Was the Apostle Paul Divisive?

In writing in opposition to Calvinism while tweeting on Twitter I hear from folks now and then stating that I am being divisive by what I tweet and by what I write on this blog. Some state that what I really should be doing is working to unite all Christians.  Still others state that I should be preaching the gospel to the lost and leave these other issues alone.  Around all these accusations is the greater accusation that I am divisive.

I have tried to respond to these accusers to explain that I am actually not attacking other Christians but instead I am exposing bad doctrine that I am led to believe is "another" gospel.  I also point out a couple of other things out in my defense.

First, I ask where the line should be drawn?  For instance many Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses state that they are Christian.  Is it not okay to expose their bad doctrines and theologies?  Where is the rule that we should only test the doctrines of cults and not doctrines that are in the church too?

Secondly I ask them if Paul was divisive in his actions as recorded by scripture.

I want to consider this question in this article.  Was the Apostle Paul divisive?  It is a great question and a good issue to consider because Paul was overt in his Epistles when stating his concern and even outrage over what he was seeing in the New Testament church that he was so faithful to.

To start with Paul confronted Peter.  Yes, Peter!  Peter was considered by many to be the leader of the New Testament church.  Some say he was the actual leader of the church while others say it was James, the brother of our Lord.  But even if James was the positional leader of the church, Peter was perhaps still regarded the spiritual leader. Who was this upstart named Paul to confront Peter?

But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”   Galatians 2:11-14 ESV

Paul uses strong language to show how he handled Peter.  He uses the word "oppose" to describe his confrontation with Peter.  Was Paul being divisive and even heavy-handed in his brush-up with Peter?

Paul was just getting started.  He lashed out at the Galatians in his letter to them and he was not gentle. He goes after them:

O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?  Galatians 3:1 

How is that for just loving the Galatians for who they were? (sarcasm).  Paul went right for the jugular.  He was very upset with the Galatians because they were allowing themselves to be deceived by keeping the Jewish law and their practice of circumcision as something that had to be done to be saved.  Paul's entire letter has a terse corrective tone and his tirade has to do with their bad theology and acceptance of another gospel.

In Paul's first letter to Timothy, Paul is at it again.  Once again, he names names.

This charge I entrust to you, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies previously made about you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith, among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.          1 Timothy 1:18-20

I wonder what my Twitter followers would think if I started naming names of those whom I had handed over to Satan.  That would cause a bit of a stir, wouldn't it?

 Later in the same letter Paul is at it again.

But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some. 2 Timothy 2:16-17

The reason Paul names Hymenaeus, Philetus and Alexander is that they were departing from the truth by stating a doctrine Paul did not agree with as they were teaching that the resurrection had already taken place.  Now I thought that we as Christians should not worry about doctrines and not be divided from other Christians even if they are off in their bad doctrines?  By the way, where in scripture does it ever say that?  Paul clearly warns Timothy to avoid speaking with these men.  Was Paul being divisive?

In his second letter to Timothy, Paul describes another situation he had with some believers that were with him while he was bringing the gospel to Asia:

You are aware that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes.     2 Timothy 1:15

There's our Paul again, causing everyone to turn away from him, so divisive! (sarcasm).  Yet here again Paul once again identifies names of men who left him. Remember, this was more than just showing their names to a few hundred Facebook friends.  The names Paul was namng would ring in infamy for hundreds of millions who have read the Bible over the millennia.

This was not the first time that Paul had experienced separation from other believers,  In his early days he had another separation event:

And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. Acts 15:36-41 

So was Paul divisive when he separated from Barnabas?  I mean, after all, it was even over a small matter of a young brother being weak in the Lord and leaving Paul and Barnabas prematurely.  Come on Paul---that's divisive (sarcasm).

The truth friends is this.  In this case and in every other, Paul was not being divisive. Paul was so committed to the gospel that it drove everything he did.  He thought that leaving John Mark would give them a better chance to strengthen the churches that they intended to visit.  Barnabas disagreed and this led to their split.  Interestingly, Luke never mentions an opinion in the matter either from himself or the Lord on whether Paul or Barnabas was right or wrong in the matter.  Therefore God saw it and did not tag either Paul or Barnabas with the "divisive" label.  In fact, God used their separation to increase his kingdom as those going forth had just doubled in size.

Was Paul divisive when he confronted Peter or the Galatians over theological issues? No, he was not and because he did confront them over their theology he was able to preserve the gospel in the case of Peter and to turn the Galatians from following after another gospel and Jesus.

Was Paul divisive when he named out Hymenaeus, Philetus and Alexander for promoting bad doctrine?  No, because Paul understood that bad doctrines destroy the faith of some if left unchecked. Can folks be divisive over theology?  Yes, I am sure that happens especially when believers argue over small interpretations of scripture or over certain practices.  What I am speaking about here is more than the petty squabble of what day believers should assemble to worship on or whether we should have chairs or pews in the church.  There is a difference!  When a confrontation arises over seriously bad doctrines or the acceptance of other gospels then one must speak and contend for the gospel.

Paul was not divisive and neither have many of the great people of God throughout the centuries who contended for the faith by confronting what they considered to be extra-Biblical.  I do not believe that I am divisive and others who like me contend with doctrines that seem as if they are another gospel or which upset people's faith.  You may ask me: "What about unity?  Doesn't that matter?".  Sure it matters but unity at the expense of holding to and defending false doctrine is never enouraged in scripture.  Unity is worthless if it is based upon embracing false doctrines.

As for me I have never ended fellowship with a Calvinist over my disagreement with them over their gospel.  In fact, I love Calvinists and have good friends that are Calvinists.  The attacks against me then that indict me as "divisive" are unwarranted because going after bad doctrine is not a divisive action.  Instead it helps maintain the true gospel.  If no one ever spoke up over all these many years we would not have a true gospel to preach.  How sad that would be!

In my situation, I know that some of the accusations made against me are from Calvinists who just want to shut me up.  I will not be silenced.  I will contend for the faith!

Paul encouraged Timothy to watch his doctrine:

Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers. 1 Timothy 4:16

Paul expressly wrote that all believers contend for the faith:

Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.  Jude 1:3

So the next time someone tells you that you are being divisive for contending for good doctrine and exposing bad theology, ask them a question:  "Was the Apostle Paul Divisive?"

Darrell Brantingham

(Check out my divisive---er---pithy tweets on Twitter @confrontcalvin)