Judg 12:6 | KingComments | STEP | The tribes separated by the Jordan can only reach each other through the fords. And that is precisely where the slaughter takes place. The Jordan speaks of the death and resurrection of Christ and that we died and rose with Him. It is in fact a place where the unity of the people of God and their connection to Him must become most visible. We can apply this to the place where the unity of the church should be most visible, namely at the Lord’s Table. There is His death proclaimed: “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes” ( ). The cup speaks of the blood of Christ and the bread speaks of the body of Christ. The church owes all her blessings to this, including the blessing of being one church. In celebrating the Lord’s Supper at the Lord’s Table, she may show that unity: “Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread” ( ). But what has been made of it in practice? Not much of this unity can be seen anymore because each group has its own thoughts and ideas about that ‘being one’. These thoughts can be too broad, so that anyone who says he is a believer can partake of the Lord’s Supper without any question and only on the basis of his own confession. This unbiblical unity can be found in the ecumenical movement, both in the established churches and in the broad stream of the evangelical movement. Because this aspect does not appear in this history, we will not speak about it here. In the attitude that Jephthah adopts here, we can think of the other danger, the opposite of being too broad, namely being too narrow. This happens when believers are barred from the Lord’s Supper who can partake of it on the basis of Scripture. Scripture indicates that a believer can partake of the Lord’s Supper if he 1. does not live in sin ( ); 2. has no wrong doctrine about the Lord Jesus and the Scriptures ( ); 3. is not a member of any church or group of which he knows that these things are present there, but are not judged and removed ( ; ; ; ; ; ). From all these Scriptures it is clear, what we also can understand well, that God and sin cannot go together. In short, it comes down to this: one must be personally pure in teaching and life and not have fellowship with believers who are not. The Scriptures do not give any other conditions for partaking of the Lord’s Supper and we therefore are not allowed to set them either. For example, if we demand that someone thinks precisely the same about the future of Israel as we do before he is accepted to partake of the Lord’s Supper, we make ‘the future of Israel’ a ‘shibboleth’ (see ). We then make insight into the prophecy a condition of partaking of the Lord’s Table. It may well be that someone, in our opinion, does not have the right insight in this. He can be taught in it. But making such a thing a condition of partaking of the Lord’s Table is an unbiblical restriction or narrowing of the fellowship. It is important to look for the fords, that is to say, to look for what is present in common faith, to share this with each other. From there an upbuilding on the “most holy faith” ( ) can take place. It is not about what separates, but about what unites, what binds. Shibboleth or sibboleth ( ) The word ‘shibboleth’ means ‘corn ear’ or ‘flood’. Those who did not pronounce this word in the way the Gileadites thought it to be right, was killed. This word served to make a clear distinction between the men of Gilead and the Ephraimites. This word reminds us of making a division. It is a danger that we can also recognize today, perhaps in our own hearts, perhaps around us. We think, or hear it said, that it is important to know what distinguishes one’s own religious community from other religious communities. What is wrong with others is widely measured, while one’s own insights are considered correct. I am not saying that we cannot be convinced for ourselves of the right place we occupy in the midst of a confused Christianity. We want to be part of and take responsibility in a local church that meets to biblical standards. It may be that we have found that place after earlier participation in other churches and/or religious communities. We will then indeed be able to indicate why we could not stay in a certain place. It will usually have to do with what God’s Word says about the church of God, how things should happen there, what is allowed and what should not be allowed. We cannot leave a church because one or more people there have been unfriendly toward us. Our personal experience is important, but a reason to leave can only be if there are things present or events that are demonstrably contrary to the Bible and there is no intention to change this in obedience to God’s Word. It is important to know whether God’s Word is given absolute authority and whether it is acted upon. When personal hurt or a difference in opinion about not fundamental things leads to a separation in God’s people, a new ‘shibboleth’ has arisen.

‏ Judges 12:6

At the Fords

The tribes separated by the Jordan can only reach each other through the fords. And that is precisely where the slaughter takes place. The Jordan speaks of the death and resurrection of Christ and that we died and rose with Him. It is in fact a place where the unity of the people of God and their connection to Him must become most visible.

We can apply this to the place where the unity of the church should be most visible, namely at the Lord’s Table. There is His death proclaimed: “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes” (1Cor 11:26). The cup speaks of the blood of Christ and the bread speaks of the body of Christ. The church owes all her blessings to this, including the blessing of being one church. In celebrating the Lord’s Supper at the Lord’s Table, she may show that unity: “Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread” (1Cor 10:17).

But what has been made of it in practice? Not much of this unity can be seen anymore because each group has its own thoughts and ideas about that ‘being one’. These thoughts can be too broad, so that anyone who says he is a believer can partake of the Lord’s Supper without any question and only on the basis of his own confession. This unbiblical unity can be found in the ecumenical movement, both in the established churches and in the broad stream of the evangelical movement. Because this aspect does not appear in this history, we will not speak about it here.

In the attitude that Jephthah adopts here, we can think of the other danger, the opposite of being too broad, namely being too narrow. This happens when believers are barred from the Lord’s Supper who can partake of it on the basis of Scripture. Scripture indicates that a believer can partake of the Lord’s Supper if he

1. does not live in sin (1Cor 5:13);

2. has no wrong doctrine about the Lord Jesus and the Scriptures (Gal 5:1-10);

3. is not a member of any church or group of which he knows that these things are present there, but are not judged and removed (2Tim 2:16-21; 2Jn 1:9-11; 1Cor 10:18; Rev 18:1-5; 2Cor 6:14-17; Heb 13:9-13).

From all these Scriptures it is clear, what we also can understand well, that God and sin cannot go together. In short, it comes down to this: one must be personally pure in teaching and life and not have fellowship with believers who are not.

The Scriptures do not give any other conditions for partaking of the Lord’s Supper and we therefore are not allowed to set them either. For example, if we demand that someone thinks precisely the same about the future of Israel as we do before he is accepted to partake of the Lord’s Supper, we make ‘the future of Israel’ a ‘shibboleth’ (see Jdg 12:6). We then make insight into the prophecy a condition of partaking of the Lord’s Table. It may well be that someone, in our opinion, does not have the right insight in this. He can be taught in it. But making such a thing a condition of partaking of the Lord’s Table is an unbiblical restriction or narrowing of the fellowship.

It is important to look for the fords, that is to say, to look for what is present in common faith, to share this with each other. From there an upbuilding on the “most holy faith” (Jude 1:20) can take place. It is not about what separates, but about what unites, what binds.

Shibboleth or sibboleth (Jdg 12:6)

The word ‘shibboleth’ means ‘corn ear’ or ‘flood’. Those who did not pronounce this word in the way the Gileadites thought it to be right, was killed. This word served to make a clear distinction between the men of Gilead and the Ephraimites. This word reminds us of making a division.

It is a danger that we can also recognize today, perhaps in our own hearts, perhaps around us. We think, or hear it said, that it is important to know what distinguishes one’s own religious community from other religious communities. What is wrong with others is widely measured, while one’s own insights are considered correct.

I am not saying that we cannot be convinced for ourselves of the right place we occupy in the midst of a confused Christianity. We want to be part of and take responsibility in a local church that meets to biblical standards. It may be that we have found that place after earlier participation in other churches and/or religious communities. We will then indeed be able to indicate why we could not stay in a certain place. It will usually have to do with what God’s Word says about the church of God, how things should happen there, what is allowed and what should not be allowed.

We cannot leave a church because one or more people there have been unfriendly toward us. Our personal experience is important, but a reason to leave can only be if there are things present or events that are demonstrably contrary to the Bible and there is no intention to change this in obedience to God’s Word. It is important to know whether God’s Word is given absolute authority and whether it is acted upon. When personal hurt or a difference in opinion about not fundamental things leads to a separation in God’s people, a new ‘shibboleth’ has arisen.