Clouding the Issue: Claims that Hinder Study
Truth has nothing to hide from open, honest investigation. As Christians who are to possess a "love of the truth" (2 Th. 2:10), we should desire to consider every issue in an objective, unbiased manner. Truth is not determined by who practices or teaches a thing. Nor is it determined by what we might think or prefer. Rather, truth is determined by God and has been revealed to us in His word (Ps. 119:160; Jn. 17:17).
We must keep these things in mind as we study the issue of religious collectivities. We need to put out of our minds what has been or is being practiced and by whom. Then we need to consider the issue objectively and honestly to determine God's will on the subject.
Unfortunately, certain claims have been made that distract from the issue and hinder study. We will notice three of the claims in this article. These claims are all made regarding those who question the right of an organization other than the local church to engage in spiritual works (such as evangelism and edification). I thought it profitable to briefly address these claims to show how they confuse the issue so we can dismiss these things and focus on the real issue at hand.
Sommerism
The label of "Sommerism" or "Sommerite" has reference to a man named Daniel Sommer (1850-1940) and is sometimes used to describe those who believe that the local church is the only organization authorized in the New Testament to be engaged in spiritual works (evangelism, edification, benevolence). Is this a fair label?
Another label that some throw around is that of "Campbellite." Often those in the denominational world will use this label to describe those in churches of Christ. The reason the label is applied to us is because we believe certain things that Alexander Campbell also believed. Why do we believe these things? Not because Campbell believed them! But because we find them taught in the word of God. So is "Campbellite" a fair label? No! We're not following Campbell. We're following Christ.
Is the label of "Sommerite" any different? We may believe some of the things Daniel Sommer believed. We may not believe some of the things he believed. Or we may agree with him in principle on certain matters but believe he was wrong in the application of those principles. But really, it doesn't matter what Daniel Sommer taught or did not teach. What matters is what the word of God says. There should be no need of this label or association. Instead of labeling a particular position as "Sommerism," why not use the Bible to answer it?
The "If, Then" Argument
This is another claim some have used which detracts from study of the issue. The argument goes like this: "If you say [this practice you are condemning or seem to be condemning that I approve of] is wrong, then [this other practice that I believe is right and think that the majority of Christians and you as well will say is right] is wrong too.
Two things must be true for this argument to work. First, the things being compared must be parallel. If this is the case, then the two practices being compared stand or fall together. If one is right, both are right. If one is wrong, both are wrong. But if they are not parallel, this argument fails. Second, those who oppose the first must accept the second. If this is the case, and the two practices are parallel, then this exposes the hypocrisy of the one opposing the first practice. But at best, all this argument is capable of doing is equating two practices and exposing the hypocrisy of someone. It is incapable of proving that the practice is authorized. Why? Because it makes no appeal to Scripture -- the place where we must find authority for a practice. We must establish authority for a particular practice by appealing to the word of God, not the practices of men.
Opposing Bookstores/Colleges
We are discussing the question of whether or not there is authority for a human organization to conduct a Bible lectureship, thus engaging in the work of edification. Since the organizations that typically sponsor these lectureships are colleges, bookstores, and publishing companies, those who defend them will sometimes charge those who oppose the practice with opposing the business. The claim is that those who oppose these lectureships don't believe that brethren can operate a business together.
Some may debate whether or not there is authority for brethren to found and operate these businesses. But this is a separate issue. The issue is not whether Christians can operate a bookstore, publishing company, or college for the purpose of selling products, publishing materials, and educating students. The issue is whether or not brethren can establish an organization separate from the local church and preach the gospel through that organization.
Conclusion
These claims are, in effect, smoke screens that distract brethren from the issue at hand. Those who make these claims may be intentionally confusing people to keep them from questioning their practices. Or they may genuinely not understand the issue themselves. I will not speculate as to what their motives may be. Motives are irrelevant. Let's examine the issue and not get derailed by such claims.
