Narrow-Mindedness by Luther Blackmon
(The Gospel Guardian, December 8, 1949)
Do not feel insulted when someone tells you that your religion is narrow. Maybe he is right. If he is right, you should feel complimented. Your critic may be confusing narrowness with bigotry, in which case he is the one out of step, not you. Bigotry the Lord condemned; narrowness (in the scriptural use of the term) he commended: "...narrow is the way that leadeth unto life, and few there be which find it."
The Narrowness of Truth
Truth is always narrow. Five plus five equals ten; this is true
from kindergarten to college and everywhere else in the world.
It isn't ten because the arithmetic book says so, but it is ten
because it cannot be anything else. If in a class of 100 students,
only one gave ten as the answer to five plus five and all the
other 99 agreed on a different answer, the one would be right
and all the others wrong.
Historical truth is narrow. The Battle of San Jacinto was fought
in Texas; Valley Forge was in Pennsylvania. These are facts which
are understood alike by all students of history. If a student
in a 'history class gave any other answer concerning the location
of these spots, he would be incorrect. No one would think the
teacher was "narrow" in telling him so.
There are twelve inches in a foot, three feet in a yard all over
the world. It doesn't matter whether the one doing the measuring
is a president or a preacher, an illiterate hillbilly or a college
professor. To fail to recognize these facts would throw the world
into hopeless confusion.
Religious Truth
Since truth in every other field is narrow and dogmatic, why should
we suppose that divine truth is so flexible as to be susceptible
of any interpretation man wants to place upon it? "We just
can't see it alike," someone answers. But we see other things
alike. Is man more able to make himself understood than is God?
We may misunderstand the meaning of a passage of scripture, but
does our misunderstanding of it change the meaning of the passage?
Does its meaning change and shift to suit our various understandings
of it? If the writer of the passage meant to teach something when
he wrote the passage, is not that something that he intended still
in the passage?
Take, for example, the much discussed passage, "He that believeth
and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall
be damned" (Mark 16:16). The question about this passage
is whether Jesus did, or did not, make baptism necessary to salvation.
He either did, or he didn't. Some of us believe that he did; others
vehemently deny it. It must be apparent to all that somebody is
teaching false doctrine on this point. Is it broadminded to ignore
these contradictions and pretend they do not exist? Baptists and
Presbyterians teach that a child of God cannot fall away from
the favor of God and be lost; Methodists teach that he can fall
away and be lost. Does the Bible teach both?
Some denominations teach hereditary depravity, that infants are
born totally depraved as a result of Adam's sin. Others deny this,
and teach that everyone is born sinless and only becomes sinful
by his own transgressions. Now if we are to escape the stigma
of being called "narrow," we must cooperate with and
encourage the man who is teaching the very opposite of what we
believe to be the truth. Is this honesty?
If one preacher preached four conflicting doctrines, people
would call him a hypocrite; but if four preachers preach these
conflicting doctrines, they are all teaching the truth!
How Broad Should We Be?
The Unitarian believes that Jesus of Nazareth was a great man
and a great teacher, but that he was not the Son of God. The Orthodox
Jew worships God, but denies the divinity of Jesus. Shall we have
these men in our fellowship? If honesty and sincerity are the
only criteria, why not? Who will say they are not as honest as
we are? Some denominational preachers are already taking this
position. They swap pulpits with Jewish rabbis right along. This
shocks the religious sensibilities in the world but the legitimate
and inevitable fruit of that namby-pamby, stand-for-nothing, anything-and-anybody-is-right
attitude that we are talking about.
Most members of denominations are not ready yet to take in the
Jews and the Unitarians on their broadminded position. They narrow
it down a bit. We must believe in Christ, they say; we must see
alike on those scriptures that teach that Jesus was the Son of
God; that he was born of a virgin; that he suffered vicariously;
that he arose from the dead; that he ascended into heaven, where
he intercedes for us. But why must we see alike on those particular
passages, but have unbounded liberty to differ on nearly everything
else connected with the religion of Christ? Are not the passages
pertaining to the organization of the church, baptism, apostasy,
worship, church membership, discipline, authority, etc., inspired
of God as much as are the other passages? Are not these things
a part of the Lord's plan? Have they not place with divine truth?
How much truth is essential, and how much is non-essential? How
much of the Bible is important, and how much is unimportant?
We feel no personal animosity, of course, toward those who teach
things we do not believe; but we cannot, with a good conscience,
bid them Godspeed. John said, "If there come any unto you
and bring not this doctrine, received him not into your house;
neither bid him Godspeed: For he that biddeth him Godspeed is
partaker of his evil deeds" (2 John 10). Paul said, "If
any man preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have
preached unto you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:9).
These apostles thought it was a matter of much import what a man
believed and taught.
We are not infallible, and we are open to any truth that may be
presented to us; we will change when convinced we are wrong. But
two things we do know, and of them we are certain: (1) truth does
not contradict truth, and (2) we will not learn by hiding our
heads in the sand and refusing to admit that religious divisions
exist, or that such are wrong.
A Forgotten Word: Duty By Mark Roberts (mroberts@flashnet.com)
"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God
and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man"
(Ecclesiastes 12:13).
Our society invents new words constantly. The term "chad" (as in Florida election ballots) can't even be found in a 1901 dictionary, while "gay" and "ecstasy" are there but with meanings quite different from what is found in a current dictionary. Sometimes all these new words and definitions can cause us to lose sight of some older terms that help define and describe our service before God.
This week we need to think about the word "duty." A more important word (for Christians) can scarcely be thought of, yet rarely does one hear it spoken. When was the last time you heard a sermon on duty? Do you ever ask yourself "What is my duty here?" Is anybody doing his or her duty anymore, or is this just an outmoded, forgotten word?
The Oxford American Dictionary tells us that duty is, "a moral or legal obligation, a task that must be done, action required from a particular person" (p. 200). Can I shorten that down some? Duty is "doing despite." Doing what you are supposed to do (that "moral or legal obligation") despite hardship, despite fear, despite opposition, despite anything or anyone. Duty is doing despite it all.
Duty is the recognition that the obligation is more important than anything else and so the obligation must be fulfilled.
Noah serves as a fine example of this idea. He was tasked to build an ark. He did this duty, despite opposition and despite a lack of perfect understanding on his part. He performed this duty despite its inconvenience. Over and over the text emphasizes that Noah obeyed God exactly (see Gen. 6:22; 7:5). He did his duty.
What does any of this have to do with our walk with God? Simply put, God has given His people certain "moral obligations" and "tasks that must be done." Those tasks must now be accomplished despite the times and environment we live in. We must do our duty.
Young people today have many moral obligations. They are obliged to be morally pure, to read their Bibles, to obey parents, to worship, to teach others the Gospel and more. Do you take those obligations seriously? Do you stop to consider "What does God want me to do? What is my duty to Him?"
Duty is oft forgotten in our me-first society. Rarely do we see people who bravely struggle on doing their "moral and legal obligations" despite so many other factors. Dare we allow such to be said of our spiritual lives? Remember, Solomon came to understand that serving God was the "whole duty of man" (Eccl. 12:13). Are you doing your duty to God? Are you doing what God commands you despite every reason not to? Let's remember our duty!
MARK YOUR CALENDARS
Our weekly services are held at 1318 Griffin Road, Leesburg, Florida
34748.
Phone: (352) 365-9946 for times of services.
Web site: http://www.geocities.com/~cdillinger/cocbs/cocbshp.htm
Our Gospel Meeting concludes this evening. Much appreciation goes out to Brother and Sister Tant for being with us this week. Please pray for them and the work that they have chosen to do. If you missed any of the lessons they are available on audiotape. Bring in a 90-minute blank cassette and we will duplicate you a copy for your personal use.
Now is the time to apply what we have learned in our studies this past week. How can we take the things we have we learned and make them "work" for the Lord?
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
BIBLE INSIGHT is published
for the members of, and visitors to, the Church of Christ at Beverly
Shores, Leesburg, Florida, USA.
Carey Dillinger is the editor. He can be reached at the church
address or via e-mail: dillinc@yahoo.com