| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: God Hath Spoken
Author: Dark, Harris
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "God Hath Spoken" ***
God Hath Spoken
_By_
HARRIS DARK
_Published by_
GEORGE W. DEHOFF PUBLISHING COMPANY
MURFREESBORO, TENNESSEE
Copyright, 1947, by Harris Dark.
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
CONTENTS
I. God Hath Spoken 7
II. Generic and Specific Commands 19
III. Intolerance 32
IV. Where Did So Many Denominations Come From? 53
V. Which Church Is Right? 76
VI. Why Not Be Just A Christian? 102
VII. Excuses 113
VIII. An Erring Child of God 132
IX. The Sabbath 145
X. Seventh Day Adventism Reviewed 161
XI. Leadership 176
XII. Congregational Objectives and Activities 196
XIII. Congregational Objectives and Activities (_Continued_) 214
XIV. How Much Is Liberal? 233
XV. And Such Like 250
XVI. What Must I Do to Keep Saved? 269
I
GOD HATH SPOKEN
Each author has his own individual literary style and critics of
literature can identify the work of an author by the construction and
diction of his writing. The Holy Spirit is the author of the Bible and
he has a literary style peculiar to himself, which distinguishes his
work from that of all human authors. There are certain literary
characteristics in the Bible that are not found in any book written by
man. It would be profitable to list a great number of them and show how
they distinguish the Bible from every other book in the world.
One of the characteristics of the Holy Spirit’s literary style is the
use of very long sentences, one of which I shall read for our text this
morning. It is the opening sentence of the book of Hebrews: “God, who at
sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers
by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom
he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his
person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had
by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on
high; being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by
inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.”
That is the reading of four verses but just one sentence. It is not easy
to write such a long sentence that is easily understood, but this one is
perfectly clear. If some high-school student were called upon to analyze
this sentence and to underscore its principal clause, he would
underscore these words, “_God hath spoken_.” These three words, “_God
hath spoken_,” are the principal clause in this long sentence, and they
express a very wonderful and a very profound truth. If you will just
remember these three words and let them dwell in your heart, meditating
upon them both day and night, the fullness of their meaning will unfold
to you more and more as the days go by.
I
God Hath SPOKEN
It’s a wonderful thing that God hath spoken. Just try to imagine what
condition this world would be in if God had never spoken. What if he had
not spoken to Adam, to Noah, to Moses, or to any of our forefathers down
through the centuries?
As a clue to the conditions which would prevail if God had not spoken,
consider the places on earth today where the Bible is unknown; where its
influence has had only a very remote and indirect effect. In such places
we find backwardness, ignorance, disease, darkness. By way of contrast,
you may consider our own country where the Bible is better known; though
far from being fully and faithfully followed. Here we have an effective
system of public education, industrial and scientific advancement, a
comparatively high degree of intelligence, numerous charitable
organizations and institutions, or what may be summarily described as a
high standard of civilization.
If such material blessings come to those who even partially respect the
word that God has spoken, just think how wonderful its influence would
be if every individual were a faithful student and faithful follower of
his word. The word that God has spoken _makes a difference_! If it were
not for his word, we would be in total darkness. “It is not in man that
walketh to direct his own steps.” The learned Grecian philosophers, with
all of their wisdom, were not able to figure out a way of life that
would lead to happiness on this earth, to say nothing of leading to
salvation in that world which is to come. If God had not spoken, we
would not know where we came from, we would not know where we are going,
and we would not know what to do in the meantime. We owe all of our
progress, not only spiritually but otherwise also, to the fact that God
hath spoken. Oh, we could learn from the material universe that God is;
we could learn that some sort of a great being had brought into
existence all of the things we behold but if God had not spoken, we
would not know his will concerning us. We would not know what he wants
us to do. We would not know about the Way that leads to happiness here
and hereafter. So I want you to meditate upon the fact that God hath
spoken. I believe that that meditation will beget within you a feeling
of gratitude for God’s word, a greater appreciation of it, and,
therefore, a more careful study of it and a more diligent adherence unto
it.
II
GOD Hath Spoken
Every word in our principal clause is significant. Not only is it
important that God hath _spoken_, but it is important that _God_ hath
spoken—that _God_ is the one who has done the speaking. Just think what
that means! The great God of this universe, creator of heaven and earth
and everything therein—God, who sprinkled the heavens with teeming
millions of bright sparkling worlds, which we behold by night, and made
these bodies of ours that are so wonderfully and fearfully
constructed—God, who has all power and wisdom, and who is characterized
by love, mercy, and tenderness—God, the everlasting God, hath spoken.
God, the Holy and Living God of all the universe, hath condescended to
speak unto us who are mere worms of the dust.
Sometimes we see a man on this earth who thinks himself too good to
speak to some other man. Some folk will not speak to each other. We
ought to stop and consider the fact that God hath spoken to us. Just
think about how great he is, how holy he is, how pure he is, how
powerful he is, and yet he condescended to speak unto us, who are weak
and sinful creatures of earth! He wants us to hear him that we may enjoy
the blessings that come from learning and obeying the word that he has
spoken.
III
God HATH Spoken
But the other word in our text is also important—the word “hath.” It is
present perfect tense. It means that God has already spoken. Our text
does not say that God is continuing to speak but that God _hath_ spoken,
indicating that at the time this fact was recorded God’s revelation to
the world through Christ had already been made. It had not all been put
in written form, but the gospel had already been revealed. It was
already in existence among men. The apostles had already been preaching
for a number of years. At the time they finished committing the gospel
to writing (about A.D. 96), it could truthfully be said that revelation
was already complete.
Our text does not say “God is speaking,” or “God continues to speak,” or
“God will speak,” but “God _hath_ spoken.” Of course, as far as you and
I are individually concerned, as we read and study his word, we are
still hearing his message. But the point is that that message was
completely delivered unto the world nearly two thousand years ago. No
additions have been made to it since then and no addition will ever be
made to it. God _hath_ spoken. His message is complete. It is,
therefore, final. Those who claim a later revelation are making a false
claim. Those who are waiting for a future revelation are waiting in
vain. This very simple clause with just three words in it indicates that
God’s message to us through Christ is complete. God _hath_ spoken. This
being true, we need not expect another revelation.
This truth is further emphasized by other statements in the Bible. For
instance, in 2 Timothy, chapter 3, and beginning with verse 16, “All
scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness;
that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good
works.” Or, as one version says, “that the man of God may be complete,
furnished completely unto every good work.” So the word God hath spoken
is complete. It’s all we need. It furnishes the man of God completely
unto every good work. Therefore, we need not expect any further
revelation.
Notice the word “scripture.” The word “scripture” means that which has
been written. The word that God hath spoken has been put in written
form. We no longer receive it from the lips of the apostles, or from the
lips of those who first proclaimed it unto the world. After God had
spoken through them, they put his word in writing and it has been passed
down to us through the ages that have followed. By the providence of God
it has been translated into our own mother tongue so that we may read it
and study it for ourselves. Our testimony then is not an oral one, but a
written one.
In the 20th chapter of John, verses 30 and 31, we read, “And many other
signs, truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not
written in this book; but these are written, that ye might believe.”
Notice that word “written.” The source of our faith has been put in
written form. This fact refutes the claim that God is speaking directly
to people today. He _hath_ spoken. His word has already been delivered.
During my recent meetings in Georgia and North Carolina, I heard two men
say that God had spoken to them audibly. One man said he was passing
through a pine thicket one day and God spoke to him. I asked him what
God said to him. He replied, “God told me I needed a saviour.” Well, God
had already told him that, two thousand years ago. We have that revealed
in the Bible. I have never talked to a man who could tell me what God
had said to him unless he got it from the Bible. When a man thinks he
hears God speak today, if anyone honestly thinks such a thing, he is
simply recalling something that he has read in the Bible, or learned
from somebody else who read it in the Bible. God’s message was
completely delivered nearly two thousand years ago. Thus it is seen that
every word of our topic is important. The Almighty God hath already
spoken unto us.
IV
Study the Bible
Now I want to draw a few conclusions from this great fact. In view of
the fact that God has spoken, let us consider how we ought to study his
word. Just think—it’s a message from God, a message from Heaven! It
applies to you, personally and individually, just as much as it would if
he were to speak to you this morning in audible tones and address you by
name. Suppose, for example, he should call you by name and say, “Now why
tarriest thou? Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on
the name of the Lord.” Why, I believe you would hasten to do it. But
friends, he has already said it. In Acts 22:16, we find those very words
and they are written to you.
Notice again this sentence, “God hath spoken unto _us_.” His words are
addressed to us and they apply to you and me. Every word in the will of
Christ, the new testament or covenant, applies to us, and we ought to
regard it as a personal message from God Almighty unto us. Surely that
thought ought to inspire us to read the Bible every day. I don’t believe
anyone who has any regard for his own welfare and any respect for
Jehovah, can meditate upon the fact that God hath spoken without being
moved to study God’s word more diligently. God hath revealed to us his
word. Therefore, we ought to read it and study it.
V
God’s Word Is Final
Furthermore, friends, we ought to regard it as final and complete and as
the standard of truth, the standard by which all of our religious
questions are to be decided. This conclusion is fundamental and very
important. It needs to be emphasized. If you talk to the people of this
world and see how many different human standards they are relying upon,
you can see the importance of settling all religious questions by the
divine standard, the word that God hath spoken through Christ.
I want to use a simple illustration. Suppose three men measure the
length of this room and one of them uses a yardstick 35 inches long,
another uses a yardstick 36 inches long and the other a yardstick 37
inches long. They won’t get the same answer because they are not using
the same standard. The same is true in the field of philosophy and
religion. If each man uses a different yardstick, nothing but confusion
and division can possibly be the result.
And, friends, that is just exactly what is wrong with this world today.
One man uses the “Pope” at Rome for his yardstick. He says that whatever
the “Pope” says is right. He measures everything by that. Then I come
along and measure by the Bible, the Word of God, and he and I get
different answers. Somebody else takes the church to which he belongs as
his standard of measurement. People say, “My church teaches so and so,”
and “My church practices so and so.” I have even had them come to me and
say, “What does your church believe on this point? What does your church
teach here?” They simply mean, “What does the group of people with which
you are associated have to say about this matter?” Over and over again I
have them ask me, “What do you _think_ about it?” I have heard that
expression many, many times during the last four weeks.
Well, you can see how all these different yardsticks will get different
answers. One man wants my opinion about it, that’s his yardstick;
somebody else uses his church’s opinion as his yardstick; another takes
what his parents think about it; still another takes tradition as his
yardstick; and someone else takes simply the way he feels about it. I
hear them say, “Well, I like it, and therefore it must be all right,”
or, “It seems good to me.” I recently heard a boy try to justify his
going to a particular church on the basis that it made him feel good.
Well, those are just all irregular standards. They are not standards.
People who reason like that are using the wrong unit of measurement.
Friends, God hath spoken and when God speaks all the world should be
quiet and listen. We should take his word as final. It should be the
standard by which we decide all questions, and until the world can agree
upon the word that God has spoken as its yardstick, as its unit of
measurement, as its standard for determining truth, we shall continue to
have division and confusion in this world. So I want to impress you with
the fact that _God hath spoken_. Let us go to that word to find the
answer to every question that pertains to religion. In fact, I might
just say the answer to every question, for almost all questions are
answered in the Bible, at least in a general way. If we would apply the
principles of its teachings, all of our domestic and social problems
would be solved. Our industrial and political problems would be solved.
Our international problems would be solved, if all people would learn
what God hath spoken and follow it.
VI
Will You Obey His Word?
I hope you are impressed with the fact which God hath spoken. Are you
willing to hear that word? Friends, the word that God has spoken tells
us that we must believe, in order to be saved. “God so loved the world
that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth on him
should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). “Without faith
it is impossible to be well pleasing to God” (Heb. 11:6). Faith is the
very foundation of Christianity, so much so the Bible says, “The just
shall _live_ by faith” (Rom. 1:17). We are to walk by faith and not by
sight.
The word which God has spoken says that “Except ye repent ye shall
likewise perish” (Luke 13:3). This word which God has spoken unto us
through his Son, Jesus, tells us that if we confess him before men he
will confess us before his Father who is in heaven. But if we deny him,
he will deny us before his Father who is in heaven (Matt. 10:32, 33).
Then, friends, this same word which God has spoken says, “Repent, and be
baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission
of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the
promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off,
even as many as the Lord, our God, shall call” (Acts 2:38, 39).
This word which God has spoken tells those who have been baptized and
have gone astray, to come back repenting and confessing their faults and
praying for forgiveness (Acts 8:22; 1 John 1:9). This word which God has
spoken promises that he will not let us be tempted above that we are
able, but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that we
may be able to bear it. (1 Cor. 10:13). This word that God has spoken
tells us to be faithful unto death and he will give us a crown of life
incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away (Rev. 2:10; 1 Pet.
1:4).
Are you willing this morning to listen to the word which God hath
spoken? I am not asking you to listen to me or to listen to any group of
people, but to listen to the word of God. He said, “Come unto me all ye
that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest.” If you are
willing to hear and to heed that word that God hath spoken, then come
forward while we sing and make your wishes known.
II
GENERIC AND SPECIFIC COMMANDS
Our topic this morning is “Generic and Specific Commands.” This subject
may sound like a very technical one; but it is, in fact, a very
practical one. A study of this topic is valuable, not merely for its own
sake, but also because it throws light on many other questions, and is
designed to help in the study of some lessons which are to follow:
The Bible teaches that man must not add to, or subtract from, the word
of God. For instance, “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command
you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the
commandments of the Lord your God which I command you” (Deut. 4:2).
“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of
this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto
him the plagues that are written in this book; and if any man shall take
away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away
his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the
things which are written in this book” (Rev. 22:18-19).
I
A Problem in Application
These Scriptures show very plainly that _one must neither add to nor
subtract from the word of God_. This fundamental principle is taught in
both the New Testament and the Old Testament. However, some have
difficulty in applying this teaching to many questions arising today.
Because of this difficulty we find people who object to such things as a
baptistry in the church building, Sunday morning Bible classes,
individual cups, song books, collection baskets, etc. These objections
arise from a misunderstanding of the basic principle announced in the
Scriptures just quoted. We hope that what is to follow will help.
First of all, let it be understood that a commandment authorizes
everything essential to obeying that commandment. For instance, the
commandment to meet and worship God authorizes a place and an hour of
meeting. The Bible does not tell us where to meet to eat the Lord’s
supper or upon what hour of the day to meet, but the very commandment to
observe this institution authorizes some place and some hour for the
meeting.
This leads us to consider the difference between a generic or _general_
commandment and a _specific_ one. A generic commandment is one that
authorizes or commands a certain action, but does not give the details
as to how that commandment shall be carried out. The difference between
generic and specific commandments must be recognized in applying the
Scriptures that have been mentioned. Let it be remembered that a
commandment may be mixed, partly generic and partly specific. It may be
generic with respect to certain details which it comprehends, and
specific in reference to others.
II
Examples
1. The best way I know to make these distinctions clear is by giving a
number of examples. God told Noah to build an ark. He specified the kind
of wood that should be used. He told Noah to use gopher wood. That
authorized gopher wood and eliminated every other possible kind of wood.
Since God specified that gopher wood should be used, it would have been
wrong for Noah to have used any other sort of wood. It would have been a
sin for him to have used cedar wood, or oak, or any other kind which
might be named. God also told Noah to put a door in this ark, in the
side of it. But he did not tell him in _which_ side to put it. Hence,
the commandment to build an ark was generic as to the side in which the
door should be located.
God specified the dimensions of the ark. He told Noah to build the ark
300 cubits long. It would have been a sin, therefore, for Noah to have
built it 301 cubits long or 299 cubits long, or any other length except
the one which God specified. God also told Noah to build some rooms in
this ark, but did not tell him how many to build. This commandment,
therefore, was generic as far as the number of rooms was concerned. On
that point Noah was free to build the number of rooms which he thought
was best.
Of course, he had to build some number. The very command to build
_rooms_ authorized some number of rooms, but God did not specify the
number so Noah was free to exercise his own judgment in that respect.
God specified the animals that were to be taken into the ark. He told
Noah to take certain ones but he did not tell him which animals to take
into the ark first. You see, therefore, that the commandment to build
the ark was specific in some respects and was generic in other respects.
2. The commandment to offer a passover sacrifice may also be used as an
illustration. If God had merely commanded the Jews to offer an animal,
that would have left them free to offer any sort of animal which they
chose. But he specified that they should offer a lamb, which meant
either a sheep or a goat. It was also specified that it should be of the
first year, a male, and without blemish. These details were specified
with the commandment. It would have been a sin for the Jews to have
ignored any of these specifications. In those days the word “lamb” was
understood to mean either a sheep or a goat. The Jews were free to offer
either, but they had to heed the specifications that it be of the first
year, without blemish, and of the male sex.
3. Coming to the New Testament for an illustration, we refer to the
great commission as recorded by Mark in the 16th chapter of his book,
verses 15 and 16: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to
every creature; he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he
that believeth not shall be damned.”
Here again we have a commandment which is partly generic and partly
specific. The word “go” is generic with respect to the means of travel
to be used. The general form of this commandment leaves one free to
travel by any suitable method. In obeying this commandment one may
travel by rail, by boat, by airplane, by automobile, on foot, on
horseback, or by any other method that is in decency and in order.
I recently held a meeting in Alabama which people attended by
practically every means of transportation. They came by train, by bus,
by automobile, on tractors, in buggies, on horseback, on foot, in
wagons, in trucks—in almost every conceivable way except by airplane or
motorboat. The general commandment to _go_ leaves one free to travel in
any of these ways.
But this same commandment is specific in respect to what shall be taught
after one gets to the place of teaching. It specifies that one shall
preach the _Gospel_. The message that is to be delivered is therefore
specified. It _must_ be the _Gospel_.
4. Matthew’s statement of this same commission says, “Go ye therefore,
and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things
whatsoever I have commanded you.” The commandment to teach is specific
as to the message, but it is generic with reference to the method that
shall be used in the teaching.
According to the general command to teach, the lesson may be either oral
or written. The teacher may be either a man or a woman, and the size of
the class may be whatever circumstances and expediency justify. This
commandment to teach does not specify the number that shall be in the
class, or the sex of the teacher, or whether the lesson shall be an oral
one or a written one.
In this same great commission we have the commandment to baptize in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost those who have
been taught. Since these names have been specified, it would be a sin to
baptize in the name of any human being or any human institution.
The word “baptize” itself denotes the act. It means to be immersed,
buried in water (Col. 2:12). However, this commandment does not tell us
how the immersing shall be done. We may immerse one according to this
commandment face foremost, sideways, lying down, standing up or in any
other appropriate way, just as long as we obey the commandment to
baptize; that is, to _immerse_ or _bury_ in water.
III
The Principle Applied
1. Some one may say that according to this principle of interpretation
instrumental music may be justified. Let us see if this is true. If
God’s word had merely told us to make music, that would have been
generic as far as the type of music is concerned. But it so happens that
God did not leave this commandment in such a general form. He specified
the type of music we shall use in worshiping him.
Ephesians 5:19 says, “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and
spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.”
Colossians 3:16, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all
wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and
spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.” God,
therefore, has specified the kind of music. He tells us to _sing_.
If God had merely told Noah to build an ark, he could have used any kind
of wood that he chose or any other material. He could have used either
cedar or gopher, but when God commanded him to use gopher wood, that
drew a ring around the word gopher and eliminated every other type of
building material. If he had merely told the Jews to offer a sacrifice
at the passover, they might have offered either a calf or a lamb; but
when he commanded them to offer a lamb, that drew a ring around the word
lamb and eliminated every other type of sacrifice that might be
conceived.
Likewise, with reference to the music that we offer in our worship, if
God had just said, “Make music,” then we could have used any kind we
chose, but he has specified singing. This eliminates every other
conceivable kind of music as far as our worship to Jehovah is concerned.
Sometimes I hear people say that God does not tell us not to use
instrumental music. This is a mistake. He does tell us not to use it. He
does so in Colossians 3:16 and in Ephesians 5:19. Those Scriptures that
tell us to offer vocal music in our worship tell us, as plain as day,
_not_ to offer any other kind.
Surely everyone will agree that it would have been a sin for Noah to
have built the ark out of cedar wood. Everyone will likewise agree that
it would have been wrong for the Jews to have offered a cow as a
passover sacrifice. By the same line of reasoning, and just as clearly
to be seen, it would be wrong today for people to substitute some other
kind of music for the kind that God has specified.
2. The commandment to eat the Lord’s supper in memory of Jesus Christ is
generic in some respects and specific in others. The Bible specifies the
day of the week upon which this institution shall be observed. This
lesson is taught by means of divinely approved example as recorded in
Acts, chapter 20 and verse 7: “Upon the first day of the week when the
disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready
to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.”
The Bible therefore specifies that the Lord’s supper shall be observed
upon the first day of the week, but this teaching is generic as far as
the hour of the day is concerned. There have been people who argued that
it would be a sin to eat the Lord’s supper at 7:30 P.M. There are others
who believe it is wrong to eat it at 11:00 A.M., just because the Bible
does not specify that hour. But the same objection could be raised to
any other hour mentioned, and thereby eliminate the possibility of
eating it at all. The commandment to eat the Lord’s supper upon the
first day of the week, necessarily implies that it should be eaten at
_some_ hour, and God has seen fit to leave man free to use his own
judgment in selecting the hour of the day.
The Bible specifies that the fruit of the vine shall be used, but it
does not say whether that fruit shall be fermented or unfermented. The
failure to recognize this fact has led some to contend that it’s a sin
to use grape juice. The very same type of error has caused others to
contend that it would be wrong to use wine. We must recognize the fact
that God has left this commandment generic as to whether the fruit of
the vine shall be fermented or unfermented.
Likewise the Bible does not designate the number of cups that shall be
used, leaving us free to use our own judgment upon that point as well.
It is true that the Bible refers to “the cup,” but every careful student
knows that that refers to the contents and not to the vessel. As a
matter of fact, there must be some distribution made between the
original container and the lips of those who partake. The Bible does not
specify at what stage this distribution shall be made. God has endowed
us with intelligence, and expects us to use it in applying these
commandments which are left in generic form.
3. Other examples of generic commands of a slightly different form are
these: “Therefore, all things ye would that men should do to you, do ye
even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets” (Matt. 7:12).
“For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live
soberly, righteously and godly in this present world, looking for that
blessed hope, and the glorious appearance of the great God and our
Saviour Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:11-13). “Pure religion and undefiled
before God and the Father is this; to visit the fatherless and widows in
their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world” (Jas.
1:27). All of these are general commandments governing Christian
conduct. They announce certain general principles that should guide us
in our behavior. We must use our own best judgment in applying these
principles to the various questions that arise, and we should pray for
wisdom to make the proper application. (Jas. 1:5).
IV
Important Conclusions
1. There are certain important conclusions which should be drawn from
what has already been said. First, in a sphere where God has made
specifications we must heed them. We must not ignore them. We must not
change them. What he specifies _must_ be done. In executing a command we
must heed these specifications. To do otherwise would be an act of
disobedience to God Almighty.
2. Second, where God has made no specifications we should not make any
and try to bind them on others. To do so would be to add to the word of
God, and to violate the principle taught in Revelations 22:18-19 and at
many other places in the Bible. God had a good reason for leaving
certain commandments in a general form. For me to work out
specifications concerning how those general commandments should be
obeyed and undertake to bind my inventions on others would be a very
grievous sin.
In the execution of a general commandment, each individual and each
congregation is left to make its own choices. It’s just as much harm to
make specifications where God has made none, as it is to ignore those
specifications that he has made. It would be just as wrong to specify
that the Lord’s supper must be eaten at 7:30 P.M. as it would be to
ignore the specification that music used to worship God must be vocal.
3. Third, in the execution of these general commandments, we should use
wisdom. Someone has said that there are three kinds of sense: revealed
sense, common sense, and nonsense. Where there is revealed sense we must
follow it; but where there is no revealed sense, where God has given a
general commandment and left us free to execute it according to our best
judgment, we should use common sense and not nonsense. In all matters,
wisdom should be exercised.
There are many Scriptures that verify this conclusion. For instance, “If
any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God that giveth to all men
liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him
ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of
the sea, driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think
that he shall receive anything of the Lord” (James 1:5-7).
Wisdom has been defined as the ability to properly apply knowledge. In
this connection it would be ability to properly apply the knowledge that
we have received from God’s word. Such wisdom comes as a result of
experience and age and study and prayer. Hebrews 5:14 says, “But strong
meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of
use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.”
Evidently that is the reason God has ordained that the older or
experienced men shall be the overseers of the local congregation.
Evidently that’s also the reason he ordained that children should obey
their parents rather than parents obey the children. Oftentimes those
who are older can discern good or evil where the younger and less
experienced are unable to do so.
Even the apostles were admonished to use wisdom. Christ said to the
twelve in Matthew 10:16: “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst
of wolves; be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.”
“Let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14:40).
4. Remember then these three important conclusions. First, in a sphere
where God has made specifications we must heed them. We must not ignore
them or change them. We must not substitute something of our own
choosing, for that which Jehovah has specified. Specifications in a
given sphere automatically eliminate everything else that comes within
the same sphere or category. Second, where he has made no specifications
we must not make any. We certainly must not try to bind any on others.
And, third, in applying his general commandments, we should use wisdom.
We should use common sense and not nonsense. Recognition and proper
application of these principles will furnish a ready solution to many
otherwise difficult questions.
5. In reference to the plan of salvation, God has been very explicit. He
specifies that one must believe in order to be saved (Acts 16:31). He
specifies that repentance is essential (Acts 3:19). He likewise
specifies that we should confess with our mouths the faith that we have
in our hearts (Acts 8:37). And he is equally definite in teaching that
baptism is a condition of salvation. “Then Peter said unto them, Repent,
and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the
remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost”
(Acts 2:38). “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and
wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). You
are invited and urged to heed these specifications.
III
INTOLERANCE
We are certainly happy to have so many visitors present and want you to
know that you are always more than welcome at our service. It is our
purpose to do everything we can to show our appreciation and make your
visit with us pleasant and profitable.
Our topic this morning is “Intolerance.” It is both timely and
important. During the past week an organization of churches throughout
the nation has been celebrating what is called Brotherhood Week and
preaching the doctrine of tolerance. There was a panel discussion on
this subject at Watkins Institute last Tuesday night which indicated
that people are interested in this topic and also illustrated the need
for tolerance. So we feel that we are speaking on something which is of
very great current interest.
Incidentally, the panel was also an index to the interest people have in
a public hearing of religious differences. A religious debate will still
attract a bigger crowd than any other sort of church service. It is a
mistake to conclude that people are not interested in a discussion of
religious issues. There was a debate just a few days ago at White House,
Tennessee, in a very small congregation, perhaps not more than forty or
fifty members. The crowds overflowed the building. They moved to the
gymnasium of the local school and filled it before the debate closed.
This indicates the extent to which people are interested in public
investigations of religious questions.
I
The Issue Defined
1. In order to study intelligently the subject of intolerance we need to
understand definitely the meaning of the term. The words “tolerance,”
“intolerance,” “tolerate,” and so on, have several different meanings.
If we aren’t careful, one person will be thinking of one meaning of a
term and another of a different meaning. If you look these words up in
your dictionary, you will see several definitions. In order that we may
understand each other, then, I want to cite two or three of them.
2. One definition says that intolerance means unwillingness to bear or
endure. In other words, it means unwillingness to suffer long. Of
course, in that sense intolerance is wrong, because the Bible teaches
that we should be longsuffering. One of the fruits of the Spirit is
longsuffering (Gal. 5:22). “And we exhort you, brethren, admonish the
disorderly, encourage the fainthearted, support the weak, be
longsuffering toward all” (1 Thess. 5:14 ARV). There are many other
Scriptures in the New Testament which teach the importance, the
necessity, of our being longsuffering. So, of course, in this sense we
ought to be tolerant, we ought to be willing to endure, to suffer, and
to bear.
3. According to Funk and Wagnal’s dictionary, the word “intolerance”
also means “not disposed to tolerate contrary beliefs or opinions.”
There, you see, intolerance is defined in terms of the word “tolerate,”
so we need to know what it means. The word “tolerate” means “to suffer
to be, or to be done, without active opposition.” You put all that
together and you simply get this: tolerance means to let the beliefs and
opinions which are contrary to your own go without opposition; whereas,
intolerance according to this definition, or meaning of the word, would
mean to oppose the beliefs and opinions which are contrary to your own.
Now, the question is, should we be tolerant in this sense? Should we be
tolerant in the sense of allowing beliefs and opinions which are
contrary to our own go without any active opposition on our part? I
think this makes the issue clear.
II
Some Necessary Distinctions
1. In order to answer this question, I am persuaded that we will have to
make a distinction between belief and opinion, and a distinction between
things that are essential and things which are not essential. (In making
this statement I am aware that the study of such a distinction may
itself involve a debate, but I am not opposed to debates.) In other
words, saying that a man should be tolerant is something like saying he
ought to “be in favor of.” Well, in favor of what? Before you can say a
man ought to be in favor, you have to know what is under consideration.
Am I in favor of it? That depends upon what you are talking about. Am I
tolerant of it? That depends upon what you are talking about. There are
some things I can and should tolerate. There are some other things that
I cannot and ought not, in the light of God’s word, tolerate at all.
2. In reference to things which do not affect one’s salvation, we ought
to be tolerant. For instance, there are some folk who think it is wrong
to eat meat, and some other folk who think it is all right to eat meat.
You can go to heaven without eating meat and you can go to heaven while
you eat meat. It doesn’t make any difference as to your salvation. On a
point like that we ought to be very generous and very tolerant.
This question is discussed at length in the fourteenth chapter of
Romans. “Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful
disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who
is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth
not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God
hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? To
his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for
God is able to make him stand” (Rom. 14:1-4).
Let a man eat vegetables only if he so desires. Let another man eat meat
if he wants to. In such cases the strong in faith should be considerate
of those who are weak. “For meat destroy not the work of God. All things
indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence”
(Rom. 14:20). “We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of
the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let every one of us please his
neighbor for his good to edification. For even Christ pleased not
himself: but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached
thee fell on me” (Rom. 15:1-3). If I had time this morning, it would be
well to read the entire fourteenth chapter of Romans and discuss it in
connection with the question of our attitude toward matters that are
indifferent.
3. What should be our attitude toward matters of belief that do effect
one’s eternal salvation? The question really boils down to this: What
should be our attitude toward people who are in error according to our
judgment? Should we allow people whom we believe to be in error to go
without correction, without some effort on our part to show them that
they are wrong and endeavor to get them to change? Certainly not.
On the contrary the Bible clearly teaches the duty of doing every thing
in our power to help people who are in danger. Before developing this
point, however, let us note the necessity of distinguishing between
scriptural and unscriptural methods or means of opposing error. We
cannot oppose false beliefs with physical or political force. Jesus
said, “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this
world, then would my servants fight ...” (John 18:36).
Even people who are wrong, who are in error, who are on their way to
destruction, who hold beliefs which will damn their souls, are not to be
opposed with physical force, or with political force. Neither are we
expected to oppose them with scorn and ridicule. We are expected to do
everything we can in love and kindness to teach them the truth and
persuade them to obey it.
III
Examples of Sinful Intolerance
1. My brethren and I should be the first to preach against the use of
unfair methods in opposing those who are thought to be in error. We have
suffered more at the hands of such intolerance than we have ever caused
others to suffer. In a certain town the members of a denomination
threatened to boycott one of their own group if he sold a building lot
to members of the church of Christ who were establishing a congregation
there, and thus caused him to back out on a trade he had already made.
Such prejudiced and unfair opposition was both undemocratic and sinful.
To have exercised freedom of speech in a public discussion of religious
differences would have been honorable and democratic, but this the
denominationalists would not do. They were too “broadminded” and
“tolerant.” It is strange that in politics people understand freedom of
speech to mean that one may publicly criticize his opponent, while in
religion they pretend that it means something entirely different.
2. Sometimes our young people are treated with sinful intolerance at
school because they refuse to engage in dances. Sometimes they are
treated with intolerance when they fail to take part in the gambling
games, games of chance, which are played in some of the schools. Very
often when they refuse to go to picture shows they are laughed at and
made fun of. It is not a question of somebody’s attempting with love and
sincerity to persuade them to change their convictions; too often it is
simply a matter of ridicule.
I could give some instances and call names of Christian young people who
have been persecuted in public schools because they had a standard of
morality and conduct which was different from that of the majority in
the school. That is intolerance of a sinful sort. It is the wrong sort
of opposition. Endeavoring to teach in love and kindness what one
believes, even mistakingly, to be the truth is legitimate; but opposing
contrary beliefs and ideals with ridicule and fun-making is wrong.
3. We saw an example of this at the panel discussion last Tuesday night.
The chairman of the meeting was inclined to poke fun at some in the
audience who arose to ask questions, apparently asking the questions in
all sincerity. He would encourage the audience to give them the “horse
laugh.” The meeting which was called to promote tolerance manifested
intolerance of an ugly sort.
It was said that this meeting was being called to advocate the doctrine
that we should discriminate against no one because of his color, his
creed, or his race. These three words don’t belong together. Color,
creed, and race do not come in the same category. A man is not
responsible for his color. He had no choice in it. A man is not
responsible for the race to which he belongs. He had no choice in it. He
was born that way. But a man does have a choice in reference to his
creed. He chooses his creed. He can believe what he wants to believe.
It is not right to put color, race, and creed all in the same class.
Certainly, you should not hold a man responsible for his color. You
should not hold him responsible for his race. He had no choice in the
matter and where there is no choice there is no responsibility. But a
man is responsible for what he believes. This the Bible abundantly
teaches. For example, “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the
spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone
out into the world” (1 John 4:1).
4. The irony of the situation was that some colored men, who endeavored
to attend the meeting, which was to promote brotherhood of all the
races, all the creeds and all the colors, were turned away from the door
and not allowed to come in, because they were the wrong color. It is
right to make a distinction between a man’s color and his creed, but the
distinction ought to be made in favor of not holding him accountable for
his color, while holding him accountable for his creed. It seems that
the spirit of the occasion was just the opposite. “We won’t hold you
accountable for your creed, but if you are the wrong color you can’t
come in.” Well, that doesn’t quite make sense, does it?
We ought not oppose error by such illegitimate means as physical or
political force, embarrassment and ridicule, or making fun. Such weapons
are very powerful; but they are unlawful. We ought not try to get one to
be baptized by making fun or ridiculing him. If I caused him to be
baptized by physical or political force, or by the force of ridicule and
sarcasm, it wouldn’t do him any good. He would be prompted by the wrong
motive. One’s obedience to God must be of his own free will.
IV
Intolerance in Schools
1. While I am talking about the advantage which is sometimes taken of
people in school, I want to read something from Harry Emerson Fosdick.
He is a man that I wouldn’t ordinarily quote or refer to. He is a
liberal. There are a thousand things on which I disagree with him, but
he has said something in a recent article which I think is worth passing
on. I might not even agree with everything in this quotation, but you’ll
see the point.
He says: “I am a liberal; I am not pleading for sectarianism or
conventional orthodoxy or anything of that sort. What I want most of all
is that Roman Catholics, Jews, and Protestants should prepare together
some book or books by means of which the best elements in the spiritual
heritage of our race can be presented in our schools, objectively and
without offense, as a matter of information.” Whether or not that is
possible might be open to debate. But listen to what he says next.
“Meanwhile,” it’s this meanwhile that I am interested in, “Meanwhile,
however, I am fed up with a familiar type of course in some of our
institutions, where religion may not be taught but where, by innuendo
and clever sniping, irreligion is taught. The Jewish prophets, Christ,
and the creative seers of our spiritual tradition might as well never
have existed, while Freud, for example, not simply as the great pioneer
in psychiatry but as an atheistic materialist, is presented at length as
though he were infallible.”
2. If I were to go into some of our public schools and teach the truth
on church unity and the meaning of baptism, I would be considered
intolerant, narrow minded and out of order in using the public schools
to teach religion. But when a man gets up and teaches that the Bible is
not true, he is teaching religion, even though it is a false religion.
He is teaching a religion just the same as the man who says that the
Bible is true.
That reminds me of one college professor who asked his class at the
beginning of the course how many of them believed that God existed.
Several students raised their hands. He said, “I predict that by the
time this course is finished there won’t be any here who believe in
God.” He was teaching religion—false religion. He was opposing the
truth. He was taking advantage of a state school in which to do it.
3. When I was going to high school nearly every chapel speaker who was
not a member of the church of Christ would tell us that one church was
as good as another. The members of the church of Christ who came never
gave us the opposite side of that. They should have told us that one
church was not as good as another—that there is only one church.
However, if they had done so, they would have been accused of being
narrow minded and of preaching their own peculiar doctrine. But the man
who says that one church is just as good as another is preaching what he
believes just as much as I am preaching what I believe when I say that
one is not just as good as another. So you see this matter of tolerance
ought to work both ways in public institutions. If one is not allowed to
say that there is just one church, then someone else who believes
differently ought not to be allowed to say that one is just as good as
another.
But to continue with Mr. Fosdick. “The separation of church and state is
a fundamental principle of American democracy, but we are allowing it to
mean what the fathers of the republic never dreamed it should mean: that
youth, in our public institutions of learning, may be taught the denials
of faiths but not the affirmations of them. Our postwar world cannot be
reconstructed on the basis of any negative futilitarian philosophy. We
desperately need great faiths about life issuing in great ethical
standards for life.”[1]
In other words, Mr. Fosdick is saying that if it is contrary to the
principles of democracy for one to teach in public schools the tenets of
his faith, it is equally contrary for an infidel to teach his infidelity
and try to destroy the faith of his students. Both are forms of
religion. On that point I agree with Mr. Fosdick. It is wrong for
infidels to hide behind a hypocritical plea for tolerance while they ply
their evil trade of making unbelievers of American youth.
V
Righteous Intolerance
1. Now, I want to give you some Scriptures to show that we ought to
oppose, that we are _obligated_ to oppose, what we believe to be wrong.
1 Timothy 5:20 says, “Them that sin reprove in the sight of all, that
others may also be in fear.” That is active opposition, isn’t it?
According to Webster, that is intolerance, but it is the sort of
intolerance which the Bible demands. Paul said in Galatians, chapter 2
and verse 11, that he withstood Peter to the face, because he was to be
blamed. The apostle Paul opposed the apostle Peter concerning his
attitude toward the Gentiles.
“Wherefore rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the faith”
(Titus 1:13). This doesn’t say merely “Rebuke them,” but “Rebuke them
sharply.” That is active opposition. “Contend earnestly for the faith
once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). Here again earnest contention
is not only permitted, but even commanded. Second Corinthians 5:11 says,
“Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men.”
2. God told Ezekiel that if he failed to warn sinners, then their blood
would be required at his hands. Hear the charge: “Son of man, I have
made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word
at my mouth, and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked,
Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to
warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked
man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine
hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness,
nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast
delivered thy soul. Again, when a righteous man doth turn from his
righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before
him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die
in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be
remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless if
thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not
sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; and thou hast delivered
thy soul” (Ezek. 3:17-21). These texts are sufficient to show that we
are bound by the law of God to give active opposition to the things
which we believe to be sinful and harmful to the spiritual welfare of
men.
3. That gentleness and longsuffering should characterize this work has
been clearly revealed. “Brethren, if a man among you be overtaken in a
fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of
meekness,” [not in the spirit of braggadocio or sarcasm; not with
ridicule, abuse, or persecution; not with physical or political force,
but in the spirit of meekness] “considering thyself lest thou also be
tempted” (Gal. 6:1). Paul said to Timothy, “I charge thee therefore
before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ who shall judge the quick and the
dead at his appearing and his kingdom, preach the word; be instant in
season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering
and teaching” (2 Tim. 4:1-2). Hence, in the light of God’s Holy Word, it
is my duty to do everything I can, in meekness and with persuasion, to
correct those whom I believe to be in error.
4. If you believe that I am saying something today which ought not be
said, it is your duty to come to me after the service is over, or even
to speak up now, and tell me wherein I am wrong. This is the work of a
friend. If you go away and tell somebody else that you think I made a
mistake and never let me know it, then you are playing the part of an
enemy. But if you come to me and endeavor to show me where you believe I
made a mistake then you will be proving yourself to be a friend.
VI
Standard of Authority Necessary
Before these things which I have been advocating can be successfully
applied we must first of all have a common standard. It was brought out
in the panel discussion last Tuesday night that the three men on the
panel each had a different standard. Assumedly, the Protestant speaker
accepted the entire Bible as the inspired word of God. The Jew did not.
He did not accept the New Testament or the Christ of the New Testament;
he accepted only the Old Testament. The Catholic speaker plainly stated
that he accepted neither as his authority, but that he placed his
confidence in the mind of man; of course, that meant the mind of one
particular man whom they are pleased to call their pope. The word “pope”
means father. The man whom they call pope is not married, never has been
married. He is an old bachelor, yet he is called father by more people
than anybody else on the earth. The Bible says “call no man your father
upon the earth” (Matt. 23:9).
The Catholic speaker was addressed in the panel discussion as “Father So
and So.” If I had been on that discussion I would have called him Mr.
Cleary. I suppose during a meeting advocating tolerance he would have
meekly tolerated my doing so. For me to call him father would be a
violation of my conscience and of the word of God. I couldn’t have
called Mr. Julius Mark “Rabbi Mark,” because my Bible says, “But be not
ye called Rabbi” (Matt. 23:8). I know Mr. Mark doesn’t agree with me on
that because he doesn’t accept the New Testament as his Bible. I know
the Catholic wouldn’t agree with that, because he says the Bible is not
the standard, that this man whom he calls father is the standard.
Just think how ridiculous it is for three men to pretend that they are
brethren when two of them propose to believe in Christ and the other one
doesn’t; one believes the New Testament and neither of the others do;
and one believes that the man whom he calls pope has all the authority
and neither of the others do. They haven’t yet agreed upon the authority
or standard to which we should make appeal in order to settle our
differences.
VII
Impractical “Tolerance”
During the few remaining minutes I want to talk about a different sort
of intolerance—or rather a different sort of so-called tolerance—the
kind that is being advocated generally by such meetings as we had last
Tuesday night, and by a great many folk whom I meet from day to day.
This particular type of tolerance simply means that we ought to agree
with everybody on everything and oppose nobody on anything. That is what
it amounts to. Its advocates pretend to endorse everything and everybody
and oppose nobody and nothing.
Let me make it clear that this is only a theory. Even the people who
advocate it do not practice it. Nobody practices it. If you are going to
take the attitude of opposing nothing and endorsing everything and
everybody, then you have to endorse intolerance. Such so-called
tolerance would cut off all evangelism. You couldn’t try to convert
anybody to anything if you put that into practice. You’d just have to
agree with everybody on everything. So you see it is mostly a theory.
People don’t really agree on things on which they don’t agree. When they
pretend that they are sacrificing their convictions in order to be
together, if you will look right close, you’ll probably find that they
don’t have any convictions. During this very hour while I am standing
here talking to you, Mr. Julius Mark is preaching at the Vine Street
Christian Church as a token of this “brotherhood” that we are talking
about wherein everybody is supposed to endorse everybody. Think of it!
Julius Mark will tell you plainly that he does not believe the New
Testament, that he does not believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of
God. He denies it. And yet he is preaching at this very minute in a
congregation which wears the name Christian. If there is anything in
this world on which Christians must be united it is the belief that
Jesus is the Christ. A fellow who doesn’t believe that has no right
whatsoever to call himself a Christian.
This almost convinces me that the Vine Street Christian Church does not
have too much faith in Christ themselves or they wouldn’t have a man
preaching for them who professedly disbelieves in Him. I think I might
put this to a little test. I do not believe in the organ that the Vine
Street Christian Church uses and they know I don’t. Suppose you try to
get me an appointment there next Sunday. See if you can. If you can,
I’ll go. If you get me an appointment at the Vine Street Christian
Church Sunday I’ll go preach for them and get somebody else to come
here. They won’t let me do it. Why? Because I don’t believe in their
organ. They’ll let a man preach for them who does not believe in Christ,
but they won’t let a man preach for them who does not believe in their
organ. Which do they think the more of, their organ or the Christ? What
do you think?
Maybe I’m mistaken. Maybe they would let me preach there. If they do,
I’ll take this all back. If I’m not here next Sunday, you inquire and
find out if I’m down there, and if I am, then you’ll know that I was
mistaken in what I have said today. Think of this! They will let a man
preach for them who doesn’t believe in the Christ. But will they let a
man preach for them who does not believe in their organ? If they don’t,
what does it mean? It means they think more of their organ than they do
of the Christ.
And speaking of tolerance, did you ever know of a public meeting leaving
instrumental music out of the worship because of tolerance for the
members of the church of Christ who were present? I talked to a man one
time who advocated that we ought to have one community church by just
leaving out those things which we can’t agree upon and taking the things
we can agree upon. I said, “What are you going to do about these people
who don’t believe in instrumental music? Will you leave that off for the
sake of their conscience?” He said, “No, they’ll just have to stay on
the outside till they can come in with us.” The people who teach that
sort of tolerance and so-called broad-mindedness don’t practice it. In
reference to something on which they have no conviction they will appear
to be very broadminded, but if you test them out on one of their pet
theories or hobbies or something that they do believe, then they are
just as narrow minded as anyone else, or more so.
VIII
The Basis of Unity
In the forum last Tuesday night it was said that we ought to leave off
all doctrinal differences and just love our neighbors as we love
ourselves. Let’s put that to the test. What does it mean to love your
neighbor? Do you love your neighbor as you do yourself when you see him
on his way to hell and don’t try to stop him? Suppose you are thoroughly
convinced that your neighbor is following a doctrine that will take him
to hell, and you don’t try to stop him, just throw your arm around him
and call him “Brother,” is that love? Why that’s the very opposite of
love! If you see a man riding down the highway and know that a bridge
has been washed out a few miles ahead and he is going to run off and
kill himself, will you try to stop him? You will if you love him. If you
see a man on his way to hell, you’ll try to stop him if you love him!
I agree that we ought to love our neighbor as ourselves, but I also
insist that love will move us to do everything we can in order to
correct him when we see him following a course which will lead unto his
destruction. Love demands that we preach the truth. Love demands that we
persuade people to obey Christ. Love brought Jesus to this earth, and if
we have the love that he had, we will do everything in our power to get
people to believe, understand and obey the truth.
In mathematics we have a very simple law which says that things equal to
the same thing are equal to each other. If two things are both equal to
a third thing, then they are equal to each other. Friends, that gives
you the basis of Christian unity. When we all get with Christ we’ll all
be together. Isn’t that simple? And that is the only ground for unity.
Christian unity cannot exist on any other basis. The only way we can
have Christian unity is for all to get with Christ, and then we’ll all
be together. The unity problem will then be solved. There can be no
unity when one takes Christ as his creed, another follows the Old
Testament and denies Christ, and still another follows a man over in
Rome and calls him “Father.” In such a group unity cannot exist.
Christ is revealed in the New Testament. When we all take our stand on
the Bible and get with Christ, we’ll be together. Jesus said, “He that
believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). That is what we
have to do to get with him. Paul said, speaking by the Holy Spirit, “For
as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ”
(Gal. 3:27). That’s the way you get into Christ. When you believe and
are baptized into Christ that puts you in Christ; then you will be with
all the other folk who are in Christ and they are the only ones with
whom you want to be. You don’t want to be with those who are outside of
Christ because they are lost. You want to be with those who are in
Christ.
If you have put on Christ through obedience to his will and continue to
follow in the footsteps of Christ as revealed in his word, then some day
you will go home and be united with Christ forever, and united with all
other Christians forever, in the world better than this one. Surely in
this large audience there are many people present who are ready to obey
Christ. When you do, you’ll be taking your stand on the ground of unity,
where unity must be established if ever established. Therefore, you will
not be to blame for the division that curses the world today. We invite
you to accept the invitation of Jesus Christ and come to him and let him
save you now. Will you come?
IV
WHENCE SO MANY DENOMINATIONS?
Sometimes the question of our topic is asked for information. At other
times it is presented argumentatively, with the implication that the
mere existence of so many denominations is evidence of their right to
exist. The implication is that churches of human origin, operating on
human authority, could never have secured such a large following. Back
of this implication is the assumption that the majority is necessarily,
or at least usually, right.
I
Majority Frequently Wrong
Those who make this assumption underestimate the capacity of mankind for
making mistakes! In the days of Noah only eight people on the earth were
right. All the others were wrong. You who put your confidence in the
majority would have said, “Noah, you’re wrong. It will never rain as you
predict. There are only eight people in your little group; all the rest
in the world, including many highly educated and brilliant men, are
against you. The majority must be right; therefore, you are wrong.” I
imagine a great many people reasoned after this fashion in Noah’s time;
but those who did got drowned.
In the days of Jesus the majority was wrong again. When he died on the
cross only a handful stayed with him. Practically all the world had
turned against him. If the majority had been right, then Jesus would
have been wrong, but we know that such was not the case.
The Bible clearly teaches that the majority will be lost. “Enter ye in
at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that
leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat; because
strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and
few there be that find it” (Matt. 7:13, 14). Hence in matters pertaining
to your soul it is not safe to put your confidence in the majority.
II
The Bible Demands Unity
In all sincerity then, where did so many denominations come from? Did
they come from the Bible? No. The Bible reveals only one church. Jesus
Christ said, “Upon this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18). Note
that he didn’t say “churches.” The Bible teaches that God’s children
should be united. Just before he died on the cross Jesus prayed that the
unity which existed between Him and the Father might also exist among
all believers. “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which
shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as
thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us:
that the world may believe that thou hast sent me” (John 17:20, 21).
Recently I heard a college professor say he was glad that we have
numerous denominations. I don’t think he realized what he was saying.
His remark amounted to an expression of gratitude for the fact that the
condition for which our Lord prayed does not exist among the majority of
those who claim to be His disciples.
Unity of thought and word is required. “Now I beseech you, brethren, by
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye all speak the same thing, and
that there be no divisions among you, but that ye be perfectly joined
together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Cor. 1:10).
Divisions and parties are condemned (Gal. 5:20).
As you know, we have the opposite of this biblical requirement. All who
profess to follow Jesus are not united. In the United States alone there
are more than two hundred denominations. One group teaches one thing;
another something different. One denomination says, “Lo, here is
Christ.” Another says, “No, He is with us.” Consequently, people are
confused and know not which way to turn. Some are driven into
infidelity. Many decide that the whole thing is incomprehensible and
just decide to follow the line of least resistance.
What is the source of all this division and consequent confusion? Is it
the Bible? Is it possible that God failed to reveal clearly his will to
man? Is it so ambiguous that we can not all “see it alike?” If so, the
Bible is a failure. If the Bible is not an adequate ground of unity,
there is no such ground. If the Bible is not a sufficient basis for
unity then it is inconsistent; for certainly its ideal is unity. So I
wish to go on record in declaring that the Bible is not the source of
the trouble!
III
A Partial Answer
In our search for the origin of denominational divisions, with all their
attendant evils, we must look in some other direction. Let me appeal to
you as an individual. How did you come to be what you are religiously?
Where did you get your conception of Christianity? From reading the
Bible, or from some other source? Did you form your church connection
because of conviction resulting from prayerful, diligent, and faithful
Bible study? Or did you merely follow the example of your parents, the
social set to which you belong, your personal taste, the law of
convenience, or some other fallible standard?
If you will examine your own hearts, it will throw a lot of light, not
only on where so many denominations came from, but especially on why
they are able to continue, which is equally, if not more, important.
Even in a congregation like this, most likely there are some whose
religious course has been determined by convenience rather than
conviction. Such persons are not steadfast. When it becomes more
convenient to do something else, or to be something else, they will turn
aside. Unless you develop some convictions, you can easily become a
liability rather than an asset.
In religion, as in politics, many blindly follow the example of their
parents. Even if this policy leads you into the church we read about in
the Bible, it is not sufficient. If you are a member of the Lord’s
church, you ought to have a better reason than the fact that your
parents happened to be members of it. You ought to have some convictions
on the subject. You ought to be what you are because you believe you
would go to hell if you were otherwise! If that is the way you feel,
then you will be worth something to the group to which you belong. Then
you will put the church first.
But how come our parents to be divided into more than two hundred
different sects? The same false standards which cause our generation to
be divided, including the example of their parents. And so we may trace
the history of denominations and erroneous doctrines back up the stream
of time from generation to generation, can’t we?
This, however, does not completely explain their origin. They had to
begin somewhere between here and Pentecost. How far back can they be
traced? When and where did they originate?
IV
Early Apostasy and Roman Catholicism
In order to answer these questions let us begin at the other end of the
line, at Pentecost, and come down toward the present to see what we can
find. Since Jesus built only one church, at least one hundred and
ninety-nine of the approximately two hundred now in existence had to get
started somewhere else, at some other time, and in some other way.
In the church that Jesus built, each congregation is entirely
independent of every other congregation. The Bible teaches
congregational autonomy, which means that under Christ each congregation
is entirely independent. According to the Bible, there can be no
organization whatsoever binding two or more congregations together. This
is the first fundamental fact to remember.
Second, in the church built by Christ, each local congregation is
supervised by a group of men who are called by either of six different
names: pastors, bishops, overseers, presbyters, elders, or shepherds. In
the Bible these six names are used interchangeably. The words elder and
presbyter are both from the same Greek word “presbyteros”; the words
bishop and overseer are both translations of the same Greek word
“episkopos”; and the words pastor and shepherd are also synonyms, being
derived from the Greek word “poimenas.” Paul referred to the elders of
the church at Ephesus as bishops and designated their work of feeding or
tending the flock by using the verb form of the Greek word for pastors
or shepherds (Acts 20:17, 28; Titus 1:5, 1:7; 1 Pet. 5:1, 2).
Hence, no distinction of title or rank is suggested by the Bible use of
these words. It is very important that we remember this fact. The
overseers, the pastors, the shepherds, the bishops, the elders, and the
presbyters are all the same men. The nine men here whom we frequently
call elders may by the same authority be called by either of these other
five names. They are the pastors of this congregation; they are the
overseers; they are the bishops; they are the presbyters; they are the
shepherds of the flock.
Whenever one of these names is used to distinguish one person from the
rest of the group they describe, trouble will always follow. That is
exactly what happened in the early history of the church. It probably
occurred in a very natural way and so gradually that only the most
vigilant became alarmed. In a group of overseers, it is most likely that
one of them will be more active than the others. It is natural for one
of them to have more ability and more zeal as a leader than the rest,
and he is liable to become known as the leader of the group.
Thus it came to pass in the history of the early church. One of the
overseers, or elders, became so much more prominent and influential than
the others that they began to designate him by a different name. They
called him the bishop. The rest of the overseers were called presbyters.
They took one of these six Bible names and made it apply to one of the
men in the group to distinguish him from the others. Now, that looks
like a very small departure, doesn’t it? If I had been living in those
days and had warned the brethren against such a practice, they would
have said, “That preacher is radical. He is making a mountain out of a
molehill. What difference does it make if we want to distinguish the man
who does most of the work by calling him the bishop?” Anyone who opposed
them would probably have been called old-fashioned, non-progressive,
etc.
But, friends, I want you to know that that is the seed out of which has
grown more than two hundred denominations in America. Out of that first
departure from the Bible plan has come the ecclesiastical hierarchies
that curse the religious world today. If you and I aren’t very careful,
we will repeat the same error. Whenever one man in the congregation is
set above all the others in the group and is distinguished by any title
whatsoever, you are taking a step in the wrong direction.
Well, let us follow the matter still further. It was also perfectly
natural for this congregation which had made one man more prominent than
the others, and distinguished him by the title Bishop, to start some
missions around over the country and exercise authority over them until
they became self-supporting. Since the man who was now called the bishop
was head of the mother congregation, you can see how it would be very
easy for the same man to become the head of this group of churches.
Thus, less than two hundred years after Christ, there came into being a
form of church organization quite opposite the plan revealed in the
Bible. Instead of a group of men, with equal authority under Christ,
overseeing one congregation there was one man over a group of
congregations.
Doubtless there were certain congregations who maintained scriptural
organization, contended against these departures, and refused to share
in the digression. When some digressed and others did not, there was
naturally a division—not because the Bible was at fault, but because
some refused to follow the Bible.
The territory represented by a group of congregations over which a
bishop gained control came to be known as a diocese. Later these
geographic units were grouped to form larger units. In these larger
units one of the “bishops,” usually the one residing in the capital of
the province, gained ascendancy in rank and authority over his fellow
“bishops” and was called the metropolitan.
The digression was augmented by conferences held in the various
provinces and in which the local metropolitan served as chairman. At
first, they were innocent “get-togethers” of delegates from the
different congregations for the sake of fellowship, friendly discussion
of their common problems, and reaching conclusions on disputed
questions. But they soon partook of the nature of legislative bodies,
and were called Councils by the Latins, and Synods by the Greeks. Thus
there came into existence a source of legislation in addition to, and
different from, the Bible. The congregations joining in this movement
were deprived of their scriptural autonomy.
Until after A.D. 300 each province held its own separate conference, and
each metropolitan was entirely independent of all the other
metropolitans in the government of his province. You can imagine how the
congregations that refused to “string along” with the crowd were
condemned and boycotted by the ecclesiastical leaders.
In A.D. 325 the first general council was called, and the congregations
represented were divided into five groups according to the political
divisions of the Roman Empire. The ecclesiastical ruler of each group
was called “Patriarch” or “Chief Father.” This council formulated what
is known as the Nicene Creed, which was adopted by most of the churches
and which is still acknowledged by many denominations today, including
the Roman Catholic. Naturally there was rivalry among the five “Chief
Fathers.” The “bishops” of Rome and Constantinople managed to gain
supremacy over the other three (those at Jerusalem, Alexander, and
Antioch). The warfare between these two was long and fierce. In A.D. 588
John the Faster, the Patriarch of Constantinople, assumed the title of
“Universal Bishop of the Church.” The Patriarch of Rome protested
bitterly, but in A.D. 606 the title of “Universal Bishop” was
transferred from John the Faster to the “Roman See.”
Thus with more than five hundred years of gradual drifting away from the
Bible plan they developed a complete ecclesiastical hierarchy, with its
councils, creeds, and dignitaries, supposedly having authority in
addition to, different from, and in some cases, greater than, the Bible.
Authority was now divided between the Bible and men who were
presumptuous enough to set themselves up as legislators in the kingdom
of God, which eventually culminated in the “Pope’s” ridiculous claim to
be infallible. By the congregations sharing in this apostasy the Bible
was no longer considered a complete and final authority.
Sometimes today people undertake to explain the existence of
denominations by saying that we cannot see the Bible alike. Friends,
that is an insult to God. Anybody who says that ambiguity and
indefiniteness on the part of the Bible is to blame for all the division
which God so plainly condemns is insulting God Almighty; accusing Him of
being unable to write a book that would express what he wanted folk to
know. It is to accuse God of passing a law against division, and
condemning division, and coming right along and giving the world a book
that would naturally result in division. I do not believe that God is
characterized by any such inconsistency. I do not believe He would
condemn us for being divided, and then give us a book that would
inevitably divide us.
Friends, it is not because we are not able to see the Bible alike, but
it is because so many people consider something else besides the Bible
as authority. I have given you a brief outline of how it started. Any
Roman Catholic “priest” in this town will tell you that, in his
estimation, the Bible is not the final authority in what people are to
do in religion, but that the man whom they call the Pope is the
infallible guide.
V
The Reformation and Protestantism
“Well, that explains,” you say, “just one denomination, but where did
all the others come from?” We shall try to show you the connection
between the Roman Catholic Church and many of the other denominations.
For a period of seven hundred years, the Roman Catholics held sway over
a vast majority of people who called themselves Christians. I believe
that all down through the ages there were some folk who rebelled against
the Roman “Pope”; and I am of the opinion, although I could not prove
it, that in every generation there were some faithful Christians not
always numerous and prominent enough to win recognition in history, but
who were nevertheless contending for and obeying the truth. Be that as
it may, we know that the Roman Catholic Church dominated most of the
religious world for many centuries—until finally the Roman Catholics and
the Greek Catholics divided in the twelfth century A.D. Then those two
held the reins until there came the period in history which is known as
the Great Reformation.
I have great respect for such men as Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, John
Locke, John Calvin, and John Wesley. [I don’t know why so many of them
were named John, I have often wondered.] Even though a great deal of
harm has been done in the name of these men, we must recognize them as
having done some noble work.
Take Martin Luther, for instance, who found a Bible while he was a
student in a convent, and studied it diligently. He became convinced
that the sale of indulgences was sinful and endeavored to reform the
Roman Catholic Church on this point. As a consequence of this effort he
was excommunicated. Naturally, he started an independent movement. His
purpose was to get back to the Bible and throw off all human authority,
taking the Bible as his only guide. If he and all of his followers had
been true to this noble ideal, there would be no Lutheran Church on the
earth today. They would have become Christians and Christians only.
I am convinced that Martin Luther did not intend to start a
denomination. He pleaded with the people not to wear his name, but
rather to call themselves Christians. He had strong convictions, and was
willing to suffer for the sake of them. But, friends, Martin Luther had
become well saturated with error before he began to study the Bible for
himself. He could hardly have been expected to discover all the truth
immediately.
He knew that the Roman Catholics were wrong on indulgences, but they
were also wrong on a great many other points which he did not discover.
If he and his followers had continued to study the Bible and to make
reformations as the need for them was discovered, then they would have
kept getting back closer and closer to the original plan. This they did
not do. Instead they made the tragic error of formulating a creed or
confession of faith. This they probably did with good intentions, hoping
thereby to protect their followers against the snares of Roman
Catholicism and other errors, but they defeated their purpose. It was
not long until the creed began to be recognized as authoritative—if not
as equal to the Bible at least as a subordinate authority. Naturally the
creed was erroneous and ambiguous. It was written by uninspired men and
by men blinded and prejudiced by Roman Catholicism. The creed makers
were wearing the colored glasses of Roman Catholicism. They who had had
Romanism drilled into them from infancy could not instantly and entirely
disabuse themselves of it. In some cases they retained Roman error; in
other cases they were driven into opposite extremes.
Naturally, after a generation or so, they acquired members who were in
the movement not because of conviction, but because of convenience, or
because their parents were. This condition, with the deadening effect of
a creed—of a human creed—made progress back to the Bible very difficult,
if not impossible. Each step of reformation called for a revision of the
creed, and creeds are hard to revise. People become attached to them;
they come to think more of them than they think of the Bible itself, if
they aren’t very careful. They develop a patriotic attitude toward the
creed which is very difficult to overcome. Consequently, we have the
Lutheran Church with us today.
This appraisal of Luther’s work will fit, in a general way, the work of
other reformers. They made similar errors. If they had maintained the
scientific attitude—which means to test every point, investigate to see
if you are right and change when you’re wrong, prove all things and hold
fast to that which is good—then they would have kept getting back closer
to God. But when their movements became crystallized, when they became
satisfied with their _status quo_, and had acquired a number of members
who were without conviction, then they not only ceased getting back
closer to God but they began to drift away from Him. As a consequence,
many of the denominations today resemble their mother, the Roman
Catholic Church, more than they did in the beginning.
And so, my friends, we have before us a brief outline of how
denominations got started. The Roman Catholic Church is the result of
centuries of drifting away from the New Testament pattern. Since it
reached the zenith of its power, many other denominations have resulted
from unsuccessful and incomplete efforts to reform the Catholics or some
other existing group. In most cases the movement of the reformers,
because of indifference and a lack of conviction in their ranks,
eventually lost ground. In every instance, consciously or unconsciously,
something besides the Bible has been accepted as authority. Errors,
which the Protestant churches, willingly or unwillingly, inherited from
the Catholics have been handed down from generation to generation even
to the present. Thus, many unscriptural practices and doctrines of the
denominations are traceable to the church at Rome with its preposterous
claim of infallibility. Many members of denominations do not realize
that much of what they get from their parents and preachers and which
they fancy to be of Biblical origin, has, in fact, descended from Rome
and can claim no higher authority.
VI
The Restoration Movement
But to pursue our historical survey a little further, at the beginning
of the nineteenth century with three hundred years of Protestant
denominational history before them, various religious leaders were
awakened to the evils of creeds, and a “back to the Bible” movement was
begun. In America the work of these men became known as the Restoration
Movement. It was their purpose to go back to Pentecost, to begin at
Jerusalem, as a surveyor begins at the established corner, mark out the
lines revealed in the New Testament, and establish congregations just
like the pattern that Jesus gave. That was a noble undertaking and it
proved to be a very successful one. It was the fastest growing religious
movement the world had seen since the days of the apostles.
But remember it is very difficult for reforms to stay reformed. In a
generation or so there grew up in this movement also an element who were
parties to it because their parents were and not because of personal
conviction. Such an element is a liability to any movement. This element
has become crystallized in the digressive wing of the movement, who,
although some of their followers may not realize it, no longer regard
the Bible as complete and final authority. They have no written creed
but they have discredited the Bible. Whether they admit it or not, their
principle is: “Where the Bible speaks we may be silent; where the Bible
is silent we are at liberty to speak.” Without any effort to explain how
it is done, they claim that God is still revealing his will to man in
some way independent of the Bible. They claim to have advanced beyond
the wisdom of the apostles themselves, and regard their own
intellectuality as equal to, or superior to, the Bible. Thus, each man
becomes a law unto himself, and there is, therefore, no ground for
unity.
I am thankful, however, that there were some who refused to assume an
indifferent attitude, who are still contending for the faith once
delivered to the saints, and who realize that we must be ever striving
to get closer to the divine plan revealed in the New Testament. Since
reformations will not stay reformed, the only way to keep on the right
road is to be forever getting back on the right way. This we cannot do
unless we have conviction, and unless we study God’s word. That’s one of
our reasons for giving so much emphasis to the importance of your
searching the Scriptures daily. It may be that we have some in our very
midst who do not know the difference between the true church and a
denomination, and who cannot give an intelligent reason for the hope
that is within them. Such an element in a congregation is easily
deceived by digressive influences and must become strong in the faith
for their own sake and for the safety of the church.
VII
The Need of Constant Vigilance
Hence, my brethren, we need to be watching today, lest we become slack
and allow error to creep into our midst and become established among us.
Remember that human nature is just the same now that it has always been.
The same sort of indifferent attitude and drifting which resulted in the
Roman Catholic Church and which resulted in the establishment of other
denominations in the world, will make a denomination out of us if we are
not always on the guard. Eternal vigilance is the price of being right.
We have the same human nature that others have. If we aren’t willing to
pay the price of being better students of God’s word, then we, too, will
drift into another denomination, and not be worth the time and place
which we occupy. We don’t need any more denominations! We have enough!
If you want to be a member of a denomination you don’t need to start
another one. You have more than two hundred to choose from. Some of them
are very highly organized and well financed. There is no reason for
starting another one; _there are many reasons for not doing so_! Unless
we are going to understand the difference between the true church and
denominationalism, unless we are going to contend earnestly for
non-denominational Christianity, then we do not deserve to exist and the
world would be better off if we did not.
VIII
Extra-Biblical Standards
There is one fact which I want to emphasize further. In every case of
denominationalism some authority other than the Bible has been
recognized. Otherwise denominations could not come into existence, and
denominations could not continue to exist. The extra-Biblical authority
might be the man whom they call the Pope at Rome. It might be your
preacher in some denomination which you look up to as being the final
authority. It might be the creed of the denomination to which you
belong. It might be the people among whom you move. It might be your own
feelings in the matter. It might be tradition or family heritage. But I
don’t care what it is, if it is outside the Bible, it is not a true
source of authority in religion. The existence of so many denominations
today is not caused by people’s being unable to see the Bible alike.
They are here because, while a few people take the Bible as their only
guide, a great many take something else as their standard.
You meet a great many people who claim to take the Bible as their only
rule of faith and practice, but when you press them to cite the
scriptural authority for certain of their practices they are utterly
unable to do so. If one takes the Bible as sole authority in religion,
then he ought to be able to point to the Scripture which gives the
authority for everything he does. So don’t let a man get by with a mere
statement “We take the Bible as our guide.” If you talk to him a few
minutes, you will possibly find that he is following some preacher,
following his feelings, or following the church to which he belongs. You
may hear him use such expressions as, “What does your church believe on
this point?” or “What does the church of Christ teach on a certain
matter?” Well, I don’t have any church. And the church of Christ doesn’t
teach anything on a certain point. If it did, its teaching would not
necessarily be of any value. Such questions, such expressions betray a
wrong conception of the church. The question should be: “What does the
Bible teach in reference to a certain matter?”
If you can’t find authority in the Bible for your position, you’d better
not depend upon it. Most of the people who are at worship this very hour
belong to a church whose name they cannot find in the Bible. Yet the
preachers who preach in those churches will tell you, “Yes, we take the
Bible as our only guide.” To refute their claim you need only ask them
one question: “Where did you get your name?” They would probably say,
“It’s a nickname. Someone else gave it to us.”
“Well, how come you to acknowledge it?”
“Oh, we just got tired of objecting to it so we finally acknowledged
it.”
“You didn’t get it out of the Bible then.”
Friends, think about how ridiculous it is for a man to say, “We follow
the Bible, and the Bible only,” when the very name of the church to
which he belongs cannot be found from Genesis to Revelation. The sad
part of it is that a great many of the members don’t know the
difference. I have asked people who wore an extra-Biblical name if they
could find their name in the Bible. Frequently, they say, “Yes. I don’t
know where it is but I’m sure it is in there somewhere.” It just isn’t
there. I knew it wasn’t there, but the poor folk thought it was because
they had heard some preacher say they were following the Bible.
Again I protest the statement that denominations are caused by people’s
being unable to see the Bible alike. That is an insult to my God and I
object to it. It is because many are following something besides the
Bible. They may deny it but they are. Otherwise there could be only one
church on this earth because there is only one church in the Bible.
If you belong to something this morning that you cannot read about in
the Bible, won’t you come out of it? Won’t you say, “From this morning
on, I will take the Bible as my guide. I will take one step at a time as
that step is revealed in God’s word until it leads me home to heaven at
last”?
Now, if you will do that, the way is simple. “God so loved the world
that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth on him
should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). “But without
faith it is impossible to please him” (Heb. 11:6). So if you are going
to follow the Bible, the first thing you must do is believe. Again Jesus
said, “Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3). So
the next thing you will do is repent.
I heard a man say this week that the only thing you had to do in order
to be saved was just believe, but the Bible says, “Except ye repent ye
shall all likewise perish,” and repentance is not believing. Repentance
is at least one thing you must do after you believe or else the Bible
says you will perish and have no chance to be saved.
And then on the day of Pentecost Peter said, “Repent and be baptized
every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins”
(Acts 2:38). It is not hard to see that. People who refuse to do it
simply don’t want to see it or just don’t want to do it after they see
it—one or the other! If you want to follow the Bible, the way is plain,
isn’t it? If you take something else for your guide, then no telling
where you will land.
But someone may say, “What is baptism?” Let the Bible answer. “Buried
with him in baptism, wherein ye are also risen with him through the
faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead” (Col.
2:12). “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death that like
as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even
so we also should walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). Hence, according
to the Bible, baptism is a burial and a resurrection. If you weren’t
buried when you were baptized, then you were not baptized; because the
Bible says we are buried by baptism. A so-called baptism which doesn’t
involve a burial isn’t the kind of baptism the Bible talks about. If you
do something else, you don’t get it from the Bible. If you stick to the
Bible, you have the matter settled. You can’t get anything else from it
except a burial. It doesn’t say anything else.
Incidentally, do you know where the doctrine of sprinkling and pouring
came from? It came from the man who is called the Pope of Rome! At the
Council of Vienna, A.D. 1311, by no higher authority than the Roman
Catholic Church, it was decided that sprinkling and pouring might be
practiced for baptism. Most often today the people who accept sprinkling
or pouring instead of baptism do not realize that they are following the
man over in Rome who claims to be greater than the Bible. You probably
got it from your parents, your parents from theirs and their parents
from some preacher and so on, but the chain leads back eventually to the
Roman Catholic Church. It has no higher authority. The Bible condemns
it.
I beseech you in the name of Jesus Christ that you submit unto His will
as revealed unto us in the Holy Bible. If you will follow Him, He will
take you home to rest at last.
V
WHICH CHURCH IS RIGHT?
(Note: As this sermon was being presented the outline seen below was on
the blackboard before the audience.)
Which Church Is Right?
_Introduction_: This is a question that concerns every person.
I. _God Has Only One_
A. See Matt. 16:18; Eph. 4:4; Cor. 12:20; Eph. 1:22, 23.
B. There are more than two hundred in America.
C. Which one belongs to God?
II. _The One That Follows the Bible_
A. Obviously they don’t all follow the Bible.
B. The Bible is a sufficient guide (2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Gal. 1:8, 9; 2
John 9; Rev. 22:18, 19).
C. What does it teach?
III. _Conditions of Membership_
A. Same as condition of salvation (Acts 2:47).
B. Faith (Acts 16:31-33; Rom. 10:14; Acts 2:36).
C. Repentance (Acts 2:38; Acts 3:19; Acts 17:30).
D. Confession (Rom. 10:10; Acts 8:37).
E. Baptism (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:47; 1 Pet.
3:21).
IV. _Worship_
A. Prayer (Acts 2:42; Acts 20:36).
B. Giving (1 Cor. 16:1, 2).
C. Studying and teaching (Acts 2:42; Acts 20:7; etc.).
D. Vocal Music (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16).
E. Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:20-34; Acts 20:7).
F. In spirit and truth (John 4:24).
V. _Daily Christian Living_ (Tit. 2:12; Jas. 1:27; Mark 12:30, 31;
Matt. 7:12).
VI. _Bible Names for God’s Church_
A. The Church (Eph. 1:22, 23; 5:25; Rev. 1:4).
B. The Church of God (1 Cor. 15:9; 1 Thess. 2:14; 1 Cor. 11:16).
C. The Church of Christ (Matt. 16:18; Rom. 16:16).
VII. _Organization_ (Acts 14:23; 20:28; Phil. 1:1).
VIII. _Charity and Evangelistic Work_ (Acts 11:27-30; 12:25; 24:17; 1
Cor. 16:1-4; Acts 11:19-21; 11:22-26; 13:1-4; etc.).
_Conclusion_: The church that follows the Bible on all points is the
one that is right.
By actual count there are 217 people present for this Sunday evening
worship. We are glad you are here. Your presence is a distinct
encouragement. It helps. We can have better work by your being here than
we could if you were not here. We have some visitors and you are very
welcome. May you enjoy with us all the blessings that are to be had here
and help us make these services even better!
At the close of the lesson we shall sing “Come to Jesus,” for the
purpose of encouraging you to accept the Lord’s invitation. The
invitation comes from Jesus Christ. By his authority and by the power of
the Holy Spirit the doors of the church were opened nearly 2,000 years
ago on the day of Pentecost, and the doors of the _Lord’s_ church have
been standing wide open ever since. Whosoever will may come. We sing
this invitation song for the sake of the exhortation it contains and to
give you a convenient opportunity to come forward and make known your
desire to obey the Lord. Backsliders are invited to return to God,
confessing their sins, repenting of them, and praying for forgiveness.
Those who have never been born again are taught by the Bible to believe
in Christ, repent of their sins, confess their faith, and be baptized
for the remission of sins. We are prepared to assist you in carrying out
your obedience of these commands. If you will come forward and make your
wishes known, we shall be glad to help you in every way we can.
I promised to speak to you tonight upon the topic “Which Church Is
Right?” That is a very important question, and the timeliness of it is
evident by the fact that in the United States there are more than 200
churches. Just for the sake of a round number, we’ll speak of them as
200. That is, indeed, enough. In fact, too many! For, in the Bible,
there is only one. Now, you just think about that—200 in the United
States alone, to say nothing about other parts of the world, and only
one in the Bible!
I
One Church in Bible
On the board tonight I have an outline of the lesson and the Scriptures
which shall be used. I would like for you who are interested to write
these Scriptures down, that you may give them further study. Search the
Scriptures, as the noble people of Berea did, to see whether these
things are true. There are many Scriptures which show that there is only
one church in the Bible. Here are a few of them listed under No. 1. In
Matthew 16:18, Jesus said, referring to the confession that Peter had
just made, “Upon this rock I will build my church.” He used the singular
form of the word. He didn’t say “my churches,” but “my church.”
Therefore, Jesus Christ built only one. He bought and paid for only one
with his blood, and he has only one tonight. “There is one body” (Eph.
4:4). There is “but one body” (1 Cor. 12:20). That body is the church.
“And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head
over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him
that filleth all in all” (Eph. 1:22-23). Since there is but one body,
and that body is the church, then it naturally follows that there is but
one church. Only one church in the Bible, and more than 200 in America!
Therefore, we must face the question, “Which Church Is Right?”
Please remember that this is no more my problem than it is yours. I’m
not to blame for all these churches’ being in the world! I did not start
them. None of you started them. We found them here when we were born
into this world. They are here. We are not responsible for their
beginning. Some of you may be responsible for helping to keep them
going, but we found them here, and we have found that in the Bible there
is only one. To decide which one is right is as much your problem as it
is mine.
You may think that tonight I shall undertake to prove that the group of
people with whom I am associated is the right group and that all the
others are wrong. Well, I’m frank to say that I believe I’m right. If I
didn’t, I would change! Some people think they are criticizing me when
they say: “Oh, well, you just think you’re right and everybody else is
wrong.” I believe that’s a compliment. Of course I believe I’m right! If
I didn’t, I would change. A man who continues in a way which he does not
believe to be right is a hypocrite! For one to teach what he sincerely
believes is not conceit but sincerity. It’s not egotism but honesty. Not
only do I believe that what I teach is right, but I stand ready to
change it whenever anyone can show me wherein it is wrong. But I promise
not to make a prejudiced or biased approach to this question.
II
The Church That Follows the Bible Is Right
Suppose you were to undertake to examine all the creeds of Christendom,
and eliminate them one by one to see which church is right. That would
take a very long time. You might even die with old age before you had
finished the task. I believe there is a much shorter and more practical
approach to the solution of the question. Just go directly to the Bible
and see what it says and follow its teaching; then you will naturally be
right.
If I were going to answer my question tonight in just one brief
statement, I would say that the church which follows the Bible is the
one that’s right. At first thought this may sound like a very trite
statement. Somebody would reply by saying, “Well, all the churches claim
to follow the Bible.” Such a claim demands investigation! It’s easy to
make such a claim, but you notice that I did not say that the church
which _claims_ to follow the Bible is right, but that the one which
_follows_ the Bible is right.
There may be a big difference between claiming to follow the Bible and
actually following it. If you will talk to some of these people who
claim to follow the Bible, you will hear them using expressions like
these: “Well, I think so and so”; “I feel like that’s all right”; “My
church teaches this and that”; “I heard my preacher say so and so”; and
“My mother and father or grandparents always belonged to this church.”
To such standards as these many people are clinging. Friends, such
expressions betray the fact that the man who uses them is not taking the
Bible as his one and only guide! They betray the fact that he is
following something else besides the Bible. Before we accept at face
value a man’s claim along that line, we’d better look behind it. We’d
better listen to the man talk for a few minutes and see whether he does
actually take the Bible to be complete and final authority in matters
religious.
The following Scriptures show that the Bible should be our guide: “All
Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,
for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the
man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good work” (2
Tim. 3:16, 17). “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any
other gospel unto you, than that which we have preached unto you, let
him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man
preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be
accursed” (Gal. 1:8, 9).
“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” (2 John 9). Then that well-known Scripture in the
last chapter of the Bible, “For I testify unto every man that heareth
the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these
things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this
book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out
of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book”
(Rev. 22:18, 19).
Many other Scriptures could be used, but these are enough to show us
that _the Bible should be our guide_. It is sufficient and furnishes the
man of God completely unto every good work. Those who claim to be
following the Bible and the Bible only should be expected to defend that
claim, in the light of the Bible. Frequently, I announce publicly that I
stand ready to put my finger upon the Scripture that furnishes the
authority for everything we do and teach and believe in matters of
religion. I always stand ready to make this claim good. Everybody is
invited to check me on this basis. If you can find something for which I
cannot give scriptural proof, then I will cease to teach, practice, or
believe it. A preacher, who is not willing to make such a statement,
evidently knows that he is not taking the Bible as his one and only
guide, and yet I believe you will agree that most of the preachers in
this city will not make you this proposition.
Not very long ago I heard a man boldly declare that his preacher
preached the Bible and nothing else. I began to name several things
which the Bible teaches and asked him one by one if his preacher taught
those things. In every instance he had to answer in the negative. He had
not fully realized what was comprehended in his statement. Another lady
came to me and said, “I just believe that all of us ought to go back to
the Bible and take it as our guide.” I reminded her that in that case
she would have to give up the unscriptural name which she had been
wearing and make a number of other changes. She said, “Well, now, let’s
don’t get back too far.” The truth was that she didn’t really want to
take the Bible as her only guide! I mention all these facts to show that
you mustn’t be too quick to accept the claim mentioned a moment ago.
You’d better examine it. For, as a matter of fact, if we were all
following the Bible there would be but one church on the earth, because
there is but one in the Bible. There’s just no escaping this conclusion.
So, I believe that my statement is apt. It is appropriate to say that
the church which follows the Bible is the one that’s right. Therefore,
if you want a scriptural answer to our question tonight, you don’t need
to examine all the different creeds separately; just take the Bible and
examine it. Follow its teaching and directions step by step. This course
will lead you into the right church, and into heaven at last. You won’t
need to investigate all the religious organizations which exist about us
without Scriptural authority.
III
Conditions of Membership
Let us see what the Bible actually teaches concerning the doctrine and
practice of the church. Then we shall know which is right so far as
these items are concerned. I want to say now, and repeat many times as
we go along, that a church may be right on one point and wrong on
another. A church may follow the Bible on one point and not follow it on
another, and a church is right to the extent that it follows the Bible.
It’s wrong to the extent that it fails to do so. No church is _all_
right until it follows the Bible on _all_ points.
First of all, let’s look at the conditions of membership in the church
we read about in the Bible. Acts 2:47 shows that the conditions of
membership in God’s church are identical with the conditions of
salvation. “The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.”
Since the Lord adds to His church all saved people, the conditions of
membership and the conditions of salvation are exactly the same.
We learn from the Scriptures listed here (speaker points to the board)
that the first thing one must do in order to be saved is to believe that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The Philippian jailor
said to Paul and Silas, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” They
replied, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and
thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord and to all that
were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and
washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all of his, straightway”
(Acts 16:20-33). In answer to the jailor’s question then, the inspired
preacher said first of all, “Believe”; then he taught him the word of
the Lord, which led to his repentance, evidenced by the fact that,
whereas he had a few minutes ago placed stripes across their backs with
a heavy whip, he now washed those stripes.
Then Paul taught him and his household to be baptized, and taught them
that baptism was urgent, because they were baptized the same hour of the
night. They did not put it off a month or a week or even until daylight,
but were baptized immediately, or straightway, even the very same hour
of the night.
Faith is emphasized also by Acts 2:36 where Peter concluded his great
Pentecost sermon by saying, “Therefore, let all the house of Israel know
assuredly that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified,
both Lord and Christ.” “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the
Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have
not believed?” (Rom. 10:13-14). “Without faith it’s impossible to be
well pleasing unto God” (Heb. 11:6). Therefore, the first condition of
salvation is faith.
The second one is repentance. Acts 2:38 says, “Repent”; Acts 3:19 says,
“Repent”; and Acts 17:30 says “Repent.” You can go home and read these
Scriptures and you’ll find the commandment to repent in each of them,
and it’s given as a condition of salvation.
Furthermore, we are taught that “with the heart man believeth unto
righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation”
(Rom. 10:10). And in the eighth chapter of Acts we read that when the
Ethiopian eunuch said, “See, here is water, what doth hinder me to be
baptized? and Philip said, If thou believest with all of thine heart,
thou mayest, and he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is
the Son of God.” Therefore, confession is a condition of salvation.
When the Pentecostians inquired what they must do to be saved, the
inspired apostle Peter said, “Repent and be baptized, everyone of you,
in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38).
Ananias told Paul, “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized,
and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16).
“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the
putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet.
3:21). No one, who knows the Bible, can have a good conscience toward
the Lord until he has been baptized. Baptism is the answer to the quest
for a good conscience.
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth
not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16). Friends, there are a thousand ways to
go to hell; one of them is to disbelieve. But suppose I ask you who will
be saved. You cannot give me a Bible answer to save your life without
mentioning baptism. For Mark 16:16, the word of Jesus Christ, says, “He
that believeth _and is baptized_ shall be saved.” To leave out baptism
would be to omit part of the Lord’s answer. No sane person ought to take
the responsibility of taking away part of God’s word. You cannot give a
Bible answer to the question without mentioning baptism!
According to the Bible, therefore, faith, repentance, confession, and
baptism are the conditions of salvation. Since all saved people are
added to the Lord’s church by the Lord, then these are also the
conditions of membership in God’s church. The church, which teaches
this, is right on this point. It might be wrong somewhere else, but the
church which teaches these facts is the right church as far as the
conditions of membership are concerned. Any church which leaves off any
one of them or adds something to them just lacks that much, at least,
being right.
IV
Worship
Let us look next at the acts of worship. There’s no place in the Bible
which says in so many words, “Here are the acts ye shall perform as
worship to Jehovah”; but there _are_ certain acts commanded, which are,
by their very nature, acts of worship. Therefore, God does state for us
the acts which the members of His church shall perform in worship unto
Him.
First, they should _pray_. Acts 2:42 states that the church at Jerusalem
continued steadfastly in the apostle’s doctrine and fellowship, and in
breaking of bread, and in prayer. Acts 20:36 gives us an example of
public prayer. At the seaside the apostle Paul knelt down with those who
were gathered with him and prayed unto God. Prayer by its very nature is
an act of worship.
We also learn in First Corinthians 16:1 and 2, that we should _lay by in
store_ upon the first day of the week as we have been prospered; and
that itself is an item of worship. Giving or sacrificing unto God for
the sake of God is an act of worship.
From Acts 2:42, Acts 20:7, and many other Scriptures that could be
listed, we learn that _teaching and studying the Bible_ are also
commanded of God’s children; and that, likewise, is worship.
In Ephesians 5:19 we read these words, “Speaking unto yourselves in
psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your
heart to the Lord.” And in Colossians 3:16, “Let the word of Christ
dwell in you richly, in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another
in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your
hearts to the Lord.” These Scriptures command us to _sing_ praises to
God and admonitions unto each other, which is naturally an act of
worship.
And then, finally, we are taught to eat the Lord’s supper (1 Cor.
11:17-34; Luke 22:19-20). Acts 20:7 tells us that this shall be done on
the first day of the week. The church at Troas, under apostolic
guidance, met upon _the first day of the week_ to eat the Lord’s supper.
And, friends, “the sabbath day,” as the expression was used in the Old
Testament, meant every sabbath day, and by the same line of reasoning,
“the first day of the week” means the first day of every week.
Tomorrow students will be registering out at Peabody and Vanderbilt.
Their schedules will state that a certain class meets on Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday. They will not state that it meets _every_ Monday
and _every_ Wednesday and _every_ Friday, but even a college freshman
will understand what is meant! When we are told that a class meets on
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we know that it meets on Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday of every week.
If you were to search the New Testament to find out how often we should
eat the Lord’s supper, you would not find the slightest suggestion that
it should be eaten once a year. You would find no sort of hint that it
should be taken upon the first of every quarter or upon one Sunday out
of each month. The only Scripture which throws any light whatsoever upon
the question puts it upon a weekly basis.
John 4:24 shows that all these acts of worship must be done in spirit
and in truth. “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship
him in spirit and in truth.”
That’s what the Bible teaches about the worship of the Bible church. The
church which does these five things in spirit and in truth is the right
church as far as the worship is concerned. A church might be right in
worship and wrong in doctrine, or vice versa; but the church which, in
spirit and in truth, teaches and practices these five items and only
these, is right in its worship; and the church that preaches and
practices anything different from this is wrong. The Bible is right.
This is what the Bible teaches. The church which does this is
consequently right; the one which doesn’t is wrong.
V
Christian Living
A church is responsible for its teaching in respect to how its members
should live. It cannot force the members to do according to its teaching
and we must distinguish between the conduct of the church as a whole and
the behavior of individual members. If the church teaches the truth and
attempts to persuade its members to obey it, and properly disciplines
them when they disobey, the church as a whole cannot be held accountable
for their misbehavior.
Concerning Christian living the Bible says, “For the grace of God that
bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that denying
ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and
godly in this present world” (Titus 2:11-12). “Pure religion and
undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and
widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the
world” (Jas. 1:27). “The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O
Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy
God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,
and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second
is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is
none other commandment greater than these” (Mark 12:29-31). And then in
Matthew 7:12, we have what is called the Golden Rule, “Whatsoever ye
would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.”
These are general commandments governing Christian behavior, and the
church which teaches and impresses these Bible lessons upon its members
is right that far, but the church which fails to condemn worldliness and
ungodly living lacks that much being right. It may be ever so sound on
doctrine and worship, but if it fails to properly admonish its members
and hold up before them the divine standard of Christian conduct and
insist that they follow it, it lacks that much being right.
Friends, here’s (speaker points to board) what the Bible teaches on
Christian behavior. The church which teaches this is right on that point
because the Bible is right and this is what the Bible says.
VI
The Name
We come now to the name. You know, there are a lot of churches right
here in Nashville tonight which simply cannot find their names in the
Bible. They could look from now till the end of the world and they
couldn’t find the names they wear in the Bible to save their lives!
That, to me, is an astonishing fact. It looks as if anybody ought to
know that the Bible cannot guide you into a church which isn’t even
mentioned in the Bible. A road map cannot direct you to a town which is
not shown on the map. A Tennessee road map cannot show you how to find a
town in Texas, and so the Bible cannot guide you to a church which isn’t
even found in the Bible. That’s a very simple test which you might apply
in your search for the right church.
What does the Bible say about the name? In Ephesians 1:22 we find that
Christ has been made head over all things unto _the church_. Ephesians
5:25 says, “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the
church and gave himself for it.” And so, first of all, it is simply
called _the church_. Then in Revelation 1:4 we read about “the seven
_churches_” of Asia, meaning the seven different congregations which are
specified in chapters three and four. In a general sense, including all
saved people on the earth, it is simply called _the church_. In the
plural form this name refers to the various local congregations of that
great body.
We learn also from First Corinthians 15:9 that it is called the _church
of God_. Paul said he was not fit to be called an apostle, because he
persecuted the _church of God_. First Corinthians Cor 11:16 says, “But
if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the
churches of God.” So in the singular and comprehensive sense, it is
called the _church of God_; not as a denominational title, but as an
expression of ownership. It is the church which belongs to God. And in
Matthew 16:18 Christ said, “Upon this rock I will build my church.” It
is, therefore, the church which belongs to Christ. And in the plural
form, we read in Romans 16:16, “The churches of Christ salute you.”
Friends, we learn from the Bible, then, that in the broad, general
sense, including all saved people, it is called the church, or the
church of God, or the church of the Lord, the church which belongs to
Christ. Referring to different local congregations, those same terms are
used in the plural form. This leads me to believe that anything bigger
than a local congregation and smaller than all God’s people throughout
the world or some specific geographic area, cannot scripturally be
called _the church_. That’s where denominationalism comes in. The only
way this universal institution can scripturally be broken down into
different parts is to do it on a geographical or congregational basis.
Splitting it up on any other basis results in sectarianism or
denominationalism—creates different parties and sects.
I have two pictures drawn here to keep that before your mind. Here’s the
Bible picture (speaker points to board). The big ring includes all of
God’s people throughout the entire world. These small dots represent
various congregations like the church at Laodicea, the church at Smyrna,
the church at Ephesus, the church at Madison, the church at Chapel
Avenue, the church at Columbia, Tennessee, and so on around the
world—different local congregations. This is purely a geographical
grouping.
But here is the best figure I can draw on denominationalism and it’s not
entirely accurate (speaker points to board again). When a group of these
congregations, even if they have all been scripturally baptized—which
they have not—draw a ring about themselves and say, “We are the ‘A’
Church,” another group says, “We are the ‘B’ Church,” and another says,
“We are the ‘C’ Church,” each group of congregations distinguishing
itself from other similar groups by a distinguishing title—that is
denominationalism, pure and simple! That picture does _not_ represent a
_geographic_ distribution, for we have all those different denominations
right here in Nashville. It’s not a geographical division, but a
division based on difference in teaching, practice, and faith. That’s
not the Bible picture (speaker continues to refer to board). Here is the
Bible picture.
The church which wears these Bible names, and only these, is the right
church as far as the name is concerned. But, friends, any church that
calls itself by any other name, any name not in the Bible, is not the
right church because the Bible is right. When a church has a name upon
their building which cannot be found in the Bible, they need not claim
that they are taking the Bible as their one and only guide, for the very
name on the church building denies that claim. Just think how foolish it
is for a preacher to stand up and say, “We take the Bible as our guide,”
when, out in front of the building, in great big letters, is a name
which cannot even be found in the Bible! That’s one reason I think we
had better examine a man’s claim to follow the Bible. Here’s what the
Bible teaches on the name, and the Bible is right. The church that wears
these names and only these is right on that point.
But merely wearing the right name will not make a church right. It may
wear the right name and still be wrong in other respects. I used to
preach in a town where there was a great big church building which had a
name in bold letters that you could see almost all over town—Central
Church of Christ. But if you went to their worship, you’d find something
that’s not listed here at all (speaker refers to section of outline on
board). They were not following the Bible on worship. They had the right
name but they didn’t have the right worship. They were right on one
point but wrong on another. There are churches over the country called
“Churches of God.” That’s a good name, but they have items of doctrine
that cannot be found in the Bible. For instance, they preach that you
have to be baptized in the Holy Spirit in order to be saved, and that’s
not in the Bible. Consequently, they are wrong on doctrine; and to
merely wear the right name does not atone for their false teaching on
what one must do to be saved.
VII
Organization
Just one more item or two and then we’re through. Number 7 here refers
to the organization of the church. According to the Bible every local
congregation is entirely independent under God to manage its own
affairs, with its elders overseeing its work. Acts 14:23: “When they had
ordained them elders in every church and had prayed with fasting, they
commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.” Acts 20:28 says,
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the
which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God,
which he hath purchased with his own blood.” In addressing the church at
Philippi Paul speaks of all the saints at Philippi “with the bishops and
deacons.”
According to this simple but effective organization of God’s church,
every local congregation is entirely independent, supervised and tended,
under God, by a group of men known as overseers or pastors or elders.
Now, that’s what the Bible teaches on church organization. The church
which follows this plan is right on that point. Wherever you see a group
of congregations tied together by some inter-congregational
organization, that group’s wrong on their organization. I know some
groups that maintain congregational independence, but are wrong in some
other way. Remember that in order for a church to be the right church,
it must be right on all these items.
VIII
Charity and Missionary Work
And then, finally, the Bible teaches that God’s church should be active
in beneficent and missionary work. It is the duty of the church to feed
the poor and to preach the gospel unto the entire world. I have a long
list of Scriptures here which authorize this statement (Acts 11:27-30;
12:25; 24:17; 1 Cor. 16:1-4; Acts 11:19-21; 11:22-26; 13:1-4; etc.).
Even though a church may be right in every other way, including
Christian living, including the name, and including the organization, if
it doesn’t do what it can to take care of the poor, and if it doesn’t
make a scriptural effort to preach the gospel to all the world, it lacks
that much being right, and cannot justify its claims to be known as the
church of Christ!
Now, friends, let me repeat again that here’s what the Bible teaches.
The church which does these things is right, because the Bible is right;
but the church which deviates from these, leaves off some of them or
adds something to them, lacks that much being right. And even though a
church followed this plan in every item except one, it would still be
wrong.
IX
Conclusions
What practical application shall we make? Simply take your Bible and
follow out this plan, study it for yourself, see that this is what the
Bible teaches, and then identify yourself with the congregation which
does the same. You say, “Maybe I cannot find one that follows the Bible
plan.” I believe you can in this town, but I’ll admit there are some
towns where you can’t. Then what would you do? The answer is very
simple—just start one! That’s one of the easiest things in the world to
do. Study your Bible, follow its simple pattern, and the result will be
a church after the New Testament order. If you can find even one person
who is willing to follow this plan and work it with you, then you’ll
have a congregation which pleases God. Jesus says, “Wherever two or
three are gathered together in my name, there will I be in the midst of
them.”
And, friends, I believe that the most practical and effective missionary
work that we could possibly do would be for all church members who move
away from Nashville and other places where the church is strong, to
faithfully and persistently follow this Bible program wherever they go,
even though they have to meet and worship in their own homes. There are
too many who forsake this plan when they go away to a strange city.
If all who move away from places where the church is strong, would
simply take Christ and the Bible with them and start a congregation
wherever they go, it would be the most far-reaching, the most effective,
the most practical, and the most economical missionary work that could
possibly be conceived! It would not only be all of that, it would also
be scriptural. What more could you expect? That certainly is enough to
recommend it to us all. So, friends, simply take this plan, if you know
of a congregation that’s following it, then identify yourself with it.
If you can’t find one, then start one, with the determination to follow
the Bible; and then you’ll be in the right church. You may forget about
all these 200 different denominations, except to do whatever you can to
lead them out of error into the truth!
I told you I would do no boasting tonight and I shall do none, but I
will say this: I sincerely believe it is the earnest determination of
the congregation at Chapel Avenue to follow this simple Bible plan, and
I believe I speak the truth when I say that if you can point out to the
overseers of this congregation that they are failing to follow the Bible
on any single item, they will change their practice immediately. That
should be the attitude of everyone who loves the truth, and they will
not embarrass you or rebuff you if you approach them on the question. If
you even _think_ they are failing on some point, they would welcome an
interview and pledge themselves to make any sort of alteration or change
that is necessary to bring the teaching, the practice, and the name of
this congregation into harmony with the Bible plan. If that were not
true, I would not continue to preach for this group except long enough
to do what I could to get them to reform.
Friends, above everything else, I want to go to heaven when I die and I
know that the only way to do that is to follow the Bible; so I still
insist that it is entirely proper and appropriate to emphasize that the
church which follows the Bible is the one that’s right. This simple
test, if faithfully and honestly applied, will eliminate every church in
this town which cannot find its name, its doctrine, and its practice in
the Bible. Are you willing to live up to the claim that you take that
Bible as your one and only guide? If so, just follow this (speaker
refers to outline on the board) step by step, believe that Jesus is the
Christ, repent of your sins, confess your faith, and then be baptized
for remission of sins. Then go on, worshiping God as the Bible directs,
behaving yourself as the Bible teaches, supporting the church which
wears the right name, which is scripturally organized, and which takes
the Bible as its one and only guide.
If, after having been scripturally baptized, you have failed on one or
more of these items, the Bible teaches that if you will repent, confess
your sins and pray for forgiveness, God will surely forgive you. As we
stand and sing the song announced, we entreat you to accept the
invitation of our Lord, who says, “Come unto me and I will give you
rest.”
VI
WHY NOT BE JUST A CHRISTIAN?
Religious people seem to realize more keenly than before the importance
and even necessity of Christian unity. But before we can have the unity
which the Bible teaches and demands, some practical means of attaining
it must be employed. It seems to me that it would be well to begin by
emphasizing some points of agreement—in other words, let us see how
close together we are, at present, and then we will be in better
position to discuss the points of difference. I believe in religious
debates, have engaged in such myself and shall be glad to do so again
whenever the opportunity presents itself, but in this sermon I want to
emphasize the truth upon which most religious people are already agreed.
I
Points of Agreement
I believe we can say that most of those who claim to be followers of
Christ are agreed upon the following points:
A. _General Statements_
1. God is.
2. The Bible is His word written by men as they were guided by the
Holy Spirit.
3. Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
4. The world needs a Savior and has no power by which to redeem
itself from sin.
5. Redemption or salvation is to be had through Christ and only
through Him.
B. _The Plan of Salvation_
If we agree upon these five points, then, we also agree that there is a
plan of salvation, for these points imply such a plan. It may be that we
can get closer together upon the items of this plan than you have
thought we could. We will all agree that faith is the very foundation of
the plan (John 3:16). All accept the fact that repentance is essential
(Acts 17:30). Everyone agrees that the plan of salvation includes the
confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matt.
10:32, Acts 8:37, Rom. 10:10). Some make additions to this simple
Biblical confession, but I have never heard of anyone’s subtracting from
it. When the comprehensiveness of the term “Christ” is understood, it is
obvious that no additions are needed. Everyone who agrees on the
foregoing will also agree that Jesus commanded baptism and promised
salvation to those who believed and were baptized. “He that believeth
and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be
damned” (Mark 16:16). We will all agree that Peter said, as the Holy
Spirit prompted him, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the
name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the
gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). We will agree that Ananias said to
Paul, “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away
thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16), and also that
the Holy Spirit said through the Apostle Peter, “The like figure
whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of
the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God),
by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21). It is also
generally agreed that when one has been immersed he has been baptized.
There are some who believe that sprinkling or pouring will do as well,
but all agree that immersion is safe. Furthermore, it is generally
agreed that when one believes and repents, confesses his faith, and is
immersed for the remission of sins in the name of Christ, he is saved.
Some believe one is saved before completing this program, but all will
agree that he is saved when he has completed it. So here again we find
the ground of unity.
C. _Christian Worship_
The next question is, “What should one do by way of worship and
Christian service after becoming a Christian?” In these realms, also,
there are many important points of agreement. In reference to public
worship all will agree that it is proper for Christians to meet upon the
first day of the week and sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs and
make melody in their hearts unto the Lord; lay by in store as they have
been prospered; pray unto their Father in heaven; teach and be taught;
and eat the Lord’s Supper in memory of Him who died for them. Some dare
to add to these items of worship, some dare to subtract from them; but
all agree that they are scriptural and sufficient. When Christians come
together upon the first day of each week and perform these five Biblical
items of worship to God, doing so in spirit and in truth, they know that
their worship has pleased their Maker and Redeemer. This, then, is the
ground of unity in our worship on the Lord’s Day. In such a program all
Christians could take part and go away believing that they had done all
that was required and nothing that was condemned.
D. _Christian Service_
In reference to Christian service there is general agreement upon the
broad principles that should govern. Everyone will subscribe to the
Golden Rule (Luke 6:31) and to the Royal Law (Jas. 2:8). We agree that
denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly and
righteously and godly in this present world, that we should love our
neighbors as ourselves, and that we should do unto others as we would
have them do unto us.
II
The Sufficiency of the Plan
The above is a brief outline, then, of points upon which there is very
general agreement. Let me ask you, dear friend, if you can think of
anything essential to salvation which is not covered, at least in a
general way, in this outline. If one follows the plan presented here, do
you not agree that he will be saved in heaven at last? Can you think of
anything else which is needed to insure one’s eternal salvation? I
believe you cannot.
Upon the sufficiency of this plan I am sure we are agreed. This being
true, would it not be wrong to include anything else? Would it not be
wrong to insist upon adding something to this simple Bible plan and
thereby cause division and destroy the possibility of the unity that the
Bible requires? If the above plan is sufficient to take one to heaven,
what more do you desire? Why add anything to it? Would it not be wrong
to add anything else?
Another question: “What will the following of this plan make of one?” I
am sure we will also agree that it will make him a Christian and only a
Christian. Let it be noted that one can do all that is suggested above
and which we have agreed to be sufficient unto salvation without
belonging to any denomination. You can believe, repent, confess your
sins, and be baptized without belonging to any denomination. You who
have done so can meet in groups upon the first day of the week and
worship God as the Bible directs without becoming members of any
denomination, and you can certainly perform your duties in the field of
Christian service without joining a denomination.
III
More Points of Agreement
But while we are in this agreeing business, let us take it even further.
In this country there is a large religious community known as the
Baptist Church. This group includes many fine people. Many of them are
honest, intelligent, cultured, refined, and good citizens. They have
taken their denominational title from their emphasis upon immersion as
being the only scriptural baptism, in contrast to those who accept
something else. I agree with the Baptists that immersion is baptism and
that nothing short of immersion will meet the definition of baptism
found in Romans 6:4 or Colossians 2:12. I agree with them that the Greek
word “baptidzo” is properly translated by the word “immerse.” But I can
agree with them upon this great truth without belonging to the Baptist
denomination. I can fully accept the very truth from which the Baptist
Church has taken its name and still be just a Christian.
The Methodist Church is one of the largest in this country. I have more
kinspeople in that denomination than in any other. For all of their good
points I give them due respect and credit. Because of their insistence
upon method and system in their religious work, they were nicknamed
Methodists many years ago. This name was later accepted by them as their
denominational title. I agree with the Methodists that system and method
are important. I endeavor to be systematic and orderly in every phase of
my work and activity. I believe that the Lord’s work should be carried
on orderly. “Let everything be done in decency and in order” (1 Cor.
14:40). We should use order, then. We should use the Bible order. But
one can certainly do this without belonging to the Methodist Church.
Why should one exalt the name of this one aspect of Christian activity
to the point of adopting it as a religious title? One can be methodical
without being a Methodist. Just as one can be systematic without being a
Systematist. One can be just a plain Christian and practice everything
the Bible teaches in reference to order and system.
When I was attending the Union Theological Seminary, one of my
professors told me that the New Testament churches were “congregational
presbyterian.” He explained his statement by saying that each
congregation was independent of all other congregations and that each
was overseen by a group of men known as elders or presbyters. I agree
with him exactly. According to his explanation his statement was
entirely correct. But I am not a member of the Presbyterian Church. One
can believe all the Bible teaches upon the presbytery and practice the
same without belonging to the Presbyterian denomination. Why should this
characteristic of church government or organization be exalted by using
it as a religious or denominational title? One can be just a Christian
and still believe and practice what the Bible teaches in reference to
the presbytery. One does not have to be a member of the Presbyterian
Church to obey God concerning the presbytery.
One can believe in the universality of the Gospel without being a
Catholic or Universalist. One can believe in the second coming of Christ
without belonging to the Adventist denomination. One can teach and
practice holy living without belonging to the Holiness Church. If one
had to join the Baptist Church because he believed in baptism and the
Methodist Church because he believed in method and the Presbyterian
Church because he believed in the presbytery of the local congregation
(1 Tim. 4:14) and so on down the list, what would he be when he had
finished? One can agree with the denominations on the very truth from
which they have taken their names, insofar as they have taken their
names from truth, without belonging to any of them.
IV
Some Important Conclusions
One can believe all truth and obey every commandment of God without
belonging to any denomination. Can you think of an exception to this
statement? Can you think of any truth which you cannot believe or any
commandment that you cannot obey without joining a denomination? I don’t
believe you can. Can you think of any truth which you cannot accept or
any commandment which you cannot obey while being just a Christian?
Isn’t it sufficient to be just a Christian? Isn’t it wrong to be
something different from or more than a Christian? Since one can be a
Christian without joining any denomination, then why join one? Would it
not be wrong to join one, since denominationalism is division and
division is wrong? Let me emphasize the statement that I can believe all
truth either in the Bible or out of the Bible and obey every commandment
of the Lord without joining any denomination.
This being true, what then does it take to make one a member of a
denomination? Believing truth will not make one a member of a
denomination, because he can believe all truth on the outside. Obeying
God will not make one a member of a denomination, because he can obey
God on the outside. If believing truth and obeying God will not make one
a member of a denomination, then what will do so?
To become a member of a denomination, it is obvious that one must
believe something besides the truth or do something besides obey God.
Since believing all truth and obeying all God’s commands will not put
one in a denomination, then he must believe something different from the
truth and do something which God has not commanded or leave off
something which He has commanded, in order to become a member of a
denomination. It seems to me that these conclusions are inevitable and
unanswerable.
But it may be that some of my hearers are already in some denomination;
hence, I raise this question: “What must you do to get out of a
denomination?” The answer is, retrace the steps which you took in going
into it. Some seem to think that in order to give up denominationalism
and to be just Christians that they will have to forsake all that they
have ever held as dear and precious in the field of religion. This is a
mistake. Believing truth did not put you into a denomination. In order
to come out of it, you will not have to forsake any truth. It will only
be necessary for you to reject the error which you accepted in becoming
a member of a denomination.
In order to come out of a denomination, you will not have to cease
obeying God upon any point. It will only be necessary for you to change
your conduct on those points where you have been disobeying Him. Since
believing truth did not put you in, you will not have to forsake truth
in coming out. Merely give up the error that you accepted, believe the
truth revealed in the Bible and obey God; then you will be a Christian,
not a denominationalist.
In order to come out of a denomination, you will not have to quit
believing that God is, that the Bible is His word, that Jesus is His Son
and the Savior of the world. You will not have to quit believing in, and
teaching, and practicing, faith, repentance, confession and baptism as
the conditions of salvation. You will not have to forsake any of the
five items of worship outlined in the Bible. You will not have to
forsake any scriptural service to your fellow-man.
Again I repeat, one can believe all truth, obey every command of God, be
a Christian, live the Christian life, die in the Lord and be saved
forever without belonging to any denomination. Since it is unnecessary
to be a member of a denomination, it is wrong to be so. Any
non-essential which causes division is wrong. “Come out from among them
and be ye separate, saith the Lord. Touch no unclean thing” (2 Cor.
6:17). “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed;
but let him glorify God on this behalf” (1 Pet. 4:16). “Neither is there
salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given
among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
VII
EXCUSES
At this season of the year we frequently say something about the custom
of making resolutions. It is a mighty good custom, provided we make the
right sort of resolutions and endeavor to keep them. I would like to
encourage you to resolve to do more for the Lord this year than you have
ever done before. Such a resolution could be broken down into many
elements, but, especially, may I urge that each of you make it your goal
to lead at least one person to obey the gospel during the year that has
just begun.
We have more than 500 members. If each member would lead some person to
Christ during this year, it would mean more than 500 additions. That
would be the most glorious year’s work this congregation has ever had.
With the co-operation of every member, this goal can be reached. Surely
there is someone in Nashville with whom you have enough influence to
lead him to Christ, provided you are willing to fully dedicate yourself
to the Lord and behave yourself each day in the way that will give you
the greatest amount of power and influence for good.
I
A Great Supper
I am not going to speak this morning upon new year’s resolutions. But I
shall say something which I believe will help you in carrying out the
resolution that has just been mentioned. For our text we go to the
fourteenth chapter of Luke, and begin reading with verse 15. “And when
one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto
him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God. Then said
he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade many: and sent
his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come, for
all things are now ready. And they all with one consent began to make
excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I
must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused. And another said,
I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them. I pray thee
have me excused. And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore
I cannot come. So that servant came, and showed his lord these things.
Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out
quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring me hither the
poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind. And the servant said,
Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room. And the
Lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges and
compel them to come in that my house may be filled. For I say unto you,
That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.”
II
Three Slackers
According to the social customs which are said to have prevailed at that
time and in the light of this text, it appears that the men in this
story had already received and accepted the original invitation to
attend this great supper. The servant was sent to tell those who were
bidden that supper was now served. In spite of their social obligation
to attend, they began to make excuse.
1. The nature of their excuses is not very commendable. The first one
said he had bought a piece of land and he was going to see it. I don’t
believe he bought that land without having already seen it. Such things
sometimes happen but not often. He had probably walked over the farm
very thoroughly before he agreed to buy it. He was simply making an
excuse and he is not the last man who has allowed a piece of land to
keep him away from duty.
I was brought up in the country and I have known men to work on their
farms six days a week from early in the morning until late in the
evening and then on Sunday morning they just had to walk over the fields
before they could go to worship. They would get out in the grass and in
the dew and get their clothes wet and come in late, too late to go to
Bible school, or maybe even too late to get to worship at all. Of
course, such conduct is not acceptable in the sight of God.
2. The next man said he had bought five yoke of oxen and must needs go
and try them. I believe again that he had already tried them or by some
other means knew whether they would work. He could have attended the
feast if he had wanted to do so, but he simply preferred to be out with
his oxen rather than to carry out the promise which he had made.
3. The third man merely said, “I have married a wife and therefore I
cannot come.” He didn’t even say, “I beg thee have me excused.” He made
no apology. He thought the fact that he had a wife was excuse enough for
falling down on his duties. He is not the last man who has allowed a
wife to keep him from doing his duty. That has happened many times.
Sometimes it works the other way. The wife allows her husband to keep
her from doing what she ought to do.
You and I regard none of these excuses as being valid. Neither did the
master of the house. He was angry. He would allow none of these
deserters to taste his supper. He didn’t even propose to make any
allowance for repentance. He, no doubt, felt that he had been greatly
mistreated or even insulted. But these excuses were no worse than many
of those which people now offer for rejecting the Lord’s invitation.
Even church members sometimes give silly excuses for not doing their
duty.
III
Common Excuses
This morning we want to discuss the excuses outsiders offer for not
obeying the gospel.[2] If you start out to do some personal work and to
lead people to the Lord individually, and that is the most effective way
to lead them, you’ll find them making excuses. There are twelve or
fifteen excuses which will probably cover 95 per cent of the cases. If
you become familiar with these, and know how to answer them, you’ll be
able to handle most of the objections you meet. I have heard all these
excuses offered many times. If you set out to do some work tomorrow—work
of this nature—you will find people offering one or more of these
excuses. Let us state and briefly discuss them.
1. “_There are so many doctrines preached I do not know which one to
believe. If wise men differ about which church is right, how then can I
be sure?_” Well, friends, wise men are still differing about what sort
of food you ought to eat. The doctors have not yet decided what is the
perfect diet; but you haven’t quit eating while the doctors argue. You
are more practical in dealing with your stomach than you are in dealing
with your soul. You keep on eating the best you can while the scientists
search for the perfect diet.
Furthermore, I never heard anyone offer this excuse who was a Bible
student. It is always offered by those who do not study the Bible,
because anyone who is able to study can find the answer. I could
entertain you at length, and maybe profit you as well, by giving you a
number of examples of individuals who have studied the Bible
independently in search for the truth, with always the same results.
Anyone who will take the time to investigate God’s word, doing his best
to lay aside his prejudice and his bias, if he is sincere and honest,
will be able to understand God’s will well enough to obey the Lord on
this earth and be saved everlastingly. The man who offers this excuse is
simply not willing to make the investigation necessary to gain the
enlightenment or information which he needs.
2. “_For me to be baptized for remission of sins would be to say that my
parents are lost._” Of course, that implies that his parents are already
dead and that they were never baptized for remission of sins. I answer
this objection by giving a concrete example. I visited a lady in West
Virginia and anticipated that she would make this excuse. In fact, when
I entered the room I could see the tenseness in the muscles of her face.
She was expecting me to say that her father had gone to hell, and she
was all set to get angry when I did. But I disappointed her. I didn’t
say it. I have never said that to anyone. I do not see how it can do any
good. There may be times when I am convinced that it is so. But after
one is dead there is no need to discuss it.
My approach was this: “I am willing to admit that your father was just
as good as you think he was. There is no reason why I should deny this.
But remember, if your father was as good as you think he was, then he
did the best he knew, he lived up to all the enlightenment he had;
because if he had not done so, he would not have been a good man. He
would have been a hypocrite. So we will just assume that your father did
the very best he could. Then you are not as good as he was unless you do
the very best that you know, and you know that you ought to be a
Christian. You know you ought to be a member of the church we read about
in the Bible. You know that you ought to be baptized for remission of
sins. If you don’t obey the gospel, then you are not as good as you say
your father was.”
The tenseness left her face. She relaxed and talked more reasonably.
Before the meeting closed she obeyed the gospel. If your father and
mother are dead, if they are on their way to heaven, and if they are
conscious, then they certainly want you to obey the gospel so you will
go there, too. If they are not on their way to heaven, if they are
conscious of being on their way to the other place, then they certainly
want you to obey the gospel, for torment in fire is one misery which is
so terrible that it does not love company. The rich man did not want his
brothers to come to the place where he was in hades.
3. “_I am better now than some of those who are in the church._” In a
sense that might be so. Morally you might be better than the worst
hypocrite in the church, but why do you want to select the lowest
standard that you can find? I have often wondered why a decent man will
select a hypocrite in the church, or an immoral, disloyal, unfaithful
church member as a standard by which to measure himself. To do so is
certainly no compliment to yourself. We do not use such standards in
other matters. We want the best standards in the affairs of this world
and even though your comparison be true, it still remains that the best
man in the church is far better than the best man on the outside. And
the average man in the church is better than the average man on the
outside. Furthermore, when you stand before the Lord Jesus Christ you
will not be judged according to any human standard, but according to the
word of God Almighty.
4. “_There are so many hypocrites in the church that I cannot afford to
become a member of it._” When one makes this excuse I don’t say, but I
feel like saying, “Well, come on in, brother; there is always room for
one more.” The man who offers that excuse is a hypocrite himself. That’s
not what keeps him out. It is just an excuse for not coming in.
Furthermore, there are hypocrites in every organization in the world.
There are hypocrites outside the church. You can’t get away from the
hypocrites by staying outside the church, because they are not all
inside the church. The church doesn’t have a monopoly on them. Most of
them are still on the outside, and you will be with them as long as you
remain there. Furthermore you’ll have to spend eternity with all the
hypocrites, those that are now in the church and those that are now
outside the church. So, if you want to get away from hypocrites, there
is only one way to do it: become a Christian and tolerate the few
hypocrites in the church while on this earth you dwell, then go home to
heaven to be free of all of them forever.
5. “_I’m not good enough to be a Christian._” If you were, you wouldn’t
need to become one. The gospel is for people who need to be better. The
gospel is for sinners. Sinners are the raw material out of which
Christians are made. The people who were saved on the day of Pentecost
were not such good folk to start with. They were murderers. They had
murdered the Son of God. Yet they could be saved. If you are not worse
than the men who, with wicked and lawless hands, nailed the Son of God
to the cross, then you are not too mean to be saved. In fact, Christ is
able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him. His power
is not limited. One of the most wonderful things about the gospel of
Jesus Christ is that it makes no difference how dark or black your
record may have been in the past, you can have it washed clean and white
as snow in the blood of the Lamb. His blood is able to wipe away all
your sins; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool;
though they be as scarlet they shall be as white as snow (Isa. 1:18).
There is no one too wicked to be saved if he is willing to believe in
Christ, repent of his sins, obey the commandment to be baptized, and
remain faithful thereafter.
6. “_Well, I’d like to become a Christian, but I’m_ _afraid I can’t hold
out._” People say a lot of things they don’t mean to say. They use a lot
of words sometimes when they don’t realize what they are saying. So does
the man who makes this excuse. Let’s just look at it a minute and see
what a fellow really says when he states that he is afraid he can’t hold
out. If you analyze his excuse, it simply means this: “I’m on my way to
hell and there is nothing I can do about it.” He didn’t mean to say
that. He didn’t intend to assume such a hopeless attitude. “I’m just on
my way to hell and there’s nothing I can do about it.” Why nobody, not
many people at least, believes that! And yet that’s virtually what you
say when you say, “I’d like to be a Christian, but I am afraid I can’t.”
God is not the author of such hopelessness. The Bible says, “Whosoever
will let him take the water of life freely” (Rev. 22:17). The Bible
teaches that God “will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are
able, but will with the temptation also make a way to escape that ye may
be able to bear it” (1 Cor. 10:13). The Bible plainly declares that all
of those who will may come. Anybody who is willing to try can be saved.
To say it is impossible for you to be saved is to dispute the word of
God Almighty. I do not believe you really want to do that.
7. “_I don’t know enough yet._” That could be so. I think I have seen
some people of whom that was true. But you can learn enough in a very
few minutes. Do you know that in every example of conversion we have in
the Bible, the people who were saved obeyed the first sermon they heard?
In every case! Now, if those people who lived nearly 2000 years ago
could learn enough from one sermon to obey the gospel, how long should
it take one today? In every instance they obeyed the first sermon they
heard. It didn’t take long, did it? I have worked with people whom I had
to teach for a full year before they would obey the gospel. Of course, I
admit that I am not as good a teacher as Peter or Paul, but when I read
to you just what those men said, then, after all, they are doing the
teaching. People of that day could learn enough from them in just an
hour or so to obey the gospel. Surely it ought not to take one several
years now to learn the same. After all, you don’t need to know much to
be saved. You don’t need to know everything. If you wait till you know
everything before you do anything, then you’ll always do nothing.
In order to be saved, you simply need to know that you are lost, that
Jesus is able to save you, and what he wants you to do in order that he
may save you. I can tell you that in less than a minute! “He that
believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). “Repent and be
baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission
of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38).
Now, that is enough if you are willing to accept it and obey it. Even if
you didn’t know it when you came, you now know enough to be saved.
An illustration which I frequently use is this: Suppose I start to drive
to Columbia, Tennessee, tonight. I get out here on the street and say,
“Well, I can’t see the way to Columbia. There are many crooks and turns
and ditches between here and Columbia. I might have a wreck and kill
myself, so I just won’t start.” That would be silly, wouldn’t it? Why, I
could see a few yards ahead of me and I would drive on in what light I
had. As I moved on the light would move on and if I kept on going, I
would likely reach Columbia or any other place to which I started.
That’s the way it is in going to heaven; you can’t see your way from
here into the Pearly Gates. If you could, you would be walking by sight
and not by faith. “But the just shall live by faith” (Hab. 2:4). You can
see the first step, and if you will take it, you will be able to see a
little bit further. Take the second and then you can see still further,
and if you keep on going, you will reach the goal.
“If a man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be
of God or whether I speak of myself” (John 7:17). They that will to do
His will shall know. You can see or learn the way as you go along.
Remember this, if you know of just one commandment that you have not yet
obeyed, you do not deserve to understand another until you are willing
to obey the one you do understand. If a man does not love the truth, God
will send him strong delusions that he may believe a lie and be damned
(2 Thess. 2:8-12). If you know truth and are unwilling to act upon it,
you do not deserve to know any further truth. If you keep on despising
what truth you do have, then God will take even that away from you. He
will send you a strong delusion that you may be deceived, may be deluded
and may be damned forever. It is a dangerous thing for one to trample
under his foot the word of Almighty God. If you know of even one
commandment which you have not obeyed, obey it now.
8. “_I live a good, clean life, I treat everybody right. I pay all my
debts, I tell the truth, I am loyal and faithful to my family, and I am
just as good as a lot of those folk in the church. The church can’t save
you anyhow, so I think I am all right._” Now, you know the answer to
that, don’t you? It’s found in the tenth chapter of Acts. I always like
to suggest that the man who makes that sort of a statement compare
himself with Cornelius. He was a just man. He treated everybody right.
He feared the Lord. He prayed to God always. He was charitable. He gave
much alms to the poor. And he was such a good man he had won the favor
of the Jews over whom he was serving as the head of an army of
occupation! He had a good reputation, even among them. Yet he was not
good enough to go to heaven without obeying the gospel. He was told to
send for Peter, who would speak unto him words whereby he should be
saved. He was not yet saved.
If you have ever committed just one sin, you cannot go to heaven until
that sin is washed away by the blood of Jesus, for sin cannot enter
there. Surely there is no one who would say that he had never committed
one sin. You don’t have to commit a great big catalogue of sins in order
to be lost. Just one unforgiven sin will take you into torment. If
you’ve ever done wrong on a single point, then you’ll have to repent of
that and obey the gospel in order to go to heaven when you die.
9. “_I’m waiting for someone else. I’m afraid my parents or husband or
wife would object. This religion is unpopular and would cause me to lose
my social standing._” This is really three excuses in one, but in each
case the person is being influenced by what someone else thinks, instead
of being influenced by what God says. A familiar answer to such excuses
is that every tub shall set on its own bottom. You’ll find that in
Romans, chapter 14 and verse 12, “So then each one of us must give an
account of himself unto the Lord.” It doesn’t use the word “tub,” but it
says the same thing. “So then each one of us must give an account of
himself unto the Lord.” When you get to the judgment day, neither your
father nor your mother, brother nor sister, husband nor wife—nobody else
can answer for you. Therefore, no one else should be allowed to _live_
for you. No one should be allowed to make your choices or decisions
because they cannot answer for you.
Someone made a remark that one of the nice things about the Catholic
Church was that the members allowed the priests to make all the
decisions, that they rather expected him to make their choices for them.
My answer was that that would be all right if the priest could also
answer for you. But the priest cannot answer for you. Therefore, you’d
better not let him make your decisions. He might not make a decision
that you would want to stand by on the judgment day. Nobody can answer
for you, therefore nobody should be allowed to choose your course. In
the light of God’s word you must accept that responsibility yourself.
Furthermore, if you want to get your husband, wife, or somebody else to
obey the gospel, the way to get them to do it is not to wait for them
but go ahead and lead the way. Step out and do it yourself. In West
Virginia a lady told me that she would obey the gospel but that she was
waiting for her husband. I knew that was not a good excuse and I tried
to get her to see it. One evening while we were singing the invitation
song I stopped and made this remark, “If I were you, I’d rather go to
heaven alone than to go to hell with my husband.” Evidently she knew
that I was talking about her, for when we began to sing again she came
down the aisle. The next day her husband also came. If she had waited
for him, they might both still be on the outside. Now they are two of
the most faithful members in the congregation.
A lady at Madison, Tennessee, made the same excuse. She even went so far
as to say, “If you’ll just talk to my husband and get him to obey, then
I’ll come along with him.” I told her that wasn’t the right attitude.
The next Sunday at church she came down the aisle to make the confession
and be baptized. When I met her, she stopped and whispered to me,
“Brother Dark, I wish you would go back and talk to my husband.” He was
just two steps behind her and she didn’t know it. That’s the way to get
your husband to come! That’s the way to get your wife to come! If you
wait for somebody else, then you’ll be lost.
There was a lady in Chattanooga who didn’t wait for her husband. She
went to church. Her husband tried to keep her from going. That’s
unusual. Most husbands like for their wives to be good whether they are
or not. But this husband didn’t want his wife to go to church. He told
her she couldn’t have any money to give to the church. She began to take
in sewing to make money for her contributions. That made him angry. He
said, “You can’t use that sewing machine, I paid for it.” So she just
kept on going without any money to contribute. He saw that he was
defeated on that point so, in desperation, he locked up her wardrobe. He
said, “I paid for those Sunday dresses and you can’t wear them to
church.” She defied him again and borrowed some dresses from the next
door neighbor and other ladies in the church and just kept on going
anyway. He felt like he had to do something about it, so he went over to
the meetinghouse to see if he could find out what could be done. He
stood on the outside and listened. It didn’t sound as bad as he thought
it would. Before the meeting closed he was baptized. Suppose his wife
had been fainthearted and had refused to go ahead without her husband.
He now says that he used to be the meanest man in Chattanooga and I’m
inclined to agree with him.
I heard another story of a lady who was influenced by her husband. She
was attending a revival meeting and he was going with her every night.
One night while they were dressing, she said something about going to
church, and he said, “No, we’re not going to church tonight, we’re going
to the show.” She replied, “I can’t go to a show. The revival is going
on. You know that! I have to be over there!” He said, “No, we’re going
to a show.” She kept on insisting that they go to church and he kept on
insisting on going to the show. Finally he said, “Now, I’ve been going
with you every night, and it’s only fair that you go with me tonight.”
She still refused. Then he said, “If you don’t go with me tonight, I’m
not going with you any more.” So she gave in.
On the way to town he stopped beside the road. His wife asked him what
was wrong. He said, “I’m not going to the show. I just wanted to test
you out. I was planning to obey the gospel. If this thing is as
important as you and your preacher say it is, then you ought to have
gone on tonight regardless of what I did. Before I accepted I thought I
would test you out.” I admit that he treated her pretty rough; but after
all, you can’t afford to let even the person whom you love best on this
earth keep you from doing that which is right. It would be an act of
unkindness. If you love someone, you ought not to let him keep you from
doing right but you ought to go on anyhow and use your influence to get
him to come along with you.
10. “_There is plenty of time yet._” This one will probably take more
people to hell than all the others put together. Procrastination is the
thief of souls. I’ve never talked to but one person who said he planned
to die and go to hell. Others say, “Yes, I’m going to change my ways. I
know that I’m lost and I’m going to change.” But when? “Well, sometime.”
A man who talks like that never gets it done. When I go into a man’s
home, talk to him, and urge him to obey the gospel and he says, “Well,
I’m going to think it over; I’m glad you came and I’ll think it over,” I
go away without much encouragement. But if a person tells me, “Yes,
Brother Dark, I’ll be over there next Sunday night and be baptized,”
then I know something is going to happen. That is the only way to
overcome the tendency to procrastinate.
I talked to some people at Madison one evening about 5 P.M. Immediately
upon entering the room I learned that they knew what they ought to do.
They had attended our meeting often and they knew that they ought to be
baptized. They understood the plan of salvation. I remarked to them that
one could get into the habit of procrastinating. I said, “Every time you
repeat the act of putting this thing off this habit becomes stronger. If
you aren’t careful, it may get you bound so tightly that you will never
overcome it.” They came forward that night and obeyed the gospel, less
than three hours after I had talked to them, and are now two of the most
faithful members in the church. Afterwards the man told me that the
remark about procrastination had prompted him to act immediately. He
realized that he had got into the habit of putting it off. This habit
was getting stronger and stronger. He had to exert his will power to
overcome it.
None of these excuses are any good. They will not stand the test of the
judgment. I doubt that you would even have the audacity to mention them
before God. There is no excuse for failing, or for delaying, to do what
you know God has commanded.
IV
The Best Resolution
The best resolution that you can make today, if you haven’t already made
it, is the resolution to quit doing wrong and to begin doing right. It
is preceded by faith; it is followed by baptism. The resolution to do
right will naturally lead to baptism, for that is a part of doing right.
Won’t you say at the beginning of this new year, “I’m going to resolve
now that from this day henceforth I will live for God”? If that be your
resolution, come forward and make it known while we stand and sing.
VIII
AN ERRING CHILD OF GOD
It is my purpose this morning to discuss the case of an erring child of
God in contrast to that of an alien sinner. An alien sinner is one who
has never been baptized into Jesus Christ, one who has never become a
member of the Lord’s church, one who has never become a citizen of the
kingdom of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. The plan of salvation for
such an one is clearly revealed in the Bible. It has been proclaimed
from this pulpit numbers and numbers of times. It needs to be repeated
over and over again, and to be kept constantly before the minds of the
people.
Not only should those who are not Christians know the plan of salvation
in order to become Christians, but those who have already obeyed the
gospel ought to know what an alien must do to be saved well enough to
teach others effectively. The alien must know the gospel well enough to
obey it. The Christian must have a working knowledge of the gospel in
order to help save others.
The Bible clearly teaches that in order to become a child of God one
must believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God; that
he must then repent of his sins (Acts 2:38 and 3:19); that he must
confess with his mouth the faith which he has in his heart; and finally
he must be baptized for remission of sins (Acts 2:38; 22:16, and many
other places which might be cited). These are the conditions of
salvation for an alien sinner. Obedience to these commandments makes one
a child of the Lord.
I
A Word of Encouragement
But suppose one errs from the truth after having obeyed these
commandments. That would make him an erring child of God. The case of
such an one deserves our consideration. Is there a plan of salvation for
one who errs from the truth after having been baptized into Christ—into
the family of God? If so, what are the conditions of his salvation? On
this topic there seems to be some confusion and misunderstanding.
Occasionally we meet someone who thinks that there is no way for him to
be saved, if he sins after he has been baptized—that his case is
hopeless, if he turns away from the church after having once been a
member thereof. I would like to speak a word of encouragement to all
such.
There’s only one thing which can keep any person on this earth from
being saved, and that is unwillingness to repent and obey God. I believe
it is true that no matter how far one may have strayed away, if he wants
to come back, if he will repent, and if he will obey the commandments
which God has given, God is willing to forgive. This is the divine
encouragement and inducement which is held out to all by the word of God
(1 John 1:9; 2 Pet. 3:4).
I believe we can say that anyone who has been a Christian very long has
at some time or other been an erring child of God, for there are none of
us who live perfect lives. I presume there are none here who even claim
to live perfectly. In 1 John 1:8 we read: “If we say that we have no
sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Everyone, then,
who has been in the church any appreciable length of time has been, at
some time, an erring child of God. If it were not possible for an erring
child of God to be saved, then none of us would have a chance, and the
whole scheme of redemption would be vain. Of course, we know that such
is not the case.
II
God’s Willingness To Forgive
That an erring child of God may be saved is clearly taught by James
5:19-20, “Brethren, if any one of you do err from the truth and one
convert him, let him know that he which converteth a sinner from the
error of his way, shall save a soul from death and shall hide a
multitude of sins.” That’s a clear-cut reference unto an erring child of
God, for this statement is addressed unto the brethren. It teaches that
if a brother errs from the straight and narrow way, there is a chance
for him to be restored by another brother. The one who restores him
renders a very valuable service which covers a multitude of sins and
saves a soul from death. That is, he saves a soul from the lake of fire
and brimstone, which is the second death, for Christians as well as
sinners are appointed unto physical death. Of course, if the erring
brother refuses to obey, he will be lost. He will be lost because of his
unwillingness to obey, and not because of God’s unwillingness to
forgive.
We have another reference to erring children of God in the third chapter
of Revelation, in the letter addressed unto the church at Laodicea. In
this church there were some lukewarm members. Lukewarm church members
are erring children of God. Of them, Jesus says, “I know thy works, that
thou are neither cold nor hot. I would thou wert cold or hot. So then
because thou art lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out
of my mouth.” Surely these people were in a bad spiritual condition,
even to the extent of making our Savior sick at his stomach; but their
case was not a hopeless one. There was still opportunity for them to
repent and to be saved.
This letter itself represents an effort on the part of God through his
Son, Jesus, to lead these people to repentance, in order that he might
forgive them. He pleads with them as follows: “I counsel thee to buy of
me gold tried by the fire; that thou mayest be rich, and white raiment
that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not
appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve that thou mayest see. As
many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore and repent.
Behold I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open
the door, I will come in to him and will sup with him and he with me. To
him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I
also overcame and am set down with my father in his throne. He that hath
an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches” (Rev.
3:14-22). From this, we not only learn that it is possible for the
erring children to be saved, but that their salvation is conditioned
upon their repentance.
III
Unwillingness To Repent
The characters mentioned in the first part of the sixth chapter of
Hebrews were lost not because they were incapable of being saved, but
because they were unwilling to repent. Of them we read, beginning with
verse 4; “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened and
have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy
Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world
to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance;
seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to
an open shame.” Please note that it does not say that these people could
not be saved; it does not say that it was impossible for them to repent;
but it says it was impossible to get them to repent, that no one could
persuade them to repent, that they persistently refused to do so.
These were not characters who were still striving to live the Christian
life, but making mistakes along the way. They were men who had
completely turned their backs upon that which was right. They were
crucifying to themselves the Son of God afresh, and putting him unto an
open shame. And one could not persuade them to repent. They were not
lost because of God’s unwillingness to forgive, but because of their
unwillingness to repent.
It is possible for one to turn so completely away from the Lord that you
cannot get that person to repent, but please remember that the trouble
still lies with the man himself. Even such an one as that could be saved
if he would repent, but he won’t repent. Whosoever will may come, but
there are some who won’t. Jesus says, “Ye will not come unto me that ye
may have life.”
There is nothing in the Bible, then, which teaches that it is impossible
for any individual to be saved, provided he will repent and obey the
Lord. There are simply some who refuse to obey. Anyone can repent, but
there are some who will not. Of such characters 2 Peter 2:21-22 says:
“For it had been better for them not to have known the way of
righteousness, than after they have known it to turn from the holy
commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according
to the true proverb, the dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the
sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.”
IV
Simon the Sorcerer
In the eighth chapter of Acts we have another example of an erring child
of God. His name was Simon and he was a sorcerer by profession. Of him
verse 13 says, “Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was
baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles
and signs which were done.” Jesus said, Mark 16:16: “He that believeth
and is baptized shall be saved.” Simon believed and was baptized,
therefore, Simon was saved. Simon was a child of God because he had
believed and been baptized. That he was afterwards in error is plainly
taught by Peter in the verses which follow. Beginning with verse 18:
“And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands
the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying, Give me also
this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy
Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou
hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast
neither part nor lot in this matter; for thy heart is not right in the
sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if
perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive
that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the Lord for me, that none of
these things which ye have spoken come upon me.”
Simon was a child of God because he had believed and had been baptized.
Afterwards he erred. That made him an erring child of God. His condition
was serious. He had so sinned as to be aptly described as being in the
bond of iniquity, and in the gall of bitterness. But his case was not
hopeless. Peter’s admonition to him shows clearly that there was still a
chance for him to be saved.
Peter commanded him to repent and to pray. The commandment to pray for
forgiveness implied a commandment to confess his sins. One cannot
consistently pray for forgiveness until he admits, at least to himself
and to God, that he has sinned. One cannot even repent until he first
admits to himself that he has done wrong. The commandment to confess
implied by Peter is clearly stated elsewhere in God’s word. For
instance, James 5:16: “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one
for another that ye may be healed.” Again we read in I John, chapter 1,
verses 9 and 10, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to
forgive our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say
that we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us.”
These Scriptures not only teach the possibility of an erring child of
God’s being saved, but also the condition upon which his salvation
depends. These conditions are: repentance of his sins, confession of his
sins, and prayer unto the Lord for forgiveness. Any erring child of God
who conforms to these conditions will be readily and freely forgiven by
our Father who is in heaven. One who refuses to conform to these simple
conditions assumes full responsibility for his own destruction. Having
put his hand to the plow, and looking back, he is not fit for the
kingdom of God (Luke 9:62). He must repent or perish (Luke 13:3).
V
The Prodigal Son
The story of the prodigal son very beautifully and accurately
illustrates the plan we are discussing. The prodigal son does not
represent an alien sinner. He was a son. He represents an erring child.
He went away from home contrary to his father’s will, and he wasted his
father’s goods in riotous living. He was a wayward child. He was a
disobedient son of his father; and finally, when he had tasted the
bitter dregs of sin, he resolved to go back home.
The Bible says that he came to himself. He recognized that he had
sinned. That was the first step in his restoration. When he thought
about the good things back in his father’s home in contrast with his own
suffering, he recognized that he had made a mistake. Then he made a
resolution. He said, “I will arise and go unto my father.” And the very
minute he made up his mind to go to his father, that was repentance.
Repentance is a change of purpose. A determination to quit doing wrong
and to begin doing right. And so when the young man said to himself, “I
will go, I will return to my father, and to my father’s house,” that
resolution constituted repentance. Then the story says that he arose and
came to his father. That was the fruit of his repentance.
He had planned his confession. He said, “I will say unto my father,
Father, I have sinned against heaven and before thee, and am no more
worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants.” The
young man expected to plead his case with his father. He didn’t even
hope to be reinstated as a son. But he was going to beg that he might be
allowed to come back as a servant. Imagine his surprise when his father
ran to meet him and welcomed him back into the family circle. The boy
started to make his confession, but before he had had time to finish,
the father interrupted him and said: “Bring forth the best robe and put
it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: and bring
hither the fatted calf and kill it and let us eat, and be merry. For
this my son was dead, and is alive again, he was lost and is found.”
Now this not only illustrates what an erring child of God must do to be
saved, but it also represents God’s willingness to forgive him. This
young man repented, he reformed, he confessed, and he prayed. He prayed
to his father to take him back into his home. (He had planned his
confession in his heart even if he were not allowed to express it all.)
That is just exactly what an erring child of God must do. As we learn
from Peter, James and John, he must repent, confess his sins, and pray
for forgiveness. Just as the father of that prodigal son was eager to
receive him back into his home, so our heavenly Father stands waiting to
receive unto the bosom of his love all of his wayward children who will
come back to him in humility, penitence, confession and prayer. Just as
that father showered his son with blessings, so Jehovah will shower his
wayward children who return to him with the blessings of forgiveness,
protection, and encouragement.
VI
The Church’s Duty
In conclusion it might be well to mention the duty of the church in
reference to an erring child of God. It is the duty of the church and of
all its spiritually-minded members to warn those who are living in
error, to rebuke them, to reprove them and to exhort them with all long
suffering and teaching, to admonish them to do these three things which
are required of them in order to be forgiven by the Lord. When we do so,
we shall in no wise lose our reward.
I close then by calling attention once more to these verses in James,
“Brethren, if anyone of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
let him know that he which converteth a sinner from the error of his
way, shall save a soul from death and shall hide a multitude of sins.”
Now, there may be some erring children of God in this audience this
morning. I want to do just what the Bible teaches me to do. I want to
admonish you, urge you, and beseech you to take advantage of God’s
goodness and God’s mercy and God’s willingness to forgive.
The alien sinner must believe, repent, and be baptized. The erring child
of God must repent, confess his sin, and pray for forgiveness. But I
don’t care how black your past may have been, how many ugly things you
may have done, if you will confess to men, to yourself, and to God that
you have sinned; if you will resolve in your heart that you will turn
away from your evil doing, and ask God to forgive you, He will certainly
do so. He never goes back on His promise. He’s not only willing, but is
eager to have you come. He will welcome you back into the fold of those
who are redeemed.
All of those evil things which you have done will not only be forgiven,
but they will be forgotten. They will never be remembered any more, and
you can start all over again to live the Christian life, with a
perfectly clean, white record; all the blots having been wiped away by
the all-powerful blood of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Don’t you want
to do that? We urge you to do so, while together we stand and sing.
[Illustration: Three Dispensations]
PATRIARCHAL
God’s law to the patriarchs and Gentiles.
Red Sea
MOSAIC
God’s law to the Jews given through Moses
{Cross}
CHRISTIAN
God’s law to the world given through Christ
IX
THE SABBATH
Negative sermons are sometimes necessary. It is the duty of gospel
preachers not only to proclaim the truth but also to condemn error and
convict the gainsayers (Titus 1:9). Wherever false teaching raises its
ugly head, we must strike it down with the sword of the Spirit. Wherever
it lurks in secret hiding places to destroy unwary souls, we must search
for it and expose it with the light of truth. We must warn people
against it.
Much money and effort are spent to protect people from contagious
diseases. In a public building of downtown Nashville yesterday I saw
above a water fountain a sign which said, “Do not put your mouth on the
faucet unless you wish to catch or spread disease.” Certainly we should
labor diligently to prevent the spreading of _religious_ error. I wish I
were able to place a skull and cross bones sign across every false
doctrine.
I
Purpose and Occasion
It is my purpose this morning to label and expose the false doctrine of
the Seventh Day Adventists with respect to the sabbath. In view of the
current meeting at the War Memorial Auditorium, this lesson is certainly
timely. I’m taking no advantage of those whose teaching I examine, for
my purpose has been duly advertised in the daily press, and they are
invited to be here. The overflow crowd present this morning indicates a
lively interest in this topic. I wish I had the opportunity to speak to
all of those who have been listening to error in reference to the
sabbath. I proceed with malice in my heart toward none.
The zeal and liberality of the Seventh Day Adventists are admirable.
They are spending a lot of money to teach what they evidently believe to
be the truth. The advertising for their current meeting is costing
thousands of dollars. Their winning several converts to a doctrine that
is not only false but also unpopular and inconvenient is evidence that
advertising is effective. But their zeal is without knowledge and their
converts have accepted error. The work they are doing at present
constitutes a public challenge to all preachers of the gospel. That
challenge shall not go unanswered. I make no personal criticism of their
speaker but I condemn his teaching because it is false.
II
Three Dispensations
The Bible reveals unto us three distinct dispensations or periods of
time. On the board I have a little diagram to represent those three
dispensations. (See p. 144.) The first lasted from Adam to Moses; the
second continued from Moses until the death of Christ on the cross; the
third began at the cross and will continue until our Lord comes again.
During the first period, the family was the unit of worship. In divers
manners and various portions God communicated with the heads of the
families, such as Adam, Noah, Abram, _et al_. These men were known as
patriarchs (Heb. 7:4; Acts 2:29; 7:8, 9) and accordingly this period is
known as the patriarchal dispensation. At Mt. Sinai God gave another law
to the Jewish nation which continued in force until Christ died on the
cross. This law was given through Moses and applied to the Jews only.
Hence the second period is known as the Mosaic dispensation. Throughout
this period the patriarchal regulations continued to apply to the
Gentile families and nations but the Jews were governed by the law given
at Sinai. There were two laws in force simultaneously but applying to
different peoples. God never had two different laws applying to the same
people at the same time.
During the third period, or Christian dispensation, we have, of course,
the will or the law of Christ. In Hebrews 1:1-2 we read, “God, who at
sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers
by the prophets, hath in these days spoken unto us by his son.” That
makes a distinct break at the cross. Before Christ came God spoke unto
our fathers by the prophets in dreams, visions, etc., but unto us he
hath spoken through his Son, Jesus Christ. In the New Testament we have
the will of Christ which went into effect when he died on the cross
(Heb. 9:15-17).
III
The Adventist Claim
The advocates of the seventh day sabbath make a very broad claim. They
claim that the command to remember the sabbath day and keep it holy (the
fourth commandment of the Decalogue given at Sinai) has been binding on
all people throughout all ages and will continue to be in force as long
as time shall last. In other words, they claim that it has been binding
throughout each of the dispensations already mentioned. With the diagram
(p. 144) to keep these three periods before our minds, let us examine
the claim in the light of the Bible.
IV
No Sabbath for Man During First 2,500 Years
First of all, I emphatically deny that God commanded anyone to keep the
sabbath before the children of Israel were led out of Egypt. According
to the Seventh Day Adventists, the “fourth commandment” was in force at
least 2,500 years before it was made known. This could not be. Moses
wrote the book of Genesis. He probably wrote it after the law was given
at Sinai. It covers almost the entire patriarchal period. _In this book
the word “sabbath” is not found at all!_ Genesis 2:2 says that God
rested on the seventh day, but it does not say that he told Adam and Eve
to rest; neither does it call the seventh day the sabbath. “And on the
seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the
seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the
seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from
all his work which God created and made.” Please note that that is _not
a commandment_; it is a statement of facts. It is a statement of the
fact that _God_ rested on the seventh day and a statement of the further
fact that (at some later date) he sanctified and blessed the seventh
day. There is no commandment in that Scripture.
Furthermore, the very tense of the verb used in verse 3 shows that he
did not sanctify the day at the time he rested. Note this tense:
“because in it he _had rested_.” It does not say “because he was
resting” but “because he _had rested_” on that day. The very tense of
the verb shows that after God himself had rested on the seventh day, _at
some later time_, when he could refer to the fact that he had rested in
the past tense, he sanctified that day. Genesis does not say _when_ he
sanctified it. Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 reveal that he sanctified it
as a day of rest for the Jews in the wilderness when he gave the law at
Mt. Sinai, after he had led them out of Egypt. The seventh day was
sanctified at the close of the patriarchal dispensation, _at least 2,500
years after the world began_.
The mentioning of the sanctification in Genesis 2:3 has been called a
case of prolepsis, or joining together in statement two events that were
separated in time. Other examples of prolepsis may be found in Genesis
3:20, 4:20, and Matthew 10:4. No one can show where God sanctified the
seventh day, much less where he commanded anyone to keep it, until after
the deliverance of the Jews from Egypt.
The seventh day of the week is first called the sabbath in Exodus 16, in
connection with the giving of the manna to the Jews in the wilderness.
In anticipation of the law soon to be given at Sinai, God instructed the
people to gather two days’ supply on the sixth day and warned them not
to expect any on the seventh day. The manner in which the sabbath is
thus introduced shows that they were not accustomed to keeping it. In
spite of these special instructions, some went out to gather manna on
the seventh day and found none. This shows their lack of familiarity
with the seventh day sabbath. The sabbath was a new institution soon to
be established. Here it was first introduced. At Mt. Sinai a few days
later it was made known. “Thou camest down also upon Mt. Sinai, and
spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true
laws, good statutes and commandments; and madest known unto them thy
holy sabbath and commanded them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the
hand of Moses thy servant ...” (Neh. 9:13, 14; see also Ex. 20:8-11, and
Deut. 5:12-15). If they were already familiar with the sabbath, how
could God have _made it known_ to them at Mt. Sinai?
Soon after the sabbath command was given at Sinai, a Jew went out and
picked up sticks on the sabbath day (Num. 15:32-36). That this
ceremonial institution was new is shown by the fact that Moses put that
man in jail until he could inquire from God what should be done. Don’t
you know that if God’s people had been keeping the sabbath 2,500 years,
_they would have known_ what to do with a man who violated it?
(Incidentally, God commanded that he be stoned to death. I have not
heard of any modern Sabbatarians thus punishing the violation of their
favorite law. If the seventh day sabbath were still in force, _the death
penalty for violating it would also still be in force_.)
And so, my friends, I boldly declare that there is no verse of Scripture
in the Bible which shows that any man ever kept the sabbath during the
period from Adam to Moses. In the history that covers this period of
approximately 2,500 years there is no commandment to keep the sabbath;
there is no example of man’s resting on the seventh day; there is no
promise of reward for his doing so; there is no threat of punishment for
his failing to do so. Those who teach that the seventh day sabbath was
in force during this period are urgently requested to cite the text that
says so. Since they cannot do so, the first pillar in the foundation of
the seventh day sabbath theory is completely destroyed. _It is simply
nonexistent._
V
Never Applied To the Gentiles
Coming now to the second part of the diagram (p. 144), I emphatically
deny that there is any place in the Bible to show that God ever
commanded the Gentile nations to keep the sabbath day, even during the
Mosaic dispensation. Seventh Day Adventists are obligated to furnish the
text which says that he did so, but they cannot furnish it. In fact,
there are plenty of Scriptures to show that this ceremonial institution
was not in force among the Gentiles.
Speaking of the sabbath, God said, “It is a sign between me and the
children of Israel for ever ...” (Ex. 31:17). If the other nations had
been observing the seventh day sabbath also, it could not have been a
sign between God and the Jews. Down in the country where I was reared
each farmer had a certain mark which he used to distinguish his
livestock in the woods from that of others. For instance, one fellow
split his hogs’ ears at two places. That was his mark, but if every
other farmer used the same mark, it would cease to be a sign of the
stock which belonged to that particular man. If every ranchman in the
West used the same brand for his cattle, it would not be a sign of that
which belonged to any one in particular. _Yet the sabbath was a sign
between God and the children of Israel._ Therefore, it was peculiar to
that law which applied to them, and was not a part of any other law
given by Jehovah to any other people or at any other time.
The sabbath was a memorial to an event peculiar to the Jewish family.
“And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that
the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a
stretched out arm: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the
sabbath day” (Deut. 5:15). The Gentiles were never delivered from
Egyptian bondage and, therefore, could not observe the sabbath in memory
of any such event. This Scripture not only proves that the Gentiles were
not commanded to observe the sabbath, but also that the Jews themselves
did not keep it _until after_ they were delivered from Egypt. If a
stranger desired to become identified with the Jewish nation and
religion he was _permitted_ to do so by submitting to the Jewish law,
including the sabbath regulation (Isa. 56:3-7). In this event he ceased
to be a Gentile religiously, but became a Jew instead. If the sabbath
had been a universal practice, it would not have been necessary for a
proselyte to _begin_ observing it when he submitted to the Jewish
religion. What has been said proves conclusively that the sabbath was
purely a _Jewish_ institution. I most urgently request that those who
advocate the observance of the Jewish sabbath show us at least one verse
of Scripture in which God ever commanded the Gentiles to do so. This
they _cannot_ do. Hence, the second pillar essential to the support of
their theory is completely lacking.
VI
Sabbath Commandments Not in The Law of Christ
Coming now to the last section in the diagram (on page 144), I
emphatically deny that there is any verse of Scripture which states that
God ever commanded _anybody_ to keep the sabbath day since Jesus died on
the cross. No one can find such a text in the Bible. I’m not unaware of
some attempts made along that line by Seventh Day Sabbatarians. For
instance, they refer to Matthew 24:20, where Jesus told his disciples to
pray that, when the city of Jerusalem was destroyed (in A.D. 70), they
might not have to make their flight on the sabbath day. But the very
same verse tells them to pray likewise that their flight be not in the
winter. He told them to pray that their flight be not in the winter
because it would be difficult to travel and find comfortable shelter at
that season. In like manner, they were told to pray that their flight be
not on the sabbath day because the unconverted Jews would still be
observing the sabbath and in harmony with the commandment given by
Nehemiah (ch. 13, vss. 15-17) would keep the gates of the city closed
throughout the sabbath day. Under such conditions it would have been
almost impossible for the Christians to have fled from the city on the
sabbath day. It was for that reason that they were told to pray that
their flight be not on the sabbath. Such instructions on the part of
Jesus did not imply that the Christians would be expected to _rest_ on
the seventh day.
Naturally you can find examples of unconverted Jews keeping the sabbath
day after Jesus died on the cross. Paul went to their synagogues and
preached to them on Saturday, telling them that they were no longer
obligated to keep the law of Moses. We have a parallel case in Nashville
today. The Seventh Day Adventists have advertised a religious meeting at
the War Memorial Auditorium tonight. That does not mean that they
recognize Sunday as the sabbath day, for they do not. The apostle Paul
went to the synagogue where the people were on Saturday to preach to
them. That does not mean that he recognized Saturday as the sabbath day,
for he did not.
The sabbath is mentioned sixty times in the New Testament. Forty-three
of these cases are in connection with the life of Jesus Christ.
According to the flesh, Christ was a Jew. He was born under the law, “to
redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption
of sons” (Gal. 4:4, 5). Before taking the law out of the way (Col.
2:14), he _fulfilled_ it by _obeying_ it perfectly (Matt. 5:17, 18).
Naturally, he kept the sabbath, just as he kept the passover and all the
other ceremonies of the law of Moses. All of this occurred before Christ
died and, therefore, before his will, under which we are now living,
went into effect (Heb. 9:15, 17).
In Bible history following the death of Christ, the sabbath is mentioned
seventeen times. In sixteen of these cases it refers to the worship of
the unconverted Jews. In the other case, the only one found in the
Epistles, it is used to state that _Christians are not expected to
observe it_. “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in
respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days ...”
(Col. 2:16). Friends, all of this simply confirms and emphasizes the
conclusion that there is absolutely not one word of Scripture to show
that God ever commanded any Christian to regard the seventh day of the
week as a sabbath day.
VII
The Christian’s Day of Worship
Christians are taught to worship on the first day of the week. “Now
concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the
churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let
every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that
there be no gathering when I come” (1 Cor. 16:1, 2). The last phrase in
this quotation shows that Paul did not refer to merely laying aside some
money at home but rather to putting money into a common treasury. This
definitely implies that the church was accustomed to meeting on the
first day of the week. The purpose of this weekly assembling was to eat
the Lord’s supper. They were rebuked for allowing something to interfere
with this holy purpose (1 Cor. 11:20-26).
The importance of this assembling on the first day of the week to eat
the Lord’s supper is clearly revealed. “... and let us consider one
another to provoke unto love and good works: not forsaking the
assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but
exhorting one another: and so much the more as ye see the day
approaching” (Heb. 10:24, 25). Under the guidance of the inspired
apostle the church at Troas also met to eat the Lord’s supper on the
first day of the week. “And upon the first day of the week, when the
disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready
to depart on the morrow, and continued his speech until midnight” (Acts
20:7).
Seventh Day Adventists teach that the Catholic Church changed the
sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, and challenge the public to cite the
Scripture which says that the first day of the week is the sabbath.
_There is no such scripture. The first day of the week is not the
sabbath! It is the day on which Christians ought to eat the Lord’s
supper._ It is a day of _worship_, not necessarily a day of _rest_.
Neither _rest_ nor _work_ should be allowed to interfere with a
Christian’s _worship_ on the first day of the week. We have met today to
eat the Lord’s supper by the authority of the Scriptures cited above and
not by the authority of any church. Christians were eating the Lord’s
supper on the first day of the week several hundred years before the
Roman Catholic Church came into existence. I hereby challenge the
Sabbatarians to furnish even one word of Bible authority for eating the
Lord’s supper on Saturday.
VIII
The Will of Christ
Christians are living under the reign of Christ. They are expected to
obey the word that God hath spoken unto us by his Son (Heb. 1:2). This
word is called the will, or testament, of Christ. As in the case of
human wills, it became of force when he died on the cross. “For where a
testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
For a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no
strength at all while the testator liveth” (Heb. 6:16, 17). The will of
Christ teaches Christians to worship on the first day of the week, but
it does not teach them to rest on the seventh day. The will of Christ
forbids murder, stealing, lying, and such like (Rom. 13:9), but it does
not forbid working on Saturday. “For the law was given by Moses, but
grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John 1:17). This grace teaches
righteous living (Titus 2:11, 12), but it does not teach that Saturday
should be observed as a sabbath.
When the will of Christ was established by his death on the cross, the
law which God had given to the Jews through Moses at Sinai came to an
end. This the Bible abundantly teaches. “He taketh away the first, that
he may establish the second” (Heb. 10:9). “But we have been discharged
from the law, having died to that wherein we were held; so that we serve
in newness of the Spirit, and not in oldness of the letter” (Rom. 7:6
ARV). In 2 Corinthians 3:6-18 we have a contrast between the law given
at Sinai, including the sabbath commandments (see verse), and the will
of Christ. The former was glorious; the latter much more glorious. The
former was done away; the latter remaineth. “For if that which is done
away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.”
In Galatians, chapter 3, speaking of the law God gave to the Jews at
Sinai, 430 years after his covenant with Abraham, Paul says, “Wherefore
the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be
justified by faith. But after that faith is come we are no longer under
a schoolmaster” (Gal. 3:24, 25). I ask you if words could be plainer.
“The law was our schoolmaster ... we are no longer under a
schoolmaster.” Is that sufficient? Do I need to cite other texts, such
as Colossians 2:14-16; Ephesians 2:10-22; Galatians 4:1-31, etc.? No
wonder Paul said in Galatians 5:4, “Christ is become of no effect unto
you, whosoever of you are (he who would be—ARV) justified by the law; ye
are fallen from grace.”
IX
Conclusion
Beloved, you have seen that the commandment to remember the sabbath day
and keep it holy is confined to the law God gave to the Jews through
Moses in the wilderness. It is not named in the history of God’s people
during the 2,500 years prior to that time. _It is peculiar to the law of
Moses._ It is not found at any other place in the Bible. It was not in
force during the patriarchal dispensation. Even during the Mosaic age,
or dispensation, it never applied to the Gentiles. It is not binding
during the Christian dispensation. It has no place in the will of
Christ. The only law in which it is found fulfilled its purpose, was
fulfilled by Christ, and was taken out of the way when he died on the
cross.
The law of Moses could not take away sins; the will of Christ can (Rom.
1:16). I beseech you by the mercies of God to believe the will of
Christ, obey its commandments, and enjoy its promises. The will of
Christ says to believers, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in
the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive
the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38). The will of Christ says, “And
now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,
calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16).
The law of Christ teaches us to worship God in spirit and in truth, by
singing, praying, studying, teaching and by laying by in store and
eating the Lord’s supper on the first day of the week. The law of Christ
teaches us to love God with all our heart, power, soul, mind and
strength; to love our neighbors as ourselves and to do unto others as we
would have them do unto us. The will of Christ promises the faithful a
crown of everlasting life. This is the perfect law of liberty. It is
holy, just and good. It is complete. It is a glorious law. Its glory
outshines that of all other laws as the sun outshines the stars (2 Cor.
3:10). It furnishes the man of God completely unto every good work. It
is the law of life, rather than the law of death. It is the law of
eternal happiness, rather than the law of condemnation.
Don’t you want to hear Christ and obey this new law enacted upon better
promises, glorious in its origin, glorious in its power and purpose, and
glorious because it leads to a life of eternal glory for all of those
who faithfully follow it? While we stand and sing we bid you come to
Jesus and let him save you from all your sins.
X
SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISM REVIEWED
Those of you who were present last Lord’s day remember that I spoke on
the topic “The Sabbath.” Since that time I have received several letters
from people who were not able to be present, but who requested that I
send them a copy of the lesson presented. I’m glad to announce that the
sermon was recorded by dictaphone and will be ready for free
distribution soon. I have also received many requests that I continue
today along the same line that was begun last Lord’s day. To these
requests I am conceding. It would be more pleasant to preach without
naming the mistakes of others but, when the souls of men and women are
involved, we cannot afford to shirk our duty.
I
Review
The main points in the lesson last Lord’s day were as follows:
1. Bible history is divided into three periods: the Patriarchal
Dispensation; the Mosaic Dispensation; and the Christian
Dispensation.
2. There was no sabbath during the first period which lasted from Adam
to Moses.
3. The sabbath commandment never applied to the Gentiles—not even during
the Mosaic dispensation.
4. The sabbath commandment was confined to the law of Moses which was
abolished when Christ died on the cross.
5. Christians are not required to rest on Saturday.
6. Christians are taught to worship on the first day of the week.
In the correspondence received since last Lord’s day there is no word of
criticism or objection. I take the silence to mean that those who were
present were convinced that what was said was based on Bible authority.
I am determined that the same shall be true of what I say today. It is
my prayerful purpose to preach nothing but what is plainly revealed in
the Bible.
The ushers have given you a mimeographed copy of some of the main points
to be discussed in today’s lesson. You may use these papers to make
further notes, especially to take note of the Bible references used,
that you may go home and read them for yourselves and see that what we
say is true. The noble people of Berea searched the Scriptures daily to
see whether they had heard the truth. If all people would do that, it
would not be so easy for error to gain acceptance.
II
“The Two Laws”
In my hand I hold a copy of one of the so-called Bible lessons
distributed by the Seventh Day Adventists. The title of this pamphlet is
“The Two Laws.” That title implies that God has never given but two
laws. That is a mistake. God has given different laws to different
people at different times, as the occasion and his eternal purpose
required. His law to Adam before the fall was different from his law to
Adam after the fall. His law to Cain was not the same as his law to
Noah. His law to Abram was not identical with his law to the Jews. His
law since Christ died on the cross is quite different from any law he
gave before that time.
God does not change (Mal. 3:6) but _he changes his laws_ according to
his wisdom. “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of
necessity a change also of the law” (Heb. 7:12). God has never had two
different laws applying to the same people at the same time. “He taketh
away the first that he may establish the second” (Heb. 10:9). The law
given the Jews at Sinai was a unit. It was one law, not two laws.
In the lesson last Lord’s day such Scriptures as Romans 7:6; Hebrews
6:8-13; Hebrews 10:9; Colossians 2:13-16; and Galatians 3:17, 24, 25
were quoted to show that the law which God gave to the Jews through
Moses at Mt. Sinai was fulfilled and taken out of the way when Christ
died. The Seventh Day Adventists admit that all of this law was taken
out of the way except Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21. They are
thus committed to the fact that God sometimes changes his laws. When
they teach that God abolished _part_ of that law they admit that he
could have abolished _all_ of it; and that is _exactly what he did_. I
want you to read those Scriptures and note that they speak of “the law,”
not a “part of the law.” For instance, “But now we are delivered from
the law (not ‘part of the law’) ...” (Rom. 7:6). “Wherefore the law (not
‘part of the law’) was our schoolmaster ... but that after faith is come
we are no longer under a schoolmaster” (Gal. 3:24-25).
Where is the Scripture that says that a _part of that law_ was
abolished? Every text which teaches that a part of it was taken away
teaches that _all_ of it was taken away and a new law, the law of
Christ, was given, not to the Jews only but to the whole world.
III
“Ceremonial” and “Moral” Laws
At this point I want to read to you the leading sentence in this
Adventist pamphlet we are reviewing:
“The New Testament Scriptures clearly present two different divisions
of the Old Testament laws: the moral law as summed up in the Ten
Commandments, which is binding on Christians as a rule of life and
conduct; the ceremonial law of typical ordinances, which was abolished
at the cross and from which Christians are entirely free.”
I want you to carefully note what that quotation says. It says that the
New Testament Scriptures _clearly present_ two laws in the Old
Testament—the “moral law” and the “ceremonial law.” Now I want to ask
you a simple question. How in this world could the New Testament
Scriptures clearly present something that is not even mentioned anywhere
in the Bible? Friends, think of it! “Moral” law and “ceremonial” law are
not mentioned in your Bible. That is not Bible language. In order to
prove the sabbath theory by the Bible it will be necessary to find each
of these four texts:
1. The text which says that the “ceremonial” law was abolished.
2. The text which says that the “moral” law is still binding.
3. The text which says that Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21 are
the “moral law.”
4. The text which says that the rest of the law given through Moses is
the “ceremonial” law.
How can such texts be found when you may search your Bible from the
first word in Genesis to the last word in Revelation and you will find
neither the word “moral” nor the word “ceremonial”? Those words are not
in the Bible. I challenge the Sabbatarians to find either of them.
Even if the first two texts named above could be found, the Adventist
theory would not be established unless the last two could also be found.
In fact, it would be destroyed, for in the very nature of the case the
sabbath commandment is a ceremonial one. There is nothing moral about
it. According to _Webster_ (the _Bible_ doesn’t mention the word) a
_moral_ commandment is one that’s based on common sense and on our
natural knowledge of what rules should guide us in our relationships one
to another. The sabbath commandment does not come in this class. There’s
nothing moral about one day in the week any more than another. Nothing
could distinguish one day from another, except a positive decree from
God Almighty. In that case it would be ceremonial. If you were to sleep
for an indefinite period, upon awaking you wouldn’t know the day of the
week. You couldn’t tell Saturday from any other day to save your life.
As far as our natural senses go, one day is just like another. There is
no authority, Biblical or otherwise, for calling Exodus 20:2-17 and
Deuteronomy 5:6-21 the “moral law” and the rest of the Mosaic code the
“ceremonial law.”
IV
The Sinaitic Law a Unit
The Bible speaks of the law which God gave to the Jews in the wilderness
in the singular, as one law, not two laws. Such expressions as “the book
of the law of Moses,” “the law,” “the book of the law,” and “the law of
God” are used interchangeably in the Bible to designate all of the
Jewish law (See Nehemiah 8:1, 2, 3, 8). They are never used to
distinguish one part of it from another part. “The law of Moses” and
“the law of the Lord” are used interchangeably in Luke 2:21-24. All of
it is called “the law of God” because God was the author of all of it.
It is called “the law of Moses” because it was all given through Moses
as a mediator (Gal. 3:19; John 1:17; Deut. 5:5). It was all written by
Moses (Exod. 31:24-27). Exodus 20:2-17 was originally written by the
finger of God on tables of stone but those tables were destroyed (Exod.
32:19) and it was written the second time by Moses himself (Exod. 34:27,
28). The only thing we know about that law today is what Moses wrote in
the first five books of the Bible. It was all given at the same time,
through the same mediator, to the same people, by the same authority,
for the same purpose, and was all taken “out of the way” at the cross
(Col. 2:14-16).
In an effort to make it appear that God gave two laws (one “ceremonial,”
the other “moral,” one eternal and the other temporal) to the Jews at
Sinai, this pamphlet has arranged, in parallel columns. Scriptures that
apparently do not apply to the same law. This is well designed to
confuse or mislead the untaught; but, in fact, it proves absolutely
nothing. The Bible speaks of many other laws in addition to the one God
gave to the Jews in the wilderness. For instance, “the law of Christ”
(Gal. 6:2); “the law of the Medes and Persians” (Dan. 6:8); “the law of
my mind” and “the law of sin” (Rom. 7:23); “the law of works”; “the law
of faith” (Rom. 3:27); “the law of liberty” (Jas. 2:12); “the royal law”
(Jas. 2:8); etc., etc. In addition to all this, there are the laws or
commandments that God gave to Adam, Cain, Noah, Abraham, et al.
With the Bible speaking of so many different laws, it is not surprising
that you can find references that apparently do not apply to the same
law. It would be surprising if you couldn’t. In order to harmonize such
texts it certainly is not necessary to apply them to two imaginary laws
that are not even named in the word of God. The law of faith was
_established_ at the cross; the law God gave to the Jews was _abolished_
at the cross (Eph. 2:10-22). The law of Christ is written on the hearts
of Christians; the law of Moses was written, in part, on tablets of
stone (Heb. 8:8-11). The author of the pamphlet places three references
from Romans, chapter 7, in his “moral” column. Even if he were correct
in doing this, his theory would still be ruined, for verse 6 of that
same chapter says, “But now we have been discharged from the law ...”
(ARV).
Some of the references placed in opposing columns by the author really
apply to the same law, and present no conflict whatsoever. For instance,
the law which God gave the Jews at Sinai was both _established_ and
_abolished_. It was first established and then abolished. It could not
have been abolished if it had not first been established. It was
established by the life of Christ; it was abolished by the death of
Christ. Christ came not to destroy _the law_ or _the prophets_ but to
fulfill (Matt. 5:17, 18). Jesus said “... all things must be fulfilled,
which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the
psalms, concerning me” (Luke 24:44). Christ fulfilled every prophecy
concerning the Messiah in the law and obeyed every commandment in the
law. In that sense he established the law, and after having done so, he
abolished it when he died upon the cross. Salvation through faith and
obedience to Christ is in fulfillment of the prophecies found in the law
of Moses. In that sense the law of faith establishes the law given to
the Jews at Sinai and abolished by Christ when he was crucified (Col.
2:14-16).
Not a single text listed by the author in his parallel columns serves to
establish the distinction for which he contends. If this is the best he
can do in that respect, it only serves to advertise the weakness of his
contention. Every text he cites refers either to the law God gave the
Jews at Sinai and abolished at the cross, or to the law God gave to the
world through Christ and which went into force when he died at Calvary.
When this is so clearly the case, isn’t it strange that a preacher would
try to make it appear that these Scriptures apply to two imaginary laws
that are not even named in these texts or at any other place in the
Bible?
Since the law given at Sinai was a unit, every Scripture which teaches
that it was taken away at the cross, indeed teaches that it was taken
away as a whole, in its entirety. Please listen again then to Ephesians
2:11-18: “Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the
flesh ... ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of
Israel ... but now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are
made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made
both [Jew and Gentile] one, and hath broken down the middle wall of
partition between us; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the
law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of
twain [Jew and Gentile] one new man, so making peace; and that he might
reconcile both [Jew and Gentile] unto God in one body by the cross,
having slain the enmity thereby ... for through him we both [Jew and
Gentile] have access by one Spirit unto the Father.”
The entire law of Moses, and _especially the sabbath commandment_ (Ex.
31:16, 17), was the middle wall of partition between the Jews and
Gentiles. The Holy Spirit says in the text just quoted that it was
_broken down_, _abolished_, at the cross. This text is a sample of the
many additional texts that could be cited to show that the entire
Sinaitic law was taken out of the way at the cross, but even one is
enough to convince all who love the truth. In Colossians 3:13-16 the
Holy Spirit clearly teaches that this law has been taken out of the way,
and that, _therefore_, the Jews themselves are no longer required to
keep the sabbaths of the Old Testament. Since the middle wall of
partition has been broken down, there is neither Jew nor Gentile in
Christ, but all are one—Christian.
V
The Law of Christ
The fact that the law of Moses in its entirety, including even the Ten
Commandments, has been taken out of the way does not mean that
Christians are without restraint, guidance and law. God hath “spoken
unto us by his son” (Heb. 1:1-2). This word that God hath spoken unto us
through Christ is called “the law of Christ” (Gal. 6:2) or the testament
of Christ (Heb. 9:13-17). It is the law of love (Rom. 13:8-10). The law
of Christ, which has been applicable to all the world since his death,
contains several commandments that were never included in any other law
given to man. For instance, the commandment to be baptized for remission
of sins (Acts 2:38); the commandment to lay by in store on the first day
of the week (1 Cor. 16:1, 2); and the commandment to eat the Lord’s
Supper (1 Cor. 11:23-26; Acts 20:7).
The law of Moses forbade murder; the law of Christ forbids not only
murder but even needless anger (Matt. 5:21-22). The law of Moses forbade
adultery; the law of Christ forbids looking upon a woman to lust after
her (Matt. 5:27, 28). The law of Moses forbade false swearing; the law
of Christ forbids all swearing (Matt. 5:33-37). It was wrong for the
Jews to work on Saturday, for the law of Moses forbade it (Deut.
5:12-15; Exod. 20:8-11). It is not wrong for a Christian to work on
Saturday, for the law of Christ does not forbid it (Col. 2:16). The law
of Moses did not require the Jews to engage in special worship on the
first day of the week; the law of Christ _does require_ Christians to do
so (1 Cor. 16:1-2; 11:17-30; Acts 20:7; Heb. 10:24, 25). It is wrong for
Christians to steal, kill, covet, etc., not because Moses said so, but
because the law of Christ says so (Rom. 3:8-10).
There was a time to hear Moses but that time has passed. On the mountain
of transfiguration, a cloud overshadowed Moses and the voice of God said
concerning Jesus, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased;
HEAR YE HIM” (Matt. 17:5). Christians should obey Christ, not Moses.
“For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus
Christ” (John 1:17). “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath
appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly
lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present
world” (Titus 2:11, 12).
Friends, would you believe me if I were to tell you that the Seventh Day
Adventists deny the existence of the word spoken through Christ? Well,
just let me read it to you from the last section of the pamphlet under
review.
“The abolition of the Ten Commandments would nullify the gospel of
Christ, and render both grace and the atonement void. ‘Sin is not
imputed when there is no law’ (Romans 5:13). Since ‘where no law is,
there is no transgression’ (Romans 4:15), it follows that if the law
[meaning the ten commandments] were abolished, there would be no
transgression, and hence no need of a Saviour.”
I can’t believe the author meant to say that, but he said it. According
to that, the “ten commandments” are the _only_ commandments now in
force. That quotation plainly says that if the “ten commandments” are
not now in force there are no commandments to disobey, no chance to sin,
and no need of a Saviour. The author has flatly denied every commandment
in the gospel. According to him, Christ gave no commandments and it is
folly to talk about _obeying_ the gospel (See 2 Thess. 1:8). If the
author was aware of what he was saying, he has deliberately denied the
word of Christ. If he said it inadvertently, it simply illustrates the
absurdities and inconsistencies into which one falls when he undertakes
to teach error.
VI
Summary
Summarizing what was said last Lord’s day and what has been said today,
I am earnestly requesting the Seventh Day Adventists to furnish the
following Bible texts which are essential to the support of their
theory:
1. The text that commanded any one to keep the sabbath during the period
from Adam to Moses.
2. The text that commanded the Gentile nations to observe Saturday as a
day of rest, even during the Mosaic dispensation.
3. The text in the new covenant, or will of Christ, that commands
Christians to rest on Saturday.
4. The text which says that any one ever ate the Lord’s Supper on
Saturday.
5. The text that even mentions either “moral law” or “ceremonial law.”
In the papers furnished you by the ushers you have a copy of this
request for Scriptures. Just to show you how earnest I am about this
matter, I’m offering a reward of $100 to the finder of either of these
texts. This offer is backed by my personal integrity and sufficient
resources. I’m not making it to be dramatic, but to impress you with the
fact that no such Scriptures are in the Bible. And yet, friends, these
Scriptures are absolutely essential to the support of the sabbath
theory. Without these texts, that theory has absolutely not one leg on
which to stand. The absence of these Scriptures leaves that theory
without any support whatsoever.
As further evidence of my sincerity, I want to make you a proposition.
If there is anybody in this audience who believes he knows now where to
find one of these texts, I’m giving you a chance to let it be known.
I’ll turn to the reference you give, read the text you cite, and see
whether it meets the demand. We will not have you arrested for
disturbing public worship, or undertake to embarrass you in any way. If
you will just raise your hand and let me know where you are, I’ll give
you a chance to stand up and cite your Scripture. If any one here even
thinks he knows where to find one of these texts, we are giving you
permission to speak up now. (Pause. No response.) Well, even if you
can’t find it now, maybe you believe you can when you get home. If so,
just write to me. My address is on the paper you have. You may write to
me in care of the Chapel Avenue Church of Christ, Nashville 6, Tenn. If
you want to collect $500, just let me know where those five texts are.
I’m simply saying this, friends, to emphasize that the very texts
essential to the sabbath theory are not in the Bible. Until the Lord
gives us a new Bible, there is no danger of my having to put out any
money on this offer.
Beloved, in closing I beseech you to hear Christ and obey his gospel. On
the condition that you believe, repent, and be baptized, he promises you
pardon. On the condition that you remain faithful to the end, he
promises you everlasting life. His gospel has facts to be believed,
commandments to be obeyed and promises to be enjoyed. While we stand and
sing, we are urging you to come to him and let him save you.
XI
LEADERSHIP
The word of God furnishes us completely unto every good work. But as we
learned this morning, many of His instructions are left in general form
and must be applied according to our best judgment.[3] For this reason,
God endowed us with intelligence, and admonished us to pray for further
wisdom that we might be able to serve Him in decency and in order.
I
Wisdom in the Lord’s Plan
We should not be disturbed by the fact that there are certain decisions
which we have to make according to our own best judgment. I believe
there is a very good reason why God made this arrangement. Simply
because the detailed instructions that would fit one place might not be
suitable at another. For instance, you had to decide how big to make
this house in which you worship. Suppose God had specified that a house
of worship should be 50 × 40 feet. That might be a suitable building for
one community, but out of order in another.
Since circumstances are so widely different in different places it was
an act of wisdom on the part of God to give us only the general
principles that should govern certain activities and to leave each
community to use its own intelligence in applying these general
principles in a sensible, expedient and practical way. But it does
impose upon us a responsibility of using some intelligence, of making
some wise decisions, and of giving some thought and consideration unto
our plans.
II
Responsibilities of Leadership in the Local Church
1. _Autonomy of the local church._ As some of you know, I was requested
last fall to teach a series of lessons at Grace Avenue on the subject of
church leadership. When I contemplated the task I wondered what I would
say, but before it was over I was wondering how I would find time to say
what was to be said. Of course, church leadership means leadership in
the local congregation because that is the only capacity in which the
church can scripturally function.
Congregational autonomy needs to be emphasized. God has ordained that
each congregation shall be entirely independent to manage its own
affairs under him without any interference or dictation from any other
congregation or from any other group of people upon the earth. Since God
has ordained that each congregation shall be independent, we cannot
function in the capacity of a group of congregations organized together.
No inter-congregational organization can scripturally exist. Therefore,
there can be no inter-congregational ownership of property. We cannot
own property as a whole, that is, as a group of congregations. You could
not deed a piece of property to the church of Christ in general. It has
to be deeded to a particular congregation. That’s the only way the
church can scripturally function. Therefore, when we speak about
leadership in the church, we are speaking of the leadership in the local
congregation.
2. _Distribution of work._ Now I realize that in the church there is not
such a clear cut division of labor or responsibility as there is in a
business organization because in the church every member is vitally
interested in every phase of the work. To use an illustration: I taught
temporarily at Peabody last spring in the mathematics department. Except
for a very general interest in the welfare of the school and my
fellowman, it made no difference to me what the history teacher next
door did or said. I had no responsibility in reference to his work.
There was a clear cut division between his department and mine. In the
church our relationship to each other is too intimate and our interest
in the general welfare too great for such a clear cut division of
responsibility to exist.
However, for the sake of efficiency there should be some distribution of
responsibility or work, for the very simple reason that what is
everybody’s business tends to become nobody’s business. _Unless there is
some mutual agreement as to who shall do what,_ _there is a danger that
a great many necessary tasks will be neglected._ Some congregations that
are large have a distribution of responsibility among the elders
themselves. Instead of bringing up every little detail before a general
business meeting, certain ones are delegated to look after certain
phases of the work and to make all minor decisions regarding the same.
For instance, I know a congregation which has a maintenance committee,
authorized by the overseers, to keep the building in repair up to the
point of spending so many dollars each month. There’s a limit placed
upon what they can spend. They don’t have to get expressions from all
the elders before they replace a broken window light, or make other
minor repairs. This responsibility and authority has already been
scripturally and officially delegated to them. That illustrates what we
mean, then, by division of responsibility—a location of responsibility
and a distribution of the tasks that are to be performed.
3. _Responsibility of making thoughtful decisions._ As we proceed I
cannot quote a lot of Scripture tonight, for the mere reason that I’m
talking about the sphere in which God has not given specific
instructions. That’s where the leadership of the church comes in. In
this sphere the overseers of the church have a great responsibility. Oh,
I could spend two or three hours reciting Scriptures and discussing the
qualifications and work of elders. But it’s not our purpose to discuss
that field at this time. We are discussing the sphere, mentioned in the
lesson this morning, where God has given only general instructions.[4]
Why, friends, where God has given _specific_ instructions the overseers
don’t have to make any decisions. They simply follow the directions
given. It’s just exactly in the realm where specific instructions have
not been given that the overseers are called upon to make decisions of
their own. Where God has specified, they have very little
responsibility. They have no responsibility in making decisions for God
has already made the decisions.
But there are a thousand questions that God has not answered
specifically. Just to mention a few, He doesn’t tell us what kind of
song books to use. He didn’t tell you how big to make this house, or how
many windows to put in each wall. He doesn’t tell you how many meetings
to have each week. He doesn’t tell you how often you should have a
protracted meeting, or how many classes to have on Lord’s day morning,
or how you should arrange your missionary program, how many preachers
you should employ and what part of each one’s support you should
furnish. A hundred other questions could be mentioned, which God has not
specifically answered. And, therefore, the elders, the overseers, in
every congregation, must make decisions for themselves in reference to
these things.
Please don’t think that I’m going to tell you the answer to these
questions, for if I were to do so, then I would be making specifications
where God has made none, and, therefore, going beyond that which is
written. But the one thing I do want to do tonight is to insist that a
great deal of thought and study be given to all such matters and that
instead of making decisions on them recklessly or thoughtlessly or
without proper meditation and study, the very opposite should be the
case.
All such questions, even though they may appear to be insignificant in
their nature, should be weighed very carefully. For, if there is any
field of work in all this world in which we want to do our very best, it
is in the work of the Lord; and be it ever so good in the past, we want
to make it better in the future; for God expects us to grow in His work,
and to become better and better as the days go by. So the one point that
I’m emphasizing most of all is that in _all these decisions a great deal
of study, thought, and prayer should be used_.
Sometimes I have been surprised at how carelessly decisions were made in
certain business meetings of churches where I have labored. I have seen
important decisions determined by a very slight suggestion from some
individual member of the group and passed immediately, without any time
being taken to carefully study the issues involved. I believe that what
a church business meeting will do is about the most unpredictable thing
in the world. Some of their decisions are made with such little study
and with such little thought that it’s almost impossible to know what
may happen when such a meeting is called. Now I believe that God expects
us to use wisdom in this field where He has left us to our own judgment.
There are Scriptures which authorize this statement. Some of them were
used this morning. For instance, “Be ye therefore wise as serpents and
harmless as doves” (Matt. 10:16). Or again, “Let all things be done
decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14:40).
4. _Importance of careful planning._ Every outstanding business
organization in this country has its post-war plans already worked out.
It has its blueprints drawn, and those plans have not been made hastily.
They have been worked out after a great deal of research, investigation
and study. The directors of those businesses have come together and have
consulted with each other. They have exchanged ideas. They have weighed
details. And after all of that study and work, they have mapped out
their plans for the years ahead.
Many of these business men are members of the church, and I maintain
that, if men who are able to succeed in the commercial and professional
world will apply the same diligent study and careful planning to the
work of the church, then it will succeed far more than it has in the
past. There is no other organization in all this world which would have
survived as much mismanagement or neglect as the church of Jesus Christ
has survived. Someone has said that the church is certainly a divine
institution or it would have perished from the earth long ago through
neglect or bad management. I have confidence in the leaders of the
churches. I have confidence in their ability. I believe that they are
interested. If they will give to the work of the church the same careful
study which they devote to the plans for their business enterprises, I
believe we will be able to make greater progress.
Just to give you an illustration close at hand, everyone will agree that
the effectiveness of our Thursday evening services has been very greatly
increased by a group of men coming together and carefully planning the
programs. If the attendance is to be taken as indication of what you
think about them, then they have been improved at least one hundred per
cent. The attendance is now twice as much as it was before. I am of the
firm conviction that what has been done for the Thursday evening meeting
can be done for every other phase of the work of the church if it is
properly studied and planned.
In some of my connections outside the church I have been greatly
impressed with the conscientiousness with which certain people go about
their work. The head of a department out at Peabody, who is engaged in
educational work, which certainly isn’t one tenth as important as the
work of the church, studies every little detail. He takes into
consideration all the facts that are at his disposal. He is continually
revising his program and endeavoring to improve his methods. He listens
to every report that he receives. He will call a conference of those who
are working under him and discuss ways and means of making his work more
effective.
Now, if educational work deserves such careful study as that, surely the
work of the church deserves even more. And yet, friends, I know
congregations—great, big congregations—that never do have any sort of a
business meeting. Just think of it! They don’t even have a business
meeting! The overseers never get together to ponder the problems which
confront the local congregation, or to study ways and means of improving
their work.
Now, please remember that the fact that the Bible furnishes us
completely unto every good work does not relieve us of the
responsibility which I am emphasizing. Anyone who stops to study the
matter will realize that this is true, because there are so many
questions which the Bible does not answer specifically. We must study
and give diligence and pray for wisdom and use whatever talent the Lord
has given us to make His work just as successful as possible.
III
Difference in Success and Failure
It needs to be emphasized that the difference between success and
failure very often consists not of any one great big item but of a great
many details or small factors working together. Not one big thing but
many little things working together very often makes the difference
between success and failure—in every phase of life except the church. In
the church they make the difference between outstanding success and just
mediocre success. It is very difficult for the church to fail
completely. As long as it follows the Bible there can be no failure, but
those _little_ things frequently make up the difference between
outstanding success and merely mediocre success, between doing something
that’s really worthwhile, outstanding and unusual, and just drifting and
dragging along.
1. _Running a store._ I want to try to make this point clear by use of
an illustration. There are some of you here who are in the mercantile
business. You know lots more about running stores than I do. I believe
you will agree that very often the difference between success and
failure there consists of many little items working together—the manner
in which you display your goods on the shelves, the spirit with which
you meet your customers when they come into your place of business, the
courtesy with which you render service to your patrons, and just a lot
of these little things make up the difference.
You don’t make a lot of money on any one item, but making a small profit
on each of a great many items is what finally spells success. If you
will consider the men who have made fortunes in this world, I believe
you will find that they did not get rich by making a whole lot of money
on one item or unit of business, but by making a little money on each of
a great many items. The difference between success and failure then is
not always one big thing, but frequently many little things working
together. You can never fill a barrel by pouring water into the bunghole
while it is running out a thousand nail holes.
2. _Keeping house._ The same thing applies to house work. I don’t know
much about housekeeping, but I’ve had a chance to observe quite a bit of
it as I’ve gone around over the country. And I try to determine the
difference between a good housekeeper and just an ordinary housekeeper.
I’m convinced that it consists not of one big factor but of a great many
details—the arrangement of this little piece of furniture, having the
magazines up off the floor, a definite place to keep each of numerous
little articles, the spider webs out of that corner, and many other
little things. I don’t know what all of them are, but some of you ladies
do, and I’m sure you get the point.
3. _Leading singing._ The same thing is true in church work. I remember
sitting and listening to a song director who is very outstanding and who
has won national recognition for his ability to direct congregational
singing. I tried to determine what made him so successful. I concluded
that it was no one big factor, but a lot of little details about the way
he directed the service; and I’m sure that Brother Murphy, who is
helping us on Thursday nights, will verify this statement.
4. _Selecting building site._ Let us consider other details of church
work. Any one of them by itself is not so terribly important, and I’m
sure that I could find someone who would argue with me about any one of
them, and say, “Oh, well, after all that doesn’t matter,” but when you
take all of them together it does matter. It makes the difference
between outstanding success and mere existence. Take for instance the
location of the church building. In many instances very poor judgment
has been used in selecting building sites.
A certain North Carolina town is still a missionary point, even though
there has been a church in it for at least 25 years. The church building
is located on a dirty back street. There isn’t a store in the community.
No business man would have located one there! Neither is there a school
building in the community. No board of education in the world would have
put one there. After 25 years in such a location the church is still
very small and weak. Very recently they finally decided, after a painful
division, to move up town.
I shall not exaggerate in describing their building. The walls were
painted, but the overhead was not. There was no rug, no paint, no carpet
of any kind on the floor. The benches were such as you cannot find in
any country schoolhouse in Davidson County. They were such as you might
have found seventy or seventy-five years ago. Hanging on the wall just
inside the door there was a mop which was used to clean the floor and
over the pulpit a bottle opener with which they unfastened the grape
juice each Sunday morning. Over on this side of the building there was a
country-store stove with a pipe running all the way across the building
and into the wall on the other side. There was a baptistry but no
dressing rooms. The people had to come down the aisle to a hole in the
floor to be baptized and go up the aisle and to some neighbor’s house to
change their clothes. Well, now, are you surprised that this church
hasn’t grown?
Down at Kannapolis where I went to hold a meeting, they had a church
building on a side street to a side street that got so muddy during the
wintertime that they had to discontinue some of their meetings. Every
time Brother Flannery was called upon to tell someone how to find the
building he would hang his head. I noticed him one night during our tent
meeting; he started to announce the location of the building and
unconsciously his head went down. He was ashamed of it. And there would
be little hope for the work at Kannapolis if they had not decided to
remedy that situation. But they’ve already bought two nice lots downtown
on which we held the tent meeting and where they will locate a church
building as soon as possible.
5. _Keeping the building in proper condition._ Along with the _location_
of the building is the _condition_ of the building. Literally, I have
preached in church buildings where the temperature was about 60° or 55°
when the service began and 85° when it closed. People would have on
their overcoats when I started to preach and want to pull off their
shirts before it was over! Well, you may say that that doesn’t make any
difference; but you take one hundred little things like that and it does
make a great deal of difference.
The arrangement of the program may look like a small item, but it’s one
of those little items, which, taken along with others, makes a big
difference. Reports and records of the treasurer and of other workers in
the church are important. Our attitude toward strangers when they visit
our meetings is significant. That’s one respect in which the Chapel
Avenue congregation is outstanding. Your courtesy to strangers has
caused much favorable comment.
6. _Advertising the work of the church._ I’ve known churches to spend
three or four hundred dollars to get a preacher, and refuse to spend $25
to get the people there to hear him. Think about that! You know the
preacher can’t do any good unless the people are there. I went to a
certain city in West Virginia to hold a meeting, and I wrote to them in
advance urging them to advertise the meeting. Well, I couldn’t say too
much, you know. They’d think I was trying to get them to advertise me.
After I arrived I asked them if they’d advertised the meeting. They
said, “Oh, yes.” I looked around for a sign but I didn’t see one. The
church building was located on a through highway that ran from the North
to the South. A streamer across the road would have attracted the
attention of everybody who passed. They hadn’t put one up. I looked in
the store windows and saw no ads. I saw none anywhere.
I decided to find out whether they had advertised the meeting. It was a
small town where everybody is supposed to know what everybody else is
doing anyway—only about 1,000 people. I went to the stores and inquired
whether a meeting was going on in town. In every store I entered I was
thoroughly informed about a Nazarene meeting. One fellow got so
enthusiastic that he took me out on the street and showed me the
preacher’s house and told me where they were holding the meeting. After
they would finish their story I’d always ask if there were any other
meetings going on in town. In each case the answer was, “No.”
In our meeting that night I related my experiment and its results. And I
said, “Now, don’t think I told those people any better. I thought I’d
help you keep the secret!” That’s the principle on which a great many
churches work.
Remember that you have not advertised the work of the church when you
merely let people know it’s going on. You haven’t advertised it until
you _make them want a part in it_! Everybody in this country knows that
the Standard Oil Company has gasoline for sale. If that were the end of
advertising, they could discontinue theirs. But that’s not the purpose
of it. Their purpose is to make people _want_ Standard gasoline, so they
keep on advertising. Too often we think we’ve advertised the church just
because people know it’s in existence, but we have not advertised it
until we make them want a part in it.
7. _Handling the finances._ Another little detail that needs careful
consideration is the planning of the financial program of the church.
There is one important respect in which the finance of the church is
different from that of any other organization. I’m not a business man,
but I know, nevertheless, that it’s well for a business concern to keep
a good surplus on hand. The bigger margin they can keep between their
income and their outgo, the better off they are. Consequently the
administrators of such businesses endeavor to build up a big bank
account; but friends, that’s the worst thing that can happen to a
congregation! You cannot get a group of people to give into a treasury
that has several thousand dollars in the bank. You cannot get people to
give to a church when they know it is not needed.
I got a big surprise a few years ago when I preached in a certain town
on the subject of giving. After I’d finished the members began coming to
me and saying, “Why there’s no need of telling us about that. We have
several thousand dollars in the bank. Why should we give? This
congregation doesn’t need any money.”
Recently I held a meeting for another church which had $10,000 in the
bank. I didn’t know it, so I preached on giving and got the same
reaction. During the rest of that meeting I preached on _spending_!
Before the meeting closed the congregation had plans to start a new
congregation in the north end of town. Since I left they have bought a
building for $4,500, paid cash for it, and started a new congregation
with about fifty or sixty members. They were going to wait until the war
was over. I wonder what they would have done in case of the Hundred
Years War! That question occurs to me when people talk about postponing
church work until after the war is over. We cannot afford to let the
Lord’s work wait until the world quits fighting!
It’s essential in reference to the financial program of the church that
plans for Scriptural spending be kept right up with, or a little ahead
of, the income; because the income is flexible. When the congregation
sees an increased need and a growing program, then the contributions
will be increased accordingly. I don’t blame people for not giving to a
treasury that’s already overflowing. I wouldn’t want to contribute to a
church whose leaders would not spend the money that was contributed. I’d
find some other avenue through which to contribute. When it is necessary
to set aside a fund for a new building, or some other major, anticipated
expense, the money should be earmarked and not counted as part of the
operating account. The financial program of the church is one of many
problems that needs to be given some careful study.
8. _Avoiding disappointment._ I want to give you another illustration.
When I went to a certain town to preach, the ladies, some of whom were
even from another congregation, began insisting on having a ladies’
Bible class. They said that the preacher over at this other church
wouldn’t have one. I asked why. They answered, “Because it always dies
on his hands, and leaves a bad feeling—a feeling of failure.” I replied,
“All right, we’ll have one and not let it die. We’re just going to
continue it twelve weeks. Then we will be through.”
I planned a twelve-week course. The interest and attendance grew
throughout the twelve weeks. Some insisted upon its being continued
longer but I said, “No, we may start another one soon, but we’ve
finished this one.” You know there’s a big difference between quitting
because you’ve finished and quitting because you’ve failed. You can
always start again if you think it wise to do so. It is prudent to set a
time limit on all activities of the church except those which are
essential or already established.
When I was doing missionary work in Richmond, Virginia, I didn’t ask
churches to send me “a contribution;” I asked them to send me a definite
amount for a definite period of time. Then, when they had promised, they
felt obligated to give that much for that length of time. You know, if
there isn’t some agreement about the amount and the length of time,
people will think, “Well, it’s got to stop sometime and the church has
as much right to discontinue it or say when it should be discontinued as
the preacher has,” and so after awhile it just plays out. But if a
congregation promises to send you $10 a month for twelve months, they
are almost certain to do it. That’s just another one of those little
details. All such things have to be worked out according to human
judgment. They have to be learned by experience and observation. The
Bible does not specify them.
I could go on talking like this indefinitely, but all these items are
mentioned for illustrative purposes, and to emphasize the one central
point I want to drive home tonight. That is, that God has left a field
in which he has not made specifications, in which we must make
decisions, and those _decisions ought to be made thoughtfully_. They
ought to be made deliberately, and every little detail ought to be
studied most carefully, for after all, _we are engaged in the greatest
work on this earth!_
IV
Point of Diminishing Returns
I want to raise one more question and then we’ll have to close. We hear
people speaking in the business world about “the point of diminishing
returns.” Maybe I should tell you what that means or give you a simple
illustration. Suppose you drive out on a muddy road like Brother Estevez
was talking about this afternoon and get your car real dirty and come
home to wash it. You turn on the hose pipe and go over it one time, and
it doesn’t look like the same car. The first going over makes a big
difference, a very obvious difference, but you don’t have it clean yet.
You go over it again and you get it a little bit cleaner, but it’s not
as noticeable this time. Then you get some soap and wash it real good
and get off some more dirt, but the difference doesn’t show very plainly
this time. The car still isn’t clean. You take some cleaning wax and go
over it again and get off a lot more dirt. Then you can take a rag and
shine it and the more you polish it, the more it’ll shine, but after
awhile you reach the point where the extra lustre that can be added by
further rubbing is not worth the effort. That’s the point of diminishing
returns. When you’ve reached the point where the additional result
obtainable is not worth the effort required to obtain it, that’s the
point of diminishing returns.
With that in mind, I want to ask this question: Do you believe that one
can ever reach the point of diminishing returns in his preparation for
the work of the Lord? If by ever so much effort I can make myself, even
to a small degree, a better preacher, don’t you believe I ought to do
it? If by ever so much effort, one can become, to any extent whatsoever,
a better song leader, don’t you believe he ought to do it?
And if by ever so much study and careful thought and planning, the
overseers can make the work of the church even slightly more effective,
don’t you think they ought to do it? Do you believe we can ever reach
the point of diminishing returns in the work of the Lord? Don’t you
agree that in his work all of us should do our very, very best? I
believe you do.
That’s all we have time to say tonight. In just a moment we’re going to
sing the invitation song that has been announced, and in doing so we
shall be urging you to accept the Lord’s invitation. {These promises are
offered to the unbeliever}[5] on conditions of faith, repentance and
baptism (Mark 16:15, 16; Acts 2:38); and to the backslider on the
conditions of repentance, confession and prayer (Acts 8:13, 22, 23; 1
John 1:9). As we stand and sing we entreat the lost to come to Jesus.
XII
CONGREGATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES
(_Note_: While this sermon was being presented the main headings of the
following outline were on the blackboard. Before the second sermon on
the same subject was delivered the following evening, a mimeographed
copy of the entire outline was given to each person in the audience.)
_INTRODUCTION_
To set in order the work of the local church it is well to consider the
objectives or results desired. Below is a list of scriptural
congregational objectives and some of the activities that will help to
reach the objectives.
I. _Evangelistic (Mk. 16:15, 16)_
1. Local
_a._ Lord’s day preaching
_b._ Protracted meetings
_c._ Newspaper and other advertising
_d._ Newspaper reports
_e._ Inviting and bringing others to meetings
_f._ Radio preaching, contact with interested listeners
_g._ Short articles in the paper
_h._ Distribution of tracts—in homes, in public buildings, by
mail, racks in lobbies
_i._ Personal evangelism
(1) Contacts at school
(2) Contacts at play
(3) Contacts at work
(4) House to house calls
_j._ Prospect file—individual and general
_k._ Community Bible classes
_l._ Prayer
2. Missionary
_a._ Tracts
_b._ Radio
_c._ Financial support to preachers and missions
(1) Should expect regular and complete reports
(2) Workers selected carefully and well supported
(3) Work carefully supervised
(4) Operating funds and assistants furnished
_d._ Selecting fields and planning work
_e._ Leadership for rural churches near Nashville
II. _Devotional (Acts 2:42)_
1. Sunday morning
2. Sunday evening
3. Wednesday evening
4. Announcements
III. _Instructional (Matt. 28:19-20; Eph. 4:11-13)_
1. Preaching
2. Sunday morning classes
3. Wednesday evening classes
4. Vacation Bible school
5. Bible story hour
6. Ladies’ Bible class
7. Other special classes
IV. _Looking After Members Individually (John 10:3, 14; Acts 20:28;
Heb. 13:17)_
1. Church bulletin
2. Correspondence with men in service
3. Correspondence with, and in behalf of, other non-resident members
4. Contacts at meetings
5. Visiting—sick, indifferent, weak, disgruntled
6. Records of names and addresses of members
7. Attendance records
8. Special attention to new members, etc.
9. Discipline
V. _Practical Training (1 Tim. 3:10; Eph. 4:11-16)_
1. Wednesday evening meeting
2. Participation in other meetings
3. Special classes
4. Supervised activities in personal work, etc.
VI. _Beneficent (Jas. 1:27; 1 Cor. 16:1)_
1. Caring for widows
2. Caring for orphans
3. Helping the poor
VII. _Incidental_
1. Financial reports, records, etc.
2. Maintenance of church property
3. Other incidentals
We are very glad to have visitors with us today. I will not undertake to
name those who are present from other places, lest I omit one. But we
want all of you to realize that you have a very hearty welcome. We’re
always glad to have you worship with us.
I was very glad indeed to hear that splendid report given by Brother
Gregory. I wish we could have more frequent reports from those who are
being assisted in their work by the Chapel Avenue congregation. Let us
remember that the gospel is being proclaimed today at half a dozen, or
maybe a dozen, different places by preachers supported, at least in
part, by the congregation here. To me, that is a very encouraging
thought.
I want to talk to you this morning upon the topic, “Congregational
Objectives and Activities.” The work of the church may be outlined in
several different ways, but the most practical outline that I have been
able to develop is one based upon the _objectives_ of the church. In
other words, what is the purpose of the church? What is the work that it
should do, and how can it best do that work? I have listed on the board
six or seven expressions according to which the scriptural objectives of
the church may be classified: evangelistic, devotional, instructional,
watching or looking after the members individually, practical training,
beneficent, and incidental—some other activities which are incidental to
these main objectives. These are Scriptural objectives. They are
authorized by the word of God, and I believe that this outline covers
everything which God intends for the church to do. Someone told me I had
omitted recreational and social objectives. Well, I left those out on
purpose, because I do not believe that they are authorized by the Bible.
Hence, as far as I’m able to know, this list is complete.
Now I want to talk about one or two of these items at this time.
Continuing the effort to give some practical lessons, I’m laying aside
rhetoric or any other technical requirements for a good sermon which
might stand in the way of practical effectiveness.
By the term evangelistic, of course, we mean preaching the gospel to the
entire world. The Scriptural authority for that is found at many places
in the Bible. For instance, the great commission as reported by Mark
16:15: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel unto every creature.
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. He that believeth not
shall be damned.” This commandment is very comprehensive. It says “Go
into all the world” and the world includes the people who live here at
Chapel Avenue, those who live next door to you, even those who are in
the house with you. It includes the people of this city, and then, of
course, people in other cities and other states throughout the entire
world. Therefore, we shall discuss this subject of evangelization under
two headings: local and missionary.
God has given us a charge to keep as a congregation. He has charged us
to preach the gospel unto the people of this community, as well as the
people of other communities. Now the question is: “How can we do it?”
There’s the command; it’s a general one. God charges us to preach the
gospel unto the people who live in East Nashville, and as little as you
may have thought about it, there are many thousands of people right here
within a few blocks of our building who do not know about the church in
the New Testament—who do not believe and study the Bible and are not
acquainted with the distinguishing characteristics of the New Testament
church.
I
Preaching on Lord’s Days
Our problem is to get the truth unto these people. What means and what
methods shall we use in carrying out this charge which God has given us?
One method we use is that of preaching on the Lord’s day; Sunday sermons
serve an evangelistic purpose to some extent. Some of the lessons are
designed for the purpose of reaching those who are on the outside, and,
of course, when that is the case, a special effort should be made to get
the outsiders here to hear the lessons. These regular Lord’s day
meetings, then, and the lessons which are presented morning and evening
can be made to serve the purpose of evangelizing this community.
But we could not confine all the lessons to that type of thinking, for
to do so would be to neglect some other important matters. Even if we
did make all the lessons of an evangelistic nature that would not
suffice to solve this problem, for that means alone will not reach all
the unsaved, even of our own community. Too many of them are at home at
this hour, or worshiping at some other place where the full gospel is
not presented.
II
Protracted Meetings
Most congregations supplement their Lord’s day preaching then by what is
called protracted meetings, or revival meetings. Such meetings
accomplish much good, and they should be executed with a definite
purpose in mind. Some definite purpose should characterize every
activity of the church. When we hold another protracted meeting, we want
to think of it as a means of helping us carry out the God-given charge
to preach the gospel unto the people in East Nashville. As long as there
is one soul within our reach who has not heard the truth or who has not
been properly exhorted to obey it, you and I have not finished our job.
Keeping the purpose of reaching the unsaved of this community clearly in
mind as we plan and conduct our next meeting will contribute much to its
success.
III
Advertising
You will agree with me that if we should depend entirely upon Lord’s day
preaching and upon protracted meetings, we would never reach all the
unsaved even in our own community. God has not prescribed that our
efforts shall be confined unto these methods. He has given us a general
charge to preach the gospel to all the world. He expects us to use some
intelligence and some good judgment in carrying out this command.
And, friends, he expects us to use every means which is at our disposal
in order to make the job complete. Of course, I mean every Scriptural or
legitimate means. For no other sort of means would accomplish the
purpose intended. We would make a very serious mistake, then, if we
relied upon any one method alone. God expects us to use every method
that is legitimate within its nature in order to carry out this charge.
What are some of the other things which can be done along this line?
First, we can make a greater effort to get people to come to the
meetings—supplement the public meetings by putting on a special effort
to get people to attend them. Newspaper advertising would be very
helpful. Personal visits and invitations to attend the meetings can be
used to good advantage. Another means of attracting people to the place
where the gospel is preached, is publicizing reports of what is being
done. Nothing succeeds like success. And _if a church will do what God
intends for it to do, it will be news_!
One preacher blamed the churches themselves for not getting more
newspaper publicity. He said “If there were a church which practiced
what it preached, it would get its name in the headlines of the daily
paper.” If you’ll stop to analyze his statement, you’ll almost have to
admit that he told the truth. We are not seeking publicity for its own
sake, but the Bible says “Let your light shine,” and condemns the
putting of your candle under a bushel where no one can see it.
When the church does something which is worthwhile and would serve as a
fine example for others, it is our duty to give it the publicity which
it deserves in order that others may profit by the example. Such is
authorized by the commandment, “Let your light shine, that others may
see your good works and glorify God.”
IV
Radio and Press
Another means which might be used to carry out this charge is radio
preaching. Of course, there has been much of this done already in the
city of Nashville, but there are many other places where it has not been
done, and where it should be used as one of the methods of carrying out
the commandment to preach the gospel to the whole world. Wherever the
radio is used every possible effort should be made to form personal
contact with those who become interested.
I know a number of congregations that are publishing short articles in
the daily paper. The daily paper is a very fine medium through which to
reach the public. The business world has known this for a long time.
That’s the reason you see so many and such costly advertisements in our
daily papers. Our merchants know that this is an effective way to reach
the public. Jesus said that the men of this world are for their own
generation wiser than the sons of light. It may be that this statement
is applicable here, for too often churches have overlooked the use of
the radio and especially the use of the daily paper as a medium through
which to reach the public.
Remember, God has charged us to preach the gospel to everybody, and one
soul is worth more than all the money in the world. If by ever so much
use of the daily press, we can accomplish the salvation of just one soul
it would be worth a million times what it cost. If we will stop to
consider the value of just one soul, we will see the great importance of
using every means that we can to win lost souls for Christ. Now, I’m
just naming some different activities here which will help us to fulfill
this duty, or to reach the objective of evangelizing our own community.
Do not think that this list is complete; it is intended rather to be
suggestive. Perhaps you can think of other means which would also help
in accomplishing this task.
V
Distributing Tracts
But even after we have done all these things there will still be some
people who are not yet reached. The church here has been engaged in
publishing and distributing tracts. This is another means which we can
use to reach our neighbors. I wish we had some system of regularly
placing tracts, appropriate tracts, in every home in this community. We
can help to preach the gospel to the world by carrying tracts in person
to those who live in our neighborhood, and by placing tracts in public
places—the Y. M. C. A., the Y. W. C. A., the bus station, the Union
Station, and other such places. The churches of Christ in general have
neglected this opportunity; if you doubt this statement, visit some of
these places—hospitals, terminals, etc.—and you will realize that we
have been letting an opportunity slip by us in this respect.
Then our tracts in the church lobby may be used to serve a good purpose.
I’m glad that Brother Billingsley has taken the initiative in providing
some racks for them, because the truth should be displayed just as
effectively as possible. I believe that you will agree that in the past
the tracts in the lobby have not been attractively arranged. If I should
preach a sermon as ragged in its appearance as that display of tracts
has been, you would fire me. You’d say you didn’t want the truth wrapped
up in that sort of a garment. We need to look out after details and take
advantage of every possible means to make the preaching of the gospel
more effective. Paul said, “For though I be free from all men, yet have
I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the
Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are
under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under
the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not
without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them
that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain
the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means
save some. And this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker
thereof with you” (1 Cor. 9:19-23).
VI
Personal Evangelism
In addition to all these methods, personal evangelism should be greatly
emphasized. Here is perhaps the greatest weakness in the method of the
churches of Christ today. On this point, we are allowing some advocates
of error to run circles around us. Here is a great unworked field which,
when properly worked, will bring results of which we have not yet
dreamed.
The Bible does not command people to come to our public meetings. If we
can reach them by these public meetings, that’s fine. If we can persuade
them to come so that we may preach the gospel to a large number at once,
that’s fine. But what will we do for those who don’t come? The Bible
says “Go.” We have not fully discharged our duty when we invite people
to come to us. And we haven’t always invited them! There are, I am sure,
hundreds of people living almost in sight of this building who have not
received a personal invitation to attend the meetings at this place.
They ought to receive at least a personal invitation. But even then,
that’s not sufficient. If they still don’t come, it becomes our duty to
go to them. Have we obeyed the great commission, even in reference to
East Nashville, until we do so? It will help a great deal if we have a
prospect file, both general and individual. Every good insurance agent
in this town has a prospect file. He knows to whom he will try to sell
insurance in the next few days. And we ought to use the same practical
common sense in executing the work of the Lord that men use in selling
insurance.
I went to a place one time to hold a meeting where they had made very
elaborate preparations. They had appointed many committees. They had an
advertising committee, a publicity committee, a parking committee, a
flower committee, and an ushering committee, and everything else you can
think of except one little item. They had failed to consider who might
be saved during the meeting, and when I asked one of the elders whom he
expected to be baptized, he hesitated, thought for a while, and finally
named one of the boys who had been coming to the services. They expected
to have forty or fifty additions, but they had never thought about who
these additions would be.
What would you think of an automobile salesman with no prospects in
mind, who went in on Monday morning and told the sales manager that he
was going to sell five automobiles during the week? The sales manager
would probably ask, “Well, to whom?” The agent would reply, “Oh, I don’t
know; I just believe there must be five people in town who’ll buy from
me this week.” Do you think the sales manager would be encouraged? Why
he would realize that the salesman didn’t know what he was talking
about. Every congregation ought to have a prospect list, and every
individual worker in the Lord’s kingdom ought to have a prospect list.
Whom will you try to save during the next twelve months? Every Christian
should be a soul winner for Jesus, and you can lead someone to Christ if
you are willing to be used by him in so doing. There is much more that
could be said along this line if time permitted.
One congregation has used very effectively the method of community Bible
classes. When the members could not get people to come to their
meeting-house, they carried Bible classes to the communities where the
people lived. Some good Christian who had the respect of his neighbors
invited those neighbors to his home for Bible study and had the preacher
there to help with the teaching. At Richmond, Virginia, most of the
additions which they have had during the last six months have come from
just such a source. If this little method were put in effect in the city
of Nashville by all the congregations, it would revolutionize this town
in just a few months.
VII
The Case of Mary Doe
The thing I’m trying to impress upon your minds is that we have not been
using all the means or methods which God has placed at our disposal. Let
me make the point just as concrete and effective as possible by using a
definite example. (Maybe it’s indefinite in some respects.) Suppose that
we have a young lady brought up here in our own community, maybe not
living more than two or three blocks from our church building. We will
call her Mary Doe. What are the chances that she will learn the truth
from our program of evangelism? We’ll say that she has been reared by
parents who go regularly to a denominational church. They’ve been taking
her there ever since she was a tiny baby. They’ve taught her to believe
in their particular denomination. They have built up within her a
denominational pride and a sense of loyalty to the church of her
parents.
At that church, she never hears the complete plan of salvation. She
hears some nice, moral lectures. She goes to the Bible classes and
discusses current events and general social problems. If she’s like many
such young people, she does not read the Bible very systematically
herself. She may read it occasionally, but not consistently and
understandingly. The chances are that Mary Doe will never learn the
proper division of the word. She might live in such an environment for
fifty years and never learn the difference between the old covenant and
the new covenant.
Perhaps she and her mother ride by our building sometime and she says,
“Mother, what church is that?” The mother replies, “Oh, that’s the
church of Christ” or maybe she’ll say, “The Campbellite church. They
think baptism alone saves you.” Well, Mary Doe believes that, even
though it isn’t true. Consequently she’ll probably never come to one of
our meetings. Very likely she’ll never read any of our literature. How
shall we reach Mary Doe?
Probably her best chance to learn the truth is through her contact with
our own children in the public schools. That is a common meeting place,
and I suspect Mary will be more likely to have an intimate contact with
a member of the church at school than at any other place. Had you ever
thought about that as an opportunity for evangelizing East Nashville? I
wonder if our boys and girls in school are taking advantage of their
opportunity. Have you realized what a wonderful opportunity it is, and
are you behaving yourself in such a way as to demand respect from your
fellow students that you may be able to teach them the truth? Or do you
so misbehave that you would be a little bit embarrassed to undertake to
show them the difference between truth and error? There is a golden
opportunity for personal evangelism that might be used even by a school
boy or girl in leading many people unto the Lamb of God that takes away
the sins of the world. Personal evangelism then may be carried out
through personal contact at school, through personal contact at work,
and through personal contact at play or in our social relationships.
VIII
House To House Calls
And, finally, my friends, it might be possible that before we could
reach Mary Doe and the several thousand people whom she represents, we
would have to start down the street and go from house to house and call
upon every home. It could be possible that Mary would not be thrown with
any member of the church, even in her association at school. Do you
believe we can claim to have fully and completely met our
responsibility, in preaching the gospel to the people of East Nashville,
until we have gone from house to house as the apostle Paul did, and as
some denominations are doing today, and taken the message to them? That
is almost an unused opportunity and method of preaching the gospel to
those who have not yet heard it, and yet it is a very practical and a
very effective one.
IX
Prayer
I would like to climax all of this by saying that prayer should be used
in our effort to carry out the great commission. If you have faithfully
and diligently engaged in all of these activities mentioned, and any
others of like nature that could be mentioned, then you can consistently
pray to God to help you in accomplishing your purpose. That’s the reason
I put prayer at the end of the list. For prayer should not be used
without being accompanied by every possible effort on our part. Neither
of these methods, nor any other that might be named, should be used
exclusively. They should all be used, working together to help us
fulfill our obligation to preach the gospel to our neighbors.
Now I had hoped to have time to talk about the other phase of the first
division of our outline—preaching the gospel to other communities—but
the clock on the wall says that the time is gone and so we have to close
with the promise that there will be more to follow. If you’ll come back
tonight, I’ll give you a mimeographed outline of the lessons which are
being used both this morning and tonight.
In just a moment we’re going to sing the song that has been announced.
That is our means of urging you to accept the Lord’s invitation to come
to him and let him save you. If you have been guilty of committing just
one sin which has not yet been forgiven, that sin must be forgiven
before you can go to heaven, because no sin can enter there, and no sin
can be forgiven for those who have never obeyed the gospel by faith
(Acts 16:31-33), repentance (Luke 13:3), confession (Acts 16:37), and
baptism (Acts 2:38). Those who have turned aside since being baptized
may be forgiven if they’ll come back repenting, confessing their faults,
and praying for forgiveness. The gospel invitation is yours. While we
stand and sing we urge you to accept it.
XIII
CONGREGATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES
(_Continued_)
I promise you in the beginning that I do not mean to discuss all of this
outline (See pages 196-198) at this time. It covers in a general way the
entire program of work that God wants His church to do. The scope of
this work is so broad that we have to break it down in order to study it
practically and effectively. Those who are directing the work of the
church need to study it in its separate parts as well as in its
entirety. This main list of objectives—evangelistic, devotional,
instructional, looking after members individually, practical training,
beneficent work, and incidentals—covers the field entirely. Every
Scriptural function of the church is included in at least one of these
general headings. I do not mean that the lists of activities under the
main headings are complete. They are not necessarily so. In most
instances they are incomplete. They are _suggestive_ rather than
_exhaustive_.
I
Use of Outline
I would like for you to take this outline home with you and study it
with two or three questions in mind. First, what can you do to help
advance the work of the church? Look over this list of activities and
write into this outline any others which, in your judgment, would be
scriptural in nature and help to make the work of the church more
effective. These objectives are Scriptural, therefore, we want to do
everything in our power to reach them. In order for the church to attain
these objectives, it must have the co-operation of every member. There
is something in this general program that _you_ can do! Perhaps you’ll
find _many_ places where you can be of service, and you know it is your
duty to render whatever service you can to make the Lord’s work as
successful as possible.
These objectives being Scriptural, this outline may help the overseers
in their work of edifying the church. Please remember that we are
engaged in the greatest work in all the world—the work of saving souls!
We are undertaking to accomplish a divine task, one which has been
assigned to us by the God of heaven. In His work we ought to do our very
best, remembering that one soul is worth more than all the material
wealth in the world. We should leave nothing undone that will contribute
toward our success.
Some constructive work was done in our business meeting this afternoon.
A committee was appointed to plan the missionary program of the church
for the year. This committee is to give some very careful study to the
selection of the most appropriate fields and the amount that should be
invested in each. The results of their study, including the program they
recommend for the next fiscal year, will be announced at the next
meeting of the overseers. This is a very practical step. It is a
definite step in the right direction. It pertains to Item No. 2 under
our evangelistic objectives as shown on the outline.
Another committee was appointed to study our Sunday morning Bible school
program and to make recommendations for improving it. That’s Item No. 2
under our instructional objective. So that makes two items on this list
that will be given very careful study by committees that have been
appointed for that purpose. We know that our Thursday evening meeting
has been very much improved by giving a little more thought to planning
the program. I believe that that meeting can be even further improved,
and I am also convinced that similar improvements may be brought about
in every other phase of the church’s work if the proper study and
careful planning is devoted to it. I am hoping that every item in this
outline will be given thoughtful consideration by those who are
responsible for the work at Chapel Avenue for the sake of improving
every phase of our work and worship.
We are told to seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness. God
would not be pleased with a secondary place in our lives, and that
means, among other things, that our program of work in the church should
be given our best thought, our most careful consideration, and our most
diligent support.
II
Sending Messages
I want to say a few things tonight under Item No. 2 of our evangelistic
program. God tells us to go into all the world and preach the gospel
unto every creature. We discussed some methods this morning that might
be used in carrying out that responsibility in our own neighborhood.
Now, the question arises, “What can we do about preaching in communities
that are too far away to receive any direct benefit from our local
program of services and personal work?”
One method which we have been using recently is that of distributing
tracts. We have published 70,000 tracts for free distributions. Bro.
Shacklett reported this afternoon in the business meeting that the most
of this supply has already been distributed. He probably has enough
calls on his desk now to more than exhaust the remainder. If it is not
too optimistic to assume that each one of those tracts has been read by
at least one person, that’s the equivalent of preaching a sermon to
70,000 people, which certainly is no small consideration!
And I happen to know that those who are selling tracts on a commercial
basis, at least some of them best known to me, are making from 100 to
200 per cent profit. The tracts that cost us less than 1 cent each, are
being sold by those who are in it for the money at 2½ cents each. That
means that by spending less than one penny we can give to these
missionary fields a service that would cost them on the market 2½ cents.
Therefore, from a financial point of view, by giving away tracts instead
of giving the money with which to buy tracts, we are making a great
saving.
The response that has been received from this work is very encouraging.
If we had time, we would like to read some of the letters that have been
received. In addition to the tracts distributed by Chapel Avenue, the
church at Madison has made a very wide distribution of one of the same
tracts, and is now contemplating publishing 100,000 with which to answer
the calls they are receiving. That seems to be one good means of
carrying the gospel to those of other communities who have not heard it.
And, remember, it is our duty to use every legitimate means at our
disposal.
The next item on your outline is radio preaching. There has been some
talk of a national radio program, and no doubt that would do a great
deal of good. There is some question as to whether the money that such a
program would cost might not accomplish more good if spent in some other
way. That’s a question which I, personally, would not know how to
decide. But we do know that the radio is being used very extensively on
a local basis in various missionary fields of our country, and those who
are engaged in that work are pleased with the results.
However, trying to whip the devil by using the radio is somewhat like
trying to whip the Germans by fighting them from the air. A great deal
can be accomplished but the battle cannot be completely won until we go
in person. Radio work, to be as effective and fruitful as it ought to
be, must be followed up by personal contact. Those who become interested
by means of radio preaching ought to be contacted and encouraged to
render complete obedience to the commandments of the gospel.
III
Sending Money
A third way in which we can help to attain this objective of preaching
the gospel to the entire world is by sending financial support to
missionary fields and to preachers working in those fields. In that
respect the church at Chapel Avenue has been very active and no doubt
will continue to be. In fact, we have just about gone as far as we can
go with the present means at our disposal, and I think it would not be
out of order to tell you that in the business meeting this evening
another man was put on the payroll at $200 per month, on a temporary
basis, hoping that when the congregation learns about it, they will
increase their contribution enough to cover this cost. Those who are
managing the financial affairs believe that the present income is not
sufficient to warrant this additional expense, but they have acted upon
their faith in you, upon their confidence in you, that your knowledge of
this increased need will bring about an increased response. I do not
believe that you will betray that confidence!
The man added to the payroll has a family of six children and recently
resigned a job paying him several hundred dollars per month as district
manager for an insurance company in order to devote his entire time to
preaching the gospel. With a charter membership of about ten souls,
twenty-four people were present for the initial meeting last Lord’s Day.
This man seems to be well qualified for the task which he has
undertaken, and we believe he will accomplish great results.
There are certain items listed in your outline which we believe should
characterize our work of supporting missionaries. It is my conviction
that regular and complete reports should be received from those who are
being supported. Brother Estevez made a fine talk along that line here
last Sunday afternoon. Brother Gregory gave us a splendid report of his
work this morning. I believe that one reason the Chapel Avenue church
has continued to be so vitally interested in the work at Kingsport is
that one of our elders is on the job there and keeps the congregation
here acquainted with what is being done.
Furthermore, the workers to be used in these fields should be selected
very carefully. You ought to be just as careful about selecting some man
to preach for you in North Carolina as you are about selecting some one
to preach for you here. It seems to me that the two cases are exactly
parallel in that respect. We ought to be just as much concerned about
who preaches for us over there as we are about who preaches for us here.
If such a policy were followed by all the churches it would bring about
a distinct improvement and prevent considerable embarrassment.
In addition, the man selected should be well supported. It’s worth just
as much to preach in Kingsport or North Carolina or Louisiana or some
other place as it is to preach in Nashville, and when the men have equal
responsibility and equal qualifications, it seems to me that they ought
to be equally well supported. Certainly the man in the field ought to be
supported well enough that he will not be cramped in his work or
distracted by concern about how he will meet the next month’s grocery
bill.
Remember that it is _our_ work when we send a man out to a field like
that, and it would be inconsistency and folly on our part to send one
without supplying him with the resources necessary for the success of
his work. Something in addition to his bare living ought to be provided.
He should have funds with which to operate. Think about how much it
costs to carry on a program of work here, by way of advertising,
maintaining a meeting place and supporting a radio program and all that
sort of thing. In some ways it is more expensive in those fields than it
is here. For instance, we have fifty other congregations in Nashville to
help us advertise the cause of Christ in this city. In those fields the
little mission church has to take all this responsibility by itself. It
has to bear all the cost of supporting a radio program, publishing
articles in the daily paper, and of carrying on all of these varied
activities that are listed under our local program of evangelism.
No business concern would send a man to some field to represent it and
work for it without furnishing him with the support necessary for
success in his work. I am convinced that it would be wiser and better in
the long run to have a few men in the field fully supported than to have
several that are but half supported, and therefore handicapped and
unable to accomplish what should be accomplished.
It is also my conviction that the church which furnishes the money is
also obligated to supervise the use of that money. I do not suggest that
we dictate to churches at other places, for there is no one who believes
more firmly in congregational autonomy than do I. Every congregation
must be entirely independent. But, surely, if you have a man preaching
for you in the state of North Carolina, or some other place, it is your
duty to know what he is doing, what he is accomplishing, and whether it
would be well for him to continue there or to move to some other
community.
I know of one man who was supposed to be preaching in a missionary
field, not supported by Chapel Avenue incidentally, concerning whom I
have received a report that the only thing he did was to teach a Bible
class on Wednesday night. Over a period of several months he received a
good income from churches throughout the country who were gullible
enough to answer a call without knowing the condition of the field and
the kind of work that was being done by the one who made the call; while
being paid to preach he was working at a secular job, receiving a living
wage therefor, and putting the money he received from the churches in
the bank in his own name. This illustrates what I mean by saying that it
is necessary that we keep a line on those who are being supported. Those
who are worthy will welcome investigation and those who are not worthy
certainly ought to be investigated.
I believe that I am, at least to some extent, qualified to speak here
for I have worked at both ends of the line. As you know, I spent five
years at Richmond, Virginia, in the missionary field, receiving support
from you and others back home. I’ve also worked at this end of the line,
and I think I know a little about how such work ought to be done. Surely
regular and complete reports ought to be received, and careful
supervision should be exercised by those who furnish the money. It is my
conviction that, when God places resources in the hands of an individual
or a congregation, they are responsible for seeing that those resources
are properly used.
That’s the reason I am reluctant to tell a rich man how to give away his
money. If he had sense enough to make it, he probably has more sense
about how to spend it than someone who could never make any. Of course
one should teach the principles that are revealed in the Bible
concerning the use of money, but I believe that the responsibility of
spending one’s money rests primarily upon the one to whom God has
entrusted the money, and that will apply to a congregation as well as to
individuals.
IV
A Three-Cornered Affair
Now arranging a program of missionary work is a three-cornered affair.
There is first of all the _missionary field_ in which the work is to be
done, and next, there is the _preacher_ who is to do the preaching and
third the _church_ to do the financing. By some means or other these
three must be brought to an agreement upon a plan of procedure. That
means that somebody must take the initiative in getting the work
started.
Sometimes a few members who live in the missionary field take the
initiative, and undertake to find a preacher and someone to support him.
They contact a preacher and ask him to come and work for them. They
contact some church or churches and ask them to support the man while he
works for them. Whenever there is enough leadership in the mission field
to take such initiative, that’s all right. But that is presupposing a
goodly degree of leadership in a mission field! There are many mission
fields which do not possess such leadership. Sometimes the few members
who live in these mission fields are relatively indifferent. They are
not always so. Sometimes they are the finest people on the earth, but
often they are not. And maybe the reason it’s still a mission field in
many instances is because they are not as wide awake and zealous as they
should be. So if a great many fields are ever reached, some of them not
having any members at all, someone else must take the initiative.
In other instances, the preacher takes the initiative. He selects a
field to which he would like to go and then he gets some churches to
support him while he does so. That’s the plan I used in going to
Richmond. It sometimes works all right and sometimes it doesn’t. For
very often a preacher who undertakes to do such work is comparatively
inexperienced, and is not nearly as well qualified to plan the program
of work as some congregation that helps support him would be. When I
went to Richmond, twelve years ago, one had to do it that way, because
at that time, so far as I know, no one congregation considered itself
able to assume full responsibility for the support of a missionary. But
I do not believe that this is the most satisfactory method.
In the third place, the congregation itself very often takes the
initiative, selects a field, selects a preacher, and sends him there to
work. Bro. Gregory gave us an example of that this morning. He told of a
congregation which made thorough investigation of the places needing a
preacher in East Tennessee and finally concluded that Kingsport would be
the most advisable place for them to help. They’ve been following that
plan for many years. Bro. Charles King has been on their payroll for
quite a long time. Several years ago they sent a committee to East
Tennessee, at an expense of $150, to select the best place for him to
preach. At that time they decided in favor of Harriman, where there is
now, I understand, a strong congregation.
In this case, you see, the church took the initiative; the church
selected the field after proper investigation; the church selected a
preacher and paid him a salary and supported him while he represented
them in that field. Where this can be done, it seems to me to be a very
fine plan. Hence, one way for an established congregation to contribute
to the success of evangelizing the world is to take the initiative not
only in planning, but also in supervising the work. With such an
arrangement the work will be promoted according to the judgment of a
seasoned and experienced group of elders rather than according to the
judgment of some young, inexperienced fellow who gets the idea that he
wants to be a missionary.
A few objections to this plan have come from preachers on the field. It
has been said, “I’d rather have twenty churches supporting me than to
have just one. For that one might get discouraged at my pessimistic
report and cut me off.” The answer to that is that there should be a
more definite agreement on the part of the preacher and the church as to
how long he is to be supported. The man on the missionary field should
not expect a guarantee of a lifetime job. And, furthermore, if his
reports were too pessimistic, it may be that his support _should_ be
discontinued. Or perhaps he ought to be advised to discontinue his
activities in that field and to move to some other. It would not have
been well for Paul to have remained indefinitely in the city of Athens.
According to the inspiration guiding him, it was better for him to move
on.
I would have welcomed counsel and advice from those supporting me when I
was working in Richmond. There were about twenty different churches
supporting me—too many for me to confer with each of them to get advice
on questions that arose; and consequently in most instances I relied
only on my own judgment, which meant that the work was being directed by
the judgment of one young preacher rather than by the combined judgment
of some experienced group of elders. And nothing would have given me
greater encouragement than for a committee of elders of some church that
was supporting me to have spent a few days in Richmond studying the
situation and advising me on the problems which arose. There were times
when I wondered if the results being accomplished justified the money
being spent.
Of course, the money was well spent. For growing out of that work which
I entered twelve years ago there are now two self-supporting
congregations. One of them has a building completely paid for and
supports a full-time preacher. The other has a part-time preacher.
Coming from one of these congregations, a young man graduated from David
Lipscomb last spring and has gone back to Virginia to preach the gospel
in his native state. Another young man from one of these congregations
is now at Lipscomb preparing himself to preach the riches of Christ. On
the side, some work and encouragement were given at Norfolk, Virginia,
where there is now a growing and prosperous congregation. These
developments have come about in only twelve years. But I couldn’t see it
then. Oftentimes I became discouraged. If some one congregation had been
supplying all the necessary support and supervising the work, it would
have been very helpful to me.
But after all, friends, when you contribute only five or ten dollars per
month to a place, you are not likely to have a vital interest in the
work. To give you a concrete example, an elder and treasurer of a church
in Middle Tennessee which sent ten dollars each month to Richmond, year
after year, spent several days in Richmond on a social visit and didn’t
even come around to see what was being done. Well, they only had $10 per
month invested there and so they were not particularly interested. But
if they’d been spending $200 a month, paying the full salary of the man
on the job, then an elder who spent the week end in town would have
looked into the situation! Where a man’s treasure is, there will his
heart be also!
In fact, I have said, and I’m about to say again, that to contribute
just $5 a month here and there and elsewhere for mission work is
somewhat like giving a nickel to a beggar on the street. Do you know why
you give that nickel? Not because you are interested in the beggar and
not because you are concerned about what he is doing, but to ease your
own conscience. You are seeking to purchase ease of conscience with
expenditure of a mere nickel! If the beggar is worthy, he ought to have
more than a nickel; if he isn’t worthy, he doesn’t deserve even a
nickel. And so when a congregation merely contributes five dollars to
each of a few places, to soothe their conscience, they can say, “Yes, we
are doing some mission work,” but certainly they are following the line
of least resistance. They may have purchased ease of an untrained and
misinformed conscience at a minimum cost, but this does not mean that
they have done their duty in meeting the responsibility that God has
placed on them!
Another way in which Chapel Avenue can and is contributing to the
attainment of this objective, is by furnishing leadership for rural
churches in reach of Nashville. Bro. Clark, Bro. Shacklett, Bro. Autry,
and others who have been going out, know that there are many
congregations within driving distance of Nashville which are almost
totally lacking in leadership. They need someone to be there on Lord’s
Day to conduct the worship and to teach and encourage them. And we have
an opportunity to do a lot of good along that line.
V
Practical Suggestions
Now these are just scattering thoughts and remarks on what we can do
and, therefore, what we _ought_ to do to attain the God given objective
of preaching the gospel unto the whole world. I advise you again that
this list of activities is not exhaustive but suggestive. The same kind
of treatment given this particular objective could be applied to the
others in this outline as well. We don’t have time to do so tonight, but
I want you to study it for yourself and consider how you, individually
and personally, can do something to help us reach these scriptural
objectives. And further, consider how the church itself may improve its
efforts along this line.
If you think of some change that ought to be made in this outline, or
some items that ought to be added to it, I would certainly be glad to
receive your suggestions. Friends, remember that we are engaged in the
Lord’s work, the greatest work in all the world! If there is any body of
people on earth who ought to be enthusiastic, it is the church of
Christ! We are working in the Lord’s kingdom, and we know that our labor
will not be in vain. If so much can be accomplished by the little that
has been done, I want you to think about what could be accomplished if
we were all doing our best! It yet remains to be demonstrated what can
be accomplished by a congregation which is wholly and completely
dedicated unto the work of the Lord. I recommend that you give a
practical and careful study then to each item on this list.
Consider our devotional program and how it may be improved. It can be
improved! To claim that there is no room for improvement would be to
claim perfection which none of us would like to do. Bro. Murphy has been
making some fine suggestions in our Thursday evening work. Those of you
who have missed them have been missing an opportunity to improve the
effectiveness of your own service in the kingdom of God. He’s made some
_practical_ suggestions. You may think some of them are not good, but
certainly every suggestion he has made should be given very careful
consideration by those who are supervising and taking part in the work
here.
Perhaps our greatest sin is our failure to put into use the knowledge
which we receive, to make practical use of suggestions offered. It would
be easy just to let Dr. Murphy’s advice pass by and go unheeded. If we
do that, it will mean that the church will be very little better off
after this eight weeks of training than it was before. But, if his
suggestions are promptly and faithfully heeded, the church will be a
great deal further along toward the accomplishment of its scriptural
objectives than it was before.
You will notice that the Wednesday evening meeting appears three or four
times in this outline and might appropriately appear at even some other
place. For instance, the Wednesday evening meeting may be used for
devotional purposes. It may be used for instructional purposes and will
be for the next eight weeks. It may also be used for the purpose of
giving practical training to those who would be workers in the kingdom
of God. If we’ll think about it like that, you see, it will give purpose
to our mid-week meetings.
Here are scriptural goals. God is holding us responsible to do
everything we can to attain these objectives promptly and effectively.
Our mid-week program can be made to serve a very important purpose in
the attainment of these ends. And, therefore, along with every other
scriptural phase of the work, should receive the wholehearted
co-operation and support of every member.
I’m looking forward to much greater things for the church at Chapel
Avenue in the weeks, months, and years ahead. Don’t you want to have a
part in it? If there are some here tonight who live in our community and
would like to work and worship with the church here, we invite you to
make that known by coming forward tonight. If there are those who have
backslidden, you are invited to follow the Bible plan of repenting,
confessing your faults, and praying for forgiveness, that God may save
your soul. And, of course, you who have not been baptized, if you
believe that Jesus is the Son of God, if you will repent of your sins
and confess your faith and obey the commandment to be baptized for
remission of sins (Acts 2:38) God promises that your sins will be
forgiven, washed away by the blood of Christ, and you will receive the
gift of the Holy Spirit! Christ invites you to come to him and let him
save you! Will you accept that invitation while together we stand and
sing?
XIV
HOW MUCH IS LIBERAL?
The subject of giving has been assigned to me for this occasion. This
assignment pleases me for two reasons: First, it is a popular subject.
Folk like to hear it because it hits them so hard. In the second place,
it is a vital question. Those who have taken the time to count the
instances say that the Bible mentions money more often than it does
faith, repentance, confession, and baptism all put together. “The love
of money is a root of all kinds of evil.” Whether, therefore, we base
our judgment on the danger of our sinning with respect to it, or the
amount of space devoted to it in the Bible, the subject of money, or
giving, is a very important one. I am approaching the subject from the
standpoint of this question: “How Much Is Liberal?” The reason for this
approach will appear as we proceed.
I
New Testament Authority
You know, as well as I, that in every instance we must go to the New
Testament for our guidance in matters religious. Our people have been
thoroughly taught, but not too thoroughly, that we are no longer bound
by the laws given to Moses and Noah, but by the law of Christ. In
studying the subject of giving, therefore, we must go to the New
Testament.
In First Corinthians 16:2 we read: “Upon the first day of the week let
every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that
there be no gatherings when I come.” This Scripture teaches that we
should give regularly, weekly (not weakly). The giving is to be just as
regular as the eating of the Lord’s supper—upon the first day of each
week. This quotation also teaches that we should give according to our
prosperity. The more prosperity one has the more he is expected to give.
A third New Testament requirement is cheerfulness in giving. “God loveth
a cheerful giver” (2 Cor. 9:7). Sometimes it is said that we ought to
give until it hurts. It is all right to give until you can miss what you
give, or until you have to do without something that you want. But you
should never give until it hurts. It is all right to give until you can
miss hurt you to give as God requires. He loves a cheerful giver.
Fourthly, we are taught to give purposely. The Christians at Corinth
made a purpose a year in advance and were commanded to give as they had
planned. “Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him
give” (2 Cor. 9:7). They had not only purposed but they had expressed
their purpose and when a Christian does that, it very nearly becomes a
promise. The text does not specifically say that we should make a
purpose, but it implies it; and if we purpose, we should give
accordingly. In reference to this question on which we are so likely to
stumble we ought to do some prayerful planning, lest we make the mistake
of not giving as we should. The temptation to give sparingly is so great
that one can not afford to depend merely upon the impulse of the moment.
Make a purpose or plan and then give according to your plan.
Finally, the New Testament commands us to give liberally. “He that
giveth, let him do it liberally” (Rom. 12:8, A.R.V. or footnote in the
A.V.). The word “liberal” comprehends both the attitude of the giver and
also the amount of the gift. The New Testament does not specify any
amount or percentage that we should give. It does not tell us to give
any certain amount or percentage of our income; but it does command us
to give liberally. You have often heard the statement, “We are not
commanded to give a tenth.” This statement is literally true, but it may
imply an error. The inference is that the New Testament assures us that
we need not give as much as a tenth. Such an inference is false. The New
Testament does not command us to give _less than_ a tenth. It names no
definite amount and no definite percentage.
In 2 Corinthians 9:5-7 we are not only taught to give liberally but we
are encouraged to do so by the statement: “He which soweth sparingly
shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap
also bountifully.” It appears to me that the New Testament thus puts us
on our honor. If it had named a certain number of dollars or a certain
percentage of our income, we might just give that amount and claim the
rest to do with as we pleased. But God has placed us on our honor, the
amount of our giving to be determined by general instructions and our
love of Him and those to whom we give. When an honorable man is placed
on his honor, it seems that he should do even more than when he is under
definite laws. Some schools have what they call “the honor system.”
According to this system, the teacher may put a test on the board and
leave the room. The students are on their honor. It seems to me that one
would be less likely to cheat under those conditions than with some one
on guard. The New Testament puts us on our honor, so to speak, with only
general instructions and commands to guide our giving.
II
Individual Responsibility
Each individual must answer for himself this question: “How much is
liberal?” The Old Testament required a certain percentage; the New
Testament requires liberality. _How much is liberal?_ What does the
Bible mean when it says, “give liberally?” Liberality would not mean the
same amount in every case. Some must give more than others. This story
was published some years ago in the _Gospel Advocate_: There was a
certain rich man in a congregation who had as much money as all the
other members. When money was being raised for any purpose he would
propose to give as much as any other _one_. When the congregation was
trying to raise money to put a new roof on their building, he arose,
according to his custom, and said, “Brethren, I will give as much as any
other man in the house toward putting on this new roof.” There happened
to be a rich infidel present that day, who arose and said, “Well,
Mister, you and I will pay for the new roof; I will give half the cost.”
Now, if you expect me to tell you exactly how much you should give, you
will be disappointed. I am not going to tell you because the Bible
doesn’t tell me. If I were to undertake to tell you, I might put it too
low. I would certainly be afraid to tell any one that he was giving too
much. A man once asked me a question which several other preachers had
been unable to answer. He said, “My wife and I make $150 per month. We
give $25 of that to the church each month. I want to know if we are
giving enough.” When I heard the question I knew why the other preachers
had not answered. He and his wife were giving more than a tenth. They
were giving 16⅔ per cent, but I was afraid to tell him whether they were
giving too much or not enough, because I didn’t know. Jesus Christ
watched the poor widow give away all her living, and He didn’t tell her
that she was giving too much. Some of our brethren today would probably
have said, “Just wait a minute, lady, we appreciate your motive and
admire your liberality, but you ought not give all you have. We wouldn’t
want you to starve to death or to do without the necessities of life.”
But Jesus stood there and watched her give away the very last thing she
had and He made no effort to restrain her. So, I can’t tell any one that
he is giving too much or the exact number of dollars that he should
give. Each one must answer for himself.
_How much is liberal?_ I can’t answer for you; you can’t answer for me.
You must answer for yourself and your answer must be a definite one,
expressible in terms of a certain number of dollars and cents. You must
decide how many dollars and cents you should give in order to meet the
requirement of liberality. How much have you studied the question? How
much have you prayed about it and investigated the word of God in your
search for an answer? How much time have you spent on the question? Are
you sure that you have reached a scriptural conclusion? You must not
merely decide what is liberal according to your own standard, but what
is liberal according to God’s standard. For, after all, God is to be the
final judge as to whether you are giving liberally. You must reach a
definite conclusion as to what God will consider a liberal amount from
you. I urge you to study the question of liberality. Search the
Scriptures, pray God to lead you to the right answer. Because the
question must be answered. It is a commandment of God in the New
Testament.
III
Abram
Although the New Testament does not, and I can not, tell you definitely
how much is liberal in the sight of God, we can get some light on the
question by studying what God has required of his people in other
dispensations. In the 14th chapter of Genesis there is an account of
four kings who went to war against five other kings. The four kings won
the war and among the captives was Lot, the kinsman of Abram. “And when
Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained
servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued
them unto Dan.” With this small band of men he won a great victory over
the four kings and their powerful armies and rescued Lot and his goods
and his people. After his return from this battle Abram met Melchizedek,
priest of God, and gave him tithes (a tenth) of all. God wants you and
me to know that Abram gave a tenth.
The book of Genesis is very brief. In a very few pages, less than the
number I hold in my hand, God has given us the history of the world for
a period of several thousand years. It is very brief. If man had written
such a history, the volumes would have filled a shelf all the way around
this room. Men have written many volumes of history concerning the
United States which has been a nation for less than two hundred years.
But God has condensed the history of the world, for a period of
thousands of years, within these few pages. Yet, he took enough of that
precious space to tell us that Abram gave a tenth. If man had written an
account of this war, he would have told the names of the captains in
each army, how many men were killed, how many were wounded, how much the
war cost, and so forth. God omitted all those things of interest, but he
did take the space to tell us that Abram gave a tenth and that he
prospered. He even repeated this information in the New Testament, where
he says, “Now consider how great this man [Melchizedek] was, unto whom
even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils” (Heb. 7:4). He
had some reason for wanting us to know this, for He has a reason for
everything He does and says. He took the space to tell us twice that
Abram gave a tenth, and Abram prospered. You may draw your own
conclusion from these scriptural and vital facts.
IV
Jacob
Turning on over to the 28th chapter of Genesis we find another
interesting story that throws some light on our question. Jacob had
taken Esau’s blessing. Esau was angry. Jacob was afraid Esau would kill
him. For refuge he went to Padanaram. On the way he spent the night at
Bethel, and slept in the open, with a rock for a pillow. I don’t know
why he chose such a hard pillow. People do some strange things. I have
heard that in days gone by the Oriental people slept with their feet,
instead of their heads, on the pillow, because the feet did the harder
work. According to that rule I think I know some people who ought to
change ends with the pillow. While Jacob was sleeping with a rock for a
pillow he had a strange dream. He saw a ladder reaching from earth to
heaven and the angels of God going up and down (not down and up) on it.
The Lord stood above it and promised to be with Jacob and to bless him.
When Jacob arose early in the morning he vowed a vow saying, “If God
will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give
me bread to eat and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my
father’s house in peace; then shall the Lord be my God: and this stone
which I have set for a pillar, shall be God’s house: and of all that
thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee” (Gen. 28:
20-22).
With this vow in his heart Jacob continued his journey to Padanaram,
where he spent twenty-two years and became very wealthy. As he was
returning to Canaan we find him praying to God as follows: “O God of my
father Abraham, and God of my father Isaac, the Lord which saidst unto
me, ‘Return unto thy country, and to thy kindred, and I will deal well
with thee’: I am not worthy of the least of all the mercies, and of all
the truth, which thou hast showed unto thy servant; for with my staff I
passed over this Jordan; and now I am become two bands ...” (Gen.
32:9-10). Please note that twenty-two years ago he had passed over this
Jordan with nothing but a stick in his hand and in his heart a vow to
give one tenth of all his increase to God. In the meantime he has become
very wealthy.
The extent of his wealth is partially indicated by an incident that
followed. Jacob was afraid that Esau was still angry. (He should have
known that Esau was too lazy to stay mad twenty-two years.) To find
grace in the sight of Esau he sent him a present, a token of his good
will. Such presents usually represent only a small fraction of one’s
total possessions. Yet this is what Jacob sent Esau: “two hundred she
goats, and twenty he goats, two hundred ewes, and twenty rams, thirty
milk camels with their colts, forty kine, and ten bulls, twenty she
asses, and ten foals” (Gen. 32:14, 15). Few farmers in this county have
that much livestock, yet that represents a small fraction of what Jacob
was worth and had acquired since crossing the Jordan twenty-two years
before. Since that time, he had been giving one-tenth to Jehovah. Again,
remember that God has taken space to tell you and me about that in this
much condensed book, the book of Genesis. He evidently meant for us to
get some lesson from these facts.
During a financial depression, a business man in Kansas went broke. He
lost everything he had and found himself $50,000 in debt—fifty thousand
dollars in the hole. A friend of his offered to give him a medical
formula to be used in any way he saw fit. The man took the formula and
went home. He turned to Genesis 28:22 and drew a ring around these
words: “Of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto
thee.” With that vow, now become his vow, he began to manufacture a
medicine. You probably have some at home. It was Mentholatum. On the
bottle or tube you will find the name of A. A. Hyde. When I first heard
this story he had become a millionaire and was still giving one-tenth of
his income to what he considered the work of the Lord.
In private conversation I told this story to some one who said, “Well,
he can afford to give a tenth, because he is rich.” I replied, “Yes, but
remember that he was $50,000 in debt when he began doing so.” It is
easier for one to give a tenth when he is poor than when he is rich. A
man who practiced giving a tenth said that when he was working for $1.00
per day it was easy to give 60 cents on Sunday; but when he began making
$500 per week and had to give $50 on Sunday, it was hard to do. It is
easier for a poor man to give liberally than it is for a rich man to do
so. That may be one reason the Bible says it is easier for a camel to go
through a needle’s eye than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of
God.
V
Jews
Now, back to the Old Testament. You know the Jews were required to give
a tenth of their income and even more. Some Bible students say the
requirement was ²/₁₀ all the time and ³/₁₀ every third year. That is not
entirely clear to me, but we do know that they had to give a tenth and
in addition to that, they had to make daily, weekly, monthly and annual
sacrifices. So at the very least, they gave more than a tenth, and you
know that the Jews were a prosperous people. For some reason God tells
us about all these Old Testament characters who gave a tenth and
prospered while doing so. They were required to give a tenth. The New
Testament commands us to give liberally. Now, which is more? Of whom
does God require and expect more—those who give a tenth or the ones who
are told to give liberally?
Now, I could stand up here and give you many more examples of those who
gave a tenth of their income and were blessed while they did so. A man
in Richmond, Virginia, who had himself and a wife to support, was making
only $20 per week. He purposed to give a tenth to the church. Later, he
became sick and his remuneration was only $10 per week. He continued to
give $2.00 per week to the church. He soon recovered, returned to work,
and was promoted to a position that paid $75 per week.
My wife and I had another good friend at Richmond, Virginia, who gave
$5.00 out of her $35 per month salary. One month, after meeting all
necessary expense, the $5.00 that she had set apart for the church was
all she had left with which to buy a new spring dress and you know how
much a young lady wants a new dress in the spring. After debating the
question for awhile she overcame the temptation and gave the $5.00 to
the church as she had planned. The next day her employer, who was not a
Christian and who knew nothing of the battle the young lady had fought
and won, gave her enough material to make two new dresses.
I could continue compiling such examples indefinitely. If you think a
tenth is too much for one to give, ask the man who has tried it. I never
knew any one to discontinue the practice of tithing after trying it for
a while. Experience proves that it is a good practice. A church in
Dallas, Texas, has a large sign on the wall of its building which reads
as follows: “If any member will practice giving one-tenth of all he
earns for one year and at the end of that time can say that he has been
made poorer by doing so, we will give him $1,000 in gold.” No one has
claimed that $1,000.
The church at Lily Chapel, near Portsmouth, Ohio, doubled its
contributions. That meant, of course, that some of the members were even
giving more than twice as much as they had been giving. One night I
requested that all who had been made poorer, or who had less left to
live on, as a result of increasing their contribution, raise their
hands. Nobody raised a hand. Then I said, “Why don’t you double it
again, then?”
VI
Blessings
Some people don’t give away enough and that is the reason they don’t
have enough left to pay their bills. If you are having trouble making
“tongue and buckle meet,” and don’t have the necessities of life, I
suggest that you start giving more to the Lord’s work. Then you will
have more left to live on. This may not sound like good arithmetic; but
it is good Bible teaching. “He that soweth sparingly shall reap also
sparingly, and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.”
“The liberal soul shall be made fat” (Prov. 25:11).
Jesus said, “Verily I say unto you, there is no man that hath left
house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or
children, or lands, for my sake and the gospel’s but he shall receive an
hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and
mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to
come eternal life” (Mark 10:29, 30). That is a wonderful promise. It
does not apply to those who give for the sake of handsome returns; but
to those who give for the sake of Christ. Those who give for His sake
shall receive a hundredfold in this life. Do we believe the Bible? Then
why don’t we give more? Many do not believe the above promise. They do
not believe that all necessary things will be added to those who seek
first the kingdom of God and His righteousness. They are afraid they
will come to want if they give liberally. Instead of giving liberally
and trusting God’s promises they try to provide for themselves by
holding on to what they have. They should heed the words of the Bible:
“There is that withholdeth more than is meet [suitable], but it tendeth
to poverty” (Prov. 11:24). Christians need more faith. We need to
believe that “it is more blessed to give than to receive.” I don’t
believe any one was ever made poorer as a result of giving, if he gave
according to the Bible. To do so would be to disbelieve the word of
Almighty God.
May I insist again that you give prayerful consideration to this
question: “How much is liberal?” Ask yourself, “How much must I give in
order for the Lord to consider me a liberal giver?” This question must
be answered to the satisfaction of the Lord Almighty. When a widow can
give all she has without being reproved by the Lord, do you believe that
God will be pleased with less than a tenth from you? In the light of
what God required of the Jews do you believe that one-tenth exceeds the
demands of liberality?
If all the members of God’s church gave a tenth [which they certainly
could do and still have plenty left] the contribution of the average
congregation would be at least four times as much as it is at present.
Think of the good work that could then be supported. We could preach the
gospel to the entire world in a short time; we could take care of all
the poor; we could count the elders that rule well worthy of double
honor (1 Tim. 5:17).
How many Jews did it take to start a congregation and support a priest?
It took only ten. Wherever there were ten Jews they could employ a
priest and support him with their tithe, or tenth. The priest was
required to give a tenth also. This left each in the group ⁹/₁₀ to live
on and meet other obligations. How many Christians does it take to
support a preacher? In this age, it takes from one hundred to one
thousand so-called Christians to keep one man busy in the work of the
Lord. In the light of this comparison, how do you think we will stack up
with the Jews on the Judgment Day? Why does a congregation of five
hundred, or one thousand, members do but very little more than a
congregation of one hundred members? Even if it takes one hundred
Christians to support one preacher, why can’t a congregation of five
hundred, or one thousand members support five, or ten full-time workers
in the Lord’s vineyard? Is it not because the members of the average
congregation are content to give barely enough to carry on a local
program that is respectable in the eyes of the public? Such a limited
conception of what is needed is not a scriptural standard of giving.
The New Testament requires liberality. The Jews had to give a tenth, and
more. We must give liberally. Let us be sure that we meet this New
Testament requirement. Let us prove our faith by our giving. Let us obey
God and trust His promises. Let us give liberally, and watch the growth
in our individual and congregational prosperity.
I want to leave just one more thought before closing. I suppose you are
glad to be here, grateful for your existence on the earth. Most people
are. Very few are tired of living. God blessed you when he gave you your
life on this earth. I will tell you how you can get a blessing still
greater—by giving your life to God. “It is more blessed to give than to
receive.” If you were blessed when you received your life, you will be
more blessed by giving your life in obedient service to your Maker. “I
beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present
your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your
reasonable service” (Rom. 12:1). Give your life to Jesus. Live for Him
who died for you.
While we stand and sing we entreat you to accept the Lord’s gracious
invitation.
XV
AND SUCH LIKE
You and I ought to be very thankful to the Lord for the opportunity to
meet and worship Him. Such a blessing is not universal. It is
exceptional in the history of the world, and I am glad to see people
show their appreciation of this blessing by taking advantage of the
opportunity.
I
The Will of Christ
As many of you well know, the New Testament teaches that the law of
Moses is not binding on Christians today, but that we should follow the
law of the Spirit of life in Christ. This means that the Ten
Commandments, as such, are not today binding, but the principles
involved in the Ten Commandments are binding in so far as they have been
included in the law of Christ. Frequently, when I make such a statement
someone replies, “Do you mean that we may do as we please? Do you mean
that it’s all right to kill today? That it’s all right to steal?”
Evidently the Holy Spirit knew that people would ask such questions and,
therefore, the 5th chapter of Galatians was written. “Stand fast
therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not
entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I, Paul, say unto you,
that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I
testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to
do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of
you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through
the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus
Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but
faith which worketh by love. Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye
should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that
calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. I have confidence
in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he
that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. And I,
brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution?
then is the offence of the cross ceased. I would they were even cut off
which trouble you. For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only
use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one
another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. But if ye bite and devour one
another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another. This I say
then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the
flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against
the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye
cannot do the things that ye would. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye
are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which
are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry,
witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions,
heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revelings, _and such like_: of
the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that
they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the
fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness,
goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And
they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and
lusts. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us
not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one
another.”
The fact that we are not bound by the law of Moses then does not mean
that we can do as we please. This Scripture plainly says, “Ye cannot do
the things that ye would.” We are restrained by the law of the Spirit.
We are restrained by the law of love. “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself.” In order that we may clearly understand what this implies, the
Holy Spirit has listed for us the works of the flesh and the fruits of
the spirit. This list is the basis of the lesson which I want to present
this morning. I have the items on the board. Perhaps those in the back
of the building cannot see them. But at least we shall refer to them as
we go along and you will get the picture anyway.
II
The Works of the Flesh
Let us look at the works of the flesh first. The Bible plainly says that
those who follow the works of the flesh shall not enter the kingdom of
God. If you find yourself guilty of one or more of these works of the
flesh, then remember that you are on the outside, that you will remain
on the outside until you repent and obey God. People who follow the
works of the flesh simply cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.
1. _Adultery and Fornication._ The first four in the list are adultery,
fornication, uncleanness, and lasciviousness. All four of these words
have reference to immorality. Some state legislatures make a distinction
between adultery and fornication, using the word adultery to apply to
immorality on the part of married people, and the word fornication to
apply to the same sort of sin on the part of unmarried people.
Therefore, those words cover exactly the same sort of crime—illegitimate
relationship between men and women. I don’t know just how prevalent this
sin is in the world—I have no statistics on that point, and would not be
particularly interested in gathering any, but I do know that such sins
are very common, and I know that you know whether you are guilty. If you
are guilty the Bible says that you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.
You must repent of that sin and have it washed away by the blood of
Jesus before there is any hope for you.
2. _Uncleanness._ This word probably covers a little more territory than
either of the first two words. The best definition I know for
uncleanness is found in Romans 1:24: “Wherefore God also gave them up to
uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own
bodies between themselves: who changed the truth of God into a lie, and
worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed
forever. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections; for even
their women did change the natural use into that which is against
nature; and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,
burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which
is unseemly; and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error
which was meet.” If I were to talk an hour, I could not give a clearer
definition of what is meant by uncleanness. It is obviously a work of
the flesh, and all who are guilty stand condemned in the sight of God
Almighty.
3. _Lasciviousness._ This term is apparently still more comprehensive.
It not only includes general acts of lewdness and abandoned sensuality
but is sometimes used to describe that which tends to produce voluptuous
or lewd emotions. For instance, “The lascivious pleasing of a lute”
(Shakespeare). The plural of the noun form is found in Romans 13:13
where it is translated wantonness. “Let us walk honestly, as in the day;
not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in
strife and envying.” Referring to this text Thayer’s Greek Lexicon
quotes the following definition of lasciviousness from Fritzsche:
“wanton acts or manners, as filthy words, indecent bodily movements,
unchaste handling of males and females, etc.”
There may be some who would not (at least think they would not) actually
become guilty of adultery but who do allow themselves to daydream about
things which are unclean and immoral. Such unholy meditations are liable
to produce wanton and lewd desires and may even lead to an overt act of
immorality. You should study the meaning of the word lasciviousness and
diligently avoid the sin it describes. “But put ye on the Lord Jesus
Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts
thereof” (Rom. 13:14).
4. _Idolatry._ We turn now to a different sort of transgressions but we
are still talking about works of the flesh. Everybody knows what
idolatry means. If a man worships something other than the God of
heaven, he is guilty of idolatry. If one values anything in this world
more than he esteems God and his relationship to God, he is virtually
guilty of idolatry.
5. _Witchcraft._ Then comes the sin of witchcraft, or sorcery, which, I
believe, includes what is commonly called fortunetelling. It is
condemned both in the Old Testament and also in the New Testament. It is
a work of the flesh. Friends, if it is wrong to practice the fraud, the
craft, the art, (or whatever it is) of fortunetellers, then it’s wrong
to patronize them, for when you do so you are giving them both your
financial and moral support.
6. _Hatred._ Hatred is a sin of the disposition. It is an attitude of
the heart. It is the state of being an enemy. This term describes
aversions and antipathies which are opposed to brotherly kindness and
love.
I’m not sure that these words were intended to be arranged in logical
order, but I do believe we can see some sequential significance in the
order of the word hatred and the three which follow just as we did in
the first four.
7. _Variance._ This word means contentions. It is hatred in action,
manifesting itself in contests, altercations, lawsuits, and disputes in
general.
8. _Emulations._ This word signifies envious and contentious rivalry or
jealousy, which often are associated with hatred and variance. Jealousy
is strife to excel at the expense of another. It is destructive, not
constructive. When you are jealous you try to pull the other man down in
order to get above him. But you can’t do it! In the effort to injure
another you sink lower yourself.
9. _Wrath._ This is the climax of the last four words. Wrath is hatred
in violent action. It consists of turbulent passions which disturb the
harmony of mind and produce domestic and civic broils and disquietudes.
(Once I used Jiggs and Maggie of comic strip fame as an example of wrath
when they were throwing pots and pans at each other, but someone
corrected me by saying that Jiggs never threw any, they all came from
the other direction! But anyway the point of the illustration was
clear.) When hatred, variance, and jealousy break out into violent
action, that’s what is described by the word wrath. Herod’s jealousy
became wrath when he killed the babes of Bethlehem in an effort to
destroy Jesus.
These last four are sins of the disposition. In some instances they are
committed, especially the first three, by people who come to worship
every Sunday and pass as devoted Christians. But friends, I want you to
see what ugly company they are keeping. They are classed by the Holy
Spirit right along with idolatry, adultery, uncleanness, and
lasciviousness. That’s mighty bad company, isn’t it? We are inclined to
be more tolerant of sins of the disposition than of sins of immorality,
but we’d better be very careful how we appraise sins without Biblical
authority. God has put them all in the same catalogue, and therefore
sins like hatred and jealousy will send you to hell just as quickly as
idolatry or adultery. If you’re guilty of any of them, you must repent
before you can go to heaven for people who continue in the work of the
flesh cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.
10. _Strife, Seditions, Heresies._ The word “strife” represents a
courting of distinction, a desire to put one’s self forward, contention
and wranglings with a partisan and factious spirit which tends to result
in division. The word “sedition” suggests the act of dividing. It means
dissension. The word “heresies” applies to the parties or sects arising
from diversity of opinion and aims.
Note, therefore, that division is condemned in every stage of its
development. The disputing, arguing, wrangling, and vanity which lead to
it are condemned by the word strife. The act of separating into parties
is condemned by the word “divisions” or “seditions,” and the parties
themselves are condemned after they occur by the word “heresies.” Again
I call your attention to the fact that God puts these sins in the
category of fornication and adultery. The very disposition to divide is
wrong; the act of dividing is wrong; and the parties and sects which
result from the division are likewise wrong. Division is evil from
beginning to end. It is a work of the flesh and all of those who are
guilty of it, who encourage it, who endorse it, or who support it,
morally or financially, will be condemned as following the flesh rather
than following the spirit.
11. _Envying._ This is another sin of the disposition. The best
definition I have found of envying is this: “Pain felt, and malignity
conceived, at the sight of excellence or happiness.” Did you ever notice
someone who is happier than you or more successful than you, and as a
result feel some sort of pain within you, or some sort of uneasiness?
Well, that’s envy. It is pain felt or malignancy conceived at the sight
of happiness or success on the part of another.
After reading in some religious paper a glowing report of a very
successful meeting, a preacher may have a strange feeling of discontent
or chagrin which self-analysis would show to be the result of his
natural (fleshly) reaction to the success of a brother evangelist. Is
not this a case of envy? Is it not a work of the flesh? Can those who do
such things enter the kingdom of God?
Preachers are not the only ones who are tempted to envy each other.
Business men, doctors, school teachers, young people in their social
relationships may all be guilty of this sin and must guard against it.
If you cannot see your boy friends or your girl friends be more popular
or successful than you without having a feeling of uneasiness and a
disposition to harm them in some way, then you are guilty of the sin of
envy, and a murderer can come just as nearly going to heaven as one who
is guilty of envy. Because they are both works of the flesh and stand
condemned by Jehovah.
12. _Murder._ We don’t need to comment upon the word “murder.” You know
what it means. You can be guilty of murder at heart. The Bible says,
“Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no
murderer hath eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15).
13. _Drunkenness._ Everybody knows what this sin is. It’s the work of
the flesh, and those who are guilty of it will be lost. And there’s only
one way to be absolutely certain that you won’t get drunk—just don’t
drink of anything that’s intoxicating. If you never take the first drink
of beer, if you never take the first cocktail or sip of whiskey, then
you’ll never get drunk. But if you do take the first one, you don’t know
what may happen.
14. _Revelings._ Reveling signifies lascivious feasting with obscene
songs and music, feasts and drinking-parties which are continued until
late at night with unclean songs, dissolute conduct, and boisterous
merrymaking. Those occasions when people turn themselves loose and do
not observe proper restraints of natural desires, are occasions of
revelry. Remember “that they which do such things shall not inherit the
kingdom of God.”
III
The Fruits of the Spirit
In contrast with the works of the flesh let us look at the fruits of the
Spirit. They are the fruits which will be produced in the life of one
who is following in the Spirit. They are the characteristics which will
adorn the life of one who obeys God. I want you to notice how attractive
these are. I want you to see how beautiful this list is.
1. _Love._ Love for God, for your brother, for your neighbor, and even
love for your enemy is a fruit of the Spirit.
2. _Joy._ God expects his people to be joyous. Paul said, “Finally, my
brethren, rejoice in the Lord” (Phil. 1:1). “Rejoice in the Lord alway:
and again I say rejoice” (Phil. 4:4). Again we read, “And these things
write we unto you, that your joy may be full” (1 John 1:4). As Christian
people, those who are following the Spirit are full of joy. People who
are trying to follow the Spirit and the flesh both are not full of joy.
But those who are truly following the Spirit are joyful, because joy is
one of the fruits of the Spirit.
3. _Peace._ Peace—peace with God, with one’s self, and usually with
most, if not all, one’s fellowmen—is a part of the fruit of the Spirit.
The calm, quiet, order, and hope which abide in the heart of a Christian
are more precious than gold. The sinner has doubts, fears, alarms, and
dreadful forebodings.
4. _Longsuffering._ People who follow the Spirit are patient; they are
not easily provoked; they bear the troubles and difficulties of life
without murmuring or repining and submit cheerfully to every
dispensation of God’s providence.
5. _Gentleness._ One who is harsh and unkind is lacking in this fruit of
the Spirit. It has been said that to be gentle means to always do and
say the kindest things in the kindest way.
6. _Goodness._ This means uprightness of heart and life—a constant
desire and diligent effort, not only to abstain from every form of evil,
but also to do good to the bodies and souls of all men.
7. _Faith._ The word faith is here used in the sense of fidelity, the
character of one who can be depended upon to keep all his promises, to
meet all of his obligations, and to be true to every relationship.
8. _Meekness._ Meekness is likewise a fruit of the Spirit. It is the
very opposite of anger. Moses was called a meek man. Jesus said,
“Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.” And although
Christ was brave and uncompromising, he was nevertheless one of the very
meekest of men.
9. _Temperance._ Temperance means self-control. Remember this very
chapter says, “Ye cannot do the things that ye would.” You cannot give
free expression unto the passions of your body. Your body must be
buffeted and brought into subjection as Paul did with his. We must learn
to exercise self-control and to make ourselves do that which we know we
ought to do.
These are the fruits of the Spirit. They are the characteristics that
should be developed in your life if you are a Christian. I just want you
to look at these two pictures—the fruit of the Spirit on the one hand
and the works of the flesh on the other. They are contrasted in every
sense of the word. They are incompatible and antagonistic. To the extent
you have one you fail to possess the other.
Let me ask you this question: Do you believe the fruit of the Spirit
will make anybody unpopular? Sometimes when people are unpopular and are
being persecuted they say, “Oh, well, those who live Godly lives are to
be persecuted.” That’s true. The Bible teaches it (2 Tim. 3:12). But I’m
afraid that very often our persecution comes from other causes. We might
be suffering because we have hatred, jealousy, and envy, and not because
we have the Spirit of Christ. Before you take pride in your persecution
you’d better examine the source of it. It might be coming from the wrong
side of the fence.
Those who follow the Spirit are a living rebuke to those who fail to do
so, and as such they will receive some degree of persecution. But I also
contend that everybody in this world will have to admire a person who
has the fruits of the Spirit in his life. His character presents a
beautiful picture to all who know him. You just can’t help admiring him.
Let us be very careful then about the cause of our persecution.
But I promised to talk to you about “And So Forth” or “And Such Like.”
After the apostle Paul had finished naming the works of the flesh he
said, “and such like.” He said that there were some things like those
named which also belong in the same classification. Now suppose you were
requested this morning to come forward and list in this blank column
some things that are like those Paul named. What would you put in this
column? There must be _some_ things like these. The Bible says there are
some things like them. Otherwise, there would have been no sense in
saying “and such like.” What are those things which are like the ones
named by Paul? The Bible itself mentions some others that could be put
in this class. For instance, lying is a work of the flesh. It could
certainly be included in the “and so forth” of Paul’s list.
But now I want to put some words in this blank column, and leave it up
to you to decide whether they belong under the Fruit of the Spirit or
the Works of the Flesh. From this point on, I’m going to let you preach
this sermon. It’ll be your sermon from here on out. I shall not tell you
where I think these words belong. Not that I’m afraid or ashamed to
tell, but I want you to make your own decision. For after all, people
will not do right until they decide to do so themselves. If I can
provoke you to think and to resolve in your own heart that you will do
right, then that will be much better than anything else which I might do
for you today. The first word I’m listing is:
1. _Dancing._ I want you to decide for yourself which column it belongs
in. Would you list it as a work of the flesh or as fruit of the Spirit?
Into which list does it fit better? I’m not going to say. Decide for
yourself. If you were called upon to classify it in one or the other of
these groups, in which group would you put it? You may say it doesn’t
belong in either. Well, I’ll still leave that up to your judgment. I’ll
put another word up here.
2. _Bible Study._ (That’s two words, isn’t it?) Do you have any trouble
classifying that? In which list would you put it? Would you say that
Bible study belongs with the fruit of the Spirit or with the works of
the flesh? I shall not try to influence your opinion. Decide for
yourself. You see I can put most anything up here today because I’m not
committing myself. I’m playing safe. Well, let’s list another word.
3. _Movies._ Not as they could be and not as they ought to be, and not
as they are in some isolated cases, but as they are in general, would
you say that they look like this crowd (Fruit of the Spirit) or do they
look like this crowd (Works of the Flesh)? Do they contribute to
lasciviousness, do they contribute to envy and hatred and such like
things, or do they look more like peace, self-control, and goodness?
Decide for yourself! I’ve asked a great many people this simple
question: “Do you believe that movies as they are in general are helpful
to society or injurious to society?” All of the answers to that question
except in one single instance have been on the same side. I think you
know what the correct answer is.
4. _Card playing._ Let’s consider card playing here, playing bridge, and
such like games. Please note what happened in Cincinnati a few years
ago. The city council passed an anti-gambling law which, of course,
outlawed playing bingo. Some of the preachers of the city got together
and wrote out a petition asking the city manager to amend the
anti-gambling law to give the churches permission to play bingo in order
to raise money to carry on their work. The city manager granted the
petition. It’s on the legislative record of the city of Cincinnati. Do
you wonder why so many people have quit going to church, why the
buildings are empty on Sunday?
A young lady in Cincinnati told me the first time I ever saw her that
she didn’t like to go to church, that she came away feeling worse than
when she went and that she didn’t get what she needed when she attended
the typical place of worship in the city of Cincinnati. Do you wonder
why? Now Cincinnati may be a little bit extreme, but similar conditions
prevail at a great many other places.
There was a lady in Louisville, Kentucky, who told me she was alarmed
about her son. She said he was a natural-born gambler. There are a lot
of “natural-born gamblers,” but they are not all in Kentucky. I asked
the lady if she didn’t go to bridge parties, and she said she did. Then
I said, “Don’t you contribute your share of the money to buy a prize?”
She admitted that she did. Next I asked, “Don’t you play a game of
chance to see which lady will take the prize home?” Again she answered
in the affirmative. My reply was, “Well, you taught your son to gamble.
Why are you alarmed?” She was perfectly content to gamble in the
living-room with a group of so-called refined ladies, but she didn’t
want her son to bet on the horse races or go to some gambling den in the
city. (I almost told you where I thought that one belonged, didn’t I? I
didn’t mean to do that.) Let’s take something else.
5. _Prayer meeting._ Where would you put attending prayer meeting? I
never heard anybody raise a question about that. I think everybody knows
where it belongs so we pass on to something else.
6. _Petting._ We just as well talk about it; everybody knows about it.
Many have been guilty of it. Where would you put petting? Does it look
like lasciviousness, tending to produce wanton and lustful desires, or
does it look like it belongs with the fruit of the Spirit? Now about the
only difference I see in petting and dancing is that the dancing is done
to music and the petting without the benefit of music; dancing is
usually done in public, where the presence of others imposes at least
some degree of restraint, whereas the petting is done in a parked
automobile on a side road or in some living-room with the shades pulled
down. That’s about the only difference. I’m perfectly willing to leave
the decision to your own honest judgment, because if you’re not honest
you’re certainly lost anyhow.
7. _Tobacco._ Maybe you think I’m going too far, but I’d like to ask you
to classify the use of tobacco. Would you classify tobacco—whether it’s
dipping, chewing, or smoking—as a work of the flesh, or as fruit of the
Spirit? Do you believe that using it will help you to save souls or
hinder you in saving souls? Would you be a little bit ashamed to let the
man whom you were trying to convert see you smoking or dipping or
chewing? Again, I’m just asking questions. Not answering them. If
anybody wants to know what my answer is, see me after we’re through and
I’ll tell you. But I want to leave it up to your own judgment. Where
would you place these things? Do they belong in the list of works of the
flesh or the fruit of the Spirit?
Friends, we are talking today about something that’s fundamental.
There’s no part of the Bible more fundamental than the 5th chapter of
Galatians. The Bible says those who do these things (works of the flesh)
shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Against these things (fruit of the
Spirit) there is no law. You’re perfectly safe when you’re on this side.
There’s no law of God or man that would condemn anything in this list.
You never heard of a law forbidding one of these fruits of the Spirit.
There’s not a state legislature on this earth that would even think
about condemning one of them. Against such things there is no law.
Perhaps the greatest progress the church of Christ could make today
would be to heed diligently the lesson of Galatians, chapter 5, and get
all of our thinking, conversation, and conduct in harmony with the fruit
of the Spirit. The very example of the membership would then be a
tremendous drawing power. It would win the admiration of all those who
observed it. All serious-minded people who want to go to heaven when
they die, would like to have a part with a group of people who are
governed in such a way. If there are some present this morning who are
guilty of following the lust of the flesh, there is still a chance for
you to be forgiven. If you will repent, confess your faults, and pray
God to forgive you, he will do so—that is, those of you who are erring
children of God. You who have not yet been baptized into Christ may
secure forgiveness by believing in him as God’s son, repenting of your
sins, confessing your faith, and obeying the commandment to be baptized
for remission of sins. If you are subject then to this call of Christ,
we invite you to accept it.
XVI
WHAT MUST I DO TO KEEP SAVED?
Allow me to add a word of welcome to all of you who are present and
especially to the visitors. We are very grateful for such good
attendance at our Sunday evening meetings, and especially for the large
number of young people present. I know of no better way to build a
courtship, and eventually a marriage and a home, than upon regular
attendance to all the meetings of the church. I have just learned
recently of one young man who is seriously considering obeying the
Gospel as a result of attending our Sunday evening meetings with his
girl friend. This is an example of how you young people may do a lot of
good, not only for yourselves but for those whom you may bring with you.
Hence I urge you to come back tonight to hear Brother Bradford and every
Sunday evening to our program of worship and study.
We had so many questions arising in my class upstairs this morning that
we didn’t get to our lesson. We are taking the same lesson next Sunday,
the first twenty-two verses of the ninth chapter of Acts, and the memory
verse will be Colossians 2:12. If you want a copy of the questions, you
can find them here on the pulpit at the end of the hour.
We had a fine program last Wednesday evening, even a bigger crowd than
expected. I hope you realize the importance of the training we are
giving the young men on Wednesday evening. It means a lot to them.
They’ll be the leaders of the churches in just a few years from now and
they’ll appreciate your presence and encouragement as they conduct our
services for the next five weeks. We are expecting a good program again
this week.
This morning my topic is “What Must I Do to Keep Saved?” There have been
many sermons, and rightly so, preached upon the subject, “What Must I Do
to Be Saved?” That is indeed a very important question. It is asked and
answered three times in the book of Acts (Acts 16:30-34; 2:36-38; Acts
9:6; 22:16). These answers teach that in order to be saved, one must
believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God; repent of
his sins; and then be buried with Christ in baptism for remission of
sins. One who has done these things is then a child of God, a member of
the Lord’s family, a citizen in the Lord’s kingdom, a member of God’s
church; for Jesus said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be
saved,” (Mark 16:16) and God adds to the church day by day such as are
being saved (Acts 2:47). All people then who have been saved are in the
church because God put them in, just as soon as they were saved.
I
The Danger of Falling
It’s not our purpose to speak at this time on the topic, “What Must I Do
to Be Saved?” but rather upon one which is equally important, “What Must
I Do to Keep Saved?” This very question implies not only the
possibility, but even the danger, of one’s falling from grace. If it
were not possible for one who has once been in a saved condition to fall
out of it into an unsaved condition, then our topic would be entirely
out of place. Furthermore, a big part of the New Testament would be of
no value. A great portion is devoted to warning Christians against
falling and to telling them how to keep from falling. Every warning in
the New Testament addressed to Christians implies not only the
possibility but also the danger of apostasy.
Simon, the sorcerer, believed and was baptized; therefore he must have
been saved for Jesus said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be
saved” (Mark 16:16). But after Simon had reached that condition, he
endeavored to buy the gift of God with money, to whom Peter said, “Thy
money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God
may be purchased with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this
matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore
of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine
heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of
bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity” (Acts 8:20-23). Surely Simon
was then lost, although he had been once saved, illustrating the fact
that one can fall from grace.
Addressing the Christians at Galatia who would be saved by the law of
Moses, Paul said, “Ye are fallen from grace” (Gal. 5:4). Why argue about
the possibility of falling from grace when such a plain statement is
found in the Bible?
If any further evidence could be desired, you can find much more in the
Bible to the same point. For instance, James, chapter 5, and the last
two verses thereof, “Brethren, if any one of you do err from the truth,
and one convert him; let him know, that he which converteth the sinner
from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a
multitude of sins.”
Save a soul from what death? Not from physical death. “It is appointed
unto men once to die,” physically. In that sense everybody has to die,
the good and the bad alike. The only death from which you can be saved
is the second death, which means to be cast into the lake of fire and
brimstone (Rev. 20:14, 15; 21:8). This verse says that if you save a
sinner from the error of his way, you have saved him from the second
death. But who are the sinners here addressed? They are members of the
church. Verse 19 says, “brethren,” you people who have already been
saved, “if any one of you”—one of you saved people—“do err from the
truth, and someone convert him,” then he has saved his soul from eternal
torment. Surely this teaches that a brother in the church, who has been
saved, may so sin as to go to hell, and will go to hell if somebody
doesn’t convert him.
No wonder, then, the Apostle Paul said, “Let him that thinketh he
standeth take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). Let him who thinketh he
standeth—let the man who thinks that apostasy is impossible—take heed,
lest he experience that which he denies. These Scriptures then are
sufficient to show that there is a danger of one’s falling from grace.
II
The Power to Stand
Please do not get the impression, however, that you have to fall from
grace. You don’t have to do it! You can stand if you will. If you will
stand, God will give you the power to stand. If you submit your life
unto Him for safekeeping and maintain the right attitude toward Him, and
the right sort of service for Him, then He will keep that which has been
committed unto Him. You don’t have to fall from grace. Anybody can be
saved who wants to. If you don’t go to heaven, it will be because you
didn’t want to badly enough to put forth the proper effort.
I’d like to emphasize the fact that anybody can go to heaven who wants
to. It is like Brother Freed used to tell us at school: “You can do
anything you want to, if you want to badly enough.” A story which
illustrates the point comes from England, where they are said to dig
graves deeper than we do in America—in fact, ten feet deep. Instead of
having the cemeteries hard by the church building as we often do, the
story says that they have them adjacent to the school buildings,
sometimes on the school campus.
In one instance they had a graveyard between the boys’ dormitory and the
administration building. Of course the boys did not walk around it. They
made a path right across it. One day the caretakers digged a grave ten
feet deep across the path and failed to put up a red light, leaving the
grave open during the night. After it got dark a boy started from one
building to another and fell into the open grave. He tried to climb out,
but the walls were straight up and down and ten feet high. Finally, he
gave up and sat down in the corner to await developments. It wasn’t long
till he heard another boy coming down the path—“pat, pat, pat.” He sat
right still, and boy number two fell off in the grave with him. Then boy
number one said, “Can’t you let a man rest in peace in his own grave?”
The second boy jumped right out of the grave like a cat—without any
trouble at all. He had a stronger desire to escape than the first boy
did. He was scared worse!
This illustrates the point that you can do anything you want to if you
want to badly enough. If you are scared enough of hell, you will go to
heaven. If you want to go to heaven more than you want to do anything
else in this world, then you will go there, and there is no power on
earth, or in heaven, or beneath the earth that can keep you from going
to heaven if _you_ want to (Rom. 8:35). You are the only person in all
this universe who can keep you out of heaven.
Now I may surprise you a little bit when I tell you that there are not
many people who want to go to heaven. I can prove it by the Bible. The
Bible says that very few _are_ going to heaven, and since anybody can go
who wants to, then only a few want to go. If many wanted to go, then
many would go; but the Bible says that there is a strait and narrow way
which leads to life everlasting and few there be that find it. But there
is a broad way that leads to destruction and many there be that travel
it (Matt. 7:13, 14). Anybody can go to heaven who wants to, but only a
few are going; then only a few want to go. If you will examine yourself
and observe the people around you, you will soon become convinced that
not many people want to go to heaven.
An illustration which I frequently use on this point is this: One Sunday
afternoon I was talking to two young ladies who were backsliders. I
asked them if they loved the Lord. They said, “Why, Brother Dark, of
course we love the Lord.” Then I said, “Do you want to go to heaven when
you die?” As you might expect they answered, “Why, sure, everybody wants
to go to heaven!” My next question was, “Will you be at worship this
evening?” They grinned a little bit and looked at each other. I said,
“You have some dates, don’t you?” They grinned a little more, and said,
“Yes.” I said, “Your boy friends don’t want to go to church with you, do
they?” They grinned a little bit more and said, “No.” Well, they didn’t
come to worship that night. I asked which they loved more, those boy
friends or the Lord. They didn’t make any answer.
Now, which do you think they loved the more? They said they loved the
Lord more than they loved anything else in the world, but they went out
with some boy friends that night instead of coming to worship. They
thought they wanted to go to heaven, and they did want to a little bit;
but they wanted to go out with those boys more than they wanted to go to
heaven. And that’s the case with a great many people. You ask them if
they want to go to heaven and they will say “Yes”; but there is
something they want to do more. They want to have a good time, make
money, or do something else, more than they want to go to heaven. That’s
the trouble with most people. That’s the reason most people are going
somewhere else. God allows people to go anywhere they want to and if
they prefer to go somewhere else rather than to go to heaven, then they
go somewhere else and He permits them to do it.
Just remember this: you cannot possibly go to heaven without traveling
the road which leads there. A lot of people would like to go to heaven
but they don’t want to travel the road which leads there. They want to
travel some other road and then get to heaven. Well, you can’t travel
the road that leads to Memphis and get to Chattanooga, can you? You
can’t travel the road that leads to hell and wind up in heaven. It just
can’t be done. So if you want to go to heaven more than you want to do
anything else in this world and are willing to put forth the effort
required to do it, you can certainly go there.
That to me is a very encouraging thought. My destiny, under God, is
completely within my own hands. I don’t have to depend upon anybody
else’s wishes, anybody else’s choice or word about it whatsoever. God
wants me to go to heaven, and with that point settled then it is all up
to me, and you can’t keep me from going there. Nobody else can, if I
want to go. Nobody can keep _you_ from going! Sometimes people make
excuses, and they blame others for their failure. They find fault with
other people and say, “He did so and so, and therefore I did so and so.”
That’s no good at all. There is nobody in this world who can keep you
from going to heaven if you want to.
III
Three Rules
From this point on I shall assume that I am speaking to people who do
want to go to heaven. On this assumption I can give you three little
rules to follow, which will insure your success. I do not mean that the
mere formality of doing these three things will make you safe for
heaven. There is not necessarily any virtue in the mere routine
suggested. But granting that you want to go to heaven, if you will
follow these three simple rules, they will enable you to do what you
want to do. The beauty of them is that they are so simple that anybody
can follow them who wants to.
1. The first one is to read the Bible every day. If you want to go to
heaven, you are willing to do that much, aren’t you? If you really want
to go to heaven, won’t you _want_ to read the Bible? It’s the book that
tells you how to get there. It is the road map that shows you the way.
If you want to go to heaven, the first rule then is to read the Bible
every day. From doing that you’ll learn what God wants you to do in
order to _be_ saved and in order to _keep_ saved. The Bereans were more
noble than the Thessalonians “because they received the word with all
readiness of mind and _searched the Scriptures daily_” (Acts 16:11).
Now, if you don’t read the Bible every day, I believe you’d have a hard
time establishing the fact that you want to go to heaven. Don’t you
believe you would? How can you prove that you want to go to heaven when
you fail to read the only book in the world which can tell you how to
get there?
I suspect that I’m talking to two or three hundred people right now who
don’t read the Bible daily, and if I knew how to make this more
emphatic, I’d do it! I’d like to fix it so you never would forget it.
The Bible is the only book that can tell you how to do what you propose
to want to do. It is the word which _God hath spoken_. The mere fact
that you are a member of the church is an announcement that you want to
go to heaven, but your behavior contradicts your profession, if you do
not read the Bible every day.
I have found sometimes that those people who argue the loudest and take
the most dogmatic positions on points of doctrine are the very ones who
don’t read the Bible. They think they know! They can tell you what’s
right and what’s wrong. If you ask them how much they read the Bible,
they’ll hang their heads in shame and say, “Well, I haven’t read it
much.” Sometimes they even preface their remarks by telling you they
haven’t read it much. They say, “Now, preacher, I don’t read the Bible
much, and I know you do, and so and so” and then proceed to tell me just
exactly how it is. _A man who doesn’t read the Bible has no right to
express an opinion in the field of religion._ A man who begins his
conversation by saying, “Now, I’ll admit I don’t read the Bible,” ought
to stop right there until he has read it. He doesn’t have any right to
talk about it, nor to undertake to tell anybody what to do, or what one
ought to do until he has read the Bible—the only reliable standard of
right living. “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word
that ye may grow thereby” (1 Pet. 2:2). “Receive with meekness the
engrafted word, which is able to save your souls” (Jas. 1:21). “Study to
show thyself approved unto God ...” (2 Tim. 2:15).
If you will read the Bible every day, there is not much that needs to be
done for you; if you will not read the Bible, there is not much that can
be done for you! Anybody who doesn’t love the Lord well enough to read
this letter that He has written, anyone who doesn’t want to go to heaven
bad enough to be a daily student of God’s word, I just can’t see much
chance for him. One of the most alarming things is the ignorance of our
own people concerning the Bible. Many of our own members are not daily
students of God’s holy word. I wish I could say something that would
scare you just as much as the second boy who fell in the grave. If I
knew what to say, I’d say it. I’d like for you to become so badly scared
that you would read the Bible every day.
Now, you can do it! If you don’t read it, you cannot blame anybody but
yourself for your failure. You say, “But, Brother Dark, I don’t have
time.” Oh, yes, you do; you have as much time as anybody. There are
twenty-four hours in the day and you have all twenty-four of them. You
say, “Yes, but I have so many other things to do.” Well, are those other
things as important as going to heaven? Do you love them more than you
love going to heaven? Do you want to do them more than you want to be
saved?
How many of you read the newspaper every day? I suspect we would get a
unanimous response on that. How many of you listen to the radio every
day? Now, it is not wrong to listen to the radio. It’s not wrong to read
the newspaper, maybe, but certainly you will agree that a man who loves
the newspaper and the typical radio program more than he loves the Lord
isn’t much interested in going to heaven. He had rather go where they
have newspapers and radios, than to go to heaven where they have the
word of God and a choir of angels singing.
You see, your behavior reflects your interests. So, you _can_ read the
Bible every day; and if you don’t do it, you can blame no one but
yourself for your failure. You can’t say, “I tried to be a Christian and
couldn’t.” You’ll just have to say, “I didn’t try. I didn’t do what I
could. I didn’t do my best.” Sometimes I hear people say, “Well, I’ve
done the best I can,” when I know they have not. I know they are telling
a falsehood when they make that statement. Anybody who doesn’t read the
Bible daily is not doing the best he can!
2. Rule Number 2 is just as simple: “Pray every day.” You _can_! The
Bible commands you to pray without ceasing (Eph. 6:18). Anybody, who can
talk, can talk to God. I am afraid that there are a great many church
members who do not pray to God every day. One cannot believe the Bible
and deny the efficacy of prayer. Prayer is powerful! Prayer moves the
hand that rules the universe. Prayer will cause God to do things that He
would not have done if you had not prayed. Prayer is a means of drawing
upon the riches and the glory and the wisdom of God. What a wonderful
thing it is to be able to write a check on the bank of heaven with the
assurance that it will be honored. That’s exactly what prayer is.
Through prayer you can draw a check upon a bank whose resources are
inexhaustible, with the full assurance that the Teller will honor the
draft or check. Prayer changes things. God will do things for you after
you have prayed that He would not have done if you had not prayed.
Whatsoever ye would therefore, that God should do unto you, ask him for
it. “Ask and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and
it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he
that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened”
(Matt. 7:7, 8). He will withhold no good thing from them that call upon
Him according to faith and in the name of His Son. “If ye then, being
evil know how to give good gifts unto your children how much more shall
your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?”
(Matt. 7:11). If you haven’t been praying to God daily, you ought to
begin to do so right now. I heard Brother H. Leo Boles say one time that
he never even bought a pair of shoes without first asking God to guide
him in the choice that he made. One should ask God’s guidance in every
choice, however trivial it may seem to be. If you are not using the
power which can come to you through prayer, then you are going along
without a great blessing that you could be enjoying. You are not doing
what you can. You can only blame yourself for the failures that come
your way.
3. Rule Number 3 is one that I have emphasized here many times: “Go to
worship every time the congregation meets.” Be faithful and regular in
your attendance at worship. Now, you _can_ do this also! Of course, I
know there are legitimate exceptions in cases of severe sickness on your
part or some member of your family or something else of like nature; but
you know the difference between that and just staying away because you
prefer to sleep, read the paper, listen to the radio, go fishing, take a
trip, or some other such illegitimate, unscriptural excuse.
You need to have the contact with other saints upon the first day of the
week. God knew what He was doing when He arranged for us to meet
together to worship Him. He knew we would get inspiration and
encouragement there that could not be found anywhere else. Whenever you
show me a man who is neglecting his church attendance, I’ll show you a
man in the same person who is drifting away from God. I believe there is
no exception to this statement. Whenever a man willfully stays away from
worshiping with God’s people, he certainly drifts away from the Lord.
I read a story one time about a certain family who had been missing the
worship. One of the overseers of the church went to see this family. He
went into the room and exchanged the customary greetings; then sat down
before the open fire. He picked up the tongs and got a red hot coal,
just glowing with heat, and laid it out on the hearth by itself. It
wasn’t long until it cooled off and turned black. The man of the house
spoke up and said, “Brother, you need not say anything. We’ll be at
worship next Sunday.” That illustrates what happens to anybody who
deliberately stays away from worshiping God with the saints. You can
attend worship regularly; if you don’t you can only blame yourself for
your failure. You cannot say, “I tried, and couldn’t.” You’ll have to
say, “I didn’t try.”
One time in West Virginia, I closed a meeting by talking along this
line. When I went back a year later one of the elders got up and said,
“We had twenty-four additions when Brother Dark was here last year.
Eighteen of them are still with us. Three of them have moved to other
towns, and three have fallen from grace.” I asked whether the three
backsliders had followed these three rules. Of course they had not. They
couldn’t have fallen from grace if they had been following these three
rules; at least I have never heard of anybody’s falling who did. Have
you? I have heard of people’s falling from grace while following one or
two of them, but not all of them. These are not the only requirements
but when faithfully performed they make it possible and easier for you
to do your duty in every way. May I insist then, if you want to go to
heaven—and you say you do—that you read the Bible every day, pray to God
every day, and go to worship every time you can.
Let me read a Scripture before I close this lesson. It’s found in the
first chapter of 1 John 1:4. It’s one of the sweetest promises in all
the Bible. “These things write we unto you, that your joy may be made
full.” God wants us to be full of joy. He said, “I’m writing these
things that you may be full of joy.” Well, what is it, John? “This, then
is the message which we have heard of him and declare unto you, that God
is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have
fellowship with him and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth:
but if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship
one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us
from all sin. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the
truth is not in us.” Will you note this promise again? “If we walk in
the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another,
and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.” This
promise is to those who walk in the light.
The word “walk” suggests continuation. The blood cleanseth from all sin
those who continue in the light. Just as the word “walk” suggests
continuation, I believe the cleansing is also a continuing process. The
best way I know to illustrate this point is by the blood of the human
body, one purpose of which is to remove poison from any place which
becomes infected, and eliminate the poison through the natural channels
of elimination. So the blood of Jesus Christ flows, so to speak, through
the veins of a Christian, keeping all impurities removed therefrom. This
I believe with all my heart.
But don’t get the wrong impression. Somebody might say, “Well, if that’s
the way it is, I’ll not be so careful. I’ll just take it easy and drift
along and let the blood of Jesus keep me clean.” Well, it won’t do it in
your case. You’ve missed the point entirely. The promise is to those who
walk in the light, to those who are doing the best they can, to those
who are working at the job, to those who really want to go to heaven,
who read the Bible, go to worship, and pray to God, and do everything
they can. In spite of all this they’ll make some mistakes.
This Scripture doesn’t say that you won’t sin. The promise is to those
who do sin—who sin in spite of the fact that they are walking in the
light. If people who are walking in the light can’t sin, then this
promise would be out of order; but this promise is to those who are
walking in the light, who are doing the best they can, and yet they sin.
When they do so, the Bible says the blood of Jesus will cleanse them
from all unrighteousness—keep them clean. In that sense, you see, you
can stay in a saved condition all the time.
Suppose I were to ask you right now, how many of you believe, if you
were to die at this minute, that you would go to heaven; I wonder how
many would raise your hands. I find very few people who answer this
question properly. They say, “Well, I hope I would. I’d like to. I don’t
know.” People go through life in doubt about their own salvation. God
didn’t expect his people to experience such uneasiness. He has written
these things that our joy may be full. A lot of people have doubts and
fears. They think if they were to die just after saying their evening
prayers, confessing their sins, that they would go to heaven, but if
they were to die five minutes before, that they would go to hell. If I
felt that way about it, I’d want somebody to shoot me just after I’d
finished my evening prayer so I’d be sure to go to heaven.
I’m not boasting when I say that I believe with all my heart that if I
should fall dead in the midst of this sentence, I would spend eternity
in heaven. That’s not because I’m so good; it’s certainly not because I
have never sinned. But I _can_ say this: if there is a single sin
against me of which I have not repented, I do not know it. If I did know
it, I would repent of it before I finished this statement. I wouldn’t
wait till time for my evening prayer. The time to repent of a sin is
just as soon as you become aware of it, right then and there. That’s
what you have to do in order to be walking in the light. Never allow an
unforgiven sin to hang over you for one minute for you might die during
that minute, and have to spend eternity in torment.
God doesn’t expect his children to go through life having so many ups
and downs, thinking one minute they’re on their way to glory and the
next minute on their way to hell. It isn’t necessary to be like that.
God doesn’t want you to be. He wants you to be full of joy. If you will
read this verse, meditate upon it, and conform to the conditions stated,
it will certainly help you to be full of joy.
I’m emphasizing the fact that you can go to heaven if you want to. I’d
like to read one more Scripture and then we close. This is found in II
Peter, chapter one, verse 5-10, “And beside this, giving all diligence;
add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge
temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and
to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness love. For if
these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither
be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But
he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath
forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather,
brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure.” Do you
notice that word “sure”? “Give diligence to make your calling and
election _sure_”; it didn’t say to make it likely, or to make it
probable, but to make it _certain_. It requires diligence, but if you
will give the proper diligence, you can make your calling and election
certain. “For if ye do these things, ye shall never fall. For so an
entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting
kingdom of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
A man who does these things will not barely slip in by the skin of the
teeth, but for him the gates will stand wide ajar. He will receive an
abundant entrance into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior,
inherit eternally a mansion which Jesus has gone to prepare for those
who love him, for those who walk in the light, for those who do the best
they can.
Do you want to go to heaven? I suspect if I were to take a vote on it
and ask all who want to go to heaven to raise their hands, that every
person in the house would raise his hand. You say you want to go, but do
you? Are you on the road which leads there? A man driving toward
Louisville, Kentucky, at sixty miles an hour, knowing that Atlanta is in
the opposite direction, would have a hard time convincing me that he
wanted to go to Atlanta. He may want to go some day but he doesn’t want
to go now, because he is going in the other direction. The man who is
going toward hell at sixty minutes an hour can’t convince me that he
wants to go to heaven, unless he is just mistaken about his direction.
Do you really want to go to heaven? If you do, let’s be on the way. The
Bible reveals the road which leads there. Get up and follow the sign
posts and some day you will get there. Why not start right now? Will you
come to Jesus now?
FOOTNOTES
[1]Harry Emerson Fosdick “The Revolt Against Paganism” in _Ladies Home
Journal_, February, 1946.
[2]For a similar discussion see J. W. Brents, _Gospel Sermons_,
(Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1891), pp. 282-298.
[3]See Chapter II.
[4]See Chapter II.
[5]Bracketed text is a conjectural reconstruction of line omitted in the
printed copy.
[Illustration: HARRIS J. DARK]
Harris J. Dark was born in Maury County, Tennessee February 8, 1905. He
graduated from David Lipscomb College and did additional work at
Vanderbilt University and Randolph-Macon College where he received the
Bachelor of Arts degree in 1934. He received his Master of Arts degree
from the University of Richmond in 1940. He has studied one year in the
Vanderbilt School of Religion and one year in the Union Theological
Seminary at Richmond, Virginia. He is just now completing work for his
Doctor of Philosophy degree at George Peabody College for Teachers,
Nashville, Tennessee.
Transcriber’s Notes
—Silently corrected a few typos.
—Retained publication information from the printed edition: this eBook
is public-domain in the country of publication.
—In the text versions only, text in italics is delimited by
_underscores_.
—Where a line was omitted in typesetting, inserted a reconstructed line
within {brackets}.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "God Hath Spoken" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.