Title : God Hath Spoken
Author : Harris J. Dark
Release date : May 5, 2021 [eBook #65258]
Language : English
Credits : Stephen Hutcheson and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net, based on a book from the library of Paul Hutcheson
By
HARRIS DARK
Published by
GEORGE W. DEHOFF PUBLISHING COMPANY
MURFREESBORO, TENNESSEE
Copyright, 1947, by Harris Dark.
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
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.
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 9 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 10 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.
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 11 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.
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 12 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 13 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.
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 14 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.
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 15 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 16 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 17 would be solved. Our international problems would be solved, if all people would learn what God hath spoken and follow it.
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 18 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.
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).
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 21 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.
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 22 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 23 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 24 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.
1. Some one may say that according to this principle of interpretation instrumental music may be 25 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 26 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 27 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).
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 29 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.
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 33 school and filled it before the debate closed. This indicates the extent to which people are interested in public investigations of religious questions.
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.
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 35 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 36 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, 37 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.
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 39 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 40 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.
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 41 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 42 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 43 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.
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 44 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 45 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.
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. 47 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.
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. 48 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 49 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 50 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.
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 51 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 52 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?
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.
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.
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 55 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, 56 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!
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 57 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?
In order to answer these questions let us begin at the other end of the line, at Pentecost, and come 58 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, 59 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 60 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 61 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 62 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 63 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.
“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 66 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 67 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 68 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.
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 69 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 70 and must become strong in the faith for their own sake and for the safety of the church.
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 71 to exist and the world would be better off if we did not.
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 72 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 73 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 74 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. 75 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.
(Note: As this sermon was being presented the outline seen below was on the blackboard before the audience.)
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 78 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!
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 79 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 80 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.
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 81 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). 82 “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 83 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 84 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.
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 85 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. 86 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 87 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.
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 89 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 90 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.
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 91 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 92 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.
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 93 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 94 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. 95 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 96 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.
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 97 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.
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 98 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.
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 99 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 100 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 101 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.”
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 believe we can say that most of those who claim to be followers of Christ are agreed upon the following points:
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 104 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 105 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.
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 106 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.
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 108 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 109 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.
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 110 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?” 111 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 112 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).
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 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, 115 That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.”
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 116 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.
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 118 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 119 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 120 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 121 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 122 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 123 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. 124 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 125 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 126 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 127 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 128 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 129 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 130 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 131 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.
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.
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 133 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.
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 134 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.
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 135 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 136 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.
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 137 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 138 the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.”
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. 139 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 140 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).
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. 141 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 142 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.
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 143 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.
Three Dispensations
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.
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 146 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.
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 147 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 148 which went into effect when he died on the cross (Heb. 9:15-17).
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.
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 149 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 150 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 151 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.
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 152 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 153 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.
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 154 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, 155 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.
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.
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. 158 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 159 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.”
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 160 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.
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.
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.
1623. 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.
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 164 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.
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 165 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. 166 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.”
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 167 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 169 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 170 [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.
The fact that the law of Moses in its entirety, including even the Ten Commandments, has been 171 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 172 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 173 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.
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 174 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 175 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.
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.
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 177 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.
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, 179 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 180 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, 181 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 182 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 183 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 184 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.
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 185 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 187 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, 188 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 189 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 190 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 191 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 192 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 193 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 194 most carefully, for after all, we are engaged in the greatest work on this earth!
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.
( 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.)
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.
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 199 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 200 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.
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, 201 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.
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 202 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.
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 203 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.”
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 204 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 205 rather to be suggestive. Perhaps you can think of other means which would also help in accomplishing this task.
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 206 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).
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 207 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, 208 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, 209 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.
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 210 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 211 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.
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.
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 213 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.
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 would like for you to take this outline home with you and study it with two or three questions in mind. 215 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 216 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.
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 218 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 219 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.
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 220 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 221 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, 222 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 223 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 224 has entrusted the money, and that will apply to a congregation as well as to individuals.
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 225 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 226 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 227 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 228 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 229 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.
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 230 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 231 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 232 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?
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.
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 234 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 235 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 236 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.
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 . 237 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 238 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.
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 240 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.
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 241 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 242 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 243 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.
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 244 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 245 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?”
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, 246 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 247 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 248 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 249 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.
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.
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 251 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, 252 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.
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 255 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 256 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 257 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 258 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 259 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 260 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.”
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 261 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 263 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 264 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 265 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. 266 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 267 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.
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 270 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.
It’s not our purpose to speak at this time on the topic, “What Must I Do to Be Saved?” but rather 271 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 272 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 273 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.
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 274 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 275 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 276 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 277 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.
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 278 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 279 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 280 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 281 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. 282 “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 283 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 284 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 286 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 287 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, 288 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?
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.