One of the sayings by which I live my life is “Know thyself.  Know thy friends.  Know thy enemies.  Know the difference.”  It is vitally important to realize that one is not alone, and that one has both friends and enemies in various endeavors based on mutual concerns and interests.  It is also important to remember that one invariably has enemies (whether one wants to or not) and that you, your friends, and your enemies all have different goals and agendas to fulfill.  This difference in goals and agendas need not mean that we fail to appreciate and work together with others of like mind to the extent that we share worldviews, perspectives, and approaches.  There is a continuum of closeness ranging from complete agreement to complete disagreement, and we ought to be savvy and wise enough to recognize the extent with which we can work with others in certain common efforts while retaining independence and freedom of action as a whole.  It is that matter, dealing specifically with religion, but also applicable beyond that narrow focus (to international relations and business strategies, certainly) that I wish to discuss today.

Mark 9:38-41, Matthew 10:40-42, Luke 9:49-50:  He Who Is Not Against Us Is On Our Side

Three passages in scripture deal with the problem of sectarianism that existed during Jesus’ efforts to train the Twelve Disciples.  It has already been discussed at length elsewhere how these disciples were obsessed with their rank and status [1] and how they often sought power and glory before being granted with the Holy Spirit, seeking after the satanic model of hierarchial and top-down government [2] [3] instead of the Christ-like model of servant leadership.

Interrelated with that obsession for rank and status is being territorial about one’s domain of authority.  Someone who is insecure and operating from a satanic leadership model is likely to be very upset about someone who they have not credentialed and approved muscling into their territory of teaching and instructing others in God’s ways–that’s their position, after all.  They are the chosen disciples, after all, the twelve, the elites, the ones closest to Christ, and who is this nobody trying to teach “their people.”  Before we condemn the (very carnal) behavior of the disciples before possessing God’s Spirit, we ought to ensure that we do not have the same attitudes towards title and rank ourselves, or the same territorial and satanic attitude.

Let us therefore examine the three passages that demonstrate the disciples’ ungodly turf-protection efforts to see what insight we can gain from them.  Let us begin with Mark 9:38-41:  “Now John answered Him, saying, “Teacher, we saw someone who does not follow us casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow us.”  But Jesus said, “Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me.  For he who is not against us is on our side.  For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.”

Now let us examine the account in Matthew 10:40-42:  “He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives He who sent Me.  He who receives a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward.  And he who receives a righteous man in the name of a righteous man will receive a righteous man’s reward.  And whoever gives one of these little ones only a cup of cold water in the name of a disciple, assuredly, I say to you, he shall by no means lose his reward.”

Now let us examine the account in Luke 9:49-50:  “Now John answered and said, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow with us.”  But Jesus said to him, “Do not forbid him, for he who is not against us is on our side.”

Let us, having examined these three parallel passages, let us draw what lessons we can for our attitudes towards other fellowships and groups of believers (remembering that this is applicable to any competitive realm, such as business or international relations as well).  For one, let us note that like many carnal religious leaders, John thought that Christ wanted the disciples to protect their organization (with its feuding wannabe pastor generals, apostles, bishops, or rabbis in charge) and rebuke and silence any competitors.  In fact, though, Jesus was concerned more about the spiritual health of the people and the gradual spread of Christian culture and behavior through outside emulation (and not only through increasing the control and size of a hierarchy or organization) than about any narrowly political goals.  This the carnal disciples (and far too many of their modern counterparts) entirely failed to understand.

Instead of those not being a part of “the organization” of the twelve disciples being rivals for power and glory, Jesus wanted his disciples to learn that those who heard the message, understood it, believed it, practiced it, and shared it with others, no matter what their title or affiliation, were allies and not enemies.  Not all allies need to be internal.  Jesus Christ never believed that only those who were a part of “his” organization were to be saved.  Indeed, in Matthew he makes it plain that anyone who receives a prophet (one who speaks and expounds upon God’s word) or even a righteous man, even just by giving them a cup of cold, refreshing water to ease their thirst, will receive a glorious reward.

Additionally, Jesus sought to teach his disciples (and through the Bible, we who live today) a broader perspective.  Those who preach the message of Jesus Christ from scripture, regardless of their affiliation, cannot soon afterwards insult Jesus Christ, God, or Christianity.  The Bible preaches a subtle way by which God’s ways permeate through society, supporting greater equality (for we are all God’s offspring created in His image and likeness), fighting against injustices like slavery [4], gradually making a culture and civilization more Christian.  Of course, evil ways just like good ways permeate gradually and insidiously through society, but those who “copy” godly messengers become godly messengers themselves, and we need not hinder them in any way, since they are helping us do our job of preaching God’s word to a rebellious and captive world.

A Modest Proposal For Amending The Rules of Association

In light of Jesus’ rebuke of his disciples for seeking expansion of God’s work only through means within their control, let us therefore examine the ways in which “rules of association” may be amended so that they may not only apply to those groups who are “under” the authority of a church organization but who are “allied” fellowships under no bond of authority, but cooperating towards common ends with a common belief system and biblical worldview.  I am aware that some of these suggestions may exist on an ad hoc or individual basis, but I wish to support making these practices generally accepted, widely recognized, and “official.”

Judicial Cooperation:  It is a practice among some “believers” to float between fellowship to fellowship seeking to escape sanctions for flagrant and unrepented sins, since the judgments and verdicts (for example, of disfellowshipment for cause) are not always recognized between different organizations.  Therefore, for those organizations with whom there is the recognition of the same biblical standard of enforcement of godly standards of behavior among the brethren, judgments ought to be automatically recognized between fellowships for such matters as being “bound” or “loosed” in the case of divorces, or disfellowshipment for moral cause (rather than simply political disagreements) so that sanctioned but unrepentant nominal believers cannot spread their immorality and their wicked examples from fellowship to fellowship.

Speaking Assignments & Fellowship:  Some ministers, simply because of political relationships between themselves and their former “regional pastors,” have been disciplined for speaking at different fellowships with identical belief systems, while other pastors with friendlier political relations have been given free permission to speak to other groups on numerous occasions.  To counteract this obvious political bias, there ought to be a free invitation for mutual fellowship and speaking opportunities for ministers from fellowships recognized as being of the same biblical belief system and worldview, and whose behavior toward us is civil and “brotherly” and is not marked by vicious slander, false accusations, and ungodliness (theft, deceit, and so on).  For those who are not against us are for us, and we ought to recognize that Christ has sheep in other folds beside our own, but that all of God’s flock shares the same standard of obedience to Him and mutual love and respect, regardless of their group affiliation.

Common Events & Efforts:  Continuing from the prior point, a recognition of a common belief system and mutual regard and respect should allow for the establishment of common events, with responsibilities shared through mutual agreement (such as “Family Weekends”).  Additionally, shared beliefs may allow for cooperation through shared evangelistic efforts or shared efforts to promote biblical understanding and instruction.  Anything from a scholarly journal of the Church of God or other shared literature to a picnic & barbeque for believers of nearby fellowships to common feast sites, family weekends, public lectures might be included within this realm of common actions, depending on the extent of the mutual regard and shared biblical belief system.

Extent of Cooperation:  Despite the fact that I (and presumably many of the readers of this blog) come from a Church of God background, this cooperation need not be limited simply to those whose organizations spring from a common ancestry in the Worldwide Church of God.  Such cooperation may be possible across “denominational” lines along with other groups of like mind, including some of the Sabbatarian Assyrian Churches of the East (whose biblical beliefs are often nearly identical to our own, despite a very different history), and one-house Messianic Jewish groups whose beliefs are strikingly similar despite a different background and church culture.  These would additionally include those other fellowships within the Church of God family who respect and honor our own.  Alliance and “association” need not specifically require subordination to a fellowship’s central authority, though subsidies would require such subordination.

Concluision:  The Proposal

Therefore, we ought to expand our range of association so that those with whom we can cooperate in various endeavors can “associate” with us in an official and recognized manner short of full union, depending on the degree of compatibility between church culture, degree of mutual respect and regard, and similarity or compatibility in doctrine and practice.  There ought to therefore be a tiered relationship of associations, ranging from those groups in full union as subsidiaries, such as national or regional associations, with exclusive internal jurisdictions, to those groups with whom we have close personal and cultural ties but no official union, with whom we have shared evangelistic efforts and mutual events and speaking and fellowship privileges, to those groups with whom we share a belief system but little else, with whom we can have shared judicial decisions based on the common biblical standard we hold to.

Let us remember the negative example of the disciples, obsessed with protecting and defending their “turf” and failing to see the larger goal of the expansion of biblical influence in the wider society through imitation by outsiders.  Therefore, let us remember that those who are not against us are on our side, so that we can establish and maintain closer ties with those whom we are closely allied in belief and practice, recognizing that our efforts are more successful and our understanding of the unity of Christ’s body more complete to the extent that we can successfully work with those of like mind but different organizational identity.  For truly, our most important identities are shared with all of those who are God’s children and followers of His ways, no matter what organization or fellowship they may happen to attend.

[1] https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com/2011/01/30/introducing-and-ranking-the-twelve-apostles/

[2] https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/los-dos-tipos-de-lider-en-mateo-2525-28/

[3] https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com/2011/03/05/some-thoughts-on-christ-like-leadership/

[4] https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com/2011/02/02/the-implications-of-philemon-on-the-process-of-cultural-change/