"God Does No Work Of Supererogation"
The other day in my reading I came upon the following paragraph in the book, "Mormonism Exposed" by G. B. Hancock, pages 66,67:
To approach God through the mediation of Christ, we must approach Him in the institution of which Christ is the head, and do so through the rules and regulation that Christ gave. In order to the glory of God, and the eternal interests of humanity no book is needed but the Bible, no institution but the church, nor any rules, except what are contained in the New Testament. The church of Jesus Christ, as given through the ministry of the apostles, gives, in man's behalf, the fulness of, and the manifold wisdom of God. (Eph. 1:22,23 and 3:8-10.) Any other institution, with other rules and regulations, would be something outside of the fulness and wisdom of God — something hence, in which we could not have the mediation of Christ. This amounts to a positive prohibition of our accepting a Mormon institution, the Book of Mormon, or any revelation this side of the apostles of Christ. We are, hence, by the authority of God prohibited from accepting the Book of Mormon, or Smith's revelations. During our recent debate with a champion of Mormonism we asked: "Is it essential to our salvation that we accept Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon? Answer yes or no." He would not answer. We then turned to him and said: "In view of the eternal interests of this people I demand you tell us: 'Is it essential to our salvation that we accept Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon?' I pause for a reply. Answer yes or no." We waited, all eyes were fixed upon him, the audience sat in silent suspense, but not a word would he utter. We then handed him the following syllogisms.
1. God, in order to the salvation of man, does no work of supererogation.
2. But Mormonism, not being essential to the salvation of man, would be a work of supererogation.
3. Therefore, God did not give Mormonism. Again, 1. We need all that is essential to salvation.
2. But Mormonism is not essential to salvation.
3. Therefore, we do not need Mormonism.
This was the type of reasoning that Hancock used in 1902 to expose this false religion. This argument upon the mediation of Christ could not be met by the Mormons; neither can it be met by any latter day revelationist, any denominationalist, any subscriber to a creed of men, or any advocator of human institutions through which the work of the church is done. Today, preachers will use this argument in refuting denominations, and then, many of them, cannot see the fallacy of present-day separate organizations through which the church works.
The organization given in the New Testament through which the church works is the congregation. Any other organization created to do this work would be supererogation (doing more than the Lord gave and required) — is not in the "fulness and wisdom of God — something, hence, in which we could not have the mediation of Christ. This amounts to a positive prohibition of our accepting" the human institution.
Again, elders are to oversee local congregations only; therefore, elders planning and overseeing the work of many congregations is supererogation — is not in the "fulness and wisdom of God — something hence, in which we could not have the mediation of Christ. This amounts to a positive prohibition of our accepting" an eldership's plans and oversight of the work of many churches.
Now put your super-organizations and your super-elderships in the syllogisms of Hancock and see how they look. I believe Bro. Hancock in 1902 presented a logical, scriptural argument. The Mormons could not meet it, the denominations cannot meet it, neither can the human institutional advocates meet it. Brethren, let's get on a scriptural basis.
men are 110w WILIIOUL empivymenu ueeauae (IL a sun c.