Truth Magazine

By Norman E. Fultz

From a burning bush on Mt. Horeb at the backside of the desert where he was tending the sheep of his father-in-law, Moses was commissioned of God to return to Egypt and, in company with his brother Aaron, seek Pharaoh’s release of Israel. Pharaoh would harden his heart, affording the opportunity for great and convincing wonders to be performed. These wonders (better known to most as the ten plagues) would culminate in the death of Egypt’s first born ones; for the Lord considered Israel His first born, and He said, “Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy first born” (Ex. 4:23). The account of these wonders is found in Exodus seven through twelve. Finally, in anticipation of the last plague on Egypt, the Lord instructed Moses and Aaron regarding the “Lord’s Passover” and Israel’s release (read Ex. 12). In v. 42, the record says, “It is a night to be much observed unto the Lord for bringing them out from the land of Egypt: this is that night of the Lord to be observed of all the children of Israel in their generations.” In the future observances of this event, when the children would ask, “What mean ye by this service?”, they were to be taught its significance fully and clearly (cf. Ex. 12:26-27; 13:8, 14).

Israel’s Night To Be Much Observed

It is said to be “that night of the Lord . . . . ” What a marvelous display of God’s power against Egypt and of His grace toward Israel! He would triumph over Pharaoh’s callousness, and His wonders would be multiplied in the land of Egypt (11:9). It was to be observed by eating the Passover lamb.

To Be Observed By Whom?

Some were excluded–the stranger, foreigner, and hired servant; in fact, “no uncircumcised person shall eat .thereof” (Ex. 12:43-45, 48b). These would have lacked the knowledge of the event necessary to its meaningful observance. There would have been a lack of faith in its significance, and faith is the foundation of all acceptable service to God. And there would be a lack of personal interest. To Israel, it was a personal deliverance from many long years of bondage, but to the stranger it would mean nothing.

It was provided for Israel–“this is that night of the Lord to be observed of all the children of Israel in their generations” (v. 42b). Nor was it only a privilege; it was also a duty. “All the congregation of Israel shall keep (do, margin) it” (v. 47).

Time and Manner of Observance

The feast growing out of the events of this night which meant so much to Israel was to be kept with regularity–every year on the fourteenth day of the first month, Abib (Ex. 12:6; 13:4-5). Deep meaning was to characterize the observance. “And thou shalt shew thy son in that day, saying, This is done because of that which the Lord did unto me when I came forth out of Egypt” (Ex. 13:8). And in the next verse the writer shows it to be a memorial which should call forth respect for the Lord’s law.

A Night To Be Much Observed By Christians

We hasten to explain that we do not mean to infer that the feast of which we are now about to speak is a continuation of the Jewish Passover. It was, however, instituted at Jesus’ last observance of that feast (Lk. 22:15-18), and there are some points of comparison that can be made without straining. We speak of the Lord’s Supper which was instituted by Jesus at night–that night of His betrayal (1 Cor. 11:23).

By Whom To Be Observed?

The Lord’s statement of inclusion also excludes some. Since His table is in His kingdom, those riot in the kingdom are excluded from a truly beneficial observance of His Supper. In many instances, as outsiders, they are lacking in knowledge of its meaning and, thus, lack the faith which characterizes citizens of the kingdom. For to these latter ones, it is a communion of the body and of the blood of the Lord (1 Cor. l0:lb). Those not in the kingdom lack the personal interest which should characterize observers, having never been washed in the blood of the Lamb, nor translated into the kingdom (Col. 1:13-14).

Who are included? Jesus said, “And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Lk. 22:29-30). While the primary statement was to the apostles, Paul showed that the command to observe the Lord’s Supper extended to all those in the church (1 Cor. 11:17-34). And should it not be considered as more than a privilege? Though a privilege, it is to so remember the Lord. Is observance not a duty? The command is, “Take, eat” and “this do ye.” It is a matter of grave concern that many members of the body seemingly consider the Lord’s Supper so lightly. Company dropping in, the opportunity to make a overtime dollars, a fishing trip, or a golf game often takes precedence over this great memorial of the Lord’s sacrifice. Every child of God should consider it an event to be “much observed.”

Time and Manner Observance

Of the disciples in Troas, it is said, “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow . . . ” (Acts 20:7). They came together on the first day of the week. They broke bread. Every week has a first day. Christians, therefore, are to observe the Lord’s Supper every first day of the week.

We should endeavor to attach the deepest meaning to it, examining ourselves, discerning the Lord’s body, showing the Lord’s death till he comes (1 Cor. 11:26-29). It is a memorial of that great sacrifice of the Lord (v. 24-25). Let each one learn what it means, and when one’s children ask, “What mean ye by this?”, tell them plainly and clearly.

And should not the observance of this memorial, as Israel’s observance of the Passover, produce a great respect for the Lord’s law and a resultant desire to learn more of Him and a deeper commitment to serve Him faithfully? And should not each Christian, therefore, seek to be faithful in assembling every time possible to praise Him and to grow in His grace and knowledge? Truly, dear fellow Christian, the institution of the Lord’s Supper is a night to be much remembered in the kingdom.

Truth Magazine XXI: 39, pp. 617-618
October 6, 1977

By Ron Halbrook

No one desires unity with all men more than Christians do. But, we are not taught by God to seek unity with others on the basis of the lowest common denominator. Upon what basis shall we seek unity among religious people? Many concepts have been held through the centuries.

God’s way for unity is found in His Word. His Word reveals His thoughts and ways, which are far above man’s; it will accomplish His purpose, which also is far above man’s (Isa. 55:8-11). Man’s unity with God in past ages has depended upon man’s faithful obedience to the Word of God. Likewise, men have had unity with one another when they have obeyed God’s Word. In the Garden of Eden, God commanded Adam and Eve, “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2:17). Disobedience separated man from God; Adam and Eve well understood this; for when they sinned and then “heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden,” they “hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God” (Gen. 3:8).

God gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision, commanding, “Every man child among you shall be circumcised” (Gen. 17:9-14). When Shechem and his people requested unity with God’s people, including the privilege of intermarriage, the sons of Jacob said, “If ye will be as we be, that every male of you be circumcised; then will we give our daughters unto you, and we will take your daughters to us, and we will dwell with you, and we will become one people” (Gen. 34:15-16). Though the offer of unity was insincere and deceitful, still the principle announced was valid. Being God’s people, being one people, involved the covenant of circumcision. Obedience to God’s Word was imperative under the Law of Moses for the unity of God’s people. The Lord told Moses to tell Israel, “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: . . . and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation” (Ex. 19:5-6).

The unity of men with God and each other in this age of His grace depends upon faithful obedience to God’s Word. The New Testament provides for unity in Christ upon the basis of the Word of God. In His personal ministry, Jesus taught men to expect this. He said sheep must follow the voice of the shepherd exclusive of all other voices, and that those who would be in his family must “do the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Jn. 10:1-4; Matt. 12:46-49), Just before ending His personal ministry, Jesus prayed for the same unity. He prayed the apostles might be kept from evil through the Father’s name, that they might “be one,” that they might “have my joy,” that they might be sanctified. How was this to be done? “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word: that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me” (Jn. 17).

When Jesus Christ sat upon the throne at God’s right hand, He inaugurated this unity upon the Word of God. He sent the Spirit to proclaim, “God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized . . . . And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:36-47). All who obeyed the Word were added to the same thing, the same body, the same church-added together-UNITED. As Jesus Christ continued his reign, He taught Christians to maintain unity upon “the word of truth,” upon “the foundation,” in “the gospel,” and in “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (Eph. 1:13; 2:20; 3:8; 4:1-7). As various errors arose to challenge His supremacy, Christ continued to unfold the inspired message until it was completed, to supply our every need (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Upon the Word of God, God’s people can still have unity in Christ.

Man’s ways for unity supplant God’s way. But the ways which seem right to men are “the ways of death,” for “it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps” (Prov. 14:12; Jer. 10:23). Before the First Century ended, men were beginning to substitute their ways for God’s way. Paul warned the Ephesian elders that men would arise “speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them;” he exalted God’s Word as the only protection (Acts 20:29-32). Paul told the Thessalonians this spirit of lawlessness was already working-“for the mystery of iniquity doth already work”-and he assured the young preacher Timothy, “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils” (2 Thess. 2:7; 1 Tim. 4:1). The young preacher was urged to faithfully “preach the word,” “for the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Tim. 4:3-4). Similarly, Peter reminded the brethren, “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies” (2 Pet. 2:1).

What are some of the concepts of men substituted for the truth of God on the question of unity? Some of them overlap with others, some grow out of others, and all of them have this in common: they are human, not divine. These concepts will be stated in brief summary form only.

Unity through Councils

Bishops from local churches in certain regions met to discuss common problems during the 200’s A.D. Finally, in 325 A.D. the first so-called ecumenical (i.e. general or world-wide) council was held in Nicaea, Asia Minor. A great many church councils have been held since then, trying to maintain or create unity among professed Christians. The last major Roman Catholic council was the Second Vatican Council in 1962. Martin Luther rebelled against several important Roman Catholic doctrines in the 1500’s in Germany. He made a formal appeal for a general council on November 28, 1518, in an effort to vindicate his stand. Protestant Reformers and the denominations which came after them continued to seek unity through the council method.

Unity through Creeds

Councils often announced their conclusions about doctrinal issues in the form of creeds. “Creed” comes from the Latin word credo, “I believe.” Popes, emperors, and civil legislative bodies have gotten involved in the process of publishing creeds. Creeds are meant to be summary statements of truth, around which people can rally in the effort to have unity. The Nicene Creed was given to the world in 325 A.D. by the Council of Nicaea. It has not only been used by the Roman Catholic Church for centuries, it has also been retained by many Protestant denominations as a standard of unity. Some religious leaders in search of unity today are proposing the Nicene Creed as a piece of the unity puzzle in plans which are being formulated, since it existed before Romans, Greeks, or Protestants had become separate bodies. An early Reformation creed was the Augsburg Confession of 1530. This was the first Protestant confession of faith and represented the Lutheran branch of Reformation. The Lutherans and Zwinglians could not agree on this formulation. Melancthon revised it in an effort to make a standard acceptable to the Calvinists, but they eventually published their own creed-the Westminster Confession of Faith, 1647. Denominational creeds are still used today, though they seem to attract far less loyalty than they once did.

Unity through Some Leader Who Becomes a Symbol of Unity

Emperor Constantine was not even a nominal Christian when he arranged the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., but he was looked up to by many church leaders and he did want to see the Christians settle their disputes. He became something of a symbol of unity as the prime mover behind the Nicene Council, but was nothing like the religious counterpart of the emperors which would come on the scene. Just as the emperors were symbols of civic unity in the Roman Empire, the Pope became the symbol of religious unity in the so-called Western Church (as distinguished from the Eastern or Greek Orthodox). The Bishop of Rome eventually took the title “pope” and claimed both spiritual and temporal authority as the personal representative of God. The popes are still “the center of unity” in Roman Catholicism. Other religious groups have relied on this approach-allowing some dominant figure to be the center of unity no matter what he said, how bad he contradicted himself, or how he lived. Classic examples are the Mormons with Joseph Smith, the Seventh Day Adventists with Ellen G. White, the Christian Scientists with Mary Baker Eddy. A more modern example is the Garner Ted Armstrong cult of the Seventh Day Church of God.

Unity through Force

Roman Catholicism initiated military crusades against certain early centers of religious dissent and reform, as against the Albigenses in France. As the Protestant Reformation picked up steam, Catholicism responded with the Inquisition-a systematic attempt to either convert or exterminate as many Reformers and their followers as possible. People were held incommunicado, tried without opportunity for defense, tortured, strangled, and burned at the stake by the forces of the Inquisition; which were especially strong in Spain. But the Protestant Reformation sometimes resorted to force as well. John Calvin warned Michael Servetus not to return to Geneva; when he did, he was imprisoned, tried, and burned at the stake. During the years that the English Reformation sought to establish itself, both Protestants and Roman Catholics were persecuted depending on who was controlling the civil power at any given time.

Fortunately, this approach to unity has largely fallen out of favor in many parts of the world, especially in the Western Hemisphere. Roger Williams is a manifestation of the disillusionment with unity through force. He came to New England, arriving at Boston on February 5, 1631, to escape persecution in England. His The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for Cause of Conscience (1644) and The Bloudy Tenent yet More Bloudy (1652) are classic statements against the use of force in religious affairs. This method is excluded in countries which recognize separation of church and state, but many millions of people still live in countries which resort to force even in religious matters.

Unity of the Mystics

There were early Roman or Latin mystics, some of which became the subjects of fabulous traditions. More accurate information is available about more modern mystics. Jacob Boehme (1575-1624), a German, taught that the true church is in the heart and therefore not a visible entity. The church was to him a hidden reality or “a universal Church of the Spirit.” The mystical approach to unity includes supernatural experiences and revelations; the unity, like the experiences, are known only to those who “have” it.

Invisible Unity

This overlaps with the former one, but there are many forms and concepts and ideas that qualify as the approach of invisible unity. The common idea undergirding them all is a denial of doctrinal or “outward” unity. This approach requires the acceptance of much outward diversity in faith and practice. Invisible unity is “unity in diversity.” The thing held in common is not the Bible or a creed or allegiance to some visible leader, but is generally something nebulous to be defined and expressed by each individual on his own. Perhaps this “something” will be called “the Spirit,” “the brotherhood of the inward man,” “a small, still voice,” “the church within,” “faith,” “the untapped resources of the human soul,” “loyalty to Christ, without reference to outward forms,” “the voice of God within,” “the light of conscience,” etc. Unity in (the specified nebulosity) will be affirmed in spite of different views on God or Christ or the church and diverse practices regarding church organization, worship, discipline, mission, etc. Of course, some groups are willing to let this invisible unity reach out further than others are. The denominational plea of “The Man, Not the Plan” is a common example; the whole point of unity on this basis is to create unity around expression of loyalty to Jesus Christ in spite of diversity on how to come to Christ, how to obey Christ, and how to be loyal to Christ. Where there is visible diversity on the “plan,” there can be invisible unity accomplished through inward allegiance to something called “the man.” The Jesus Movement and the Pentecostal Movement are varieties of invisible unity. This whole approach is to affirm there is unity where there is obviously disunity; it is convenient, for all one must do is close his eyes to the obvious disunity. With his eyes thus closed, he is ready to say, “I see no disunity; what I see is unity.” It is much simpler than grappling with the real disunity!

Truth Magazine XXI: 39, pp. 614-615
October 6, 1977

By Morris W. R. Bailey

It has been pointed out that the failure to handle aright, or rightly divide, the word of truth is responsible, in a large measure, for many of the doctrinal errors that plague the religious world today. In our previous article we pointed out that the failure to distinguish between conditions before and after the cross of Christ, when the old covenant ended and the New Testament became effective, can be, and has been responsible for erroneous concepts regarding the conditions of salvation. This disposition becomes obvious when examples of forgiveness of sins without baptism that occurred during the personal ministry of Christ are regarded as precedent for our being saved without baptism today.

In this article we propose to show that the claims of Pentecostal and other Holiness groups, to the gift of miraculous healing, and the ability to speak in tongues-gifts that were conferred upon certain men while the New Testament was being written-are due to the failure to make the proper distinction between

The Temporary And The Permanent

By this is meant the distinction between miraculous manifestations that attended the inauguration of a new order, and the law or laws by which said order was perpetuated. This is a distinction that runs all through the Bible, from the beginning. Observe the following examples.

1. The creation of the universe. Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Previous to creation nothing existed. By a miracle God brought the heavens and the earth into existence, and established the laws by which the universe is governed today. The miraculous, having served its purpose, has given way to the permanent order and does not have to be repeated today.

2. The vegetable kingdom was brought into existence by a miracle. Genesis 1:11 says, “And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, herbs yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit after their kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth, and it was so.” The question of which came first, the oak or the acorn is immaterial. If the oak came first then it came by a miracle-creation. It then produced an acorn from which the next oak grew in harmony with natural law. If the acorn came first then it came by a miracle, and produced the first oak according to the law of nature which Goc’ established, and which is permanent.

3. Animal life came by the miracle of creation. Genesis 1:21 says, “And God created the great sea monsters, and every living creature that moveth, wherewith the waters swarmed, after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind: and God saw that it was good.” Sometimes the question is asked, Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Again we say, it is immaterial as to which came first. If it was the chicken, it was a created chicken and it laid the first egg from which the next chicken came. If it was the egg which came first, then it was a created egg which then produced a chicken. In either case, there was first the miracle of creation, then the law of reproduction, which is the permanent order.

4. Man was brought into existence by a miracle-creation. Prior to that event, “there was not a man to till the ground” (Genesis 2:5). But Genesis 1:27 says, “And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him, male and female created he them.” The purpose of the miracle having been accomplished, man was then told to “Multiply and replenish the earth” (Gen. 1:28). This is God’s law of procreation-the permanent order.

This same order-first the miraculous then the permanent order-characterized God’s dealings with Israel. He divided the waters of the Red Sea to save them from the Egyptians (Exodus 14:15). The purpose of the miracle having been accomplished, it has never been repeated. When God gave the Law of Moses from Mount Sinai, its giving was accompanied by miraculous phenomena that struck terror to the hearts of the children of Israel (Exodus 19:16). These were never again repeated after the Law of Moses-the permanent order-was given. God fed the Israelites miraculously with manna from heaven for forty years (Exodus 16:34). But when they entered the land of Canaan the manna ceased and they ate the fruit of the land (Joshua 5:12).

We have given considerable space to the above examples, but all to emphasize this obvious fact, that miraculous phenomena but serves a temporary function, and is no part of the permanent order. We shall now show that this is no less true with regard to

Miracles That Attended The Inauguration Of Christianity

First, let us notice that the system known as Christianity is the permanent order, to which the Law and the prophets were but preparatory. I do not know if I can give a definition of Christianity that would suit everyone. But I offer this as what I conceive it to be. “The System of Redemption designed by God in the Eternal Past, executed by Christ through His Death on the cross, and revealed by the Holy Spirit through the Apostles and other inspired men of the First Century.” This may not be a perfect definition, but I believe it is a fair summary of what we call Christianity. Since it is Christ-centered and built upon Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God, it was essential that His claim be authenticated by substantial proof. Such proof does exist in

The Miracles Of Christ

Time and space forbids our telling all the miracles He performed during His earthly sojourn. A fair summary of His miracles is found in the language of Jesus, Himself, when, in answer to the question of the disciples sent from John the Baptist, ‘Art thou he that cometh, or look we for another?’ Jesus replied, “Go tell John the things that ye hear and see: the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up” (Matthew 11:2-5).

Not only did Jesus demonstrate His power over the ills of the body, but also over the forces of nature (Matthew 8:23-26 records His stilling the tempest on the sea of Galilee); the demon world (Matthew 8:28-32 records His sending the demons out of two men, and into a herd of swine); and the Law of gravity (Matthew 14:25 records His walking on the sea).

We are not left in any doubt as to the purpose of the miracles wrought by Christ. On the occasion of the healing of a palsied man, and when challenged concerning His right to forgive sins, Jesus said, “But that ye may know that the Son of man hath authority on earth to forgive sins (then saith he to the sick of palsy) Arise, and take up thy bed, and go unto thy house” (Matt. 9:6). This miracle demonstrated Christ’s authority to forgive sins — a divine prerogative.

In a summary of the miracles performed by Christ during His personal ministry, John said, “Many other signs therefore did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life through his name” (John 20:30,31).

So while the miracles of Christ conferred some physical benefit on those on whom they were performed, that was not their primary purpose. The purpose of such miracles was to establish the fact of Jesus’ divinity. They were thus used by the apostles in preaching the gospel to unbelievers (Acts 2:22, 10:38). These miracles have been preserved for us in a permanent record, the New Testament. Thus we have access to the same evidence as those who heard the gospel preached by the apostles.

So when some professed faith-healer modestly (?) claims that his miracles are due to the power of Christ working through him, it raises some questions:

1. Why is such power limited today to just one thing-healing? Why do they not stop tornados? There has been no lack of opportunity. Why not miraculously provide us with the money to pay taxes, as Jesus did (Matt. 17:24-27)? What a boon that would be! And, why do they not raise the dead? Does Jesus not have the power to do all that he did while on earth?

2. Granting (which we do not) that actual miracles of healing are being performed today, we ask, What would be the purpose of such miracles? If it is the physical benefit that is conferred, we are then led to ask, Why is this gift of healing limited to so few men (Oral Roberts, and a few others), and why is there still so much sickness when God sends his material blessings on all men (Acts 14:16,17)?

3. Since the divinity of Jesus was abundantly confirmed by the miracles He performed during His personal ministry (John 3:1,2), what purpose would more miracles serve today? If men will not be convinced by the miracles of the First Century, what assurance is there that they will be convinced by miracles worked today?

The fact of the matter is, the miracles of Jesus, like the miracle of dividing the Red Sea, and feeding Israel on manna, served a temporary purpose. Having accomplished that purpose they do not have to be repeated.

Truth Magazine XXI: 39, pp. 613-614
October 6, 1977

By Mike Willis

The greater majority of people has lost sight of the true values of life. Someone has compared our loss of insight as to the true values of life to going into a department store in which someone has mischievously mixed up the price tags. A nylon scarf might be priced at $219.95 and a mink coat at 494. Similarly, most modern men have gotten their values mixed up; we place a high value on the accumulation of possessions and a low value on such virtues as moral integrity, honesty, etc. There can be no doubt that most of us get our values mixed up from time to time. Consequently, we are frequently content to be eating hamburger (i.e., the less important things in life) when we could be eating filet mignon (i.e., the more important things in life). On one occasion, Jesus said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God’ ” (Mt. 4:4). He recognized that some things in life were more important than others. Let us look more carefully at that context to be sure that we understand the lesson which He was teaching us.

The Temptation of Jesus

The passage from which I just quoted was taken from the temptation of Jesus. Jesus had just begun His public ministry having recently been baptized by John (Mt. 3:13-17). Then, the Holy Spirit led Him away to the wilderness to be tempted by Satan. For forty days and nights, Jesus fasted after which He became hungry (Mt. 4:2). At precisely this point in His life, the Devil confronted Jesus. The Devil said, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread” (Mt. 4:3). There can be no doubt that Jesus was hungry enough that He wanted bread to eat. Yet, had He turned the stones into bread, His sole purpose for working that miracle would have been to gratify His personal hunger; there would have been no higher purpose accomplished through the miracle. Hence, He replied, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.'” This reply indicates that Jesus believed that some things were more important in life than food for survival. Too, He recognized that the life which was worth anything depended upon the word of God for its survival and not upon the mere bread which perishes.

On Bread Alone

We live in a society which seemingly thinks that man can live on bread alone. This evidences itself in the fact that the number of Americans who are deciding to go through life without engaging in any kind of worship to God Almighty is increasing. The number of Americans who read their Bibles is infinitesimal. I think that it is significant to measure the quality of life which exists in America, a society which has decided to live on “bread” alone.

The crime rate continues to increase year after year. The divorce rate is skyrocketing. Personal integrity is at an all-time low. A large segment of our society would rather live off the welfare programs of the federal government than to go out and get a job to earn a living. Shoplifting is a problem to every business in this country. Employees walk off with a number of their employers’ tools. Our government officials are corrupt.

Though we live in a land which has more prosperity than any nation before us, we find that we are not satisfied with the quality of our life. The couches of our psychologists and psychiatrists are filled. We who have the most to live with are finding out that material things do not satisfy us. Years ago, Solomon said, “The eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor is the ear filled with hearing” (Eccl. 1:8). He recognized that material things do not give permanent gratification. The man who sees a beautiful sight one day wants to see a more beautiful sight the next day. Things do not give happiness. Whatever pleasures this world can give are only gratifying for a short period of time.

Furthermore, the price at which these pleasures come is frequently too high. Jesus refused to compromise Himself; the price of bread was too high for Him to turn a stone into bread. He recognized that “life is more than food, and the body than clothing” (Lk. 12:23). Yet many among us have never learned this lesson. In order to get the food which perishes and the other material things of this life, some compromise themselves to such an extent that they cannot even live with themselves. To obtain their desired material possessions they are willing to forsake their Lord, their children, and their beloved wife. Some are even willing to lie, steal, and cheat. When “bread” (i.e., the material things of life) costs this price, its price is too high; honorable death would be preferable to dishonorable life.

Every Word That Proceeds Out Of The Mouth Of The Lord

In contrast to those who live on bread alone, the Christian is one who decides to live on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord. He recognizes that the word of God leads us to that life which is life indeed. “It holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come” (1 Tim. 4:8). Unlike the worldly man who looks upon God’s commandments as so many prohibitions which forbid him from enjoying life in this world, the Christian realizes that the limitations placed on man by God are for his own good. They keep man from engaging in things which will only bring him unlimited sorrow.

The life which God commands of His children is one which improves the quality of life which exists on this earth. The family which lives according to God’s word will be a better family than the one which does not. The husband-wife relationship will be one characterized by the intimacy revealed in Eph. 5:22-33. Instead of a home. in which the wife is wanting to be the liberated woman of the women’s liberation movement, the children being rebellious, and the husband harshly domineering, the Christian family will be one in which the husband shows as much love for his wife as for his own body, the wife will be a keeper at home and lover of her children, and the children will honor their parents. This is the kind of family God wants us to have. This is the kind of family which will result when man realizes that he does not live by bread alone but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord.

Other relationships will be equally improved by a steadfast adherence to the word of God. Our relationships with one another will be better when we treat each other as Jesus commanded: “whatever you want others to do for you, do so for them” (Mt. 7:12). Our nation’s problems can be solved by adherence to the word of God. When men realize that the able bodied man who refuses to work should not be allowed to eat (2 Thess. 3:10), that there are no distinctions before God in the various races of men (Gal. 3:28), that the employee owes his employer an honest day’s work for an honest day’s wage (Eph. 6:5-9; Jas. 5:4), that old-fashioned Bible morals are not only desirable but necessary for the survival of this country, etc., then this country will be headed in the right direction. It must, however, begin with the realization that man shall not live on bread alone but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.

Even more importantly, the man who realizes that he can live on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God is prepared to die having the promise of eternal life with God. Whatever sacrifices are necessary to be able to live on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God are infinitesimal when compared to the blessings which God has in store for. His saints. Jesus recognized this when He refused to turn the stones into bread; He would have preferred to have died of starvation than to compromise Himself to live on bread alone. May each of us learn this important lesson which Jesus taught us through His temptation; “Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God” (Mt. 4:4).

Truth Magazine XXI: 39, pp. 611-612
October 6, 1977