This is the second part of an ongoing examination of Todd Deaver’s book, Facing Our Failure. The first installment is here.

It has been several weeks since my first installment of this continuing review of Todd Deaver’s book, Facing Our Failure. Much has transpired with my personal ministry since that time, and I apologize for the delay, but not for the good work that God is doing through the people here at the local congregation. Thanks be to God that I have been too busy locally to get back to this review!

But now that I have a moment, I wanted to drop a few more lines about this book. Granted, the thoughts given here will not be as comprehensive as I would like, but it will have to suffice for the present time.

At issue here is the topic of fellowship. To get a background on this book, please see the earlier review. Instead of turning over ground that has already been plowed, I would like to use this installment to simply put forth some basic facts about fellowship that come into play when discussing Todd’s book. In light of the scriptures, these are things we MUST admit to be true:

  1. God wants His people to be united. On this there can be no disagreement, since it is taught so clearly in scriptures. See John 17:20-21; 1 Corinthians 1:10-13; 3:1-4.
  2. Not every instance of sin is a reason for the breaking of fellowship. This is the only logical conclusion, in light of scriptures, and again there can be no disagreement. For instance, Paul did not write the Corinthian brethren to tell them he was breaking fellowship with them, even though they were mired in a great number of sins. Instead, he wrote to correct their errors. John also wrote that if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7-10). We will sin, John says, but if we confess it to Him and repent, we are staying in the light, and staying in fellowship with Him and one another.
  3. There are cases, however, where fellowship between God’s people must be severed. On this point there must also be no disagreement, since the scripture is clear that people were “disfellowshipped” at times. See the cases of Hymenaeus and Alexander (1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 2:17) for example. We may disagree on the particulars of “who” and “why,” but we cannot disagree on the fact that there are times when the Bible calls for severing of fellowship. I mentioned above that Paul wrote the Corinthians to correct their errors. But he also told them not to keep company with anyone named a brother who is “sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person” (1 Cor. 5:11). This also indicates that there are habitual, persistent sinners that the church cannot continue to fellowship.

In the future there may be other points that I will want to add to this list of things that we must agree on. But for now this must serve as a basis. God wants His people to be united, and not every sin should result in a breaking of fellowship, but there are cases where fellowship must be broken.

Now, back to Todd’s book. I suspect (and maybe he will comment and confirm or deny this) that Todd would agree with these three things. I believe these conclusions to be inescapable. Todd Deaver has promised that he will offer a proposed solution to the “fellowship problem,” and hopefully his thinking will be within these parameters.

One thing Todd wants to point out strongly is that preachers who hold contradictory positions do not always sever fellowship with one another. We must agree with this, because we have seen it happen. But does this necessarily entail that there is no correct standard? By Todd’s standard, it is not the sin that is in question, but whether we disfellowship over the sin.

Mainly I think Todd wants to apply this to instrumental music in worship, so let’s keep it there for a moment. He says in his book that the question is not whether IM is a sin or not, but whether we extend fellowship to those who practice it (p. 19). Now in my thinking, sin is the issue! But let’s think about that point for a moment. If IM is a sin, then to fellowship those who unrepentedly make a practice of using it would be wrong. I understand there are a whole host of nuanced arguments about “sinning ignorantly,” having not been taught the right way to worship, etc., but just for argument’s sake let’s stay with the thought that those using IM are aware that there is no command to do so. Would not practicing a form of worship that is unauthorized by God in effect make one an idolater? And since Paul said not to keep company with one called a brother who is an idolater, should we keep company with one who practices a false form of worship?

There will be much argumentation over whether using IM in worship is “idolatry,” but we must remember that with God, sin is the issue! I believe a case can be made that worshipping in ways that go beyond God’s commands could be considered idolatry. If something is against His will, and someone makes a practice of that thing and will not repent, should we maintain fellowship? I believe the scriptures tell us otherwise.

Bottom line for this installment: I agree with Todd that some preachers hold contradictory positions on the fellowship issue, but still fellowship one another. I admit that often those who hold contradictory positions will still fellowship one another. But the fact that we do this does not mean that a standard for fellowship does not exist, it just means we do not practice it perfectly. It would appear that we can go to scripture to find out what kind of things should cause a break in fellowship. Clearly not every intermittant sin is a cause for disfellowship, but there are obviously some persistent sins that do. We will look at that topic next time I write.