This transcript was auto-generated. 

To summarise very simply I think this passage is obviously about a conflict between these two men but more than that is how they reached a resolution on any of the issues that might create a potential for conflict. Abraham and Abimelech make a covenant to live in peace and then Abraham confronted Abimelech about a potential problem area to ensure the peace will not be jeopardised. This tells me that sometimes believers need to make up their minds to practically seek peace and keep short accounts and communicate clearly with one another. If there's a problem, address it early and make an agreement and spell out the details. When we have a potential conflict with somebody, we have three possible choices to make.

Number one is you can ignore the problem. I think I spelled that out in the last episode that ignoring the problem if the area of conflict relates to sin or wrong behaviour the Bible calls being an appeaser and appeasement causes problems when the trouble is caused by sin.

The second thing you can do and this is what lots of people seems to do nowadays is go to court. Where becoming a more litigious society and we need to we need to try and curtail that option especially within the Christian community.

The third option as described in first Corinthians is what is called  settling things within ourselves. Let’s be clear this does not apply to matters where clearly the law has been broken, for instances when fraud or theft is concerned or any matters relating to the safeguarding of children of vulnerable adults. But in normal areas of personal conflict between Christians, or if we find ourselves at odds with someone, the correct response initially should go and speak to the other person individually. If that doesn't work, take another believer with you and if both of you are Christians in the same church maybe invites an elders or church leader to go with you to try and resolve it, but try and not pursue conflict.

Years ago, when I was growing up there was a Christian organisation, I don't think it still exists, it was called the Christian coalition service. Its purpose was to arbitrate in disputes between Christians who might otherwise end up in court. One article I read, and this was like 30 years ago listed the kinds of things they dealt with. Like a man who blamed his financial advisor for a £20,000 investment that went bad. Another case involved a young single mother who changed her mind and wanted the child back from the adoptive family. On a mundane level another person was upset because a minister’s dog barked at night, and they didn’t want the police or council involved and ruin the minister’s reputation.

Most of their work was with marital disputes, but what got my attention about this article was the Christian coalition chief executive who said their primary willingness to take on any case was that the party who initiated the claim should believe that whoever gets any was less important than the shattered relationship. I think biblically people living in peace free  of conflict is more important than the money or any barking dogs. As a result, this article said people after going through their process often ended up friendly and decided that whatever they were fighting about in the first place wasn’t that important. That will hardly ever happen in court case, because one party usually “wins” the other party “loses” and everyone is left feeling hostile to each other. As the NT teaches.

“If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all people”.

(Romans 12: 18)