WE SHOW OUR FAITH IN AND LOVE FOR JESUS CHRIST BY OBEYING HIS WORD
In this essay I wish to do five things: (1) Make clear some wonderful truths, (2) Remind us of a fact which we surely all know, (3) Make an admission, (4) Set out a list, and (5) Discuss in some detail two items on the list. I shall consider these matters in the order in which I have listed them.
l. SOME WONDERFUL TRUTHS. Before considering the basic problem with which this essay is to be concerned, I wish to make clear that: (l) I hold that the church which Jesus Christ purchased with His own blood (Acts 20:28) exists on earth today; that is, there are men and women who are living today who are actually members of that church; (2) that all who obey the gospel, being baptized into Christ (2 Timothy 2:10; Romans 6:3-5; Galatians 3:26-27), are saved from their past sins in such action (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38; 3:16; Romans 6:17-18), being added by the Lord Himself to the church (Acts 2:41, 47); (3) that all members of the church who live a faithful life (living a life of “sowing to the spirit” or “walking in the light” of His word, the Bible, (Galatians 6:7-9; 1 John 1:7) will go “into eternal life at the judgment” (Matthew 25:46); (4) that since salvation is in the body of Christ, (the church), no one is saved so long as he remains outside of the church (Acts 2:47; 20:28; Ephesians 2:13-16; 5:26); and (5) that the church is not a denomination, or any part of a denomination. In considering the rest of this essay, no reader should conclude that any statement of concern regarding certain matters should be regarded as constituting grounds for detraction from any of the preceding points.
2. A REMINDER OF A FACT. In the paragraphs of the essay which will follow this one, I will be concerned with a number of things which are matters of grave concern presently. In setting out these matters of concern, I do not mean to imply that the whole church is involved in all or even in any one of these weaknesses. However, I do feel sincerely that these matters are prevalent enough in the church today to warrant grave concern upon the part of everyone who loves Christ and His cause.
3. AN ADMISSION. The church is composed of human beings. It was because each of us was a sinner that we needed to be saved by the blood of Christ (Romans 3:23; 6:23; Ephesians 1:7). Further, even after we become members of the church none of us reaches the state of living a life of sinless perfection during this life. While it is possible that any one of us, as a member of the church, can live a life of “walking in the light” (1 John 1:7), John makes clear that not one of us lives a life of completely avoiding isolated acts of sin (1 John 1:10). However, just because there are weaknesses in members of the church, we must not conclude either: (1) that the Lord’s church is not in existence today, or (2) that the church is not the unique body of Christ.
4. A LIST OF AREAS OF CONCERN. Following is a list of at least some of the matters which seem to me to be of grave concern for the church today: (l) the attitude toward truth held by some members of the church today—some reject the view that truth is both absolute and attainable; (2) lack of militance in the proclamation and defense of the gospel—some in the church today feel that it is un-Christ-like to militantly proclaim and defend the truth; (3) lax views on the matter of Christian fellowship—some members of the church hold that the basis of Christian fellowship is merely one fact (belief in the Lord Jesus Christ) and one act (being baptized), with “doctrinal matters” being irrelevant to fellowship; (4) lax attitudes and practices on divorce and remarriage; (5) failure to attain true Christian character and true Christian peace of mind; (6) unhappy homes-homes which are not truly Christian; (7) ignorance of the Bible—many members of the church today know very little about the Bible; (8) great influence of “Romantic” type philosophy and neo-orthodox theology—some lean upon “feelings,” not adequate evidence; (9) the influence of the so-called “new Pentecostalism” among some members of the church; (10) the practice of some schools and colleges, operated by our own brethren, of employing as teachers those who are not truly sound in the faith, and (11) the proliferation of journals which propagate false doctrines; (12) the view that men cannot prove either that God exists or that the Bible is the word of God (some brethren seem to have rejected the Bible view, as set forth in Romans 1:18-21, and have accepted in its stead the agnostic philosophy of such thinkers as Blaise Pascal and William James—this is quite crucial and needs to be prayerfully considered).
5. DISCUSSION IN SOME DETAIL OF TWO ITEMS ON THE PRECEDING LIST. I wish to discuss in some detail the following two items from the above list: (1) Improper attitude toward truth, (2) The lack of militance in the proclamation and defense of the gospel.
(1) Improper attitude toward truth—that is toward the Bible. When involved in a discussion of Bible teaching, some present-day members of the church are heard to say such things as, “Oh well, that is just your idea about it, my idea is as good as yours. What seems true to you is true for you, what seems true for me! Besides, even If there is even if there is such a thing as absolute or objective truth, we couldn’t learn it anyway—and, even if we did learn it, we couldn’t ever know that we had learned it.” The position reflected by such statements is false.
In the midst of a prayer, Jesus said, “Thy word is truth” (John 17:17). What does it mean to say of a statement that is true? A statement is true if, when it says “X is the case,” X really is the case. The Bible is true; it is the inspired, inerrant, and authoritative word of the one true living God.
What does it mean to say that truth is “absolute”? To say that truth is absolute is to say that it does not depend upon the mental reactions of the person who is considering it. This means that the truth of a proposition is not changed by individual persons drawing conclusions about it. On the other hand, to say that the truth of a given proposition depends upon the mental states of those persons who consider it is to say that the subject (the “knower”) never knows the object (what is to be “known”) as it really is—but “knows” it only as it appears to him. Therefore, according to this view, the truly crucial element in the entire matter is not what actually is the case, but the activities of the “knowing” subject.
In regard to Bible truth to say that it is “absolute” is to say that the Bible teaches now exactly what it taught long before any men now living on earth were born. The fact that some men who now live on the earth have studied the Bible and have drawn conclusions as to what it teaches, does not change one thing which the Bible has taught through the many centuries it has been on earth. Surely, we can all see that if truth is not absolute—but is merely relative—then there is no truth at all in any truly meaningful sense. There would be no objective truth to which we could refer in order to evaluate any statement. There would be no way for anyone to be really wrong about any belief or affirmation. It should be clear that the contention that truth is relative—not absolute—is absurd on the very face of it, for it would be the case that that contention itself would be merely relative. Truth is absolute. It does not change with the changing mental states of the individual people who consider various propositions. Men do not—by being involved in various mental states—“create” the truth which is God’s will. Rather, God’s will is objective truth. It doesn’t matter how many people draw differing conclusions about that truth—the truth remains the same! God’s truth has objective stability and independence outside of any particular knower. However, many in the church today have espoused the subjectivistic point of view which holds that the “truth” of a proposition depends on the mental states of the knowing subjects. It seems clear that some in the church today—no doubt under the influence of false philosophy and false theology—have espoused erroneous views concerning the Bible which are reflected by their making such statements as the following, “The Bible teaches doctrine X to man A, and it teaches doctrine non-X (the contradictory of doctrine X) to man B, and both man A and man B hold views that are true. Doctrine X is true for man A, and doctrine non-X is true for man B.” The position implied by such statements is false. Truth is absolute—not relative! The Bible teaches today exactly what it taught approximately nineteen hundred years The fact that men living today have now studied the Bible and have drawn conclusions as to what it teaches does not change its actual message one bit.
The second specific element in this general problem (that some hold that even if there were absolute truth, none of us could learn it) is also a crucial one. We hear such statements as, “Even if it is the case that the Bible is absolute truth, as you have explained, such is not important because men cannot come to knowledge of that absolute objective truth—at least they cannot know that they know it. You see, absolute truth is not attainable.” To show the falsity of such a view I call attention to the words of our blessed Lord when he said, “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). Again and again and over and over, the New Testament teaches that we can know certain truths.
Let it be made clear that the affirmation that men can know truth does not entail the proposition that any man is, or can be, omniscient. But one does not have to be omniscient to know at least some things. And we all do know at least some things. I suggest that each and every reader take his own concordance and check every passage in the New Testament which contains the words “know” and “knowledge.”
A serious study of the Bible will reveal that not only is it possible for men to come to know the truth but that we must come to a knowledge of certain truths. As a matter of fact, I will say without any fear of successful contradiction that not only I, but many others also, already know the following truths which are taught in the Bible: (1) that there is one true living God (Exodus 20); (2) that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (John 20:30-31); (3) that men must believe in Jesus as the Son of God in order to be saved (John 8:24); (4) that Jesus was born of a virgin (Matt. 1:18-25); (5) that men must repent of their sins (Acts 17:30-31); (6) that men must confess their faith in Christ (Matthew 10:32-33); (7) that men must be baptized in water in order to be saved (Acts 2:38; 22:16; 10:47-48; John 3:35); (8) that salvation is in the church, the body of Christ (Ephesians 1: 22-23; 2:13-16); (9) that to be saved eternally members of the church must live lives dedicated to Christ (Revelation 2:10; Luke 14:26-33; 2 Peter 1:5-11); (10) that one must believe and practice in religion only what is authorized by the Bible (2 John 9-11; 1 Chronicles 15:1-15); (11) that all in the tomb (both good and evil) will be raised from the dead (John 5:28, 29); (12) that all men will, in the future, stand before Christ in Judgment (Hebrews 9:27; Matthew 25:31-46); and (13) that all men at the judgment will go either into eternal life or into eternal punishment (Matt. 25:46). There are a number of other things that we can and do know, but these are sufficient to establish the point here being made: truth is absolute and attainable.
(2) The great need for militance in the church today.
The Bible clearly teaches that the church is the army of Jesus Christ and, thus, that every member of the church should be a good soldier of Christ (2 Timothy 2:3). Paul taught that Christians should fight the good fight of the faith (1 Timothy 6:12) and put on the whole armour of God (Ephesians 6:10-18).
Yet, it seems clear to me that many in the church today have been influenced more by modern-day theologians, philosophers, and psychologists than they have by the plain and simple teachings of Jesus, Paul, Peter, John and other New Testament writers. Many actually hold that it is un-Christ-like for a child of God to be involved in any kind of militant proclamation and defense of the truth.
Apparently, Alexander Campbell had to deal with the same problem during the days he was editor of The Millennial Harbinger, for in that journal, after explaining not only the value but the necessity of the militance in the proclamation of the gospel, he said,
But yet, plain and obvious as the preceding remarks may be, many will contend that religious controversy, oral or written, is incompatible with the specific and contemplative character of the genuine Christian, and promotive of strifes, tumults, and factions in society, destructive of true piety towards God and of benevolence toward man. This is a prejudice arising from the abuses of controversy.
Of the value of controversy, Campbell further said,
There can be no improvement without controversy. Improvement requires and presupposes change; change is innovation, and innovation always has elicited opposition, and that is what constitutes the essentials of controversy. Every man who reforms his own life has a controversy with himself. And, therefore, no man who has not always been perfect, and always been in company with perfect society, can be a good man without controversy. This being conceded (and who can refuse to concede it?) it follows that whensoever society, religious or political, falls into error, or rather, so long as it is imperfect, it is the duty of all who have any talent or ability to oppose error, moral or political, who have intelligence to distinguish and utterance to express, truth and goodness, to lift up a standard against it, and to panoply themselves for the combat.
Further Campbell said,
If there was no error in principle or practice, then controversy, which is only another name for opposition to error, real or supposed, would be unnecessary. If it were lawful, or if it were benevolent, to make a truce with error, then opposition to it would be both unjust and unkind. If errors were innocent and harmless, then we might permit it to find its own quietus, or to immortalize itself. But so long as it is confessed that error is more or less injurious to the welfare of society, individually and collectively considered, then no man can be considered benevolent who does not set his face against it. In proportion as a person is intelligent and benevolent, he will be controversial, if error exists around him. Hence, the Prince of Peace never sheathed the sword of the spirit while He lived. He drew it on the banks of Jordan and threw the scabbard away. (The above quotations are from The Millennial Harbinger, Vol. 1, No. 1, Jan. 4, 1830, 40-41.)
I have not quoted these statements from Campbell because he is an authority in religion—only the Bible is authoritative! But I have given these quotes to show that a great and good man recognized the basic Bible truth on the matter of militancy. Bible teaching verifies what he has said this matter (Jude 3).
The Bible teaches that there is one definite body of doctrine and that we must be loyal to that one body of doctrine (Galatians 1:6-9; Jude 3; Matthew 7:21-23; John 3:32; Revelation 22:18-19).
The church was truly militant during the first century and it grew at an almost incredible rate. The church was truly militant from the mid-nineteenth century to the middle of the twentieth century. Again it grew at an almost incredible rate. Not only did it grow in number, it remained basically sound during the times that it was militant during this later period. It is surely the case that when men lose their zeal for a militant proclamation and defense of the truth, they are either losing or have already lost their clear concept of the uniqueness and essentiality of the truth of the Lord.
We have considered in some detail two major areas of concern with the Lord’s church today: (1) false views of truth, and (2) false views as to whether militancy should be characteristic of the efforts of God’s people to carry out the Great Commission. It is my sincere conviction that if members of the church do not deal properly (as the Bible clearly teaches us to) two crucial problems, then we shall see—within the next few years—an apostasy of major proportions, perhaps even surpassing that of the late nineteenth century. It is my view that some apostasy has already taken place as a result of the acceptance of “Romantic” types of philosophy of religion, neo-orthodox theology, with the resulting acceptance of new-Pentecostalism. May God help us all to be loyal to Him by being loyal to His word. There is no other way to show one’s faith in or love for the Lord Jesus Christ than by obeying His word (James 2:18-26; Galatians 5:6; John 14:15-21; 1 John 5:3; 1 Samuel 19:22-26; Revelation 22:18-19).
The above article was written in 1974.