Controversy is always unpleasant, and most people shrink from the prospect of becoming involved in it. Disagreements and disputes bring anguish of mind. In the Church, controversy has caused unhappiness and divisions, so much so that many say they will have no part in anything controversial.
Nevertheless, error that is propagated in the name of truth must be resisted.
Pain and inflamation are nature’s warning of infection in the body. So it is with the Church. Where error is presented as truth, evil as good, man as sovereign above God, there must be a reaction, and this reaction means controversy. Only by such reactions is it possible for the Church to maintain purity of doctrine and life.
When a body no longer reacts to harmful stimuli, it is either desperately sick or dead. The same is true of the Church.
Unfortunately, there have always been disagreements over secondary matters. Some have been the result of personality clashes in which bruised human egos triumphed over what should have been Christian humility.
But where there are deviations from basic Christian truths, there must be reactions for the truth. Such reactions are good and right and are a blessing to the Church as a whole.
Obviously there must be a source of reference, a norm on which to base convictions. This is found in the Holy Scriptures.
The New Testament gives abundant proof that our Lord and the founders of the early Church harked back to the Old Testament as the basis of their authority. They accepted at face value statements that some today would say were “taken out of context” but that were really messages of the Holy Spirit received by those whose minds and hearts were open to his teaching.
In subsequent church history, the early fathers went to the Word of God for guidance and authority. Later years brought the Westminster Confession of Faith, produced by a group of about 150 men who were noted for their deep and reverent scholarship and who worked five days a week for over five years. This monumental work, which has never been excelled as a statement of the Christian faith and the reasons for it, says this about the Scriptures: “The authority of the Holy Scriptures, for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the author thereof; and therefore it is to be received, because it is the word of God” (chap. 1:IV).
Section V continues: “We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church to a high and reverent esteem for the Holy Scripture; and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it doth evidence itself to be the word of God; yet, notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word in our hearts.”
Somewhat quaintly worded, yes; I have no unyielding attachment to this particular wording. But I know of no finer statement of the complete integrity and authority of the Holy Scriptures.
The most important thing to remember in dealing with the matter of Christian controversy is that it is not what men think or say but what the Scriptures say that is of ultimate significance.
In the early Church, Judaizers went up to Antioch and troubled the Gentile Christians by telling them that circumcision was necessary for salvation. The future of the Church was at stake. Was salvation a work of God’s free grace to be received by faith alone, or were there other requirements? Was the Christian under the bondage of the Law, or was he freed from that bondage by Christ?
If one reads Paul’s letter to the Galatian Christians in conjunction with Luke’s account of the meeting in Jerusalem, one realizes that Paul attended the meeting, not to receive instructions, but to tell of God’s work of grace among the Gentiles and of his own clear, direct revelation from Jesus Christ. Paul entered into this controversy with convictions nothing could shake. He knew that a deadly heresy was being injected into the life of the Church, and he would not tolerate it.
Matters brought to court must be resolved by reference to applicable laws. To act in defiance of the clear meaning of the law brings chaos and anarchy.
In differences within the Church, the final decisions must be made in accordance with the clear teachings of the Scriptures. Like the Bereans who, when they heard the Apostle Paul, searched the Scriptures to see whether his preaching was true, the Church must take the Bible as the final authority. If it does not, the way is opened for any heresy.
When controversy takes place in a spirit of Christian love, all can benefit. It is lack of love that brings discredit. Paul warns those who find it necessary to oppose a disobedient person not to “look on him as an enemy but to warn him as a brother” (2 Thess. 3:15). But for those who would preach “another gospel,” Paul has only the severest condemnation (Gal. 1:8,9).
Controversy demands not only love but also humility, a humility that is willing to take rebuffs, unjust criticism, and misunderstanding, all for the glory and honor of God. Once we let personalities prevail, the battle is lost and our witness for good vanishes.
Let us also beware of gloating over the sin of others and broadcasting it to the world. There is no surer way to lose one’s testimony for the right.
Controversy is necessary when the truth is perverted or assailed. But we must beware lest our contending for the faith become contentiousness, accompanied by bitterness, lovelessness, and harshness of judgment.
The whole question of truth has to do with God and his revelation to man. It has to do with the person and work of Jesus Christ and the record we have of him in both the Old and the New Testament. It has to do with doctrines and their application to our own lives.
To speak out in defense of the Christian faith is serious business, and it is difficult to do with grace and humility; but it is not sinful. To remain silent when the faith is perverted or denied is sinful. If there is danger of disturbing the peace of the Church by speaking, there is far more danger when the purity of the Church is threatened and no one speaks.
Controversy there must be, when the purity of the Church is in danger; but it should be carried on in an atmosphere of prayer, Christian love, and dependence upon the help of the Holy Spirit.
L. NELSON BELL
