Truth Magazine

By Ron Halbrook

For the Truth’s sake, we must learn to avoid hypocrisy in all forms. God condemns it repeatedly. Preachers and teachers of the Word can be as guilty as anyone else. Jesus told the Jews, “All therefore whatsoever (the Pharisees) bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not” (Matt. 23:3). Paul asked, “Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?” (Rom. 2:21) When Jesus said, “Judge not, that ye be not judged,” he referred to hypocritical judgment (Matt. 7:1-5). We must “judge righteous judgment,” not condemning what we allow or allowing what we condemn for the sake of man’s favor (Jn. 7:24).

Hypocrisy comes in many forms. (1) Men often try to appear “better” than they are. Men “join the church” of their choice, because the community “expects” it, without ever examining the Bible to see what God’s choice is! (Matt. 7:15-27). Meeting community standards in religion, while disobeying God’s Word, is hypocrisy. Community approval is _the only “reward” for such religion, for God rejects it (Matt. 6:lff).

(2) Men often try to appear “worse” than they are. Peter tried to blend in with unbelievers, by denying the Lord. When the Lord “looked upon Peter,” he “went out, and wept bitterly” (Lk.11:54ff). Some Christians today need that same repentance: “let your laughter be turned into mourning” (Jas. 4:9). To laugh with our friends at immoral jokes, to have a “social” drink with them, to smoke with them, and to use their cursing, is to destroy our influence by hypocrisy! God’s children are to be “without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world; holding forth the word of life” (Phil. 2:15f).

(3) Men often claim sincerity in religion, but refuse discussion, examination, and debate. A child who works math problems but refuses to have his work discussed or examined, is NOT a sincere student. Jesus freely debated and discussed his doctrine in public, as did his Apostles. There was a time when Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, and others would submit their doctrine to public debate “for the truth’s sake.” Now they generally refuse to debate such things as sprinkling for baptism, the purpose of Bible baptism, their creeds, instrumental music in worship, human organizations, etc.

(4) The sacramental system encourages hypocrisy. Some men teach that God “infuses grace into the soul” of one who partakes of the “sacraments” (certain religious acts). Unwittingly, this encourages people to think they can sin to their heart’s desire and then “make it all right” by use of the “sacrament.” Human sacraments are worthless to begin with, and only obedience “from the heart” to God’s Word cleanses from sin (Rom. 6). (5) Modernism IS hypocrisy personified. Modernists claim to honor Christ while saying he was “wrong” on certain things, and to honor the Bible as God’s Word while saying it contains contradictions and falsehoods (cf Heb. 4:15; 2 Tim. 2:16f). This is bald-faced religious hypocrisy, as practiced by Judas when he gave Christ the kiss, of death. Let us examine ourselves, that faith may work by love (Gal. 5:6).

Truth Magazine XXI: 21, pp. 332-333
May 26, 1977

By Roland Worth, Jr.

American religion plays great lip service to the Bible. It is on every pulpit; in most churches there is at least some type of reading from it every Sunday; the creed books declare it to be their standard. It is the world’s best seller every year.

Yet do people really accept the Bible? Do they accept what it teaches?

Thanks to public opinion poll data we can answer this question with more than just speculation based on personal experience. At least two major polls of religious belief have been taken in recent years:

In 1965, the Catholic Digest sponsored a nationwide survey of opinion (both inside their church and outside it) as to what Americans believe on a wide variety of subjects connected with religion. The findings of this survey were reported in What Do We Believe? The Stance of Religion in America (Merid ith Press, New York: 1968), with an analysis by Martin E. Marty, Stuart E. Rosenberg, and Andrew M. Greeley.

In 1963, another major survey was undertaken, in this case by the University of California at Berkley and concerned religious opinions in four northern California counties. The findings are reported in Rodney Stark and Charles Y. Glock’s volume on American Piety: The Nature of Religious Commitment (University of California Press, Berkeley, California: 1968).

From these two sources we can gain a reasonably accurate understanding of what the typical American religionist believes. We could present a lengthy refutation of the popular misconceptions that these studies revealed. Since most of my readers are already Christians and know the truth on these matters, I will refrain from doing this. I will let the figures speak for themselves, without comment.

(The charts and figures that follow, though they are based on those found in the above two volumes, are seldom a verbatim reproduction; in other words, the format has normally been at least slightly changed in order to emphasize the points we are trying to make.)

What Was Jesus?

The Catholic Digest survey (pages 224-225). The “supernatural” column below lumps together those who believe that Jesus is “God” and those who label Him “Son of God.” The “Human” column is for those who simply considered Him as “another leader.”

DENOMINATION	SUPERNATURAL		HUMAN
	1952	1965	1952	1965
Roman Catholic	92%	89%	6 %	51%
Protestant	83%	76%	10%	13%
Baptist	91%	85%	6 %	9 %
Methodist	83%	73%	9 %	14%
Lutheran	79%	73%	12%	17%
Presbyterian	82%	71%	12%	15%
Episcopal	76%	64%	17%	25%
Congregational	64%	53%	24%	29%

The California survey (page 32). This survey reveals that the shift away from belief in a supernatural Jesus may grow in the future due to the large number who have “doubts” on the subject.

The “Human” column below lumps together the two categories “Jesus was only a man though an extraordinary one” and “Jesus was a great man and very holy, but I don’t feel Him to be the Son of God any more than all of us are children of God.”

DENOMINATION	“DIVINE SON OF GOD”	“SOME DOUBTS”	HUMAN
Roman Catholic	86%	8 %	4 %
Protestant	69%	17%	11%
Congregational	40%	28%	28%
Methodist	54%	22%	20%
Episcopal	59%	25%	13%
American Lutheran	74%	18%	8 %
Disciples of Christ	74%	14%	8 %
Presbyterian	72%	19%	7 %
American Baptist	76%	16%	6 %
Missouri Lutheran	93%	5 %	1 %
Southern Baptist	99%	0 %	1 %

Virgin Birth of Christ

The California survey (page 34) found that the following percentages of church members that would accept as “completely true” the Biblical teaching that Jesus was born of a virgin.

DENOMINATION	PERCENT
Roman Catholic	81%
Protestant	57%
Congregational	21%
Methodist	34%
Episcopal	39%
Disciples	62%
American Lutheran	66%
American Baptist	69%
Missouri Lutheran	92%
Southern Baptist	99%

Return of Christ

There were the following answers to the question: “Do You Believe Jesus will actually return to the earth some day?” (California survey, page 34).

DENOMINATION	DEFINITELY OR PROBABLY	POSSIBLY	PROBABLY NOT OR DEFINITELY NOT
Roman Catholic	57%	16%	23%
Protestant	54%	20%	23%
Congregational	21%	28%	48%
Methodist	33%	25%	39%
Episcopal	37%	29%	28%
Presbyterian	54%	23%	20%
Disciples	46%	26%	18%
American Lutheran	66%	18%	13%
American Baptist	68%	17%	11%
Missouri Lutheran	83%	6 %	5 %
Southern Baptist	98%	0 %	2 %

Miracles of Christ

The California survey (page 36) provided three categories of answers to the questions of whether there were miracles : (1) “Miracles actually happened just as the Bible says they did,” in other words, a full acceptance of what the Bible teaches on the subject; (2) “Miracles happened but can be explained by natural causes;” (3) doubted or denied miracles.

DENOMINATION	DOUBTED OR DENIED	NATURAL EXPLANATIONS	FULL ACCEPTANCE
Roman Catholic	9 %	9 %	74%
Protestants	17%	19%	57%
Congregational	32%	32%	28%
Episcopalian	27%	22%	41%
Methodist	24%	31%	37%
Disciples	14%	16%	62%
Presbyterian	14%	20%	58%
American Lutheran	13%	14%	69%
American Baptist	9 %	16%	62%
Missouri Lutheran	5 %	4 %	89%
Southern Baptist	3 %	0 %	92%

Life Beyond Death?

The Catholic national survey produced these figures in answer to the question, “Do you think your soul will live on after death?” (Page 246).

DENOMINATION	NO	YES	UNCERTAIN
Roman Catholic	3 %	83%	14%
Protestant	7 %	78%	15%
Episcopal	15%	68%	17%
Presbyterian	11%	70%	19%
Congregational	11%	65%	24%
Methodist	7 %	75%	18%
Lutheran	7 %	78%	15%
Baptist	5 %	81%	14%

The California study resulted in these figures (page 37),

DENOMINATION	PROBABLY OR DEFINITELY NOT	PROBABLY TRUE	COMPLETELY TRUE
Roman Catholic	5 %	16%	75%
Protestant	9 %	24%	65%
Congregational	21%	40%	36%
Methodist	13%	35%	49%
Episcopalian	13%	31%	53%
Presbyterian	7 %	21%	69%
American Baptist	7 %	19%	72%
American Lutheran	5 %	23%	70%
Missouri Lutheran	4 %	10%	84%
Southern Baptist	0 %	3 %	97%

Does the Devil Exist?

The California study found that religionists gave the following replies (page 37),

DENOMINATION	PROBABLY NOT OR DEFINITELY NOT TRUE	PROBABLY TRUE	COMPLETELY TRUE
Roman Catholic	14%	14%	66%
Protestants	43%	15%	38%
Congregational	78%	13%	6 %
Methodist	66%	15%	13%
Episcopalian	60%	16%	17%
Presbyterian	48%	17%	31%
Disciples	38%	34%	18%
American Baptist	29%	17%	49%
American Lutheran	26%	20%	49%
Missouri Lutheran	10%	9 %	77%
Southern Baptist	1 %	5 %	92%

Original Sin?

The belief in “original sin” is widely spread throughout American religions in spite of the fact that the Bible does not teach it. The California poll asked “A child is born into the world already guilty of sin?” The answers were (page 40),

DENOMINATION	COMPLETELY TRUE	PROBABLY TRUE	PROBABLY OR DEFINITELY NOT TRUE
Roman Catholic	68%	10%	19%
Protestants	26%	6 %	65%
Missouri Lutheran	86%	4 %	9 %
American Lutheran	49%	12%	37%
Southern Baptist	43%	3 %	55%
American Baptist	23%	9 %	65%
Presbyterian	21%	7 %	68%
Episcopalian	18%	7 %	71%
Methodist	7 %	4 %	87%
Disciples	6 %	2 %	90%
Congregational	2 %	2 %	94%

Heaven and Hell?

The Catholic survey enquired whether people believed in the existence of a Heaven and Hell after death (pages 248-251).

DENOMINATION	NO AFTER LIFE OR NOT SURE	YES HEAVEN	YES HELL	NO HEAVEN	NO HELL	NOT SURE HEAVEN	NOT SURE HELL
Roman Catholic	17%	80%	70%	1 %	7 %	2 %	6 %
Protestant	22%	71%	54%	3 %	15%	4 %	9 %
Episcopal	32%	54%	17%	10%	38%	4 %	13%
Congregational	35%	58%	25%	4 %	37%	3 %	3 %
Lutheran	22%	66%	49%	3 %	22%	9 %	7 %
Presbyterian	29%	61%	39%	3 %	22%	7 %	10%
Methodist	25%	66%	44%	3 %	17%	6 %	14%
Baptist	19%	78%	68%	1 %	7 %	2 %	6%

Nature of the Bible

The Catholic survey asked, “Do you believe the Bible is really the revealed word of God; or do you think it is only a great piece of literature?” (page 228).*

DENOMINATION	GREAT LITERATURE	WORD OF GOD	OTHER OR DON’T KNOW
Roman Catholic	9 %	82%	9 %
Protestant	10%	85%	7 %
Episcopal	25%	71%	12%
Congregational	19%	70%	11%
Presbyterian	16%	78%	7 %
Methodist	13%	81%	10%
Lutheran	13%	79%	8 %
Baptist	5 %	91%	4 %

*Figures sometimes “add to more than 100 per cent since some people gave more than one response.”

Conclusion

What such figures as these indicate is that, regardless of claims, many denominationalists are in dissent from clear Biblical teachings. Regrettably, what Stark and Glock say of the Episcopalian Church has application to other groups as well,

“During. . . attempts to try him for heresy, Episcopalian Bishop James A. Pike defended himself as having merely told the laity what the clergy have taken for granted for years. Bishop Pike charged that modernized interpretations of doctrine which are commonplace in theological journals have been kept secret from ordinary church members in the interest of harmony. While it seems quite true that the new theology has rarely been preached from the pulpit in Episcopalian churches, which supports Bishop Pike’s Contentions, nevertheless the average Episcopalian has adopted these modernized views. Indeed, the majority of Episcopalian church members in our sample hold theological views quite similar to Bishop Pike’s. This presents the ironic picture of Sunday services where both pastor and laymen reject or at least doubt the theological assumptions of the creeds they recite and the rituals in which they participate, but never acknowledge this fact” (page 209).

Truth Magazine XXI: 21, pp. 330-332
May 26, 1977

By Jeffery Kingry

Ever since the week I obeyed the Gospel I have observed that my brethren have had problems. At the tender age of eighteen I was confronted with my first taste of animosity between brethren. The preacher spoke out against worldliness. A brother with sore toes and a “pricked” heart called for an “emergency business meeting.” He demanded a public apology or a new preacher. When neither seemed to be forthcoming and his bellicose demands did not cow the brethren into “firing” the preacher, he dramatically stalked out in a rage, slamming doors and spraying gravel all over the parking lot as he took “his contribution someplace else!” Oblivious to the embarrassed chatter of the brethren I could only weep with incredulity that such could happen among my brethren. I thought I had left all that kind of behavior behind in the world.

Years later, I still weep sometimes at the way brethren treat each other, but such behavior does not come as a surprise anymore. What is surprising is that brethren still believe they can act that way, treat their brethren like animals and expect to stand justified before God without any effort towards repentance or reconciliation. There is no place in the Lord’s church for sin, and God has given us the tools necessary to deal with unrepentant sinners.

What is Sin?

Scripture defines sin as violation of God’s law (1 Jn. 3:4; 5:17), violation of conscience (Jas. 4:17), or presumptive living (Rom. 14:23).Basically the man approved of God is one who acts to please God and not himself (Rom. 15:3). The “unrighteous” man is one who acts without firm conviction that he is pleasing God with his action. That faith, knowing God approves, comes only with the written testimony of God. When I am unsure that I am doing right, but I act anyway without the written approval of God as my source of action, I sin. When I assume that God will approve my deed, my faith is then based upon my will and not God’s and I sin. And when I break God’s law, whether presumptively, ignorantly, or intentionally, I sin.

How Do I Treat Sin?

How one treats sin in this life determines ones “mental health.” Mental health is actually the Christian’s right relationship with man and God. God has promised us that living righteously will bring peace (Jas. 2:18), love, joy, (Gal. 5:22), and confidence (Psa. 42:11). But the scriptures also point out that sin, guilt for sin, lack of true repentance and reconciliation produces not only ultimate spiritual death but physical and mental strain that brings intense pain in this world (Psa. 38:3; Prov. 14:30).

Righteousness means simply, “Being right.” One is “right” when he acts “righteously.” Only God has a right to determine the “right” way. God has given us in His word the right response for every situation we may be confronted with (2 Tim. 3:16,17). In our “walk” through life the path of the just is as a shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect day (Prov. 4:18). The “right way” not only brings right relationships (peace) with God and man (cf. 1 Jn. 1:7), but also produces physical and mental vigor: “Let not wisdom depart from thine eyes: keep it in the midst of thy heart. For it is life unto those that find it, and health to all their flesh” (Prov. 4:21,22).

Many brethren are miserable, unhappy, and make life for their brethren much like their own because they miss this fundamental fact. Righteousness to many saints for years has been centered solely in “doctrine” rather than personal living. The “doctrine of Christ” includes more than the work and worship of the church, and the negative aspects of a life without worldliness. Many define their doctrine mostly in a negative sense, “Righteousness is not using an instrument of music, not using vain repetitions, not fellowshipping liberals/anti’s/legalists/pharisees/digressives, not drinking, smoking, or reading Playboy Magazine.” Many think that they are justified for what they do not do. The scriptures declare “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:10). Being Christ-like does include not doing certain things (cf. l Cor. 6:9-11), but above all, it means doing what is right (Phil. 1:9-11). Failure to do right, to respond with God’s righteousness to difficulties, trials, and temptations, is to sin (Jas. 4:17).

How God Treats Sin

When we react rightly to sin, therefore, we must respond to it the same way God does. God does not overlook sin. He does not consider some sins “petty”. God does not follow double standards, showing respect for people He “likes” and being censorious of those He “dislikes.” God does not minimize sin by saying, “That is just the way some people are.” Changing people from “the way they are” was so important to God that it took the suffering, pain-filled death of His Son to change people. God has given only one way to overcome sin: confrontation, repentance, and reconciliation. Matt. 5:23,24 demands reconciliation between men. Matt. 18:15-18 demands confrontation between brethren because of sin and either reconciliation or discipline. This is God’s righteousness. There is no other way.

“My Soul Is My Own!”

But it is not. God bought it, and it cost the blood of Jesus Christ, and you can no longer use it as you please. You are not entitled to petty hatreds, malice, anger, envy, and covetousness. You cannot let resentments and hurts build up in your heart, finding vent like a jet of steam in hateful talk, criticism, backbiting, and hateful deeds. You are not allowed by God to “worry yourself sick.” You no longer can say to God, “I cannot go to my brother to take the division and hurt away from between us. I just cannot do it.” God has declared that you not only can do it (cf. 1 Cor. 10:13; Phil. 4:13) but you must do it.

We must react to sin by rebuke, teaching, exhortation, with a view to change behavior . It is not enough to “go forward” some Sunday or Wednesday when one has sinned against a brother. There must be a reconciliation of those brethren in the Lord (Matt. 5: 2326). Among ourselves we must confront sin in whatever form it takes (Rom. 15:14).

Problems Have Solutions

Man can be lazy, selfish, and ignorant. It takes a great deal of effort to produce anything worthwhile. The farmer toils in the sweat of his brow for the fruit of the earth. The scholar labors in study and searching to produce the fruit of the intellect. The child of God must labor just as diligently to produce the fruit of the spirit: a Christlike life. When the Christian permits events, environment, and things to control him, he is submitting to the Devil and not to God. How many times have you yourself said in defense of your actions., “But did you see/ hear what he did to me? A Christian must take the initiative in life to subdue sin and conquer the world, not be conquered by it. We do not act as a reaction to the world. We are the salt of the earth, and the light of the world. The world has its existence in reaction to us!

Christians solve problems by the power of God. We do not live with a problem we overcome it. We do not reject a problem because it is difficult, we grasp it and battle it with the armor and weapons of God. We are not deflected by sin, we conquer sin. Every test overcome by making a godlike response gives us strength to deal with the next trial (Jas. 1:2-4). We are not responsible for the way the world or the brethren treat us, but we are responsible for the way we treat them. You are responsible before God for what you are.

Truth Magazine XXI: 21, pp. 328-329
May 26, 1977

By Johnny Stringer

Baptism is absolutely necessary for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), for salvation (Mk. 16:16; 1 Pet. 3:21), and for union with Christ (Gal. 3:27). Let none deny the importance of baptism. However, let us not make the mistake of attributing feats to baptism which it cannot accomplish. Some seem to have the curious notion that baptism nullifies and erases marriages!

Paul said, “For the woman which hath an husband is hound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she he married to another man; she shall he called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man” (Rom. 7:2-3). Clearly, then, a woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives; marriage is a lifetime arrangement; and if she is married to another during the lifetime of her first husband, she is an adulteress because of the fact that she is still bound to her first husband. This is the general rule. Jesus made an exception to it, saying that one who puts his mate away for the cause of fornication is free to remarry (Matt. 19:1-12).

It is argued by many of our brethren that one can divorce and remarry unscripturally and then when that person is baptized, he can continue to live with the second mate without being guilty of adultery. They believe that whatever mate one has at the time of baptism is his scriptural mate and that all previous marriages no longer count. But the scriptures teach that unless he puts away his first mate for the cause of fornication, a person is bound to the first mate for as long as that mate lives. The act of baptism cannot change that. Baptism cannot nullify the first marriage! When one is baptized, he is still bound to his first mate and, therefore, has no right to live with the second mate. Since he is still hound to the first mate, he commits adultery by his relations with his second mate.

Baptism, brethren, is to blot out sins; it is not to blot out marriages! The one who is living in an adulterous union-that is, living with a second mate while still bound to the first mate (Rom. 7:2-3)-can be baptized and have all his past sins blotted out. He can be forgiven for having lived with a person he had no right to live with. But he is still bound to that first mate; therefore, he cannot continue to live with the second mate without continuing to commit adultery.

Not many are willing to give up their adulterous unions. They will not repent of them. To do so is difficult. Whether or not one is willing to do so is a real test of his dedication and devotion to Christ; it shows whether or not he really loves Christ above everyone and everything else (Lk. 14:26, 33). The one who is truly converted will stand the test and cease his adultery. Those who do not want to cease their adultery will often use the children as an excuse not to sever the relationship. It is more than a little interesting that folks do not seem too concerned about the effect on the children when they want to end a marriage for an unscriptural reason, but when it comes to the matter of ending an adulterous relationship which they do not want to end, then they become terribly concerned about the effect on the children. They need to consider the effect that it will have on the children to grow up and learn that their parents are living in adultery! Which will produce the better effect on the children: learning that their parents had such little regard for the word of God that they openly defied it and lived without shame in an adulterous relationship, or seeing that their parents are so devoted to the God of heaven that they were willing to make an extreme and agonizing sacrifice in order to please Him and reach heaven?

Brethren, if you did not put away your first mate for the cause of fornication and if that mate is still living, you are still bound to that mate; your baptism did not nullify that first marriage. You, therefore, have no right to live with another. If you have already begun to live with one other than the one to whom you are bound, cease that adulterous relationship. The brief period of pleasure that such a relationship will bring on earth will not be worth an eternity of agony in hell.

Truth Magazine XXI: 21, pp. 327-328
May 26, 1977