Truth Magazine

By R. L. Morrison

Christians seldom backslide by a “blow-out.” It is the “slow leak” which takes the heavy toll. I mean, one seldom goes into apostasy all at once, it is a gradual process. Undoubtedly, some do not intend to do it at all, but they do anyway.

“Take heed brethren, lest there be in any of you and evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God” (Heb. 3:12). Some people think a child of God cannot depart, and the way some brethren live and act makes one think they are of that number. But inspiration says a brother can depart. God did not warn us of something which is impossible for us to do.

We do not stand still. We either make some forward progress or we slip backwards. The change may not be apparent but it exists nonetheless.

We are exhorted to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest we should let them slip (Heb. 2:1). This could describe a row boat on the shore of a stream. The boat swings with the current until finally it is drawn away and carried down the stream with it. It may seem safe but the continual pull of the current will eventually cause it to drift away. So it is with the child of God when he allows himself to drift with the world. It is a deceitful process. The result is eternal loss.

Christians must guard against carelessness and indifference lest Satan gain the advantage and overthrow our faith.

Truth Magazine, XX:11, p. 13
March 11, 1976

By Larry Ray Hafley

From Florida: `Do we have scriptural authority for `chain prayer?’. . . It is being practiced here at the college, and as it brings back memories of my days in the Baptist church, this is a matter of great importance to me.”

It is much better to hear of college students engaged in prayer than in a chain or succession of dirty jokes and immoral jesting. All agree with this, but it does not answer the question.

First, what is “chain prayer?” A chain prayer is a succession of petitions, supplications, intercessions, and thanksgivings delivered by two or more persons. It is a sequence of prayers uttered by various ones in order. This is my understanding of “chain prayer.”

Second, is it scriptural? It is scriptural for Christians to come together to pray (Acts 4:23-31). “Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him” (Acts 12:5). “He (Peter) came to the house of John. . . where many were gathered together praying” (Acts 12:12). In Philippi, Luke begins the record of the events that led to the conversion of the jailer with these words, “And it came to pass, as we went to prayer” (Acts 16:16). Later, in the prison, “Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God and the prisoners heard them” (Acts 16:25). At the conclusion of his farewell to the Ephesian elders, Paul “kneeled down, and prayed with them all” (Acts 20:36). “And they all (disciples at Tyre) brought us on our way, with wives and children, till we were out of the city: and we kneeled down on the shore and prayed” (Acts 21:5).

One way for several to pray would be for certain ones to pray audibly in succession; hence, a chain prayer. That is one means. It is not the only manner to pray, nor would it always be the most appropriate, but it is one way that several could pray. Such a method would be generally authorized.

Abuse and Admonitions

A practice is not wrong simply because it can be abused; however, some chain prayer procedure is fraught with danger. Guilt by association is not totally fair, but chain prayer has had its glory in denominationalism, Pentecostalism, emotionalism, and in unscriptural escapades of all kinds. Our inquirer opened the door for such comment when he said, “It brings back memories of my days in the Baptist church.” No, a thing is not essentially wrong because Baptists do it, but some items bear close watching due to their popular association and acceptance by known spiritual outlaws. Chain prayers under certain circumstances are one such item, in my judgment.

In times of deep emotional distress, Christians have assembled to pray, and they have used what would be called “chain prayer” as they have poured out their pleading and bleeding hearts unto the Father of all mercies. So, in moments of strong emotions, prayer offered in succession may be a natural outpouring of kindred spirits. No criticism is given of fervent prayer addressed in chain form unto God, provided, of course, that all other factors connected to the situation are scriptural.

What are the dangers of chain prayers? One may develop the idea that such prayers are the most “intimate” and “thrilling” way to approach God and that those who “merely” pray privately “don’t know what they are missing.” It is easy to use the chain prayer format to be seen of men (Matt. 6:5, 6). The environment of some chain prayer services is not wholesome. Our querist, it is hoped, did not refer to the modern day chain prayer phenomenon; at least, he did not mention it. Our reference is to the habit of some chain prayer advocates who hold hands and stand in a circle with the lights dimmed or the room darkened. Such an atmosphere is used to produce a spiritual “high.” It allows the participants to take a religious “trip” into the mysterious world of “pious” sensualism. Under these circumstances, prayer is a substitute for pot (marijuana). Since the members of the group are Christians, they are not on drugs, but their chain prayer circle is merely a subtle replacement for the “trip” pot smokers take in a dimly lit, incense filled room. I do not charge that affairs like this are what our querist has in mind. I say that this is the practice of some and that similar acts can occur; it is a dangerous trend, I fear.

“But Brother Hafley, didn’t you say earlier that deeply stirred emotions often are connected with informal chain prayers?” Yes, but the emotions were the father of the prayers, while frequently the chain prayers are the father of induced and contrived emotions. Aroused, undefined “feel goodishness” leads to all manner of wild speculations and fanciful sensations. Thus, they are not at all parallel to what was earlier described.

Summary and Conclusion

Brethren may gather and pray in orderly succession. The modern chain prayer concept is filled with perils and pitfalls. The abuses of this means of prayer are not easily avoided. The dangers of chain prayer are real and warnings should be constantly urged. “Feelings” and “leadings” of one’s emotions and impulses should be generated and motivated by the word of God. Guide your heart and life by the Spirit of God as revealed in the Book of God, the Bible. “Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and learn not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thing own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil” (Prov. 3:5-7).

Beware of staged and planned piety that requires “a certain atmosphere.”

Truth Magazine, XX:11, p. 12-13
March 11, 1976

By John McCort

One of most glaring discrepancies in Mormon doctrine is their position on polygamy. Over the years their position on polygamy has changed like the colors on a chameleon. They try to give the impression that their position has never changed on this particular subject. History does not bear that fact out.

The original Mormon position was that polygamy was sinful. The Book of Mormon scathingly condemns polygamy in no uncertain terms,

“But the word of God burthens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax In Iniquity; they understand not the Scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son. Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord …. Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it one wife; and concubines shall he have none; for I the Lord God delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me, thus saith the Lord of hosts” (Jacob 2:23, 24, 27, 28).

The original Doctrines and Covenants likewise rebuked the practice of polygamy,

“Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproach with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again” (Doctrines and Covenants, Section 101:4, 1835 edition.).

This section was included in every edition of the Utah Doctrines and Covenants until 1876. In 1876 Section, 101 was removed and Section 132, which allows polygamy under certain circumstances, was inserted.

“David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save In those things which they received not of me. David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan … And in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife ” (Doctrines and Covenants, 132:38-39, 1876).

The contradiction between the Book of Mormon and the 1876 Doctrines and Covenants is unmistakable. “Behold, David and Solomon truly had wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me ” (Jacob 2:24). Compare that with, “David also received many wives and concubines … and also Solomon … and in nothing did they sin ” (Doctrine and Covenants 132:28-29). How can the Mormons explain deleting Section 101 from the original Doctrines and Covenants, since the Doctrines and Covenants are supposed to be inspired? How can they reconcile what the Book of Mormon says on polygamy and what the revised Doctrines and Covenants say?

The early leaders of the Mormon movement officially favored polygamy. Joseph Smith had approximately 44 wives, some of which were joined to him by “celestial marriage.” Brigharn Young, who succeeded Joseph Smith as President of the Latter Day Saints church, stated that if any denied the scripturality of polygamy they would be damned:

“Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise you that you will be damned; and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given, and deny It In your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned” (Brigham Young, “Journal of Discourses”, Vol. III, p. 266. Delivered July 14, 1855).

Orson Hyde, a later president of the Latter Day Saints church, stated,

“The revelation of the almighty from God to a man who holds the priesthood, and is enlightened by the Holy Ghost, whom God designs to make and ruler and a governor in his eternal kingdom, is, that he may have many wives, that when he goes yonder to another sphere he may still continue to perpetuate his species, and of the increase of his kingdom and government shall be no end . . .” (Orson Hyde, “Journal of Discourses”, Vol. 11, p. 85. Delivered October 6, 1854).

This same Orson Hyde declared that Jesus was a polygamist,

“We say it was Jesus Christ who was married (at Cann to the Marys and Martha) whereby he could see his seed before he was crucified.” (Apostle Orson Hyde, Sermon 3). “If all the facts were written, we, no doubt, would learn that these beloved women were his wives “(The Seer, p. 159).

Their position makes Christ not only a polygamist but a fornicator. The Book of Mormon, in no uncertain terms, states that polygamists are fornicators and whoremongers. The Mormon position forces them to take the position that Jesus was married. (The Bible never mentions Jesus’ being married.) They take the position that in order to enter into the “celestial kingdom” (the highest of the heavenly kingdoms), an individual must be married. They suddenly discovered that Jesus couldn’t go to the celestial kingdom because He wasn’t married. They had to invent this story about Jesus’ being married and having children to get him into the celestial kingdom. In the process they made him a fornicator.

The Mormon churches now teach that polygamy is sinful. Either they must repudiate Brigham Young as a prophet, or they must concede that they will be damned as Brigham Young stated. (My guess is that both alternatives are true.) They have been guilty of blatant dishonesty by telling people that their position has never changed. The polygamy issue certainly is a millstone around their neck.

Truth Magazine, XX:11, p. 11
March 11, 1976

By Mike Willis

Throughout the history of the American restoration movement, the term “disciple” has been a popular one both in the description of the individual members and of the congregation. Indeed, the most liberal segment of the groups historically related to the restoration movement has called themselves the Disciples of Christ. The usage of this term was not accidental; it was taken from a biblical source: “. . . and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch” (Acts 11:26). But, what are the particular characteristics which are supposed to manifest themselves in the life of a Christian who is referred to by the word “disciple”?

Definition of the Term

The Greek word from which “disciple” is translated is mathetes. Here are several definitions of it:

“Lit., a learner (from manthano, to learn, from a root math-, indicating thought accompanied by endeavor), in contrast todidaskolos, a teacher; hence it denotes one who follows one’s teaching . . . all who manifest that they are His disciples by abiding in his word . . .” (W. E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Vol. 1, p. 316).

“A learner, pupil, disciple: univ., opp. to didaskolos.. . . one who follows one’s teaching” (Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 386).

“Learner, pupil, disciple” (Arndt and Gingrich, A GreekEnglish Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, p. 486).

. . . The emphasis is not so much on the incompleteness or even deficiency of education as on the fact that the one thus designated is engaged in learning, that his education consists in the appropriation or adoption of specific knowledge or conduct, and that it proceeds deliberately and according to a set plan. There is no mathetes without a didaskolos . . .” Mittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. IV, p. 416).

“(1) … The word is found in the Bible only in the Gospels and Acts. But it is good Greek, In use from Herodotus down, and always means the pupil of someone, in contrast to the master or teacher…. In all cases it implies that the person not only accepts the views of the teacher, but that he is also in practice an adherent…. (2) …. The disciple of Christ today may be described in the words of Farrar, as `one who believes His doctrines, rests upon His sacrifice, imbibes His spirit, and imitates His example’ ” (International Standard Bihle Encyclopedia, Vol. II, p. 851).

There is nothing in the word to denote of whom the person is a disciple. The New Testament refers to disciples of John the Baptist (Mt. 9:14), the Pharisees (Mt. 22:16), Moses (Jn. 9:28), and Jesus (Mt. 12:1). Our interest lies only in the last of these. Sometimes the word “disciple” is applied to the Twelve; all apostles were disciples but not all disciples were apostles.

Emphases of the Term

The primary thrust of the word is this: Christians must be learners. The person who is a disciple acknowledges his ignorance and his need for a teacher. The disciple of Jesus recognizes “that a man’s way is not in himself; nor is it in a man who walks to direct his steps” (Jer. 10:23). Obviously, not all men are willing to acknowledge this need for revelational guidance. The acknowledgment that one is a disciple implies his desire and willingness to learn. A disciple does not possess a lackadaisical attitude toward Bible study. Therefore, to be a disciple also implies progress is being made in one’s knowledge.

Actually, no one can be a Christian without possessing these attributes. The Great Commission commanded the apostles to “go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them (i.e. those who have become disciples-MW) in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Mt. 28:19). No one who lacks the characteristics of a disciple is a proper subject of baptism. The “making disciples” (from the verb cognate of mathetes) emphasizes that one is drawn to Christ through teaching; Christianity is a taught religion. Jesus said, “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the prophets, `And they shall all be taught of God.’ Every one who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me” (Jn. 6:44-45). The teaching and learning process is to continue throughout one’s life as a Christian. The newborn Christian is to “long for the pure milk of the word, that by it you may grow in respect to salvation” (1 Pet. 2:2); all are expected to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18). The blessings of God abide on “he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it” (Rev. 1:3).

Anytime a Christian ceases to be a learner, he is in danger of falling from grace. God has never been pleased with a Christian’s quitting his study of God’s revelation. The author of Hebrews rebuked some with these words: “For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for some one to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food” (Heb. 5:12). Paul warned that those who lost their love for the truth were inevitably headed toward apostasy. For this reason, Paul wrote Timothy saying, “Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture” (1 Tim. 4:13). The disciple is a learner.

Secondly, a disciple is a follower. The man who knows the Christian religion revealed through Jesus is not necessarily a disciple; he must be an adherent to it. Jesus left a perfect example with the expectation that we should try to follow it (1 Cor. 11:1; 1 Pet. 2:21-25). “Jesus said to His disciples, ‘If any one wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me” (Mt. 16:24). The redeemed in heaven will be those “who follow the Lamb wherever He goes” (Rev. 14:4). The disciple of Christ will try to imitate the life of Christ in his daily living.

Thirdly, a disciple of Christ recognizes the authority of his teacher. ” `There are three senses in which men are sometimes called “disciples” of any other person: (1) Incorrectly, from their simply maintaining something that he maintains, without any profession or proof of its being derived from him. Thus Augustine was a predestinarian, and so was Mohammed, yet no one supposes that the one derived his belief from the other. It is very common, however, to say of another that he is an Arian, Athanasian, Socinian, etc. which tends to mislead, unless it is admitted, or can be proved, that he learned his opinions from this or that master. (2) When certain persons avow that they have adopted the views of another, not, however, on his authority, but from holding them to be agreeable to reason or to Scripture, as the Platonic, and most other philosophical sects-the Lutherans, Zuinglians (sic), etc. (3) When, like the disciple of Jesus, and, as it is said, of the Pythagoreans, and the adherents of certain churches, they profess to receive their system on the authority of their master or Church, to acquiesce in the “ipse-dixit,” or to receive all that the Church receives. These three senses should be carefully kept distinct’ ” (McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. II, p. 815). The true disciple of Christ is the one described in number three. (The disciple must maintain loyalty to Jesus and not to the teachings of a religious institution.) He accepts as truth things which he cannot verify simply because his teacher Jesus said they were true. What possible manner do we have to verify whether there is one God or many, a good God or a bad God, etc. except through the revelation communicated through Christ?

Being a follower who recognizes the authority of his teacher, a disciple will submit to Christ’s will even if he disagrees with it. If I follow Christ’s teaching only where I am able to logically verify it and reject it at points which I do not like what it teaches, I am not a disciple. Abraham was a faithful follower of God because he submitted to God’s will to sacrifice Isaac even though his better judgment told him not to sacrifice him. Some are followers of Christ to a point; they follow him until He says something which they do not like (e.g. divorce and remarriage, dress codes, submission to the civil authorities, etc.). Such a person is not a disciple of Christ.

Conclusion

Jesus summed up these aspects of discipleship when He said, “If you abide in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (Jn. 8:31-32). If you profess to be a disciple of Jesus, you need to be involved in some kind of regular, systematic study of His revelation, you must be an adherent to the principles revealed therein, and you must be an imitator of the One who revealed God’s word to us. If you are a Christian, you are a disciple; are you a disciple?

Truth Magazine, XX:11, p. 9-10
March 11, 1976