Dealing with Contentiousness

Following is part of an exchange with a friend on FaceBook.

=====
--beginnning of FaceBook Transcript--

That is a fact, but what does a church that exercises discipline look like, I wonder. More one on one confrontations with the elders? or elders' wives? More congregational exhortations? More members confronting members? We have great preaching, but discipline lacks greatly.

We lost an elder because one man, a contentious fellow, was allowed to keep on badgering the elder in Sunday School. For whatever reason, he would challenge the elder with this and that "deep" question... Finally, the elder left (for more than one reason). Should not the contentious man have been kicked out rather than us lose a good man!

I want to see the contender gone, but our pastor can't seem to exercise discipline...


---------- it is not the pastor's job to exercise discipline, except where he is a member of the empowered body. In the RCUS, the body is the Spiritual Council, made up of elders and ministers. The judicial procedures of complaint, witnesses, trial, etc. are carefully spelled out in the constitutions.

Yes, the contentious person should not have been allowed to act in such a way. An elder should have reproved him, and if he remained contentious, evidence should have been gathered, charges made, and a decision made according to the government of the church and denomination.

In the RCUS contentiousness is especially marked out in the constitution for discipline, but in practice, to our shame, it is sometimes tolerated beyond godliness.

--end of transcript from FaceBook.

=======
Comments on the above

Earthly discipline is very hard in churches, sometimes. People lie over and over. Relatives protect one another. Other agendas intrude and corrupt the procedures. Ministers often do not believe in the constitutional provisions for discipline and opt for more "compassion" and "empathy," forgetting the damage to the church by self-will, rebellion against authority, and transgression of the law of God. They take the easy way.

But it must be done. Ministers and elders who do will be maligned, bullied, and slandered. But what is new? Jesus and the apostles also experienced these things.

Surprisingly, the church that disciplines, even though it will be criticized and maligned, will also gain the respect of the community and people of good will. Those who have an ax to grind will continue to gripe and complain, but the church and its officers will be respected for being willing practice what they preach.

From the constitution of the RCUS:

"An offense is anything in doctrine, principles, or practice of church member, officer, or judicatory that is contrary to the Word of God and nothing shall be admitted as matter of accusation or considered an offense which cannot be proved contrary to the Scriptures or to the regulations of teh Church founded on them. The following sins especailly merit discipline: heresy, schism, blasphemy, adultery, forniation, lascivious wantonness, theft, fraud, perjury, lying, contentiousness, intemperance, profanation of the Lord's Day, impudent scoffing, cruelty, and other violations of the Ten Commandments."

Bridling the Tongue

“Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: 20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. 21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.” (Jas 1:19-21 AV)

James has been talking about trials that come and the reason they come: to prove and purify our faith, as fire does the gold and silver. Now comes an exhortation and warning: shut up and listen.

In the midst of trial the temptation is to speak first, listen second, think last. Result, a bad thing is made far worse. This is especially true in church. Every church worth its salt has some method for solving problems and working out disputes. None of them include running from house to house, complaining and describing our hurt feelings.

In those circumstances our words take on the character of filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness. The word "naughtiness" used in the King James perfectly describes the meaning of the Greek. "Naughtiness" is derived for the word "naught' which means "nothing" or "of no value." The basket of very naughty figs that Jeremiah saw were so rotten they were worth nothing, or worse than nothing. A naughty child is one whose behavior is worthless and rotten.

The phrase "superfluity of naughtiness" then is paradoxical, "overflowing with nothingness" or possessing a great deal of negative value. A perfect description of the things we say under stress if we do not remember to "be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath."

We will never accomplish the work of God by the wrath of man. The wrath of man is deadly, destructive, deadly to the Christian and the church.

The elders of the church must be sensitive to the destructive character of the wrath of man, and not yield to it. They must be careful not to provoke it, and to teach people how to solve disputes, using the methods described in the bible and church constitutions. By no means must they allow people to bypass the constitutions.

The rule of Christ in the church is through those elders and deacons and ministers appointed by Him and chosen by the consent of the people. When people despise these elders and deacons and ministers and bypass their government and rule, they attack the very structure of the church and the rule of Christ in the church. This must not be allowed, for bullies then usurp the government of the church. In well regulated churches, there are lawful means to removed or suspend officers who misbehave, but no individual has the right to unilaterally resist the authority.

A person who drives through a stop sign, may not have seen the sign, and may be convinced that he is innocent of any wrong. However, if he refuses to stop when pursued by a policeman watching the intersection and tries to flee, he becomes guilty of a greater offense. If he then refuses to obey a summons to come to court and resists the officer who is sent with orders to arrest him, he has become guilty of a great many very serious offenses and be subject to a heavy fine and imprisonment. If he still refuses to submit in prison, his very life may be placed in jeopardy.

If the courts and the officers, however, refuse to enforce the provisions of the law, the very life of the society is placed in danger. The stop sign is there for a reason to protect the life of the innocent. If the rebellious person is allowed to run the sign with impunity, he endangers his own life as well as the lives of others.

Thus it is with the tongue. James is going to write a long essay on the evils of a lawless tongue [Chapter 3], but he sums up this section by saying, James 1:26 "If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain."

His religion is as empty and as rotten as the "superfluity of naughtiness" that comes from his mouth. Men speak out of the abundance of the heart, and will give account for ever idle [vain] word that they say.

The Utter Ruin of a Man

Proverbs 5:22 "His own iniquities shall take the wicked himself, and he shall be holden with the cords of his sins. He shall die without instruction; and in the greatness of his folly he shall go astray."

A person is certainly able to freely choose to follow the path of unbelief and sin. What he is not able to choose is the consequences of that choice of unbelief and sin.

G. K. Chesterton said that people never break out into a larger space, they always break out into a smaller one.

The cords of sin bind a man more and more to iniquity. This is God's decree and they cannot escape it. Sin is the judgment upon the sinner for his sin. "Because they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind," is the way Paul puts it in Romans 1.

A man may think he is master of his own mind and is free to think as he chooses, but nothing could be further from the truth. Waves of near insanity sweep over mankind from time to time, fads and customs of thought come and go; men think old, old, follies and imagine themselves very sophisticated and chic, but they are boringly dull. Solomon said years ago, Ec 1:9 "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun."

The truth is, man was created to think God's thoughts after Him, as an image. Ps 36:9 "For with thee is the fountain of life: in thy light shall we see light." When we turn from God's light, we think we see, but we see with darkened minds.

The mind was created to see the distinction between the Creator and the creature, but this is exactly where man goes astray. He worships and serves the creature more [rather, or besides] than the Creator.

God is not idle, however when man does this, Paul says. When man does not use the gift of intelligence to see that God is to be worshipped, God darkens the man's mind. Ro 1:28 "And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient [unfit]."

So the poor man, under the wrath of God, has his mind darkened so that he cannot think straight. Unwilling to make the distinction between the Creator and the creation, serving the creation, He more and more becomes unable to make other distinctions, for his mind is corrupt.

The moral and social wicked stew described at the end of Romans 1 is the result of the darkened mind of the wicked rejection of God. He is held by the cords of his sins and cannot deliver himself. Unless God saves him from the his own folly, he will more and more turn to hatred of God and foolishness, ultimately dying without instruction, hating and despising those who try to help him.

He goes astray in the "greatness of his folly."

The result is described in Romans 1:29-32. The reprobate mind is described as:

"Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenant1-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."

Faithful pastors and teachers, though warning again and again, can only watch with horror and tears.

Concerning the last post.

Many of the recent translations miss the point of Proverbs 25:23. They usually go something like this "As a north wind brings rain, so a sly tongue brings angry looks." Not only does "sly" miss the point, but also the comparison is off. The comparison is this "As the north wind is to rain, so the backbiting tongue is to anger."

But in Palestine the north wind did never bring rain. Rain never came from the north. The north wind drove away the rain. So then, we must say that backbiting drives away anger, which is stupid, or we must say anger drives away backbiting. It is the only thing that makes sense.

The translators have fits with this passage because of the word "north." I think that some were so afraid of the word anger--the idea that it is godly to be angry with backbiting--that they turned the Scripture upside down. Shall I say they were false witnesses? No, I dasn't say that, should I? Could a milk-toast view of Christianity have influenced this translation? hmmmm.

But, on the other hand [don't you love it] it is possible to get a valid interpretation from the NIV. The lying tongue spread anger everywhere, pits brother against brother, husband against wife, etc. But the value of the traditional KJV is that it directs the anger where it belongs--against the slanderer, so that his slander comes back against him, even though he or she wants people to get mad at each other. It is the backbiter who is the culprit, not all the ones who are backbitten. There is where the anger should go: against the devil-tongued one.

Pr 25:23 "The north wind driveth away rain: so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue."

Does the Lord really mean that it is not only OK but a positive good to get angry with those who destroy other's reputations by backbiting? Surely not. We must be patient, forgiving, kind, charitable, while our neighbor's reputations go up in flames--or so the message is in many churches. How long has it been since anyone in your church was disciplined by the elders for this unspeakable crime against God, the very sin of the devil himself against the church?

"Angry" means to "abhor," "indignation." In the form used here it means to "show anger" or "indignation." You are not only to be angry, but you are to show it. Your love for your neighbor's reputation requires it, and your love for the sinner requires it.

"Countenance" means the presence or person. It is translated often "before" as in Ex. 20:3 in the First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me." The slanderer ought to be ashamed and fearful of uttering a slander in our presence. What we think about defamation of ministers, elders, Christians, and people in general ought to be abundantly clear. If we lose friends because of it, so be it. We must not aid and abet the devil's work.

"backbiting" literally means "secret." It is what is said in secret. The slanderer speaks in secret and then lies about saying it. Those who aid and abet the slanderer cover for their lies, lying to cover lies and cover sins. It is the sin of the "whisperer" in Romans 1:29, one of the sins that shows the soul abandoned of God and given over to wickedness and reprobation of mind.

"Tongue" means "tongue." The slanderer speaks abominable things about those he hates and wishes to destory, but then denies that he said them.

Those who cover for slanderers are as bad as those who slander. Solomon showed us the way of righteousness. It is such a shame that there are so few who will bear faithful witness, but will cover for the evil. This evil will continue in our churches until Christians get mad about it.

We Needed the A Team!

It is too bad that William Jennings Bryan did not call for help in the famous "Monkey Trial" with Scopes in 1925. Help was available, specifically in the person of John Greshem Machen, who in 1925 was Professor of New Testament at Princeton Theological Seminary. Machen was one of the foremost scholars of his day and later would found Westminster Theological Seminary as a Bible-believing alternative to Princeton.

Bryan was a good man, a good politician, and a devout Bible believer, but he was no match for Clarence Darrow. Very often cases in court as well as judicial cases in church judicatories are settled by the cleverness and immorality of the attorneys and the willingness of witnesses and attorneys to lie, instead of the rule of laws and constitutions.

Maybe the case would have turned out the same, but Machen would have given a much better defense of the authority and integrity of the Bible.

Of course, the Bible stands on its own and is witnessed by the Spirit of God and the nature of reality, so Darwinism is dying and the Bible still holds sway over the minds of people. But I suspect that Machen would have given Darrow a whipping. Bryan won the case, but lost the battle.

Too bad, Christianity didn't have its "A-Team."

There is some good material about Machen in the current issue of Leben, published by City Seminary of Sacramento.

A Duh Moment

It was last night during one of the basketball playoffs--I forget which one. One of the sports chicks on the sideline had just interviewed one of the basketball players, a young black, talented, articulate, intelligent--the player not the sports chick.

A few minutes later, the feed went back to the main desk in time to hear one of the other empty female heads gushing something like this, "He is such a bright young man. I really think he should do something significant--he should get into government and do something significant."

"SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT" "HOPE" "GOVERNMENT" ?????? Those words have absolutely no relation to each other. I do not know what this player does with his $6 million or so each year, but I suspect he would not have to go into government to do something significant, like taking care of his family, going to church, treating his neighbors and relatives with dignity, and treating his fellow athletes right.

"Going into government" often means getting in the way of those who do significant things. Please don't do it. Stay out of politics if you want to be significant.