A Question of Authority
Kerry Duke

Jesus told Pilate, “Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given to thee from above” (John 19:11). Authority belongs to God. Rulers do not have authority over citizens because they rule them; they rule citizens because they have authority, and that authority comes from God. “There is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God” (Rom. 13:1).

Parents have authority over children (Eph. 6:1), husbands have authority over wives (I Pet. 3:1-6), and elders have authority over a congregation (Heb. 13:17). They have this authority because God delegated it to them. This principle is simple but significant. A human being can have legitimate authority over another person only as God has stipulated. Two implications follow from this truth. One is that no person or group has the right to take away this authority as long as it is being legitimately exercised. The other is that those posessing this authority, from God have no right to surrender it to others.

God gave parents authority over their children. No parent has the right to abdicate the exercise of that authority, and no government has the right to take its rightful use from them. Decisions regarding the health, education, and overall welfare of children are up to parents. God gave them this authority, and they will answer to God for how they have used it.

Suppose parents form an organization to help each other with the problems they face in raising children. At first, they meet to encourage and advise each other. They elect officers, charge membership fees, and make suggestions for all the parents who are members of the organization. But eventually the suggestions become demands. The group begins to tell parents how they must educate their children. They make requirements of parents regarding discipline, chores, and curfews. What began as a parental support group has become a legislative body.

I don’t know of an organization of private citizens like this. But what if it did happen? Would it be right scripturally? Can any individual or group have authority over parents in the legitimate exercise of their God-given authority over their own children? Of course not. Why? Does the Bible anywhere specifically say that a “Parental Society” or “Parent’s Convention” like the one described is unscriptural?

The issue in this hypothetical situation is not in finding a New Testament passage that specifically forbids this arrangement, but in adducing a passage that authorizes it! But this cannot be done! God did not have to say

“Thou shalt not have an organization that has authority over the parents’ oersight of their children.” Why? Because God authorized parents to oversee their children. Parents can delegate, not abdicate, that authority to others (Gal. 4:1-2). But no group, even with the parents’ permission, has the right to supersede the authority God gave to parents. This is clear not becuaes of an explicit warnign in the Bible, but because of the simple absence of authority.

Congregations are to be autonomous just as homes are autonomous. They are to make their own decisions in matters of judgment. What is true of an organization above the home applies to an organization above the local congregation. If an organization is wrong that tells parents how they must raise their children, then an organization is wrong that tells churches how to run their affairs. The hierarchy of the Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, and state boards of denominational churches are wrong for this reason. Missionary societies, which give orders to congregations, are unscriptural on the same basis. These groups are wrong not because they are specifically condemned in the New Testament, but because they are nowhere authorized. God did not have to say, “Thou shalt not have church governments that exercise authority over local congregations” any more than He had to specifically denounce the kind of parental organization mentioned earlier.

This principle is what separates pure New Testament Christianity from Catholicism and Protestantism. It is the reason for not using instrumental music in worship or baptizing babies. It is why the church of Christ refuses to pray to Mary or handle snakes in worship. It is why churches of Christ are autonomous and do not place themselves under larger governing bodies. These things are not wrong because they are specifically condemned in Scripture. They are wrong because God gave no authority for them.

In a day when many do what they want in religion and complain to anyone who questions their way, “The Bible doesn’t say I can’t,” this simple hypothetical question is useful.

Perhaps another application is relevant. If no organization has the right to govern the legitimate exercise of authority by parents, then how could an organization, such as a one world government, have the right to govern the individual nations of the world? If there can be no authoritative parental organization above individual homes, how can a governing body above autonomous national governments rightly exist? If congregations and families are self-governing, then are not nations the same?

This reasoning also exposes an extreme at the opposite end of the doctrinal spectrum: the idea that a Bible college is wrong because, like a missionary society, it is an organization separate from the church doing the work God gave the church to do. This argument misses the point of the missionary society controversy. The unscripturalness of missionary societies lies in the fact that they govern congregations and thus undermine congregational autonomy. The issue is the authority these organizations wield, not the works they engage in (assuming, of course, that their teaching is biblical). Individuals can engage in evangelistic works that are not under the oversight of an eldership, and they can bind together in these works if they so choose. They have individual liberty to do so. It is not necesssary to defend a Bible college by calling it an “adjunct of the home.” The issue is individual Christian liberty.

Consider again our beginning illustration. Parents can form support groups to help each other. They can delegate authority to caretakers and teachers. But the minute they surrender their autonomy by creating an organization that legislates parental decision for them and to them, they abdicate their role as parents and transgress God’s Word. Parents may rightly delegate to entities or individuals under them, but they have no right to give up their authority to anyone that functions above them in raising their children, just as no group or individual, even the God-ordained institution of the state or the church, has the right to take away the legitimate exercise of this authority. The same is true of any organization which displaces congregational autonomy, either by the voluntary and unscriptural judgment of elders to surrender their authority to the organization, or by the organization binding its decision on congregations. The missionary societies of the 1800’s and early 1900’s which in part caused the division that led to the formation of the Christian church had this kind of power. But a school or college does not violate the principle of congregational autonomy merely because it is not under an eldership.

Labeling a Bible college a “parachurch” organization misses the point. A parachurch organiztion is a group that works beside or alongside the congregation. In this sense, the home is a parachurch organization and an individual doing evangelistic work on his own is functioning in a parachurch capacity. For that matter, the church is a para-home organization, and a school is a para-home organization. The real problem is when an organization becomes a super-church entity exercising authority over local congregations.

Editorial

Big is not always best. Some seem to think that the larger a thing is the better it is when it comes to the church of the New Testament.

A number of years ago the brethren thought that a missionary society was what was needed to get the gospel into all the world. So they went over the country and around the world to try to establish one. They succeeded in doing this to a large measure and a sizable degree. Many churches of Christ joined the missionary society thinking the bigger the better. They wanted to get the gospel of Christ into all the world and they thought if every church would join the missionary society this could be greatly helpful in getting the job done.

But brethren then did not know what they were getting into. First of all, the missionary society was sinful and wrong. It took the power of oversight away from the elders of all the congregations belonging to it. This was not God’s plan. God’s plan for church government was for qualified men to be appointed and they were to take the oversight of the congregation where they were appointed (Acts 14:23; Acts 20:28).

It is sometimes easy for church of Christ people to get excited over some unscriptural thing if it is big.

Sometimes it is easy to get churches of Christ excited over a scriptural work if it is big and sounds good. A number of years ago a congregation of the church of Christ launched a program called One Nation Under God. They raised millions of dollar to send out the largest mailing of religious literature in the history of this country. But when we went to the post office, thousands of those mailouts were in the garbage can and all over the floor. In talking with others about this mailout, their story was the same as ours – thousands and thousands of dollars wasted. In fact, millions of dollars of the Lord’s money went down into the garbage can in the money spent on this mailout material. Oh, yes, it was the largest mailout of religious material in the history of the United States of America, but what does this mean? Nothing! It was merely a historical mailout of religious material.

Give us eight or ten million dollars and let us see how many Christian workers and gospel preachers we can train. These gospel preachers and Christian workers will be with us fifty to sixty years and they will not be thrown into the waste can. Educating Christian boys and girls is great gain.

The Herald of Truth radio program started off small with the Fifth and Highland church of Christ in Abilene, Texas, overseeing it. But it grew to be very large and world wide. Guess where it is now? It is in the hands of the liberals in the church and they are fighting the faithful churches of Christ. Hundreds of faithful churches of Christ came to support the Herald of Truth only to build and lose it to a group that preaches and believes in denominationalism. It is scriptural for churches of Christ to cooperate in benevolence and world evangelism. There is no question about this. But we are convinced in that things can get too big and out of hand. “All things are lawful unto me but all things are not expedient” (I Cor. 10:23). Too big may not be expedient.

We have always had brethren dreaming dreams of millions of dollars and they have visions which are beyond their ability. When we get involved in a thing that is so costly that we must compromise Bible truth to keep the dollars flowing in, in order to operate, we are not wise. Think and pray about this, brethren.
––Malcolm L. Hill

A Refusal to Fight False Doctrine
Glenn B. Ramsey

The instruction of a great soldier of the faith is, “Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses” (I Tim. 6:12). This would not be an easy fight. Paul further required Timothy to “endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ” (II Tim. 2:3). Later Paul would talk about his own life by saying, “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith” (II Tim. 4:7).

If one is lazy or unconcerned, or only interested in selfish things, it is easy to find an excuse for running from an enemy rather than confronting that enemy. This is true in the physical world and the battles that must be fought there, and it is certainly true in the spiritual world and the battles that are to be fought there. Paul instructed in Romans 12:18, “If it is possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceable with all men.” Did Paul follow his own advice? Obviously he did! Yet Paul was almost always in a position where he was contending for the faith and, as he said, he was always set for the defense of the gospel (Phil. 1:17). He also commended the Philippian Christians because they had helped him in these efforts and thus were in fellowship with him as he defended the faith (Phil. 1:7). Paul never refused to engage an enemy of the truth. Yet, Paul was willing to yield in matters of judgment and opinion. In this way Paul followed Jesus’ example. We should follow Paul as he followed Jesus.

A casual observation of the activity of men who profess to be Gospel Preachers today would indicate that they either haven’t read Paul’s instructions, don’t believe them, or don’t believe such instructions apply to them! All preachers today need to read and heed the instruction of the Lord to Ezekiel:

Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man of their coasts, and set him for their watchman: If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him.

But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul. But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned, if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand. So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me. When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity, but thou hast delivered thy soul (Ezek. 33:1-9).

Obviously, there must be watchmen in spiritual tual Israel, and the watchmen must sound the warnings! It is then up to the individual to heed the warning and take appropriate action. There are sometimes those who will “sound the trumpet” but who will not fight in the battle! How many in the Lord’s church are concerned about the moral sins of fornication, adultery, homosexuality, drunkenness, gambling, immodesty in dress, and such things? The better question is, “How many in the Lord’s church are sounding the warnings about such things and then engaging the enemy in battle over these things?” How many are sounding the trumpet about the false teachers that have been ravaging the church for the past twenty-five to thirty years? Some of the preachers that consider themselves “better-known” are just now acknowledging that there are false teachers within the “ranks” of professing Christians who are dangerous to the cause! Where have these “johnny-come-lately” trumpet blowers been? Not only have we seen the damage that is done by the purveyors of “change” when they have their way in the churches of the New Testament, but we have also seen the insidious results of personal moral sin in the lives of many of these who have fought the faithful soldiers when those soldiers stood in defense of the truth! Yet many of the “liberals” in the body of Christ held high the hands of these folks when they were being challenged by the faithful! Do they still uphold them? We will see. If one only casually studies the history of the Restoration period of the New Testament church, it will be noted that relatively few, even then, took seriously the admonition of God to faithfully defend the truth, even against those who were close friends and family. Perhaps we should note that the number of “faithful” watchmen on the walls has always been rather small! However, this does not justify or forgive those who profess to be soldiers of Christ from their duty. For all practical purposes many preachers and professing Christians today are A.W.O.L.! They are “absent without leave” from God! How different these are from the example of the great Apostle Paul!
Certainly the wise servant of God understands that the mission of the church of Christ is to preach the Gospel of Christ to every creature under heaven (Mark 16:15-16). We must never lose sight of the primary goal of evangelization of the souls of the world! Yet, as in Ezekiel’s time so today, we must be concerned about the dangers both from without and from within. We must beware lest we are “full of dead men’s bones” and other corruption on the inside (of the church) while presenting an outward appearance of proper evangelism at work! Indeed, the “beam” must be removed from our own eye if we would help remove the “mote” from another’s eye!

On Unity Meetings
G. K. Wallace

(This material is part of a speech made at the Freed-Hardeman lectures in 1974).

In 1933 James DeForest Murch wrote continuously in “Christian Action” a publication of the Christian Standard. Jimmie Lovell took up the same cry in “Action.” Murch called for “spiritually committed persons in homes, churches, and communities, using specially-designed Bible studies. Christian Action Conferences were held in all parts of the nation.”

Through this “Christian Action” they set out to infiltrate churches of Christ and teach them that instrumental music in worship was an indifferent matter. George A. Klingman, was among the first in 1932 to enter fellowship with the Christian Church. When I entered Abilene Christian College in 1924, Batsell Baxter, President, refused to keep George A. Klingman on the faculty because he was not sound in the faith.

Claude E. Witty of Detroit, Michigan, joined the bandwagon of the Murch movement. Murch and Witty started a Unity movement. They had a five point program:

1. “Prayer”
2. “Survey” – see how people believe.
3. “Friendliness” – fellowship meetings– This is the pattern of similar unity movements being initiated by others today. Here is where they learned it.
4. “Cooperation” – work together in common enterprises.
5. “Study and discussion.”

The first National Unity meeting was held in Detroit, Michigan, in May, 1938. Among the participants were H. H. Adamson, J. N. Armstrong, W. R. Walker, P. H. Welshmer, and O.A. Trinkle, and others. This was a rosey affair with everyone talking in parables.

In 1939 there was another Unity Meeting in Indianapolis and Murch and his crowd felt ready to “grind their organ.” W. R. Walker delivered a speech in which he thought he could defend the instrument by the silence of the scriptures. Edwin R. Errett, editor of the Christian Standard, tried to defend their position in an exchange with H. Leo Boles, editor of the Gospel Advocate. H. Leo Boles so successfully defended the truth at Indianapolis that the Christian Church adopted a less direct attack on the church of Christ. (To be continued)

On Keeping Files
Malcolm L. Hill

We believe in keeping files. My personal files on liberalism, modernism, anti-ism, and the apostasy in the church of Christ have grown so much in the past 30 years that we can hardly find storage space for them.

It is not unusual to run upon brethren that do not like files and facts. Why would this be so? It is so because either they have been wrong or some of their family or friends have been wrong and they do not want to be caught having been wrong. Many times in the past 25 or 30 years I have confronted brethren about their preaching, their fellowship, and what they have said and done. In not a few cases brethren and churches have denied certain facts and said we were wrong. All I have done is gone to the files and pulled from them the proof of my position and what I have affirmed or denied.

We have almost all the lectureships of both schools and churches on file which have occurred in the past 25 or 30 years. When we have confronted certain brethren about appearing on programs with unfaithful brethren without saying anything about their false doings, some have denied they were on these programs. All we have done is gone to the files and proven they were.

Some have become angry when we have done this. Others have in one way or another tried to belittle us for keeping files. In talking with a brother not long ago about a matter, he became angered when we told him we had the proof. He actually did not want to acknowledge what we were affirming except to say, “yes, I know because you have told me that before.” By the tone of his voice and the way he answered, one could tell he did not like the fact that we had the proof for our affirmation.

The apostle John had the facts about the seven churches of Asia and they knew it (Rev. 2-3). The apostle Paul had the facts about the church at Corinth and they knew it. Jesus Christ had the facts about Saducees and Pharisees and they knew it. So we have a Bible right to keep files and records. God himself keeps a record on each one of us (Rev. 20:11-15).

All of us should remember that proveable words and deeds which we have spoken or done often come before us and confront us. I have said the more we say and do the more we have to take back and swallow. We should not get mad nor upset when we must face our doings.

We can never go wrong by doing right. We will always be happy when we have done right and doing wrong never makes one feel right. Let us all do right and we will never have to fret about files and facts.