Truth Magazine

By Robert F. Hendrix

NOTE: (R.L. Kilpatrick, editor of Ensign (formerly Ensign Fair], recently organized one of W. Carl Katcherside’s Unity Forums in Huntsville, Alabama. A printed announcement gave this objective: “To open the avenues of communication between churches of the Restoration Movement, denominational churches, and individuals in the interest of Christian fellowship and brotherly love. ” The report filed here was made by Robert Hendrix, faithful preacher for the Gooch Lane Church of Christ near Huntsville. Often confused with another faithful preacher named Roger, Robert had done most of his preaching among churches in middle Tennessee and north Alabama.

Brother Hendrix is well qualified to analyze the current misnamed grace-unity movement. A fine son of his was tragically disturbed by the Ketcherside-Fudge doctrines and ended up forsaking the gospel of Christ entirely. Brother Hendrix said in a note accompanying his article, “If I had known this early in the game, I believe we could have had more success with helping him. ” This tragedy was unfolding during 1973 and was one of several such instances known to me personally which motivated me to publish reviews of Ed Fudge’s doctrines that year. To those who believe Truth Magazine `jumped the gun” and also dealt too harshly with the Fudge influence, let me say that for many like brother Hendrix’s son we acted too late and were overly patient. These latter are the faults, not those imputed by certain critics, for which I seek God’s mercy.

In his personal note, brother Hendrix added these comments on the Unity Forum: “At each session they served coffee and other free refreshments and overwhelmed everyone who attended with courtesy . . . this is what impresses those who are not spiritually minded and sets them up for converts – then to feed them with such hogwash as `do your own thing and you are still our brother’ keeps them hanging on. You would have believed that you were at a performance of the PTL Club by the way each session started, with Dr. Don Finto whooping it up with `praise the Lord’ exclamations, spontaneous singing, chanting of Scripture, hand clapping, closing eyes and singing, etc. Ed Fudge was there two nights along with . . . a few from Athens. It makes me terribly sad to see the deceit of the unknowing visitors taking place right before my eyes, for there are always some present who don’t know the right hand from the left. ” Brother Hendrix asked in one of the sessions if the man who had been lauding all the denominations thought that “the Lord planted the Methodist Church, Christian Church, etc., ” especially “in view of Matthew 15:13. ” He admitted that the answer is, “No. ” These comments accurately portray the technique of the so-called grace-unity movement. The unwary are subjected to a subtle combination of gushing courtesy, the popular do-your-own-thing philosophy, and an informal entertaining atmosphere which brings the worship of God down to the level of a high school pep rally. Ron Halbrook)

On the dates of April 15-17, 1980, brother W. Carl Ketcherside was featured in parlor “A” of the Von Braun Civic Center, in Huntsville, Alabama, in a “Christian Unity Forum.” As I sat listening, recording, and taking notes of what occurred in the 7:30 Tuesday and Thursday evening sessions, and listening and asking questions in the Wednesday and Thursday 9:30 morning “Open Forum Discussion” sessions, the words at the heading of this article came to my mind. From some of the notes I am now rereading about what went on this week in this “Christian Unity Forum,” the following line appears on my note pad, “I feel that the thrust of this forum is shouting, `Loose, Loose, Loose,’ and we can have unity among all of our brethren.” Regardless of the subject of any of the five sessions that were carried out this week, without exception this thought seemed to jump out and grab you! I do not believe as brother Ketcherside, the featured speaker, and Joe Black (minister of the Cahaba Valley Church of Christ, Birmingham, Alabama), master of ceremonies and panel member on Open Forum Discussion; Don Finto (minister of the Belmont Church of Christ, Nashville, Tennessee), song director for all features, and panel member; and Bud Plaster (pastor of the First Christian Church or Disciples of Christ, Jackson, South Carolina) panel member, that the solution to uniting the religious world today is to “loose where Jesus did not loose.”

At four of the five sessions which I attended (I missed the Wednesday 7:30 p.m. gathering), the thought was expressed and stressed that we “should love everybody,” “all of God’s children are in some kind of error” (none is perfect), and consequently there is “liberty in Christ,” so we should be “loose” in our thinking on whom we can fellowship.

Brethren, I believe in and stand whole heartedly for “losing where Jesus loosed.” I also believe and preach the other side of the coin; Jesus taught in the same connection with losing that the faithful should “bind whatsoever had been bound in heaven” (Matt. 18:18). Paul charges that preachers should “reprove, rebuke, and exhort” (2 Tim. 4:2), and two-thirds of that charge is not loose, loose, and exhort! We had better be courageous and faithful to point out sin wherever it pops up, and condemn it, as well as encourage and exhort wherever the situation is worthy of it, and be sure that the authority for doing both is God’s Word rather than the “think-so’s” or beliefs and feelings” of men.

It was obvious that the leaders in this Christian Unity Forum as well as the majority of those in attendance (possibly 150-200 was the largest attendance at any one session) were of the following opinions: (1) The body of Christ is made up,’ of “baptized believers in Jesus Christ.” (2) These “Christians” are in every denomination and regardless of what name one wears (Christian, Methodist, Baptist, etc.) or whether he insists on using the instruments of music, and many other things, he should be considered a bother with whom we are in fellowship in serving Christ. In the 7:30 p.m. opening address, “The Fellowship of Life,” the featured speaker used the church at Corinth as an example of how Christians should be loose and feel free to fellowship just about everything. He said (and I quote from my tape), “Now just remember this, 1 Corinthians 1:9, God is faithful by whom ye were called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Now that was said to the church of Corinth, and the church at Corinth was a real doozie of a congregation. I want you to know that I have seen a lot of real congregations in my life that would rack your soul, but I have never in all the born days of my life, I have never seen one like Corinth. ” He went on in his great oratical style to expound on their being divided four ways over men, having lawsuits, believing in no resurrection, abusing the Lord’s supper, and practicing fornication and idolatry. His purpose was to leave the conclusion that we are entirely out of harmony with the scriptures to think we can’t fellowship just about everything and everyone today. This is the note on which the forum began and ended.

Brethren, let us not be taken by the smooth speech of men regardless of their supposed sincerity. God did not condone and fellowship those groups of sinful men in Corinth, neither will he do so in regard to the same sins today. He told the church to “. . . put away from among yourselves that wicked person” (1 Cor. 5:13). This clearly shows that those who refuse to repent after proper discipline – both instructive and corrective – are considered to be disorderly (2 Thess. 3:6), and with such, Christians are “not to eat” (1 Cor. 5:11). Yes, brethren, being as narrow as “truth” (Jn. 17:17) as well as “losing where God has loosed” is the basis of Christian Unity.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 28, pp. 459-460
July 17, 1980

By Ron Halbrook

Faith is exalted in Modern religion as a great benefit but the object of faith need not be true, it is argued. Hocking argued,

But with the conception of reverence for reverence we arrive at liberalism within religion.

At the same time, the principle of reverence for reverence establishes the liberal attitude toward the various religions of the world. Wherever there is worship, there is the living flame (Liberal Theology, p. 57).

All kinds of religion and worship embody “the living flame.” Faith can sidestep the question of absolute truth and still receive practical benefits – at least temporal benefits.

The exaltation of such groundless faith leads “inevitably to a bottomless skepticism which is the precursor of despair,” and the higher such faith is exalted “the greater will be the inevitable crash when the crash finally comes” (Machen, What Is Faith, pp. 174, 179). The Holy Spirit through Paul warned of just such a crash when men began to undermine the factual basis of New Testament promises. Notice especially the words we have emphasized in 1 Corinthians 15:12 and 16-19:

Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?

For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

The only hope about which Modernism is sure is a temporal, material hope for goals on this earth. For instance, Washington Gladden was a classical spokesman for Liberalism and the Social Gospel. In his sermon on “The Incarnation,” he rejected the notion “that the work of Christ is to get people safely away from this world to heaven;” therefore Gladden sought instead “the Christianization of human society” (sermon reproduced in Robert T. Handy, The Social Gospel in America, see esp. pp. 160-1). That hope has been echoed again and again by American preachers under the influence of Modernism. The faith of Abraham when he “against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations” was not faithless faith (Rom. 4:18). Rather, it was the confident extension of a faith that was based upon the fact of God’s past dealings with Abraham. The Bible is not commending Abraham for a Modernist-type faith which might have said, “I enjoy the benefits of hoping to be the father of many nations, for the wish is a living flame of faith; of course, it is not necessary to believe that this promise will be literally fulfilled.” The immediate benefits of counterfeit money are the same as for genuine, but the more counterfeit currency a person spends the more misery he faces when he learns the truth.

Many people were surprised at the openness of Modernism to the Neo-Pentecostal or Charismatic movement of the 1960’s-70’s. Does this mean that Modernism has not conceded that the miracles of the New Testament were factual historical events? No, indeed. Such miracles as the virgin birth of Jesus, His raising of a man dead four days, His own bodily resurrection,, and His ascension to heaven are still viewed with indifference. The emphasis of the modern, so-called Pentecostal movement on inward experience attracts some Modernists. They have said all along that an inward experience is man’s encounter with God and the voice of authority in religion. The so-called gifts of the Spirit claimed by Charismatics, “speaking in tongues” above all, are intense personal experiences which appear to be self-validating to the individual. The emphasis is not on any miraculous historical event which can be recognized as such by friends and enemies alike (cf. Lk. 22:50-51; Jn. 11:47-48; Acts 4:16). The bridge which some have found between Modernist and Charismatic faiths is the authority of a religious experience, and not respect for Bible miracles as historical reality nor for Bible authority as an absolute standard.

The object of our faith must be true if faith is to have real value! Peter argued that the object of our faith “our Lord Jesus Christ” – was literally seen and heard in the miraculous events of his life. “For we have not followed cunningly devised fables” (2 Pet. 1:16-18). Symbolism and all figurative language is thrown out of court by historical events witnessed by the Apostles. They did not claim the authority of a subjective religious experience but the authority of Jesus Christ who literally and bodily rose from the dead (Matt. 16:13-21; chap. 28; Acts 1:3). When the object of faith becomes a matter of indifference, the faith itself becomes indifferent. To destroy faith in the facts of the life of Christ and then to proclaim faith in Christ is to maintain a contradictory, self-destructive, faithless faith. To expect the world to be converted to a faithless faith is certainly to expect a miracle of major proportions!

The Miracle of Faithless Faith at Work (Are Facts Essential to Christian Living?)

Modernists have claimed over and over that Christianity is a way of life not dependent upon propositional truth. A person can be a Christian and live as one whether or not he believes the statements made in Matthew 1 about the virgin birth of Jesus or those in chapter 28 about the bodily resurrection. To the contrary, the Christianity found in Scripture was “a way of life founded upon a message” (Machen, Christianity and Liberalism, p. 21). Without the gospel facts which were preached, there could be no promises and commands, no power to shape character, no basis for the unique way of life proclaimed. 1 Corinthians I S shows that the gospel is one piece of cloth – to pull one thread is to unravel the whole garment. The facts preached must be kept in memory or held fast, else all is lost (vs. 2). The hope, peace, love, joy, honesty, and goodness of the Christian life depend upon the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Christian graces of 2 Peter 1:5-11 depend upon the historical reality of miraculous events in the life of Jesus Christ, affirmed in verses 16-18.

Jesus was right in arguing that His words and works are inseparable. He pronounced a bedfast man’s sins forgiven, then healed him in order to prove that “the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins” (Matt. 9:1-8). When the Jews threatened to stone Him for claiming to be God’s Son, He challenged them saying, “For which of those works do ye stone me?” (referring to His miracles, Jn. 10:30-38). The Modernist professes admiration for the recorded words of Jesus, such as the Sermon on the Mount, while viewing His recorded works on a scale from contempt to indifference. Since Christianity is a way of life embodied in the words of Jesus, His works are nonessential to Christianity, we are told. Actually, even the words of Jesus are sifted by the Modernist in search of “general and permanent principles” shared by all world religions, and certified by experience. These generic principles are the true gospel hidden within the recorded one. These principles are litle more than humanistic values read into the teaching of Jesus.

Recorded words of Jesus treated as non-essential or nonauthentic are those which relate to the supernatural and to His claim of personal, Divine authority:

1. His claim to be the exclusive Savior (Jn. 8:24; 14:1-6).

2. His claim to Deity (Jn. 8:58).

3. His claim to be judge of all men (Jn. 12:48).

4. His claim to forgive sin (Matt. 9:2).

5. His claim to exclusive authority in religion (Matt. 28:18).

6. His appointment of the Apostles to reveal on earth what is bound and loosed in heaven (Matt. 16:19; 18:18).

Everything the Apostles said is sifted by the same screen all claims to the miraculous and to an exclusive, final, Divine revelation are thrown aside. So, not even the words of Jesus are honored unless they happen to agree with the preconceptions of Modernism. Truly, to reject His works is to manifest the spirit which will reject His words.

Modernism expects man to live by certain selected words of Christ and of His Apostles, yet destroys the credibility of the only record we have of those words. Only a miracle could sustain man in such living for any significant time when the foundation is destroyed. Ecumenical “church unions based on piety, sentiment, love of organization, or the simple urge for togetherness become not only live possibilities but appalling actualities” (Montgomery, The Suicide of Christian Theology, p. 37). Ecumenical unions with all world religions can precede upon the same basis. Those who thus act on a faithless faith ultimately must face the question which thousands have already faced and answered by deserting Modernism and religion altogether. That question is, “if Christian faith reduces to humanistic values, then why bother with church membership” or religion at all? (Ibid., p. 33). The road from Modernism to secularistic humanism to moral anarchy leads in a straight line. Living faith in the facts of the gospel is essential for day to day Christian conduct.

Why Is Modernism Attractive?

Machen correctly identified the root idea of Modernism as “the denial of any entrance of the creative power of God (as distinguished from the ordinary course of nature) in connnection with the origin of Christianity” (Liberalism, p. 2). The proclaimed goal of Modernism is seductive. It claims to mediate Christianity to the modern world, an attractive aim. But, in the process, Liberalism relinquishes “everything distinctive of Christianity, so that what remains is in essentials only that same indefinite type of religious aspiration which was in the world before Christianity came upon the scene” (Ibid., p. 7). The miracles of the Bible are rejected because, we are told, modern man will not accept a gospel which includes supernatural claims. Soon the gospel is reduced to a jumble of platitudes which in practical application mean whatever any man wants them to mean. Modernism is nurtured by evolution, worship of science, and by the appeal of convenience. Modernism is the power of this world victorious over “the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). Its success is explained by the Holy Spirit in 1 John 4:5: “They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.” Modernism attracts the worldly mind precisely because Modernism is capitulation to the worldly mind.

What was the appeal of Satan in the Garden of Eden when he wished to set aside the authority of God’s Word in Eve’s heart? Satan had her to think that the Word of God should not be treated as a legalistic barrier to that which is “good for food,” “pleasant to the eyes,” and “desired to make one wise” (Gen. 3:1-6). God’s law, His rule, His very Being must yield to human lust, human desire, human conquest. Modernism has its own intellectual and propositional content – such as the proposition that truth is not propositional – but its appeal is not simply to the intellect. The appearance of pride and intellectual arrogance remind us that Modernism appeals to man’s loves, emotions, aspirations, and aims.

The devices used in the Garden are still used in every worldly force and movement:

1 John 2:15-17 Power of the World

Love not the world, neither the things

that are in the world. If any man love

the world, the love of the Father is not

in him. For all that is in the world,

the lust of the flesh, and – Lust For Fleshly Experience

the lust of the eyes, and – Lust For Material Things

the pride of life, – Lust For Human Autonomy

Is not of the Father, but is of the world.

And the world passeth away, and the lust

thereof: but he that doeth the will of God

abideth forever.

Those who find that the will of God revealed in Scripture does not satisfy their yearning for things of the world can find satisfaction in Modernism, humanism, or complete moral anarchy. After the Earl of Rochester returned from infidelity, he confessed that his real problem had not been intellectual: “A bad heart, a bad heart is the great objection against the Holy Book” (Mistakes of Ingersoll and His Answers Complete, p. 40). Beneath the intellectual arguments lies an unwillingness to submit a man’s life to God’s revealed will, in many cases.

Does this mean that the power of the world is greater than the power of truth? No, John said that we may overcome the world “because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world” (1 Jn. 4:4). The power of truth is sufficient to overcome the world but all men do not love the truth. Jesus is the King of truth in the Kingdom of truth; He said, “Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice” On. 18:37). Yet, the person to whom He spoke, Pilate, would not hear Him; Pilate loved that which is of the world more than that which is “of the truth.”

Jesus said that His teaching came from God. “If any man will – i.e. wishes to (RH) – do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself (Jn. 7:16-17). Robert E.D. Clark pointed out in Conscious and Unconscious Sin (pp. 167-68) that there was a purpose in the teaching method of Jesus. “Knowing what was in man,” Jesus would

seek to convince people by an appeal to the mind until He knew that He had presented sufficient evidence, and that rationalization alone stopped that evidence being accepted. After that, a continued attempt to present evidence on the same lines would have caused greater and greater sin against the light. Naturally, He would therefore refuse to go on presenting it, and instead would make the greatest efforts to show people that they were rationalizing in the hope that they might realize what were the true reasons for their rejection of Himself.

We must recognize, Clark argued, that the strongest evidence which can be presented today still will not convert some men. Clark continued,

The point for us to decide is not whether the story of Christ’s resurrection is as rigidly provable as we could wish it to be, but whether, if it did conform to the standard we demand, we should instantly change our lives and be willing to forsake all for Christ, or whether we should promptly raise the required standard of evidence or find some other point to argue about . . . The Christian does not stand for a religion which can answer every objection the wit of man can raise, but for the teaching of Jesus Christ that all who are of the Truth find in Him their Savior, Lord and God (material by Clark from James D. Bales, How Can Ye Believe?, pp. 95-96).

In short, so long as there are men not hungering for truth but yearning to rationalize their own desires, there will be hearts prepared to accept Modernism. In many cases, it is not a question of the evidence presented but of the hearer’s will.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 28, pp. 455-458
July 17, 1980

By Irven Lee

My high school class celebrated its fiftieth anniversary in May of this year. As I look back down the hill it seems that that diploma was given to me only a little while ago. I lacked a few weeks being sixteen, and I weighed about sixty-five pounds less than my. present weight of one hundred eighty. Money and jobs were not- in abundant supply since the indescribable depression had settled down on every community in the land. I cannot now remember where I laid some object that I had in my hands a few minutes ago, but many of the events of those school days at the Murray High School are easy to see as I look back over my shoulder.

When I marched by to be given that diploma I had a future and now I have a past. It would have been impossible to describe my future on that big day fifty years ago. I now know what my future was in 1930 because it has become my past by this time. Nashville, Tennessee, Valdosta, Georgia, and Chattanooga, Tennessee were to be called home at intervals along the way, but most of my years were to spent in northwest Alabama. You young people who are finishing high school this year might also be surprised if you could see your future.

When the forty-eight seniors at Murray came to the big day, we made plans for a commencement service. We had finished something, and we were about to commence something else, but we did not know what we were commencing. We were pushed out into a world that knew poverty and hard work. What we would do or become was determined more than we knew by our parents, teachers, intimate friends, preachers, and habits of those days. Who knows how much the providence of God may have helped us? I wish I had known how great my debt of gratitude was in 1930 and had been more thoughtful and skilled in expressing it. I think I just took things for granted.

By nature I was a boy with dreams and optimism, so I did not feel afraid to commence whatever it was that I was to commence. Each day passed with some satisfaction and left hope for tomorrow. There must have been some days that did not qualify for such description but, honestly, I do not remember where or when they fitted into the picture, if there were those unhappy days. I was a timid boy without money or prestige and only a few people in the world even knew that I existed. That did not bother me. In my little world I had my hopes, and they could hardly be called ambitions, but they were enough as I anchor my soul so I gladly “commenced” the rest of my life after that commencement service.

My classmates and I never dreamed that the depression would give way to the most extravagant and wasteful generation that has lived on the earth. I could drive a T-Model Ford in those days, but I have seen better cars since. I then knew of no family with central heating that was thermostatically controlled. I had never seen a television. Houses were generally small, and bedrooms had no closet space. Can anyone estimate what percentage of the world’s oil has been used in my generation? Those of us who have thought through the years that we were poor have lived with luxury as compared to the past and as compared with the possessions of people in other parts of the world. I think we just took things for granted while we went on consuming the world’s natural resources.

Let me say to you young people that my past does not give me power to foretell your future. You are beginning (commencing) a journey into an entirely different world to that in which I have lived. I would be afraid to touch the button on a time machine to turn my age back to your age. I would be afraid to face the future if I were your age unless the time machine could give me the hope and optimism that were mine fifty years ago. Expect changes. Live life as it comes passing by and make the most of it. May God’s blessings be upon you. My oldest grandchild is graduating from high school this year. Can any of you describe the world in which he may celebrate his fiftieth anniversary with his high school classmates?

The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has not changed in my life time, nor will it change during yours. High school graduates this spring, and all others, should take the Bible with them through life’s journey. Have reverence for it, knowledge of it, and a strong determination to follow its counsel regardless of what others may do. My generation has allowed our moral standards to be lowered very much. Divorce and all major crimes are much more common than when I got my diploma in 1930. Alcohol and other drugs are destroying more lives. Be wise and understand what the will of the Lord is. Ire knows best.

I make no boast of a perfect life. My hope of eternal life is based on grace and mercy even though I have tried to do right and to encourage others to do the same. It is a joy to me to see young people who are devout in this vulgar and skeptical world. Selfishness is not a part of the Christian’s life. Let us remember this until the end.

One’s life is a little like a book with many chapters. The book could end at the end of any chapter. If I live another decade, I will be able to see my grandchildren through school and married. I do believe these will be pleasant pictures to see. I would theta want to see their children and watch them grow up into wonderful young people. Let me die in hope for good things for them. My age and limitations in health let me know that the end of the last chapter in my case is near. Since family, brethren in Christ, and my hope of the crown have made my life pleasant, I am willing for the end to come. The chapter of helpless senility is one I do not desire to write. May the Lord spare me that period of life.

I can easily look back and see many events of the past, but I can look ahead only by the eye of faith. I find myself as hopeful as I was when I passed by the principal for my diploma and went back to my seat fifty years ago. The vapor of my life has appeared for a little while, and it must soon vanish. There will be a new generation moving ahead into the future. My hope is that that generation will accomplish more than my own has. Let spiritual values be appreciated more in the future. May there come a great awakening of interest in the Bible.

Life does not consist of the abundance of things possessed. Ideals, friendships, love, principles, hope, and heaven’s approval are far more important than things. Happiness is a by-product of the abundant life, and it is not to be bought at the market place. The very best things of life remain with us in greater abundance after we have shared them with others.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 28, pp. 454-455
July 17, 1980

By Mike Willis

Approximately 80 million Americans, roughly 40% of the total .population, do not consider themselves members of any church (J. Russell Hale, Who Are The Unchurched?, p. 2). Several sociologists have undertaken the task of defining who the unchurched Americans are and what they are like (see Hale’s study, also see David A. Roozen, The Churched and the Unchurched In America: A Comparative Profile, and The Unchurched American [The Princeton Religion Research Center]). Though these studies are primarily aimed at the sociologist, a person can learn some interesting statistics from an examination of these materials.

One of the interesting results of Hale’s work has been his classification of those who are not going to church. By using his classification system, I would like to consider the kinds of reasons people are giving for not going to church. My methodology will be to consider what legitimate criticisms might be involved in each of these groups (with the hope that we can learn to correct whatever might be leading to these objections, so long as the truth of God’s word is not compromised) and then consider what God’s word might answer to each so far as his reason for not going to church might be considered. Throughout this presentation, I shall be using Hales classification and description of those who are “unchurched.”

1. The Anti-Institutionalists. “This category includes those persons who -are defectors from the church on the basis of what they perceive to be the Church’s preoccupation with its own self-maintenance.” Many of those who do not go to church for this reason consider themselves to be better Christians because they do not participate in the institutional church.

What is occurring in modern denominationalism is certainly giving some legitimacy to this objection. Denominationalists (and some liberal congregations of the Lord) are building exorbitant edifices for worship, constantly begging for money to pay for these buildings and some other works, and use every form of promotionalism to raise money and boost the attendance. One certainly gets the impression from what he reads in bulletins and newspapers that an inordinate emphasis on money and numbers is present in not a few churches. Consequently, many Americans have correctly perceived what is going on in twentieth century denominationalism and are properly turned off by what he sees. The emphasis on spiritual things has been thrown out to be replaced with a good dose of positive mental attitude.

This unchurched person makes the mistake of throwing out the baby with the bath water. Because he has been turned off by sinful abuses and activities of denominationalism (both in and out of the church), he simply throws out the church. However, one must not forget that the church is a part of God’s eternal plan through Jesus Christ (Eph. 3:10-11); no less important person than Jesus Himself built the church (Matt. 16:16). Reconciliation to God occurs through Christ in that one body (Eph. 2:16). Hence, God has a true purpose for the church to exist; the church was not born simply because some lazy preachers schemed a way of earning a living without working. This person needs to reject the sinful practices of modern denominationalism and begin a search for the Lord’s people! There are people of the Lord who are serving Him, without being guilty of the things which are turning this group of Americans off!

2. The Boxed-In. “These are people who, for the most part, have once been church members and have left . . . . Doctrine or ethics have been so narrow as to smother them . . . . The church is viewed as worse as a prison, at best as a strait-jacket. Their psychological state is expressed in such phrases as `Don’t fence me in!’ or `Unhand me!’ or `Let me go!’ They want no external restraints. They will be captive to no one. They have taken charge of their own lives.”

There are certain legitimate objections in these kinds of criticisms. Some churches have legislated traditions and opinions which have bound their membership over and above what God has bound. Ridiculous moral regulations which would have the effect of “turning off” the general public include such things as teaching that receiving a blood transfusion is sinful, that celebrating one’s birthday is sinful, that a young lady cannot wear make-up, trim her hair, or wear slacks, that a person cannot attend a movie of any kind, that a young person cannot wear a graduation ring because wearing of jewelry is forbidden, and that using any form of contraceptive is sinful. Obviously, many Americans reject such taboos and are turned off by them.

Others find the doctrines of their church unbelievable; consequently, they are unwilling to go to church because of their doctrinal disagreements. Frankly, I would be turned off by such doctrines as the following as well: (a) the doctrine that God predetermined who would be saved and who would be lost without regard to anything that they do (election); (b) the doctrine that once a man is saved he can never be lost regardless of how he lives (perseverance of the saints); (c) that tongue-speaking is authentic; (d) that one cannot see a doctor; (e) that faith healing is true (especially when one witnesses the sick come to church, testify to being healed, and then turn again to the beds of affliction); (f) snake handling; (g) purgatory; (h) papal infallibility; etc. These and many other doctrines which are taught in modern denominationalism are recognized as ridiculous; many are turned off by churches which teach such ridiculous doctrines.

The other side of this coin is that some Americans refuse to be bound by the revelation of God’s word. They are going to do what they want to and believe what they want regardless of what the Bible says. Hence, they find the doctrinal standards of the Bible to be too confining to them. They are unwilling to believe that there is only one church, that salvation is only available through Jesus Christ (Jn. 14:6), that one must be baptized in water in order to be saved (Mk. 16:16), and similar doctrines. Too, they reject the moral instructions of God’s word. Some Americans refuse to believe that homosexuality is sinful (1 Cor. 6:9-10), that pre-marital and extra-marital sexual relationships will damn one’s soul (Gal. 5:19-20), that dancing is condemned as lasciviousness (Gal. ,5:19), that drinking (social drinking included) is prohibited (1 Pet. 4:3), and that any person who divorced his mate for any reason other than fornication and subsequently remarried is guilty of adultery (Matt. 19:9). Frankly, I do not have anything to offer these unchurched people. They are lawless men – men who refuse to walk in the light of God’s word. Consequently, there is no fellowship with God possible for them so long as they walk outside the revelation of God (1 Jn. 1:6-7).

3. The Burned-Out. These “are some who feel that their energies have been utterly consumed by the Church . . . . The used feel that they have been exploited or manipulated.”

I can understand why some would feel that way. Many of the faith healers are constantly writing letters to people all over this country telling how God directed them to write and ask for a contribution. Some people have given thousands of dollars to religious charlatans; no wonder they feel used. Others have worked long hours in different denominations to keep the institutions going. They have been involved in every fund-raising, promotional scheme employed by denominational pastors to increase the membership and contribution. Many of them have seen through the facade to perceive that spiritual work is not being done in these denominations. Hence, they feel that they have been manipulated and used.

The fact that one has been used and abused in the past, however, does not excuse him from future responsibility. Such a man must be guided by the revelation of God in working for the Master, not some denominational machinery. However, work he must (1 Cor. 15:58; Tit. 2:14; 3:1). Our lives are to be filled with serving others, even as Jesus came to serve rather than to be served (Matt. 20:26-28). The day of rest for the servant of God is not in this world but in that which is to come; rest will be given to us at the second coming of Christ (2 Thess. 1:7). Hence, though a man might be burned out by the exploitative schemes of denominationalism, he needs to turn to Christ and work with the saints of God in serving the Master.

4. The Cop-Outs. These are “those who were never really committed to the Church in the first place . . . . The Apathetic Cop-Outs lack any deep feelings for or sensitivity toward what the Churches stand for, say or do . . . . They are indifferent to the point of saying, `I could care less.’ . . . The Drifters are Cop-Outs whose association with Churches has been so marginal that floating from place to place without ever establishing strong ties has become habitual. They may fear the demands of responsibility to others or to programs.”

I can see no legitimate justification for these people not worshipping with saints. The problem is that they have never been converted to Christ. They simply do not love God .enough to be concerned about obeying His word. Some, consequently, simply never take any interest in spiritual things. Others have only a nominal interest. These are the people who visit every congregation in the city and never take an active part in any of them; they hold membership-at-large, being a part of the church universal but not of the local church. Any excuse they give for’ not being involved is simply a “cop-out” because they have never been involved in the first place!

The gospel has no promise of everlasting salvation to such people; the eternal punishment of hell is all that remains for these kinds of unchurched people. Because they refuse to worship and serve God, He will reject them in the final day.

5. The Happy Hedonists. These people “find fulfillment of life’s purpose in momentary pleasures or a succesion of pleasure-satisfying activities . . . . Their hedonism was not often manifested in their idolization of leisure pursuits.”

Many of our neighbors are happy hedonists. They want to spend their Sundays sleeping in, going golfing or fishing, watching sports events on television, and any number of other pleasure related activities. They are happy with the way they live and have no plans or intentions of changing. They remind me of the people described by Paul who were “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God” (2 Tim. 3:4), people “whose God is their belly, and whose glory is their shame, who mind earthly things” (Phil. 3:19). Obligations of church membership to such. people are rejected because they intrude on the time they can spend more profitably on some form of instant gratification.

Unfortunately, the churched Americans are just about as guilty of being hedonists as are some of the unchurched. By constantly preaching on attendance, some of them will be persuaded to attend one service a week. On Sunday evenings and Wednesday nights, they are too absorbed in the pursuit of pleasure to take time out to worship God. They never find time for prayer and Bible study because it interrupts watching television. Like their unchurched counterparts, the church hedonists prefer to pursue pleasure rather than serve God.

When Solomon considered what it was good for man to do all of his days on this earth (Ecc. 2:3), he considered the pursuit of pleasure (Ecc. 2:1-11). He withheld from himself no pleasure which might bring happiness to him. Yet, when he reached the end of his course, he said, “Then I looked on all the works that my hands had wrought, and on the labour that I had laboured to do: and, behold, all was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was no profit under the sun” (Ecc. 2:11). The pursuit of pleasure offers no permanent happiness; “the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing” (Ecc. 1:8). Many people find out how empty life is from the mere pursuit of pleasure and seek, for something else; others go to their grave without learning this only to be tormented forever because they did not “fear God and keep His commandments” (Ecc. 12:13-14). Though pleasurable pursuits are good when kept in proper perspective, they cannot save anyone’s soul.

6. The Locked-Out. These “are the opposite of BoxedIn. These are those unchurched people who feel that the Churches have closed their doors against them.” They include those who have been rejected by the church because of their refusal to comply with some doctrine, those who have been neglected by the church because of various reasons (they are in the wrong social class or some other reason), and those who feel that they have been discriminated against.

Some of these criticisms are legitimate. For example, Wayne B. Williamson frankly admitted that the Episcopal Church has made little attempt to evangelize the poor; he said, “Many of its leaders came close to holding the lower classes in contempt and made their greatest appeal to the affluent and the powerful” (Growth And Decline in the Episcopal Church, p. 138). In some churches, the blacks have not been welcome; many have done little or nothing to evangelize the blacks and other minorities. Older people are sometimes treated as if they were unimportant because they have so little to contribute financially and are unable to do much labor in the local work. Hence, the religious world has “locked-out” some of the world. Fairness demands that we add that some of the minorities have also locked-out the white, middle-classed American.

This should serve to remind each of us of the universality of the gospel. The gospel is to be preached to every creature of every nation (Matt. 28:18-20; Mk. 16:15-16). The invitation of Christ is extended to “whosoever will” (Rev. 22:17). Hence, we should make equal attempts to evangelize all men, so much as we have opportunity.

Some are locked-out of the church, however, because they refuse to live by the moral codes of the New Testament. This sociological category includes as “locked-out” those who do not go to church because they have been divorced and remarried without scriptural cause, social drinkers, and other moral perverts who refuse to walk according to the revelation of God. Frankly, I know of nothing. to offer these people except the preaching of a gospel of repentance.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 28, pp. 451-453
July 17, 1980