Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 9
NEED_DATE
NUMBER 22, PAGE 2,5b

Let's Preach It

Guy McDonald, Beaumont, Texas

I believe the gospel can be preached to the whole world on radio, TV., printed page, etc. But I believe it must be under the supervision of the elders of the local congregation.

I do not believe the elders of one congregation has the authority to surrender their funds to another congregation to do their preaching for them. If one congregation can give their money to do this work for them, to another, why can't all congregations in the world do the same. If they can surrender their money, why not the discipline and the rest of the oversight?

The reason for this position is that God ordained elders in every church (Acts 14:23) and they all must have the same qualifications. if qualified, elders then all have the same responsibility and obligations, that of overseeing the "flock among you." (1 Peter 5:1-4)

We read in 2 Tim. 3:17 where the man of God is furnished unto every good work. Paul furnishes us with the information that elders work is restricted to the local congregation.

There is neither command, necessary inference or divine example of one congregation surrendering their resources to another to do their work for them.

Soon after the apostles all died churches in many provinces created a form of centralization by placing their work and resources under the control of an agency that exercised the authority over a district of several churches. Within a few centuries this practice resulted in the Roman Hierarchy.

About one hundred years ago many churches of Christ fell into this same error that has corrupted the religious world for centuries. They surrendered their money to an organization known as the "Missionary Society." They solicited money from churches everywhere and its officers had full control over these church contributions in preaching the gospel at home and abroad. All these churches co-operating in this centralized project lost their autonomy. The Christian Church or Disciples of Christ is a living example of what happens to the church when man changes God's laws. They are far removed from the true church now, and of course well on their way to Rome.

The fact that this organization preached the gospel to millions does not justify the unauthorized removal of the "oversight" of resources from the local eldership to a centralized agency. And it does not prove that centralization is better than the plan God gave. The Lord's plan is for every congregation to manage it's own affairs.

No one congregation is obligated above another to preach the gospel. All are to preach it according to their ability. They are equally related in this effort. The smallest church has the same commission as the largest. The larger congregation has no right to solicit funds from the smaller to do their work for them.

The sponsoring churches today are doing just that and this is no difference in principle. They have changed the name, and put on a new dress, but the results will be the same.

The sponsoring churches tell sister congregations they are not doing their work for them, but they are only having fellowship in such as this. All the contributing does is help pay the bill and if they would tell the truth that is all they are after. THEIR plea is, we can do so much in this way, we can reach millions with our BIG programs, and you can do so little. They say it is exclusively their work; they hire the preachers, censor the programs (sermons) and no one else has anything to say about it. It is their work and they ought to pay for it.

We noticed where there were millions reached about one hundred years ago too, but look at the results. God's plans were changed. He was dishonored, the church was split, and thousands will be lost as a result.

How can a faithful child of God keep silent while this monster creeps upon the church? Especially, the more mature, who have the responsibility of warning when danger is near?

The majority always goes with the "crowd;" it has always been that way. If the majority had not gone away the church would be much stronger today. Yes, they went with the "Society," and it looks as if many will go with the "sponsoring churches."

Only a few men had the courage to speak out against the "Societies," but why? Because they closed their eyes and minds to the things going on about them, and flatly refused to study the issue. Frankly, brethren, that is the trouble today. Many have allowed themselves to become prejudiced against those who have studied the issues and are warning of the innovations.

It will be another sad day for the church when it is again divided over what some call matters of opinion. That's what they said in regard to the Missionary Society. Some can see the difference between matters of faith and opinion while others can not. The scriptures furnish us unto EVERY GOOD WORK, and it does not furnish us with the schemes that are being imposed upon the brotherhood today.

Wake up! This monster (sponsoring church idea) looks small from a distance, but when one gets close enough to get a good look it will be too late. He will completely destroy you or will have broken your resistance. This monster is already at work; he has reared his ugly head and is striking right and left. He is no longer afraid. He knows he has strength and is taking advantage of it.

Christians in almost every congregation are being forced to contribute to one thing or another not authorized by the Bible. In many cases they are being cast out when they tell the elders they cannot contribute to certain projects. These elders seem little interested in the welfare of the ones who do not agree with them. About the only interest they have shown so far, is to get the "trouble makers" out of the way. They are "trouble makers," just as Jesus, Paul, Peter and others who wanted to do the will of the Father.

If the Christian Church hasn't made room for this. movement I have missed my guess and stand ready to apologize. Some of the leaders in the Christian Church have recently stated that the church of Christ now has her "Missionary Societies." Can we deny it, truthfully?

I am afraid not. The Christian Church is waiting with open arms. Are you prepared to go with them? Or do you want to stay with the truth and be saved -when you die? You will have to make the choice; no one can make it for you. You'll never make the right choice by evading issues and sticking your head in the sand.

Quit "kidding" yourself, start warning the brethren of these awful schemes which are designed to divide the church again.

Brethren, I have no ax to grind with anyone. I don't claim much intelligence, and so far as being recognized in the brotherhood is concerned, I'M NOT. But one thing I know is safe and that is the Bible. Why not place your confidence in it and be saved?

I believe in churches co-operating. Churches did send donations to another church (2 Cor. 8 and 9) Also Rom. 15:25; - I Cor. 16. The ISSUE is, under what conditions? God gave two conditions: Where one or more churches may send to another, or other churches.

A. 1 Cor. 16:1-4. This contribution was from churches to one church.

1. Conditions

a) The church in Jerusalem was an object of charity

b) The money was for the benefit of the poor members. (Rom. 15:25-27)

c) This was not for evangelization, but for the needy

d) 2 Cor. 8:1-3. The same condition existed here as 1 Cor. 16:1-4.

2. The churches of Macedonia were poor, but were not objects of charity.

They had "power" to give. They gave according to power. The Jerusalem church was an object of charity. They had no power to give.

2 Cor. 8:13-15. This tells us the gifts to the Jerusalem church was to bring about "equality."

2 Cor. 9:12,13. Paul tells us the gifts to the Jerusalem church were to "fill up, or supplieth the want of the saints." This was not for evangelization purposes either.

Romans 15:25-27. Here Paul tells us twice that the donations were for the poor in Jerusalem.

Donations from one church to another were for specific reasons.

The receiving church was in "want."

The gifts were for the poor, a work they were unable to do for themselves.

The design is specific; "That there may be equality." (2 Cor. 8:14)

"At this time," the present time, this was not a permanent arrangement, such as we have today among the churches. If there had never been a donation from one church to another except under these conditions there would never have been a Catholic Church.

Think it over.