Who Is Our Erring Brother by David Lee

Who Is Our Erring Brother? by David Lee Burris

BROTHERHOOD FELLOWSHIP

20 TH CENTURY CHURCHES OF CHRIST DEBATE: BROTHERHOOD & FELLOWSHIP 21 ST

Decision Science? Regulative Principle? How Do You Maintain Both Unity & Truth?

Levels of Authority Ideas discerned from the text have different levels of authority. That is to say, some propositions derive less directly from the Bible than others. 1. 2. 3. 4. Direct biblical authority describes ideas that exactly correspond to the teaching of the text. The sermon preaches what the Bible teaches. Indirect biblical authority describes ideas that are only inferred from the text. Casual biblical authority describes ideas that are only vaguely suggested by the text. Corrupted biblical authority describes ideas that twist the meaning of the text into something it never intended.

One BodyImplication & InferenceFall 1988: “Some inferences are feasible, but not necessary. Conclusions which are not necessitated by logic, but are probable by logic, are in this class. They are made because they appear wise and expedient. Other inferences are merely arbitrary. Such an inference is but one out of a plurality of probable alternatives, any one of which may be held to the personal satisfaction of the student. One inference enjoys as much worth as another. ”

Restoration Movement divide @ Regulative Principle: DISCIPLES Of Christ - “We must not condemn what God has not!” Churches Of Christ – “We must not add what God hasn’t authorized!”

Thomas Campbell’s Assessment: The Two Principles In Tension “The authority of primitive Christianity and obligation of Christian unity should be cooperative and mutually corrective. ”

“But still up comes the delicate question, What comes of all the pious Turks, Jews, Pagans? No; that is no concern of ours, says my friend Andrew: but what comes of all the pious Catholics, Greeks, Protestants? The Greek and Roman Church say, "We believe in one baptism for the remission of sins; ’ and they believe that infants are sinners, and therefore the former immerse and the latter sprinkle them; and that is baptism with them. All Christendom either immerse or sprinkle, except the Quakers, and they go for spiritual sprinkling or spiritual immersion. ‘What havoc does baptism for the remission of sins make among all these!!’ I simply say, they are not in the kingdom of grace; because Jesus said, ‘Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God. ’ But he may accept the will for the deed, and admit them into the future kingdom, such of them as are merely mistaken, who are disposed to obey, or who think that they have obeyed, as he may accept infants and idiots into the future kingdom without faith or baptism. ”

IntegrityDevil Is In The DetailsFeb. 1996: “We do, indeed, receive to our communion persons of other denominations who will take upon them the responsibility of their participa-ting with us… All these persons, of so many and contradictory opinions, weekly meet around our Lord’s table… Our bond of union is faith in the slain Messiah, in his death for our sins, and his resurrection for our justification. Therefore, we acknowledge nothing among us but Christ, and him crucified. ”

David Lipscomb’s Approach: The Two Principles In Tension “We will maintain the truth, press the truth upon him, compromise not one word or iota of that truth, yet forbear with the ignorance & weakness of our brother who is anxious but not yet able to see the truth. How do I know that the line beyond which ignorance damns, is behind me, not before him? ”

POINTS OF CONTENTION: Unity-with. In-Diversity Fellowship W/O Endorsing Essentials & Non-Essentials WHO IS A CHRISTIAN?

Unity Within Diversity 1. Unity-in-Diversity. The grace-unity movement asserts that the only way unity can be attained and maintained is through unity in diversity. They argue that we can no more think alike than we can look alike. The unity-in-diversity brethren state that we have unity with the Christian Church by recognizing that we are different in our beliefs about using mechanical instruments of music in worship and by accepting each other in spite of this difference.

• This kind of unity is not “of the Spirit” (Eph. 4: 3). Paul did not try to maintain a unity-in-diversity with the Judaizers; instead the Judaizers were charged with preaching another gospel (Gal. 1: 8 -9) and brethren were told to “cast out the bondwoman and her son” (Gal. 4: 30). John did not recommend a unity-indiversity with the Gnostics of his day; instead he charged that they had gone beyond the doctrine of Christ and did not have God (2 Jn. 9 -11). Those who were faithful to Christ were commanded not to bid them Godspeed lest they become partakers in their evil deeds. Unity Within Diversity

• The unity which they preach is a unity which requires those who oppose instrumental music in worship to compromise their convictions. Those who favor using mechanical instruments of music in worship make no changes whatsoever; they continue to use their instruments of music in worship and preach that it is right to use them, although they are not used at some unity forums lest brethren should be alarmed at where the movement is headed. Those who oppose instrumental music in worship are told to quit preaching that a person sins and brings himself into a state of spiritual condemnation when he uses mechanical instruments of music in worship. He must give up his conviction that using mechanical instruments of music in worship is a sin which will cause one to lose his soul. Unity Within Diversity

Fellowship Without Endorsing 2. Fellowship Without Endorsement. Recently, we have been treated to several treatises on fellowship which try to distinguish levels of fellowship. One might be in the fellowship of God but not in the fellowship of other saints. We have been told by some of our grace-unity brethren that those in the Christian Church are in fellowship with God but that they cannot join with them in the fellowship of worship (because it would violate their conscience).

• Does fellowship imply endorsement? Leroy Garrett says, “No. ” The Bible says, “Yes. ” Paul mentioned that James, Cephas, and John “gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship” (Gal. 2: 9). The “right hands of fellowship” from these leading men indicated that they approved the gospel which Paul was preaching. Yes, the right hands of fellowship meant endorsement. In fact, inviting a Gnostic preacher into one’s home in such a manner as to aid his work & increase his influence resulted in “bidding him Godspeed” and becoming a partaker in his sins (2 Jn. 9 -11). The unity-in-diversity brethren are flatly contradicting the word of God when they teach that we can receive those who introduce mechanical instruments of music into the worship of the church without endorsing that which is sinful. Fellowship Without Endorsing

Essentials Versus Non-Essentials 3. Essentials and Non-Essentials. The grace-unity movement un-scripturally distinguishes essentials from nonessentials. Everyone of us recognizes that there are essentials and non-essentials in the Bible. Paul placed eating meats sacrificed to idols (Rom. 14 -15) in the latter category. Whether or not one decides to marry is placed in that category (1 Cor. 9), as are also whether or not a preacher is supported, meeting in an upper room, etc. However, there are other things which are essential, such as the deity of Christ, the Lordship of Christ, the resurrection, etc.

• The grace-unity brethren work to reduce the essentials to a bare minimum. Leroy Garrett and Carl Ketcherside reduce the essentials to seven facts and one act which they call “gospel. ” The other items are called “doctrine. ” With reference to the “gospel, ” all of those brethren who can no more think alike than they can look alike must learn to think alike! Shelly’s list of essentials is the seven ones of Ephesians 4: 4 -6; however he quickly points out that using mechanical instruments of music in worship is not a violation of the seven ones. Essentials Versus Non-Essentials

• Brethren who reduce the “essentials” to a bare minimum are forced to go through the commandments of God and decide which are “essential” and which are “non-essential. ” Surely, they would be so kind as to tell the rest of us what criteria is used to distinguish an essential from a non-essential. Their subjective and arbitrary lists are worthless. Is God’s commandment to “flee fornication” an essential or a non-essential? How can we tell? Brethren, I have no desire to join hands with those brethren who put themselves in the position of becoming a judge of the law of God, distinguishing which of God’s commands must be obeyed and which do not have to be obeyed (Jas. 4: 11 -12). Essentials Versus Non-Essentials

WHO IS A CHRISTIAN? 4. Who Is A Christian. As the grace-unity movement continues its evolution, more and more the question is raised regarding who is a Christian. Movement spokemen recognizes Christians in all denominations, regardless of whether they have been baptized. They may even be modernists, embracing evolution and denying the virgin birth of Jesus! Rubel Shelly says that one is a Christian so long as he is baptized in order to obey God. (The Baptists who deny that baptism is for the remission of sins teach that one is baptized in order to obey God. ) The grace-unity movement loosens what God has bound as the conditions for becoming a Christian. The Lord Himself said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mk. 16: 16). I will not tell a man that he is saved before and without being baptized. I will not recognize as saved anyone who has not complied with the Lord’s conditions. We dare not loose what God has bound (Matt. 16: 19; 18: 18).

REDEFINING NECESSARY INFERENCE • Men sometimes infer when God has not implied. These are the human inferences and speculations, often found in creeds, which the pioneers were fighting (as in the quotes our brother sometimes uses); see Apr. 12, 1973, Gospel Guardian article “God’s Revelation Designed to be Understood-Ill. ” God says (1) “Go, ” and men infer a complex system of church centralization; (2) “Preach, ” and they infer an exclusive hierarchal system; (3) “sing, ” and they infer everything from tin buckets to philharmonic orchestras; (4) “fellowship, ” and they infer everything from the smell of coffee to the smell of hot tar going on the roof of a new gym.

REDEFINING NECESSARY INFERENCE • Creeds are largely formalized inferences on predestination, centralization, etc. which are, in turn, inventions of human inference in matters where God has not implied. God forbids such opinionating, speculating, violating of his covenant, and adding to His Word. Such is not necessarily implied, not within our liberty, not within expediency because not within the law of Christ. Such is the sinful invention of men drifting from Christ as the only Head and from the Bible as the only authority (Jn. 10; Eph. 1: 22 -23; 2 nd Tim. 3: 16 -17).

REDEFINING NECESSARY INFERENCE • These brothers’ argument hinge in part on their suggesting God wouldn’t cause one to be lost whose intellect was too weak to infer what God implied. True, but the danger is extreme in saying this means necessary implication isn’t binding. The next step, on the same premise, is to see that one might be too weak to recognize a divinely approved example, and to set that aside as not binding. Then, one might be too weak to recognize a direct command, so it can be set aside. Thus, the Bible is overturned completely.

GOSPEL VERSUS DOCTRINE • Carl Ketcherside says, “Not one apostolic letter is a part of the gospel” (Mission Messenger, Vol. 35, No. 6, p. 86; No. 2, p. 20)… The Bible doesn’t teach either the strict “gospel-doctrine” distinction of Ketcherside, nor does it consistently limit the word “gospel” to matters of primary obedience. The Bible speaks of the Lord’s will (Matt. 7), his covenant (Hebrews), the gospel (Acts, Gal. ), the truth Jn. 8), the faith (Gal. , Jude) & the doctrine or teaching (Matt. 7, Acts 2, Rom. 6, 2 Jn. 9, 1, 2 Tim. ). Each word has a distinct emphasis (as gospel emphasizes good news and doctrine, a thing taught); yet, all refer to the same scheme of redemption, the same resulting body of material, and the same inspired revelation. Since the gospel is taught, it is doctrine. Since the teaching is good and wonderful in its source, nature, and meaning, it is gospel. There is no more difference between gospel and doctrine than between gospel and truth, the truth and the faith, His covenant and teaching, His will and the faith, etc. The word “doctrine” is definitely used in reference to primary obedience (Acts 13: 5 -12). When a Christian violates the teaching of “the epistles, ” he also violates “the gospel” (Gal. 2: 11 -14).

GOSPEL VERSUS DOCTRINE • We can show the all-sufficiency of scripture by showing (1) Matt. - Jn. emphasizes faith in Christ, (2) Acts emphasizes conversion, and (3) the epistles” emphasize how to grow daily and set the church in order. But, there is no strict division here, and thus no Bible term to indicate an absolute distinction. Each of the three divisions teaches something needed for daily growth and setting churches in order, teaching conversion, and building faith in Christ. No one division is written only for the world as distinguished from another written only for benefit of Christians. Luke and Acts are written from one Christian to another. Every Christian needs repeated study in Matt. -Jn. ; this “strengthens him in faith and hope. ” Writing to saints, Peter recounted some primary points of the gospel, stirred up the brethren, and told them they would always need such study (2 Pet. 1, 3).

IMPUTED OBEDIENCE • Next we consider our these brothers’ concept of grace. They are teaching that the work of Christ, in addition to the blood sacrifice, was to obey perfectly for us. Christ is “a representative law-keeper, who justifies others by his obedience. ” “Because of His obedience, those who are in Him can be saved although they never do achieve perfect obedience themselves. ” Once we are in Christ, the obedience of Christ is imputed to us rather than sin being imputed to us. “There is a sphere where sin is not imputed to the sinners and that sphere is ‘in Christ. ’ “ This is “the righteousness which is by faith” referred to “in Romans 4: 6 -8" (quotes from G. G. , Vol. 21, No. 44). (They want us to emphasize that they believe imputed obedience is conditioned on true faith. )

IMPUTED OBEDIENCE • If the work of Christ was not as “a representative lawkeeper who justifies others by His obedience, ” what is the meaning of his perfect obedience? Our brothers’ say, “Because Of His obedience, those who are in Him can be saved although they never do achieve perfect obedience. ” If that is not it, what is the meaning of Christ’s obedience? In the first place, his death could not be accepted on our behalf if be owed life for his own sins.

IMPUTED OBEDIENCE • The perfect life was lived to make him perfect in sympathy and understanding of our struggle with sin. We emphasize the perfect life provided a perfect sacrifice. The perfect priest, “without sin, ” did not offer a life-long obedience to be counted in place of our disobedience; he culminated a life of obedience in a perfect sacrifice for our sins, and thus saves us. “Through death” he saves us. See Hebrews 5: 8 -9; 9: 28; 10: 12. Yes, his obedience is full of meaning for us.

IMPUTED OBEDIENCE • The idea that God imputes the obedience of Christ to us leads our brother to say, “But there is a sphere where sin is not imputed to the sinners and that sphere is ‘in Christ. ’ “ So, as long as we’re in Christ, God keeps imputing his obedience to us and so does not impute sin to us. (Again, Ed says this is conditioned on true, continuing faith. ) This is a misconstrued allusion to Rom. 4, especially vv. 4 -8. God does not impute past sins to those justified by faith. Such is the meaning of Ps. 32, from which Paul quotes, “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. ” “The Lord imputeth not iniquity, ” not in the sense that sin is not imputed in the first place, but in the sense that imputed sin was “forgiven” to one who “acknowledged” and confessed his sin unto God (Ps. 32: 1 -5). Sin, once forgiven, is not imputed or remembered any longer. So it is in Heb. 8: 12, “Their sins. . . will I remember no more.

IMPUTED OBEDIENCE • We emphasize again, the Law did not foreshadow (1) one to perfectly obey for us, so (2) his obedience could be imputed to us, and (3) so our present sins would not be imputed to us. The people were never taught to look on the thousands of lambs as perfectly obedient ones, foreshadowing One who would perfectly obey for us-nor are the other two points just mentioned foreshadowed. The lamb without blemish did emphasize that Christ would be a sinless sacrifice. Every man broke the Law and then stood under the sentence of death (Gal. 3: 11 -12; Heb. 2: 15). They saw in the rivers of blood that sin requires death, and yet that animal blood is insufficient (Heb. 9 -10). But the shadows, the sacrifices they offered, served to bring them unto “the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world” through one perfect sacrifice (Jn. 1, Gal. 3, Heb. 10).

THE MAN VERSUS THE PLAN • In Vol. 21, No. 1, our brother says the “Man versus Plan” idea is “an unscriptural distinction between Christ and His teachings. ” He adds, “It’s right to emphasize the teaching of the, New Testament Scriptures in dealing with the matter of unity” so long as one doesn’t neglect or overlook “Christ’s role” in unity. But in the same place he does himself recognize the very distinction he disavows. He suggests the Philippian jailor may never have “enjoyed the benefit and blessing of additional instruction” after primary obedience in baptism. That primary obedience “embraced everything that was absolutely essential, ” so the jailor could have lived the rest of his life with the man and without one iota of the plan of “additional instruction. ” Our Lord never taught such a thing nor authorized us to do it. This Man without the Plan could have resulted in nothing but death (Jn. 15; 1 Pet. 2: 1 -2; Matt. 28: 20). The plain teachings of the New Testament are the basis of unity, for through them - and only through them - can we maintain our vital relationship with our Savior. ’

THE MAN VERSUS THE PLAN • The truth is, when the gospel was preached by inspired men in the 1 st century, both the Man and the Plan were preached – with special emphasis on the Son of God who gives the Word of God and thus has absolute authority over the People of God in all the affairs of spiritual service. The church and the Bible and the Christ. Our “emphasis in restoration” preaching or gospel preaching, must be on the absolute authority of the Son, all-sufficiency of the Word, and the distinctive characteristics of the People of God. Digressives, such as our brother quotes, are forever trying to figure out how to emphasize some part of the gospel without emphasizing all of it; is our brother getting on the merry-go-round with them? Let us all determine, as Paul, to shun not “to declare. . . all the counsel of God” (Acts 20: 27).

LIBERTY IN CHRIST • “These worthy men” further believed “this does not give the objector the right to forbid the other brother’s doing” the things listed because “opinion will not interfere with his salvation. ” We can’t label such “opinion or practice as sinful” nor preach “repentance and reformation” to the man who engages in such so long as he doesn’t urge “it on others as an item of faith. ” Since such practices are not expressly forbidden nor commanded, we should “allow the largest liberty. ”

CREEDAL ERROR AN ALLOWED WEAKNESS • Our brother [Edward Fudge] published in the Firm Foundation (Vol. 89, No. 22, 23) some studies on Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10). Along with some fine points, he presented a distinction, which is not borne out by scripture. Nadab and Abibu were punished because of irreverent pride, but their brothers sinned later in the chapter and weren’t punished because their sin was simply born of human weakness. Concerning Eleazar and Ithamar, we have this explanation, “But their sin grew out of human weakness, not out of haughty will. It involved a false piety, not a flagrant pride. ” Thus, those who sinned by pride in worship were not forgiven, but punished; those who sinned by human weakness were forgiven.

CREEDAL ERROR AN ALLOWED WEAKNESS • If the Bible teaches such, Lev. 10 is not the place. Moses was angry at first in the case of Eleazar and Ithamar. After hearing the explanation, “he was content” (v. 20). If Moses was content, then God’s law wasn’t broken in the first place. Where was Moses ever content with a bonafide case of sinregardless of excuses and explanations. Christ did not sin by healing on the Sabbath; it seemed to some that he did, but they were put to silence by his explanation. On Lev. 10: 12 -20, Pulpit Commentary says, “It was true that the letter of the Law bad been broken, but there was a sufficient cause for it (see Hos. 6: 6; Matt. 12: 7). ” An inspired man like Moses could determine whether an apparent violation was actually allowable in God’s sight or not. (This is wholly unlike the “situation ethics” idea of turning every man loose to set aside any and every law of God which blocks some desire he is determined to fulfill. )

LINES OF FAITH & SETS OF OPINION • We beg our brother to reconsider the realm of lawful expedience versus the realm of unlawful opinion. He confuses the two in his article. Concerning the use of instruments, etc. , our brother says we shouldn’t require “unity of opinion”-i. e. we must allow brethren to have whatever opinion they wish on such practices. We shouldn’t “forbid the other brother’s doing” these practices, asserts our brother.

LINES OF FAITH & SETS OF OPINION • Sin and responsibility for division lie at the door of these who force such practices on the conservative or of those who forbid the liberty of such practices. He thinks these concepts will avoid contention and promote unity; “it is ours to refute them-or put them into practice, ” he says. He hasn’t refuted them (though we shall in this article), so we assume be thinks they should be ‘’put into practice. ” The result (as we understand his article): we should treat brethren who enter into the realm of unlawful opinion exactly as we do those who enter the realm of lawful expediency.

LINES OF FAITH & SETS OF OPINION • The brothers’ position hinges on the fact that instruments, etc. , aren’t mentioned in the New Testament; not being mentioned, they are not in any sense a matter of faith, he seems to think. To practice what his article asserts is to undermine the Bible. While instruments, etc. , are not matters of faith in the sense that the Bible affirms we should use them, they are matters of faith in that they violate Christ’s covenant by disregarding its silence and adding to its teaching! This is the old issue of whether God must specifically forbid a thing by name before it is sinful (a matter of faith), or whether God’s specific approbation of something (like singing) is also a prohibition of everything else like playing). See Heb. 7: 14. Whatever isn’t specifically forbidden our brother places in the realm of lawful opinion - seeing sin only when the not-specifically-forbidden thing is forced upon brethren.

SEEKING GROWTH SEEING LOSS • . . their reason for this was that such unauthorized practices” create “disunity, ” when they are forced on those who object. Such “unauthorized practices” weren’t considered “condemning in themselves. “ So, though “human standards of orthodoxy” were opposed and condemned when they blocked unity, they were not wrong for those who could maintain unity along with their human traditions. Our brother says, “the wrong-unlessauthorized concept” later “came to be regarded as a guide for positive action” and “a standard of orthodoxy. ” Thus, tests of fellowship don’t need to be authorized except when they are a problem in blocking unity in a particular situation.

TESTS OF FELLOWSHIP • Why do tests of fellowship need to be authorized at any time in the first place? Because only Christ has authority to institute terms of fellowship. Certainly, yielding to those terms does result in unity-unity on the terms of Bible teaching, the teaching of Christ. The institution of such tests is a “positive action” and thus those who act under Christ as Head must have a thus-saith-the-Lord. When the church institutes “positive action” in its work, worship, and organization, it still must act under Christ as Head and therefore have a thus smith-the-Lord. Since Christ has all authority, all religious activity must be approached by asking, “What does Christ say? ” When this is done, unity results. When human traditions are embraced, (1) we stand condemned for acting without divine authority (Eph. 1: 22; Matt. 28: 18), and (2) unity may or may not be disturbed, depending on how many accept the traditions. Not only when alienated brethren are seeking unity, but in all religious activity whatever, the question of authority for what we do is basic. – 1970’S SERIES, TRUTH MAGAZINE

Although There’s Obvious Overlap… A MAN’S THOUGHTS DO NOT AUTOMATICALLY EQUATE WITH HIS ACTIONABLE DEEDS; NOR DOES BEING DISCOVERED IN DOCTRINAL ERROR AUTOMATICALLY EQUATE WITH

VENN DIAGRAM OF SALVATION ESSENTIALS SPIRITUAL FULLNESS B A S I C S DOCTRINAL FULLNESS

SPIRITUAL FULLNESS B A S I C S DOCTRINAL FULLNESS

DIAGRAM POSITIONING ERRING BROTHER Salvation Essentials EB Spiritually Immature Doctrinally Shallow

DIAGRAM POSITIONING ERRING BROTHER SALVATION ESSENTIALS EB SPIRITUALLY IMMATURE DOCTRINALLY SHALLOW

Doctrinal Error As Sin In Disconnect • UNITY WITHIN DIVERSITY • FELLOWSHIP WITHOUT @The end AGREED PRINCIPLED ENDORSEMENT of the • ESSENTIALS th ONLY CRITERIA • AN EVER EXPANDING DEFINITION OF CHRISTIAN BROTHERHOOD 20 Century

21 ST CENTURY CHURCHES OF CHRIST DEBATE: BROTHERHOOD & FELLOWSHIP 20 TH

Decision Science? Regulative Principle? How Do You Maintain Both Unity & Truth?

Levels of Authority Ideas discerned from the text have different levels of authority. That is to say, some propositions derive less directly from the Bible than others. 1. 2. 3. 4. Direct biblical authority describes ideas that exactly correspond to the teaching of the text. The sermon preaches what the Bible teaches. Indirect biblical authority describes ideas that are only inferred from the text. Casual biblical authority describes ideas that are only vaguely suggested by the text. Corrupted biblical authority describes ideas that twist the meaning of the text into something it never intended.

One BodyImplication & InferenceFall 1988: “Some inferences are feasible, but not necessary. Conclusions which are not necessitated by logic, but are probable by logic, are in this class. They are made because they appear wise and expedient. Other inferences are merely arbitrary. Such an inference is but one out of a plurality of probable alternatives, any one of which may be held to the personal satisfaction of the student. One inference enjoys as much worth as another. ”

Restoration Movement divide @ Regulative Principle: DISCIPLES Of Christ - “We must not condemn what God has not!” Churches Of Christ – “We must not add what God hasn’t authorized!”

Thomas Campbell’s Assessment: The Two Principles In Tension “The authority of primitive Christianity and obligation of Christian unity should be cooperative and mutually corrective. ”

“But still up comes the delicate question, What comes of all the pious Turks, Jews, Pagans? No; that is no concern of ours, says my friend Andrew: but what comes of all the pious Catholics, Greeks, Protestants? The Greek and Roman Church say, "We believe in one baptism for the remission of sins; ’ and they believe that infants are sinners, and therefore the former immerse and the latter sprinkle them; and that is baptism with them. All Christendom either immerse or sprinkle, except the Quakers, and they go for spiritual sprinkling or spiritual immersion. ‘What havoc does baptism for the remission of sins make among all these!!’ I simply say, they are not in the kingdom of grace; because Jesus said, ‘Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God. ’ But he may accept the will for the deed, and admit them into the future kingdom, such of them as are merely mistaken, who are disposed to obey, or who think that they have obeyed, as he may accept infants and idiots into the future kingdom without faith or baptism. ”

IntegrityDevil Is In The DetailsFeb. 1996: “We do, indeed, receive to our communion persons of other denominations who will take upon them the responsibility of their participa-ting with us… All these persons, of so many and contradictory opinions, weekly meet around our Lord’s table… Our bond of union is faith in the slain Messiah, in his death for our sins, and his resurrection for our justification. Therefore, we acknowledge nothing among us but Christ, and him crucified. ”

David Lipscomb’s Approach: The Two Principles In Tension “We will maintain the truth, press the truth upon him, compromise not one word or iota of that truth, yet forbear with the ignorance & weakness of our brother who is anxious but not yet able to see the truth. How do I know that the line beyond which ignorance damns, is behind me, not before him? ”

POINTS OF CONTENTION: Unity-with. In-Diversity Fellowship W/O Endorsing Essentials & Non-Essentials WHO IS A CHRISTIAN?

Essentials Vs. Non-Essentials & Levels of Truth “It is axiomatic that one cannot bring nine different denominations together without finding a broader basis upon which to do it. The rules of faith of the participating denominations are simply not broad enough to facilitate such unity. Likewise, the rule of faith of the N. T. Lord’s church is not broad enough to allow the kind of unity some have argued for today (Matt. 28: 20). Hence, we should not be surprised when we hear of brothers Owen or Harrell using honesty and sincerity as a basis for receiving an erring brother or of brother Rubel Shelley saying that there are different levels of truth, some essential and some not so much so. More such bases may be in store for us in the future. When someone seeks a broader unity than the Bible allows, he must find a broader basis than the Bible. ” – Steve Wallace

CHARLES SPURGEON ON CHRISTIAN CHARITY: ◦ “Sympathy is especially a Christian's duty. Consider what the Christian is, and you will say that if every other man were selfish he should be disinterested; if there were nowhere else a heart that had sympathy for the needy there should be one found in every Christian breast. The Christian is a king; it becometh not a king to be meanly caring for himself. Was Alexander ever more royal than when his troops were suffering from thirst, and a soldier offered him a bowl full of the precious liquid, he put it aside, and said it was not fitting for a king to drink while his subjects were thirsty, and that he would share their sorrow with them? O ye; whom God has made kings and princes, reign royally over your own selfishness, and act with the honorable liberality which becomes the seed royal of the universe. You are sent into the world to be saviors of others, but how shall you be so if you care only for yourselves? It is yours to be lights, and doth not a light consume itself while it scatters its rays into the thick darkness? Is it not your office and privilege to have it said of you as of your Master— ‘He saved others, himself he cannot save? ’ ◦ The Christian’s sympathy should ever be of the widest character, because he serves a God of infinite love. When the precious stone of love is thrown by grace into the crystal pool of a renewed heart it stirs the transparent life-floods into ever widening circles of sympathy: the first ring has no very wide circumference; we love our own household; for he that careth not for his own household is worse than a heathen man and a publican: but mark the next concentric ring; we love the household of faith ‘We know that we have passed from death unto life because we love the brethren: ’ look once more, for the ever-widening ring has reached the very limit of the lake, and included all men in its area, for ‘supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks are to be made for all men. ’ ◦ If any man shall think that we are not ‘born for the universe’ and should narrow our souls, I can only say that I have not so learned Christ, and hope never to confine to a few the sympathy which I believe to be meant for mankind. To me, a follower of Jesus means a friend of man. A Christian is a philanthropist by profession, and generous by force of grace; wide as the reign of sorrow is the stretch of his love, and where he cannot help he pities still. ” – Charles Spurgeon

La. Gard Smith’s Concept of Five-Fold Fellowship HUMANITY

FIVE LEVELS OF FELLOWSHIP: humankind brotherhood fellowship of the faith the “in Christ” fellowship Fellowship of Conscience Assembly family Fellowship

La. Gard Smith’s Concept of Five-Fold Fellowship The Sky-blue Background Faith Fellowship “In-Christ” Fellowship Conscience Fellowship Congregation al Fellowship The Entire Human

WHO IS … My Brother? Universal Fellowship: The Family of Man The first level of fellowship, discussed in chapter 6, is that which exists among all humans. We all are descendants of Adam and are brothers and sisters in the family of man. We share the human experience, render aid to one another, and participate with fellow humans in various endeavors of common interest (e. g. , PTA). As Christians, we are concerned for the spiritual well-being of our fellow humans, and we seek to lead them to Christ.

WHO IS … My Brother? Faith Fellowship: Like Family Chapter 7 discusses a level of fellowship that the author describes as “faith fellowship. ” This is fellowship with those who believe in Christ but have not been biblically baptized. This level of fellowship is higher than “universal fellowship, ” but it falls short of “in Christ” fellowship (to be discussed later). Brother Smith says that these unbaptized believers are not “family, ” but they are “like family. ” The description, “like family, ” is not identical to Ketcherside’s “brothers in prospect, ” but it does have a similar ring to it. Explaining this description, he writes, “In virtually every way they think and act as those in the family would think and act” (106). Really? Do they think and act as those in the family? Their thinking utterly rejects what Jesus said to do to be saved as well as the need for scriptural authority in religion, and their actions in worship and service to God are not governed by his word. Such thinking and acting is certainly not appropriate for the family of God.

WHO IS … My Brother? “In Christ” Fellowship: The Extended Family This is the fellowship we have with all who have been scripturally immersed. It includes those with whom we have serious doctrinal differences and those who have gone into sin. It is true that these are brethren in God’s family. Nevertheless, we must not extend the “right hand of fellowship” to those who teach doctrines that condemn souls or engage unrepentantly in sin. We must not give the impression that we endorse their teaching or conduct or that we regard them to be right with God (2 John 9 -11; Eph. 5: 11). The Bible does not teach that the faithful are in fellowship with those in sin (2 Cor. 6: 14).

WHO IS … My Brother? “In Christ” Fellowship: The Extended Family – continued In his discussion of this level of fellowship, brother Smith discusses those who are baptized without understanding its significance. They should be taught the true meaning of baptism, he says, but then they may be regarded as brethren and given the right hand of fellowship. I believe that in order for baptism to be biblical, it must be for the biblical reason: the remission of sins (Acts 2: 38). Being baptized without understanding its significance is of no more value than eating the Lord’s supper without understanding its significance. Repentant believers who were baptized for the remission of sins are my brethren.

WHO IS … My Brother? Conscience Fellowship: Close Family Brother Smith says that conscience fellowship “provides elbow-room for the exercise of individual and collective conscience” (78). Certainly, allowance must be made for differences of conscience in our personal lives. However, we are not free to tolerate practices that are clearly sinful. Our brother recognizes this fact, acknowledging that “there are some doctrines too obviously ungodly to leave to others’ conscientious understanding” (143). He mentions, for example, homosexual marriages and “also heterosexual re-marriages that violate Jesus’ clear teaching” (143). In fact, he avers, “Such obvious sin cannot simply be a matter of individual or congregational conscience” (144).

WHO IS … My Brother? Conscience Fellowship: Close Family – continued Having said that, however, brother Smith warns of the danger of confusing sin with doctrinal differences. He believes that if someone’s doctrinal belief leads him to believe that a remarriage is not adulterous, then allowance should be made for his view. That puts the matter on the level of a doctrinal difference rather than sin. He asserts that we may be guilty of “accusing others of tolerating adultery without acknowledging that, if the other person is right about the remarriage not being adulterous, then there is no sin at all being tolerated” (146). Brother Smith does not discuss whether he would make the same allowance for those whose doctrinal beliefs lead them to believe that homosexual marriages are acceptable. Those inclined to accept his position would do well to consider this point. If the Bible clearly condemns a practice, the fact that some brethren do not accept that teaching does not make the practice any less sinful or more worthy of acceptance.

WHO IS … My Brother? Congregational Fellowship: Immediate Family This is the fellowship among Christians who work and worship together in the local congregation. Brother Smith discusses the blessings of such a family relationship, but he also discusses the problems that sometimes lead one to consider departing a particular congregation. Sometimes the congregation’s activities are such that one has difficulties maintaining a good conscience while participating. Our brother shares with us that he has experienced that dilemma.

Question: Who Is My Brother? “To see ourselves as unworthy, grace-saved, children of adoption is to put ourselves on notice that we, of ourselves, are in no position to draw any lines of fellowship other than those which God himself has drawn – either to exclude where God has included, or to include where God has excluded. ” ― F. La. Gard Smith, Who Is My Brother? : Facing a Crisis of Identity & Fellowship

• Consequences of a Restrictive Paradigm • On page 27, Smith states, ―Our own splintered fellowship would be sufficient reason alone to conduct serious unity talks among ourselves. In addition to the separation that developed between the Christian Churches and the churches of Christ over the issues of instrumental music and missionary societies in 1906, many other issues served as the basis for subsequent schisms within the churches of Christ. Some examples include the "one-cuppers" (those who believe that the use of only one cup during the Lord‘s Supper is acceptable), the ―non-Sunday school group (those who believe that Sunday school, mentioned nowhere in the Bible and unheard of prior to the 18 th Century, is wrong), etc. On page 137, Smith describes three women from a congregation in England that utilized straws to sip communion so as to maintain adherence to the ―one cup practice while at the same time taking precautions to minimize personal risk during flu season. Though Smith does not share this same conviction regarding the use of ―one cup, he expresses a similar concern over ―technicalities in his ―open letter to Max Lucado on page 252. Smith cites several of the previously mentioned examples of God‘s punishment of Saul, Uzzah, etc. as he appeals to Lucado regarding the issue of promoting unity at the expense of doctrinal integrity. APPLYING CRITICAL THINKING @CRITICS

Question: Who Is My Brother? “If the conversion experience is a wondrous, divine gestation process, baptism is a definitive, wombdeparting point of birth. A fixed point. A precise moment in the life of a believer which parallels the very death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord that made the imparting of his grace to us possible. ” ― F. La. Gard Smith, Who Is My Brother? : Facing a Crisis of Identity & Fellowship

Question: Who Is My Brother? “Christ’s death was not a process. It was a single, supreme act of divine sacrifice, so awful that the earth shook and the rocks split! Nor was Christ’s burial a process, but the pitch-dark, ominous dividing line between death and life. And ‘process’ is hardly the word for Christ’s resurrection, the most glorious, defining event in the history of the world!” ― F. La. Gard Smith, Who Is My Brother? : Facing a Crisis of Identity & Fellowship

• A Matter of Time • As Smith has detailed in his emphasis on the importance of baptism, the question as to―when a person becomes a Christian has been of critical concern within the churches of Christ. Ultimately, the answer to that question is that a person becomes a Christian when God forgives the person‘s sins and―writes his or her name in the book of life. The position among those in the churches of Christ has generally been that forgiveness occurs at baptism–period! The previous examples have demonstrated that such was not always the case. Even in the post-Pentecost era, it cannot be proven definitively that God only forgives sins at baptism. The most supportable position that can be promoted is that the ― normative pattern conversion under the New Covenant involves forgiveness and receipt of the indwelling Holy Spirit coinciding with the immersion of repentant believers. The urgency of baptism observed in the New Testament supports this understanding. To go beyond this posture and insist on a definitive point in time of salvation may incorporate a fallacy of reasoning attributable to a failure to recognize the distinction between our finite place in time and God‘s infinite nature. Many within the churches of Christ have been exposed to John Clayton‘s lessons about―The Nature of God that is based on the book Flatland. The illustrations convey the idea of a two-dimensional being‘s incapacity to comprehend a three-dimension object (a sphere) as an analogy of three-dimensional man‘s incapacity to comprehend an omnipresent God who had no beginning and is unbound by time and space. APPLYING CRITICAL THINKING @CRITICS

Question: Who Is My Brother? “For that very reason we must be careful not to transform clemency into a more generalized rule of justification. That is why (among reasons) "the thief on the cross" is such a bogus argument for faith-only salvation. Not only was water baptism physically impossible at that moment, but what we were witnessing in that incident was clemency, not justification. ” ― F. La. Gard Smith, Who Is My Brother? : Facing a Crisis of Identity & Fellowship

• Those Who Are Not ―One of Us • Mark 9: 38 -40 TNIV 38 ―Teacher, said John, ―we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us. ―Do not stop him, Jesus said. ―No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. • Smith examines the ramifications of this scripture in his chapter on ―Faith Fellowship (chapter 6). He wrestles with the issue of how we should fellowship with those who reflect the godly devotion emphasized in the previous section, yet who have not experienced baptism in a manner consistent with the ― normative pattern observed in the New Testament. It is evident that he is cognizant of God‘s emphasis on―mercy, not sacrifice (Matthew 12) as he explores the possibility that God may ultimately grant ―clemency to the ―godly but un-immersed. This ―paradox is considered in his chapter on ― The Prospect of Eternal Fellowship (chapter 12). - John Lang APPLYING CRITICAL THINKING @CRITICS

Question: Who Is My Brother? “If the circumference of fellowship is to be determined by ‘the central tenets of Christianity, ’ as suggested, then how about Paul’s own list, which he specifically associated with keeping ‘the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace’ (Ephesians 4: 3 – 6)? If I am not mistaken, Paul listed seven central tenets, not just six. Is Paul’s ‘one baptism’ any less central than his ‘one Lord, ’ or his ‘one faith? ’ Has his ‘one baptism’ nothing whatsoever to do with the ‘one body? ’” ― F. La. Gard Smith, Who Is My Brother? : Facing a Crisis of Identity & Fellowship

• Baptismal Theology as a ―Test of Fellowship • It is understandable why Smith stated on page 17, ―Of all the doctrines unique to the churches of Christ, none has been more central than the absolute necessity of adult, faith-prompted baptism for the remission of sins. In view of the introduction of infant baptism in the late 2 nd century and the altered understanding of the nature of baptism introduced by Zwingli in the 16 th century, there has been a significant departure from the teaching and practice of baptism as the early church understood it. The vast majority of believers in Christ practice infant baptism. The vast majority of those who practice immersion consider it to be a post-salvation ceremony, consistent with Zwingli‘s doctrinal stance. Comparatively speaking, the churches of Christ represent an extreme minority of believers who promote the practice of baptism in a manner consistent with the understanding that prevailed prior to the time of Constantine and the―legalization of Christianity in the 4 th century. Accordingly, it is natural that the doctrine of baptism has been emphasized so much within our churches. Early church baptismal theology is definitely our ― strong suit. Given the― restrictive paradigm that developed within the churches of Christ; however, baptismal theology became a―test of fellowship. Although early leaders in the Restoration Movement promoted the understanding of baptism held by the early church, they didn’t promote a sectarian emphasis on baptismal theology as a―test of fellowship. This perspective is reflected in Alexander Campbell‘s ―Lunenburg Letter of 1837. APPLYING CRITICAL THINKING @CRITICS

• “Should I find a Pedobaptist more intelligent in the Christian Scriptures, more spirituallyminded and more devoted to the Lord than a Baptist, or one immersed on a profession of the ancient faith, I could not hesitate a moment in giving the preference of my heart to him that loveth most. Did I act otherwise, I would be a pure sectarian, a Pharisee among Christians. Still I will be asked, How do I know that any one loves my Master but by his obedience to his commandments? I answer, In no other way. But mark, I don’t substitute obedience to one commandment, for universal or even for general obedience. And should I see a sectarian Baptist or a Pedobaptist more spiritually-minded, more conformed to the requisitions of the Messiah, than one who precisely acquiesces with me in theory or practice of immersion as I teach, doubtless the former rather than the latter, would have my cordial approbation and love as a Christian. So I judge, and so I feel. It is the image of Christ the Christian looks for and loves; and this does not consist in being exact in a few items, but in general devotion to the whole truth as far as known. ” – 1837 Alexander Campbell’s Lunenburg Letter • - John Lang APPLYING CRITICAL THINKING @CRITICS

Question: Who Is My Brother? “If God wants there to be unbaptized believers in heaven, that is up to him. All we know and all we can preach is what we read in the Book. And from what we can read in the Book, there is no such thing as salvation, redemption, or justification apart from penitent, faith-prompted immersion. ” ― F. La. Gard Smith, Who Is My Brother? : Facing a Crisis of Identity & Fellowship

F. La. Gard Smith Has Complicated The Simple: • Approved (Good) fellowship • With the Godly (1 John 1: 1 -7) “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us; ) That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full. This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. ” Those whom are in truth and speaking truth thus working together (Ephesians 4: 15 -16) “But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. ” Those who are of the same body (1 Corinthians 12: 12 -14) “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. ” Those who have been taken out of darkness (Colossians 1: 12 -13) “Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son. ” • • • Disapproved fellowship The non-repenting brother or sister (Matthew 18: 15 -17) “Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. ” The immoral (1 Corinthians 5: 1 -13) “It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. ” Those who are not with Christ (Matthew 12: 30) “He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. ” Those in darkness (Ephesians 5: 11) “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. ” Those who do not follow the teachings of Christ (2 John 9 -11) “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. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. ” All evil (1 Thessalonians 5: 22) “Abstain from all appearance of evil. ”

Question: Who Is My Brother? “The second part of the criteria for determining the circumference is equally convoluted. To say that a person is excluded from the ‘circle of fellowship’ for denying that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh (2 nd John 7 – 9) tells us little about what a person must positively affirm about the gospel in order to be included within the circle. ” (New Agers Qualify? ) ― F. La. Gard Smith, Who Is My Brother? : Facing a Crisis of Identity & Fellowship

Simple Criteria for Fellowship Limitation: • The nature or character of Deity • Some error reflects upon the nature or character of the Godhead. Those, for instance, who teach the “dispensation” notion that the Jewish rejection of Christ was a surprise to God are reflecting upon the foreknowledge of God. This is a woefully dangerous error. • Some have alleged that Christ was initially created by God and that he, therefore, does not possess a divine nature equal to the Father’s. This is a heretical concept that undermines the Lord’s claims regarding himself.

Simple Criteria for Fellowship Limitation: • Attacks on Scripture • Some error attacks the credibility of the Bible as an infallible revelation from God. There are teachers who allege that the Bible contains contradictions; that there are jars and clashes between the Gospel accounts. Genesis One is promoted as mythological. The Bible and theory of evolution are said to agree on almost all issues, etc. • Doctrines such as these are radical indeed and propagators of them should be neither supported nor commended.

Simple Criteria for Fellowship Limitation: • Insufficiency of the New Testament • Any error that undermines the finality of New Testament revelation is worthy of censure. • For example, those who argue for miraculous gifts and continuing revelation for this age are contending for a form of subjective religion that ignores the completed, authoritive New Testament. When this is accepted, virtually anything goes in religion. • Should teachers of such ideas be bidden Godspeed? NO!

Simple Criteria for Fellowship Limitation: • Corruption of God’s plan of salvation • What shall be said of those who deny the Lord’s clear plan of salvation and who obliterate the concept of the distinctiveness of Christ’s church? • Some teachers have publicly advocated that Christians should extend fellowship to those “baptized” as infants, to those who have been sprinkled instead of immersed, and to those who endorse the idea of salvation by faith alone. • Others have announced that the “church of Jesus Christ” is but one of many sectarian groups, hence active association ought to prevail across denominational lines. • Shall teachers who propose such ideas be accorded the same status as those who are faithful in their instruction? How can such be?

Simple Criteria for Fellowship Limitation: • Corruption of Christian worship • How shall we view those who publicly argue that the New Testament establishes no pattern for acceptable worship? • For them, the Lord’s supper may be eaten whenever the notion strikes one, and the use of mechanical instruments of music in Christian worship is a matter of indifference. Shall such teachings be allowed to go unchallenged? • Does the Bible teach that altering God’s plan of worship is of serious consequence? Take a good look at Leviticus 10: 1 -2.

Simple Criteria for Fellowship Limitation: • Compromising what Christ taught regarding morality • What should be our posture toward those who, by their anti -biblical ideas, promote, encourage, or, at the very least condone, immoral acts such as adultery? Should the blanket of “toleration” be thrown over them indefinitely? • Christ had a strong rebuke for the brethren in Thyatira because they continued to tolerate (apheis — present tense) false teaching on fornication (Revelation 2: 20). Surely, we ought to learn something from this inspired narrative.

FYI: WHEN THE WEAKER BROTHER OF FIRST CORINTHIANS 8: 12 SEEKS TO IMPOSE THEIR SPIRITUAL INFANT JUDGEMENTS ON THE COLLECTIVE CHURCH FAMILY AND WHEN THOSE WHO RIDING HOBBIES OF OPINION MAKE DEMAND TO TEACH CLASS OR PREACH – WE ENTER THE CATEGORY OF CONGREGATIONAL DISCIPLINE!

By the Biblical Standard F. La. Gard Smith is in Error! SALVATION ESSENTIALS EB SPIRITUAL MATURITY OVER WIDE FELLOWSHIP

Fellowship • 2 Corinthians 6: 14 (NKJV) Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? • As we can easily understand the comparisons of light to darkness, we should understand the difference or comparisons of good and bad. • When we join ourselves in company with those who are evil or bad, then we are associated with their titles and descriptions. • It is like going into a saloon and not drinking alcoholic drinks. • If someone sees you going in or coming out, what do you think that they will assume.

Fellowship • Ephesians 5: 11 (NKJV) And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. • This command is violated more often than not. • Because we have worked with and labored with some for long periods of time, we have built up a friendly relationship. • But if all of a sudden they start to teach and practice sin, we must expose them.

Fellowship • We should not start an argument that clouds the truth for the sake of our physical friendship. • Many brethren have this problem when one turns out to believe or teach false doctrine, however small or minute we might perceive it to be. • Who are we to decide who we are to fellowship. • God gives us plenty of instructions of what to avoid. • By implication we learn that we are even to avoid them that practice or teach these things.

Fellowship • Galatians 2: 9 (NKJV) and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. • Compare this with the teaching of 2 John 10 -11. • 1 John 1: 3 (NKJV) that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ.

Fellowship • Fellowship with God and Christ and the Holy Spirit, are equal. • When you fellowship those who have a good spiritual relationship with God, you are one and the same. • Any relationship that we have with any party of the God -head, automatically gives us the same relationship with the other parts of the God-head. • They are one and the same. • If I have a relationship with God and you have a relationship with God, then we automatically have a relationship with each other. • 1 Corinthians 3: 9 (NKJV) For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, you are God's building.

Fellowship • Definition of the word "fellowship". • 2842. koinonia, koy-nohn-ee'-ah; from G 2844; partnership, i. e. (lit. ) participation, or (social) intercourse, or (pecuniary) benefaction: -(to) communicate (-ation), communion, (contri-), distribution, fellowship. • Let's see how this word is used in scripture. • When we learn how it is used in scripture, then we can know how we are to use it in our lives and conversations. • This is needed because many have given the wrong application to the word fellowship.

Fellowship • 1 Corinthians 1: 9 (NKJV) God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. • "were called" is used a lot in scripture. "church" comes from a word (ekklesia) which means the called out. • We were called out of darkness. • We were called to partake of the heavenly calling. • God calls men everywhere to repent. • We as Christians were called out of the world into His realm for a purpose.

Fellowship • Ephesians 3: 9 (NKJV) and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ; • The fellowship is the relationship. • The mystery is that which had been unknown or known only in part. • This outlines that the will of God has been for all men, everywhere, and at any time or dispensation. • No matter what dispensation a person lived in, they were still subject to God's eternal purpose.

Fellowship • Philippians 2: 1 (NKJV) Therefore if there is any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and mercy, • Philippians 3: 10 (NKJV) that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death,

Fellowship • The book of 1 Peter in chapters three and four detail a lot of how we partake or share in His sufferings. • Philippians 1: 3 -6 (NKJV) I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, {4} always in every prayer of mine making request for you all with joy, {5} for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now, {6} being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ; • V 5. The church at Philippi supported Paul in his evangelistic efforts. • So, even though Paul was doing the preaching, they were having a part in the spread of the Gospel. • 1 John 1: 6 -7 (NKJV) If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. {7} But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.

Fellowship • Now let us look at some principles that apply to fellowship without the actual word being used. However, the same concept applies. • John 17: 20 -21 (NKJV) "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; {21} "that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. • Being one with Christ makes us one with God in us. Christ lives in us. We dwell in the Spirit. We have communion with the saints. We are a part of the body of believers, which is the church, which is the body of Christ. • Romans 12: 5 (NKJV) so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another.

Fellowship • Ephesians 2: 19 -22 (NKJV) Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, {20} having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone, {21} in whom the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, {22} in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit. • The church is to grow. • We are built together. • We are part of the church. • We all have to work for the good of each other. • Jesus started it all out by becoming the chief cornerstone.

Fellowship • Ephesians 3: 5 -7 (NKJV) which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: {6} that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, {7} of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. • All are equal in the sight of God. • The promise to every child of God is qualitatively the very same. • We should no more be looking for personal glory, than we should be committing sin.

“ALL THAT WANDER DO NOT GET LOST; ALL THAT ERR DO NOT ALWAYS FALL FAR FROM THE GOSPEL TRUTH!” – D. L. Burris