Bible & Theology Current Events

Do Two Christians Have to Agree on Everything to be in Fellowship with One Another?16 min read

April 11, 2017 12 min read


Do Two Christians Have to Agree on Everything to be in Fellowship with One Another?16 min read

Reading Time: 12 minutes

It is a fact that good, honest Christians sometimes disagree about various issues – whether elders should have more than one child, whether women should cover their heads in worship, whether Christians should be pacifists, and so on. To pretend honest, truth-seeking brethren always share identical beliefs is unhelpful.

This is the question we need to be able to answer: Can you worship and serve Christ alongside another Christian – in full, brotherly camaraderie – when you disagree with him/her on a point of doctrine? If so, at what point should you sever ties of fellowship?

I won’t attempt to address every doctrine (that would be both impossible and presumptuous of me), nor will I address what fellowship (or lack there of) should look like. But there are some principles found in Scripture that can give us greater clarity about this fellowship question. But first, let’s look at some false extremes so we can better see the truth.

Wrong Answers To The Fellowship Question

Extreme A: The “Core Gospel” Theory

Many teach that there is a “core” set of essential doctrines on which believers must agree – matters such as the resurrection of Christ, the necessity of baptism, etc. Some are quick to point to the popular sentiment: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.” (It should be noted this phrase is not found in the Bible.)

We need to be careful about turning a man-made quip into a religious creed. What human gets to decide which matters are “essential” or “non-essential?” What about instrumental music in worship, or taking of the Lord’s Supper on Saturday, or how to properly handle church funds? The problem with this theory is that no one can seem to agree on what should be included in this “core” list.

Ironically, the idea that Christians must merely share a belief in a “core gospel” of fundamentals, while minimizing the importance of everything else, has caused a tremendous amount of division in the church. If this is the answer to unity, it is a poor answer.

One particularly novel idea (one which has seen a small resurgence recently) is that this “core gospel” should be comprised only of God’s explicit commands, and that Scriptural inferences from deductive reasoning shouldn’t be a reason to break fellowship. However, Jesus Himself didn’t believe this; during His earthly ministry, He expected the Jews to be able to make doctrinal inferences from Scripture (Matt. 22:29-32). Furthermore, the command to abstain from “things like these” is a command to make inferences (Gal. 5:21). There can be no Christianity without some degree of human inference. (Is not this false “core gospel” theory an inference in and of itself?) Christians must make Biblical inferences about things like full immersion in water for baptism, denominationalism, instrumental music, etc. – matters on which there can be no room for disagreement among those who share the mind of Christ.

Extreme B: The “Perfect Agreement” Theory

Some demand that their fellow believers agree with them on every single doctrinal issue before extending a right hand of fellowship. This approach forgets that Christianity is, in large part, a growth process – that we will never reach moral and intellectual perfection in this lifetime. Romans 14 clearly explains how Christians can sometimes still be in fellowship despite their doctrinal disagreements. It is unrealistic to expect someone to know everything about the Bible – and agree with 100% of your doctrinal conclusions – before administering baptism.

Extreme C: The Naysayer’s Theory

Some are quick to point to the doctrinal disagreements among Christians today as proof that restoring New Testament Christianity is impossible. The argument goes like this: “If two intelligent Christians who believe in the all-sufficiency of Scripture can’t agree on everything, then this is a failed experiment. Let’s turn the church of Christ into a denomination.”

The problem with this theory, however, is that it confuses unity of mind with an exhaustive unity of belief & opinions. Again, Romans 14 commands Christians to be in fellowship, despite having a few contrary opinions. While the Bible only teaches one position on any point of doctrine, the unity of mind among Christians is the simple acknowledgment that truth can be understood (at least eventually). Together we are dedicated to better understanding that single truth, no matter how imperfect we might be in the process.

So what are some Biblical principles that can help guide this matter of fellowship among two Christians who disagree?

Principle 1: Jesus Is Our Basis of Christian Fellowship

If we walk in the light, as [Jesus] is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin” (1 John 1:7).

My confidence that you are in fellowship with Jesus is how I determine whether I can be in fellowship with you. I do not have a right to extend spiritual fellowship to someone not first in fellowship with Christ – even if they claim to be a follower of Christ (Matt. 7:21-23).

I judge the faithfulness of self-proclaimed believers in Christ by (a) what they say, and (b) what they do. Jesus said, “You will recognize them by their fruits” (Matt. 7:16). Shame on me if I ever convey approval of someone’s error (Rom. 1:32; 2 John 10-11).

Fellowship Begins by Being “in Christ”

One must repent (Acts 2:38; 3:19) and be baptized for the express purpose of entering into Christ for the remission of sins (Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:3-4; 1 Pet. 3:21). Who am I to call someone my “brother” or “sister” in Christ if they have not satisfied God’s initial requirements to be saved?

Fellowship Continues by Sharing the “Mind of Christ”

Unity can only be found in a shared agreement of what it means to submit to Jesus. “Can two walk together unless they have agreed to meet?” (Amos 3:3). Paul commanded:

I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. (1 Cor. 1:10).

Peter commanded, similarly:

Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind. (1 Pet. 3:8)

This “unity of mind” is how we approach God and interpret His Word. Or, to use a more theological word, “unity of mind” is about sharing the same hermeneutic. Jesus is the example of the kind of “mind” we are to have as we submit to the Father (Phil. 2:5-11). There is a right way and a wrong way to approach His Word (2 Tim. 2:15), and to properly interpret it, we must:

  • Rid our lives of pride and selfish motives.
  • Understand the teachings of Scripture as timeless and relevant to all matters of life.
  • Recognize Scripture as the verbal, plenary, inerrant Word of God.
  • Understand that the 66 books of the Bible are the sole source of authority, and no man-made document or tradition carries equal weight.
  • Be willing to submit to the commands, apostolic examples, and all subsequent inferences as we realize them along the way – even at great personal cost.

Being “united in the same mind” does not mean we must always agree on every doctrine immediately, but it does mean we must be in agreement in our approach to God’s Law (i.e. the mind of Christ). Someone who has a high view of Scripture cannot, by definition, share the “same mind” as someone who has a low view of Scripture.

Fellowship Is Severed When One Begins “Walking In Darkness”

“Walking in darkness” inhibits fellowship with God and consequently severs fellowship with His children (1 John 1:6). A wrong hermeneutic will cause one to walk in darkness, and will manifest itself as neglecting His commandments (1 John 2:3; 3:22-24; 5:2-3), disregarding His Word (1 John 2:5), and living unrighteously (1 John 2:29), etc.

Principle 2: There Are No Unimportant Doctrines

Say it with me in your heart: There is no such thing as two equally valid, yet contrary, positions about a Bible doctrine. God has not spoken out of both sides of His mouth on any issue (though some Bible topics are more clear than others). The Bible only teaches one position on any given topic. If there is a doctrinal disagreement between two Christians, it is because someone has misinterpreted what the Bible teaches.

The often-abused example is given of the late Gus Nichols and Guy N. Woods who, a generation ago, publicly disagreed about the nature of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, yet still maintained fellowship with one another (with Woods holding the position that the Spirit dwells within the heart representatively, and Nichols holding the position that the Spirit dwells within the heart literally and personally). Let us not make the grave mistake of thinking that both positions were equally valid and thus of no consequence.

Though Nichols and Woods honestly disagreed on this topic, we believe both men are presently in glory. And we hold both of these great men of God were saved – not because this issue didn’t matter – but because the blood of Jesus cleansed them of the issues about which they were honestly mistaken (1 John 1:7). Which brings us to the third principle.

Principle 3: Jesus May Extend Grace To Our Wrong Positions (To an Extent)

There is no question that there is no salvation outside of Jesus (John 14:6; Acts 4:12). And baptism is the only way into Jesus (Gal. 3:26-27). But what if a Christian is honestly trying to serve God, but gets a few more difficult doctrines wrong along the way?

Thankfully, the blood of Jesus cleanses the Christian’s sins when he or she does not understand, or has no intention of breaking, God’s Law (1 John 1:7). There is a degree to which Christ is patient with honest Christians despite their imperfections. I will not presume the extent to which His grace covers error, but the fact still remains in Scripture.

For example, Jesus told the church in Ephesus to repent of their wrongdoings; otherwise He would “remove their lampstand” (Rev. 2:5). This implies that – at least for the time being – the Ephesian Christians in error were still saved, but they were on probation (so to speak). Christ had extended them grace in their wrongs, but they were expected to repent upon recognizing the truth.

In a similar fashion, perhaps it could be said that Christians today sometimes get things wrong. There is a degree to which the blood of Christ continues to cleanse them, yet when they come to a better knowledge of the truth, Christ expects them to repent and do better.

I am confident that there are some Biblical matters about which I am wrong. Yet, so long as I seek to humbly submit to Jesus, I can enjoy the security of having my name written in the book of Life (Rev. 3:5). As I mature spiritually, I hope to better align my beliefs with Scripture along the way.

Principle 4: Fellowship Should Never Endorse What Is Wrong

Christian Fellowship is largely based upon decisions that are the fruit of basic honesty. My beliefs are defined by how I treat other people. If I fail to clearly state my opposition or support of another’s life or teaching, I become a hypocrite. Christians are commanded to judge one another to determine whether fellowship can continue (1 Cor. 5:12-13).

I must honestly judge those with whom I am considering fellowship, otherwise I risk “taking part in his wicked works” (2 John 11). When I extend my “right hand of fellowship” (Gal. 2:9), I endorse the life and teaching of brethren I deem to be honest and share my mind in Christ. I must never engage in any form of fellowship which validates a wrong belief.

Elders are to protect the church on a congregational level from false teaching (Heb. 13:17). Yet I protect the church on a personal level by means of my fellowship. Paul told the Roman Christians to “watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them” (Rom. 16:17). On the other hand, Paul told the Philippian Christians to “keep your eyes on those who walk according to the example you have in us” (Phil. 3:17). Paul’s letters are filled with names of people to be avoided (e.g. 2 Tim. 4:14) and people worthy of commendation (e.g. Col. 4:7-17).

Of course, my judgments are human and thus sometimes wrong. I am open to honest discussion about my judgments. When Peter and Barnabas wrongfully excluded their fellowship from Christians, Paul rebuked them (Gal. 2:11-14).

Principle 5: Fellowship Sometimes Requires Judgment

The Bible repeatedly commands Christians to be patient with one another (Rom. 14:1; 15:1; 1 Cor. 13:7; Gal. 6:2; Eph. 4:2) – and it isn’t just referring to personality conflicts. We must be patient with fellow Christians as we hope to lead them to a “more accurate” understanding of Scripture (cf. Acts 18:26).

We need wise judgment as to how long we should patiently bear with people who are mistaken about a particular doctrine. However, Scripture must carefully restrict the degree to which we tolerate opposing views.

There are three dimensions to consider when making this judgment call:

The First Dimension of Fellowship: Discerning Right from Wrong

Sin is sin, error is error, and wrong is wrong. The Bible only teaches one thing on any given issue, and I either get things right or I don’t. But if this is the only dimension of fellowship, then few Christians – if any – could ever be in fellowship! Perhaps we could say that all Christians are theoretically wrong about something. Surely no two Christians agree about every matter of Scripture (if we consider even the most intricate of doctrines). I openly admit that I may hold some beliefs that are wrong. Yet by God’s grace I hope to come to a better understanding of God’s Word as I grow in my understanding of Scripture.

The Second Dimension of Fellowship: Being of the Same Mind

If I disagree with another Christian, I must ask whether we are operating with the same “mind of Christ.” Remember, the “mind of Christ” is how I approach God and interpret His Word. Sometimes it may take longer to determine whether someone shares the same mind as you, but over time a pattern will begin to develop.

For example, a self-proclaimed “Christian” who does not believe in the essentiality of baptism for salvation is woefully mistaken and thus I cannot be in spiritual fellowship with him. He has not obeyed the gospel. We disagree, not merely about baptism, but fundamentally how we approach God and interpret His Word. The Bible plainly declares that baptism is the occasion at which my sins are washed away (Acts 22:16; 1 Pet. 3:21). To disagree about baptism reflects nothing short of a heart problem.

Yet, if two Christians share the same “mind” while disagreeing about a more peripheral doctrine, we can expect the truth to prevail over time. It is when someone exchanges the truth for a lie that two people must break fellowship.

The Third Dimension of Fellowship: Admitting the Relative Complexity of the Doctrine in Question

Some doctrines are simply more complicated than others. The Bible itself acknowledges this fact (2 Pet. 3:16). Thus, it logically follows that it will sometimes take longer for some Christians to come to the right conclusion about more difficult doctrines. We need to give Christians, who are operating with the same “mind of Christ,” time to study the issue and work out the matter on their own. We need to sympathize with brethren who have not yet found the truth on a particular subject, but who may still be searching for it. If I am honest, I know there are some issues I am still working through myself. This is simply part of “walking in the light” (1 John 1:7). The command to grow was written to Christians, not non-Christians (1 Pet. 2:2).

Thus, as it relates to my fellowship with Christians with whom I disagree, I need to use judgment in identifying the doctrines that are more difficult to understand. It is unfair for me to quickly sever fellowship with a Christian who is still honestly searching for the truth. At the same time, I need to take great care not to validate someone’s belief I know to be wrong (Acts 18:24-26).

It should be observed that New Testament Christians did work and worship in congregations where perfect doctrinal agreement did not exist – congregations where only a few Christians had not, metaphorically speaking, “soiled their garments” (Rev. 3:4). They worshipped and fellowshipped in imperfect churches, working to “strengthen what remains” (Rev. 3:2). Christians can for a season, in good conscience, remain in fellowship with other Christians who are mistaken about some issues if their aim is to bring them toward perfection. How long that season should be, however, is sometimes based upon wise judgment.


Do two Christians have to agree on everything to be in fellowship? Not necessarily.

The Limits of Fellowship

Yet we cannot have Christian fellowship with those who are not first in fellowship with God. This means people who are not in Christ and people who have left Christ cannot enjoy spiritual fellowship with other Christians.

Christians find fellowship by sharing the “mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 1:10; 1 Pet. 3:8). This means we share the same healthy fear of God, submission to Christ, and respect for His Word. This allows for the occasional honest disagreement over some specific doctrines, yet over time – if all parties are operating with the “mind of Christ” – more and more differences will be resolved.

All of God’s Word Is Important

There is no “core gospel.” No command is too small. God never speaks out of both sides of His mouth. All of God’s instructions are equally important (though all may not be equally clear). We must continually strive to get everything right.

The reason the “core gospel” theory is so popular is because it is so similar to the actual truth (all false doctrine has a little bit of truth in it). The Bible teaches that some doctrines are simply more clear than others, as Peter says (2 Pet. 3:16). Yet, all Biblical doctrines are essential because all are from God.

Protect Your Conscience

Christians must take great care not to violate the conscience (Jas. 4:17). Even though there are some matters about which Christians can disagree, it is important not to participate in anything that will communicate that you support that which is wrong.

Remember The Three Dimensions of the Fellowship Question

Fellowship is not always limited to a binary of right and wrong. If this were the case, virtually no Christian could be in fellowship with another, since none of us have reached Christian perfection. To what extent should Christians be patient with those who believe differently than you?

The second dimension takes into account whether two Christians are operating with the same mind, or the same hermeneutic. The third dimension takes into account the relative difficulty of the doctrine in question. I want you to treat me with the same degree of longsuffering as I am commanded to extend to you in Christ.

Be Thankful for Elders & Congregational Autonomy

We are thankful that God has established autonomous elderships to rule over individual congregations to help Christians work through these difficulties. Elderships are to exercise wise judgment in settling doctrinal disputes, and Christians have an obligation to submit to their decisions (Heb. 13:17). Yet what if a Christian still disagrees with their decision? It is important for him to consider the three dimensions to this question of fellowship.

Ben Giselbach is the pulpit minister at the Edgewood church of Christ in Columbus, GA. He and his wife Hannah have two children, Ezra & Colleyanna. Ben is a graduate of Freed-Hardeman University and has returned to pursue his MDiv. He has written three books in his You Are A Theologian Series: Thinking Right about the Bible, Thinking Right about God, and Thinking Right about Salvation.
  1. Matthew Benfield

    I do not envy your position. You have tackled one of the most difficult topics in our brotherhood. As such, I'm confident you'll get much disagreement. Still, I want to applaud you for the courage it takes to open yourself to scrutiny. I also want to offer some thoughts in response: 1. Very respectfully, I think you go too far when you assert that someone who disagrees with out position on baptism has a heart problem. As clear as it may seem to you and me it may not be so clear to others and therefore need not represent a heart problem. 2. Whether a person has "the mind of Christ", according to Philippians (the only place I know the phrase is used) is determined by whether they humbly place others before themselves, not whether they share our hermeneutic of C.E.N.I. I do not believe it can be historically demonstrated that such a hermeneutic existed before the time of Francis Bacon (J.S. Lamar based his book, "The Organon of Scripture", which explains this hermeneutic, on Bacon's work "Novum Organum"). 3. Finally, this is most worrisome, for me as well as for you. You say that you dare not presume to know the extent to which God's grace covers error. But, you do. And we must. You and I both rightfully stand by the biblical doctrine of withdrawal. Yet, we cannot withdraw from someone unless we make a judgment about whether their mistake is covered by God's grace, i.e. if they are still "in." If they are in fellowship with Christ then we must be. If they are not, neither can we be. So, we must make judgments in that regard. Indeed you do in this article. I wonder, actually, at how differences over the Holy Spirit are considered "allowable" but differences over instruments is not. It seems to me that the case for the indwelling has much more support than the support for acappella, just by sheer number of references. Further, I understand your hesitancy in regard to the "core" doctrine, but it seems that each person/church has its own core. We all have a list, real or imagined, of thinfs which sever fellowship. This is most difficult because no where are we given such a list and everyone's list differs because everyone's perspective differs. You have stepped out on a limb by addressing such a historically difficult problem. I admire your courage. But I hope you'll take time to consider this feedback and, perhaps, reconsider some of the details of your argument.

    • Ben

      Matthew – I appreciate your kindness despite the matters you’ve taken issue with. Many can learn from your tone. Here’s my answers to the points you raised: 1. Yes, I would still assert that anyone who disagrees with the essentiality of baptism for remission of sins has a heart problem – in light of how obvious the Scriptures command, exemplify, and imply it (could the Bible be any more clear?). By heart problem, I specifically mean an honesty problem. Some of the greatest minds in the denominational world have plainly stated that Acts 2:38 does in fact teach baptism is the moment one’s sins are forgiven, but then explain it away due to their “theological traditions.” Such a person does not share the mind of Christ. 2. There is no getting around the fact that Philippians 2:5-8 models for us the mind of Christ – not just in how we treat our brethren – but also how we view ourselves in relation to God. This is the foundation for proper hermeneutics: Humility and absolute submission to God. “CENI,” as you colloquially call it, is not a hermeneutic in and of itself but a means by which God communicates His Will. You cannot adequately handle Scripture without knowing how God communicates. We will either have a high regard for His Word, or a low regard. The extent to which we obey His Word will follow suit. I believe the basic rules of communication have always applied to Scripture just as they do to everyday speech. If I do not first and foremost empty myself of my own pride, then I will never see myself chiefly as the student and God as the Teacher. That is the foundation of proper hermeneutics. 3. I will not presume the extent to which God’s grace covers error – I just know that it does (just not to what degree of egregious error). But God alone is sovereign; I am not. I can only deduce from the words He has spoken. I hope to see people in heaven I did not expect to be there. But God has explained how we can confidently know we ourselves are saved. But I will not draw exact lines for God when He has not told me the location of those lines. No serious Bible student questions whether the Spirit indwells Christians. The question is how the Spirit indwells Christians, which is certainly a complicated study. I can easily see how two seasoned men who share the mind of Christ can disagree on the subject, yet I cannot see how two seasoned men can disagree about whether mechanical instruments in worship are permissible. The instrument question boils down to hermeneutics 101 (how I view my own opinions and preferences as I stand before the Master). I have greater patience for one such error than I do the other.

      • Rusty Pettus

        Ben I am not sure why we can believe an err in the nature of God and chalk it up to a complex issue that we may disagree. The doctrine of the "word only" Holy Spirit was created by the Dutch Reformers. It is a deistic view of the Spirit that seeks to limit and contain his work. It is almost unanimously rejected by all of Christianity for 2000 years. So how can we differ in opinions on the doctrine of God and "the blood of Jesus cleansed them of the issues about which they were honestly mistaken" and it not cover other doctrines?

        • Ben

          Rusty - I feared using any examples in my article for the very fear of posts like yours, but I went ahead and used the example of Woods and Nichols only because their example is widely used and abused. Without betraying my own position about the Holy Spirit, I would caution you not to question the salvation of godly men who have held the position that the Holy Spirit dwells within the heart of the Christian in a representative fashion, much like the Lord dwelt within the temple of Israel in a representative way. Holy men like Franklin Camp, Guy N. Woods, and Alan Highers hold to this view. And Nichols, along with all other faithful brethren, would agree with Camp, Woods, and Highers about everything else the Spirit does and does not do. I caution you to think soberly about this, and not divide the church simply because another discerning Christian doesn't agree with your advanced position. The fact of the matter is, the exact nature of the indwelling Holy Spirit is a complex issue, whether or not you will concede to that reality. Christians need some time - and patience - from their brethren who think they have this matter figured out. Perhaps you, too, are thankful that other Christians have been patient with you as you have worked through Biblical misconceptions of your own throughout the years. I, for one, am thankful the blood of Jesus does cover many of my own misinterpretations. I will not presume that He will always be so patient with me, but Scripture does teach that He is, and will be, to a degree.

          • Rusty

            Ben, I do not judge their eternity and have no issue in being in complete fellowship with them. I do find it interesting however that when it comes to Franklin Camp, Guy N. Woods, and Alan Highers we brush it off as honest men and a complex issue. But they have adopted a man made doctrine that did not exist until the 1500's and is highly unorthodox. But then we do not offer the same grace to those who may dis-agree on other doctrines and label them as people with dishonest hearts. To me this is problematic.

          • Ben

            I do not think their position is a new invention. But neither do I believe the principle of restoring NT Christianity is a new invention, yet many would label this as unorthodox, too. I tend to think we err when we look to Christendom as our definition for "unorthodox" in lieu of Holy Writ. Regarding your straw man notion that "we do not offer the same grace to those who may disagree on other doctrines and label them as people with dishonest hearts," I invite you to re-read my article, though I know it is lengthy.

          • Rusty Pettus

            I would completely agree that baptism is essential and is for the remission of sin. I have only found it interesting where we believe grace should cover differing opinions concerning the doctrine and nature of God but then draw lines in other areas.

          • Ben

            We can only try our best in explaining the doctrine of fellowship, which can be a complex issue. I hope to continue searching for a clearer understanding.

    • Luke Dockery

      Matthew, You raise some good points, for sure. I think F. LaGard Smith’s Who Is My Brother? is a must-read on this topic, even though I don’t agree with all of his conclusions. His concept of “levels” of fellowship is helpful in my opinion (and takes into account some of the principles Ben mentions here).

  2. Caleb Guard

    Is there a flow chart available to make this plain and simple?

    • Ben

      Very funny. I'll gladly adopt a more concise explanation if it is also more biblical.

  3. Edwin Walker

    Excellent article. One problem we have is illustrated by the contention over the indwelling. We try to answer questions that God has not answered. How does the Spirit indwells Christians? God didn't say, He just said that He does. It is often when we try to draw conclusions beyond what scripture says that we get into disagreements. Christians must recognize when we have formed an opinion that is not specifically taught in scripture and be sure that we do not let opinions disrupt our fellowship. Thanks for taking on the challenge.

  4. Lee Keele

    You lost me when you equivocated having the mind of Christ with your hermeneutic.

    • Ben

      The plain definition of hermeneutics is "how we interpret the Word of God." Thus, a proper hermeneutic is foundationally a matter of honesty, humility, and a proper view of self. Consequently, the mind of Christ is our perfect example of a proper hermeneutic. A hermeneutic is not some cold, complex theological algorithm that varies from person to person. God has expressed His Will through words - through logical propositions and understandable examples - and two people can come to an eventual agreement about what God means. But agreement can only be found if two people share the same mind of Christ. People often interpret very plain Scriptures differently due to a wrong heart, attitude, or disposition. Even the most knowledgable academics can study the Scriptures and miss the point because they approach God's Word with a wrong heart (John 5:39-40). When we lose our humility and honesty, we no longer can see the truth. That is why it is harder for academics, philosophers, and people in powerful positions to understand the message of Scripture than it is for common folk (1 Cor. 1:20-31; Matt. 11:25).

      • Rusty Pettus

        Ben I am confused. Agreement can only be found if two people share the same mind of Christ. So which brothers did not have the mind of Christ in the Holy Spirit debate?

        • Ben

          Rusty, that's the point of the article. There can be no fellowship if two brothers do not share the mind of Christ. But Christians are commanded not to agree on every specific doctrine necessarily, but they are to find unity in the "mind of Christ" (1 Cor. 1:10; 1 Pet. 3:8). How do we reconcile the command to be unified in the same "mind" when good Christians still sometimes disagree on various specifics? Christians can sometimes disagree (with the necessary caveats), but they must first share the mind of Christ if doctrinal agreement is ever going to be found.

  5. Stephen Scaggs

    Thanks Ben for the writing. Definitely a much-needed topic. Warm regards. Stephen

  6. Joann

    Thank you, Ben, for the article and thank you to all who so kindly responded.

  7. Beverly

    This article has helped my peace of mind on this subject particularly where God's grace is concerned in disagreements. What do you do when someone accuses you of being a false teacher and remove their fellowship from you just because you accept a verse for what it says and they think it is a contradiction and should not be accepted?

Comments are closed.

Leave a comment
Website design, hosting, and management provided by Azimuth Media.