Sullivan church of Christ – Sullivan, MO
Date: December 11, 2005
A FORGOTTEN FORM OF FELLOWSHIP
David B. Smith
No faithful saint would deny that fellowship is a treasured aspect of
Christianity. The joy of the common salvation, the like precious faith, as saints
agree upon the Truth, exists far more beautiful than human words can describe.
Indeed, approved fellowship is a refreshing drink of cool water to the soul; for,
there is something uniquely special about the cooperation of God’s children
upon the foundation of the Truth and for the cause of the Truth. Faithful saints
need other faithful saints in their daily task of living right and pressing toward
the attainment of the crown of righteousness. And, so, within the framework of
fellowship exists the ability to bid one God speed, to endorse his righteous
activity, to participate in acts of holiness together, et cetera; truth, of course, is
the standard for fellowship (II John 9-11). Fellowship, then, is not an issue to
be taken lightly. There are conditions that require constant attention, which, if
violated, promote the devil’s agenda and breach the beautiful relationship that
once existed between God and the violators of His doctrine. A full knowledge of
fellowship, its implications and its limitations, is therefore required of every
child of the Almighty.
Standard definitions of fellowship, in the practical sense, having likely fallen on
two extremes. Some understand the nature of fellowship, but refuse to practice
consistent with the definitions, while others engage in activities without an
understanding that such activities constitute an extension of fellowship. Most,
however, understand that fellowship involves a joint participation, cooperation,
the ability to endorse, and such like. For a large number, then, it is easy to
understand the participating in some spiritual service, such as a lectureship, or
endorsing the spiritual status of another, such as advertising and/or promoting
some activity of an individual or congregation, equates to a reciprocal extension
of fellowship on the part of every person involved. Yet, there seems to exist a
general deficiency of knowledge with regard to what has become a forgotten form
of fellowship — giving and receiving. Perhaps some are ignorant willfully of this
particular form of fellowship, knowing the admission of such would require the
refusal or cessation of certain moneys either outgoing or incoming, respectively.
Regardless of what claims maybe made to the contrary, though, giving and
receiving is indeed an extension of spiritual fellowship. This is ably affirmed by
Paul of the Philippians, when of them he states that “no church communicated
[“had fellowship,” ASV] with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only”
(Phil. 4:15).
The term “communicated” (KJV) or “had fellowship” (ASV), is a translation of the
verb koinoneo. This verb is from the root koinonos, which simply inheres
“fellowship.” Kittel concludes, “the word is especially adapted to express inner
relationship” (Gerhard Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
[Grand Rapids: Eerdmans], 1965, vol. 3, p. 797). Relationships or activities
described by these words are more than mere, casual acquaintances; they
express activities or relationships in which both parties are enjoined in the
closest possible sense and agree mutually which the spiritual state of the
other. This is well established from the negative uses of the verb, such as in I
Tim. 5:22 and II John 11. In both instances, one who endorses or engages with
someone in sin is as guilty in the sin as any other party involved. Thus, the
Greeks would employ the verb koinoneo with phonon tini to indicate that one was
an accomplice in the murder of someone. Hence, the verb inheres a sharing, a
partnership, an agreement, a taking part with another or a communion with
another party. And, as pertaining to the area of giving and receiving, Greek
lexicographers Moulton and Milligan rightly confirm that “koinoneo is always used
of active participation, when the result depends on the cooperation of the
receiver as well as on the action of the giver” (J.H. Moulton and G. Milligan,
Vocabulary of the Greek Testament [Peabody, MA: Hendrickson], 1930, p.
351). Hence, in the spiritual, “giving and receiving,” the accomplishment of the
spiritual task depends upon both actions — making the givers and the receivers
equal parties together in the spiritual task. Giving and receiving is fellowship.
Application is the hardest part for some, since the truth of the matter will
perhaps require a revision of certain actions (whether of giving or receiving). But,
truth is the issue here; purity is at stake in this crucial matter. No person or
congregation may either give to or receive from another individual or congregation
who resides in error on some point. To do so would make the pure impure, as he
or they would now be party to the error. For instance, congregation (A) starts a
work that requires more monetary assistance than can be covered by
congregation (A) alone. Request for financial assistance is noised abroad, and
soon the number of congregations who wish to help grows. Of the congregations
who wish to help, congregation (B) is known to teach the error of “unity in
diversity;” congregation (C) tolerates immoral activity; and congregation (D) holds
error with regard to divorce and remarriage. All of the other congregations are
doctrinally sound. Needing financial assistance to get the program “off the
ground,” congregation (A) accepts the financial support of every congregation who
offered, including B, C, and D. But, in receiving support from other
congregations, congregation (A) has endorsed every congregation in the
endeavor. Now congregation (A) is party to false doctrine and immorality, by
consent. The same is true of giving. Suppose that congregation (A) is searching
for a work to support, rather than receiving. Congregation (B), who holds the
error of “unity in diversity,” is offering a program that seems to have the
potential of great appeal in the community. A decision is made by congregation
(A) to give congregation (B) support in their endeavor. Once again, congregation
(A) is party to error, by the process Paul called “giving and receiving.” This
principle is applicable to every spiritual labor, be it a lectureship, a radio
program, or such like. “Giving and receiving” in faithful works, among the
faithful, is truly a rewarding experience, but the giving and receiving between any
party of unfaithfulness is spiritual injurious to all involved.
Ultimately, there will be those who rebel against the very principle of “giving and
receiving.” The plea is often heard that “the end justifies the means,” that “the
devil’s had the money long enough,” But, who could believe that such an
attitude is becoming of Christians, who are to be transformed daily into the
image of the Christ? Regardless of what “defense” may be offered to the
contrary, the Sacred text will still affirm that “giving and receiving” is fellowship
(Phil. 4:15). And this is perhaps where a word of wisdom can be offered: no
congregation or individual should endeavor to start a work that cannot be begun
and sustained by the assistance of faithful brethren, and faithful brethren only.
This is merely the principle of “counting the cost,” in the most practical form.
Too often, brethren start what would otherwise be a great work, but find
themselves desperately short of the basic needs after starting. In turn, this
usually leads to a compromise in receiving support from those with whom the
Lord has no fellowship. This should signal a clear warning to all that prevention
is the key. Questionnaires and the information passed along by reliable
brethren is necessary, not wrong. The goal is to do all things by the authority of
the Christ (Col. 3:17), and this requires the acknowledgement of and respect for
the sometimes forgotten form of fellowship — giving and receiving.
—Via “The Informer,” Weekly Bulletin of the Northside church of Christ,
Calhoun, GA, 01/03/2002
NOTE: SEE BULLETIN INSERT below that addresses the Northside/Highland
exchange on this issue.
THE NORTHSIDE/HIGHLAND EXCHANGE CONCERNING
GIVING AND RECEIVING AS FELLOWSHIP
[NOTE: Quotes in Blue are from the Northside congregation, and quotes in
red are from the Highland congregation.]
The elders of the Northside church of Christ of Calhoun, GA wrote a letter to the
Highland church of Christ of Dalton, GA on April 26, 2004. The letter concerned
itself with the issue of giving and receiving as fellowship, as Phil. 4:15 teaches.
This letter informed the Highland congregation that they were guilty of
fellowshipping erring congregations by receiving and accepting funds to support
“Preaching The Gospel” TV program.
The fact is, Highland actually withdrew from the Central church of Christ in
Dalton, GA in July 2002. They refused to receive funds from this apostate
congregation. As the Northside elders correctly noted, the elders of Highland did
the Biblical thing by refusing to be involved with an apostate congregation. The
letter states, “When you (Highland elders — BJ) refused to be in fellowship with
Central and sent their support checks back to their elders, you were practicing
the Biblical teaching on fellowship, (Rom. 16:17; Eph. 5:11; 2 Cor. 6:14; Phil. 1:5-
7; Phil. 4:15-17; 2 John 10-11). You showed us, how to handle the fellowship
issue regarding ‘giving and receiving’ and we commend you for doing that.” The
letters goes on to inform the Highland elders that Central was not the only
apostate congregation which supported “Preaching The Gospel” TV program. As
the letter states, “There is evidence of other congregations who support this
work who are more blatant in their apostasy than Central.” I don’t know about
you, but I would very much appreciate being warned of other congregations even
“more blatant in their apostasy than Central.”
The elders of Northside continued to write the following:
When a faithful congregation is involved in this program with Highland and you
(the overseeing eldership) receive an apostate congregation's support, we all
become joint participants, not only with Highland, but with the apostate
congregations as well. When the TV program advertises the names of those
apostate congregations at the end of each program as “one of the churches of
Christ in your community who makes this program possible” we are then
endorsing them and therefore are biding them “God’s speed” (2 John 10-11).
This causes the Northside eldership great concern for the spiritual welfare of
Northside, Highland and all other faithful congregations involved in this work.
The Northside eldership asked the Highland elders the following question:
Would the Highland congregation and her eldership participate in any of
the following activities or fellowship those who do? (Emphasis, theirs)
“Children Church”, “Winterfest”, “Impact at Lipscomb”, “Uplift at Harding”,
“Churches of Christ Disaster Relief, Inc.”, “Herald of Truth”, “Lads To
Leaders/Leaderettes, Inc.”, “Support Any Para-church organizations whether
Medical, Benevolent or Evangelist”, “Church Ball Leagues”, “Car Wash or Garage
Sale to Raise Funds For Mission Trip”, “Church Gymnasiums”, “Puppet or Drama
Shows”, “Singing groups such as ‘Acappella’ or ‘Corner Stone’, etc.”, “Small
Group Meetings replacing Sunday evening services”, “Celebrate Christmas or
Easter”, “Praise Teams”, “Female Ministry Leaders”, “We Care Campaign”, etc…
Would you fellowship those who engage in the following sins? “Adulterous
Marriage”, “Social Drinking”, “Those who attend the Dance, Prom, etc.”, “Those
that hold and teach error on the ‘WORK’ of the Holy Spirit today”, etc…
Would you fellowship or allow the following men to speak in your pulpit?
(Emphasis, theirs) “Larry West”, “Randy Becton”, “Steve Flatt”, “Walt Leaver”,
“Joe Beam”, “David Newberry”, “F. Lagard Smith”, “Charles Hodge”, “Patrick
Mead”, “Harold Hazelip”, “Keith Parker”, “Jerrie Barber”, “Jack Evans”, etc…
Would you encourage your congregation to attend a denomination for a
(Emphasis theirs) “Love Won Out Conference” sponsored by “Focus On The
Family”? We don’t believe that you would allow such activities, sins, speakers
or joint denominational participation. But, some of the current supporters of
“Preaching The Gospel” are engaged in one or more of the above digressions.
The following list represents just a few of the congregations who practice
at least one or more of the digressions listed above and are participating
in “Preaching The Gospel” TV program. (Emphasis theirs) “East Brainerd,
Chattanooga, TN”; “Hendersonville, Hendersonville, TN”; “Hillsboro, Hillsboro,
TN”; “Mountain Creek, Chattanooga, TN”; “West End, Knoxville, TN”;
“Woodstock, Woodstock, GA”. There are others but this list is sufficient to make
our point.
Then, the Northside eldership made this very pertinent observation: “Non-
Christians who hear these good sermons by brother Watkins do not know the
‘spiritual’ danger that they will encounter when they attend one of these
advertised apostate congregations (Rom. 16:18).”
The question is, “How did the Highland elders respond to the legitimate issues
and concerns raised by the Northside elders?” Remember, the Northside elders
sent their letter on April 26, 2004. They did not receive a reply back from the
Highland elders until October 20, 2004. Needless to say, they didn’t touch top,
side, or bottom concerning what Phil. 4:15 teaches concerning “giving and
receiving” as fellowship. The Highland elders state,
Though we are appreciative for the sincere interest that you have demonstrated
in the work we oversee, and are sensitive to the opinions you hold as dear
brethren in Christ, we would respectfully disagree with any suggestion that we
are in violation of scriptural teaching regarding Preaching the Gospel Television
Program. We find no scriptural reasons to verify the implication that the
Highland congregation is in any violation of God’s word in receiving funds for this
or any other work we are involved with.
The Highland elders make this following argument:
First, we are not aware of any supporting congregations that have been publicly
withdrawn from by the faithful brethren in their area. Perhaps this is why not a
single eldership, outside of our dear brethren at Northside, has ever questioned
contributors of Preaching the Gospel. If a congregation has not been publicly
marked and withdrawn from by the faithful brethren in their own area, it would
seem odd to say the least to ask a congregation such as Highland to not receive
funds from a church that area brethren may perhaps consider to be weak in the
faith, but not completely apostate.
In Northside’s second letter to the Highland eldership, they answer this
argument very easily. They ask the Highland elders,
Why is it acceptable to receive funds from a congregation who has digressed to
the same degree or even to a greater level than the Calhoun and Central
congregations? It seems odd, to say the least, that just because a congregation
has not been, “publicly marked and withdrawn from by the faithful brethren in
their area”, they are considered to be somehow less unfaithful.
The argument made by the Highland eldership has nothing to do whatsoever with
the real issue. It is a feeble attempt to get around it. Whether or not area
congregations have publicly marked and withdrawn from other area congregations
who are in error has no bearing on the issue.
The Highland elders also make the argument that some of the congregations
pointed out by the Northside elders are weak in the faith, but not apostate. But,
this is a denial of the evidence. In Northside’s second letter to them, they call
them on it. They state,
It is not whether a congregation, such as Highland, can receive funds from a
congregation that area brethren may perhaps consider to be weak in the faith.
The issue before us is whether or not a faithful congregation of the Lord’s church
can be engaged in a joint work with a “known apostate congregation” (whether
they have been marked and withdrawn from or not) and not be in violation of
scripture on fellowship.
Just to give proof that the Highland Eldership does not care about whom they
receive support from to support their works (Preaching The Gospel and now
Gospel Broadcasting Network), congregations all over the country have received
solicitations from Highland to financially support their works. The Sullivan
congregation has received a few of these. Now, I have a question: WHAT DO
THE HIGHLAND ELDERS KNOW ABOUT THE SULLIVAN CONGREGATION?
The answer is that they know not a thing; for all they know, we could be an
apostate congregation, having women preachers, mechanical instruments of
music, or teach the A.D. 70 heresy, known as Max Kingism. Did they ask any
doctrinal questions? No, they did not. All they wanted was our money to
support their multi-million dollar broadcasting outfit.
Does it make any difference as to whom we fellowship in evangelistic and
edification efforts. The Bible still teaches that giving and receiving is fellowship
(Phil. 4:15). Plain and simple! [READ THE BULLETIN ARTICLE, “A
FORGOTTEN FORM OF FELLOWSHIP,” WRITTEN BY DAVID B. SMITH THAT
CLEARLY SHOWS FROM THE WORD OF GOD THAT FELLOWSHIP IS GIVING
AND RECEIVING.] If it doesn’t make any difference from whom we receive funds
to support our works, then why not solicit and receive support from every
denomination in town?
Here is another argument that the Highland elders bring up in diversion to the
real issue at hand. In essence, they ask about receiving a check that a non-
member or an erring Christian places into the collection plate. Their argument
is that in order to be consistent, Northside (and all congregations) would have to
return the check that was placed into the collection plate. The Highland elders
also asked about receiving a memorial gift donated to the church library.
The above argument is one that has been asked before, but it is not the same.
It is mixing two different issues. It is comparing apples to oranges. The
Northside elders aptly and sufficiently answer this argument. Notice the
following quotes from their letters:
Is there a difference between accepting contributions for a specific church work
and accepting a check in the contribution? Our response would be “yes.”
Worship is something God accepts on an individual basis. God holds each
individual accountable for his/her worship. When the whole church comes
together to worship there are unfaithful members present who engage in the five
avenues of worship. There are non-Christians who also participate. Each
individual is only accountable for himself/herself. The acceptance of all five acts
of worship are accepted or rejected by God as they are being executed. Worship
“in giving” is accepted or rejected when it is given, not when it is deposited in
the bank. If our acceptance of worship is dependent on everyone in the assembly
being a faithful Christian then heavens doors are bared. So the analogy given is
invalid.
As to the issue of fellowship regarding a church library, you suggested, "funds by
an unfaithful member towards the purchase of books for the library did not
transgress God’s law on fellowship”. Our concerns with this issue that you
raised did not involve whether or not one could accept a memorial gift donated to
a library or cash or check placed in the collection plate. You stated in both of
your responses that there is no transgression of God's law on fellowship in
either instance, to this we agree. To accept a book for a library would be no
different than accepting a month's free utilities from N.G.E.M.C. What joint work
would a congregation be participating in to do so? This would be no more an act
of fellowship than giving a check to keep receiving electrical services. But we
continue to ("attempt" to) make a distinction between a worship service and a
joint evangelistic effort. Christians are not engaging in fellowship with the
apostate or sinner who drops a dollar or thousand dollars into the collection any
more than Christians would be in fellowship with the same apostate or sinner
who would choose to sing, pray, listen to the preaching or partake of the Lord's
Supper. And if the said donation should be deposited, who would have sinned,
the one who made the deposit, the elders or every Christian present for worship.
Since the scenarios presented in your letter to us were basically the same as in
your first response in relation to this, we believe they were answered sufficiently
in our last correspondence to you.
And so, the Highland elders can’t see the difference in a worship service with a
random check placed into the collection plate by a non-Christian or unfaithful
member of the church, and a joint-cooperative work such as “Preaching The
Gospel” or “Gospel Broadcasting Network.” There is simply no getting around
the fact that the Bible defines joint-cooperative works as giving and receiving and
that such constitutes fellowship. —Compiled by Ben Justice