"Let Him Alone"
The way some of the brethren are acting during these crucial times makes one wonder if the Bible is believed to be as great a guide as we claim. If a person actually believes the power of God to be with His word as we claim, these current controversies would surely be tried in that crucible with complete confidence that God's way would be victorious. If we actually accept the power of the word of God, the only way error can enter and remain in our practices is for us to cease contending for all things in the light of the Bible only.
Now if we don't believe in the power of God's word, we can shun any form of argumentation that allows the reading and listening audiences to look at the things in question, viewed from both sides and in the light of God's word. Denominationalism decided long, long ago that this is the better plan, and most of them quit debating entirely and all of them would much rather steer clear of public discussions. We understand why. "Muley cows just don't believe in hooking." But surely the members of the church aren't so far from the truth in their practices that they don't have any "horns" to use in turning back the challenger! We wonder, and we want you, friend, to think about it.
In "This and That" of the Gospel Advocate, April 22, 1954, we have what appears to be evidence that some of the brethren have been denuded of all power to scripturally justify certain practices, and they just don't believe in "hooking." We read there: "This writer is not questioning the wisdom of the brethren who object to Christians supporting orphan homes. These brethren themselves tell us that they are both wise and scriptural in their course. If a man knows he is wise and scriptural, it would only raise a fog of dust to try to convince him that he is neither. As long as he is not accomplishing anything much, the practical thing is to let him alone; even if, he does resent being let alone."
Now we do not understand how the writer reached the conclusion that to try to convince anyone who opposes his position on orphan homes "would only raise a fog of dust" without reaching the same charitable conclusion regarding himself. Does not the writer believe that his position is wise and scriptural? Then why write as he did? If he does believe that his position is wise and scriptural, then can he say anything against those who do not agree with him that would not apply to his own position? You reckon it was a hit and run tactic borrowed from "dehorned" denominationalism?
Yeah, we know some brethren who "resent being let alone." The church is "plumb full" of them. We are for them. They resent it so much they advertise in the newspapers, use the radio and television, and go from house to house trying to get lost souls to turn from the devil and come to Christ, becoming a member of the church with them. Preachers and other Christians go places where the church is unknown because they know they cannot go to heaven "being let alone." Religious acts and practices which are contrary to the teaching of the Lord are opposed by a thousand voices who "resent being let alone." It often seems that the devil is as "well supported as before the opposition started," but these men believe that sectarian isolationism brought rigor mortis to the spirituality of denominationalism many, many years ago, and the urge of true Christianity shouts from the housetops, respecting the Lord's "Go ye therefore, and preach the gospel to every creature!"
The other day we received a letter from one of our educators which kindly answered questions we had submitted relative to debating the practices now used in caring for unfortunate children. He wrote that he did not believe debating would settle matters between brethren, but he, like the above mentioned writer, does affirm his positions, and, this he did in the Abilene Lectures this year. O.yes, they like to debate, just like the denominationalists — with only their side represented. If someone challenges their publicly affirmed positions, "Let him alone." My, my! we used to say the sectarians did that because they were afraid someone might be convinced they were wrong!
However, to make any statement publicly, to affirm anything publicly, should be in agreement with facts and the Bible and able to stand investigation. If it can, it is right. If it cannot, it is wrong. Therefore, to make a blanket charge, including all who object to his position, as the above mentioned Gospel Advocate writer, saying they "object to Christians supporting orphan homes," should be close enough to the truth to stand investigation. We are included, but misrepresented by the charge, for we do not make such an objection, nor are we personally acquainted with anyone who does. We do not "fight against Christians contributing to colleges in which the Bible is taught," yet we were included in the charge. We do object to colleges and all other like human institutions demanding financial help from the treasury of God's divine church.
"Let him alone," is a good standard to be borne by those who are so spiritually sick and weak they cannot contend with the challenger, those who are so far from God's word they are polled of all power found therein, for the "dehorned" denominations, but its defeatism should not show itself in the camp of the Lord's army.
Yeah, we "resent being let alone"! "It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps," and the warnings of any brother are not so trivial that mortals can push them aside as though they were as great as God and needed no correction. Christ came to man, leaving him a plan by which he can come to righteousness. His personal ministry led him daily in the opposite direction of "being let alone." He preached to unpleased listeners, showing them how to direct their steps aright. His disciples have always "resented being let alone." Peter, uttering the gospel plan of salvation for the first time, announced to erring humanity that they must turn from the ways and practices they were accustomed to if they would be saved. About three thousand figured they could be wrong and obeyed the gospel. Friend, there's sin in the camp that cannot stand investigation.