Reactionary Religion

by Allen Malone
via Sentry Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 1, 31 March 1992

God’s people of old went astray as they desired to be like the nations around them (I Samuel 8:19-20). They left the way of God because they were more interested in following the customs of others than in following God's prescribed path. Regrettably, many today are similarly motivated in religious matters. All should guard against being so influenced.

But what of those of us who rue being like "the (denomi-)nations round about?" Does our being different make us right? Does our opposition to the erroneous beliefs and practices of others suggest that our own are God-approved? The answer is a resounding "No!" In fact, if we often judge religious doctrine and practice on the basis of what those about us believe and do, it is probable that, for that very reason, we are at times violating the scriptures. The reasons for this are very simple.

First of all, let us remember that the way of error is the "broad way" of which Christ spoke in His sermon on the mount (Matthew 7:13-14). Satan is not particular; his way allows room for all manner of wrong. On any given subject, his supermarket of sin offers countless brands of error from which we may choose. We may reject another’s erroneous position on some issue only to accept a position equally erroneous. Satan’s desire is that we believe and practice error. He cares little about which erroneous position we choose to espouse. We can therefore be very different from others we know to be wrong and yet not be right ourselves.

Secondly, it should be recognized that people who are mistaken on many points are probably not mistaken on all points. If our primary motivation (consciously or subconsciously) is to be different from our religious neighbors, we can easily become victims of our own prejudice. Rejecting a particular religious doctrine or practice because of who accepts it can lead us to reject not only their erroneous practices but also those things for which they happen to have biblical authority. Let us beware lest we throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater.

Thirdly, it should be realized that a religion that reacts to what others are doing will tend to go to extremes. Remember this: simply because our position on some religious issues seems to be the opposite of a position we know to be false does not suggest that our position is true. Many religious errors are "extreme positions" that result from emphasizing some scriptures on Bible subjects to the exclusion of others. Generally, to react to these erroneous conclusions by assuming that the opposite position is true is simply to go to the "opposite extreme." Is one extreme better than the other? Generally not, for in most cases, "opposite extremes" simply emphasize and ignore different sets of scriptures. Thus, while positions at opposite extremes seem to be very different, they usually have one unfortunate similarity—neither considers all that God has revealed regarding the subject in question. Let us realize that the sum of God’s word on any subject is the truth on that subject (Psalms 119:160 ASV). Our beliefs and practices, no matter how different from others’, are only right if they are biblically sound.

All of this exhorts us to acknowledge both intellectually and practically that God’s word must be our only standard in religion. What others may believe or practice has no bearing on what is pleasing to God. What He teaches and authorizes in His word is right. What He does not teach or authorize is wrong. The Israelites forgot this and went astray as they tried to be like their neighbors. If we forget this, we may go astray as we try to be different from ourselves.

What Are Some Examples of "Reactionary Religion?"

Example #1:

Some, in reacting to emotionalism, have begun to advocate Stoicism. There are many religious groups whose assemblies are conducted in a manner designed to arouse emotion. Lights are dimmed; hands are clapped, held, or wildly shaken; bodies sway, and ecstatic utterances are encouraged. The arousal of emotion has become an end in itself. In reacting to this error, some brethren have decided that virtually any show of emotion, especially in worship, is inappropriate.

Does rejecting emotionalism mean that we must become Stoics who express no emotion? Certainly not! The proper place of emotion in the worship and service of God is emphasized in the Bible. We are instructed to sing with "grace in your hearts to the Lord" (Colossians 3:16). We are to give recognizing that "God loveth a cheerful giver" (II Corinthians 9:7). When the preaching of the word convicts us of sin, we should remember, "Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation" (II Corinthians 7:10). We should neither be surprised nor displeased if sincere prayers, songs, sermons or affirmations of love and salvation are accompanied with rejoicing or tears, for thus it has ever been among God’s faithful (Nehemiah 8; Acts 13:47-48; 20:31; Philippians 3:18; 4:4). When we partake of the Lord’s Supper and are caused to remember our Lord and all that He has done for us, we should expect that at times we will be especially moved to rejoice as we look to the same joy to which He looked (Hebrews 12:2) or to weep as we think of that death to which He approached "with strong crying and tears" (Hebrews 5:7). We should not, therefore, reject proper emotion through over-reacting to the religious world’s emotionalism, but allow ourselves to feel and appropriately express the emotion aroused by God’s word.

Example #2:

Some, in reacting to false teaching regarding grace and faith, have come to feel that they must rely on themselves. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the reformers went astray by reacting to the false concept of salvation by works. Their reaction led to the development of the doctrines of "faith only" and "grace only." Today, we live among their spiritual descendants and readily perceive their rejection of plain scriptural teaching regarding man’s responsibilities before God. Nevertheless, let us realize the danger of our reacting to their lopsided, extreme views regarding salvation; the likely result will be our reverting to a concept of salvation as somehow based on our works rather than on God’s grace in Christ.

The central theme of the gospel is that when we were weak, defiled sinners, incapable of doing anything to reconcile ourselves unto God, Christ bore the penalty of our sins. This is the basis, the very means, of our salvation -- past, present, and future (Romans 3:21-26; 5:6-8; Ephesians 2:1-10). Without question, it is also true that God has conditioned our reception of the benefits of His grace upon our approach to Him by faith (Hebrews 11:6) and that the faith that avails with Him is an obedient "faith that works by love" (Hebrews 5:9; Galatians 5:6; James 2:21-26). Even so, let us never react to others’ denial of faith’s conditions by accepting the concept that faith’s obedience somehow earns us something or the feeling that we must merit God’s pleasure by some sort of perfection! The faith that saves is faith in Christ, not faith in our obedience. All who stand spiritually stand in God’s grace (Romans 5:1-2) and are but "unprofitable servants" (Luke 17:10).

Example #3:

Some, in reacting to the improper influence and labor of denominational preachers, have misconstrued the legitimate roles of evangelists and elders. In the denominations about us, the "pastor system" prevails. A preacher is given the title "Pastor," and becomes the corporate administrator of a congregation. We have been unable to find in the Bible any accounts of evangelists being given this type of labor and influence.

One unfortunate reaction to the "pastor system" has been the rejection of "located preachers" by a few brethren. This reaction stands in opposition to various New Testament examples (Acts 11:26; 18:11; 19:8-10; 20:31). Far more often, however, brethren have reacted by feeling that as long as they had the local evangelist do virtually all of the teaching and preaching in the congregation and did not allow him to "run things," that all was well. Consequently, in reaction to the denominations "pastor system," another "pastor system" has developed-a system in which the preacher does the "shepherding" (pastoring) of the flock and those men who are supposed to be shepherds, the elders (Acts 20:28-35; Hebrews 13:7, 17-24; I Peter 5:1-4), are merely titled "Pastors" and then serve as little more than a board of corporate administrators.

Furthermore, whereas the apostle Peter forbids elders to act as "lords over God’s heritage" (I Peter 5:3), the reaction of many congregations to the world’s "pastor system" has actually encouraged this abuse. Thinking that "the office of a bishop" is a position of rank, rather than a work of service (I Timothy 3:1). Some have come to view elders as having a superior position over all other saints. Passages such as Hebrews 13:17 receive much emphasis, but are rarely considered in the light of related scriptures such as I Peter 5:3 and Mark 9:42-45. This, coupled with the concept of many brethren, especially some elders, that decision-making is the primary work of elders, creates a situation in which it is not uncommon for saints in God’s churches to be constrained to submit to the will of elders, while neither being consulted nor kept informed regarding the decisions their elders arbitrarily render.

The Bible shows that God desires that the work of faithful evangelists prevent these kinds of abuses by elders. Yet, due to the brethren’s reactionary response to the denominations’ "pastor system," rarely do we see evangelists in the churches of God being allowed, much less encouraged, to do their God-given work of appointing and disciplining elders (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5; I Timothy 3:1-15; 5:17-22).

Sadly, a frequent consequence of these things is that churches lose their desire for elders. In elderless churches where business meetings run smoothly, the prevailing sentiment is that elders are unnecessary—decisions are being made just fine without them. Where the sting of "lordship" has been felt most strongly in the past, members often dread the local church having elders again lest once again the membership will have virtually no input in decisions regarding the collective work in which they are to be involved.

To say the least, much study is needed regarding the important God-ordained work of both evangelists and pastors (elders). Without this study, we risk reacting improperly to certain aspects and unknowingly adopting others from the "pastor system" that prevails in our religious world.

Brethren, let us realize that merely being different from our religious neighbors does not make us right. Any position we take that is merely a reaction to what others are doing is likely to be less than, or something other than, what the Bible actually enjoins. The nobility of character extolled in the scriptures is neither tainted with gullibility nor prejudice (Acts 17:11), but searches the scriptures with a desire to learn God’s will from God Himself.