No Time for Cowards in the Kingdom
Glenn B. Ramsey

The Scriptures teach:  “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom”  (Ps. 111:10).  The Preacher wrote, “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is the whole duty of man” (Eccl. 12:13).  An individual is not a coward (one who shows or yields to ignoble fear) simply because he fears God.  Indeed, “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov. 9:10).  An individual who has proper fear of the Lord is motivated to depart from evil (Prov. 16:6).

It is evident that fearing some things (for instance the Lord) does not make one a coward.  But it is also the case that fearing other things may indeed make one a coward.

One is a coward if he is more concerned with what man can do to him than he is with what God can do to him.  Jesus said, “And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.  But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear:  Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him” (Luke 12:4-5).  It is those who are afraid to do God’s bidding that will be cast into the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone (Rev. 21:8).

There has never been a day when God was pleased with cowards in His service.  Today we need men in the kingdom of God who are not cowards.  This is no time for cowards in the kingdom of God.  “Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong” (I Cor. 16:13).  In the kingdom (church of Christ) today we need elders who are not cowards.  We need men who will obey Acts 20:28 by living strong lives personally and who will bravely obey Acts 20:28.  These men will watch for the wolves (false teachers and preachers and those who “say” but “do not” God’s will.)  These men will require faithfulness in Christian living on the part of those of the local church.  These men will lead in proper worship.  These men will be strong to obey God’s will related to withdrawing from the disorderly (II Thess. 3:6) and marking and avoiding false teachers wherever they are (Rom. 16:17; II John 9-11).

Today is no time for cowardly preachers.  There are some preachers who are the “best that money can buy.”  And it is evident that some have been bought!  Why else would some preachers continue as they say “in the fellowship” of the church of Christ when they teach doctrines contrary to the Lord’s Word?  We need, today, preachers who will follow God’s directions and preach the Word, whether it seems convenient to do it, or otherwise—whether the people want to hear it or not (II Tim. 4:1-2).

Today we need Bible School teachers who do not have hidden agendas—who only want to teach and lead young boys and girls, men and women deeper into the Word of Life!  Remember Paul’s admonition to Timothy:  “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them; for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.”  Our Bible School teachers are sometimes the “last hope” for young people before they leave home and go into the working world and, regrettably, often leave God!

Finally, we need members who are not cowards.  We have not received a spirit of fearfulness but of power and love and self-control or discipline.  (Read II Timothy 1:7).  A Christian has counted the cost and is set for the proper defense of the Gospel, both in word and in deed.  Each Christian is well aware of the fact that he can fall (I Cor. 10:12).  Each Christian must be vigilant and strong — no time for cowards.  The Christian should labor so as to be able to follow Hebrews 13:6: “So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me.”

Today, in the Kingdom of God, we need men like some of the great men of old such as Abraham (Gen. 22:10-12); Joseph (Gen. 39:9); Daniel (Dan. 6:10-11); David (II Sam. 12:13); Joshua (Josh. 24:15); Barnabas (Acts 4:36-37); Stephen (Acts 7:51-54); Paul (Phil. 3:4-14).

We do NOT need, in the Kingdom of God today cowardly men like selfish Lot (Gen. 13:10-12); Eli—a cowardly and poor example of a father (I Sam. 3:11-14); King Saul, a cowardly self-willed and stubborn man (I Sam. 15:22-23); men like the wicked King Ahab—an ignoble example of ungodliness (I Kings 21:25).

In New Testament days there were hypocrites and self-righteous people like the Pharisees (not all the Pharisees were this way — consider the example of Paul) (Matt. 23:13-36).  Then, of course, there is the example of the covetous, envious, jealous, self-serving Judas Iscariot — the betrayer of our Lord (Matt. 26:45-50).  Surely there are no such men today!  Yet what about the preacher and elders and spineless members who sell the Lord’s beautiful bride into apostasy for the mammon and popularity of this world!  Are they not as bad as  Judas?

There is no middle ground between right and wrong—truth and error—good and evil.  The cowards are lined up on one side, the faithful on the other.  We are either serving God as faithfully as we can, or we are cowardly following the devil and his crowd.

We are either men and women of courage who fearfully serve God, or we are cowards who try to save ourselves!  May our Lord bless the Kingdom with men of wisdom who are like the great men of the Bible.  May He help us to be men — to fight the good fight of faithfulness and lay hold firmly and completely on the promise of the eternal life that awaits the faithful.

Editorial

God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion are being overlooked today.  But one might say, “What are God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion?”  God’s law of inclusion is that when men do what they should do according to the Bible, then they are acceptable to God and are to be treated as His children.  If one has become a Christian and is living the Christian life, then he is to be received by all other Christians.  If one is in fellowship with God, then how could he be rejected by Christians (I John 1:6-7)?  But God also has His exclusion law, and what is it?  His exclusion law is when one deliberately and willfully rejects Bible teaching and Bible doctrine, then God’s fellowship is not extended to him.  If God’s fellowship is not extended to such a one, then how could faithful Christians receive such a person into their fellowship with God’s approval (II John 9-11)?  Christians may receive into their fellowship only those whom God has received, and those whom God rejects must be rejected by His faithful people and His faithful church.

God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion fall into three categories.  These categories are: (1) the unaccountable, (2) those to be included, and (3) those to be excluded.  The unaccountable would include little children (Matt. 18:1-6) and those who do not have the ability to reason and understand the truth of the Bible (John 8:32; Matt. 28:19; James 4:17).

Who are those to be received into God’s fellowship, which is God’s law of inclusion?  Those to be received into God’s fellowship and included among the saved are those who have heard the gospel of Christ (Rom. 10:17), those who have believed the Word of God (Heb. 11:6); those who have repented of their sins (Acts 17:30-31); those who have confessed Jesus Christ (Rom.10:9-10), and those who have been baptized into Christ for or unto the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:15-16).  All of these are absolutely necessary before God will receive one into His fellowship.  If God demands these in order to be included and in order to have fellowship among the saved, then who are you or I to say or act otherwise?  Men are either included or excluded by God, and no man has the right to make an exception.  To do so is presumptuous sin beyond measure.

To stay among the saved and to continue to be accepted by the Lord, one must grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ (II Pet. 1:5-10; Heb. 5:12; 6:1-6), one must possess the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23), one must reject the world and the things in the world (I John 2:15-17), one must seek the kingdom of God first (Matt. 6:33); and a number of other things specified and taught by the Bible.  One must possess and continue to possess all things set forth by Jesus to the best of his ability in order to be included among the saved and fellowshipped by God and his faithful people.

But what about God’s law of exclusion, those to be rejected in spiritual matters and in fellowship?  The infidel is excluded from God’s fellowship (Heb. 11:6; John 8:21, 24).  The agnostic is to be excluded from God’s fellowship (James 1:6-8).  Those who follow after the works of the flesh are to be excluded from God’s fellowship (Gal. 5:19-21).  All who deliberately disobey God’s plan as set forth in the Bible are to be excluded from His fellowship and the fellowship of His saints.

Churches of Christ in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s recognized God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion and respected them.  The liberalism we are now seeing in the churches of Christ would not have been tolerated for one moment in the years specified.  Men like LeRoy Garrett and Carl Ketcherside were rejected and marked by most all churches of Christ and most all of the Christian colleges and universities in those years.  But now the whole thing has reversed among churches of Christ and the “Christian” universities.  If you go to David Lipscomb University, the liberals have taken over.  If you go to Freed-Hardeman, you will find that the liberals have taken over for the greater part.  The same is true with Faulkner University, Harding University and Graduate School, Pepperdine University, Oklahoma Christian University, Abilene Christian University, and all other universities that I am aware of.  They are not going liberal but have already gone liberal, and they make no apologies for it as can be seen from the men they use in their work.  At the present these schools do not recognize God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion and seem not to care, and the same is true with churches of Christ and many preachers therein along with some elders and deacons.  God will deal with this in the after-a-while if not sooner.

God has always had His laws of inclusion and exclusion, and they work sooner or later.  Adam and Eve found this out in the Garden of Eden.  The people of Noah’s day found out about God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion.  The people of Egypt found out about God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion in a very sad way.  Every accountable man will find out about God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion, either in this life or in the life to come.  People may ignore God’s laws of inclusion and exclusion in this life, but they will not do so in the world to come (II Cor. 5:10-11).

Tomfoolery
Malcolm L. Hill

A number of months ago I was informed by a former Southern Christian University student that Brother Rex Turner, Jr., had a Christian church preacher teaching for them.  This student said that the said Christian church preacher asked women to lead in prayer at times.

Brother Jerry Sullins visited Memphis School of Preaching a few days back and asked about this matter.  Brother Sullins was told by Keith Mosher, a teacher at Memphis School of Preaching, that President Rex Turner, Jr., did not know that said Christian church preacher was on their faculty, but upon finding out about the matter, he was on the staff and he was a preacher for the Christian church.  Can you believe this?  This infuriates all dedicated Christians if it did happen, and it infuriates them if it did not happen.

Rex Turner, Jr., is not president over one thousand-plus faculty at Southern Christian university.  His operation is small like ours at Tennessee Bible College and yet he does not know if he has denominational people on his faculty or not.  Can you believe this?  What a reflection on him to try to get out of this situation in such a manner!

And what about the people at Memphis School of  Preaching accepting this answer from Brother Rex Turner, Jr.?  Evidently they can accept this explanation from Rex Turner, Jr., because he is a very good friend of Curtis Cates, and Cates has worked with them on and off through the years.  Cates highly recommends Southern Christian University to students even though they can have a Christian Church preacher on their faculty who believes that instrumental music is all right in worship to God and that women can lead prayer in a mixed audience of men and women.

Brother Jerry Sullins was told that the Christian church preacher no longer teaches at Southern Christian University.  Brother Rex Turner, Jr., removed him when he found out that he was on the faculty.   It is strange to me that Memphis School of Preaching watches every comma and period that Mac Deaver writes about the work of the Holy Spirit and is Pharisaically critical of his work, but they have no problem with Rex Turner, Jr., not knowing that he had a Christian church preacher on his faculty, believing and teaching that instrumental music in worship to God is acceptable.  What a reproach to the Memphis School of Preaching faculty.  If I taught at Memphis School of Preaching, I would request an apology from Curtis Cates for getting them into this dilemma or resign in Christian dignity.  Religious politics makes for strange bedfellows and positions.  Does Brother Garland Elkins agree with us in this?

Innovations We Face Both Young and Old
David Hill

“To introduce as or as if new, to make changes” is the way that Webster defines the term innovation.   To be considered just now is innovation or the introduction of new and changes made in the church.  Under examination is innovation in light of where the Bible leads in Christian fellowship. Fellowship has been simply defined as “joint participation” and is exemplified by the statements on worship (Acts 2:42) and the fellowship one has with God (I John 1:7).  Can one enjoy innovation in keeping with the Word of God?  Both the terms “change” and  “new” are two words that have characterized this generation.  We all have had our interests directed to what’s new.  Everyone basically is interested in a new car, new house, and new technology.  This is of great importance to the citizens of the U. S.  New advances in science have amazed us, technological advances have overwhelmed us, and our affluence has caused us to pursue all that is new.  The world is not such a different place from the world of Paul’s day when they were interested in telling and hearing some new thing (Acts 17:21).

First, consider some observations from history.  The church is affected by the world because the Lord’s church is made up of people who must live and interact with the world.  The first century church in Corinth was affected by the world about them.  This ancient city was well-known for its immorality.  The temple of Venus was located in Corinth, and, according to the historian Strabo, over 1,000 harlots were used to practice their prostitution even as a religious act.  Visitors to the ruins of the ancient temple report that vulgar monuments and statues still are partially visible reminders of the sexual immorality promoted by hedonism.  It should be no surprise that to this people the apostle Paul had to write, “It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you” (I Cor. 5:1).  The world had affected the church.  At Thyatira, Jezebel seduced the servants of God to commit fornication and to eat things offered to idols (Rev. 2:20).  The world affected the church.  The church at Laodicea was lukewarm and uninterested in a religion with zeal, fire, or commitment, because they were “rich and increased with goods and had need of nothing” (Rev. 3:17).  Yes, the material world had affected their service to the Lord.  One has of necessity to interact with the world (I Cor. 5:10), but one does not and should not practice worldly things in substitute for God’s clear instruction.  To do so is so presumptuous and sinful.  It effectively presumes that the individual knows more than God; now that is as presumptuous as one can get.

Innovation affected the first century church.  The Greek world with its philosophy and developing educational and governmental systems was innovating the world.  Philip of Macedon carried Greek culture to the then known world as he went about conquering.  The Roman Empire was innovating transportation with the best roads the world had ever seen.  Communication was improving with the transportation and commerce, and the people had more affluence especially in Rome and the primary Roman territories.  They had an interest in new, change, and innovation.  Yet, God said, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (II Thess. 2:15).  There are good traditions — divinely authorized traditions.

Our society has been affected many times over compared to the ancient society of the first century.  We have seen things not even dreamed of by those of the long ago.  Space flight, television, telephones, nuclear development and even electricity would amaze the folks of 100 years ago much more so the people of the first century.  It is that environment that has produced a people primarily in the United States looking for something new.   Has it affected the church?  You know it has.  Coupled with the affluence of this society— who truly believes that they have need of nothing— the church has been greatly affected.  Why do the practices of the church need to change?  Well, according to some because it’s a new day with the Gen-Xers who must be catered to.  God’s Word still says, “hold the traditions which ye have been taught.”  But many in the church say if we do hold to the old traditions, we’ll lose this generation.  It is ironic that the supposed innovation needed in the church, according to an ever-increasing number, is actually old denominationalism and some of it hundreds of years old.  Make no mistake about it, the world is affecting the digressive move that is so prevalent in the church today.  Further, realize that this has affected both young and old alike in too many cases.

A loose society has influenced a loose church; a no-fault society has produced a no-fault church.  The BT Express lyrics of the 1970’s “if it feels good do it, do it til you’re satisfied” now affects religious practice both in and out of the church.  Never mind that God said, “will worship” does indeed “perish with using” (Col. 2:22).  That is worshiping to suit me or practicing a thing because it’s what I like or makes me feel good— that’s will worship.  It starts with a casual attitude to religion according to Buddy Bell of Montgomery, Alabama.  He stated that a dress code was the first thing to go at Landmark Church of Christ in Montgomery as they began the process of changing.  Why? Because that bothers people.  They will not come to worship if a dress code is in place.  Well, let me quickly say I know of no congregation that has a formal dress code.  Perhaps some do, but the idea that Bell and Don McLaughlin of North Atlanta Church of Christ ranted and raved about at the Tulsa Soul Winning workshop (TSWW) of 2001 is a dressed-down, breaking down of respect for one’s presentation of himself/herself in worship to God.  Remember, worship is a joint participation or act of fellowship.  That means that our actions, appearance and words affect others as well as us (Eph. 5:19; I Cor. 14:16).  The way one dresses reveals respect for himself/herself and others or a lack of it.   Consider the following question: how would you dress for your mother’s funeral?  It is a matter of respect.

Next, the growth of the charismatic or Pentecostal movement in this country and the world is affecting religion in general and the Lord’s church specifically.   Listen to what Joe Beam was saying about the Holy Spirit’s revelations to him as early as 1996 Nashville Jubilee.  At TSWW 2001 Don McLaughlin presented a young man with the “gift” to paint the face of Jesus.  From where would McLaughlin suggest the gift came? Buddy Bell said he was “prompted by the Spirit” to ask for porn addicts to come down and minister  and give testimony at Landmark!  Prompted by the Spirit?  Where would one hear such talk — Pentecostals?  God speaks through His word once for all times delivered to the saints (John 17:17; James 1:25; II Tim. 3:16-17; Jude 3; Gal. 1:6-8).  Why would individuals press for another revelation?  Because another revelation would free them from the strict confines of the New Testament, and the Pentecostals claim God reveals all kinds of things to them with no interest whatsoever in the consistency of their supposed revelation and God’s holy word.  Christianity Today has consistently reported over the past decade the explosion of Pentecostalism, and The Charlotte World April 11, 2003, page 9 reported that the Assemblies of God had grown by 371% over the past 50 years with the United Methodist Church falling 48% over the same time.  You see, it is a hand-clapping, foot-stomping, swinging and swaying day where anything goes in worship including dancing and contemporary music.  Has it affected the church?  Drama teams, special music, praise teams, worship teams, children’s church, none of which can be read on the pages of the New Testament, are now being used in worship in churches of Christ.  Instrumental music is coming through the back door at youth programs and services other than Sunday morning.  At programs like Winterfest-Gatlinburg you can find a young woman playing an instrument singing spiritual songs and even leading the crowd in singing.  Is instrumental music in worship authorized for youth events only?  No, not one word of New Testament authority is given for instrumental music with spiritual songs in worship to God.  Yet, innovation has taken the day, and the church of today and tomorrow will bear the burden of such activities.

How shall we respond?  Some would suggest by their actions that pretending it isn’t happening is the answer.  Some acknowledge the activity but continue to fellowship those who practice the unauthorized innovations.  Both allow the impurity to enter the body of Christ and thus the festering begins.  Is it a doctrine of Christ?  No, so to be faithful one must have no fellowship with the false activities or those who do (II John 9-11).

What will it take to awaken the brethren?  Will the physical placement of the instrument in the auditorium of the meeting-house awaken them?  I don’t know.  This is one thing all can be sure of: God has revealed His will, we can know it, and we must practice it to be saved eternally.

On a mission trip to Moscow, Russia over a decade ago my colleague Ron Gilbert stepped on a syringe unawares.  It stuck to his shoe and he eventually noticed it and would you believe, he was panicked.  The incident happened in an area of Moscow known for drug use.  Yes, he panicked, as did all of us with him because of the potential destruction of his health from just a small needle.  Thankfully, the needle did not puncture his skin, therefore no health problems resulted.  But, had it, it could have been certain death.  If we had responded like many in the church do to fellowship issues, we would have said “don’t worry, it will be all right,” or simply ignored it altogether.

God designed a timeless religion —one that can be practiced practically anywhere, and no changes are allowed or needed.

Another Look at II John 9-11
Kerry Duke

John wrote, “Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God . . . 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” (II John 9-11).  The doctrine of Christ is the teaching Christ gives (the New Testament), not just the doctrine about Christ (His deity).¹  To receive this person into one’s house is not merely to allow the person to enter through the door.  We can scripturally bring a false teacher into our home, especially if we teach him.   To receive into one’s house in this passage means to support this person’s work of teaching by giving him a place to spend the night and by feeding him or giving him supplies for his journey.   The books of II John and III John are written to Christians about traveling preachers.  The book of II John tells them what to do with false teachers; the book of III John tells them what to do with true teachers of the gospel.  When Christians took false teachers into their homes in this sense, they were partaking of the false teaching by supporting the ones who taught it.  (What if some Christian who took a false teacher into his house argued, “Well, I’ve been told he is a false teacher, but he didn’t say anything wrong when he was at our house”?)   John says they were also guilty when they “bid him God speed.”  The expression God-speed is from charein from chairo.  This word is translated “greet” in the New King James version.  Does this mean when we say hello to a false teacher that we are guilty of fellowshipping his error?  This cannot be, since we are to salute even our enemies (Matt. 5:47).  To greet in this verse must mean more than a simple greeting.  It must involve approval, encouragement, and wishing the person well.  The word chairo most often means to rejoice or be glad, and it appears to involve this aspect when it is used to refer to a greeting.  Arndt and Gingrich define its use as a greeting as “welcome, hail (to you), I am glad to see you” and in II John 10-11 they observe that it means “greet someone, bid someone the time of day.”²   If this is true, then John forbids having joy for what a false teacher does, especially when that gladness is shown in a greeting or farewell.   The idea of being “a partaker” is fellowship.  The verb is koinoneo, to share, to partake of, to be a joint participant in something.  The ones who support a false teacher may not teach false doctrine themselves, but they partake of the guilt of his false teaching.  The principle of aiding and abetting is thoroughly taught in Scripture and fully recognized in legal circles.  Men who are otherwise good can be guilty of this.  Jehoshaphat was a good king, but he allied himself to the wrong men at times.  One of these was Ahab (I Kings 22).  After this incident, Jehu rebuked Jehoshaphat with these words: “shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?  Therefore wrath is upon thee from the Lord” (II Chron.19:2).   Jehoshaphat was guilty because he helped the ungodly.  Later he “joined himself” to Ahaziah, king of Israel, “who did very wickedly” (II Chron. 20:35).  They joined together to make ships to go to Tarshish.  God sent Eliezer the prophet who said to Jehoshaphat, “Because thou hast joined thyself with Ahaziah, the Lord hath broken thy works” (II Chron. 20:37).  In the same way, those who assist thieves and other criminals are liable on the basis of the principle of aiding and abetting.

How does this passage apply to our relationship to false teachers today?  To begin with, we cannot financially or materially support false teachers.  Those who send money to Benny Hinn are partakers of his evil deeds.  Christians who send money to the Herald of Truth, Abilene Christian University, and a number of other works are partakers of their false teaching.  Churches that send money to liberal congregations or liberal missionaries partake of their liberal teaching.  Also, we cannot encourage or give verbal support to false teachers by greeting them in such a way that we give approval to what they do.   When otherwise good preachers go to lectureships with liberal speakers, they are joint participants in that program.  They are either helping to promote the liberal stance of those on the program or they are correcting it.  They cannot be “neutral participants” because the program is them and the other speakers, some of whom are liberal.   If these good brethren say, “I am glad to be here, and I appreciate this lectureship”, are they not giving God-speed (chairo) to the program?  Of course they are.  If they do not also give a voice of dissent by speaking against the wrong that is being promoted there, then they are partakers of that wrong.  If Jehoshaphat displeased God by helping Ahab in a war, how can otherwise good brethren please God by helping liberals in these programs?  But some will say, “they did not help the liberal cause just by being on the program with them.”  They do not help them just by being on the program with them, but they do help the liberal cause when they appear on a program with liberals and are silent about the liberalism.  This dodge is ridiculous.  When a preacher goes to a lectureship, he is going either to promote and help the program or he is not.  If he is on a program with liberals, he is joined to them in that work unless he makes clear that he disagrees with their liberal ways.  Of course, if he does that, he won’t be invited to a lot of lectureships.  That is a price many of our preachers are unwilling to pay.

Footnotes:
  ¹For a fuller discussion of this point, see my article, “What is the Doctrine of Christ in II John 9-11?”  In Living Oracles, March 2002, pp. 4, 5, 8.
²William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 874.

Matters of Opinion and Fellowship
Ronald D. Gilbert

Many seem to be under the impression today that there is no such thing as Bible doctrine concerning fellowship.  I say this based on the actions of many.  Consider the following passages on this topic: I Cor. 5:1-11; Rom. 16:17-18; Eph. 5:11; I Thess. 5:14; II Thess. 3:6; Titus 3:10; I John 1:7; II John 9-11.  We see then that there is a Bible doctrine concerning fellowship.  Is it as important as the Bible doctrine on the Lord’s Supper or baptism?  Many brethren would be very upset if some brethren were off on the Bible doctrine of the Lord’s Supper or baptism, but they feel the Bible doctrine of fellowship is not important.  I say this, again, based on the practice of some brethren.

When we talk about matters of opinion concerning fellowship, we are not talking about whether one follows the Bible or not.  That has been determined; we must follow the Bible if we are to please God.  Some congregations by their practice must believe that church discipline is a matter of opinion because they do not practice it.   A congregation has as much right not to take the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week as to refuse to practice church discipline.  If not, why not?

In some areas concerning fellowship there is room for opinion.  The antis have caused and continue to cause much division in the Lord’s church by not understanding these matters.  The Bible does not have an exclusive pattern for caring for orphan children.  Also, having Bible class is a matter of opinion.  Which good work the local church will sponsor is a matter of opinion.  There should be liberty among Christians in matters of opinion and option.

Sometimes brethren say, “I don’t like the way he stands against false doctrine,” so they will not fellowship him.  I have observed most of the time when some make this argument a good question to ask is, “How are you standing against false doctrine?”  Many times, some brethren are like the antis—they cannot tell you how it should be done, but they know the way you are doing it is wrong.  A good example of this occurred here in Cookeville, Tennessee, a few years ago.  A well-known false teacher was coming to Cookeville to speak at a meeting.  There was a meeting of area churches, and it was decided to take out a full-page advertisement in the local newspaper opposing this false teacher.  Over 50 congregations put their names in this ad saying that they opposed this false teacher.  Several brethren criticized this effort.  They did not like the way it was done.  Someone made the observation, “I like the way we did something better than the way they did nothing.”  Were there other options?  Yes!  Some brethren said in their opinion, this was not the best way to handle that situation.  By their own statement they said it was in the realm of opinion.  I also noticed that some who did not like the way we handled this announced and attended the meeting.  Those chose to fellowship the congregation that brought in the false teacher and mark the faithful churches who opposed him.  To this day, many of the congregations will not announce any activities of the churches who took a lead in the newspaper advertisement.

Is it biblical, brethren, for a congregation to “withhold fellowship” from a faithful individual or faithful congregation?  Some practice this on a regular basis because they disagree in matters of opinion.  I wish brethren and congregations would mature to the point of knowing the difference in matters of opinion and doctrine and be consistent in practicing the truth on these matters.  Spiritual growth must occur, or brethren will never know the difference in matters of opinion and matters of faith.

Where would you put the following—under the heading of matters of opinion or matters of doctrine?

Instrumental music
Taking the Lord’s Supper on days other than the first day of the week
The divided assembly
Women taking public lead in worship
Women serving as elders and deacons
Hand clapping during singing
Using visual aids during preaching
Church having a lectureship
Having a Vacation Bible School
Preaching on radio, television; having a web page

It is sad to say that some brethren do not know enough concerning God’s word to know the difference in matters of opinion and matters of doctrine.  In matters of opinion, let us have liberty.  In matters of doctrine, let us have unity.  Study to know the difference (II Tim. 2:15; I Tim. 4:13-16).