Unity, Division, and a More Excellent Way

Syria, recently, has been the picture of constant violence, countless deaths, and unspeakable horrors.  Both the establishment and the rebels fight continuously as the world watches.  As we become repulsed by the inhumanity of it all, the question arises:   Why are they fighting?  Why all this bloodshed?  Is this really worth it?

James 1:4 (HCSB) tells us "What is the source of wars and fights among you? Don’t they come from the cravings that are at war within you?"

Indeed, war is a phenomenon that happens all over the world, in every culture, in every region, in every time period, at every level of society, both internally and externally.  Yet, what is the Bible's recommended approach to this situation?

Historically, Christians have often chosen either a Just War approach or a Pacifism approach.
In the Bible, we find a clear example of a right approach to this situation.  In the time of the kings of Israel, King Saul became aware that a young boy, David, was anointed to be next king.  In opposition to this, Saul became focused on trying to eliminate this potential threat to his kingdom.  Saul resorted to sending David to the front lines of battle hoping that he would die (an act that David himself would also do later on against Bathsheba's husband).  Saul tried to kill him at the king's table with a spear.  And Saul eventually went to all out war against David and his mighty men.  Yet, David was committed to the Lord's anointed, as Saul, though acting sinfully, was still the Lord's anointed for the time being.  Though David had a chance to kill Saul, God called him to submission to the current king of Israel. And so David lived in exile until the Lord's timing arose.

In this we see the principle of unity and submission.  There is a time when it is better for us to live with a hostile regime than to incite insurrection.  And by doing so, we preserve peace and prevent unnecessary bloodshed.

But, is there ever a situation where division is necessary?  Is divisiveness always wrong?
There seems to be three possible situations on this.

1. Blatantly Sinful Divisiveness:

In the Old Testament, we have a clear example of sinful rebellion in the rebellion of Korah who opposed Moses and was punished by the Lord.  Additionally, the New Testament gives the following direction: 

"Now I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause dissensions and obstacles contrary to the doctrine you have learned. Avoid them, for such people do not serve our Lord Christ but their own appetites.They deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting with smooth talk and flattering words." Romans 16:17-18 (HCSB)

"But avoid foolish debates, genealogies, quarrels, and disputes about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. Reject a divisive person after a first and second warning, knowing that such a person is perverted and sins, being self-condemned." Titus 3:10-11 (HCSB)

"Now the works of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, moral impurity, promiscuity, idolatry, sorcery, hatreds, strife, jealousy,outbursts of anger, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions, envy,drunkenness, carousing, and anything similar. I tell you about these things in advance—as I told you before—that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God." Galatians 5:19-21 (HCSB)

2. Righteous Divisiveness:

As the Bible is described as a sword, correctly teaching the Bible or "handling scripture" can be described as "rightly dividing the Word of Truth." 

In the Old Testament, there are several places where Israel is called out from the surrounding society.  In Israel's idolatry, men of God have called God's people to "divide" or separate from that which God hates.  In fact, because God is Holy, this means that God is completely separate from all of creation.  And God's people are called to demonstrate this quality of God.  This can be seen in the example of Phinehas who kills with a spear.  This can be seen in the example of Joshua who called Israel to worship God.  

In the New Testament, we see several places where separation is called for.  Jesus called for separation and division between a disciple and any other loyalties.  We are called to be separate and in doing so God becomes as a Father to us. Additionally, we see that many people separate from the Church because they were not truly of the Church.  Even more so, we are called to maintain the purity of the Gospel. And, in doing so, we reject false teachers. 

3. Stumbled Divisiveness:

Here, we have an example that is not exactly similar to blatantly sinful divisiveness.  The distinction here is that, in this case, people are genuinely motivated by a love for God.  In this situation, a person may have a sincere conviction from God, whether moral or doctrinal, concerning themselves or others.  And this conviction may be in opposition to the position of the community of believers that the person is a part of.  As this is not over the most important things (such as the purity of the Gospel), whether the person is correct or not, is separate from the matter.  The situation here is over differences between believers who both genuinely love the Lord and want to honor God, but have a difference of understanding.





But, a midst this, one wonders,
How does using the Word correctly keep us from minimizing important theological differences which we  otherwise might think are not that important? Perhaps three principles toward appropriate use of division could be:


1. When it violates the essential core of the Gospel. 
2. When it can result in harm to the church (indulging in clear sin, etc.)
3. When it violates the agreed upon doctrinal statement of the community of believers.



"But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way." 
1 Cor. 12:31 (KJV)

Universal Beauty?

In the field of Software Engineering, you often come across a discussion on "clean" or "beautiful" code in contrast with "sloppy" or "ugly" code.  Upon further examination, we find that there sometimes is a disagreement on what exactly makes code "clean" or "beautiful".   Some find code to be beautiful when it is very compact and efficient.  Others find code to be beautiful when it is very easy to read and understand. Others find code to be beautiful when using patterns in architecture and design.

When one writes or sees code that is exceptionally beautiful, there is an emotional experience where we stand in awe.  This does not necessary happen only in the reading or writing of source code.  But, it can happen when writing or reading a paper that appears exceptionally beautiful.  In the realm of papers, it could be eloquence such as one would find in the writings of Cicero.  It could be perfection of poetic form as we happen to judge perfect form to be.  It could be perfection of function as we see a persuasive paper move people persuasively.

Some people associate the word "beauty" with anything which produces this emotional reaction in us.  But, the root behind this experience often lies in our beliefs about perfection and the ideals we hold to.

For example, in some parts of the world, a woman is considered beautiful if she has a nose-ring, while others might find this unusual or non-ideal.  In some parts of the world, a woman is considered beautiful if she has a neck-ring, while others might find this unusual or non-ideal.  In America, many people might consider a woman beautiful if she is able to wear a size-zero dress, while others might find this unusual or non-ideal.

In each of these cases, there's a belief of what the theoretical ideal woman should be like.  It extends beyond the item itself (nose-ring, neck-ring, size-zero dress) and goes to symbolic characteristics such as "delicate", "petite", "slender", "soft", "curvy", etc.  Thus, except for some notable exceptions such as Amazon women and Baby Got Back, many societies throughout history have maintained many overlapping ideals for the ideal woman, though expressed and implemented differently.

Some of this points to a question of whether there is a universal beauty or ideal.  And if so, where would it come from?  Would it be merely something that societies negotiate together and agree to as a whole?  Would it be something built into all of us (such as the genetic predisposition for males to be physically stronger than females)?  Despite some perhaps due criticism of superficiality, some efforts toward a world-wide beauty contest seem to be attempting toward one or more of these directions.

Yet, as there perhaps might appear to be a universal beauty and ideal in God's general revelation of creation, there most certainly is a clear beauty ideal in God's special revelation of the Bible.

Of women, the Bible teaches that true beauty is found inside and not outside.  That one's personal charm is merely a deception and one's outward beauty will soon fade away, but the fear of the Lord is true beauty.

Yet, more importantly, the Bible teaches:

14 But how can they call on Him they have not believed in? And how can they believe without hearing about Him? And how can they hear without a preacher? 15 And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: How beautiful are the feet of those who announce the gospel of good things!

Romans 10:14-15 (HCSB)


For everyone who calls on the Lord will be saved.