Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

Under the heading above, Bill Jackson recently wrote:

All believers in the Bible know that error is defeated by truth. That is so, whether it is error from outside the church, or some kind of error embraced by some in the kingdom. Within the kingdom, error is often seen in hobbyism brethren going off on some tangent – and it has been so since the Judaizers began their work in the first century. But hobbyism, by its very nature, is a deviation from the norm of truth, and will hold positions that truth will show to be error.

Probably the greatest hurt done to the church in nearly 2,000 years, and before the current liberalism crisis, was by those who have been called the “anti-cooperation” folks. Many members of the church can remember when this hobby began, and they also will be able to recall that points of doctrine have been added all along, showing that the system was of human origin, for God doesn’t have to update his doctrine!

But to our point on the snares “built in.” The hobbyists began to speak against congregations cooperating together in works, but usually the point of emphasis was on money. Faithful brethren then pointed out that the church in Antioch sent goods to the brethren in Judea, and that the funds went to the elders (Acts 11:27-30). More, brethren then pointed out that Paul took contributions, in his work among many congregations, and that many congregations thus sent aid to the Jewish brethren in their time of need. Thus, truth answered the hobby! But then the cry is raised, “But that was in benevolence! Brethren cannot use benevolence passages to justify works in the realm of evangelism! ” Hobbyism then had developed the human rule regarding “benevolence passages” and “evangelistic passages,” and never the twain shall meet!

Well, hobbyism has snares “built in.” Those who love truth then pointed out that evangelism (including the local preacher’s salary and salaries of all missionaries) is supported by the funds of 1 Corinthains 16:1,2, which is a benevolence passage! Down goes the hobbyistic point! No hobbyism can stand the searchlight of truth, and that’s why the hobbyist will hope that brethren will believe him, “no questions asked! ” (Bill Jackson, The Southwesterner, Vol XV, No. 47, September 14, 1988, pp. 1, 2)

Brother Jackson, along with Garland Elkins, Roy Deaver, Tom Warren, Alan Highers and others, is in a fight to the death with “the current liberalism crisis.” Much of what he has written lately sounds like the “antis” of both the 19th and 20th centuries. Those who sanctioned the “tangent” of dining rooms and cafeterias (a.k.a. “fellowship halls”) and attempted to water down “anti” objections with “Wee Willie the Water Cooler” are now fighting “Family Life Centers.” Suddenly, their entertainment recreational facilities have become full grown, full blown health spas ministering to I ‘the felt needs of the whole man.” They loved the kitten, but they hate the incorrigible, fat cat it has become. They loved their camps, retreats, bridal showers and church socials when they were cute, controllable little puppies, but they despise the big, belligerent dogs they have become. Their tangents, or side roads, have become industrial spurs, replete with institutional appendages that attach themselves to innovations unknown to the New Testament.

Brother Jackson would not have “the current liberalism crisis” that threatens to envelope and engulf him if he had listened to the “antis” who warned him that his tangents would evolve into Frankensteinian monsters. “Crossroads” and “Herald of Truth” are but two examples. The colleges are another. From them, the promoters of “the current liberalism crisis” are being produced like bolts in a factory.

Brother Jackson says, “Many members . . . can remember when this (‘anti-cooperation’) hobby began.” If so, those “many members” must be over 100 years old. See the writings of Ben Franklin in his book of sermons. Read David Lipscomb in the Gospel Advocate on “this hobby.” But suppose those who disagree with brother Jackson were to say, “Many members . . . can remember when this ‘anti’ Family Life Center hobby began,” or, “Many members . . . can remember when this ‘anti’ Crossroads hobby began.” Would that prove that brother Jackson’s opposition to those things was invalid?

“‘Anti-Cooperation’ Folks”

Brother Jackson likely would not appreciate the Christian Church if they labeled him and his brethren as “the ‘anti-music’ folks. ” He is not anti-music per se. He is opposed to mechanical instruments of music in worship, but he is not antis-criptural music; namely, singing and making melody in the heart in psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Just so, there are no . . . anti-cooperation’ folks.” All believers accept scriptural cooperation of churches (2 Cor. 11:8; Rom. 15:25, 26; 1 Cor. 16:1-4; 2 Cor. 8; 9). However, some oppose (are anti) arrangements whereby one church oversees the funds and function of other churches.

Were Benjamin Franklin and David Lipscomb “the ‘anti-missionary’ folks” of their day? No, and they would have resented such a libelous label. Their “anti-ism” regarding missionary societies did not make them opposed to preaching the gospel to the lost. Likewise, when one objects to pianos and organs in worship, he is not anti-music. When one opposes certain forms of cooperation, he is not anti-cooperation; that is, he is not against scriptural, congregational cooperation.

Works And Money

Brother Jackson says, “The hobbyists began to speak against congregations cooperating together in works, but usually the point of emphasis was on money.

(1) Scriptural, congregational cooperation “in works” must not be spoken against (2, Cor. 11:8; 1 Cor. 16:1).

(2) Unscriptural cooperative arrangements often involve error both “in works” and “money.” Brethren opposed the Missionary Society’s involvement “in works” not assigned by the Lord and as a misuse of “money.”

(3) Brother Jackson opposes “Family Life Centers.” Suppose those who have them (and they are legion in “the current liberalism crisis”) were to say, “Brother Jackson has begun to speak against Family Life Centers and their works, but usually the point of emphasis is on money. ” Would that be a fair representation of brother Jackson’s views on the issues involved? Hardly.

(4) Suppose those among brother Jackson’s brethren who want the colleges in the budget of all the churches were to say, “The hobbyists began to speak-against congregations cooperating together in (college) works, but usually the point of emphasis is on money.” What would Foy E. Wallace, Jr. have said to that? What would a young Guy N. Woods have said to that?

(5) Brethren Jackson, Elkins, Deaver, Warren, Highers, etc., to their credit, are opposed to the loose leanings, liberalism and denominationalism of the Herald of Truth as it presently exists. Suppose the Herald of Truth were to issue a statement aimed against them by saying, “The hobbyists (Getwell Road church, Memphis, Elkins, Jackson, Deaver, Highers, etc.) began to speak against congregations cooperating together in works, but usually the point of emphasis was on money (since the afore-mentioned hobbyists ceased to solicit funds for Herald of Truth).” Would that be a fair assessment of their opposition to Herald of Truth?

Acts 11:27-30

Yes, brother Jackson, “faithful brethren” have always “pointed out that the church in Antioch sent goods (‘relief) to the brethren in Judea, and that the funds went to the elders (Acts 11:27-30).” Unfortunately, other brethren, like Bill Jackson, have argued for an intermediary, congregational agent from that text. They argued (see chart at top of right column):

Thus, a pattern for such things as Herald of Truth was sought from the text. Brother Jackson’s comments cited above are not what the “antis” opposed. The “sponsoring church,” as outlined in the chart, was the thing opposed.

No one opposes what the passage describes. Acts 11:27-30 shows:

Foy E. Wallace, Jr. said, “Acts 11:29, 30 is not a case in point for what some brethren was promoting in the way of a general eldership as a board of benevolence and missions for all churches” (Torch, Vol. 1, No. 2).

If brother Jackson will practice what he now says Acts 11:27-30 presents, we will shake hands with him. Then we shall ask for the verses that justify cooperative arrangements like Herald of Truth. His statement in the article under review surrenders Acts 11:27-30 as proof for systems like Herald of Truth.

Romans 15:25, 26; 1 Corinthains 16:14; 2 Corinthains 8 & 9

Paul commanded, ordered, that collections be made by certain churches and that their designated, appointed messengers deliver them to the needy saints in Jerusalem. No one has ever been against the policy and procedures of cooperation as outlined in the above passages to which brother Jackson alluded. I suspect that no one knows that any better than Bill Jackson, lest it be Guy N. Woods.

The texts show:

Do not be deceived. Those horrible “hobbyistic antis” have never objected to the plan, practice and pattern of cooperation in relieving needy saints as seen in the texts and outline above. However, here is what brother Jackson needs to find:

The chart above is what the “antis” have opposed. It is your practice, not that of Romans 15:26, 27; 1 Corinthians 16:14; and 2 Corinthians 8 & 9, that is rejected.

That Cry That “Is Raised”

Brother Jackson cries against a cry, crying, “But then the cry is raised, ‘But that was in benevolence! Brethren cannot use benevolence passages to justify works in the realm of evangelism! Hobbyism then had developed the human rule regarding ‘benevolence passages’ and ‘evangelistic passages,’ and never the twain shall meet!”

First, one is in the Bible. The other is not. A pattern for congregational cooperation in benevolence is taught. The other is not. A pattern for the sponsoring church, for which brother Jackson contends, is found in neither evangelism nor benevolence.

Second, even brother Jackson believes in two patterns. In benevolence, he believes churches may build and maintain benevolent societies for the care of the needy. In evangelism, he does not believe churches may build and maintain missionary societies for the work of evangelism, “and never the twain (benevolent and missionary societies) shall meet!” Whose “human rule” is it that allows a separate benevolent organization but not a separate evangelistic one?

Third, some of brother Jackson’s brethren believe in two patterns for edification and benevolence. They believe churches can support benevolent societies to care for the needy, but they do not believe churches can support edification societies (colleges) to educate the saints. “And never the twain (orphan homes and colleges) shall meet!” Whose “human rule” is it that allows a separate benevolent society but not a separate edification society?

Fourth, some believe churches can send money to a college’s Bible department but not to a college’s general fund. Thus, they have developed the “human rule” regarding Bible department passages and college passages, “and never the twain shall meet!

Fifth, some of brother Jackson’s brethren believe churches may build “fellowship halls” (dining rooms, cafeterias), but they may not (like the late Ira North and the Madison, TN church) build “Family Life Centers.” Hence, the “human rule” regarding “fellowship hall” passages versus “Family Life Center” passages, and “never the twain shall meet!”

Sixth, the late Roy Lanier,- Sr. and Reuel Lemmons used to argue that churches could maintain benevolent societies for the care of the needy if they were overseen by elders, but Guy N. Woods argued that elders, as elders, could not be over another organization. So, there was the “human rule” of “eldership” benevolent societies and “non-eldership” benevolent societies, “and never the twain shall meet!”

Seventh, some of brother Jackson’s brethren believe money can be sent to a benevolent society operated by brethren but not to one owned and operated by Catholics and Baptists. Some believe churches can send to both I Has liberalism developed the “human rule” of “our benevolent society” passages as opposed to “their benevolent society” passages? “And (Are you ready for the chorus one more time?) never the twain shall meet!”

In view of the items above, just who is it that has “points of doctrine (that) have been added all along, showing that the system was of human origin, for God doesn’t have to update his doctrines”?

1 Corinthains 16:1, 2

Contextually, 1 Corinthians 16:1, 2, “is a benevolence passage! The particular funds raised in accordance with Paul’s ” order” could not have been used to pay “the local preacher’s salary.” Those specific funds were “for the poor saints” in Jerusalem (Rom. 15:25, 26; 2 Cor. 8:4; 9:1,12,13). They were not collected to pay preachers. So, those certain “gatherings” could not have been used to pay “the local preacher’s salary” (cf. 2 Cor. 8:19-21).

Though 1 Corinthians 16:1, 2, does not teach the fact, it is scriptural to pay “the local preacher’s salary” (2 Cor. 11:8; 12:13; Phil. 4:15-17).

Though 1 Corinthians 16:1, 2, does not authorize it, churches may provide facilities for the preaching and proclamation of the gospel (1 Thess. 1:8).

A number of provisions have to be made for the church to carry on its various and sundry works of evangelism, benevolence and worship. These items require money. (A) How shall the church raise its money to perform its work?

(1) By pie suppers, pancake breakfasts or rummage sales? No, for the Bible is silent about such sales and promotions.

They are not authorized by the Scriptures (1 Cor. 4:6).

(2) By cheerful, purposed giving of members as they are prospered? This is the only way set forth in the New Testament (Acts 5:2,4; 2 Cor. 9:7; 1 Cor. 16:2).

(3) Though 1 Corinthians 16:1,2, deals with benevolence, the principle of how one gives is applicable in all cases, i.e.,’as God hath prospered him,” for the accomplishing of all the work the Lord authorized the church to do.

(B) When shall the local church take up a collection for any of its divinely designed and assigned works?

(1) Every time it assembles, on any day of the week? Is this when?

(2) The only passage that tells us the time when the church took up a collection is 1 Corinthians 16:1,2. The passage itself does not authorize the church to buy class books, song books, nor to pay the preacher. But it is the sole, single Scripture which tells us when a collection was made. The text is not used as authority for paying preachers or buying chalk boards, but it is the only passage which designates a time for any collection of any kind. Therefore, those who speak as the oracles of God, give of their means “upon the first day of the week.”

Now, brother Jackson has the same problem or dilemma he endeavored to ensnare us in. 1 Corinthians 16:1,2, was for the needy saints. (1) It was not for a benevolent society. (2) It was not for Herald of Truth, World Bible School or for World Radio Gospel Hour in West Monroe, Louisiana. But brother Jackson believes that contributions may be sent to similar organizations. All of that from “a benevolence Passage!” “Down goes the ‘liberalistic’ point I” Especially does it go down when you recall that he has two patterns. He will take the money from the passage and donate it to a benevolent society but not to a missionary society.

We read of the Lord’s supper in 1 Corinthians 10 & 11. We know that “as often as” we partake of it, we declare the Lord’s death until he comes again. We are not told how often to partake of it. The only passage that cites a time is Acts 20:7. Unlike the Corinthian references, we are not told the facts surrounding the purpose of the Lord’s supper in Acts 20:7. However, by putting the two together, we come together on the first day of the week (that is when) to have the fellowship described by Paul (the how and what of the communion).

Likewise, various works of local churches are prescribed in the New Testament. These activities require funds. The only passage that cites a time of giving for any project of any kind is 1 Corinthians 16:1, 2. By placing the passages together that deal with the works and the collection of funds, we learn when to lay by in store, how to give, and for what purpose.

Conclusion And Appeal

Those who truly know the so called “antis” know that the “no questions asked” charge is false, but we will not belabor the point here.

Brother Jackson, you and those with whom you stand, doubtless recognize and realize that you have lost the institutions you fathered, fostered and fought for. Herald of Truth is gone. You cannot endorse it. It will not indorse you. The college in Abilene is gone. You cannot endorse it. It will not endorse you. World Bible School is gone. You cannot endorse it. It will not endorse you. The Madison church near Nashville and the “On The March” liberalism planted by Ira North is gone. You cannot endorse it. It will not endorse you.. Guy N. Woods is gone. He is too tied,allied and identified with institutionalism to be of any measurable assistance. He may whisper in your ear to encourage you, but he himself is a toothless, declawed old bear, unable to fight what feeds him. He is gone. He cannot openly help you nor publicly endorse your efforts against liberalism. He dares not, cannot and will not help expose the liberalism in Abilene’s college nor in Nashville’s gymnasiums. The organizations he championed have him tethered, muzzled and defanged. Expect no ringing expose’s from him on the pages of the Gospel Advocate. They will not appear there. It is sad, but true, however much you may like to deny it.

So, you must fight virtually alone against the institutional powers that be, and, as you will see, it is a losing battle.

In view of these facts, and in view of a never ending eternity, please consider with an open mind and an open Bible the issues that alienate you from the “antis.” Is there hope, brother, for objective study, fair representation of differences and a brotherly spirit that desires unity in truth? You have no closer kin, and a host of family and friends in the faith and in the flesh stands ready-to reason, reflect and rejoice in Christ Jesus, our righteous, ransoming Redeemer.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 23, pp. 709-711, 722-723
December 1, 1988

By Larry R. DeVore

In the bulletin of the BOSTON CHURCH OF CHRIST (their style of all capital letters), beginning in the May I st issue, Gordon Ferguson, forty-five year old, re-baptized gospel preacher, who was “pulled out” (his terminology, Ird) for “discipling” and “re-training,” has a series of articles on “progressive revelation” that should leave no one in doubt as to their journey into apostasy.

He does tell the truth in his very first sentence, and then he departs from the truth rapidly. He says, “Viewed in one way, the concept of progressive revelation from God is false” (BCOC Bulletin, May 1, 1988). He tries to lull Bible believers to sleep by quoting 2 Peter 1:3 and 2 Timothy 3:16-17. But then he says that God “does reveal the application of those old truths” (their emphasis, Ird). He quotes 2 Timothy 2:7 and Philippians 3:15 as scriptural proof, but these hardly “prove” what he is trying to make them say.

Gordon says in the same article, “Within the discipling ministries, God has led us into some amazing discoveries.” “. . . we are willing to throw off the traditions which both bind and blind us.” So, they claim special leading by God for their activities, and they have laid aside the “traditions” (i.e., scriptural authority, Ird) which “bind” them. In other words, they are no longer going to be “bound” by the teaching of the Scriptures. He further says “non-traditional decisions (translate that as unscriptural decisions, Ird) have been necessitated by their insistence on discipleship being the standard rather than an ideal. ” He attempts to squelch criticism by these statements. “Probably some critics will no doubt say that we begin some practice and then go to Scripture in order to justify it. But the issue is whether or not the Bible does in fact justify it. Bottom line, to criticize fruitfulness for Christ demonstrates a pretty hard heart and closed mind, anyway.” This is the old argument of “Look how much good we’re doing! ” The “discipling ministries” are baptizing a lot of people (31 named in the bulletin quoted), so how dare you criticize us! In fact, we are condemned as having a “hard heart” and “closed mind” to even bring the subject up. Well, those remarks are not going to stop our examination of what they are claiming.

In Gordon’s second article, he purposes that those who “emphasized the doctrinal aspects of Scripture” are guilty of “deification of Scripture” and says this “is a tragic mistake to make” (BCOC Bulletin, May 9, 1988). He then takes a slap at the concept of a restoration movement, when he states “any religious group which strongly emphasizes doctrinal accuracy runs a risk of losing perspective and losing God. Historically, the churches of Christ have been noted for such an emphasis.”

Gordon also states, “An insistence that we must have ‘book, chapter and verse’ for anything new has virtually guaranteed that we will have nothing new, even if the old is a failure.” Can you believe it! The Word of God is a failure! God has given us “all things that pertain to life and godliness” (2 Pet. 1:3), but that is not enough for Gordon Ferguson and the BOSTON CHURCH OF CHRIST! They want God to be “actively leading His people.” If not, he says, “we are doomed to a stale dying religion” (bulletin, May 8, 1988).

Gordon wants to do away with the motto “we speak where the Bible speaks and are silent where the Bible is silent.” He wants to replace it with the following; “Where the Bible speaks, we are silent; where the Bible is silent, we speak.” Frankly, I prefer the original, which closely paraphrases 1 Peter 4:11. But Gordon prefers to mis-use the Scriptures by saying, “But if He has not (spoken, Ird), then we have the freedom to discover the most effective way to carry out His principles. Success is of God. If He is truly leading us, we will not be unsuccessful. Period!” (Bulletin, May 8, 1988) They are not going to do something because it is scripturally authorized; they are going to do it and if it works, then God must be leading them! They have exchanged sophistry for Scripture!

Gordon also affirms that the “early church did not have a ‘rule-book’ mentality.” I don’t think Gordon and I have been reading the same book. Take a look at such Scriptures as 1 Cor. 1:10; 4:6; 15:1-2; Gal. 1:6-12; Phil. 3:16; Col. 3:17; 1 Thess. 2:13; 2 Tim. 1:13; 3:16-17; Tit. 1:9; Heb. 8:5; 2 Pet. 3 and many others. It seems to me that the writers of the New Testament had a different understanding of the importance of God’s Word than Gordon does.

Doctrine Is Unbiblical

But his best short is coming next. Gordon says, the churches of Christ over the past one hundred years have absolutely proved that a religion focused on doctrine is unbiblical.” Gordon says that the churches of the Lord have been and are “unbiblical.” Standing for the truth, “contending for the faith” is “unbiblical,” according to Gordon. But the Boston Church is right in everything that they do, because God is leading them. Who can believe it? Gordon says, because “No group has studied more, debated more, and united less,” we are ‘ ‘unbiblical. ” All that proves is that some have contended for the truth, and some contended against the truth. Gordon also says, “Most ‘mainline’ congregations are full of worldliness and deadness.” That may be so, but I don’t known how you could prove it. But that only shows that some of God’s people are not living by God’s truth, That does not affect the truth of God’s Word, or the fact that it is our “rule book” to guide us from earth to heaven (see John 17:17). God has provided us everything that we need in his Word (see 2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:3).

Reconstructing Or Dividing?

In the BOSTON bulletin for May 15, 1988, Gordon tries to justify their “church plantings” concept. He says, “The concept of ‘church plantings,’ with one church per city is obviously in line with the biblical examples. There is simply no biblical example of anything else.” He refers to Acts 14:23 (elders in every church) and Titus 1:5 (elders in every city) and says “the conclusion is obvious. God intended for each city to have one church!” Recognizing that many larger cities have several congregations, what does Gordon want to do about this? He says, “Actually, the answer is quite simple. Unless a congregation exists which is really making and training disciples in a multiplying way, such a church must be planted! An existing congregation that has not already sought out the effective approaches which others have been using for years is not likely open to change as a congregation anyway. If they do not want change (translate that “do it BOSTON’s way,” Ird), and if the city in which they met is not being effectively evangelized, no other choice exists except to plant an evangelistic church. Prayerfully, those in other groups which have a heart to really be disciples will join in with the planted church. No other solution seems possible. The world must be reached. No amount of sentimentality should be allowed to affect the Great Commission and its demands.” “The urgency which prompts these conclusions is the same urgency which prompts ‘church reconstructions.”‘ Gordon spells it out for us. Don’t allow any feelings of remorse or “sentimentality” to stop you from splitting churches. The BOSTON PLAN for “reconstructing” churches of Christ will not be stopped even though congregations across the country are going to be split in two. This has already happened in many places.

Women Preachers

In the BCOC bulletin for May 22, 1988, Gordon has more to say, this time about women leaders. “Another key principle which God has helped us re-discover concerns women leading women in a high-powered manner. ” Notice that everything Boston does is described in glowing terms; “powerful, exciting, high-powered.” Gordon says that “Women in the first century church had high profiles.” He refers to Acts 21:8-9 which mentions Philip’s four daughters who prophesied. From this he makes a mighty leap and says “But preach they did!” “Praise God that He is raising up high-powered women leaders . . . … Gordon says these “activities took place in women’s groups.” But we wonder how long before another “progressive revelation” will have them preaching in mixed groups as well?

The BOSTON CHURCH OF CHRIST are the only ones training church leaders in the right way, according to Gordon. “My own training in a Preacher’s School and a Graduate School, both sponsored by the churches of Christ, left me woefully inadequate in my preparation for ministry. ” (Gordon could have better spent his time in studying God’s word.) He further says, “Without question, the discipling approach practiced by Boston and similar congregations is The biblical way to do it!” If evangelists and elders are not being trained the Boston way, they are not being trained right! Gordon also states, with regard to training elders; “Unqualified evangelists (those not discipled to maturity) (translate that; ‘not trained at Boston’) cannot disciple other leaders effectively, especially elders. ” “Qualified evangelists can and must disciple elders . . it “It is time for elders to humbly submit to discipling and for evangelists to humbly disciple them. ” The plain implication in the BOSTON plan is that evangelists have authority over the elders!

Baptism Invalid?

In Gordon’s article “progressive Revelation” (Part IV, in the May 29, 1988, issue of the BCOC bulletin), he talks about “Disciple’s Baptism.” After reading and re-reading his article I conclude he is teaching that unless you are taught by a “multiplying ministry” evangelist, your baptism is not valid. Notice, “To baptize a person who has not made the decision to be a disciple is to baptize someone who does not understand repentance. ” “Anyone who does not approach baptism with that understanding (i.e., Boston’s teaching on discipleship, Ird) has been mistaught. ” Gordon says “Either these people never became disciples, or they quit being disciples. In either case, they are not saved. Calling ourselves ‘Christians’ or ‘members of the church’ means nothing.” “And my personal conviction is that may of those in ‘churches of Christ’ have never biblically repented, have never become disciples, and are thus not Christians. A large number of people, including me, have faced the issue and have been baptized with a true disciple’s repentance.” Now get what Gordon is saying. He is not talking about people who were immersed in denominations. He is talking about people who have heard the true gospel preached, have believed it and obeyed it. They have been baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:27). But Gordon says, “they are not saved,” they “are thus not Christians.” If you haven’t been taught according to the BOSTON method of evangelism, you cannot be a Christian! I don’t believe that! Do you?

Progressive Revelation and Church Autonomy

In the BCOC bulletin for June 5, 1988, Gordon has somewhat to say about the concept of church autonomy. I believe he’s against it! He says, “One real hindrance to brotherhood unity has bee an ungodly view of church autonomy.” “The idea of a non-cooperative, and often prideful, separation from each other as congregations is absolutely non-biblical.” Have you noticed from all these quotations; that if you’re not doing it BOSTON’S way, it’s “non-biblical”? Gordon says church autonomy is “contrary to the very purpose of God and is sinful. ” He also said, “‘church autonomy’ as we have practiced is an invention of sinful man – an ungodly tradition.” He wants to do away with church autonomy because he wants Boston-trained “leaders” and evangelists to be “brotherhood leaders rather than simply congregational leaders.” He mentions several men in the New Testament, such as Philip, Barnabas, Paul, Timothy, Erastus and others. He then affirms, “These men were brotherhood leaders! They were world Christians, not simply Philippian Christians or Ephesian Christians! Leaders with less training were ‘pulled out’ and later ‘plugged in’ by fully-trained leaders as the needed dictated.” Gordon admits he is part of this new concept. “I personally have repented of my pride and erroneous thinking, and am now a world Christian. I have been ‘pulled out’ for more training (voluntarily, of course) and a more equipped brother (Bruce Williams) has been ‘plugged in’ (yes, also voluntarily) to San Diego in my place.” “The results? . . . a united brotherhood through a united leadership” United? Well, I guess “united in error.” If you have Boston-trained leaders sent out to take over or “reconstruct” congregations around the world, then you will have “unity” by the Boston plan? But the only unity that will please God is the “unity of the Spirit” (Eph. 4:3). That only comes by following his word. The word “autonomy” is not in the Bible but the concept is. The word autonomy simply means “independent; self-governing. A self-governing community or group” (Funk & Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary). This concept is taught in such passages as Acts 14:23 (“elders in every church”) and 1 Peter 5:2 (“feed the flock of God which is among you”). Paul said in Ephesians 5:24, “the church is subject to Christ.” The church in Ephesus wasn’t subject to “brotherhood leaders.” It was subject to Christ! Period! The apostles could be classed as “brotherhood leaders” and they traveled a lot, preaching the gospel. But we have no living apostles today! The Boston trained leaders are poor substitutes for apostles! Faithful churches cannot accept these men and women from Boston as “modern day apostles” or even as faithful teachers of the word. They have a totally foreign concept of “church hierarchy” and “leadership” than that which is taught in the New Testament.” “Mark them” and “avoid” them (Rom. 16:17).

To be fair to Gordon, we should go back and look at his “proof texts” for this doctrine of “progressive revelation. to He cited 2 Timothy 2:7 and Philippians 3:15 as his “proof” (quoted from the NIV, Boston’s favorite translation). 2 Timothy 2:7 simply says the Lord will give you “insight” (NIV). The KJV says “understanding.” There is no “revelation” involved her. How does one obtain “insight” or “understanding”? Paul says in Colossians 1:9, “be filled with the knowledge of His will in a wisdom and spiritual understanding.” Plain enough! Study God’s word. In Philippians 3:15 the NIV says, “And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you.” The KJV says “reveal.” Here too, the text simply involves getting a clear understanding by studying God’s Word. There is no “modern day revelation.” God is not going to “progressively reveal” anything to anybody today, Gordon Ferguson to the contrary notwithstanding! I have nothing personal against Gordon Ferguson, I have never met him. But how can you separate the doctrine from the one who is teaching it?

A final note. I probably won’t be receiving their bulletin any more because of their stated intentions of no longer sending it out free, but of charging $26.00 a year for it. It is a beautiful printing job; blue and gold inks on enameled paper, with a stated circulation of 9,200. But no matter how attractively you package false doctrine, it is still false doctrine! The devil is an expert at this (see 2 Cor. 11:13-15).

The Boston Plan is not God’s plan! Avoid it!

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 23, pp. 712-714
December 1, 1988

By Mike Willis

Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called Today; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin (Heb. 3:12-13).

The Lord warned mankind to beware of the “deceitfulness of sin.” The devil promises more than he delivers and other than he delivers. To Eve, the serpent promised, “Ye shall not surely die: for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3:4-5). Believing the serpent, Eve ate of the fruit. But the devil lied to Eve. Sin promised what it did not deliver. Sin brought physical and spiritual death, pain, heartache and sorrow.

Sin has not changed in its nature nor has the devil quit deceiving men. Sin’s allurements still promise what it cannot deliver. Consider some examples of the deceitfulness of sin.

Sin Promises Liberty But Gives Bondage

Under the guise of personal liberty and freedom, sin enslaves men. Peter warned of false teachers saying, “While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage” (2 Pet. 2:19). Much of modern sin’s defense is under the guise of liberty. Abortion is defended as the woman’s right of free choice; homosexuality is advocated as the liberty to choose one’s sexual preference; pornography is advanced as freedom of expression (speech). The devil is still deceiving people by promising them liberty but bringing them into slavery. Here are some examples for us to guard against:

1. The use of alcoholic beverages. Those who defend drinking decry the days of prohibition as days in which personal liberties were restrained by right-wing radicals. Consequently, our society has virtually no restraints on drinking. Even when drunks kill someone while driving under the influence of alcohol, the judges frequently give them a “slap on the wrist” and release them to commit their crimes again.

In the presence of a society reeling to and fro from the problem of drunkenness, some brethren defend the right of Christians to drink alcoholic beverages, using such passages as John 2:1-11 and 1 Timothy 5:23. 1 Timothy 5:23 teaches that one may use “wine” for one’s physical infirmities; nevertheless, the context implies that young Timothy shunned drinking to such a degree that he would not even use wine for medicinal purposes without an apostolic injunction to condone it. The interpretation given to John 2:1-11 by modem defenders of drinking states that Jesus gave a party of people, who had already been drinking intoxicating beverages, 150-180 additional gallons of intoxicating drink to party with. That interpretation makes the drunken orgies at the fraternity houses of the state universities rather mild parties by comparison. A much more logical interpretation of John 2:1-11 recognizes that the Greek word oinos can be used to described unfermented grape juice.

The devil encourages men to use wine. He describes those who oppose its use as those who are trying to restrain one’s liberties. He advertises the product of the brewer’s art using glamourous men and women enjoying the best of life. He persuades men to believe that using alcohol is harmless.

However, he deceives men. Using wine makes drunkards of men. Men become enslaved to drink. They drink for relaxation, when under stress, and to escape reality. Even those who are not full fledged gutter drunks frequently drink and drive, making their automobiles as dangerous as a loaded pistol. Homes are broken under the influence of drunkenness. When one calculates the harm which has come to man because of drinking, he stands amazed at how many people have been seduced by the deceitfulness of sin.

2. Smoking. The Scriptures forbid being enslaved to anything (1 Cor. 6:12 – “I will not be brought under the power of any”). Cigarettes contain a drug which is habituating, just like cocaine, heroine and other addictive drugs. Smoking also contributes to cancer, emphysema, heart disease, and other physical ailments. Nevertheless, some (even among our brethren) resent the implication that smoking is sinful and argue that smoking is a liberty which man has. “While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption.” They are addicted to the cigarette, being unable to face the day to day circumstances of life without leaning on their crutch – the cigarette. Without concern for the other person, cigarette smokers blow their smoke in the faces of other people. Can you imagine a man eating an onion and blowing his stinking breath in your face?

Yet notice how attractively Satan has packaged his product. He shows two beautiful people at one of nature’s most beautiful settings holding hands and sharing a cigarette. He makes smoking the “manly” activity for young men (“you’re in Marlboro country”), the sophisticated activity of liberated women (“you’ve come a long way, baby”), and non-threatening to one’s health (“the lowest in tar and nicotine”). He promises what he cannot deliver. Smoking destroys the health, makes beautiful women speak with a raspy voice and the victim of lung cancer, and makes strongwilled men the slaves to their cigarette addiction. Indeed, the devil has entrapped men with the deceitfulness of sin.

Sin Is Attractively Adorned

The devil makes sure that he does not describe sin as it really is. He disguises it to deceive the hearts of men. Perhaps there is no better example of how the serpent deceives mankind than with reference to sexual immorality. The devil portrays fornication as the innocent sexual experiment of budding adolescents, the accepted behavior of the macho man and liberated woman, the normal expression of marital dissatisfaction, and the accepted solution to people in a boring marriage.

Fornication is not so beautiful. I have recently witnessed its impact on the family. A teenager has created absolute chaos in her home by her repeated acts of fornication. Her immorality has led to rebellion against her parents, runrung away from home, and arrest by the police. Fornication is no less painful to older participants. A father has broken his marriage vows, divorced his wife, emotionally seared his children, disassociated himself from his parents and friends to satisfy his sensual lusts. Indeed, such people are “slaves of corruption.”

Sin Deceives One Into Thinking He Can Quit Its Practice Whenever He So Desires

The devil permits man to think that he can quit the practice of his sin whenever he so chooses. While man is thinking that he can cease his sin anytime he pleases, Satan is connecting the strands of his rope to completely entrap his victim. The cigarette smoker realizes he has been deceived when he tries to lay down the cigarette but does not possess the power to quit. The fornicator watches the devil’s ropes tighten about him when he uses a child born out of wedlock to persuade his victim to enter an adulterous marriage. Deeper and deeper the victim goes into sin until his heart is so hardened by sin that he cannot be brought to repentance (Heb. 6:4-6).

Sin Deceives One Into Looking At Sin’s Pleasures Without Thought To Sin’s Consequences

The devil’s deception also emphasizes the “pleasures of sin” (Heb. 11:24-25) without thought to sin’s consequences. The devil never speaks to us about hell, eternal damnation from the presence of the Lord. The devil never reminds us of the Lord’s second coming. The devil never encourages us to think about the results of our choices on the later development of our life. Rather, the devil persuades us to concentrate on sin’s temporal pleasures for the present.

When one looks at Paul’s choice to give up earthly power, prestige, and position to become a Christian, suffering persecution at the hands of both Jew and Gentile and culminating in his being put to death for being a Christian, his choice to become a Christian was a foolish choice. However, when viewed from eternity’s vantage point, his choice was the only logical choice to make. Sin never makes sense from eternity’s vantage point; consequently, the devil will ever concentrate on the immediate pleasures which sin can bring.

Preventatives To Sin

The writer of the warning in Hebrews 3 exhorts us to overcome sin’s deceitfulness in these ways:

1. Take heed. The Christian must constantly be on guard to avoid the temptation to sin. He needs to be “sober, be vigilant, because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour” (I Pet. 5:8). Anything which lulls us into a false sense of security,dulls our senses, or otherwise allows us to take down our guard should be avoided.

2. Exhort one another. Christians need each other’s support and encouragement. We need to watch for those who are becoming weak so that we might rush to their aid. Paul exhorted, “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted” (Gal. 6:1). When we see a brother missing services, rush to his aid; don’t wait until he is so ensnared by sin that he cannot be reclaimed for the Lord.

Conclusion

We have a cunning adversary whose craftiness and deceit should not be underestimated. We need to become aware of the devices which he uses to destroy men’s souls, instruct men in the dangers which they pose to the soul, and become equipped to resist his assaults. The deceitfulness of sin is one of Satan’s tools to destroy men’s soul. Take heed and beware!

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 23, pp. 706, 726-727
December 1, 1988

By Forrest D. Moyer

III. Some Things We Must Know

1. We must know God. In fact, those who do not know God are in the group of those who will be banished from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his power (2 Thess. 1:7-9). Paul’s intent in his precisely logical presentation on Mars Hill was to produce the knowledge of God in order that man may “seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us” (Acts 17:22-30). It is a lack of knowledge of God that causes the bulk of the immorality in the world. Paul said that we are not to live “in lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God” (1 Thess. 4:5). We can only come to know God through his revelation of himself in his word. True, in nature we can know that there is a supreme being, but we cannot know who he is or what his characteristics are. Only by divine revelation can we know God and that revelation is the Bible (1 Cor. 2:9-13). To know God, we must study his word. The proof of our knowing God is seen in our keeping his commandments. “And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, ‘I have come to know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected” (1 John 2:3-5).

2. We must know Jesus. Paul’s desire was to know him (Jesus) and the power of his resurrection (Phil. 3:10). John wrote, “Many other signs therefore Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name” (John 20:30-31). Thus, we come to know Jesus just as we come to know God -through the revelation that is given to us in the Bible. It is only by knowing Jesus that we can have the salvation that is made possible by his death, burial and resurrection. Paul tells us of the gospel which he preached “by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:1-4). We must know that Jesus was born of a virgin (Luke 1:26-38), that he did signs and wonders among the people (John 20:30-31), that he died for me, that he was raised for my justification (Rom. 4:25), that he ascended into Heaven to sit at God’s right hand where he reigns over his kingdom (Eph. 1:19-23; 1 Cor. 15:24-26) and ever lives to make reconciliation for the sins of his people (Heb. 7:25). When I come to know him, I win only want to love him and serve him as the King of kings and Lord of lords (Rev. 19:16).

3. We must know the truth. Only by our knowing the truth can we be made free from sin (John 8:32). The reason that “the man of sin” could deceive so many people was that “they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved” (2 Thess. 2:10). The reason that many people “go onward and abide not in the doctrine of Christ” (2 John 9) is that they often do not know the truth. If I love the truth, I will diligently seek to know it so that I can live by it.

The writer of the majestic Psalm 119 is a dynamic example to us of love for the truth of God’s word. As he uses the Hebrew alphabet to label each section, in practically every verse he uses a term that refers to the law of God. Observe:

v. 11: Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.

v. 14: I have rejoiced in the way of thy testimonies, as much as in all riches.

v. 16: I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget thy word.

v. 24: Thy testimonies also are my delight, and my counselors.

v. 47: I will delight myself in thy commandments, which I have loved.

v. 72: The law of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver.

v. 97: O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day.

v. 105: Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

v. 140: Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.

Our need is to develop this same kind of love for the truth. Then we will diligently seek it.

4. I must know the truth about salvation. In very simple language Jesus sets forth his plan of salvation in such passages as Matthew 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-16, and Luke 24:47. We should have little trouble understanding it. It is tragic that these demagogues of religious theology have concocted ways of salvation that are not in God’s book and deceive the hearts of the simple with such teachings as “faith only,” “give your heart to Jesus as we pray, ” etc. Jesus teaches that we must hear the gospel, believe it, repent, and be baptized in order to be saved or receive the remission of sins. Not only did he set it forth very plainly, but we see it consistently in action in the book of Acts. In the second chapter Peter tells his inquiring listeners to “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins” (v. 38). In every case of conversion we see the same plan in operation. Now, I must know this truth in order to be saved. I cannot be scripturally baptized without knowing the purpose of that baptism (Col. 2:12). Knowing and obeying his truth will make me free from sin.

5. We must know how to live. The purpose of divine revelation is to teach us how to live our lives in this world. Paul wrote Timothy in order that men might “know how to behave themselves in the house of God” (1 Tim. 3:14-15). The Lord’s message teaches us to “live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world (Tit. 2:11-12). And “as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul” (1 Pet. 2:11-12). The character of God and of Jesus is revealed in the Bible. My goal is to become as God is. Therefore, I must know how to live and I can do that only as I know his truth.

6. We must know God’s promises. We five in a world where there are temptations, discouragements, and numerous hindrances to godly living. We need motivations to keep on living as God desires. Some of the greatest motivations are the “exceeding great and precious promises of God” (2 Pet. 1:4). When temptations come, when discouragements weigh heavy upon us, the promises of God will sustain us. He has said that he will never leave us (Heb. 13:5-6). He has said that “all things work together for good to those who love God” (Rom. 8:28). He has said that we will have a gloriously new body in Heaven (2 Cor. 5:1-2). He has promised eternal life (Tit. 1:2). When we know and believe these promises, we have the incentive to keep on keeping on. We have the positive assurance that our labor is not in vain in the Lord (I Cor. 15:58). Let us loam and rely on the promises of God.

IV. Our Knowledge Must Be Connected With Doing

Our reason for learning the truths of the Bible is not that we might be a “walking encyclopedia.” It is not that we might be a master at Bible trivia. We learn that we may do. Jesus said that the man who heard and would not do is like the foolish man who built his house on the sand (Matt. 7:24-28). James gives us the graphic picture of one who looks in the mirror and then forgets what he saw and then compares the forgetful hearer to such a foolish one (Jas. 1:22-25). We must be doers of the word. John tells us how we truly come to know God. He says, “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments” (1 John 2:3). He goes on to say that a person who claimed to know and did not keep his commandments is a liar (v. 4). Our whole purpose in gaining the knowledge of God is to five as he wants us to live (1 Pet. 1:16).

Once again we look to the Psalmist as he spoke of applying truth to life in Psalms 119.

v. 33: Teach me, O Lord, the way of thy statutes, and I shall keep it unto the end.

v. 34: Give me understanding, and I shall keep thy law; yea, I shall observe it with my whole heart.

v. 112: I have inclined mine heart to perform thy statutes alway, even unto the end.

As a result of following God’s way we can say as the psalmist said: “Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them” (v. 165). May we come to have the kind of knowledge in our hearts that will make us free and will keep us in the pathway of righteousness all the days of our lives.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 22, pp. 682-693
November 17, 1988