What Does The New Testament Teach?
Although I am not one of the "writin' brethren," someone needs to do some "writin'." And when some "writin' brother" who writes as much or more than almost any brother, having one "writin'" all his own, and another publication in which he writes much, published by one of the organizations supported by contributions from churches of Christ, and some individual Christians, implies that a preacher does not have the right to write and criticize some plan or some program both of which he is convinced are not in harmony with New Testament teaching, then it is time for some "writin'" to be done. If anything is unbecoming the dignity of a preacher it should be the disposition to criticize everyone who does not agree with him and then disallow the right of the one who disagrees to write. This is indeed, "the pot calling the kettle black."
What we need in the church today is some men to write after the character of the writings of men such as F. B. Srygley, F. W. Smith, E. A. Elam, M. C. Kurfees, and H. Leo Boles. These men wrote on the church, its nature, its mission and its organization, truths which must be stressed again today or the church is headed for another apostasy. These men did not write about the "congregations of the church of Christ," or "worship services of the church," nor of the "church of Christ," nor of the "preachers of the church of Christ?' They did write about "the church," or "churches of Christ," or the "worship," and "preachers of the gospel." Neither did they write about what the "church of Christ teaches" about this or that or the other; but rather they wrote what the "New Testament teaches," or what "the scriptures say," or what "Christ authorizes." It is not what the "church teaches," but what does the New Testament teach, and does the church of which I am a member follow the teaching of Christ or the New Testament.
Neither did they speak or write that "I think," or even, "we think," or "I believe," or "we believe," but they spoke or wrote what the "scriptures teach," or "Christ says," or "the New Testament plainly teaches." What does anyone care what I think, or what you believe, what does the Bible teach, what does it say, is the important matter. Too many in this period are making "suppositions" or "conjectures" the basis of "writin'" or speaking.
We need to get back to a "Thus saith the Lord," "Sound speech, that cannot be condemned." Brother N. B. Hardeman wrote to the elders of a church when I came to Texas in 1929, in which he stated of me, that, "He will never be given to human opinions or speculations." I did not fully understand this when the elders showed the letter to me then, but since that time it has "soaked in" on me just what he meant. It is my earnest desire that this prediction always be fulfilled in me.
At the lectureship at Abilene Christian College in February of this year many fine things were said with reference to caring for widows and orphans, and ways and means of "doing mission work" (preaching the gospel). But there was too much, any of it would have been too much, "supposin'," and "I believe," and "we believe," in some of the speeches or lectures. Attention was called to the examples of a church in one area sending support directly to the preacher on the field, or of several sending directly to the same man at a certain place at the same time. But what some brethren would like to see is the example in the New Testament of one church sending a contribution to another church for this second church to send on to the preacher in the field. For example, when the Philippian church sent "the things" to Paul in Rome by Epaphroditus, why did not the Philippian church send "the things" to the church at Rome, and let the elders there distribute to Paul what they wanted him to have? Or why did not the church at Philippi when it sent to Paul's "need" in Thessalonica, send this money to the church at Antioch (Paul's "sponsoring" church), and let them send it on to Paul?
May I quote now from one of those gospel preachers mentioned earlier in this article? "It is not stated how long Paul and Barnabas remained at Derbe, but they remained a sufficient length of time to preach the gospel and teach many . . . . From Derbe they reversed their course and revisited Lystra, Iconium and Antioch; the persecution in those cities having subsided. They did this in order to 'confirm' the disciples by 'exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God.' They did not leave these churches lately established to struggle alone, or to die, but visited them to encourage and further instruct them. In every one of the churches they appointed elders — a plurality of elders in every congregation.
"Elders are overseers, or bishops. The duties of elders are plainly taught in the New Testament.
"From Antioch the apostles went to Perga and preached; from there they went to Attalla; and from there they returned to Antioch, in Syria, 'whence they had been committed to the grace of God' when they started on this journey.
"It required several years to make this journey and to do this work.
"Having returned home, Paul and Barnabas gathered the church together and reported their work — 'rehearsed all things that God had done with them (through them), and that he had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles.'
"As Acts 15:3 states this report 'caused great joy unto all the brethren.'
"Paul and Barnabas remained with the church at Antioch 'no little time.'
"This shows how missionary work was done under the inspired guidance of the apostles. The church as such commended to God and sent out the missionaries, whatever support was given was sent directly to missionaries or given directly to them, the missionaries returned and reported to the church the results of their work. No other organization was necessary and no other was used." — From Elam's Notes for 1925.
If some brother does not object I may write, and quote, some more.