The "Total Situation" Argument
THE PROPOSITION: "The Scriptures teach that one church may (has the right to) contribute to (send funds to, render assistance to) another church which has assumed (undertaken) the oversight of a work to which both churches sustained the same relationship before the assumption of the oversight."
Definition Of Terms:
1. "SCRIPTURES" the 66 books of the Bible, the whole of the various component parts of God's revealed will to man.
2. "TEACH" impart information, authorize — by direct statement (declaratory, imperative, interrogative); approved example; and necessary inference.
3. "ONE CHURCH" a single congregation of baptized believers.
4. "MAY" as defined in the proposition, "has the right to."
5. "CONTRIBUTE TO" defined in the proposition: "send funds to; render assistance to."
6. "ANOTHER CHURCH" another single congregation of baptized believers.
7. "WHICH HAS ASSUMED" defined in proposition as "undertaken" — "undertaken" means: "to take upon oneself solemnly or expressly; to lay oneself under obligation, or enter into stipulations, to perform or execute; to covenant or contract; to accept as a charge; to accept responsibility for the care of." as — radio program.
8. "THE OVERSIGHT OF A WORK" watchful care, superintendence of a specific work, a particular work, so as to have authority to make decisions in matters of expediency relative to the ongoing of this specific work.
9. "BOTH CHURCHES SUSTAINED THE SAME RELATIONSHIP" as to oversight; neither of them had the oversight of the accomplishing of this specific work.
10. "BEFORE THE ASSUMPTION OF THE OVERSIGHT" since no two churches can ever be equally related to a specific work in the absolute sense, there must be some limitation, or stricture. What I mean here is: they sustained the same relationship relative to oversight of a specific work before one of them undertook that oversight.
What I Am Not Affirming:
1. That a church can forfeit its independence — or autonomy.
2. That one church can oversight of the work of another congregation.
3. That one church can become a forwarding agency for another church — whether right or wrong, that is another proposition.
4. That all of the work of the church must be done as per my proposition — but this is Scriptural.
5. A church can have oversight of a diocese.
6. Centralized control and oversight — brother Douthitt does.
What I Am Affirming:
1. The proposition which I have signed — watch Douthitt try to make me talk about another one. But we have signed this one and this one we will discuss until he gives up.
2. That where there is a specific work to be accomplished, to which two churches are equally related (neither of the two has oversight of the accomplishing of that specific work), that one of the two congregations has the right to undertake the accomplishing of that specific work even though the accomplishing of the totality of that specific work is beyond its ability, without help; and that the other church has the Scriptural right to assist that church in the accomplishing of that work.
MY ARGUMENT — BASED UPON A SYLLOGISM (two premises lead to a conclusion).
An Amazing Course Followed By Some: Rejection Of Logical Reasoning!
1. Read statement from Ruby, p. 149.
2. These brethren attempt to use logic on every other subject — and they do so. Just examine their writings. cf. some brethren on law of Christ in reference to marriage.
When An Argument Is Presented In Syllogistic Form, There Are Two Questions To Be Asked:
1. Is it valid? — if not, argument is false.
2. If it is valid, then ask: Are the premises true?
Now These Two Questions About That:
1. What is "validity," or when is a syllogism "valid"?
"An argument is valid when the premises necessitate the conclusion." (Ruby, p. 151)
2. "In a valid argument, the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion." (Ruby, p. 151)
So, My Affirmative Will Deal With Answering These Two Questions:
1. Is the syllogism valid?
(1) Violates no rule concerning syllogisms.
(2) Letter from Yale professor stating syllogism is valid.
2. Are the two premises true: (if so, then the truth of the conclusion is GUARANTEED.) No wonder these men are throwing logic out of the window!)
MY PROOF OF THE MAJOR PREMISE: "All total situations the constituent elements (component parts) of which are Scriptural are total situations which are scriptural."
1. "Proof" from my opponent used it to prove "worship" (G.G., 6:15; 50, p. 5).
According to Douthitt, I don't have to prove it since he admits it (without knowing what he was doing!)
He uses it on identity of the church. (Picture him and a Baptist arguing over identity of the church).
He uses it on located preacher. (Picture him and Garrett arguing).
He uses it on Bible classes. (Picture him and Bonneau arguing).
2. Proof from the Scriptures:
(1) The WHOLE of God's Word is the SUM of its COMPONENT PARTS (the various parts of the Bible). 1 Cor. 13:8-10.
(a) The word of God was being revealed "in part"
(b) When all of the "parts" were revealed (written down) then the "PERFECT" or THE WHOLE would be here — then Spiritual gifts would cease! James 1:25, The Holy Spirit believes my Major Premise — Douthitt rejects it!
(2) The Major Premise is NECESSARILY INFERRED from the way God has revealed His will: a. Not all of worship given in one passage, b. Not all of plan of salvation given in one passage, c. Not all identifying marks or component parts of the church are given in one passage.
PROOF OF MY MINOR PREMISE: The total situation described in my proposition is a total situation, the constituent elements (component parts) of which are scriptural. (Each and every one of these elements relate to the specific question of church cooperation).
*According to my opponent, I HAVE NOTHING TO PROVE, SINCE HE HAS ALREADY ADMITTED EVERY ONE OF THESE CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS! — as I shall show you. cf. Chart 16, 18, 35 and 29. — BUT I WILL GO AHEAD AND PROVE THEM, SINCE THAT IS THE JOB OF THE AFFIRMATIVE, WHETHER HE KNOWS IT OR NOT!
The Constituent Elements (Component Parts)
1. Every congregation has the obligation to strive to save souls (in the literal sense, the Lord does the saving) . by means of evangelism (making known the good message). 1 Tim. 3:15; Phil. 2:16.
*This is accomplished by: (1) Acts of benevolence -Matt. 5:16; (2) Preaching of Word orally-Rom. 1:15-and by printed page.
2. Every congregation has the right (liberty of action) to meet this obligation by choosing one or more of various specific ways. Ex. radio program. *This is necessarily inferred from the obligation since the obligation can be met only by the accomplishing of various specific works. A congregation has the right to will to accomplish certain, specific works-Phil. 2:13; II Cor. 8:10,11.
3. After WILLING (deciding) to do, the congregation has the right to DO it! II Cor. 8:10-11.
4. Before any congregation has oversight of the accomplishing of a specific work, the two congregations are equally related as to oversight-neither of the two has the oversight! This is necessarily inferred from the very nature of the case of God's having laid the obligation upon the church-Phil. 2:16; I Tim. 3:15-since this can be met only by means of specific works.
5. When one of the two churches actually undertakes (has covenanted or contracted, done whatever is necessary in this particular case to bring the accomplishing of the work under its oversight), a CHANGE OF RELATIONSHIP HAS OCCURED-the two churches are not now equally related to this particular work. Acts 20:28. One church cannot have oversight of the work of another church.
6. Another church may give assistance to this church (to aid it in the accomplishing of this specific work);
(1) This assistance may involve preaching-
IICor.11:8; Acts 11:22-24.
(2) This assistance may involve physical needs-Acts 11:27-30; II Cor. 8:1-15.
(3) This assistance may involve:
(a) Funds are goods-Acts 11:27-30.
(b) Preacher-II Cor. 11:1-15
(c) Writing which involves spiritual instruction. If one tract, many; also radio, etc. Acts 15:22-32.
________ Notes on Acts 15:22-32 _
What This Says:
1. The Jerusalem church chose men to be sent to Antioch, v. 22.
2. The Jerusalem church prepared an epistle to be sent to the brethren of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, v. 23.
3. Judas and Silas (the brethren sent by Jerusalem) were to tell the brethren of Antioch the same things as those contained in the epistle, v. 27.
4. The brethren (Paul and Barnabas, Judas and Silas) went down to Antioch. They gathered the multitude (the church) together, and delivered the epistle, v. 30.
5. Judas and Silas exhorted the brethren of Antioch, v. 32.
What This Shows:
1. One church can scripturally send some of its own men to render assistance to another church.
2. The assistance which these men are to render pertains to spiritual matters.
3. One church can send a writing (as a tract) to another church.
4. This writing may be for spiritual benefit.
5. One church can render assistance to another church. This assistance can be rendered by (1) sending men, or (2) by a written message. If this assistance can be rendered in two ways, then the rendering of service is general-not specific.
6. Douthitt says pattern applies to all church resources-so if can send tract can send money for a tract, can send money for a radio program.
(4) This assistance may be given to a church with abundance-II Cor. 11:8; Acts 15:22-32-at least one that is not an object of charity.
(5) This assistance may be given BY a church with VERY LITTLE power to give to church with MORE power to give-II Cor. 8:1-15.
(6) This assistance may be given when it is a matter of choice with the giving church-II Cor. 8:8, 10; Rom. 15:26.
(7) This assistance may involve choice upon the part of the receiving church-Rom. 15:31.
(8) This assistance may be "beyond power" or "according to power"-II Cor. 8:1-5, 12.
(9) This assistance is based upon the principle of equality-II Cor. 8:13-14.
7. Elders may have oversight of the accomplishing of a work which is beyond its ability (without help from others). Acts 11:27-30.
8. This work (the situation involving this specific work) is not necessarily brought about by catastrophe. Acts 11:22-24; II Cor. 11:8.
9. There can be right (or liberty) where there is no specific obligation: II Cor. 8:8; Rom. 15:26. *Note these illustrations:
(1) BIBLE CLASSES-we do not HAVE to have them just the way we do, but we will all fight for the RIGHT to have them.
(2) LOCATED PREACHERS-don't have to have them just the way we have them-could just let brethren "take turns" at preaching.
(3) SONG BOOKS-don't have to have song books, but we will all fight for the right to have them.
(4) LITERATURE FOR BIBLE SCHOOL-don't have to have it, but we will all fight for the right to have and use it.
(5) CHURCH BUILDINGS-don't have to have them, but we will all fight for the right to have them.
(6) INDIVIDUAL COMMUNION CUPS-don't have to have them, but we will all fight for the right to have them.
BROTHER DOUTHITT HAS ALREADY ADMITTED ALL OF THE ABOVE CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS AS BEING SCRIPTURAL, cf. chart 15, 16, 16a, 16b, 16c, 18, 29, and 35.
Brethren, my only plea is that you will carefully study the passages cited in relationship to the argument made.