Views: 2<\/p>
[Note:\u00a0 <\/strong>This MS is available in larger font on our Longer Articles<\/strong>\u00a0 page.]<\/span><\/p>\n Introduction<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The church of Christ is not only constitutionally non<\/strong>-denominational, but anti<\/strong>-denominational.<\/span><\/p>\n The truth in the title of this essay is so basic and obvious that every member of the church of the Lord should know and understand it. (How could one truly obey the Gospel without knowing this Truth?) That the millions in Protestant and Catholic \u201cChristendom\u201d equate church <\/em>with denomination <\/em>is not surprising. They have never known anything else and have thus not grasped the ideal of pristine Christianity and the relentless pressure in Scripture to maintain its purity (Mat. 7:15\u201316; Gal. 1:6\u20139; Eph. 5:23\u201328; 1 Tim. 4:1\u20133; 2 Tim. 3:1\u20139; 4:1\u20134; 2 John 9\u201311; Rev. 22:18\u201319; et al.).<\/span><\/p>\n One of the greatest of all ironies (not to mention tragedies) is that thousands in the Lord\u2019s church <\/strong>now conceive of the church likewise. In previous generations, when we preached against denominationalism, we did so principally in order to help those in the denominations contrast their errors with the beauty and simplicity of the New Testament church. Now it has become necessary to preach as pointedly on this subject to the church<\/strong>. This preaching has always been necessary to some degree because some brethren were and are so bereft of Bible knowledge that denominational concepts influenced them more than the Truth (e.g., referring to preachers as \u201creverend\u201d and \u201cpastor,\u201d speaking of \u201csacraments,\u201d describing a member of the church as \u201ca Church of Christ,\u201d or \u201ca Church of Christer,\u201d et al.).<\/span><\/p>\n However, far more than ignorance now figures into this equation. In recent years numerous influential members of the church have become extremely liberal in doctrine. They have allowed denominational doctrine (some of it very modernistic) to determine their convictions more than the Bible. Some of these have wielded their ungodly influence through their wealth. Others have been allowed to advance their heresies from large and worldly urban congregations. Yet others have been allowed (and encouraged) to serve their doctrinal poison to immature youngsters in \u201cChristian\u201d universities. Such folk conceive of the church of Christ as a denomination, and they are determined to recast it to fit their conception. This fact explains why we must redouble our efforts to proclaim the New Testament church and to expose denominationalism.<\/span><\/p>\n I will develop this subject under the following headings: (1) proofs of intent, (2) points of impact, and (3) precepts of incompliance.<\/span><\/p>\n Proofs of Intent<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n From the almost endless supply of such statements from various persons, I will cite a few from only two apostate brethren among the many change agents:<\/span><\/p>\n Rubel Shelly <\/strong>of Nashville, Tennessee, is one of the most notorious. He once valiantly fought the liberalism he has now been espousing for over twenty years. Note a few of his revealing statements:<\/span><\/p>\n I am trying to think my way out of a sectarian spirit. I grew up in the context of one…. I exhibited a sectarian spirit, and I taught a sectarian spirit. I am embarrassed. I am ashamed. I have repented. I am trying to outgrow it. And I\u2019d like to encourage other people to rethink some attitudes and to rethink some matters that pertain to unity of believers. [Note: Shelly\u2019s reference to his \u201csectarian spirit\u201d refers to his thinking and behavior when he was a strong voice for the Truth.]<\/span><\/p>\n We [the church of Christ, DM] are about like a flea on the back of a large dog, on our way to becoming a dust mite on the back of a flea on the back of a large dog.<\/span><\/p>\n It is important that we be part of the change that is happening in the world and not be left behind by it…. The church must change. The church must change in terms of its form and its methodologies because the world changes.<\/span><\/p>\n My children will not stay with the church I grew up in. They will not be part of an irrelevance. We [meaning various denominational groups and himself] come from our different backgrounds and traditions….The kingdom of God is wider, deeper, larger, greater than any of those particular streams or traditions…. So, I want to be a part of anything and everything that I consider holy and of God, and I want to encourage your ministries…. Some of you know my tradition, the churches of Christ, as a very narrow, legalistic, arrogant, \u201ceverybody\u2019s- going-to-hell-but-us\u201d kind of tradition…. Yet I really do believe the Spirit of God is awakening our fellowship, our little part of the body of Christ. [Note: This statement made in an address to \u201cChrist\u2019s Church,\u201d a Pentecostal Holiness sect, in Nashville in 1984.]<\/span><\/p>\n Carroll D. Osburn <\/strong>is \u201cCarmichael Distinguished Professor of New Testament\u201d at Abilene Christian University where he has taught for many years. His academic credentials and honors are numerous, but not as numerous as the number of young students\u2019 minds he has victimized. Osburn\u2019s condescending and superior attitude all but slap one in the face in the following statements:<\/span><\/p>\n It need hardly be said that the crystallized sectarianism that has pushed the movement into the backwaters cannot speak powerfully to this generation. [Note: \u201cThe movement\u201d that is cursed with \u201ccrystallized sectarianism\u201d are his words to describe the church of the Lord.]<\/span><\/p>\n Instrumental music will remain an issue, but it certainly is not deserving of center stage, and never was. There is something grossly distorted about a religion which depends for its cohesiveness upon paltry issues that kill the spirit…. A non-sectarian rediscovery of biblical theology is mandatory.<\/span><\/p>\n Sectarianism is sinful. To remain useful, such terms as fellowship<\/em>, brotherhood<\/em>, and church of Christ<\/em>, require biblical redefinition if they would reflect a non-sectarian internality. [Note: By sectarianism <\/em>he refers to faithful, Truth-loving saints.]<\/span><\/p>\n In view of the emerging non-sectarian identity of the church, a significantly revised concept of the mission of Christian higher education is demanded. All components of our faculties must be involved in this redefinition of Christianity in non-sectarian terms…. Working together in uncommon collegiality, we must expect of one another the highest level of academic and spiritual excellence if we would become prophetic thought-leaders among a broadened constituency in a post-sectarian era. [Note: Emerging non-sectarian identity of the church <\/em>describes the effect of his liberal theology on the church. Broadened constituency <\/em>is his code term for fellowship with denominations.]<\/span><\/p>\n Rejecting arrogant exclusivisim, Christian fellowship is extended to a broader arena.<\/span><\/p>\n There should be room in the Christian fellowship for those who differ on…whether the Lord\u2019s Supper must be taken every Sunday, or whether instrumental music is used in worship. There should be room in the Christian fellowship for those who believe that Christ is the Son of God, but who differ on eschatological theories such as premillennialism, ecclesiological matters such as congregational organization, or soteriological matters such as whether baptism is \u201cfor\u201d or \u201cbecause of\u201d the remission of sins. [In other words, not much of anything should be counted as fellowship issues.]<\/span><\/p>\n Anyone with any power of discernment can readily see that if these men have their way the church, as we now know it, will vanish. It will simply enter that murky, muddy religious cesspool of indistinct, accept-everything-and-stand-for-nothing denominationalism. Remember: These are but two of many such powerful voices sowing error and discord in the church.<\/span><\/p>\n Points of Impact<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Shelly, Osburn, and their comrades have had sufficient impact on the body of Christ that they have in essence divided it. The cleavage is clear between them and the direction they have marked out and those who are determined not to budge an inch from the Scriptural teaching concerning the church. Their major points of impact are as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n The Plan of Salvation <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n They claim that we have preached too much doctrine and not enough Christ. They ridicule as \u201cfive-steppers\u201d those who teach the Lord\u2019s plan. They advocate salvation both by grace alone and faith alone (never mind the contradiction). They deny that knowledge of the Scriptural purpose of baptism is necessary for baptism to be Scriptural, thus, by implication, admitting millions of denominationalists to the church.<\/span><\/p>\n They say that whether baptism is unto or because of remission of sins is of no consequence.<\/span><\/p>\n Worship <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n They make instrumental music a matter of personal conscience and option. They have introduced \u201cpraise teams\u201d and \u201cpresentation\u201d music (e.g., solos, duets, choirs, etc.). They revel in other denominational innovations (e.g., responsive readings, parallel worship assemblies, applause, lifting up and waving hands, candlelight communion services, et al.). They serve the Lord\u2019s Supper on other days besides the Lord\u2019s day.<\/span><\/p>\n Women\u2019s Roles <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n They allow women to serve at the Lord\u2019s Table, read Scripture and lead prayers and singing in mixed adult worship assemblies, and teach mixed adult Bible classes. They have no objection to women serving as \u201cdeacons,\u201d \u201celders,\u201d or \u201cpreachers.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Hermeneutics <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n They insist that the New Testament does not constitute \u201claw\u201d and is not a \u201cconstitution\u201d; rather, it is merely a \u201clove letter\u201d of general guidelines. They assert that God holds us accountable for only a few \u201ccore\u201d or \u201cbull\u2019s eye\u201d concepts (e.g., the atonement, the Deity of Christ, the resurrection, et al.) and that specific doctrines outside of these are optional. They insist that the Scriptural, logical, and time-tested hermeneutic principles of determining Bible authority by means of direct statement, implication, on-going accounts of action, the law of inclusion\/exclusion, and respect for the silence of Scripture are human in origin and are flawed and outmoded. The change agents seek to impose a \u201cnew hermeneutic\u201d upon us that will allow the denominations to remain in their errors while we extend fellowship to them.<\/span><\/p>\n Moral Issues <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n They have \u201cdiscovered\u201d twenty or more \u201cloopholes\u201d for circumventing Jesus\u2019 teaching in Matthew 5:31\u201332 and 19:9. As a result, some congregations have preachers (and doubtless some elders and deacons) in adulterous marriages, to say nothing of thousands of other couples who have thereby been encouraged to continue in their adulterous marriages. They defend \u201csocial\u201d drinking, dancing, wearing of immodest clothing in public, public mixed swimming, gambling, and so forth, in the name of \u201cChristian liberty.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Fellowship <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n They declare that we have been too narrow, restrictive, and exclusive. They no longer believe that the one faith <\/em>(Eph. 4:5) refers to the Gospel, the <\/strong>faith, but claim that it refers merely to the atonement. They aver that the \u201cteaching of Christ\u201d beyond which we dare not go (2 John 9) is not what Jesus and His inspired messengers taught<\/strong>, but it rather refers merely to the teachingabout <\/strong>the Deity of Christ. Thus they say that one who believes in the atonement and Deity of Christ should be granted fellowship, regardless of his baptism (or lack of it), worship practices, concept of the church\/kingdom of Christ, doctrine concerning marriage, divorce, and remarriage, or any other doctrinal question. They say that the word fellowship <\/em>could not possibly imply endorsement and there is no such thing as \u201cguilt by association\u201d [never mind 2 John 9\u201311, DM].<\/span><\/p>\n The Church <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n They believe that it is impossible and unrealistic to speak of restoring the New Testament church (\u201cWe need a twenty-first century church, not a first-century church\u201d). They deny that there is a distinctive pattern for the church, unless it is the personal life of Christ in Matthew\u2013John. They say that Acts\u2013Revelation only give us a flawed picture of the church\u2014the way it ought not <\/strong>to be. They are purposefully and gleefully moving down a road that leads to outright denominationalism, many of them at break-neck speed.<\/span><\/p>\n Precepts of Incompliance<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n God\u2019s faithful people must not comply with the doctrines of these denominationalists among us. We must not sit idly while those guilty of spiritual treason subvert the Truth and destroy the church. There are several things we can and must do.<\/span><\/p>\n We Must Understand the Nature of the Church <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n It is a Divine institution in design, purpose, work, worship, organization, terms of admission, and code of conduct (Mat. 16:18), all of which are set forth in the New Testament by inspired men. It is therefore just as God wants it to be; no human being has the right to tamper with it. It never was a denomination and never will be. It stands in opposition to every humanly devised religion. It is the only religious institution on earth that exists with the approval of God and His Son; all others will be destroyed (Mat. 15:13). Its work is spiritual because the church is spiritual in nature (John 18:36). As \u201cthe pillar and ground of the truth\u201d (1 Tim. 3:15), the church must take the Gospel to the lost world.<\/span><\/p>\n We Must Understand How Precious the Church Is to Deity <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n It is included in God\u2019s \u201ceternal purpose…in Christ Jesus our Lord\u201d (Eph. 3:11). Jesus purchased it with His blood (Acts 20:28). He \u201cgave himself up for it\u201d (Eph. 5:25). It is variously described as the unshakable kingdom of God\/Christ, God\u2019s house [family], flock, holy nation, elect race, royal priesthood, and Christ\u2019s bride, all of which demonstrate intimate relationship as well as ownership. Jesus will save only it because He sanctified and cleansed only it by His blood through our baptism (Eph. 5:23, 26). It is \u201cthe fulness of him [the Christ] that filleth all in all\u201d (1:22\u201323). The church must be so precious to us that we seek it and its welfare above and before all else (Mat. 6:33).<\/span><\/p>\n We Must Faithfully Stand for the One Gospel <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The practices <\/strong>have changed in various congregations because the message <\/strong>was first changed. As seeds are to plants, so is the religious message to the institution produced. Just as one cannot produce corn from tomato seed, neither can one produce a church of Christ from some \u201cseed\u201d besides the Gospel. God\u2019s Word is still the seed of the kingdom (Luke 8:10\u201311), and seed still brings forth only after its kind (Gal. 6:7). Where the message is corrupted, corrupt practice is bound to follow. God\u2019s curse is upon all who teach (or follow) a different message (Gal. 1:8\u20139).<\/span><\/p>\n We Must Steadfastly Oppose Those Who Teach a Corrupted Message <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Opposition includes exposing and refuting errors (Gal. 2:11\u201314; Jude 3). It includes identifying (\u201cmarking\u201d) those who are still among us, but who have joined the enemy and are striving to denominationalize the church (Rom. 16:17\u201318). It means refusing to have fellowship with them (Eph. 5:11) or even to associate with them in any way that implies approval (2 John 9\u201311).<\/span><\/p>\n Elders Must Understand Their Pivotal Role and Responsibility <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n They must take the time and the trouble to keep themselves informed about who the false teachers are and what they are teaching. There is no excuse for not doing so because of the availability of informative and Scripturally sound papers, lectureships, and books. A man who does not have time to read, study, and keep himself informed does not have time to be an elder. Elders dare not allow a local or visiting preacher, class teacher, or any other member to teach false doctrine unopposed. Elders err who invite unsound preachers for meetings, workshops, or lectureships on the excuse: \u201cHe won\u2019t teach error while he is here.\u201d They are also unwise to reproduce bulletin articles by false teachers, even though a given article may teach the Truth. Such practices give credence to unfaithful men for the error they have taught or will teach on other occasions. Likewise, elders who allow false teachers and the activities of apostate schools and churches to be publicized in their congregations are not thinking clearly. Elders should issue warnings to their members about apostates (men, schools, and churches), rather than encouraging those in their care to participate in the errors of such.<\/span><\/p>\n Conclusion<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Many among us have ceased to give any heed at all to the Gospel and have already drifted away from it (Heb. 2:1). The full extent of their apostasy is anyone\u2019s guess, but it is evident that many of them have adopted seed principles that will result in full-blown denominationalism. We dare not pretend that these things are not happening while the apostates are stealing congregation after congregation. The only hope for this age or any other is the incorruptible seed, \u201cthe word of God, which liveth and abideth forever\u201d (1 Pet. 1:23). Let us ever be true to it in our preaching and practice, and the church will remain the church.<\/span><\/p>\n [Note: <\/strong>I wrote this MS, and it originally appeared as an \u201cEditorial Perspective\u201d in the August 2004 issue of THE GOSPEL JOURNAL, <\/em>a 36-page monthly of which I was editor at the time.]<\/span><\/p>\n Attribution: <\/strong>Printed from TheScripturecache.com<\/em>, owned and administered by Dub McClish.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Views: 2[Note:\u00a0 This MS is available in larger font on our Longer Articles\u00a0 page.] Introduction The church of Christ is not only constitutionally non-denominational, but anti-denominational. Christ built only one church (Mat. 16:18); denominationalism encourages the idea of many churches. The way of Christ is…<\/p>\n\n