Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 5
May 21, 1953
NUMBER 3, PAGE 2,3b

Christian Church Preacher Defends Digression

Arthur W. Atkinson, Jr., Dayton, Ohio

It was my privilege to attend the last of a series of meetings held here in Dayton, Ohio, at the YWCA, the purpose of which were to acquaint the people with the teachings of the different religious bodies now in existence. The meetings were held once each week on Thursdays. The church of our Lord was represented one Thursday by Brother Ray Dillard of the Riverdale church.

The meetings were two hours in length. The speaker talked for one hour and then the assembly asked questions for the second hour. This afforded a very unique opportunity as will be shown.

The last evening the preacher of the Santa Clara Christian Church in this city was the speaker. In his hour talk he gave a background familiar to all members of the body of Christ. He did not, though, tell of the introduction of the missionary society and instrumental music, and the subsequent division caused by those innovations. I give below some of the questions asked him and his answers to them. The answers given will show the wide breach that now exists between the church of Christ and the Christian Church and between the New Testament and the Christian Church.

The speaker was asked to give either affirmative or negative answers to the following questions: Do you believe in the virgin birth? Do you believe in the resurrection of Christ from the dead? Do you believe in the inspiration of the Bible? Do you believe in the miracles in the New Testament? The speaker stated that he could not answer these questions with an unqualified "yes" or "no." He went on to show why he could not. The sum total of his remarks indicated that it made little or no difference whether he believed these things to be true. His remarks also showed that he had very little confidence in these happenings or truths. His idea of inspiration was the "natural theory," i.e., these men wrote the scriptures impelled by the same force as is a poet or author today. Thus, his refusal to answer the questions showed him to be as rank a modernist as today exists.

He was asked about the importance of baptism. He stated that baptism was an important act but that to say it was absolutely necessary would be carrying the command too far. He was then asked if a person could become a member of the Santa Clara Church without submitting to immersion. He stated that "under the present rules" the person could not be accepted as a "full-fledged" member but that many Christian Churches enrolled them as "associate members." However, some Christian Churches do have "open membership," as he called it, and accept anyone and everyone with or without immersion. His statement "under the present rules" more or less indicated that they may soon change the rules and become an open membership church at Santa Clara.

He was asked about instrumental music and stated in reply that he knew very little about it. He didn't bother himself with such trivial matters as that.

He stated during the course of his talk that the Christian Church had contributed much to, and was working for, religious unity. He was asked what the standard of unity was and how it was to be achieved. He stammered about on that question for a full five minutes and never got close to the New Testament plan. Of course, one can see why he could not give a clear cut answer for he does not believe the scriptures. He stated that he did not believe it possible for any group of people to follow the Bible and it alone. He admitted that the Christian Church was a denomination and that it was not a true New Testament church, nor did he believe that such a church could exist. He also admitted that they had long ago given up using the motto, "Where the Bible speaks we speak, and where the Bible is silent we are silent." The principle they follow today is simply one of accepting those things of value and letting the others go. When asked who would determine what was valuable and what was not, he could not answer.

He attributed the early growth of the restoration movement to the transient population of that day and to the fact that the movement started in the midwest. As he said it, "We were a natural; we just happened to catch the right people at the right time in the right place." In other words he was saying that the gospel of Christ was not the power but that things just happened as they did.

The speaker did use the title "Reverend." He is the pastor of the Santa Clara Church. He stated that every minister was an elder. I guess that makes nearly every Christian an elder.

The Christian Church does have women preachers. Someone asked him what Paul meant when he forbade women to speak. He stated that he had never thought too much about it and didn't know where it was found nor to whom Paul was speaking. He had been preaching for over 25 years but knew very little Bible. He did, however, have two Ph.D.'s in two different fields of education.

He said in his talk that some of the older members still believe in the "one way" and the "baptism-for-the-remission-of-sins-idea" but they were few in number.

I have not taken time nor space to show the inconsistencies of all these arguments. To the student of God's word they are apparent. The purpose of this article is simply to show the length and breadth of the digressive element. There is no limit to their apostasy. They are a sect among the sects too far gone ever to be rescued.

Of course, this man was from what is known as the "liberal" branch of the digressive element. We have the "conservatives" in Dayton also. However, even they are becoming more and more like the "liberals." They use the title "Reverend," sing birthday songs in the worship, have their suppers and socials and of course, their instrumental music. The sad part of it is that many of them still call themselves the church of Christ. The speaker at the YWCA said that they used to call themselves the church of Christ but they changed it to Christian Church because there was confusion among some of the members about the group who did not use instrumental music and those who did. We should be very happy that they decided to change and it is my hope that those few who still presumptuously call themselves the church of Christ will cease to do so or start practicing and teaching what the church in the first century did.

Brethren, all of this started with just one little (?) innovation about one hundred years ago. The gates were opened — the floods of apostasy poured in and they are engulfed by the tide. All of the danger, though, is not past. Today the church once again stands at the crossroad and perhaps the day is not too distant when we must choose which road we will follow. Let us be sure that we do not lend our effort to any trend or movement that could again open wide those gates. Let us stand steadfast and speak things which become sound doctrine. And "if any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God." (1 Peter 4:11)