I have been reading certain articles, watching certain videos, and listening to certain tape recordings in recent days, and there is something terribly disturbing about all of it. It is disturbing, of course, that some among us ostensibly do not have the proper respect for the Bible and would compromise with error. But this is not the thing I am talking about. The very fact that brethren conflict with one another is disturbing, but neither is this the thing I am talking about just here.
Maybe I’ve missed something along the way, but must the children of God, when they disagree with one another, act like the children of the devil? Why we call attention to the mistakes of our brethren, should I not do it with tears in our eyes, rather than with a smirk on our face? When we reply to those who have criticized us, should it not be with hearts filled with heaviness instead of hatred? Is there ever a time when the child of the King of the Universe has a right to be discourteous and ugly? In all the scathing language used by Jesus and his apostles in denouncing sin, they never became outright discourteous and ugly.
I can understand why people in the political arena act as discourteous and hateful as they sometimes do when they have disagreements, for they are, for the most part, children of the devil, and this is what we would expect from children of the devil. I can understand why members of labor unions act like children of the devil when they have their differences, for they are, for the most part, children of the devil, and this is what we would expect from children of the devil. But must the children of God act discourteous and hateful when they have their differences? Hear me out, please!
What happens to our integrity—plain old honesty—when we get into controversy with our brethren? Is it necessary to lie, or tell only part truths in order to make our case against them stand? In order to be sure the brethren being attacked are duly castigated, is it necessary to suppress some of the facts, hint at things that are not true, and even tell outright lies about the matter?
Let me make it plain that I do not want an Independent Christian Church preacher teaching my class or filling the pulpit where I preach for any cause. But while that is the case, it does not give me the right to accuse my brethren of things they have not done. I have viewed the video of the Joplin meeting, and particularly that part where some are supposed to have advocated getting the Christian Church preachers to come and preach their doctrine from our pulpits. There is not one word in that exchange about these preachers preaching their doctrine. Reference is made instead to their preaching enough doctrine so that we may see there is not all that much difference between them and us. As already stated, I do not agree with that idea and would oppose such a proposal where I preach. But that does not give me the right to misrepresent the position brethren have taken, especially when they assure me that they are not talking about allowing false doctrine to be taught in our classes or from our pulpits, and that they did not for one moment have it in their minds that we should enter into some kind of compromise with those in error.
Please be assured that I am not talking about those only on one side of a controversy. The man who planned and conducted the Joplin meeting, for example, made a speech in which he demonstrated as ugly a spirit as any of his attackers. (And that is saying quite a bit.) Not only so, but more than once in his speech he told things that simply are not true. In that same speech, he castigated brethren for saying things about him that were not true, and yet he became guilty of the very things he was condemning, and with an attitude just as ugly as that of any of his accusers.
When a preacher of the gospel becomes guilty of various sins of immorality, such as fornication, or fraud, or theft, we say that the gospel he has preached has failed to influence his own life. What about the preacher who rejoices to see a brother fall, and who will even become guilty of lying to put his brother in a bad light? Is he not in the same condition? I Corinthians 13:4-7 says:
Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
I fear these words do not accurately describe some of those whose articles I have read, whose videos I have watched, and whose tape-recorded reports I have heard. I am not saying that those who have love will not attack sin and error, but that dishonesty and discourtesy can have no part in the actions of the Christian, even in his attacks against that which he considers sin.
If we stand for the right on doctrinal matters, but become ungodly, discourteous, and dishonest, what have we accomplished?
-Bobby Duncan
0 Comments