Conflicts--Good or Bad?

     "Chapter and verse, please,"  I said simply.  I was a college student, in a Bible study.  A belligerent young man had been coming to the group lately, and had made some very angry, mean-spirited and unbiblical comments against others in the group, and even against God.  No one else in the group was saying anything in response to him, and he was taking this and running with it.  As a Bible-believer, and as someone who cared about the others in the group, I couldn't let this stand, which was why I simply asked for chapter and verse as biblical proof for what he was saying.  

     Everyone in the room gasped that I had challenged this guy.  They had seemingly thought that if they ignored him, it wouldn't be a problem.  Perhaps they thought they could pretend it away.  I don't know.  Some things are worth ignoring.  To me, this was not.  

     Mr. Belligerent sort of stammered.  "Well...uh...it's not one of those things you can find in the Bible."

     "Then it's not one of those things that's true," I said simply.

     "God sometimes lies," he quickly threw out.

     "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?" I quoted Numbers 23:19.

     Mr. Belligerent's face puckered in annoyance.  "I hate Christians who use the Bible against me."

     "Then stop making heretical statements, and you won't have to worry about it anymore."

     By now, everyone in the group was horrified that I was taking this guy on.  I had hoped they would take courage and also refute these false statements he was making against God, but they were all mad at me!  I was the bad one, because I had argued with him.  I am not going to say that everything I said to this guy was perfect.  Over the course of several weeks, I really lost it with him.  The next week, he made a very mean comment to another student, and I demanded, "Are you incapable of saying anything pleasant?"  I was pretty strong.  But this begs the question, when did this become a conflict?  Did my involvement make it a conflict, or was it already one?  Is conflict always wrong?  

     In Jude verse 3 (Jude only has one chapter), we are told, Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.  There you have it, we are to contend for the faith.  That means fight for the truth of God's word when it is under attack.  In light of that, I do not think I was wrong to refute this young man's incorrect statements.  Furthermore, I believe the conflict began as soon as he started saying wrong things about God and the Bible, not when I challenged him for it.  But what about other kinds of conflicts?  

      I remember growing up, whenever arguments broke out between myself and others, the adults present (whether they were teachers, parents, or someone else in charge) would immediately spring into action to try to put a stop to the fighting.  I remember one wise mentor telling us, "No fighting is allowed here!"  The message given to me was that fighting is always wrong.  But is it?  We have already seen from the book of Jude that conflicts for the sake of truth are God's calling to us, so obviously, not all fighting is a sin.

     Years later, as a young woman, I went on some mission trips with the ministry I ultimately ended up serving with full-time.  At all our trainings, we had it drilled into us again and again, "The number one reason missionaries leave the field early is because of other missionaries!  You must learn to get along!"  The responsibility was placed on us as individuals that the entire mission depended on us, singlehandedly, getting along with the others.  Of course, no one ever told us how to carry out this most vital task of getting along.  It's always hard when someone tells you what to do, but won't tell you how.  

     This negative view of conflict led to a lot of problems.  Sometimes, conflicts happened because someone was being either aggressively controlling (such as Mr. Belligerent I had mentioned at the beginning) or passive-aggressive, and yet the person who addressed this was seen as the bad guy, because they were forcing the issue to be talked about, and become a conflict.  What they didn't realize was that there already was a conflict, but everyone was in denial.  The idea of "to see the problem is to be the problem" became a theme in my young adult days.  One time, a pastor gave a talk to our group about how it's a sin to confront others (which is obviously not true, since Jesus told us how to confront in Matthew 18).  This pastor went on to state that how, if you point out a problem you see, it really means you're the one who started it.  That is the most fallacious thing I had ever heard.  This would mean that, if someone broke into my house and I caught them in the act, called the police, had them arrested, pressed charges against them, and testified against them in court, it really means that I was the one who caused them to break in to begin with.  It makes no sense!  Obviously, pointing out a problem does not mean you caused it!  People who make those claims are trying to protect themselves from ever being confronted or held to account.  That should be a red flag, because we all need to be held accountable.  Speaking out is biblical.  Ezekiel 33:7 tells us, Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the people of Israel; so hear the word I speak and give them warning from me.  God often leads people to speak up about things that aren't right.  

     What I find interesting is that never once did I hear anything about how God can use conflicts--even between believers--for His glory.  Never once did I hear that God's will can be accomplished through missionaries deciding to leave the field.  It was a given that nothing good came out of failure to get along.  But is that true?  

     First, what is our responsibility in getting along?  Romans 12:18 says, If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.  The ideal is for us to live at peace with all, but there are some important qualifiers here.  If it is possible.  This recognizes that it isn't always possible.  As far as it depends on you.  This implies that it isn't 100% your responsibility.  You can only do so much.  

     You cannot change or control anyone but yourself, so focus on what you can do.  Work on you.  When there is a conflict, look within.  What is your part?  Do you need to make anything right?  In spite of the other person's part, do you still have any responsibility in it?  Write out an inventory of your problem.  Here is how that works: 

     As pictured below, you'll take a piece of paper and divide it into five columns (you can do your own, or print out something like this picture:

Copyright, Celebrate Recovery inventory form

     The first column is the name of the person you had the conflict with.  The second column is the cause.  That is, what the person did.  This is for your eyes only, so brutally spare no detail of what this person did.  Feel the anger over it.  You need to in order to heal.  The third column is for the effect--that is, the effect of what the person did, and what impact it had on your life.  The fourth is the damage, how their actions damaged you.  The final column is the hardest, but the most necessary.  That is my part. This is where you can look at yourself.  You've already looked at the other person.  You needed to.  But now you need to look at yourself.  Be honest with yourself.  Ask God to help you know the truth about yourself and others.  Psalm 51:6 says, Behold, You desire truth in the inward parts, And in the hidden part You will make me to know wisdom.  For a deeper look at conflict resolution with the inventory, see my September 10, 2020 post, In the Presence of my Enemies.  

                                                  

      Maybe you will discover that you are largely the one at fault.  Maybe you will discover that you were only very minimally at fault.  Perhaps it's 50/50.  But you are only responsible for your part.  In most cases, you need to make your part right.  Make amends.  There are exceptions, such as if your amends would harm the other person, yourself, or someone else.  

     When you make amends, you are only apologizing for your part.  Do not take on responsibility for their part, and do not put your part on them.  Don't say, "I wouldn't have done such and such if you hadn't XYZ."  Simply make your part right.  The other person may or may not make amends for their part, but at least you will have done the right thing.  The person may or many not accept your amends, but again, this isn't on you.  You are not responsible for them.  On the other hand, if the person really does want to have a heart to heart about it, and you both want to peaceably discuss the different impetuses of your conflicts, that is fine, but don't go into it expecting that.  If you work things out (or even if you don't) dealing with a conflict can be a growing experience for everyone involved.  The growth in your own life is a positive side of conflict.  Even as children, conflicting with others is how we learn and grow.  Don't completely discount the value of conflicts.  

     Sometimes, it is for the best that you move on from a situation when there is conflict.  If your best efforts aren't enough in keeping the peace with someone, God might be leading you onward to the next place He has for you.  It isn't necessarily bad.  Paul and Barnabas parted company because they had a "sharp disagreement" (Acts 15:39).  What was the result?  The gospel spread further than it would have!  Conflicts are not necessarily failures.  

     I am almost done reading the book Becoming Elisabeth Elliot, by Ellen Vaughn.  This masterfully-written biography about one of the 20th century's most influential Christian women has been eye-opening to me.  I have felt incredibly validated by some of the missionary struggles Elisabeth Elliot faced, aspects I had never heard before (and I had heard her story all my life).  The sanitized version of the story that I grew up with was: Elisabeth Elliot lovingly went to witness to the tribe that murdered her husband, and ended up seeing them come to Christ!  Understandably, that angle to the story is very inspiring and encouraging.  And it is the truth.  But there was so much more to it.  Elisabeth went to reach the tribe with another missionary woman, Rachel Saint.  Rachel's brother, Nate Saint, had been speared to death along with Elisabeth's husband Jim (and three other missionaries) trying to reach this tribe with the gospel.  Elisabeth and Rachel were united in their desire to see these people come to salvation.  Unfortunately, they were not united in anything else, and they were ultimately unable to work together in the long term.   In fact, I was unable to find any pictures of the two of them working together, which is why their pictures from that era are separate (even though they were working together at the time).  

Rachel Saint

. 

Elisabeth Elliot, her young daughter Valerie, and a local young woman.

     As I read about the conflicts between these two faithful servants, it was easy for me to take sides, since these conflicts were so similar to conflicts I have had with fellow missionaries.  Even the way their mission agency tried to facilitate a resolution reminded me of some of the lame attempts I have seen in different ministry situations.  And yet, we must consider that both of these women faithfully served the Lord for the rest of their lives, following the conflict.  Elisabeth Elliot decided that, after a time, she needed to leave their work.  Frustrated by the failure of her working relationship with Rachel, Elisabeth recognized that the ministry itself wasn't a failure.  She wrote: I find that faith is more vigorously exercised when I can find no satisfying explanation for the way God does things.  I have to hope, without any evidence seen, that things will come out right in the end--not merely that we shall receive compensation, but that we and all creation will be redeemed.  This means infinitely more than the good will eventually outweigh the evil.  

     Steve Saint, Rachel's nephew, who also maintained a close relationship with Elisabeth (whom he called "Aunt Betty") said: "I know both women were hurt by the other's lack of acceptance.  But God works through hurt."

     Yes, God surely works through hurt.  I think in all the trying to drill into people how wrong fighting is, we need to recognize the good that can be accomplished through it.  Conflicts, even irreconcilable conflicts, are not necessarily failures.  Moving on isn't a failure.  Fighting to contend for the faith surely isn't a failure.  All the ministry we do, in the midst of conflict, is still effective: forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.  (First Corinthians 15:58).  

     Conflicts, especially between Christians, are difficult.  But they are not a sign that you are a failure.  They are not the end.  There is life after conflict.  We have that resurrection power in our lives (Romans 8:11).  If we believe in eternal life, surely we can believe there is victory in the face of conflicts.  I will close with the words of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians: But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.  (First Corinthians 15:57).