Jesus told many stories and then asked his listeners to tell him the answer to his questions about them
This is really a very effective way to be sure that the lesson that we want to make is being understood When it comes to reunion discussions wc have often been told that words mean different things to different people and that many of our brethren in another fellowship actually believe the same as we do but simply express it differently
Perhaps the easiest way to avoid any misunderstanding is to employ the principle that Jesus used and tell a simple story and ask our brethren to give us their answer When one asked our Lord “And who is my neighbour? ‘ Jesus proceeded to tell him the story we know as The Good Samaritan At the end of the story, Jesus asked his questioner the question, “Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? ‘
By adopting the example given to us by Jesus, let us approach our unamended brethren with the following story and then let them tell us what will happen to each young man in the story and the Biblical principle involved
‘There were three young men living near a Christadelphian Hall and they attended the same school that a number of young Christadephians went to These young men had no knowledge of the Bible whatever, their parents being atheists William joined the army and was sent overseas Richard and Robert became acquainted with some Christadelphian young people and began to attend CYC functions In due course of time both of these young men became interested in Bible study and asked for instruction for baptism They attended a first principle class for a number of months and soon had a good knowledge of the things of God Both young men applied for baptism and were interviewed in preparation for baptism Both gave a good confession of their faith and the date of the baptism was set The day before baptism, Robert had a change of heart and decided not to be baptized after all Richard was not affected by Robert’s withdrawal and proceeded to be baptized for the remission of his sins Several months later William came home from overseas on leave and the three boys decided to go to the beach together On the way they are involved in a terrible automobile accident and all three young men are killed instantly”
Now we need to ask our unamended brethren to please tell us what will happen to each boy when Jesus returns to raise the dead We will all have the same answer for William who knew nothing about the Bible and Richard who was baptized for the remission of his sins Robert is the question mark He knew the truth, he passed the baptismal interview and then decided to turn his back upon God Does he escape resurrectional judgment and sleep on as William will or will he be raised ? That is the question Next we need to know what Biblical principle is involved with whatever it is that happens to him God does not do things arbitrarily, He always has principles that He has laid down in His word The amended fellowship has an abundance of scriptures that we would bring to bear to show that light is the ground for responsibility and that Robert will be raised to answer for his sins Not only do we believe this with all our hearts, we believe that it is a first principle of our faith We believe it so strongly that our statement of faith was amended to exclude those who do not believe it This has been our position for well over eighty years
None of us like division All sincere Christadelphians want to be united with those who hold the same truths The question that must be answered is, do we hold the same truths? Our unamended brethren have stated and we quote, the vast majority of their members do not believe that the enlightened rejector will be raised to appear at the judgment seat of Christ ‘ By this statement they have really answered the question concerning the young man Robert in our story
Where does this now leave us? When our unamended brethren plainly tell us that they believe just the opposite of what we hold to be a first principle of truth, we have only two choices One, is to hold fast to our faith and lovingly tell our unamended brethren that we cannot compromise our position on a first principle of truth or two, throw away our amended statement of faith and say that we now believe that this wrong doctrine is an acceptable wrong doctrine and will no longer affect our fellowship with those who hold it This second position is totally unacceptable to those who believe that this is a first principle of our faith The unamended brethren understand our position and honor it They have said that they also have first principles upon which they are not willing to compromise Of course they do All sincere Christadelphians believe in what the world calls closed communion The emblems of our Lord are not available to anyone who happens to attend our memorial service This is true in both the amended and the unamended fellowship They, like us, exclude from their table those who hold different views on what they consider to be first principles
Whenever we exclude someone from the Lord s table, we run the risk of being accused of being unloving and unChristlike Both fellowships are exposed to this accusation by the world but we cannot be affected by the false accusations of those who would try to get us to break down our standards upon first principles The only way to completely eliminate divisions would be to adopt an open fellowship and let anyone partake This thought is abhorrent to all Christadelphians
Divisions are sad But divisions should not surprise us In fact, we should be surprised if there were no divisions because Jesus actually promised us that they would exist Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth ? I tell you, Nay, but rather division If there were absolutely no divisions within our body we would be proving Jesus wrong As long as we hold the truth to be more important than our personal feelings we will continue to have division We cannot ask brethren who believe differently than us to compromise their beliefs in order to accommodate us, nor should we allow them to persuade us to forsake what we believe is a first principle in order to have reunion with them
This is putting our love for God ahead of all else Every Christadelphian loves someone that they cannot break bread with It may be a parent or child or even a spouse but our love for God must come first. We must not accuse one another of lacking love when we refuse to compromise upon a first principle. Those who believe the same should be together. Those who believe differently should be content to be apart until their differences are resolved The amended reunion committee has worked very hard for many years to see if reunion could be achieved. We believe that the reason reunion has not been achieved is because there are real differences in belief We cannot make someone else believe what we believe is the truth, and we cannot compromise the truth One of our Bible school teachers this past summer made the point on this subject that “if we were sure at one time that this is the truth, and it is the truth, then it will always be true and it can never be untrue “
This is one of the things that has separated us from the world around us They are constantly changing their beliefs. God does not change This division occurred many years ago because some began to believe and teach what we sincerely believe is an error If it was error then it must still be error now The only way to have reunion with those who believed error is by becoming convinced that they no longer believe the error The homely story of the three boys immediately determines what one believes concerning resurrection Robert is either raised or not raised There is nothing in between If someone cannot forthrightly declare that Robert will come from the grave, then that person does not believe the same as we do This does not mean that we do not love them It simply means that our love for God’s truth must overrule our personal desire to be united with those who believe what we feel is a fundamental error
For this reason, we can appreciate the tremendous responsibility that has rested on the shoulders of our reunion committee over the years It has been their responsibility to represent us in meeting with our unamended brethren to see if in fact the error that used to exist still exists. They have been unjustly accused by some of being stubborn, but it is not stubbornness to stand up for the truth. Reunion has not taken place because our unamended brethren have not been able to say that they believe what they do not believe. We must respect this. We are not asking them to compromise. They have stated to us in a letter dated September 5, 1981 that “It has become evident that there exists a variation in the concept of the outworking of God’s plan of salvation between the Unamended group and the spokesmen for the Amended group . . . The variation has to do with mankind’s inherited effects from Adam’s sin and also it has to do with what remedy baptism provides in connection with these effects. It is evident that the relationship to God at birth, before the commission of the first personal sin, of Adam’s progeny is viewed differently by the two groups.’
By having said this, they are plainly telling us that we believe differently. Now we believe that this “difference” is a first principle of our faith. The cause of the division was this difference of belief If it were right to have had the division because of this difference, then the division can only end in reunion when the cause is removed Our brethren in the unamended fellowship are telling us that the cause is still there. They made this clear when they said concerning the amendment (clause 24 of the BASF) “Since the Unamended do not believe that the Amendment is Scripturally supportable we cannot agree to accord this clause the status of Truth ” We do believe it is true They do not This is why there was a division in the first place and this is why reunion has not taken place.
We need to respect the beliefs of others even if we do not agree with them. We should not be angry Sometimes we find angry people pointing their finger at others accusing them of having no love and there are three fingers of “no love” being pointed back at the angry one doing the pointing It is certainly not wrong to be disappointed that the reunion which we have worked so hard to accomplish for so many years has not taken place. We love our unamended brethren and wish that we could agree but have no right to force them into saying they believe like us when they are honestly telling us that they cannot “agree to accord this clause (our belief) the status of Truth.”
There are two points we each need to remember.
- We believe that light is a basis of resurrectional responsibility to the judgment seat of Christ. They have said that “the vast majority of their members do not believe that the enlightened rejector will be raised to appear at the judgment seat of Christ.”
- We believe that this belief is a first principle of our faith.
James tells us that we do well if we fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” Our true love for our brethren and sisters will prevent us from asking them to compromise their beliefs. Until we can agree, we must lovingly agree to differ. It is our prayer that God will be merciful to each of us. He has said, “I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.”
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One