Truth Magazine

By Lewis Willis

The division of the church which was launched by liberal brethren in 1938, and which came to fruition in the 50s and 60s, has arrived at its destination! No amount of warning or pleading could stop the movement in its departure from the truth. Today the new leaders herald their arrival as a full-fledged denomination!

Ironically, those who led the apostasy for years are now trying to stop this final plunge into the abyss of denominationalism. However, they are being ignored for the most part. Only a fraction of the movement will hear what they have to say. Finn Foundation, a paper edited by Buster Dobbs, has been fighting the new liberals or “change agents” who have risen to the leadership of liberal churches. Another strong voice among apostate brethren is The Spiritual Sword, edited by Alan E. Highers. Almost every issue of these journals for the last several years has been devoted to calling their people to arms against those who were leading the movement into the ranks of modern denominationalism. But the warnings went unheeded.

October 1996

An editorial by Highers in the issue of The Spiritual Sword, establishes that the new leaders now openly advocate the fellowship of liberal churches with denominations. He cites the following as proof of his claims.

1. A speech by William S. Banowsky at the Abilene Christian University lectures, 2-21-96. Highers said Banowsky,”advocated an inclusive fellowship with denominationalism.” Banowsky indicated that he started out “with the idea of an identifiably exclusive church, but he grew to understand the concept of a universally inclusive church.” In his view, the church consists of all the denominations. He even stated that we need to confess “our self-righteousness to our neighbors.” Highers further noted that Banowsky “accused churches of Christ of deifying the letter of the Bible and placing paper and ink between us and God … that faith is more a matter of intuition and feeling than of logic and reason . . .we will not win this fight for faith if we wage it on the basis of reason.” Highers properly observed that Banowsky “pleads for heartfelt religion such as (is) manifested by Pentecostalism.” Why is he so concerned about “deifying the letter of the Bible” and about “paper and ink”? Banowsky’s point is, we must not restrict ourselves to what is authorized in the New Testament, based on logic and reason from the text. Instead, we must depend upon our feelings. Our feelings should be followed, instead of following the Scriptures. That will definitely produce a denomination!

2. A speech by Rubel Shelly at Florence, Alabama, April 1996. Shelly is probably the most influential of the new liberals. He appeared in Florence in a conference “with an assortment of denominational preachers and charismatic leaders.” Shelly said, “One of the things that I think is so wonderful and precious and dear to the heart of God about a conference like this is that it is a conference that cuts across the lines that we have erected to keep us separate … We need every one of us on the same team . . . We will not lose our separate denominational.. identifies . we will not have to give up our distinctive practices with regard to our different organizational structures, worship, and so on. I see no need for that . . . Being a Christian is more important than whether … you’re premillennial, . . . or you’re Baptist, or you’re charismatic, or you’re church of Christ, or you’re Presbyterian.” Shelly now ignores such questions as the organization and worship of the church. You can be baptized by sprinkling or use instrumental music, but he still desires fellowship with you.

3. A speech by Max Lucado at a Baptist church in San Antonio, Texas, 4-2-96. In that speech Lucado likened religion to God’s navy. There is only one ship; with only one captain, having only one destination. Speaking of the various denominations, he said,”though there may be many cabins below the deck in which we live, and where we choose to bunk, when God calls us to all stand on the deck and face the enemy, shoulder to shoulder, we need to take the command seriously. Unity matters to God.”

On another occasion Lucado has said, “When I see someone calling God Father and Jesus Savior, I meet a brother or a sister  regardless of the name of their church or denomination.” W. Carl Ketcherside and Leroy Garrett used almost this identical language several years ago when they departed to denominationalism. One need not won-der long where Lucado, Shelly, and Banowsky got their rhetoric.

Another evidence of this further move toward denominational status is a recent book by Richard T. Hughes, Distinguished Professor of Religion at Pepperdine University. His book, Reviving The Ancient Faith, attempts to prove that the Restoration Movement from the beginning was never intended to do away with denominationalism. According to Hughes, the movement simply sought to re-fine what was already there, while maintaining fellowship with denominations. Hughes believes that opposition to fellowship with the denominations is found only among those in churches of Christ who are poor, uncultured, and uneducated. These brethren, according to Hughes, “helped father . . . a radical primitivist and sectarian subtradition rooted in economic deprivation and estranged from the world of culture and education.” He argues that mainstream or liberal churches of Christ of the twentieth century have “abandoned many of the trappings of sectarian religion and moved toward denominational status” (91). I believe he is absolutely correct in saying those liberal churches are now a denomination.

What has been the effect? In our area, the very liberal Church in the Falls, had Rubel Shelly in to teach on the “Core Truth” which has to do with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. If one is right about Jesus, Shelly contends, fellowship should be established with that per-son. One of their elders, Mark Nitz, wrote about this, saying, “The lesson is clear. We do a grave injustice when we make all discipleship issues and personal beliefs of equal importance to the gospel. One’s understanding of instrumental music, the Lord’s Supper, or the Second Coming are not nearly as important as faith in Christ . . . Let’s not reject a brother who has a differing conviction but who clearly understands the core truths of the gospel” (Bulletin, 3-27-96). According to Nitz, as long as one is right about Jesus, he can be fellowshiped no matter what he believes or practices about instrumental music or the Lord’s Supper. Those questions must not affect fellowship. One is not surprised when they announce a “Gospel concert at Arlington Street Church of God” in which “several of our members will sing.” Tickets are being sold at $10 each (Bulletin, 10-16-96).

I find it interesting to note that liberal churches can fellowship and participate in activities with the denominations, but they will have nothing to do with those of us who practice only what is authorized in the Lord’s word. This was all predicted many years ago. If there is any surprise in it, however, it is only in how quickly it has come.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 2 p. 3-4
January 16, 1997

By Mike Willis

These words are the opening verse of Psalm 34, a psalm of David written “when he changed his behaviour before Abimelech; who drove him away, and he departed” (superscription to the psalm). The words are the more remarkable when one considers the context in which they were spoken.

The Historical Context

David became so popular in Israel that Saul viewed him as a rival to the throne. On more than one occasion, Saul tried to kill David, even manipulating his own children to use them to secure his death. (Saul gave his daughter Michal to be David’s wife upon payment of 100 foreskins of Philistines, hoping that the Philistines would kill him [1 Sam. 18:25].) David became the closest of friends with Saul’s son Jonathan. When Jonathan saw that his father was determined to murder David, he entered a covenant with him, in spite of his father’s animosity toward David (1 Sam. 20).

When David left Jonathan’s presence, he fled to Nob. There he met the priest Ahimelech who gave the shewbread to David and his men because they were hungry. When David asked if Ahimelech had any weapons, the priest replied that the only weapon there was the sword of Goliath, and he gave it to David.

David left Nob and fled to the Philistine town of Gath where Achish was the king. The text in 1 Samuel 21:10-15 records this incident:

And David arose, and fled that day for fear of Saul, and went to Achish the king of Gath. And the servants of Achish said unto him, Is not this David the king of the land? Did they not sing one to another of him in dances, saying, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands? And David laid up these words in his heart, and was sore afraid of Achish the king of Gath. And he changed his behaviour before them, and feigned him-self mad in their hands, and scrabbled on the doors of the gate, and let his spittle fall down upon his beard. Then said Achish unto his servants, Lo, ye see the man is mad: wherefore then have ye brought him to me? Have I need of mad men, that ye have brought this fellow to play the mad man in my presence? Shall this fellow come into my house?

Thinking David was mad, Achish drove him from his presence. David praised God in Psalm 34 in commemoration of this deliverance from Saul and Achish. The point which I wish to emphasize is David’s praising God in the midst of adversities such as this. David began by saying, “I will bless the Lord at all times: his praise shall continually be in my mouth” (Ps. 34:1).

Praise At All Times

Obviously the words of this verse that thaw the most attention are at all times and continually. David was re-solved to praise the Lord, not only in the days of prosperity and peace, but also in his days of adversity.

1. One should praise God in prosperity. Prosperity poses a threat to the soul of the righteous. The wise man Agur said, “Remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me: Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the Lord? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain” (Prov. 30:8-9). This text calls attention to the danger that prosperity poses to the soul  “lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the Lord?”

Moses warned Israel of the danger of prosperity saying,

“And it shall be, when the Lord thy God shall have brought thee into the land which he sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give thee great and goodly cities, which thou buildedst not, and houses full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged, which thou diggedst not, vineyards and olive trees, which thou plantedst not; when thou shalt have eaten and be full; then beware lest thou forget the Lord, which brought thee forth out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage” (Deut. 6:10-12).

Prosperous people sometimes become too consumed in the daily affairs of life to make time to praise the Lord. The cares of this world systematically root out the praise of God.

Prosperous people should make time to praise God. How richly blessed we are. I have never gone a day in my life when I went without food because my family could not feed me. When we grew up, we always had shoes to wear, a coat in cold weather, and a warm house in which to live. After Sandy and I married, we have always been able to feed our children, provide them the medical attention they needed, provide clothes and a good house in which to live. We drive to worship in an air-conditioned car with power everything, we sit in a building that has padded pews at 700 temperature, we go home to an air-conditioned house with color co-ordinated drapes and carpet. We have been richly blessed. If any people in the world should praise God, those who have been so blessed should head the parade to give praise to his name!

2. One should praise God in poverty. No one wishes tobe poor. How many of us would be able to praise God if we were poor? Paradoxically, one frequently finds the richest faith in those who have enjoyed so few of God’s temporal blessings. These people learn to depend upon and trust in God, rather than in riches. They have so little good to look forward to in this life, that they genuinely yearn for heaven. How refreshing is the experience of seeing those who have so little be so rich in faith. Paul was impressed with this among the Macedonians when he wrote,

Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia; how that in a great trial of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty abounded unto the riches of their liberality. For to their power, I bear record, yea, and beyond their power they were willing of themselves; praying us with much entreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us the fellowship of the ministering to the saints. And this they did, not as we hoped, but first gave their own selves to the Lord, and unto us by the will of God (2 Cor. 8:1-5).

There is a special set of temptations that come to the poor. As Proverbs 30:9 indicates, the poor are tempted to steal and profane the name of the Lord. They can develop habits of greed, the same as rich people can; they can be “minded to be rich” in spite of their deep poverty (1 Tim. 6:9). David was resolved to praise God even in the days of poverty.

3. Praise God in adversity. Both rich and poor face adversities of life. Sometimes men are tempted, in the face of such adversities, to become bitter, resentful, and angry toward God. The burdens are sometimes heavy and hard to bear; nevertheless, David resolved to praise God even in the face of adversity. Think of his adversities: the king of the land was trying to kill him, influential men in Saul’s court slandered him, he was forced to flee to a foreign land where his life was still in danger, and he had to wander from place to place constantly changing the place where he hid. These things came on him even though he had risked his life to fight the enemies of the Lord (such as Goliath and the Philistine army).

Having just recently escaped from Achish by pretending to be a madman, David praised God for his deliverance saying, “Many are the afflictions of the righteous: but the Lord delivereth him out of them all. He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken” (Ps. 34:19-20).

4. Praise God in sickness. Sickness comes to every man. One should learn to praise the Lord in sickness, just as he praises God in health. Paul was given a “thorn in the flesh” which he asked the Lord three times to remove (2 Cor. 12:1-8). When the Lord refused to remove the thorn in the flesh, saying, “My grace is sufficient to thee,” Paul accepted the Lord’s decision. He learned that the thorn in the flesh was there for the good of his soul  lest he become puffed up (2 Cor. 12:7). Therefore, Paul resolved, “Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong” (2 Cor. 12:9-10). Paul could praise God in sickness just as certainly as when he was in good health.

Conclusion

Have you learned to praise God at all times? There are difficult circumstances which the Christian faces that make it difficult to bow before the knees of an omniscient God and say, “Lord, I am in pain. I don’t know why I must go through these things. However, you know bet-ter than I do what is best for me. Therefore, I continue to worship and serve you, even in the face of this adversity.” Despite how difficult that it, this is the spirit Christians must cultivate.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 2 p. 2
January 16, 1997

By Norman E. Fultz

One of the most discouraging things faced by those who are involved in trying to build up the church is facing the problem of backsliding members. It’s not new. It’s an ancient problem as we shall see.

To call one a “backslider” is not the most complimentary thing he could be called. Many folks who are in reality backsliders do not like to be so designated. They choose a milder term to describe themselves or another who has lapsed into sin. “Erring” and “out of fellowship” are frequently substituted, for they do not sound so harsh; but the consequences of the condition are not changed by softer terminology. Webster defines the term “backslider” as “to slide back; to lapse morally or in the practice of religion.” A backslider is a starter who didn’t finish. It means one who reached plateau and slid down. It means one who began but did not continue. It means a failure, or at least about to fail. No, it isn’t complimentary!

Some will jokingly call themselves backsliders, but backsliding is not a laughing matter. It is a serious situation. The kingdom of Judah in Jeremiah’s day is a good illustration. While there are many references in the Old Testament in which God’s people are called backsliders, for now consider just Jeremiah 2. Look at some of the figures God uses to depict the condition.

They had been given a good land, but they defiled it (Jer. 2:6-7). Even their pastors had transgressed, the priests did not know the Lord, and the prophets prophesied by Baal (v. 8). While nations who worshiped idols were not known to change their gods, God’s people “changed their glory for that which does not profit” (v. 11). In short, they had “forsaken” him (v. 19). Yes, truly backsliding is serious.

Backsliding results when the heart is not right (Prov. 14:14). The heart is not fully committed to God and his ways (cf. Matt. 22:38), and the affections are not properly focused (cf. Col.3:1-3). The heart is the seat of action (Prov. 4:23). Thus, when the heart is not right, the actions will reflect it.

Are there present-day backsliders? There were some in the days of the apostles. Peter spoke of some becoming “entangled again” in the rudiments of the world (2 Pet. 2:20). Paul called some by name (2 Tim. 4:10; 2:16-17), and James said Christians could be guilty of spiritual adultery and become enemies of God (Jas. 4:4).

We frequently find those who have “quit the Lord,” turned back to the world, and sold their spiritual birth-right. Many cease assembling with the saints (Heb. 10:25), live unbecomingly (Phil. 1:27), leave their first love (Rev. 2:4), and become lukewarm and indifferent (Rev. 3:15-16). In short, they have lapsed in the practice of the religion of Christ. They are backslidden!

How great is the mercy and longsuffering of God! He appeals to the backslider to return to him. “Return, ye back-sliding children, and I will heal your backslidings” (Jer. 3:22). “0 Israel, return unto the Lord thy God; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity. …I will heal their back-sliding, I will love them freely: for mine anger is turned away from him” (Hos. 4:1, 4). And again, “O Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wickedness, that thou mayest be saved” (Jer. 4:14). And in the New Testament the appeal is,”Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works” (Rev. 2:5). And even to those backslidden into self-satisfied indifference, the Lord pleads, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone will hear my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me” (Rev. 3:20).

God’s plan makes a way for all people who would be saved; so, dear backsliding brother or sister, he will save you if you will repent and return unto him. Otherwise you will be lost forever in the devil’s hell.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 2 p. 1
January 16, 1997

By Bob Dickey

He was young and exuberant, and I immediately admired his apparent zeal. Having just learned that I was a preacher in the Indianapolis area, he said, “I’m a Christian, too, but I guess you guys think of us as digressive.” We exchanged handshakes and pleasantries, then I returned to his opening statement and began to discuss our differences. He was kind, but adamantly bold: “The importance of the church, baptism, and fellowship seem to be the most important things to you,” he charged, “But, to me, it should be love and compassion for our fellowman!” I agreed that love, justice, and mercy were the weightier matters (Matt. 23:23-24), but asked him if he didn’t think that the Catholics (Mother Theresa) and Mormons showed a great deal of that; did that love and compassion make them true to God and his Word? “That’s another thing,” he replied, “I don’t think we’re the only ones who are right, there are certainly Christians in other churches! I long for the day when we won’t just be trying to place people into the church by slamming them under the water!”

I left that young man and our conversations that day and journeyed onward in my work. But I could not leave behind that numbing ache in my stomach and sad realization in my heart, that we were worlds apart. His was a case of zeal without knowledge, I thought. The case of many of our own young (and not so young) is a knowledge without much zeal. Both lead to spiritual disaster. I cannot help but won-der how far some of our own may be from the subjective outlook and indifference to Bible truth that will eventually lead them down the same digressive path.

Many young people have been raised in churches of Christ under the influence and teaching of preachers who defend the centralizations, institutions, and social gospel practices of more recent time. We should not be surprised to learn that this lack of sound teaching has produced some deplorable conditions among a second generation. They neither know nor care about the purity of the Lord’s church. They have few convictions about the fundamentals of the faith, and seemingly know nothing about the historical issues and battles of the past. A “return to the old paths” concept seems totally foreign to them. I know that for a fact, for the young man I spoke with stopped me in the middle of our conversation and asked, “What do you mean about this `ancient order’ thing?”

Somehow, I knew, in spite of a patient explanation, that he could not appreciate the historical ideals that characterized those who made their departure from denominationalism to New Testament Christianity years ago. His is a generation raised on philosophical preaching and social consciousness. His generation has not been taught to follow only the Scriptures. Few of his age seem to understand the commitment or responsibility to demand a “thus saith the Lord,” nor the necessity of being simply Christians in a uniquely undenominational sense.

Denominational Influences

Popular preachers of national TV and radio prominence continually minimize the importance of the church, convincing the multitudes that church membership is unnecessary, or that it may be a choice based purely on whim. They have led them to believe that there is nothing to the church which belongs to Christ.

We have long since passed the time when denominational preachers would vilify the Lord’s church or debate the fundamental teachings of what makes the Lord’s church unique. We live in a time when religious people are unwilling to “contend earnestly for the faith once delivered.” They know nothing of the call to “fight the good fight of faith.” Debating, contending, rebuking, and correcting error has become distasteful, not only in mainstream religious circles, but increasingly among our own brethren.

Some Are Not Far Behind

If what I read means anything, I am persuaded that some present-day preachers of the Lord’s church are not far be-hind in their attitude toward the church Some cannot say that the church of which they are members contains all of the saved. Equating their churches, by their various activities and actions, with the modern churches of men, they no longer preach a distinctive New Testament message. Practicing practically all that sectarian bodies do, they have given up Bible authority for human reasoning, pragmatism, and mere expediency.

What About Us?

Closer to home, there are even dangerous tendencies being followed by so called “conservative” churches today. We have not been left unaffected by the march of denominationalism and modem liberalism. We must continue to restore the New Testament order. The trends of many of these churches must be opposed. We must help our brethren to learn to oppose denominational concepts especially when they are creeping into local congregations of the Lord’s church.

Certainly one of the causes for alarm among us concerns the failure to preach the distinctive message of Christ and his church. And, while we might well address the many reasons for digression and dangerous trends among us, the scope of this article is limited to our preaching on the church of God. Many of our brethren, young and old, are not being impressed today with the solid Bible teaching and plain preaching that they so desperately need to keep them grounded and true to Christ. They are not always being given the kind of preaching that will help them appreciate that the nature and character of the church is foreign to the structures and purposes of denominationalism.

Our preaching on the church must:

1. Correct some common misconceptions. Many look upon the church as a multiplicity of denominations grouped together (1 Cor. 12:13; Eph 1:22-23; Col. 1:18). Some, by their thoughtless remarks, see the church as nothing more than a physical building instead of a spiritual body (1 Cor. 3:9; Eph. 2:19-22; 1 Pet. 2:5). Others think of the church as a mere social club  a sort of religious society or fraternity where various social activities are held (Rom. 14:17). Premillennialists conceive of it as a temporary expediency substituted for God’s original plan (Eph. 3:10-11).

2. Expose modern false teaching. We must dispel and root out the arrogant claims of those who have long ago left the Bible behind. We must deny the claims of those who feel that each man can have his own religion “at home.” We must show the impossibility of those who clamor for us to “just preach Christ and not the church.” We must patiently ground our people and answer the false claim of those who say “doctrine doesn’t matter or relate to our modern needs.” We must continue to slay the ridiculous notion that “the church of Christ is just another human denomination.”

3. Protect against that which would weaken the church. There are many things that weaken the church: false teaching (Gal. I:6ff,1 John 4:1), ignoring the Bible pattern (Col.3:17), speaking differently than God (I Pet. 4:11), failing to practice discipline (Rom. 16:17-18; 1 Cor. 5), emphasizing social instead of spiritual needs (Rom. 14:15-17; 1 Cor. 11:20-24), neglecting the mission of the church (1 Tim. 3:15; Matt. 28:18-20), failing to give as prospered (1 Cor. 16:1-2), indifference and apathy (Heb. 5:11-14; 10:24-25), complaint and criticism (Phil 2:14), promotion of factions and party spirit (1 Cor. 1:10ff; Jas. 3:14-16), pessimism and despair (Heb. 12:12; 1 Thess 5:11). These are a few, among other factors, and not all of them weaken in the same way, but they all are a threat to the strength and ongoing work of the Lord’s local church. We must preach and protect against them.

4. Set forth its distinctive character. We must show to all that it is “the called out” (1 Pet. 2:9-11; Eph. 5:8; 2 Thess. 2:14). We must plainly declare that it has no denominational name, creed, organization, worship, work, or requirement for membership. We must help all men learn about the church in its prophecy, establishment, and history. We must help them to become familiar with true Bible designations that identify it. We must show them the Bible pattern established by the Lord and help them to distinguish it from the innovations of man. We must teach them that it is sufficient to accomplish what God assigned it to do. We must help them to see that it is a kingdom that can-not be shaken (Heb. 12:8-29).

5. Help all to appreciate its importance. Finally, we must fight against all that would devalue the importance of the Lord’s church. Much modern preaching is leaving doubts about the significance of the church and its relationship to the Father, thereby leaving doubts about its importance to the individual believer. But when we preach what the Bible shows it to be; when we call upon all to comprehend what it cost to purchase, when we come to see what it really is, certainly we will be moved to appreciate its great value. If we come to be ashamed of the church of our Lord, we will be ashamed of God’s wisdom which designed it (Eph. 3:10) and ashamed of Christ’s blood which purchased it (Acts 20:28).

Let us not be ashamed to preach about the church of our Lord! When we speak about love, commitment to Christ, and dedication to his cause, let’s not divorce it from our duties and privileges of the local church. When we preach about loyalty to Jesus, let’s make certain that our hearers know that this involves them in pure and simple undenominational Christianity!

Guardian of Truth XLI: 1 p. 28-29
January 2, 1997