D is for…

By far one of the most widely appreciated and misused Bible verses has got to be Matthew 18:20. In that verse, Jesus says, “For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.”  I have heard this verse referenced as the “theme verse” for small group ministry, the rationale for house churches and the biblical reason given for why spending time with some friends or family members is all the church someone really needs.  And at first glance Jesus seems to say just that: “Get a couple of believers to gather, and I’ll join you.” 

However, the context makes it clear that when Jesus says that he is present with two or three Christians, it is when they are in the middle of a most difficult and unenviable task: reproving or correcting a fellow Christian.  This text is not the affirmation that Jesus is present when we gather even in small gatherings (though the doctrine of the Holy Spirit and passages like John 14 seem to make it clear that he does), but the assurance that Jesus will be with us when we do the most painful and necessary task for helping the church to grow in faithfulness:  That is “speaking the truth in love” (ala Ephesians 4:15) for the sake of correcting one Christian who has sinned against another Christian (See all of Matthew 18:15-20).

And the presence of Jesus in the middle of such muddle is one of the signs of the true church.  To continue my list of the ABC's of the true church: the D is for Discipline. And by discipline, I mean church discipline, the actual correcting or reproving of one believer by another or group of others because we belong to the same Community of faith, have taken the same vows and our “members of one another” (as the Bible says in 1 Cor 12:12.) 

The Knox Confession from the 16th century actually lists “ecclesiastical discipline uprightly ministered, as God’s Word prescribes, whereby vice is repressed and virtue
nourished” as right up there with true preaching and right administration of the sacraments.

While discipline evokes fearsome images of “witch hunts,” “inquisitions” and “tribunals” in the New Testament, we actually have a good deal of frank conversation about the need for discipline wisely and rightly handled when our actions, beliefs or especially teaching (see James 3:1).  Besides Jesus’ discussion of what we do when someone sins against us in Matthew 18:15-20, we also have the example of Ananias and Saphira (and some very harsh discipline by the Spirit) in Acts 5 and Paul’s instructions on what to do with a couple who continue on in sin, even after they have been repeatedly confronted, in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13.  In Ephesians 4, the conversation about “speaking the truth in love” is a form of discipline whereby teaching errors are confronted and the body of Christ is equipped and strengthened.

Regardless of size or structure, one of the marks of the true church is whether its members are willing (in the words of the vows for officers in my denomination) to “abide by its discipline.”  I also believe that most of us are so uncomfortable with any kind of confrontation or accountability that we mostly just move on to another place whenever we are confronted or have a need to confront others.  Our commitment to each other is so

Now, once again, the forms of this discipline, the means for carrying it out and the degree of organization or institutional formality can vary from church to church.  (And there are horror stories out there of church discipline done badly.)  While some forms of discipline are certainly better or wiser than others, the most important thing is that if “a church is a church” that there are some agreed upon convictions, commitments and agreements as well as some clear, thoughtful caring and redemptive processes whereby “vice is repressed and virtue nourished.” 

Unfortunately there is so little healthy discipline in the church today that it raises the question of whether ANY church actually measures up here, I am afraid.  (And anticipating the inevitable question about my own denomination, I actually think this is, sadly, our most colossal failing at the moment.)

But the answer is more commitment and love for each other, even to the point of confrontation, not less. 

Comments

[Derek Simmons]

Tod:
When we are “speaking the truth in love” is this an admonition directed at the motivation of the speaker or at the filtering apparatus of the hearer? Or both? What does the Greek used in this passage teach us about the focus being primarily “speaker” or primarily “hearer”?

Derek

[Tod]

Derek:

Since I was a speech communication major, I tend to think that both speaker and hearer need to focus on the "in love" part for the communication to have its desired effect. But exegetically, the verb is "speaking", so it would be directed at the speaker. This verse doesn't mean "speaking hard truth nicely" or in worst cases passive-aggressively (like telling others that someone is a heretic but couching it with, "but you know I love the guy.")

The Greek word here is also translated as "holding onto" or "walking in" the truth in some versions, but the Greek word is almost always used to mean speaking in other writings. And while holding on to our "living" the truth is certainly admirable, the emphasis here is on the content of the leaders for building up the body of Christ.

The preposition "in" is usually in Paul's writings a relational description (like "in Christ") and is meant to be a contrast to the manipulative methods of the false teachers. Truth and love intertwined together, lead to the body's growth in the one who is both Truth and Love.

So another way to translate the passage in "amplified" form:

"Speaking the truth in relationships of love (and not deceiving or manipulating in any way) we will all grow up in all things into the head, who is Christ."

[Derek Simmons]

Tod:
Thank you; especially for the "amplified" form.
Derek

[Eric Wilbanks]

Discipline. Much needed and much maligned. No one wants to be disciplined and most see it as punishment instead of instruction. That’s unfortunate. Good thoughts…

Now chew on this.

While the context of Mat. 18:15-20 certainly involves some form of discipline, the grammatical attributes are mis-appropriated. Take a look at the passage again.

“If your fellow believer sins against you…”

This is first and foremost about reconciliation. The verses that follow describe due process. You see the progression from personal/organic to formal, which is in harmony with Matthew 5:25. Grammatically, the reconciliation process ends at verse 17 (“If he refuses to listen to the [ekklesia], then treat him like a person who does not believe in God or like a tax collector.”) and then begins in verse 18 with an explanation as to why our actions on earth have merit in the first place (answering the question of authority in terms of allowing these issues to progress to a formal status). “I tell you the truth, the things you don’t allow on earth will be the things God does not allow. And the things you allow on earth will be the things that God allows.

It’s at this point that the language changes again, as if adding a footnote. It’s like hearing a newscaster announce, “In a related issue…”

“Also, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about something and pray for it, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven.”
The idea behind the Greek term for “Also,” palin, is that of “oscillatory repetition,” meaning that the ideas just discussed repeat themselves in the following.

So, not only do our actions concerning reconciliation have heavenly consequences, but in a related issue, our mutual prayers have the same affect! That’s the power of agreement.

But how could this be true? Are we truly as powerful as many charismatics would have us believe? Verse 20 is the answer and the KEY to understanding our power of agreement, whether in prayer or in reconciliation:

“This is true because if two or three people come together in my name, I am there with them.”

The use of the word “for” to begin verse 20 (KJV, NIV, NRSV…) is a bit misleading because it doesn’t really communicate the relationship between verses 19 and 20. The Greek “gar” is “a primary particle…used in argument, explanation or intensification.” Surprisingly enough, the NCV actually does a great job with this passage, using the phrase “This is true because…”

Ask anyone who knows me and they will tell you very quickly that I believe in discipline. And while a formal structure or an institutional paradigm makes discipline a no-brainer (what’s an organization without a policies and procedures manual?), the primary context of Matthew 18 is not discipline. Furthermore, it is possible to have discipline work within a loose framework of covenantal relationships. Families are a perfect example. “Interventions” are another.

While there are certainly hundreds of examples of "misused" verses that have long since lost their contextual punch, this isn't one of them...at least not in the way that you've presented it here.