Truth Magazine

By Cecil Willis

One of my favorite writers of the Restoration period is Moses E. Lard. What he had to say, he said with “punch” in it. Whatever he felt, he felt strongly. And what he felt strongly, he said strongly. It has always been difficult for me to understand how one of the most brilliant minds produced during that glorious period could so strongly oppose instrumental music in worship, and yet so stoutly defend missionary societies. I guess he had a little of whatever makes Reuel Lemmons “tick” in him also.

A few nights ago, I was reading from Lard and ran across the following interesting quotations. I have put the captions on the quotes.

On Becoming an Apostate

“As a people we have from the first and continually to the present proclaimed that the New Testament and that alone is our only full and perfect rule of faith and practice. We have declared a thousand times and more that whatever it does not teach we must not hold, and whatever it does not sanction we must not practice. He who ignores or repudiates these principles, whether he be preacher or layman, has by the fact become an apostate from our ranks; and the sooner he lifts his hand high, avows the fact, and goes out from amongst us the better, yes, verily, the better for us.”

The Cure for Innovations

One of the issues of Lards day was that of injecting mechanical instrumental music into the worship. Lard said: “The day on which a church sets up an organ in its house, is the day on which it reaches the first station on the road to apostasy. From this it will soon proceed to other innovations; and the work of innovating once fairly commenced no stop can be put to it till ruin ensues.”

But some of the churches of Lards day were beginning to install organs in their meeting houses. Lard said: “But what shall be done with such churches? Of course nothing. If they see fit to mortify the feelings of their brethren, to forsake the example of the primitive churches, to condemn the authority of Christ by resorting to will worship, to excite dissension, and give rise to general scandal, they must do it. As a body we can do nothing. Still we have three partial remedies left us to which we should at once resort. 1. Let every preacher in our ranks resolve at once that he will never, under any circumstances or on any account, enter a meeting house belonging to our brethren in which an organ stands. We beg and entreat our preaching brethren to adopt this as an unalterable rule of conduct. This and like evils must be checked, and the very speediest way to effect it is the one here suggested. 2. Let no brother who takes a Letter from one church ever unite with another using an organ. Rather let him lives out of a church than go into such a den. 3. Let those brethren who oppose the introduction of an organ first remonstrate in gentle, kind, but decided terms. If their remonstrance is unheeded, and the organ brought in, then let them at once, and without even the formality of asking for a Letter, abandon the church so acting; and let ail such members unite elsewhere. Thus these organ grinding churches will in the lapse of time be broken down, or wholly apostatize, and the sooner they are in fragments the better for the cause of Christ. I have no sympathy with them, no fellowship for them, and so help me God never intend knowingly to put my foot into one of them.”

The March of Sin

Speaking regarding the progression of sin, Lard said: “Apostasies begin with things that have no harm in them and end in ruin. At first they creep, but in the end stride continents at a single step. Finally we say watch, beware!”

On Dancing “Christians”

Lard discussed dancing and instrumental music in the same article. Apparently it was true then, as now, that doctrinal defection inevitably led to moral compromise. Lard said:

“Let those who urge it first show that there is no harm in dancing before they ask us to acquiesce. Let them either show where it has the sanction of Christ or the apostles, or was practiced in some primitive church; or else let them forever cease to urge this plea, and abandon the practice. The church never parts from aught but trouble when it parts from such members. If they can be reclaimed and saved by all just means let this be done; but the church should not compromise, not for one day, with dancing. Let its action be kind but firm, and terribly prompt. This alone will save. Of all the unsanctioned acts a church has to deal with, none demands prompter treatment than dancing. It is one of those specious and insidious evils which must be cured in its very inception, or it is never cured. Tolerate it, and by and by those who advocate it will claim the right by prescription to engage in it. Remonstrance is vain then. Our churches should lift a unanimous voice against it, and proceed to rid themselves of it with energy and a promptitude which would leave not a vestige of it in Zion. Let the world know, but especially let professors know, that it must be completely and forever abandoned. A stand like this once taken and maintained with dignity and firmness, and the evil is soon cured. But as long as the shilly-shallying course of some of our churches is persisted in, dancing will increase in them until it ultimately becomes the rule; then the result is clear. Attempt to correct it now and dancing will exclude the church, and not the church dancing… I never knew a dancing Christian on his dying bed to send for a dancer to comfort him, nor a fiddle, called for in the chamber where death completes his work. Let no Christian think that he can scandalize the church of God with the evils of which we are speaking and stand approved in the judgment day…. The churches of Christ in the whole land owe it to themselves, and to the high and just ground they have taken, to guard with Sleepless vigilance against even the semblance of an innovation on the practice and usages of the apostolic churches.” (Lards Quarterly, 1864, Vol. 1, p. 330)

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 44, pp. 3-5
September 14, 1972

By Leslie Diestelkamp

All over the nation, with a few delightful exceptions, there is a tendency to flee the inner cities. Churches are moving out to the suburbs. Large, attractive and well-preserved buildings are being abandoned or sold to some denominational groups. And the reason is race! The older neighborhoods are being filled with non-white people and the white folks who used to live in the apartments are now moving to the more fashionable homes in the suburbs. So, instead of driving back to the old meeting place, or instead of just starting new congregations in the suburban areas, brethren are moving whole congregations out, deserting the multitudes who now surround the old church building.,

But why should they do this? Why not, rather, make a determined effort to reach the multitudes that have moved into our old neighborhoods? The gospel was not of Caucasian origin nor is it effective only for salvation for people with lily-white skins. In fact, those people of other races who now predominate the inner-cities are loved as much by the Lord as we. And, they may indeed be more receptive to the truth and appreciative of the gospel grace of God than are the sophisticated suburbanites.

But some brethren will say, “We have invited them to come and we have made those welcome who did attend our services, but we can~t seem to really reach them for significant teaching and for obedience.” In this regard I beg consideration of the following:

1. A hundred times in the last generation or two you invited the white people near the meeting iiouse. How many come? Even though only a few came, you kept trying, and gradually a few were won. Then dont expect the new neighbors–of another race to be more easily reached or more quickly responsive.

2. When you were trying to reach the former white neighbors you didnt call in a black preacher, did you? So now, if you want to reach non-white people, dont depend entirely upon white preachers.

3. Be sure all are considered equal. Dont allow a “white side” and a “black side” to develop in the seating arrangements. Treat the non-white people as neither superior nor inferior. Sit by them, sing with them, take your wife and children when you visit them and urge them to visit your home. Use those who are Christians in the public service just as you do others.

4. Be patient. Remember, the old white congregation didnt grow up in a year. It took one, two, or three decades, didnt it, and even then most of the “additions” were Christians who moved to the city from rural areas. So it will take time under these different circumstances, but it can be done.

5. Be firm and steadfast regarding truth. It is a pity that many white brethren who oppose sponsoring church arrangements and church support of human institutions seem willing to concede these departures to black people. Consequently many faithful brethren are content to let unsound brethren evangelize and teach those of other races. I have even heard of v.4 one strong, faithful, inner-city church that bag considered giving their old building to unsound brethren — just because they happen to be black and may be willing to take over the work in that inner-city area. These white brethren would not consider giving their building to unsound white people. But we have not done our duty just because we turn the building over to black brethren. We must maintain truth and fidelity.

It is indeed gratifying to notice that a few inner-city congregations have become fully integrated and that in doing so they sacrificed no scriptural truth. Some have thus become truly unified, fruitfully victorious and significantly happy in real brotherhood. I hope many more will enthusiastically follow the game wise and scriptural way soon.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 44, p. 2
September 14, 1972

By R. C. Smart, Sr.

“And Shiloh is coming to Natick on Sunday evening, April 30, at six p.m. At least a couple of representatives of Camp Shiloh in New Jersey will be coming—coming to share something of the plans, the work and the future of the Christian Camp that ministers to many children of the Mid-Atlantic inner cities. Representatives of Camp Shiloh will be speaking at the Brookline congregation on Sunday morning and here in the evening.”

The above is a quotation from the bulletin of Church of Christ, 324 N. Main St., Natick, Mass., April 26, 1972. There is nothing personal in this article as I have never met anyone from the Natick church. I have received their bulletin for some time. It has often contained items that were of a liberal nature but this seems to be the extreme example of their liberal attitude towards the scriptures. I almost said blasphemy.

The quotation from Genesis 49:10 “until Shiloh come” is given the following exegesis by various commentaries.

A. Clark, Vol. 1, p. 269: “Judah shall continue a distinct tribe till the Messiah shall come.”

Pulpit Comm. Vol. 1, p. 526: “Believing Shiloh to be the name of a person, the majority of commentators both Jewish and Christian and ancient as well as modern agree that the Messiah is the person referred to, and understand Jacob as fore-announcing that the time of his appearance would not be till the staff of regal power had dropped from the hand of Judah.”

Hippolytus, A.D. 170-236, (quoted from Ante Nicene Fathers, Vol. 5, Pg. 206): “Now the blessed Jacob speaks to the following effect in his benedictions, testifying prophetically of our Lord and Saviour . . . a ruler shall not depart from Judah, nor a leader from between his thighs, until be come for whom it is reserved; and he shall be the expectation of the nations.”

We could fill pages with such quotations but we feel we have established the meaning of the verse. It seems that it has been left to the modern day distorter to garble such prophetic statements which should be held in the greatest of respect by the lover of Gods word. Whether it is done in ignorance, jest, or carnality, the effect can be conducive of no good to the cause of Christ.

With such an attitude toward God and his word we understand more clearly the actions of some of our liberal brethren. We doubt very much that Shiloh came to Natick, Mass., April 30. If he ever does, it may well be to fulfill Revelation 2:5: “Remember therefore whence thou are fallen, and repent and do the first works; or else I come to thee, and will remove thy candlestick out of its place, except thou repent.”

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 43, p. 13
September 7, 1972

By Hershel Patton

Sidney J. Harris wrote an article in his syndicated column (Nashville Banner, August 4, 1971) entitled “Catastrophes Begin with a Nail.” Because what he says is so true, I want to copy here the major portion of his column, and then make a few applications of the principle set forth to spiritual matters.

“Most looming crisis, when they come, has had their origin for want of a nail.

“You remember how it goes: For want of a nail, a shoe was lost; for want of a shoe, a horse was lost; for want of a horse, a message was lost; for want of a message, a battle was lost, for want of a battle, a war was lost; for want of war, a kingdom was lost; and all for the loss of a nail.

“Corny as that sounds, the fact of the matter is that history does hang on such little things as much as on any grand design. So do most large tragedies, which have their origins in tiny flaws unperceived at the time. What we, call a catastrophe usually starts with a nail.

“A crack so tiny it could not be seen was responsible for the collapse of the Silver Bridge over the Ohio River a few years ago, killing 46 persons. The crack led to the breaking of a crucial steel eye bar, which plunged the 1,700foot suspension bridge into the river.

“Not long afterwards, investigating a plane crash in which almost 100 were killed, the CAB found that the mechanical difficulty leading to the crash originated in a small metal part it would have cost a dime to replace. But nobody had bothered to check it out.

“These examples could be multiplied scores of times. It is hardly ever that some gross malfunction is responsible for a disaster — for gross malfunctions can usually be caught before they do much damage. It is almost invariably some little defect that passes hasty or negligent inspection (Emphasis mine H.P.) Think of this the next time you are sitting in a plane, at the ramp, waiting to take off, and silently cursing the mechanics for being so tediously thorough.”

And, we would do well to think of this the next time we want to do something religiously and are anxious to “take off,” but held back while others are being tediously thorough in checking for Bible authority. Apostasies and divisions — great catastrophes — of the past have occurred when men rushed into actions and arrangements because they “looked good” and “accomplished good” instead of measuring for Bible authority. The Missionary Society and Instruments of Music in worship are examples of attractive endeavors that men hastened to embrace about a century ago, “fussing and fuming” at those who tediously searched and asked for scriptural authority and which resulted in a great cleavage among professors of New Testament Christianity and the establishment of the First Christian Church (another denomination). It all happened “for the want of a nail.” Just one nail Scriptural of authority would have been all that was necessary to bring about acceptance of these things by all Bible loving people. Recognizing the need for such authority, with a diligent search revealing none, the catastrophe could have been avoided. But the “nail” was not found and many determined to “take off” without it, so, there was disaster.

Todays Spiritual Catastrophes

Today, professors of New Testament Christianity are again experiencing a catastrophic rupture of fellowship-a “looming crisis–and, all “for the want of a nail.” Liberal promoters “whistle in the dark” saying the “Antis” are dying on the vine, and we have very little opposition, However new congregations, made up of saints who reject modern innovations (churches functioning through human societies and institutions; centralizing the work of many churches under one church-eldership) – the Sponsoring Church; churches engaging in secular and social endeavors are springing up daily, older congregations boldly announcing their opposition to such liberalism, and these churches are growing. This distinction is not only being recognized everywhere all across the United States, but in Africa, Australia, Philippines, Japan, and wherever the Bible is taught, believed, and followed.

Promoters of the above mentioned practices are not only aghast at what their practices have brought about, but are now expressing alarm at further liberalism in their ranks — a looming crisis. At a workshop conducted by and at Abilene Christian College in Abilene, Texas, preachers and teachers in the church of Christ openly advocated (to the astonishment even of some liberals) (1) adopting the church of this century to the surrounding of the world by -brethren involving themselves in the same worldliness as found around them-like adapting hippy-type music in the church to attract the hippy crowd. The speaker called it “holy worldliness”; (2) tongue speaking should be practiced today and brethren should not oppose those who do speak in tongues; and (3) the Bible as a whole is not the inspired word of God. Indeed, there is a crisis of liberalism-and, all “for the want of a nail” – the nail of authority!

Brethren who desired to centralize the functioning of many churches through human institutions or a Sponsoring Church, and have the churches function in secular and social endeavors, were so thrilled over the good prospects of their devices that they did not tediously check for the nail of authority, and when it war, pointed out to them that it was lacking, they said it does not matter. If is not needed. We can build without it. Once this attitude was accepted, it is no wonder that others reached out for other things-tongue speaking, holy worldliness, Bible not an inspired standard, etc. Truly, ignoring this first little break-“no authority needed for some things” leaving out this nail), has brought on tile present crisis. The whole idea of New Testament Christianity is threatened.

The Basic Cause

In a recent correspondence with Brother Batsell Barrett Baxter, he wrote, “Herschel, the difference between us is not, as you think, a loyalty to God, Christ, the inspired scriptures and the church, but rather an interpretation of the scriptures. You have, now I shall speak frankly, bound where the scriptures do not bind. Your unnecessarily limited interpretation of the way congregations can cooperate with each other is a twentieth century reenactment of the Pharisees teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men (Matt. 15:9).” Involved in this statement is the idea that there are matters wherein we are not bound by scripture. I am accused of binding something belonging to this realm. But, what practice have I bound? Actually, I simply question a practice that Brother Baxter advocates. Churches cooperating is a realm he mentions where the scriptures do not bind. Now, I do find instances of churches cooperating in the scriptures. Churches sent wages to Paul while he preached at Corinth (2 Cor. 11:8). These churches cooperated in supporting Paul by each one sending to the same place-preacher. Churches of Macedonia and Achaia cooperated by each one raising funds, selecting her own messenger, and sending to the poor saints in Jerusalem. This is scriptural cooperating by churches. I have not bound this type of cooperation; the scriptures do, if we admit what the scriptures say as binding. Brother Baxter advocates one church ~group of elders) setting itself up as a “Sponsoring Church,” or some brethren forming a corporation or institution of some kind to receive funds from the churches and then dispense those funds in whatever work (evangelism, benevolence, etc.) is planned. This is not only different from the Bible “pattern,” but it also violates the responsibility of elders and the independence and autonomy of the local church as set forth in the scriptures. Brother Baxter says the scriptures do not have to be followed here… the nail of authority for his action is not needed. Really! Who is making a law where there is none? Who is “teaching as doctrine the precepts of men”?

I am aware of general and specific authority, of the realm of the “generic,” but before anything is permissible in this realm, as a “how,” “means,” or “method,” the thing itself must be authorized, be lawful (I Cor. 10: 23). Before “church” camps and recreational halls can be justified as a “how” of meeting mans social needs, it must first be shown scriptural for churches to meet this need that is a part of its mission. The Sponsoring Church, Societies, Institutions, etc. are not “hows” of evangelism and benevolence, but organizations (other than a local church) that must use means 1hows) in doing tile work. Churches have scriptural authority to engage in evangelism and limited benevolence, using means that are commensurate with Bible instruction, but churches contributing funds to an organization that selects and uses means and methods of functioning is without Bible authority.

The difference between brethren today therefore is indeed a loyalty to God, Christ, the inspired scripture, and the church, and not just a matter of “judgment” or “how” the Lords evangelistic or benevolent or edification work is to be done.

The divisions, heart-aches, alienations, and extreme apostasies that have taken place, and are still taking place, all go back to “the want of a nail.” Once the nail of authority is omitted (“We dont need Bible authority for a lot of things we do”, “There is no pattern”), the great crisis (catastrophic apostasy with its alienations) is inevitable — And “All for the Want of a Nail.”

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 43, pp. 10-12
September 7, 1972