Responding to Conflict, Part 2

In AD 47, the Apostle Paul and Barnabas set out from Antioch on what we call the First Missionary Journey. Along with Barnabas’ cousin John Mark, they went throughout the Roman Empire preaching the gospel, planting churches and establishing elders.

Not long into that journey, John Mark decided to pack up and go home while Paul and Barnabas continued, ending their trip in AD 49.

The very next year, Paul decided he was going to go back and visit the newly planted churches. At the end of Acts 15, Luke records for us what happened.

And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord.

While it’s a good thing that there were two missionary trips instead of one, I’m sure both Paul and Barnabas lamented the fact that they had to split over their differences. And knowing something about Paul’s personality and Luke’s style of writing, I think “a sharp disagreement” is probably an understatement. If that’s all the Bible told us, we might think that Paul and Mark never got a chance to work things out. But thankfully, this story has a happy ending.

Near the end of his life, almost 20 years afterward, Paul wrote the letter we call Second Timothy. And in chapter 4, as Paul gives his final farewells, he tells Timothy: Do your best to come to me soon. And then he writes: Luke alone is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is very useful to me for ministry.

Mark is useful to me. Paul came to see Mark as a partner and a co-laborer in the gospel. We don’t know exactly how that came about but it’s comforting to know that there had come some sort of reconciliation. And the true basis of that reconciliation was the truth of Jesus Christ.

The message of Jesus Christ is the basis of all genuine reconciliation. Christ reconciles us to our heavenly Father, and then He uses us to bring reconciliation with others. We minister as ambassadors of Christ working to bring peace between God and men. As we’ve been saying repeatedly, God is very much invested in relationships. He is a God of restoration. He is a God of reconciliation.

So, how can God use us to help bring reconciliation? What does making peace look like?

Last week, I gave you a four-phase process, which is what we are going to continue today. For the sake of consistency, I’ve reworded those phases, but the structure is the same.

Phase number 1, we mentioned last week, and that is contemplation. This is a thinking or planning phase. It’s a step of meditation. We want to think rightly about what has happened, and we want to set it within its broader context. That’s contemplation.

And we said that contemplation had four main components or directions. You look up at God, recognizing His sovereign purposes in this. You look down at God’s word in humility. You look in at your own heart, recognizing how you have fallen short of God’s standard. And then, finally, you look out in compassion and sympathy at the other person. That’s phase 1: Contemplation. Look up, look down, look in, and look out.

Phase 2 is Confession. You’ve thought about how you’ve contributed to the problem, and then you go before the Lord in genuine confession. And I mentioned to you Ken Sande’s elements of healthy confession. Those apply to confessing before the Lord, and they also apply when confessing to another person.

The confession phase is so vital to this process because it sets the entire conflict within the context of God’s holiness and our imperfection. Our natural tendency is to judge others, to use a different criteria for them than we use for ourselves. But confession remind us that we are sinners too. None of us has lived up to God’s standard. We contribute to conflict by doing things we should not do, and we contribute to conflict by not doing what we should. Both need to be addressed in confession.

In Jesus’ time, the Jewish establishment had become a breeding ground of hypocrisy. That’s why hypocrisy has become synonymous with Pharisee. The leaders developed a system of self-righteousness which led to elevating themselves over others. And Jesus said to the people, “Before you take the speck out of someone else’s eye, take the log out of your own eye.” In other words, “Don’t be blind to your own significant contributions.” Confession helps us make sure we obey that commandment.

Now we come to phase 3, which I am now calling Consideration. Last week, I used the term Evaluation, which is about the same thing, but “consideration” starts with C, so we’ll go with that. There’s contemplation, then confession, then consideration.

Consideration is another thinking phase, similar to contemplation. In consideration, what you need to do is think about how severe this conflict was, or is, and how God would have you respond. Not every conflict needs to be addressed in the same way.

Now, to help us consider our response, Ken Sande has developed what he calls “The Slippery Slope of Conflict.” You don’t need to copy all this down at the moment, but let me show you an adaptation of that diagram. Let’s put that on the screen. This is a tool that Ken Sande developed to help us understand how we respond to conflict.

If this curve were an icy hill, where would you want to be standing to be secure? You’d want to be on top, right? That’s where it’s stable. If you’re on the edges, that’s dangerous.

This slippery slope represents the spectrum of ways we can respond to conflict. On the far-left of the slope, you have escape responses. On the far-right, you have attack responses. Most of the time, when conflict arises, we have a fight-or-flight reaction. We either want to escape what’s happening, or we want to attack the other person. I remember hearing one pastor refer to this as sharks and turtles.

Some of you are like turtles. If there’s an argument, you just want to crawl back into your shell, and stay away. You want to escape. You want to make sure you’re protected.

Others of you might be more like sharks. You are going to fight. You’re going to attack.

For most of the conflicts we face in our daily life, those extremes are not going to honor God.

Now, if you notice, there are blank spaces on the edges of that diagram. Those spaces are for labels describing different types of responses.

In thinking about escape responses, or, as Sande calls it “Peace-faking” instead of peace making, we have three different possibilities.

The least extreme escape response is Denial. Denial is when someone pretends like a problem doesn’t exist or when they refuse to resolve a conflict in the right way.

This is the person who says, “It’s not that big a deal.” These people think conflict is just going to magically go away.

As an example, Ken Sande cites Eli the priest who refused to address the sin in his sons’ lives and he writes “These responses [of denial] bring only temporary relief and usually make matters worse.”

A second category of an escape response is Flight. Flight is describing the person who prefers to run away from the problem.

This is very common in our culture. I had a bad argument with my girlfriend, I’ll just leave her. I don’t like my boss, so I’ll quit. My wife and I can’t get along, so we’ll get a divorce. I don’t like something or someone in the church, so I’ll find a new one. The person is thinking, “I don’t have to put up with this!” That’s not going to help the situation. You end up running and running and running.

There are circumstances where it’s wise to step away temporarily, or for a longer time if someone’s safety is involved, but generally, if we want to honor God, we can’t train ourselves to keep running away from problems.

The most extreme example of an escape response is Suicide. When someone feels absolutely hopeless with no way out, they might take their own life.

That’s what Judas did because he didn’t know of any other way to handle his guilt over his sin.

It’s always a tragedy when someone takes their own life. It’s sin. And God only knows how many suicides could be prevented if people learned how to deal with guilt and with conflict in a much more constructive way.

So, those are the escape response: Denial, Flight, and Suicide.

On the other side we have the attack response. These are people who break peace. They make war.

The first example of an attack response is Assault. This is trying to intimidate the other person. You scream. You shout. You gossip or slander. You insult them. You make threats. You might even hurt someone physically.

Proverbs 26:21 says: As charcoal to hot embers and wood to fire, so is a quarrelsome man for kindling strife.

Some of you might have grown up in homes like this. It was normal to hear people screaming and shouting at one another. Well, normal or not, it’s not acceptable before the Lord. It does not honor God when we lose self-control and begin to attack someone either physically or verbally.

A second example of an attack response is litigation. Litigation is when we involve the civil authorities.

I might call the cops on you. That happened once at a pastors’ meeting which I was a part of. It was shameful. One pastor claimed he felt threatened, and he called the cops. Imagine what it’s like to be at a pastors’ meeting and have 4 squad cars pull up because someone didn’t know how to deal with a disagreement.

Another example of litigation is taking someone to court. In First Corinthians 6, Paul commands us not to take another Christian to court. Settle it in the church, he says. Why go to the worldly courts for a dispute between two brothers in the faith? Lawsuits between believers don’t honor God.

Lastly, the most extreme example of an attack response is Murder.

Are there people in this world who will kill someone else in order to win? Yes. That’s what Cain did to Abel. That’s what Saul tried to do to David. That’s what Jezebel did to the prophets. That’s what the Pharisees did to Jesus and to Stephen. Murder is the last step in eliminating or attacking your opponents.

And while we may not literally take someone else’s life, we should remember that Jesus said the judgment of murder is the same judgment as hatred. We can’t let anger build up in our hearts.

So, how should we respond to conflict. Again, this is part of the consideration phase. We don’t want to escape, and we don’t want to attack. So, how do we move forward.

Again, Ken Sande gives us a very helpful guide. Three example of responses are what he refers to as “personal peacemaking.” On that diagram, they would be on the left half of the peacemaking responses. Those responses are overlook, reconcile, and negotiate. That’s personal peacemaking: Overlook, Discuss, and Negotiate.

Overlooking a response means you forgive the other person in your heart. This is for small, insignificant wrongs.

How many times do I sin, and yet God mercifully covers that sin rather than send some kind of immediate judgment? That’s the heart of compassion we are called to have many times.

Proverbs 19:11 says it is a man’s glory to overlook an offense. This is an immediate form of forgiveness. I’m not going to talk to them about it. I’m going to forgive them from the heart and move on.

If someone steps on your toe in the hallway, you might decide, rather than go tell them what they did and tell them to do better, to just let it go.

You know, when a couple first starts out, when the relationship is new, it’s easier to let little things go. She made you breakfast and burned the toast? Who cares, I love her. I won’t even mention it. I won’t even think about it.

But after we’ve been married for some time, if we’re not careful, we forget how to do overlook. We get angry. We get bitter. We find it difficult to simply let little things like that go. We make it much bigger. “This is a test! She wants to see if I’ll eat it. She burns my toast on purpose because she wants me to die of cancer!”

Whether in marriage or in any other relationship, we should stop and consider that maybe the offense is so insignificant, that we can just let it go. We can overlook.

Another response, if we feel like we can’t overlook it, or if too much damage has been done in the relationship, or if this is a dangerous pattern in the other person’s life, or if the testimony of Christ is at stake, then we might choose to have a discussion.

In Matthew 18, Jesus says if there’s a problem between you and someone else, go talk to them one-on-one. You do it in private. Using the principles we’ve been talking about for good communication, you plan out how you will talk to them about what happened. And that might even include an element of confession. You need to get ready to go resolve it.

Now, discussion works well when we’re only talking about the relationship. But when you’re dealing with material issues like money or scheduling or roles, you will have to go a step further. That’s called Negotiation. You need to sit down with the other person, understand where you’re coming from, and look for a solution together.

If my wife and I are arguing over where to go on vacation, we need to find some time to talk it out. And Ken Sande has wonderful advice on how to have that kind of conversation. It’s very helpful, but we don’t have time to get into it today.

Hopefully, though, those three examples of personal peacemaking make sense to you. The consideration phase is when you think, “What’s the best way to address what’s happened?” Do I just overlook it? Do I talk to them to find reconciliation? Or do we need a more extended time for a negotiation?

Now, when a situation is more complex, there may be times when two parties can’t come to a solution on their own. They need outside help. Ken Sande calls that Assisted Peacemaking, and gives three options.

Here are the three options for assisted peacemaking. Option number 1 is mediation. Mediation.

Mediation is when to parties agree to have a third party help them reach a solution. A few years ago, I was part of a team that had to meet with a retired judge who was serving as a mediator in a legal case. The mediator was trying to help two parties come to an agreement. The mediator doesn’t have the final say. But he’s working to try and help us come to an agreement.

Another option, and this involves losing some control here is arbitration. Arbitration. That’s the second example of assisted peacemaking.

Arbitration is when two parties decide to let someone else decide for them. We’re going to find someone who is unbiased, and whom we both trust. We’re going to tell them what’s going on. We’re going to let them ask questions. And we’re going to let them make the decision. That’s arbitration.

The final category of assisted peacemaking is Accountability. Accountability is reserved for those situations when you’re dealing with someone who refuses to seek peace.

Thinking back on Matthew 18, Jesus said that if someone sins against you, you are supposed to go them in private. That’s a discussion. But if they don’t want reconciliation. If they don’t want to repent, then Jesus says, take two or three people with you. Those people serve as witnesses to help call the other person to repentance.

But what if that person refuses to listen even to 2 or 3 brothers or sisters in the Lord? What else can you do? You’ve already called for outside help, but the other person doesn’t want to address what’s happened.

Here's what Jesus says. This is Matthew 18:17—If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

The goal here is not shame or vengeance. This is not intended to be an attack. This is intended to be a final step to call someone to repentance. If someone professes to be a Christian, but has a serious problem in their life that they don’t want to deal with, Jesus says a church should lovingly intervene to hold that person accountable.

Practically speaking, in our own church, this wouldn’t mean standing up in the middle of a service and announcing the issue in front of everybody. It means talking to the elders first. As leaders in the congregation, we want to help bring peace and righteousness. And if we determine that, yes, this is an individual who is not demonstrating the fruit of repentance, and their life has become a danger to the purity and the testimony of the church, then we will proceed by bringing in the rest of the church to pray and to call that person to repentance.

That process is even laid out in our church bylaws. We want to make sure every new member recognizes that we will honor the Lord’s instruction here.

Jesus warned about the danger of someone believing they are saved but ending up in eternal condemnation. That’s self-deception. And if someone appears to be in that situation, we want to be used by God to wake them up. We want God to restore them.

But if someone continues in unrepentance, and they don’t want to turn, eventually we remove their name from the membership of the church. We don’t truly know if God will save them, but the church removes its affirmation in their life. We treat them like an unbeliever, which means we love them, we preach the gospel to them, and we call them to repentance. But we do not affirm them as a brother in the Lord. In our case, that means removing them as a member and prohibiting them from partaking of the Lord’s Supper with us. That’s external accountability.

And just to be clear, it’s not a permanent decision. It’s connected to their lack of repentance. Just like any unbeliever, if a person demonstrates the fruits of repentance, they will be joyfully received into the church. That’s the hope of accountability. It’s not a punishment; it’s a tool prescribed by God intending to produce repentance.

Well, we’ve covered a lot so far, but I hope it’s been helpful to think about the range of ways you can respond to a conflict. After personal contemplation, after personal confession, you need to pause and consider where on this scale you think God would have you respond.

You don’t attack. And you don’t escape or ignore the problem. Start with the intent of overlooking what happened, and if that doesn’t seem like it’s going to work, or if you’ve tried that, but it didn’t work, then move think about the next option. But don’t jump into a response without considering what might be best. Don’t include more people than you have to. But at the same time, don’t rule out the wisdom and assistance others can provide. Consider how you will approach this issue?

This brings us to the final phase. Phase 4: Connection. After you’ve done all the previous steps, now it’s time to go meet with the other person. Now it’s time for that personal connection.

If you’ve chosen to overlook a minor issue, then connecting with the other person means going back to normal. If my wife forgot to kiss be goodbye when I left for work, and I choose to overlook it, then it shouldn’t look any different when I get home later. I don’t need to bring it up. It’s done.

But if you are anywhere else on that slippery slope, you need to plan and then enact that meeting with the other person. It’s not enough to just confess and think of how a situation might be resolved, you have to act. In the same way that it might take courage to speak about your faith in Jesus Christ, it might take courage to talk to this other person, or to someone who can help you. But just because something takes courage doesn’t mean that you can ignore gentleness and kindness and any other principle we mentioned about good communication.

If it’s something small that just needs a discussion, maybe, once the time is right, you ask your spouse, “Honey, can I talk to you about something that I’ve been thinking about?” And if that’s a good time, then you can talk. And again, you don’t come out guns blazing, you start with confession. You recognize what you have contributes. And that needs to be genuine. And then, if the opportunity is there to talk about the other person, you speak in gentleness. Your motivation isn’t to win a debate, it’s to help them and, if necessary, to find a good solution.

On top of all the other Scripture passages we’ve been mentioning or alluding to, one helpful passage when it comes to talking to someone else about an issue, is 1 Thessalonians 5:14. First Thessalonians 5:14.

Verse 13 ends by saying: Be at peace among yourselves. Then verse 14 continues: And we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all.

Every type of interaction requires patience, but different types of people require different types of approaches. If someone is being willfully disobedient, we’re called to admonish them, to correct them in gentleness. If someone is scared or hesitant, they need encouragement. And if they’re hurt or weak, they need help. You can’t have a cookie-cutter approach to a conversation. Connecting with someone needs to be individual and personal.

Think about all the ways Jesus interacted with the people. His conversations with the Pharisees or with Pilate were different than with the Samaritan woman or the rich, young ruler. Jesus knew how to make a personal connection because He knew what was in man.

We are not omniscient. But we can still seek to follow in Christ’s steps by being deliberate about how we approach every conversation.

We’re going to wrap up in a moment, so I’m not going to dive into a bunch of Bible verses, but I think most of you know the verses that apply here. The difficult is putting them into practice.

We’re called to correct others in gentleness. We’re called to forgive and forbear. We’re called to remember that in Christ, we’re on the same team. If we’re not on the same team, we’re called to love our enemies.

Are you in a conflict right now? Is there some sort of tension that you need to address?

Honoring the Lord Jesus Christ means recognizing that it’s not going away on its own. And even if it seems like it can, that’s not what Christ wants. He wants us to pursue peace and reconciliation for His glory and the glory of the Father. This is part of what sets us apart from the world. We don’t run from problems. We don’t shy away from our own sin. We confess, and we take deliberate steps to bring peace. We are here to serve others, just like Jesus did. When a conflict arises, we can glorify God by following the principles of contemplation, confession, consideration, and connection.

In light of all that we’ve been saying, let me close with a familiar verse, but I hope it sounds a little different when we set it in light of conflict resolution.

First Peter 2:11-12—Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul. Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation.

As we seek to make peace in our own lives and in the lives of others, God will use that to make the beauty and the power of Jesus Christ shine in this dark world. Amen? Let’s pray