Truth Magazine

By J. Wiley Adams

Evidently the Lord knew God’s people would have to deal with false prophets. This has always been the case. Now is no exception. We not only have false prophets or teachers but we also have to combat them. In this there is no alternative if we are to remain faithful to our heavenly Father.

In Matthew 7:15-21, Jesus gave us the acid test for determining if and when one is a false prophet. “Ye shall know them by their fruits.” Let us consider some of the fruits of The Examiner, its editor and its cloister of writers.

The Examiner, edited by Charles Holt (coupled with its predecessor, Sentinel of Truth which was also edited by Holt) has caused no little concern in the church of the Lord from the late sixties until now. Prior to that time going back a few years, Holt had believed that elders could be single men and that confessing Christ prior to baptism was only a ritualistic formula without scriptural precedent. My remembrance of brother Holt’s early work is this: the gospel meetings he held were characterized, in addition to much excellent material, with a flare for the unique, the unusual, and a disposition to be risque with Divine Truth. To differ with him was an open invitation to intimidation and sarcasm. He was right. He was always right. He was not to be disputed or called into question. When some elders in the church here and there would not let him run the church, he became bitter, cynical, and belligerent. Seething with hostilities he went into secular work and for a long time kept a low profile as far as brethren were concerned until later on in the mid-sixties the opportunity presented itself to edit Sentinel of Truth. After causing much trouble with that publication, he ceased being the editor when his financial backer died, and a little later on the journal ceased publication. Once again he dropped out of immediate sight but played pattie-cake with W. Carl Ketcherside, the liberals, and some radical elements here and there. Then he emerged again into public view with The Examiner. This paper was only a reprint of the former one, Sentinel of Truth. Attracting quite a number of brethren who were disgruntled about something or other, he seems to have set out with determination to finish wrecking the church, if he could. He has not and he will not. Together these two publications have created havoc all around the country among God’s people. Now we are well able to evaluate the fruits of these two misadventures in religious journalism.

Since Holt’s doctrine denies the scriptural existence of the local church as an entity or corporate body of believers, where is the congregation set up by Holt and his followers according to his views which will serve as the right example of whatever he is talking about? To establish a local church of any kind would deny his premise because he says in one of his cute-isms, “there ain’t any such thing,” meaning the local church.

And where can we see a place where Holt’s type of eldership is exemplified? Why even talk about elders at all since elders without a flock to oversee would be a paradox. He maintains that elders are just older men (or women), that they get to be elders simply by growing older, that the qualifications were never meant to be what we have said they are, that elders are not appointed (except by the Holy Spirit), that they just start out to lead the flock, taking the oversight thereof, and the flock falls in behind them of their own accord.

Actually Holt’s position on the local church alone makes any discussion of elders, flocks, the organization and work of the church, the treasury money or anything else of like kind, absolutely superfluous. Everything he believes stems from his disavowal of the local church as an entity or corporate body. That being true why does he even bother to beg the issue and discuss other matters which of necessity grow out of and are related to the local church issue. There is really only one basic issue: the scripturalness or unscripturalness of the local church. Still he talks of congregations, elders (by his definition), seeks to dismantle the church buildings or sell them, dubs all gospel preachers who are supported by the gospel as hirelings and all elders as tin gods who are lording it over the brethren. Yet he has established his own organization called Truth and Freedom Ministry, Inc. in Chattanooga, Tennessee for the purpose of propagating his heretical ideas. He is the head of this organization which shuns not to beg, coax and persuade its readers to send their money in to help further their cause. His money-making pleas are surely reminiscent of the so-called TV evangelists of our day.

While not having any congregations operating according to his plan he seeks to infiltrate these unscriptural “things” called local churches with his clandestine “stake-outs” to spy out the land and report to their leader. Win them over by private teaching if you can. This is their plan.

In this writer’s own experience a few years ago, some of Holt’s “disciples” who were withdrawn from for heresy, sued the individuals in a local church in a civil suit for the corporate property. They, while denying the local church, petitioned the court to declare themselves to be the entity instead of those they had sued and thus become the owners of the property! Verily the legs of the lame are unequal. Needless to say the court system of the State of Georgia was able to see through this inconsistent facade.

Holt has been joined in these efforts by some who evidently are possessed of the same ego and arrogance as himself. It is like playing a record over and over again. Holt has trained them well. All of these seem to have something against Bible authority in the church. While speaking of love their material is filled with venom and hate. Together they have sent their magazine all around to brethren far and wide on a free basis. Godly brethren have had to interrupt their good labors, preachers and elders alike have had to stop and fight these abominable heresies. How can it be other than the work of Satan and those involved as being Satan’s agents? Churches in disarray, brethren arguing over these issues needlessly, good brethren discouraged – all because of the embittered tirades of a little “pontiff” and his college of would-be cardinals.

Brethren, there are certainly some things in the churches here and there which need to be corrected. Who would deny it? But in the name of all that is right let us not allow the churches to he destroyed because of these abuses. We need not tear down the whole building in order to replace a few rotten boards. We need a repair job maybe but what we do not need is a demolition squad.

As you may have already guessed, this writer speaks from much experience in dealing with the fruits of the teachings set forth in Sentinel of Truth of the past and The Examiner of today. We are not fighting a straw man nor are these matters to be relegated to the realm of “personality squabbles” as some in the past, and maybe now, have been prone to do. All of it makes this writer both sad and indignant. We must continue to fight with the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God, and hack every would-be “Agag” to pieces. We must not and will not give place to the Devil. Brethren, keep up the good fight of faith. God will bring low every evil work for truth will prevail ultimately!

“Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them” (Matt. 7:19,20).

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 19, pp. 605-606
October 4, 1990

By Andy Alexander

When we are obedient to the first principles of the gospel of Christ, we are added by Christ to his body (Acts 2:37-47). This puts us into a saved relationship and to maintain this relationship we must continue or abide in the teaching of Christ (Jn. 8:3 1; 2 Jn. 9). We may deceive ourselves into thinking we are in fellowship with God, but if we are in darkness then God severs that relationship and he ceases to commune with us.

All people who walk in the light or abide in the truth make up the body of Christ. We are all to speak the same thing and be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment (1 Cor. 1:10). The Lord’s body is not a part of anything else and is not a faction or a sect. A sect is “a division and the formation of a party or sect in contrast to the uniting power of the truth” (Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 10 17). A sectarian is one who is a member of a sect. The Baptist denomination and the Methodist denomination are examples of sects. The individual members of these sects would be called sectarians.

A sectarian is someone who promotes division in the Lord’s body by teaching a perverted gospel. The Judaizing teachers of Paul’s day were sectarians because they perverted the sound doctrine that Paul had taught (Gal. 1:6-7). Sectarianism can be practiced in several ways. One may emphasize a particular truth and exclude other truths of God’s word. Or, one may twist or pervert the simple teaching of Christ. But, in either case, the whole of God’s word is not taught and practiced. Any person or group of people who perverts God’s word in any form or fashion is guilty of factionalism or sectarianism.

The brethren in Galatia could unite on the sound doctrine which Paul had delivered to them, but the Judaizing teachers brought in a “new” gospel which caused division. These false teachers were the trouble-makers and they hindered the Galatians from obeying the truth (Gal. 1:7; 3:1; 5:7). Paul used his trip to Jerusalem with Barnabas and Titus as an example for the Galatians to follow as to how long to put up with false teachers and their erroneous doctrines (Gal. 2:1-5). Less than one hour is a short span in history, but is too long to tolerate a compromise with false doctrine. A long historical period of time did not elapse before Paul openly rebuked Peter for the sin of hypocrisy (Gal. 2:11-14). Was it possible that Paul was concerned for the soul of Peter and the people lie might adversely affect, or was he trying to make a name for himself? The Lord left no doubt that sectarianism and factionalism are wrong and those who are guilty of such will not inherit the kingdom of heaven (Gal. 5:19-21).

New Sect Claims to be Non-Sectarian

There exists today in our land a sect of people who claim to be non-sectarian. These people are actually promoting a sect or division in the name of non-sectarian faith. Calling yourself non-sectarian does not make you non-sectarian. A member of the Baptist denomination would call himself a Christian, but that does not make him a Christian. Most sects have a leader and this sect is no different. Charles Holt from Chattanooga, Tennessee is the guru who holds together this diverse band of disgruntled people. The Examiner is the paper which he uses to espouse his false doctrine.

One distinguishing mark of a sectarian journal is its unwillingness to have its views challenged. The Examiner has always been closed to those who oppose its teaching. Someone else will have to foot the bill for both sides to be heard because Holt himself will not publish dissenting viewpoints. Truth has nothing to fear from examination. Holt has repeatedly argued that the church of Christ today constitutes a modern sect. He claims that because members of the church of Christ insist there is a pattern for the organization, work, and worship of the church, we are a sect and have lost sight of Christ. This charge cannot bear the light of open investigation.

Holt and his “non-sectarian” associates who write in The Examiner emphasize being totally committed to Christ, but they claim this commitment cannot be shown by adhering to the pattern given in the New Testament for the organization, work, and worship of the church. These self-styled non-sectarians claim that we ought to be loyal to Christ, but there is no pattern given by Christ in his word as to how we are to accomplish this loyalty. Certainly we must be loyal to Christ, but just what does loyalty to Christ involve? It involves total obedience to the teaching of Christ. We cannot choose parts of his will to follow and exclude other parts. Jesus said, “And why call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Lk. 6:46) What things? Everything Christ commands we must do. When we have done all, we are still to consider ourselves unprofitable servants: “we have done that which was our duty to do” (Lk. 17:10).

Holt claims that men have designed and required the five acts of worship that we engage in today. He states, “These ‘worship services’ are today claimed to be the divinely prescribed times when the obedient church members must come together at the appointed place, to engage in the man-designed and man-required ‘Five Acts of Worship’! Scripture says absolutely nothing about such services” (The Examiner, Vol. V, No. 2, p. 3). Holt and his followers also claim there is no such thing as the local church, elders and deacons, or any organization whatsoever. The pattern they would have us to follow is to do away with the worship we read about in the New Testament, do away with the work that the churches were engaged in, and do away with the local church itself! Does Satan himself want any more than this?

Sects Stumble on Bible Authority

The Examiner group stumbles in exactly the same place other sectarian groups stumble and that is how to establish Bible authority. Those in the denominational world demand a single verse that reads, “You must hear the word of God, believe in Christ as the Son of God, repent of your sins, confess your faith in Christ, and be immersed in water for the remission of your sins.” Since the Lord did not give it in this fashion, they take the part that pleases them and ignore the rest. Holt obviously wants a single verse that says, “You shall partake of the Lord’s supper every first day of the week, give into a local church treasury as you have been prospered every first day of the week, sing without instrumental music in your assembly every first day of the week, teach and pray every first day of the week at 11:00 A.M. in a brick building with ‘church of Christ’ on the front.” Since God did not give it in this fashion, Holt claims there is no pattern. Can Holt and his followers find the whole pattern one must obey to receive pardon from sin in a single verse?

Bible authority is established in one of three ways. We learn by direct command, necessary implication, or approved example. We learn in the secular world by these same three ways. A child learns the stove is hot by a direct statement from their parents, “The stove is hot, do not touch it.” Or, the child can witness one of the parents burn himself and then jump, holler, and scream. This would be an example to the child. Or, the child can watch what happens to meat cooking in the pan, taste the warm meat, and necessarily infer that the stove made the meat hot. This same process is used in learning what God would have us to do.

Mark 16:16 is a direct command that we must believe and be baptized in order to be saved. Acts 8:38 clearly teaches by example that baptism is done in water. In the same text we learn by necessary implication that preaching Jesus includes preaching about baptism. The Lord expected the Jews to learn by necessary implication that there is life after death. He quoted the statement of God in Exodus 3:6 (“1 am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”) to show they should have deduced or inferred that “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living” (Matt. 22:23-32).

We are taught by Christ that we must worship God in spirit and in truth (Jn. 4:24). How are we to do this? Did God command something and then not give us a form or pattern as to how we are to carry out his will? Of course not! We are to learn from the direct statements, the inspired examples, and the necessary implications in his inspired word.

Consider the contribution on the first day of the week. Holt deplores the idea of Christians giving of their means weekly to support preachers, to teach the gospel, and to help needy saints. He would rather you send that money to his “worthy” organization (“Truth and Freedom Ministry, Inc.”) so that he can teach against organizing the Lord’s body in local areas and taking weekly contributions. This is sectarian to the core.

The Lord wants his people to preach the gospel and he commended churches that were active in their support of faithful gospel preachers (Mk. 16:15; Phil. 4:14-18; 2 Cor. 8:1-5). How did they raise the money to accomplish this commendable deed? Holt demands a single verse that says, “Thou shalt give on the first day of every week to support the local preaching of the gospel and gospel preaching in foreign fields.” Because no such passage exists he claims there is no pattern.

However, God commanded the church both to support gospel preaching and to care for needy saints. In 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 Paul taught the church how and when to raise money to perform its work. He wrote concerning the collection of the saints and told the Corinthian brethren the same thing he told the churches of Galatia. They were to take a collection “on the first day of every week.” A separate passage on raising money for the support of gospel preachers is not needed. God’s command for the church to support gospel preaching requires raising money. We know by necessary implication that this money is to be raised in the same way it was raised to support needy saints because there is no other pattern on how to collect money (2 Cor. 11:8; 1 Tim. 5:17-18). To raise money in some other way such as car washes, cake and rummage sales, or mid-week collections is to operate in the realm of silence. “Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Col. 3:17).

Leaving God’s pattern for worship, The Examiner group has now accepted those who use instrumental music in their worship because it is not specifically forbidden in God’s word (The Examiner, Vol. V, No. 2, p. 5). This is another blatant error made by those in the denominational world, many liberal churches of Christ, and now by The Examiner sect. They ask, “Where does God say not to?” Christianity is a positive religion: We are to do what God says. Christ says that those who will enter heaven will be those who do the will of the Father (Matt. 7:21). Acting without positive divine authority is sin. In Acts 15:24 we have an example of some men who were guilty of subverting the souls of men by teaching doctrines which the Lord had not commanded. The Lord commanded Israel to have priests from the tribe of Levi and God expected his silence concerning the other tribes to be respected (Heb. 7:14). God commands his people to sing and make melody in their hearts in their worship to him. If we are going to respect the silence of God, then we will sing and not use instrumental music in worship.

Moral error often follows doctrinal error. Cecil Hook, a writer in The Examiner, openly taught that remarriage after a divorce for any reason is acceptable to God. Hook states, “When we contend that the divorced wife cannot remarry, we are laying the same cruel burden on the woman,” i.e. the burden of supporting herself without a husband. Hook’s “wise” advice is “divorce her instead of just separating, and let her remarry” (The Examiner, Vol. IV, No. 5, p. 25). The authority of Christ means nothing when such human philosphies are advocated (Matt. 19:9). God hates divorce but the Examiner recommends it (Mal. 2:16).

If there are no patterns in the Bible, such as for the organization, work, and worship of the church, then we must conclude there is no pattern for the marriage relationship. One man with two women, or one woman with two men, or two men with no woman would be pleasing to those who reject God’s pattern of one man for one woman for life. To insist on one man and one woman for life as God’s pattern for the marriage relationship would be to Holt “pattern theology,” a concept which causes Holt to tremble. When we leave the form of sound words, the sound doctrine of lesus Christ, we spiral headlong into disaster.

Sectarianism Gone to Seed

Holt’s doctrine would have us quit assembling in a regular manner and stop worshipping God as per the pattern laid down in the New Testament. He would have us stop our regular contributions to the Lord, quit serving under qualified elders, and tolerate playing the instrument instead of singing only and compromise with moral error. All the things God has designed to strengthen us, Holt would have us give up or compromise. This is heresy, a damnable doctrine, sectarianism gone to seed. A sect as defined by Webster is “a dissenting or schismatic religious body: esp. one regarded as extreme or heretical; a group ahering to a distinctive doctrine or to a leader.” If the doctrine of Christ is the standard for truth and unity, Holt and his followers are sectarian in the purest form of the word!

Jesus prophesies that false teachers would come and seek to devour the flock of God (Matt. 7:15-20). He commands that we test the spirits to see whether they are of God (1 Jn. 4:1). False teachers exist! Do not be fooled by a false piety or phony grin. Study your Bible and test their teaching.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 19, pp. 596-598
October 4, 1990

By Clinton D. Hamilton

Introduction

Among the people of God, there appears to be a tendency to swing from one extreme to another. Even in the New Testament times, there were those who were moving away from truth to error (Gal. 1:6,7; 5:1-4). There is also the tendency in some brethren to become obsessed with one point and look at everything through this perspective. Consequently, one’s thinking becomes clouded and the observations made are warped, Exegesis of Scripture becomes eisegesis because the point of obsession causes the Scripture to be explained so as to advance this one point that seems so centrally important and pivotal.

Apparently it did not take long for the early church to leave the simple mission for her expressed in Scripture and to become a bureaucracy with layers of officials and titles. The functions and duties associated with these officials and titles did not conform to the scriptural teaching. Throughout the history of religion, as soon as a restoration of New Testament religion is accomplished there is already at work the deterioration into a bureaucratic structure with functions and titles that again violate the scriptural teaching. When these excesses occur, an attempt to correct then also occurs. Sometimes, there is an over reaction to the abuses manifested in another arrangement that likewise does not conform to scriptural teaching.

Our generation is witnessing such a phenomenon. In responding to the error or a highly bureaucratic, institutionalized arrangement, some brethren have ignored plain scriptural teaching that in effect denies the New Testament arrangement. This article is addressed to this issue.

Meaning of Some Basic Terms

Church in English translations of the Bible and ekklesia in the Greek text are terms the understanding of which is crucial to a correct understanding of the New Testament arrangement. Ekklesia means an assembly or company of people. The particular context in which it occurs must define the nature of the assembly or company. It could be a mob gathered from the street in a place of meeting (Acts 19:29,32,41). On another occasion and in a different context, the term can mean an assembly as provided by law and regularly constituted (Acts 19:39). Another sense might be a group of people called into being under the leadership of one individual (Acts 7:38). It can also mean the group or company of people built by the Lord upon the bedrock of his deity (Matt. 16:18) and this would include all such people throughout the world for all time. The term is also applied to disciples of Christ called out of the world into special relation to him and residing in certain geographical areas but never meeting in a single assembly (Acts 9:31). A group of people persecuted in their homes and possibly other places but viewed as being part of a company or assembly (Acts 8:1,3; 22:4-5; 26:10-12; Phil. 3:6) is also referred to by the term. Sometimes the term is used to refer to the assembled group during which assembly certain rules or laws are to be observed relative to order, number, and gender of those who are permitted to address the group or company that is assembled together (1 Cor. 14:23-35). It should be observed that in all the uses of the term in all these contexts, although the precise meaning is different, the basic meaning of company or assembly is evident. The company may be assembled as a body or dispersed but in the broader sense they are still a company or an assembly. This company of believers, when it refers to those saved by the Lord Jesus and laid upon the foundation of his deity may be in the whole world in all generations, in a single locality (1 Cor. 1:2; Acts 20:17; et. al.), in more than one geographical region, assembled in one group, or disassembled.

Those constituting the body of Christ are saints (1 Cor. 1:2, et. al.) but among them in a local assembly there are elders and deacons (Phil. 1:1; Acts 20:17,28; 14:23) who must possess certain qualifications prior to being appointed elders in every church (Acts 14:23). Presbuteros, elder, refers to one who is older and experienced in the word of God and its application to one’s life. Bishop, episcopos, is used interchangeably with elder (Acts 10:27,28). These two terms refer to one and the same. Poimen, pastor or shepherd, also is used interchangeably with elder or bishop (1 Pet. 5:1-4). The elders are to pastor or shepherd the flock with Jesus being the chief shepherd. These persons are given specific responsibilities in relation to the saints among whom they are elders, bishops, or pastors (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:1-4; Heb. 13:17; 1 Thess. 5:12-14; 1 Tim. 5:17-20). A church when fully constituted, without lack, will have elders (Tit. 1:5). It is obvious there is a differentiation of functions among members of the church (Eph. 4:11-16; 1 Cor. 12:28).

Appoint, cheirontoneo, originally used in connection with showing of the hand in the Athenian legislature, was used in the New Testament to indicate a recognition of someone for a special function or service. It was used when Paul and Barnabas appointed or ordained elders in every church (Acts 14:23) and in connection with churches who chose certain individuals to convey their contributions to the poor saints in Jerusalem (2 Cor. 8:19). In this latter case, it is obvious that the collective group took the action of choosing the individuals.

Another word for appoint is kathistemi which means to set apart an individual to a position or office. This is the word used in Titus 1:5 which reference to elders,

The churches of Galatia and the church at Corinth were given charge to lay by in store on the first day of the week and what they laid by in a treasury was to be conveyed by messengers of the church that produced the treasury (1 Cor. 16:1-3). The funds the brethren contributed were stored or in a treasury to be conveyed to those in need in Jerusalem. It was to be stored up so that when Paul arrived there would not be the need to take up a collection. The treasury jointly built up by divine arrangement was to be conveyed by messengers whom the church chose also by divine arrangement. This is clearly collective action of the assembly of disciples.

All these New Testament terms clearly indicate that there are to be actions taken ip a collective sense. The local assembly acts as a unit to accomplish an objective which God has charged to be done. It is true that the actions authorized are not designed to be accomplished only by a complex bureaucratic organizational structure. However, on the other hand, neither does the New Testament demand that there be no collective or unit action. When a church does what the New Testament charged her to do, that church does not become an institutional one in the bad sense of this term. When a church contributes to the doing of what God commands the church to do in the manner in which he commands, there is not the building up of an institutionalized arrangement which runs counter to the New Testament teaching. True, the church may become institutionalized in a sense that would violate scriptural teaching. On the other hand, an arrangement can be set up that circumvents the collective action commanded by God. Brethren need to observe Scripture and not create figments of their imagination that in fact cause them to violate Scripture.

Collective Actions

The whole church can come together in one place (1 Cor. 14:23). In this case, the assembly at Corinth gathers together in one place. It is the assembly assembling. Saints are not to forsake the assembling of themselves together (Heb. 10:25). On the first day of the week, saints laid by in store (in a treasury) to carry out a work authorized by God (1 Cor. 16:1-2). When the church assembles, edifying takes place through teaching and exhortation (1 Cor. 14:26). Those engaged in such edifying are worthy of their hire (1 Cor. 9:7-14). It is obvious that the assembly can provide the place of assembling which act (assembling) is commanded by God. Further, the evangelist who preaches the gospel should live of the gospel as ordained of God (1 Cor. 9:14). Therefore, the treasury put together by the contributions of the saints on the first day of the week when they assemble can be used to do what God commands. This is made clear in the instruction given concerning the putting together of a collection for God given purposes (1 Cor. 16:1-3).

When the church assembles on the first day of the week, the Lord’s supper is to be observed (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:2334). Being instructed to observe the Lord’s supper in assembly (1 Cor. 11:33), the church is certainly authorized to provide that which they are commanded to do when assembled in one place. Collective action is authorized to provide what is necessary to carry out the command which is the obligation of all of them and not just one of them. To carry out these instructions as an assembly is not to institutionalize the church in a bad sense. In fact, to raise the issue of institutionalizing in this context is preposterous.

The Lord commands on occasion that, when assembled together, certain brethren overtaken in sin of which they are not repentant shall be committed to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor. 5:4-5). This is an action taken by the assembly in assembly. Since all things are to be done decently and in order in an assembly of saints, it follows that some collective decisions would need to have been made (1 Cor. 14:40).

Churches that put together collections for a purpose which God commands, make the choice of how the collections are handled (1 Cor. 16:3; 2 Cor. 8:23; 11:8-9). This required collective action, that is the congregation acted as a unit. The same is true in the case of Acts 11:28-30 when the brethren in Antioch sent relief to the saints in Judea. Paul and Barnabas were the ones the church chose by whom to send their contribution to the elders in Judea (Acts 11:30).

Evangelists in areas remote from contributing churches were and are to be assisted in proclaiming the gospel (Phil. 4:15-17; 2 Cor. 11:8-9). Of necessity, the contribution had to be collected into one treasury and then a decision had to be made about how to convey it to the evangelist. Furthermore, a prior decision had to be made by the congregation about which preacher would be assisted and by how much. Doing all this does not involve the church in violation of the will of God by institutionalizing it as some are wont to say. When a church does what God authorizes, without violating some other instruction of the New Testament, one cannot charge that there has been a departure from God’s way.

Churches with poor among them who need assistance certainly should contribute to their necessities (Acts 4:34-35; 6:1-6; 11:30). When the brethren make a collective decision about whom to help and in what way, they are doing what God commands if they do not violate some other command in the doing of it. The fact that collective action occurs is not sinful. The church is not thereby institutionalized.

On the other hand, in seeking to carry out what God commands, it is possible to create arrangements or organizations which would violate scriptural teaching. Institutions may be created outside the church or arrangements made within the church that would be wrong. As Jesus said to the Pharisees, we ought to do what God commands without omitting obedience to all that he has commanded (Matt. 23:23).

Conclusion

It is clear from the preceding study that collective action of the church is authorized or commanded by God. When the church does what is authorized in the manner in which God commands, there is no sin. But if one moves the church into acts not authorized, structures the church with officers and functions not authorized, or builds appendages to, or creates organizations through which the church seeks to accomplish what God commands, then there is an institutionalizing of the church in a sense that God never authorized. But let ut not condemn as sinful the doing of that which God commands.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 19, pp. 594-595
October 4, 1990

By Calvin R. Schlabach

You’ve probably seen the same bumper sticker on cars that I have. “Don’t follow me, ” it says, “I’m lost, too!” Certainly, the way some people drive, their cars ought to have some kind of warning posted, but that particular bumper sticker caught my attention the other day. It occurred to me that those words of warning could be very appropriately applied to some others we need to be warned about.

I thought of those words a few days ago when I was watching one of our local television “evangelists.” When he wasn’t blowing his own horn about all the “good” he was doing or begging his listeners to send more money to God (but be sure to make your check out to this fellow), he was preaching a “gospel” that would condemn men’s souls rather than save them (Matt. 23:15; Gal. 1:6-9).

When he was telling people that they could be saved by faith alone (Jas. 2:24), or that they could just pray to God for salvation (Acts 2:37-38), or that he had led hundreds of thousands of people to Christ (2 Pet. 2:18), or that people could follow him and he would lead them to heaven (Jn. 6:68), I felt angry that there wasn’t a warning flashing across the bottom of the television screen! “Don’t follow me! I’m lost, too!”

But people didn’t see any such caution, and most people never see the warning that Jesus gave us in the Scriptures. “Let them alone,” he says of such false teachers. “They are blind guides of the blind. And if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit” (Matt. 15:14). Yes, that “evangelist” was lost, and most people will not open God’s word to learn this for themselves. Instead, they will blindly follow men like him into the pit of eternal condemnation.

Those words of warning would also be appropriately applied to some of our worldly neighbors. I am often amazed at my brothers and sisters in Christ who will engage in some activity that is at best questionable, and then try to justify it by saying, “But everyone’s doing it! “

Friends, don’t we realize that these people are lost? Should our standard of conduct come from people who know nothing of God and his will for men (Rom. 12:2)? When we are tempted to adopt their life style, ethics, priorities, or goals in life, let’s remember the warning: “Don’t follow me. I’m lost, too!” Following their lead may take us somewhere we really don’t want to go (Matt. 7:13-14).

Wouldn’t it be a good idea, too, for us to apply a similar caution even to other Christians? I am concerned when I see members of the Lord’s church who blindly follow wherever they are led. They never bother to study the Bible for themselves; they never question the things they are taught; they just accept whatever comes from the preacher or the Bible class teachers without stopping to examine things for themselves (1 Thess. 5:21).

Fortunately for many Christians, most of those in teaching positions in the Lord’s churches are capable, honest men, good students and teachers of God’s word. But should I be content to blindly accept whatever a preacher says and hope that he’s not wrong? Should I have that much confidence in him or that little concern for my own soul? No! I made that mistake when I was in a denomination and was trusting my “pastor” for guidance. I’ll not be foolish enough to risk condemnation again!

The lessons of history, from the days of the apostles (Gal. 1:6ff) until the present time, demonstrate clearly that when Christians cease to study God’s word for themselves, to question and examine what they are being taught, they become easy victims of error. Have we so quickly forgotten how liberalism and institutionalism swept through and devastated the church within the last generation? Many Christians at that time were so enamored with “great leaders” that they never bothered to ask where they were being led – they never bothered to ask whether these things were of God. And we know the results. Let’s be careful about blindly following even good men.

Let’s remember that the only one whom we can completely trust to safely lead us in all things is Jesus Christ our Lord. He calls men to follow him (Jn. 12:26), and we need not worry if we do so. He set the perfect example that will lead us through all of the problems and pitfalls of this life and on to eternal glory with the Father in heaven.

In the book of Revelation, those who are eternally saved are described as, “the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes” (14:4). He “shall be their shepherd, and shall guide them to springs of the water of life” (7:17).

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 18, p. 559
September 20, 1990