New Theme Song For Bible Talk: "I Surrender All"
A factionist is one who, in teaching a false doctrine, seeks to draw away the disciples after him, thereby tending to divide the church. A hobbyist is one who has a particular theory to which he continually reverts. A hobby-riding factionist comes under the severest condemnation of the Lord. (Rom. 16:17,18; Gal. 5:19-21.) Factionists do not like for their opponents to expose their fallacies, Bible-contradictions, and illogical self-contradictions — their lack of logical consistency. Leroy Garrett, editor of Bible Talk, for instance, refuses to publish material which exposes his almost complete lack of logical consistency, which is manifested by his being on both sides of almost every important point of his particular hobby, the "located preacher" question.
It is a valid device to expose the illogical inconsistencies of a disputant. Since Garrett refuses to publish the exposition of his own inconsistencies, the present writer has been forced to find another medium for such. This effort is undertaken with no personal animosity toward him but is done with the sincere aim of showing the reading public that there is nothing to Garrett's absurd contentions.
His Former Ground Of Opposition
Some two years ago, when Garrett launched his paper, he was vehement in his opposition, among other things, to: (1) preachers of the gospel receiving a salary ( a definite amount for a definite period of time); (2) preaching of the gospel to the church (he said it was IMPOSSIBLE to do such!); (3) the furnishing of a preacher with a house as a part of his support; (4) a preacher preaching in a congregation with elders (he advocated the idea that just as soon as elders were appointed, the preacher was to "move on").
His Defeat Shown By His Later Admissions That All Of These Are Scriptural
Since launching his paper with the above-mentioned points of contention, Garrett has engaged in a number of oral debates. How thoroughly he was defeated in those discussions is evidenced by the fact that he was "whipped out of" every one of his main points of opposition and NOW ADMITS ALL OF THEM TO BE SCRIPTURAL! Factionists of all shades have suffered defeat in the past, but it is hardly conceivable that any ever suffered a more devastating one than has this particular editor (how can one be more defeated than to be forced to give up every point of opposition ? ?). Note the following admissions found in BIBLE TALK, September, 1954, pp. 181-184: (Remember, he formerly opposed each of these points.)
1. In the matter of support: (1) one can receive more than barest necessities; (2) one can receive a definite amount for a definite period of time — a SALARY no less!
2. In the matter of "preaching": preacher can preach the gospel both to the church and to the lost.
3. "Mutual Ministry": (1) only the capable are to edify the church; (2) the elders have the right to limit who shall preach or teach; (3) elders have the right to limit the amount of edification done. (It is seen that Garrett now advocates a LIMITED ministry, not a MUTUAL one! Such is the profit of getting a factionist into a public discussion).
4. "Regular" preaching: (1) regular preaching is scriptural; (2) if one could preach one time in an assembly, he could preach any number of times (stated in discussion with present writer, Mar. 5, 1954); (3) same person can preach four times a month or more than forty times a year!
5. Work of preachers in relation to work of elders: (1) elders may employ an evangelist to assist them in the work they are ordained to do; (2) one does not become a pastor by teaching the church four times a month or more than forty times a year — thus a preacher does not occupy an OFFICE just because he preaches a great number of times per year in the same congregation; (3) one does not become a pastor just because he labors with a congregation for a long period of time — so he does not occupy an office just because he stays with a congregation for a long period of time (even a lifetime!); (4) preacher can preach the gospel to a church with elders without becoming a pastor.
Other admissions could be cited, but these will suffice to expose his defeat in the oral discussions. But inconsistency does not ordinarily bother a factionist. When they are pointed out, he makes such absurd statements as: "I had rather be right than be consistent," (as if one could be right and not be consistent), and "what difference does it make WHAT I admit?" Normally, one would expect greater reasoning power from a child.
His Devices Of Escape
The usual course of a hobby-riding factionist is to avoid letting anyone know exactly what it is that he opposes. He seeks to do this by getting on both sides of the fence of the salient points of the question involved. Then, when his error is exposed on a particular point, he cries, "I admit that is scriptural," and then jumps in flea-like fashion to another point. When one proves that it is right to preach the gospel to the church, he says, "But what about the salary?" When that is proved, he cries, "But what about a house for the preacher?" When that is proved, they cry, "But what about working where there are elders?" etc., etc. When those who oppose Bible classes are confronted with the scriptural proof for classes, they cry, "But where are the women teachers?" When proof for the women teachers is presented, they cry, "But where are the classes?" It is apparent that they realize that when they "pin-point" their opposition, they, like those who oppose Bible-classes, are easily routed, for they have no argument — only quibble, flea-hopping, and misrepresentation.
Equally popular as an escape with such men is the setting up of a "straw-man," which they know to be wrong, and which they further know that no Bible believer would defend. They cry, "It makes no difference what I admit to be scriptural — what you must do is prove that your office of MINISTER is scriptural. It does no good to tell these hobbyists that preachers of the gospel do not occupy OFFICES (but are simply doing a WORK under the oversight of the ELDERS) — they just continue to cry like a parrot: "Defend your office. Defend your office." Garrett seeks to prove that preachers occupy an office just because their name might appear as "John Jones, minister." In connection with that idea, I would like to pose a question to Garrett:
Is Garrett "A" Minister Of Christ Or "The" Minister Of Christ?
On the back page of his tract, HAVE YOU ENTERED THE MINISTRY, Garrett signs his name: "Leroy Garrett, Minister of Christ" (note the "big-M" Minister!). Now Garrett charges his brethren, when they have "minister" after THEIR names, with occupying an OFFICE and further charges that the word "minister" after one's name demands the idea that he believes that he is the ONLY minister. Logically the same premise, applied to the above statement of Garrett, demands the idea that he is the ONLY "Minister" of Christ! Let him now answer this question: "Does the expression 'Leroy Garrett, Minister of Christ' mean that Leroy Garrett is "A Minister of Christ" or "The Minister of Christ" ? Either way he answers, his hobby is exposed: (1) if he says it means "A Minister" he is under obligation to give his brethren credit for the name meaning, (2) if he says it means "THE minister," he would thereby, according to his own arguments, relegate to himself as an exclusive term, a term which rightfully belongs to EVERY child of God.
His Present Ground Of Opposition
Having been "whipped out" of all his points of opposition to the work of "located preachers," Garrett, refusing to acknowledge his error and, determined that he will yet find something wrong with preachers and their work, has turned his attention (as has already been stated) to an ABUSE of the work of preachers. He continually insists that someone defend the. OFFICE which preachers occupy, even though it has been repeatedly pointed out to him that preachers occupy no OFFICE, but are simply doing a WORK, under the OVERSIGHT of ELDERS! Such is hobbyism, pure and simple! "But," he cries, "some preachers have been guilty of saying that they occupy an office." That may be so, but if they did, they did wrong. It is likely true that there have been instances of lying, stealing, and adultery upon the part of SOME preachers. Men would have as much right to ask Garrett to defend that as he would to ask them to defend the OFFICE OF MINISTER who takes over the work of elders. A SCRIPTURAL defense of the WORK of preachers WILL be presented in later articles. To that, Garrett will, I predict, pay no attention, but will continue, like a record-player that will not run down, "Defend your office; defend your office; defend your office; defend ...."