Books

Focus On The Fundamentals Of The Faith

By W. Douglass Harris

Is What You Have Heard About Churches of Christ True?

All that some know about churches of Christ is based on pure hearsay and most of that is rank misrepresentation. We would like to think it is ignorance and innocence, but fear that much of it is malicious.

Fairness and honesty would require one to base his conclusions on firsthand evidence rather than hearsay. Nicodemus appealed to the law of fairness when charges were made against Christ by saying, “Doth our law judge any man, before it hear from him, and know what he doeth?” (John 7:51). Surely this principle applies to religious bodies and their teaching.

Misrepresentation is one of the most dishonest sins of which one can be guilty. It was misrepresentation that caused the Lord to be crucified. Is what you have heard about churches of Christ true? Did you learn it directly from them? In this article, we will discuss some of the more popular misrepresentations.

1. “Churches of Christ do not accept the Old Testament.” The truthfulness of this accusation depends on what they meant by “accepting” the Old Testament. If by that is meant accepting the inspiration of the Old Testament, the charge is false. But if it means accepting it as binding on us today, from overwhelming evidence of the Scriptures, we hasten to disagree. And those who say they accept it as binding today cannot support their claim. There are many peculiar laws in the Old Testament which they make no pretense of keeping today. What about the prohibition in Leviticus 19:19 of wearing a garment which had in it a mixture of linen and wool? Or the law in Deuteronomy 24:1 which exempted a newly-wed man from military service for a whole year? Or the law which required creditors to release their debtors every seventh year (Deuteronomy 15:1). Or the law that required Jewish farmers to allow their land to lie fallow (idle) every seventh year (Leviticus 25:3,4). Is it necessary for males now to go to Jerusalem three times a year to worship as it was then? What about animal sacrifices, burning incense, and polygamy as practiced then? How inconsistent to claim all the Bible is binding today and ignore these laws!!

Is it fair to accuse churches of Christ of not accepting the Old Testament, because they teach as many scripture passages do, that the Old Testament is not binding today? It was even foretold in the Old Testament that another law would be given (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Amos 8:5,9). Jesus said He came to fulfill the old law and take it out of the way (Matthew 5:17,18). Paul said we were freed from the law which said, “Thou shalt not covet,” that is the ten commandment law (Romans 7:1-7). The same apostle affirms plainly that Moses’ law was done away (2 Corinthians 3:6-11), being abolished by the death of Christ (Colossians 2:14); that it was a temporary provision (Galatians 3:23-25). The book of Hebrews was written to show the superiority of Christianity over Judaism, because it is based on a better law (Hebrews 8:6-13; 10:9,10). Therefore, to say that we do not accept the Old Testament because we teach that it is not binding today is pure misrepresentation.

2. “You believe that one is saved by water alone.” There has never been a more false accusation. We do not believe that one is saved by anything only, but by a combination of factors. A few of those things are as follows: (1) God saves (1 Timothy 2:3,4), (2) Christ saves (1 Timothy 1:15; Matthew 1:21), (3) The Holy Spirit saves (Titus 3:4,5; 1 Corinthians 6:11), (4) God’s grace saves (Ephesians 2:8; Titus 2:11), (5) The blood of Christ saves (Romans 5:9; 1 Peter 1:18,19) (6) The gospel saves (1 Corinthians 15:1,2), (7) Faith saves (Romans 5:1; Mark 16:16), (8) Repentance saves (2 Corinthians 7:10), (9) Baptism saves (1 Peter 3:21), and (10) Hope saves (Romans 8:24). All of these factors are involved in our salvation. To isolate one of these factors from all the others does violence to the Scriptures. Baptism, upon the proper pre-requisites, is essential to salvation, but baptism alone will save no one.

3. “You teach a doctrine of salvation by works.” Without recognizing that there are different kinds of works alluded to in the Scriptures, people will parrot this popular misrepresentation as being true. True, we are not saved by meritorious works, but we are saved by appropriative works (Acts 10:34,35; James 2:24). To lump all works together without making any kind of distinction is to do violence to the Scriptures. We must make a distinction between works of faith and meritorious works.

Works of faith do not exclude grace. Anything done by faith cannot be meritorious, but a matter of grace (Romans 4:16). But how do you harmonize Paul and James on works, a reader may ask? In Romans Paul is speaking of one kind of works (meritorious, or works of the law), and James 2:14-26 is referring to another kind of works (works of faith or obedience). There is no other way to harmonize the two, except to reject the inspiration of James as Martin Luther did. It will not do to say that Paul was referring to the justification of an alien sinner and James to the justification of a child of God, because James cites Rahab as one of his examples and she was an alien sinner.

There is only one meritorious cause in our salvation — the death of Christ. Obedience or works of faith simply appropriate (not earn) the benefits grace offers through the blood of Christ. Although salvation is a gift, it is a conditional gift. God told Joshua He was giving them the city of Jericho, but the gift was conditional (Joshua 6:1-5).

My brethren have never taught, and do not now teach, a doctrine of salvation by meritorious works, and to accuse us of such is rank misrepresentation. If one should live a thousand years and perform a million good works, he would not earn his salvation.

4. “You teach a head religion instead of a heart religion.” This distinction is not made in the Scriptures. Christianity is primarily a heart religion (Matthew 12:34; 22:37; Romans 6:17; 1 Peter 1:22). The heart of the Bible is not the blood pump in our breasts, but the part of man that thinks (Matthew 9:4), reasons (Mark 2:8), understands (Matthew 13:15), determines (Daniel 1:8), loves (Matthew 22:37), and hates (2 Samuel 6:16). None of these are functions of the blood pumps in our breasts, but intellectual processes or functions performed by the brain. Scriptural change of heart is not some mysterious process that gives one a better-felt-than-told feeling, but a rational, intelligent process. Sometimes people pat themselves on their breasts and exclaim that they would not exchange what they feel there for a stack of Bibles as high as they could reach and call that heartfelt religion. But this is not biblical heartfelt religion.

The Bible heart which must be changed is composed of intellect, emotions, and will. Unless all of these have been changed, there is no scriptural complete change of heart. The intellect is changed by testimony which is the facts of the gospel (John 20:30,31); the emotions are changed by the demonstration and revelation of God’s love (John 3:16; 2 Corinthians 8:9; 1 John 4:19), and the will is changed by the motives of the gospel (Romans 2:4; Acts 17:30,31). When one’s faith is changed by the facts of the gospel to become a believer in Christ, his intellect is changed. When one is moved by the knowledge of God’s love to hate sin and love righteousness, his emotions have been changed. And when one ceases the practice of sin by repentance, his will has been changed. All he needs to do to be saved is change his state by being baptized into Christ (Romans 6:3,4; Galatians 3:26,27).

5. “You do not believe in the work of the Holy Spirit in conversion.” There never has been a case of scriptural conversion that was not started and carried to completion by the Holy Spirit. Our difference with our accusers is not whether the Holy Spirit operates in conversion or not, but we differ with them on how He does His work. It is the teaching of the New Testament that the Holy Spirit works in conversion through the revealed word and in no other way — that the word is the instrument used by the Holy Spirit in the conviction of sinners and the sanctification of Christians (Ephesians 6:17). That is the reason that in every case of conversion recorded in the book of Acts (the book of conversions) the word was proclaimed. The gospel is God’s power unto salvation (Romans 1:16). Where the word has not gone the Holy Spirit cannot and does not go.

Conversion is the same as the new birth, and the Holy Spirit has His part in the new birth (John 3:5). It is the work of the Holy Spirit through the word to do the begetting in the new birth (1 Corinthians 4:15; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23). We are willing to affirm the following proposition: For everything that is said in the New Testament to be done by the Holy Spirit in conversion, it can be shown that the same thing is said to be accomplished by the word. God does not have two forces at work in conversion — the Spirit and the word — but the Spirit’s working through the word. For anyone to affirm that we do not believe in the work of the Holy Spirit in conversion is misrepresentation of the rankest sort.

6. “Alexander Campbell established ‘your’ church.” Christ said He would be the founder of His church (Matthew 16:18). This means that no man could possibly be the founder, including Alexander Campbell. Neither will the charge stand historically. Alexander Campbell did not come to the United States until 1809 while he was still in the Presbyterian church. Letters have been preserved and affidavits are on file in the Probate Judges’ office of Jackson County, Alabama to prove the existence of the Rocky Springs Church of Christ in 1807. There were churches of Christ in Morrison’s Court, Glasgow, Scotland in 1778. Also in Leith Walk, Edinburg, Scotland in 1798, and in Criccieth, North Wales in 1799. Alexander Campbell was not baptized for remission of sins until June 12, 1812. He left the Presbyterians and went into the Baptist church in 1813 where he remained until he later severed his relationship with them. Churches of Christ were already in existence before all of this took place in Campbell’s life.

Note the following statements from Campbell himself: “We have no system of our own, to substitute in lieu of every creed in existence. We neither advocate Calvinism, Unitarianism, Arianism, Socinianism, but New Testament. I have no idea of adding to the catalogue of new sects. This game has been played too long. I labor to see sectarianism abolished, and all Christians of every name united upon the one foundation on which the apostolic church was founded” (Christian Baptist, Vol. 1, page 32, Burnett’s Edition and Christian Baptist, Vol. 111, page 217).

To a New Orleans paper who referred to him as “the founder of the denomination” he wrote, “You have done me, gentlemen, too much honor in saying that I am the ‘founder’ of the denomination, quite numerous and respected in many portions of the West, technically known as ‘Christians’, but more commonly as ‘Campbellites’. I have always repudiated all human heads and human names for the people of the Lord, and shall be thankful if you will correct the erroneous impression which your article may have made in thus representing me as the founder of a religious denomination.”

Conclusion: What you have heard about churches of Christ may not be true. Will you be fair enough to follow the suggestion of Nicodemus (John 7:51)?