These Things I Believe
By Vernon W. Hurst
[Page 8] |
1. I believe that as a group we have lost our great opportunity in the religious world of today. The Restoration Movement, the swell of public acceptance upon which we rode to prominence, has lost its impetus. It may be more accurate to say "upon which our fathers rode to prominence." This generation has long since ceased the work of restoration and cast anchor in the status quo. They have forgotten that an anchor, so long as it holds, prevents movement in any direction. It may prevent our drifting upon the rocks of previously recognized error but it will just as surely prevent our sailing on the high seas of undiscovered truth.
When I say I believe we have lost our greatest opportunity, I mean that united we may have gone a long way toward uniting the scattered flock of God and leading the world to the "Good Shepherd." Divided, there exists no hope of our doing so. The people of God, scattered over the hills of sectarianism, will never hear and recognize in the call of a divided religious movement the voice of the Shepherd they know and trust. In the words of a prominent religious leader of the previous generation, "We lost our great opportunity when we permitted ourselves to become divided over instrumental music." Volumes have been written to fix the blame for that division. One side, or both sides, may hear the blame. We may know or we may never know, but knowing or failing to know will not erase the great and irreparable harm. Only the Judgment can properly evaluate the loss to the teeming millions of the world.
Jesus said the world would never accept the testimony of his divinity from a divided body of believers. It matters not who is at fault. The result is the same when those who accept the testimony of the apostles concerning Christ permit Satan to divide them. We are not one
[Page 9] |
I do not deny that within the ghostly ruins of the "Restoration Movement" men and women still pathetically seek for a remnant of that glory which has departed. But they seek without hope. Those who built the city have gone. The voices of those who stood on the walls inviting the wayfaring stranger to enter and find peace have been stilled. Their places have been taken by those who have neither their courage or vision. The gates which once swung open to offer haven to every honest heart which sought the Lord have now been closed to all whose humility forbids their making the arrogant boast of possessing God exclusively. Walls which once rang with the sound of voices praising Him, now echo back the hollow sound of those praising themselves. This I believe!
2. I believe that our present position in the religious world speaks eloquently of the undeniable fact that we have misinterpreted the scriptures. We exist not as an example of those who "speak as the oracles of God" but of those who speak their own ideas and theories to their disgrace and eventual destruction. Many will not like my saying it but they must content themselves with seeking to destroy me without hope of ridding themselves of the truth of what I state.
More than a score of factions, each furthering the party spirit by seeking to defend its own interpretation of God's Word and rejecting as heresy everything else, cannot possibly be an identifying mark of a group of people who have mastered the art of true and accurate interpretation. People who have set records of strife and division cannot at the same time provide an example of the oneness for which Jesus prayed. Furthermore, the honest hearts who love Jesus cannot look to such a group for the solution of the religious problems which plague our day. Proper interpretation of Bible principles can never produce division and strife between those who love God with equal fervor. We have interpreted the Bible in such a way as to produce division, and we now seek to interpret it in such a way as to justify it. This I believe.
In our zeal to make the religious world over in our own image instead of in the image of Christ we have brought out of our own interpretation of the new covenant scriptures an impossible standard of unity. Our present plea serves not to bring closer together those who love God but actually serves to make it impossible for them to be together. Without positive proof this is merely an assertion. If proven it will serve as a serious indictment.
"If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house or give him greeting" (2 John 10).
This has been set forth as the only basis of togetherness which we recognize. Upon this basis we have contended that anyone who comes to us and does not bring an interpretation of the new testament with which we can agree is to be refused and not regarded as a "brother in good standing." From this it has been inferred that those who cannot agree upon the interpretation of the new testament cannot be one. Since no two of us can agree completely upon the meaning of the new testament as a whole, and since such agreement is possible in degree only, our interpretation of this passage has made the oneness for which Jesus prayed impossible.
Such an interpretation of this verse makes it imperative that the one we immerse today must be rejected tomorrow. Why? Because any person who sincerely believes that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and is willing to repent of his sins and submit to immersion in water is a subject of baptism. But coming from the confusion of this present religious world it would be virtually impossible for him to have anything approximating a complete understanding of the new testament. Thus he could not "bring this doctrine." Our interpretation of 2 John
[Page 10] |
Not only does our interpretation force us to immerse a man and immediately reject him; it makes highly improbable if not completely impossible, a state of togetherness between ourselves. In accepting such a position we forget that each of us is in the process of "growing in knowledge." Each person coming to us is limited in how much of "this doctrine" he can bring by how much of it he knows. Since all are engaged in "growing in knowledge" none of us can "bring this doctrine" in its entirety. None of us know it all so none of us can bring it all.
Despite the fact this is unanswerable, some stubbornly bow their necks and insist that "this doctrine" includes all that is taught in the new testament scriptures. Such a position, aside from its prejudicial aspects, violates every rule of language interpretation. If we will study the context with objective care we will see the "doctrine" John had in mind was something which could be accepted and "brought" by every child of God. Thus it was more limited than the new testament scriptures as a whole. John makes very clear the exact subject to which he refers. In verse seven he says, "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, men who will not acknowledge the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh." That is the absolute irreducible minimum. One must believe this in order to be accepted. Moreover every subject of the gospel can believe it, and can "bring" it, completely.
On this basis I feel that only prejudice could possibly cause anyone to conclude that "this doctrine" refers to anything other than that indicated by the immediate context--the doctrine that Jesus has come in the flesh. Compare John's statement here with 1 John 4:2.
3. I believe that God recognizes as His own, honest people who are trapped in the confusion of Babylon. It is here we have overlooked a vital scriptural principle and are guilty of treating as aliens those whom God regards as His own. We have held them at arm's length until they solved, or made a pretence of having solved, the intricacies of the blinding confusion which has fallen like a pall over the modern religious world. Many have become discouraged by this treatment and have given up the fight. They fell in the gloom which pervades the forest of prejudice before they ever reached the full sunlight of truth. I fear that we bear much of the responsibility.
This belief is not the product of my own inclination. I base it upon a scriptural principle so lucid it gives its message to all, the most meager of learning as well as the most scholarly. Let us record it here. "Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues" (Rev. 18:4).
Look at the passage carefully. It is an invitation to God's people who are in Babylon to come out. While in Babylon they are invited to come out because they are His people. The idea of God having a people in Babylon will be repugnant to many. They argue that they must come out before they become His people. This is denied by the fact that God claimed them even as He extended the invitation, before they had a chance to come out. They must be regarded as belonging to God during whatever period of time is required to extricate themselves and that would be determined by circumstances. As long as Babylon exists there is a possibility of God having people there.
If He loves them enough to claim them I will count them as very precious unto myself regardless of the abuse and recrimination heaped upon me by the arrogant and dogmatic. As long as I believe God has a people there I will echo His invitation for them to come out. I will do it gently and with all the love of which I am capable. Should we discour-
[Page 11] |
4. I believe that individual children of God may meet with Christ's approval in a church which, as a whole, is unfaithful. No one knows better than I how shocking such a position may appear to one who has been reared in the belief that God's people are all included in one completely restored church, and the salvation of every child of God is determined by his connection to, and exclusive association with, that church. But such a theory did not originate in the word of God. It is the result of the desire of some men to be superior to other men. This has been one of the shortcomings of man through the ages. One of its most prominent manifestations has been his attempt to claim a position of special favor with God. Out of such an attitude grew the belief that only we enjoy God's approval and all hope is denied one whose sincerity and devotion matches our own but who has, through no fault of his own, had no opportunity to learn all the truth we think we know!
Again, I do not base my belief on personal preference but on a scripture so clear it cannot be denied by one who is capable and willing to consider it objectively. In Revelation 3:1-6 we read of the church at Sardis. It was not completely faithful in anything. "For I have not found any work of yours complete in the eyes of my God" (New English Bible).
It would be hard to imagine a church worse off than this--not one of its works complete in the eyes of God. It was not completely faithful in anything. But this was not true of all of its members. Some of them met the approval of God. If I can prove this I will have taken away the right of one man to judge the faithfulness of another purely on the ground that he happens to find him as a member of a church which is unfaithful to God's word. Jesus said of some at Sardis: "Yet you still have a few names at Sardis, people who have not soiled their garments, and they shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy."
How dare some in view of the implications of this scripture, judge a brother unworthy of even approaching God in public prayer, solely on the grounds that he happens to find himself in an unfaithful church? If Jesus recognized some people as worthy to walk with him in white in spite of the fact they were in a church which was unfaithful in everything, perhaps it would be well for us to take a closer look at some of the members of those churches which we believe to be wrong in some things. These things I believe!