Pushing Principles Too Far...

"But there is a danger of going too far. We live in a world of extremes of all kinds. It is difficult for any length of time to maintain an equilibrium in the application of any principle on account of the disbalances of mind so prevalent in the population, and the tendency of men to drive each other into extravagant positions through the sheer friction of personal antagonisms.

This is probably more manifest in the Truth than in anything else, because of the obligation to make a firm stand which arises out of the Truth, as it arises out of nothing else. When men differ about the Truth, their differences are more unappeasable than in any other subject, because of the greatness of the interests involved and an earnestness of purpose and a depth of affection created by the Truth, as by nothing else. It was not without a reason that Jesus foretold division as the result of his appearance—division so keen that “a man’s foes should be they of his own house.”

The only end there can be to this embarrassment is found in the discrimination between true principles and uncertain details that do not overthrow them. There are general principles as to which there can be no compromise: but there are also unrevealed applications of these principles in detail which cannot be determined with certainty, and which every man must be allowed to judge for himself without any challenge of his right to fellowship. To insist on uniformity of opinion on those uncertain details is an excess of zeal which may be forgiven, but which meanwhile inflicts harm and distress without just cause."

A good example of pushing a principle too far comes from a correspondent to The Christadelphian, 1875, p. 88. Brother Roberts responded to his question writing,

"If by joining a 'Grange-house,' you can get provision at wholesale prices, wisdom would say 'join.' There is just another 'if:' it may be that membership would impose some conditions or involve some practices incompatible with the duties of a brother of Christ. In that case, it would be wrong to join. You must judge of this by knowledge of the matter you possess. The mere business union with a number of others would not of itself be objectionable, for in this way we are all united more or less with the world, such as in the obtaining of gas, good streets, &c. If union were to lead to intimate association, it would be objectionable. It is as well to steer as clear of 'the world' as possible: but good judgment is necessary to prevent us pushing the principle too far."

Brother Roberts in dealing with the enlightened rejecter speaks of those who

push "true principles too far through failing to make allowances for other principles".

"The principle has application in another direction, because the work of God has taken an individual after a national form. The individual salvation offered to Israel in the preaching of John and Jesus, and rejected by them, has been offered to the Gentiles instead, and along with it a call to “all men everywhere to repent,” and a “revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will render to every man according to his deeds. . . . in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ” (Rom. 1:17–18; 2:5–6, 16). This operation develops a household of Christ, whose house, men continue to be so long as they “hold fast the confidence and rejoicing of the hope steadfast unto the end.” These have special privileges, and will have special accountability to answer for; but some have reasoned that because this is true, therefore the rebellious among men who “refuse him that speaketh,” will have nothing to answer for in “the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God” if they should happen to be among the dead. This is a fallacy of the nature of the supposed mistake to which we have already referred, viz.,—that those would make, who should reason, that because God knew Israel only of all the families of the earth, therefore he would not punish the other families. It is a mistake made by some who have pushed true principles too far through failing to make allowance for other principles. It is not a mistake made by those who have remained in harmony with Dr. Thomas from the beginning. These have always recognised that the truth creates responsibility wherever it understandingly comes, and that if men refuse the submission which God commands, they expose themselves to the terrors of the second death, naturally taking rank with the third class of the parable—additional to the faithful and unfaithful members of the household, whom the Lord describes as “those mine enemies who would not that I should reign over them.” (Robert Roberts, The Christadelphian, 1894, p. 17)

Notice, there are at least two things necessary to help us from pushing principles too far:

We must take other principles which apply into account and make allowances for those principles.

We must exercise wise / good judgment.

A few examples of principles pressed too far that Christadelphians can recognize:

Principles Pressed Too Far	Truth
A man is under the sentence of death. Ergo: he must either symbolically die in the waters of baptism or literally die and so fulfill that sentence of death.	You cannot transmute the condemnation of death which is physically enacted into a symbolic act and thereby free the man from its literal fulfillment. That baptized men still physically die shows they are still under the condemnation of death (though they are under the promise of eternal life in the resurrection if found faithful). And that some will be "alive" and "remain" at the Lord's coming indicates that God sees it as a legalistic technicality to have the law universally carried out. If you understand the principle in John 7:23 you will also understand that death was made for man and not man for death.
The Bible is complete. It is all we need for life. Ergo: We should not look for knowledge, or testimony or helps to understand the Bible or to live life outside of the Bible.	God did not introduce the written record of His Word into a creation that either lacked order or suffered from a privation of history. It is His plan vs. man's. There are things throughout the Bible either written about, or alluded to, which require outside explanations and extra-Biblical records to contextualize, understand and/or demonstrate. "How can I understand unless some man should guide me" was the attitude of the commended eunuch, which indicates that while we must "try the spirits" we are not required by God to carve out our own unique path rejecting anything any other man has discovered. "Try the spirits" is the rule of behavior. If eternal life were predicated solely on an intellectual recognition of what the Bible teaches then obedience and character and faith would be superfluous, which they aren't. These are not developed in a void. If there were no historical record, the Bible would be difficult to understand, at best. Worse, its prophetical testimonies would have no witnesses. The Bible is the crucible by which all things are tried. Early Christadelphian magazines demonstrate that our early brethren were well-read truth/knowledge seekers. We should be too.
The ecclesia is the true body of Christ. Ergo: our Fellowship must be kept as pure as possible.	The mortal ecclesia is composed of people called out of the world. It is composed, without exception, of people who, being subject to the weakness of the flesh, commit sins and fall short of their high calling. It is out of this body that Christ will ultimately choose those he judges as "worthy" (though for all it will be through his grace). In the truest sense the "body of Christ" does not exist and won't exist until he chooses and immortalizes his bride in the resurrection. Those who press this principle too far do violence to other principles. Even their own nature should teach them that pressing principles too far is a dead-end. "There is division enough, in all conscience—division that is inevitable—division that must be, unless we are to ignore divine obligations altogether; but there are divisions that ought not to be. It is possible to go too far in our demands on fellow-believers." (RR)
We have fellowship with one another. Ergo: we have fellowship with all in our Fellowship without exception.	"truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ" (1st John 1:3)
Fellowship with one another may occur whether we "receive a visit" or not from distant brethren. Ergo: we have fellowship with all in our Fellowship without exception.	"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." (1st John 1:7)
We are commanded to withdraw from everyone who controverts apostolic doctrine. Ergo: Every time you withdraw from someone who holds false doctrine you are, in effect, creating a new Fellowship. This is called 'withdrawal' by separatist Fellowships but, in reality, it is excommunication.	Scriptural withdrawal, not excommunication, was and is the genuine Christadelphian practice.
The unity of the body is based on a oneness of mind. Ergo: Common Constitutions and non-scriptural tests of fellowship are added to ensure unity exists.	The unity of the Body on a practical level is limited in this age, as God has so ordered things. Paul and Barnabas, two great men of the truth, testify to this fact. The first ecclesias had ecclesial autonomy, and John Thomas and Robert Roberts so ordered the Christadelphian ecclesias on the same basis... but as always there is an apostasy that prefers excommunication over original Christadelphian practices. These non-Christadelphian practices of separatist Fellowships would be easier to deal with if they weren't done under the false colors of "upholding" original Christadelphian practices.

Principles Pressed Too Far

Truth

A man is under the sentence of death. Ergo: he must either symbolically die in the waters of baptism or literally die and so fulfill that sentence of death.

You cannot transmute the condemnation of death which is physically enacted into a symbolic act and thereby free the man from its literal fulfillment. That baptized men still physically die shows they are still under the condemnation of death (though they are under the promise of eternal life in the resurrection if found faithful). And that some will be "alive" and "remain" at the Lord's coming indicates that God sees it as a legalistic technicality to have the law universally carried out. If you understand the principle in John 7:23 you will also understand that death was made for man and not man for death.

The Bible is complete. It is all we need for life. Ergo: We should not look for knowledge, or testimony or helps to understand the Bible or to live life outside of the Bible.

God did not introduce the written record of His Word into a creation that either lacked order or suffered from a privation of history. It is His plan vs. man's. There are things throughout the Bible either written about, or alluded to, which require outside explanations and extra-Biblical records to contextualize, understand and/or demonstrate.
"How can I understand unless some man should guide me" was the attitude of the commended eunuch, which indicates that while we must "try the spirits" we are not required by God to carve out our own unique path rejecting anything any other man has discovered. "Try the spirits" is the rule of behavior.
If eternal life were predicated solely on an intellectual recognition of what the Bible teaches then obedience and character and faith would be superfluous, which they aren't. These are not developed in a void.
If there were no historical record, the Bible would be difficult to understand, at best. Worse, its prophetical testimonies would have no witnesses. The Bible is the crucible by which all things are tried. Early Christadelphian magazines demonstrate that our early brethren were well-read truth/knowledge seekers. We should be too.

The ecclesia is the true body of Christ. Ergo: our Fellowship must be kept as pure as possible.

The mortal ecclesia is composed of people called out of the world. It is composed, without exception, of people who, being subject to the weakness of the flesh, commit sins and fall short of their high calling. It is out of this body that Christ will ultimately choose those he judges as "worthy" (though for all it will be through his grace). In the truest sense the "body of Christ" does not exist and won't exist until he chooses and immortalizes his bride in the resurrection. Those who press this principle too far do violence to other principles. Even their own nature should teach them that pressing principles too far is a dead-end.

"There is division enough, in all conscience—division that is inevitable—division that must be, unless we are to ignore divine obligations altogether; but there are divisions that ought not to be. It is possible to go too far in our demands on fellow-believers." (RR)

We have fellowship with one another. Ergo: we have fellowship with all in our Fellowship without exception.

"truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ" (1st John 1:3)

Fellowship with one another may occur whether we "receive a visit" or not from distant brethren. Ergo: we have fellowship with all in our Fellowship without exception.

"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." (1st John 1:7)

We are commanded to withdraw from everyone who controverts apostolic doctrine. Ergo: Every time you withdraw from someone who holds false doctrine you are, in effect, creating a new Fellowship. This is called 'withdrawal' by separatist Fellowships but, in reality, it is excommunication.

Scriptural withdrawal, not excommunication, was and is the genuine Christadelphian practice.

The unity of the body is based on a oneness of mind. Ergo: Common Constitutions and non-scriptural tests of fellowship are added to ensure unity exists.

The unity of the Body on a practical level is limited in this age, as God has so ordered things. Paul and Barnabas, two great men of the truth, testify to this fact. The first ecclesias had ecclesial autonomy, and John Thomas and Robert Roberts so ordered the Christadelphian ecclesias on the same basis... but as always there is an apostasy that prefers excommunication over original Christadelphian practices. These non-Christadelphian practices of separatist Fellowships would be easier to deal with if they weren't done under the false colors of "upholding" original Christadelphian practices.

Last Update: December 4, 2006