The goal of this book, encapsulated in the title, is to “restore” Christian relationships. But does there come a time, when despite having followed all the principles, that one has to say, “Enough is enough?” Are there some relationships that CANNOT be restored?

The answer of course depends upon what we mean by “restored.” If we mean, a restored relationship is being “close, intimate friends” then I think we are going to be disappointed for a number of reasons we will develop in a moment. Instead, I am going to argue here that the key text is Romans 12:18 which says, “If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.” The Apostle Paul’s perspective is a bit different than what most Christians assume to be the norm for relationships. While it is a worthy ideal to want to be close and intimate with people; we may have to settle for being “at peace” with them. To be at “peace” simply means you are not warring with them; you have resolved all conflicts with one another by asking for and granting forgiveness as needed, thus removing all bitterness so that you can speak to and of them with dignity, respect and kindness. You can greet them at church or on the street, look them straight in the eye and sincerely wish them well.

But it does not mean that you are going to be intimate friends with them. To the contrary, the Apostle Paul specifically qualifies this instruction by saying, “in so far as it depends on YOU.” In other words, we have a divine obligation to work at resolving problems and settling conflicts Biblically, but it only takes one person to destroy a relationship. Sometimes, no matter what we do, or what we sincerely want to happen, we cannot be reconciled with another because they do not want to be reconciled with us. In a perfect world, with perfect church courts exercising perfect justice, a person guilty of harboring bitterness and refusing to be reconciled would be disciplined by wise and godly elders. However, perfect justice is not to be had in this world and sometimes guilty men continue in their folly. Thus, the best that one can do is put the issue in God’s hands, humbly admit one’s own errors and try to live at peace with the other person.

There are those cases when two people have a close, intimate friendship and a conflict erupts and the relationship is broken. Both parties want to “restore” the relationship, they have asked for and received forgiveness from one another, yet when all was said and done, the intimacy is now gone. Perhaps they are not truly “reconciled” because the relationship was not properly “restored?” Well, it is possible that one member or the other is bitter and despite having said they forgave the other party; in reality continues to hold an offence against them. In this case the relationship COULD be restored, once that bitterness was dealt with. Even the “godliest” of men are not above frequent self-deception, hiding behind lofty motives to disguise something unsavory in the background. Sometimes, one may SUSPECT that there is a lack of forgiveness on another person’s part, but only God sees the heart. We do not know, therefore we may not judge and perhaps the only thing we can do is say, “good-bye.”

But there may also be another dynamic at work here. Every time we enter into a relationship we have certain expectations of what we want out of that relationship. It could be that we think we have the same goals, or compatible skills or gifts that would allow us to work together with another for the benefit of both. We might just enjoy another person’s company; perhaps they make us laugh! We may think we know the other person, but in reality that person may well have incompatible expectations; wanting something we cannot provide. They may be much different than what we assumed; or we may be different from what they assumed. And in reality, the relationship between us just might not be what we think it is.

When conflicts arise, we have an opportunity to test the quality of the relationship. An intimate friendship built over time is too precious to lose over a foolish squabble or a matter of piqued pride. Sometimes, though through the process of working through a conflict we see a side of the other person we never saw before. We might discover that we never really had the kind of relationship with them we thought we had. So, even though we might handle a conflict Biblically and appropriately, it is possible to find that the relationship is never quite the same.

In this sense, some could argue that we are “un-reconciled” because the relationship has not been “restored” to where it once was. Perhaps though, we were never as truly intimate as we thought we were. Developing an intimate relationship involves getting inside another person’s head; as time goes on and we become more intimate, people let down the barriers they have erected to protect themselves from hurt. But a point may come when we find out what the person is really like, or they discover the same about us, and we just might conclude that this is a relationship we do not want to continue. To refuse to do so because we have been hurt and therefore have become bitter is a sin. To decide that one cannot be as intimate and vulnerable with another because the relationship was never as close as we thought or that the other person was not as committed to the relationship as we thought they were, is just wisdom. Thus we can be at peace with that person, and genuinely reconciled with them, but we cannot restore something that never existed in the first place.

Let me see if I can use a silly, but hopefully helpful illustration; say two people meet and share certain common interests. Let us call them “Bob” and “George.” Since they do not really know each other (after all, they just met!) they make certain assumptions about the other person. As time goes on, “Bob” believes that he and “George” are developing a genuine emotional intimacy, feeling free to share more and more of his deepest beliefs, doubts, fears and anxieties. Then, to “Bob’s” horror, he discovers that “George” is sharing those confidences with others, and speaks about “Bob” in disparaging terms; “Man, that Bob sure has some weird ideas! Why do you know what he told me…”? Of course “Bob” is hurt, angry and feels betrayed. As a godly man though, “Bob” is not just going to go off in a huff and become bitter and estranged from his brother. He follows Matthew 18:15 and in love, confronts the offense with “George.” “George” too is a godly man, and realizes he has sinned against “Bob” repents of that sin and asks for forgiveness. “Bob” of course grants it.

But what kind of relationship will the two men have from this point on? Clearly, “George” is not one with whom confidences can be shared. He is also not willing to have the same degree of openness with “Bob” that “Bob” believed he had with him. “George” might not have wanted to offend “Bob” by disagreeing with him on certain issues, or confronting him when he thought “Bob” was off base. So the relationship was never really as deep or intimate as “Bob” thought. Thus though the men can and ought to live in peace with one another, they are not necessarily going to have the kind of relationship they thought they were going to have.

Thus, there may well be some people with whom we were once fairly close, that when all is said and done, we just do not care to share that same degree of intimacy and vulnerability in the future. We are not angry with them, we are not bitter towards them, and when their name comes up in a conversation, we can speak well of them. We do not hate them and we certainly do not criticize them, we just no longer want to be close to them.

Hence, it may well be perfectly legitimate and moral to say “good-bye” to some relationships. Now granted, perhaps this term is a bit extreme; it could be interpreted that we cut a person out of our lives completely but that is not really what I mean. Instead the “good-bye” refers to recognizing that you will not be close, intimate friends with everyone, and that handled properly, there is no Biblical reason to feel guilty about it. There are a number of reasons why we may not have the sort of intimacy we would like with some people. People are complex, with diverse motivations and expectations. Within the realm of God’s Moral Law, people can have legitimately different preferences and priorities that make them more likely to develop deep, intimate relationships with some people, and not others.

Furthermore, without going too deeply into psycho-babble, everyone has an outer face they show to the world and the real person they are inside. Life has taught all of us various strategies of living in a sin-cursed world; becoming intimate with people is risky because the better others know you, the more they can hurt you. Therefore, in simple self-defense, we have all learned to be careful with whom we share our heart. Jesus said it this way, “Do not throw your pearls before swine…” The tricky part is making sure we do not use these reasons as an excuse to avoid taking the proper actions when a relationship CAN be restored; i.e., not masking or rationalizing bitterness, malice, lack of forgiveness, etc..

Now how can you tell whether the loss of intimacy is the result of a wise and accurate assessment of the situation; or if you are using the above principle as a mask to disguise bitterness and lack of forgiveness? Well, it is simple really; when you think about the other person or their name comes up in a conversation, do you want to find fault with them, criticize them or tell others “your side of the story?” If we cannot make a commitment to get over past hurts or offenses, then we have not forgiven them, no matter what we may have said. Remember, forgiveness is a solemn commitment before God that we will not bring up an offence against another; not to Him, not to them, and not even to themselves. If we find ourselves doing so, then we are holding that offense against them. We need to recognize that sin, repent of it and move on. One way of course to do so is that whenever a past hurt comes up is to pray for God’s blessing on that person. Sometimes we just need to get our mind off them, and put it on something else; for example, all those verses that remind us that if we do not forgive others, we will not be forgiven ourselves!

So let us look at some relevant principles of “un-restorable” relationships. First, let us recognize that even Almighty God says that SOME relationships cannot be restored. In His sovereign decree, He sent His only begotten Son into the world to live and die for His Elect. By His perfect sinless life and His sacrificial death on the cross, Jesus perfectly and completely fulfilled all the righteous requirements of God’s Law and redeemed sinful men from His righteous wrath. Yet, even though Christ’s death was sufficient to pay the penalty for ALL men’s sins, there are some men who will still go to Hell. Hence, in the providence of God, not all men will be restored to a right relationship to God.

Since all things in creation mirror the nature of God, therefore we ought to expect that in our relationships with others, we will find that some relationships cannot be restored either. For example, we might genuinely love and car for a person who is in unrepentant sin. We have fulfilled our covenant duties towards them and earnestly desired and diligently worked to help bring them to repentance. But for reasons we may never understand, that person may not repent, even though lawfully and lovingly confronted by two or more witnesses. The church then, sadly, properly exercises discipline and puts that person outside of the Covenant community. That relationship is broken and it cannot be properly restored until the person repents. Granted, the purpose of church discipline is to bring about the needed repentance; but if the person does NOT repent, then the relationship cannot be restored. We may want it restored, we may pray for it to be restored, we may do everything within our power to see it restored, but ultimately and finally, it may NOT be restored.

But are there other relationships, not quite as serious as a case of excommunication where despite our best intents and sincere efforts a broken relationship can never be restored? As we have discussed previously in this book, Biblical love is not primarily an emotion but a commitment to do what is right for another person. The Lord Jesus’ parable about the “Good Samaritan” is an excellent illustration of what we have been talking about. The Samaritan finds a stranger beaten and bloody by the roadside. He bandages the man’s wounds, takes him to a place of refuge and pays money out of his own pocket for his care until the poor guy recovers. From the story, we certainly do not get the impression that there was ever ANY intimate, emotional relationship between the Samaritan and the stranger. They never had the opportunity to become “best buds” nor did they ever engage in long, soulful conversations about each others lives. Yet, Jesus said that the Samaritan “loved his neighbor.” The Samaritan loved the man, by doing what was necessary for him, even though they would probably NEVER develop a deep, meaningful relationship.

Now throughout this book, we have been talking about restoring relationships within well defined covenant contexts; i.e., family, church and immediate community. Husbands and wives are SUPPOSED to have deeply intimate relationships with lavish amounts of loving affection; a man is to love his wife even as he loves his own body (Eph 5:28-29). Parents and children or siblings ought to LIKE each other, as well as love each other. And all the above ought to characterize our relationships within our broader local covenant community, the church (Phil 2:1ff). But think with me for a moment, does God require you to be intimate and vulnerable with EVERYBODY?

Clearly, the answer must be “NO!” We simply do not have time to develop warm, intimate personal relationships with everyone we come into contact with on a regular basis; even within the family or the church. Every moment we spend with one person, means less time spent with others. We are limited, finite individuals and we just cannot be on close terms with everyone, even in our local church. Jesus Himself appears to have had a sort of intimacy with the twelve Disciples that He did not have with the rest of His followers. And out of that twelve he seems to have had a deeper, more intimate relationship with three of them, than He had with the other nine. And even among the three, John was known as the Apostle Jesus loved. Thus there certainly seems to be divine precedence that even the Lord Jesus, when in the flesh, had a limited number of intimate relationships. Even though He loved ALL His disciples, He had a special kind of relationship with some that He did not share with others.

True, we must LOVE each other, but that love is not the same thing as being “intimate” with everyone. Siblings grow up, many be forced to move away from home for economic reasons, and establish new households sometimes far away. No matter how close they might have been as children growing up, life could lead them in different directions. They may talk regularly on the phone, visit one another during the holidays or even plan vacations together, but they simply cannot be on close intimate terms because their lives are so different. Even among your siblings, you might well have a brother or sister with whom you “feel” closer and more intimate than with another.

In the local church, there are some people with whom you can have a special ministry, helping them to understand Biblical principles; or they have a special ministry in YOUR life. They will receive your counsel, listen to your corrections and sincerely commit to putting these things into practice. You may well have granted others the same degree of intimacy in your own life. The two of you may have a deep commitment to each other and the quality of their relationship is such that you both can trust the other to “speak the truth in love.” But there are others who for whatever reason will not let you have this kind of ministry in their lives; or you may not want them to have that kind of ministry in your life. In such cases, neither of you are necessarily in sin, nor are either of you deficient in any way. You both might well relate better to someone else, and so receive the same kind of ministry we all would like to have in each other’s lives.

And of course, there are people with whom you “click;” i.e., you share common interests, expectations or values that make it worth your while to want to spend more time with them. There are other people though who are just different; not bad, or wrong, just different. You have a divine obligation to love and serve both types of person, but it is unlikely that in this life you will ever become “close” to some just because you are so different.

For example, I have never had much interest in watching various athletic competitions. Like opera, ballet or modern art, I just don’t get the appeal. I suppose, that since so many people LIKE these things, my disinterest probably means that my cerebral cortex lacks some common chemical compound that associates pleasure with these activities. However, the appeal of watching grown men sweating themselves silly just to move a ball around (or fat women shrieking in Italian, or men wearing tights) passes me by. Now, in self-defense, I have learned over the years to scan the results of various sporting events just so I can participate in conversations with those who do like such things; but really, I have no interest. Now this means, that if someone places a high value on their home team doing well, avidly watches every game, and has definite opinions of the abilities of new players, he and I are not going to share much in common. I just cannot share his enthusiasm and he is not likely to appreciate that something he thinks so important is something I think is an overpriced waste of time.

Granted, we may well be able to find some other, common interests that we can share and discuss, but the point here is that people like different things. We have friends that really “love” going out and paying exorbitant amounts of money for the dubious pleasure of eating raw bait (er, I mean “sushi”). And though they frequently invite my wife and I to go with them, neither of us can work up much enthusiasm. Sure, on occasion we may go out with them, only to hear their roars of dismay when we insist on ordering something COOKED from the menu (“Waiter, can you dip this piece of raw fish in some batter and then deep-fat fry it for me?”); but we value their fellowship over their taste in food.

The Bible actually has a specific word that relates to the kinds of relationships we have been talking about here; phileo, the Greek term for “friendship.” While the differences between phileo (“friendship” love) and agape (or “Christian” love) may not be quite as distinct as some commentators have made it, there are nuances to each word. Generally speaking, we could say there is a difference between “liking” someone and “loving” someone, and that we just might not “like” everyone we are supposed to “love.”

For what it is worth, I suspect that one of the fundamental problems Christians have in their relationships is that we are so consumed by the idea that we must follow our feelings that many Christians implicitly assume that one has to “like” someone before they can “love” them. Therefore, if they “like” a person, they treat them with dignity, respect, care, gentleness and compassion. But if they do not like another, they feel free to gossip, slander, whisper, back-bite the person or harbor bitterness, envy and malice against them. If they like someone, they will overlook offenses, and offer sympathy and support. If they do not like someone, they are more “thin skinned,” are more likely to take offense and will take sides against them, even if that person may be in the right. And what is really wicked, is that the reason why they do not “like” another person may well have nothing to do with his character or Christian walk, just that this person is “different.”

People may be “different” for any number of reasons. They may have personalities that grate against ours; i.e., some people may be boisterous, extroverted and talkative. Others on the other hand may be reserved, quiet or even shy. Put two people with conflicting personality types together in close proximity and they may find it very difficult to enjoy the experience. I am sure you can put a face to the kind of people I am talking about here. There are some people who just annoy you. It could be the way they dress, the way they speak, the things they speak about, the way they make decisions or any of a myriad of other reasons; you just do not “like” them. If you are honest you will admit that in all the areas you find this person so troublesome, they are not really in sin. But they irritate you. You don’t like them, you find it hard to be around them, and you feel guilty about it.

Christ calls us to be at peace with all men (Rms 12:18) and one implication of that peace is not to judge others, or criticize them (Rms 14:1ff) on any other basis than God’s moral law. Sure, there are some people we may find hard to “like” because they are so different from us (or maybe because they are too much like us!). But I do not see anywhere in Scripture where I am commanded to “like” everyone; simply that I am to “love” everyone; these are two different things.

When Christians do not understand this distinction, they then tend to try to justify their “dislike” of someone. See if you can follow my logic here; Mr. Average Christian finds “Bob” irritating and annoying. But Mr. Average Christian knows that he ought to love “Bob” because “Bob” is a Christian and Christians are supposed to love one another. But Mr. Average Christian thinks loving someone means liking someone; and since he does not like “Bob” therefore he believes he does not love “Bob.” Since not loving “Bob” is a sin, Mr. Average Christian sincerely tries to develop a liking for “Bob.” But “Bob” drives Mr. Average Christian absolutely crazy every time they get together. So what does Mr. Average Christian do? Why, he must justify his dislike of “Bob!” Clearly, “Bob” MUST be a bad person, otherwise Mr. Average Christian would like him. Furthermore, Mr. Average Christian KNOWS that “Bob” is unlovable, because he has talked with everyone about “Bob” and they all agree!

Allow me to offer a more Biblical way; you do not have to like everybody and you are not going to be “best buds” with everybody, and it is perfectly acceptable for you to say to yourself, “I do not like Bob but I will love him by living in peace with him.” You see, we have a problem in English. All thought is constrained by language. When we say, “I do not like someone” it always comes across as a bad thing; that we have negative feelings about someone. Strictly speaking, to say that we do not “like” someone or something is merely saying there we have a lack of positive feeling about a person. And lack of a positive is not necessarily the same as the presence of a negative. But the phrase “I do not like something” is universally understood as a negative. In common usage, if you “love” someone, you are thought to have a strong, positive feeling for them and if you hate someone, you have a strong, negative feeling against them. If you like someone, you have a mild positive feeling for them but if you “do not like” someone, it is understood that you have a mild negative feeling against them.

Again, the underlying assumption in all the above is that your emotional response to a person is indicative of their worth and value to you. It is assumed then that our emotions must determine our attitudes and actions towards others, not our duties or obligations.

What I am suggesting is that how we feel about others is immaterial. We have divine obligations that bind us in our duties to one another. And even though we might not always “like” certain people, we can fulfill our duties towards them and live in peace with them. Of course, it is easier to “love” someone we “like.” But simply because a duty is more difficult does not excuse us from our responsibility to fulfill it.

Now to be honest, I have never found a nice way of saying to someone “I do not like you” because the person obviously will find that offensive and hurtful. And since we are to speak only for the edification of others (Eph 4:29) I do not think I have ever said this to someone. But over the years, there have been some relationships where I found it most difficult to be closely associated with certain people. For whatever reason (and we will look at some in a moment) we just did not get along. And on occasion, after making sure that all problems were resolved, sins repented of and forgiveness granted on both sides, I have decided that it was probably for the best not to pursue a deeper relationship with that person. I do not think I am rationalizing when I say that I did not have bitterness or anger towards them; after all we each asked for and granted forgiveness. But for whatever reason, it became clear that we would not be close, intimate friends. So, I said, “Good-bye” to the hope of ever having anything but a “peaceful” relationship with them and left it at that.

I have come to a realization about relationships that some may think cynical but nevertheless I consider an indisputable fact; not everyone is going to like you. And you know, this is really no “big deal;” so what if some people do not have warm, fuzzy feelings about you or if you do not “feel” the same about them? We are called to love each other, pure and simple and that means doing what is right for one another, regardless of our feelings.

Furthermore, no matter what you want, or what you do, other people will not always feel about you, the way that you feel about them. There are teachers, pastors, fellow-church members to whom you may have developed a really strong emotional attachment. It could be because they ministered to you in a special way; it could be that they just have an appealing, attractive personality. But for whatever reason, you may earnestly desire a closer, more intimate relationship with them, than what they are willing to have with you.

There are many well-intentioned Christians who want to be close to certain people, who just do not want to be close to them. However, the fact that they may “like” someone, does not mean that they are going to necessarily be “liked” back. Every young man or woman goes through at least one episode of unrequited “love” before settling down. And of course it hurts terribly. When people do not like us, the way we like them, we feel as if somehow we are deficient or unworthy. Then, we either get depressed or angry! Who are they to think so highly of themselves! Why the nerve of that self-satisfied, arrogant jerk!

But why should it be so hard for us to take an honest look at the world, and at ourselves and see things the way they really are? People are different, and like different things, sometimes for completely irrational reasons. So what if certain people do not have a strong, positive emotional response to you? God loves you, and has known you from before the foundation of the earth! He called you into His kingdom and has given YOU a specific ministry to His body. Since it is physically impossible to be close, intimate friends with everyone, does it make any sense at all to waste time and emotional resources pining away on people who for whatever reason, just do want to have the same kind of relationship with you that you would like to have with them.?

OK, granted, it is one thing if there is something about our personality, hygiene or lifestyle that others find offensive and so preclude building an intimate relationship. For example I have failed to become close with some people over the years because they insisted on chewing with their mouths open. I am unapologetic about the fact that this practice actually, physically nauseates me. Since we have a lot of people in our home (hospitality being a divine obligation) we run into this problem more often than one might think. Since I recognize that speaking with a mouthful of food is a cultural practice and not governed by God, I cannot judge such a person or criticize them. They are not “bad” or “disgusting” people because they have a habit I find offensive. And on occasion, when such people have sat at my table, I have had to excuse myself from the meal and go read a book until dinner was over. They were my guest, and I do not think it appropriate to correct them.

However, now I have a quandary; if I am going to have a relationship with this person, especially a relationship that will entail eating at the same table, I must either be able to overlook their mastication habits, or address the issue. And if I address the issue, there is a very real possibility that I will deeply offend them, and therefore lose any opportunity to continue the relationship.

Now, as we have seen, “love covers a multitude of transgressions” which certainly must apply to overlooking offensive personal habits. And there have been times, when for the good of the relationship, I refused to initially address this issue with someone because I just did not think they could handle any criticism, let alone one as personal as this. But if there was going to be a relationship, then we had to work this out. Hence, the issue had to be raised as gently, compassionately and as non-judgmentally as possible. Before I could bring the issue up, I had to “earn the right to be heard” by demonstrating to that person that I really was committed to their holiness and happiness. And when I felt the time was right, and addressed the issue, sometimes people were overcome by embarrassment, profusely apologized and immediately changed the offensive behavior. Other times, people became angry and hurt and hurled accusations back, “Well you’re not so perfect…” and the relationship ended right then and there.

Sometimes, though, I just stopped inviting certain people home to dinner. They are not bad people, just people I did not think I wanted to become intimate with (or at least as intimate as sharing a meal together!). Now granted, the above is a silly illustration and we ought never to allow food to become a cause of division (cf. Rms 14:15). I only mention this to remind us that people are different, and there are things about all of us that SOMEONE will find offensive. We do not judge such people, or criticize them or act condescendingly to them because they are different. We certainly do not gossip, complain, insult or denigrate them. We live in peace with them, we love them, but we do not always have to become intimate friends with them.

In fact, I am going to go one step further; sometimes, for the peace and purity of the church and for the love of the brethren, there are some people that we ought to keep at arm’s length just because we do not like them! Now that is a radical thought; one I do not think I have ever seen in print before. Since strong claims require strong evidence, let me see if I can prove the above from Scripture.

The Bible itself defines at least two classes of people that we ought to keep at a distance. The first is the fool of Proverbs. While I develop this idea more fully in “Restoring Christian Finances; Wealth Wisdom and Poverty from Proverbs” here let us just note that the fool in Scripture is not a clown, but a rebel. The fool is someone who delights in speaking his mind, and insists that the world must operate according to his ways, rather than God’s. The fool, by definition is someone who is uncorrectable; he is a fool because he will not learn.

God specifically says, “Do not rebuke a fool, lest he hate you…” Hence, God Himself says that there are some people with whom you cannot have an intimate, warm, and vulnerable relationship. Some people will not take any correction and will hate you for it if you try, even in the most loving, kindly terms, to give it to them. Yet, Matthew 18:15 and other passages REQUIRE us to lovingly confront each other so that we can resolve our problems. Thus if someone refuses to accept a loving confrontation, and will turn on us with hatred, by definition, we cannot have a relationship with them. We have not broken off the relationship, they have! And such a relationship cannot be restored just because the person will not take constructive criticism.

And I am sure you know exactly the kind of person that Solomon was talking about. It has to be “my way, or the highway.” They have to be right, no matter what. They are more concerned about how they think they look, than they are about being obedient to God. Sometimes, if they are very bright people, it can be exasperating to try and even talk with them about problems because they can talk so fast they can always out argue you on any issue. Every time you try to raise an issue for resolution, world war three seems to break out. Eventually, you have to ask yourself, “Is this relationship worth the amount of time and mental anguish?”

Every relationship has a price. It takes time to build a deep, intimate relationship. Time spent working through problems with one person, means less time available to spend with others. Furthermore, there is the “frustration” factor. Since we are all sinners who fall short of the glory of God we all sin against each other. The closer and more intimate you become with a person, the more opportunity you have to sin against them, and for them to sin against you. Working through the hurt, anger, fear of such encounters exacts an emotional price for all concerned. Now the reward of working through problems together Biblically is a kind of relationship the world can never know. But some people do not want to work through problems, and you have to let them go.

Now, who determines whether or not a person is a fool? Here is a bit of a quandary. Proverbs clearly calls certain people “fools” and warns us not to become like them, or to become closely associated with them. Yet Jesus forbids us to call one another “fool” (Matthew 5:22) and warns us that doing do makes us liable to Hell! I do not believe there is a contradiction between Solomon and Jesus; after all, Solomon himself is a picture of Jesus in His Kingly glory and wise rule. Instead, allow me to suggest that while we are allowed to make certain judgments based on the lifestyle of another, we are to keep those judgments to ourselves. If we look at the specific wording of Matthew 5:22 the context is being angry at our brother and then lashing out at him by calling him a “fool.” This was a very serious accusation in Bible times; a fool was a man who rejected the authority of God and therefore by implication, was an unbeliever. Thus to call a man a “fool” was to say that he was unsaved AND un-save-able! No one has the right to make this kind of determination about another because salvation is purely within God’s domain. Hence, to call a man a “fool” in Scripture is not just insulting, but blasphemy because it presumes upon Almighty God’s prerogatives.

However, it may well be legitimate to look at another person’s life, see the way he handles conflicts and criticisms, acknowledge his pattern of speaking his own mind and refusing to listen to others and rightly conclude; “This man is acting like a fool; he will not accept correction and he will not repent.” While we have no right to make a declaration about his character or nature we may well rightly decide not to become intimate with him, just because God Himself tells us to avoid such people.

Yet, you can still live at peace with such a person, even if you want to keep him at arm’s length. You resolve your conflicts with him confess your sins and make things right over previous offenses. But if you KNOW that you and this other person are just going to clash again and again, how wise is it to seek to continue to try to develop a deep, intimate relationship with them?

Well, if such a person is married to you, then you have no option. The time to conclude that a person could be a fool is BEFORE marriage, not after. A married couple must be of “one flesh” and therefore they are required to work through such issues until like two stones rubbing against each other, both are changed. I would also argue that the same applies to your parents, your children and your siblings; you MUST work through such conflicts because you are family.

But what about the relationships we have in the church? The Church is God’s family and therefore we have the same divine obligation here, as we do in our flesh and blood families. In fact, the Lord Jesus makes it clear that His spiritual family has to take precedence over our physical ones. However, there is a difference between a “family” as we understand it and the “family” as understood in Scripture. In modern American culture we identify the family almost exclusively as “Dad, Mom and Siblings.” This very narrow definition means a very limited number of relationships. Hence, you must be close and intimate because there are only a few of you.

But in Biblical times, the “family” included the entire company of people related by blood including Aunts, Uncles, and Cousins no matter how far removed. This far larger number of people means a far larger number of potential personal relationships. Just as it would have been impossible to be intimate with EVERY member of one’s extended physical family, so it is impossible to be intimate with EVERY member of one’s extended spiritual family.

However, belonging to a family in Biblical times meant that the people related to you had a righteous call on your support. You had a moral responsibility to them that exceeded any obligations to those outside of the family; your “kin” had a “first call” on you (1 Tim 5:8). In the same way, those who claim the Name of Christ have a divine call for our love and service. We owe them, because we ARE family.

But the above does not mean that we are supposed to be intimate with every single Christian on the face of the earth. Just as in a physical family, there might be cousins we are particularly close to because we share common goals, interests or aspirations, there are going to be people in the church that we are closer to than others. And just as in a physical family there may be some members that we just do not care for all that much, so also will there be people in the Church with whom we will never be close.

And SOME of those people will not be close to us because we find them (or they find us) irritating and annoying. Whether it is their sin, or our sin, it will take a lot of investment of emotional energy if we are going to spend large amounts of time with them. I call these “High Maintenance” relationships because they take a lot of time and trouble to make work. And call me old and cynical if you will, but there are some people that demand so much of both that you simply cannot justify the expenditure.

These are the kinds of people that just weary you deeply in your soul. When you resolve a conflict, you feel as if you have done fifteen rounds with a professional boxer. And you know that despite your best intentions, eventually you are going to go through it all again. After six or seven such incidents, isn’t it time to say, “Enough!” I do not want to judge them, or criticize them and the differences between us may be such that only God can sort out who was right and who was wrong at the end of time. I just want to live in peace with them, and therefore, I say, with all love and good intention, “Good-bye.”

Now, I know what some compassionate and concerned reader is going to say, “This sounds as if you are saying that it is OK to give up on someone Brian, and God never gives up on people; neither should we!” And there is a great deal of truth in that statement.

However, God is infinite, we are finite. Every moment we spend with one person, means a moment we cannot spend with another. If for example someone does not like my preaching (or writing, or personality) there are innumerable other preachers (or writers or people) out there that can perhaps minister to them in a more effective way; why should they not seek such men out? If someone does not like my personality, my priorities, my sense of humor, or anything else about me, there are innumerable other people out there with whom they just might “click” and enjoy spending time with. But there are people who do “like” our ministries or who are attracted to our personalities and with whom we can become close and intimate and help each other in the Lord to become more holy. So who should get our limited time and energy?

Now when we have conflicts with others, or when we just find people irritating or annoying, we MUST follow the principles of Matthew 18:15, Colossians 3:16, etc., and use the mechanism God gave us to resolve problems and conflicts. Our goal is to live in peace with every person, and offences therefore must be dealt with properly.

But that brings us back to the “fool” we were discussing. Ideally, if we cannot resolve a problem with someone, then we go to a third person who can help adjudicate the problem (1 Cor 6: 5). In evangelical Presbyterian churches, we have “courts” where disputes can be settled, problems resolved and relationships restored. When they work, the elders provide a group of older and presumably wiser men who understand how Biblical principles are supposed to apply in practical situations. Hence, if we get into a conflict and cannot resolve it on our own, we can bring it to their attention so things can get sorted out. This is a radical concept for many Christians and in my experience for many pastors. One of the first pieces of pastoral advice I received from an “elder statesman” in the church was, “stay out of personal problems because they will always turn around and blame it on you.”

Sadly, after twenty-five years of ministry, I understand my elder brother’s point of view. Most Christians are not interested in resolving problems but in being proven right. Even in many Presbyterian courts, which have five hundred years experience in adjudication, many elders do not want to touch personal disputes because they know they are likely to torque off both parties. But if we fail here, we are implicitly refusing to use the mechanism that God Himself gave us for resolving problems. So many relationships are destroyed just because the elders refuse to do, what God tells them to do in 1 Corinthians 6:5.

Thus if one does not have a “court” where an appeal can be made, what can one do? Even worse, there are some people who will not submit to a common authority. They refuse to acknowledge the right of someone else to make a judgment of right and wrong. Thus if there is no objective court to decide between you, and neither party in a dispute acknowledges their error, the relationship cannot be restored. I would argue that you have no other option but to let that person go. You can “agree to disagree” with the other person, and ask them to live at peace with you, allowing God to judge between you at the end of time. In effect, you put the conflict aside but the price is that your relationship may never again be what it once was.

Furthermore, while I would hesitate to call such people “fools” there are those who certainly seem to suffer from what I call “OPD” or “obnoxious personality disorder.” They seem to spend their life going through relationship to relationship offending people left, right and center. It could be that such people do not understand some of the dynamics we have been discussing in this book and maybe, by the grace of God we can have a ministry in their life and help them change the behaviors that keep getting them into trouble. If so, as members of the same spiritual family, we have to serve such brothers and minister to them.

But sometimes, the “OPD” that caused such people so many problems in the first place, will turn right around and bite you! You want to help, you want to minister, you want to encourage and exhort them to become what God would have them be; but like the fool in Proverbs, they will hate you if you correct them. I say, let them go. If possible, let them go with peace, having resolved the immediate problems and conflict, but let them go you must.

With others, maybe you just do not get along because your personalities clash. In that case, confess your sins to one another, grant forgiveness to one another, and then, get on with your life. Live at peace with that person, do not gossip or talk about them, and do not even think about them other than to pray regularly for them.

There is also a second category of person that God specifically says we should keep at arm’s length. Paul says to Titus, “…reject a factious man after a first and second warning…” (Titus 3:10). There are people who are “factious” i.e., divisive and combative. They may not necessarily be “fools” in the sense that Proverbs uses in that they are not necessarily living in defiance of God’s principles; they are just stubborn and want to fight about everything. You probably can even put a face and name to someone you know that just seems to want to argue with people all the time. They are thin skinned and take offense easily. They make giant issues out of small disagreements. They cause divisions and factions usually by saying one thing to your face, and something else behind your back. They always seem to have a problem with lawful authority and polarize churches because they are always trying to get others to agree with them. As long as everyone agrees with them, everything is fine; but if someone dares to disagree with them, a war seems to break out.

Paul says that such people are to be “rejected.” Now whether or not this means formal discipline via Matthew 18:15 or something else is difficult to say from the context. The first and second warnings could well refer to the first two steps of Matthew 18.

However, certainly it is legitimate to apply this verse to those people who for whatever reason, always seem to get into an argument with you? Quarrels are forbidden to Christians (2 Tim 2:23-24) and there are some people with whom it is almost impossible NOT to quarrel because you are on opposite sides of every issue. Now, technically speaking, an “argument” does not have to become a “quarrel.” When one “argues” one simply offers reasons for or against something. When one “quarrels” there is the idea of personal animosity.

But by applying the Romans 12:18 passage, we can learn to be at peace with such people by simply not “biting” when controversial issues arise. We may well just let “love cover a multitude of transgressions” when a brother offers some “stupid” opinion because we know that if we start to debate him on it, it will end up in a quarrel. By mutual agreement, we may decide that for the purpose of peace, we will avoid discussing certain issues just because we value the relationship with our brother, over our allegiance to a particular position. Sometimes, like Paul and Barnabus in Acts 15, we may just have to go our separate ways; each man following the call that God has given him.

However, the “factious” man will have none of that; he’s right, you’re wrong and he is darn well going to keep pushing the issue until he has his way. Maybe his brain lacks some neurotransmitter that fails to signal “stop” when he is in dangerous territory, or maybe he is just an obnoxious, self-centered individual who does not really care one bit for others. Either way, he is factious because he insists on fighting over an issue until everyone either gives in to him or he causes divisions within the covenant community.

Rejecting such a person does not necessarily require formal church discipline; it might just mean that here is a person you do not want to let too closely into your life. Because he claims the name of Jesus, he has a divine call on your love; i.e., if he is sick, you will tend him; if he is impoverished, you may financially help him; etc. But it may well be that for the peace of the church; you have to say “good-bye” to the possibility of having anything other than a superficial relationship with him.

Conclusion

It is never easy to let a relationship go. Sometimes we may have invested a lot of time and effort into becoming close to another person, only to find that in the end, the relationship would never be what we originally hoped it would be. Other times, people that were once close to us drift away because life simply moved on. And sometimes, there are people who whether because of our sin, their sin, or just sin in the world, never become close to us in this life. Let us live in peace with all men, agreeing to speak of them with love, offering affection as required, and meeting needs as we can; but not beating ourselves to death with false guilt if we are not always the best of friends with everyone.

There are some people God has placed in our lives just because they are an irritant and we need to learn how to work past our own sins in order to receive the blessings God intends to give us through that person. There are other people with whom we just will not click. In both these cases, we can live in peace, even if we are not intimate friends. But there are other people who just want to cause problems and we need to learn how to say “good-bye.”