Part I: Unity and Diversity

In America today, corporate values are often expressed through a commitment to the principles of DEI. This over-used acronym stands for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and its primary goals are to foster an environment that encourages participation from people from various backgrounds (Diversity), promote fairness (Equity), and provide opportunities for all people without partiality and without deference to race, gender, orientation, etc. (Inclusion). Typically, the beneficiaries of such practices are those groups that have been traditionally marginalized and, in extreme cases, oppressed.

Opponents of DEI are critical of the lack of regard for merit. They insist that employment or promotions should be based on a candidate’s ability rather than a candidate’s membership in a marginalized group. This seems like a valid argument, especially for positions requiring specialized skills and expertise.

The values of the Christian Church are vastly different from those of Corporate America. In fact, it could be argued that the values of the church are completely antithetical to those of Corporate America. However, it is interesting to think about how DEI might describe the organic development of the early church. Consider these points: Firstly, the church is comprised of multitudes of different people from various backgrounds and cultures. This is the definition of diversity. Secondly, the Bible is clear that God is no respecter of persons. This true statement intimates that equity is a necessary component of God’s ways in dealing with humanity. In his epistle, James extolls this principle by admonishing his readers concerning how to receive a person of low status versus one of higher status (James 2:1-9). The clear implication is that equity is to be exemplified in the church. Thirdly, nothing could be more inclusive than Paul’s declaration in Romans 3:23, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” This applies equally to those inside and outside of the church.  

Therefore, though DEI may be a plague within Corporate America, it is reflected in the values of the church. Now, in hiring practices or in promoting employees, merit should be the governing factor. But when it comes to salvation in Christ, we are saved by grace through faith and not by works. So, we have no merit of our own to recommend us. The purpose of this thought experiment concerning DEI has been to establish the fact that the Church is the epitome of diversity in its membership. The question that follows is, “How can the Church achieve unity amidst such overwhelming diversity?” Before trying to answer this question, let us examine the Scriptures to be convinced of the assertion that the Church is diverse.

From the Gospels, we learn that the first followers of Jesus were not scholars or priests, but citizens of the working class. We know the profession of the first disciples. Andrew, Simon Peter, James, and John were all fishermen. The high priest and his family were amazed by the boldness of Peter and John when they spoke before the council because they were “unlearned and ignorant (Acts 4:13).” Paul explains it this way, “…God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise (1 Cor. 1:27).” Although the majority of the twelve were probably from the working class, there was diversity. We know that Matthew, also known as Levi, was a tax collector. This position would have afforded him much wealth and an important status within the Roman provincial government.

The high priest, the Sadducees and Pharisees, and other members of the Sanhedrin, were among those that rejected Christ. Yet, Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were powerful men who were among his followers. From the book of Acts, we learn that the first Gentile convert was Cornelius, a Roman Centurion. And much to the chagrin of many first-century Jews, Gentile converts would represent the ultimate in diversity and inclusion.

Among other early converts were an Ethiopian Eunuch¹, a Philippian jailor, a seller of purple cloth, and a husband and wife who were tent makers. It seems that Paul, while imprisoned at Rome, even made converts among Caesar’s household, if not actual relatives, they at least dwelt within Caesar’s house, possibly as servants (Philippians 4:22). The lesson to us is that the gospel message is well-designed to reach every stratum of society.

So, it seems that diversity is welcomed within the church and a natural consequence of taking the gospel to every nation in accordance with the Great Commission. However, there are also numerous warnings throughout Scripture concerning false teachers and the harm they can cause within a congregation. Jesus called them “ravening wolves” that come in “sheep’s clothing.” Paul contended with the Judaizers that had infiltrated the church, especially in Galatia. John’s epistles were largely dealing with the Gnostic congregants that left the church most likely in reaction to the publication of his gospel.

The church welcomes people of all backgrounds, from every culture and position in society. Diversity is part of the strength of the church. Paul uses the analogy of the “body of Christ” in several places. For instance, in Romans 12:5 he writes, “So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members of one another.” Also, in the first epistle to the church in Corinth, Paul describes the variety of spiritual gifts that are present in the church but clarifies that these are necessary for a complete, well-functioning body. In verse twelve, he writes, “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.”

Therefore, in the early church, there was great diversity of members possessing various gifts. This was part of the strength of the church in that day. Today, some people look at the great number of denominations within Protestantism and see it as division and disunity. However, could it be possible that the Church Universal is similar to the individual local churches which are comprised of many different members from various backgrounds and possessing unique gifts?

With the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, Constantine I declared that Christianity was no longer illegal in the Roman Empire and Christians were given widespread religious freedom for the first time. With Constantine’s support, the church soon became the official religion of the state and enjoyed unprecedented influence and power. Over the next few centuries, matters of doctrine were debated in ecumenical councils such as Nicaea in 325 AD and Constantinople in 381 AD. As the doctrines of the church were developed, there was an overarching attitude concerning the unity of the church that is best expressed by the phrase, “one, holy, catholic (meaning universal), and apostolic.”

It is beyond the scope of this first article to go into depth about the issues that led to the first schisms between the Western, or Latin Church, headquartered in Rome, and the Eastern, or Orthodox Church, not to mention the divisions later created by the Protestant Reformation. That will be the subject for a later discussion. But the important point to be made is that there was great unity in the church at that time despite the vast cultural and linguistic differences. Can the modern church ever return to that type of early unity? Probably not. But it is incumbent upon us to find and draw focus on our common beliefs and to also establish the boundaries that would exclude fellowship.

In the coming weeks, subsequent articles will address more of the doctrinal distinctives that define the various theological traditions with an emphasis on the origins of the Free Will Baptist denomination. Currently, there are two trends that should be countermanded. The first is a movement away from denominationalism towards non-denominational churches. The other is a trend among young people towards Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.

For the former trend, the obvious concern is accountability. Without any ties to an historic theological tradition and without an association of churches to enforce doctrinal purity, non-denominational churches are more susceptible to errors in teaching. Concerning the latter trend, protestants need to become more familiar with our own traditions to combat the movement toward what might appear to be a more rich and robust theology and ecclesiology.

Dr. J. Matthew Pinson, president of Welch College, recently reviewed a new book by Gavin Ortlund². In his review, Dr. Pinson states, “The book also shows that there are sufficient resources right under our noses, in our own evangelical tradition, to provide the depth, substance, reverence, awe, and beauty that are so attractive to young people who are looking for a way out of the shallowness they have encountered in recent evangelicalism.” This idea expresses an excellent goal for this series of posts. It is hopeful that through the study of our own traditions, we will be better equipped to draw those who are seeking depth and meaning.

In conclusion, we have seen how diversity is a natural part of the church. But how do we achieve unity in the midst of that diversity? In his apostolic prayer, Jesus said, “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me (John 17:20-21).” Jesus prayed for unity, not only among the apostles, but for those who would believe in him through the testimony of the apostles. That includes every believer since that time.

In Ephesians chapter four, Paul speaks of “Endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit.” He describes that unity in terms of, “…one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”

In the next few verses, Paul describes how various gifts, or offices, have been given for the “perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God.” Here again, we see that “unity” is a goal toward which we strive. It is part of the “perfecting of the saints” and the “edifying of the body of Christ.” This is a great source of hope for the church to know that each member is given a measure of grace as a gift of Christ for the purpose of unifying the whole body.

In verses fourteen through sixteen, Paul sums up the idea like this:

“That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.”

The church has been given the grace that it needs to build itself up in unity. The key to that unity, as with everything we do, is that it is “in love.” It is our love for one another that unifies us as members of the Church invisible despite our many differences. It is love of truth that leads us to doctrinal purity and establishes the boundaries that prevent fellowship with false teachings. Let this be our motivation in all we do.

Over the next few weeks, subsequent articles will be posted examining the origins of the various theological traditions so that we may better understand who we are.

---

1.     Even though the Ethiopian Eunuch is chronologically before the Roman Centurion in the Book of Acts, it seems that he is not widely considered the first Gentile convert. The reason must be that he had traveled to Jerusalem to worship and had purchased the scroll of Isaiah’s prophecy. Thus, he is most likely considered a Jewish proselyte and, as such, would not qualify as a Gentile convert.

2.     Ortlund, Gavin. What It Means to Be Protestant. Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2024. Dr. Pinson’s review can be found at the following: https://www.fwbtheology.com/favorite-books-in-2024-correcting-imbalances/