The Guardian of Truth Foundation and Florida College
As an amateur historian of long practice as well as a preacher of the gospel, I by discipline observe the inception, evolution, and result of many things, often without any intended effort. I have been fascinated at beginnings and various impetus in the initial inception and then evolution of various things. In the secular sense, we are living in a rich, full age, there are so many things happening for the trained observer to consider. I do not mean to be an alarmist , but our world is changing faster today than I have heretofore witnessed. The New World Order now has more vestige and presence than I have ever before witnessed, for instance.
Many changes are occurring
among my brethren, as well. One matter that has of late occupied more of
my focus has been the privately funded societies to offer the climate and milieu
for brethren to pool their resources in and through which to collectively preach
the gospel, institutions while not local churches, are doing the work God has
assigned to the local church (I Tim. 3: 15). I saw a resurgence of such
institutionalism among us during the seventies, but we addressed and challenged
it, and it went away, some thought. In actuality, those who had the
mentality of preaching the gospel through human
institutions with their own oversight, treasury, president, etc. simply pulled
back and waited. So called neo-institutionalism is now here in full force
and there will be no pulling back this time, I predict. Already, it is
evident that the promoters of such societies have their heels deeply positioned
and they intend to keep their entities, notwithstanding the resulting division
and disruption of unity. "We Have A Right" (Guardian of Truth Foundation
publication) say they. It is we, those of us who believe in simply doing
what God has said, doing the collective work of preaching the gospel in and
through the local church, with its oversight and treasury, who are being labeled
as the divisive ones (I Tim. 3: 15, Heb. 7: 14).
How did this recent
development happen, what is behind it? This is a valid
question and one that I shall attempt to briefly answer.
For a number of years, there
has been friction between two influential groups among so called
non-institutional Christians. The two groups, if you
will, were Florida College and the then Guardian of Truth Foundation.
While there were extant and definable doctrinal issues, I believe, based on my
observation, there were also some power struggles already in place, at least,
regarding the Guardian of Truth Foundation, perhaps more precisely
worded, on the part of some of the foundation members (later designated
simply as G.O.T.F.). I might also inject that a
number of men who had manifest loyalty and attachment
to the G.O.T.F. correctly challenged some of the modernistic teaching
emanating from Florida College, such as teaching that the days of Genesis one
constituted ages and not literal days, etc.
Without burdening the reader
with detail, the thinking that resulted in the
formation of Florida College became serious about the time of the end of
World War Two. Brethren wanted a school to which to send their
children, a school that maintained and practiced the spiritual values that they
had. Hence, in 1946 Florida College became a reality.
One determination the school had was to distance
itself from churches of Christ relative to financial support and proximity and
be unlike most other colleges that brethren had started. Hence, the
original resolve was to keep the college separate from churches. Not
trying to provide dates, the college progressed and has, to date, become a
school academically competitive, at least, on the lower levels of academia.
Notwithstanding the apparent sincere efforts on the part various ones, past and
present, Florida College (later referred to as F.C.) has exerted a lot of
influence on churches, indirectly so. Rather than just academically
include the Bible as part of their curriculum, F.C. developed a special
Bible Department and offers a Bachelor of Arts in Biblical Studies. Along
with the Bible Department came the image of "Church of Christ Seminary," such
was inevitable. More brethren began to look to F. C. for their
preachers and even elders. F.C. often has represented a melting pot
and circumstance of convergence, young men and women coming together from
all sorts of backgrounds and often brining to the school their divergent
doctrinal views. In the climate of academia, views are often aired and
discussed, sometimes more philosophically than with an aim to biblical solution
and closure. The school decided to include an annual lectureship program
and this effort evolved to include many members of churches of Christ
representing a large number of states (I have never attended the F.C.
lectures). The lectureship involves the assignment of different Bible
themes to various men, usually preachers. It is elementary and without
debate to the common observer that F. C. is a major player when it comes
to impetus and influence among especially non-institutional churches of Christ
of any given time period.
When one considers the
history of the Guardian of Truth Foundation and all the surrounding stimuli, one
sees a number of foundations, again, I say this without wanting to immerse the
reader in detail. Some of the original
positioning of these foundations involved legal matters and the effort to
prevent those believed not originally intended from having access to the
monies contained in the foundation treasuries. Foundations compose
a separate study and reveal the developing and often
merging thinking of the supporters of these special orders. One sees in
such research, gradation as to the viewed design of some of these foundations.
Some of the simple, initial impetus, in one historic case worthy of mention, was
for a man of wealth to have his estate after his death used to preach the
gospel. In another case, the forming of a publication entity that would
especially favor the publishing of books by brethren, but would engage in such
as a business for financial profit. In the embryonic state, some orders
had no desire to become vehicles providing brethren the opportunity to pool
their resources to expressly and collectively preach the gospel to the lost,
having their own treasury for said purpose and overseeing president and board of
directors, I believe. Foundations "among" churches of Christ as well as
schools have for the most part, been very problematic, to say the least.
At best, there has been struggle and a fine line to keep these entities separate
from churches. At different points, brethren involved in foundations are
seen to allow their love for these orders to misguide them.
Roy Cogdill, a man who stood
opposed to church supported foundations allowed his affection with one
foundation to cause him to inconsistently act. In the Gospel Guardian
Magazine (Vol. 29, Number 7, April, 1977), brother
Cogdill made the following appeal for the Akin Foundation directed at
individuals and churches:
Addendum: Related articles to read are as follows:
"Individual or Collective Action, Which?"
"Working Together in Business, Really?"
"The Foundations are the Same as...."
"Authority, Misunderstood Today"
"The Foundations are not Churches, So...."
"Are the Guardian of Truth and Florida College Lectureships the Same?"
"If the College is an Adjunct of the Home, Then..."
"Rationale in Favor of Privately Supported Foundations"
"Non-Church Organizations and 'Liberals'"
"Human Institutions, an Unimportant Issue?"
"A Review of 'May Only the Church Teach the Gospel?'"
"The Pillar and Ground of the Truth"
"Neo-Institutionalism, are we Splitting Hairs?"
"Why Have Privately Supported Preaching Institutions?"
"A Look at Religious Journals Among Brethren" (This and the next article are not linked back to the above article.)