The Bible School Controversy -- No. 2
We are continuing our study of the Bible school controversy. Our former article closed by pointing out the fact that it is perfectly in keeping with all Bible truth for a Christian to establish and maintain a secular business that he might be able thereby to do more work for the Lord.
In the Sommer-Armstrong debate, to which we have referred, it was shown that Brother Sommer himself was running a religio-secular paper. To this Brother Sommer replied that his paper was no more secular than the Bible itself. Here are his own words, "The 'Octographic Review' is devoted to truth and righteousness as taught by the apostles of Jesus Christ, and is certainly not more secular than the Bible is." (Page 88.) On the previous page he had pointed out the kind of school he would endorse in these words, "What I have just quoted indicates the kind of school which I regard as scriptural. Such a school was the Buffalo Seminary."
One would suppose from this statement that Sommer would not object to a school operated just as Buffalo Seminary; but on page 89, he reverses himself again and compares such a school to a missionary society, a dance hall, or a brothel. This gives us some picture of the twisted and difficult thinking of Daniel Sommer — a man who could contend that his own paper, with its Home Circle, its Clippings and Comments from various classes of people, its Advertisements, and all the other various sections was "not more secular" than the New Testament of God's Son, written by inspired men, dedicated and sealed with the blood of the Lord himself!
One other objection from Sommer will suffice for this time; this objection was his claim that it was a sin to apply a sacred name to anything of human origin. He states it thusly, "What is worse, they have applied the sacred name 'Bible' to a thing of human origin which is chiefly secular. If this be not misusing a sacred name, making light of a sacred name, and falsifying in so doing, then what is it? Or what should such use of a sacred name be called?" (Page 119) Armstrong replied to this objection as follows, "The Greek words bibles and biblon are used indiscriminately by the Holy Spirit to refer to any kind of book or writing. These uses of these words are as well fixed as are the uses of the word 'Book' in the English. They were common words for our words 'writing,' and 'book'." Armstrong further showed that the word "Bible" is an English word, and is not of divine origin; that it became an established word as a noun in the fifth century; that the same word "Bible" is used as an adjective in such examples as 'Bible work,' 'Bible class,' Bible maps,' Bible societies,' and 'Bible school.'
Such were the charges and objections as set forth by Sommer, champion of the opponents of Bible schools. We now take our leave of him, and notice some statements of men of a later date. The following is a quotation from the December issue of "Bible Talk," a paper published in Dallas, Texas. This quotation is from the pen of W. Carl Ketcherside: "The thing I want to know is where is the authority for Christians to start, encourage, or maintain an institution of human origin for the purpose of doing the very work that God gave the church to do." In the same paper, under the pen name of Theophilus' in the February issue we have; "We all agree, I suppose, that Christians, can build schools, but can they build a school through which to do the work of the church?" Then on page 79 (same issue) the editor says, "As for my being radical in these two points, I do not object to Christians starting schools for purposes of education, but to their doing the work of the church through such schools."
We have quoted from these men to show that there are those today who are claiming that the schools are doing the work of the church. I wish that these brethren would be specific and point out the particular things the schools are doing which constitutes what they call "the work of the church." Since they have not done this, I think it proper to make a note of the work being done by the church. If it be found that the schools are really doing a work which God has given exclusively to the church, I, too, will oppose them on that ground.
First, let us inquire just what is the work of the church? As set forth in the Great Commission we have, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, and Lo, I am with you even to the end of the world." (Matt. 28:19, 20) Surely this is a work committed to the church, and the work here enjoined is that of preaching the gospel, baptizing, and then teaching those baptized. To the Ephesians Paul wrote, "To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be made known by the church the manifold wisdom of God." (Eph. 3:10) I contend that this "manifold wisdom of God" is the gospel, and that it is the duty of the church to make this gospel known to all. Hence, from these passages and others it is clear that the chief work of the church is the saving of souls. Preaching the gospel is soul saving; teaching the baptized is soul saving. The work of caring for the poor is secondary. (Acts 11:28-30; 1 Cor. 16:1-3; James 1:27; 1 Tim. 5:8-16) Under these two heads (soul saving and caring for the needy) all the work of the church is comprehended. But while these things are the work of the church, they are also the work of individual Christians. While men and women as Christians can and should do the work that the local congregation does, they are not limited or circumcised (as is the church) to that work alone. They may engage in other work as individuals.
But where is the Bible school that is doing this very work? Does anyone know of a Bible college that exists for the purpose of having the Bible preached, and is supporting such preaching from its treasury? I know that oftentimes a teacher, or a student may go out from the school and preach and baptize people and establish congregations. But is the college from its treasury supporting them for that purpose? to do that work? If so, let it be known.
Where is the school or college that from its own treasury is trying to support the needy? Do not name some individual in the school; but the individuals have a right to do such, whether they are in a school or not.
The work of a school is strictly educational; and nearly all the branches of secular education are taught, along with the Bible. This teaching is done by a group of Christian men and women, and is done where the students are under a Christian environment. It is the teaching of the Bible that provides a part of this Christian environment. Such influences will no doubt have a bearing on the students; and will even lead some who are not Christians to obey the gospel. But this same kind of influence and environment will have the same kind of effect anywhere — whether it be a school, a store, a factory, or a farm. Christian people will create a Christian atmosphere and will teach the Bible wherever they are.
But it is sometimes objected that the colleges are preacher factories, and that the training of preachers is the work of the church. This statement is false at both ends. They are not preacher factories because they teach both boys and girls, and they work in the same classes, and prepare the same lessons, and recite on the same subjects. A check on these schools will reveal that a very small percentage of the students in all of them actually become preachers of the gospel — and most of these were already set in the way of preaching before they ever entered the schools. To say that the training of men to preach the gospel is the work of the church is to say something that no man can prove from Holy Writ. Teaching and training is done by individuals, and not by the church. Paul did what he did by way of training Timothy and Titus; and to Timothy he wrote, "And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also."
Preparing and training preachers is an individual work — not a work of the church.