Scriptural traditions are worthy of the believer’s allegiance and should move him to break fellowship with those who refuse to adhere to those biblical traditions. The apostle Paul spoke of traditions that the believers in Thessalonica had received from him. These traditions were good and were to be maintained by the believers (2 Thessalonians 2:15). In fact, these traditions were so important that the people of God were to “withdraw” themselves from those (including “every brother”) who walked disorderly (in disobedience to the traditions). No doubt, these traditions were the very ones which Paul made known in his epistles.
The previous generation has handed down to the present generation some wonderful traditions. Those most precious are directly found in scripture while others are closely associated with scriptural principles. Paul admonished believers at Thessalonica to “hold” these types of traditions. Likewise, believers today should diligently continue in godly traditions. Those that are directly taken from scripture are a given, but there are others that are also important. No Bible verse specifically states believers should attend a midweek worship service, but it is certainly a scriptural tradition (Hebrews 10:25). In like manner, no Bible verse indicates that the early church held Sunday School, yet it is a very scriptural tradition (2 Timothy 2:15).
Sometimes a deep chasm exists between the doctrines, traditions, and commandments of men and those that are God-ordained. Perhaps no passage better identifies this contrast than Mark chapter 7. The religious leaders of Christ’s day held “the tradition of the elders” (Mark 7:3, 5), “the tradition of men” (Mark 7:8), and their own “tradition” (Mark 7:9, 13). In doing so, they rejected “the commandment of God” (Mark 7:9). This clearly displays the critical importance of identifying whose traditions one willingly receives and accepts. If traditions are truly of the Lord, they are to be accepted and implemented into the believer’s life (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Yet, those man-made, unscriptural traditions are to be rejected altogether.
It is difficult to find one who has a scriptural balance concerning tradition. Some see every so-called tradition as a direct violation of scripture, while others see traditions as equal to or superior to scripture. Scripturally speaking, both views are fundamentally flawed. In a basic sense, traditions are anything that men “have been taught” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). It involves a teaching that has been “delivered” (Mark 7:13) and “received” (2 Thessalonians 3:6; 1 Peter 1:18). At times, tradition is scripture or, in the least, scriptural (2 Thessalonians 2:15; 2 Thessalonians 3:6), while at other times, tradition is ungodly and makes “the word of God of none effect” (Mark 7:13).
Church discipline has commonly taken place under one of two extremes. It is either nonexistent or overused. Church discipline, however, is intended to be one of God’s methods of chastening. Before weak and unscriptural churches became so prevalent, those disciplined by one body of believers would not be readily accepted into another congregation while in a state of rebellion. Issues had to be settled and hearts made right. People had to repent and seek restoration. Discipline was implemented not only for the purity of the body, but also so that those who had gone astray might repent and find true restoration amongst the body. God used this chastening to purify saints and churches alike.
In the most basic sense, punishment is directed toward those who have done wrong. Though any particular punishment may seem harsh by those receiving the punishment, God intended it to be a calculated response toward wrongdoing. Though there are some passages in the Old Testament that indicate punishment was directed toward the people of God (Ezra 9:13; Hosea 12:2), the vast majority of references demonstrate that it was intended for the enemies of God (Psalm 149:7; Proverbs 11:21; Isaiah 10:12; Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 24:21; Isaiah 26:21; Isaiah 27:1; Jeremiah 25:12; Jeremiah 46:25). A careful study of the New Testament will strengthen the distinction as there are no references to God punishing His people.
In spite of the rebellion of others, David’s men remained loyal to their king. David’s followers honoured him with their loyalty despite Absalom’s rebellion which caused David and his men to flee from Jerusalem (2 Samuel 15:13-15). David’s men wanted to protect the true king so much that they wanted him to avoid endangering himself by going into battle. David’s men were ready and willing to sacrifice their lives for him but wanted his life preserved at all costs. Their loyalty to David caused them to elevate his desires and needs far above their own needs, wants, and even safety. Unlike many kingdoms of the world, the soldiers were more concerned about the life of the king and the preservation of his kingdom.
Absalom rebelled against king David (his father) by seeking to take over David’s kingdom and end his life. Ahithophel, who had previously served as an advisor to David, gave counsel to Absalom that could have eliminated David and his followers (2 Samuel 17:1-4). The counsel pleased Absalom, but he chose to request a second opinion from Hushai. Yet, Hushai was still a loyal friend of David, unbeknownst to Absalom, who was actually working undercover in Absalom’s kingdom (2 Samuel 15:31-37). Thankfully, Absalom asked for his counsel. Hushai proceeded to tell Absalom the shortcomings of Ahithophel’s counsel and offered his own counsel that would protect king David. After hearing the counsel of both Ahithophel and Hushai, Absalom unwisely determined that Hushai’s counsel was better. Hushai’s loyalty to the king and God conquered Absalom’s rebellion and eventually ended it.
David was loyal and his loyalty was certainly infectious. Throughout his life, he had those who attempted great feats in order to assist or protect him. Others wanted to simply be a blessing to him. First Chronicles chapter 11 provides insight into such events. One of these examples involved David’s three mighty men performing a life threatening effort simply because David thirsted for a drink of water from the well of Bethlehem (1 Chronicles 11:15-19). Consider that level of loyalty that would inspire men to risk their lives simply because their king expressed a thirst for some particular water. In addition to the men who were willing to risk their lives for David’s safety, there were many others who merely wanted to be by David’s side. Such was the testimony of Ittai.
Hypocrisy requires more effort than most people realize. In fact, the level of effort expended by the hypocrite frequently exceeds what would be necessary to simply do right. Unfortunately, man’s sinful heart will frequently choose hypocrisy over genuine righteousness. As an individual chooses to live hypocritically, his practice of hypocrisy becomes more proficient. Young children do not often understand hypocrisy. They innocently speak and do things regardless of how it may negatively impact others. Eventually, these same children, taught by adults, learn how to hide things and pretend to be something that they are not. Eventually, the honest, transparent child grows into a deceptive, hypocritical adult unless the parents consistently direct the child away from this behaviour. How do people avoid this transformation from taking place? The individual must actively and consistently attempt to live a life without deception by allowing God to control his life.
