Fruit and Doctrine - Is there a difference?

[Br. Bear]

Greetings,

as the title says, is there a difference between fruit and doctrine?

Scripturally, there is sound fruit and bad fruit, there is sound doctrine and bad doctrine. Most Christians know that.

The question is, though,

• If a person bears good fruit, as in, you will know them by their fruit, does it matter if the doctrine they hold or follow or preach or teach is bad?
• And visa-versa? If they have good doctrine and sound, but they bear no fruit or corrupt fruit?

Some of this is obvious but some is not.... it seems.

1. We can speak the words and talk about love and grace but do we need to be doing more?
   
2. Should we be more careful what we swallow doctrinally and what we repeat doctrinally and what we meditate on, doctrinally, even if we appear to be bearing good fruit?
3. Will only bearing good fruit be enough or do we need to watch our hearts and minds and thoughts and words, as well?

• What is the Scriptural position about these things?
• Is there one line for fruit and another for doctrine?
• Or are there many lines?
• OR, is there only one way and that we must walk on, and if so, what is it?

Most agree that we are saved by Grace, God's grace and not by works which accounts for the type of fruit we bear but is that the same for doctrine because what we read in Scripture appears to indicate that we have to get is right and hold fast to what is right and only teach what is right, doctrinally, which amounts to us doing something, something very important, if we read and believe what the consequences of dabbling with unsound doctrine bring upon many.

A few questions here, so chew it over and get posting!


Bless you ....><>

 

[Brad Huber]

Correct doctrine for the most part is determined by men and differs quite a lot, good fruit is obvious and spoken of, describing it in scripture and is normally easily agreed upon.

 

[RJ]

Spiritually, doctrine is a body of teachings found in the Bible, something that is taught from God to us; often man defines it as theology. Fruit is also from God , bared by us and a byproduct of salvation or Jesus in you.

 

[Br. Bear]

Greetings,

is the fruit referred to a doctrine?

Bless you ....><>

 

[B-A-C]

I voted yes.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
You can teach people what the Bible says, but you can't make them act on it.

 

[Jesus_is_LORD]

I voted yes.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
You can teach people what the Bible says, but you can't make them act on it.

Well said,


To add my 2 cents.
I think that they are connected very strongly and correlate.
So for example as RJ said, "Spiritually, doctrine is a body of teachings found in the Bible, something that is taught from God to us; often man defines it as theology. Fruit is also from God , bared by us and a byproduct of salvation or Jesus in you."
My belief is if we have the right beliefs and we are acting on them, they will bear good fruit.
I belief that every doctrine in the Bible or every WORD of God has a purpose of bearing good fruit.

God said His WORD will not return void. So if God's WORD will do what it is suppose to do, can we describe what
it was suppose to do as fruit? My answer is YES. So if God wants to teach us to forgive, and we read about forgiveness(doctrine)
and we believe it and act on it, it will bear the fruit of forgiveness.

Now, concerning your question about bad doctrine and good fruit, generally speaking I don't think that can be something that
can be sustained (generally speaking). I believe that bad doctrine will not bear good fruit over time consistently in the long run.
Now of course, God knows our hearts, so one can believe a false doctrine with good intentions in their heart and God can take
their actions which were based on a false doctrine and still cause it to bear fruit.

So for example, Job's friends, they had a bunch of bad doctrine, but even in their confusion, God still used them
for the sake of Job to help Him in that process and His friends produced a lot of good fruit in showing us and all who read that book(Job) what not to do in many situations. So even in their bad doctrine God was able to bear fruit. His friends I think had good intentions and everything they did wasn't wrong, for example they sat with him quiet without saying a word for many days, just comforting him and being there with Job, that is something that we can learn from.

I think our focus shouldn't be to seek out to bear fruit directly, of course that is our end goal. But I think if we focus
on receiving God's love and getting to know Him through good doctrine, the bearing of good fruit will come naturally.

I think often we may seek to bear fruit but not know who God(Jesus) really is, and then we start to work for our salvation
thinking that we are bearing fruit, but we are doing a empty exercise in the futility of the flesh. Such individuals were the ones
that heard from Jesus, "depart from me I never knew you," and to their defense they talked about the works that they did
but in their minds they thought there were bearing fruit. But as Jesus said, He never knew them, so knowing should be a priority to doing(fruit).

So I think doctrine should come first in terms of getting to know God and the fruit will just flow as we are connected to the true vine, but God in His Grace and Love and Power can bear good fruit in-spite of bad doctrine. Though best practice would be to seek the doctrine and relationship with God first and the fruit will be the product (result)

 

[Brighthouse]

My nickel worth, lol Good fruit cannot be born from man made doctrine,for good fruit can come from man, but sure is not of man.Example love ( 1 John 4:19) We do not start good fruit from any doctrine of man.Doctrines of men to me is what religion means.A relationship is born from a new creature( 2 Cor 5:17) not from any old self.One last thought. ( James 1:17-18) What good thing comes from man made doctrine except bondage to other men?

 

[timotheus]

Good question(s). Certainly bad doctrine in someone's life could be "bad fruit". But I think anyone who has circulated through the various flavors of genuine Christianity - say in the US - knows there are groups that major on right doctrine, but there seems to be a lot of division and attacking of brothers and sisters in Jesus - in the name of sound doctrine. We know from Revelations 2-4 that sound doctrine is important. But I think keeping the commandments of our Lord - to believe in Him and to love one another - are more important.

If we major on having the Holy Spirit fill our lives, and being close to hear His heart ... that will go a long way toward keeping our doctrine pure and right.

 

[RJ]

What good thing comes from man made doctrine except bondage to other men?

God's doctrine is built or created from truth. Man's greatest downfall is bondage to untruth!

 

[Brighthouse]

1Peter 4:12-19!! Please note verse 17-18 I of course believe strongly in 2Peter 3:18!! I also believe strongly is allowing brothers and sisters to become aware of false and most dangerous doctrine.( 2 Tim 3:10-17) I have been rescued myself from dangerous doctrine,doctrine which I myself used to preach!verse 11 In the Lord all fruit must be examined.When one goes to a store to buy fruit do we not first examine it to see if we wish to partake in buying such fruit? Of Course we do.

The days of summer are soon upon us,and with the heat, is coming a great fire upon the church itself,the purpose of this great fire is not to burn down the church! But rather to prove to many that the time of judgement upon the Church is finally at hand! It is the time of accountability!( 1 Peter 1:3-9) And the members of that Church will finally have to get off the fence of being lukewarm!( Rev 3:16)

In our Church here in Michigan we can already see the birth pains of such judgement,for the softer at heart,a better way to express this would be to say,that the day's of playing games with one own salvation is coming to an end.I am a realist,I do not dream or pray for a better world,for that would be going against the will of God himself.

What I do pray for,and am most thankful for,is that the very will of our Lord Jesus will be self evident, to those who have been asleep in there faith for far to long!( Rom 13:11-14) I am called by God as the humble bell ringer for the Body of Christ,Not as a judge,nor accuser!

The bell that rings is the bell of all of us examining ourselves this day,to see if each of us be in the faith.( 2Cor 13:5) And if not,then to do something about it,before it is to late.For surly as Jesus lives inside of me,the day is drawing far faster then many think to becoming accountable! Just as sure as we all need to stay alert!!( Matt 24:42-44)

I am not a prophet, but even as clouds grow dark on the horzion and one says it look as though rain is coming( Matt 5:45) Make no mistake all will get wet! The difference is not the rain,but where we stand when it rains! Are we over comers? I assure you before Almighty God we will find out! I wish the ministry of reconciliation born in each of us,and given to preach, that we beg others to really become reconciled unto the Lord today!( 2 Cor 5:17-21)

For we do not know what tomorrow will hold or bring any of us.This message is not just for you,but also to myself,as the Lord has been dealing greatly upon me concerning what he wished me to relate to my other brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ!( Gal 6:1-10!!!!) Blessing to you all through HIM!! ( 1 Cor 1:4-9)

 

[Edward]

I am not a prophet, but even as clouds grow dark on the horzion and one says it look as though rain is coming( Matt 5:45) Make no mistake all will get wet! The difference is not the rain,but where we stand when it rains! Are we over comers? I assure you before Almighty God we will find out! I wish the ministry of reconciliation born in each of us,and given to preach, that we beg others to really become reconciled unto the Lord today!( 2 Cor 5:17-21)

Let me add a little more to the ministry of reconciliation.

Reconciliation to God through Jesus Christ our Lord and savior is the motivator for believers to reconcile with one another.

So how is reconciliation born in each Believer?
For the believer, the restoration of friendly relations demonstrates the peace and unity that we can have in Jesus Christ. Reconciliation also fulfills what Jesus said would be a key element in demonstrating to the world that we are Christians, that we love one another (John 13:34-35; John 15:12). Likewise, reconciliation shows us that relationships are more important than religion.

Jesus spoke about this when he was having dinner at Matthew’s house and others questioned why he was there with tax collectors and sinners. In Matthew 9:12-13. Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 13 But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” By these words, Jesus emphasized that repenting and restoring relationships were what was most important to God (See also Hosea 6:4-10 and Matthew 12:7).

Another thing that makes reconciliation different for believers as the Old Testament Hebrew word for reconciliation. The Hebrew word for reconciliation is kapar, which is pronounced kaw-far’. It is most often translated into the English word, atonement. It brings to mind that when Jesus died on the cross for us He provided an atonement for our sins with the Father (Romans 5:10; 2 Corinthians 5:16-21).

The English word for atonement literally means a condition with out tension. Therefore, the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross removed the tension between us and God. No other word could serve as a better example of what reconciliation should mean between believers. Our reconciliation with one another has its Biblical foundation in the atonement of Christ.

From the Bible believers can learn about reconciliation.
The Bible teaches in Matthew 5:21-25 that reconciliation should take place as soon as possible. It even tells us that if we are at church and realize that we need to reconcile with someone, we should leave church and immediately go to them. Then we can return to the church after reconciliation has taken place.

This is reinforced in Matthew 18:15-20 where the process of reconciliation for believers is described. It tells us in verse 15 that when we go to make reconciliation, we should go alone and keep it private. Unfortunately, in most cases when there is a dispute between two parties in the church, everyone in the church knows about it before the parties involved. The rule of thumb should be that if someone is not part of the problem or part of the solution then it should be classified as gossip to speak with them about it.

If the other person refuses to reconcile or discuss the issue, then Matthew 18:16 tells us to take one or two others so that both sides of the story can be confirmed. Again, the issue is kept private at this point. However, if there is still no reconciliation, then and only then should it be brought to the church (Matthew 18:17). We are told in verse 17 that if the party or parties refuse to listen to the church, then they should be removed from the congregation.

Unfortunately, most churches do not follow this process and the issue creates major dissension and often causes a split in the church congregation. Paul pointed out the wickedness of not following the Biblical model in 1 Corinthians 6:1-8. He said that the local church should be resolving issues that many people brought to civil courts. He pointed out that even the least esteemed person in the church was a better judge than an unbeliever. Sadly, the same holds true today, believers would rather sue one another than have the local church decide what is right.

What should be our approach when reconciling with someone else?
The Bible teaches that when we approach someone else with a problem, we should do it in a spirit of meekness. Our motivation should be to communicate the problem in a way that attacks the problem and not the person. This communicates grace and love to the other person and a willingness to restore the relationship. (See Proverbs 10:12, Galatians 6:1-5, and Ephesians 4:1-3, 25, 29-31).

In addition to this, we must be willing to ask for forgiveness and forgive if asked (Matthew 18:21-35). To forgive means that we give up our right to enforce justice when we have been wronged. Asking for forgiveness is different than apologizing. An apology only applies when no wrong has been done because the root of the word apology means “without the Word.” This makes an apology only appropriate when no Biblical offense has taken place.

Forgiveness involves a two-way transaction between the individuals. The offender(s) humbles themselves and ask for forgiveness and the person who was offended grants forgiveness. When we grant forgiveness we release our right to enforce justice and bring up the topic again. Our motivation to forgive is based on the fact that God forgave us of our sins and removed them from our account when we confessed our sins to Him.

Theologically speaking, the penalty for our sins was not dismissed, but transferred to Jesus Christ when He died upon the cross. Because of His great act of love, we are able to love and forgive others (Psalms 103:8-12; Proverbs 10:12). They should motivate us to do everything in our power to restore our relationships with others even if we’re not the person who has done wrong. In the same way, Christ did the same for us (Romans 5:8-9; Romans 12:1-2; Ephesians 5:21; 1 John 4:19).

Practically speaking, believers have an advantage over non-believers because they share the Holy Spirit who empowers them to humble themselves and to seek the will of God. Likewise, the more time we spend in God’s Word as a believer, the more the Holy Spirit changes our mind to think like Christ. This makes reconciliation easier for believers, but only if they seek the leading of the Holy Spirit.


Conclusion
Reconciliation is the process of restoring friendly relationships with one another so that we can get along. The Bible teaches that reconciliation should take place as soon as possible. The Bible also provides a process for believers to resolve their differences. When this process is followed, it will lead to reconciliation if both parties are seeking the will of God and the leading of the Holy Spirit. Reconciliation to God through Jesus Christ is the motivator for believers to reconcile with one another. Finally, believers have an advantage over nonbelievers when it comes to reconciliation because of the power and leading of the Holy Spirit.

I know I have been hard on some at times, in the Spirit of the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:13-18). There are a lot of happy happy, joy joy, prosperity preachers, We need Preacher that teach heaven is real, hell is real hot and Jesus Christ is coming ready or not. You can't run and you can't hide. Be reconciled now for there not much time. Find your true peace in God's word today and accept Jesus in your life now.

 

[Curtis]

Fruit does not come from the individual person, but from the seed which is the Word of God by which one is born again from. A good tree can never produce bad fruit, neither can a bad tree ever produce good fruit.
A person can have good fruit, but have bad doctrine. A man's actions are not his fruit he bears, but in what he believes as doctrine. If a man believes wrong his actions will also be wrong. If what he believes is true, his actions will follow his beliefs, and be true. Eventually as a christian grows in the Lord, and the power of his might what he believes will change, which translates into right actions. He that has began a good work in us will bring that work to completion, until the day of Jesus Christ.

 

[Brighthouse]

Brother Edward,some fine words there.HOWEVER!!! LOL Yes there is a however here!! ( Acts 15:36-39!!) Verse 39!! They never reconciled from this.If a brother or a sister believes that another cannot come to an agreement,then like Paul did, they leave them to the grace of the Lord. Forgiveness is granted,but in the forgiveness a consequence can also occur!( Col 3:25)

Here the consequence was to not join again.To me brother,we all in Christ also have the same freedom,no matter how another wishes to judge it or not. For to me only the Lord can truly know the heart of each of us.( 1 Sam 16:7) In this case Mark rescued him. Paul believed here that Mark deserted him,it did not matter what others felt as we see here.

The purpose lies not with how we wish to think upon it,but rather upon the purpose both served from the disagreement.Could Mark have done what Silas did later in Acts 16:25-34?? Unknown,but even if we ourselves cannot understand this disagreement,the Lord did.And that is freedom we all have in Christ Jesus to me brother.Is it fair to look to place another in bondage because you believe they should be in it? I sure do not!

An agreement comes from all parties concerned,not just from one person who believes they have heard from the Lord on any certain area.( 2 Cor 13:1) For there is no living soul born yesterday or today or forever for that matter who has perfect truth on anything.( 1 Cor 13:11-13) I suffered greatly in my own life because I looked to remove freedom from others!( Gal 5:13-15)

This is not a rebuke to what you said at all!! Please do not look at it in this light either. This, I had to learn the hard way,and I am looking to help others who may have made the same mistake I once did to another. I cannot make another submit to me,they must be willing without any heavy hand upon them to follow in this willingly.For if they are not allowed to do such,then I am looking to take control of another life,and I am not entitled to do that ever! A friend loves at all times( Proverbs 17:17) and a friend understands what love truly is as well.( 1Cor 13:4-8) I learned! I hope others will follow in this as well.

 

[B-A-C]

or there is no living soul born yesterday or today or forever for that matter who has perfect truth on anything.

True enough, but the danger here becomes... we can never know any truth at all. ( John 18:38; ) Which is incorrect. There are certain truths we can all
know.

I cannot make another submit to me,they must be willing without any heavy hand upon them to follow in this willingly.For if they are not allowed to do such,then I am looking to take control of another life,and I am not entitled to do that ever!

Well hopefully we can "control" our children for a while. But you are right. But while it's not really our job to "make" someone believe something.
It is our job to make them aware of certain truths. (i.e. Heaven Hell, Sin, the need for a Savior, etc...) they may never agree with it, but if we don't at
least tell them, we will be held accountable.

 

[Brad Huber]

We cannot save a single person, only Jesus can, and if we are lucky, He will use our words or action to help bring that truth to light.

 

[Edward]

Well hopefully we can "control" our children for a while. But you are right. But while it's not really our job to "make" someone believe something.
It is our job to make them aware of certain truths. (i.e. Heaven Hell, Sin, the need for a Savior, etc...) they may never agree with it, but if we don't at
least tell them, we will be held accountable.

Amen B-A-C,
"if we don't at least tell them, we will be held accountable."

Brother Brighthouse, Thank you for your input and views on the ministry of reconciliation. I believe Acts 15:36-39 is a great example on the ways disagreements should be handled. Some many look at this as something negative and with out reconciliation. But that the difference between fruits and doctrines

There is a great deal to be learned from the disagreement and separation of these two men, which I will attempt to point out as we proceed with this. The fact that this personal conflict is openly displayed on the pages of the New Testament is evidence that the Holy Spirit guided the writer, Luke, in producing this narrative. Natural inclination would have led Paul’s friend to omit this potentially embarrassing incident! I see no signs of bitterness or alienation between these two. Paul would later affectionately mention Barnabas as being worthy of monetary support in his work of proclaiming the gospel (1 Cor. 9:6).


Characteristics of this Conflict
Paul and Barnabas kept the problem on a personal level. These men had a personal disagreement, which they dealt with personally, face to face. So far as we are told, they did not involve others in the disagreement. (Matthew 5:24) “First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift,” The teaching of our beloved Jesus told them to do.

Paul and Barnabas did not take the problem personally—they did not let their disagreement alienate them as friends and as brothers. I do not wish to minimize the intensity of the disagreement, but neither do I wish to read into this incident a personal “falling out.” It is a vastly different thing for two men to agree to dissolve a partnership in ministry than to have a friendship turn sour, developing into some kind of personal animosity. I find absolutely no indication in the New Testament which would indicate a loss of love or respect for each other. I see no signs of bitterness or alienation between these two.

Paul and Barnabas saw the matter through to a resolution. These two men stuck to their convictions, and neither was willing to change, but that did come to a solution to the impasse. The solution was a separation—to go on two separate missions, but it was a solution. The problem did not continue to fester.

Neither Paul nor Barnabas appear to have been acting out of self-interest or self-will. Put differently, it does not seem that these men were acting out of fleshly desires or inclinations. Humanly speaking, it would have been easier for either of the two to have “given in” to the other, or for both to have compromised. For these two men to go their own ways was a personal sacrifice, required by their convictions and calling.

Neither Paul nor Barnabas sought to make this a biblical issue, in which one was “right” and the other was “wrong.” How often, when two Christians differ, they try to sanction their actions with texts of Scripture. Each party in the dispute gathers up a collection of proof texts, and the one with the longest list wins. This was not a biblical issue, in the sense that one of the two was doing the biblical thing and the other was being disobedient. Both Paul and Barnabas were “right” to do what they did, and would have denied their convictions and calling to do what the other felt compelled to do.

Both Paul and Barnabas seem to be acting in accordance with their own spiritual gifts and calling. Who, but Barnabas, would we expect to come alongside Mark [his near relative], to encourage him and to be used of God to minister to this stumbling saint so as to stand and to serve the Lord? And who, but Paul, would we expect to come down hard on failure to complete a mission?

Both Paul and Barnabas ministered to John Mark by what they did. I see Paul and Barnabas, out of different gifts and ministries, applying this instruction, spelled out by Paul to the Thessalonian church:

And we urge you, brethren, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with all men (1 Thessalonians 5:14).

Knowing that Paul would not take him along on his next journey surely had an impact on Mark, just as knowing the Barnabas was willing to invest his life and ministry in him, even though he failed, would be an encouragement. Paul’s negative response, combined with Barnabas’ positive action, served to encourage “Mark” to take his problems seriously and to strive to prove himself a faithful man of God.

The separation of Paul and Barnabas was a cooperative action, not a competitive one. All too often, when partners in ministry have separated in an unhealthy way, they have both pursued the same ministry, in the same place, requiring the involvement and support of the same people. In short, division or separation has not solved a problem, it has expanded it, resulted in competition, rather than cooperation. Barnabas took Mark, and went to Cyprus. Paul to Silas, and went in the opposite direction. The itinerary which they had planned was, in effect, cut in two, so that their initial purposes were met, but in a way that created no problems for the ministry of either.

The passing of time bears witness to the fact that both Paul and Barnabas acted in a way that was beneficial to them, to Mark, to each other, and to the gospel. Notice that the result of this separation was two missionary ventures, not just one. Others were involved in ministry, including Silas, Timothy, and Luke. The Book of Mark was, to some degree, the result of Barnabas’ actions and ministry, and the birth of many new churches was the result of Paul’s actions and ministry. Neither Paul nor Barnabas later needed to repent of any wrongdoing in the matter of Mark, and Paul could say of Mark that he was now of profit to his own ministry (2 Timothy 4:9, 11).

I believe that the New Testament bears witness to some very positive changes in the outlook and ministries of both Paul and Barnabas. Barnabas backed off from taking Mark into the more dangerous areas, choosing instead to take him to Cyprus, where Mark had successfully served, before his desertion at Perga ( Acts 13:5, 13). Barnabas also seems to have taken Mark to a ministry of edification in existing churches, as opposed to a front-line ministry of evangelism in hostile territory. Barnabas may also have been reminded that one must not only consider the individual, but the cause Paul, on the other hand, may well have grown a great deal through this experience with Mark and Barnabas, and his ministry seems to have been enriched by it. By reducing the number of churches he had to visit, it opened the door to reaching out to new, unreached cities with the gospel. Paul seems to have learned a lesson in choosing to lay hands too quickly on a person, especially one who was not yet proven (1 Timothy 3:10; 5:22). He may have concluded, as a result of this experience, that in the future he needed to commit himself to faithful, proven men, with gifts similar to his own, so that he could extend and reproduce his own ministry and gift ( 2 Timothy 2:2). Paul may have also learned the need to be more sensitive and tender toward those who are not as “thick skinned” as he. I cannot help but see a tenderness and gentleness evidenced in Paul’s letters to Timothy, that does not appear to be present in his dealings with Mark. As I read 1 and 2 Timothy, I see some parallels between Mark’s fears and retreat and Timothy’s uncertainty and hesitancy in ministry, which requires constant encouragement from Paul. Paul seems to have grown in gentleness and understanding, as he deals with Timothy, and I am inclined to think that this experience with Mark was a significant part of his education.

It appears that Barnabas’ ministry to Paul had come to an end, and that Silas was now the better partner in ministry. One of the strongest gifts of Barnabas was his gift of encouragement (Acts 4:36). Barnabas first came alongside Paul at a time when he was a newly born believer, and when none of the apostles would associate with him, fearing him. Barnabas sought Paul to ministry with him in Antioch, too (Acts 11:25-26). As of Acts 13:9 and following, the need for Barnabas seems to be diminishing. Now, in chapter 15, Mark needed Barnabas’ gift of encouragement much more than Paul did. This strong difference of opinion and of approach was the one means by which God could separate these two “inseparable” friends, brothers, and servants.

The separation of Barnabas paved the way for the selection of Silas (and others, like Timothy and Luke). I am convinced that for the second missionary journey, Silas was a better suited partner than Barnabas. For example, Silas, like Paul, was a Roman citizen (or at least appears to be). I do not know whether or not Barnabas was a Roman citizen. How difficult it would have been for Paul to protest against his unfair treatment as a Roman citizen in Philippi if Barnabas were not a Roman as well (Acts 16:37). If Paul and Barnabas had gone about, reading the decree of the Jerusalem Council it would have had less impact than when Paul and Silas informed the churches of this decision. All in all, the gifts and ministries of Silas appear to have been better suited to the second journey than those of Barnabas. And thus God orchestrated a change in personnel, in a most unusual but effective way.

There is that painful confrontation which the godly Christian must initiate when a fellow-Christian had erred. There is the obligation of the offended brother to go to the offender (Matthew 18:15-20). And of the stronger brother to seek out the weaker, who is entangled in sin (Galatians 6:1). The unruly must be admonished (1 Thessalonians 5:14). Those who refuse to be corrected and who persist in sin must be shunned (Matthew 18:17; 1 Corinthians 5; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15). There is also the need to confront those, who by teaching or practice, distort or deny the truth (Galatians 2:11; ; Titus 1:13; 3:10-11). 2 Timothy 2:23-26.

In Conclusion, I believe that Paul and Barnabas have given us a model here for dealing with differences which are based upon our gifts, calling, ministry or personal beliefs. We should praise God that these two men never parted in spirit and in essential unity, but only in ministry. So as a example to all Christians we learned even in sharp disagreement we can parted company and remain Friends in Christ, remain supportive to each other ministry (1 Cor. 9:6). Call on each other in the time of need (2 Timothy 4:9, 11) Mark's help. Its not always about being biblical correct or sin, even personal differences we should follow (Matthew 5:24) as did Paul and Barnabas did. If needed, part in the Spirit of the Lord in a loving way. Paul and Barnabas did this face to face as instructed in (Matthew 18:15-20 ) but if it go's farther both witness's and Church leader should take note on the example set forth by Paul and Barnabas as a goal between both parties. Both should leave the trouble and chaos behind, may they part way in peace, joy and harmony of the Lord. Bring Glory, Honor and Praise to God, When God speaks and acts in all situation, Victory is Guaranteed! Thank You Jesus! Amen

Feel free to rebuke or correct any biblical errors and personal insights i may have over looked. For this is only the way I see it in the Spirit of our Lord Jesus Christ, with all His love to all Gods children.