Do differences of opinion means disunity?

Many people in big organisations e.g. corporations, companies, churches , comunities etc. view differences of opinions as a sign of disunity. Does unity only means everyone must adhere to only one opinion which is usually the official one sanctioned by the leader(s)?

I don't think so. In any organisation, there are sure to be differences of opinions and views. Even in authoritarian organisations, opininal differences are there though they are not openly expressed due to the fear of reprisals.

There can still be unity in the body despite differences of opinions. Unity , in my opinion , is an attitude. It is not a public display in show of force or in public adherence of an 'official' opinion. Even if people are afraid to openly express their personal views, public displays of supporting an 'official' view are  merely a public show and not genuine in the hearts.

Unity means that even though we may have different opinions, we can still come together to discuss the differences and respect each other and not be bitter with one another.

However, it is so sad to see some leaders view differences of opinion as a threat to them and label these people who do not toe the official line as "rebels" and "traitors" and call their ideas "rebellious".

Yesterday night, my church cell group discussed 1 Cotinthians 1:1-14. St. Paul wrote that there were many following different leaders like Paul himself, Apollos and Cephas ( Peter ) in the Church of Corinth.

Why do people follow certain leaders? The possible reasons I thought of are :

• People tend to identify more with leaders of the same wavelengths and views.
• People hope to benefit by aligning themselves with 'influential' leaders.
• People who are timid and less expressive hope that these leaders would be able to publicly express their grievance on their behalf.

The author of the cell group material we were using last night seems to imply that having cliques in churches is totally a bad thing and would definitely lead to personality cults. It is not. Negatively, we call it 'cliques' but positively we can also call it 'networking' or 'encouragement groups'.

Cliques becomes bad only when members forget the purpose of the whole organisation but start fighting for cliques' agendas.




Likewise, when people start to lose focus on Jesus Christ and start to focus much on the leaders, this is when cliques becomes personality cults. And this is when rivalry starts.

We can even have pastor personality cults. I remember when i was a youth, a sister kept using this phrase "Pastor said this .. " and "Pastor said that .. ". She should have said "God said this .. " or " The bible said this .. ".

A pastor wields a great deal of influence on his/her sheep. But a pastor is human too and is not perfect. The bible says if anyone claims to be perfect, he is a liar and the truth of God is not in him. For our rightousness is like a dirty rag to God.

The Corinth Church had lost focus on Jesus and its members are now focusing on church leaders. Paul wrote 1 Corinthians to bring them back to the source of their faith , salvation and wisdom - God.

He did it gently in love by asking thoughtful questions i.e. "Were you baptised in Paul, Apollos or Cephas's name? Who gave you wisdom ? Who made the foolish to shame to wise?"

Thus, Paul redirected their focus back to God in love.