Truth Magazine

By Wane Walker

David declared in Psalm 14:1, “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” There have always been men who have denied the existence of that supreme being whom we acknowledge as Creator and Lord of all. Not only have those who are opposed to religion made such claims, but today men of religion, self-styled theologians, are also saying that God does not really exist except in the minds of those who think He does. Yet, they themselves offer no demonstration or proof for their allegations besides their own philosophy and reasoning. We ought to have more objective evidence one way or the other. Is there any? I believe there is.

First, we have the existence of the universe to contend with. To deny it exists is absurd (although some have tried it) because our own senses indicate it is here. The immediate question that comes to mind is, how did it get here? There is a scientific axiom, called cause-effect, which states that something cannot come from nothing; every effect must have an adequate cause. Christians believe that God was the First Cause. Moses wrote, “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). No more reasonable explanation has ever been offered. In addition, the Psalmist affirmed, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handiwork” (Psalm 19:1). The only power great enough to be the cause of all we see and know can only be God.

Next, there is the design of the earth to be reckoned with. Our wonderful world, with the perfect timing of its revolution around the sun and rotation on its axis, the water-evaporation-condensation cycle, the movement of the winds from the equator and back, and the ocean currents, runs like one giant piece of clockwork. Now we all understand that a well-constructed house does not just spring up out of the ground. Nor does a watch, with all its minute organization, gather itself together from sundry bits and pieces. Why is it then that some try to tell us that the earth, in all its beauty and precision, is the result of blind chance? “Every house is builded by some man; but he that builded all things is God” (Heb. 3:4). The world “build” here means to construct or erect, as of a building. The Bible pictures this globe of ours as a huge, well-planned structure whose architect and engineer is God.

Finally, the nature of man is worthy of notice. It is impossible to deny that man has certain capacities which animals do not. For instance, man has a conscience that helps him determine right from wrong; he can appreciate that which he considers beautiful; and he is rational, having the power to reason and communicate logically. Although animals do have powerful instincts, they do not have these characteristics. So we ask, where did man get them? Science cannot even explain where man came from, much less how he became superior to the animals. If-and that’s a big if-evolution were true, man could not have inherited these qualities from his supposed animal ancestors because they did not have them to pass on. Nor does the environment provide an adequate source as some have hypothesized. The only reasonable answer offered so far is the one that includes God. “So God created man in his own image” (Gen. 1:27). Certain of the characteristics which God possesses such as morality, rationality, and aesthetics, He gave to man in creation.

We believers need never be daunted by the onslaughts of modern, atheistic philosophy, because evidence for the existence of God is there and it is sufficient. We must also remember that when a person makes the claim, “There is no God,” he is obligated to prove it-and prove it he cannot. And while we cannot “prove” that God does exist, as a mathematician can prove 4×2+4xy-y2=(2x+y)2, or as a chemist can prove 2H2+02=2H20 by formulae, we can show from the evidence that it is more reasonable to believe in God than to disbelieve.

Truth Magazine XXII: 13, p. 221
March 30, 1978

By Robert Wane La Coste

Quite often when making an effort to present a truth from the scriptures, one will retaliate, “That’s just your interpretation of it.” I believe that this statement expresses the excuse given most often as to the why of religious differences today. The idea is: “everyone has a right to see things their own way, and because we all see differently, we could never have unity on what the Bible teaches.”

My friends, this is a grave error. Suppose everyone had a right to “see” the traffic light any way they wanted to-just make your own interpretation of what it meant. I believe I would become a pedestrian and fast (and make it a point not to go near a traffic light)! But the fact is, the Bible teaches truth. In most cases it is as clear as a red or green traffic light. We could all see it, if we really wanted to, but the fact is that many people want to be “religious” and still believe what they want to believe. So they “interpret” the Bible the way they want to “see it.”

As an example of this, get the following “interpretation” herein of an individual who read what Jesus said on the talents. This individual was a Mormon who years ago believed it scriptural to have many wives. “It is this way,” says the man. “Jesus in his parable of the talents calls his servants and gives unto them different talents. One he gave five, to another he gave two, and to another he gave one. Now these talents may well represent wives. When the Lord returned he found that the servant to whom he had given five wives had increased by rearing many children. The second servant had also as many children, but the man with the one wife had been unfortunate. The Lord took the one wife from him and gave her to the one who had five and said unto him, ‘Well done thou good and faithful servant; take thou this other man’s wife. Thou hast been diligent with a few wives, I shall make thee Lord over many.’ But the one who had a wife and did not increase his family shall never be permitted to enter into the joy of the Lord” (Letters of a Mormon to his son, pp. 23-24).

Now who will believe this man’s interpretation? Can I interpret the parable of the talents like the above and still please God? To be consistent with their ideology that we all “have a right to our interpretation,” some would have to allow this man and others to commit fornication! Who can believe it? Surely God has said something in this parable, but we are not ready to give in to this foolishness whatsoever!

The fact of the matter is, this parable is self-explanatory. Many young children know the truthfulness and the simplicity of this teaching by the Savior. Those who advocate “a right to your own interpretation” really just want a license to pervert scripture and they would do well to admit it. We should learn to take Jesus’ word as is, minus any private interpretation. The Apostle Peter wrote concerning this same scripture, “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Pet. 1:20-21). Peter tells us plainly that when this sacred word was given it was not written by these men with their fancies, personal desires or interpretations. They wrote exactly what God wanted them to write. What makes men so naive today as to believe that they can freely do that which holy men of God were forbidden to do? No man has the right to be wrong with the Word of God. Peter also wrote, ‘7f any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God” (1 Pet. 4:11). In taking the truth as is, one may “know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32).

Truth Magazine XXII: 13, pp. 220-221
March 30, 1978

By Thomas L. Andrews

The burden of disappointment is common to most people. Everyone has experienced the joy of hope for a period of time only to have it crushed by reality and then have to suffer disappointment. Suffering is exactly what it is, for many times we cry real tears. The tragic thing about disappointment is that it can be frequent, and yet the pain does not necessarily decrease with experience in many cases. The hurting can be terrible time and time again.

Perhaps there is no greater opportunity for disappointment than when working with people. People let us down and disappoint us, oh so often. This hits harder when dealing with brethren for we tend to expect more from Christians, and we have the right to expect more. Yes, but brethren will be disappointing. How many have wondered about the value of trying at times when brethren are acting so unconcerned and even hateful. Take courage for you are not alone in this feeling. Jesus is our example.

As we read, “Will ye also go away?”, the disappointment of Jesus rings in every word. Sympathy for Jesus would be felt even if we did not believe Him to be the Son of God. People that Jesus had fed, healed, and taught turned their backs on Him-“From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him” (Jn. 6:66-67). Again, no doubt, as Jesus looked on the mob that was crying for his crucifixion, He could see people that were a disappointment to Him. What was it that He said? “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Lk. 23:34). That is our example.

Yes, people, even brethren, are disappointing. The aggravation, the worrying, all the things we have to deal with are trivial compared to what Jesus experienced. There was no doubt in Jesus’ mind as to whether people were worth all the suffering. He knew the value of souls for He came to seek and to save the lost (Lk. 19:10).

Disappointment is one of the burdens that we must bear (Rom. 15:1; Gal. 6:2). This must not be a hindrance to us in the Lord’s work. With Jesus as our example, we must busy ourselves in the Lord’s vineyard. There is much to do and there is no place for idle disappointed Christians sitting around. God told Elijah to get up and go to work (1 Kings 19). Talk to Jesus; He understands.

Truth Magazine XXII: 13, p. 220
March 30, 1978

By Jon QuinnTerrace

As the Christian seeks to bring the lost to Jesus, he will always be confronted with abuses, misuses and misunderstandings of Scripture which so characterize the mass of society today. One area where such a misunderstanding is readily seen is the utter lack of regard for the teachings of the apostles in their epistles. In the denominational world today it seems that the apostles’ teaching has become merely “Paul’s opinion” or “Peter’s point of view” or “John’s idea”-no longer authoritative today, but just a convenient way to do things in the first century. Consequently, Paul, for example, has been labeled a “male chauvinist” by some because in several of his writings they contend he downgrades the place of woman. And I have heard Peter accused of being overly influenced by the Jewish practice of immersing proselytes. This caused him to demand the penitent believers to be baptized on the day of Pentecost. The fact is that the men who wrote the New Testament were recording more than the foolish, fallible viewpoints of men and their instructions are as authoritative as the instructions spoken directly by the Lord and printed in red in some Bibles.

Jesus foresaw the writing of the New Testament during His life on earth. In fact, not only did He foresee it, but also intended it. He deliberately made provision for it by appointing, teaching, authorizing and guiding the men who wrote it. The term “apostle” is the word Jesus used to apply to the twelve men selected by Him from among all His disciples. They were chosen for a specific work (Lk. 6:12-16). Mark adds that He “sent them out to preach” (Mk. 3:14). The verb, apostella means “to send.” The mission on which the apostles were sent was essentially a teaching and preaching mission. Of course, on a few occasions, the noun apostolos is used to apply to someone other than the chosen apostles of the Lord (Acts 8:23; 14:14) but nevertheless, its use almost universally applies to the “chosen twelve.”

The word apostolos seems to be the Greek equivalent to the Aramaic shaliach which means “the one who is sent as he who sent,” that is, the apostles’ authority was not their own, but instead they carried the authority of Christ in their teachings-that even “their” teachings were not in reality their own but rather the teachings of Christ. It is this point the Lord makes when he instructs His apostles, “He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives Him who sent me” (Matt. 10:40; Jn. 13:20).

The apostles, then, were a unique group among the disciples. They were unique in that the Lord had personally selected them for a specific task; they were unique in that they were personally with Jesus and had witnessed the things concerning which they wrote; and they were unique in that they were directly inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Personal Selection and Commission

No apostle was self-appointed, nor was he selected by another man, group of men or even congregations. All were personally chosen by Jesus Christ. They were chosen by Jesus from among many disciples (Lk. 6:13). When the apostles sought for a disciple to take Judas’ place, even they dared not make the choice for themselves, but depended on the Lord to make the decision, and thus Matthias became an apostle (Acts 1:21-26). The qualifications to be met by a disciple in order to become-an apostle are given here: that he must have accompanied Jesus and witnessed His resurrection. When Jesus chose Paul to be an apostle, He appeared unto Him that he, too, might be literally an eyewitness to His resurrection (Acts 9:3-7; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:4-9).

Personal Experience

Jesus called His apostles for two reasons: (1) that they might be with Him and (2) that they might be sent out to preach (Mk. 3:14). These two reasons go together because much of the preaching that the apostles would be engaged in would be giving their eye-witness account concerning their experiences with Jesus. Jesus said to them, “You are my witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning” (Jn. 15:27; cf. Acts 1:22). This historical experience was necessary, and was kept in mind at the time Matthias was chosen to take the place of Judas. Paul was the exception to the rule and yet even Paul was granted a post-resurrection appearance of Christ that he also might be able to give his own eye-witness account concerning his own historical experience with Christ (Gal. 1:1; 1 Cor. 15:4-9). Nevertheless, Paul recognized that his eye-witness account was unique among the apostles-“as a child untimely born.”

Special Inspiration

While it is true that in one sense the Holy Spirit dwells in all Christians, the apostles were promised something more to aid them in their unique work of preaching and confirming the word of God. This was to insure that mankind would indeed receive the perfect and true will of God untarnished by human opinions, ideas and mistakes. Jesus promised the apostles the “keys of the kingdom” and “whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven” (Matt. 16:19, NASB). During the last week before Jesus’ death, He prepared His apostles for what was about to take place. He promised to send them the Comforter after He left who would teach them all things and bring to their remembrance all things that He had taught them (Jn. 14:25-26; 16:12-13). Jesus was providing that after His ascension, His apostles would continue the mission He began, and that they would not need to rely on their own fallible memories, opinions and ideas, but they would be guided to instruct others perfectly in the way of God that His word would be preserved forever. After His death and resurrection and just before He was lifted up into the clouds, Jesus again assured the apostles that the promise of the Comforter would be realized “not many days hence” (Acts 1:1-8).

This baptism of the Holy Spirit indeed became a reality on the day of Pentecost, just fifty-three days after Jesus had died for the sins of the world; it was with this special inspiration that the world was (and is) assured of receiving the pure word of God. His word was delivered to the world in the writing of the Gospels (in which the Holy Spirit guided the writers through giving them a perfect remembrance of the things that they had been taught personally by Christ) and in the writing of the epistles (in which the Holy Spirit supplemented the teachings of Christ).

So we see that Jesus purposefully prepared for the writing of the New Testament and that it was entirely written by inspired apostles or by those inspired men that were companions of the apostles (e.g., Luke, Mark). It was because of this inspiration that Paul was able to state that the message he taught was indeed “the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13). And Peter could assure the Christians to which he wrote that the word they had obeyed was indeed God’s pure word which would never pass away (1 Pet. 1:22-25).

Conclusion

As we seek to teach God’s word to those about us, we might be wasting our time quoting Acts 2:38 or 22:16 et al. unless we first establish that the apostles’ words meant something, that they are more than mere opinion which we may take or leave. We need to establish that we reject Christ when we reject the apostles’ teachings. People who take only what Jesus directly instructed as He ministered in Palestine undermine all the preparation that He made in readying and teaching His apostles and deny that Jesus ever made good His promise to send the Holy Spirit which would guide the apostles “into all truth.” To reject any instructions for Christians simply because they are “only Paul’s opinions” is to reject Jesus Christ (Lk. 10:16). We do well to point people to the commands, examples and necessary inferences in the New Testament epistles, but we would do better to establish first that these epistles have authority for us today. “He that heareth you heareth me; and he that rejecteth you rejecteth me; and he that rejecteth me rejecteth Him who sent me” (Lk. 10:16).

Truth Magazine XXII: 13, pp. 218-220
March 30, 1978