HOME | | THE MAGAZINE | BOOKS | SITEMAP | EMAIL
				Sound Fellowship By Bro. Oscar Beachamp, Berean Mag.1961

Beloved brethren and sisters in Christ Jesus.

To all who are deeply concerned about "holding fast the form of sound words" which God in His mercy has permitted us to know, there can be no doubt that today we face the greatest danger of having the Truth corrupted by false doctrine and loose fellowship than any time since Dr. Thomas recovered it over 100 years ago from the mire of orthodox false teaching.

The numbers who courageously, faithfully and uncompromisingly stand up for and defend sound doctrine and fellowship are being reduced to a small and despised minority. During the last few years many who once valiantly defended sound fellowship have become weak, vacillating and tolerant toward false teachers and teaching which they once refused to fellowship.

Even some who appear to be more or less concerned, and who speak brave words against the rapidly-declining state of fellowship, lack the faith and the courage to take action against it, or "come out" from it.

There seems to be an idea growing in the minds of those who have left the firm foundation of sound fellowship, that a certain amount of false doctrine can be fellowshipped, or it can be tolerated under certain circumstances, or that one is not responsible for the toleration of false doctrine if it is in another ecclesia other than his own, especially if it is far away.

Some have already reduced their responsibility to their own meeting, and the number appears to be growing who are resigning themselves to the "comfortable" feeling that so long as they are individually free from error they are in no danger. Many are just a step from the churches as regards fellowship.

These conclusions are neither based upon imagination nor opinion. They are based upon the awful fact that many brethren, once esteemed as stalwart supporters of sound doctrine and fellowship, have had to COMPLETELY REVISE THEIR BELIEF CONCERNING FELLOWSHIP in order to adjust themselves to their new associations and justify themselves in forsaking those who refused to be moved away from the firm foundation on which all faithful brethren have stood since Dr. Thomas' day.

To such, the passages of Scripture which teach us how to deal with teachers of error are becoming meaningless and useless. Toleration is now becoming a definite policy and practice. Brethren who now uncompromisingly stand for the old position on fellowship are discredited and despised.

The tolerant, the liberal, the compromising and the worldly-minded type of brethren are the ones now who are admired, honored, exalted to leadership and chosen as "counsellors."

And so, it seems, the time has come for vigorous teaching and action by those who have not been victims of this "strong delusion," that we may revive and keep alive that which "has been committed to our trust," in the hope that we may "strengthen the things that remain," and save as brands from the burning a few who have been victims of this latter-day departure from the Faith in its purity.

Questions which naturally arise in doubtful minds when the subject of fellowship comes up, are: To what extent can we bear with the teacher of false doctrine? How much false doctrine can we tolerate without endangering the purity of the Faith? What attitude should we assume toward the teachers of error?

Divine instruction concerning the preservation of the purity of the Faith, and the manner in which error should be dealt with, is so clear and positive that there is no excuse for anyone who is instructed in the Word having any doubts about what to do when error appears in the Body.

Failure to take action against error, as a rule, is not so much a lack of knowledge as to what should be done, but a lack of faith and courage to do it. Personal admiration and friendship for the teacher of error, a desire to maintain peace at any price, weakness for kinship, a desire to remain with the majority, etc., are more often barriers to courageous, decisive action in dealing with error than a lack of knowledge of what should be done.

However, let us consider the questions above noted. When Bro. Roberts was faced with the problem of dealing with teachers of error (and not the least of his difficulties was well-meaning brethren who wanted to take a tolerant attitude toward these corrupters of the Faith), he wrote down his conclusions, based upon scriptural truth, in "My Days and My Ways," page 203.

"By what means shall a community, based on the Truth, preserve the Truth in purity in its midst? Obviously by the means indicated by Paul and John, that is, by exacting of all who are in it an implicit adherence to the things, facts, principles, points, tenets, or whatever else they may be called, which go to make up the Truth in its entirety, and by refusing to associate with those who oppose or refuse to endorse any of those elements.

"Some recommend in opposition to this the employment of argument with those who may be in error. But if an ecclesia is to go no further than argument, how could its existence continue?

"An effort should doubtless be put forth to reclaim those who are in error; but, where those efforts fail, dissociation by withdrawal is natural and inevitable.

"The ecclesia is not a place for argument; it is for worship in agreement. When a man requires to be argued with, his natural place is outside, and if he will not go outside, separation must be enforced by withdrawal on the part of the rest.

"Division is the inevitable concomitant of an uncompromising adherence to the Truth. Peace purchased at the cost of compromise is doubly dangerous. The Truth is the standard and must alone be allowed to rule. All doubt ought to be solved in its favor.

"The action of separation is not an act of judgment against those from whom we may separate. It is an act of self-vindication; an act by which we discharge a duty and wash our hands of evil. The Truth has gradually emerged from the fables in which for centuries it had been lost, and only an inexorable policy on the part of those receiving it will preserve it from the recurrence of the disaster which drove it from among men shortly after the days of the Apostles."

It was the judgment of Bro. Roberts, based upon sound scriptural reasoning, that the teacher of error, when it is evident that he cannot be turned away from his error, must be fellowshipped no longer; that it is imperative that we withdraw from anyone who holds doctrine contrary to any element of the One Faith; and, that the teacher of error should be considered as outside the unity of the Body and a corrupter of the Truth. All of which is in strict accordance with Apostolic precept.

How many times have we read, and heard read and discoursed upon the words of the Apostle Paul in Gal. 1:6-9 -

"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel, which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ.

"But, though we, or an angel from, heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

"As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."

It is vain to try to make it appear that Paul here was speaking only of those who completely departed from every element of the Faith. This was not so, though it led to that very thing, which is one of the reasons why a "slight" departure is so dangerous.

"Just a little thing; a harmless crotchet; it should not be made a matter of fellowship," the compromisers of the Truth would doubtless say if such a perversion of the Truth should occur today. It was nothing more than a claim by some of the Jewish converts that it was necessary to keep certain provisions of the Law of Moses in order to be saved.

But it was not a small matter to Paul or any other earnest defender of the Faith.

Just so, the various crotchets which have plagued the Body have denied some element of the one saving Gospel, the most recent one causing division in the body being a perversion of the doctrine of the Atonement, or the truth concerning Christ's nature and sacrifice,

Many times in the past faithful brethren have remarked that, if all the crotchets which false teachers have tried to mix with Christadelphian doctrine had been tolerated, the Truth would have been totally perverted.

Today nearly all false doctrines which have caused division in the body are represented in the "mixed multitude" merged together through ambiguous proposals which conceal, rather than reveal, the existence of error in the merging groups.

Who has the authority to say that these latter-day perverters should be treated tolerantly, when Paul said of all such, "Let them be accursed?" How dare anyone bid them God-speed by fellowshipping them and assisting them in carrying on their corrupting influence by condoning, evading, whitewashing and sugar- coating their pernicious errors that they may be continued in fellowship?

Has not the divine sentence already been passed upon all who do such things? How dare we try to change it? Is the teacher of error any less guilty than those of Paul's day? Is the teacher of error any worse than those who aid, encourage and fellowship him? Not according to the inspired Apostle John! They cannot escape complicity with the teacher thereof - they are "partakers of his evil deed" (2 Jn. 11). - Berean, 1961