Quit Blaming Bible Study and Prayer

Our message to liberals today is: "Quit blaming Bible study and prayer for your decision to depart from the faith!"

Ordinarily we encourage brethren to study the Word and to pray. The church has engaged profitably in these activities since the first century, and many problems have been avoided by a careful consideration and application of the Scriptures. However, in this century just the opposite has happened. Every discontented brother (and especially sister) that says, "We're going to study this subject for 3 to 6 months," ends up ignoring what the Bible teaches on the role of women.

No one can imagine why they waste time studying the matter—when they already know what conclusions they are going to draw. Why don't they just stand up like men—or the women who have goaded them into action—and say, "We know what the Bible teaches, but we're going to change what we do in worship." No, instead they attribute their change of position to Bible study and prayer.

The most recent church to do this is the Downtown Church in Searcy, Arkansas, and it is reported in The Bison, a Harding University Student publication (Nov. 15, 2019). Here is the opening paragraph of the story:

After several months of careful study, discussion and prayer, members of Downtown Church of Christ are focused on maintaining unity as the church moves in a new direction, specifically regarding women's roles.

Now, honestly, does anyone need to finish reading the article? Most could probably complete writing the story without any more information, since it is so predictable. But at the outset, let it be stressed that the changes of the roles of women did not come as a result of genuine Bible study, or they would have remained unchanged. God did not answer their prayers by saying, "I didn't really mean what I wrote in 1 Timothy 2:8-15."

These so-called Christians are a disgrace to James Harding and others of his generation who labored diligently to establish the Lord's church and Christian colleges, upon whom now they turn their back. They are a shame and a disgrace to the Holy Spirit who authored the now-abused Bible texts, and they are a disgrace and a disappointment to the Lord Jesus Christ, who suffered and died that all might be saved.

If we have the right to reject the truth that is clearly set forth in the Word in one area, then there is no stopping point. We may as well study the Lord's Supper for several months and pray about that—with the result being that we only observe the death of Christ twice a year (guess when?).

Unity

Notice that one of the claims was the importance of maintaining unity. Didn't unity prevail in the northern kingdom when Jeroboam introduced the golden calves and made priests out of men from the various tribes? Did anyone complain? Did anyone challenge the slip into idolatry, violating a clear commandment of God about making no graven images of anything upon the earth (Ex. 20:4)? If anyone did object, we have no record of it. Maybe Jeroboam had the leaders of the northern kingdom study the subject for months, then discuss it and pray about it (1 King 12:25-33), although that is doubtful. But what would the difference be?

So, now the Downtown Church in Searcy has unity in error. Those at the Tower of Babel did, also (Gen. 11). What good is unity if it is not based on truth? The tribe of Benjamin refused to turn over the perverted men of Gibeah (Judges 19-20). And their stubborn unity nearly caused the tribe to become extinct. Is this the kind of unity that the church ought to seek? Yes, the church in Searcy is moving in a new direction, all right—away from the Word of God.

Well on the Way

The congregation, first of all, affirmed some of the practices they were already doing; one of these involved women "singing on the praise team." Well, let's see. What verse discusses praise teams? Perhaps it can be found in Colossians 3:16½. No, because verse 17 says that everything we teach and practice must be authorized. If we cannot do it in the name of Jesus Christ, then it ought not to be done.

"Well," someone might ask, "where's the authority for the song leader?" It is implied by 1 Corinthians 14:40—that in worship everything should be done decently and in order. When we sing, someone needs to select the song so that we all can sing the same one. Second, it is helpful if we all start about the same time. Third, an added bonus accrues if we all have the same pitch. One person can achieve these goals. Why would we have two, four, eight, or more people to do the same thing? One male can eliminate whatever confusion there might be. No authority exists for a team—much less a team with female leaders in it.

To this practice the Downtown Church wants to add women serving communion, reading Scriptures from the pulpit, and teaching adult Bible classes (presumably with men in them). All of these are positions of actual (or perceived) authority. Women teaching men is expressly forbidden. No amount of study or prayer can get rid of 1 Timothy 2:11-12. Reading the Scriptures constitutes teaching. Women serving the bread and fruit of the vine may be the least noxious of the three, but they still have the appearance of authority.

Yes, we have heard the argument that, if women can pass the bread and fruit of the vine horizontally down the row, then why can't they pass it vertically from pew to pew? Well, we frequently have guests with us. Some may be agnostics or even atheists. Some may be from denominations. They pass the Lord's Supper horizontally, also. Should we have them distributing the Supper vertically as well? "Oh, but they are not even members." Right. They have no authority to serve, and neither do the sisters.

How Much Unity?

Lest anyone think the elders of the Searcy Church think they're going soft on these matters, they have definitely decided that there will be no "female shepherds or preachers." Why does this fact fail to comfort us? Well, for one thing, that conclusion was determined by only a 2/3 vote. So, if there are 12 elders currently, that means it was an 8 to 4 vote. It is not uncommon for elders to resign or pass away. Suppose two of the majority view die and three more are appointed whose sympathies lie with the four. Suddenly it's a 7-6 vote. Of course, there would need to be another several months of studies, along with discussion and prayer. Then one might expect female preachers and elders to be added. Can someone guarantee that such a scenario would not occur?

One of the current elders, Dr. Pat Garner, tried to justify the recent decision by citing changes in culture. He spoke of how we live in a time of "both great and rapid socio-cultural change." Some of those changes polarize communities. "Is it even possible," he asks, "to maintain a body with a transcendent unity in the midst of divergent opinions?"

Another doctor, named Luke, answered that question in Acts 2:42: "And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers." As a result of these measures, the entire community (most of whom were Jews) were not united, but all the Christians were—because they all paid heed to what the Holy Spirit, through the apostles, taught! Unity with the world will never exist, but unity with brethren cannot be maintained, either, when some determine to walk away from spiritual truths.

What will the Downtown Church in Searcy do when they realize that homosexuality, as a sin (not to mention homosexual "marriages" in the community), is a socio-cultural change polarizing people? Will they pray about that and then decide that unrepentant homosexuals can be part of the church? The Downtown Church's approach to the cultural divide is downright dangerous. Actually, Paul addressed culture. After giving the command that women must not teach or have authority over a man, but be in silence, he explained why:

For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression (1 Tim. 2:13-14).

"Well, I don't see anything about socio-culture situations there," someone may protest. That is exactly the point. God made the decisions concerning leadership in the home and in the church before any culture existed besides that of Adam and Eve. The leadership of males was doubly-determined. God created Adam first, thus implying a leadership role. He failed to exercise leadership in the garden, or he might have stopped Eve from disobedience. Second, Adam remains the spiritual leader because he was not the one deceived.

These two facts are not going to change regardless of what happens in today's society or culture. This is one of those principles that has been the case in the Patriarchal Age, the Mosaic Age, and the Christian Age. It has not been rescinded, and there will be no amendment to replace it. The reality of the situation has nothing to do with society in the first century or any other century. It has never been an issue of culture.

Fellowship

So, how are brethren supposed to react to the Downtown Church? Will they just continue as though nothing has happened? Will they write a letter or call the elders to see if they will discuss the matter further? Ultimately, they must decide whether or not to fellowship the almost 2,000 members. Probably, members there are related to members in other churches over a great deal of Arkansas, and what is the connection between the Downtown Church and Harding University? Are some of the elders board members? How close are the ties?

Are some going to say, "Personally, I am against their decision, but they are too big a congregation not to fellowship"? Or maybe some will say, "Brethren have invested way too much time, effort, and money in Harding University to allow it to fail now. It's not as though they are not teaching the truth on salvation." Or, "Think of how much good they are accomplishing. We can't turn our backs on that."

All of these are excuses. As Brother Guy N. Woods said, "An excuse is a lie wrapped in tissue paper." Did the size of each congregation matter when Jesus had John write to the seven churches in Revelation? No. As for the, "It's too big to fail," philosophy, that is exactly how apostasy spreads. No one is willing to take a stand, and it just encourages other churches and institutions to follow the same ungodly path. When people fail to stand up and be counted, the problem escalates; it seldom, if ever, diminishes. Third, how much good are they going to accomplish by opposing the explicit teaching of the New Testament? That message will not be overlooked.

What does Jesus think about what the Downtown Church has done? Has He already removed their candlestick? Will He come upon them at an hour they know not? Will He spew them out of His mouth? One thing is certain: He knows their works. Only He knows how much time those elders / pastors / shepherds have to repent, which they sorely need to do. The remainder of us might pray that they will do so.