Toe-Fue Fellowship and Innocence

Some brethren have become so lax on the subject of fellowship that they have grown quite careless in recent years. Some have adopted a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy concerning where they hold gospel meetings, conduct workshops, or appear on lectureships. Then, when they are questioned about it, they profess total innocence, saying, “I didn’t know it was like that,” or “I was not familiar with some of those speakers.” All right; that will work—once—but what about when it is a common occurrence? If the director of a lectureship invites one individual (usually upon someone else’s recommendation and he turns out to either teach error or fellowships those in error), the mistake will probably not be repeated. But when said director has invited several of that kind over a period of time, does it not dawn on brethren that there is something wrong? And in some instances, it would be really hard to plead ignorance—even once.

Over the years, this column has featured the names of a few men who have been recognized by most brethren to be false teachers. About a dozen have featured Max Lucado (portions of which were republished a few weeks back. Rick “Abihu” Atchley has been the focus of attention on occasion (10-19-03, 10-26-03, 11-2-03, 1-14-07, 1-21-07, 1-28-07, 2-4-07, and 2-11-07). Another name has been Rubel Shelly (5-14-00, 5-21-00, 5-28-00, and others). All of these are TOEs (Teachers Of Error). They have all appeared on the lectureships at Pepperdine over the years, along with Jeff Walling, Patrick Mead, Don McLaughlin, and other well-known heretics. The director of those lectureships at Pepperdine from 1983-2012 was Jerry Rushford.

The question one might ask is, “Who would fellowship all of these TOEs?” And the answer is FUEs (Fellowships Usually Everyone). The Affirming the Faith lectureship is an annual event conducted by the North MacArthur Church of Christ in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; it includes on its program brethren from a number of “our” universities, as well as the Bear Valley Bible Institute. However, some of these also speak on the Oklahoma Christian University lectures. So much information concerning this subject is available that one begins to overload trying to digest it all.

One name that appears on both the Affirming the Faith (ATF) lectures and the Oklahoma Christian University (OCU) lectures is that of Jay Lockhart, who is on the Master’s faculty of Bear Valley. This writer has never met Brother Lockhart, so far as he knows, and he has no idea if Lockhart personally teaches error. His current article in the Spiritual Sword (April, 2015) is sound. Here is the problem. He has spoken more than once on the ATF lectures (2009, 2013) and at least once on OCU (2012). The OCU lectures are not known for their soundness. The group known as Acappella appears there often.

In fact, they sang at OCU in 2012. Keith Lancaster, who organized Acappella Vocal Band, was present this year (2015). Most conservative brethren do not believe the premise of Acappella Vocal Band is Scriptural (imitating musical instruments with the voice). Most conservative brethren would not be on a program if that particular group was going to be there, but Jay Lockhart did in 2012. This raises the question: “Do all of those who appear on OCU endorse Acappella?” If they do not, could they explain why they are on the same program?

Although this situation is deserving of an answer, it is not even the main point. The fact is that OCU invites men like Jerry Rushford, as well as Jay Lockhart, even though they may not have appeared on the same program. In other words, here is the situation.

Jerry Rushford, who directed the Pepperdine lectures for 30 years invited such men to participate as Max Lucado, Rubel Shelly, and Rick Atchley. If he is not a TOE, he is at least a POE (Promoter Of Error) and a FOE (Fellowshipper Of Error).

The same lectureship who invited men like him (OCU) invites Jay Lockhart (FUE). So is Lockhart also a FOE? If not, why not? Who wants to explain the reason why Lockhart is not just one link removed from Rubel Shelly? Below is the link:

Shelly – Rushford – Lockhart

The link does not have to be just these three men. It could be said Shelly (and those like him) are linked to Rushford (and those like him), who are also linked to Lockhart (and those like him). Is no one worthy of guilt in such associations? Again, this is only one example. Pages could be filled with names that would illustrate this point.

Let’s put this situation in a Biblical setting. Jesus warned of false teachers (Matt. 7:15). Can anyone imagine Jesus going to a conference of wolves unless it was to expose the deceit and treachery abundantly present? Jesus exposed the Pharisees on three counts in Matthew 6 (giving, praying, and fasting to be seen of men). Later, He excoriated them, along with the scribes (Matt. 23). Would He appear on a lectureship with someone who also fellowshipped Caiaphas?

Paul delivered Hymenaeus and Alexander to Satan, meaning that he withdrew fellowship from them (1 Tim. 1:18-20). If Timothy, then, appeared with them on a lectureship somewhere, would Paul speak alongside of Timothy in another location? To ask the question is to answer it. One is supposed to mark false teachers—not fellowship them (Rom. 16:17-18)! Have we forgotten the fundamental truths of the New Testament? We’re no longer drifting—we’re sinking!

Still, someone might pay attention to those who would say, “You’re stretching the principle concerning fellowship.” However, even those in the world recognize this principle. When John Fitzgerald Kennedy was President, there was a period of time when he became chummy with Frank Sinatra. In fact, the singer wanted to host a fund-raiser for the President’s re-election campaign, which would be kicking off soon. It was Peter Lawford’s job to arrange this event. The President backed out, and according to sources, Sinatra never spoke to Lawford again. But why did Kennedy not want to take advantage of the offer? The answer is that he was advised not to because Sinatra was known to be close friends with Sam Giancana, a Sicilian American mobster who ran the Chicago Outfit. In other words, Kennedy’s advisors did not want the President to be one link away from Organized Crime. In the minds of Americans, the connection would have been as shown below.

Giancana – Sinatra – Kennedy

That is a link that the President’s people did not want to have in the minds of the American people. One wonders why so many brethren don’t get it—especially when they formerly had no problem understanding it. Have things changed? It may be worse to have a direct connection, but being only once removed is problematic. Jehoshaphat is said to have allied himself by marriage with Ahab (2 Chr. 18:1). He did not personally marry someone from the evil Ahab’s household, but his son, Jehoram, married the daughter, Athaliah, of Ahab and Jezebel, thus forming a very close tie between the two kingdoms.

This close association eventually caused Jehoshaphat (an otherwise righteous king) to unite with Ahab to take Ramoth-Gilead—a battle in which Jehoshaphat would have died unless God had rescued him. On his return, the prophet Hanani rebuked the king for that association. Speaking for God, the prophet asked the king: “Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord? Therefore the wrath of the Lord is upon you” (2 Chron. 19:2). Has God somehow changed His attitude towards voluntary associations with evil in the past few millennia?

Some have not forgotten that we should forego having earthly links with worldliness and sins of the flesh, but what about spiritual fellowship with those who do not love the Lord? Someone might recoil with horror and ask, “Are you saying that false teachers do not love the Lord?” Congratulations! That is the point! Did Hymenaeus and Philetus, who taught that the resurrection was already past (2 Tim. 2:17-18) love Jesus? Did the Judaizing teachers love Jesus? Those who oppose the truth that makes men free do not love the Lord! When they denigrate the Lord’s church, when they compromise on God’s plan of salvation (as Shelly and others have done), when they give up correct worship (as Acappella has done), when they invited denominational personalities to speak on lectureships, they do not love the Lord!

A Plea of Innocence

Anyone, even a careful individual, might be invited somewhere once and not know the kind of congregation it is or what the beliefs of other speakers are (in the case of a lectureship). A plea of ignorance cannot be offered time and again, however. A few almost seem to pride themselves on speaking in certain locales—not even desiring to know anything about those who invited them. A few have even been warned by well-meaning brethren, and they become part of the event anyway.

In the 1960s, Tom Paxton wrote a number of songs which were recorded by many popular artists. The song, “We Didn’t Know,” was a Viet Nam protest song that includes a few other recent situations that people ignored. The third verse (omitted below) challenged US involvement in Viet Nam, but the other two verses should continue to haunt mankind.

As the main point of the song is considered, brethren should think of those who today are trying to justify their actions with this same philosophy. Does it work? Do we really want to begin using this rationale to shirk our God-given spiritual responsibilities?

“We Didn't Know”

Tom Paxton (Words and Music)

We didn't know, said the Burgomeister,
About the camps on the edge of town.
It was Hitler and his crew,
That tore the German nation down.
We saw the cattle cars, it's true,
And maybe they carried a Jew or two.
They woke us up as they rattled through,
But what did you expect me to do?

Chorus

We didn't know at all,
We didn't see a thing.
You can't hold us to blame,
What could we do?
It was a terrible shame,
But we can't bear the blame.
Oh no, not us, we didn't know.

We didn't know said the congregation,
Singing a hymn in a church of white.
The Press was full of lies about us;
Preacher told us we were right.
The outside agitators came.
They burned some churches and put the blame,
On decent southern people's names,
To set our colored folks aflame.
And maybe some of our boys got hot,
And a couple of ___ and reds got shot,
They should have stayed where they belong,
The preacher would've told us if we'd done wrong.

Chorus repeated

Those who do not know what they are saying shouldn’t be: