To Infidelity and Back

by Henry F. Lutz

Paul writes, "Every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" "For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?" (I Cor. 1:12, 13; 3:4). "I pray you," said Luther, "leave my name alone, and do not call yourselves Lutherans, but Christians. Who is Luther? My doctrine is not mine. I was not crucified for any one. Paul would not that any should call themselves of Paul, nor of Peter, but of Christ. How, then, does it fit me, a miserable bag of dust and ashes, to give my name to the children of Christ! Cease to cling to these party names and distinctions! Away with them all and let us call ourselves Christians, after him from whom our doctrine comes!" Those engaged in this restoration movement heed the admonitions of Paul and Luther and call themselves "Christians," or "disciples of Christ," while they call the churches, "churches of Christ" or "churches of God." They do not use these names in a sectarian, but in a Scriptural, sense. They do not claim to be the "only Christians," but aim to be "Christians only." We read in Acts II:26, "The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch." "If any man suffer as a Christian," says Peter, "let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this name" (I Pet. 4: 16). Any name used to designate a part of the followers of Christ and to separate them from the rest, is wrong, because it expresses a wrong and unscriptural idea. "Would to God," said Wesley, "that all sectarian names were forgotten, and that we, as humble, loving disciples, might sit down at the Master's feet, read his holy word, imbibe his spirit, and transcribe his life into our own!" John says, "We shall see his face and his name shall be in our foreheads" (Rev. 22:4).

The Ordinances Restored.

In addition to the restoration of the New Testament creed and names, it was found that there can be no organic Christian union, after the primitive type, without a restoration of the ordinances as administered by the Apostles. Protestants all accept two ordinances, baptism and the Lord's Supper, but they differ greatly in the manner of observing them. Some have open and others close communion. Some observe the Lord's Supper monthly, others quarterly and still others annually. In looking for apostolic precepts and examples, it was found that the early Christians met on every first day of the week to break bread; and that each Christian was commanded by Christ to partake of the Lord's Supper, after examining himself to see that his heart was prepared for this spiritual feast. We have neither the authority to decide the frequency of the service, nor who shall partake of the Supper.

The greatest hindrance to a practical working union of the followers of Christ is the babel of teaching and practice as to baptism. Some hold that the mere baptism of infants will save them, while others belittle baptism or ignore it altogether. Some baptize infants, others only adults. Some sprinkle, some pour, and others immerse for baptism. Some sprinkle, pour or immerse, just as the candidate wishes it. Does the New Testament teach this babel of confusion or has it come from human inventions and additions? It has already been pointed out that only those who had previously been born of the Spirit, or undergone a change of heart through faith and repentance, were baptized by the Apostles. We are told that Jesus never baptized any one (John 4:2), therefore he never baptized any infants. If we examine carefully the cases of household baptism recorded in the New Testament, we will find that in each case infants are necessarily excluded; as those baptized "heard" (Acts 10:33), "believed" (Acts 16:34), "were comforted" (Acts 16:40), "addicted themselves to the ministry" (1 Cor. 16:16), etc. These acts all refer to people who had reached the age of intelligence and accountability and, therefore, cannot refer to infants. Infant baptism is based on two errors that crept into the church—the doctrines of infant damnation and baptismal regeneration. Infants are saved without baptism, for Jesus said "of such is the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19:14), and baptism is of value only because of its relation to Christ and the faith of the sinner (Mark 16:16). The greatest emphasis we can put on baptism is to say that Christ commanded it and made it a condition of salvation to those that hear the gospel and have the opportunity to obey it. To refuse to obey this or any other commandment of Christ, reveals a rebellious heart that cannot be saved.

Of the action of baptism we speak in a previous chapter, therefore we need not treat of it here only to say that all churches agree that the immersion of a penitent believer in water is Scriptural baptism, and this is the only practice on which all can unite. Thousands of those that are contented to be Christians only have given up sprinkling and been immersed after studying the Bible on the subject.

The Bible Restored.

Christian union on the primitive gospel necessitates the restoration of the Bible to its proper place and authority. Sectarianism has largely displaced it with creeds and other human standards. Recently I read the following in an introduction to a catechism: "This catechism has well been called a Bible for the laity." When we remember how contradictory, and, therefore, erroneous, these human deductions as to Bible teaching are, we can see the need of putting them aside and restoring the Bible as the Christian's all-sufficient and only sufficient guide.

The Bible has also been thrust aside and kept from the people by false theories of conversion and the consequent erroneous practices in evangelistic work. People have been taught that they are totally depraved and can do nothing towards their conversion, that faith is a direct gift of God, that the Holy Spirit converts sinners by immediate miraculous power, that the evidence of pardon is in dreams, visions or feelings, and that sinners have to wait until God by entreaties is reconciled to save them. All these theories are erroneous and logically set aside the entire gospel plan of salvation. The Holy Spirit, through the Apostles, used the truths of the Word or gospel to convict sinners, and taught penitents, out of the New Testament, on what conditions they could inherit the salvation Christ purchased on the cross. The sinners that wanted to be saved accepted this salvation by complying with Christ's conditions of pardon, and went on their way rejoicing, because they had the infallible Word of God for it that they were saved. In other words, the Apostles preached the gospel, and penitent sinners were immediately saved by believing it (Mark 16:16), repenting of their sins (Acts 2:38) and openly committing themselves to Christ in baptism (Acts 22:16).

Finally, the Bible has become a meaningless riddle and uninteresting to most people because it is not rightly divided. It is assumed that all parts of the Bible are addressed to everybody. This is far from the truth. While we must recognize the unity and interdependence of the entire Bible and that each part teaches great spiritual truths for all, we must also remember that its different parts contain specific precepts addressed to different classes of people and only applicable to them. Thus the Mosaic law was for the Jews only, and was superseded by the gospel (Gal. 3:24, 25). Turning to the New Testament, we find that the four Gospels were written to make believers (John 20:31), the Acts of the Apostles, "Book of Conversions," to tell and show people how to be saved or become Christians (see chapters 2, 8, 16, etc.), while the rest of the New Testament is addressed to Christians or church-members as their rule of faith and practice. The churches in this Restoration movement aim to restore the Bible to its primitive place in producing penitents, guiding them unto salvation and in giving all instructions to the churches needed for their edification and guidance.

Restoration of the New Testament Church Government.