Elder Oscar B.
Mink
Former Sovereign
Grace Baptist Pastor
Now In His
Eternal
Rest With The Saviour He Loves So Dearly
(May 3, 1924 -
August 25, 2004)
“... Whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God” (I
Corinthians
10:31).
This
text leaves no question as to what the motive of every saved person
should be. All of our actions should emanate from a desire to magnify
the Lord.
The text is all-comprehensive, and leaves no thought, word, or deed to
be
executed without God’s glory being its design and premeditated end. A
mock or
superficial motive can stimulate the flesh, but such a motive will
never
produce or effect a change for the good of man or the glory of God. The
right
motive is the foundation of all honest contemplation, and a right
motive is
absolutely necessary in producing the good works which influence men to
glorify
the Father which is in heaven (Matthew 5:16).
Act
and Attitude
The
law of Moses dealt
with sin as an act, but He that is infinitely more glorious than Moses,
taught
that a wrong attitude or motive is sin (Matthew 5:27, 28).
The
Mount Sinai code of law had no power nor penalty beyond an overt or
manifest
transgression. Its judicative arm was too short to reach the motive or
attitude
of those with whom it had to do, but Christ rendered a guilty verdict
against
the dormant evil in the heart (Matthew 5:28). Man judges from
outward
appearance, but God looketh on the heart (I Samuel 16:7), and so
it was
Christ said to the Pharisees: “Even so ye also outwardly appear
righteous
unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity” (Matthew
23:28).
The law of Moses dealt with the motions of sin, but He that is
absolutely holy,
judges the motives of men. “I, the Lord, search the heart ...” (Jeremiah
17:10). If the motive is wrong, no matter how correct the external
action
may be, it is unacceptable with God. The most eloquent, articulate, and
doctrinally correct preaching, is but so many misspent words when the
attitude
or motive is wrong. It does man no good to honor Christ with his lips,
when his
heart in far from Him (Mark 7:6). What may appear as a good and
commendable action is not in truth a good deed, unless the doer is
willing for
Christ to get all the glory for His effort. For acceptance with God,
all of our
labors are hinged on the purity of our motives, and if not prompted by
a desire
to glorify God, will be reduced to ashes at the judgment seat of Christ
(I
Corinthians 3:11-15).
Contending
for the Faith
We
are commanded in
Scripture to “Contend for the Faith” (Jude 3), but when “the
Faith” is contended for with a malicious spirit, doubt is cast on
the
motive of the contender. When such an ill spirit is manifested, it
gives rise
to the question: “Is the contender for the faith seeking to glorify God
in his
defense of the truth, or is it his motive to make his remonstrant look
bad, and
himself superior?” The Apostle Paul
said: Some men “glory
in appearance, and not in heart” (II Corinthians 5:12). The
saint is
never to seek the approbation of his peers at the expense of God’s
glory.
Again, I refer to Paul on this point as he said, “… Do I seek to
please men?
... I should not be the servant of Christ” (Galatians 1:10).
But Paul, the great defender of the faith, was exceedingly careful so
as not to
unduly offend his weaker brethren. Paul taught that an unwarranted
offense was
a “sin against Christ” (I Corinthians 8:12).
Error
is to be undauntedly
withstood and sometimes the obviating of error demands plain speech.
The words
of rebuke may be sharper than a two-edged sword, and oft-times need be,
but
this does not mean he who gives the reprimand should be tactless and
unconcerned about how it will affect the erring brother. The “like it
or lump
it” attitude manifests a haughty spirit and is antagonistic to the
spirit of
conciliation. “Let us not be desirous of vain glory ...” (Galatians
5:26).
It
was in a fellowship
meeting at Antioch, that Paul rebuked Peter for his dissimulation. Paul
said: “But
when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he
was to
be blamed” (Galatians 2:11). Paul’s purpose in rebuking
Peter was
not to embarrass him, but to embolden him in his stand against
circumcising
Judaism. Paul’s rebuke of Peter was not harsh or hostile and Paul’s
desired end
in the matter was realized; this particular error of Peter was utterly
mitigated, or at least it never again made the inspired record.
Paul’s
rebuke of Peter was
not intended to alienate him, but to meliorate him, and Paul’s motive,
being
pure in this matter, God honored his efforts. Later we read where Peter
spoke
of Paul as “our beloved brother, Paul” (II Peter 3:15).
In our
spiritual swordsmanship, we are to contend for the faith without fear
or favor,
and as strange as it might seem, this can be done while being as “harmless
as doves”. The wise pastor knows how to sternly rebuke his people
without
scolding them, and he knows how to use pulpit vinegar without causing
his
people to sour on him.
Offenses
Are Inevitable
“... It is impossible but that offenses will come ...” (Luke
17:1).
It is
good for a saint to be offended by the world, for the world is
anti-God, and everything that is against God should offend the
Christian. The
offenses of the world against the Lord’s churches, contrary to its
nefarious
motives and designs, have served to stabilize them, rather than causing
them to
stagger. However, the breach created by the trespass of a church member
against
member or a church against church, retards brotherly edification and
bedims the
glory of God in His churches.
Sadly,
in our day, the
attitude or mind-set that gives vent to division and schism in New
Testament
churches and between churches is not as loathsome and strange as it was
a few
brief years ago. That which turns brotherly converse into verbal
conflict and
sets church against church, should be hated with an insatiable passion
and
utterly avoided, even at the cost of humiliation. Nothing is more
destructive
to church unity than contending for the faith with a contentious
spirit.
Baptists all through their history have been obedient to the faith and
that
without being obdurate. However, it seems that the contemporary church
atmosphere is permeated with an acute sensitiveness, and the least
variance is sufficient
grounds for dis-fellowship. Could it be we are like microwaves and heat
up real
quick? “He that is soon angry dealeth foolishly …” (Proverbs
14:17).
The
rebuke of error is
vital to the church and necessary for its well-being. Then, too, a sure
way to
grow in grace and knowledge of the truth is correction of error, and
when the
reproval is made with a heart-felt concern for the erring brother, the
brotherly relationship will, as a rule, be enriched and the error
purged. On
the other hand, if the rebuke is actuated or motivated by any carnal
desire, or
for any reason other than to gain the erring brother (Matthew 18:15),
it
will most likely confirm the brother in his error.
An
honest rebuke is not a
verbal thrashing, but it is a zealous effort to mitigate an offense or
nullify
error, and this godly end can only be realized if “the spirit of
meekness”
is manifested by all parties involved, for “an angry man stirreth up
strife”
(Galatians 6:1; Proverbs 29:22).
Purity
of Motive Precludes
Compromise with Error
“Do not err, my beloved brethren” (James 1:16).
Truth
is far too precious to sacrifice upon the altar of expediency or
compromise, and error is to be exposed at all times and expunged
whenever and
wherever possible. However, Paul says that the “reproving” and “rebuking”
of error is to be done, “with all longsuffering and doctrine” (II
Timothy 4:2).
An
earnest and honest
contention for the faith, even though permeated with and manifested by
love,
will yet gender adversity, and alienate some beloved brethren. This sad
truth
is evidenced by the heavy heart of Paul, being motivated by his great
love for
the erring churches of Galatia, as he said unto them: “Am I
therefore become
your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” (Galatians 4:16).
Paul’s
disdain for the Galatian error was graphically stated, yet it was
presented in
such a way that the purity of his motive in so doing, was left beyond
question.
There
was never an ill
motive in the heart of the Saviour, and the caption under the picture
of His sacrificial
life, reads: “He glorified God on the earth” (John 17:4). His
every
thought, word, and deed was motivated by His unflinching determination
to
glorify His heavenly Father, and
Paul says: “... He
that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord” (II Corinthians 10:17).
All
saved people, in or
out of the Lord’s churches, as to nature, are composite beings; they
are given
a new nature in regeneration, but their old nature is still with them
and is as
vicious as ever. Owing to a lack of suppression of the old nature,
Baptist
church members will err, and that most grievously at times. While the
Lord’s
churches are to never patronize error, they are to follow every step
delineated
in Scripture in their effort to recover the erring member, before
excisive
discipline is invoked against him.
After
the scriptural
admonitions have been followed in spirit and in the letter, and the
result is
yet negative, there is no recourse left to the church, but exclusion of
the
offending person from membership of the church. The church is to make
no
concessions to error, for there is no fellowship so sweet that it
merits the
least compromise of the word of God, and any such compromise is a
dangerous
compounding of the error.
Nevertheless,
the motive
in discipline should never be fleshly gratification, but for the
glorification
of the Head of the church, which glorification is, in some cases,
manifested by
the gain of the erring person.
God
in wisdom endowed His
churches with power to attract and with power to repel, with power to
enlist
and with power to exclude. The power to repel and exclude is a last
resort
measure, however, once the necessity has arisen whereby a member must
be
excluded; the church should not approach the problem with either a
tepid or
vindictive spirit, but with a spirit of meekness and resolve and
concern for
the spiritual welfare of the offending brother.
Notwithstanding,
there are
offenses so atrocious in nature, that the church is left without an
option, and
must, without delay or deliberation, exclude the guilty person from the
membership of the church (I Corinthians 5:1, 2). But,
thank God,
His churches are not often afflicted with such overwhelming revulsion,
but are
in its absence given ample time to deal with other forms of leavening
and seeds
of discord.
There
is no offense
committed by a Christian brother against his church which is
insuperable, and
there are no barriers between the Lord’s churches which are incapable
of being
overturned. So as to not vitiate church discipline, all
church interaction
with the disciplined person must be avoided; no public part of the
church
service is open to him, and nothing should be done by the immediate
church
members, nor by any sister church, to desensitize or lessen the effect
of the
discipline invoked by the membership church.
The
censoring of dialogue
and the circumscribing of social intercourse with the disciplined
person, may,
in some instances, be deemed wise, but there is no scriptural mandate
which
prohibits all social or family communion with the excluded person. The
church
is never to placate the deposed offender, and if he remains or becomes
recalcitrant, the position of the church in his regard should remain
intact.
However, it is not a compromise on the part of the church to recognize
and
encourage any conciliatory gesture made by the subject of discipline.
Otherwise, no fallen brother would ever be lifted up and restored to
fellowship
in the disciplining church.
“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and
offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; AND AVOID THEM
(emphasis OBM) (Romans 16:17).
This
Divine injunction is all too often distorted or twisted and made to
comprehend each and every variance that may surface, but this is not
the force
or meaning of it; otherwise, it would spell oblivion for all of the
Lord’s
churches. In the next verse (18), Paul identifies for us the
persons
whom the church is to “avoid”. “For they that are such serve
not our
Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair
speeches
deceive the hearts of the simple”.
These
deceivers are in the
church, but they were not “added” to it by the Lord Jesus
Christ, and
their every motive is self-interest and pride. They are to be
undeviatingly
withstood, and one way to withstand them is to avoid all spiritual
fellowship
with them. If this avoidance is tenaciously adhered to, their evil
designs will
be defeated, and in due season it will be manifested that they were
never of
the Lord (I John 2:19).
The
least contravention of
the word of God is to be taken seriously, but we know that good men,
men who
steadfastly hold to the gospel of grace and biblical ecclesiology, err
in other
points of doctrine. The above cited injunction of avoidance (Romans
16:17),
does not apply to these men, for they love the Lord’s churches, and
their
general motivation comes from a strong desire to be obedient to the
will of God
in everything.
It is
not the aim of these
“good men” to create division in the Lord’s church(es), and they are
just as
sure their convictions on these lesser points of doctrine are Holy
Spirit
wrought, as are those who take variance with them. Thus, there is no
scriptural
basis for breaking fellowship with them, for if it was so, every New
Testament
church would be in utter disarray, and fellowship between churches
would be out
of the question.
All
Bible doctrine is
essential for spiritual growth and maturity, and doctrinal affinity
enhances
fellowship. So, there is some room for fellowship among all of the
Lord’s
churches, for they all believe every Christian and church is prone to
err, and
that we all must wait until we get to heaven to find the perfect
Christian and
the perfect church.
However,
it seems in this
evil day, that anything less than perfect agreement between brethren,
makes one
of them a heretic of the rankest sort. While fellowship between
brethren and
churches is based on doctrinal accord, it does not mean that every
detail of
every doctrine must be in place before there can be fellowship. This is
a vital
truth and needs to be addressed and emphasized, for in so doing, the
prospect
is that some of the unnecessary divisions which prevail in and among
the Lord’s
churches would be eliminated; there can be condemnation of error
without
castigation of the errant brother.
Conclusion
“And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness
charity”
(II Peter 1:7).
The
graces which Peter refers to in this text, are not in every case easy
to add, but we should not be quick to give up in our effort to add
them. In the
spiritual sense, the terms “brother” and “sister” denote a relationship
that is
eternal, and to enhance that relationship on earth, the perpetual
forgiveness
of offenses is necessary (Matthew 18:21, 22). To preserve
and
promote peace in the church, Paul said: “... Be ye kind one to
another,
tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake
hath
forgiven you” (Ephesians 4:32).
The
spiritual and
discerning church will, upon self-examination, discover that all of its
theological jots and tittles are not in place, and that some of its
doctrinal
walls do not perfectly hew or conform to the sacred plumb-line. Baptist
churches are the most glorious institutions on earth; they are the
pillar and
ground of all divine truth, but there is not one among us who has fully
apprehended that for which it has been apprehended, or that needs no
further
maturity or growth in grace and truth. Let us esteem our membership
church most
highly, but let us not look down our critical noses and deny an equal
greatness
to any of the Lord’s precious churches. It has not seemed good in the
sight of
the Lord to bless all of His churches in the same way, but this does
not mean
He loves one less and another more. In purchasing His churches, the
omniscient
Christ paid the same price for each of them (Acts 20:28), and
there is
not one among them all which is loved and preferred by Him above
another (Ephesians 5:25).
The
spiritual Christian
will readily admit there is much wrong in his discipleship (I
Corinthians 10:12), and that he comes miserably short in his
service to God
and his church brothers and sisters. Being aware of these unsavory
facts should
make us reluctant to adversely criticize those who are walking with us
in the
troubled path of faith. The least scrutiny of our fellow church members
will
reveal much in them which we consider to run counter to the honor of
God and
the best interest of
His church.
Conversely, the censorship being honest, we will in almost every case,
discover
that the supposed weak brother is strong in some areas where we are
weak, and
we could be profited by emulating his strong points.
We
are not saying withhold
all criticism; on the contrary, a word of rebuke in due season is good (Proverbs
15:23), but destructive criticism has no place in social
relationships,
much less in the Lord’s churches. The flesh takes a certain
satisfaction from “telling
him off”, but it often follows that we look back on our temper venting
with
regret and shame, and conclude: “I wish I had not said that. I surely
could
have handled that situation in a far better way.” “He that is slow
to
wrath is of great understanding: but he that is hasty
of spirit
exalteth folly” (Proverbs 14:29).
The
egotism of the old
nature is not eradicated by regeneration, but it hangs on with an
unrelenting
tenacity, and all too often trips up the saint and causes him to unduly
assert
himself. Thus it was with Peter when he said to his cross-bound
Saviour, “Though
I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee ...” (Matthew
26:35).
Knowing the oft deficiency of my faith, I find it difficult to
criticize Peter
for his haughtiness, or to ask Elijah why he ran from Jezebel, or
say to Moses: “Why did you not speak unto the rock instead of smiting
it?” (I Kings 19:1-3; Numbers 20:8-11).
The
devil hates church
harmony, peace, and unity. It is his aim to bring discord and confusion
in the
Lord’s churches, and he delights in bitterness and rivalry among church
members. However, the devil cannot create this ill condition in the
church,
apart from help within the church. Sadly, it seems there is always a
Sister Eve
or a Brother Diotrephes to
ally themselves with the devil in his church wrecking scheme. Christ
said, “... Offences will come: but woe unto him, through
whom they
come” (Luke 17:1).
The
devil is the arch
rival of the saint and he infinitely hates the blood bought church of
Jesus
Christ. He knows that God is glorified in His churches, but he also
knows that
sin diminishes fellowship with God, and he knows the greater the church
is
permeated with and persists in sin, the less is God glorified in the
ill
affected church.
Therefore, it behooves every member to pray fervently for one another, to respect one another, and to spiritually promote one another. A kind word of appreciation goes a long way in quieting the spirit that is caught in the gall of bitterness. After all, it is the meek who inherit the earth, and our Supreme Example said, “I am meek and lowly in heart” (Matthew 11:29). Beloved, God has already given His best to us and it surely becomes us to give our best to His church (Ephesians 5:2).
“Let brotherly love continue” (Hebrews 13:1).