by
Barry O’dell
The argument goes like this: “Well, Jesus
said that there is good seed and bad seed in the church and Jesus will take
care of judging and separation when He returns.” This thought comes from Matthew 13:24-30 in
what is known as “The Parable of the Wheat and Tares.” The argument often comes from preachers and
elders who are convinced that the church should not publicly deal with sin in
the church because, “we are not the judges.” Recently I had a discussion
with a man who felt that this parable applies to individuals who were members
of the church who had been divorced and remarried for reasons other than
fornication. Is this what Jesus was teaching in this parable? By the way, this is one of only two parables
which He explained to His disciples (Matt. 13:37-43 contains the
explanation). Is the church, when it
sees sin within, to ignore that sin and wait for Jesus to “handle it” when He
comes back? What is the point of this parable?
The argumentation above will often revert to
emotion. This is what I mean by that. “We know that________ and ________ are
not Scripturally married, but they have children and we don’t want the children
to leave the church.” There is no doubt that this is an emotional argument.
However, are our emotional arguments more authoritative than the inspired word
of God? When one reads the explanation
that Jesus gives of this particular parable He says, “The field is the
world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons
of the wicked one” (Matt. 13:38). He also states that at the end of the age
there will be a separation made by His angels, even within His kingdom (Matt.
13:41). The point of this parable is that there is and always will be evil in
the world. We, as Christians, must live in the world, but not love the world (1
Jn. 2:15-17). It would be impossible for us to leave this world and, as such,
be completely separated from sinful situations.
If Jesus were teaching that the church and her
elders has no right to deal with sin in the church He would be directly
contradicting many things written by Paul.
When sin was addressed in the church at Corinth Paul wrote, “Your
glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole
lump? Therefore purge out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, since you
truly are unleavened” (1 Cor. 5:6-7). He did not advise them to “leave
it alone and let the Lord handle it when He returns!” In fact, he went on to write, “But now I
have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a BROTHER, who is a
fornicator or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an
extortioner - NOT EVEN TO EAT WITH SUCH A PERSON” (1 Cor. 5:11). But is that too harsh?
Two people were living in fornication and the
church was not mourning over the sinful situation (5:2). They were told, by Paul, that when they were
gathered together they were to “deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction
of the flesh” (5:4-5). Why? “...that his spirit may be saved in the day of the
Lord Jesus.” The congregation of God’s
people in Corinth was not to ignore or tolerate the sin! By inspiration of the
Holy Spirit Paul went so far as to say, “not to keep company or even eat with
such a person” who is a brother and who is living in sin (5:9-11).
In 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15 Paul instructs that
church in regard to a brother who is “walking disorderly” (out of step) with
apostolic tradition (3:6). The Christians are instructed to “withdraw”
THEMSELVES from those who do such a thing. The Christians were to withdraw
themselves from any fellow-Christian who was living in sin! In verse 14 he
states that the church should “not keep company with him.” What is the purpose
of withdrawing ourselves from a Christian who is living in sin? “That he may be
ashamed” (2 Thes. 3:14) and that “the spirit might be saved” (1 Cor. 5:5).
Are these steps “too extreme?” The denominational
world makes this same argument with baptism. Churches of Christ, we are told,
are too narrow minded and exclusive because we teach that one must be baptized
in order to have the remission of sins. Which of God’s commands are too extreme
to obey? Who decides? What about family and friends who choose to live in sin? Jesus said His family is “whoever does the
will of the Father in heaven” (Matt. 12:50). His friends are those who keep His
commands (Jn. 14:15). To fail to expose and discipline sin, whether as a public
matter or in a private setting, is to condone that sin! We are commanded, “And
have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose
them” (Eph. 5:11). How do we expose and
discipline sin in the church?
Sin can occur between two individuals. According to Jesus (Matt. 5:21-26) obligation
is placed upon the offender. “Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar,
and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift
there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother,
and then come and offer your gift. Agree with your adversary quickly…” However, in Matthew 18, there is
responsibility placed upon the offended (Matt. 18:15-17). The point being that
when offences come, all parties must do their part to make the situation right.
We are to bear with one another and forgive one another because we have all
been called into one body (Col. 3:12-15).
God
has never tolerated sin among His people. The Old Testament is filled with
examples from the nation of Israel that this is the case. The sin of Achan
(Jos. 6-7) impacted the nation of Israel and was dealt with by God. The sins of the Kings of Israel impacted the
entire nation and eventually took them into captivity (2 Kg. 17). The same is
true in the New Testament. The church in Corinth knew of the sin, ignored the
sin, and was sharply rebuked by an inspired apostle for that attitude. They
were commanded to deal with the sinful situation in a public manner because the
sin was common knowledge among them (1 Cor. 5:1-5). The church should react to
public sin in the same manner today. If a member of the Lord’s body is living a
sinful lifestyle and the church knows of it, the church has a God-given obligation
to deal with the sin. If we do not, we are encouraging the sinner! 2
Thessalonians 3:6-15 instructs us to “withdraw ourselves from anyone who walks
disorderly.” If we fail to deal with sin
it will cost us our souls.
The elders of the church have responsibility
here because they watch out for our souls (Heb. 13:17). The Christian who has
gone off into sin must be approached and encouraged to repent. They are to be
treated gently and admonished as a brother (Gal. 6:1; 2 Thes. 3:15). If he fails
to repent and continues on in his sinful ways, we must, as a last effort,
withdraw ourselves from him. The Bible tells us why we should do these things. 1
Corinthians 5:5 states that it is to be done so that the soul may be
saved. 2 Thessalonians 3:14 states that
it is done to cause shame. Sin is shameful! Many times, however, we are afraid
to do what we are supposed to do because “we don’t want to push people away.” If
a person is living in sin and won’t repent, they are already as far away from
God as they can be. That is no reason for the faithful child of God to not do
what must be done. We can only be saved from sin when we come to God on His
terms. May we never have the mindset that some of God’s commands are “too
extreme” to obey.
Barry’s
Bio: Barry O’Dell is the pulpit minister for the Leonard
Street church of Christ in Pensacola, FL. He is a 1997 graduate of Memphis
School of Preaching and currently serves as an instructor at the North West
Florida School of Biblical Studies.
Links:
