|
Introduction: I can still hear
Barney Fife, “You gotta nip it in the bud, Andy. Nip it in the
bud. Nip it! Nip it! Nip it!” Andy would reply, “But Barney
…” “Nip it!” Barney would curtly say. While the Andy Griffith Show played this repartee up for laughs, this is great
advice. When problems arise, we need to nip them in the bud. As
this year began, we examined the Jerusalem
church, the most
successful congregation of all time, noticing eight major factors
that contributed to their excellence. In later lessons we studied
deeper into our devotion to worship and
becoming one heart and one soul. The third key we found in their triumph was their ability to
aggressively deal with problems. When problems arose they nipped
them in the bud. The Jerusalem church faced three kinds of
problems, 1) sin problems, Acts
5, 2) people problems, Acts
6, and 3) doctrine problems, Acts
15. After each of these problems had been overcome, the
scripture reveals that brethren were encouraged, work was
strengthened and the Lord’s body was increased (Acts
5:14; 6:7; 15:30-35). If we, the Franklin Church of
Christ, will be a triumphant church like Jerusalem, we must follow
their pattern. Discussion: I.
Sin
problems: Ananias and Sapphira, Acts
5:1-14. A.
The
Jerusalem church recognized this was about Ananias and
Sapphira’s relationship with God, not with the brethren (Acts
5:4). When dealing with sin, our emotional ties often
distort our view. We must not let thoughts about how dealing with
the sin will affect our relationships distract us. Therefore, we
see no questions about who Ananias and Sapphira’s friends were,
who their parents were, what role they played in the congregation,
etc. None of those things mattered. What mattered was God should
be glorified in their lives and He was not. B.
The
Jerusalem church knew sin was from Satan (Acts
5:3) and Satan’s work cannot be allowed in Christ’s
church. A little leaven leavens the whole lump (I
Corinthians 5:6-7). If Satan’s influence had not been
dealt with, then the problem of hypocrisy and lying would have
grown among the brethren, destroying the fellowship they had and
the strength they were developing. Instead, dealing aggressively
with the influence of Satan produced a greater commitment to
purity among the members and produced a stronger church (Acts
5:11-14). C.
The
Jerusalem church knew Ananias and Sapphira had sinned of their own
free will (Acts
5:4). While Peter recognized Satan’s influence, he knew
it was Ananias’ choice to submit to Satan’s influence. There
was no posturing about Ananias and Sapphira’s upbringing,
background, culture, etc. Ananias and Sapphira had become children
of God and were expected to behave accordingly. The church knew
these two had sinned and something must be done. D.
The
Jerusalem church dealt with this sin quickly (Acts
5:2-3). Sometimes we get so caught up in possible glimmers
of hope that a person is changing that we allow them to wallow in
sin. Doing so allows their soul to be in danger of hell while we
try to interpret how hopeful a particular right action is. Don’t
forget, Ananias and Sapphira were “attending church”. The
apostles did not stop to say that their attendance was hopeful of
some possible change. The sin occurred and it was dealt with
immediately. 1.
Allow me to
modify this one point with further scripture. We must recognize
the extraordinary nature of this event. This occurred as an
example that all would know the high standards God has set. Acts
5 does not teach us to kill our brethren. First, who among
us would still be alive? Secondly, notice the use of the
miraculous, which we no longer use. Thirdly, even Peter himself
did not follow the pattern of “killing” the sinner in Acts
8:19-24. This situation was much like the deaths of Nadab
and Abihu in Leviticus
10. God did not kill every priest who sinned. But in the
beginning of the covenant, God demonstrated an example that should
be remembered by those who followed after and read God’s law.
God expects to be glorified by His servants. When we do not
glorify Him, we should expect judgment. 2.
We have a
pattern in Matthew
18:15-17. When you see a brother sin, you go to
him. Don’t wait for the elders to do something. If he listens,
all is well. If not, take two or three with you. If he listens,
all is forgiven. If not, take it to the church. If he still does
not listen, he is to be to us as a tax-gatherer or a Gentile.
Remember Paul’s admonition in II
Thessalonians 3:15. Even though disciplined, we do not
count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. II.
People
problems: Widows indeed, Acts
6:1-7. A.
Far too
often, when someone has a “people problem”, a complaint is
made and the offender gets defensive. I am most impressed that the
native Hebrew Christians did not. Nor did they mount a
counter-attack, trying to find some fault in the Hellenistic Jews
that justified the oversight. They simply heard the complaint and
came up with a solution. B.
The
Jerusalem church grew through this problem because the native
Hebrews were willing to bend over backwards to show understanding
and concern for the Hellenists’. This is evident in that the
names of the seven men appointed were all Hellenistic (Acts
6:5). Imagine how the native Hebrews could have
complained, “How do we know these Hellenists won’t neglect
us?” But they didn’t. They wanted unity and they trusted each
other to uphold that unity. C.
The
Jerusalem brethren did not hold grudges. Once the solution was
attained they returned to harmony. Too many resolve problems but
then keep dragging them back up. Some continue to view others with
a jaundiced eye. Some continue to accuse others of wrongdoing,
typically behind their backs. But the Jerusalem brethren put the
problem behind them and grew from it (Acts
6:7). This demonstrates a great mindset about problems.
While we will never desire problems, we understand they are not
death knells for the congregation but rather are opportunities to
work together, overcome together and grow together. III.
Doctrine
problems: Circumcision, Acts
15:4-35. A.
The
Jerusalem church was able to overcome the problem regarding
circumcision because they didn’t dismiss it, they debated it (Acts
15:6-7). Typically, we don’t want to debate issues. We
would rather push them under the rug. No doubt there will be
issues or disagreements over some actions or applications which we
deem does not change anyone’s standing with God. But this issue,
and others like it, would affect salvation (Galatians
5:2-4). We cannot dismiss these issues. Rather, we must
get them out in the open so unity can be reached. B.
That the
Christians came together to discuss the issue and listened to the
arguments based on the work of the Holy Spirit through Peter [Acts
15:7-11], Barnabas and Paul [Acts
15:12] and the revelation of the Holy Spirit mentioned by
James [Acts
15:13-18], demonstrated that these brethren believed
God’s will on the matter could be understood. One of the major
reasons so much doctrinal division is allowed in churches today is
an underlying current that says, “We can’t really figure it
out.” But we can understand what the will of the Lord is (Ephesians
5:17). C.
The
Jerusalem church was able to overcome this problem because they
kept the discussion centered on the problem, not the
personalities. The discussion was about what the Spirit had
revealed. It was not about who had the problem. Barnabas didn’t
say, “These guys are Pharisees. Remember how much trouble the
Lord had with the Pharisees? They can’t be right.” They
didn’t name call and make personal attacks. They examined the
issues. D.
Having been
a party to numerous religious discussions, disagreements and
debates I am constantly amazed at what occurred in Jerusalem over
this issue. There was a big doctrinal problem over the necessity
of circumcision, but by the end of the discussion there was unity
(Acts
15:22). That demonstrates a great key to overcoming
doctrinal problems. Those Pharisees who were incorrect about
circumcision were not interested in simply defending their
position. They wanted to believe the truth. They wanted to teach
the truth. They were simply mistaken. Instead of allowing their
pride to get in the way, they humbly submitted to what the Holy
Spirit had revealed. The fact is, the only way doctrinal problems
will ever be resolved is if we remove our own pride and agree to
submit to whatever the Spirit has said. E.
Of course,
we have been involved in too many discussions where brethren were
not willing to submit to the Holy Spirit’s guidance in the Word.
What do we do then? We revert back to what we learned in the first
part of this lesson about dealing with sin in the members. Conclusion: As I have said before, we are at a crossroads. We can either be satisfied where we are or we can follow Jerusalem’s example. If we choose the first, we will do what all American churches do: peak, plateau and eventually die. If we choose the latter, we can be what Jerusalem was. We can set Franklin, Middle Tennessee and the world ablaze with God’s gospel.
Glory
to God in the church by Christ Jesus
|
||||||||||
