Readings for today: Acts 15-16
I frequently come across people who are surprised when conflict takes place in a church. They have this impression that because we all love Jesus we would never have a difference of opinion. Never have an argument or disagreement. They seem to think “unity” is the same as “unanimity” which simply is not true. From the very beginning, the church has struggled over significant issues. Struggled to come to one mind and one accord on various things. Because we are all sinners, it is not easy to discern the will of God.
Today’s passage highlights a number of different conflicts. Conflict over circumcision and the role of the Jewish law in a Christian’s life. Conflict over restoring an individual who has proved untrustworthy in the past. Conflict over where the Spirit was leading different evangelism teams to go. Conflict in Philippi over the deliverance of a slave girl. Conflict in prison which results in the conversion of the jailer. It is messy. There is division. The process of discernment often involves trial and error. Mistakes are made. I imagine feelings get hurt. Frustrations mount. But through it all, the Spirit is faithful to make His will known. And the result is the churches are strengthened in their faith and increase in numbers daily as God adds to them those who are being saved.
Is it possible that Acts 15 and 16 are paradigmatic for today? Do they reflect real life in the real church? Should we expect conflict? Expect disagreement? Expect arguments over where to go and what to do and who to involve? And if so, how can we resolve conflict peacefully? In a way that glorifies God and brings honor to His name?
One of the keys to navigating conflict in a godly manner is mutual submission. In Acts 15:1, a question is raised. Is circumcision required for salvation? This was no small matter. It was a question of identity. For centuries, the rite of circumcision had set the Jewish people apart. Marked them as God’s chosen people. They had suffered for this belief. Been persecuted for this belief. No matter where they found themselves, they were easily identified by the fact they had been circumcised so there was never any place to run or hide. Since Abraham, circumcision had formed the core part of their shared identity and linked them intimately with the covenant promises of God. Now it was being threatened...what should they do? Paul and Barnabus had strong opinions. Based on what they had seen and experienced, it appears the Holy Spirit was moving among the Gentiles. Non-Jews. People who were not circumcised. Why add to what the Spirit was doing? This stirred up quite a bit of dissension and debate. So they decided to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles to make their case. Again, there was much debate. Strong opinions offered on all sides. Finally Peter stood up. Shared his heart. Shared his experience. Sought to apply the Scriptures. Once again, Paul and Barnabus shared about the signs and wonders they had seen in their travels. James called for a decision and the council decided to let circumcision be a secondary matter. Non-essential when it comes to salvation.
This has huge implications and it is notable that their conclusion “seemed good to the apostles, elders, and the whole church.” Though the issue will continue to come up throughout the rest of the book of Acts, this moment represents a turning point. A general willingness of all parties to mutually submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. Another aspect that’s highlighted is their ability to differentiate between essentials and non-essentials when it comes to the gospel. Again, just because a compromise was reached doesn’t mean everyone agreed. Unity is not the same as unanimity. I imagine quite a few of the Pharisees who had come to faith walked away with serious reservations. But they set those reservations aside for the sake of the unity of the church. They recognized the danger of division and how much harm would come should the church fracture over this issue. They made sure to focus on the essentials - not getting mixed up in idolatry, sexual immorality, and maintaining purity which are all matters of the heart - rather than force Gentiles to become Jews before becoming Christian.
Would that modern-day Christians were able to do the same! Instead of fighting over secondary matters like baptismal practices, worship styles, spiritual gifts, etc., can we not exercise mutual forbearance and submission and keep the main thing the main thing? Rather than pull up stakes the moment we disagree with the preacher or the elder board, can we not put aside our differences for the sake of the unity of the church? Rather than bounce the moment we are disappointed or let down, can we not obey the gospel’s call to forgive and reconcile? Unity does not mean unanimity so we should never expect we will always agree. The key to doing life together is navigating conflict with a humility that honors God and keeps Christ at the center.