Is This "Hobbyism"?
The New Testament commands that we "teach": that we "visit" the fatherless: that we "communicate" to the needs of each other: that we are to "do good" unto all men, especially to the household of God. We are not told what "method" shall be used in teaching, whether in one class or many classes. Neither do we have example that specifies how to teach. We may use the written word: oral teaching person to person, person to many persons: over the radio or television: or one or more of many other ways. We may buy groceries for one another: give money to buy groceries: pay for lodging: pay for medical care and hospitalization: or many other things relating, to the needs of one another when in need. Whatever "method" becomes expedient in each case is authorized so long as it is in harmony with all of God's teaching. We have examples of obedience to these commands in the New Testament — individuals "teaching," and the "teaching" in the congregations; individuals helping one another with the necessities of life; and congregations sending to the needs of their brethren of other congregations when the congregation where the needy were was unable to care for them. We have example of brethren of a congregation taking care to provide for the needs of widows (a widow's needs are not taken care of until the needs of those dependent upon her are met, and the same is true of the children of Christians, both parents being dead or unable to care for their own).
The "we" of the above, of course, are the "called-out" of Christ — Christians — members of the body of Christ. The Christians of the New Testament days fellowshipped one another in congregations that were under the oversight of elders whenever there were men qualified to do that work. This writer should not need to call attention to the fact that these elders were the "leading teachers" in every congregation, their ability in this respect being one of their prominent qualifications. When other teachers were developed, they were developed under the teaching and training of the elders. Could any dispute this? Surely, none would try. Yes, there was method used in teaching. We do not know how many methods they used. We only know that teaching was done by the elders and teachers of that early day in the congregations. There were no organizations imposing into this business of the congregations. The congregations used methods, but organizations other than the local congregations to use these methods simply did not exist. Was the teaching done that God wanted done? Beloved, God grant that you answer with honesty and sincerity.
We have example of congregations sending to the needs of Christians in other congregations. We have no example of some other organization imposing itself into this business of the congregations. As in the case of the teaching mentioned before, was the work done that God wanted done? Please be careful not to cast a slur upon those who worked under the direct teaching of the holy apostles.
We have example of a congregation providing for the needs of its widows (this has to include those dependent upon them). In the same congregation we have example that they ministered daily to the needs of all among them. What methods they employed in order to properly care for each we are not told. We do know that it was done in that local congregation. Was the work done that God wanted done? Where is there evidence that some other organization was used to employ the methods needed to do this work. There is none, of course.
The gospel must be preached. We have example of individuals and congregations sending to the needs of those who evangelized the world of that day. We have no example of other organization "assuming" the oversight of any program of evangelization; no, not even one congregation overseeing a program of evangelization except that which would be done by those of a local congregation under the oversight of the local elders. We have example of an evangelist laboring with a local congregation. We have example of individual Christians preaching the word wherever they went. We have no example of one church attempting more than they were able to support in this matter of preaching the gospel, whatever the method used. Search your hearts, beloved, and based upon the knowledge of the word of God therein, answer: Was the preaching of the gospel done that God commanded? If what God commanded was accomplished, what more can be done?
All of these things were done in obedience to God's command. We have the record of this obedience; not the methods used in each case, but the record of the organization that used the methods. As long as they continued in the ways of which we have record, the beginnings of a super-organization that later resulted in the Roman Catholic Church did not exist. Again, may I ask, was the work done as God wanted it done? Who can presume that what God directed successfully in that day will not accomplish the will of God today? What more can be done?
We are commanded to withdraw from disorderly brethren, those who do not adhere to the traditions received from the apostles — II Thessalonians 3:6. We are commanded to hold fast the traditions the brethren received from the apostles either by word or epistle — II Thessalonians 2:15. Certainly these traditions included the teaching of the apostles concerning the works mentioned before in this article, and are a part of the doctrine which the apostles taught.
We have but to look into the New Testament to learn what the apostles commanded and to observe what the early Christians did that was approved by the apostles that we may know what the traditions (ordinances — doctrines) were that the apostles delivered to the brethren — and to us. We must not turn away from them, but hold fast to them. Where is there record of organization employed to use any method to obey these traditions given by the apostles other than the local congregation? Where is there evidence that brethren formed any organization, of any nature other than the local congregation, to instruct or produce deacons, elders, teachers, or evangelists? Where is there evidence that brethren from several congregations, or one local eldership," formed themselves into an organization for the purpose of carrying out any tradition delivered by the apostles — the care of the unfortunate — the aged — preaching the gospel? There is none except as the local elders took oversight of their own. Remember, EVERY WORK THAT GOD WANTED DONE, WAS DONE. All that was done was done ACCORDING TO THE TRADITION (DOCTRINE) TAUGHT BY THE APOSTLES. We must "abide in" this doctrine. We must NOT "go beyond" it.
The proponents of things "beyond" what the early Christians did accuse their opposition of having no "love" for the lost, the unfortunate, etc. Beloved, God loved all these before we knew anything about them. God gave His Son to save them. Yet, God's apostles gave the traditions by which the work is to be done. Shall we say that God knew not how to make the most of the gift of His Son to the conversion of the greatest number it is possible to really convert? Was not God wise enough to instruct to the best use of the abilities and substances of the converted? Need this writer call attention to the seriousness of courting the wrath of God by presuming that we may have our own ways?
In this article, the writer has exposed his thinking and teaching upon these matters. Where is this teaching contrary to the word of God? This teaching is not "anti" any method that is in harmony with all. God's teaching, and used by such as we have record using "methods" in the tradition — doctrine--of Christ. This writer has faith ONLY in obedience to the traditions which we have clearly revealed in the New Testament to accomplish ANY work that God wants done — to convert every soul it is possible to convert. If this makes this writer an "anti," he is an "anti." If it makes this writer a "hobby-rider," he is a "hobby-rider." However, until from the word of God this writer is informed of one single organization other than a local congregation that can carry out God's ,commands to the church, I shall trust only in that which I have outlined in this article — come what may.