Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

Within recent years, the amount of pornography which has been printed in the United States has increased more than ten-fold. Practically any minute market in America has pornographic books of many titles available t0 the general public around its counter. The newspapers carry advertisements from theaters which specialize in girly movies and more sadistic portrayals of human immorality. Recently, some have even been talking of “snuff movies,” i.e. movies which record on camera the actual murder of another human being. Surely I am not the only person in America who has noted the increase in the number of movies with reference to which the television networks must append a statement to the effect that the movie might not be recommended for children or immature persons. (I have serious doubts that acceptance of pornography or violence is a mark of maturity.) No one would deny that there has been a violent increase in pornography in our society.

I suppose the thing which is most disconcerting to me is that this increase in pornography is definitely a mark of the general deterioration of the moral fiber of the American people. If no one was buying pornography, the publishers would quit printing it. The fact that more and more pornography is becoming available evidences the fact that more and more American are buying more and more of it. If there were no market, there would be n0 pornography. But, there is a market and what a market it is! In Searching the Scriptures (July, 1976), in an article entitled, “Mind Pollution-Pornography,” Weldon Warnock reported, “James K. Barret, a former Mafia operative and FBI undercover man, wrote in Reader’s Digest, Nov., 1973, that smut was a billion-ayear operation for the Mafia.” Just how accurate these statements are might be hard to determine, but we can rest assured that the publication of pornography is a lucrative business.

Pornography and the Courts

The purveyors of this moral filth have been in a running battle with the courts of this land t0 determine whether or not they have the right to publish their product. I might add, that they have been victorious more often than not. The problem for the courts of America has been two-fold: (1) to write a law which prohibits pornography without, at the same time, relinquishing the right t0 freedom of the press and (2) to define pornography in such a way that it has meaning (most of the definitions given to the word have been so subjective and filled with loopholes that they are virtually useless).

Here is the federal law against obscenity which was passed by Congress:

Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure Chapter 71. Obscenity Section 1461

“Every obscene, lewd, lascivious, or filthy book, pamphlet picture, paper, letter, writing, print, or other publication of an indecent character; and

“Every article or thing designed, adapted, or intended for preventing conception or producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral use; and

“Every article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing which is advertised or described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for preventing conception or producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral purpose, and

“Every written or printed card, letter, circular, book, pamphlet, advertisement, or notice of any kind of information, directly or Indirectly, where, or how, or from whom, or by what means any of such mentioned matters, articles, or things may be obtained or made, or where or by whom any act or operation of any kind for the procuring or producing of abortion will be done or performed, or how or by what means conception may, be prevented or abortion produced, whether sealed or unsealed; and

“Every paper, writing, advertisement, or representation that any article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing may, or can, be used or applied for preventing conception or producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral purpose; and

“Every description calculated to induce or incite a person to so use or apply any such article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing

“Is declared to be nonmailable matter and shall not be conveyed in the mails or delivered from any postofftce or by any letter carrier.

“Whoever knowingly uses the mails for mailing, carriage in the mails, or delivery of anything declared by this section to be nonmailable, or knowlingly causes to be delivered by mail according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, or knowlingly takes any such thing from the mails for the purpose of circulating or disposing thereof, shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, for the first such offense, and shall be fined not more that $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, for each such offense thereafter.”

The change in the moral code for America since the writing of that law is apparent to everyone. It is no longer criminal to get an abortion; as a matter of fact, our tax dollars can be used to pay for one! Hence, this has not been the last word of the courts regarding obscenity.

To further determine what is obscene, the U.S. Supreme Court devised a series of tests to determine what is obscene in the Roth v. U.S. case. Those tests are as follows: (1) The Social Value Test. Any material which has any redeeming social value has the full protection of the first amendment to the constitution. (2) Prurient Interest Test. Any material appealing as a whole to lewdness is obscene. The law stated, “A thing is obscene if, considered as a whole, its predominant appeal is to prurient interest, i.e. a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion, and if it goes substantially beyond customary limits of such matters.” (3) The Patently Offensive Test. Magazines which “cannot be deemed so offensive as to affront current community standards of decency” are not obscene. (4) The Hard Core Pornography Test. If something is classified as “hard core pornography; ” it is considered obscene.

Our readers can certainly see the loopholes in these tests. Who is going to be allowed to determine whether or not a specific object has redeeming social value, appeals to prurient interests, is patently offensive or is, hard-core pornography? Anytime that a local, lower court brought action against a smut peddler, the matter was appealea all the way to the Supreme Court. The justices of the court soon found themselves having to spend long hours perusing obscene literature to decide whether or not it was in violation of the law. Soon, Justice Black issued a statement saying that “federal censorship is not the answer to these problems.” In essence, the Supreme Court has thrown the matter back into the hands of the lower courts and is allowing communities to set their own level for determining what is obscene.

At the present, there is nothing but confusion present in the courts of our land regarding what is obscene. It is ironic, to say the least, that “Christian” America is having more problems with obscenity than atheistic Russia is having. Soviet Russia, in its early revolutionary days was extremely liberal in matters of sexual conduct and laws governing sexual conduct were mild or nonexistent. “But the Russians discovered that the moral decline setting in because of this liberality in the legal code threatened the new society they had envisioned. There were revisions, and today the USSR tolerates no pornography or sexual writings” (Censorship, Obscenity and Sex, Alfred P. Klausler, p. 56).

No Help From the Law

It is obvious that the law is very little, if any at all, help in dealing with the matter of obscenity. Some Christians are persuaded that this is not all that bad. Once society permits the law to legislate any moral standard, trouble lies ahead. During the discussion surrounding the prohibition laws, David Lipscomb wrote, “Not finding that the scriptures ever teach Christians to use the civil power to enforce morality, righteousness, or religion, we have come to the conclusion that a man of God ought not to use it for such ends” (as quoted by David Edwin Harrell, Jr, in “From Consent to Dissent: The Emergence of the Churches of Christ in America,” Restoration Quarterly, XIX:2, Second Quarter, 1976, pp. 105-106). “Elisha G. Sewell, coeditor of the Gospel Advocate, argued that consistency demanded that prohibitionists support the passage of other laws: `To make their work a complete success, they ought to next have stringent laws enacted to force men to reform from profane swearing, and others to force men to obey the gospel of Christ and become Christians. If they have a right to force men to obey God in the matter of temperance, why not in every other respect?” (Ibid., p. 106).

Certainly these statements call attention to a tension which must be faced by proponents of censorship. However, the other side of this same coin is “no censorship.” Our legal codes already enforce a morality which prohibits murder, theft, rape, etc. A moral standard is already being enforced on people. Frankly, I am unable to suggest any legal way of solving this problem without sacrificing to some degree the right to freedom of the press. Hence, I am more and more coming to believe that morality cannot be legislated; it comes through conversion to God.

Obscenity and the Christian

Whereas obscenity is a sticky legal problem it poses no such dilemma to the Christian. The Christian is a man who is totally committed to following the legislation of Jesus Christ. He is committed to following what the New Testament teaches regarding such matters. Whereas moral relativitists might be without foundation in determining what is obscene, the one who clings to the Bible as the revealed word of God has something by which he can measure what is and what is not obscene. Here are some passages which help the Chrsitian determine that he must stay away from obscenity:

1. Mt. 5:28. Jesus said, “. . . I say to you, that every one who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.” Any book, magazine, or picture which sexually arouses a person causes that person to violate this command of Jesus. Such a person has committed adultery in his heart when he lusts after the person depicted. Christians will shun any kind of material which produces this kind of lust.

2. Gal. 5:19. Uncleanness and lasciviousness are here condemned by God. Uncleanness (akatharsia) means “the impurity of lustful, luxurous, profligate living.” Lasciviousness (aselgeia) means “unbridled lust, excess, licentiousness, lasciviousness, wantonness, outrageousness, shamelessness, insolence …. wanton acts or manners, as filthy words, indecent bodily movements, unchaste handling of males and females.” Col. 3:5=6 uses some of these same words and instructs the Christian to mortify these deeds in his body.

3. Phil. 4:8. “Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, let your mind dwell on these things.” The Christian is to think about things which are productive of good. He knows that all evil things proceed from an evil heart (Mt. 15:18-20). Hence, he has a responsibility to keep his heart pure (Prov. 4:23).

Conclusion

Hence, while the world is wrestling with the problem of pornography, the Chrsitian knows which is the safe course in which he should walk. God has revealed to him what kind of life he should live. Just as the World is in a turmoil over whether or not administer discipline to children, it is also in a turmoil regarding the problem of pornography. If one listens to the psychologists, not only will he receive conflicting opinions, he will lose his children and soul in the process. The Christian knows which law he must follow when discussing the subject of discipline. Similarly, today the world is in a turmoil regarding pornography with psychologists and lawyers revealing divergent opinions on the subject. But while the world wrestles over which course it is going to take, the Christian knows in which path he should walk. God has revealed that to him. He knows no uncertainity for he knows that God condemns the publisher, marketer, and reader of pornography.

Truth Magazine XXI: 17, pp. 259-261
April 28, 1977

By Bill Cavender

“The doctrine that pleasure is the sole or chief good in life and that moral duty is fulfilled in the gratification of pleasure-seeking instincts and dispositions; living for pleasure” (Webster). Hedone: “Pleasure, is used of the gratification of the natural desire or sinful desires” (W. E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words).

“For we also once were foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures (hedone), living in malice and envy, hateful. hating one another” (Titus 3:3). “Whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not, even of your pleasures (hedone) that war in your members? Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may spend it in your pleasures (hedone)” (James 4:1-3). “Men that count it pleasure (hedone) to revel in the day-time, spots and blemishes, reveling in their deceivings while they feast with you; having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; enticing unsteadfast souls; having a heart exercised in covetousness; children of cursing” (2 Pet. 2:13-14).

Who would deny that hedonism reigns supreme everywhere? The “Playboy Philosophy” is the moral and spiritual fashion of the day. Plain old decency, discreteness, purity, honesty, truthfulness, morality, manners and modesty are as out-of-date and “old foggyish” as the horseless carriage, and mother’s brass scrub-board and number three washtub. With the bikinis, short shorts, mini-skirts, skin-tight and ultra-thin garments, pornographic movies and magazines, topless and naked entertainment, sex education in schools and illicit lust affairs on every hand; with the overwhelming emphasis on sports (more brutal and cruel than ever), fishing, hunting, camping, traveling, weekending; and with the corresponding de-emphasis of worship, Bible study, prayer and spirituality, who would deny that ours is a pleasure-mad, hedonistic world?

Wars, murder, lawlessness, divorce, drugs, alcohol, thievery, hate, malice, envy and strife will remain as long as hedonism is our god. The only answer is faith in the one true God, in His Son Jesus Christ, in the Scriptures, in true repentance and deep contrition for sin, baptism into Christ for the remission of sins, and a faithful life in worship and service to God from henceforth.

Truth Magazine XXI: 17, p, 258
April 28, 1977

By Ron Halbrook

For the Truth’s Sake, baptized believers must be active in Christ’s kingdom. Each Christian must run the race so that he may obtain God’s approval (1 Cor. 9:24). Each must “endure hardness, as a good soldier of Christ” (2 Tim. 2:3). Christians join in offering “up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 2:5). They resist the temptation to conform to the world in sin, and they care for the helpless (Ja. 1:27). God “without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work” (1 Pet. 2:17). God is not concerned with any effort to earn, deserve, or merit His approval (Rom. 4:1-5), but with “faith which worketh by love” (Gal. 5:6). When the lost seek God’s approval,.they must come to Him in “obedience to the faith,” serving the God of all grace in “obedience unto righteousness” (Rom. 1:5; 6:16).

No one can hear, believe the gospel, repent of sins, confess Christ, or be baptized for us (Rom. 10:17; Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38; Rom. 10:10 1 Pet. 3:21). “Repent, and be baptized every one of you,” Peter said. No one else can run, endure, offer sacrifices, resist temptation, care for the needy, or otherwise “obey the truth” in our place (Gal. 3:1). Jesus said, “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me” (Lk. 9:23). God’s love is personal and individual. “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men”-The Gospel is for each one of us (Tit. 2:11). God patiently awaits our obedience to the gospel, for He is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9). Our love for God and acceptance of His grace must be personal and individual.

The modern clergy-laity systems are all frauds and counterfeits of New Testament Christianity. They blunt “faith which worketh by love” because they create a class of professional religionists. These professionals stand between God and the individual, non-professional saint. The professional clergy studies, keeps, and dispenses “the mysteries” to the common laity. It is considered impudent if not vulgar for an ordinary layman to question the professional “Reverend.” The “Reverend” is something of a sacred cow in the domain of religion. The laity looks to the clergy to confer special blessings, perform acceptable worship, and to offer whatever service is necessary to keep things straight with God in behalf of the nonprofessional.

Simple New Testament Christianity requires the obliteration of the kingdom of the clergy and any distinction between “clergy” and “laity.” “Clergy” is from kleros, a lot, heritage, or inheritance. Rather than some of us being elevated to receive others of us as a special lot or heritage, we are all equally God’s inheritance in Christ (Eph. 1:11). “Laity” is from laos, the people. Rather than some of us being common, ordinary non-professionals, all “the people of God” are equally His purchased possession (Tit. 2:14; Heb. 4:9). The kleros are the laos without distinction. Let us hear and obey God’s Word “without benefit of clergy.” No professional can render for us that “faith which worketh by love.”

Truth Magazine XXI: 16, pp. 252-253
April 21, 1977

By Ernest Udom

(Brother Ernest Udom sent this article to me, requesting that I help him publish it. Brother Udom attended classes taught by brother Billy Moore, when brother Moore visited Nigeria. Brother Udom has sent me a letter of recommendation from brother E. J. Ebong. Brother Udom’s article speaks well for his soundness in the faith. He has requested support for his work of preaching the Gospel. Since I have no personal, first-hand knowledge of the work in Nigeria, I recommend that any churches interested in assisting brother Udom contact Billy W. Moore in Butler, Missouri or brother Udom personally.-Keith Sharp.)

In the world we live in we see that things occur in pairs, or two by two, i.e., truth and error, faithful and unfaithful, right and wrong. No one can be both right and wrong at the same time in his belief. Whether one preaches truth or error, usually some people will follow that teaching. If some even preach that Satan is a savior, there will be those who will follow. This means that all over the world people are now believing either truth or error.

Going to the authority of the New Testament scriptures, we read that, when the church was in her infancy, it was the apostles who had the whole truth (Jn. 16:13). They taught that in Christ neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail (Col. 5:6) and that the Law of the Old Testament, given to the Israelites by Moses, had been taken out of the way and nailed to His cross (Col. 2:14). But what did the false teachers of that time say? In Acts 15:1, we read that some came from Jerusalem, saying they were sent by the apostles themselves, to tell the brethren in Antioch that Gentiles could not be saved unless they also obeyed the Law of Moses and were circumcised. Were they right? Of course not. They lied to teach their own belief. The apostles were right because they spoke for Christ and had the whole truth of God. The false teachers were wrong because they still wanted to be saved by the old Law, which was out of date since the death of Christ.

In Thyatira a woman calling herself a prophetess taught Christians to eat things sacrificed to idols and to practice immoral acts (Rev. 2:10). These teachings were against the Law of Christ, but people still practiced them. Did that make them right? Of course not. They were unfaithful to Christ. Other places in the New Testament where Christians were warned about error are: (1) Peter warned about false teachers in the district of Asia Minor who would arise from their midst (2 Pet. 2:1-3). (2) Paul, in his farewell message to the elders of the Ephesian congregation, warned them that men would arise from among their own selves, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after themselves (Acts 20:28-30). (3) Paul warned the Corinthians about false prophets disguising themselves as apostles of Christ (2 Cor. 11:13). (4) Christ warned that many false prophets would arise and lead many astray (Matt. 24:11). (5) Paul warned Timothy about those who would hold the form of religion but deny its power (2 Tim. 3:5, 8). People like this can be found in the church today, claiming to be members of Christ’s true church but denying the saving power of the gospel of Christ. Instead they seek their own method of saving souls. (6) The Holy Spirit warned clearly that some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils (1 Tim. 4:1).

Today in the church there are many faithful preachers teaching the whole word of God. However, there are also many false brethren who support false preachers teaching false doctrines. False doctrines are those which cannot be found in the New Testament Law of Christ. Some of the false teachings of today, not found in the New Testament, are: (1) That a local congregation can take money out of her treasury to help build schools, colleges and universities to teach secular education. Did God intend for the church to teach secular education? (2) That the Lord’s money can be used to build hospitals to care for the sick and to possibly convert them. Is this the method of caring for the sick God revealed to us or how to convert souls? (3) That the church can assume the responsibility of caring for orphans outside its own congregation, ask for help to feed them from the whole brotherhood and set up an organization in addition to the church, complete with a board of directors, staff and labor. Some orphanages are still under an eldership, but in both cases one congregation sets itself up to care for orphans that are not its responsibility then pleads for others to allow them to discharge a work that is not their responsibility. (4) The church can give college scholarships to help young men go away to learn to preach. Many scholarships have been given to Nigerians to go to America to learn to preach. How many have come back to preach to: Nigerians? Are they not taking care of their own business now, instead of God’s business? Education is fine, and anyone who can ought to get as much as possible. However, nowhere in the New Testament can it be found where a church paid for secular education. Christ’s church does not need seminary preacher factories, but Bible education should be taught in the home and in the church. (5) Church owned farms are a good way to raise crops, sell the produce and get money to preach. But there is no scripture to back up this teaching. (6) Other false teachings include donating money to help in community development, using the Lord’s money to care for all needy people whether they are Christians or not, sending support to preachers through certain men called middle-men or representatives and building Bible colleges with the Lord’s money.

False teachers and false brethren try to justify their sinful practices by saying, “Whatever the individual Christian can do, the church can do.” This sounds good from the standpoint of human wisdom, but where is the scripture that authorizes this? In fact, as we will see later, there are some things the church cannot do that individuals are commanded to do.

But why do some Christians follow this false doctrine? Because it sounds right by human standards. It is wise to men. But the wisdom of men is not as good as the wisdom of God and will be destroyed (Isa. 29:14; 1 Cor. 1:19; 3:19). Those who teach and those who follow, are they abiding in the truth of God? Have they not drifted from the truth? When we go to the New Testament, we can easily read that the Lord had a purpose for the money that was to be collected. Not only are we told how to collect money into the church treasury, but also how to spend it. Contributions from individual Christians were to be laid by in store, or put into a common treasury, on the first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:1-2). It had to be a willing contribution (2 Cor. 8:12) and one purposed, or deliberately set aside after deciding God’s share (2 Cor. 9:7). All money was to come from individuals. No where does any scripture say anything about money from church farms, schools, hospitals or jails. Why not? Because there were none. All of them have been brought into the church by false teachers and supported by false brethren.

What does the Bible say the money was used for, i.e., money collected on the first day of the week? (1) Needy saints in Jerusalem were helped by saints in Corinth, Macedonia and Achaia (2 Cor. 8:1). (2) The church in Rome also sent aid to the needy saints in Jerusalem (Rom. 15:26). (3) Fourteen years earlier a famine was over all Judea, and the church in Antioch sent relief to needy saints in Judea (Acts 11:27-30). It was sent to each congregation in Judea, because that was where the need was. (4) Much earlier, when the church had just been established in Jerusalem, there was a need, but there were no Christians any where else to help. Instead, Christians who had lands and houses sold them and laid the money at the apostles’ feet, so that the needy saints in the church could be fed. The only record of any being helped says they were needy saints, or Christian. No one else was fed (Acts 2:44-45; 4:32-37).

This may sound cruel and sinful, not to feed anyone who is hungry, but we must obey whatever God says. God, in His wisdom, says that only needy saints are to be helped by money from churches. An individual can and must do all that he is able to do, especially for those who are of the household of faith (Gal. 6:10). But what an individual Christian can do and what a church can do may be different, according to the New Testament.

In the scriptures given above on how the churches can send help to needy saints, take note that they did not send the money through a missionary society or to a sponsoring church. Rather, it was sent to elders of the church in need. They (the elders) distributed the money to the saints. Some have tried to say that the money was sent to the elders in Jerusalem, and then they sent it to other churches. But the need of 1 Cor. 16:1-2 and 2 Cor. 8:1 was 14 years later than the famine in all Judea recorded in Acts 11:27-30. The Jerusalem elders did not run a sponsoring church, but they received help directly from those who sent it and received it for those in Jerusalem who needed it, the needy saints of Jerusalem. Any honest soul who can read or understand the Bible should be able to see that the church was not a welfare society for the world but took care of its own and did its main job of preaching the gospel (Lk. 8:11; 1 Thess. 1:8).

Another use of the Lord’s money, from the treasury of the church, was to support the preaching of the gospel. (1) Churches sent money directly to Paul while he was preaching in Corinth (2 Cor. 11:8). (2) The church at Philippi had fellowship in the gospel which Paul preached, i.e., they supported Paul directly by sending to his needs (Phil. 1:3-,5; 2:25-30; 4:14-20). (3) The Lord commanded that those who preach the gospel should also make their living from the gospel, or be supported by those hearing the gospel (1 Cor. 9:14). (4) Even elders who rule well. should be counted worthy of double honor, i.e., those elders who preach or teach full-time should also be paid or supported by the church (1 Tim. 5:17-18), as well as receive respect as leaders.

In these scriptures we see that the money was always sent directly from the church sending the money to the one the church was supporting. In one case it was Epaphroditus who carried the help from the Philippians to Paul. In no case was the money sent first to a sponsoring church or middle-man to pass on. Did Epaphroditus keep back part of the help for himself? He worked to the point of death for Paul. How many middle-men do that for any preacher today? Today sponsoring churches and middle-men have robbed preachers by keeping back some given by churches. Their evil has corrupted the church of Christ and brought sin to those who follow these evil practices. How much longer are you going to put up with these tricks and cheating going on in the name of religion? It is time to get back to God’s truth and to do His will.

Again, the money given into the treasury by individual Christians was used to teach the gospel in their own area. (1) Paul and Barnabas taught in the Antioch church (Acts 11:25-26). (2) There were other teachers in the church at Antioch who also taught the truth (Acts 13:1). (3) The church is the ground (support) and pillar (upholder) of the truth (1 Tim. 3:14-15). (4) Timothy was a preacher who was instructed to teach faithful men what he had heard from Paul, that they could teach others (2 Tim. 2:2). (5) Paul taught disciples in the school of Tyrannus for two years (Acts 19:9-10). This was not a Bible college built by Paul, as some would have you believe, but only a place used by Paul to teach the gospel for awhile. (6) It was a church in which all kinds of Christians were taught, such as old men, aged women, young men and women (Tit. 2:2-6).

In none of these scriptures, nor in any others in the New Testament, can anyone find authority for the church to build Bible colleges with presidents, principals, staff and labor. It means then that, since they are not in the Bible, they never were in God’s plan and are sinful. But false teachers say that Bible authority is not needed, and they bring fighting among brethren, corrupt the church, grow rich at the expense of churches and fight with others for the political power they desire. Brethren, since these things cannot be found in the Bible, let us do away with unscriptural practices. Do you truly believe that a Christian could occupy one of these offices that have brought hatred, jealousy, dishonesty and other malpractice?

The work of the church is to preach the gospel, edify saints and care for needy saints. And that is all! There is no scripture that allows a church to educate anyone. The work of education is for parents and schools that are not supported by churches. If the church took care of all the needy in the world and educated all who wanted it, there would not be enough money or time to preach the gospel, which is the primary job of the church. Let God’s ways be our ways.

Briefly, I have stated the purpose of the Lord’s money in the church as God has commanded. God’s purpose leaves no room for hospitals, farms, colleges, hotels, recreation, printing companies or anything else paid for with money from the Lord’s treasury. The Lord’s money is not to be wasted on things of the world, but is to be used according to God’s purpose. If we do otherwise, we will answer for our sins at judgment.

Do not be like Judas, as some brethren are, as thieves who use the Lord’s money for their own desires and power. They forbid using God’s money as He has directed. To prove they are thieves, more money is spent for human organizations than for preaching the gospel. Nigerian preachers who are supported by churches who support these organizations receive twenty-five to forty dollars a month. Why do they not receive more? One reason is: the money they spend on human organizations which the Lord did not establish. Let us remember the words of David in Psalms 125:5, that those who turn aside upon their crooked ways, the Lord will lead away with evil doers. Those who support human organizations, have they not turned away upon their crooked ways? I have not been saying that individuals cannot engage in gainful work. Christians can even group themselves together and establish an enterprise which is honest and which will bring them gain. But there is no way a church can support a human organization and be pleasing to God.

Brethren desire to be like the denominations around them and leave God, just as the Israelites left God to have their own king. They too wanted to be like others around them. But the Israelites disobeyed God (1 Sam. 8:4, 19-20) in wanting a king, and they finally began to worship idols and went into captivity for seventy years (Jer. 25:12). We should take a warning from this not to disobey God by preaching a social gospel or by living by man’s philosophy (Col. 2:8). But rather we must preach the true ,gospel of Christ to keep ourselves and the church without spot, wrinkle or blemish (Eph. 5:26-27).

The individual Christian can do some things the church cannot do, such as: (1) bless their enemies (Rom. 12:14-21); (2) rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep; (3) not repay evil with evil, but feed their enemies (Rom. 12:14-21); (4) use their hands to work (Eph. 4:28; 2 Thess. 3:10; 1 Thess. 4:11); (5) be subject to the government of their country to pay taxes and obey authority (Rom. 13:1-8; 1 Pet. 2:13); (6) provide for their families (1 Tim. 5:8, 16); (7) go to a brother one has wronged, or go with another to correct a brother, (8) train children (Eph. 6:4); and (9) visit orphans (James 1:27) and widows. Visit means to go and see and help, not to send someone else. We hear a lot about visiting orphans by building orphanages, but nothing about building a home for widows. Are widows less deserving of our love than orphans?

In 1 Tim. 5:16, God commands that, if any Christian has a widow, he is to take care of her. The church is not to take care of her. But if there are true widows who are qualified (1 Tim. 5:9-10) and do not have relatives, then the church is to take care of them. It then becomes the church’s responsibility to take care of them, not because we think it is a good idea, but rather because it is God’s will. Here is one place where the church cannot do something that an individual can do. That is, the church cannot help a widow who has relatives, but an individual Christian can. This should forever put the lie to those who say that, whatever an individual can do, the church can do.

Are you satisfied with God’s word as revealed in the New Testament, or do you think you can teach God? Job asked, “Shall any teach God knowledge?” (Job 21:22). Are you willing to become free from error? Then come back to God’s word, the word of truth that will set you free (Jn. 8:32). Are you on the side of right or wrong, truth or error, God’s side or Satan’s? If you have supported error, please compare what you practice with God’s word, and come ye out from among them. Examine yourself.

Truth Magazine XXI: 16, pp. 249-252
April 21, 1977