In This Issue...
NOTE: What follows, appeared in the bulletin of
the Seibles Road Church of Christ in Montgomery, Alabama, dated
November 3, 1996. It was of such tremendous value that we are
reprinting it here. --Editor
It is with a great deal of
sadness that I report that BUDDY BELL has moved
from Pensacola, Florida to Montgomery. He is now the minister of
the Landmark church of Christ.
Our readers may remember that in
1994 we wrote about brother BELL and
JOE BEAM coming to Montgomery to speak on Faulkner
University's "Focus." Many protested their being on the program,
even the Bible Department of the University, but to no avail.
Read and consider the following
three letters made public by brother RAY DUTTON, a recent member of
the Landmark congregation, which chronicle his efforts to
investigate and arrive at the truth. You can see the reaction he
received when trying to deal with this problem as the Bible
directs. Every congregation needs a man like Ray Dutton in their
membership. He is to be commended for his efforts to try to correct
I have some very close relationships
at Landmark and find no pleasure in making this exposure. I cannot
remain true to the old paths, however, and remain silent about this
potential tragedy in Montgomery. We will have more on this issue in
upcoming bulletins and what it means to the church in Montgomery.
I have written a letter to brother Bell with some pointed, direct
questions regarding his position on these matters and have not to
date received his response.
Please pray that the elders will
have a change of heart. Please pray that the membership will not
tolerate this unscriptural action. Please remember brother Dutton
and his family in your prayers. It would be great if all faithful
members would write him a note or letter of encouragement. This is
a tragic, serious situation, brethren. -- O. B. Porterfield
To: The Elders of the Landmark church of Christ
From: Ray Dutton
Date: September 25, 1996
Brethren, you are the shepherds
of my soul, and I come to you begging you for your spiritual
guidance in one of the darkest hours of my life. My soul aches with
a burden I am bearing. Because of it, I cannot sleep. I cannot
rest. I feel like my soul is being torn apart.
I wanted to come and just talk to
you all about this situation, but honestly, I was afraid that I
would be too emotional to talk about it the way that I should.
Therefore, I apologize for having to put my thoughts in writing,
but I did not want you to misunderstand anything I am about to tell
Recently, I became very upset about
the scheduling of a known false teacher to speak to our young
people. Some of you thought I over-reacted to the situation. Maybe
you were right. Maybe that kind of thing should not upset me, but
it did. Maybe I have just become too sensitive about speakers we
have been inviting to Landmark.
When you made the announcement that
you had asked Buddy Bell to come to Landmark, I did my best not to
over-react. Though I was well aware that Buddy had a reputation for
keeping company with a number of known false teachers, I had hoped
that he was personally committed to the truth of God.
Many of my brothers and sisters, here and in other congregations,
came to me to ask me what I thought. I asked them to be patient and
not jump to any conclusions. I promised them that I would talk with
Buddy and then let them know what he said. After Buddy officially
began his work with us on September 15, I met with him the
Let me assure you, brethren, that
I have no ill will in my heart against Buddy. On the contrary, I
love him and want nothing but the best for him and his good family.
Buddy, seems to be a very sincere and loving person. I have always
enjoyed hearing him speak. He is, no doubt, a very fine young man.
Therefore, I would never want to hurt Buddy or his reputation if
that could be avoided.
Yet, I am certain that if I share
with you and others what I now know, Buddy is going to be hurt.
This eldership is going to be hurt. My family and I are going to be
hurt. And this church is going to be hurt. Frankly, I would to God
that I could walk away from Landmark and not have to deal with this
situation. But I am convinced with all my heart that to do so would
dishonor my heavenly Father and would endanger the souls at
Landmark and in this city.
I don't say this because I want to
leave. I love Landmark. I love each one you elders and all of my
other friends here. I love every precious soul in this church. Kay
and I chose Landmark in 1986 as the place where we wanted to rear
our children and spend our lives. But... I would give up my family
at Landmark and never return if that alone would save the many
precious souls here who are now gravely in danger from a man I now
believe is a false teacher "secretly brought in" (Gal. 2:4), who
has come to God's flock in "sheep's clothing" (Matt. 7:15) but is
in truth a "ravenous wolf."
Brethren, I do not make these
charges lightly. I clearly realize the seriousness of what I am
saying. I have spent hours upon hours in prayer over this since I
had the meeting with Buddy. I cannot begin to tell you how much I
have agonized over my decision to lay these things at your feet. I
have counseled with my elder mentors, and to a man they have told
me that I must tell you what I know about Buddy and his beliefs.
All of them have said that these errors must be dealt with for the
sake of all the innocent souls who are now in danger of being led
astray by this false brother.
# 1: BAPTISM
My first question for Buddy was "Who
are the saved?" Buddy said that he felt that if he and I were
teaching a non-Christian that our answers would be the same. He
then stated to me that he believed that baptism was essential. I,
then, asked him if a person could believe what the Baptists and
Methodists teach about salvation and be saved. He did not answer
YES or NO. He hedged by saying that he wasn't sure whether a person
had to understand that baptism was for the remission of sins.
Since his answer troubled me, I
asked him if he believed Baptists are SAVED. Again, he responded
that he had a hard time answering that, and that he had some real
mixed emotions about that. So I asked him if he considered them
brothers and sisters in the Lord's fellowship. His answer:
"Probably some I would." When I pressed him further to
explain himself, he admitted to me that he was confused about some
of these things and that he thought a lot of Baptist
people who have been immersed for a very good reason and who love
the Lord that God's grace would cover that.
Brethren, I'm confused too, but not
about baptism. I'm confused as to why we have a man preaching for
us who is not sure whether baptism MUST BE for the
remission of sins. If the Baptists can be saved by the
doctrine of FAITH ONLY, just as long as they are immersed
for a very good reason, then I confess that I have been
confused on salvation all of my Christian life.
# 2: INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC and
In the late 1800s and early
1900s, faithful brethren throughout our great brotherhood were
forced out of their churches by false brethren who pushed the use
of instrumental music until they had driven out
all of the faithful brethren who could not in good conscience
worship with it. These digressive teachers took more than half of
our church buildings. They argued that instrumental music
in Christian worship was optional and should not be made
a test of fellowship. Yet, they continued to sway the minds of
brethren until they had enough numbers to bring the instrument in.
They then callously told the remaining brethren that they would
have to go along with it or leave. The result was the formation of
the Christian Church / Disciples of Christ denominations.
For almost 100 years our faithful
preachers have taught us that the addition of instrumental
music to Christian worship was a SIN against God. It was
"adding to God's Word" (Deut. 4:2; Prov. 30:6; Rev. 22:18). It was
a clear perversion of the worship of a God who demanded that we
worship Him in "truth" (John 4:24) as well as "spirit." But just
like Carl Ketcherside and Leroy Garrett
of the 60s and 70s, we again have brethren like
Rubel Shelley, Jeff Walling and others who now argue that
we SHOULD NOT MAKE IT A TEST OF FELLOWSHIP. When
I asked Buddy how he viewed the Christian Church, he floored me by
boldly saying that he was in "FULL FELLOWSHIP WITH THEM."
Since I couldn't believe what I had just heard, I asked
him the second time, "You are in full fellowship with them?" Buddy
said, "I feel that way."
Brethren, what we have is a brother
who claims to be in "full fellowship" with the very ones that have
destroyed the unity of the Lord's church with an innovation that
they themselves argued was "no big deal." Buddy feels that he is in
"full fellowship" with the very ones the apostle Paul condemned in
Romans 16:17-18, "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which
cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have
learned, and AVOID THEM. For they that are such serve not our Lord
Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair
speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."
No doctrine has done more to destroy
the unity of our brotherhood than instrumental music,
but Buddy thinks we should be in "full fellowship" with
those who advocate this error. If Buddy believes that "in
matters of faith, unity; in matters of opinion, liberty,"
he puts the use of instrumental music in Christian worship
as nothing more than opinion.
Now, I want to be fair and tell you
that Buddy says he personally does not use it and that he would not
want it brought in at Landmark. But his position was that he didn't
think that our arguments against instrumental music
was that strong and that they were mostly historical
arguments. His opinion was that it should not be used at Landmark
because it would disrupt the fellowship. But on the other hand, he
would not argue that it was either scriptural or unscriptural. He
feels like both sides have some arguments and that in his mind the
whole issue was not a "big deal."
When I asked him if you elders had
asked him these questions, he stated that you HAD.
Frankly, he said that you had asked him about his view on
instrumental music and that some of you
"shared his exact position." Later, when I told him that
I didn't believe that the majority of our members believed what he
believed about this issue, he said that he knew a number of the
brethren at Landmark and that he did not agree with my statement.
Brethren, the perversion of true
worship with musical instruments may not be a
"big deal" to Buddy, but it is to me. And regardless of what Buddy
thinks, I believe that it is a "big deal" for most members of this
church. I believe that most members of Landmark still believe that
it is a SIN, and that its use would endanger their souls.
#3: SOLOS, CHOIRS, QUARTETS AND OTHER
When I asked Buddy if he
believed solos, choirs, and quartets were
scriptural in worship, he did not even hesitate with his answer. He
told me in no uncertain terms that he believed that the practice of
using solos, choirs, and quartets was in his
words, "very scriptural." In fact he went on to state that he had
NO biblical problem with them. The funny thing is that he was
amazed that I was so convicted that they were wrong.
We discussed the issue back and
forth for a good while, and finally he just dismissed my arguments
by saying that he thought the biblical evidence was "very
strong" for the use of "special music" (this is the
phrase these false brethren use to describe the use of
solos, choirs, and ensembles in worship). Then he stunned
me by saying that he would love to be a part of a church
where that kind of freedom in worship existed, but he
wasn't sure if it would ever happen at Landmark. I asked him why he
doubted that it would be introduced here, since he was convinced on
the issue. Certainly he would move the congregation in that
direction. He responded by saying that he had taught it at
Gateway (Gateway Church of Christ, Pensacola, Florida --
editor) but that they were not using special music. I reminded him
that I knew for a fact that Gateway already had
a similar group. I told him that my daughter had visited
Gateway and was surprised to see a group of singers
sitting off to one side, each one wearing microphones. Buddy
admitted that but denied that it proved Gateway
was moving in that direction.
Brethren, you have pledged over and
over that you were not going to let this unscriptural practice be
brought into our church. But now you have a preacher that openly
argues that the practice is "very scriptural." What are you now
going to do when Buddy teaches what he believes?
#4: THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE CHURCH
When I questioned Buddy on his
beliefs about the role of women in the church, he again stated
several things with which most of us would seriously disagree. For
example, he told me that if he happened to be in a group where
there were both men and women, and if they wanted to pray, he would
"not be uncomfortable with us all praying in a chain
prayer." But don't worry, he said that he was not
planning on inviting a woman to lead prayer in his Bible class.
When I asked him about women being
appointed as deacons, he was rather ambivalent. He said he had some
questions about it, but he "might not object" to
it. I reminded him that the scriptures said one of the
qualifications of deacons was that they be "husbands of one
wife" (I Tim. 3:12).
I also asked him about his view on
women waiting on the Lord's table. He quickly said, "It
wouldn't matter to me." He said he thought it was a
stupid idea, and that he didn't know why anyone would want to do
it, but that it was just "not a biblical issue."
#5: HONESTY WITH THE BRETHREN
What worries me as much as anything
is the fact that Buddy has no intention whatsoever in exposing his
radical views to the whole church. False teachers never come into
a church with the intention of being up-front and honest with the
members. Buddy knows well how terribly disruptive his views would
be at this point in his work. But, given time and opportunity, one
person after another, one family after another will be drawn into
the web of his error.
Time and again I challenged Buddy
to let the Landmark brethren know the very things he was telling
me, but he strenuously rejected that idea. I told him that I
thought that it was nothing less than trickery for him to stand
before this church and claim that he was going to be
"biblical," when he knew that faithful brethren would not
believe he was "biblical" if they knew what he
believed. Brethren, I believe that it is nothing less than
cowardice and hypocrisy for Buddy to publicly claim to be
"biblical" while privately advocating heresy.
Could it be that the reason Buddy
is opposed to making his views public at this time is that he is
aware of what the Bible demands of us who are faithful. "A man
that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition reject"
(Titus 3:10). The apostle John told us exactly how we are to
handle false teachers who come to us with their apostasies:
"Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of
Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he
hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and
bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither
bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of
his evil deeds" (II John 9-11).
#6: FELLOWSHIP WITH THE DENOMINATIONS
Finally, one of the most dangerous
doctrines espoused by Buddy during our discussion is his view on
having fellowship with denominational churches. I have already
pointed out that he claims to be in "full fellowship" with the
Christian Church. When I questioned him about fellowshipping the
Baptists and Methodists, he looked at me and said, "I'm
going to fellowship them where I can fellowship them." To
prove his point he brought up "Promise Keepers."
To my surprise he openly stated that he was going to be, in his
words, "real comfortable rejoicing with those people about
Jesus on what He's done."
Honestly, brethren, does this not
represent an unquestionable defiance of such scriptures as Romans
16:17-18, II John 9-11, Titus 3:10, II Thess. 3:6, I Tim. 4:1-3? If
we go along with such are we not guilty of making the word of God
of "none effect" (Mark 7:13)? How can
we promote fellowship with those who preach "another
gospel?" Did not Paul tell us, "But though we,
or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that
which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said
before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto
you than that ye have received, let him be accursed" (Gal.
Buddy thinks we should promote these
denominational gatherings with our presence, even though these very
denominational preachers lead scores of men and women to hell by
turning them from the truth of God to the lies of the Devil. When
the apostle Paul had the opportunity to "fellowship"
one of the false teachers of his day, Elymas the
sorcerer, his actions were quite different from those advocated by
Buddy. Paul said to Elymas, "O full of all subtilty and all
mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness,
wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord"
(Acts 13:10)? Then God cursed Elymas with blindness. Buddy wants us
to "fellowship" those who "pervert the
right ways of the Lord."
Buddy thinks we should
"rejoice" with these purveyors of error, but again Paul
warned Titus that "there are many unruly and vain talkers and
deceivers, specially they of the circumcision, whose mouths must be
stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought
not, for filthy lucre's sake" (Titus 1:10-11). How can we
support and encourage these false teachers at "Promise
Keepers" or any other denominational endeavor when Paul
says that their "mouths must be stopped?"
Brethren, I pray to God that you
will remove this false teacher from our flock before he begins his
destructive work. To do less will threaten the unity of Landmark
and the unity of God's people in Montgomery. His continued presence
at Landmark will likely destroy the cooperation of our churches in
the "Inner City Ministry." But what is worse; if Buddy does not
renounce these errors, he will not only endanger his own soul, but
he will ultimately jeopardize the souls of many spiritually
immature Christians throughout the Montgomery area.
Brethren, I love Buddy and I want
to help him change his views on these matters, but his "mouth must
be stopped." No matter how sincere Buddy is in what he believes, I
believe Satan is using him to destroy innocent souls.
You are shepherds of God's flock.
A wolf has entered God's sheepfold in sheep's clothing, and if he
is allowed to stay, he will not "spare the flock." I stand ready to
help you accomplish this. I'll be more than happy to study these
matters with you, with Buddy, and with any other member at
Landmark, but I cannot just walk away from this situation and
pretend that these matters are just innocent differences in
Brethren, just as I was obligated
by God to share this information with you first so that you can
take the appropriate action to remedy this situation, I also have
a personal obligation to the other faithful members of this
congregation to warn them about these things. I would hope that you
can resolve this matter within the next week or two. I would not
want to embarrass you by going directly to our brethren when it is
your place to take the lead in this. But as we talked previously,
I will do what I believe God's will demands that I do "through
Christ who strengthens me."
May God's grace and mercy be with
Open Letter To: The Elders of the Landmark church of
From: Ray Dutton
Regarding: Our decision to leave Landmark
Date: October 9, 1996
Brethren, I hoped that this time
would never come, but recent events have made it impossible for my
family to remain under your oversight at Landmark. This is
effective immediately. Though we love our Landmark family deeply,
and hate to give up the sweet association we have had with so many,
your recent instructions to me have put me in the bitter position
of having to deliberately disobey YOU or disobey my Heavenly
Father. Like Peter, who was instructed not to teach the truth about
Jesus, I have decided that "We ought to obey God rather than men"
When I learned that Buddy Bell was
going to be our new preacher, I was greatly disturbed because of
his reputation. I tried to follow the teachings of Matthew 18 to
the best of my ability. On September 17, I went to my brother, whom
I believed might be holding to and advocating false doctrines. When
I learned of the errors he espoused, but failed to be able to get
him to change or to openly tell the church what he believed, I came
When I met with you elders September
25, I gave you a detailed account of the numerous false doctrines
that he had shared with me. You led me to believe that you would
confront him with these things. You did meet with him, and he
confirmed that he had told me those things. According to what you
told me, he did not deny any of these things that I had presented
in my letter. But! instead of correcting him or removing him from
the pulpit, you chose to support him and to rebuke me for not
having kept these matters a secret. Even worse, what really made me
realize that I would no longer be able to stay at Landmark was the
fact that one of you actually tried to defend his unscriptural
position on using choirs and quartets in Christian worship. This
elder's exact words were: "There is not a scripture in the Bible
that you can show me that either supports or denies special music."
He even went on to deny that Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16
apply to worship.
Brethren, I would never have
believed that such words would come out of the mouth of an elder at
Landmark. Nor could I believe that not one of you objected to this.
The fact is that the Bible does not have to list everything in the
world that is unscriptural to do in worship; it simply tells what
to do and then instructs us not to add" to God's word (Deut. 4:2;
Prov. 30:6; Rev. 22:18). There is not one command, example, or
implication in the Scriptures that the churches of the New
Testament ever used "choirs, quartets, or solos." The Bible
commands: "Speaking to yourselves" (Eph. 5:19) and
"teaching and admonishing one another" (Col. 3:16). These
commands to the churches of Ephesus and Colosae could not THEN and
cannot NOW be carried out by one person singing a solo or by an
"ensemble" (such as the one used at the Carriage Hills
Church of Christ) doing our singing for us.
Brethren, I love all of you and I
love Buddy, but I am convinced that these errors endanger the souls
of all at Landmark. It is not right to risk the souls of our young
people and other innocent Christians by allowing Buddy to teach his
errors privately as he did to me and as I fear he will do with
others. Even if he elects not to preach these false doctrines
publicly, he cannot conscientiously teach the truth on these
matters either. Since you made it clear to me that you have no
intention of making these facts available to the other members at
Landmark, and since you have told me that I should not repeat them,
I am left with no alternative. I have to leave Landmark, because I
refuse to remain silent and thereby risk the souls of innocent
members who have no idea what Buddy truly believes about these
crucial matters. Therefore, I believe it is my obligation to my
Heavenly Father to "tell it unto the church" (Matt. 18:17).
We will keep all of you in our
prayers. Pray for us, and may God be merciful to us all.
Letter Mailed to the Landmark Membership
I apologize for having to send this
letter to you. As God is my witness, I hoped this day would never
come. But, my family and I are leaving Landmark. We have been a
part of this wonderful family since 1986. Though we have not been
able to get to know all of you the way we would have liked, it
still hurts us to have to make this move.
I have found myself involved in a
situation that has left me with no alternative than to move my
family to another congregation. It is my firm conviction that the
church at Landmark is presently in danger. This danger centers
around the false doctrines currently held by Landmark's new
preacher. I love Buddy. He has tremendous potential for good in the
Lord's church, but his views regarding some very crucial matters of
doctrine have made this letter necessary.
I have included two letters that I
have presented to the elders. The first letter of September 25 was
written after I had a very disturbing meeting with Buddy on
September 17. The other letter is my final letter to the Landmark
elders after our meeting last week, on October 2. I believe you
deserve to know these things. What you do with the information is
up to you. My conscience would not let me leave Landmark without
your knowing what I know, and my Father has commanded me to "tell
it unto the church" (Matt. 18:17).
If you have any further questions
about these things, you can reach me during the day at my office,
272-8700, or after 7 PM at home, 244-0182.
May God be with you all.
434 E. Vanderbilt Loop
Montgomery, AL 36109
More About BUDDY BELL
Please refer to last week's
bulletin, November 3, that made reference to brother BUDDY BELL
being hired as the new minister for the Landmark church of Christ
here in Montgomery. A copy of a letter that I sent to him follows
this preface. It was mailed on October 17 via certified mail. I
received a call from a lady at Landmark who said that the letter
was received but that brother Bell was away at a meeting and would
not return to Montgomery until the end of October. To date we have
not gotten a reply from brother Bell. When, and if, I receive his
answer, I will run it in this bulletin. I realize that if he
chooses not to respond, that it is his privilege to do so. It would
be great, though, to set the record straight and his answers would
confirm where he stands. Wouldn't it be great if brother Bell took
a Bible stand and made it known loudly and clearly? Certainly by
taking such an action he could lead many back to the Truth. I pray
that this happens. I have already stated that I have no personal
ill will toward brother Bell or the Landmark church. Quite the
contrary, I am concerned for his soul and those that he would
influence. I have very close relationships with some at Landmark.
But, with brother Bell's "track record" don't you believe we have
a right to ask his beliefs on some of the things that trouble the
church in the world and in Montgomery today? I Peter 3:15 teaches,
"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to
give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope
that is in you with meekness and fear." --O. B. Porterfield
October 17, 1996
Buddy Bell Landmark church of Christ
1800 Halcyon Blvd.
Montgomery, AL 36117
Dear brother Bell:
I was given a copy of the
information gathered and printed by brother Ray Dutton. A person
then told me that what you said last Sunday concerning this
material they "took as repentance on your part." Others say that
they did not. I hope that you do not object to my writing to you
concerning these matters and asking did you repent on Sunday and,
if so, would you please state what you repented of?
I intend to write an article in our
bulletin on Monday, October 28, 1996 concerning this and I would
appreciate your help in making it accurate, if you see fit, by
answering some straightforward questions. Let me say at the outset
that if you have repented of the things that have troubled the
churches in Montgomery and many other places, I will certainly
rejoice and intend to give it all the publicity I can. I want to
inject here, brother Bell, that I am not asking you if you intend
to accomplish any of these things at Landmark or if any of these
things are on your "agenda." I am interested in knowing what you
believe the Bible teaches on each of the following questions.
1. Did you repent of the things that
brother Dutton says in his printed material you told him?
2. Do you believe that there are
some people in the Baptist, Methodist, Catholic or other
denominational bodies who are saved?
3. Do you believe that a person must
understand that baptism is for the remission of their sins before
they are baptized in order to be scripturally baptized?
4. Are you in full fellowship with
the Christian Church?
5. Do you believe that it is
scriptural to use solos, choirs, quartets and other "special music"
in the worship service?
6. Would you object to a woman
leading public prayer whether it would be in a Bible class, a chain
prayer or in the worship service?
7. Would you object to a woman being
appointed as a deacon in the church?
8. Would you object to a woman
serving the Lord's Supper to the congregation?
9. Do you believe that it is
scriptural for the church to observe special days such as Easter,
Christmas, dedicating babies, honoring parents or graduates as part
of the worship service?
10. Do you believe that it is
scriptural to fellowship Baptists, Methodists, Catholics or other
11. Do you believe that it is
scriptural to promote and/or be a member of the organization known
as "Promise Keepers?"
12. Do you endorse "Jubilee?"
13. Would you attend and/or
encourage others to attend "Jubilee?"
14. Do you believe that one would
be lost if they were to use instrumental music in the worship
15. Do you fellowship Joe Beam?
16. Would you participate on a
program, worship service, youth meeting, etc., with Joe Beam and
encourage others to attend?
17. Do you believe that Rubel Shelly
is a false teacher?
18. Would you participate on a
program, worship service, youth meeting, etc., with Rubel Shelly
and encourage others to attend?
19. Do you believe that Jeff Walling
is a false teacher?
20. Would you participate on a
program, worship service, youth meeting, etc., with Jeff Walling
and encourage others to attend?
21. Would you recommend Max Lucado
to speak at any gathering of the Lord's people?
22. Do you believe that the present
day church of Christ had its beginning on Pentecost (Acts 2) or
that it came about as a result of the Restoration Movement?
23. The doctrines of the Carriage
Hills church of Christ here in Montgomery are well known. Would you
fellowship them? Would you encourage the young people at Landmark
to join in with them for devotionals, etc.?
24. Do you endorse the magazines,
"Image" or "Wineskins?"
25. Do you believe that it is
scriptural to accept people into the fellowship of the church of
Christ based upon their denominational baptism?
26. Do you believe that there are
other scriptural reasons than fornication (Matt. 19:9) that the
innocent party in a divorce can remarry?
27. Do you believe that it is
scriptural to use material (lessons, filmstrips, etc.) prepared by
denominations in the worship service or Bible classes?
28. Do you believe it is scriptural
to let a denominational preacher use our church buildings to speak
on whatever subject they choose?
29. Do you think that it is
scriptural for the church to have car washes, yard sales, etc. to
raise money for the work of the church?
Thank you for taking the time to
read this letter and giving consideration to answer these
questions. I hope to hear from you very soon. I want you to know
that I have absolutely no ill will toward you and if you have truly
repented, I believe there would be great rejoicing in all of the
Lord's church. I know there would be on my part!
O. B. Porterfield, minister
The Seibles Road church of Christ
.Return to Table of Contents
The A.D. 70 System
of Kingism #3
(The Resurrection Of All The Dead Occurred In A.D. 70)
Garland M. Robinson
"The author sincerely believes that the
general resurrection belongs to the same time and event as given to
the coming of Christ, the judgment, end of the world, and receiving
of the eternal kingdom." "This text deals with spiritual, not
physical death, which is fairly evident from the context. The
quickening power of God and Christ (John 5:19-23) has to do with
spiritual regeneration." (Max King, Spirit of Prophecy,
The teaching of Kingism says that
the references to the resurrection in the New Testament have to do
with a spiritual resurrection and not a resurrection of the body.
Their view is that the church of Christ which began on Pentecost
(33 A.D.), was stifled, repressed, restrained by the Old Law of
Moses. The Lord's church, they say, ran concurrently with the Law
of Moses until the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. At that
time, the body of the church was "resurrected" (in a spiritual
sense) from the shackles of Judaism and received in its full glory
and power. Therefore, references to the resurrection have to do
with the spiritual resurrection of Christianity.
Again, with this teaching comes the
immediate question, "If the resurrection of all the dead occurred
at the destruction of Jerusalem, then where are they now and what
are we that are alive doing here? Why are the grave yards still
full and men around the world continue, day by day, to populate
them even more?" Good questions!
The Holy, inspired Scriptures,
easily refutes this wild and reckless doctrine. Jesus said,
"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all
that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29And shall come forth; they that have done
good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil,
unto the resurrection of damnation" (John 5:28-29). As per
Kingism, this is a reference to the church under the persecuting
domination of Judaism. But, this Scripture speaks of "all" that
are in the graves. Literally, two Greek words are used in this
verse, both of which are plural, saying "all those" in
the tombs. Question, is the church plural? Were there
churches being smothered by Judaism? No, the church is one
body, not many (Eph. 4:4; 1 Cor. 12:13).
If that were not enough, consider
this: was the church "dead" for the first 40 years of its
existence? Did the Lord establish dead, lifeless, bodies (the
church) which would be resurrected from the graves (tombs, plural)
in A.D. 70? Imagine, the Lord died and shed His blood in order to
purchase and establish a dead religious system that consisted of
"bodies" (plural) and placed in "graves" (plural) to be resurrected
40 years later! Who can believe it?
Further, there are two classes of
"all those" that will be resurrected from the "graves" in John
5:28-29: some have done good while others have done evil. Each
class of "all those" (individuals, plural) will receive that which
is due them. There's no way in the world to arrive at any other
conclusion than to understand that this verse identifies a general
resurrection of "all those" that have lived upon the earth, from
Adam and Eve, to the last person in the world.
Between A.D. 30 and A.D. 70, was
there a good church(s) and an evil church(s)? Were both
resurrected and each received that which was due them? Outrageous!
This text cannot be explained in any way other than a general
resurrection of "all those" dead ones (bodies) who have been buried
in "graves" around the world since the beginning of time.
In writing to the church at Corinth,
Paul discusses at length the resurrection of the dead (1 Cor. 15).
He establishes the fact of the Lord's death, burial and
resurrection from the grave (vs.1-11). The brethren there believed
and accepted that fact. However, in verse 12 we read, "Now if
Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among
you that there is no resurrection of the dead?" The Holy Spirit
emphatically sets forth, in the remainder of the chapter, the fact
that those who have died will one day be raised from the dead just
as Christ was raised from the dead. Christ's bodily resurrection
is used as a comparison or likeness of our own bodily resurrection.
Heaven's argument is,
13...If there be no
resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: 14And if Christ be not risen, then is our
preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. 15Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God;
because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ:
whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 16For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ
raised: 17And if Christ be not raised,
faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ
are perished. 19If in this life only we
have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 20But now is Christ risen from the dead, and
become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21For since by man came death, by man came also the
resurrection of the dead. 22For as in
all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23But every man in his own order: Christ the
firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming"
(1 Cor. 15:13-23).
One day, yet in the future, those
who have died will come out of their graves and stand before the
Lord to be judged (2 Cor. 5:10)! Our body will be changed! It
will not be the body that was buried for flesh and blood cannot
inherit the kingdom of heaven (1 Cor. 15:36-58). None the less,
there will be a bodily resurrection of all the dead. Every verse
in this text makes plain that what is under consideration are
humans, people, those who once lived and have died. There's no way
the church is spoken of here because it is alive and singular, not
dead and plural. The church does not have now, nor has ever had,
"flesh and blood" (cf. v.50). Adam (a living human being) died
even as all humans die as a consequence of his sin. Through
Christ, all (along with Adam) will one day be made alive (v.22).
Christ is referred to as the
"firstfruits" of them that sleep (vs.20-23). That is, Christ was
the first to be raised from the dead never to die again. For Him
to be the first, implies there were others to follow. That is the
argument and point of First Corinthians 15. But, if the
resurrection occurred in A.D. 70 and it was only a "spiritual"
resurrection, then that necessitates the Lord's resurrection was
only a spiritual resurrection -- that He did not literally, bodily,
rise from the grave! But He did rise from the grave! He walked,
talked and ate with the apostles (John 21). He showed them the
scars in his hands, feet and side (cf. Luke 24:39-40; John 20:20-
The Lord's resurrection from the
grave is proof of our future resurrection from the grave (1 Cor.
15:12-22). "But every man in his own order: Christ the
firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming"
(1 Cor. 15:23). It is inconceivable to imagine how some say
the resurrection is past already -- long ago in 70 A.D. and, that
it was the spiritual resurrection of the church from under the
suppression of Judaism.
The Bible often speaks of departures
from the truth and provides ample information to refute such
damnable doctrines. Error concerning the final, universal,
resurrection from the dead is nothing new in our generation. There
were even those as far back as the first century that believed and
taught damnable error with regard to the resurrection. Two men
especially were immortalized in heaven's book, the Bible, in
calling their names and marking them for their error for all time.
Read it, 16"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will
increase unto more ungodliness. 17And their word will eat as doth
a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the
resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of
some" (2 Tim. 2:16-18; Rom. 16:17-18). Notice: saying the
resurrection has already occurred is a doctrine of no little
consequence. Those who so believe and teach have left the faith
and overthrow the faith of others! It is not and can not be an
optional matter to deny the final resurrection of all the dead. It
is a matter of faith -- a matter of fellowship -- a matter of
heaven or hell. To deny the future resurrection of all the dead is
to deny the resurrection of Christ and to deny the resurrection of
Christ makes salvation impossible and our preaching to be vain (1
Return to Table of Contents
1996 Bound Volume of
Seek The Old Paths
$5 (includes postage)
Make check payable to
Old Paths Publishing
304 Ripley St.
Corinth, MS 38834
Bound Volume ready in January, 1997
Only 200 available!
The 1996 Volume has been sold out
Seek The Old Paths
Lectureship books available.
1996 -- The Seven Churches of Asia, $5
1995 -- The Church at Corinth, $4
1994 -- Immorality, $3.50
Shipping/Handling -- 1 book, $1.50
2-3 books, $2.25
All books are sold by Old Paths Publishing,
not the church.
Send order to:
Old Paths Publishing
304 Ripley St.
Corinth, MS 38834
Table of Contents |
Seek The Old Paths |
East End Church of Christ
This page has been turned to times since 12/6/96.