| February 28, 1999 |
Vol. I, No. 44
|
Benjamin Franklin, a preacher among churches of Christ who died in 1878, once preached a sermon on "The Infallibly Safe Course." It appears in Z.T. Sweeny's collection of sermons called THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH (1930).
Franklin observes that in the major areas of religious controversy there is a course that is infallibly safe; a choice all agree is acceptable and cannot be wrong. Since we have but one life to live, and since so much is at stake, he says we should follow the way all agree will bring one to heaven. Franklin applies this principle to such matters as faith in God, baptism, immersion, and human creeds.
This message is at the very heart of the restoration plea. We believe the New Testament's instruction and approved practice on all essential matters. Christ said He would send the Holy Spirit to guide the apostles "into all truth" (John 16:13). He told them to teach what He had commanded them (Matt. 28:20). The apostles, and others under inspiration, delivered God's will for the Christian age. What they commanded and the practices they approved, then, must be acceptable and cannot be wrong.
But what if we change what the apostles taught and practiced? Such changes are dangerous because they lack God's approval and because God gave many warnings against leaving "the truth." With our souls hanging in the balance, why risk something different than what the scriptures authorize?
Suppose, for example, you could choose between two medicines. Everyone agrees one works with no side effects. The best medical authority is behind it. But you also have pills "someone" says will do just as well, but it lacks the same authority and may have side effects. Would you reject the certain medicine for the risky one?
Here are applications of the "infallibly safe course" approach to some current issues.
The Scriptures teach believers in Christ to "repent and be baptized for forgiveness of sins" (Acts 2:38), penitent believers to be baptized to "wash away" their sins (Acts 22:16), and people arose from baptism to "walk in newness of life" (Rom. 6:4). While one may wish God would accept believers who have never been baptized for forgiveness of sins, He gives no promise that He will. Why, then, take such a risk? Why not teach and practice the infallibly safe way --baptism "for forgiveness of sins"?
The same reasoning applies to immersion. No one doubts that baptism by immersion was the universal and authorized practice in the early church and for a long time thereafter. Human wisdom says sprinkling may be acceptable, but with no Scriptural justification. When souls are at stake, why take the risk? All agree that immersion is the infallibly safe course.
Vocal music was clearly the practice of the church while under apostolic authority. Both the New Testament and church history make this certain. Since we know that unaccompanied singing in Christian worship pleases God, and in addition, it is obvious that instruments are leading many churches toward an unscriptural "entertainment atmosphere" in worship. Why leave the infallibly safe way of unaccompanied singing to God?
This principle can also be applied to many other issues. We are on biblically safe ground, for example, to observe the Lord's supper each first day of the week, to have qualified elders in each congregation, to have men conduct the worship and to have freewill offerings. We are also infallibly safe to regard the church as the body of Christ to which God adds all the saved and which should not be divided into factions. To view the church as a body divided into denominations is to leave the infallibly safe course.
We wouldn't substitute a risky medicine for a safe one. Surely on matters of eternal destiny, we should follow the safe way. Even those who offer something different agree there is an infallibly safe course one could follow. Let's stay with the safe way and boldly proclaim it.
--Stafford North
In Matt. 9:9-13, the apostle records a brief account of the events surrounding his own call to become a follower of Jesus. Mark and Luke record this event in Mark 2:14-17 and Luke 5:27-32. From them, we learn that Matthew was also known as Levi, and that his father's name was Alphaeus. Matthew himself tells us, "Then as Jesus passed on from there, He saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax office. And He said to him, 'Follow Me.' And he arose and followed Him. And so it was, as Jesus sat at the table in the house, that behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Him and His disciples. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to His disciples, 'Why does your Teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?' But when Jesus heard that, He said to them, 'Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. But go and learn what this means: "I desire mercy and not sacrifice." For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.'"
Let us observe a few facts from the record of these events. First note that before he became a disciple of Jesus, Matthew or Levi was a tax collector. The King James Version uses the term "publican." A publican was someone who took a job collecting taxes for the despised Roman government. In our society he would correspond to a customs agent. In the minds of the scribes, Pharisees, and most other Jews, publicans were lumped together with those called "sinners" -- prostitutes, whoremongerers, and others who had chosen to live ungodly life styles. Jesus called a publican to leave the tax tables and become a disciple.
Second, in response to Jesus' call, Matthew left his tax table and followed. He also invited Jesus to come to his home, made a great feast and invited his own friends and acquaintances -- other publicans and others who were not in favor with the Pharisees and the religious elite.
Next we observe that the Pharisees complained that Jesus, a religious leader, would associate with the ungodly. Jesus responded: "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick." That is, those who are already sinless do not need preaching to. Preaching should be directed to those who need to repent and reform or to those who need to grow and develop. (Jesus was not saying that anyone IS sinlessly perfect, but the Pharisees often gave the impression that they thought they were).
Finally, Jesus cites a passage of Scripture found in Hosea 6:6 and suggests the Pharisees go and learn what this verse means. The Jews of Hosea's time were careful to offer every sacrifice according to the law, but were not careful to live in accordance with the law. The Pharisees of Jesus' day were much like them as Jesus says in Matt. 23:3, "Whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do."
--CRJ