Truth Magazine

By Mike T. Rogacs

Those who have engaged in a study of the word “faith” will know that the word is used in at least two different senses in the New Testament. One sense refers to the state of believing in something or someone. In Col. 2:5 the usage is “your faith,” the individual’s belief. But we take notice that there, along with Gal. 2:16 and Phil. 3:9, the reading is “your faith in Christ,” the individual’s belief in Christ being what He claimed to be.

The second sense of the word “faith” refers to the system of faith or religion of Christ with all its laws, commands, etc. This is often manifested by the phraseology “the faith” (2 Cor. 13:15; 1 Tim. 4:1; 5:8; etc.). Those who have found this distinction to be true often apply the same distinction between the phrases “faith in Christ” and “faith of Christ,” the first referring to the individual’s belief in the Lord, and the second having reference to the system of faith that the Lord gave, the “one faith” of Eph. 4:5.

For our study here, we then raise the following question: Given the afore mentioned distinctions, does Gal. 3:26 therefore teach that “we are all children of God by faith in Christ Jesus”-that is, are we made children of God through our simple individual belief in Christ? The question is a proper one for study. On the surface, the language lends itself to a definition of salvation by simple belief. The verse is widely used by those who teach that faith alone saves, and that Galatians 3:26 is simply a clarification of the “faith only” interpretation of John 3:16. We submit that Gal. 3:26 does not teach salvation by simple faith (belief). We submit that such a view expounded from this passage is an example of the principle of 2 Peter 3:1617 and a violation of 2 Tim. 2:15. Our conclusion will rest upon the context around Gal. 3:26, which, if studied, will clearly show the intended meaning of verse 26.

Notice the rendition of verse 26 as found in the American Standard Version: “For ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus.” Draw your attention to the punctuation supplied. This wording and punctuation better fits the apparent meaning of the inspired writer which in effect could be read: “For ye are all sons of God in Christ Jesus through faith”, with “faith” here NOT referring to simple belief of the individual, but referring to the faith of Christ, the gospel. The distinction we are attempting to show is that Paul is not speaking of simple belief by saying “through faith in Christ,” but that he is saying we are “in Christ” through the faith (of Christ).

We interrupt our train of thought to notice that often brethren, in order to refute “faith only” doctrine have said that the Greek probably should read, “ye are all sons of God through the faith of Christ” and say that “of” was intended instead of “in”. This may be closer to the meaning of the passage than the “faith only people”, but the Greek apparently does say “in Christ” and not “of Christ”. But again, the verse is not saying “faith in Christ” or even “faith of Christ”.

The context immediately preceding verse 26 is discussing that the law of Moses (“the law”) was followed by the new system of religion called “faith” and “the faith” in verse 23, and “faith” in verses 24 and 25. This is the gospel, system, faith, of Jesus Christ replacing the law, the system, of Moses. This discussion of the contrast runs all through chapter three and in fact is the whole foundation of the epistle to the Galatians. What we find in the context of chapter three is, in short, as follows: God gave a promise to Abraham that all nations would be blessed in his seed and that, as now is revealed, this promise was to include the justification of the Gentiles and not just the Jews (v. 7). God confirmed through Paul that Moses’ law was a curse unto man and it could not, and was not intended to, justify any man, Jew or Gentile (v. 10, 11). Instead, another system-that of Christ-needed to come before the promise to Abraham could be fulfilled, a fulfillment which would include the blessing of the Gentiles (12-21).

It is then in verse 22 that God’s intentions of the fulfilled promise is revealed. (And as luck would have it, the American Standard Version does not render the whole literal Greek correctly, and the Greek supports the King James Version in the wording of question in our topic.) “But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” In other words, the promise of Abraham is now given to all who believe in God and His promise, and it is given BY (through) the faith, the gospel, which Jesus Christ revealed.

The contrast between the old law and the faith of Christ is the topic. And, again, it continues to verse 26. There the purpose is to show that we cannot be children of God in Moses, in Aaron, or in anyone else by the power of the law of Moses or of any other law. But instead, “ye are all the children of God in Christ, by (the) faith.”

It is then that Paul by inspiration goes on to say, “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (v. 27). This is the verse that really confirms what Paul was saying in the preceding verse.

So, it all falls into place. The gospel of Jesus Christ does say that we are born again, become children of God, when we are baptized (John 3:1-5; Heb. 10:22; Romans 6:3-8). When we are baptized, it is into Christ, to put on Christ (Gal. 3:27). So, it is factual that by the faith (gospel), we learn how to become children of God in Christ.

No, Gal. 3:26 is not teaching that we become children when we believe in Christ. If anything, the passage is really teaching the necessity of becoming children of God by a definite pattern of salvation found in the gospel of Jesus Christ, a pattern which includes faith, repentance, confession, and then baptism into Christ. (John 1:11-12; Rom. 10:10; Acts 2:38; etc.) Could this, the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham given so very long ago (that all could be children in Christ Jesus by the faith of Jesus Christ) be the promise that is “unto you, to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call” (Acts 2:38-39)? Think on these things.

Truth Magazine XXI: 8, pp. 125-126
February 24, 1977

By Earl E. Robertson

We Walk By Faith

“We walk by faith, not by sight,” said the apostle Paul 12 Cor. 5:7). This statement is highly significant in that “faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). If God has not spoken about a matter, positive action taken in the performance of any such deed is presumptuous sin. No man can take legislative leadership into his own hands and speak and act when the Almighty has not spoken. David prayed, “Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins” (Psa. 19:13). The man who acts presumptuously reproaches the Lord and will give answer to God for his high-handed behavior (Num. 15:30). Some justify the use of instrumental music in worship by saying that there is no specific statement in the Bible saying “thou shaft not use instrumental music in worship.” The idea that there must be a “thou shah not” before a thing is sinful is a false premise. When one’s course is cast on a false premise, his conclusions necessarily will be false too. It invalidates Paul’s statement that we walk by faith! There is no substitute for this-we actually and really do walk by faith. The conditional element is the spiritual actions of Christians which are acceptable to the Lord is faith: faith that comes by hearing the word of God! Proof of the proposition that instrumental music in worship to God is acceptable to Him can not rest on the absence of scripture! The right to have instrumental music in worship is not antecedently proven simply in the absence of a divine prohibition specifically stated; rather, it is proven by authorization in God’s word. After all, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Deut. 8:3; Matt. 4:4).

Acceptable service to God is based on faith (Heb. 11:6). When we sing unto the Lord we do it by faith, that is, this is what the Lord teaches in his word and as we do what he teaches it is being done by faith. No service can be performed “by faith” if the Lord has not spoken.. Silence of scripture does not give authorization; scripture gives authorization! “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God,” Peter affirmed (1 Pet. 4:11).

Oftentimes the people of God have become dissatisfied with God having absolute control over men in morals and spiritual service. It is at this point that men begin to take liberties that God has not given. The mere fact that one may wish to do a certain service unto the Lord is not the basis to determine whether that service shall be accepted or rejected. It is a well known fact in the word of God that when persons sought to give unto God a service either what God had not commanded or what He had forbidden, both the giver and the gift was rejected. The gift is not offered because God needs it, but because God had commanded it and it is good for man. God rejected Cain’s offering because it was not of faith-God had not authorized it. Therefore, He rejected Cain, too. When God is, by His worshipers, placed in His proper perspective, His word will be the criterion for all worship offered by them.

Whatever music is made unto the Lord must be done “in the name of Christ” (Col. 3:17). This is a most serious matter, yet is taken so lightly by many. The word “name” (of Christ or Lord) translates the Greek onoma, and is defined as follows: “By a usage chiefly Hebraistic the name is used for everything which the name covers. . . i.e. for one’s rank, authority, interests, pleasures, command . . . .to do a thing en onomati tinos (in the name of someone-er), i.e. by one’s command and authority, acting on his behalf, promoting his cause” (Thayer, p. 447). This word is found in Acts 2:38 where repentance and baptism for the remission of sins are said to be “in the name of Jesus Christ”. Peter told us: “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). The name (authority) of Christ is essential to salvation. It is just as essential to offer praise unto the Lord. Whenever and wherever the name (authority) of the Lord is spoken, it becomes the only means to establish faith within the human heart; to act without it is to act in spiritual darkness and unbelief.

We shall illustrate this by examples. Samuel, the judge in Israel, anointedaSaul the son of Kish to be the first king over the united kingdom of Israel. Upon this, God commanded Saul to “go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass” (1 Sam. 15:3). We are informed that Saul “smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur,” but that he and the people took Agag the king alive and spared the best of the sheep and oxen, fatlings and lambs, and would not utterly destroy them is told also. In spite of this failure to obey God, Saul contended, “I have performed the commandment of the Lord” (1 Sam. 15:13). Samuel protested saying, “What meaneth then this bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?” Saul said “the people” did this! But Saul was king! The Lord had spoken to him! He then stated that their intent was “to sacrifice unto the Lord;” but Samuel said, “Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams” (1 Sam. 15:22). This shows clearly that all service which the Lord has not ordered is unacceptable to Him. Saul made a costly error and then confessed: “I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the Lord, and thy words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice” (1 Sam. 15:24). His action was not of faith, but rebellion against faith! Instrumental music in worship to God today is not an act of faith; it, too, is rebellion against faith.

Rebellion against the will of God is rebellion against faith. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram illustrate this point (Numbers 16). God had commanded that Aaron and his sons should burn incense while other Levites (than Korah) performed their assigned duties. They rebelled against God’s order saying that Moses and Aaron were arrogating to themselves too much authority, that they also had a right to burn incense. When Moses heard this, he fell upon his face! These people gathered two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly who were famous in the congregation-men of renown-to more effectively carry out their scheme in the total absence of divine authorization. This would be enough to justify about anything today that brethren would ever want to do! But it was no justification at all. Moses made a speech to convince them that he did indeed have the God-given right to do exactly what he had done and was doing. Then he told them, “If . . . the earth open her mouth and swallow them up, with all that appertain unto them . . . then ye shall understand that these men have provoked the Lord.” At the end of that faithful speech, “the ground clave asunder that was under them: and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up, and their houses, and all the men that appertained unto Korah, and all their goods . . . and they perished from among the congregation.” Indeed, a supreme price for rebellion! They attempted to serve God in the absence of holy authorization, an act without faith.

May these illustrations of attempted service without faith serve to impress upon our minds the awful price one must inevitably pay for such sinful action! Faith or trust in God’s way of doing things comes because of hearing (Eph. 1:13). The acceptation of one’s action does not depend only upon one knowing what the Lord says, but also upon his attitude toward that truth. Jesus said, “Take heed therefore how ye hear” (Lk. 8:18). “How” one hears is his attitude. A proper attitude toward the truth will not permit a flaunting of it in any way, but rather will demand reverence in seeking a prosecution of it. Transportation of the Ark of the Covenant by the right people illustrates this matter rather very well. After Aaron and his sons covered all the vessels of the tabernacle, the sons of Kohath were responsible for carrying it, “but they shall not touch any holy thing, lest they die” (Num. 4:15). The Kohathites were sons of Levi (Gen. 46:11) authorized to bear the sanctuary (Num. 10:21). God had charged them with this responsibility (Num. 3:30, 31). Any change in this arrangement would be without faith and, consequently, disobedience. Circumstances and situations could not alter this order; it was God’s way and He would tolerate no deviation! A deviation from this would be a manifestation of a wrong attitude toward God and His word. God was so stern in His demand about this that Uzzah “died by the ark of God” when he “put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it” (2 Sam. 6:6, 7). Not only did this man not have authorization to touch this Ark, but even before the crossing of the Jordan, God instructed the people saying, “When ye see the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, and the priests the Levites bearing it, then ye shall remove from your place, and go after it. Yet there shall be a space between you and it, about two thousand cubits by measure: come not near unto it, that ye may know the way by which ye must go: for ye have not passed this way heretofore” (Josh. 3:3, 4). Maintaining a distance of “two thousand cubits” would make impossible a touching by the hand, and when unauthorized hands got close enough to so touch it, the sinful attitude toward God’s authority was wrong enough, much less the actual touching of the Ark by the hand. Proper respect for the word of God would not allow one, unauthorized, to get close enough to touch it! Lack of proper respect for the word of God is the real problem concerning instrumental music in worship to God today. Uzzah paid with his life for acting without faith, although his intentions were good. He did not want the Ark to fall from the Ox Cart on which it was being transported to the city of David! An unauthorized means of transportation and an unauthorized hand touching it, were disrespectful of God’s authority and, therefore, sinful! Friend, our attitude toward what God says will determine whether we obey or disobey Him; it will determine whether we walk by faith or whether our walk is by sight.

God Specified The Kind

There are two kinds or species of music: vocal and instrumental; singing and playing. If God had commanded, “Make music,” then we could sing or play, or sing and play. But he did not give a generic command merely authorizing “music;” God gave specifying authority-authority naming one kind out of the general term “music.” God authorizes “singing” and not playing. This specific does not include another kind; singing does not include playing. Therefore, playing is eliminated. How many kinds of music are there? Just two. Sing and play- are coordinate terms. Neither is dependent upon the other; they both are music. But of the two, God said, “sing”! When God, therefore, specifies one coordinate, man does not have a choice as to which kind or coordinate he shall use in worshiping the Almighty!

Here are some Biblical illustrations to help us see that only what God says is authorized. Additions of other coordinates cannot be made to what God says and those additions be authorized. Only the coordinates which He authorizes are permissible. God commanded Noah, “Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch” (Gen. 6:14). Of this directive Moses said, “Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he” (Gen. 6:33). A New Testament writer said, “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house” (Heb. 11:7). God’s command to Noah embraced specific authority, not general. God said make the ark of “gopher” wood. “Wood” is generic; “gopher” wood is specific. Oak, poplar, and cedar, are all coordinates-kinds separate and distinct from each other. Noah could not have done the will of God had he used any other kind of wood but gopher. It is not man’s right to inquire why God limited the wood to gopher in the building of the Ark; and, it is none of man’s business why God only commanded singing in worship to Him. Let us be satisfied with what He wants! The Ark would not have accomplished the intent God had in saving man if Noah had taken “liberty” with the silence of God’s word. Noah could have reasoned as some do today that since God did not specifically say, “Noah, thou shalt not use oak wood in the building of the Ark,” that he then could, in the absence of such a prohibition, use oak. But oak was not included in the authorization.

In the land of Egypt God spake unto Moses and Aaron giving instructions for the beginning of the Passover. He said, “Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house” (Ex. 12:3). If God had only commanded the offering of an “animal” for the Passover feast, any kind of animal would have been accepted. However, the command was not general authority, but specific. Cow, hog, and horse are all animals and are coordinates with neither “kind” depending on the other. When God said “lamb” that authorized only the lamb for service out of the entire animal kingdom. To have assumed that since God did not say, “Thou shalt not offer a horse,” it would be acceptable to offer the horse, would have been without authorization-without faith-and, consequently, presumptuous and sinful. Another animal than the lamb would have been different in kind and rejected by the Lord. Just as “horse” would have been another coordinate in the animal kingdom, so is “instrumental music” another kind of music than singing. Another kind then is both unauthorized and lawless. Jesus said such action cost men their souls (Matt. 7:21-23).

Carefully looking at the very nature of this service as worship paid to the Creator one must conclude that it is spiritual. All service to God is spiritual in character and nature. This necessarily comes from the human heart. The design of the gospel is to save (Rom. 1:16), but it must get into the heart to accomplish this (Lk. 8:12, 15; Rom. 10:8-10). Belief is with the heart. Love for .God is with the heart (Matt. 22:37). Obedience to God is with the heart (Rom. 6:17, 18). It is just as true that all our worship to God is with the heart (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). It is not with the piano or organ; it is with the human heart. This is the instrument and object of the specific to sing!

Truth Magazine XXI: 8, pp. 122-124
February 24, 1977

By Cecil Willis

In this, another article upon the subject of miracles, we would like to continue with a comparison of the miracles in the New Testament with those of so-called miracle-workers today. They are of entirely different natures. If one will but recognize what the Bible says about the nature of miracles, then he will not be deceived by the pseudo-miracle-workers of today.

New Testament Miracles Were Undeniable

As we turn to about the nature that the miracles performed by Christ and the were undeniable. When the apostle Peter be present the proofs of Christ’s deity on the Pentecost to a group of unbelieving and murdering Jews, he begins by saying that the miracles that Christ performed were indisputable proofs of His deity. The Jews had a part in the crucifying of Christ and yet Peter said to them, “Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God unto you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did in the midst of you, even as ye yourselves know; him being delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye did by the hand of lawless men did crucify and slay” (Acts 2:22, 23). Notice that Peter declared that these Jews themselves knew of the miracles which Jesus had performed. Even these who were so profane in heart that they could slay God’s Son could not deny the actuality of Christ’s miracles. Even the most wicked of Christ’s enemies could not deny that Jesus did perform miracles.

Seeing that the New Testament miracles were undeniable, contrast that with the so-called miracles that we are asked to believe. On Pentecost, Peter could declare that these unbelieving Jews knew of Jesus’ miracles; but, today, fake-healers, and pseudo-miracle-workers depend upon testimonials of their own adherents to prove their miracles. It was never necessary for New Testament miracles to be proven by testimonials, for they were of such nature that they were apparent. On the other hand, today’s so-called miracles are questionable.

Not very long ago a fellow came to the church building where I was preaching and had a lot to say about the fact that we denied miracles were worked today. I asked him to point out one modern-day miracle, and he proceeded to do so. He told me that a preacher performed a miracle on a little black boy in Chattanooga, Tennessee. This little boy had lost an eye, and in its stead, he had a glass eye. This man declared publically that the preacher performed a miracle on the glass eye so that the little boy could see out of it. Well, that all sounded pretty good. But quite coincidentally, I happen to be in Chattanooga at the time that this “miracles” was supposed to have been performed. Of course, the man did not know that I was. In fact he was not there himself! He had only heard about it. But I was preaching in a Gospel meeting in that town when this great wonder occurred. The members of the church of Christ there carried a large advertisement in the local newspaper exposing the fraud. After the little boy was supposed to be able to see out of glass eye, the preacher absolutely refused to let a member of the church blindfold the little boy’s good eye. The man who related the story to me, thinking it was the truth, was astonished when I completed the facts for him, but that is exactly what happened. Biblical miracles never depended upon such deception and fraud. Peter could say, “which ye yourselves know”. They were undeniable. But not so with the so-called miracles of today.

New Testament Miracles Were Subject to Empirical Senses

Secondly, let us note that New Testament miracles were such that they could be examined by the empirical senses. They were such that they could be tested by the eyes, ears, touch, taste, etc. We find that Jesus made the dumb to speak. If a man had never spoken, and suddenly began speaking, one could hear what he said, and thus test the miracle. He made the lame to walk and one could see that the healed man could walk. He raised the dead; they could examine the raised man. He turned water into wine and they could test this miracle by taste. But contrast this with the attempted miracles of today. In the first place, they only attempt healing. They never attempt any other kind of miracle that Jesus did.

But, what kind of healings do they attempt to perform? They will heal one of an internal cancer. But did you ever see them heal a man whose face had been eaten off by this terrible disease? Their failure to cure the man would soon be apparent. Hence they do not try it. Or, did you ever see them instantly cure any broken bones? You did not, and will not ever see it. However, they can give testimonials as to people that were cured of indigestions, of stomach disorders, of the smoking habit, or T.B. or some other internal disease. But try to find a single miracle that one can test with the sense of touch, sight, or hearing. You cannot do it! You will not find it!

Some time ago a man came to my home advertising a meeting, and we began discussing the Bible. Eventually the matter of miracles came up. He himself could not work a miracle, but he knew others who could. Finally, I asked him if he had even witnessed a miracle. In his honesty, he admitted that he had not. But he replied that he had talked with people who had. I cite this example just as an, admonition to you. When you hear of miracles’ being performed, try the difficult task of tracing down the person who was healed. Ask for the names and addresses of some of the people who are healed and then find out what they were healed of. It will likely be nervousness, smoking or some disease that is internal. But the miracles that Jesus and the apostles performed were of an entirely different nature. They could be tested with the senses and were undeniable.

New Testament Miracles Were Instantaneous

Another characteristic of New Testament miracles is that these marvelous happenings occurred instantly. They were immediate. I want to cite a few New Testament miracles-please note that they were instantaneous and never partial healings.

Luke 13:10-13: “And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath day. And behold, a woman that had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years; and she was bowed together, and could in no wise lift herself up. And when Jesus saw her, he called her, and said to her, Woman, thou are loosed from thine infirmity. And he laid his hands upon her: and immediately she was made straight, and glorified God.”

Luke 8:43,44: “And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, who had spent all of her living on physicians, and could not be healed of any, came to him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately the issue of her blood stanched.”

Matt. 20:29-34: “And as they went out from Jericho, a great multitude followed him. And behold, two blind men sitting by the way side, when they heard that Jesus was passing by, cried out, saying, Lord, have mercy on us, thou son of David. And Jesus stood still, and called them, and said, What will yet that I should do unto you? They say unto him, Lord, that our eyes may be opened. And Jesus, being moved with compassion, touched their eyes; and straightway they received their sight, and followed him.”

John 5:2-9 “And straightway the man was made whole, and took up his bed and walked.”

Acts 3:6-8 “In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk. And he (Peter) took him by the right hand, and raised him up: and immediately his feet and his anklebones received strength. And leaping up, he stood, and began to walk; and he entered with them into the temple, walking, and leaping and praising God.”

When God enabled a man to work a miracle, he enabled him to do it immediately. Some time ago I received a letter from a lady that I have never met, but in it she told me that some fellows who thought that they could work miracles had been several days trying to heal a boy with a broken leg next door to her. Now if they had persistently continued their efforts, they could have pronounced it partially healed-in about eight weeks.

What I am saying is not in the least to doubt the power of God. God worked the miracles we have just read about, but the purpose of miracles exists no longer. While I do not doubt the power of God, I certainly doubt the assumed authority and power of pretentious men who think that they can work miracles.

Several years ago a “healer” came into Tampa, Florida, and a good personal friend of mine took a little boy of his who had the chicken pox to be healed. The “healer” took the little boy and put him in the healing line. When the time for the healing of the boy came, he took the little boy by the shoulders, shouted at him, jerked him around and then pronounced him healed. Yet, the chicken pox were still very apparent. When the great miracle-worker was asked why the spots did not instantly go away, he replied, “Oh, they will leave in two or three days.” How much longer would they have lasted if he had not “healed” the boy? Not any! Such deceit and fraud does not even deserve to wear the name religion.

New Testament Miracles Were Complete

Furthermore, one never reads in the Bible of where one was partially healed. God does not do a half job on His miracles. Yet, we find people testifying that they can see better after they were “healed” than before. But if God healed them at all, they would have as perfect eyesight as any human being.

One lady was rather provoked at my beliefs (unbelief!) about such healers. She called me up and after a conversation with her, she invited me to her house. We had several good discussions. But, she maintained that God had healed her. I asked of what she had been healed, and she promptly replied, “bad eyesight”. Yet at that very instant she was wearing glasses. God does not halfway heal a person. When God does it, He does a complete job. This same lady claimed to be getting direct revelation from God. She was kind enough to make me copies of the “divine” messages. In one of them, God had told her to vote for a republican, even though she was a democrat.

In this lesson on New Testament miracles it has been necessary to contrast the miracles of the Bible with the “miracles” of today. Since most modern “miracleworkers” attempt nothing, or very little except healing, we have mostly discussed “healings”. Next week the topic will be specifically “Miraculous Divine Healing”.

Truth Magazine XXI: 8, pp. 120-122
February 24, 1977

By Voyd N Ballard

Some twenty years ago when institutionalism was again raising it’s ugly head in the church, those that favored the institutions and were determined to push them onto the church, commenced a campaign against faithful preachers and brethren in which they branded us as an “insignificant bunch of antis and legalists who would soon fade out of the picture.”

I lived in Bakersfield, California when the division happened there some fifteen years or so ago. The institutional crowd threw the loyal brethren out of the property at Lincoln and Brown Streets in East Bakersfield after engaging them in a lawsuit over possession of the property. This lawsuit was instigated mainly by a few preachers who favored the institutional orphan homes and the Herald of Truth, and who branded the brethren who opposed these man made institutions as a bunch of “insignificant antis and legalists” that would never amount to anything. I well remember them bringing in Rue Porter to defend these institutions. Rue preached for over an hour one night in an attempt to defend the institutional position. During the whole sermon he used only three or four scriptures, none of which even came close to supporting the institutional cause. (Rue was a good preacher and debater, but no man can find scripture which does not exist to support that which the Lord has not authorized.) I think no man then living knew that better than Rue Porter. So Rue’s speech in the main consisted of telling how small and insignificant these “antis” and “legalist” were. I remember him stating at that time that `not more than five percent of the preachers in the church were opposed to Herald of Truth and the Orphan Homes and that this percent would decrease with time. Rue has long since gone to his reward, but he did live long enough to see time fail to sustain his prediction.

Now, once again we have raised up a group of preachers who not only want to fellowship institutionalism, but every other ism as well. These fellows have embraced the old sectarian doctrine of “faith only” and some of them are mighty close to the doctrine of the “impossibility of apostasy” so once again we are hearing the old song, “I don’t like the way you are opposing us.” “No man can be saved by obedience.” “You are just a legalist” “Man is saved by the grace of God; If the Christian ever gets to Heaven it will be by the grace of God, not by what he has or has not done.”

Well Sir, I for one very frankly confess that I am a legalist! The definition of a “legalist” or “legalism” is “strict adherence to law of prescription.” But, some say, “we are not under law, we are under grace.” That we are under grace, no one denies. However, I am willing to affirm that the grace of God is expressed (or revealed) only in and through the law (gospel) of Christ, and that no man can be made free from sin nor keep free from sin except through his obedience to this law. True, man cannot be saved by his own law. He cannot work out a law or plan of his own and be saved by the works of that plan. “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8,9).

If man could work out his own plan, he could boast of being saved by his own works, but the Holy Spirit says this we cannot do. However, this passage says we are “saved by grace through faith.” Faith then, is the door by or through which we enter the grace of God. The only faith the Bible knows (approves) is faith that moves man in obedience to the law (gospel) of Christ. “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear . . . ” (Heb. 11:7). Faith that does not move man to obey God is not the faith spoken of in Eph. 2, or anywhere else in the Bible for that matter. The only other kind of faith spoken of is defined as “dead faith.” This is the faith devils have. I suppose these “faith only” advocates believe there is one God; That is well, but it is not enough! “the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” (Jas. 2:19,20).

“The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men.” Titus 2:11. How? Through Christ and his law. However, all men are not in the grace of God. If so, then we have universal salvation! Since the grace of God has appeared (been revealed) to all men, therefore, all men have access to His grace through faith. This faith “cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). In other words it comes by hearing the law or truth of Christ, and the truth (and only the truth) makes man free (John 8:32). Therefore, the faith that saves is the faith that moves man to obey the law of Christ. It is the faith that moves him to turn in repentance of his sins (Acts 17:30,31), Confess Jesus as Lord (Rom. 10:9) and be baptized into Christ for the remission of his sins (Acts 2:38). This baptism puts one into Christ, into the one body (Eph. 4:4), which is the church (Col. 1:18). To be in Christ is to be in the church. All spiritual blessings are in Christ (Eph. 1:3), so outside of Christ there is no salvation. There is not one verse anywhere in the New Testament that says one believes into Christ, Not one! Talk about “faith only” it is not in there, brother! Yes sir, I am a legalist. Faith, repentance, confession and baptism are the terms of salvation set forth by “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus . . . ” (Rom. 8:2). This is the Lord’s law or prescription to the alien sinner, and I am ready to affirm that without obedience to this law no alien sinner can be saved.

No one denies that salvation is by faith, but just remember this, no man in any age was ever said to be justified by God on account of his faith until that faith was expressed in obedience to the will of God. If I am wrong about this let one of these “faith only” boys step forward and cite a case. And I will tell you something else: If you do find anywhere in the Bible (Old or New Testaments) just one single person that was ever said to be justified by God on account of his faith before that faith obeyed God, you will do something that no denominational preacher has ever done, and I have been calling on denominational preachers to produce just such a case for the past forty years! I have issued this challenge to Baptist debaters that had this Calvinistic “faith only” doctrine down to a gnat’s eyebrow long before some of these “faith only” “grace only” boys in the church were dry behind the ears.

These boys get all mixed up on what the grace of God is, how we come into it, and how we stay in it. One of the main reasons they get into such a mess is because they fail to take into consideration that there are three different classes of works mentioned in the Bible. These are:

1. The works of man, which I have discussed above and which Paul was talking about when he said, “not of works, lest any man should boast.” Man cannot be saved by his own works, plan or system. He is saved by God’s plan which is described in Eph. 2 as the grace of God. This whole plan of redemption originated with God, was revealed in the gospel by God, is “the gift of God” and therefore, the grace of God by which man is saved.

2. The works of the law of Moses: This law was never intended to bring man to justification. Men were justified by their obedience to God long before the law was given. This was justification through obedience based upon the promise of the coming “seed” at which time the grace (whole plan of God) would “appear” (be revealed) through Christ. “It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made . . . ” (Gal. 3:19). Therefore, man cannot boast of salvation either by his own works nor by the works of the old law. Neither could save. The promise of salvation was made to and through Christ.

3. The works of Righteousness: “Therefore by the works (deeds) of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God; Being freely justified by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus . . . ” (Rom. 3:20, 24).

This redemption that is in Christ Jesus is justification by the grace of God. But note that it is redemption in Christ Jesus. The grace of God is therefore in Christ Jesus, and nowhere else. The grace that saves is the grace we enter through faith and this is an obedient faith that “delivers us from the power of darkness, and translates us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through the (his) blood, even the forgiveness of sins . . . ” (Col. 1:13,14). Redemption-, even the forgiveness of sins is therefore in Christ, His Body which is the church or Kingdom. The man does not live that can produce a passage of scripture showing any hope of salvation outside the church or kingdom of Christ, and it takes more than “faith only” to put us into that kingdom. It takes the works of righteousness. These include baptism into Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:26,27). “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, (water baptism-who wants to deny it) and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 2:5).

The law of the spirit of life in Christ not only frees us from the law of sin and death by putting us into covenant relationship with God, Christ and the Holy Spirit in the kingdom or church, but our continued obedience to this law is the only thing that will keep us in this relationship. The man does not live that can prove there is a difference between the gospel of Christ and the doctrine of Christ. Paul preached the gospel of Christ as the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16) to every one that believeth; not just to the alien sinner, but to the saints as well. He told the saints in Rome: “So as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.” This statement was addressed “To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints” (Rom. 1:7). In the 16th chapter at verse 25 he said the Lord was able to establish them “according to my gospel.” But in chapter 6 at verse 17 he said they had “obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.” He affirmed that their obedience to this doctrine resulted in their “Being made free from sin” and “becoming the servants of righteousness.” So these people obeyed the gospel or the doctrine of Christ (one and the same) and their obedience made them “free from sins,” “saints of God” and members of the “one body in Christ” (Rom. 12:5) They were admonished to be legalists. Their eternal salvation depended upon their “strict adherence to the law of Christ” and they were to “mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them” (Rom. 16:18). Any man who thinks he can ignore the law of Christ and still be saved by the grace of God is in for a rude awakening at the judgment. “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he bath both the Father and the Son.” This is the Lord’s “prescription” for being saved and for keeping saved. After all, He is the Great Physician and he has the authority to prescribe (Matt. 28:18,20.) He has certainly prescribed the law of salvation to the alien sinner, and has set forth the conditions by which the sinner comes into the grace of God. He has also prescribed that we continue to obey Him after becoming Christians if we are to remain in this grace. “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men. Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world. . . ” (Titus 2:11, 12).

I am therefore a legalist, for I believe these scriptures which teach me that I must follow the law of Christ.

Truth Magazine XXI: 8, pp. 118-120
February 24, 1977