Fellowship
Roger D. Campbell

The Meaning and Usage of the Greek Words

Note: The following is a study of fellowship condensed from a paper on this topic by Roger Campbell. Notice in particular Roger's treatment of working with false brethren on lectureships. Also, remember that Roger wrote this paper almost twenty years ago. We commend this study to the readers of Living Oracles. Kerry Duke

In order to fully understand the biblical meaning of fellowship, it is necessary to examine the Greek words from which the word "fellowship" is translated. There are five different Greek words relating to this study, and the meaning and usage of each is noted below.

Koinonia is a noun form which is translated as "fellowship," and Thayer defines it as: "Fellowship, association, community, communion, joint participation, intercourse; in the N.T. as in class Grk. 1. the share which one has in anything, participation. . .2. intercourse, fellowship, intimacy. . .3. a benefaction jointly contributed, a collection, a contribution, as exhibiting an embodiment and proof of fellowship."^l

Arndt and Gingrich define the same word as: "1. association, communion, fellowship, close relationship. . .2. generosity, fellow-feeling, altruism. . .3. abstr. for concr. sign of fellowship, proof of brotherly unity, even gift, contribution. . .4. participation, sharing. . ."²

A closely related noun form translated as "fellowship" is koinonos which Thayer defines as: "a partner, associate, comrade, companion. . .to be the partner of one doing something. . .a partaker, sharer, in any thing. . .³ The meaning given to this word by Arndt and Gingrich is: "Companion, partner, sharer. 1. One who takes part in someth. with someone. . .2. One who permits someone else to share in someth."⁴

Smith's Greek-English Concordance to the New Testament shows that koinonos is found ten times in the New Testament, but only once is it translated as "fellowship."⁵ In Corinthians 10:20 Paul said, ". . .the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils." Koinonos is most often translated as "partaker."

Metoche is another noun form which is translated as "fellowship," but its usage is limited to II Corinthians 6:14. The verse states, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?" Thayer defines metoche as "a sharing, communion, fellowship,"⁶ and Arndt and Gingrich similarly give its meaning as "sharing, participation."⁷

Two closely related Greek verbs, koinoneo and sunkoinoneo, also have a meaning of fellowship. According to Thayer, koinoneo means "to come into communion or fellowship, to become a sharer, be made a partner. . .to enter into fellowship, join one's self as an associate, make one's self a sharer or partner."⁸ Arndt and Gingrich define it as: "share, have a share. . .To share, participate in the deeds of others means to be equally responsible for them. . .Participation in someth. can reach such a degree that one claims a part in it for oneself; take an interest in, share. . .Give or contribute a share. . ."⁹

The other verb form, sunkoinoneo, carries with it a meaning very similar to that of koinoneo. According to Arndt and Gingrich, it means to "participate in with someone,"¹⁰ and Thayer says that it means "to become a partaker together with others, or to have fellowship with a thing."¹¹ It occurs but three times in the entire New Testament, and it is translated differently in each case:

1) Ephesians 5:11—"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them."

2) Philippians 4:11—"Notwithstanding ye have well done, that ye did communicate with my affliction."

3) Revelation 18:4—"And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues."¹²

The above information includes certain facts which cannot be overlooked. First, the words which are translated as "fellowship" take on different meanings, depending on the context. Secondly, in the overall meaning of the words translated as "fellowship," there is definitely the idea of participation, sharing, and being partners or partakers. To lose sight of these four words in regard to fellowship is to miss the true meaning of the word. In regard to the relationship or action of fellowship, Pledge says, ". . .those (all) in fellowship must do something to maintain that relationship once in it. There must be a partaking AND a sharing; a receiving AND a giving on the part of all involved in fellowship."¹³ These passages listed also show that fellowship can be described as a state, relationship, or condition. For instance, this activity or experience is denoted in the Scriptures as:

1) Fellowship or communion with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ (I John 1:3).

2) Communion or fellowship with the Holy Spirit (Phil. 2:1; II Cor. 13:14).

3) Fellowship one with another, i.e., among brethren (I John 1:7).

4) Communion between the Son of God and His Heavenly Father (Matt. 11:25-27).¹⁴

However, the passages and Greek words quoted above show that fellowship is much more than a condition. It is also an activity, that is, action is involved or it is something that can be done. The Lord's Supper is described as an act of fellowship, for Paul described it as a "communion" and spoke of those who eat it as "partakers" (I Cor. 10:16-17). In this feast, brethren participate one with another, and at the same time there is a spiritual unity or a sharing with Christ. In Galatians 2:9 it is stated that Paul and Barnabas received "the right hands of fellowship" from Peter, James and John. This obviously meant that the latter group was not only endorsing the work of Paul and Barnabas, but they were counting themselves to be their associates in it. Also, the contribution which went from the Gentiles in Macedonia and Asia Minor to the poor among the saints at Jerusalem was a definite act of fellowship (Rom. 15:26; II Cor. 8:4; 9:13), and for those who contributed were partners or shared in the great work. By sending this money, they evidenced their unity in Christ. Furthermore, the Scriptures teach that church cooperation in evangelism is also an act of fellowship. When Philippi and other churches sent money to Paul while he labored at Corinth, they aided his work and became partakers of his preaching (Phil. 1:5; 4:15; II Cor. 11:8).¹⁵

Having examined the meaning of the Greek words from which the word "fellowship" was translated, and some of the necessary conclusions from the use of these words, it is now necessary to examine further aspects of fellowship.

Fellowship's Basis and its Relationship to Unity

Directly related to the question of fellowship is the matter of unity. While in prayer to His heavenly Father, Jesus said, "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me" (John 17:20-21). This prayer clearly shows that Jesus desired that His followers would be one, and thus united. Such unity existed in the early days of the church at Jerusalem, as seen by the fact that "the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul" (Acts 4:32). Prior to that time, their unity was shown by their being together "with one accord" (Acts 2:46). But when they were united, they were in fellowship, for the two concepts (unity and fellowship) go hand in hand. Brother N. B. Hardeman said, "If men are united and have fellowship in the church of the Lord, they must be converted precisely as the Bible directs, and they must be of the 'same mind and the same judgment.'"¹⁶

Where there is fellowship, there must first be unity. Unity, in other words, involves the fellowship described in I John 1:3: "that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ." The unity for which Jesus prayed was to be based upon the Word of God: "Unity is based on the teachings of the apostles. Our fellowship with God comes through fellowship with the apostles and this establishes fellowship with each other. When unity is destroyed fellowship is broken."¹⁷ Because unity is based upon God's Word, fellowship, in turn, must be determined by the divine standard. There is no room for human opinion to dictate, but instead the lines of fellowship are drawn by the New Testament and we must conform to them. The very thought of unity or fellowship necessitates the existence of agreement:

One principle we must ever keep before us is the fact that preceeding all fellowship there must be agreement (Acts 9:26-28; Gal. 2:1-10; Amos 3:3). Without agreement THERE CAN BE NO FELLOWSHIP in the New Testament sense of the word. God settled this long ago and we, to be in agreement with God, must practice it.¹⁸

I John 1:3ff makes it clear that Christians have fellowship with one another because they have a mutual fellowship with God the Father and His Son. Thus, when one is not in fellowship with the Father and the Son, he cannot be in fellowship with his brethren. Fellowship may be viewed as being both vertical and horizontal in nature. Our fellowship in a vertical line refers to our fellowship with the Godhead, while the horizontal line refers to our fellowship one with another. The fellowship which we enjoy in a vertical line is the cause of the horizontal, and the horizontal is evidence of the vertical: one cannot exist without the other. In other words, unless we have fellowship with God, we have no fellowship with man, and vice versa.¹⁹

Man was created in God's image to be in fellowship with God. Man was created for the pleasure of Jehovah (Rev. 4:11), and man's failure to be in fellowship with God is rebellion against God's purpose for him. The fellowship which man has with God is based upon the condition that man walks with God, or as John describes it, "if we walk in the light" (I John 1:7), meaning that we must walk in harmony with that which God has allowed us to see through His inspired Word. Thus, this fellowship with God is based upon man's obedience to God's law and his expression of love toward God (I John 2:3-6).²⁰

Some have erroneously concluded that union should be sought, in order that fellowship might exist. Such is based on the assumption that union is equal to unity, but this is false. It is possible to tie the tails of two foxes together and thus have union, but not have unity. It is impossible to disregard doctrinal differences and Truth and call a relationship unity or fellowship: "When Truth is given up for so called fellowship, it is the surrender of real fellowship. All real fellowship is based on Christ and the Gospel."²¹ God will not accept every case of unity, because in some cases there must be a division to keep the church pure. This certainly was the case at Corinth when the church had to withdraw from the fornicator (I Cor. 5) and lose a portion of their unity. This example, when coupled with Romans 16:16-17, shows that some division is necessary in order to stay in the favor of God.

These things being true, where does fellowship begin? The Scriptures teach that: "The beginning of fellowship is with Christ in obedience to the Gospel. Fellowship with Christ brings fellowship among Christians. Just as certain things are essential for fellowship with Christ, obedience to the Truth, continued obedience to the Truth is necessary for fellowship to be maintained by Christians."²²

Fellowship with God is reached when an individual becomes one of His children, for at that time he is born into God's kingdom and out of the kingdom of the devil (John 3:5). A person becomes a child of God by being baptized into Christ, for only in Christ is salvation located (Gal. 3:27; II Tim. 2:10). At that point the person becomes a member of the Lord's church and enjoys the fellowship of God, and therefore he also enjoys the fellowship of God's faithful children. A person's fellowship with God and his brethren from that time forth is dependent upon his continuous obedience to God's Word.²³

Our fellowship must be in the Truth because the "light" of I John 1:7 is God's Word. David said, "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path" (Ps. 119:105), and we must be guided by that light. Obviously then, when the teachings of men do not harmonize with that standard, they are engaged in false or sinful teaching. Very plainly Paul said, "Now I beseech you brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple" (Rom. 16:17-18). These verses teach that any person who teaches a doctrine "contrary to the doctrine" of the apostles is to be marked and avoided. That means that a false teacher is to be labeled as such and disfellowshipped. God's faithful children cannot be united with false teaching without being guilty themselves.

A similar passage to Romans 16:17-18 is Titus 3:10-11. Paul said, "A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject. Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself" (3:10-11). Paul describes a person who is to be rejected, but who is he, and in what sense is he to be rejected? The word "heretick" comes from hairetikos, and Thayer says in this passage it means, "schismatic, factious, a follower of false doctrine."²⁴ Also, the word reject in this instance means "to shun, avoid."²⁵ Thus, Paul's meaning is that a false teacher is to be avoided: that was exactly what he said in Romans 16:17-18, and again the import is to withdraw fellowship from false teachers and teaching.

Another passage which must be considered in regard to fellowshipping false doctrine is II John 9-11. The ASV renders this passage: "Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son. If any one cometh unto you, and bringeth not this teaching, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting: for he that giveth him greeting partaketh in his evil works."

Verse nine clearly teaches that all who go forward and fail to abide in the doctrine of Christ have not God, neither do they have His approval. Such a person is not in a proper relationship with God, and thus cannot be in God's fellowship. But, when a person is not in fellowship with God, neither can faithful brethren fellowship him. Faithful brethren can no longer extend the right hand of fellowship to such a false teacher.

Verse ten points out that if anyone comes to us without this teaching, i.e., the teaching of Christ, he is not to be received nor given any type of greeting which would indicate an acceptance of his false teaching. This is the case because one who bids the false teacher Godspeed or who gives him greeting becomes a partaker of his evil deeds. "Partaker" is from koinoneo and it means to have fellowship with, in the sense of sharing or becoming partners. If a person teaches false doctrine, he stands condemned before God, but this verse sets forth the Truth that anyone who fellowships this person stands condemned also! Why? This is true because when one fellowships false teaching, he becomes a partner in that sin and thus shares in it and partakes of it! That is exactly the meaning of the Greek word koinoneo, and when individuals or congregations extend the right hand of fellowship to a false teacher, they engage in sin. Thus, the only proper course of action is to try and teach them the Truth, but if they refuse to change, fellowship must be withdrawn from them.

A number of instances have been cited to show that fellowship must be withdrawn in specific cases. However, Paul's instruction to "withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly" (II Thess. 3:6) includes all sins not explicitly named in the New Testament. It is possible for one to "walk disorderly" by committing any sin which shows that he is not obeying the words of inspired men (II Thess. 3:6, 14). This includes willfully forsaking the assembling of the saints (Heb. 10:25), fornication, covetousness, uncleanness (Eph. 5:3), homosexuality (I Cor. 6:9-10), hypocrisy (I Cor. 16:22), etc. Any persons who engage in such sins and are unwilling to repent, must be withdrawn from.²⁶

New Unity Movement and Liberal Arguments

Headed by Karl Ketcherside and Leroy Garrett, the New Unity Movement attempts to unite the Independent Christian Church with the churches of Christ. In reality, they are trying to bring together all baptized persons, regardless of their doctrinal differences. Their cry is for "unity in diversity," but they really are hoping for union and not unity. One of their claims is that there is a distinction between "Gospel" and "doctrine." According to them, "doctrine" is what is taught to the church and does not deal with fellowship, but only the maturation and growth of Christians.²⁷ This notion is refuted by Paul, for he said that those who caused division and offences contrary to the doctrine were to be marked and avoided. Thus, Paul said that matters of doctrine were tests of fellowship!

Those of this movement also claim that fellowship always is considered to be a noun and only involves a relationship between persons: "It is never to be used as a verb and is never to be used with things. According to this view, fellowship has to do with the state or relationship between God, man, and men into which the immersed believer enters when his obedience to 'gospel' is completed. Thus, all who have obeyed 'gospel' are in the fellowship."²⁸

They conclude that since fellowship is never a verb, it can never be "done" by people; that is, people cannot "do it" to one another. This entire line of reasoning is easily refuted by the examination of the meaning of koinoneo. This is a verb form which means to be a partaker, to share in, etc. and it is used to mean fellowship which is extended to others: therefore, fellowship is a noun sometimes, but not all of the time.

Another argument of this movement is that there is no agreement which must be made or conditions met before fellowship can exist. This means that all major doctrinal points can be overlooked.²⁹ This is false, because in Acts 9:26-28 it is recorded that the church would not fellowship or accept Paul until Barnabas vouched for him. In Galatians 2:10 it is seen that the right hand of fellowship was extended to Paul and Barnabas only after it was seen by the brethren at Jerusalem that the Gospel was committed unto Paul and the grace of God perceived. Both of these examples show that prior to the right hand of fellowship being extended, there were certain conditions which had to be met.

The arguments of liberals in the church are many in regard to fellowship, and many are deceived by their fancy speeches. Many of them insist that we should have unity and fellowship to the point of overlooking many doctrinal differences among us. This is false because fellowship is based upon the Word of God or doctrine of Christ. To go beyond this standard is to forfeit the fellowship which persons had with God (II John 9-10). Others say that fellowship should be extended to all persons who accept Jesus as the Son of God and are baptized. Who drew such a conclusion? It was not made by God, but came about by the wisdom of men! This teaching overlooks the fact that the Scriptures emphatically teach that some can lose fellowship with God after being baptized into the church.³⁰

Logan Fox and others contend that those who have been sprinkled are Christians, and thus they should not be refused our fellowship. He says that it is obvious to the heart and mind that those who are sprinkled are Christians. Such assumes that sprinkling is really baptism and that sprinkled persons are considered "Christians" by the Lord. Neither of these assumptions is supported by teachings by the Lord. The extremists go so far as to contend for open fellowship with any who consider themselves to be Christians. This is a plain rejection of anything said by the Scriptures and a refusal to accept God's authority.³¹

Many of these same persons claim that the restoration plea for unity is impractical. The restoration plea for unity based only on the Bible has not failed, but rather men's efforts have failed to carry out its principles. Others claim that we should have open fellowship because the church of Christ is just a denomination. Denominational doctrine and tendencies exist in a great number of congregations, but this does not make the Lord's church a denomination. When only the Word of God is sown and followed, the result is the non-denominational church of the New Testament (Luke 8:11). One of the most degrading liberal claims is that we should practice open fellowship because we cannot understand the Bible alike. Their plea is that no two people can see the Bible alike, so certainly all religious people cannot agree. However, Jesus said, "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32), so in the Lord's mind, we could know and practice the truth.³² All of the arguments which are set forth by such brethren as this are in an effort to compromise the Truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to make the Lord's body just another of the many man-made denominations.

Current Issues and Problems Examined

Anyone who honestly evaluates the present situation in our brotherhood today must admit that it is plagued with the chronic problem of division. We can preach to denominationalists until we are blue in the face about division in their ranks, but we must face the cold reality of our own division. The seriousness of this lies in the fact that sin is involved when division takes place. Paul said, "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" (I Cor. 1:10).

Thus, unity based upon Truth must be our goal though it is not always attainable. Much of our division is over matters of strife, envy and opinion, but we are also greatly divided over doctrinal matters. When this kind of division takes place, who is responsible for it? Although this question has been argued for years, the biblical answer is that those who teach false doctrine are responsible for division.

Perhaps one of the areas in which lines of fellowship have been most clear-cut is the division among our brotherhood over "anti-ism." In most cases it is not a matter of the practices of "antis," but rather their attempts to bind on others exactly what they practice. Such efforts were made in the first century when Judaizers tried to bind circumcision on the Gentiles (Acts 15:1-6). It was certainly acceptable for the Jews to be circumcised, but it was sinful when they tried to force such a practice upon the Gentiles. It was wrong because God had made no such law. Today the practices of individual support of orphans, money sent directly to preachers, using only one communion cup, having no Bible classes, etc., are all acceptable because they are scriptural. Division has resulted because some have said, "Everyone has to do it this way or be wrong." What they have done is write a law which God has not authorized, and are guilty of going beyond the doctrine of Christ (II John 9-11). As a result, faithful brethren cannot fellowship such false teaching because to do so would make them partakers of their evil deeds (II John 11).

One of the issues which has been discussed the least is the matter of one congregation withdrawing fellowship from another congregation. Some have denied that this practice is founded upon the Scriptures, but those who advocate it have discussed it very little, and they practice it even less. There are principles which must be observed in regard to false teaching. Faithful brethren cannot extend fellowship to other religious groups or denominations because they are not walking in the light and are not in God's fellowship (I John 1:7). Yet, when a congregation of God's people fails to walk in the truth of Christ's teachings, it is no longer in God's fellowship. We cannot fellowship those whom God does not fellowship: if a congregation is not walking in the light, then it is in darkness, and Paul said to "have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness" (Eph. 5:11). To extend fellowship to a group of people who are in darkness, regardless of who they are, is to rebel against Paul's instructions in Ephesians 5:11.

The book of Revelation indicates that God will withdraw His fellowship from congregations which refuse to repent of their sins. The seven letters which were written to the churches of Asia indicate that if they would not repent, their candlesticks would be removed out of their places (Rev. 2:5): in other words, they would no longer be in the fellowship of God. It is not stated how long the Lord would allow for them to repent, but the warning is simply stated. If God refuses to extend His fellowship to an apostate congregation, then how can faithful brethren continue to extend their fellowship to such a group of people? To extend fellowship to a congregation from which God has withdrawn His fellowship is to become partakers of their evil deeds and be engaged in their sin. Therefore, one congregation must withdraw from a group of God's people who promote, teach, or uphold false teaching. A failure to do so is to cause any congregation to lose their fellowship with God.

Certain objections are offered to the above conclusions, and these must be carefully evaluated. One of the first objections is usually that there is no authority for such action. There is authority in Romans 16:17, because Paul said to "mark" and "avoid" those who teach doctrine contrary to the Word of God.

Others say that it is wrong to withdraw from a congregation because innocent persons would be involved. By this they usually mean that faithful members would be withdrawn from who were not deserving of such action. If a person is so faithful, why is he still in an apostate church bidding them Godspeed (II John 11)? One who is faithful would first try to teach the apostate group (Titus 3:10), then withdraw from them and go elsewhere. Closely linked to this is the argument that the church from which fellowship is withdrawn may be trying to correct the problem. Human judgment must be applied, but this is not the issue: the real issue is whether a congregation can scripturally withdraw from another one.³³

Another argument is that there is no fellowship between congregations in the first place. The churches of Christ who were known by Paul saluted the church at Rome (Rom. 16: 16) and the churches of Asia saluted the church at Corinth (I Cor. 16:19). There was a very definite bond which existed between these churches which could be labeled as fellowship. If such fellowship existed between them or churches today, why can it not be withdrawn? As in other matters, some say that they have never heard of such a practice, so it must not be right. This argument could do away with almost every practice of the New Testament church, and thus is must be rejected as pure ignorance.³⁴

One of the greatest downfalls in our brotherhood in matters of fellowship has been a failure to practice the teachings of II John 9-11. Men have often written or spoken the Truth regarding this passage, but have failed to carry out its principles in their own situation. Very simply stated, the passage teaches that one who teaches false doctrine does not have God: this means that he is not in God's fellowship. When an individual or congregation fellowships a false teacher or false teaching, they stand condemned also because they become partners, sharers, or partakers of the false teaching. Thus, when an individual or congregation extends their fellowship to a false teacher, they sin in so doing (II John 9-11). To deny this is to deny the teachings of II John 9-11 and the meaning of koinoneo, which has been set forth previously in this paper.

The problem listed above is extremely critical, but it also leads to another question. Can an individual or congregation (A) fellowship another church or individual (B) which has extended fellowship to a false teacher or false teaching (C)? There are actually three lines of horizontal fellowship involved: first of all, neither (A) nor (B) can fellowship (C) and be right in God's sight because of (C)'s false doctrine. To fellowship (C) would make (A) or (B) condemned because they would be partakers of the evil deeds of (C) (II John 11). But, if (B) fellowships (C), then (A) cannot fellowship either one. Why? They cannot do so because (C) is condemned by its false teaching and (B) is sinning by fellowshipping (C). If (A) were to fellowship (B), (A) would be engaged with and in fellowship with sin. Thus, (A) would forfeit its fellowship with God: if this were not true, then why did (B) and (C) lose their fellowship with God? This conclusion is not pleasant, nor encouraging, nor easy to practice, but the question is, is it right? In order for it to be correct, then it must be God's opinion of the situation. In order for it to be wrong, then it must be acceptable in God's sight for individuals and congregations to fellowship error. To affirm that this is acceptable is to disregard Paul's teaching for us to "lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins. . ." (I Tim. 5:22).

An ever present problem along this line is the appearance of supposedly sound men on lectureships with persons who are known false teachers. Can a person appear on a lectureship with such men and not be in fellowship with them? Certainly to appear on lectureships with false teachers and say nothing against their doctrine is sinful. To act in this fashion is to become partakers of or sharers in their teaching, because a failure to condemn their doctrine in reality is to endorse it. Is it possible, though, to associate with these men and not be in fellowship with them? It seems that it is possible if the one who does not want to fellowship them will speak out against their falsehoods and let all present at the lectureship know exactly where he stands on the issues at hand. This would be the same as preaching for the Baptist Church: there would be a definite association of one's name with the Baptist Church, but the one speaking could avoid fellowshipping the Baptists by condemning their doctrine and preaching the Truth. It is not possible to preach the Truth among false teachers unless their doctrine is exposed and denounced!

Another important question must he considered: if "sound" brethren are continually asked to appear on the same lectureships with false teachers, have such "sound" preachers really made it known that these brethren are wrong? The plain fact that men are constantly asked to return to such lectureships demonstrates that they either do not speak out against the errors of those present or else they speak in generalities! If they did speak out against the false teaching of those present, then they wouldn't be asked back. To please the ears of those present at a lectureship is indeed the easiest and most popular thing to do, but is it what our Lord would do if he were given the opportunity to expose false teachers?

Regarding such lectureships, in reality, what can one hope to gain or accomplish by speaking for a few minutes on a lectureship with false teachers? Anything which could be said there could be said just as well, if not better, via correspondence with the false teachers or through the pages of a periodical. One thing which will be gained by appearing with false teachers is an association of a person's name with false teachers: even if a person does expose the error involved, the publications which for months list one's name with false teachers could be of great harm in the long run. Preachers need to decide whether they want their names associated with those who preach the true doctrine of Jesus Christ or with those who teach the devil's false doctrine!

When the situation is reversed so that a congregation has a false teacher speak for them or hold a meeting, is there a different conclusion to be reached? When a congregation allows any teacher to preach for them, they have extended their fellowship to him: this is true because they bid him Godspeed (II John 11). To do this is to become partakers of their evil deeds, but to become partakers or partners of evil deeds is sinful (I Tim. 5:22; II John 11). Thus, a congregation cannot allow a false teacher to preach, regardless of whether they tell him to "just preach the Truth." Because of the principles of II John 9-11, a congregation also cannot extend fellowship to a visiting preacher who fellowships error.

Conclusion

The topic of fellowship has received very little attention from most brethren, yet its importance cannot be stressed enough. If we fail to be in God's fellowship, we will be lost: that is how very serious this issue really is. This study has set forth the definitions and usage of the Greek words which have a great bearing on the meaning of fellowship. It has also examined the relationship of fellowship and unity, the Bible basis of fellowship, and liberal arguments which are made regarding fellowship. Withdrawing fellowship was also discussed, as well as some current problems among us. Admittedly, this section has not been entirely complete, nor has it answered every question for the writer; neither has it claimed to have all the answers. It is hoped, however, that this paper can provide a good foundation for a greater study.

Endnotes

1. Thayer, Joseph Henry, Thayer's Greek-Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors, Inc., n.d.), p. 352.
2. Arndt, William F. and Gingrich, Wilbur F., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), pp. 439-440.
3. op. cit., Thayer, p. 352.
4. op. cit., Arndt and Gingrich, p. 441.
5. Smith, J. B., Greek-English Concordance to the New Testament, (Scotsdale: Herald Press, 1955), p. 205.
6. op. cit., Thayer, p. 407.
7. op. cit., Arndt and Gingrich, p. 516.
8. op. cit., Thayer p. 351.
9. op. cit., Arndt and Gingrich, p. 439.
10. op. cit., Arndt and Gingrich, p. 781.
11. op. cit., Thayer, p. 593.
12. op. cit., Smith, p. 328.
13. Pledge, Charles A., "Fellowship," The Beacon (Pensacola: Bellview church of Christ, Jan. 1, 1981), X, No. 1, 2.
14. Miller, Russell B., "Communion (Fellowship)," The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Ed. James Orr, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman's Pub. Co., 1939), II, p. 689.
15. Ibid.
16. Hardeman, N. B., "Fellowship," Hardeman's Tabernacle Sermons (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Co; 1943), V, p. 82.
17. Camp, Franklin "Fellowship," The Church Faces Liberalism (1970 Freed-Hardeman College Lectures), Ed. Thomas B. Warren, (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Co., 1970), p. 224.
18. op. cit., Pledge
19. Horton, Howard, "The More Abundant Life as One of High Fellowship Values," The More Abundant Life, (1961 Abilene Christian College Annual Bible Lectures), (Abilene: Abilene Christian College Students Exchange, 961), p. 68.
20. Ibid., p. 70-71.
21. op. cit., Camp, p. 242.
22. Ibid., p. 240.
23. Warren, Thomas B., "The Bases of Fellowship," The Church and Fellowship (Henderson: Freed-Hardeman College, 1974), p. 33.
24. op. cit., Thayer, p. 16.
25. Ibid., p. 482.
26. Elkins, Garland, "The Challenge of Failure to Withdraw Fellowship," The Spiritual Sword, (Memphis: Getwell church of Christ), XII, No. 1, October, 1980, p. 28.
27. Woodson, William, "The New Unity Movement in Perspective," The Church and Fellowship, (Henderson: Freed-Hardeman College, 1974), pp. 45-46.
28. Ibid., p. 46.
29. Ibid.
30. op. cit., Camp, p. 226.
31. Ibid., p. 227.
32. Ibid., pp. 230-236.
33. Pilgrim, James, "Can a Church Not Fellowship a Church? II," The Church and Fellowship, (Henderson: Freed-Hardeman College, 1974), pp. 223.
34. Ibid.