Spiritual Fellowship
Part 2 of this series concluded with an important question, just what is to be considered spiritual fellowship?
The expression appears in the book of Philippians:
“If, then, there is any encouragement in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any spiritual fellowship, if any tender affection and compassion, make my joy full by being of the same mind and having the same love, being completely united, having the one thought in mind. (Philippians 2:1, 2)
From this it would appear that to have spiritual fellowship would mean to be of the same mind, to agree on spiritual matters.
So if a Christian were to refute a false belief or teaching would he be engaging in spiritual fellowship with that person? What if a Christian wife were to use the Bible to exhort her husband to repent would she be guilty of having spiritual fellowship with him?
If we say that by giving Scriptural admonition or reproof to a person even currently engaged in wrongdoing we are guilty of spiritual fellowship with them, would this not also mean that when we engage in witnessing to persons, even members of what Jehovah’s Witnesses consider to be Babylon the Great, we are also guilty of having spiritual fellowship with them?
The society presented a much more balanced position on this prior to 1983:
“WHAT SPIRITUAL FELLOWSHIPING INVOLVES
The Greek expression used by Paul for “mixing in company with” is the verb syn·a·na·miʹgny·mi, meaning “to mix or mingle together.” The basic verb involved (miʹgny·mi) is used at Matthew 27:34 to describe the mixing of wine with gall and at Luke 13:1 to describe Pilate’s mixing blood with sacrifices. So it involves a real merging or blending, a uniting into a combination or compound. For us to ‘mix in company’ with others would imply a fellowship existing among us. The English term “fellowship” has the sense of “comradeship; companionship; friendliness,” there being a “community [or, common and mutual sharing] of interest, sentiment, etc.” (The World Book Dictionary) So, to fellowship with another means accepting the other person as on an equal standing with oneself, being interested in and entertaining his views, sharing these with an open and favorable attitude. To have spiritual fellowship with another would be, in effect, to have a spiritual ‘good time’ together. But when we exhort a person to repentance we are not uniting ourselves with him in an amicable union; we are not sharing with him any improper attitude and sentiment he may have shown but, rather, are dealing with him as a person in need of correction.” (The Watchtower August 1, 1974 pg. 468 par. 8)
All that can be said from Paul’s counsel to both the Thessalonians and the Corinthians is that it is in harmony with Jesus counsel at Matthew chapter 18. A person that refuses to acknowledge sinful conduct and refrain from engaging in it while still considering himself a brother should not receive social fellowship from the congregation until such situation changes, while at the same time congregation members would still admonish him.
In the September 15, 1981 issue of the Watchtower, paragraph 7 states:
“It is sad that a person’s conduct and attitude would require such action, but once he has been expelled, how are the loyal members of the congregation to view and treat him? Should they conduct themselves toward him as they would toward any neighbor, workmate or person they happen to meet on the street? Should they say “Hello” or even chat briefly if they cross paths with the expelled person? What about working for him or hiring him? To what extent should Christian parents, or other relatives, communicate or keep company with the individual? Many such questions arise. How thankful we can be that Jehovah God provides us with guidance in dealing with an expelled wrongdoer!” (The Watchtower September 15, 1981 pg. 17 par. 7)
These are all important questions. Let’s see if the answers provided by this Watchtower are firmly rooted in God’s word the Bible or go beyond the things that are written. (1 Cor. 4:6)
The article continues:
“Jesus gave as the final step in connection with the sinner: “If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.” (Matt. 18:17) Yes, as a last effort to turn back the sinner from his way, the matter would be taken to spiritually older men of the congregation. These could hear the facts and obtain the witnesses’ testimony. And they would be able to reprove the wrongdoer with God’s Word. However, if he refused to repent, they would act in behalf of the congregation to discipline him, protecting the congregation from his dangerous influence by expelling him.”
First of all, nowhere in Jesus words does he mention that the matter should be cared for by the spiritually older men of the congregation. His instruction was first that the matter should be handled privately, then take one or two more. There is no need to conclude that by congregation Jesus meant one or two more spiritually qualified representatives. Also notice, according to the article, that part of the responsibility of the spiritually older men is to reprove the wrongdoer with God’s Word. Yet this is apparently not considered spiritual fellowship.
The article continues:
As an aid in determining what our conduct should be toward such a person, we need to understand Jesus’ words: “Let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.” In later centuries, some Jewish rabbis did express extreme views, such as that a Jew should not even help a Gentile who was in peril of death. Such heartlessness was not shown only toward Gentiles. For instance, in Jesus’ parable about being a true neighbor, both a Levite and a priest refused to help an injured fellow Jew, though a Samaritan later did so.—Luke 10:29-37.
It is unclear why the statement “in later centuries” was added. Jesus illustration of the Good Samaritan was given at the time, so this attitude and treatment of strangers must have been current. In any event, it appears that the article concludes that Jesus was not recommending the wrongdoer be treated as the Jewish rabbis treated Gentiles.
The article continues:
But in Matthew 18:17 Jesus could not have meant that his disciples were to refuse to do an act of human kindness, as in a case of accident or of desperate need. Jesus showed such kindness to some Gentiles. For example, he did so to a Syro-phoenician woman. Though Jesus, his disciples and the woman acknowledged that her situation was unusual because she was a Gentile and Jesus was sent to the Jews, Christ nevertheless healed her daughter. (Matt. 15:21-28; Mark 7:24-30) Jesus showed similar human kindness when a Roman army officer implored him to heal a paralyzed and suffering slave. The officer admitted that he did not expect Jesus, a Jewish teacher, to enter his home. Yet “older men of the Jews” begged Jesus to show mercy to this worthy Gentile, and he did so. (Luke 7:1-10; Matt. 8:5-13) So by what he said about someone’s being “as a man of the nations and as a tax collector,” Jesus did not forbid expressions of merciful kindness. What, then, did he mean?
The following reasoning clearly contradicts what was stated previously. If Jesus was not instructing his disciples to treat wrongdoers the same way Jewish rabbis treated Gentiles, why would he instruct them to imitate the way Jewish rabbis treated tax collectors?
“AS A TAX COLLECTOR”
First, how did the Jews look at and treat tax collectors?
“The publicans [tax collectors] of the New Test[ament] were regarded as traitors and apostates, defiled by their frequent intercourse with the heathen, willing tools of the oppressor. They were classed with sinners . . . with harlots . . . with the heathen. . . . Left to themselves, men of decent lives holding aloof from them, their only friends or companions were found among those who, like themselves, were outcasts.”—“Cyclopædia” by M’Clintock and Strong, Vol. VIII, p. 769.
Yes, Jesus’ hearers well knew that Jews in general shunned tax collectors. Only reluctantly would Jews have even minimal business contacts with them, to pay the tax required by law.” (The Watchtower September 15, 1981 pg. 18 par. 12-15)
Yet the following comment not quoted by the Watchtower also appears in MClintock and Strongs Cyclopedia:
“The class thus practically excommunicated furnished some of the earliest disciples both of the Baptist and of our Lord. Like the outlying, so-called “dangerous classes” of other times, they were at least free from hypocrisy. Whatever morality they had was real, and not conventional. We may think of the Baptist’s preaching as having been to them what Wesley’s was to the colliers of Kingswood or the Cornish miners. The publican who cried in the bitterness of his spirit, “God be merciful to me a sinner” (Luk_18:13), may be taken as the representative of those who had come under this influence (Mat_21:32). The Galilaean fishermen had probably learned, even before their Master taught them, to overcome their repugnance to the publicans who with them had been sharers in the same baptism. The publicans (Matthew perhaps among them) had probably gone back to their work learning to exact no more than what was appointed them (Luk_3:13). However startling the choice of Matthew, the publican, to be of the number of the twelve may have seemed to the Pharisees, we have no trace of any perplexity or offence on the part of the disciples.” (M’Clintock and Strong Cyclopedia vol. 8 under Publican)
The following is taken from the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia under Tax, Taxing:
“In the score of instances in the New Testament where publicans are mentioned, their common status, their place in the thought and action of Jesus, their new hope in the gospel are clearly set forth. The instances in which our Lord speaks of them are especially illuminating:
(1) He uses them on the basis of the popular estimate which the disciples undoubtedly shared, to point in genial irony a reproach addressed to His hearers for their low standard of love and forgiveness ( Matthew 5:46 , Matthew 5:47 ).
(2) He uses the term in the current combination in giving directions about excommunicating a persistently unrepentant member of the church (Matthew 18:17).
(3) He uses the term in the popular sense in describing the current condemnation of His attitude of social fellowship with them, and constructively accepts the title of “friend of publicans and sinners” (Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:34).
(4) Most significant of all, Jesus uses the publican, as He did the Samaritan, in a parable in which the despised outcast shows to advantage in an attitude acceptable to God (Luke 18:9 ff).
This parable is reinforced by the statement, made more than once by our Lord, that the readiness to repent shown by the publicans and other outcasts usually found with them was more promising of salvation than the spiritual pride shown by some who were satisfied with themselves (Luke 3:12 ; compare Luke 7:29 ; Matthew 21:31 , Matthew 21:32 ; Luke 15:1 ). The choice of Levi as a disciple (Matthew 10:3 , etc.) and the conversion of Zaccheus (Luke 19:8 f), of whom Jesus speaks so beautifully as a son of Abraham ( Luke 19:9 ), justified the characteristic attitude which our Lord adopted toward the despised class, about equally guilty and unfortunate.
He did not condone their faults or crimes; neither did He accept the popular verdict that pronounced them unfit for companionship with the good and without hope in the world. According to the teaching and accordant action of Jesus, no man or woman is without hope until the messenger of hope has been definitely rejected.
It is fitting, if somewhat dramatic, that a study of taxation – that historic root of bitterness periodically springing up through the ages – should end in comtemplation of Him who spoke to an outcast and guilty tax-collector (Luke 19:10 ) the wonderful words: “The Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost.” (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia)
This raises the question: “Was Jesus encouraging his disciples to adopt toward the sinner the attitude the Scribes and Pharisees had toward tax collectors?
To be continued in Part 4