1
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?
2
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• The title of this study is taken from the Fifth
  Annual Truth Magazine Lectures Open Forum subject
  (June 23 through 26, 2008). I am not sure if
  four or six hours will be dedicated to the
  answering of, Must we divide over every issue?,
  but they evidently expect to arrive at an answer.
  In Volume 52, the May, 2008 issue of Truth
  Magazine, the editor Mike Willis in addition to
  announcing their lectureship also plugs it by
  writing an editorial titled, Must We Divide Over
  Every Issue?

3
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• Allow me before directly treating our subject any
  further to say that the inferred opposite of
  division is unity and that unity is a vital
  biblical subject. Unity is in the scriptures
  presented as possible and even requisite (I Cor.
  1 10 Eph. 4 3). Hence, every faithful child
  of God is very concerned about the unity of Gods
  people and will do what they can to promote the
  absence of sinful division. The scriptures also
  present the means of arriving at and maintaining
  unity, the word of God (I Cor. 1 10, Eph. 4
  3-6).

4
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• Unity is a product of Christians believing and
  practicing the same thing, it is just that
  simple. All of the efforts to effect unity apart
  from sameness of doctrinal belief and practice
  are absolutely sinful and ecumenical. As two or
  more Christians believe and practice Bible
  truths, they are automatically in fellowship
  (united) and are walking in the light, even
  while geographically separated (cp. I John 1
  7-9).

5
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• Another matter that needs to be addressed in the
  matter of treatment preparation is the title of
  the open forum and editorial, Must We Divide
  Over Every Issue? Why not study the challenge
  of, What Is the Truth on Every Issue?, so we
  can arrive at doctrinal sameness (unity)? It has
  been my experience that when the idea and action
  of division is injected at the inception of a
  study, emotion enters and many people become
  handicapped and hampered in seeing the truth.
  Mike Willis in his editorial lists fifteen
  issues.

6
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• While I believe there are at least four
  categories of these issues, ranging from the
  axiomatic, self-serving, and deceitful, and
  issues having graduated degrees of complexity,
  Mike lumps them all together. As to what I deem
  axiomatic or containing a self-evident truth,
  Mike mentions what he calls the issue of, May a
  woman teach a class of women and children? (See
  Titus 2 4.) One that I think is self-serving as
  well as prejudicial in its wording is issue
  number two, May a publishing company conduct a
  Bible lecture program? Into this mix, Mike
  injects several issues that brethren have faced
  that can be, I am persuaded, situational and
  complex. For instance, the war issue, his number
  fourteen.

7
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• A pertinent question is who decides when it is
  time to divide and over what issue division must
  be forthcoming? I bring this up based on some
  past experience. It seems that there have been
  different groups of brethren who have thought
  that they are the official voice of the
  brotherhood. I recall preaching on an issue and
  one of the Guardian of Truth Foundation board
  members took me to task. Don, you should not
  have preached on this issue. I was very
  concerned as to why he should thus rebuke me and
  I asked him why not?, thinking I could have
  been premature in not having all the necessary
  facts.

8
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• We must first meet to decide if such should even
  be deemed an issue and if so, we must decide when
  to preach on it and if we classify it as an issue
  worthy of division. When I asked who is the
  we, he said The Guardian of Truth
  Foundation. Who appointed these brethren to
  make such determinations, certainly not God (cp.
  2 Tim. 4 2-5, Rom. 16 17).

9
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• By the way, if Mike Willis and the Guardian of
  Truth Foundation crowd are so interested in unity
  and the avoidance of division, why do they not
  desist in pushing a human institution to preach
  the gospel? Why are they setting forth once
  again the divisive institutional issues that were
  fought especially during the forties, fifties,
  and sixties? I am referring to such teaching as,
  We are just individual Christians working
  together to preach the gospel.

10
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• They are going to destroy a lot of the good
  teaching of the last five decades that has shown
  the difference between individual and collective
  action (cp. I Tim. 5 16). Once again, why are
  they determined to persist in their foundation
  when they all to the man would agree that such is
  not required. Yet, as far as they are concerned
  in regards to their sometimes stated designs and
  goals, the Guardian of Truth Foundation is
  necessary and they are pushing it to the point of
  implosion.

11
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• One more matter is the common thinking, The only
  issues that should and can result in division are
  issues involving the treasury of the local
  church. I must immediately admit that this
  rationale does contain an element of truth.
  However, when offered as absolute, it is flawed.
  How about an issue consisting of a female member
  working at a strip bar and some defending it?
  The treasury is not involved, but such can be a
  matter that could result in both spiritual and
  physical division (cp. I Cor. 5).

12
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• As a rule, when there is talk of unity or the
  antithesis, division, Romans 14 is cited. While
  I do believe there are applicable principles
  found in this text (see vs. 1, 8, 12, 13, 22,
  23), the text is often seriously abused. In the
  first place, Paul is only dealing with matters
  that are immediately doctrinally and morally
  indifferent or, put perhaps a better way, matters
  that are not inherently wrong (v. 14, cp. vs.
  2-6, 21). Moreover, the exact circumstances that
  precipitated in much of the issues among these
  brethren cannot be totally duplicated today
  (newness of the gospel, First Century Jew and
  Gentile mix, etc.).

13
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• May I now draw your attention to I Corinthians
  11 19
• For there must be also factions among you,
  that they which are approved may be made manifest
  among you (ASV).
• Indeed, there were issues in the church at
  Corinth. Consider some of these harboring a
  fornicating member dragging one another before
  civil law to defraud abusing spiritual gifts and
  effecting confusion in the assembly and some
  teaching a perverted doctrine relative to the
  resurrection (I Cor. 5 6 14 15 12).

14
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• The issue in the context of I Corinthians 11
  19 is how they had perverted the occasion of the
  Lords Supper and were abusing the poor (I Cor.
  11 17f.). Therefore, I know that pertaining to
  these issues mentioned in I Corinthians and their
  attendant particulars, there must be
  divisions. This presupposes that there will be
  some who love the truth and will offer opposition
  to the sin and error.

15
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• The attitudinal, circumstantial, time factor, and
  consequential considerations. I submit that
  involved attitude, circumstances, time factor,
  and consequences of a held teaching or practice
  can and do play an important role relative to
  division. I do not believe that the artificial
  and cultural covering of I Corinthians 11 3-16
  was ever meant to be a permanent and universal
  binding practice on all women, issue number
  eight mentioned in Willis editorial. What do I
  say, then, regarding those among us who are under
  the impression that they should wear a covering?

16
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• First, what is their attitude? Some infants in
  Christ (time factor) have the attitude, I am
  just not sure as to whether or not I must wear a
  covering, what kind it should be, and when I
  should wear it, but since I am not sure, I must
  satisfy my own conscience while I continue to
  study this issue and wear something on my
  head. I think there is a marked attitude
  difference in this person and the one who says,
  I wear a covering because the scriptures require
  it! One preacher who is now associating himself
  with the Guardian of Truth Foundation group told
  me, The covering is binding on all women and
  those who do not wear it are hell bound, this is
  what I teach. He added, Since you do not teach
  this, you are a false teacher!

17
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• The circumstances of this scenario are conducive
  to all manner of serious problems that cannot
  help but prevent unity and the consequences are
  binding on others requirements of salvation that
  are not taught in the scriptures. Swift
  challenging action must follow (Acts 15 1f.,
  Gal. 2 11-14). In this second example, division
  is inevitable, unless there is a change in
  attitudes and teaching.

18
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• Some issues among us are deceptively and
  emotionally worded. Take issue number seven
  mentioned by Mike, May a woman who is suffering
  physical abuse in a marriage obtain a civil
  divorce to protect herself? The scriptures
  plainly teach only one acceptable reason for
  divorce, fornication (Matt. 5 32, 19 9).
  Editor Willis believes there are multiple reasons
  for acceptable divorce, one of which is what he
  terms physical abuse (Mike even includes mental
  and spiritual abuse).

19
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• Notice Mikes wording, civil divorce. In view
  of such wording, it is no wonder we have many now
  teaching, One may obtain a civil divorce for a
  reason other than fornication and still be able
  to later biblically divorce and marry another.

20
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• Must we divide over every issue? The question is
  simplistic in its essential nature and misplaces
  the emphasis. Time must be allowed to study
  differences and attempt to mutually arrive at the
  truth. However, it has been my experience that
  we really do not need to focus on division, but
  rather on the truth. As we have seen, unity is a
  product of two or more believing and practicing
  the truth (cp. Amos 3 3).

21
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?

• To the converse, division is the product of not
  believing and practicing the truth and even
  opposition to the truth, usually. Regardless of
  unity or its counterpart, division, truth
  must be the focus and how we determine truth will
  naturally result in either unity or division.

22
Must We Divide Over Every Issue?