Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
February 21, 1957


Bill Moseley, Saticoy, California

For as many years as I can remember, and I know many before that, every preacher of the gospel and every other sound member of the Lord's church has always pleaded for consistency. All through the years of debating with denominationalism and fighting the battle against error, in almost every one of these debates, a false teacher is shown to be inconsistent. Why is this so? Simply because they are in error. A man cannot be in error and be consistent at the same time. I think even those in the brotherhood today who endorse the "sponsoring church" type of organization will agree to that. Any clear thinking person can see that to be inconsistent is to be in error somewhere along the line. But it seems that some of my good brethren are not thinking very clearly upon the issues confronting the church today. Could it be that some gospel preachers and elders in the church today are doing the same thing that we have so long condemned the sectarian world for doing? That is, being inconsistent ? It is my honest opinion that that is exactly what is happening in the church today.

For instance, we know that the doctrine of the Methodist church is not only inconsistent with the Bible, but with itself; for it teaches differently now than it did before the year 1910. If it had been all right and consistent, there would have been no need for the change. I think it can be proven beyond any doubt that for a person to endorse the "sponsoring church" type of cooperation that he is not only inconsistent with the Bible but also with himself.

Such things that some brethren are contending for today are not found in the Bible. Therefore, what could it be but inconsistency? I should think that a person would be in a very embarrassing position to hold to some new idea of man that is directly opposite of what God taught.

What member of the church would say that a manmade institution is better than a divinely authorized one? Not many. Any Christian can readily see why the church that Christ established is better than a man-made one. It is better because it exists by the authority of God, and because it is able to save the souls of men. I am sure that those who contend for institutional orphan homes will agree to that.

My point is this. Man can make many beautiful things. We can go to the store and buy such things as flowers that look so real, that only a close examination would reveal the difference. But does that flower have the life and the fragrance to it that the flower does that God has made? Of course not. Again I repeat that anything that God makes is always superior to man-made things.

Now which of our brethren would deny these simple facts? None, I'm sure. But along comes "old man inconsistency." We know that the Bible by the authority of God authorizes two institutions. He authorizes the church as an institution. (Matt. 16:18; Eph. 1:22,23, etc.) He also knows the individual Christian home because he compares the church and Christ to the husband and wife. (Eph 5.)

Now it seems today that some men in the church have the idea that man-made orphan homes are better than the God-authorized Christian home. Why not put the needy in a private Christian home? There are surely enough such homes in this country. Indeed it is a fact that it is so.

Now we can see what this will lead to. Preachers will say that the church that Christ died for is better than a man-made one. Why will they be so inconsistent as to say that God's home is not as good as man's? That, in effect, is what they say, when they erect, and expect the church to support such a thing. It seems to me that certain preachers are going to have to give up their institutional ideas, or say that Christ died in vain. Which will it be, brethren? If the church that God built is better than man's, why isn't his home?

I nor any other man can find a scripture to authorize an "orphan home" in their present form. So let's be consistent with the Bible. Do things in Bible ways, such as good Christian homes. I am not condemning orphan homes if they are operated scripturally, but today they are few and far between. When will brethren see that? I for one am here to contend that since his church is better, so is his home.