Voices from 1968: A Leaf from the Pages of a "Subversive" Journal

In the little spare time I have I have been reading through the works of Carl Ketcherside (which were recently given to me as a gift of grace). I am currently in volume 9 and hope to finish the set in the near future. There are pages that I find myself in disagreement. There are pages that I eagerly say "Amen" too. All is very good reading no matter where he comes down. Yesterday I read a short article by David Reagan in the October 1968 issue of Mission Messenger. Perhaps it was the year "1968" that caused me to be sensitive to the passage (I always like to find out about the time I was born). It is called "A Moment for Thought" and I would like to share this brief article with you. I share it because I think Reagan makes us look in the mirror and examine ourselves ...

"A Moment For Thought" by David R. Reagan

"I recently read about a poll conducted among American Catholics. The most startling revelation of this poll was the fact that more than 60% of American Catholics feel that abstinence from meat on Friday is more important than Jesus' admonition to 'love our neighbor as ourself." [sic].

Rather shocking isn't it? In fact, I would go so far as to say it is downright appalling and pitiful that so many "Christians" could have such a warped concept of what Christianity is all about.

Yet, before we get on our self-righteous high horse and start condemning the 'pagan' Catholics, let's pause for a moment and ask ourselves how members of the Church of Christ - the "New Testament church" - would respond to a similar question. Suppose, for example, that the same pollster were to ask the stalwart members of our brotherhood the question, 'Which is more important, abstention from the use of musical instruments in the worship service or the command of Jesus to 'love your neighbor as yourself"?

I have no doubt our response would be so overwhelmingly in favor of abstinence from musical instruments that we would make the Catholics look wishy washy in their preference for abstinence from meat.

Similarly, I think I know what the response of our brethren would be if the same question were worded differently - "which is more important, regular church attendance, or love of neighbor?" or, "which is of greater importance, the systematic observance of the Lord's Supper upon the first day of the week, or the love of one's fellowman?" Again, I have no doubt that the love of man would finish a poor second among our brethren.

Our explanation of the Catholic response would be the classic one, 'What can you expect from people who never study the Bible, but simply do what the Pope tells them?" How would you explain the fact that we who pride ourselves on our Bible study would agree with the Catholic response?" (Mission Messenger, October 1968, p.158 in volume 9 of the works of Carl Ketcherside).

End of Quote

This is a thought provoking voice from the past. I have been meditating on the question now for a day. I am not so sure where we might come down 38 years after this short piece was written. But the question is an important one . . . and how we respond says volumes about who we are as the People of God.

One day a scholar in the torah came to Jesus and asked, "which is the greatest commandment of the Law? Jesus replied, 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your mind. And the second is like it: love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

I wonder if Jesus really meant it?

Shalom,

Bobby Valentine

Read More

Text & Context 3: Word Study Principles

Text & Context #3: Word Study Principles

Word studies are an important part of the study of the biblical text. There importance can be over emphasized however. From time to time we encounter an "exegesis" that is basically nothing but word studies (or the author claims they are). But as valuable as a word study can be they can also be easily distorted and abused. 

The abuse of word studies has actually come under some rather intense scholarly criticism over the last generation or so (led by James Barr). Some of the worst violations of sound rules for word studies are by scholars themselves . . . especially in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament edited by Kittel. Most scholars today will say "TDNT is still a valuable tool but it must be used with caution." The same is true of Colin Brown's Dictionary of New Testament Theology. But the principles of a good word study are also violated routinely by preachers. What follows are seven guidelines for a procedure in doing a word study.

1) A distinction should be made between glosses (that is translation substitutes) and definitions. All of the meanings (please note the plural) of a particular English gloss may NOT transfer back to its Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic counterpart.

2) The study of a word is not equal to the study of a concept. This is, in the opinion of James Barr (i.e. The Semantics of Biblical Language) the fundamental problem with TDNT and many other biblical studies. A study of the article in TDNT on agape for example provides more than adequate criticism here. It is not infrequent to hear that "agape" means a distinctive kind of godly or Christian love. The exchange between Jesus and Peter in John is a classic case where this rule is abused (greatly!). This conclusion can only be reached by a highly selective reading of John's usage of the terms agape and phileo. Certain approaches to worship share in the problems of this "word study" approach to biblical theology. I would suggest that the ever popular "Edification Model" to worship exhibits these problems. 

3) A single word often has several distinct . . . even UNRELATED senses. There is, often, no common core sense underlying all of its occurrences. (Please recall my illustration of the word "means" itself in the first installment of Text & Context.

4) The lexical sense(s) of a word should be studied using both the conventional conceptual approach which identifies the concept(s) the word denotes and the lexical field approach which compares and contrasts the word with other words with related senses. 

5) Etymology is commonly useful as a mnemonic device for remembering transparent meanings, but it is generally irrelevant in determining a word's sense in a particular context. The word "automobile" means "self-moving vehicle" but few people actually know that or use the word because of that etymology. One example that is quite common is the word "ekklesia" to which preachers commonly will define by its "etymology" to mean "the called out." But there is little to no evidence that Paul or Luke ever actually used the word in that sense. Context, not etymology, determines the meaning of a word.

6) The immediate context is the most determinative feature for identifying the meaning of a word in particular occurrences.

7) The immediate context of word usually points to only one of its possible senses. Deliberate double entendre is rare and should normally be invoked only when clearly indicated. 

The new third edition of Baur's Lexicon (BDAG) is an essential tool and should be consulted long before TDNT. The recent New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis 5 volumes, ed. by W. A. VanGemeren moves ahead of the older theological dictionaries in avoiding many fallacies in word studies. For further reading on word studies I recommend the easily accessible material by Donald Carson in Exegetical Fallacies (a book that belongs in every preacher's library). If you are hardy then Peter Cotterell and Max Turner's textbook Linguistics & Biblical Interpretation is a must have.

Shalom,
Bobby Valentine

Read More

Reaction to Kingdom Come: Gardner Hall

Reaction to Kingdom Come by Gardner Hall.

Last week I became aware of a review of my book, Kingdom Come, by Gardner Hall. I have never met Gardner before. Gardner published his review in a journal called Biblical Insights and has placed it also on his website. I read his reaction and then asked him if I could place it on my own website. I was thrilled by his review because he took the book seriously, he has wrestled with it and gave both positive and negative. I think Gardner is mistaken in some of his interpretations (regardless of my point of view on the role of women that is not a subject in the book itself). We disagree on matters here (I obviously disagree with what he calls problem areas) and there but unlike some critics he also sees some value in the book ... to the point of recommending its purchase. Gardner is the grandson of Flavil Hall, I have learned (mentioned in the book too). He is from, I gather, what is commonly called the "non-institutional" wing of the Churches of Christ. Be that as it may he is a brother in the Lord. I appreciate the effort he made to join the dialogue ... and the book if nothing else is an effort to get us in Churches of Christ to dialogue about some important theological concepts. One thing that pleased me is the fact that Gardner is the only reviewer known to me that calls attention to the written prayers at the end of each chapter. John Mark and I believed they were among the most important things in the book. With these thoughts in mind I share Gardner's review unedited.

Kingdom Come,

Embracing the Spiritual Legacy of David Lipscomb

and James Harding

by John Mark Hicks and Bobby Valentine

A new book, Kingdom Come, Embracing the Spiritual Legacy of David Lipscomb and James Harding, will leave careful Christians with a mixture of admiration and apprehension. The admiration will be for Lipscomb and Harding’s emphasis on personal devotion to Christ and holiness, articulately summarized by authors, John Mark Hicks and Bobby Valentine. The apprehension will come from some of the applications that Hicks and Valentine draw from the writings of the two giants who lived at the turn of the twentieth century.

It is no secret that "mainstream churches of Christ" became increasingly worldly in the last part of the twentieth century, emphasizing parties, recreation, pop "Bible" study (for example, drawing spiritual lessons from the Andy Griffith TV show) and other spiritual fluff. The most eloquent protests against such worldliness have come not from the more conservative elements of "the mainstream" but from progressives such as C. Leonard Allen, John Mark Hicks and Rubel Shelly. In various books and publications, they plead for more personal spirituality, Bible study and prayer even as they press for women in the pulpit, acceptance of instrumental music in worship and other elements of their progressive agenda. The authors of the book, Kingdom Come... are from this progressive group.

The authors take a similar historical approach to the Stone-Campbell restoration movement as that taken by Richard Hughes in his 1996 book Reviving the Ancient Faith. They divide the movement into three spheres of influence: (1) A compromising, materialistic stream represented by liberal Christian churches of today, (2) A dogmatic and somewhat sectarian influence seen in many churches in Texas. Austin McGary and the Firm Foundation magazine represented this approach during the lifetimes of Harding and Lipscomb. It later characterized men such as R.L. Whiteside and Foy E. Wallace. (3) Harding and Lipscomb represented the third stream seen among churches around 1900. The authors call it the "Nashville Bible School Tradition." Richard Hughes used the term "apocaliptic" to describe this third approach and feels that it originated with Barton W. Stone. Ed Harrell prefers the term "cultural separatism." It was characterized by an emphasis on separation from the world, pacifism, a belief in the personal indwelling of the Spirit, concern for the poor, God’s providential intervention apart from the Word and in the case of Harding, R.H. Boll and others, premillennialism.

The authors summarize the thrust of their book on page 19.

Though the Nashville Bible School Tradition was prominent in the early years of the twentieth century, ultimately the Texas Tradition practically absorbed it in the south and became the majority perspective in the 1940’s and 1950’s through the influence of such leaders as Whiteside and Wallace. However, we believe the Nashville Bible School Tradition is particularly compelling, more biblically authentic and needed in the contemporary church... This book endeavors to facilitate the appropriation of communal practices, individual habits and kingdom vision that shaped the life and teachings of Harding and Lipscomb.

Restoration History and Denominational Attitudes about God’s Church

Biblically, the church of Christ is all the saved individuals in the world known only to God (Acts 20:28). It is not synonymous with the "Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement." Churches of Christ are congregations that God stills considers to have a "candlestick" in spite of different levels of growth (Revelation 2,3). They do not belong to a movement that has a Nashville Bible School tradition, Texas tradition, One-Cup tradition, No Bible Class Tradition, or any other tradition. They belong to Christ. Unfortunately, studies in Restoration History often reinforce denominational concepts.

However, just as the Corinthians could not have denied the influence of Paul and Apollos even as they were told to identify spiritually only with Christ, historical reality is that men like Lipscomb, Stone, Campbell, etc have influenced many disciples today. The key to benefiting from a study of "Restoration History" while avoiding denominational concepts is to identify spiritually only with Christ and remind ourselves constantly of the spiritual truths about the makeup of God’s church mentioned above, even as we learn from the successes and avoid the mistakes of those who have sought God before us. That’s where books such as Kingdom Come... can be helpful.

Strengths of the book

Persuasive calls for renewed spirituality, prayer and separation from the world aren’t only needed among mainstream "churches of Christ" but also among more independent groups of disciples that have been also affected by the materialism of twentieth century America. Excellent practical suggestions about making prayer, holiness, study and service more a part of the daily lives of disciples make this book much more valuable than its $14.99 price tag. The written prayers at the end of each chapter are unique and help the reader consider his own pleas to God for more holiness, separation from the world and spiritual fellowship.

More difficult issues

Hicks and Valentine follow their protagonists, Lipscomb and Harding, into the deep waters of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and direct providential intervention. Harding in particular argued energetically that the Holy Spirit dwells in us and intervenes in our lives apart from the influence of the word.

Certainly, it is possible to overstate the case made by Foy Wallace and others of "the Texas tradition" regarding the Spirit’s indwelling and Divine intervention only through the Word. To do so is to overlook the fact that we can never grasp all the ways that God works in our lives and to put Him as it were in a box. While acknowledging that God’s ways are often beyond our understanding, the scriptures do emphasize the fact that the Word is His sufficient means of revelation for us today, and at least His primary tool of intervention in our lives. If those of the "Texas tradition" have helped Christians see that fact, we can thank them for it.

However, just as the "Texas tradition’s" position about the Spirit and divine intervention can be overstated to the point of mechanical dogmatism, so can Harding’s position lead to outright subjectivism. Irrational testimonials about God’s providence and seeking His guidance through subjective feelings or occurrences in our lives ultimately promote pride and confusion. It’s better to trust in the Word as God’s primary tool of intervention, even as we thank Him for His workings that are beyond our comprehension.

Inconsistencies

The authors eloquently use Harding and Lipscomb’s writings to plead for separation from the world. However, they have allowed the feminist movement of the world to pressure them into a distorted interpretation of texts such as 1 Timothy 2:11,12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34,35 so that they can promote women in the pulpit.

Though arguing persuasively in chapter nine that separation from the world implies aloofness from its carnal wars, at the end of the chapter they advocate political activism to promote legislation and political change. It seems that detachment from one, carnal warfare, would imply detachment from the other, political activism. Such trust in politics would be anathema to Lipscomb and Harding.

An inconsistency of Harding’s that is surprisingly shared by the writers is that Christ will reign again in some way on the earth. On page 186, they quote Romans 8 and Anthony Hokema, to advance the idea that the physical world will not be utterly destroyed, but redeemed. They say, "Our hope then, is to reign with God on the earth... The old heaven the old earth will be purified by fire and renewed for inhabitation by God’s saints." (page 187) This, of course, in spite of Peter’s declaration that our "one hope" is "reserved in heaven" (1 Peter 1:4) and that the earth and the elements in it will be burned up (2 Peter 3:10). Perhaps I am missing something, but it seems that there is an inherent inconsistency in linking the concept of other-worldliness with the promotion of an earthly heaven.

Hicks and Valentine disassociate themselves from what they called the "ecclesial hermeneutic (‘command, example and inference’)" of Harding and Lipscomb and their participation in the battles with the Disciples of Christ denomination over instrumental music and the missionary societies. They obviously don’t see that such common-sense Biblical interpretation and the battles with those who were losing confidence in restoration, were integral parts of their other-worldliness. Inevitably, there must be separations between those who cling to primitivist principles and those that reject them. Division, though it must be avoided until there is no other recourse, is sometimes necessary (1 Cor. 11:19).

Though correct in promoting personal holiness, an emphasis on grace and other-worldliness, the progressives’ rejection of a careful approach to Bible authority and their push for ecumenism will probably land them into something like the first of the three streams of Restoration Movement they mention, that of the liberal Disciples of Christ denomination. It will not lead them into the third stream they claim to be reviving, that of Harding and Lipscomb.

Lipscomb and Harding are indeed fascinating case studies. Though flawed in a few of their approaches, their overall emphasis on separation from the world and personal holiness is greatly needed today! Hicks and Valentine’s book also has its weaknesses. However, their passionate, heartfelt and well-articulated thoughts can help strong Christians who are mature enough to separate the wheat from the chaff.

( Kingdom Come, Embracing the Spiritual Legacy of David Lipscomb and James Harding by John Mark Hicks and Bobby Valentine was published in 2006 by Leafwood Publishers in Abilene, Texas and can be ordered from the publisher, www.leafwoodpublishers.com, or from Amazon.com.)

Read More

Coming Together in 1827: The Unknown Union

Coming Together in 1827: The Unknown Union

Most of us have probably at one time or another heard of the great union meeting between the Christians of Barton Stone and the Reformers of Alexander Campbell in Lexington, Ky from Christmas 1831 to New Years 1832. Most do not know the extreme difficulty of that miracle of the Spirit and that will be the story of another post.

However, there was an earlier union that has not received quite the press of 1831-2. But it was no less significant. It was the union of German Baptists who were sometimes known as "Dunkards", some "Brethren" (of a Mennonite background) and branches from Stone and Campbell's movements.

The "Dunkards" were a group committed to Primitivism and had the following distinctive characteristics:

1) they practiced trine immersion (face forward into the water)

2) they practiced the Lord's Supper in the context of a love feast

3) they washed feet as a required ordinance

4) they took the Lord's Supper only once or twice a year (and only at night else it would not be the "supper")

5) a few other quaint ideas (to me anyway)

In 1821 at the Brethren Annual meeting, which assembled in Somerset County, Pennsylvania addressed itself to the issue of trine immersion and "rebaptism." Article 6 of the minutes of that meeting questioned "Whether members might be received into the church who have been but once immersed (without rebaptizing them in the manner we believe it ought to be done according to the gospel.)?" The answer of the meeting is surprising, perhaps, in that it indicated the flexibility on the part of the eastern leadership. After affirming that trine immersion was the true baptism, the Brethren decided that "if such persons would be content with their baptism and yet acknowledge the Brethren's order as right, we would leave it over to them and receive them with the laying on of hands and prayer."

This shows both the "liberality" of the Dunkards and also the distinctive nature of what seperated them from "us" on this point.

Dunkard preachers like Joseph Hostetler and John Wright came into contact with some of Stone's folks in Indiana and Campbell's Christian Baptist about the same time. Hostetler is the author of a letter to Campbell that he reprinted and used as the basis of his "Restoration of the Ancient Order, XI." Campbell goes out of his way to call J.H. his brother, that he regards him -- even with his unique views -- as part of the family of God and that they were in fellowship on the gospel and not on our opinions.

In July 1828 a "unity" meeting was conducted in Edinburgh, Indiana. Two reports of this are recorded in Stone's Christian Messenger. We learn from Elder Joseph Hatchitt,

"The Wright Brothers, whose names you will see in the minutes have been formerly denominated "Depending Baptists," have laid that name aside, and now call themselves the "church of Christ." I judge there are six to eight elders among them and many churches. When we met in conference together, we could find nothing to separate us [AMAZING!!, B.V.] asunder. In fine, we saw as nearly eye to eye as any company of Elders who have assembled in modern times -- and there was such a sweet spirit of love."

By 1827 fifteen of the Dunkard congregations of Indiana had united with Stone and more loosely with Campbell. When the "Disciples" held their first state convention in Indianapolis in 1839 Barton Stone was the featured speaker and all the Dunkard congregations were represented.

Joseph Hostetler and John Wright are heroes of unity. The union of Stone and the Dunkard/Brethren is a remarkable event in our history one that we should "brag" about. It is an episode we should ask God for the courage to emulate. It shows that we can unite even with folks considerably different than ourselves if the core focus is upon Christ and we are committed to doing God's will.

If we, like our forefathers in the faith, believed that we are in fact one in Christ, that unity was a mark of faithfulness perhaps we would have more John Wrights and Joseph Hostetler's today.


In the Spirit of Unity,
Bobby Valentine

Ut omnes unum sint (John 17.21, Vulgate, 'that they may all be one')

Read More

Happy Anniversary

Happy Anniversary: Baby Doll ...

We were hitched on March 7, 1992, but I am telling you about it today because we have a date! That turns into 15 years of marital bliss. It hardly seems like it has been that long. In those years I have dragged her from Florida to Alabama to New Orleans to Mississippi to Milwaukee and to the desert.

Pamella is God's gift to me. She keeps me on track. She encourages me. She is the fantastic mother of my two daughters. She is smart, athletic, sensitive and creative. She has a mysteriousness about her that causes me to scratch my head in wonder.

I have learned over the years that my wife, Pamella, is a complex creature. Just when I think I have her figured out I learn that I really have nothing at all figured out. That is disheartening actually because I am quite a simple creature.

Though always inadequate, our theme song has always been Pretty Woman as sung by Van Halen (yes we knew that Roy Orbison sang it first):

Wow!
Pretty woman, walking down the street,
pretty woman, the kind I'd like to meet,
Pretty woman, I dont believe you it must be true,
No one could look as good as you
Mercy!
Pretty woman won't you pardon me,
pretty woman I couldn't help but see,
Pretty woman, oh you look lovely as you could be,
Are you lonely just like me
Adrrrrr...
Pretty woman stop a while,
pretty woman talk a while,
Pretty woman give your smile to me
Pretty woman yeah yeah yeah,
pretty woman look my way,
Pretty woman say you'll stay with me,
Cause I need you, need you tonight
Uh!
Pretty woman dont walk on by,
pretty woman dont make me cry,
Pretty woman dont walk away, yeah,
ok If thats the way it must be,
ok I guess ill go home,
its late, maybe tomorrow night...
But wait.. what do I see..
Shes walking back to me
Wow! Wow!
Pretty woman.

Happy Anniversary Pamella. May we have sixty more. I love you and I am proud to have you as my life companion.

Shalom,
Bobby Valentine

Read More

Genes in our DNA: Unity & Diversity Can Co-Exist

The following quotations testify to a gene that flows in our veins as heirs of the Stone-Campbell Movement. It is at times a recessive gene for sure but it is there nonetheless. The quotations speak for themselves so I will let them stand. This point of view is what started the "reformation" of the 19th century. It is always healthy to revisit our roots from time to time.

"I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be ONE." – Jesus

Barton Stone



"IMPRIMIS. We will, that this body die, be dissolved, and sink into union with the Body of Christ at large; for there is but one Body, and one Spirit, even as we were called into one hope of our calling ...

Item. We will, that preachers and people, cultivate a spirit of mutual forbearance; pray more and dispute less . . ." (Barton W. Stone, Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery, 1804, in Historical Documents Advocating Christian Union).

"The scriptures will never keep together in union, and fellowship members who have not the spirit of the scriptures, which spirit is love, peace, unity, forbearance, and cheerful obedience. This is the spirit of the great Head of the body. I blush for my fellows, who hold up the Bible as the bond of union yet make their opinions it tests of fellowship; who plead for union of all-Christians; yet refuse fellowship with such as dissent from their notions. Vain men! Their zeal is not according to knowledge, nor is their spirit that of Christ. There is a day not far ahead which will declare it. Such anti-sectarian sectarians are doing more mischief to the cause, and advancement of truth, the unity of Christians, and the salvation of the world, than all the skeptics in the world. In fact, they make skeptics" (Barton W. Stone, "Remarks," Christian Messenger, August 1835, p. 180).

Thomas Campbell




"Let the ministers of Jesus but embrace this exhortation, put their hand to the work, and encourage the people to go forward upon the firm ground of obvious truth, to unite in the bonds of an entire Christian unity; and who will venture to say that it would not soon be accomplished? . . . Nothing ought to be inculcated upon Christians as articles of faith; nor required of them as terms of communion, but what is expressly taught and enjoined upon them by the word of God... Division among Christians is a horrid evil, fraught with many evils. It is antichristian ... It is antiscriptural . . . It is antinatural" (Thomas Campbell, Declaration and Address, 1809, in Historical Documents Advocating Christian Union).

Alexander Campbell





(Alexander Campbell- during a long series of articles "A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things" responded to a Dunkard {a German Baptist who immersed 3x} who queried him on footwashing, frequency of the Supper, and the Holy Kiss [all of which J.H. believed Campbell to be in error on]. Campbell's reply shows the heart of the Stone-Campbell Movement like nothing else -- Bobby Valentine])

"DEAR BROTHER -- For such I recognize you, notwithstanding the varieties of opinion
which you express on some topics, on which we might NEVER agree. But if we should not, as not unity of opinion, but unity of faith, is the only true bond of Christian union, I will esteem and love you as I do every man, of whatever name, who believes sincerely that Jesus is the Messiah, and hope in his salvation. And as to the evidence of this belief and hope, I know of none more decisive than an unfeigned obedience, and willingness to submit to the authority of the Great King" (Alexander Campbell, "A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things, No. XI," Christian Baptist, 1825, p. 223).

Robert Richardson

"Christian Union on the Bible alone, has, from the beginning, been the watchword of our religious movement. To effect a union of the pious of all denominations upon this basis was its original and cherished purpose ... For it has been our happiness to learn, and to show to others, that the Christian faith is not a belief in doctrines, as has been generally supposed, but that it is simply a TRUSTING IN CHRIST -- A PERSONAL reliance upon the Lord Jesus Christ as our Savior. Such was the Christian faith in the beginning . . . It is not to inferences and abstractions that the homage of the affections, the trust of the soul and the beneficent and self-denying life of the true Christian are devoted. It is a PERSON and not a particular set of doctrines, that are the object of his faith, hope and love ... Inferences drawn from facts, are ever to be carefully distinguished from the facts themselves ... It is hence Christ in the faith, Christ in the heart; Christ in the life, that constitute genuine orthodoxy" (Robert Richardson, "Union of Christians," Millennial Harbinger. March 1866, pp. 98-101.)

David Lipscomb

"So long as a man really desires to do right, to serve the Lord, to obey His commands, we cannot withdraw from him. We are willing to accept him as a brother, no matter how ignorant he may be, or how far short of the perfect standard his life may fall from his ignorance...We will maintain the truth, press the truth upon him, compromise not one word or iota of that truth, yet forbear with the ignorance, the weakness of our brother who is anxious, but not yet able to see the truth ...Why should I not, when I fall so far short of perfect knowledge myself? How do I know that the line beyond which ignorance damns, is behind me, not before me? If I have no forbearance with his ignorance, how can I expect God to forbear with mine? ...So long then as a man exhibits a teachable disposition, is willing to hear, to learn and obey the truth of God, I care not how far he may be, how ignorant he is, I am willing to recognize him as a brother." (David Lipscomb, Gospel Advocate, April 22, 1875).

"A sectarian is one who defends everything his party holds or that will help his party, and opposes all that his party opposes. This partisan takes it for granted that everything his party holds is right, and everything the other party holds to be wrong and is to be opposed. Hence the party line defines his faith and teaching. He sees no good in the other party. He sees no wrong in his own party . . . A truth lover and seeker always looks into whatever party he comes in contact with, and will first look to see what truth the party holds ... The love of truth is a spirit of kindness and love toward all, even to the holder of error. He loves the holder of truth because he receives truth and strength from him" (David Lipscomb, "A Sectarian and a Truth Seeker," Gospel Advocate. June 27, 1907, p. 409.)

Ours is a heritage of unity within diversity.

Shalom,
Stoned-Campbell Disciple

Read More

Yes I am a Nerd

Yes! I am a Nerd!

I think this is hilarious. Yes, I like the Far Side too.

I had a conversation today with a elder. He confessed to me today that I am a nerd. That made me think of Weird Al's great song.

Read More