The
Truth in Print Vol. 20 Issue 6, July 2014
A
Publication of the Valley church of Christ,
2375 W.
8th Street, Yuma, AZ 85364 (928-782-5058)
Website Address ~ http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com
Our
Brethren’s “Sole Purpose” Argument & “The Percentage Justification”
A “whole” is
understood in reference to the sum of a thing; one hundred percent is fixed or
understood. The word “church” refers to a body of Christians in a particular
locale who have joined together by agreement to worship and work in God’s
arrangement and according to His, not man’s, specified works. In the local
church as God ordained it you find the church, a divine organization, with its
own leadership, and own funds to do the works of providing worship and edification,
teaching the word, the support of evangelists, and benevolence to needy saints.
This “completeness” in organization and work is demonstrated by the commands,
examples and instructions given to the local churches in the New Testament (cf.
Acts 4:34-37, 6:1-6; I Tim. 3:1-7, 3:15, 5:16; I Th. 1:1, 8; I Cor. 11:20-34; Acts
20:7; I Cor. 14:5, 26; I Cor. 16:1-3; 2 Cor. 9:1-5; Phil. 4:14-17 etc.).
Some of our
brethren have built and maintained human organizations (businesses) that do a
portion of the above works belonging to the local church. Such will often seek
to justify their own organization’s work in these areas by citing a percentage
basis. They will reason if the “sole purpose” is evangelism to save the lost
world then it would be wrong. Then they say that the “spiritual work” done is
not the primary work of the legitimate business in question. This is an all too
obvious maneuver or trick that intentionally takes away the importance of the
“whole” as belonging to God’s specified organization -- the local church
arrangement given to His people.
Some will say if the organization built by brethren
should give up all of its “business” work and devote itself solely to preaching
to save the lost world then it would be wrong; it would be like the Missionary
Society, they say, that replaced the local church. This is nonsense and can be
outright deception to justify human societies built by our brethren. The
Missionary Society never told the churches to cease to exist. It never sought
to replace the local churches for it depended upon them for support.
This slick
argument deliberately ignores the authority of the scriptures respecting the
“whole” and its placement where God put it – the local church organization divinely
authorized for the stated purposes given above. They play down the importance of the “whole”
and its placement, while maintaining that each local church is required to
follow New Testament authority for its organization, work and worship (“the
whole”). The commands, instructions and examples given in the New Testament do
not produce their organization with a percentage of “the whole.” Yet we are
expected to believe that there is total honesty and integrity in their mutation where they’ve incorporated parts of the whole
elsewhere.
We decry, being
God’s people, that the world’s religious leaders use human wisdom, emotions and
outright lies --- that their goals are power, prestige, pleasing self and material
gain; we decry that the members themselves in false denominational churches
love their soft pedaling on “sound doctrine” in order to be able to go ahead
and fulfill their own desires; we preach that their leaders (noted among them)
fully understand their members’ lusts and let them fulfill them; we say that
when their members study, and apply scriptural authority, the things such
leaders and carnal members seek will be take away from them (Cf. I Cor. 5:1-2;
Rom. 16:17). We preach that such men who use false maneuvers to pervert God’s
patterns should they be found among us would surely be withdrawn from.
In this worthless
“sole purpose” argument they seek to justify a human organization having a percentage
of the work that God gave to the local church as His divine arrangement. To
argue that a business built by brethren can have a percentage of its purpose
and work devoted to teaching God’s word, is to argue that another can have a
percentage devoted to the support of evangelists, and another to the work
benevolence for needy saints, and yet another to provide for worship through preaching,
teaching, having classes, singing, and the Lord’s Supper. When are our brethren
going to add the Lord’s Supper to their human organization’s work? After all it
would only be a percentage and not the whole work of the local church!
We’d spoof a church
that purchased items and then put a concession stand in its foyer to sell
products – breath mints, combs, coffee, donuts, reading glasses, Bibles, etc.
to raised funds for its treasury. Where is the authority for God’s organization
to engage in the buying and selling of products in order to build its treasury?
There is none!
Let’s take
evangelism as the work of a business built by brethren. Now allow a percentage
line of reasoning like this – strictly human mind you: What is wrong with the
human society having a “majority purpose” (percentage basis of work to be done)
given to evangelism and to save the lost, and a “minority purpose” (percentage
basis of the work to be done) of legitimate business work of some kind? This is
nothing more than someone making up their own rules.
One brother in
order to display the fact brethren are making up their own rules asked, “Is 50%
Evangelism & 50% Legitimate Business Ok? Good point for after all that 50%
is above the minority percentage limit of 49% -- surely now no one wants to try
to scripturally justify going above that percentage!
Another brother
stated their “sole purpose” argument leaves the option of an organization with
99% Evangelism purpose and 1 % Business purpose – thus this ingenious argument
leaves the one who makes it with having shot himself in his own foot! May our
brethren build organizations that are 99 % Evangelism in purpose and 1 % Business
in purpose? After all, what percentage of the “business” does it take to keep
an organization built by brethren that engages in evangelism scriptural? There
is no authority for the legitimate “business” to engage in evangelism for God
gave that work to the local church.
Argument:
I think the “primary purpose” authorizes a “secondary religious” function.
Some will argue
if the Primary Purpose of an organization built by brethren is a “business” –
then edification, evangelism and worship can be carried out as a Secondary
Purpose. This is the above “Sole Purpose” argument just stated another way. This
is just more of making up one’s own rules. What if the Primary Purpose is not a
“business” --- does a non-profit enterprise authorize the “spiritual”? Since
when does a legitimate “business” enterprise authorize the “spiritual”? Again,
brethren are demonstrating their ability to make up their own rules.
Argument:
I think if the “spiritual is incidental” to the overall work it is Ok.
To put this
maneuver another way we hear if the “spiritual” work is “incidental” to the
overall work of the human society (organization), then it’s Ok as long as it
stays there. Considering the word “incidental” as it relates to business
organizations – “incidental expenses” are still business expenses for the
organization to which they belong; if you don’t think so go ask a business owner!
Where do the
scriptures teach that Christians can transplant (transfer) part of the work God
gave the local church to their “business” organization and call it “incidental”
to anything that has to do with the legitimate work of a business enterprise?
Where do the scriptures teach Christians can transplant part of the work of the
local church to a non-business, or tax exempt enterprise, and call it “incidental”
to the work?
Some say the
“lectureship” belonging to a business is like a local church having a bath room
or drinking fountain – it is just an “incidental” -- while at the same time
admitting that the business engages in the “spiritual.” Since when does a
restroom have anything to do with evangelism or bible classes? Should a
business have a restroom it did not just appear out of thin air – it belongs to
the business! Where is the authority for the legitimate business to engage in
the spiritual? This is as poor an argument as using Peter, Andrew, James and John
in their “partners in fishing” – then stating brethren have a right to join
themselves together in a “business,” while admitting that at that time in
Luke’s account they were under the Old Covenant, and therefore were not
Christians -- which amounts to declaring, “There was no local church at that
time!”
Even more
ridiculous is to move from “their” (Peter, Andrew, James and John) partnership
in fishing to two or three brethren in Christ joining themselves together in an
effort to preach the Gospel as found in Acts 13, 14, 16, 18 – seeking to
persuade fellow Christians that these organizations should be tolerated – while
covering one’s back by stating here that they know what you read in Acts is not something that would be of the order
of what the human organization has that is promoting the worship and
evangelism. That’s like declaring “It has nothing to do with what they are
promoting that I’m telling you should be tolerated!” Why use it then to begin
with?
Wake up
brethren! There are false maneuvers being used in order to justify on a
“percentage basis” our brethren, who are more institutionally minded than many
think, maintaining their own organizations. Many “non-institutional” brethren
are “institutionally” minded as regards to the businesses they build to be
engaged in the “spiritual.”
By Bob Lovelace
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To
learn more call, visit or visit our website at:
http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com