1 Corinthians 13:10 is a passage often abused the Church of Christ. The verse reads as follows:
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
According to the hardline Church of Christ this verse is about the completion of Scripture. It’s often used by the hardline Church of Christ to prove that certain Spiritual gifts have ceased ‘with the canonization of Scripture’.
The truth is Paul was not speaking of a ‘bible’ at all. The context for one is about love. Secondly, the perfection to come is when we see ‘face to face’ and no longer through a darken glass. We know in part in this lifetime but when we are ‘face to face’ we will know everything. This is not speaking about a bible but a life beyond this life.
This blog site will be a continuation of the old site https://answeringchurchofchrist.wordpress.com/
As pointed out, maybe the direction in 2008 wasn’t the best way to go. Going forward, our primary focus will not be Johnny Robertson nor any of his local comrades’. Rather, we will focus on the hardline Church of Christ as a whole. Additionally, we will offer alternatives to their teachings. We will delete the previous threads about Johnny and/or ones indirectly related to him.
Randy Craigar said he has attempted to contact the owner of https://answeringchurchofchrist.wordpress.com/ in hopes that he reopen his Blog but that obviously isn’t ever going to happen. Johnny boastfully has professed to have scared the Moderators away of https://answeringchurchofchrist.wordpress.com/. True of false, I have no idea. Randy’s brother preaches in Rocky Mt, VA., where we crossed paths. A conversation transpired which led us to reopen the site. To be honest, we wondered if the owner of https://answeringchurchofchrist.wordpress.com/ was even alive seeing he just vanished from the scene years ago without a real explanation.
For those interested, I opted for the pseudonym ‘Axel Reid’ when I first started this site but due to undo pressure I will post my name Nathaniel [Nathan] Hodges. You can find me on Facebook, Twitter, etc. I may link those to the site as I see how it goes.
My inside people tell me that he doesn’t come to our blogs anymore because he doesn’t want his people at ‘his Church’ to see another side other than what he teaches. Most, in fact, are not even aware of the division within the hardline Church of Christ, nor do they know that a progressive Church of Christ exist which are not legalistic. Well, that’s fine. My point here is to refute his “false teachings” (to use his lingo), and if he doesn’t want to come and defend his doctrine, that’s his prerogative.
I’ve decided that it’s too exhausting to try and watch and review each of their programs, as much as I enjoy picking their flimsy arguments apart with little defense from their side. So, the blog is going to go a little more generalized, where we will watch what they teach on ALL fronts – from their blogs to their websites ( oh they took them down hmm) to their radio and TV broadcasts, and we’ll be commenting on those things. Now, lest they think they’ve somehow claimed a “victory” by driving us away – we’re not going away, just changing things up a bit from the 2006 blog. I hear he has ran to Rocky Mount in hopes to find people unaware of their tactics.
That being said, if anyone would like to make a specific comment on something one of the “false teachers” teaches on one of their broadcasts, please feel free to add it as a comment and I’ll make a new post using your comments.
Let’s talk about a type of interpretive method common in hardline Churches of Christ (and definitely used in Johnny Robertson’s and James Oldfield’s television broadcasts). It basically states – every practice, thought, and value we hold must find within the New Testament (they excluded the Old Testament because they are Marcionites…oops…I mean because they are the Church under the NT constitution and not the OT – Israel’s constitution) a clear command, example, or necessary inference. If one of these three cannot be found, then what we are doing is considered “unauthorized” and thus a sin. This is how acappella Churches of Christ justify their doctrine when it comes to opposing musical instruments.
This interpretive method has been called PATTERNISM – the belief that there is a specific pattern (think…”BEHOLD THE PATTERN”) given to us in Scripture and there cannot be any deviation to be the true church (note that language…”true church”…ouch).
It seems to me that this interpretive method (patternism) falls under its own weight. No where do we see Jesus or the apostles adopting command, example, and necessary inference as their interpretive lens with their Scripture…thus it lacks a clear command, example, and necessary inference (e.g., Jesus’ participation in the synagogue, feast of Dedication…all of which have no “command, example, or necessary inference in the OT).
This interpretive method simply does not take seriously the complexity of many biblical passages. Command, example, and necessary inference do not contend with things that are cultural, things that are situationally-specific, or things that are coincidental in nature. For example, the NT clearly commands us to wash one another’s feet, greet each other with a holy kiss, and for women to wear head-veils. Yet, at least in how we actually lived, we never followed any of these very clear and direct commands! Why? We judged them to be culturally conditioned and not applicable to our day and age. Or, what about the fact that when the Bible tells us by example that there were seven deacons in the Church in Jerusalem according to Acts 6. We have no other mention of the number of deacons a Church ought to have. Does that mean that the Church can only have seven deacons because it is the only example we have? In this we have judged that the Acts 6 passage is situationally-specific. Or what about the fact that when the location of communion is mentioned in the New Testament, it is always in an upper room? No where do we read about the church taking communion on the first floor (at least not explicitly). In this we have said that this is simply coincidental.
In the end, I would say patternism has much that it lacks in regards to understanding and applying the Bible.