In a previous command, Jesus said, “If thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee . . . first be reconciled to thy brother” (Matthew 5:23–24). This command deals with the other side of a conflict: “If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and . . . thou hast gained thy brother” (Matthew 18:15).

In both cases, we are commanded to take the initiative. In the first case, we are to go in order to clear our consciences and restore fellowship with an offended brother. In the second case, we are to help an offending brother clear his conscience and restore fellowship with us. Our natural inclination when offended by another believer is to wait for the offender to come and make it right with us. Meanwhile, we may try to forgive the offender and hold back feelings of anger and bitterness.

The problem with this approach is that “the tongue can no man tame” (James 3:8).We cannot stop the hurts of our hearts from coming out of our mouths, especially when a friend asks us what is bothering us or when someone talks about the one who hurt us.When we tell them about the offense, we violate the command to go and tell our offender his fault “between thee and him alone.”

 

Q: Since we are commanded to tell only an offender his fault, why did Paul tell Peter his fault in front of the entire group and also tell the whole church about the fault of Demas? (See Galatians 2:14, II Timothy 4:10.)

A: When a sin that affects an entire group is committed, the head of the group must be notified, in the same way that the head must be alerted about an infection in part of the body so that proper action can be taken to deal with it and prevent it from spreading throughout the entire body.

This is consistent with the instructions that Paul gave to Timothy about church leaders: “Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear” (I Timothy 5:19–20).

“Rebuking before all” is what Paul did to Peter concerning the matter of separation: “When Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision” (Galatians 2:11–12).

Paul went on to explain how Peter’s hypocrisy had led astray other Jewish Christians and even Barnabas. Because Peter’s offense had affected an entire group, he needed public rebuke. God used Paul’s voice to warn others of falling into the same trap.

There are ample witnesses to verify the need for public rebukes—we can assume that Demas was warned by Paul and other witnesses not to love the world. Thus, Paul wrote, “For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica” (II Timothy 4:10).

It is critical that we distinguish between different types of offenses in order to determine the most effective rebuke for each situation. In every case, however, it is our responsibility to first examine our own lives according to Matthew 7:5: “… First cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.”