Truth Magazine

By Guthrie Dean

How should congregations cooperate? In short, what is scriptural church cooperation? Three general answers have been given: (1) Campbell, McGarvey, Pendleton, et al, taught that it was right for congregations to cooperate through the Missionary Societies. (2) Certain Texas brethren (following the Civil War) developed the concept of congregational cooperation which centralized the work under the eldership of one congregation, to whom other congregations contributed. This is essentially the type of cooperation which has been revived in our day under the name of “sponsoring church” cooperation. It was finally rejected by the churches of the past generation as being no different in principle from the Missionary Society. (This is the kind of cooperation involved in the Herald of Truth, Campaigns for Christ, and other modern promotions.) (3) The third kind of cooperation which has been advocated was that “congregations of the Lord, working in their individual, local, and independent capacities were truly `cooperating’ in the work of the Lord.” They might all cooperate under certain conditions to a given work, but they did it directly, and never turned their funds over to some intermediate agency (either society or congregation) to spend for them. David Lipscomb was the chief defender of this type of cooperation, and gradually as the issues were discussed pro and con, brethren generally came to a clear, positive, and definite understanding that this was the only kind of cooperation taught in the New Testament.

No one is questioning the right or even the responsibility of church cooperation. But we believe that the cooperation authorized in the Scriptures does not allow or justify the sponsoring church or institutional type of cooperation as practiced by some churches today.

The Scriptures Authorize a Pattern for Congregational Cooperation

“Now in these days there came down prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch. And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be a great famine over all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius. And the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren that dwelt in Judea; which also they did, sending it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:27-30).

Foy E. Wallace comments on Acts 11:29-30: “But every article of late with even an attempt to deal with this issue had referred to the case of Antioch in Acts 11:29-30 as a solid example of centralization practice. It is not an example of what is being done. Even a casual reading of the case will reveal the loose thinking and careless writing in evidence in some of the papers. The passage reads: `Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judea: which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the – hands of Barnabas and Saul.’ The first thing to observe is that the disciples in Antioch sent the relief to the elders where the brethren dwelt in Judea. One writer said the Antioch disciples sent the money to the church in Judea-no, that is not what it says. We might as well speak of disciples in Tennessee sending something to the church in Texas. There were churches in Judea and they `sent it to the elders,’ obviously where the brethren that needed the relief dwelt. There is not so much as an intimation in this passage that money was sent to the elders of the church at Jerusalem for all Judea. This passage does not even mention Jerusalem nor elders in Jerusalem. It merely states that relief was sent to the brethren that dwelt in `Judea,’ and that it was sent to the `elders’ by Barnabas and Saul. Where in Judea? The elders where the brethren dwelt. So the passage certainly does specify what elders and where. Acts 11:29-30 is not a case in point for what some brethren are promoting in the way of a general eldership as a board of benevolence and missions for all the churches” (Torch, Vol. 1, No. 2). This passage does not justify brotherhood elders, state elders, district elders, area-wide elders, or anything of the sort. Elders attempting to oversee any work to which other churches are equally related are overstepping their bounds of scriptural oversight.

On Acts 11:29-30, McGarvey writes: “The manner in which the elders of the churches in Judea are here mentioned, without a previous notice of their having been appointed, shows the elliptical character of Luke’s narrative, and it results from the circumstance that he wrote after the churches had been fully organized, and all of the officials and their duties had become well known. The elders, being the rulers of the congregations, were the proper persons to receive the gifts, and to see to the proper distribution of them among the needy” (Acts of the Apostles, pp. 230-231). He had no trouble understanding that the passage under consideration refers to elders of the church, rather than “sponsoring elders” of the church in Jerusalem. Similarly, Matthew Henry writes: “They sent, it to the elders of the churches in Judea” (Matthew Henry’s Commentary, p. 459).

The fact that there were “churches in Judea” (1 Thess. 2:14), led the scholar David Thomas to write: “The elders were those that were regarded as the most experienced members of the various churches; and Barnabas and Saul were deputed to take the contributions to them, and entrust them with the distribution as their discretion would dictate” (Acts of the Apostles, p. 184).

R.C. Lenski states regarding the relief in Acts 11:2930: “When the relief became necessary, Barnabas and Saul were the commissioners who were sent from Antioch to the elders in Judea to administer the needed help . . . . The relief was sent, we are told, `to the elders.’ This term comes as a surprise since Luke has not mentioned elders; but he is writing from his own later standpoint and for a reader who knew what elders were. We might call them pastors. They had charge of the congregations in all their church affairs and attended to the services, the teaching and the spiritual oversight” (Commentary on Acts, p. 462).

Truth Magazine XXII: 17, pp. 279-280
April 27, 1978

By Earl Robertson

Paul wrote, “But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness” (Rom. 6:17, 18). What a blessing to be free from sin! Awareness of guilt causes one to long for freedom-freedom from a consciousness of being rejected by the Lord.

Paul thanks God for this freedom (Rom. 6:17; 7:25). Salvation is from and of the Lord (cf. Jonah 2:9; Eph. 2:8-10). Paul here emphasizes both the fact of all being bondmen to sin and the possibility of freedom to all.

A “form of doctrine” had been delivered to these Romans. This was simply the gospel preached to them. It embraced the facts of His (Christ’s) death, burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 15:1-4). Furthermore, it embraced His commandments which, when obeyed, freed sinners. Jesus commissioned the apostles to preach His gospel to every creature (Mk. 16:15, 16), which gospel demanded all sinners to believe the gospel, repent of their sins and be baptized in water for the remission of their sins (Mk. 16:15, 16; Acts 2:38). No sinner can be freed from sin without the gospel. Sinners can hear and understand the gospel, some denominational preachers to the contrary, notwithstanding (Eph. 3:1-6).

This text shows this obedience to be “from the heart.” These people had sincerely and willingly yielded to the molding efficacy of this form of doctrine. The word “form” comes from the Greek tupos (in this passage it is accusative singular tupon), and is said to be “the teaching which embodies the sum and substance of religion and represents it to the mind” (Thayer, p. 632). Form, mold, pattern is the idea. As the truth is taught to one and his mind accepts it, this is that yielding to the forming power of that gospel. It will change one-change one from servants of sin to servants of righteousness.

However, we must notice that this change comes only to the ones who “obey from the heart.” “Obey” is action on the part of the sinner. Often we hear some preacher say sinners can not obey. They even tell us that action on the sinner’s part makes void the grace of God! That is not what this passage says. This verse says we are made free from sin when we obey the gospel of Christ. See Romans 1:16.

Truth Magazine XXII: 17, p. 279
April 27, 1978

By Leslie Diestelkamp

This is intended as the last in a long series of essays on the general subject of “The Family Circle.” We have tried to show that the home is the cradle of civilization and the bulwark of the church. That is, nations rise and fall, prosper of fail, depending largely upon the quality of character those nations have as that character is represented in the family circles of the country. Likewise, churches grow and accomplish great service to God, or else they stalemate and fail in fruitfulness, depending upon the quality of righteousness that emanates from the family circles in the congregations.

But the purpose of this final essay is to try to impress upon all of us that the home is the greatest influence to determine the eternal population of heaven. Of course, I hasten to stress that no one will reach heaven who has become accountable to God unless he has been led by the precious Word of God and, in an obedient faith has come into the body of Christ, the church of the Living God (Rom. 1:16-17; 10:17; 6:3,4,17,18; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Pet. 2:5). Please remember, this essay is not intended to minimize the influence of the Word of God, nor the necessity of the church for which Christ died. But my purpose is to show that few indeed will receive the Word or obey the Lord aside from proper influence from the family circle, and for that reason I say the home is the vestibule to heaven.

Parents are constantly preparing seed beds in which the seed of the kingdom (Mt. 13:3-8, 18-23), the saving gospel, may be planted. In order to accomplish this preparation for fruitful harvest, parents must instill three dynamic principles into the minds of the children:

1. From infancy, children must be taught and trained in respect for authority. They must learn to respect the policeman, the teacher, the president, their parents, the law of the land and the law of God. By word and by example, parents must help the children to learn to give responsive and responsible honor to whom honor is due.

2. Parents must also train their offspring in basic and fundamental honesty. Of course this includes honesty with money, but far beyond that, it must include honesty with words, with people, with principles, with practice and with self. Deception and hypocrisy must be abhorred and avoided.

3. In the family circle the children must learn the God-given and eternal principles of morality. By the wise words and the pure deeds of their parents the children must be lifted far above the course, vulgar, profane language of the world. At the same time they must be led into brave and courageous action that may set them apart from the sinful conduct of the community.

Of course, parents who have the eternal welfare of their children at heart will teach them the stories and lessons of the Bible. But such Bible teaching will fall upon deaf ears if they are not first and foremost trained in the three basic principles enumerated in the numbered paragraphs above. And, significantly, sometimes our neighbors who are not real Christians may do a better job training their children than do many Christians. Even if they cannot teach them the gospel, if they train them in respect for authority, real honesty and morality, then when the youth hears the gospel his mind will be a proper seed bed, and he may certainly be receptive. Conversely, even if Christians teach their children to say the names of the apostles and the books of the Bible, and if they take them to Bible class regularly, but if they do not train them in those basic principles of respect for authority, honesty and morality, then there will be no fertile seed-bed and little likelihood of response.

Of course it is true that a few people rise above the bad environment in which they grew up and turn to God with fidelity. They rebel against the fighting, corruption and permissiveness of the early home life, and deliberately accept truth and righteousness. But this is the exception, not the rule. Generally speaking, it is still true that, “as the twig is bent, so will it grow.” To say it another way, only occasionally may a poor seed bed be changed into a good one, but usually the quality of.the harvest depends upon the preparation of the soil. In other words, usually eternal destinies are settled in the training received in infancy, adolescence and youth.

Adults Also

It is not my intention to suggest that children are the only ones who are influenced regarding eternal destinies by the family circle. Every one of us, male and female, young and old, is greatly influenced by circumstances at home. In the many years of living and working in the remote and barren fields of the world, I have always said, “I can fight the old devil himself if everything is well at home.” And I have known many strong men who have been overcome by Satan, either morally or doctrinally, because they found no solace, no consolation, no encouragement, no sanctuary in the family circle. Of course the same thing is true of woman-that is, they need a place of refuge just as much so as do the men. Home must be good, wholesome, uplifting for the young and the old, for children and parents.

The population of heaven will be composed of three kinds of people: (1) those who died without guilt; (2) those who were able to overcome evil influences of the home and (3) the multitudes who were fortunate enough to have a part in a family circle that provided love, loyalty, respect and fidelity and thus provided the basic foundation for faith and obedience to God.

Husbands, wives, parents, and children, do not take home for granted. Do not expect God to make your home a sanctuary. Do not expect an accident to happen that will transform a house into a real home or that will change a den of iniquity into a house of prayer. But do not be discouraged! Love will cast out hate! Purity will overcome evil! Obedience from the heart will bear fruit in a conscience void of offense. Faithfulness to the Lord will pay dividends even in this life in consolation and assurance.

Home life will not be perfect, for homes consist of people, and people are always faulty. But home life can be good if the people in the home will make it so, and that good life can find expression in happiness, usually, and in holiness for sure! Peter said, “The eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayers …. And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good” (1 Pet. 3:12,13). “Now the God of peace . . . . make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen” (Heb. 13:20,21).

Truth Magazine XXII: 17, pp. 277-278
April 27, 1978

By Mike Willis

Every week, I am privileged to conduct a call-in radio program on one of the local stations. During the course of an hour, I usually receive eleven to fourteen calls. In a recent program, a lady called to state that the reason she did not attend church service somewhere was because of the hypocrites in the church. During the remainder of the program, a clear one-third of all of the calls which I received pertained to hypocrisy in Christians. Surely, this is indicative of our need to be sure that we are not guilty of hypocrisy.

Defining the Word

What is a hypocrite? In order to answer that question, let us consider the meaning of the Greek words hupokritas and hupokrisis. Surprisingly, in classical Greek these words are rather neutral in meaning; they have neither a good nor bad connotation. The hupokrites in classical Greek was the man who expounded or interpreted. He was also the man who answered another. Because a play is a work which is made up of question and answer, it was not long before the words were used to refer to the ones who participated in the play. Hence, the hupokrites was the actor. From this latter usage, hupokrites developed its bad sense.

Because the actor is one who plays a part, the word came to mean a man who pretends to be what he is not. The art of the actor is that from the moment he dons the mask his whole conduct on stage should be in keeping with his allotted role. In ancient theaters, the actor used a mask to cover his face in order to help him to pretend to be the character whose role he assumed. From the moment he donned the mask, the hupokritts pretended to be someone other than who he really was. Soon, the word hupokrites was used to refer to the man who made human life the stage and his conduct his role. It came to refer to the man who pretended to be righteous when he was wicked.

Examples of Hypocrisy

To further illustrate the meaning of the word hypocrisy and to show God’s attitude toward the hypocrite, let us consider some biblical examples of hypocrisy.

1. Peter (Gal. 2:13). This passage records the conduct of Peter while he was in Antioch. In the early church, Antioch was one of the first congregations to overcome its Jewish background sufficiently to break down the middle wall of partition which separated the Jews and Gentiles. In Antioch, the two groups had fellowship with each other; they ate meals together. When Peter came to Antioch, he joined right in with the two groups. He ate with Gentiles on the same basis as he ate with Jews. Soon, however, some men from the Jerusalem church arrived in Antioch. The Jerusalem Christians apparently still clung to their Jewish heritage. These men would have considered it a sin to eat with a Gentile. Consequently, they would disapprove of what was going on in Antioch. When these men arrived in Antioch, Peter donned his mask; he pretended to be what he was not. Whereas he had been eating with the Gentiles, when the men from Jerusalem arrived he ceased to have anything to do with the Gentiles. Hence, he was playing a part, pretending to be different to what he really was. Consequently, we read this report of what happened in Antioch:

But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy (Gal. 2:11-13).

This example from the New Testament illustrates what a hypocrite is; he is a man who pretends to be something he is not.

2. Matt. 23. Consider the various passages in this chapter which illustrate to us what the hypocrite is. Here is Jesus’ description of the hypocrisy in the Jews; He said:

The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do sad observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things, and do not do them. And they tie up heavy loads, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger. But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men (vs. 1-5).

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you devour widows’ houses, even while for a pretense you make long prayers; therefore you shall receive a greater condemnation (v. 14).

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. You blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel! (v. 23-24).

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of robbery and self-indulgence. You blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of it may become clean also (vs. 25-26).

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. Even so you too outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness (vs. 27-18).

These passages very well portray the nature of hypocrisy. Like the beautiful mausoleum which is very beautiful on the outside but full of decaying bodies on the inside, the hypocrite puts on a front which is very attractive but inwardly he is full of wickedness.

Hypocrisy Is Still In the Church

There is probably no church which is without hypocrites. I have been in the company of song .leaders who told more ungodly stories than many non-Christians with whom I have associated. Having had the opportunity to know a few Christian businessmen, I have. heard many of them warn me not to do business with other Christians. When asked to tell me why they said that, they began to tell me of one case after another of brethren in the local church who were indebted to them and who refused to even answer their statements of debt. Quite frankly, I would have had a pretty hard time following such a brother when he led the congregation in prayer if he refused to pay his debts and I knew about it.

I have known of men who served the church in various capacities getting involved in immoralities. Rather than having the decency of resigning from the offices which they held or classes which they taught, they preferred to play the hypocrite. Consequently, they manifested this spotless image to the church while wallowing in the immoralities of sin. That, my brethren, is hypocrisy.

We could cite other examples of hypocrisy. The man who pretends to be righteous but who cheats on his income taxes is a hypocrite. The man who portrays the image of a faithful Christian while loafing on the job which he is being paid to perform is a hypocrite.. The man who waits on the Lord’s table but lies when asked about the condition of the car which he is selling is a hypocrite.

Not All Sinners Are Hypocrites

Let me hasten to relate that not all sinners are hypocrites. None of us who claim to be Christians can live a perfect life. Consequently, we are going to be guilty of sin from time to time. The man who, when guilty of sin, falls down on his knees, prays to God for forgiveness, and honestly tries to cease practicing the sin of which he is repenting is not a hypocrite. This man is not trying to put on a cloak of righteousness to cover the wicked conduct in which he is engaged; he is a man who openly admits his guilt and asks God’s forgiveness. The hypocrite is aware of his guilt but has no intention of quitting his sinful conduct. Rather, he only wants to retain the respect of God’s people while following the Devil.

Conclusion

The hypocrite has the ability to hide his devious deeds from the sight of men, at least some men on some occasions. However, he can never conceal his conduct from God. Though the hypocrite might have a good reputation among men, his character is rotten and God knows it. The hypocrite is, therefore, a man who cares more about what men think of him than what God thinks of him.

God has revealed to us that all hypocrites will be exposed. Jesus said,

Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. But there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known. Accordingly whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms shall be proclaimed upon the housetops (Lk. 12:1 3).

The hypocrite will be exposed by God at the judgment. At that time, God shall tear away the cloak of righteousness with which the hypocrite hides his wicked heart underneath. Every idle word (Mt. 12:36) and every evil thought (Heb. 4:13) will be exposed for what it is.

Are you ready to stand before the judgment seat of Christ? Only the man who is protected by the blood of Christ can stand before God. Having had his sins washed away, this man is acceptable to God Almighty. The hypocrite, on the other hand, will be cast into Hell. Let us be sure that our righteousness is genuine and not feigned.

Truth Magazine XXII: 17, pp. 275-277
April 27, 1978