers? [7] Actually,
then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits
with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather
be defrauded?
I Corinthians 6:7 is a forerunner to chapter 13, "Love...is not
provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered...". But
here, we are dealing with what a Christian's behavior should
be in a situation where one believer has treated another unjustly
and not with a matter concerning the principles of the Gospel.
One is a personal offense, the other is an affront to the Gospel
truth.
Is There Scriptural Precedent for Public Correction?
Yes, there is, in matters which affect the principles of the
Gospel. Paul states in Galatians 2:11-14:
[11] But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed
him to his face, because he stood condemned. [12] For prior
to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with
the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and
hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.
[13] And the rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with
the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.
[14] But when I saw that they were not straightforward about
the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of
all, "If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like
the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like
Jews?
Why did Paul confront Peter publicly "before them all"? Because
he "saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of
the Gospel" and their words and actions were causing others to
be led astray. Therefore, we see a clear-cut Biblical precedent
for public rebuke where it concerns aberrant teachings which
depart from the truth of the Gospel.
In II Timothy 2:15-18, Paul calls false teachers by name
("Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, men who have gone
astray from the truth...".) In Acts 20:29-31, Paul tells us
he continued to warn the early church about false teachers
and doctrine for three years. ("Therefore be on the alert,
remembering that night and day for a period of three years
I did not cease to admonish each one with tears.") In fact,
the New Testament is replete with public correction of erroneous
teachings within the church.
Why is it Important to Correct Publicly?
As James said, "Behold, the ships also, though they are so great
and are driven by strong winds, are still directed by a very
small rudder, wherever the inclination of the pilot desires.
So also the tongue is a small part of the body...Behold, how
great a forest is set aflame by such a small fire!" [James 3:4-5]
Words are powerful; God likens the tongue to a rudder on a ship
and a bit in a horses mouth. These, in themselves, are powerful
words recorded there in James for our counsel, caution and exhortation.
Words are so powerful, that when the Hebrew nation went into
battle, God commanded that any man who was "afraid and fainthearted"
should be sent home "so that he might not make his brothers'
hearts melt like his heart." [Deuteronomy 20:8, among others]
God knew that if the fearful stayed in the ranks, they would
speak of their fear and act accordingly, thus causing others
to become fearful as well. We often influence one another with
our words, even, perhaps especially, when we are not aware
we are doing so.
Where the straightforwardness of the Gospel is deviated from
publicly, those aberrant words are equally as powerful and
potentially influential to the hearers, particularly to seekers
and those who may not be well- rooted and grounded in God's
Word. In such situations, we must not remain silent. We are
as accountable to God for remaining silent when we ought to
speak out as we are for speaking inappropriately or when we
ought to remain silent.
Furthermore, God has said in Proverbs 18:21a: "Death and life
are in the power of the tongue" Throughout Scripture, we see
the damage errantly spoken words can do; how they impact and
sway the hearer(s). Therefore, with the potential for countless
thousands on the other end of radios and televisions to be
led astray, correction of aberrant, often heretical, teachings
needs to be equally as public. When erroneous teachings are
proclaimed to broad audiences as Gospel truth, thereby impacting
and influencing them, shouldn't those errant teachings be repudiated
to equally as public and broad of an audience? The issue here
is not fault-finding, but addressing public teaching of false
doctrine related to the foundational tenets of our Christian
faith.
Isn't Public Correction Unloving?
No, it isn't. Quite the contrary.
Proverbs 27:5: Better is open rebuke than love that
is concealed.
It simply isn't Divine love to sit by and do nothing where
the straightforwardness of the Gospel truth is concerned. I
am not talking about wrangling over words and making obtuse
arguments about peripheral issues, but where the Gospel itself
has been departed from. It only takes a few errant words to
firmly fix an aberrant, unorthodox doctrine in the minds of
the hearers... "Behold, how great a forest is set aflame by
such a small fire!" [James 3:5b] We are talking about a very
"narrow gate" here, as Jesus Himself stated in Matthew 7:13-14:
[13] Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide, and
the way is broad that leads to destruction, and many are
those who enter by it. [14] For the gate is small, and the
way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find
it.
If we, as Christians, are all one Body [in Christ] as we
claim to be, then we ought to love another enough to speak
the truth in these matters... and to hear the truth and receive
correction as well...even when it may be an unpopular truth.
We ought to love one another enough to "contend earnestly for
the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints."
[Jude 3]
The phrase "contend earnestly" in Jude is unique in all of
the New Testament. In the Greek, it means to contend, literally
to the point of agony, as an athlete might in the Olympic games,
as competing and contending to win the prize. That is a very
distinctive mandate to vigorously contend for the faith, for
the Gospel truth in the face of aberrant teachings. In fact,
the little epistle of Jude tells us both why [false teachers]
and how [in the love of God] we are to "contend earnestly"
for the faith.
Isn't Public Correction Divisive and Harmful to the Unity
of the Body? We need to understand that if we don't "rightly
divide the word of truth" [2 Timothy 2:15], God's Word will
divide us. God always draws a dividing line between truth and
error. We also need to understand that Jesus Christ did not
come to bring the shallow, superficial kind of peace which
downplays the profound differences between truth and error
just for the sake of some kind of specious unity. Any kind
of "unity" which calls for unanimity for unity's sake itself--strange
as that may seem--is a false unity if it has compromised and
attempted to unite truth with erroneous, faulty teachings.
Anything we make concessions at the expense of God's truth
to get-- including unity, especially unity--we will ultimately
lose. What compromise really means is that nobody gets what
they want, doesn't it? God is not interested in providing solutions
"everybody can live with", but, rather, with truth, holiness
and righteousness. Which is precisely what often separates
God's version of "unity" and "oneness" from man's ideas about
what constitutes unity.
Man's version of unity is not what God wants--and certainly
not unity at the cost of compromising the Gospel. He wants
a holy people separated to Himself--this is what Jesus meant
when He said "follow Me". For far too long, many of us have
labored under the misconception that putting on a unified "front",
while overlooking aberrant teaching within the ranks, will
usher in revival. Not so. When God's people really start seeking
first His Kingdom and His righteousness [Matthew 6:33]--earnestly
seeking to live our lives, worship and pray according to God's
Word, "hating even the garment polluted by the flesh" [Jude
23], loving His truth and loathing sin and error--then God
Himself, by His beloved indwelling Holy Spirit, will unite
and knit together the hearts of them that love Him and His
truth. Then God's light and glory will shine forth from the
midst of such a people and the world will know. We, the professing
Body of Christ, will never know true, Christ-centered unity
any o! ther way. Church history these last 2000+ years has
revealed to us that inescapable fact.
We need to be separated from error. Where there is ongoing
denial of, and unwillingness to clearly and soundly repudiate
false teachings, rather than attempting to unite truth with
error under the guise of misguided "unity" and "love", we need
to understand that division is not an undesirable thing in
that context, but a needful thing and we should take action
according to the Biblical criteria. Consider carefully why
Paul uses such strong and forceful language in Galatians 1:8,
then goes on to reiterate and reemphasize the point in verse
9:
[8] But even though we, or an angel from heaven,
should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have
preached to you, let him be accursed. [9] As we have said before,
so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel
contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.
Paul is referring to any perversion of the Gospel The message,
Paul is saying, must not change, and must not be changed, even
by him, because the absolute truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ
never changes--this is "the faith which was ONCE FOR ALL delivered
to the saints." [Jude 3] and any deviation therefrom is to be
insufferable. It does not matter to Paul here whether the one
who might come preaching "a gospel contrary" was doing so out
of the best of, albeit misguided, intentions or not. There is
no qualification here whatever...because the Gospel deals with
the eternal destiny of souls and so, therefore, it is a life
and death matter. Simply, an extraordinarily strongly-worded
"...if any man is preaching to you a Gospel contrary to that
which you received, let him be accursed."
In a brief aside, it occurs to me as I have been pondering
over the various passages dealing with these matters, if Paul
was here today, he'd likely be called "unloving" and "divisive"
for his preaching regarding aberrant teachings. He rebuked
and offered correction publicly in Scripture and I expect he'd
do so equally as publicly if he was here with us today.
Proverbs 28:23: He who rebukes a man will afterward find
more favor Than he who flatters with the tongue.
Closing Thoughts
How the individual reader views the "Matthew 18 Contention" and
contending earnestly for the faith is highly dependent upon what
place one gives the written Word of God. Do you view Scripture
as God's absolute, objective truth? As the gauge by which all
teachings and subjective spirituals matters are to be measured?
Today, some would have us believe that "God is bigger than
His word" in an attempt to elevate a subjective, experience-oriented
faith above a sound, Bible-based Gospel. Consider Psalms 138:2b,
where God tells us He has equated His Word with His name; with
His very character:
"For Thou hast magnified Thy word according to all Thy name."
There is today a group of people who believe themselves to
be "apostles and prophets", claiming there is a "new move of
God", a "third wave" and "fresh [extra-Biblical] revelation"
through dreams and visions. In fact, some have gone so far
as to equate those who do not agree with their assertions with
"Saul", while likening themselves to "Davids". Whether there
are prophets in the church today is not the issue at hand.
The crux of the matter is this: Is our standard for the personal
practice of our Christian faith going to be determined by the
accumulative evidences of the objective Word of God--the Bible--or
shall we make our criteria for the practice of our faith dependent
upon the personal, subjective spiritual revelations and prophecies
of an exclusive, modern-day cadre of self-professed apostles
and prophets?
Are we going to view personal spiritual revelations through
the lens of God's Word or are we going to view God's Word through
the lens of personal spiritual revelations? The former--God's
Word--is objective and absolute truth. It is as applicable
to your life as it is to mine and has been to countless other
dear saints who have preceded us. The latter--personal spiritual
revelations--are subjective, not absolute...and not always
accurate.
Acts 17:11: Now these were more noble-minded than those
in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness,
examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things
were so.
Paul not only didn't object to the Bereans "examining the Scriptures
daily, to see whether these things [Paul was teaching] were so"
[Acts 17:11], but he highly commended them, calling them "more
noble-minded than those in Thessalonica". If we wish to avoid
error and deception, we all should be as "noble-minded" as the
Bereans were. In evaluating all teachings and subjective spiritual
revelations, we should never forget Isaiah 8:20: "To the law
and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word,
it is because there is no light in them." [KJV]
"Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my
conscience is captive to the Word of God....God help me.
Here I stand. I can do no other." [Martin Luther]
Except where otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations
are taken from the New American Standard Bible, copyright 1960,
1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, by The Lockman
Foundation, La Habra, California.
|
