The Basis of Christian Fellowship
Glenn B. Ramsey

As in all other things, the basis of Christian fellowship must reside in a "thus saith the Lord." Indeed all that we do must be done in the name of (by the authority of) our Lord (Colossians 3:17). While most recognize this principle, many are partial in its application.

In a recent conversation with a preacher of my acquaintance, we were discussing the subject of fellowship. He said that I was drawing the line of fellowship too strictly. My response was that it was not up to me to draw the line, but rather it was my obligation to respect and honor the line that God has drawn!

We must first recognize that it is not up to men to "draw the line" of fellowship any more than it is up to men to decide the conditions of salvation. Only God has such authority. Men must recognize His authority and abide by the same.

Usually when we are talking about the limits of fellowship, people think of mere "association" with others. There is a sense in which we fellowship those with whom we associate. In that sense, we fellowship all the people of the world who are in our acquaintance. Since we are to live at peace with men of the world as much as possible, to that degree we are in fellowship with them.

This is very different from saying that one is like a thief who may live in one's neighborhood; or like a child molester that may live in the same city; or like a murderer who takes the life of his neighbor.

The concern of this writing is with the kind of fellowship we may have with those within and without the church of our Lord. A passage avoided "like the plague" by the liberals in the church today is Ephesians 5:11. This passage says, "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." The use of the word "fellowship" in this passage is that one is a joint-partaker of the deeds of one who performs works of darkness (error, falsehoods, etc.). The guilt here is not by mere association (One might live next door to such a person.); the guilt is because of a joint participation with this worker of evil. Thus, to obey God's Word one must not share the company of or be involved as a co-participator with such an individual. To obey this commandment one cannot give any appearance of agreement or appreciation to such a worker of evil.

The second part of Ephesians 5:11 is another of those "all but forgotten" commandments of the New Testament. We are not only to "have no fellowship" with such workers of darkness, but we are to "reprove them!" This does not sit well with the modern-day liberal mind-set of many men who profess to preach the gospel. They want to leave the reproving and rebuking and correction of error to God. That would be fine, except for the fact that God says that it is a part of our duty to reprove such. Paul so instructed Timothy in II Timothy 4:1-4. Any men who profess to be gospel preachers and refuse to reprove, rebuke and exhort as a part of their preaching would do just as well to avoid teaching the essential nature of baptism, the exclusive nature of the church of Christ, the eating of the Lord's Supper on the first day of the week, or any other clear instruction of God! Sad indeed is the fact that some so-called "preachers" among us have quit preaching these essentials besides the fact that they do not obey Ephesians 5:11.

In Philippians 4:14, Paul said, "Notwithstanding ye have well done, that ye did communicate with my affliction." The word "communicate" is the same as the word "fellowship" in Ephesians 5:11. Paul is obviously talking about a type of "joint participation" since their communication with his affliction meant that they had helped him during his time of affliction.

Perhaps the plainest illustration of the basis of fellowship is given in I John 1:6-10.

"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 that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us 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."

All who are Christians are such because they have given heed to the "call of the gospel" (II Thess. 2:14) and thus by that gospel have been called unto the fellowship of Christ. Paul uses this very language when he says, "God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord" (I Cor. 1:9). The word "fellowship" as used here relates to a type of partnership or social intercourse of involved parties. It is much more than mere association. It is where one helps the other and agrees with the other.

John does not say that our fellowship depends on our perception of fellowship! Some want to excuse themselves from their fellowship of false teachers in and out of the church by arguing that they do not think of themselves as being in such a fellowship. John says that there is more to having fellowship than merely "saying" that we have fellowship! The implication is that the actions of the parties involved determine the fellowship. The conditions to be in fellowship with God are that we "walk in the light" of His truth. This places us in the fellowship with God, Christ, and all men who are also "walking in the light" of God's truth! Men must choose to honor God in this matter or else they are liars and do not follow the truth.

The blessed fellowship of God extends to include all His faithful children. God does not fellowship those who teach error. He does not fellowship those who are not His children. He does not fellowship those who walk in the darkness of the influence of false teachers though claiming to be in fellowship with God.

The basis of fellowship is God and His word. Let us yield ourselves to His wonderful word and submit to His will. "That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ" (I John 1:3).

Editorial
Malcolm L. Hill

As President of Tennessee Bible College, I have tried to follow the Bible to the best of my ability. I have been tried from time to time with reference to political pressures from the brotherhood. Gifts have been waved before my face to move me into a certain position or with certain brethren. This type of thing I abominate. It tells me that some think I am for sale. Are those who would do a thing like this for sale or have they sold out already? People who can be moved by money or religious politics are no better than Judas Iscariot!

In talking with a brother not long ago, I lost a lot of respect for him because he confessed that politics played a very important role in his life. How can a person like this live with himself? He is nothing more than a puppet on a string. One like this cannot be a man of God. A person that can be manipulated by religious politics, money, power, and position is in reality a man without principle. Who can tell what he might do if things were right? One reason we have no regard for a self-centered man is that he will do whatever it takes to promote self. I have come in contact with men like this from time to time and to be quite plain with you they stink worse than a pole cat or skunk.

How much value do you place on a person that will sell out for a lectureship, a position with a congregation, a position in a circle with certain brethren and the like? I have come across some that would have you believe that they are sticklers for the very letter of the law but when it comes to standing up and speaking out where truth and justice are concerned they cannot be found or heard. Such people are spiritual midgets and are a disgrace to the name Christian.

Those who take a lead in Christian education, which would include schools of preaching and religious journals, need to ask themselves some questions and they need to be honest with themselves when they answer. Do money and support cause them to bend the truth? Are they afraid to take a stand on certain issues in certain ways because they have close friends in mind?

I believe there is a certain middle-of-the-road group that have made up their minds to fellowship whomever they wish as long as they can get by with it. While they would have all to believe they have a deep reverence for the Bible and God, in reality they have very little respect for neither. This is proven when men will knowingly fellowship those whom God does not approve (Eph. 5:11; II John 9-11; Rom. 16:17-18). Anyone that would fellowship those out of fellowship with God are themselves out of fellowship with God (I John 1:6-7; II John 9-11). Our fellowship with God is determined by walking in the light of His word (I John 1:7). How can there be fellowship between two brothers when one brother is out of fellowship with God? On the other hand, how can I refuse fellowship with a brother is in fellowship with God?

The greatest issue in our brotherhood today is whom should we fellowship and whom should we reject. This is the issue and make no mistake about it. Where can we find the answer to this problem? In the Bible and the Bible only. It is not hard to answer if we are willing to follow the Bible.

How to Determine Bible Preachers
Ronald D. Gilbert

By Bible preachers I mean faithful gospel preachers—men who teach the truth of God's word and practice what they preach, not only practicing what the Bible teaches on morals but on other issues like fellowship as well. We encounter preachers all across the country who fall short of being the kind of preachers God wants them to be. This is true in the United States as well as overseas.

This past august Jimmie Hill and I made a trip to Africa. We worked in Malawi with brother James Judd. In Zambia we worked with brother Jerry Sullins. Both men are sound preachers doing great works training gospel preachers. On each trip I have made to Africa I have learned of men from the USA who are teaching false doctrines and causing problems. Some of these are liberal Americans living on the mission field and others are just visiting liberals. The faithful African brethren have their hands full. They must fight liberalism from some African preachers and from visiting Americans.

In most of the campaigns we work with in Africa, question and answer sessions of an hour or two each day are normal occurrences. A question and answer session is a good way of determining some of the problems that brethren are having. Some questions are asked and unless you know something of their culture you cannot understand the question. This is where our faithful African preachers who translate for us are of great help. Not only will they translate the question on paper from their language to ours but also they give you a little background on the custom that is under consideration.

During our recent trip to Africa at one meeting there were 630 people present. We had several good question and answer sessions. I would like to list some of the questions that were submitted word for word as they came to us:

1. "Is it allowed to give if you had made a meeting of a woman for example on Saturday before the first day of the week?"
2. "Is it right for a woman to be sent to buy beer for the husband who is not a Christian? Should the woman refuse?"
3. "Is it lawful for a Christian to marry without making a wedding? Or to marry someone who has a child, when you are not married or to marry someone who was divorced when you are not yet married?"
4. "When your cattle dies is it wrong to eat that meat? But what if you give it to other people or you sell it and use that money as a Christian, is it wrong?"
5. Is a sister congregation using a chorus to sing for the church and you know that it is wrong, how do you go about it; should you just keep quiet or do something?"
6. "What do you say on this? A non-believer contributes money in a church to help the poor, in this case he is married to more than two wives. Do you think God can receive his gift and bless it? Remember there is no communication between God and sinners. Let the white men explain vividly on this."
7. "In I Cor. 14:34-35 is it right before God after giving opening prayer on the first day of the week to permit the woman to be talking in Bible Study? Clarify!"

Question number one has reference to a man committing fornication on Saturday night and God accepting his offering on Sunday. While we were in Malawi brother Judd gave us a 40-page document titled "Jesus—Who Is He Really?" This material was put out by George Franklin from Clovis, New Mexico. We were told brother Franklin was there with World Bible School. The brethren in Malawi were disturbed by the false doctrine contained in this material. On page nine he tells a little story that might help you understand grace. It's from the book In the Grip of Grace by Max Lucado. On page 32 of Franklin's material he tells the story of a man who died "hoping he had done enough to go to heaven." He said this man completely misunderstood God's grace. He said, "Why did he believe his salvation had to be earned? There was not a thing that he had ever done or could ever do to save himself. Do I think he was lost? No. God's grace makes up for our mistakes even in doctrine." Then on page 33 he said, "How might one be lost? If everything we have said before is true then we ask the question, how can a person be lost? I would say only one way—that would be a deliberate, wilful rejecting of Jesus, the only Savior." Then on page 33 Franklin said, "What if a Christian man came up to you, shot you dead, then was immediately gunned down by a policeman just arriving on the scene? Would he lose his soul? It is a bizarre situation, I agree, but here we have a man who has placed his faith in Christ and has entered into a covenant with God through Christ, and yet, for whatever reason he commits a murderous act and then dies on the scene in a hail of bullets. Would he lose his soul? Twenty years ago I would have answered quickly, 'Yes indeed!' Today, though, I'm not nearly so quick to answer. There are too many things I don't know and can't know. Why did he gun me down? Did he perceive me as a real threat to someone God had given him to protect? Was he sane or insane? Had he not been gunned down, was the the sort of person Peter was when he cut off a man's ear very deliberately intending to split the fellow's head open, the sort of man who would later have repented bitterly and prayed to God for forgiveness? Or was this the kind of man who defiantly committed murder saying, 'I don't care what God says, I hate that man, and I intend to kill him'? You see, we don't know, and we didn't have time to find out because he died so quickly. So what do we have to do? We have to leave all of this kind of thing in the hands of God where it belongs." A man who believes we are under God's umbrella of grace and holding false views about grace is the wrong man in the mission field!

Question number two asks about a Christian woman being sent by her husband to buy beer. What if Rubel Shelly had been there? Notice what he has said concerning the drinking of beer. (April 19, 1996, Florence, Alabama—Topic: "God Calls for Unity of His Body"). Rubel said, "Jesus drank it and made a lot of it. You may in a given culture choose to be a teetotaler, because in that culture it bears a better witness you believe for the Lord. But people, not every culture is like ours here in the Bible belt. And I've been to church fellowships where big pitchers of beer and bottles of wine are all down the table. Church fellowships now in Europe. Paul says you can hold either view on any one of these things; the one thing you can't do is judge your brother, say that his love for God is less than yours because he disagrees with you or that he's condemned because he didn't draw your conclusion." (Rubel Shelly makes mission trips. He has been to Africa.) Culture does not determine right and wrong; God's word does.

Questions three and six deal with marriage and polygamy. Roger E. Dickson lives and works in South Africa. Roger has written the International New Testament Study Commentary (1987). This book is widely circulated in Africa. On pages 127-128, in commenting on Jesus' teaching in Matthew 19 concerning divorce he said, "This was Jesus' law for the Jews who were at this time in a covenant relationship with God. In I Corinthians 7:8-15 Paul discusses the situation where one partner is converted to a covenant relationship and the other is not." Then on pages 441-442 in commenting on I Corinthians 7 Roger Dickson said, "Paul instructs, therefore, that should the unbeliever depart, the believer is no longer obligated to be a marriage partner to the departed and is not under bondage to him or her in any manner concerning a marriage relationship. The believer is free to remarry and should not suffer the suppression of sexual drives, loneliness and economic poverty in the case of deserted mothers with children by remaining unmarried because of the unbeliever's desertion. (Some commentators feel that the deserted is not free to remarry, only free from marital obligation to the one who deserts.)" There are many men teaching false doctrine concerning marriage on the mission field. Some teach that polygamy is just a matter of culture.

Roy Merritt who lives in Africa and conducts a school training preachers, has written several pamphlets. One is called "Question Box Number Seven." Brother Merritt was asked the following question: "Suppose a man has divorced and remarried. The divorce was because he and his family did not like the wife, not because of adultery. Now the man wants to become a Christian and comes to the church to ask for baptism. The Bible says he is living in adultery with that second wife. Must he divorce her before he is baptized to show his repentance? If he continues with that woman after baptism is he still in adultery?"

Notice Roy Merritt's answer on page 13: "There is plenty of debate among Christians over this issue and strong feelings on both sides. Some feel that the marriage is sinful and that the couple must divorce and the man must return to his first partner. I wonder if Jesus really demanded such harsh solutions to problems? Certainly there are no examples of this in the Bible. When sins are forgiven, they are forgiven completely and without conditions. My own opinion is that the divorce and the remarriage took place before the couple became Christians. When we give our lives to Jesus our past mistakes are forgiven completely—as far as the east is from the west! (Psa. 103:12). It is my opinion that the mistake was to divorce and remarry, and that it (sic) not a mistake to be married! That mistake has been foreign and must not be repeated. The marriage can continue." Roy Merritt thus teaches false doctrine concerning marriage, divorce and remarriage.

Question number five that I listed deals with chorus groups and special music. Concerning singing groups Roy Merritt has written a booklet entitled, "Singing Groups, What Does the Bible Say About Them?" On page three he said, "If the Bible says that choirs and quartets are bad and sinful, then we should stop ... Is there some place in the Scriptures which opposes choirs? ... Let me share with you what I have learned from my studies! First, I decided to write on this page a list of all the verses in the Bible that oppose choirs, quartets and singing groups! You can read them here!"

"N-O-T-H-I-N-G"

"N-O-T   E-V-E-N   O-N-E   V-E-R-S-E!"

"If God says nothing, who are we to say something?"

Brother Merritt fails to understand that the Bible authorizes by what it says and not by what it does not say. See Colossians 3:17 and I Peter 4:11.

I have nothing personally against these men that I have quoted from. Most of them I have never met. However, their speeches and writings speak loud and clear. These men are not Bible preachers as God would have but they are false teachers. Many good brethren are supporting false teachers and are not aware of this. Brethren, it is time that faithful congregations of God's people ask questions and know who and what they are supporting. It is a serious thing to teach false doctrine, and it is also a serious thing to support others to teach false doctrine. Tennessee Bible College is working hard to do our part to get sound, faithful Bible preachers into the mission field.

Unscriptural Practices: Today Versus Yesterday
Kerry Duke

The teaching of the majority of gospel preachers 50 years ago was much different than the teaching of many preachers today. Those who are old enough to remember that period can testify to this fact. For those who are younger, a look back at some issues of the 1948 Gospel Advocate will demonstrate a shocking difference. I recently surveyed the articles appearing in the Advocate that year. Those articles reflect an understanding of Scripture that has vanished from many churches. Specifically, I noticed three distinct characteristics in these writings.

One obvious mark of teaching 50 years ago was its emphasis on Bible exposition. Each weekly issue contained a Bible lesson for the next Sunday. These lessons were straightforward explanations of biblical texts and were packed with urgently needed facts, insights, and applications. The titles of many articles reflect a biblically-centered thrust: "Studies in John," "Philip and the Samaritans," "Between the Old and the New," "The End of Your Faith," "Written for Our Learning," "Back to the Bible," "Spiritual Giving," "The Mistakes of Moses," "The Certified Gospel," and "A Voice was Heard in Ramah." I found no articles which approached an important question from a psychological or philosophical viewpoint and only occasionally cited Scripture as the basis for proof. The writers were obviously men of the Book and were not afraid that some might have found biblical discussions dry or boring.

Another characteristic of this literature was a noticeable absence of entertainment and fads. In fact, an article by H. M. Phillips in the June 3 issue entitled "Church Entertainments" denounces such. He was bothered by churches who sought to retain members, especially young people, by entertaining them. He pleaded, "It is high time that some cry out against this fast-growing fad of the church being the entertainer." In addition to being the wrong emphasis of the church, he contended, entertainment is a futile way to maintain attendance: "No church can keep up an entertainment very long before the world in general says it is a worldly affair, and it loses its influence for spiritual matters." How far we have come in 50 years! Some church bulletins are so full of announcements and reports of fun and games that the Bible is sometimes not even mentioned! Even more, entertainment-minded brethren have corrupted the worship of God with their carnal desires. Instead of singing together in the assembly as Scripture demands (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16), they want to be serenaded by a solo or a choir. Instead of singing words with spiritual meaning (the very nature of the singing God requires - Col. 3:16), they prefer to mimic instruments of music and clap their hands. Instead of saying "Amen" with respectful demeanor, they prefer to applaud and cheer the "performers" in "worship." And since a 30-minute sermon may be too dull for our age, dramatic presentations employing males and females in the worship assembly are increasingly popular. If only brethren had listened to brother Phillips' cry!

The 1948 Advocate was also distinct in its unabashed refutation of sin and false doctrine. Consider these articles: "The Fellowship Question," "Rise of the Papacy," "The Sabbath Day," "Paraphrase or Translate," "Baptism and the Remission of Sins," "How to Become and Remain a Christian," "Some Dangers of Premillennialism," "Baptism and the Remission of Sins," "Forsaking the Assembly," "Pleadings for the Instrument," and "Do Debates Do Any Good?" In the April 1 article "Marriage," S. F. Zimmerman cited Matthew 19:9 and observed that "if one is divorced for any cause other than adultery, and remarries, in that marriage he becomes guilty of adultery, no matter how much the law of the land may have legalized said cause!" How many sermons today are that straightforward? In the July 22 article "Come Out,...Be Ye Separate, ... Touch Not," C. D. Plum spoke out specifically against illicit sex, dancing, and ungodly movies (in 1948!). How he would be shocked at television today! How he would be ashamed of the many preachers of our time who will not speak against these things because they believe the grace of God should be preached on instead! How outraged he would be at preachers who refuse to be specific! When someone suggested to him that preachers should condemn worldliness but not be specific, brother Plum replied, "If I know a thing is productive of evil and is worldliness, I owe it to dying souls to tell them what that thing is. If I do not, the Lord will remember this when I stand before him in judgment." In a June 24 article entitled "Preach Hard!" Horace A. Holt called attention to "many brethren among us who are continually calling on preachers to preach hard, but who are mighty particular about the direction said hard preaching is aimed. It seems to be well known that we all favor 'hard preaching'—the harder, the better, as long as it is aimed 'yonder way'!" He then related his experience in a meeting in Alabama. The brethren there wanted him to condemn sinners who visited; but he soon found out who really needed hard preaching: the members. He proceeded to preach on indifference, forsaking the assembly, gossip, drinking, dancing, and other sins—all of which some of them were guilty. Unlike some preachers today, he was unswayed by the fear of not being invited back!

Sin and error of every kind are being neglected in sermons today. Virtually every basic Bible doctrine, from the six 24-hours days of creation to baptism for the remission of sins to eternal punishment, is being denied by some of our preachers. Did any of our preachers in 1948 envision the extent of the apostasy they warned against? More than ever in this century, now is the time to take some of Paul's final words seriously: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables" (II Tim. 4:2-4).

Where are Our Strong Gospel Preachers?
David Hill

When one attends a prominent lectureship, it is very common to hear primarily preachers talking over their coffee or lunch about the great preachers who have gone before. There have been some tremendous preachers who proclaimed the saving gospel of our Lord Jesus, several of whom this century has blessed by their presence in the world. They are certainly worthy of our recognition and admiration. In fact, anyone who will faithfully proclaim the will of the Lord is to be admired and appreciated. Our children should be taught diligently to appreciate the truth of God's Word, and they should be taught by adult Christian parents to respect strong faithful gospel preachers for they are doing what no one else in the world is able to do (Rom. 10:14-15).

So where are the strong preachers today? Who will be looked to as the strong defenders of the truth in this time? Many seem to be concerned with posterity, and Heywood Broun said, "Posterity is as likely to be wrong as anybody else." However, a true study of history is certainly valuable and has always been a part of the Lord's religion (Deut. 6; II Thess. 2:15; Heb. 3:15-19; Heb. 8).

Where were the strong preachers in Elijah's day? Were they hiding in a cave (I Kings 18:4) or were they out on Mt. Carmel (I Kings 18:9)? Of course, students of the Bible know that Elijah was out on Mt. Carmel standing strong for the almighty God! Was it politically correct to stand for the Lord in Elijah's time? When Elijah asked the people to make a decision between God and Baal, "the people answered him not a word" (I Kings 18:21). Wonder what the political parties thought about the matter? No, these last two questions were not a part of Elijah's consideration. He stood for the Lord, and we revere him to this day!

In the 1930s and 1940s, the late Foy E. Wallace Jr. stood strong in defense of the truth and against the heresies of premillennialism. In fact, some in Cookeville, Tennessee, still remember when brother Wallace came to the old Broad Street Church of Christ for a two-week gospel meeting and challenged the congregation to invite their friends and neighbors and denominational preachers to come and hear him refute premillennialism. He went on to another meeting and returned to Cookeville to overflow crowds which included denominational preachers! Brother Wallace stood each night and challenged those in attendance to prove their case. He challenged openly those denominational preachers to stand for what they believed and every faithful Christian looks back to that time with great respect for Foy E. Wallace. He stood for the Lord! Most who remember that time will tell you that brother Wallace gave premillennialism a death's blow in the Upper Cumberlands. Would the descendant congregation Jefferson Avenue allow such to happen today? Where are our strong preachers?

In the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, the debate over the use of the instrument of music in worship was raging. In Nashville, Tennessee, the late David Lipscomb, H. Leo Boles, and many others stood strong against the "innovations" in worship and against the missionary societies. They are still held in high esteem for their wonderful stand for the truth. By 1922 Nashville hosted the great cooperative effort among the churches of Christ held in the Ryman Auditorium. The gospel of the Lord was proclaimed clearly, distinctly and powerfully by the late N.B. Hardeman, and much good came from these meetings. The Hardeman's Tabernacle Sermons which can be found in many a preacher's library came from this great event. Crowds at the meetings were estimated to be between 6,000 and 8,000 with an estimated 2,000 turned away. What was the result? The Lord's church flourished in Nashville, Tennessee, with only a loss of about 20 percent of congregations to the Christian Church. Oh, the above numbers are bannered each year by organizers of the Nashville Jubilee, but the likes of Joe Beam, Rubel Shelly, Max Lucado, Bill Long, Steve Flatt and many other less notables cannot begin to compare. In fact, Joe Beam's relating of the direct operation of the Holy Spirit on his life would have been publicly exposed and put down by faithful men like Lipscomb, Boles, Hardeman and others. Where are our strong gospel preachers?

In my lifetime men like the late B.C. Goodpasture, Guy N. Woods, Gus Nichols, W.A. Bradfield, G. K. Wallace and many others proclaimed clearly and distinctly the gospel without fear or favor. They defended the truth publicly and privately. They were not distracted by denominational gimmickry, by political correctness, or the heartfelt needs of the community, but they were clearly focused on the pure water of life. Where are our strong gospel preachers?

Satan: He or She?
Kerry Duke

The Women's Liberation Movement did not stop with politics. Feminists are demanding more recognition in religion, calling for equal participation in all areas of church work, especially the pulpit. But they have not been content to stop there. Now they want to rewrite the Bible. They argue that Bible language is biased toward males. They argue that "men" should be rendered "human beings," that "son" should be translated "child," and that "he" or "him" should instead read "they" or "them." Some even say that "God the Father" should be changed to "God the Father and Mother"! Such gender-neutral or inclusive language translations are becoming increasingly popular. But my question to these people is this: will you contend that references to the devil should also be stated in inclusive language so that women are not excluded? After all, if God is both Father and Mother, then why not refer to Satan as one who, "as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom she may devour"?

Unity or Compromise?
Kerry Duke

A recent issue of Christianity Today devoted much space to proposed unity between Catholics and Protestants. In a letter to the editor, a concerned Evangelical complained, "Unity is a fine thing—but not at the price of compromise: I'm sure you will agree. The idea seems fine—but we see no move by the Catholics to give up the real reasons for separation which are not in the Bible!" (Feb. 9, 1998, p. 10). Why don't our brethren reason this way in regard to current attempts to unite us with Christian churches and liberal churches of Christ? We ought to say of these churches what this Evangelical said about the Catholics: Until they give up the practices and doctrines responsible for the division, we cannot fellowship them. If they are unwilling to do so, all talk of unity is a farce. Compromise is good and even necessary in some areas of life, but it should have no place in matters of Bible teaching.

The Sinfulness of Unscriptural Fellowship
Holger Neubauer

In 1973 the United States Supreme Court gave civil sanction to the murdering of unborn babies. Since then millions of children have been cut up and sucked out of their mother's wombs. This awful sin has been practiced for so long that there is hardly an eyebrow lifted when the horrendous numbers of aborted babies accumulate year after year.

The same kind of indifference to high-handed sin exists in the church regarding the issue of fellowship. Churches, elderships, individuals, colleges, schools of preaching and just about every venue that Christian people support are affected by the issue of fellowship and the vast majority are insensitive to the issue altogether. The ungodly practice of harboring, endorsing, utilizing and encouraging false teachers is practiced so regularly among brethren that again hardly an eyebrow is raised over the issue.

We would do well to consider how the ancient prophets viewed false alliances and ungodly associations. The courageous prophet Ezekiel condemned evil partnership with Egypt, Chaldea and Assyria (Ezek. 16:26-29) and identified such practice as "whoredom." In Ezekiel 16:35-36 these poignant words convicted God's people: "Wherefore, O harlot, hear the word of the Lord: Thus saith the Lord God; Because thy filthiness was poured out, and thy nakedness discovered through thy whoredoms with thy lovers, and with all the idols of thy abominations, and by the blood of thy abominations, and by the blood of thy children, which thou didst give unto them." Through evil association the ancient city of Jerusalem tolerated idolatry and the worship of false gods. Jerusalem was viewed by God "as a wife that committeth adultery" (Ezek. 16:32).

The New Testament likewise is explicit and replete with teaching on false alliance and fellowship. Ephesians 5:11 admonishes us to "have no fellowship with unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." II Corinthians 6:14 teaches, "What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?" II John 9-11 makes clear the Lord's will concerning false teachers: "Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." In light of these passages, how can brethren commend lectureships, workshops and gospel meetings with known false teachers? I suggest that commendation of programs with false teachers is evidence that covenant with God is broken. This is nothing but spiritual adultery. This sin will lead many souls to eternal punishment.

On any university lectureship among churches of Christ false teachers will be found. Among the false doctrines are: God's marriage laws only apply to Christians, the guilty party of Matthew 19:9 is free to remarry, the eldership has no authority in matters of option, instrumental music in worship is not sinful, social drinking of alcoholic beverages is a Christian liberty, naming names of false teachers is unkind, women leading in worship, hand clapping in the assembly is a matter of culture and a host of other false doctrines. Then those brethren who do not teach error but who appear on those same programs usually say nothing about the false teachers they are appearing with. This is again nothing but compromise and making allegiance with the enemy.

From my experience I have found that many preachers are filled with "political correctness" which is nothing more than cowardice. Many will not speak out or do as God commands because their faith is not genuine and they are more interested in their own purses and worldly recognition than they are in following all of what God demands.

The matter of Christian fellowship is grave and consequential and trifling with this issue as many have done will only aid in the apostasy taking place and will ultimately lead to the ruin of souls. As Ezekiel was commanded to "cause Jerusalem to know of her abominations" (Ezek. 16:2), so God wills the truth to be known on this matter of fellowship with evil.