About 15 years ago, brethren in a Bible class at Pearl Street were studying the subject of church discipline. This writer asked the question, “Why don’t brethren withdraw fellowship the way the Bible says they ought to?” Brother Dub McClish answered succinctly that the problem was the three F’s: “Friends, family, and finances.” Even though that particular answer was new to many, it made immediate sense.
Concerning the latter of these three, one speaker told of a congregation in Tennessee whose elders had a meeting with their preacher and told him that he could not teach on marriage, divorce, and remarriage because, having just moved into their new building with a high mortgage payment, they could not afford “to run anybody off.” Apparently, they did not want to hear any of that “in season, out of season” preaching (2 Tim. 4:2). One cannot even imagine the church budget determining what was suitable preaching material in the first century.
The other reason why brethren do not fulfil their Christian responsibility to wayward members is that they are related to or are best friends with an influential member of the church. How sad if Christians are saying things, such as, “Yes, it’s a bad situation, but his father’s an elder,” or, “She’s the daughter of the preacher.” Do people not realize that, if someone is guilty of sin, they do not get a free pass because they are related to or are friends with brethren in the leadership? How well is that going to work on the Day of Judgment? “But, Lord, I should be in heaven because I’m the child of a preacher.” “Lord, I was really good friends with an elder; he would really want me to be here.” If anybody recognizes that such excuses will be rejected then, why are they tolerated now?
Two other applications of this awful practice need to be considered. The first relates to another topic about which the Preaching Brother (P.B.) wrote. He had been trying to teach New Testament Christianity in the area in which he lives (not the state of Florida). So, he wrote some newspaper articles in which he distinguished between the grace that is taught in the Bible and the grace that is being taught and practiced by many folks in the 21st century.
The way that some folks believe it today is summarized by saying: “Let us sin that we might receive more grace” (Rom. 6:1, 15). In other words, people like to sin, and God likes to be gracious. Hey! It’s a great plan; we both get what we want. All facetiousness aside, this really is the way some people teach grace; they have tossed out the need for man to repent (that is, cease practicing what is sinful). Many people are really not enthusiastic about hearing that they should live holy and righteous before God (2 Cor. 7:1).
But what got the ministerial alliance in an uproar was when P.B. wrote articles about instrumental music versus singing a Capella. He also included in one of them this comment: “Ask your preacher why he doesn’t preach on certain Bible subjects.” They responded with a half-page article in the paper in which they denounced him as “causing religious division.” Really? Since neither Jesus nor the apostles ever sang with musical instruments, why are they upset when people do not use them today? No church in the first century is said to have had mechanical accompaniment when they sang hymns. Brethren for hundreds of years sang a Capella. So, when someone introduced instruments into worship, that was the party that created division. If not, why not?
“Oh, but since most people use them today, isn’t it divisive to refuse to have them?” No. They were not authorized in the first century, and they are not authorized now. God has never made any changes in His New Covenant. God defines what true worship is, as well as who true worshippers are (John 4:24), and He did not include instrumental music as part of what He wants in the assembly. By simply singing, as God commanded, we are following His commandments (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Those who do otherwise are responsible for the division.
P.B. asked to meet with the ministerial alliance to discuss religious division. Believe it or not, they were not interested in doing so. So, he asked to meet with any group in one of their buildings to discuss any subject they liked. Again, they ignored him. He asked them if any or all of them would debate him on one subject; there were no takers. Since they would not engage in an honorable public discussion, he told them he would respond to their charges in the newspaper, which he did. It took eight months. They have not attacked him since.
Readers might be wondering, “Well, this is all fine and good, but what does it have to do with the main theme of this article?” It was necessary to provide the background for the next sentence in P.B.’s letter, which follows: “The bad/sad part was that some of our members got mad at me.” What? That was the situation, but why? He checked his records and was reminded that some of the members who had quit (over a period of time) gave the following reason—they did not believe there was only one church, as described in the New Testament. “How is that possible?” a sane Christian would ask. How could it be any clearer that Jesus only built one church (Matt 16:18) and died for one church (Acts 20:28)? Paul even says there is one body (Eph. 4:4). There was one overriding reason why they refused to believe the Scriptures on this point—they had family and friends in religious denominations!
The correct response ought to be, “So what?” Are family members more important than truth? Jesus stated that His followers were His family—and more important than His earthly family (Matt. 12:46-50). We all want friends, but it would never occur to genuine Christians to compromise in order to keep them. If they say things, such as, “Your preacher is condemning us,” the response should be, “He is setting forth the Scriptures. Has he said something untrue? Has he advocated something false? Please show us from the Scriptures where he is wrong, and we will talk with him.”
It does not matter what a family member thinks or how insulted he may feel. The only question is, “What does the Bible teach?” Jesus said that He came to bring division among family members (Matt. 10:34-37). He and the truth that He taught is what sets us free from sin (John 8:31-32). No family died for us or can set us free. Christians submit to the teachings of the New Testament. It does not matter if we agree or disagree with them. The Bible is right. Our feelings must take second place as we consider objective truth. But if this is our standard, can we hold those in denominations to a lesser one? They too are subject to what Christ and the apostles taught (John 12:48; Heb. 2:1-4); their traditions are worthless. Unity can only result if we all walk by the same rule (Phil. 3:16).
While some use the Methodist Discipline, the Baptist Manual, Luther’s Catechism, Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, or some “Lateran Council” of the Catholic Church, the so-called “Christian” world will never be united. Only when people get back to reading the Scriptures can unity prevail. How can there be members of the church who do not understand this principle? Is it hard to understand Jesus’ prayer for unity (John 17:20-21)? Is it difficult to comprehend Paul’s command for unity and prohibition against division (1 Cor. 1:10-13)?
P.B. reports that those who had friends and relatives in those denominations then tried to get him fired—unsuccessfully. It is obvious that they have a higher regard for their earthly family than the spiritual family they are in (or have now left). And what message does that give to those folks? They are saying, essentially, “I think more of you than I do the Lord’s church. I esteem you higher than someone who preaches the Word of God. I love you more than Jesus Who died for my sins. I value your denomination more than the Lord’s church.”
Furthermore, those in this group are endorsing (by their actions) three things: a false gospel which those in denominations teach, the false worship that they conduct, and other false doctrines to which these groups subscribe. Paul warned against false gospels (Gal. 1:6-9); Jesus talked about useless worship (John 4:20-24); Paul warned against false teachings (1 Tim. 4:16). How could a supposed Christian be so wrong?
P.B. did not mention this application, but it needs to be pointed out. Some may have been in total disagreement with those timid brethren who will not stand (Eph. 6:10-17), but let me ask this question directly: “Why do you see what is wrong with family and friends being regarded more highly than the Lord’s church—but do not see that you are doing the same thing by fellowshipping congregations in error and false teachers?”
Those who would never allow the church to forego discipline or compromise with denominations often will not take a stand against liberal teachers. “What is so different?” one wonders. Did the inspired apostle write an amendment to 2 John 9-11 that the rest of us do not know about? At certain lectureships, some speakers are rubbing shoulders with those who teach real (not imagined) error, and they apparently think nothing about it.
The most common excuse for preachers fellowshipping liberals is, “Oh, I’ll go anywhere to preach the truth.” Really? What verse is that? “Jesus spoke in the synagogue.” Yes, He did—until the crowd heard what the message was. Then they wanted to kill Him (Luke 4:28-30). Jesus did not appear on a lectureship in Jerusalem with the high priest, and Paul did not allow himself to be scheduled on the same program with Hymenaeus and Philetus on the subject of eschatology.
Warning after warning is provided in the New Testament on the subject of fellowship (Rom. 16:17-18; Titus 3:10). Heretics are to be rejected—not given the right hand of fellowship! Why is this part of the New Testament not being followed by some brethren?
The answer is the same as in the other two instances—friends, family, and finances. “Hey! I’ve got friends over at the Apostasy Street Church. I won’t withdraw fellowship from them or refuse to participate in their activities.” ”My nephew is a deacon over at the Will Worship Church of Christ. He says that things are not nearly as bad as reported. They only use instrumental music in their Saturday evening service.” “We know that Brother Dynamo at the Expansion Street Church of Christ some-times goes a little far, but he is so well-loved, and we have 25 of our former members over there. You know they wouldn’t put up with anything really unscriptural.” Has anyone heard excuses such as these?
If some brethren choose to disregard clear-cut errors taught by false teachers and fellowship them anyway, should we all follow suit? No. What others choose to do is not our standard. The Word of God is our guideline. We must abide in the truth (John 8:31-32)—even if we are the only ones who do. (We are not talking about opinions here but actual plain teaching in the Scriptures.) How is it that the church ran into apostasy from the second to the sixth centuries? How were so many pulled away from the changes to worship and salvation that all had once held to? It may be an answer that is too simplistic, but it would not be surprising to learn that it had something to do with friends, family, or finances.