Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

REPLY:

Since the question is broad and general, the answer must deal with the New Testament mold or form of doctrine. The church cannot do anything that is not authorized by its head, the Lord Jesus Christ (Eph. 1:22,, 23). Whatever is not in harmony with what the Bible reveals is a sinful practice. Let us see what the pattern for one church to send money to another church is in the word o# God. When we do so, we shall have all the truth, and all that is contrary to it is sin (Matt. 28:20; 2 Jn. 9).

Baptism Parallel

In order to have scriptural baptism, one must have:

1. THE PROPER ACTION: Baptism is immersion (Acts 8:35-39; Rom. 6:4). No other action is found in the Scriptures. Whatever differs from this is improper or unscriptural action. Sprinkling, for example, is an improper, unscriptural action.

2. THE PROPER SUBJECTS: Subjects for baptism must be penitent believers (Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38). There is no exception to this in the Bible. Any person who does not fulfill these qualifications is an improper, unscriptural candidate. Unbelievers are improper subjects.

3. THE PROPER ACTION: Baptism is “for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38); that is, to be saved (Mk. 16:16; 1 Pet. 3:21). Baptism for other purposes cannot be documented with Scripture, hence, they are improper, unscriptural reasons for baptism. Baptism as an “outward profession of an inward faith and salvation” is an improper, unscriptural purpose.

Likewise

Regarding the sending of money from one church to another church, the Bible reveals:

1. THE PROPER ACTION: A gift from one church to another church (1 Cor. 16:1-3). Each church collects and gives. This is the proper action. Another action, such as the pooling of funds of churches under one overseeing church and eldership, is improper and unscriptural. Such action simply is not found in the New Testament. No church ever sent through another church, never had another church as its agent, for any purpose. The centralization of funds under one church is parallel to sprinkling. It is another action.

2. THE PROPER SUBJECTS: The churches must have inequality; that is, there must be a church with power or ability to give and a church in want or need (2 Cor. 8:12-14). There is no exception to these subjects in the New Testament. Whenever goods were exchanged, one church was able to give and another was in need–there was inequality. The need concerned the “poor saints” (Rom. 15:25-27). Other subjects, churches able to meet the needs of their saints, are improper and unscriptural. Churches sending money to churches with equality are improper subjects. It is like baptizing one who does not believe; they are not scriptural subjects.

3. THE PROPER DESIGN: The proper design is, said Paul, “that there may be equality” (2, Cor. 8:14). This is the purpose of the gift from one church to. another church. “For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance also may be a supply for your want:: that there may be equality” (2 Con 8:13, 14). If relief, easing the burden of others from the supply of another “that there may be equality” is not the reason one church sends money to another church, it is an improper, unscriptural reason.

Conclusion

The answer to our querist’s question must be negative. “Can one baptize another for just any reason?” No, baptism must be performed in strict accordance and adherence to the New Testament pattern. So it is with money sent from one church to another church. “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Col. 3:17).

Truth Magazine, XX:26, p. 2
June 24, 1976

By Mike Willis

James Burton Coffman has begun the task of writing a series of commentaries on the New Testament. Already he has written single volumes on all of the gospels and on the book of Hebrews. These commentaries are written with the average Christian in mind; they are not limited to the scholar, although it does reflect serious study of the text itself. Although Coffman has written in the books of the New Testament on which our brethren have done some of their best works, without a doubt these books will be valuable tools to future generations. Coffman has invested himself sufficiently into this work to turn out something that will be useful for future generations.

My only criticism of these books is that the bibliography shows a lack of acquaintance with some of the most important commentaries on the various books on which the author has written. Perhaps acquaintance with these books would have only made the books so scholarly that they would have been useless for the average man. However, I feel that a greater exposure to some of the more reputable scholarly works would have enhanced the value of these commentaries.

Each of the volumes of this set sell for $6.95. As I said, at the present, Coffman has commentaries available on Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Hebrews. As later volumes are published, I shall let you know about them. I am sure that you will want to add this set of commentaries to your library whether you are a preacher or not. They are published by Firm Foundation Publishing House.

A Commentary on Genesis by Harold G. Stigers. Zondervan Publishing House. Price $12.95.

This new commentary on Genesis looks extremely good. Stigers is opposed to the documentary hypothesis expounded by modernists and spends some time in his introduction explaining why he has rejected it. The commentary shows an acquaintance with both the Hebrew text and modern scholarship regarding it. There are frequent word studies in the commentary which help to clarify the difficult passages in it. There are many references to the pertinent archaeological discoveries which relate to the exposition of the book of Genesis. Although this work will not replace the older works on Genesis, it will certainly supplement them.

The Training of the Twelve by A. B. Bruce. Kregel Publications. Price $6.95.

Those who are familiar with this book will be delighted to know that Kregel has reprinted it. Dr. Bruce has done a masterful job of relating the life of Christ to its impact on the twelve apostles whom he had chosen to carry his message into the world. There are insights in this work which you have not previously seen. Whether you are studying the lives of the twelve apostles or the life of Christ, you will want to know what Bruce has written on the subject.

Truth Magazine, XX:25, p. 13-14
June 17, 1976

By Keith Sharp

One of the pleasant memories of my childhood is of an old, brown, jack mule that Roy Payne, a close friend of my family, used to harness to the plow. The mule’s name was “Old Nigger” (no offense intended, that was simply his name). “Old Nigger” died a few years ago at the approximate age of forty years, a very “ripe old age” for a mule. He spent practically his entire life in the harness. “Nigger” was easy to work and would rarely offer harm to any human. In short, “Old Nigger” was meek.

The word “meek” was used in our Lord’s time to describe the temper of an animal broken to the harness-an ox broken to the yoke.”1 Who are the “meek?” How do they “inherit the earth?” Why do they do so? Vine thus describes “meekness”:

. . . the exercises of it are first and chiefly towards God. It is that temper of spirit in which we accept his dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting; it is closely linked with the word . . . (humility), and follows directly upon it. . . . It is only the humble heart which is also the meek, and which, as such, does not fight against God and more or less struggle and contend with Him. This meekness, however, being first of all a meekness before God, is also such in the face of men, even of evil men. . . .” 2

Vine identifies three characteristics of “meekness,” which we shall examine in order.

First, he indicates the relationship of “meekness” to “humility.” These terms are not synonymous. Rather, humility will cause one to be meek. If we have humility, we will be led to both obey God and properly treat our fellow men (Phil. 2:1-8), and these are two major components of meekness.

Meekness is first demonstrated in our relationship to God. “The meek man is one broken to God’s harness, one not motivated by the carnal mind but uniformly controlled and directed by `the mind of the Spirit’ (Romans 8:1-11).”3 When people stubbornly refuse to submit themselves to the law of God, they are not meek, no matter how much they may appear to be so.

But, meekness will also manifest itself in our relationship to other people. The meek are “not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good” (Rom. 12:16-21; cf. Matt. 11:29; 1 Pet. 2:19-24).

But, there is another manifestation of meekness, one which Vine fails to notice, which is essential to our understanding of the third Beatitude. When most people speak of a meek person, they mean one who is a spineless, “casper and milk toast” type. But the basic element of meekness, in relation to one’s own character, is

“equilibrium-the full and complete possession of one’s being, an inner mastery. It has been illustrated in some lexical definitions as the captain at the helm of his ship in the midst of the storm, who, in full control of the vessel, guides the ship steadily through the storm. It is said of Moses in Numbers 12:3, `Now the man Moses was very meek, above all men which were upon the face of the earth,’ yet he was among all men the most courageous, and with Joshua as his colleague and commander in-chief, the greatest fighter in Israel.”4

What greater example could there be of “complete possession of one’s being” than Moses standing before the panicked multitudes of Israel, caught between the murky depths of the Red Sea and the fearful vengeance of Pharaoh, yet calmly commanding, “Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will show you today” (Exod. 14:13). What greater monument to equilibrium than Moses’ leadership of three million backsliding, complaining, rebellious Jews for forty years in a terrible wilderness, and yet only losing control of his temper twice?

The basis, then, of meekness is humility. Three words in three relationships sum up meekness: submission toward God, gentleness toward men and equilibrium toward oneself.

The philosophy of this world has always been and continues to be, “Might makes right.” The ungodly and cruel seem to “get ahead” on this earth. Even an Alexander the Great, who could never master himself, could enjoy every luxury this world has to offer.

Had Jesus declared, “The meek shall inherit Heaven,” this would have posed no problem. But, the paradox lies in the fact that “the meek shall inherit the earth.” How do the meek inherit the earth? “The word ‘inherit’ means literally “to receive by lot . . . receive as one’s own”5 or “receive as an inheritance.”6

“But as the Israelites after taking possession of the land were harassed almost perpetually by their hostile neighbors, and even driven out of the country for a considerable period, it came to pass that the phrase was transferred to denote the tranquil and stable possession of the holy land crowned with all divine blessings….”7

Thus, the term came to denote, not simply to possess something, but to truly enjoy it to the fullest. Is this a promise of a physical kingdom to be established upon this earth some time in the future, in which God’s people will have permanent physical possessions on this earth? Assuredly not, for the New Testament is abundantly clear that our hope is a Heavenly, not an earthly, home (2 Cor. 4:16-5:3; Col. 3:1-4; 1 Pet. 1:3-5; 2 Pet. 3:10-13). And we have a grand total of one hope (Eph. 4:4). Nor does this mean the meek are to be wealthy. True happiness cannot be found in material possessions (Eccles. 2:4-11, 18-19). The meek inherit the earth in that they enjoy the best this world has to offer right now. They live the happiest lives while on this earth (cf. Eccles. 2:3; 12:1, 13-14).

Why do the meek so inherit the earth? They do so because they have true peace of mind, without which even the wealthy are miserable and with which even the impoverished have joy (Phil. 4:4-9). They have the comforting promise that God will care for their physical needs (Matt. 6:33), the help and fellowship of the finest people on this earth (Mark 10:28-30), and the hope of a home in Heaven far more beautiful than anything on this earth after we leave this world (1 Pet. 1:3-5).

Those who vainly strive after worldly gain cannot enjoy the fruit of their labor for fear of losing that which is the sole object of their hope and affection. But the true Christian, who has complete mastery of himself, i.e. equilibrium, who is submissive toward God and gentle towards his fellow man can truly enjoy this earth while looking for a much greater reward.

The philosophy of this world was well summed up by Leo Durocher: “Nice guys finish last.” The selfish, cruel and unscrupulous acquire the things of this life. But “the meek,” those who are the very epitome of a “nice guy,” enjoy the very best of this earth. The selfish possess the things of the earth; the meek inherit the real blessings of the earth. Which describes you?

FOOTNOTES

1. James W. Adams, “The Restoration of Unity Among Divided Brethren,” The Preceptor, October, 1969, p. 1.

2. W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Old Tappan: New Jersey, 1940), III, 55-56.

3. Adams, loc. cit.

4. Foy E. Wallace, Jr., The Sermon on the Mount and the Civil State (Nashville, 1967), p. 16.

5. Vine, 11, 258.

6. J. H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago, 1886), p. 348.

7. Ibid., p. 349.

Truth Magazine, XX:25, p. 11-12
June 17, 1976

By Paul K. Williams

The repulsive disease of leprosy has a strange fascination. God’s law for Israel described its symptoms in detail and gave minute instructions to the priest for its diagnosis. This law also said, “As for the leper who has the infection, his clothes shall be torn, and the hair of his head shall be uncovered, and he shall cover his mustache and cry `Unclean! Unclean!’ ” (Lev. 13:45).

So it was with interest that I listened to two members of a Leprosy Mission interviewed on Radio South Africa (Mar. 2, 1976). This ancient disease is still a terrible scourge, especially in the poorest countries. The good news is the sulfa drugs can now cure it, so that it is not the sentence of a slow death it was in Bible times.

But what caught my ear was said at the end of the program. The interviewer asked, “How is leprosy spread?” The experts replied, “It used to be thought that it was spread only by prolonged skin-to-skin contact. But now we think it is spread by coughing and sneezing.”

So it has taken medical science 3,500 years to discover that God’s way of preventing leprosy is medically correct. His law said, “he shall cover his mustache.” The leper was to wear a cloth, what we would call a face-mask, which would hang down from his upper lip. The spread of the disease was thus prevented because the sneeze or cough was covered. God’s people were in this way protected from the spread of the terrible disease by the law of a loving God.

Nothing about leprosy would lead a person to guess it could be spread by droplets in the breath of a sufferer, for leprosy is a skin disease. Certainly Moses, the lawgiver, had no human way of discovering that the disease could thus be spread. But God knew, and He gave the law that protected His people. He gave a law which only now is appreciated for its wisdom. He gave a law which, in its nature, shows that it came from God, not man, for it contained this, and other, provisions which show a knowledge which science did not attain until thousands of years later. Praise be to our wonderful God!

Truth Magazine, XX:25, p. 13
June 17, 1976