More and more I am seeing and hearing things that scare me. Fear, you may say, should not be part of the Christian’s vocabulary. And certainly, there are things which must not and should not frighten His children. I am still frightened by the way in which many want to carry the church of Christ. People are not wanting to “make waves,” “ruffle feathers,” or “rock the boat.” In plain language, they do not want to truly make known their religious convictions or to defend the truth contained in God’s Words. I have heard some men say, “Just sit tight and it will pass.” Are we living in a generation that has no convictions? Has the time come when God’s people had just as soon watch error grow as they had to “earnestly contend for the faith”? This attitude will clearly define one’s true convictions.

I am not referring to those who have already defected and taken on the identity of denominationalism and apostasy. I refer to those who want to be identified as sound but do precious little to help in holding “the pattern of good works” (Titus 2:6-7), and who will not stand with others who are “contending for the faith” (Jude 3). What will be accomplished with those who are “closet Christians”? My brethren, we greatly need those who will truthfully stand up for Jesus.

When Christians are confronted with error or even the hint of error, they must stand up for Jesus. If error is to be met and defeated it will only be done when God’s people take a sure and firm stand for truth. In fact, that is what is demanded of the saints (1 Corinthians 15:58; Revelation 2:10; Hebrews 12:1-2). Godly preachers and elders must never say that the conscience is the guide because the conscience will always be wrong unless it is educated (Acts 23:1; Hebrews 10:22; 1 Corinthians 8:7; 1 Timothy 4:2). I mention the conscience because some try to salve their consciences by saying “It would be better for me to let others do the defending and debating.” What a cowardly position to take. Remember this question asked by Moses in Numbers 32:6; “And Moses said unto the children of Gad and to the children of Reuben, Shall your brethren go to war, and shall ye sit here?” Some are content to let others go to battle in their stead. We must realize that no one else can fulfill our personal responsibility. And how small will the number grow if more and more take this same position? It is time for every Christian to stand up for Jesus!

It seems that some have stuck their heads in the sand as if the problem will go away. I suppose it is a sense of security for some, but in fact, it is not safe at all. This is an indication of brethren being afraid or uncaring. Either way, it is ungodly! Who would want to go into battle with those who are willing to just “live and let live?” When men are content to let error run rampant through this brotherhood, are we not just as guilty as the false teacher? Read 2 John 9-11 and see the sin of not standing against ungodly issues, practices, and those who espouse and spread them. Who will stand up for Jesus?

Toney L. Smith

“What harm is there in such things?” is the echo of the question of silly Christians bent on doing everything the law will allow. The word harm is too mild to express it. Danger is the word that ought to be swung as a sign with a red lantern on both sides of it over such places as a warning to those who patronize them innocently. Dancing is based on the lust of the flesh. Argument is hardly necessary to sustain the assertion to normal people. It appeals to that part of human nature that needs no emphasis, but constant restraint. Nobody dances merely because he or she “dearly loves to dance.” Proof: Regulations requiring brothers and sisters or husbands and wives to dance together, barring other partners in the dance, would soon put dancing “out of style.” Mixed swimming is no better. Good sense and common decency condemn the idea of men and women swimming together in such scanty attire that it amounts to no attire. Such pageantry of nakedness is repulsive to the moral sense of people who yet possess modesty. It shocks the sensibilities of those who engage in such at the first, and they are “timid,” but “get used to it,” which only verifies the statement of the apostle that one’s conscience may become seared and reach the state of being “past feeling.” Parents, save your children! Elders and preachers, “fulfill your ministry” of rebuke, reproof, and exhortation!

What about card playing? A deck of spot cards has always been associated with dens of vice and gambling. If a mother claims the right to play cards in the parlor in a game of “social gambling,” she cannot consistently object to her son’s making the same use of a pair of dice in the backyard--his parlor--with his companions. A whisky bottle in a Christian’s pocket, though it contained nothing but “soda pop,” would not be a good recommendation if carried around. A pack of spot cards is as much out of place in a Christian’s hand as a whisky flask in his pocket. Christians who love the Lord and his church, who regard their Christian influence as precious to the salvation of others, will cease to engage in practices that are not consistent with the dignity of their profession and which reproach the worthy name by which we are called.

Behind all of this worldly drift and moral decline is the grotesque influence of Hollywood. Can anything good come out of Hollywood? It has become a synonym for scandal. Yet Christian parents fail to see that the “movie caste” is casting the character of their sons and daughters. And not infrequently do we hear some Christians say that they attend the movie for the “moral” of the picture. About like going to the garbage can for a good biscuit! Granting that one might be found, we prefer the cupboard to the garbage can for good morsels of food. The same is true regarding our attitude toward moral lessons.

But suppose everything except the moral were eliminated from the movie? How many Christians would attend? We venture an opinion that the number would barely compare with the prayer-meeting crowd--about a baker’s dozen!

Paul’s admonition to the Romans will serve as a fitting final word: “Be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.” In fashion with the world or in favor with God--which?

Foy E. Wallace, Jr.

Religious, as well as social and political, problems have not been the same in every age and generation. Martyrdom and persecution were the prices of being a Christian in the first century of the church. Later came a millennium of papal assumption, accompanied by tyranny, superstition, and ignorance. Emerging from that benighted era came Protestant creeds, orthodox denominationalism, religious confusion. Then the plea for a return to the ancient order of things. But the people were blinded by Protestant creeds, Lutheran, Calvinist, Wesleyan, and general orthodox views, and those who would lay aside party names, party creeds, and party doctrines, to “speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent,” were opposed by religious prejudice and intolerance hardly imaginable today.

While prejudice exists today in milder form, yet there is a “tolerance” being preached that would amount to signing an armistice with all error and declaring peace with Satan himself.

The peril today is compromise in doctrine, general indifference in religion, and worldliness in the church. The recent press announcement of the union of Congregational and Christian Churches, with a set of human by-laws and resolutions nothing short of a new creed to govern the united bodies, illustrates the present-day tendencies toward compromise. The spirit of indifference finds sufficient illustration in the common sentiment expressed in nearly every religious conversation that “it makes no difference what one believes if his heart is right,” which is about as rational as saying that it makes no difference what disease one has if his health is good!

While these are the influences prevailing generally in religion, there is one that more vitally affects the church from within. It is not the problem of prejudice and intolerance of the world toward the church, but of worldliness in the church. An alliance with the world and mammon threatened the church at Pergamum. An alliance of the same nature threatens the church today--ancient perils in modern churches. Money and pleasure are the two absorbing interests today. An avalanche of worldliness threatens to engulf society, including the home and the church. Members of the church freely patronize the dance, play cards, engage in promiscuous mixed swimming in public bathing pools (which would be better named “cesspools,” morally), and frequent the vulgar movie and vaudeville, the parent of all the moral laxity and social corruption of today. All such things once under ban in decent society are now freely practiced by prominent members of the church. Puerile attempts are made to defend them and puny excuses are offered to justify them by those whose conduct in such things nullifies the effect of gospel preaching in practically every community today. For when the church does everything the world does, how can the world be reached with the gospel?

To be continued…

Foy E. Wallace, Jr.

The letters to the seven churches of Asia recorded in the first three chapters of Revelation have been designated by G. Campbell Morgan, a widely known and read Bible exegete, as "first-century messages to twentieth-century Christians." The designation seems to be quite appropriate and in full harmony with the contents of the letters to these churches. Each letter sets forth a definite principle and each church represents a particular condition. Ephesus was outwardly maintaining works, labor, patience, and discipline in life and teaching. But their loyalty was outward, mechanical, formal--a cold orthodoxy. They had left their "first love"--an inward backsliding, a lack of the spirit of devotion to Christ in the letter of obedience. Laodicea was spiritually lukewarm, proud, satisfied, independent, indifferent. Sardis was dead, with nothing left but a name. How true of some churches known to us today! Thyatira was faithful in word and work, but silently acquiescent to an evil influence in the church. Pergamum was threatened by alliances with wealth and worldliness in that center of wickedness where "Satan’s throne" was. Smyrna exemplifies wealth in poverty--a suffering church, faithful even unto martyrdom. Philadelphia was the faithful, militant, perfect church, before which God had set an open door.

We have often heard it said that history repeats itself. Conditions represented in these letters prevail in churches of Christ, in principle, today.

To be continued…

Foy E. Wallace, Jr.