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). |