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” (1 Cor. 1:10).
Divisions and parties are condemned (Gal. 5:20).
As you know, we have the opposite of this biblical requirement. All who
profess to follow Jesus are not united. In the United States alone there
are more than two hundred denominations. One group teaches one thing;
another something different. One denomination says, “Lo, here is
Christ.” Another says, “No, He is with us.” Consequently, people are
confused and know not which way to turn. Some are driven into
infidelity. Many decide that the whole thing is incomprehensible and
just decide to follow the line of least resistance.
What is the source of all this division and consequent confusion? Is it
the Bible? Is it possible that God failed to reveal clearly his will to
man? Is it so ambiguous that we can not all “see it alike?” If so, the
Bible is a failure. If the Bible is not an adequate ground of unity,
there is no such ground. If the Bible is not a sufficient basis for
unity then it is inconsistent; for certainly its ideal is unity. So I
wish to go on record in declaring that the Bible is not the source of
the trouble!
III
A Partial Answer
In our search for the origin of denominational divisions, with all their
attendant evils, we must look in some other direction. Let me appeal to
you as an individual. How did you come to be what you are religiously?
Where did you get your conception of Christianity? From reading the
Bible, or from some other source? Did you form your church connection
because of conviction resulting from prayerful, diligent, and faithful
Bible study? Or did you merely follow the example of your parents, the
social set to which you belong, your personal taste, the law of
convenience, or some other fallible standard?
If you will examine your own hearts, it will throw a lot of light, not
only on where so many denominations came from, but especially on why
they are able to continue, which is equally, if not more, important.
Even in a congregation like this, most likely there are some whose
religious course has been determined by convenience rather than
conviction. Such persons are not steadfast. When it becomes more
convenient to do something else, or to be something else, they will turn
aside. Unless you develop some convictions, you can easily become a
liability rather than an asset.
In religion, as in politics, many blindly follow the example of their
parents. Even if this policy leads you into the church we read about in
the Bible, it is not sufficient. If you are a member of the Lord’s
church, you ought to have a better reason than the fact that your
parents happened to be members of it. You ought to have some convictions
on the subject. You ought to be what you are because you believe you
would go to hell if you were otherwise! If that is the way you feel,
then you will be worth something to the group to which you belong. Then
you will put the church first.
But how come our parents to be divided into more than two hundred
different sects? The same false standards which cause our generation to
be divided, including the example of their parents. And so we may trace
the history of denominations and erroneous doctrines back up the stream
of time from generation to generation, can’t we?
This, however, does not completely explain their origin. They had to
begin somewhere between here and Pentecost. How far back can they be
traced? When and where did they originate?
IV
Early Apostasy and Roman Catholicism
In order to answer these questions let us begin at the other end of the
line, at Pentecost, and come down toward the present to see what we can
find. Since Jesus built only one church, at least one hundred and
ninety-nine of the approximately two hundred now in existence had to get
started somewhere else, at some other time, and in some other way.
In the church that Jesus built, each congregation is entirely
independent of every other congregation. The Bible teaches
congregational autonomy, which means that under Christ each congregation
is entirely independent. According to the Bible, there can be no
organization whatsoever binding two or more congregations together. This
is the first fundamental fact to remember.
Second, in the church built by Christ, each local congregation is
supervised by a group of men who are called by either of six different
names: pastors, bishops, overseers, presbyters, elders, or shepherds. In
the Bible these six names are used interchangeably. The words elder and
presbyter are both from the same Greek word “presbyteros”; the words
bishop and overseer are both translations of the same Greek word
“episkopos”; and the words pastor and shepherd are also synonyms, being
derived from the Greek word “poimenas.” Paul referred to the elders of
the church at Ephesus as bishops and designated their work of feeding or
tending the flock by using the verb form of the Greek word for pastors
or shepherds (Acts 20:17, 28; Titus 1:5, 1:7; 1 Pet. 5:1, 2).
Hence, no distinction of title or rank is suggested by the Bible use of
these words. It is very important that we remember this fact. The
overseers, the pastors, the shepherds, the bishops, the elders, and the
presbyters are all the same men. The nine men here whom we frequently
call elders may by the same authority be called by either of these other
five names. They are the pastors of this congregation; they are the
overseers; they are the bishops; they are the presbyters; they are the
shepherds of the flock.
Whenever one of these names is used to distinguish one person from the
rest of the group they describe, trouble will always follow. That is
exactly what happened in the early history of the church. It probably
occurred in a very natural way and so gradually that only the most
vigilant became alarmed. In a group of overseers, it is most likely that
one of them will be more active than the others. It is natural for one
of them to have more ability and more zeal as a leader than the rest,
and he is liable to become known as the leader of the group.
Thus it came to pass in the history of the early church. One of the
overseers, or elders, became so much more prominent and influential than
the others that they began to designate him by a different name. They
called him the bishop. The rest of the overseers were called presbyters.
They took one of these six Bible names and made it apply to one of the
men in the group to distinguish him from the others. Now, that looks
like a very small departure, doesn’t it? If I had been living in those
days and had warned the brethren against such a practice, they would
have said, “That preacher is radical. He is making a mountain out of a
molehill. What difference does it make if we want to distinguish the man
who does most of the work by calling him the bishop?” Anyone who opposed
them would probably have been called old-fashioned, non-progressive,
etc.
But, friends, I want you to know that that is the seed out of which has
grown more than two hundred denominations in America. Out of that first
departure from the Bible plan has come the ecclesiastical hierarchies
that curse the religious world today. If you and I aren’t very careful,
we will repeat the same error. Whenever one man in the congregation is
set above all the others in the group and is distinguished by any title
whatsoever, you are taking a step in the wrong direction.
Well, let us follow the matter still further. It was also perfectly
natural for this congregation which had made one man more prominent than
the others, and distinguished him by the title Bishop, to start some
missions around over the country and exercise authority over them until
they became self-supporting. Since the man who was now called the bishop
was head of the mother congregation, you can see how it would be very
easy for the same man to become the head of this group of churches.
Thus, less than two hundred years after Christ, there came into being a
form of church organization quite opposite the plan revealed in the
Bible. Instead of a group of men, with equal authority under Christ,
overseeing one congregation there was one man over a group of
congregations.
Doubtless there were certain congregations who maintained scriptural
organization, contended against these departures, and refused to share
in the digression. When some digressed and others did not, there was
naturally a division—not because the Bible was at fault, but because
some refused to follow the Bible.
The territory represented by a group of congregations over which a
bishop gained control came to be known as a diocese. Later these
geographic units were grouped to form larger units. In these larger
units one of the “bishops,” usually the one residing in the capital of
the province, gained ascendancy in rank and authority over his fellow
“bishops” and was called the metropolitan.
The digression was augmented by conferences held in the various
provinces and in which the local metropolitan served as chairman. At
first, they were innocent “get-togethers” of delegates from the
different congregations for the sake of fellowship, friendly discussion
of their common problems, and reaching conclusions on disputed
questions. But they soon partook of the nature of legislative bodies,
and were called Councils by the Latins, and Synods by the Greeks. Thus
there came into existence a source of legislation in addition to, and
different from, the Bible. The congregations joining in this movement
were deprived of their scriptural autonomy.
Until after A.D. 300 each province held its own separate conference, and
each metropolitan was entirely independent of all the other
metropolitans in the government of his province. You can imagine how the
congregations that refused to “string along” with the crowd were
condemned and boycotted by the ecclesiastical leaders.
In A.D. 325 the first general council was called, and the congregations
represented were divided into five groups according to the political
divisions of the Roman Empire. The ecclesiastical ruler of each group
was called “Patriarch” or “Chief Father.” This council formulated what
is known as the Nicene Creed, which was adopted by most of the churches
and which is still acknowledged by many denominations today, including
the Roman Catholic. Naturally there was rivalry among the five “Chief
Fathers.” The “bishops” of Rome and Constantinople managed to gain
supremacy over the other three (those at Jerusalem, Alexander, and
Antioch). The warfare between these two was long and fierce. In A.D. 588
John the Faster, the Patriarch of Constantinople, assumed the title of
“Universal Bishop of the Church.” The Patriarch of Rome protested
bitterly, but in A.D. 606 the title of “Universal Bishop” was
transferred from John the Faster to the “Roman See.”
Thus with more than five hundred years of gradual drifting away from the
Bible plan they developed a complete ecclesiastical hierarchy, with its
councils, creeds, and dignitaries, supposedly having authority in
addition to, different from, and in some cases, greater than, the Bible.
Authority was now divided between the Bible and men who were
presumptuous enough to set themselves up as legislators in the kingdom
of God, which eventually culminated in the “Pope’s” ridiculous claim to
be infallible. By the congregations sharing in this apostasy the Bible
was no longer considered a complete and final authority.
Sometimes today people undertake to explain the existence of
denominations by saying that we cannot see the Bible alike. Friends,
that is an insult to God. Anybody who says that ambiguity and
indefiniteness on the part of the Bible is to blame for all the division
which God so plainly condemns is insulting God Almighty; accusing Him of
being unable to write a book that would express what he wanted folk to
know. It is to accuse God of passing a law against division, and
condemning division, and coming right along and giving the world a book
that would naturally result in division. I do not believe that God is
characterized by any such inconsistency. I do not believe He would
condemn us for being divided, and then give us a book that would
inevitably divide us.
Friends, it is not because we are not able to see the Bible alike, but
it is because so many people consider something else besides the Bible
as authority. I have given you a brief outline of how it started. Any
Roman Catholic “priest” in this town will tell you that, in his
estimation, the Bible is not the final authority in what people are to
do in religion, but that the man whom they call the Pope is the
infallible guide.
V
The Reformation and Protestantism
“Well, that explains,” you say, “just one denomination, but where did
all the others come from?” We shall try to show you the connection
between the Roman Catholic Church and many of the other denominations.
For a period of seven hundred years, the Roman Catholics held sway over
a vast majority of people who called themselves Christians. I believe
that all down through the ages there were some folk who rebelled against
the Roman “Pope”; and I am of the opinion, although I could not prove
it, that in every generation there were some faithful Christians not
always numerous and prominent enough to win recognition in history, but
who were nevertheless contending for and obeying the truth. Be that as
it may, we know that the Roman Catholic Church dominated most of the
religious world for many centuries—until finally the Roman Catholics and
the Greek Catholics divided in the twelfth century A.D. Then those two
held the reins until there came the period in history which is known as
the Great Reformation.
I have great respect for such men as Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, John
Locke, John Calvin, and John Wesley. [I don’t know why so many of them
were named John, I have often wondered.] Even though a great deal of
harm has been done in the name of these men, we must recognize them as
having done some noble work.
Take Martin Luther, for instance, who found a Bible while he was a
student in a convent, and studied it diligently. He became convinced
that the sale of indulgences was sinful and endeavored to reform the
Roman Catholic Church on this point. As a consequence of this effort he
was excommunicated. Naturally, he started an independent movement. His
purpose was to get back to the Bible and throw off all human authority,
taking the Bible as his only guide. If he and all of his followers had
been true to this noble ideal, there would be no Lutheran Church on the
earth today. They would have become Christians and Christians only.
I am convinced that Martin Luther did not intend to start a
denomination. He pleaded with the people not to wear his name, but
rather to call themselves Christians. He had strong convictions, and was
willing to suffer for the sake of them. But, friends, Martin Luther had
become well saturated with error before he began to study the Bible for
himself. He could hardly have been expected to discover all the truth
immediately.
He knew that the Roman Catholics were wrong on indulgences, but they
were also wrong on a great many other points which he did not discover.
If he and his followers had continued to study the Bible and to make
reformations as the need for them was discovered, then they would have
kept getting back closer and closer to the original plan. This they did
not do. Instead they made the tragic error of formulating a creed or
confession of faith. This they probably did with good intentions, hoping
thereby to protect their followers against the snares of Roman
Catholicism and other errors, but they defeated their purpose. It was
not long until the creed began to be recognized as authoritative—if not
as equal to the Bible at least as a subordinate authority. Naturally the
creed was erroneous and ambiguous. It was written by uninspired men and
by men blinded and prejudiced by Roman Catholicism. The creed makers
were wearing the colored glasses of Roman Catholicism. They who had had
Romanism drilled into them from infancy could not instantly and entirely
disabuse themselves of it. In some cases they retained Roman error; in
other cases they were driven into opposite extremes.
Naturally, after a generation or so, they acquired members who were in
the movement not because of conviction, but because of convenience, or
because their parents were. This condition, with the deadening effect of
a creed—of a human creed—made progress back to the Bible very difficult,
if not impossible. Each step of reformation called for a revision of the
creed, and creeds are hard to revise. People become attached to them;
they come to think more of them than they think of the Bible itself, if
they aren’t very careful. They develop a patriotic attitude toward the
creed which is very difficult to overcome. Consequently, we have the
Lutheran Church with us today.
This appraisal of Luther’s work will fit, in a general way, the work of
other reformers. They made similar errors. If they had maintained the
scientific attitude—which means to test every point, investigate to see
if you are right and change when you’re wrong, prove all things and hold
fast to that which is good—then they would have kept getting back closer
to God. But when their movements became crystallized, when they became
satisfied with their _status quo_, and had acquired a number of members
who were without conviction, then they not only ceased getting back
closer to God but they began to drift away from Him. As a consequence,
many of the denominations today resemble their mother, the Roman
Catholic Church, more than they did in the beginning.
And so, my friends, we have before us a brief outline of how
denominations got started. The Roman Catholic Church is the result of
centuries of drifting away from the New Testament pattern. Since it
reached the zenith of its power, many other denominations have resulted
from unsuccessful and incomplete efforts to reform the Catholics or some
other existing group. In most cases the movement of the reformers,
because of indifference and a lack of conviction in their ranks,
eventually lost ground. In every instance, consciously or unconsciously,
something besides the Bible has been accepted as authority. Errors,
which the Protestant churches, willingly or unwillingly, inherited from
the Catholics have been handed down from generation to generation even
to the present. Thus, many unscriptural practices and doctrines of the
denominations are traceable to the church at Rome with its preposterous
claim of infallibility. Many members of denominations do not realize
that much of what they get from their parents and preachers and which
they fancy to be of Biblical origin, has, in fact, descended from Rome
and can claim no higher authority.
VI
The Restoration Movement
But to pursue our historical survey a little further, at the beginning
of the nineteenth century with three hundred years of Protestant
denominational history before them, various religious leaders were
awakened to the evils of creeds, and a “back to the Bible” movement was
begun. In America the work of these men became known as the Restoration
Movement. It was their purpose to go back to Pentecost, to begin at
Jerusalem, as a surveyor begins at the established corner, mark out the
lines revealed in the New Testament, and establish congregations just
like the pattern that Jesus gave. That was a noble undertaking and it
proved to be a very successful one. It was the fastest growing religious
movement the world had seen since the days of the apostles.
But remember it is very difficult for reforms to stay reformed. In a
generation or so there grew up in this movement also an element who were
parties to it because their parents were and not because of personal
conviction. Such an element is a liability to any movement. This element
has become crystallized in the digressive wing of the movement, who,
although some of their followers may not realize it, no longer regard
the Bible as complete and final authority. They have no written creed
but they have discredited the Bible. Whether they admit it or not, their
principle is: “Where the Bible speaks we may be silent; where the Bible
is silent we are at liberty to speak.” Without any effort to explain how
it is done, they claim that God is still revealing his will to man in
some way independent of the Bible. They claim to have advanced beyond
the wisdom of the apostles themselves, and regard their own
intellectuality as equal to, or superior to, the Bible. Thus, each man
becomes a law unto himself, and there is, therefore, no ground for
unity.
I am thankful, however, that there were some who refused to assume an
indifferent attitude, who are still contending for the faith once
delivered to the saints, and who realize that we must be ever striving
to get closer to the divine plan revealed in the New Testament. Since
reformations will not stay reformed, the only way to keep on the right
road is to be forever getting back on the right way. This we cannot do
unless we have conviction, and unless we study God’s word. That’s one of
our reasons for giving so much emphasis to the importance of your
searching the Scriptures daily. It may be that we have some in our very
midst who do not know the difference between the true church and a
denomination, and who cannot give an intelligent reason for the hope
that is within them. Such an element in a congregation is easily
deceived by digressive influences and must become strong in the faith
for their own sake and for the safety of the church.
VII
The Need of Constant Vigilance
Hence, my brethren, we need to be watching today, lest we become slack
and allow error to creep into our midst and become established among us.
Remember that human nature is just the same now that it has always been.
The same sort of indifferent attitude and drifting which resulted in the
Roman Catholic Church and which resulted in the establishment of other
denominations in the world, will make a denomination out of us if we are
not always on the guard. Eternal vigilance is the price of being right.
We have the same human nature that others have. If we aren’t willing to
pay the price of being better students of God’s word, then we, too, will
drift into another denomination, and not be worth the time and place
which we occupy. We don’t need any more denominations! We have enough!
If you want to be a member of a denomination you don’t need to start
another one. You have more than two hundred to choose from. Some of them
are very highly organized and well financed. There is no reason for
starting another one; _there are many reasons for not doing so_! Unless
we are going to understand the difference between the true church and
denominationalism, unless we are going to contend earnestly for
non-denominational Christianity, then we do not deserve to exist and the
world would be better off if we did not.
VIII
Extra-Biblical Standards
There is one fact which I want to emphasize further. In every case of
denominationalism some authority other than the Bible has been
recognized. Otherwise denominations could not come into existence, and
denominations could not continue to exist. The extra-Biblical authority
might be the man whom they call the Pope at Rome. It might be your
preacher in some denomination which you look up to as being the final
authority. It might be the creed of the denomination to which you
belong. It might be the people among whom you move. It might be your own
feelings in the matter. It might be tradition or family heritage. But I
don’t care what it is, if it is outside the Bible, it is not a true
source of authority in religion. The existence of so many denominations
today is not caused by people’s being unable to see the Bible alike.
They are here because, while a few people take the Bible as their only
guide, a great many take something else as their standard.
You meet a great many people who claim to take the Bible as their only
rule of faith and practice, but when you press them to cite the
scriptural authority for certain of their practices they are utterly
unable to do so. If one takes the Bible as sole authority in religion,
then he ought to be able to point to the Scripture which gives the
authority for everything he does. So don’t let a man get by with a mere
statement “We take the Bible as our guide.” If you talk to him a few
minutes, you will possibly find that he is following some preacher,
following his feelings, or following the church to which he belongs. You
may hear him use such expressions as, “What does your church believe on
this point?” or “What does the church of Christ teach on a certain
matter?” Well, I don’t have any church. And the church of Christ doesn’t
teach anything on a certain point. If it did, its teaching would not
necessarily be of any value. Such questions, such expressions betray a
wrong conception of the church. The question should be: “What does the
Bible teach in reference to a certain matter?”
If you can’t find authority in the Bible for your position, you’d better
not depend upon it. Most of the people who are at worship this very hour
belong to a church whose name they cannot find in the Bible. Yet the
preachers who preach in those churches will tell you, “Yes, we take the
Bible as our only guide.” To refute their claim you need only ask them
one question: “Where did you get your name?” They would probably say,
“It’s a nickname. Someone else gave it to us.”
“Well, how come you to acknowledge it?”
“Oh, we just got tired of objecting to it so we finally acknowledged
it.”
“You didn’t get it out of the Bible then.”
Friends, think about how ridiculous it is for a man to say, “We follow
the Bible, and the Bible only,” when the very name of the church to
which he belongs cannot be found from Genesis to Revelation. The sad
part of it is that a great many of the members don’t know the
difference. I have asked people who wore an extra-Biblical name if they
could find their name in the Bible. Frequently, they say, “Yes. I don’t
know where it is but I’m sure it is in there somewhere.” It just isn’t
there. I knew it wasn’t there, but the poor folk thought it was because
they had heard some preacher say they were following the Bible.
Again I protest the statement that denominations are caused by people’s
being unable to see the Bible alike. That is an insult to my God and I
object to it. It is because many are following something besides the
Bible. They may deny it but they are. Otherwise there could be only one
church on this earth because there is only one church in the Bible.
If you belong to something this morning that you cannot read about in
the Bible, won’t you come out of it? Won’t you say, “From this morning
on, I will take the Bible as my guide. I will take one step at a time as
that step is revealed in God’s word until it leads me home to heaven at
last”?
Now, if you will do that, the way is simple. “God so loved the world
that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth on him
should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). “But without
faith it is impossible to please him” (Heb. 11:6). So if you are going
to follow the Bible, the first thing you must do is believe. Again Jesus
said, “Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3). So
the next thing you will do is repent.
I heard a man say this week that the only thing you had to do in order
to be saved was just believe, but the Bible says, “Except ye repent ye
shall all likewise perish,” and repentance is not believing. Repentance
is at least one thing you must do after you believe or else the Bible
says you will perish and have no chance to be saved.
And then on the day of Pentecost Peter said, “Repent and be baptized
every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins”
(Acts 2:38). It is not hard to see that. People who refuse to do it
simply don’t want to see it or just don’t want to do it after they see
it—one or the other! If you want to follow the Bible, the way is plain,
isn’t it? If you take something else for your guide, then no telling
where you will land.
But someone may say, “What is baptism?” Let the Bible answer. “Buried
with him in baptism, wherein ye are also risen with him through the
faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead” (Col.
2:12). “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death that like
as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even
so we also should walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). Hence, according
to the Bible, baptism is a burial and a resurrection. If you weren’t
buried when you were baptized, then you were not baptized; because the
Bible says we are buried by baptism. A so-called baptism which doesn’t
involve a burial isn’t the kind of baptism the Bible talks about. If you
do something else, you don’t get it from the Bible. If you stick to the
Bible, you have the matter settled. You can’t get anything else from it
except a burial. It doesn’t say anything else.
Incidentally, do you know where the doctrine of sprinkling and pouring
came from? It came from the man who is called the Pope of Rome! At the
Council of Vienna, A.D. 1311, by no higher authority than the Roman
Catholic Church, it was decided that sprinkling and pouring might be
practiced for baptism. Most often today the people who accept sprinkling
or pouring instead of baptism do not realize that they are following the
man over in Rome who claims to be greater than the Bible. You probably
got it from your parents, your parents from theirs and their parents
from some preacher and so on, but the chain leads back eventually to the
Roman Catholic Church. It has no higher authority. The Bible condemns
it.
I beseech you in the name of Jesus Christ that you submit unto His will
as revealed unto us in the Holy Bible. If you will follow Him, He will
take you home to rest at last.
V
WHICH CHURCH IS RIGHT?
(Note: As this sermon was being presented the outline seen below was on
the blackboard before the audience.)
Which Church Is Right?
_Introduction_: This is a question that concerns every person.
I. _God Has Only One_
A. See Matt. 16:18; Eph. 4:4; Cor. 12:20; Eph. 1:22, 23.
B. There are more than two hundred in America.
C. Which one belongs to God?
II. _The One That Follows the Bible_
A. Obviously they don’t all follow the Bible.
B. The Bible is a sufficient guide (2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Gal. 1:8, 9; 2
John 9; Rev. 22:18, 19).
C. What does it teach?
III. _Conditions of Membership_
A. Same as condition of salvation (Acts 2:47).
B. Faith (Acts 16:31-33; Rom. 10:14; Acts 2:36).
C. Repentance (Acts 2:38; Acts 3:19; Acts 17:30).
D. Confession (Rom. 10:10; Acts 8:37).
E. Baptism (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:47; 1 Pet.
3:21).
IV. _Worship_
A. Prayer (Acts 2:42; Acts 20:36).
B. Giving (1 Cor. 16:1, 2).
C. Studying and teaching (Acts 2:42; Acts 20:7; etc.).
D. Vocal Music (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16).
E. Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:20-34; Acts 20:7).
F. In spirit and truth (John 4:24).
V. _Daily Christian Living_ (Tit. 2:12; Jas. 1:27; Mark 12:30, 31;
Matt. 7:12).
VI. _Bible Names for God’s Church_
A. The Church (Eph. 1:22, 23; 5:25; Rev. 1:4).
B. The Church of God (1 Cor. 15:9; 1 Thess. 2:14; 1 Cor. 11:16).
C. The Church of Christ (Matt. 16:18; Rom. 16:16).
VII. _Organization_ (Acts 14:23; 20:28; Phil. 1:1).
VIII. _Charity and Evangelistic Work_ (Acts 11:27-30; 12:25; 24:17; 1
Cor. 16:1-4; Acts 11:19-21; 11:22-26; 13:1-4; etc.).
_Conclusion_: The church that follows the Bible on all points is the
one that is right.
By actual count there are 217 people present for this Sunday evening
worship. We are glad you are here. Your presence is a distinct
encouragement. It helps. We can have better work by your being here than
we could if you were not here. We have some visitors and you are very
welcome. May you enjoy with us all the blessings that are to be had here
and help us make these services even better!
At the close of the lesson we shall sing “Come to Jesus,” for the
purpose of encouraging you to accept the Lord’s invitation. The
invitation comes from Jesus Christ. By his authority and by the power of
the Holy Spirit the doors of the church were opened nearly 2,000 years
ago on the day of Pentecost, and the doors of the _Lord’s_ church have
been standing wide open ever since. Whosoever will may come. We sing
this invitation song for the sake of the exhortation it contains and to
give you a convenient opportunity to come forward and make known your
desire to obey the Lord. Backsliders are invited to return to God,
confessing their sins, repenting of them, and praying for forgiveness.
Those who have never been born again are taught by the Bible to believe
in Christ, repent of their sins, confess their faith, and be baptized
for the remission of sins. We are prepared to assist you in carrying out
your obedience of these commands. If you will come forward and make your
wishes known, we shall be glad to help you in every way we can.
I promised to speak to you tonight upon the topic “Which Church Is
Right?” That is a very important question, and the timeliness of it is
evident by the fact that in the United States there are more than 200
churches. Just for the sake of a round number, we’ll speak of them as
200. That is, indeed, enough. In fact, too many! For, in the Bible,
there is only one. Now, you just think about that—200 in the United
States alone, to say nothing about other parts of the world, and only
one in the Bible!
I
One Church in Bible
On the board tonight I have an outline of the lesson and the Scriptures
which shall be used. I would like for you who are interested to write
these Scriptures down, that you may give them further study. Search the
Scriptures, as the noble people of Berea did, to see whether these
things are true. There are many Scriptures which show that there is only
one church in the Bible. Here are a few of them listed under No. 1. In
Matthew 16:18, Jesus said, referring to the confession that Peter had
just made, “Upon this rock I will build my church.” He used the singular
form of the word. He didn’t say “my churches,” but “my church.”
Therefore, Jesus Christ built only one. He bought and paid for only one
with his blood, and he has only one tonight. “There is one body” (Eph.
4:4). There is “but one body” (1 Cor. 12:20). That body is the church.
“And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head
over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him
that filleth all in all” (Eph. 1:22-23). Since there is but one body,
and that body is the church, then it naturally follows that there is but
one church. Only one church in the Bible, and more than 200 in America!
Therefore, we must face the question, “Which Church Is Right?”
Please remember that this is no more my problem than it is yours. I’m
not to blame for all these churches’ being in the world! I did not start
them. None of you started them. We found them here when we were born
into this world. They are here. We are not responsible for their
beginning. Some of you may be responsible for helping to keep them
going, but we found them here, and we have found that in the Bible there
is only one. To decide which one is right is as much your problem as it
is mine.
You may think that tonight I shall undertake to prove that the group of
people with whom I am associated is the right group and that all the
others are wrong. Well, I’m frank to say that I believe I’m right. If I
didn’t, I would change! Some people think they are criticizing me when
they say: “Oh, well, you just think you’re right and everybody else is
wrong.” I believe that’s a compliment. Of course I believe I’m right! If
I didn’t, I would change. A man who continues in a way which he does not
believe to be right is a hypocrite! For one to teach what he sincerely
believes is not conceit but sincerity. It’s not egotism but honesty. Not
only do I believe that what I teach is right, but I stand ready to
change it whenever anyone can show me wherein it is wrong. But I promise
not to make a prejudiced or biased approach to this question.
II
The Church That Follows the Bible Is Right
Suppose you were to undertake to examine all the creeds of Christendom,
and eliminate them one by one to see which church is right. That would
take a very long time. You might even die with old age before you had
finished the task. I believe there is a much shorter and more practical
approach to the solution of the question. Just go directly to the Bible
and see what it says and follow its teaching; then you will naturally be
right.
If I were going to answer my question tonight in just one brief
statement, I would say that the church which follows the Bible is the
one that’s right. At first thought this may sound like a very trite
statement. Somebody would reply by saying, “Well, all the churches claim
to follow the Bible.” Such a claim demands investigation! It’s easy to
make such a claim, but you notice that I did not say that the church
which _claims_ to follow the Bible is right, but that the one which
_follows_ the Bible is right.
There may be a big difference between claiming to follow the Bible and
actually following it. If you will talk to some of these people who
claim to follow the Bible, you will hear them using expressions like
these: “Well, I think so and so”; “I feel like that’s all right”; “My
church teaches this and that”; “I heard my preacher say so and so”; and
“My mother and father or grandparents always belonged to this church.”
To such standards as these many people are clinging. Friends, such
expressions betray the fact that the man who uses them is not taking the
Bible as his one and only guide! They betray the fact that he is
following something else besides the Bible. Before we accept at face
value a man’s claim along that line, we’d better look behind it. We’d
better listen to the man talk for a few minutes and see whether he does
actually take the Bible to be complete and final authority in matters
religious.
The following Scriptures show that the Bible should be our guide: “All
Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,
for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the
man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good work” (2
Tim. 3:16, 17). “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any
other gospel unto you, than that which we have preached unto you, let
him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man
preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be
accursed” (Gal. 1:8, 9).
“Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath
not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the
Father and the Son” (2 John 9). Then that well-known Scripture in the
last chapter of the Bible, “For I testify unto every man that heareth
the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these
things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this
book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out
of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book”
(Rev. 22:18, 19).
Many other Scriptures could be used, but these are enough to show us
that _the Bible should be our guide_. It is sufficient and furnishes the
man of God completely unto every good work. Those who claim to be
following the Bible and the Bible only should be expected to defend that
claim, in the light of the Bible. Frequently, I announce publicly that I
stand ready to put my finger upon the Scripture that furnishes the
authority for everything we do and teach and believe in matters of
religion. I always stand ready to make this claim good. Everybody is
invited to check me on this basis. If you can find something for which I
cannot give scriptural proof, then I will cease to teach, practice, or
believe it. A preacher, who is not willing to make such a statement,
evidently knows that he is not taking the Bible as his one and only
guide, and yet I believe you will agree that most of the preachers in
this city will not make you this proposition.
Not very long ago I heard a man boldly declare that his preacher
preached the Bible and nothing else. I began to name several things
which the Bible teaches and asked him one by one if his preacher taught
those things. In every instance he had to answer in the negative. He had
not fully realized what was comprehended in his statement. Another lady
came to me and said, “I just believe that all of us ought to go back to
the Bible and take it as our guide.” I reminded her that in that case
she would have to give up the unscriptural name which she had been
wearing and make a number of other changes. She said, “Well, now, let’s
don’t get back too far.” The truth was that she didn’t really want to
take the Bible as her only guide! I mention all these facts to show that
you mustn’t be too quick to accept the claim mentioned a moment ago.
You’d better examine it. For, as a matter of fact, if we were all
following the Bible there would be but one church on the earth, because
there is but one in the Bible. There’s just no escaping this conclusion.
So, I believe that my statement is apt. It is appropriate to say that
the church which follows the Bible is the one that’s right. Therefore,
if you want a scriptural answer to our question tonight, you don’t need
to examine all the different creeds separately; just take the Bible and
examine it. Follow its teaching and directions step by step. This course
will lead you into the right church, and into heaven at last. You won’t
need to investigate all the religious organizations which exist about us
without Scriptural authority.
III
Conditions of Membership
Let us see what the Bible actually teaches concerning the doctrine and
practice of the church. Then we shall know which is right so far as
these items are concerned. I want to say now, and repeat many times as
we go along, that a church may be right on one point and wrong on
another. A church may follow the Bible on one point and not follow it on
another, and a church is right to the extent that it follows the Bible.
It’s wrong to the extent that it fails to do so. No church is _all_
right until it follows the Bible on _all_ points.
First of all, let’s look at the conditions of membership in the church
we read about in the Bible. Acts 2:47 shows that the conditions of
membership in God’s church are identical with the conditions of
salvation. “The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.”
Since the Lord adds to His church all saved people, the conditions of
membership and the conditions of salvation are exactly the same.
We learn from the Scriptures listed here (speaker points to the board)
that the first thing one must do in order to be saved is to believe that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The Philippian jailor
said to Paul and Silas, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” They
replied, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and
thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord and to all that
were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and
washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all of his, straightway”
(Acts 16:20-33). In answer to the jailor’s question then, the inspired
preacher said first of all, “Believe”; then he taught him the word of
the Lord, which led to his repentance, evidenced by the fact that,
whereas he had a few minutes ago placed stripes across their backs with
a heavy whip, he now washed those stripes.
Then Paul taught him and his household to be baptized, and taught them
that baptism was urgent, because they were baptized the same hour of the
night. They did not put it off a month or a week or even until daylight,
but were baptized immediately, or straightway, even the very same hour
of the night.
Faith is emphasized also by Acts 2:36 where Peter concluded his great
Pentecost sermon by saying, “Therefore, let all the house of Israel know
assuredly that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified,
both Lord and Christ.” “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the
Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have
not believed?” (Rom. 10:13-14). “Without faith it’s impossible to be
well pleasing unto God” (Heb. 11:6). Therefore, the first condition of
salvation is faith.
The second one is repentance. Acts 2:38 says, “Repent”; Acts 3:19 says,
“Repent”; and Acts 17:30 says “Repent.” You can go home and read these
Scriptures and you’ll find the commandment to repent in each of them,
and it’s given as a condition of salvation.
Furthermore, we are taught that “with the heart man believeth unto
righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation”
(Rom. 10:10). And in the eighth chapter of Acts we read that when the
Ethiopian eunuch said, “See, here is water, what doth hinder me to be
baptized? and Philip said, If thou believest with all of thine heart,
thou mayest, and he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is
the Son of God.” Therefore, confession is a condition of salvation.
When the Pentecostians inquired what they must do to be saved, the
inspired apostle Peter said, “Repent and be baptized, everyone of you,
in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38).
Ananias told Paul, “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized,
and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16).
“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the
putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet.
3:21). No one, who knows the Bible, can have a good conscience toward
the Lord until he has been baptized. Baptism is the answer to the quest
for a good conscience.
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth
not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16). Friends, there are a thousand ways to
go to hell; one of them is to disbelieve. But suppose I ask you who will
be saved. You cannot give me a Bible answer to save your life without
mentioning baptism. For Mark 16:16, the word of Jesus Christ, says, “He
that believeth _and is baptized_ shall be saved.” To leave out baptism
would be to omit part of the Lord’s answer. No sane person ought to take
the responsibility of taking away part of God’s word. You cannot give a
Bible answer to the question without mentioning baptism!
According to the Bible, therefore, faith, repentance, confession, and
baptism are the conditions of salvation. Since all saved people are
added to the Lord’s church by the Lord, then these are also the
conditions of membership in God’s church. The church, which teaches
this, is right on this point. It might be wrong somewhere else, but the
church which teaches these facts is the right church as far as the
conditions of membership are concerned. Any church which leaves off any
one of them or adds something to them just lacks that much, at least,
being right.
IV
Worship
Let us look next at the acts of worship. There’s no place in the Bible
which says in so many words, “Here are the acts ye shall perform as
worship to Jehovah”; but there _are_ certain acts commanded, which are,
by their very nature, acts of worship. Therefore, God does state for us
the acts which the members of His church shall perform in worship unto
Him.
First, they should _pray_. Acts 2:42 states that the church at Jerusalem
continued steadfastly in the apostle’s doctrine and fellowship, and in
breaking of bread, and in prayer. Acts 20:36 gives us an example of
public prayer. At the seaside the apostle Paul knelt down with those who
were gathered with him and prayed unto God. Prayer by its very nature is
an act of worship.
We also learn in First Corinthians 16:1 and 2, that we should _lay by in
store_ upon the first day of the week as we have been prospered; and
that itself is an item of worship. Giving or sacrificing unto God for
the sake of God is an act of worship.
From Acts 2:42, Acts 20:7, and many other Scriptures that could be
listed, we learn that _teaching and studying the Bible_ are also
commanded of God’s children; and that, likewise, is worship.
In Ephesians 5:19 we read these words, “Speaking unto yourselves in
psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your
heart to the Lord.” And in Colossians 3:16, “Let the word of Christ
dwell in you richly, in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another
in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your
hearts to the Lord.” These Scriptures command us to _sing_ praises to
God and admonitions unto each other, which is naturally an act of
worship.
And then, finally, we are taught to eat the Lord’s supper (1 Cor.
11:17-34; Luke 22:19-20). Acts 20:7 tells us that this shall be done on
the first day of the week. The church at Troas, under apostolic
guidance, met upon _the first day of the week_ to eat the Lord’s supper.
And, friends, “the sabbath day,” as the expression was used in the Old
Testament, meant every sabbath day, and by the same line of reasoning,
“the first day of the week” means the first day of every week.
Tomorrow students will be registering out at Peabody and Vanderbilt.
Their schedules will state that a certain class meets on Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday. They will not state that it meets _every_ Monday
and _every_ Wednesday and _every_ Friday, but even a college freshman
will understand what is meant! When we are told that a class meets on
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we know that it meets on Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday of every week.
If you were to search the New Testament to find out how often we should
eat the Lord’s supper, you would not find the slightest suggestion that
it should be eaten once a year. You would find no sort of hint that it
should be taken upon the first of every quarter or upon one Sunday out
of each month. The only Scripture which throws any light whatsoever upon
the question puts it upon a weekly basis.
John 4:24 shows that all these acts of worship must be done in spirit
and in truth. “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship
him in spirit and in truth.”
That’s what the Bible teaches about the worship of the Bible church. The
church which does these five things in spirit and in truth is the right
church as far as the worship is concerned. A church might be right in
worship and wrong in doctrine, or vice versa; but the church which, in
spirit and in truth, teaches and practices these five items and only
these, is right in its worship; and the church that preaches and
practices anything different from this is wrong. The Bible is right.
This is what the Bible teaches. The church which does this is
consequently right; the one which doesn’t is wrong.
V
Christian Living
A church is responsible for its teaching in respect to how its members
should live. It cannot force the members to do according to its teaching
and we must distinguish between the conduct of the church as a whole and
the behavior of individual members. If the church teaches the truth and
attempts to persuade its members to obey it, and properly disciplines
them when they disobey, the church as a whole cannot be held accountable
for their misbehavior.
Concerning Christian living the Bible says, “For the grace of God that
bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that denying
ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and
godly in this present world” (Titus 2:11-12). “Pure religion and
undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and
widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the
world” (Jas. 1:27). “The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O
Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy
God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,
and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second
is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is
none other commandment greater than these” (Mark 12:29-31). And then in
Matthew 7:12, we have what is called the Golden Rule, “Whatsoever ye
would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.”
These are general commandments governing Christian behavior, and the
church which teaches and impresses these Bible lessons upon its members
is right that far, but the church which fails to condemn worldliness and
ungodly living lacks that much being right. It may be ever so sound on
doctrine and worship, but if it fails to properly admonish its members
and hold up before them the divine standard of Christian conduct and
insist that they follow it, it lacks that much being right.
Friends, here’s (speaker points to board) what the Bible teaches on
Christian behavior. The church which teaches this is right on that point
because the Bible is right and this is what the Bible says.
VI
The Name
We come now to the name. You know, there are a lot of churches right
here in Nashville tonight which simply cannot find their names in the
Bible. They could look from now till the end of the world and they
couldn’t find the names they wear in the Bible to save their lives!
That, to me, is an astonishing fact. It looks as if anybody ought to
know that the Bible cannot guide you into a church which isn’t even
mentioned in the Bible. A road map cannot direct you to a town which is
not shown on the map. A Tennessee road map cannot show you how to find a
town in Texas, and so the Bible cannot guide you to a church which isn’t
even found in the Bible. That’s a very simple test which you might apply
in your search for the right church.
What does the Bible say about the name? In Ephesians 1:22 we find that
Christ has been made head over all things unto _the church_. Ephesians
5:25 says, “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the
church and gave himself for it.” And so, first of all, it is simply
called _the church_. Then in Revelation 1:4 we read about “the seven
_churches_” of Asia, meaning the seven different congregations which are
specified in chapters three and four. In a general sense, including all
saved people on the earth, it is simply called _the church_. In the
plural form this name refers to the various local congregations of that
great body.
We learn also from First Corinthians 15:9 that it is called the _church
of God_. Paul said he was not fit to be called an apostle, because he
persecuted the _church of God_. First Corinthians Cor 11:16 says, “But
if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the
churches of God.” So in the singular and comprehensive sense, it is
called the _church of God_; not as a denominational title, but as an
expression of ownership. It is the church which belongs to God. And in
Matthew 16:18 Christ said, “Upon this rock I will build my church.” It
is, therefore, the church which belongs to Christ. And in the plural
form, we read in Romans 16:16, “The churches of Christ salute you.”
Friends, we learn from the Bible, then, that in the broad, general
sense, including all saved people, it is called the church, or the
church of God, or the church of the Lord, the church which belongs to
Christ. Referring to different local congregations, those same terms are
used in the plural form. This leads me to believe that anything bigger
than a local congregation and smaller than all God’s people throughout
the world or some specific geographic area, cannot scripturally be
called _the church_. That’s where denominationalism comes in. The only
way this universal institution can scripturally be broken down into
different parts is to do it on a geographical or congregational basis.
Splitting it up on any other basis results in sectarianism or
denominationalism—creates different parties and sects.
I have two pictures drawn here to keep that before your mind. Here’s the
Bible picture (speaker points to board). The big ring includes all of
God’s people throughout the entire world. These small dots represent
various congregations like the church at Laodicea, the church at Smyrna,
the church at Ephesus, the church at Madison, the church at Chapel
Avenue, the church at Columbia, Tennessee, and so on around the
world—different local congregations. This is purely a geographical
grouping.
But here is the best figure I can draw on denominationalism and it’s not
entirely accurate (speaker points to board again). When a group of these
congregations, even if they have all been scripturally baptized—which
they have not—draw a ring about themselves and say, “We are the ‘A’
Church,” another group says, “We are the ‘B’ Church,” and another says,
“We are the ‘C’ Church,” each group of congregations distinguishing
itself from other similar groups by a distinguishing title—that is
denominationalism, pure and simple! That picture does _not_ represent a
_geographic_ distribution, for we have all those different denominations
right here in Nashville. It’s not a geographical division, but a
division based on difference in teaching, practice, and faith. That’s
not the Bible picture (speaker continues to refer to board). Here is the
Bible picture.
The church which wears these Bible names, and only these, is the right
church as far as the name is concerned. But, friends, any church that
calls itself by any other name, any name not in the Bible, is not the
right church because the Bible is right. When a church has a name upon
their building which cannot be found in the Bible, they need not claim
that they are taking the Bible as their one and only guide, for the very
name on the church building denies that claim. Just think how foolish it
is for a preacher to stand up and say, “We take the Bible as our guide,”
when, out in front of the building, in great big letters, is a name
which cannot even be found in the Bible! That’s one reason I think we
had better examine a man’s claim to follow the Bible. Here’s what the
Bible teaches on the name, and the Bible is right. The church that wears
these names and only these is right on that point.
But merely wearing the right name will not make a church right. It may
wear the right name and still be wrong in other respects. I used to
preach in a town where there was a great big church building which had a
name in bold letters that you could see almost all over town—Central
Church of Christ. But if you went to their worship, you’d find something
that’s not listed here at all (speaker refers to section of outline on
board). They were not following the Bible on worship. They had the right
name but they didn’t have the right worship. They were right on one
point but wrong on another. There are churches over the country called
“Churches of God.” That’s a good name, but they have items of doctrine
that cannot be found in the Bible. For instance, they preach that you
have to be baptized in the Holy Spirit in order to be saved, and that’s
not in the Bible. Consequently, they are wrong on doctrine; and to
merely wear the right name does not atone for their false teaching on
what one must do to be saved.
VII
Organization
Just one more item or two and then we’re through. Number 7 here refers
to the organization of the church. According to the Bible every local
congregation is entirely independent under God to manage its own
affairs, with its elders overseeing its work. Acts 14:23: “When they had
ordained them elders in every church and had prayed with fasting, they
commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.” Acts 20:28 says,
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the
which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God,
which he hath purchased with his own blood.” In addressing the church at
Philippi Paul speaks of all the saints at Philippi “with the bishops and
deacons.”
According to this simple but effective organization of God’s church,
every local congregation is entirely independent, supervised and tended,
under God, by a group of men known as overseers or pastors or elders.
Now, that’s what the Bible teaches on church organization. The church
which follows this plan is right on that point. Wherever you see a group
of congregations tied together by some inter-congregational
organization, that group’s wrong on their organization. I know some
groups that maintain congregational independence, but are wrong in some
other way. Remember that in order for a church to be the right church,
it must be right on all these items.
VIII
Charity and Missionary Work
And then, finally, the Bible teaches that God’s church should be active
in beneficent and missionary work. It is the duty of the church to feed
the poor and to preach the gospel unto the entire world. I have a long
list of Scriptures here which authorize this statement (Acts 11:27-30;
12:25; 24:17; 1 Cor. 16:1-4; Acts 11:19-21; 11:22-26; 13:1-4; etc.).
Even though a church may be right in every other way, including
Christian living, including the name, and including the organization, if
it doesn’t do what it can to take care of the poor, and if it doesn’t
make a scriptural effort to preach the gospel to all the world, it lacks
that much being right, and cannot justify its claims to be known as the
church of Christ!
Now, friends, let me repeat again that here’s what the Bible teaches.
The church which does these things is right, because the Bible is right;
but the church which deviates from these, leaves off some of them or
adds something to them, lacks that much being right. And even though a
church followed this plan in every item except one, it would still be
wrong.
IX
Conclusions
What practical application shall we make? Simply take your Bible and
follow out this plan, study it for yourself, see that this is what the
Bible teaches, and then identify yourself with the congregation which
does the same. You say, “Maybe I cannot find one that follows the Bible
plan.” I believe you can in this town, but I’ll admit there are some
towns where you can’t. Then what would you do? The answer is very
simple—just start one! That’s one of the easiest things in the world to
do. Study your Bible, follow its simple pattern, and the result will be
a church after the New Testament order. If you can find even one person
who is willing to follow this plan and work it with you, then you’ll
have a congregation which pleases God. Jesus says, “Wherever two or
three are gathered together in my name, there will I be in the midst of
them.”
And, friends, I believe that the most practical and effective missionary
work that we could possibly do would be for all church members who move
away from Nashville and other places where the church is strong, to
faithfully and persistently follow this Bible program wherever they go,
even though they have to meet and worship in their own homes. There are
too many who forsake this plan when they go away to a strange city.
If all who move away from places where the church is strong, would
simply take Christ and the Bible with them and start a congregation
wherever they go, it would be the most far-reaching, the most effective,
the most practical, and the most economical missionary work that could
possibly be conceived! It would not only be all of that, it would also
be scriptural. What more could you expect? That certainly is enough to
recommend it to us all. So, friends, simply take this plan, if you know
of a congregation that’s following it, then identify yourself with it.
If you can’t find one, then start one, with the determination to follow
the Bible; and then you’ll be in the right church. You may forget about
all these 200 different denominations, except to do whatever you can to
lead them out of error into the truth!
I told you I would do no boasting tonight and I shall do none, but I
will say this: I sincerely believe it is the earnest determination of
the congregation at Chapel Avenue to follow this simple Bible plan, and
I believe I speak the truth when I say that if you can point out to the
overseers of this congregation that they are failing to follow the Bible
on any single item, they will change their practice immediately. That
should be the attitude of everyone who loves the truth, and they will
not embarrass you or rebuff you if you approach them on the question. If
you even _think_ they are failing on some point, they would welcome an
interview and pledge themselves to make any sort of alteration or change
that is necessary to bring the teaching, the practice, and the name of
this congregation into harmony with the Bible plan. If that were not
true, I would not continue to preach for this group except long enough
to do what I could to get them to reform.
Friends, above everything else, I want to go to heaven when I die and I
know that the only way to do that is to follow the Bible; so I still
insist that it is entirely proper and appropriate to emphasize that the
church which follows the Bible is the one that’s right. This simple
test, if faithfully and honestly applied, will eliminate every church in
this town which cannot find its name, its doctrine, and its practice in
the Bible. Are you willing to live up to the claim that you take that
Bible as your one and only guide? If so, just follow this (speaker
refers to outline on the board) step by step, believe that Jesus is the
Christ, repent of your sins, confess your faith, and then be baptized
for remission of sins. Then go on, worshiping God as the Bible directs,
behaving yourself as the Bible teaches, supporting the church which
wears the right name, which is scripturally organized, and which takes
the Bible as its one and only guide.
If, after having been scripturally baptized, you have failed on one or
more of these items, the Bible teaches that if you will repent, confess
your sins and pray for forgiveness, God will surely forgive you. As we
stand and sing the song announced, we entreat you to accept the
invitation of our Lord, who says, “Come unto me and I will give you
rest.”
VI
WHY NOT BE JUST A CHRISTIAN?
Religious people seem to realize more keenly than before the importance
and even necessity of Christian unity. But before we can have the unity
which the Bible teaches and demands, some practical means of attaining
it must be employed. It seems to me that it would be well to begin by
emphasizing some points of agreement—in other words, let us see how
close together we are, at present, and then we will be in better
position to discuss the points of difference. I believe in religious
debates, have engaged in such myself and shall be glad to do so again
whenever the opportunity presents itself, but in this sermon I want to
emphasize the truth upon which most religious people are already agreed.
I
Points of Agreement
I believe we can say that most of those who claim to be followers of
Christ are agreed upon the following points:
A. _General Statements_
1. God is.
2. The Bible is His word written by men as they were guided by the
Holy Spirit.
3. Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
4. The world needs a Savior and has no power by which to redeem
itself from sin.
5. Redemption or salvation is to be had through Christ and only
through Him.
B. _The Plan of Salvation_
If we agree upon these five points, then, we also agree that there is a
plan of salvation, for these points imply such a plan. It may be that we
can get closer together upon the items of this plan than you have
thought we could. We will all agree that faith is the very foundation of
the plan (John 3:16). All accept the fact that repentance is essential
(Acts 17:30). Everyone agrees that the plan of salvation includes the
confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matt.
10:32, Acts 8:37, Rom. 10:10). Some make additions to this simple
Biblical confession, but I have never heard of anyone’s subtracting from
it. When the comprehensiveness of the term “Christ” is understood, it is
obvious that no additions are needed. Everyone who agrees on the
foregoing will also agree that Jesus commanded baptism and promised
salvation to those who believed and were baptized. “He that believeth
and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be
damned” (Mark 16:16). We will all agree that Peter said, as the Holy
Spirit prompted him, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the
name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the
gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). We will agree that Ananias said to
Paul, “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away
thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16), and also that
the Holy Spirit said through the Apostle Peter, “The like figure
whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of
the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God),
by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21). It is also
generally agreed that when one has been immersed he has been baptized.
There are some who believe that sprinkling or pouring will do as well,
but all agree that immersion is safe. Furthermore, it is generally
agreed that when one believes and repents, confesses his faith, and is
immersed for the remission of sins in the name of Christ, he is saved.
Some believe one is saved before completing this program, but all will
agree that he is saved when he has completed it. So here again we find
the ground of unity.