37. “All Speak the Same Thing” (1 Corinthians 1:10)
“Now I beseech you, brethren, by the
name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there
be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same
mind and in the same judgment.”
It has been my experience that such verses have
been sadly distorted by those who justify divisions. Their reasoning is
circuitous and tortuous: ‘Paul says we should all agree perfectly and have
no divisions. Our ecclesial members do not agree perfectly on such-and-such.
Consequently we must divide from those who disagree, in order that we have no
divisions among us!’
It does not take a genius to see that there is
something wrong with such logic. The point overlooked is this: Paul is
admonishing the brethren to the pursuit of an ideal — perfect oneness in
mind and spirit among the brethren. Just because the ecclesia does not
immediately achieve such harmony is no reason to throw up one’s hands and
separate. Does Paul say here anything about separation? Even an imperfect unity
must be preserved and nurtured, not dismantled because it has a
flaw.
“Fellowship is primarily a ‘community
of interest’ rather than individual advantage. It is the family sharing
which keeps Father, Son and believers in a unity of belief as well as purpose;
and as far as Father and Son are concerned, this unity is an unbreakable one.
But in the hands of believers in the ecclesia it can be a fragile thing, so
unpredictable is the human heart. Paul was very conscious of this and exhorted
the Corinthian ecclesia: ‘Now I beseech you, brethren,.. that ye be
perfectly joined together.’
“In practice this vital doctrine of the
unity of the Household cannot be manifested without the dedicated effort of
every member of each ecclesia. It is, by the Father’s will and help, a
cooperative and precious creation made possible by the shed blood of Jesus. This
whole conception of fellowship is at once magnificent and humbling; but it can
be broken: by the disagreement of an individual member with his ecclesia, or
vice-versa” (J. Marshall, “The Living Ecclesia”, The
Christadelphian, Vol. 108, No. 1280 — Feb. 1971 — p.
56).
In the same context of his Corinthian letter, the
apostle stresses that the brethren were called unto the fellowship of
God’s Son (v. 9). It is a striking concept, reminiscent of the
Lord’s words: “I will draw all men to me” (John 12:32)
and “Him that cometh unto me I will in no wise cast out” (6:37).
Here is the strongest affirmation of the principle that our
“fellowship” is not ours alone — it is God’s and
Christ’s. And any unilateral attempts by men to subvert or destroy this
sublime unity, without clear and certain and incontrovertible evidence from the
Bible, is a direct affront to Heaven.
Far from commanding an absolute unity as a
condition of fellowship, Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 1:10 strongly
suggest just the opposite: that differences of opinion and internal schisms
already existed in Corinth, and whilst not approved, were at the least
preferable to out-and-out division. For Paul to say ‘Brethren, we must
agree’ is certainly not the same as saying ‘We must
excommunicate all those who do not agree’. Paul was far from being a
Pope!
Such fallacious reasoning reminds us of what we
might call the “divorce syndrome”. To wit: ‘Paul says our
marriage must conform to the divine ideal. Since it does not, then it is not a
proper marriage. Therefore we will divorce and each seek another marriage that
will reflect the perfect ideal.’ Such an attitude, we trust, will be seen
by all to be hopelessly unrealistic. Who can fail to see that the divine ideal
of marriage is something to be sought by all husbands and wives, as they
seek to overcome their failures and press on toward the mark? Why cannot we all
see, also, that this is the proper attitude toward that “marriage”
of brethren in the ecclesia? Why must we demand “perfection of
fellowship” as the price of unity when experience sadly shows us that
nothing else in this life is ever perfect? Why cannot we learn to conquer
petty differences and put up with relatively trivial abrasions on our way to
achieving a closer approximation of the divine ideal? This is all that Christ
— and Paul — would have us to do.
In the first-century ecclesias some were
“unskillful” while others were able to partake of “strong
meat” (Heb. 5:11-14). Some were “babes” while others were
“fathers”. Some were “yet carnal” (1 Cor. 3:3) while
others possessed high degrees of spirituality. And it is the same today. In the
absolute sense, then, it is impossible that all brethren have “the same
mind and the same judgment”. Some will always be more advanced than
others, and some will always present problems to the rest. True fellowship, like
true freedom, does not consist in a rigid like-mindedness on all things —
that is an impossible wish! True fellowship and true freedom does consist in
the limited toleration of differences, allowing scope for development in the
truth at an individual pace, while the strong patiently help rather than
criticize and condemn the weak.
“It must be confessed that divisions
oftentimes take place which could be avoided without prejudicing the truth in
any way. A little more patience, a little more kindness, a little less sense of
personal pride and self-importance, a little more discrimination between
essential and non-essential elements of belief — How many a division would
thus have been avoided!
“To create a division would appear to be
considered by some as a very meritorious act, and a proof of zeal and stability
in the truth, whereas it often arises that it is a proof of pride, bitterness,
and a wayward determination to get one’s way at any cost. The truth is
that the making of divisions has become far too easy a process, and the time has
come when a little resistance should be made to the disintegrating spirit in our
midst; and which, if allowed to go unchecked, will work disaster and split the
brotherhood into useless shreds... These little ecclesias of ours up and down
the land are worth keeping; and any needless disruptive tendency must be
strongly resisted” (D. Hughes, “A House Divided”, The
Christadelphian, Vol. 40, No. 467 — May 1903 — pp.
203,204).
Paul continues in his Corinthian letter:
“Now this I say, that everyone of you
saith, ‘I am of Paul’, and ‘I of Apollos’; and ‘I
of Cephas’; and ‘I of Christ’. Is Christ divided? Was Paul
crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Cor.
1:12,13).
In another section (Chapter 18) I considered the
teaching of this verse on the matter of fellowship. Now I shall simply note some
of the other similar passages in the apostolic writings, which stress this same
all-out commitment to unity and peace and edification, or (negatively expressed)
to what C.C. Walker calls “the resistance of unnecessary division”
(The Christadelphian, Vol. 40, No. 467 — May 1903 — p. 204).
Paul himself commands the Roman brethren:
“Be of the same mind one toward
another... Condescend to men of low estate... Be not wise in your own
conceits” (Rom. 12:16).
Peter also:
“Be ye all of one mind, having
compassion one of another; love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous; not
rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise
blessing” (1 Pet. 3:8,9).
And:
“Yea, all of you be subject one to
another, and be clothed with humility” (5:5).
In all of the above, it is to be pointedly
stressed that the way to achieve “the same mind” is not to
divide from those of a different mind, but as the apostles say, to be
condescending, compassionate, and humble. Have we as a brotherhood sincerely and
in a wholehearted manner sought this peace and unity? Or have we too often, for
the most personal and self-serving of motives, undermined the ecclesial good in
the perpetuation of controversies of quite secondary importance? The article by
Brother Hughes, quoted above, written in 1903, concludes with some words of
almost prophetic import:
“If we go on everlastingly agitating on
unimportant points, everlastingly dividing and subdividing, the superstructure
of the truth, which it has cost so much to re-erect in these latter years, will
crumble away and leave behind an irreparable loss. ‘Every kingdom divided
against itself is brought to destruction, and every city or house divided
against itself shall not stand’ (Matt. 12:25; Luke 11:17)” (Op.
cit., p. 204).