Is the Fellowship Issue Hard to Understand?
By Kerry Duke
Paul wrote, "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us" (II Thess. 3:6). I have heard many say this passage is hard to practice, but I have never heard anyone say it is hard to understand.
Paul also wrote, "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them" (Rom. 16:17). Though the discipline of members of a local congregation commanded in II Thessalonians 3:6 differs in some aspects from our treatment of those outside the congregation, the basic thrust of Romans 16:17 is clear. If someone were reading this verse for the first time and took it seriously, what attitude would he have toward false teachers? Would he get as close to them as he could, or would he "avoid them" like Paul commanded? Would he team teach with them by appearing on lectureships with them, all the while closing his eyes and shutting his mouth to the false teachers he is working with? Would he announce and promote meetings conducted by false teachers? Would he invite them to hold meetings at his home congregation? If he took Paul’s words seriously, the answer to these questions is clear.
John said that one who bids Godspeed to a false teacher "is partaker of his evil deeds" (II John 11). Surely the idea of aiding and abetting a crime is not a complex matter. Osama bin Laden did not fly a single plane into the World Trade Center or the Pentagon, but who would deny that he is partaker of these evil deeds. And what about those who support him and other terrorists? President Bush said, "We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts of terrorism and those who harbor them." God be thanked that our leaders understand the fellowship issue better than many of our brethren! If our leaders followed the reasoning of some brethren, there are no terrorists to capture, since those who actually committed terrorist acts against our country on September 11, 2001 are dead. Who does not understand similarly this principle in regard to stealing? What same jury would argue that the driver of the getaway car was not participating in the crime? Thankfully, our citizens and our laws acknowledge this principle at least to an extent.
This principle is taught in the Old Testament as well. Psalm 50:18 says, "When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with adulterers." The guilt described in this verse is not from committing theft and adultery, but consenting and partaking with those who commit these sins. Solomon, warns, "My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not. If they say, Come with us . . .Cast in thy lot among us. . . My son, walk not thou in the way with them" (Prov. 1:10-15). This sin of participating with the wrong people was the blemish on the record of the otherwise good king Jehoshaphat. Jehu rebuked the king, saying, "Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord" (II Chron. 19:2). Jehosphaphat had "joined affinity with Ahab," that is, he had allied himself with wicked Ahab (II Chron. 18:1). Even after this rebuke, Jehoshaphat joined himself to the wicked king Ahaziah to make ships to go to Tarshish. Then Eliezer rebuked him, saying, "Because thou hast joined thyself with Ahaziah, the Lord hath broken thy works" (II Chron. 20:37). Would anyone imagine that Jehoshaphat failed to understand these words? Who would think that he would have argued, "Yes, I was with king Ahaziah, and I know that he has done wrong, but I didn’t do any wrong myself"?
Those who are opposed to the truth understand the fellowship issue. Even the wicked Diotrephes did not "receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church" (III John 10). This evil tyrant disfellowshipped not only faithful preachers but also those who were "fellow helpers" (III John 8) of these preachers! I have seen this thinking at work among brethren; I have seen it carried to extremes that are hard to imagine. One church decided they could no longer endorse Tennessee Bible College because of its stand on fellowshipping liberals. But they didn’t stop there. They cut off the support of a man who graduated from TBC years earlier who was working in another state and was not a TBC employee!
I admit that the specific application of this principle is sometimes difficult. The same is true of many other basic Bible truths. Each situation is unique, and th totality of circumstances involved must be considered. But difficutly in determining what to do in some instances does not invalidate the basic point of the principle itself. It just means we have to study harder. Peter said Paul wrote some things hard to understand (II Pet. 3:16), but he did not mean that Paul’s teaching in general is hard to understand. And the problem with otherwise faithful preachers fellowshipping false teachers is usually not a lack of understanding. It is a lack of conviction regarding the seriousness of following Bible truth and a shortage of courage in standing up for it.