ANSWER TO OBJECTIONS (No. 1)

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 163]

     In an editorial in Firm Foundation, June 11, 1963 Brother Lemmons writes about "Objections Brother Ketcherside Does Not Answer." He says I am "in direct contradiction to the scriptures," that my writings contain "a body of error," and that they contain hidden poison. Our brother proceeds to list twelve objections which he affirms I do not answer. Here are my answers to them.

     1. "Brother K teaches that the grace of God is wider than the authority of Christ, and that many may be saved by the grace of God who have never submitted to the authority of Christ." I teach that the grace of God is greater than the church and existed before it. Grace is not a product of the church but the church is a product of grace. All who are saved must be saved by God's grace. When the Father made Jesus the head over all things to the church, he specifically exempted himself. I am under the authority of Jesus and I have no right to offer salvation upon any other basis than that authorized by Jesus. The Father is not under that authority. If he chooses to save those who have never heard the good news, or those who have heard it and misunderstand some of its implications in their lives, he will not be acting in violation of his own will or of the authority of his Son.

     I am bound by the decrees of Christ but I have no right to try and bind the source of all authority by the restrictions he bound upon me. As J. W. McGarvey wrote: "It is not necessary, in order to contend for scripture teaching on baptism, to take the ground that God has tied his hands and put it out of his power to grant mercy to any who have been misled in regard to that ordinance. He has bound us, but he has not bound himself, except that he is bound to do what he has promised. He has not bound himself to do no more than he has promised. Don't injure the cause of truth by taking positions which rob God of the power to be merciful."

     I do not think any will be saved who refuse to submit to, or rebel against, the authority of Christ. It is my opinion that some may be saved who have done all they know to do but have never learned about Jesus or have been honestly mistaken about some of his requirements. What is poisonous about this position which I share in common with all the pioneers of the restoration movement?

     2. "Brother K makes a distinction between 'the gospel' and 'doctrine' which is foreign to the Bible." There are two classes of persons as relates to any kingdom--aliens and citizens. As respects the kingdom of heaven there are two distinct messages adapted to the state of each. Both messages are the word of God. One is "an evangel" or "good news" designed to enroll students (make disciples); the other a course of instruction, or doctrine, for the purpose of instructing and edifying those who enroll. The gospel is to be preached to the whole world, or every creature (Mark 16:15). The apostolic doctrine was addressed to saints and congregations of immersed believers. The "euangelion" (gospel) was to lead men to enlist. You cannot evangelize saved persons. Alexander Campbell wrote: "We preach the gospel to unbelievers, to aliens, but never to Christians or those who have received it" (Millennial Harbinger, April, 1862).

[Page 164]

     The gospel is the seed by which we are begotten (1 Cor. 4:15); the apostolic doctrine is the food we eat (1 Cor. 3:2). The gospel was proclaimed fully by Peter on Pentecost and those who gladly received his word fully obeyed the gospel. There was never anything added to the good news, but those who obeyed the gospel "continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine," and this was revealed as conditions warranted and they were able to digest it. The gospel is a message of victory in Jesus to an alien world. Suppose the audience on Pentecost had not asked Peter what to do and no opportunity had been thus provided to inform them they should be baptized. Would this have meant that he had not preached the gospel to them? Baptism is the enabling act by which we are permitted to share in the blessings of the message. We are brought into the fellowship of God and Christ through the gospel and we then grow up in Christ by learning the doctrine.

     Dr. Carroll Kendrick wrote in Gospel Advocate (1890, page 373), "There is absolutely neither precept nor precedent for preaching to the church. Preaching the gospel is for the world." Alexander Campbell wrote, "Preaching the gospel and teaching the converts are as distinct and distinguishable employments as enlisting an army and training it, or as creating a school and teaching it. Unhappily for the church and the world, this distinction, if at all conceded as legitimate, is obliterated or annulled in almost all Protestant Christendom." What is poisonous about this position which I share in common with the restoration pioneers?

     3. "He teaches that after one has been made a child of God he may make all sorts of errors concerning doctrine, but none of these, regardless of how grievous, except for denying the Deity of Jesus Christ, can be a basis for withdrawal of fellowship." I simply say, as did Brother J. N. Armstrong, late president of Harding College, "I will make nothing a test of fellowship which God has not made a condition of salvation." To be in error is not necessarily a sin unless it is voluntary, else all of us will be damned, for none of us know it all. Only those doctrines which separate from God should separate us from each other. One comes into the fellowship of God and Christ through faith in the Sonship and acknowledgment of the Lordship of Jesus over his life. Only by renouncing that lordship through denial of Jesus in word or conduct is that fellowship broken. God never disinherits any of his children because they are honestly mistaken and we should not divide them.

     Our differences in the fellowship of the saints are grounds for discussion and not division. To be specific, we sin against God and our brethren when we form parties on the basis of our belief in, or opposition to, colleges, orphan homes, Herald of Truth, use of tobacco, missionary societies, interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy, leavened bread, the manner of breaking the bread, fermented wine, individual cups, Bible classes, uninspired literature, the one-man minister system, instrumental music, foot washing, the hour when we ought to meet, a head covering for women, and such like things. Certainly some are in error on all of these things but the greatest error of all, and a sin because it is voluntary, is forming sects about the "pro" and "con" of such things. We are one because we agree in Christ, not because all who are in Christ agree. It is a sin to be factious and one who builds a party around either aspect of these things is a factious man and will have to be rejected after due warning, not because of his position but because of his disposition.

     My position on this matter is identical

[Page 165]

with that expressed in Propositions 6 and 7 of the "Declaration and Address" as read by Thomas Campbell. What is so poisonous about this position which I hold in common with the pioneers of the restoration movement?