EVIDENCE THE BIBLE REQUIRES UNANIMOUS NOT MAJORITY RULE

Excerpts from 1900

http://funday.createaforum.com/improve/x/?message=464

[NOTE: I believe salvation means moral maturity and that everyone will attain such maturity, as per the parable of the Good Shepherd. I believe there is no real Hell, that it’s just a metaphor. I believe there is life after death and that angels, not God, inspired the Bible, which accounts for the many mostly trivial errors in it. I believe that angels called themselves God, meaning servants of God. As an example, in the Old Testament it says God appeared to Moses in a burning bush. In the New Testament of Acts, it says an angel appeared to Moses in a burning bush. The following are excerpts from an article, called UNANIMITY - THE DIVINE METHOD OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT, by G. H. Lang, of Unity Chapel, Bristol, England in 1900 AD.]

__To the Gentile assembly at Antioch there had come from Judea certain men who taught the brethren that, as circumcision had from the time of Abraham been the sign of a person belonging to the visible company of the people of God, they could not be saved unless they were circumcised.

__Paul and Barnabas dissented from this teaching, and in order to obtain the opinion of the apostles and the mother assembly, the brethren at Antioch deputed Paul and others to proceed to Jerusalem and there discuss the question; and we read, "when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the assembly and the apostles and the elders."

__The order in which the matter proceeded is then shown as follows. "They rehearsed all that God had done with them," evidently including in their remarks a statement of their having refrained from teaching Gentile believers that they must be circumcised, and also laying before the assembly the facts concerning the discussion that had gone on at Antioch.

__That they did this is clear from verse 24, where the apostles display a knowledge of what had transpired at Antioch, which things they evidently learned in the information of Paul and Barnabas.

__Thus the matter was laid before the assembly, and the proposal to enforce circumcision thrown open for discussion.

__Certain of the Pharisees, not having been yet divested of their sectarian spirit, rose and urged that it was needful that Gentile Christians should be circumcised and enjoined to keep the law of Moses. This imposing of the ceremonial Judaic law upon Gentiles had not been the practice of the early assembly, as may be seen by the recorded teaching of the apostles and their speeches on this occasion; but the addresses of these Pharisees made it clear that there was a division of judgment upon the question.

__Now, had their method been the more modern plan that we are discussing, it would have been recorded that they ascertained on which side of the question there was a majority of members, and so settled the matter. But, as opposed to this, we learn that when this divergence of view is manifested, the meeting is adjourned, and a fresh gathering of apostles, elders (v. 6), and the whole multitude of the disciples (v. 12), constituting the "whole assembly," (v. 22), is called together to consider the matter.

__Then we learn that upon the subject being again brought forward, there was "much disputing" (v. 7), showing that those wide and opposed differences of opinion which now manifest themselves were seen then also. Here again I remark that had the apostolic method of reaching a decision been the present one, we should expect to find a record to that effect; but, on the contrary, the disputing and speech-making uninterruptedly continued.

__Peter, Barnabas, Paul and James all freely expressed their thoughts, until we find the significant record (v. 22). "Then it seemed good to the apostles and elders with the whole assembly," to do certain things.

__This is the essence of the whole question -- nothing was done until all differences have disappeared in unanimity; then action taken. So that, with the approval of the whole assembly, it could be written to the brethren at Antioch, "it seemed good to us, having come to one accord," (v. 25).

[Apparently, it was decided that circumcision was not necessary for "salvation".]

__Experience has abundantly shown that the minority is frequently in the right and the majority in the wrong. Rather than making known to the Church His wishes by this majority rule plan of voting, the Lord has rather promised to reveal His will by and through the bringing of His people to unanimous judgment.

__It seems clear that a method which is as likely to lead to a wrong decision as to a right one cannot be a divine method, and ought not to be followed by those possessing the divine nature, and capable of having the mind of Christ (2Pet 1:4, 1Cor 2:16), in whose workings mistakes are unknown. A method at all likely to cause disagreement and possibly open division cannot be of God, who is "not a God of confusion, but of peace," (1Cor 14:33).

__Majority rule is eminently likely to lead to dissension, both secret and public, a truth with which any who have had much experience on the subject must be sadly familiar. Can anything be more likely to stir up contention and cause disaffection than that a section of the church should have their wishes and, possibly their sincere convictions, rejected, simply because a larger section of the church, with no other advantage, has different opinions?

__Thus, in this practical matter [referring to 2 Cor. 2] also the Lord indicates His willingness to recognize the decision of an assembly, if that decision be unanimous; nor is there one single precept or example in His Word to indicate that He allows the authority of His name to be attached to the decision of only a portion of His people.