The Gospel Advocate….lies, lies, and more lies.
Hello all:
I subscribe to the Gospel Advocate. My Grandfather subscribed to it as well. I enjoy reading it - usually.
I received my March issue today and found that the issue’s special feature was “Dangers Ahead: Roadblocks to True Unity.”
I read the first article by GA President Kerry G. Anderson and was appalled. I expect the Gospel Advocate to be against Instrumental Music, and I expect them to generally be against unity with the Independent Christian Churches. I expect them to tout the “Law of Silence” and how they believe that Instrumental Music is unscriptural.
What I do not expect from them, is a lack of truthfulness and a lack of integrity.
The first page of the article starts out by asking “If our beliefs on issues like worship, roles of men and women, and baptism are right, why should be apologize?” The article (and other places in the issue) goes on to talk about how Church of Christ leaders are being asked to apoligize “for causing the 1906 Division.” I’ve not heard anyone ask for an apologee, not once. Not on any of the discussion boards or blogs that I frequent. No where. Where is the evidence?
In the second to last paragraph of the article, Anderson states that he has been to various “worship services” where “a woman has preached, someone has spoken in tongues, the Lord’s Supper has been ommittedon Sunday, babies were baptized, unbaptized believers were welcomes as forgiven as sinners, and candles and incense have been given as offerings.” This is not a description of any Independent Christian Church that I am aware of. Independent congregations are much like Church of Christ congregations, except with Instrumental Music and occasionally a more relaxed stance on the roles of women - but not preaching. Anderson might have visited some Pentacostal Church somewhere, but he certainly didn’t see that at an Independent Christian Church congregation - they wouldn’t allow any of that any more than a Church of Christ congregation would. Anderson might be confusing an Independent congregation to a Disciples congregation, but even the Disciples don’t do all of those things.
My advice to the Gospel Advocate: If you don’t like something in the brotherhood, fine - teach against it, advocate against it, persuade others you are right, but don’t lie about it.
I’m not a fan of New Wineskins, but if the Gospel Advocate keeps it up, I’ll be switching my subscription over…
-Clarke
RSS feed for comments on this post. | TrackBack URI
March 19th, 2006 at 5:31
Hey Clarke,
If the GA truly believes what you reported that they wrote, then it is not surprising that they would strongly oppose acceptance of those folks. I think they feel that their world is threatened, and are overreacting.
When my children were very young I figured out that it is completely useless to try to reason with an emotionally out-of-control child. You have to wait until they are “in their right mind” to explain things rationally to them. Adults are not much different in that respect. In the heat of an emotional overreaction, the best thing you can do is try to help them calm down and feel secure. Then you can try to reason with them.
I can understand why they would feel their world is threatened. It seems inevitable that the younger generation is not going to leave all the church of Christ traditions in place when they inherit the church from their parents. Things that the parents hold dear are going to be discarded. It is a generational war, and the younger generation will eventually win. That is scary to the older generation.
I know the lines are not perfectly along generational lines. But it seems to me that this is a reasonable approximation.
I don’t know if it is possible to calm the fears of these folks. But that is what is needed IMO.
Alan
March 19th, 2006 at 5:42
Ouch, typical nonsense coming from those in the legalistic/patternistic wing of our denomination. I have always disagreed with their self-righteous sectarian spirit but was able to have respect for the view. I now view them as erring brethren teaching opinions of borderline heresy. We can not put up with these folks who are causing even further splits in the universal church of Christ. They have and continue to cause more damage. Strong views I hold, I know but its got to stop, unity must be everyones goal.
March 19th, 2006 at 6:47
The Gospel Advocate & Firm Foundation were my favorites for years, but they are extremely overly protective of their patternistic and traditional viewpoints.
Their battles with Carl Ketcherside, Leroy Garrett, and a few others they deemed teaching erroneous doctrines are legend. Leroy was not even allowed to defend his position on their pages after he was accused of just about everything except tripping the Pope.
I agree with Leroy garrett that much of our divisions have been caused by a few hard-headed editors of our church rags that believe their opinions are the only ones acceptable for the Lord’s church.
The GA & FF certainly do not advocate unity unless it’s on their own terms; anything less would be joing forces with the enemy.
March 19th, 2006 at 6:56
It is sad to see it, but I remember once listening to Rubel Shelley. I have never heard him before and was curious to know what the fuss was about. His talk was good and scriptural… and then I read a report about the talk that, frankly, lied about what he said — and did so repeatedly. I determined then and there to not listen to those sources again.
As for the howls of the dying, you might want to see what their lectureships are like:
http://www.oabs.org/Archives/Lectures/spring2006.htm
Wow. You can’t make this stuff up.
March 19th, 2006 at 12:29
There’s a Circling Of The Wagons thing that showed itself in the Christian Affirmation, has been evident (to me, anyway) in GA for years and years, is showing itself in some former ICOC’s with the currently discussed Plan For United Cooperation, showed itself in Dr. Burks’ recent statements about Harding’s core beliefs, and so on and so on. I dodge Harding’s fundraising phone calls, but my evil twin wants me to answer one so I can tell the poor telemarketing schmuck that I cannot support them because I disagree with their core beliefs.
I’ve read a zillion explanations for why folks feel they need to do this stuff, and haven’t found one I’m really satisfied with except that I do feel that it takes quite a bit of arrogance to feel so Right about what one believes that one wants to make sure everyone knows who agrees with you and who doesn’t. When people tell me they agree with me, I worry about ‘em!
March 19th, 2006 at 13:49
Sorry to burst your bubble, but re-read the article you are slamming. Kerry Anderson says “The general approach that I hear” He does not say that is what he knows is being asked. At no point does he say the various “worship services” he refers to are from the ICC. He is speaking of not only unity between the COC and the ICC, but among all who claim to be Christians. Tell the facts correctly before you begin to get others stirred against GA. GA is not being legalistic or other negative things you and your other commentors claim. They only want to see God’s Word “rightly divided”.
March 19th, 2006 at 14:07
Clarke-
I, too, have felt that over the last several years GA has made some questionable calls. A couple years ago they ran an article on the “Ten Most Dangerous Books to the Faith” and they included some great books like “Crux of the Matter”. The books they included were not dangerous. They just raised questions that some are afraid to ask. And now they are directly opposing efforts to bring people together.
Last month I listend in online to the Open Forum at Freed-Hardeman on this topic and in that forum they brought up that Churches of Christ were expected to apologize. Nothing is farther from the truth. First of all, I think we should apologize for our attitudes over the years. I think that the Christian Churches need to apologize as well. But no one from either side has ever come out and said that this needs to formally happen. In fact, I have listened to Bob Russell and other Christian Church leaders talk about this issue and never once have they said that Churches of Christ need to apologize. They simply want to have relationship with us. They want to find ways to work together. Why can’t we come together and go feed the hungry? Just because we don’t all believe in the same methods of worship shouldn’t prevent us from doing something like that. Same thing when it comes to missions and evangelism.
Basically what this is by GA is fear-mongering. It is taking a perception that is out there and running with it. They have no first-hand knowledge to base their story on. It is sad to see. This magazine which should be a leader in the future of our movement is becoming like Firm Foundation and Spiritual Sword. Oh well.
March 19th, 2006 at 14:25
Hugginbug:
The passage I quoted does not include the words “The general approach that I hear.” There is more than one reference in the magazine to requests for apologies.
Furthermore, the entire article that Anderson wrote was about the unity movement between Churches of Christ and Independent Christian Churches. Since that is the case, it was not be logically for him to go off on a tangent in a written article about the practices of some third party churc, and for his readers to know that is what he is doing unless he makes that point clear. While I have no doubt that that is what he was doing, it is fairly clear that the reason for him doing so is to prejudice his readers against the Independent Christian Churches.
If you go back and read my blog, you’ll see that I’m not a liberal. I’m a pretty conservative person, both in the church and politically as well. I have no ill will against the GA or any of my brothers and sisters in Christ, but I can not tolerate decite by those in our fellowship, whether they believe that they are doing good or not.
-Clarke
March 20th, 2006 at 6:32
You see this in the MSM (main stream media) and in politics. The same worldly mindset has invaded the church because too many have something to protect. SO they attack with non-truth…. (pc for lies).
March 20th, 2006 at 6:35
“The Gospel Advocate & Firm Foundation were my favorites for years, but they are extremely overly protective of their patternistic and traditional viewpoints.”
What’s ironic is that they led the first movement away from the “authority paradigm.” When the avalanche has begun, it’s too late for the pebbles to vote.
March 20th, 2006 at 7:11
I enjoy the GA for several reasons:
1. I tend to be “liberal” (compared to many) in my (spiritual) thinking and hermeneutics. The GA is a great balance for me. Many times it will keep me from innovation for innovation’s sake.
2. They have great Bible teaching. I may not always agree, but it makes me think about God and the scriptures in a reverent manner and appreciate the need for basic, solid Bible application.
3. It allows me to appreciate and respect my brothers who are “conservative”. I thank God that not everyone thinks like I do and there are people He created to balance me.
That being said…
The GA can sometimes come off as inflammatory and unnecessarily provocative. As someone who was converted in an ICOC congregation, I can relate and have often done the same. Thank God grace abounds! Let us not be drawn into a downward spiral of accusation and conjecture, but appreciate our brothers who may have different opinions.
Philippians 1:15-18 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
Some, to be sure, preach Christ out of envy and strife, but others out of good will. These do so out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; the others proclaim Christ out of rivalry, not sincerely, seeking to cause [me] trouble in my imprisonment. What does it matter? Just that in every way, whether out of false motives or true, Christ is proclaimed. And in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice
March 21st, 2006 at 7:13
What does it matter? Only one thing matters. Who listens to Jesus Christ and speaks truthfully. If someone wants to be inflamatory and not truthful… so be it. But we had better recognize it and not defend it.
March 24th, 2006 at 10:32
I think that we nee to re-read the 9th commandment. We would have a big problem if we found out that a brother were stealng or cheating on his wife. But it seems just normal for a brother to bear false witness aganst another brother in an attempt to destroy his reputation. This is simply sin and it needs to be confessed. I pray that our brothers at the GA will see the reality of this sin and repent.
April 12th, 2006 at 10:37
Interesting. I love to read comments when people slam people for slamming people. Always very intriguing. Did the GA lie as the OP stated? I assume the op in such a bold proclamation knows everything that the article’s writer has ever heard in order to make such a claim, otherwise such words are no different then the GA’s words came off to the OP. I personally have heard several comments to the fact the churches of Christ needed to “repent” for the division between it and the ICC. Just read some of the comment lines on Wade hodges blog for one such place of reference (not Wade himself that i can remember its the commentors).
The article may be terribly written with to many off the cuff statements and the writer should have spent more time qualifying his statment with sources be they letters to the GA or blog or what have you. It may deserve criticism for its presentation and content but this whole deal of slamming those who slam reminds me of “an eye for an eye” and may be its time we all go back and read Jesus words again.
July 19th, 2006 at 9:06
Seems to me the whole focas is wrong. We keep talking about what this person said or what that person said. The commentators, the organizations, the colleges, the GA are all for naught. We are only to be united as brothers and sister in Christ. If its not in the bible than why do it. Instrumentality–not in there, women preaching–not in there, Independant Churches of Christ, not in there, Christian Church, not in there. Though I believe Church of Christ and Church of God are in there. The only uniting we need is in in the scripture.
Greg