The best thing believers can do with divisive persons is avoid them and refuse to give them an ear, recognizing, as Paul said in light of Alexander the Coppersmith, that God will repay them according to their evil deeds. 

As society is presently ripped apart with divisions on every issue, the church is likewise bombarded with divisive people who are using the current cultural divide to mimic the culture and tear apart the body of Christ. Christians have to be acutely aware that Satan uses cultural moments like this in the church to separate the body of Christ. I can’t think of a more appropriate caution at the moment than to call Christians to awareness in who they listen to and how they handle themselves before those who seek the ruin of the church.
This phenomenon is nothing new, of course, and the apostles provide a lot of instruction in how to handle divisive people in Christ’s church. The apostle Paul was constantly under assault by those who wanted to undermine the message of the gospel. In 2 Timothy 4:14, he specifically mentions Alexander the Coppersmith who did him much harm in his efforts to preach Christ. Throughout the New Testament, we find no hesitation by the apostles to warn of those who were undermining the gospel ministry.
With this in mind, it’s important to provide an overview of the warnings we find in the Scriptures, the characteristics of those who seek to harm believers, and the instruction we receive in how to respond.
How to Identify Divisive Persons
First, divisive persons have an obsession and unhealthy craving for controversy and quarreling. In 1 Tim. 6:4, Paul specifies that some people are full of pride, having an unhealthy obsession with fighting as they spend their time quarreling over words. This is a hugely important caution for our times.
In any theological controversy, designations and classifications are made in an attempt to determine the truth of a matter. Some of these labels are certainly necessary to understand the nature of a controversy. The problem is that divisive people use these labels not as a way of working to understand a controversy, or with the goal of bringing brethren together in what are often complex theological disputes, but with the purpose of further separating Christians from each other.
When Paul references the divide between Euodia and Synteche in Philippians 4, he called upon the church and her leaders to come along side these Christians and “yoke them” together in what they had already achieved in gospel fellowship. A key identifier of a divisive person is that he uses labels and designations not with the goal of helping believers to come to the truth of a matter, but instead to separate and conquer those with whom he disagrees.
We should always ask if the person we are listening to has this evident goal of peace and unity in his disagreements. Humility, without an unhealthy craving to fight, is a key identifier as to whether sincerity motivates the interaction.
Second, divisive persons serve themselves in theological dispute. Helping Christians come together in the gospel fellowship they have already achieved is not the goal of their engagement. When Paul helped Christians in dispute, he first told believers to work together in what they had already achieved in gospel fellowship (see Phil. 1). There is a great amount of agreement that has already been achieved in the faith of Christians when they stand back from any dispute. This unity achieved among believers who have walked together in the truth of the gospel and all subsequent points of agreement, should be celebrated in theological disputes.
Divisive persons do not care about the truth already achieved, but instead, they use present disputes as opportunities to wreck the unity that already exists among believers. Pride makes the dispute about winning rather than helping believers walk in the unity of the Spirit (Eph. 4).
Read More

In July, the Department of Education awarded 71Five several grants worth over $400,000. But three months later, a state official notified the nonprofit by email that their grants were being taken back, saying that the nonprofit was disqualified from the grant programs because of its hiring practices.

An Oregon youth ministry is challenging state officials after the state Department of Education revoked several of its grants. Youth 71Five Ministries said officials stripped the nonprofit of its funding because of the ministry’s practice of hiring staff and volunteers who agree with its Biblical beliefs.
71Five is a youth mentoring program that serves young people of all religions and backgrounds through a Christ-centered perspective, said Bud Amundsen, executive director of the ministry, which has operated in the Rogue Valley area for 60 years.
Staff members mentor young people who face challenges such as poverty or a family member’s addiction, providing vocational training and recreational activities in group homes, detention centers, and the ministry’s own centers. The ministry hires employees and volunteers who align with 71Five’s mission and beliefs, he added. The nonprofit’s 30 employees and more than 100 volunteers all signed a statement of faith before joining the organization.
Since 2017, 71Five has received multiple grants from the Oregon Department of Education’s Youth Development Division that support the nonprofit’s work.
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by Christopher F. Rufo |
Tuesday, October 31, 2023
In 2015, BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors led a delegation to the Palestinian territories, so that the group’s activists could learn from the “Palestinian struggle.” She condemned Israel as an “apartheid state,” and the running theme of the trip was revolution, “from Ferguson to Palestine.” The same year, Cullors signed a statement drawing parallels between the Palestinian fight against Israel and the black one against America. During a speech at Harvard Law School, Cullors went further, telling the audience: “If we don’t step up boldly and courageously to end the imperialist project called Israel, we’re doomed.”

For years, left-wing intellectuals have treated “intersectionality” as an inevitability. The social theory, which holds that all oppressed peoples must join together to overthrow their common oppressor, has been an essential strategy of the Left.
There is some truth to this theory. When the fortunes of the Left are rising, intersectionality seems like a juggernaut: identity groups get aggregated into the mass, internal conflicts are subordinated to the cause of liberation, and a policy of “no enemies to the left” shifts political life in favor of the radicals. But the aura of inevitability surrounding the intersectional coalition is an illusion moments of crisis can bring suppressed contradictions to the surface and begin a process of fragmentation.
The recent Hamas terror campaign against Israel might become such a crisis. Following the attack, the foot soldiers of intersectionality—most notably, Black Lives Matter (BLM), the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and the academic “decolonization” movement—celebrated the militants who murdered civilians, raped women, and butchered babies. BLM’s Chicago chapter published a graphic lionizing the Hamas paraglider terrorists who killed innocents. The DSA blamed Israel for the terror attack against it, arguing that it was the “direct result of Israel’s apartheid regime.” Ivy League professors with expertise in “decolonization” called it a “stunning victory” and said that “Palestinians have every right to resist through armed struggle.”
For years, these academics and groups had been able to hide their ideological commitments and operate with an air of respectability. But after last week’s statements, they have encountered a well-deserved backlash. Jewish groups, including the generally left-wing Anti-Defamation League, have condemned BLM’s anti-Semitism. A Democratic congressman quit the DSA in protest. Major donors have rebuked Ivy League universities for failing to condemn Hamas forcefully. The Financial Times warned that the “left’s take on Hamas” could lead to a “Democratic party split.”
Read More
Related Posts: