Can Two Walk Together, Except They Be Agreed? – Amos 3:3
Until
the late 1800s the Christadelphian body was a unified group believing the same
basic doctrines. These doctrines were arranged into what was known as the
Statement of Faith along with the Biblical proof for each doctrine. This
Statement of Faith along with certain doctrines to be rejected and the
commandments of Christ were used as the basis for fellowship among
Christadelphians and to show the world how Christadelphians differed from the
churches of the world. In the late 1800s a new teaching began to be taught among some Christadelphians. This idea seems
to have stemmed from the belief that to know the "revealed will of
God" and to refuse baptism was a special sin that required a special
punishment. It was decided that these rejectors would have to be resurrected by
Christ and condemned to a second death. This was to take place at the same time
and place as the resurrection and judgment of those in covenant relationship with
God. Since the original Statement of Faith specified that only the faithful and
unfaithful [the specific word used in that Statement of Faith was "servants"]
in Christ would be resurrected and judged by him at this time, it became
necessary for this group of Christadelphians to make a change in the Statement
of Faith. The change was made to include the so-called enlightened rejector in
the resurrection and judgment along with the believers in Christ and this was
then made a test of fellowship by those making the change. Consequently there
have been two major groups since that time calling themselves Christadelphians,
the Unamended (Unchanged) and the Amended (Changed).
What
appeared as a slight difference in the two Statements of Faith has become many
differences in the fundamental doctrines of the two groups. These differences
show up mostly in the doctrines dealing with the nature of man, the nature and
sacrifice of Christ, and in the purpose for and effects of baptism. The
Unamended believe that all men are descended from Adam, born of a woman,
inheriting at birth a legal condemnation to eternal death, legal alienation
from God, and mortality with its propensity to sin. They believe that in order
to be subject to resurrection by Christ one must have been baptized (in this
dispensation) into him; cleansed of the alienation due to legal condemnation
and all personal or committed sins. They believe that Christ, being born of a
woman, a descendant of Adam, had this same alienation due to legal condemnation
as well as mortality, and that in order for him to be resurrected he had to be
cleansed by his own blood. This was done in symbol at circumcision, at
attaining maturity and at baptism. Upon his actual death he then became
eligible for, and entitled to resurrection and the gift of immortality.
The
Amended believe that no man, including Christ, inherits from Adam anything
other than mortality; that there is no legal condemnation or alienation from
God at birth. They believe that man needs baptism only to cleanse him from his
committed personal sins and to free him from a condemnation to a second death
due to having heard the "revealed will of God" taught. They believe
that Christ was baptized only to show the way for others to obtain salvation
but that his baptism had nothing to do with his own need for resurrection.
These
differences are not all that separate the two groups but they are some of the
more basic ones and should show the extent of the gap that exists between the
two groups.
Several
years ago an effort was made to examine the differences to see if agreement
could be reached and a reunion achieved between the two groups. Nationwide
committees were appointed by both groups and a series of meetings were held
over a period of several years. After these meetings it became apparent that
accord could not be reached as neither group was willing to change its beliefs
nor to compromise. A decision to discontinue the meetings was made and the
reunion effort was shelved.
Since
that time some members of both groups who were not satisfied with this effort
have commenced a new effort toward reunion. The approach they take is
completely different from the other effort in that they have tried to minimize
and even ignore the differences between the Unamended and Amended and are
seeking to join the two groups without resolving any of these differences. In
one of their circulars they have referred to the differences as
"artificial barriers." In their appeal for unity they have completely
ignored the scriptural requirements for true unity, disregarding the thoughts expressed
by God in Amos 3:3, "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"
Also the words of Christ in Mark 3:25, "And if a house be divided against
itself, that house cannot stand."
Two
groups of people or two individuals who have differing beliefs concerning God's
fundamental doctrines cannot both be right. Both can be wrong, but both cannot
be right. In our case either the Unamended or the Amended are wrong in their
beliefs concerning these differences and the joining of right and wrong
together will produce chaos, not unity and peace.
I
would now like to refer to three scriptural references used in one of the new
reunion circulars. In a section entitled "Appeals for Unity" there
are several scriptures referred to but the following three I want to examine at
this time as they show what the scriptural appeal for unity really means.
"Now
I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all
speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be
perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."
"Now
the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward
another according to Jesus Christ: that ye may with one mind and one mouth
glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."
"Fulfill
ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of
one mind."
Notice
that in all three references it is stressed that believers be of one mind or thought, of one
speech or teaching. Can this be possible with different doctrines on the
fundamentals of the gospel? Even though joined together the two groups would
not be in unity as the Bible teaches unity.
Another
scripture referred to in this circular is where Christ is praying on behalf of
his followers in John 17:21-23, "That they all may be one; as thou,
Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the
world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I
have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou
in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that
thou hast sent me, and loved them, as thou hast loved me."
The
unity between God and Christ is a unity of thought and word. They believe and
teach the same things. In order for anyone to become unified with God and
Christ they, too, must believe and teach the same things taught by God and
Christ. Can people with two differing beliefs on fundamental doctrines
establish this desired unity with God and Christ? There is no way!
I
would like to refer to another scripture used in the reunion circular in stressing
the need for unity in the body.
"There
is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all,
and through all, and in you all."
To
man's way of thinking there are many acceptable gods, religions, baptisms,
faiths, etc., but to God there is only one acceptable belief. This is the one
gospel taught by his Spirit through the writers of the Bible, and any belief
not in accordance with this gospel is not recognized or accepted by God. Paul
says in Ephesians 4:3 that all true believers should be "endeavoring to
keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." Two groups having
separate beliefs cannot keep the unity of the Spirit nor can they achieve peace
together.
There
is a sadness over there being two separate fellowships among Christadelphians
and it is truly regrettable that such is the case. How did this come about? Did
this not result because one group changed and withdrew from the other over what
they considered to be basic doctrines of truth? Has not this gap widened
through the years due to further changes not in the Statements of Faith, but in
actual doctrines being changed? Fellowship is riot just the act of partaking of
the memorials together but the sharing in common union with God
and Christ and with all those in agreement with them in doctrine and walk. Let
us look at the words of John in 1 John 1:3, "That which we have seen and
heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us; and truly
our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." And
again in 1 John 2:24, "Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have
heard from the beginning. If that ye have heard from the beginning shall remain
in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father."
Which
should be our first concern, establishing and maintaining true fellowship with
God and Christ or establishing a fellowship that cannot be true with a group
not in agreement with God and Christ? As we said earlier, both groups cannot be
in fellowship with God and Christ if they hold differing beliefs on the
fundamental doctrines of the gospel. True unity, fellowship, or peace can only
be established by first correcting the errors that exist in whichever group
they exist and then joining together. Any joining together of the two groups
until the errors are corrected will only result in both groups being out of
fellowship with God and Christ and the possible loss of salvation for all
involved.
Charles
T. Kelley
Del
Rio, Texas