Throughout the whole process, seek to extend grace to the fellow elders that God has designed to lead his church. A plurality of elders is a precious gift of God. Where one elder might be quick, bold, or decisive, others balance him out with gentleness, discernment, thoughtfulness, and pastoral care. And where some elders may be eager to please with great compassion, their fellow elders can encourage them to not neglect biblical principles and to lead with candor and clarity.

How should fellow elders of the same church navigate dissent, discord, and differences? In the early church, an argument arose between Barnabas and Paul that created tension, strife, and controversy (Acts 15:39). Barnabas was eager to reintegrate John Mark as a traveling companion, yet Paul wanted to move on without him, judging him to be unreliable (Acts 15:38). This “sharp disagreement” resulted in one of the most prominent divisions in the life of the early church.
On our own elder teams, the number of issues we can disagree over is legion. Should we observe the Lord’s Supper every week or just once a month? Do we serve wine or grape juice or offer both? If Baptist, do we admit into membership those baptized as infants? Do we hold one Sunday worship service or go to multiple services (or even multiple campuses)? Should we use a team-preaching model or have one main preacher? What’s the ideal age to allow the baptism of believing children? Do we employ one musical style or have a traditional and contemporary service? How long should services run? Do we discipline this recalcitrant member? Do we send this dear family to serve overseas? And on and on.
When instincts differ among elders on the same team, what can we do? How can we preserve plurality, honor divergent views, and shepherd in harmony with fellow elders?
Foundations for Disagreement
We might start with some foundations that can keep disagreements from becoming destructive — and that can also prevent some disagreements altogether.
First, start by cultivating a spirit of genuine trust outside the moment of disagreement. Create space to get to know one another, to spend time together, to grow in gratitude for each other, and to laugh and play together. Learn about one another. Be able to identify the strengths and weaknesses of fellow elders. Gain a deep appreciation of their spiritual gifts and what they contribute to the team. Then give each other permission to speak your minds without repercussion. Seek to cultivate healthy conflict by the kind of open disagreement that neither maligns another’s character nor calls into question his loyalty. Give each other the benefit of the doubt.
Second, develop a robust affirmation of faith for elder candidates. Don’t leave core doctrines up for grabs. Unity on the church’s central beliefs and theology is essential for an elder team’s health. The more robust a statement of faith, the more unity your elder team will have as a foundation beneath your disagreements. This unity will cultivate shared instincts on church life, shepherding, philosophy of ministry, and the mission of the church. If 97 percent of your doctrines, beliefs, and practices are settled, it’s much easier to wrestle together over the remaining 3 percent where differences emerge.
Third, seek to understand one another’s perspectives and experiences. An elder’s history, spouse, friends, background, and education shape his views. What shapes your concerns, conclusions, or inclinations? We all come with different presuppositions, experiences, and ideas. Get them on the table, and be aware of others’ typical blind spots as well as your own. A plurality of elders provides insight, accountability, and protection from going astray.
Moving Through Disagreement
Once the foundation is laid, how does an elder team go from disagreement to moving forward? Here are four questions to ask when wrestling with a particular issue.
1. What does the Bible say?
An elder team should be eager to study the Scriptures together to understand what the Bible says about this issue. This study may not solve our disagreement, but it’s the starting place to bring our ideas in conformity with God’s word. The God-breathed Scriptures are for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness, equipping us for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16–17).
Read More
Related Posts:

Many Christians are suffering for their faith in this world. Even in countries without active persecution, Christians are excluded and face problems for simply being faithful. God cares deeply about this. Pray to Him about this. Ask for justice to be done. You can confident God knows your situation and listens. 
Ahab and Jezebel and their family ruled Israel as tyrants; we read of their exploits in the latter part of the book of 1 Kings. They were not satisfied with setting up an alternative religion to Baal instead of worshipping the true God. They went much further than this, seeking out God’s prophets to kill them (1 Kings 18:4). True believers went into hiding so that Elijah thought he was the only one left (1 Kings 19:14).
What do you think the faithful believers in those days prayed for at night? I am sure they prayed for the downfall of the rule of Ahab and Jezebel. They wanted God to get the glory He deserved from his people. They would pray that God would care for them.
Naboth was one of these faithful believers who was killed by Ahab and Jezebel (the full story is in 1 Kings 21). He stood up against a king who wanted to take his land, even though God gave it to him as an inheritance. Naboth was executed on trumped-up charges and his sons were also killed to ensure the crown got to keep his land. This act of injustice led to a promise of the fall of the house of Ahab in a bloody and terrible way.
Read More

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Thursday’s vote on the so-called “Respect for Marriage Act” has paved the way for the Supreme Court to overturn the 2015 5-4 opinion in Obergefell v. Hodge and thus return marriage back to the states. These lawmakers have unwittingly created the perfect scenario to fix the mess the Court originally created.”

Although the House passed the “Respect for Marriage Act” with a 258-169 vote that included 39 House Republicans, this action is a strategic blunder by advocates of same-sex marriage. Rather than a victory, the “Respect for Marriage Act” will make easier the argument to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 5-4 opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges regarding same-sex marriage.
Three of the five Justices in the slim Obergefell majority are no longer on the Court – Kennedy, Breyer, and Ginsburg. Chief Justice John Roberts issued a stinging dissent. Justice Thomas and Alito also dissented. Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson have since joined the High Court.
Until the passage of the “Respect for Marriage Act,” the biggest hurdle to overturning Obergefell was not on the law but on policy. Obergefell, like Roe v. Wade, has no support in the Constitution. Like Roe, Obergefell was “egregiously wrong from the start.” As Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “The majority’s decision is an act of will, not legal judgment. The right it announces has no basis in the Constitution or this Court’s precedent.”
Until now, the biggest obstacle to overturning Obergefell was based on those who relied on the flawed decision to obtain a marriage license. What happens to these licenses? The consequence of overturning Obergefell is now off the table and is no longer a policy reason for upholding the opinion despite that fact it was wrongly decided. Until the decision is overturned, those who obtained licenses will be “grandfathered” in and the licenses will remain valid. However, like abortion, the Supreme Court will return the matter of marriage to the states to decide a state-by-state law going forward. States will then be free to return to their laws prior to 2015 that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
The case involving Kim Davis may be a vehicle to overturn Obergefell. This case is working its way back to the Supreme Court where one of the arguments will be that Obergefell was wrongly decided. Justices Thomas and Alito have already invited future challenges to the 2015 Obergefell marriage case since the decision was never constitutional.
Justice Clarence Thomas (joined by Justice Samuel Alito) wrote that the Supreme Court’s majority decision in Obergefell v. Hodges caused a collision with religious liberty, and the Court must fix it. Four justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, strongly dissented in Obergefell. Justice Alito predicted the opinion would cause significant problems for religious freedom.
Read More
Related Posts: