Truth Magazine

By Ron Halbrook

III. Apostasy Through Centralization

A. Danger of Apostasy. If we are disciples of Christ, we cannot substitute some other pattern for his own pattern of independent and autonomous churches, each overseeing its own work. When elders advocate a different practice, they speak “perverse things” which lead men away from Christ in the name of following him (Acts 20:30). When preachers defend another practice, they “depart from the faith” and fail their mission to “preach the word” and to “charge some that they teach no other doctrine” (1 Tim. 4:1; 1:3; 2 Tim. 4:2). Brethren who follow such elders and preachers are following blind guides – “both shall fall into the ditch” (Matt. 15:14).

B. Pattern of Centralization. Over and over in history, the people of God have proven themselves vulnerable to the temptation to centralize their work. In the pattern of apostasy, Israel desired a king, large city churches carried out area-wide programs leading to the papacy, and brethren formed missionary societies one hundred years ago. Churches today centralize their work of evangelism in the Herald of Truth, benevolence in orphanages, and edification in church supported colleges.

C. Revelation vs. Substitution. We must learn again the vital difference between divine revelation and human substitutions. Is Jesus Christ divine, or only a great human teacher? Must we immerse in baptism, or will sprinkling do? Are we limited to singing, or is playing instruments acceptable? If the church is to preach the gospel, does that exclude from its mission political work, economic reforms, social service, and entertainment? When God revealed the local church and equipped each one to do its own work, may we substitute churches working through human institutions (church supported schools, camps, orphanages, colleges, etc.) and the centralized elderships of the sponsoring church idea (Herald of Truth, World Radio, etc.)? If any one of these substitutions is acceptable to God, all of them are!

D. Divine vs. Human Organization. Does the authority of God’s Word and the voice of his Son mean anything to us? The voice of the Good Shepherd authorizes the local church to conduct its own work of evangelism, edification, and benevolence. It may use agents and methods, buy goods and services. We can all agree to that because the divine organization of the church is revealed – thus saith the Scriptures! But church donations to human institutions, including the brotherhood eldership of sponsoring churches, for any endeavor, is emphatically not authorized in the teaching of Christ. Since the law of Moses authorized a priesthood from Levi and “spake nothing” concerning Judah, the effect was to forbid, exclude, and prohibit priests from Judah (Heb. 7:14). To bind circumcision today, when the inspired men “gave no such commandment,” is to pervert the gospel (Acts 15:24; Gal. 1:7). God’s revealed plan for the local church has the emphatic effect of forbidding, excluding, and prohibiting us from forming human institutions to coordinate and centralize the work of the churches.

E. What’s the Difference? “What’s the difference? We are all doing a good work either way,” someone says. It makes a great difference to God, whether it does to men, whether we speak “as the oracles of God” or not. It makes a big difference to God whether we practice what is revealed in “the doctrine of Christ” or go beyond that revelation (1 Pet. 4:11; 2 Jn. 9). God’s plan for the local church is in the Bible, in the oracles of God, in the doctrine of Christ. We can put our finger on the Book, chapter, and verse for it. Now, here is the difference: human institutions, societies, conventions, boards, headquarters, and centralizing elderships for church cooperation are not in the Bible. They are not in the oracles of God, not in the doctrine of Christ. We can not put our finger on the Book, chapter, and verse which authorizes any of them!

F. Centralization Is Just One Phase of Apostasy. It is no accident or coincidence that the big city churches of the 1940s which aspired to be sponsoring churches also wanted to use much of the money raised for a massive benevolence program to the general public in Europe – a sort of Marshall Plan for the churches of Christ. These same churches became much interested in supporting colleges, orphanages, camps – and then clinics, convalescent homes, hospitals, and something called “medical missions.” These same churches pioneered church kitchens, “fellowship halls” (euphemism for rooms used for suppers, parties, and games), recreational programs, and “family life” centers (glorified gymnasiums). These churches are into everything from job training to legal services. These same churches are broadening their concepts of grace and fellowship, participating in ministerial associations and interdenominational services, and generally entering the mainstream of Protestant denominationalism.

It is no accident or coincidence that our studies for three days have covered that whole spectrum. Those of us who protest “liberalism” realize that this problem is much deeper than one specific program or issue over which we differ. The fundamental problem is a gradual loss of respect for the authority of God’s Word – a creeping “loose constructionism” opening the way to a whole complex of concepts and, practices which are foreign to the Bible. Such teaching eats as a vicious and violent cancer deeper and deeper into the vitals of faith (2 Tim. 2:17; 2:13).

Conclusion: Let Us Stand With Christ – Hear His Voice! Those who love the Good Shepherd and hear his voice must not be seduced by illusions of a grace, peace, and unity which tolerate liberalism. Rather we must take the mighty weapons of truth and press the war against apostasy, “casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God,-and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:35). We are not trying to destroy souls – we are trying to destroy the digression that destroys souls. We do not hate our digressive brother, but labor in love to convert him from the error of his way in order to save a soul from death and to hide a multitude of sins (Jas. 5:19-20).

As much as we love our erring brethren and long for fellowship with them, we love Christ even more and desire fellowship with God above all other desires. The lines of truth and fellowship are drawn by the Lord himself in Scripture. They are not ours to barter and negotiate. We cannot apologize for them nor compromise them – not in this place, or any place, not at this time, or any time. We can extend hands of love, courtesy, and concern for the welfare of our erring brethren, but not “the right hands of fellowship” which betoken unity in Christ, in work, and in worship.

Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds (2 Jn. 9-11).

May God help us all to accept and to abide in the teaching delivered by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.(1) May we follow the voice of the Good Shepherd, and flee from the voice of every stranger.

Endnote

1. Another sign of digression is the effort to limit “doctrine of Christ” in 2 Jn. 9 to the doctrine that Jesus is the Christ. This limitation greatly broadens the lines of fellowship, but it is a false unity. My book on The Doctrine of Christ and Unity of the Saints (Marion, Ind.; Cogdill Foundation Publ., 1977) is a detailed examination of 2 Jn. 9.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 18, pp. 556-557
September 21, 1989

By Clinton D. Hamilton

This is the first column as query editor of the Guardian of Truth I have written. It seems appropriate, therefore, for me to express some introductory comments.

Comments About Hoyt Houchen

All of us express to Hoyt Houchen sincere gratitude for his work in editing this column with diligence, grace, and sincerity. Those who know him respect him and appreciate his dedication to truth as revealed in the faith. His loyalty to the Lord is unquestioned and his desire to adhere to Bible teaching is well known. Those who are acquainted with his work are convinced of his goodwill, devoutness, and genuine humble spirit. He, as the editor of this column, has left a tradition of good work and Bible adherence.

Purpose of Writing

My work schedule in heavy. It was after several days of reflection about it that I finally accepted the invitation of Mike Willis to edit this column. Many brethren have insisted that I write more. This I have determined to do. But I had given no thought to commence such by editing a query column, although I have always appreciated the challenge of well phrased questions in the search for truth. Questions can clarify and they may also confuse. If the respondent understands the querist, much good can come from the communication. However, both need to understand each other. It is proverbial to say that “fools ask questions that wise men cannot answer.” It is true that some questions may be posed to which no one can give answer.

The purpose of this column under my editorship will be to deal with the Bible related questions and to respond to these to the best of my ability, seeking always to respond with what the Bible teaches. One recognizes that knowledge of the truth is not uniform among all of us. What may be perfectly clear to one may appear to be not clear to another. Hopefully the analysis, argumentation, and conclusions expressed in this column will accord with the truth for it will be the focus of the studies detailed herein.

As a student of the Bible, I have been thrilled with the richness of the revelation of the mind of God. That he would share his thoughts with men is almost overwhelming. When I read his word, I keep in mind what it is that I am reading. Since man is made in his image (Gen. 1:26,27) and since he is the author of the word (1 Cor. 2:9-13; 2 Pet. 1:19-21; Jn. 17:17), one can expect to understand his revelation because it is rational, agreeable to the reason of men (1 Pet. 2:2). Logikon in this latter passage, which is translated spiritual in the American Standard Version, occurs one other time in Romans 12:1. However, int eh King James Version, it is translated reasonable in Romans 12 and sincere in 1 Peter 2. There is an important element for all of us in these passages. Man is a creature of reason because has rational nature by design of God. His revelation is directed to this rational nature in words which can be understood when one reads them (Eph 2:1-7). Wherein we fail to understand, the fault lies not with God but with man. Believing, therefore, that men can understand the revelation, this column will be written. Wherein either of us does not understand, there is something hindering that understanding.

Before one undertakes such a task as editing this column, one needs to understand the policies and attitude of the editor. Accordingly, I queried the editor carefully to ascertain policies under his editorship about the freedom of one who edits the column in his writing. Upon being fully assured that I was free to express my analysis, argumentation, and conclusions without any impediment from the editor, I knew I could be comfortable in editing the column. He, of course, asks for himself the same freedom, which is altogether proper.

One of the basic purposes in my editing this column will be to bring people together on the basis of the faith. There is no desire to create friction and to cause ill will among brethren. Another purpose Will be to express revealed truth, not personal opinions and views which might create confusion. It also shall be the purpose to deal with the issue in the questions in relation to revelation and not to deal in personalities. It shall not be the purpose to disparage, ridicule, or provoke other persons. One can deal with scriptural responses to questions without being hateful or ill-willed toward others. Typically questions will be answered as briefly as possible. However, it may be necessary to set the context for answers which the questions do not put in the context. Frequently, a brief answer can be misunderstood, if context is not properly given to it. This is a judgment issue with which not all persons might agree.

Because of the limitation of time and space, not every question that may be sent can be dealt with in the column. I have been given complete latitude and freedom to choose which questions to answer and what answers to express. Mike Willis, the editor, only wanted my pledge to be scriptural which, of course, was my intention expressed to him.

It is in the preceding context that I begin this work and in which I purpose to execute it throughout my tenure as editor of the column. I do not propose to be speculative and to deal with issues that would fall in the category of foolish questioning that will create envy, strife, railings, evil surmising, and wranglings (1 Tim. 6:3-5; 2 Tim. 2:23-26; Tit. 3:9). The intent will be to minister toward godliness (reverence and respect for God). Now to a question which was forwarded to me by the editor from a reader.

The Holy Spirit

Question: “Please explain Luke 11:13, Acts 5.32; Romans 5.5; 2 Corinthians 1:21-22, 5:5; and Galatians 4:6 in reference to the Holy Spirit.”

Reply: Deity has three persons in the total class deity. These persons are Jehovah, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit (Gen. 1:1-3; Jn. 1:1-3,14,18; 1 Cor. 2-10, et.al.). Humanity from the beginning has been composed of billions. But what makes one a human being and to have the quality of humanity is that which each has. Likewise, whatever attributes there are of deity are those held by each member of the class. There is one humanity and there is one deity. This should not be difficult for us to understand. This is a fundamental concept which will underlie the response to this question.

Jesus promised to send another Comforter (Jn. 14:16-19). Comforter, parakletos, means one who is an advocate, succorer, helper, or guide. Another, allos, means one of the same kind or nature as opposed to heteros, one of a different kind. As Jesus had been the guide or helper, the Holy Spirit is to be one of the same kind. It is the Holy Spirit who is to come when he has gone away for the purpose of guiding them and to be with them. He would bring to their remembrance what Jesus had taught (Jn. 14:26) and would reveal what they had not been ready to receive when Christ was with them (Jn. 16:12,13). About the mission and work of the Holy Spirit much is taught in the Bible. The passages cited in the question are some of this revelation.

The truth, the faith, revealed by the Holy Spirit is to guide men in their relation to God (1 Cor. 2:13; 1 Thess. 2:13). Led by the Holy Spirit, we are baptized into one body (1 Cor. 12:13).

Christ dwells in our hearts by faith (Eph. 3:17). Since Jehovah, the Son, and the Spirit have the same nature, one can easily deduce that the Spirit and God dwell likewise. The issue of in-dwelling, therefore, should not be considered a mystery with reference to the Holy Spirit and not with reference to God and Christ. Our lives are hid with Christ in God. Christ in us is the ground of the hope of glory (Col. 1:27).

The context of Luke 11:13 shows that human fathers having love and affection for their children are able to give them good gifts. These parents have sins and sometimes evil motives but if they can give good gifts, then certainly God who is pure and sinless can give the Holy Spirit as a gift to them that ask him. That is exactly what happens when one obeys him (Acts 5:32). The apostles were witnesses of that to which they testified and so is the Holy Spirit whom God gives to all those that obey him. One receives the Spirit by the hearing of faith (Gal. 3:2) and his works are reflected in one’s life (Gal. 5:22). One walks by the Spirit in order not to fulfil the lust of the flesh (Gal. 5:16). If one does not so walk, he grieves the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:30). Timothy was to guard the good things which had been committed to him through the Holy Spirit which dwells in us (2 Tim. 1:14). We are made partakers of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 6:4). To a person of faith there is no dispute of this point. The Spirit bears witness to us through or by the word of God (Heb. 10: 15-17). God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are in us when we are led by his revelation. That the Spirit dwells in us, is given to us, or sent into our hearts is not debatable with a person of faith. The revelation of God declares this.

God’s love “has been shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which was given unto us” (Rom. 5:5). All God’s blessings or grace are made available to us through the word of God, the gospel, of which the Holy Spirit is the revealer (Tit. 2:11,12). The work of the Spirit as he was sent by the Son to do is the means of the pouring out of God’s love in our hearts. The love of God comes to fruition in us when we are led by the Holy Spirit.

The token or pledge that God has given to those obedient to him is the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 1:21,22). God’s pledge that the blessedness that he promises will be forthcoming is the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 5:5; Eph. 1:14). God’s sending the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth and to dwell in our hearts is the pledge, earnest, or token that what he promises will be ours. He is in those who are led by faith.

Because we are sons of God, he sends the Spirit into our hearts (Gal. 4:6). We are sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus because we have been baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:26,27). Those that are led by the Spirit are the children of God (Rom. 8:14). When men are led by the Spirit whom God and Christ sent, they are sons of God and have the Spirit of God in them. It is not a mysterious direct operation that is unpredictable and wholly emotional. It is really a matter of faith by which one is to walk (2 Cor. 5:7). Faith is created by the word of Christ (Rom. 10:17). When one walks by faith doing his revealed will, God promised the Holy Spirit to dwell in his heart. One begins in the Spirit and remains in the Spirit by walking by his revelation (Gal. 3:3). Sanctification of fife or conduct is evidence of the Spirit’s dwelling in one’s heart (1 Thess. 4:8). How comforting this should be to a Christian that God’s pledge or earnest, the Holy Spirit, is in us. Believers know because of the word of God and should live with this assurance, being led by the Holy Spirit.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 18, pp. 549-550
September 21, 1989

By John A. Smith

I recently had the opportunity to attend a special seminar for ministers and teachers at Possibilities Unlimited (a unique drug and alcohol treatment center for young people in Lexington, KY). I was not prepared for what I was going to experience. Few things that I have seen in my life have affected my thinking as dramatically as did the noontime presentation by the “Possibilities Unlimited Players.”

The curtain slowly opened to reveal seven “druggies” who were going to tell the story of their sordid past by reenacting recent counseling sessions. They spoke of their addiction to and experimentation with cocaine, marijuana, alcohol and a variety of other harmful substances. Their involvement with drugs had caused them to become withdrawn from parents and disinterested in school work. None of this surprised me as I had witnessed the same things several years ago when I taught junior high school. These seven young people, who ranged in age from 15 to 23, bravely stood before a room full of strangers to impress upon the adults present the severity and complexity of the drug abuse epidemic in central Kentucky. As they spoke I was suddenly struck with a terrifying realization. These young people looked just like my kids and the other young people where I preach! They were all clean-cut, well-dressed and very mannerly.

I comforted my fears with the rationalization that they had been “transformed” by the P.U. staff. Surely just weeks before they had been wearing grubby jeans and t-shirts which advertised the latest in hot drug culture music. In my mind I pictured the boys as having long greasy hair pulled back in pony tails with 17 earrings on one ear. The girls, I assumed, most likely didn’t look much better. And so with this rationalization to comfort me for awhile the presentation was a little less frightening.

After the young people had finished their presentation, they stood before an audience of about 150 adults and agreed to answer any questions that we might have. I found many of their answers more troubling than their appearance.

One lady wanted to know if they had been exposed to any type of spiritual training. I thought of my own children and the number of sermons and classes they had attended. Surely this, I reasoned, was a certain vaccine against drug involvement. But this was shattered when five of the seven responded that they had been active in some type of church youth group on a regular basis, even while heavily involved in drugs. I found out later that most of these had been members of conservative evangelical churches which respected and promoted a biblical standard of morality. Obviously just “going to church” was not going to be enough. Again I was shaken.

Later during the question and answer session, they were asked if any of them had come from broken homes. I pictured each of these courageous young people trying to put their lives back together without the ‘support of a loving and happy home. Surely the divorce and domestic turmoil to which they had been exposed had contributed greatly to their drug involvement. So, my kids are safe. After all they have their mother and father living happily together in the same home. However, my stomach began to quiver as I kept tally of their answers. Only one out of the seven had come from a broken home. Most of them described their families as caring and loving. I was suddenly beginning to feel overwhelmed.

The final question was asked through teary eyes by a woman who had sat quietly near the side of the cafeteria. With a distinctive quiver in her voice she asked what their parents could have done or not done that would have kept them from becoming so heavily involved in drugs. (I found out later that this woman was the mother of one of the young ladies on the stage.) They each responded with two suggestions which were extremely insightful. Their suggestions were that their parents trust them less, not making excuses for them, and be harder on them.

By being naively trusting and making excuses to teachers and neighbors, the parents had become “enablers.” They were actually making it easier for their children to become increasingly more involved with drugs. The young people said they often attempted to cover up drug induced behavior by weaving some wild and fanciful tale which the parents appeared to buy without question or, at least, chose not to confront. Thus the parents made it easier for their children to continue their downward spiral into the abyss of drug abuse. These young people were crying out for discipline. They did not possess the self-discipline needed to resist the various temptations to which they had been subjected. They needed and wanted parents to impose rules which were fairly and firmly executed.

As I was leaving the cafeteria, I begin to once again picture Molly and Tom. Diane and I had always tried to be realistic with them. We were strict with them. We set guidelines for their behavior and swiftly carried out the appropriate discipline if the rules were violated. So maybe we didn’t have anything to worry about. And after all, in spite of everything else, neither of them look like a “druggie.”

Later in the day I had the opportunity to talk privately with Dr. George Ross the director of Possibilities Unlimited. I complimented him on the fine program and the appearance of the young people. I was impressed all day with how well dressed and groomed the clients were. I told him how glad I was to see institutions which imposed dress and grooming standards. I was not prepared for his response. Appearance was after all among my last fortresses of convenient parental comfort. His words hit me like a thunder bolt. “The way you see them now is the way they looked when they came to us.” I couldn’t believe my ears. They had not been wearing grubby jeans, gigantic ear rings, or drug music t-shirts. They were by all appearances clean cut, “All-American,” rosy cheeked young people. They looked just like my kids!

I pondered this for days as I looked into the eyes of Molly and Tom with fear and uncertainty. My heart ached as I pictured having to take them to a similar treatment center. So many of my defenses had been stripped away. For days I felt vulnerable and so inadequate to help them face the various pressures coming their way. I talked with them about what I had seen, the advice of the young people and their friends. We prayed about it as a family and discussed it again.

I am convinced now that there are no easy answers or easy preventions to the problem of drug abuse and young people. As parents we need to set a good example for our children. As we bring them up on the pure milk of the Word, we need to show them how it applies in practical ways in their lives. Knowledge of God’s Word is not enough. They need to begin developing the wisdom to see how it can have a positive and practical effect in their lives. They need to see and be impressed with the benefits of a pure and holy lifestyle. Their lives and ours must revolve around Jesus Christ and service to him and others. We need to pray with them and for them – trusting in God and not in our abilities to raise them.

I wish that every parent could have seen these brave young people struggling so hard to overcome the cruel slavery to drugs. We all need to be stopped and troubled by them as we ponder the rearing of our own children. We must learn to look beyond the outward appearance to determine what is really going on inside their minds and bodies. Parents need to take the time to talk with their children and be involved in their lives.

Dr. Ross presented the following signs as important indicators of the possibility of drug activity:

How can you tell If your ‘normal’ kid is on drugs?

Are you looking but not seeing?

School – Has the adolescent brought home lower grades and developed a negative attitude toward school? Does the adolescent skip classes? Has the adolescent been suspended or expelled? Heavy drug users often drop out of school.

Dishonesty – Has the adolescent concealed drug usage and either denied or minimized it when discovered? Has the adolescent been caught stealing from parents or shoplifting? The adolescent may resort to cheating at school or forging school excuses.

Personality Changes – Has the adolescent changed friends, started using foul language, or begun lying about his activities? Seclusiveness and avoidance of adults, and irritability and fits of anger or rage with little or no provocation are common. There is a loss of motivation, lowering of ambition, loss of drive toward goals, and no quest for excellence.

Sexual Behavior – Promiscuity is common, with consequences of venereal disease or pregnancy. Girls may be on birth control pills.

Law Breaking – Traffic violations, vandalism, shoplifting, breaking and entering may occur.

Physical Condition – Personal grooming and hygiene may deteriorate. Speech and actions may be detectably slowed. Gait and posture may change. Clothing and hairstyle may change. Younger teenagers may have decreased physical development of sexual characteristics. In girls, menstruation may become infrequent and decreased.

The adolescent may exhibit a lack of vitality, with need for excessive sleep at unusual times. Eating habits may be altered and weight loss may occur. Bloodshot eyes, dilated pupils, volubility, excessive or inappropriate laughter, along with slowed speech and decreased coordination may indicate marijuana use. The adolescent may attempt to conceal bloodshot eyes with eye drops, and mask marijuana or alcohol odor with perfume or shaving lotion.

Medical Condition – Infections of the skin and respiratory tract are common. A chronic cough without apparent infection may occur. Extreme fatigue and lassitude are common. The adolescent may complain of frequent colds or chest pains.

Family Relations – Immaturity and withdrawal from family relationships are common. The adolescent may avoid being seen with parents or siblings and avoid family outings. Household responsibilities and chores may be neglected. The adolescent may accuse parents of “hassling” or not trusting him. The adolescent may become manipulative, striving to create conflict between parents.

Although many of these indicators often appear in any teenager as part of normal puberty, if an adolescent demonstrates a large number of these characteristics, then there is a high probability that he is harmfully involved in drugs.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 18, pp. 558-559
September 21, 1989

By Robert F. Turner

Is it heresy to suggest we may be placing too much emphasis upon the presence of each and every church member at each and every service? Well, the Scriptures still read, “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together. . . ” (Heb. 10:25); and many years of experience testify that “oncers” and those who frequently “miss services” are the weak, and the first to “fall away.” But our stress on “attendance” may be out of balance with other aspects of the problem. While we are counting bodies it is possible we are neglecting the very basis for coming together: selling short those elements that give attendance its proper sphere and meaning.

Jesus taught, “Labor not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life” (Jn. 6:27). He was not saying it was wrong to work for food, but that there was something more important than food for. the body. Peter said of wives, “Whose adorning, let it not be the putting on of apparel; but . . . the hidden man of the heart”. (1 Pet. 3:34). He did not question the wearing of clothes, but put them in a less important place than “the ornament of a, meek and quiet spirit. ” In like fashion, while physical presence is a part of “together” worship, there are other essential elements without which our presence means little. We need to seek and understand these things, and stress their importance.

Malachi wrote 100 years or more after the Israelites returned from captivity, apparently in the days of Nehemiah. Despite God’s goodness and mercy in bringing the exiles home and the blessings of a rebuilt temple, the priests, and the people had allowed their worship to degenerate into a farce. They offered polluted bread upon the altar, and sacrificed blind, lame and sick animals (Mal. 1-6-8). God said through Malachi, “Oh that there were one among, you that would shut the doors, that ye might not kindle fire on mine altar in vain.” Better to close up shop than to make such a mockery of their service to God. In verse 13, “Ye say also, Behold, what a weariness is it.” One need not say this to show it in his attitude and conduct.

The real problem is identified in Malachi 2: “If ye will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart to give glory unto my name, saith Jehovah of hosts, then will I send the curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings; yea, I have cursed them already, because ye do not lay it to heart” (v. 2, emphasis mine). Brother Homer Hailey comments, “Malachi teaches that although ritual may be important in religion, it is not. an end in itself. Ritual is only of value when, it expresses a deep and sincere spiritual worship unto God” (The Minor Prophets, p. 403). Here “ritual” refers to the form or order of conducting worship, N.T. examples stipulate elements of approved worship, but the “five items” are vain if we do not lay it to heart. We must not neglect the “spirit” of “spirit and truth” (Jn. 4:23-24).

Jesus identified something else more important than mere presence, in worship. “If you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift” (Matt. 5:23-24). This is placed in an old covenant setting, but the principle is clear. We can not worship acceptably when we have made no effort to correct our life and standing with our brethren. McGarvey-Pendleton comment: “Reconciliation takes precedence of all other duties, even of offerings made to God. . . . The offering of unclean hands is an abomination” (Fourfold Gospel).

The Hebrews passage (10:24-25) gives assembling a purpose other than and in addition to worship. “Let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: not forsaking . . . but exhorting.” Lightfoot says, “The thought is not so much that they were to encourage one another to meet together but that they were to meet together where such encouragement was available in the assembly. A chief function of public worship, according to Paul, is the edification of all who come together (1 Cor. 14:26ff)” (Jesus Christ Today). Obviously the benefits of assembling can not be had by those who neglect and forsake coming together, but we should be able to see that “attendance” alone is barren and of little value.

Sometimes the forsaker says, “My parents made me go when I was a child, and I determined when I was older . . . . ” Parents have obligation and authority to direct their children in right paths, but “nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4) goes far beyond forced attendance. The far more needful and difficult task is to teach the child to love the Lord and the brethren, to understand the reason and purpose of worship, and to want to serve God. Preachers, elders, and other zealous members may make the same mistake when they pressure the delinquent into attending. “The weapons of our warfare are not carnal” (2 Cor. 10:4-5) but involve “bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” It is not enough to capture the body, we must capture the heart for Christ.

Look carefully at 2 Corinthians 5:14f. “The love of Christ constrains us.” The “constraint” or police force of the kingdom of Christ operates through glad tidings upon the heart. We are made to realize we are lost in sin, to appreciate Christ’s unselfish sacrifice in our behalf, and are “forced” by fear, appreciation, and love to obey him. But this divine discipline does not stop with baptism. The true convert, being “renewed in the spirit of your mind” (Eph. 4:23), is a “new creature” (2 Cor. 5:17), and the law written on the heart (Heb. 8:10) dictates his life. Discipline must not be allowed to degenerate into mere social pressure. The conscience of taught and converted persons becomes the police force of the Lord’s kingdom.

What then are our obligations to delinquent members? We must seek to “restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness” (Gal. 6:1); “stir you up by reminding you” (2 Pet. 1: 13); exhorting and warning (Heb. 10:25ff). It is extremely important that our disciplinary actions be just that: an effort to teach more perfectly, and to stir their latent conscience to action. Even Paul’s delivery of Hymeneus and Alexander unto Satan was “that they may learn not to blaspheme” (1 Tim. 1:20). The “punishment” of the incestuous man was inward, for Paul said forgive and comfort “lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with too much sorrow” (2 Cor. 2:6-7). The withdrawal of 2 Thessalonians 3 was “that he may be ashamed” (v. 14). Camal weapons do not bring souls to Christ, nor can brow beating make faithful Christians. But a properly taught and tender conscience is a powerful force indeed.

We may place too much emphasis upon attendance alone or “per se,” but I would never suggest we could over emphasize the true need and reason for assembling with the saints, or meeting any of our divine obligations. It is important however, that we teach brethren to “lay it to heart,” if we would have faithful attendance and a worship which is acceptable before the throne of God.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 18, pp. 551-552
September 21, 1989