"Receive Him Not .... Neither Bid Him God Speed"
"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." (2 John 9:11).
Yes, I know John was talking about the man who would "confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh." However, there is a principle involved in this scripture which prohibits a Christian from having anything in common with the person who transgresses God's word.
It has been said that the West Coast is a "hot-bed for isms." Perhaps this is true. At least there are many "isms" making their appearance here from time to time. I think, however, this is not limited to the West Coast. We have had, and will perhaps always have, these "isms". It is to be expected in those who are not members of the Lord's church. But when we find it among the members of His Body it is disgusting indeed; among men who wear the name of Gospel preachers of whom we have a right to expect better things. Many indictments have been brought against such men in the pages of the Bible Banner. Indictments which have been proved and substantiated by many infallible proofs. This article is not so much in regard to these men. I am raising the question as to what should be our attitude toward those who receive such false teachers and "bid them God speed"?
Brother Beam has taken upon himself the responsibility of championing the cause of the "Instrumental Music Brethren". He is willing to fight their battle for them. Those brethren may be rejoicing because he is willing to battle for them; for it seems that they are not disposed to champion their own cause. Following this course brother Beam has turned aside from the truth. He has denied the Word of God and spurned the knowledge of recognized men through the generations past. But my Question is: Is Brother Beam in worse condition than the man who will support Beam in his efforts? Recently Central church in Long Beach conducted several nights meetings, using different speakers each night. Among these speakers were preachers who say; "We do not agree with brother Beam on the Music Question". Preachers who have been known to publicly state their position as being contrary to his. These men helped brother Beam and the Central church to stage these meetings. Did they not encourage an erring brother and congregation? It is possible that they could have done what they did without being charged with doing wrong. If they had spoken out against the position of Central and their preacher while making their speeches they would have done well. And there could be no criticism. Did they so speak? If so the information has not come to us. Did Brother Beam feel that he was safe in inviting such men to speak for him? Was he pretty well assured in his own mind that they would not attack his unscriptural position? I know of some preachers who were not invited. Could it be that Ernest knew they would, or at least might, speak against the use of the instrument or declare themselves as being opposed to the position of Central church, I imagine he thought they might do just such a thing and I imagine he would not have been disappointed. Did these brethren violate John's teaching? If so are they not guilty of sin and as much so as brother Beam? Frankly I had as soon espouse a false doctrine as to be guilty of encouraging the one who does.
Certain brethren have banded themselves together in an organization known as Tanda Lodge. At least one of the purposes of such an organization is to do the work which belongs to the Church. We are told that this is separate from the church and that the church is not responsible for it, financially or otherwise. However these brethren make their appeal to the church for support of the organization. They invite members of the church to take part in a contest to raise money for it; and as a reward for their efforts the young people of the winning congregation will be given a free vacation. The Old Fashioned Pie Supper idea was given up for fear it might be wrong. The contest with its prize was substituted in its place. If it is not the responsibility of the church then why make appeals to the church for financial support why send letters to members of a congregation asking them to pledge a certain amount for the support of Tanda Lodge. The Organization seems to compare favorably in its existence with the U. C. M. S. $59,000.00 plus all the interest that will accumulate before the debt is retired doesn't seem like a very good financial venture to begin with; and that to purchase property where Christians may have their vacations and engage in some sort of religious activities. But brethren who are opposed to such additional organizations; at least they tell us they are, will have a part in furthering such an institution; appear on their programs etc. Will they speak out against such an organization? Or will they be identified in the minds of faithful brethren as favoring such? We shall see!
The Bible Banner is doing a fine job in defending the church against all "isms" and every encroachment of false teachers. Those who support, and sympathize with, error stand self condemned. They have drawn the line themselves and are to be rebuked having become partaker of the evil deed.