Home | About Us | Past Featured Subjects | Bulletins | Sermons & Audio | Studies In The Cross Of Christ | Classes

Click Here for the Latest Edition of the Charlottesville Beacon
 

Planning to Visit Us?

What to Expect
Current Class Information

Assembly Times

 Sunday

   Bible Classes (10:00 am)

   AM Worship (11:00 am)

   PM Worship (3:00 pm)

 Thursday

   Bible Classes (7:35 pm)

Location

Piedmont Family YMCA

442 Westfield Road

Charlottesville, VA 22901
Click Here for Specific Directions

Misrepresentations of the Church

by James W. Boyd

It is wrong to misrepresent anyone or anything. Sometimes it is done ignorantly. Sometimes it is deliberate. To deliberately misrepresent is dishonest. Regardless of the motives behind the misrepresentations of the church, they do the church harm. The misrepresentations need to be refuted and corrected. The truth deserves defense against those who would misrepresent it.

We should not be alarmed that the church is sometimes misrepresented. Nor should we assume that what we have to say in its defense will forever silence the voices of those who have no love for the church but instead seek its detriment. It is no new thing for those who love the Lord to suffer various kinds of persecution. “Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you” (Matt. 5:11-12). “All that would live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution” (II Tim. 3:12).

We are not to hastily conclude that we suffer misrepresentation just because of our godliness. Sometimes we may be living in such a fashion as to misrepresent that for which we profess to stand. We may give a distorted picture of what we believe and therefore people misunderstand and misrepresent. Hypocrisy provokes ugly things against the church.

When some Jews approached Paul in Rome, they said, “But we desire to hear of thee what thou thinkest, for as concerning this sect, we know that everywhere it is spoken against” (Acts 28:22). The “sect” of which they spoke was the Lord’s church, mistakenly thought to be a sect of the Jews at that time.

Our lesson is to help us be as was Paul when he said, “...knowing that I am set for the defense of the gospel” (Phil. 1:17). We not only need to be ready to give answer to every man that “asketh a reason for the hope that is in us,” but also to defend the Lord’s church against misrepresentation.

THIS IS SERIOUS

We cannot minimize the seriousness of the church being misrepresented. The inevitable consequence is that truth is hindered. False ideas will be believed. People will be misled and develop misconceptions. The result of this is the creation of prejudice — spiritual blindness to the truth that saves. It will discourage brethren as well as turn away the lost without even a fair investigation of the truth. It leads to the condemnation of souls that Christ came to save.

Misrepresentation is based on “half-truths” and a lack of complete information. Distorted versions of what the Lord’s church really upholds will cause the church to be erroneously presented to others. It is sinful to circulate a false report. Lying and bearing false witness is transgression. Even if one is sincere and honestly believes what he presents, if it is false, he is guilty of misrepresenting. Certainly, everyone that may do this does not do so out of maliciousness as much as out of ignorance and prejudice. But no honest person will continue to believe and circulate a false report once the truth has been presented to him. Therefore, in making a defense of the church, we can only appeal to those who are honorable enough to be open-minded. We really do not expect to make headway with those who are intent on being injurious.

CAMPBELL’S CHURCH

It is said that the church of Christ was founded by Alexander Campbell and was a break-off from the Baptist Church. There are those who proudly point to Campbell as the founder of their church, such as the Christian Church, the Disciples of Christ. But those of the church of Christ are not among them nor admit to Campbell or any other man being the founder of that to which they belong.

Is it wrong to plead for the Lord’s church? We are concerned about the church of which you read in the Bible. Cannot people be concerned about that? Take your Bible and learn that the church of Christ was founded by Christ on the foundation that Jesus is the Son of God (Matt. 16:16-18). It began on the first Pentecost following the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2). This was nearly two thousand years ago. It was founded in the city of Jerusalem, with the Word of God being the guide as was delivered by the Holy Spirit through the apostles.

To assign the name of Campbell to that institution, or to call those who are members of it “Campbellites,” is to cast derision on those who are concerned only with the church of the Bible. There is nothing taught or practiced by members of the church of Christ that came by the authority of Campbell or any other uninspired man. Should we hold convictions which Campbell and others also held, it is because we have derived these convictions from the same source, the Bible. I was a member of the Lord’s church for over three years before I recall even hearing the name of Alexander Campbell (though it may have been mentioned). We are not what we are because he designed or authorized anything. We seek to uphold no denomination whatever, but only the Lord’s church. To accuse us of something other than that is to misrepresent.

The Protestant and Catholic world has smarted under the plea and the effort to return to the Bible as the sole authority in religion. They have balked at disposing of human creeds. They have done many things individually and collectively to undermine the growing conviction that God’s Word is sufficient and exclusively permitted in determining truth. Campbell was only one, and not even the first of his generation, to contend that people should “speak as the oracles of God” (I Peter 4:11). Is one who obeys what Peter taught a Campbellite? Is he not rather acting like a Christian?

We do not deny Campbell’s scholarship in the Bible, nor his astute mind. His accomplishments are outstanding in the annals of religious history. But by no adherence to the truth can he be called the founder of the church. Nor did he pretend to found one. Our hope is in Christ, not Campbell. We are what we are because of what the Bible teaches. The challenge is continually put forth to the scoffer to show wherein we follow Campbell because of Campbell. When one points out the error of our way he is not our enemy, but our friend. Unlike so much in this world, we seek the truth without the additions and subtractions imposed by theologians, scholars, councils, conferences, etc. etc. We are Christians, not Campbellites.

THE ONLY CHRISTIANS

We are accused of trying to monopolize the name “Christian.” But the truth is that we are calling for people everywhere to abandon names that have no Biblical authority and for everyone to wear just the name the Bible gives — which is “Christian.” We never read of the members of the Lord’s church being called Baptists, Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Catholics, etc. Those who contend exclusively for the name “Christian” do so with Biblical authority. Those who want to wear other names, or names in addition to the identifications of Scripture, are going beyond what is written. The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch (Acts 11:26). Peter said, “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf” (I Peter 4:16). Paul almost persuaded Agrippa to be a Christian (Acts 26:28).

Names have significance and meaning. They bestow honor and identification. We want to be identified with Christ as the Bible teaches. Denominational names divide, not unite. The Lord opposes such division. We would that all religious people who professed to follow Christ would adhere to the Biblical terminology rather than perpetuating the divisive errors of human institutions. Surely, this is a far cry from trying to monopolize the name.

TOO NARROW

The members of the church are often accused of being narrow-minded. This may be true in some instances. But some think that if you believe there is a right and a wrong about anything that you are narrow-minded. Believe it or not, to be accused of being narrow-minded may be a compliment even though it is not intended to be. There is nothing wrong with being as narrow-minded as is the revealed truth in God’s book.

People do not object to narrow-mindedness in the chemical laboratories. They insist upon it in mathematics, athletics, mechanics and medicine. It is only in the realm of religion where people are wedded to traditions and customs and unbiblical doctrines and practices that they do not want to accept the line God has drawn between truth and error. They want anything to be all right.

Jesus said that the way of life was strait and narrow, not broad and wide (Matt. 7:13, 14). Many are on such a broad-minded craze that they will embrace those things that are prohibited or those things not authorized of God. That is too broad for acceptance before God.

Let us illustrate. Why do people use an organ in worship? It is not because the Bible teaches it. Those who do not use it are not just trying to be different and narrow for narrowness sake. There is that earnest desire to speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent. We have no right to add to what God has spoken. And when he has spoken, we have only the privilege of conforming to his will. Only singing is authorized in the Scripture for Christian worship in the realm of music. Some may call it being narrow, but it is only as narrow as is God’s revelation.

Some think that making any distinction between right and wrong is narrow. They are so inconsistent as to deny there is such a thing as absolute truth, and they are absolutely sure in making that assertion!

WATER SALVATION

The church is misrepresented by saying we believe and practice water salvation. That water is involved in salvation is true because the Bible teaches it. “Baptism doth now also save us” is what Peter said in First Peter 3:21. We are not going to deny that. There is one baptism (Eph. 4:4-5) and we deny it not. Every example of conversion to Christ was concluded with baptism (Acts 2, 8, 9, 10, 16). We believe it. We are baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3-4). We are baptized into the body (I Cor. 12:13). Paul was baptized to “wash away sins” (Acts 22:26). All the words of denominational clergymen shall never alter that fact.

We are also aware that water is not the saving element. The blood of Christ is the saving element (Rom. 5:9; Eph. 1:7). It is not a question “if” the blood saves but “when” does the blood save. When we are baptized into his death we reach that saving blood. That is why we are raised to a new life (Rom. 6:3-4). The water is only the element into which we are commanded to be baptized (Acts 10:48).

This is not the same as “baptismal regeneration” as some practice: that is, believing that the efficacy is in the water. The power is in the blood of Christ. But the blood is applied when we have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine that pictures the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (Rom. 6:17-18). Baptism is a symbol of those facts, but not a symbol that we are saved before being baptized.

Why should it surprise us that God involves water in our salvation? Has not he involved water in other “salvations?” Did not Jesus involve water in granting the blind man of Siloam to see (John 9)? Were not those who were saved with Noah “saved by water” (I Peter 3:20-21). Was not water involved in delivering Israel from the Red Sea (Exodus 14), and Paul called that a baptism in First Corinthians 10:1-2. Was not water used in the healing of Naaman from leprosy (II Kings 5)? Why should we think it such a strange thing that God has declared baptism in water to be essential to salvation? To ridicule any appointment that God has assigned it is to misrepresent His truth.

There are other misrepresentations, and they are as equally false as those which we have mentioned in this brief span. But we all ought be very careful about making a thing appear to be something when it really is not true. What the honest person will do is to hear the explanation and measure it by what the Scripture teaches rather than blindly, prejudicially, continue to misrepresent the truth as many are inclined to do.  

 Other Articles by James W Boyd
How Come this "Cambellite" Stuff We Keep Hearing?