Please buy a copy of his book Facing Our Failure. It’s a remarkable piece of research clearly demonstrating the intellectual bankruptcy of conservative Church of Christ theology — bankrupt because the conservative Churches of Christ have never been able to articulate a theology of who does and doesn’t fall away. No one has refuted Todd’s work. It remains unchallenged.

Here at GraceConversation, three of the most well-known, widely published ministers of the conservative Churches of Christ have failed to articulate a coherent position, and when we called them on their failure, they quit. (Greg left the conversation earlier for entirely legitimate reasons independent of this dialogue.) I’m disappointed that they gave up, but not surprised. After all, in over 100 years of debate, the conservatives have never come up with a consistent rule for whom they consider saved and whom they consider fallen. And in my many years of discussing this issue with conservative ministers, every one has left the conversation when asked to state a clear position.

I’m especially disappointed that Mac Deaver quit, as I see his disagreement with his son Todd as a microcosm of the division in the Churches of Christ. We are called to be peacemakers and to bring reconciliation. And I don’t know any way for the two sides to reconcile except through dialogue — and it takes two to have a dialogue. If someone would rather debate than converse, rather quit than confront the weaknesses in his views, reconciliation cannot happen. Mac has made a tragic choice for both his earthly and his spiritual families. I pray that God softens his heart.

And I want to thank the many who logged in and read these posts — especially those who commented, and more especially those who disagree with me. Seriously. There’s no point in the dialogue if everyone already agrees!

I remain willing to continue this conversation about the issues that divide the Churches of Christ. I’d only want to take on the effort with a well-known representative of the conservative Churches. And, God willing, one day someone from the conservative Churches will be willing to discuss his views in this forum. In the meantime, we’ll leave this website up and the materials available as a resource for anyone interested. And I’ll keep participating in the comments. I love comments.

For further material on the topic, Todd’s Bridging the Grace Divide blog and my own OneInJesus blog could be helpful. Readers may also be interested in two online books I wrote: The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace (also available in paperback here or here) and Do We Teach Another Gospel?

Jay and I have now finished presenting the case for our position on apostasy. We have argued that there are three ways a saved person can fall away:

• A Christian falls away when he no longer has faith. “Faith” means faith in Jesus.
• A Christian falls away when he is no longer penitent. Equivalently, a Christian falls away when he no longer submits to Jesus as Lord. Equivalently, a Christian falls away when he willfully continues to sin.
• A Christian falls away when he seeks to be justified other than by faith in Jesus.

Drawing from a wide range of scripture, Jay demonstrated that this position is consistently and repeatedly affirmed in the New Testament.

We believe our conservative participants amply demonstrated that their position on apostasy is incoherent. Our conservative friends actually disagreed among themselves, presenting two conflicting positions on apostasy. Greg and Phil argued that all doctrinal error, if not repented of, condemns; Dad restricted damning error to those wrong doctrines that lead one to sin.

Yet, having stated his position, Dad (who, by this time, was the only active conservative in the discussion) contradicted it time and time again when asked to apply it to specific cases. He also implied that the Bible requires an unattainable perfectionism by affirming that repentance always entails the cessation of the sin, and by refusing to acknowledge the difference between imperfect obedience and disobedience.

Along the way we also had occasion to analyze a number of conservative “proof texts” that were introduced, and to show how they were being misused.

As we end this important conversation, let me again thank Jay for initiating it and inviting me and the other men to participate. Jay is the kind of progressive I never heard about in my conservative upbringing. I was always told that progressives refuse to have their views tested in public discussion with conservatives because they know their position can’t be defended.

Jay apparently didn’t get the memo. GraceConversation was his idea. He discovered that many conservative leaders aren’t anxious to defend their own views in a public forum. But after a number of rejections, he found two who were willing and, after more rejections, a third to replace Greg when he had to leave the discussion.

I greatly appreciate Jay and the work he has done here (he did most of the writing for our side, as you noticed), as well as his ongoing work at oneinjesus.info.

We sincerely thank the three conservative authors – Greg, Phil, and Dad – for the time and effort they contributed. Despite our strong disagreement, we love and appreciate them.

And we thank you, our readers, for patiently following the discussion and sharing your thoughts with us.

We hope much good was done here. We assure you only good was intended.

May God help us all to overcome the obstacles impeding the unity for which Jesus fervently prayed. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

Let’s take a moment and reflect on what the scriptures teach us about church discipline.

Let’s look again at this chart from an earlier post.

Notice that church discipline fits into the same categories as our salvation.

There are those who are struggling to repent, who are toying with sin and considering leaving the Lordship of Jesus. And there are also those who have completely left the Lordship of Jesus – or never have really knelt before him – but who pretend to be Christians to take advantage of the flock.

And then there are those utterly without faith, some of whom not only deny the faith but try to spread their faithlessness within the church.

Finally, there are those who divide because they don’t think Jesus is a sufficient Savior — they insist on saving themselves, denying the hope we have through Jesus.

In other words, a failure to continue in those things that save can lead to being removed from the fellowship of the church. The discipline passages aren’t arbitrary rules – they’re just the natural outworking of grace and its boundaries.

The way the church responds to these threats depends on whether the discipline is for those inside or outside the church – not that it’s always easy to tell!

And it depends on the immediacy of the danger to the church. We act quickly to protect the souls of our members or to protect them from predators.

For those in the church, normally, the response is patient, prayerful, gentle, humble rebuke and instruction.

But if that person’s soul is at risk because he’s fallen out of love with Jesus, he may have to be disfellowshipped in hopes of bringing him to repentance – this being a compassionate, “tough love” approach.

The person without faith or penitence is, of course, in no sense a Christian and must not be treated as such. If he tries to spread his faithlessness, the church cannot give him a platform. Academic freedom, tolerance, and love for the lost do not extend to giving aid to the enemies of Jesus. A seeker, of course, is to be welcomed.

However, there are people, either saved or lost, who must be expelled to protect the remainder of the flock. The divider is to be warned and expelled – even if he’s a believer – because he is destroying God’s house. Those who come to steal or take advantage of the naive must be warned and expelled.

If the harm is sufficiently imminent, we expel first. If a member is found to be a stalker, we can counsel and pray with him far away from the women and children. If he’s a conman, his platform to deceive must be immediately removed.

Where the division is due to selfishness (one symptom of a lack of love) – the color of the carpet – disfellowship is hardly the place to start. Rather, the idea has to be to restore an atmosphere of love – an atmosphere that may have been missing for years. Some serious apologizing and reconciliation may be needed, sometimes even by the leadership.

Elderships are forced to wrestle with these sorts of problems all the time. Failing to properly classify the problem in scriptural terms often leads to a failure to truly resolve the problem. People get their feelings hurt, leave, or even divide the church when discipline is handled badly. But love goes a long way. So long as the congregation feels that the elders truly care more about their well being than their own, a church will put up with a lot to stay together.

However, an eldership bent on protecting the preferences of a privileged few members, on maintaining power at the expense of love, or demanding overly strict doctrinal conformity is a bad eldership and won’t be able to hold its congregation together. After all, you can’t be guilty of the things that get people disfellowshipped and be an effective shepherd of the flock.

None of this justifies dividing or disfellowshipping over a non-gospel question. Instrumental music, right or wrong, is not grounds for separation. Nor is the frequency of taking communion. That’s not to say that there’s no right or wrong answer, only that these aren’t at the heart of the gospel. They aren’t faith, hope, or love.

Indeed, dividing over non-gospel issues makes the divider a sinner against the gospel of Jesus — by committing the Galatian heresy. Those who do this are those that Paul says to watch out for (or mark) in Rom 16:17. You see, in the end, many of those screaming the loudest for separation are the very ones the Bible says to separate from. They should be rebuked and called to repentance, rather than heeded. These are the men who divide the body of Christ and work against the prayer of Jesus —

(John 17:22-23)  I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23 I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Jesus said the world would know that we were sent by Jesus by our complete unity. And there will be no unity until we unite based on the gospel, and just the gospel.

I need to address a difficult topic. Sometimes people divide a church for good reason. What if the leadership of the church does not require the members to have a genuine faith in Jesus? (Faith) What do you do if the leadership of a church is eaten up with the Galatian heresy and insists on damning those they disagree with on all manner of topics? (Hope) What do you do if the leadership of the church has no love for the lost or needy? (Love)

Each of these kinds of problems strikes at the heart of the gospel. These are not like disputes over the color of the foyer, the song selection, or even whether to use instruments. These are disputes over whether the church will honor the truth — the gospel of Jesus Christ.

In such a case, it seems to me that the first order of business is found in some of the passages earlier quoted, such as —

(2 Tim. 2:25-26) Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

Remember, “truth” refers to the gospel.

(Matt. 18:15-17) “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. 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.’

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.”

I don’t think a family who sees these sins in the church’s leadership should just quietly slip out the door. If the problem is severe enough to leave over, it’s severe enough to meet with the leadership and lovingly point out the problem. It may be a futile gesture, but leaving without giving a reason is certainly not going to change the minds of those left behind.

If the leadership refuses to change, I counsel my friends who get caught in such a circumstance along these lines —

• If there’s a chance that staying will help change things, stay.
• But if it’s futile to stay, leave.
• And even if you think you might change things down the road by staying, don’t allow your children to lose their faith in and zeal for Jesus by staying too long. Nothing is worth the faith of your own children.

These aren’t absolute rules. I can see where a family might need to leave to be immediately productive in their ministry for Christ elsewhere. We are called to ministry, but turning a congregation around may not be your ministry. You may better serve the Lord where you can participate in missions or work with the homeless. It’s a judgment call — with the decision to be made in Kingdom terms: what’s best for God’s Kingdom?

However, in such a case, it’s often better to join with another existing church rather than forming a new church. It’s not always possible, of course, but I think the Kingdom is normally better served by one 500-member church rather than four 125-member churches.

Again, it’s not possible to lay down hard and fast rules, other than to say the decision needs to be about what’s best for the Kingdom, a Kingdom where unity is of the essence.

Consider this oft misused passage —

(Rom 16:17) I urge you, brothers, to watch out for [“mark” in the KJV] those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

This is written to many preachers in the 21st Century Churches of Christ. It’s not about those who disagree on instrumental music or elder re-affirmation. It’s those who claim the power to damn over questions that have nothing to do with the gospel, like instrumental music and elder re-affirmation. Such men should be fled – not honored or catered to. They certainly shouldn’t be made ministers or elders.

You see, “contrary to the teachings you have learned” especially means contrary to first 15 chapters of Romans, including Romans 14 and 15. Many in the Churches of Christ have “marked” men contrary to the grace taught in Romans, and thereby have become the very men that Paul tells us to watch out for.

(Titus 3:9-11) But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Who is “divisive”? Plainly, anyone who works to divide brother from brother. And so, who is a brother? Any baptized, penitent believer who is still a penitent believer.

If I demand that someone who uses an instrument be disfellowshipped even though he is a baptized, penitent believer and gives every evidence of being an honest follower of Jesus, which one of us is “warped and sinful”?

Does this mean I can’t teach my understanding of instrumental music? No. It only means that I can’t use that understanding to drive a wedge between brothers.

Being divisive over doctrine is just a natural outworking of legalism – of the Galatian heresy we considered earlier. Indeed, adding “salvation issues” to the gospel necessarily leads to division because the choice of which issues are truly salvation issues is purely subjective, as we’ve seen.

(1 Cor. 1:12-13) What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul?

In 1 Corinthians 1-4, Paul wrestles with division among the congregation. He doesn’t directly address whatever their dispute was over. We don’t know if these disputes were doctrinal or simply over personalities. For Paul, the answer is the same either way: don’t divide.

Notice that Paul also condemns those who say “I follow Christ” (literally, “I am of Christ.”). He says, “Is Christ divided?” In other words, how dare you claim to be “of Christ” and yet work to divide his body! If you want to be of Christ, be like Christ, and bring forgiveness, love, and grace, not division. Peacemakers are of Christ. Shepherds and ministers who scatter the flock are not.

Paul raises the stakes in chapter 3 –

(1 Cor. 3:16-17) Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? 17 If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him; for God’s temple is sacred, and you are that temple.

Each “you” is plural in the Greek (we Southerners would say “y’all”). The congregation is God’s temple. It’s where God lives through his Spirit. If you divide a congregation, then you divide Christ’s body – the very house of God. If you destroy God’s house, God will destroy you.

I don’t know about you, but I think I can see a real-life application here. This just might mean that if I’m a divider of God’s Kingdom, I won’t get to live in that Kingdom when the next age arrives. It’s not a risk I care to take.

Of course, not all division is over doctrine. Division can also be caused by personalities, egos, jealousy, or any number of other sins. Regardless of the cause, fomenting division is repeatedly, strongly condemned. I know of churches that divided over decorating choices! I know lots of churches that divided over the choice of preacher. It’s not always doctrinal.

But when it’s not doctrinal, it’s always about a lack of love. If a church truly loves each other, they’ll find a way to work through a disagreement over the preacher. If the preacher truly loves the church, he’ll resign rather than be the source of division!

When churches fall apart over carpet colors, the carpet color is simply evidence of a much deeper rift – usually who gets to have power. And if the church were truly filled with love, the powerful – those with influence – would yield to others. Because Jesus would. In fact, he did.

(Phil. 2:3-4) Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. 4 Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.

But if a church is really just a social club with a baptistry, then we’ll quite naturally want to do what we enjoy – which is getting our own way.

Now, the Churches of Christ are very fortunate that many of the Christian colleges have started conflict resolution centers. Pepperdine and ACU have offices serving Churches of Christ struggling with internal conflict. Other universities have administrators or professors who are very skilled in this area and glad to help a church in need.

There are times that a church wants to stay together but they just don’t know how to resolve their problems. Sometimes an objective third-party can bring peace whereas no insider could.

Scores if not hundreds of congregations have worked in this way to work through problems that, in the past, might have led to a split.

Division is a sin.

This is one of the most abused verses in all of scripture (which says a lot!):

(2 John 1:7, 9-11) Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. … Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.

The “doctrine of Christ” is plainly the doctrine of his incarnation.

Short argument

(2 John 1:1-3) The elder, To the chosen lady and her children, whom I love in the truth – and not I only, but also all who know the truth – 2 because of the truth, which lives in us and will be with us forever: 3 Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Father’s Son, will be with us in truth and love.

“Truth” in vv. 1-3 is a reference to the gospel, that is, the truth about Jesus. Some teach that this means “all doctrines taught by Jesus” or “all truth found in the Bible” And so they demand that we disfellowship all who have a wrong opinion on any Biblical issue at all.

But if this is true, only those with perfect doctrine may remain in fellowship! And it would be supremely arrogant to imagine that you possess all doctrine exactly right, wouldn’t it?

The context is all about the divinity of Jesus and the gospel (which is what we must believe and confess to be saved). Anyone who denies faith in Jesus is certainly to be treated as a non-Christian. If he is at church as a seeker, welcome him as an honored guest. If he seeks to spread his error, expel him.

It astonishes me that some denominations allow men studying for the ministry to be taught by the faithless. Indeed, a number of seminaries are filled with professors who deny that Jesus even claimed to be the Son of God. A denomination with any genuine respect for Jesus and his word would expel such people – not just because they are wrong, but because they aren’t even Christians.

This is not an institutional problem in the Churches of Christ. The accusation is often made, but it’s utterly without support. Rather, we are guilty of other sins.

The interpretation of this passage and the use of “truth” in the New Testament is discussed in greater detail in these posts —

The “Teaching of Christ” in 2 John

John’s Gospel

“Truth” in Paul, Part 1

“Truth” in Paul, Part 2

“Truth” in Hebrews, James, and 1 & 2 Peter

We generally cannot distinguish someone who is struggling with his penitence from someone who has abandoned Jesus altogether. In such cases, I think we have to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume we’re dealing with a Christian but a Christian who is struggling with sin and needs to be confronted and perhaps even to be disfellowshipped.

However, where it’s clear this person has so left Jesus that he has become an enemy of the Kingdom, our response is dictated by several passages –

(2 Tim. 3:2-5) People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God – having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.

Does this passage, fairly read, describe those who –

• Use the instrument in worship (or don’t)?
• Accept the “Pauline exception” to the prohibition against divorce (or don’t)?
• Refuse to build a fellowship hall with church money (or do so)?
• Allow couples who divorced and remarried before baptism to join the church without first divorcing (or don’t)?

Obviously, not. You can disagree on any of these issues and not be described in this passage! These sinners Paul is discussing are plainly enemies of the faith — they even deny the power of God!

(Matt. 10:16) “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.”

We are instructed not to be stupid – or naive. When evil is present in the church, we must rid the church of the evil.

But sin by a penitent believer, who is trying to obey God but who fails, is not this kind of evil. If there’s any doubt, we treat the sinner as a brother in need of correction, not an enemy to be ejected.

(Matt. 7:15-17) “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.”

I can’t even begin to count the number of times I’ve seen Matt. 7:15-17 wrongly used of godly brothers and sisters in Christ. If someone argues for the use of instrumental music, he is characterized as a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Not so!

A sheep is not a wolf. You cannot be among the saved and be a wolf. If your error is covered by grace, you are still in error and need to be corrected, but you are nonetheless a brother in Christ who must be treated as a brother.

If you and I disagree on one of the countless questions that divide the Churches of Christ, I must consider you wrong (and you must consider me wrong), but if we are both believers (have faith in Jesus) and penitent (yield to Jesus as Lord), then we’re still brothers (as annoying as that may be!). And neither is a wolf. Both of us are sheep.

Many people disagree with me about lots of different things. Disagreeing does not a wolf make. Disagreeing does not make one “ferocious.”  You are not ferocious unless you intend to do harm – that is, what you know to be harm.

I know men and women who’ve joined a church to seduce women or to receive undeserved charity or to steal. Any church of any size has had this experience. These are wolves.

I know men and women who’ve joined a church in hopes of drawing away a portion of the flock to create a preaching job for a man looking for a post. Again, this is evil and must be recognized as such — because such a man joins a church intending not to submit to its leadership. He’s a liar and a rebel.

Now, it may be that those who do such things are sincerely deluded and can be taught better and brought to repentance. But if this fails, or if the church must immediately expel the evil-doer to protect its members, expulsion is the solution. You don’t let a thief or sexual predator hang around while you pray with and console him and he continues to steal or take advantage of your members! In such a case, expel first – and keep counseling, if possible.

In such a case, the expulsion isn’t foremost to drive the person to penitence, although this is always a desired outcome. Rather, the primary goal is the protection of the flock.

It’s hard to state absolutely rock-solid, black-letter rules for how to make the necessary distinction. It starts with a proper foundation in grace – but not going so far that you put your church or its members at unnecessary risk.

Love. Be gentle. Don’t be stupid.

Several passages deal with members who are wandering from the faith but haven’t yet left the faith. They are struggling in their submission to Jesus as Lord.

(2 Thes. 3:14-15) If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.

Plainly, the disobedient person under consideration is still a brother in Christ. He is impenitent, but not so much so that he is lost – at least, not so far as we can tell.

The goal of the disassociation is to shame him. Now, obviously enough, this means the action must be taken while he still cares what the church thinks. He must still be part of the community – so much so that being expelled could bring him to repentance. For this to work, the thought of losing the friendship of his brothers and sisters must be unbearable.

If the man can simply move his membership to another congregation or leave the church altogether and be content, then it won’t work. The solution isn’t to insist that other congregations honor the decision (although, as a rule, they should). The solution is for the church to have such a dynamic love that members can’t bear to lose it!

(1 Cor. 5:1-5) It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father’s wife. And you are proud!

When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus … hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.

Shouldn’t you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? …

Here’s a more specific example of the same teaching. The problem was, again, a lack of penitence. They knew incest to be wrong. This wasn’t an honest disagreement over doctrine, such as those considered in Romans 14. Here’s an example of a man guilty of known sin making no effort to overcome his sin.

The attitude of the church is to be one of “grief,” literally, mourning. The church isn’t angry – it’s worried. A member is on the brink of falling away. Just as we are distressed for a family member fighting a fatal illness – and in agony when our loved one seems to give up – the church is desperate for this man to return to his Lord.

The goal, of course, is for the man to repent, as this is the only possible path back to Jesus. He is “handed over to Satan” in the sense that he may no longer enjoy the sweet fellowship of the Kingdom and must live as the world – getting a preview of what it will be like if he doesn’t change. It’s “tough love.”

(2 Cor. 2:6-8) The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him.

And as Paul urges his readers in his next letter to the church in Corinth, the church must be ready – anxious – to forgive and restore fellowship. The penitent man needs to be reassured of the church’s love. He is not to be considered a second-class Christian.

(Matt. 18:15-17) “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. 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.’

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.”

I’ve posted a much more detailed exposition of this passage here. Here’s the short version.

This passage has been horribly misinterpreted – especially by some ministers. Here’s what it DOESN’T mean –

* This is not a lesson on conflict resolution. It closely parallels some very sound conflict resolution principles, but that is not why Jesus said these words. After all, the outcome of a failure is that the sinner is disfellowshipped. Moreover, this is spoken in the context of the parable of the lost sheep. It’s about restoring a Christian caught up in sin — a sin that might cause him to be lost. That’s what the parable is about.

* This is not a legal structure that allows us to avoid responsibility for our sins. I’ve had ministers very seriously argue that they don’t have to change their bad behavior because the person making the accusation didn’t follow the Matthew 18 process! Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!!

Change your behavior because you’ve made Jesus your Lord and love your neighbor. If you lean on legal technicalities to avoid accountability, you’re not much of a Christian.

* “Against you” almost certainly is not part of the original text Matthew wrote. The words are absent in the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus – two of the very oldest, most complete, ancient manuscripts – as well as being absent in quotations by some of the earliest Christian writings, such as the works of Origen, Basil, and Cyril.

After all, why should the victim be the person who has to deal with this problem? Remember – this is not about conflict resolution so much as rescuing a soul from potential damnation! It’s great when the victim can take this task on, but sometimes the elders or someone else is in a better position. Sometimes the victim isn’t even a member of the church! (Must a beaten wife confront her husband before the church can remove the wife beater from its fellowship? I think not.)

Ultimately, the point of the passage is simple enough. We are to confront those who commit sins that they know to be wrong. Impenitence is best dealt with early on – before the Christian is completely seduced by the sin.

Gentle, prayerful, humble confrontation comes long before disfellowshipping, but there may well come a time when the sinner must be disfellowshipped – for his own good. And this time is before the sinner leaves the church on his own. He must still enjoy being a part of the community – so much so that loss of community will shock him into repentance.

Consider 1 Tim. 4:2. A conscience can be “seared as with a hot iron” and no longer capable of being brought to repentance. Consider also Heb. 6:4-6. Don’t wait too long!

Finally, the attitude of the church is of critical importance.

(2 Tim. 4:2) Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage – with great patience and careful instruction.

The leadership is certainly to rebuke sin – but patiently and with instruction. Take the time to teach those who disagree. Give God time to work through prayer. Don’t give up too soon.

(Gal 6:1) Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.

Take the time to search for “gentle” or “gently” in the New Testament. This word is repeatedly used of the leadership of the church. When a sinner is confronted, restoration must be gentle – and humble.

We must restore humbly because it’s easy to feel morally superior when dealing with a man who has fallen into known sin. And as soon as the leadership begins feeling morally superior, it’s in serious danger.

(2 Tim. 2:25-26) Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

Paul urges gentle instruction, rather than bombastic condemnation. Imagine how the history of the Churches of Christ would have been different had our leaders actually obeyed this passage?

Repentance comes from God. We can lead the sinner back to his Savior. We can’t scream them into penitence.

“Truth” in the New Testament means the truth about Jesus, the gospel. As a result, the truth we are to return our sinning members to is the truth of the gospel – the same truth that led them to repent in the first place. Therefore, this isn’t about getting the instrumental music or elder re-affirmation question right. It’s about getting “Jesus is Lord” (Rom 10:9) right.

This is a continuation of the progressive posts on what causes a saved person to fall away. And that’s important, because these teachings on church discipline won’t make any sense to someone with a very different understanding of grace. You see, it all fits together. It has to fit together, because it all comes from the same Mind.

Now, the New Testament says quite a lot about disfellowshipping or excluding various people from the church. These verses are often interpreted this way –

* I am right

* You are wrong

* You must leave

Simple enough, I suppose, but completely removed from the heart of God shown through Jesus and the scriptures.

Let’s begin by just thinking – doing what Einstein called a “thought experiment.” Imagine that all these previous lessons we’ve covered on apostasy are actually true. Reasoning solely from what we’ve learned regarding grace, what sorts of people should the church exclude from its fellowship?

Well, expelling someone from God’s church is a serious matter. Obviously, non-Christians who are part of our community as seekers, wishing to learn more about Jesus, are welcome. We are delighted to have visitors! As we traditionally say, they are our “honored guests”! And, indeed, they are. Therefore, we won’t expel someone just because he isn’t saved. (The unsaved are not yet part of the church, of course. The point is, we don’t withdraw our association from them for this reason.)

And whatever the practice is, it must be built on a strong foundation of love — both for the person being disciplined and, where need be, love for the church being protected from an evil person.

One of the most critical pastoral problems any church faces is when a saved person is in danger of losing his salvation. How do we keep this beloved brother or sister from being deceived and hardened by sin and so falling away?

Another test of any church is how to deal with a factious person. There are two ways a church can be divided. Sometimes, an influential person is caught up in the Galatian heresy and seeks division to enforce a standard of salvation other than Jesus, Son of God, Lord, and Savior. Other times, the split is over personalities or preferences. Either way, division injures the body of Christ.

Finally, there are the true wolves in sheep’s clothing, evil persons pretending to be Christians in order to take advantage of good people. How should the church respond?

Thus, as we’ll soon demonstrate from scripture, we have three categories of reasons that we might expel someone from our fellowship —

• A Christian struggling with temptation who might be brought to repentance by being disfellowshipped.
• A factious person who seeks to divide God’s church.
• A malicious person seeking to take advantage of God’s people by pretending to be a Christian.

With these thoughts in mind, let’s consider some key passages.

The first column is the Plan of Salvation as we’ve traditionally taught it.

The second column follows the language that Todd and I used in our first several posts.

The third column expresses the same thoughts in Jesus-centered terms. “Faith” is accepting Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God. “Repentance” is accepting Jesus as Lord. But there’s a third element that Gal 5:4 helps us focus on — accepting Jesus as Savior. You see, he’s not really our Savior if we try to be our own saviors. It’s not until we add “only” to faith and repentance that we stop trying to sharing the role of savior with Jesus.

The fourth column, labeled “Baptism,” marks the line between becoming saved and being saved.

The fifth and sixth columns repeat the second and third columns, because the standard for being saved is the same as becoming saved.

The seventh column borrows its language from Gal 5:6b —

The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

“Love” fits in the slot for repentance and for accepting Jesus as Lord because love fulfills the law. “Only” fits into the slot in parallel with “Savior” because it’s the “only” that allows Jesus to save — rather us having to save ourselves.

The final column take the familiar triad — faith, hope, and love — and shows how it parallels our salvation. “Hope” is both the new heaven and earth that await us at the End of time and the confidence we have that we’ll actually be there. And that confidence is found in the “only” — in our trust in Jesus to save us.

Notice that, as shown in the first column, we mention nothing in the “plan of salvation” about looking to Jesus as our Savior, and this is a mistake. Now, it’s implicit in our pre-baptismal teaching. We really do teach salvation by faith and not works before baptism! We just don’t list it in our 5 steps.

The problem is that after we’re baptized, we no longer consider faith, hope, and love good enough. Rather, we find our hope not only in Jesus but also in our ability to discern implications from the scripture that are — to say the least — less than obvious! And while we don’t add circumcision to the plan of salvation, we often add lots and lots of other things.

We skip the “only” part of Galatians 5:6 and so we skip the “hope” and “Savior” parts as well. We say the words but we contradict them in countless ways. It’s the “only” that makes the gospel good news!

And our refusal to see this is tearing the Churches of Christ to shreds — and costing the souls of many.

Therefore, it’s imperative for all who understand to teach everyone who will listen. The times do not permit silence. We cannot run from controversy. We cannot fear loss of reputation or friends. I mean, would you rather lose your friend for your few remaining years on this planet — or for eternity?

Neither can we put the institutions we work for ahead of sound theology. There is no wisdom, courage, or love in remaining silent just so the contributions will keep flowing in. Indeed, this would be to worship Mammon rather than God. No, to follow in the steps of Jesus, we must be willing to pay the price of telling the truth.