The One Faith

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 145]

     It is very difficult for most of us to grasp the real essence of Christianity. We are conditioned by environment and experience to resist its simplicity, and to try and mould and make it into a pattern to fit our preconceived notions. We live in a world of automation and systematization. We are dominated by monster machines of our own creation which have, under the guise of making life easier, robbed us of our freedom and individuality. We have become statistics instead of persons, we have numbers instead of names, we are slaves to punch cards which rule our earnings and regulate our disbursements.

     It is not to be wondered at, that in such a world, we should be seduced into an attempt to reduce our most intimate relationships to standardized procedures, properly classified and codified. Nor should we be amazed that men forget that the relationships always suffer a tortuous and agonizing death, throttled by monotony and tormented by a sense of duty and a fear of forgetfulness. A man who draws up a code of marital responsibility in which he agrees to kiss his wife three times per week, on Monday, Wednesday and Friday afternoons, at 7:00 o'clock p. m., Central Standard Time, will soon have no wife to kiss. There are areas in human existence which must be left free for spontaneous expression. There are crannies of the heart which are too sacred for the prying eyes of other administrators to explore in an attempt to legislate what shall occupy them. An effort by another to thrust himself into them will serve only to shatter the fragile vessel.

     Our gracious Father in heaven fully understands our needs and yearnings. He knows the manifold complexities of human personality because He made us. In all ages He has adapted His revelation to the needs and conditions of men in their own day. He sent the world of mankind to school for hundreds of years, providing able teachers in the persons of the prophets, who labored in the primary and elementary eras of the world to bring that world to maturity. In this last age He has spoken unto us through His Son.

     While preparing the world for the coming of this dispensation, God acted through law. At the very outset He provided a constitution for Israel, specific in detail and meticulous in its provisions. It is evident that any commonwealth in which justification is to be attempted by law must have that law fully and completely spelled out at the very inception. The commandments cannot be given piecemeal as the people violate the spirit of the arrangement, else men will die because of ignorance of that which has not yet been given.

     The advent of Jesus marked a great change. "Christ is the end of the law" (Rom. 10:4). "The law was our custodian until Christ came.... we are no longer under a custodian" (Gal. 3:24, 25). Law was supplanted by faith, but

[Page 146]

faith is neither a law nor a custodian. If it is Christ died in vain. "For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law" (Rom. 3:28). "But now that faith has come we are no longer under a custodian" (Gal. 3:25).

     Christianity has always faced the same problem which has plagued society. Maturity cannot be measured by the calendar. A great many who should be mature by reason of age (or the age) reveal that they still have infantile or adolescent traits. At Corinth Paul could not address the brethren "as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ." But he wrote, "Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom" (1 Cor. 2:6). The writer to the Hebrews faced the problem. "For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again the first principles of God's word. You need milk, not solid food; for every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil" (Heb. 5:12-14).

     One of the basic needs of the human being is a sense or feeling of security, and from infancy until death, he acts or reacts in such a manner as to provide for it. Some of the reactions may be unconscious, or appear to be unrelated to the need but are governed by it nonetheless. The adolescent, who is conditioned to expect security in the home and as a member of the family, because of the father-child relationship, finds security in specific laws and strict enforcement. He inwardly craves restraint and secretly regards it as a token of affection. Arbitrary laws are essential to his wellbeing.

     On the same basis, God's children, having grown up in an age when they are to be treated as men, but suffering from immaturity, seek for security in a legalistic code. Unable to truly exercise the freedom to love and exist on the plane of the Spirit which is above law, they must take the provisions of grace and warp and twist them into a written code, and then exercise police powers over their brethren who are more humble than themselves, to enforce their code in ruthless disregard for the conscience of the others. This is equated with being loyal to God and faithful to the Bible when actually it is detrimental to the whole Christian revelation and utterly disruptive of the fellowship which Jesus came to create.

     This leads us to the examination of what we believe to be a palpable error in the thinking of many brethren in our day. It is manifested in their treatment of the term, "the faith," and is especially exhibited in their conclusions concerning Ephesians 4:5, where the apostle informs us there is "One Lord, one faith, one baptism." The "one faith" is frequently explained as being the entire collection of new covenant scriptures, and what is worse, those scriptures as an intended written code, or legalistic system.

     The advocates of orthodoxy seem not to realize that the very scriptures they regard as a written code, themselves declare we have no such arrangement. One of the chief writers of the letters embraced in these scriptures, a man who wrote more of them than any other, declared that God "qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant, not in a written code but in the Spirit, for the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor. 3:6). Again he writes, "But we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code, but in the new life of the Spirit" (Romans

[Page 147]

7:6). Jesus did not nail one law to the cross and hand another one down!

     It is a common thing to hear the one faith described as "the system of faith including the whole New Testament." Nowhere in the scriptures is our relationship to Jesus defined in such language. No one who speaks as the Bible speaks can justifiably employ this kind of terminology. Our relationship to Jesus is a personal relationship. We are joined to him in an intimate embrace in spirit as a man is joined to his wife in the flesh. "But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him" (1 Cor. 6:17). You cannot reduce a person to a system. In reality there is no such thing as a systematic theology or systematic Christian relationship. These are creations of men. They are responsible for most of the spiritual ills in the world.

     We have no inclination to verbally assault our brethren who are guilty of trying to cling to the Judaistic philosophy of legalistic justification, and live B.C. lives in an A.D. world. Instead we feel a sense of compassion as we always do for those who still exhibit juvenile tendencies when they are grown men. We realize that all of these carried-over adolescent traits result from fears and frustrations which are unresolved in their hearts. Rather we seek to deliver them from their ingrown inhibitions and partisan impediments so they may grow up in Christ Jesus and act like men.

     We have an abiding confidence in the power of truth to dispel error as the dawn drives away the darkness. We do not lose heart when months of repetition are required before our brothers gain a faint glimmer of what is being said. We are content to labor and to wait, to plant and allow God to provide the increase. It is in that spirit we again examine the expression "the one faith," to determine its nature and content. We shall seek to provide certain guidelines for our study as we proceed.

     2. In the early days of the Way, "the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith" (Acts 6:27). The faith to which the priests became obedient was the faith to which the penitents on Pentecost became obedient. There was but one faith. Thus men embraced the faith twenty years before the first letter was written by an apostle. It is evident that the collection of letters constituting the new covenant scriptures were not a part of the faith.

     3. When Paul landed at Cyprus on his first preaching tour, about 48 A.D., he was summoned by Sergius Paulus, the proconsul, who was anxious to hear the word of God. "But Elymas the magician withstood them, seeking to turn away the proconsul from the faith" (Acts 13:8). This was four years before Paul wrote his first epistle and there is no indication that he ever addressed one to Cyprus. Thus it was possible for men to be obedient to the faith, and to be turned away from the faith, years before any part of the new covenant scriptures was written.

     4. On that same tour which reached as far as Derbe, Paul returned through Lystra, Iconium and Antioch, "strengthening the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith" (Acts 14:22). Thus men were in the faith and able to continue in it before even one apostolic letter was penned. But the faith in which they were to continue was that which Paul had brought them. Fortunately we can learn what it was. At Antioch he referred to David and said, "Of this man's posterity God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus, as he promised" (Acts 13:23). Again, "And we bring you

[Page 148]

the good news that what God has promised to the fathers, this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus" (verses 32, 33). Again, "Let it be known to you therefore, brethren, that through this man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, and by him every one that believes is freed from everything from which you could not be freed by the law of Moses" (verses 38, 39).

     This was the faith which was proclaimed, the faith which they embraced, the faith in which they were to continue. This is the one faith. Paul defines it as "my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret for long ages." He says that this is "made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about obedience to the faith" (Romans 16:25,26).

     5. Not one of the apostolic epistles was written to introduce men to the faith, or to induct them into it. Every epistle, without exception, was addressed to those in the faith and because they were in it. For instance, in 1 Corinthians (16:13), the sanctified in Christ Jesus are urged to "stand fast in the faith." In 2 Corinthians (13:5) they are given the instruction, "Examine yourselves whether ye be in the faith."

     6. If the apostolic epistles constituted the one faith, no congregation of saints on earth, during the lifetime of the apostles, could have the faith in its perfection or completeness. These letters were written to different congregations and individuals and were not compiled or collected until long after the apostles were dead.

     7. If the epistles constituted the faith only one of the apostles could possibly have had the faith in its fulness. All of them, including Paul had been slain thirty years or more before John wrote the last of the sacred canon. Some of the apostles may never have seen or read a single letter included in the new covenant scriptures, yet all of them proclaimed the faith. Not one of them, except John, knew anything about his three letters or those addressed to the seven churches of Asia.

     8. The first epistle of which we have record is 1 Thessalonians, probably written about 52 A.D., from Corinth. Yet, the year before that, "the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily" (Acts 16:5). Before the epistle was sent the Thessalonians were in the faith, for they had "turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven." The apostle said he thanked God continually for the fact "that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers" (1 Thess. 2:13, 14).

     The one faith is not a compendium of moral principles, a code of ethics, or a compilation of laws. It is not a collection of letters, even though divinely authorized and produced by agency of the Spirit. It is the firm conviction that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God and that he "was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification" (Romans 4:25). The very next statement is, "Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Upon no other basis of justification can such peace be secured.

     We must honor with our attention the passages cited by the honest brothers under the mistaken view that these support their legalistic claims. In doing so

[Page 149]

we are not attacking men but simply investigating their use, or misuse, of the sacred scriptures. It is amazing how men, motivated by partisan considerations, can unwittingly bend the word of God to justify the sin of division and scandal of schism.

     The second epistle of Peter was written to the same persons as the first (2 Peter 3:1) and these were God's chosen ones who were scattered throughout Asia Minor (1 Peter 1:1). They believed in God who raised Jesus from the dead and gave him glory, so that their faith and hope might be in God (1 Peter 1:2l). They had purified their souls in obeying the truth and had been born again of the gospel which had been preached unto them (1:22-25). But Peter declares that in time past they were not a people, but were now the people of God (1 Peter 2:10). Peter was a Jew as were all of the other apostles. The gospel was first preached to the Jews, and later the Gentiles were admitted to the faith.

     It was natural for Peter as "a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ" to address his letter "to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God." James Macknight in his Apostolical Epistles paraphrases thus, "Symeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to all, both Jews and Gentiles, who have obtained like precious faith in the gospel with us believing Jews..." The word for "like precious" is isotimos, which is a term of quality or nature. It is from isos, equal; and time, value, honor. The faith obtained by the Gentiles through the righteousness of God was in no sense inferior to that obtained by the Jews, although the latter had primacy in proclamation. It was a faith equal in value or honor. The term has not one thing to do with those in the faith agreeing upon every detail of understanding and interpretation, desirous as that might be. It is not even related to our being alike. The statement is that all who enjoy the righteousness of God have obtained the same precious faith. There is one faith for both Jew and Gentile.

     It is a startling commentary on the destructive violence of the party spirit when one realizes that otherwise good and gentle men are betrayed into equating the faith which all of us share in Christ Jesus with narrow partisan tests of communion. To Peter it was a source of rejoicing that others were included in the like precious faith; to orthodox factionalists it is a matter of loyalty to Christ to use the same passage to exclude believers from their "fellowship." Betrayed by the use of the word "like" in the King James Version the cult of the rubber stamp gleefully raises the banner of conformity over rival institutions, demanding that all who enter bow to the party mandates. One need not be a scholar of reputation to question the partisan usage of the verse. Even a reading of other versions would be enough to make the party application suspect.

     "To those who through the justice of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ share our faith and enjoy equal privilege with ourselves" (New English Bible).

     "To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours" (Revised Standard Version).

     "To those who have been given, through the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ, a faith as precious as our own" (The New Testament in Plain English).

[Page 150]

     "To those who by the beneficence of our God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ have obtained a faith equal in privilege to ours" (The Authentic Version).

     It is argued by factional leaders that "the faith" here spoken of is the entire body of new covenant scriptures. In addition, each party includes in "the faith" the particular and peculiar traditional interpretation and deductions which separate and segregate it from all other believers, sects and parties. Thus when one debates the validity of cups or classes, he is contending for "the faith." When another engages in heated discussion over support of orphan homes or Herald of Truth, he is contending for "the faith." When another argues about the use of instrumental music, either pro or con, he is contending for "the faith." When another goes on a radio station and delivers an attack on the pre-millennial interpretation he is contending for "the faith." The content of the faith which was "once for all delivered to the saints" differs with each contentious party of the saints. No two have the same faith. Instead of "one faith" there are as many faiths as there are factions.

     To differ with the party on the one item which is its distinctive and exclusive test of union and communion is to deny the faith and thus to bring upon one the treatment accorded to "a heathen and a publican." If a congregation divides over the use of individual cups or glasses, one who contends for them in the opposing party denies the faith. Regardless of how much one loves Jesus and believes in him, or how pure his life and how fervent his spirit might be, he has denied "the faith" when he cannot in good conscience truckle to the edicts and pronouncements or kowtow in abject submission to those "who seem to be somewhat."

     Jude was not even speaking of the apostolic letters, much less of the fanciful, farfetched and fitful interpretations placed upon them. The faith once for all delivered had been received before he wrote his letter so it is evident the epistle of Jude was not part of it. We can determine from the immediate context the nature of the faith and the reason for the exhortation to contend for it. The word "contend" is a term of combat. It is epagonizomai in the Greek. W. E. Vine says it "signifies to contend about a thing, as a combatant." We can ascertain the nature of the faith for which contention must be made by the character of the opposition.

     The opposers were ungodly men. They had secretly infiltrated the camp of the saints. They perverted the grace of God into licentiousness. They denied our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. Against such characters, long ago designated for condemnation, "the sanctified, preserved and called ones" (verse 1) were to battle intensely for preservation of "the faith which was once for all delivered." It is obvious that the faith was related to the proper concept of grace and its function, and the acknowledgment of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. These were the things being perverted and denied which made the earnest contention so essential.

     One can hardly think of anything more detrimental to God's purpose or to Christ's prayer for unity than to apply such scriptures to the differences arising between brethren. Are our brothers who differ with us about individual cups ungodly persons? Are those who do not share our ideas about classes designated for condemnation? Do those who hold a divergent view about instrumental music pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness? Do the brethren whose views about orphan homes disagree with our own deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ? The truth is that regardless of the right or wrong of any of these things they are not a part of the faith once for all delivered to the saints. To

[Page 151]

confuse them with the faith is to confound sinners and mobilize the saints for savage civil strife. It is also to reveal the meagerness of our own scholarship and the dearth of our love.

     The faith delivered once for all is that which produces our common salvation. It is that which initiates us all into the majestic covenantal relationship with the Father and Son. It is that which inaugurates fellowship with Deity and adopts us into the heavenly family. It is this faith based upon grace which severs us from the old life of sin and gives us access to eternal life "the eternal life which was with the Father and was made manifest unto us."

     Faith is the foundation of the Christian life and love is its embodiment. In Christ Jesus "faith which works by love" is what counts. Love is the fulfilling of the law. All the commandments are summed up in it (Romans 13:10). Love must be in deed and in truth, not in mere word or speech. "But if any one has this world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?" (1 John 3:17).

     This will explain a passage which is urged against our thesis in this article. In 1 Timothy 5 the apostle gives instruction relating to the case of widows. The community of saints is ordered to sustain real widows, that is, those who are left all alone, and bereft of all immediate relatives. Those widows having children or grandchildren are to be supported by their offspring. The record says, "If any one does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his own family, he has disowned the faith and is worse than an unbeliever" (verse 8).

     Many unbelievers, motivated only by natural affection, would not allow a widowed mother to suffer. A Christian has the additional motive of belonging to Christ Jesus, whose ministry was summed up in the words, "He went about doing good." To refuse to love others is to deny the working principle of the faith which is intended to bind us to Jesus. It is to make our profession empty, shallow and senseless. Rowland Hill was wont to remark that when a man becomes a Christian even his dog knows the difference.

     To confuse the faith which all must have to be in Christ with knowledge of the word which all must acquire as they grow in Christ is a tragic error. To make fellowship contingent upon uniformity in degree of knowledge is a fatal fallacy. If fellowship is based upon the faith, and the faith consists of every epistle in the new covenant scriptures, then one must fully know every passage or he cannot be in the faith. Yet Paul declares, "If any one imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know" (1 Cor. 8:2). This proves we are all deficient in knowledge, and the one who imagines that he is not is worse off than the others.

[Page 152]

     Those who plead for uniformity in knowledge of the word of God as a basis for fellowship must either demand perfect knowledge or else they must designate the areas in which one must know to be in the fellowship, as distinguished from those areas in which he may be ignorant and still be justified of God. How much in God's word can one be mistaken about and still be justified? What percentage must he be right about before God no longer recognizes him as in the family? How much must one grow in intellectual attainment in order to continue as a brother? How sick must one become from spiritual vitamin deficiency before the Father disowns him as a child?

     To postulate that one must have perfect knowledge of every detail of revelation is to require inerrancy and infallibility and to demand that he be God. This is what I call "the Haman's gallows argument." If it is affirmed that fellowship with ourselves is contingent upon knowing all we know and understanding everything as we do, then our fellowship with God is dependent upon our knowing all that God knows and understanding everything as He does. Since no one is rash enough to claim this for himself, he admits he is not in fellowship with God, and damns himself by the argument he concocted to deny others. "By what judgment you judge you will be judged."

     On the other hand, if he concedes that others do not need to agree upon every matter of doctrinal interpretation in order to be in the fellowship, he must exercise his human judgment as to what portion is essential. When he binds this upon others as a term of communion he exercises the prerogative of God. Was not the revelation of God given to all of the saints? Do others not have the same freedom as ourselves to make those emphases which are commended to their own intellects and consciences as important and relevant to the Christian walk? If, in the physical life, we must recognize the difference in digestive ability and capacity, shall we not do the same in the spiritual realm? Is not growth in the family of God progressive and individual?

     Life is more important than food. "Is not the life more than meat?" (Matt. 6:25). The whole purpose of food is to sustain life. Bread which comes from the earth is the staff of physical life. The bread which came down from heaven is the staff of spiritual life. Any use of food to impair life, or any application of a theory of nutrition to destroy life, is criminal. If our emphasis upon physical food is such as to destroy human life and its relationships we have a warped view of the place of both life and bread. In the same manner we must regard the sacredness of the life in Christ Jesus as superior to the given means of growth. Our sense of values must never become so distorted that we sacrifice life for doctrinal correctness, especially when that correctness is determined by our own deductions and interpretations. Bread has not been given for the purpose of pounding the other children over the head. No one but the Great Physician can determine the proper amount of spiritual food intake and rate of growth for each of God's children. Those who berate others may themselves be deficient. Our problem is that we have too many "doctors" practicing without a license, each heading his own little clinic and dispensary.

     The true basis of our continuance in corporate unity can never be predicated upon an arbitrarily determined degree of knowledge at a given time. If it is, we shall need to exclude from our fellowship in the afternoon those whom we immersed in the morning. If it be argued that when men come into Christ, we must give them time to grow, the same principle will force us to continue to be patient, forbearing and tolerant with them as long as they are growing in Him. Thus the basis of the corporate functioning in Christ is the faith which creates the state, and a proper attitude toward truth of those within that state. One may love truth and know little of it, or he may know a great deal and have but little respect for it. In the final analysis

[Page 153]

attitude is the determinant factor between true discipleship and sectarianism. One is not a sectarian because of where he happens to be at a given time, but because of his attitude toward truth regardless of where he is. This must never be forgotten, for if we forget it we will probably be sectarian.

     1. Both the gospel (Good News) which brings us into affinity with eternal life and the apostolic doctrine which sustains us, are the word of God. Paul commended the Thessalonians because they accepted the gospel "not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers" (1 Thess. 2:13). To the Corinthians he wrote, "If any one thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. If any one does not recognize this, he is not recognized" (1 Cor. 14:37, 38). We accept without question or quibble that the Good News of salvation in Christ Jesus and the means of Christian growth are both from the Father of lights.

     2. The apostolic letters do not constitute the new covenant, or new testament, and are nowhere said to do so in the sacred writings. The new covenant is not a written code (2 Cor. 3:6). It is not even written with ink (2 Cor. 3:3). The apostolic letters were written with pen and ink (3 John 13). The new covenant is an individual and personal Agreement by which one commits himself to, and is adopted by God into his family, as a child. This covenant is written on human hearts by the Spirit of the living God (2 Cor. 3:3; Heb. 8:10). This divine-human Compact cannot be effected by any other person on earth for another. Neither can it be affected by any other person. Read those two sentences again!

     3. Those who heard the Good News on Pentecost, and accepted its implications for their lives entered into the new covenant relationship as fully as any persons ever did since that time. At the moment, they knew nothing of the apostolic doctrine which was gradually revealed over a period of many years as need arose and abuses were created by those in the covenantal relationship. The gospel which produced the covenantal relationship had to be announced prior to that relationship which it was to create and which grew out of it; while the apostolic doctrine was revealed as a need was felt for information as to conduct and behavior in Christ. The entrance into the life relationship was not contingent upon knowledge of subsequent doctrine. The gospel was to make children of God; the apostolic doctrine was to make the children of God better.

     4. The Good News was never proclaimed to any person with any other intention or objective than to bring him into covenant relationship with God through Jesus Christ. No apostolic letter was ever written to any person or group to bring such person or group into the covenant relationship. All letters were written to those in covenant relationship and because they were in it. The very first letter Paul wrote was addressed to those who were in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. The second letter was addressed to the same identical ones.

     5. The apostolic epistles are not a pattern or blueprint. There is a difference between a love letter and a blueprint. One may contain advice but the other sets forth specifications. A blueprint must always be available in full and in the hands of the builders before construction

[Page 154]

starts. There were many in Christ Jesus who actually suffered death for him before the first epistle was written. Congregations of saints had been planted and grew in spiritual stature before letters were ever written to them. Our pattern is a person! Our life is unity with that person! "He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son has not life" (1 John 5:12). "He is our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption" (1 Cor. 11:30). Our pattern is not external but internal. Our lives are shaped and transformed by the Spirit and not by an external code. We "are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:18).

     6. The purpose of the apostolic epistles is to provide, by our assimilation of truth as revealed, for our growth in the divine nature in order that we may automatically and spontaneously act and react to given situations as Jesus would under the same circumstances. It was when congregations responded as Jesus would that Paul wrote them letters of thanksgiving and commendation as he did to Philippi, "let your bearing toward one, another arise out of your life in Christ Jesus" (2:5). It was when they did not that he wrote them of the dangers attendant upon such a course. "But that is not how you learned Christ" (Eph. 4:20). Christianity is not Jesus pointing us to a book as a pattern, but a book pointing us to Jesus as our pattern.

     This will make all of the difference in the world in our attitude toward each other. Every sincere person thinks he understands and does just what the book teaches. His stock-in-trade remedy for disunity is the platitude, "If everyone will just take the Bible for what it says, and do just what it teaches, we will all be one." This old cliche' has been proven unrealistic and unworkable. Those who mouth it the most are the most strife-torn and divided. In spite of the sincerity of each, what is actually meant is, "If everyone will just take the Bible for what I say it means, and do just what I teach it requires, we will all be one." All of our confusion stems from the fact that every one who regards the Bible as our pattern, thinks he perfectly grasps that pattern while others labor in ignorance, stubbornness and stupidity. All of us have seen communities where there are five or six different groups who say that if everyone will take the Bible for what it says, unity will result, and yet none of the six have anything to do with any of the others. The world is catching on to such childishness and inconsistency.

     Once we recognize that Jesus is the pattern, it follows that the greater our sincerity the more humbly will we admit that we fall far short of this example, and the easier it is to recognize that none of us are perfectly following the pattern. Then we can receive each other in Christ as equals--not in knowledge, understanding or perception--but in our need of grace to save. It creates a lot of difference in attitude if we think that some of us are already on higher ground tossing a rope to those who are floundering about in the waves, or if we recognize that all of us are still in the deep and are all struggling together to reach a goal or ideal. We need to be careful that we do not secretly pride ourselves that it is by our grace others can be saved.

     The real criterion is not at all our knowledge of a code or book, even though divinely given. It is love for a person. In the school of Jesus it is not mastery of a text but affection for the teacher which brings recognition. Knowledge inflates self, but love inspires imitation of another. As the apostle puts it, "Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. But if one love God, one is known by him" (1 Cor. 8:1-3). Of course if we truly love him we will want to hear what he says and do what he asks us to do. We will not do this because of legalistic demands but because of loving commands.

     7. Nothing we have said herein is intended to derogate the apostolic epistles. It is written simply to place doctrine in

[Page 155]

proper perspective, to enable us to regard it as God intended. To say that life does not originate with bread is not to speak disparagingly of bread. To observe that family relationship is not created by food is in no sense to undervalue food. The man who truly grasps what we are saying will find the revealed word of God growing more precious unto him day by day. This has been our personal experience in the freedom we enjoy from the pettifogging trivia which legalistic attitudes convert into tests of communion. "Christ sets us free, to be free men. Stand firm, then, and refuse to be tied to the yoke of slavery again" (Gal. 5:1.). We intend to study God's precious truth for ourselves. We shall allow no one to do our thinking on earth who cannot answer for us at the judgment. And this very resolution makes every word within the sacred pages pulsate with life and glow with the light of new meaning and relevance in our own life.

     1. The word of God has a meaning and the doctrine of God can be understood. Such understanding can only result from diligent investigation by earnest students who examine the text of the revelation and apply to their research those rules of logical interpretation which govern such matters. When proper examination has been made, free from preconceived bias, the result must be conceded to be the doctrine of Christ as given through his holy envoys, the apostles.

     2. In view of the fact that such conclusions must depend in part, or in whole, upon the deductions made from the sacred scriptures, and thus represent the sacred oracles as filtered through human rational processes, the conclusions cannot be constituted conditions of union or communion, or tests of one's relationship to the Father. They must not be regarded as the basis of life but of growth and that rate differs with each individual in Christ.

     3. The deductions from the sacred revelation as made by one individual, or a group of individuals conducting research in concert, are not formally binding upon any other individual, unless commended unto such individual by his own investigation, perception and conscience. They can be shared with others but not saddled upon them, for they can be binding only to the degree and in the measure that they are personally grasped and comprehended. If this be not true the following evils will result.

     a. Individual responsibility will be destroyed and men will be subjected to creedal tests and criteria arbitrarily imposed.

     b. Those who concur with such imposition upon themselves will repose their faith in the wisdom of men rather than in the wisdom of God.

     c. The supreme court of appeal will be "the infallible interpretation" of each party, a thought as reprehensible as "an infallible interpreter," or pope.

     4. No opinion, honestly held by a child of God, can be made a basis for fellowship or a test of it. Such an opinion must never be bound upon others as a creed, nor must others threaten excommunication of one who holds such opinion if he does not relinquish it. The sword of the Spirit must never be used to kill or destroy those who are indwelt of the Spirit. Separation upon the basis of opinion must never be condoned. The called out ones are never called out from among the called out.

[Page 156]

     They are all my brothers, not because of any of their views but in spite of all of them. I shall recognize them as brothers publicly and privately. I will call upon them to pray and participate in meetings. I will love them and cherish them. I shall maintain my personal convictions about all of the troublesome problems--instrumental music, the pre-millennial concept, orphan homes, classes, colleges, cups--but I will not allow these to negate or deny the sublimity of our relationship.

     We are members of the same body. We are branches of the same Vine. We are sheep of the same flock. We are children of the same Father. No one will ever again herd me into a party corral where I must set at nought or mistreat some of my brothers to be recognized and used by a group of others. I value the love of my Lord too highly. The price one pays for factionalism is too great. The Christ whom I serve is not a party chieftain but Lord of the whole church. He is not the president of a faction but the head of the whole body--every member of it!

     I have no perfect brothers. They are all brothers in error. All of them are as weak and fallible, as helpless and remiss, as myself. Some are in error on some things, some on other things, but none of them know all there is to know, and none are free from error. No, not one! It is foolish and arrogant for brothers in error to label others as "brothers in error" as if those who slapped on the label were free from all error. Such men, knowing their own failures and shortcomings should be ashamed to live and afraid to die!

     If I am in the fellowship with any brothers at all they are brothers in error. This does not bother me because it is this kind of persons to whom grace is extended. Those who are perfect as God will not need the blessings of grace. I do not love error. I simply love my brothers and I do not intend to deny brotherhood on the basis of imbecility, lack of understanding or mistaken views. If life in Christ consisted of being right about everything and every point of doctrine, I would have to confess that I have never lived, and the "I" of today would have to sever all relationship with the "Me," of yesterday.

     I do not plead that my brethren accept instrumental music, pre-millennialism, orphan homes, classes, cups or colleges. I simply plead that they quit playing God and accept all of God's children as their brothers. God does not tell us how to treat the lengthy catalogue of disturbing items. He does tell us how to treat our brothers. I might be right about all of these things and go to hell because I did not show love for my brothers, or, I might be mistaken about a lot of things and go to heaven because I love my Father and all of His children.

     We live in Christ through the faith, the one faith, the faith once for all delivered. That faith is created by the cross. It is not a faith based upon being in the right position about everything, but upon being in the right Person. I shall elevate nothing higher than the cross. I will allow nothing to overshadow it. I will permit the blood of the cross to blot from my life those things which hinder, but I will permit none of these to blot out the blood of the cross. The life is in the blood. I will use the cross to batter down walls between brethren but I will not use it to batter down brethren. This is my position!