Preaching And Teaching
Much has been said recently by Leroy Garrett and others concerning the usage of the words "teach" and "preach" in the New Testament. These men distinguish between the terms "teach" and "preach" and contend that one cannot "preach" to the church, but that one must "teach" the church and "preach" to the sinner. I do not set myself up as an authority on words and their meanings, but unlike a writer in the December 1953 issue of "Bible Talk," the knowledge which I have of the New Testament usage of these two words comes not from "linguistic authorities," but from an observation of the usage given them by the Holy Spirit of God. I urge you to carefully and prayerfully consider the following ways in which these words are used in the New Testament.
In the great commission Jesus said, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." (Matt. 28:19-20.) Jesus told his disciples to teach them so that they might become Christians and then teach them how to live the Christian life. Thus, we have Jesus telling us to teach those who are not Christians... But these men would say, "No, Lord, you have the wrong term. You cannot teach those who are not Christians. You preach to them."
Again in John 6:45 Jesus said, "It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and learned of the Father, cometh unto me." A sinner therefore cannot come unto the Lord unless he has first heard and learned of the Father. Jesus quotes the prophets as saying that they shall hear and learn through the process of being "taught of God." Garrett and others say that you cannot teach the sinner that you preach to him. Jesus said that he was to be taught of God. Hence, regardless of whether you use the term preach or teach, Jesus said the sinner is to be "taught of God."
If these men are correct in their contention that one must "preach" to the sinner, then in order to be in harmony with the words of Jesus they are forced to the conclusion that in preaching there is teaching!! Else the sinner would not be "taught of God." If they admit that there is teaching being done through preaching then their entire contention comes to naught. If they continue to deny that there is teaching being done when one is preaching, then in order to be in harmony with the words of Jesus, they must admit that one can "teach" a sinner. Whichever position they choose to take proves that their contention is groundless and out of harmony with God's word.
One of the most conclusive proofs that their contention is false is found in the third and fourth chapters of the book of Acts. "And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them, being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead." (Acts 4:1-2.) Here are Peter and John teaching and preaching to the same group of people. There is no honest person who, upon reading these two chapters, will say that Peter and John taught awhile and then stopped and preached awhile. They both taught and preached while delivering the sermon recorded in the third chapter of Acts.
However, for argument sake, (and only for that) let us say that there is a distinction between the two terms and that Peter did two different things when they preached and taught. There is no escape from the fact that they had taught and preached to the same group of people. To whom then were they preaching and teaching? Those who were not Christians. They were teaching the unsaved. The question may arise, but how do you know that they were unsaved? Because Peter tells the group that he is, teaching what they are to do to be saved. (Acts 3:19.) Garrett and others would say that you cannot teach a non-Christian, but here is a direct case of it being done in the book of God. Such striving about words is to no profit but subverts many of those who hear and thus is condemned by God. (2 Tim. 2:14.)
We noticed last week that the contention of Leroy Garrett and others that you cannot teach a non-Christian, but that you must preach to him is false and will not stand investigation. They also teach, however, that you cannot preach to a Christian, but that you must teach the Christian.
In Acts 20:7, we have a record of Paul preaching to the Christians at Troas. "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight." But Garrett contends that the word "preached" is incorrectly translated in the King James Version and that the American Revised Version corrected that error when it was translated, "Paul discoursed with them," which translation he says implies a "round table discussion." We should be thankful however, that Luke did not leave us in doubt concerning the type of discourse which Paul gave. Luke, as he records this incident, did not say that Paul continued to converse with them, nor did he say that Paul continued his round-table discussion with them, but he said "and continued his speech until midnight." Hence, the type of discourse which Paul gave at Troas was a speech, thus he preached to them. It will be necessary for Leroy Garrett and the others to distinguish between making a religious speech to Christians and preaching to them. Their distinction would have to be one which could stand investigation, which of course they cannot do.
In Acts 20:26 Paul told the elders of the church at Ephesus that he had gone among them "preaching the kingdom of God." But Garrett and his company would say, "No Paul, you can't preach to Christians, you are wrong." If Paul could stay at Ephesus three years and then tell the elders of the church that he had been going about among them "preaching" why cannot one do so today?
When Paul wrote to the saints at Rome he said, "So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also." (Rom. 1:15.) Paul then was going to preach the gospel to those who were Christians at Rome. However, in his debate with Brother G. K. Wallace near Paragould, Arkansas, W. Carl Ketcherside said, concerning this scripture, "Listen, friends, the Roman letter was not to be read to the church at Rome alone, but it was to be read by a great many others as well." (Page 84.) He also quotes from MacKnight as follows: "In regard that Paul after acknowledging that he was bound to preach the gospel both to the Greeks and to the barbarians, adds, I am ready to preach the gospel even to you who are in Rome, the idolatrous inhabitants in Rome were included in the expression, you who are in Rome. This verse therefore, as well as the following, is proof that the epistle to the Romans was intended not for the Roman brethren alone, but for unbelievers also, to whom copies of it might be shown." (Page 84.) Ketcherside rests his entire argument that Paul was not going to preach to the church in Rome upon the assertion that the letter to the church in Rome was to be read by others besides the church. His quotation from MacKnight was given to prove that it was to be read not only by the church, but by others as well. What difference does it make if it was to be read by some who were not Christians? Ketcherside, by his own argument, admits that the letter was to be read by the church. Note again his statement that it was not to be read to the church at Rome alone. His quotation from MacKnight also attests the fact that he admits that both the church and outsiders were included in the expression "you who are in Rome." So what does he have? He has Paul ready to preach the gospel to those in Rome who are Christians and those who are not Christians. Hence, his own argument clearly condemns the position which they teach.
Let us notice one other argument in this connection. In Galatians 1:6-9 Paul said, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed, As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." Paul was writing unto the churches of Galatia. (Verse 2.) He was speaking to those who were Christians and he used the expression "preach any other gospel unto you." Hence, Paul affirms the fact that it is possible to preach to those who are Christians. Other arguments could be given and these could be enlarged upon, but these are sufficient evidence that their position is utterly false and cannot stand an honest investigation.