Chapter 1: Irreconcilable Differences
Twenty years ago, I read and preserved a statement from a prominent newsman. I quote him, but edit some of his terminology.
He wrote, “Irreconcilable differences frequently are cited as the cause or a divorce.” “‘Pshaw!’ remarked one middle-aged man. ‘That’s all my wife and I have in common’.”
This reminds me of the unqualified indictment, on the part of many conservative preaches and writers of the concept of Unity In Diversity, as it relates to fellowship among brethren who may differ on some significant matters. Brother Karl Ketcherside, now deceased, proposed this as the key to establishing unity among the divided parts of The Restoration Movement;” namely the Christian Churches; non-Bible-Class churches; and “Institutional” and “non-institutional” churches, et al. As this movement expanded his vision to include all “immersed believers,” and finally “unimmersed” believers as children o God in prospect.” Brother Ketcherside’s application of the principle became so broad that ultimately it simply reduced itself to the concept of “unity in the invisible church” with the concommitment (1) recognition as faithful Christians of all sincere and dedicated persons in all the denominations of Christendom who confess to respect the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and (2) participation with them in all religious activities in areas of mutual agreement.
In this article, it is not my purpose to discuss Brother Ketcherside’s movement per se. I am concerned with the effort on part of some professed “conservative” brethren to stigmatize as “apostates” any person who dares suggest that ‘unity in diversity,” within proper limitations, is (1) a valid concept and (2) this must be given consideration in any intelligent discussion of “fellowship” among brethren with “irreconcilable differences” concerning their respective “opinions, teaching, and practice.” The interests of truth are not furthered by a blanket condemnation of a valid principle because it is abused by illegitimate extension in application. That there are many differences among equally sincere and devoted brethren, none can deny. That these differences in many cases appear to be irreconcilable is also not debatable. Hence, there is diversity. The question is: Can there be unity while tolerating diversity?
If so (I think none would expose his ignorance by denying it), to what degree, in what regard to what matters, and under what conditions can this toleration Scripturally obtain? Rather than name-calling and marking, I should like much to see intelligently written articles from devoted and capable brethren addressing the answer to these questions.
Let us not arrogantly assume that the last word has been said on the question of “fellowship” and dictatorially issue the mandate: “You accept our dicta or exit the door on the left and join the ranks of the untouchables.” I have seen a presumptuous and Scripturally indefensible questionnaire regarding many of these “irreconcilable differences” which has been sent to preachers to ascertain their stand. To the questions has been appended a list of those preachers who bowed to its implicit dicta and those who did not with the suggestion that these might wish to join the movement and mail out such questionnaires. Shades of the Spanish Inquisition! What next?
Koheleth expressed profound truth when he wrote: “The words of a wise man’s mouth are gracious; but the lips of a fool will swallow up himself. The beginning of the words of his mouth is foolishness, and the end of his talk is mischievous madness. A fool also is full of words: a man cannot tell what she be; and what shall be after him, who can tell him?” (Ecclesiastes 10:12-14, KJV).
The older I grow and the more I study the Word of God, the more I am convinced that I do not here have the absolute answer to many legitimate Bible questions. Exactly where (in every case) unity in diversity becomes compromise with error and ceases to be a legitimate toleration of differences n the basis of self-effacing humility, brotherly considerations, and sacrificial love (agape) enjoined by Paul (Philippians 2:01-11), I cannot say always with absolute certainty. I simply do not know as much as some brethren seem to know in this area.
However, their arrogant dicta moved me not, for before them in ultimate judgment I will not stand, but before the Lord. I err in the area of fellowship (and I trust I may not), I wish to err on the basis of charity and not on the basis of sectarian intolerance! Let us not be stampeded by zealots. I remember a sign I once saw in a business office which said, “The hurrier I go the behinder I get.” Brethren, may we go slowly in the area of fellowship, but with deliberate speed in the areas of “faith, hope, and love.” May we not confuse the satisfaction of our own egos with devotion to truth! 1402 *****
MY COMMENTS: — The doctrines and conduct of some of my fellow-Americans who are determined to force one preacher out of the Philippine work upset me. They pass out money and imply US support for Filipinos who follow them will soon come. They and their barkada are trying to force all who disagree with them to be rejected as unfaithful brethren, unworthy of fellowship. They suggest they will have their support cut off for those who disagree with them. If the body of Christ here is hurt, and brethren split in the process, this is acceptable to them.
These “troublers of Israel” are Ron Halbrook on Marriage-Divorce- Remarriage (MDR), and Jim McDonald and Ken Marrs against those who believe blood-eating is OK, and others coming here following their “party-line.” Halbrook emphasized MDR. The Philippine Constitution and supporting laws specifically forbid divorce. Claiming family protection laws and annulment are the equal to divorce and substitute for it, Halbrook “mishandles” truth. Family protection laws deal in separation, NOT divorce. Annulment is possible, but takes years. Halbrook insists all who disagree with him are false teachers. He names these, including “one preacher”. He ignores many important points: (1) “One preacher” has not and will not teach on MDR here. It has NO relevance in this nation where divorce is unlawful. (2) “One preacher” has none of the characteristics of 2 Peter 2:01-22 where God totally identifies false teachers. The remainder of the New Testament adds nothing. (3) Historically, MDR has been an unsettled dispute for generations among faithful brethren in the US. (4) Bro. Halbrook has misrepresented several, including “one preacher”. (5) He has acted unethically in other ways.
McDonald and Marrs say after one has been “patiently taught,” if he continues to believe blood-eating is OK, he must be disciplined. My concerns on blood-eating are, (1) Filipino brethren make up their own minds from their won study of Scriptures (Acts 17:10, 11), and (2) McDonald and Marrs cease teaching this division. Here, the problem of blood-eating is far more cultural and tribal than doctrinal. It has existed for generations. Two Americans coming here for short visits a couple of years are not going to solve it. Filipino brethren need to work it out for themselves. Each Christian and each congregation must make his and its own decision.
Brethren Halbrook, Marrs, and McDonald are greatly increasing the potential for division by passing out money and offering support to Filipino preachers (they did exactly that in their 1998 distribution nearly half a million dollars benevolent funds and in a manner totally absent from Scriptural. If they are, as they claim, doing all things according to Christ’s will, let them find at least one Bible text justifying their “method of distribution.” Theirs is an obvious attempt to persuade you to their positions, subverting your souls by putting you in violation of 1 Timothy 6:05. They are using American money as a tool to produce division, all in the name of serving God (Romans 10:01, 02; John 16:01, 02). Don’t be misled by their rhetoric or money. SOME of you (and I know who you are) are already guilty of that sin, and I fear for others. I implore you to repent while God gives you time and opportunity. Your souls are far more important than money.
I plead with you: Read carefully Brother Adams’ articles. Decide for yourselves where truth is. Follow Acts 17:0, 11 and Philippians 1:01. And make up your own minds. God, HINDI Ron Halbrook, Ken Marrs, Jim McDonald, Wally Little, *** “one preacher,” Puterbaugh, or any American will be your judge (1 Corinthians 2:05; Corinthians 5:10; Romans 2:06). The Americans trying to persuade you to their positions on these doctrines are following the process of developing a denomination, whether they admit it or not. I OBJECT, AND WILL FIGHT THEM IN THIS! I REJECT THEIR DENOMINATION, IN THE UNITED STATES AND HERE IN THE PHILIPPINES! I PRAY YOU ALSO WILL BALK AT “JOINING” IT!!! BRETHREN, I BEG YOU — THINK! DO NOT DIVIDE OVER AMERICAN OR FILIPINO FOOLISHNESS!!! YOUR SOUL, AND GOD’S CHURCHES ARE FAR MORE VALUABLE THAN THAT!