He informed the corrupt Pharisees that they were not legitimate heirs of Abraham; rather, they were devilish in their actions (John 8:33ff). One can scarcely read the 23rd chapter of Matthew without feeling the “heat” of Christ’s rebuke of certain corrupt Hebrew leaders. It is not, therefore, wrong to oppose error. Further, it is a gross inconsistency to “rebuke” someone for being a “rebuker.” Why is it that folks cannot see the flaw in their argument when they are intolerant of those with whom they charge intolerance?
Pay attention saints: Disagree about God?
The most stunning component however, is the allegation that it is permissible for people to entertain “different understandings” of divine truth that pertains to the salvation of one’s soul. We must call attention to the following. God is infinite in his knowledge (Psalm 147:5). He is a “God of knowledge” (1 Samuel 2:3), who “knows all things” (1 John 3:20). The riches of his knowledge is a reality too deep for human conception (Romans 11:33). It is never accurate to say, or even to imply, that God is unconcerned with disagreements among men relative to the eternal truths that he has revealed to the human family. Disputes regarding what the Lord requires men and women to believe and practice is not the result of “different understandings.” It is because of misunderstandings on the part of misinformed people – even though they may be very sincere.
God is a being of truth, i.e. faithfulness (Deuteronomy 32:4). All his words are “pure” (Psalm 12:6). He cannot speak that which is untrue (Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18), for his word is truth (John 17:17). Any disagreement as to what God requires, therefore, is a disagreement over the difference between truth and error. To suggest that God is not concerned with the difference between truth and non-truth, is to cast serious reflection upon the God of truth. It is a dangerous thing to suggest that folks may disagree about what God demands, and, at the same time, stand approved in his sight. In his letter to the Roman saints, Paul discussed the advantage that historically had been granted to the Hebrew nation. For one thing, they had been entrusted with the “oracles of God,” i.e., the sacred Scriptures (Romans 3:1-2). The question then is raised: “what if some were without faith”? The meaning of that question is this. What would be the case if some of the Jews proved to be unfaithful to Jehovah’s plan on their behalf? What if some of the Hebrews decided to chart their own course, thus, by implication, entertained disagreements with the faithful about what the Lord required of them?
Would they have nullified the divine plan? Would they have exposed God as being unfaithful? Absolutely not! This stinging rebuke is then offered: “… let God be found true, but every man a liar” (Romans 3:4).
Conclusion
This conclusion must be drawn from the apostle’s argument. Any theory, opinion, or doctrinal position that is adverse to the revealed will of God is a lie, and those who perpetrate such are liars (whether they intend to be or not). Most assuredly this is strong language, but the force of it is designed to preserve the integrity of the Almighty, by implication this text teaches that those who profess to be Jehovah’s people must agree with him, and among themselves. The Lord expects us to strive for a submission to him, and a united teaching on fundamental truths. It is exceedingly foolish to suggest that God does not care whether people understand his will or not. “Be not foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is” (Ephesians 5:17).