Truth Magazine

By Cecil Willis

For the past few weeks we have been diligently trying to learn what the scriptures teach concerning the relationship between the Law of Moses and the Gospel of Christ. The danger of confusing the two ‘laws is one of the most persistent problems confronting the religious world, both in our generation and the _New Testament period. Some might think that we are spending too much time on this particular problem, but if one will reflect on the errors in modern denominational churches which arise because they confuse the Law and the Gospel, he will then decide that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to overemphasize the importance of this study. Again this week we want to select some instances in the scriptures in which this particular problem is discussed, and analyze them as best we can in this brief study.

A Spiritual Marriage

By our title, we are implying that those who choose a part of the Old Covenant to graft into the New Covenant are guilty of spiritual adultery. Paul said that they are married to two husbands. Carefully follow these inspired words from the pen of the great apostle Paul, as recorded in Romans 7:1-6: “Or are ye ignorant brethren (for I speak to men who know the law), that the law hath dominion over a man for so long time as he liveth? For the woman that hath a husband is bound by law to the husband while he liveth; but if the husband die, she is discharged from the law of the husband. So then if, while the husband liveth, she be joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if the husband die, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she be joined to another man. Wherefore, my brethren; ye also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto God. For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were through the law, wrought in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we have been discharged from the law, having died to that wherein we were held; so that we serve in newness of the spirit, and not in oldness of the letter.” If one will consult the context of this passage, he will see that Paul’s purpose was to show the relationship between the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ. In fact, the first five chapters of the book of Romans deal with the problem of how one is justified. Paul undertakes to show that one is not justified by the Law of Moses, but by the system of faith.

Then in Rom. 7, Paul spoke of one’s relationship to Christ as a, marriage. In a number of other passages, our connection with Christ is declared to be a marriage. In Eph. 5:22-23 Paul thoroughly discussed marriage, and then said, “This mystery is great, but I speak in regard of Christ and the church.” In Rev. 22:17, the apostle John spoke of the church as he bride. Paul said in 2 Cor. 11:2, “For I am jealous over you with a godly, jealousy; for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ.” So, Paul used God’s truths concerning marriage to apply to a spiritual marriage, the wedding of the Christian unto Christ, or of the church’s being, married to Christ.

He tells us that God’s marriage laws say that the woman is married to the man for so long time as he liveth. In the Gospel accounts, Christ stated that the only legitimate reason for one to leave his or her mate was if one left his mate for any cause other than fornication, and married again; then he should be called an adulterer. Our society has so degenerated that divorces are granted for any or no cause, and promiscuous or no marriages are very common. Yet, from the beginning. it hath not been so. God’s law relating to marriage still says; “For the woman that hath a husband is bound by law to the husband while he liveth; but if the husband die, she is discharged from the law of the husband. So then if, while the husband liveth, she be joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if the husband die, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress; though she be, joined to another man” (Rom. 7:2, 3). Good people, that law of God is, yet binding upon all men and women, and God makes no exceptions to it. The mere fact that our government may recognize a marriage is no indication that God approves it. When a man and a woman are joined together in marriage, only death is to separate them.

Christians are spiritually married to Christ, and men were at one time married to the Law of Moses. The only way in which men are permitted to be married to Christ is for the first husband, Moses, to be taken away. “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto God” (Rom. 7:4). In the physical marriage relation, one cannot be married to two husbands at one time. Men were at one time married to Moses, but they now are to be wed to Christ. Before one could be married to husband No. 2, Christ, husband No. 1, Moses, had to die. When was man made dead to the Law of Moses? Paul tells us in no uncertain terms: “wherefore, my brethren, ye also were made dead to the law, through the body of Christ” (Rom. 7:4). So when Christ died on the cross to take away the Law of commandments written in ordinances that were against us, referring to the law of Moses; it then became possible for us to be joined to another. But we could not be joined to the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ at the same time, for if we are married to two spiritual husbands at the same time, we are spiritual adulterers, and we know that no adulterer hath eternal life abiding in him.

Yet, there are millions of people who want to remain married to the Law of Moses. They want to continue to obey the decrees of the Mosaical Law, yet they want to wear the name of Christ. Paul denounced this practice as adulterous, and condemned those who practiced it. Friends, you may think that this is plain language, and that I am abusing people, but if you will just turn and read Romans 7:1-6, you will see that this is exactly what Paul said, and woe be unto me if I preach not the Gospel. Let me encourage you not to take only my word for these statements, but take your own Bible and study them. If we understand the Bible at all, we will understand it alike, so search the Scriptures daily to see whether these things are so, for the truth shall make you free. Error can never be substituted for truth.

Now what is the conclusion of this matter? We cannot live under the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ at the same time. So under which are we living? Here is the conclusion of the whole matter, stated in the inspired words of Paul: “But we have been discharged from the law, having died to that wherein we were held; so that we serve in newness of the spirit, and not in oldness of the letter” (Rom. 7:6). What relation do we sustain to the Law? Paul says we have been discharged from it. No person amenable to God can misunderstand what Paul meant when he said that we are discharged from the law. Some may not believe it, but they, too, understand, what he says.

2 Corinthians 3

After our lesson, this article, we are going to discontinue this particular phase of our study on the Law and the Gospel. This is now four weeks in which we have done nothing but study plain statements of Scripture showing that the Law was abrogated. If this truth is not now established, no amount of testimony from the Bible would establish it. However, we would like to study just one more passage.

The entire third chapter of Second Corinthians is a contrasting of the Law of Moses and the gospel of Christ. The superiority of Christianity is pointed out. Notice how Paul showed that the Law, the ministration of death, passed away, and the Gospel, the ministration of glory, remains. He said, “Being made manifest that ye are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in tables that are hearts of flesh” (2 Cor. 3:3). This shows definitely that Paul spoke of the Law, for he called it that which was written on tables of stone, which of course, was the Ten Commandments which God wrote with His own finger. Then Paul went on to speak of that Law, and said that it was done away: “But if the ministration of death, written, and engravers on stones, came with glory, so that the children of Israel could not look stedfastly upon the face of Moses, for the glory of his face; which glory was passing away; how shall not rather the ministration of the spirit be with glory? For if the ministration of condemnation hath glory, much rather doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For verily that which hath been made glorious hath not been made glorious in this respect, by reason of the glory that surpasseth. For if that which passeth away was with glory, much more that which remaineth is in glory” (2 Cor. 3:7-11). Paul said the Law, was glorious, but the Gospel is more glorious. The Law passed away, was nailed to the cross, but the more glorious system of the Gospel remaineth.

Paul went on to say, “Having therefore such a hope we use great boldness of speech; and are not as Moses, who put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel should not look stedfastly on the end of that which was passing away: but their minds were hardened: for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remaineth, it not being revealed to them that it was done away in Christ” (2 Cor. 3:12-14). I do not know what words Paul could have used that would have been plainer than those he used here to tell us that the Law was done away. He said that there were some people who still felt that the Law was binding, but it had not been understood by them that the Law, the one written on stones, the Ten Commandment Law, was done away in Christ. Now let him who says that this Law is yet binding on man products the evidence that it is, and explain what Paul has said in this passage.

Conclusion

We want to see thousands of people cease to try to be saved by a law done away in Christ, and obey the Law of Him who nailed the Law of Moses to His cross. Those who try to live under the Old Testament Law are no worse than those that have tasted the preciousness of the Gospel, and yet want to go back to that Law for certain items which they prefer, which are omitted in the Gospel. We exhort you to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, repent of your sins, confess your faith in Him, and be buried with Christ in baptism into death, for the remission of your sins. This is the teaching of the Gospel of Christ, and is no part of the Old Testament Law. This may easily be your last opportunity to become a Christian. Use it! “For what is your life? It is but a vapor that appeareth for a little while, and then vanisheth away” (Jas. 4:14).

Truth Magazine, XX:7, p. 3-5
February 12, 1976

By Robert C. Welch

Never in the history of mankind has there been such a battle to gain control of the minds of men as we are now facing. And never has it been so hard to keep from being swayed by the propaganda.. The, swift and total coverage by the media of communications has intensified the barrage. The lack of restraint from the extremes of political; economical, amoral, sociological and religious ideologies has given strength and’ courage to the forces of such rebels. The results of this battle for our minds are manifested in the confusion, mental disorder, crime, fear, family breakdown, and lack of interest in the church and religion:

The forcefulness of this barrage of propaganda has kept many from accepting the truth of the gospel and has turned the minds of many weak Christians from:. the path of righteousness. “And even if our gospel, is veiled, it is veiled in them that perish: in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn, upon them” (2 Cor. 4:3, 4).

Communism and its near relative, socialism, are presented as a desirable way of life by far too much of the news coverage and social studies in this land of freedom and free enterprise. We are saturated day and night with the propaganda of the entertainment world, portraying, as the way of life, murder, civil rebellion, lasciviousness, adultery, perversion, drunkenness, nakedness and every other crime and social evil which the writers can think of and which the actors can portray. The trend in the highly influential field of education is not only to remove any reference to morals, but to play up much of that which has throughout the ages been considered immoral as acceptable in today’s society. Direct attack is made on the Bible and those, who would show faith in its teaching, by denying creation and substituting evolution, by denying inspiration and claiming it to be myth and superstition or mere historical development, by denying its precepts and substituting human standards of morality or amorality and pseudo-spirituality.

God demands the undivided mind of the person. There is no middle ground. There is no double standard. There is no split-loyalty. “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind” (Matt. 22:37).

The truth of the gospel is the weapon which the Lord has, provided for the enslavement of our minds. He battles for our minds also, to release us from the brainwashing which the world has inflicted upon us. “For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but mighty before God to the casting down of strongholds; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:4,5).

Make no mistake about it; we, preachers of the gospel, are after your minds also. This is the only way we can save you from sin, make you children of God and keep you under his protection and blessings. We must make our voice heard above the den of voices in the land. For the safety of children of God we have this urgency. “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve in his craftiness, your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity and the purity that is toward Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3). We are attempting to get men to heed the following admonition: “And be not fashioned according to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God” (Rom. 12:2).

This is the only thing that will turn the world from its present mad rush toward social, moral and, spiritual disaster. Let us strive with all our might to control men’s minds with the gospel of Christ. Let us always try to keep our spiritual and moral sanity as we have to live under the brainwashing influence of moral filth, deceit, ungodliness, and wickedness that is so nearly pervading the sight and wound.

Truth Magazine, XX:7, p. 2
February 12, 1976

By Dennis L. Shaver

I BELIEVE the male is the stronger sex, and as such he is to give honor unto the woman, the weaker sex (Pet. 3:7).

I BELIEVE the man is to be the head (ruler) of the woman (Eph. 5:23).

I BELIEVE the woman is to submit herself unto the man (Eph. 5:22,24; 1 Tim. 2:11).

I BELIEVE the man is to love the woman as he loves himself (Eph. 5:28).

I BELIEVE the man has the primary responsibility of providing the income for the home (1 Tim. 5:8).

I BELIEVE women should bear children and be keepers at home (guide the affairs of the home) (1 Tim. 5:14).

I BELIEVE women must not usurp authority (be domineering, or have dominion) over the man (1 Tim. 2:12).

I BELIEVE a woman cannot, by the authority of God, preach in the assembly of the Lord’s people (1 Cor. 14:34,35).

I BELIEVE women are to be help-meets with the man (Gen. 2:18).

I BELIEVE women are to love, and respect their husbands (Eph. 5:33).

I BELIEVE a woman who realizes her place in God’s plan is worth more than all of earth’s riches (Prov. 31:10).

Truth Magazine, XX:5, p. 12
February 5, 1976

By Dan Walters

Brother Jerry R. Phillips has written a series of articles on miracles in Facts for Faith, a publication previously connected with the Gospel Guardian and edited by Brother Gordon Wilson. A number of his points have been made by other writers on miracles in recent years. It is my belief that these brethren are mistaken in their views and are making potentially dangerous statements concerning miracles.

Brother Phillips begins by defining miracles as “those events which nature, left to herself, could never produce.” It is his belief that miracles are in harmony with the laws of nature, and that they cannot be contradictions of nature since they both proceed from the same source. Any natural occurrence which shows the guiding hand of God is, according to Phillips, a miracle. Thus he goes on to include providence, discipline, and answered prayer among the miracles. Of each of these workings he says, “It is divine. It is above nature. It is a miracle.”

He does not teach that the spiritual gifts are still with us today, though he is less than emphatic in his denial of. this possibility. He says, “these manifestations of the Spirit were apparently temporary in that peculiar form . . . .” He also says that “a sophisticated study of 1 Cor. 13 may result in a variance of interpretation regarding the time and reason for the termination for these gifts. . . .” The conclusion that the gifts were terminated ” . . . is not to be taken as tantamount to the declaration that miracles have ceased. . . .”

I mention his lack of assurance on this question because it is my belief that his views make it impossible for anyone holding them to successfully oppose neo-pentecostalism. Let us return to his definition of miracles and see whether it is scriptural. All of the events described as miracles in the Bible are contrary to the laws of nature as we know them, even if nature were being influenced or guided in one direction or another. There is no instance where providence, discipline, or answered prayer within the confines of natural law is referred to as a miracle. Miracles were very definite events about which no honest person could be mistaken. This is illustrated by the fact that the miracles of Jesus are numbered. The turning of water into wine is called the “beginning of miracles,” (John 2:11). The healing of the nobleman’s son at Capernaum is called “the second miracle that Jesus did” (John 4:54). If any answered prayer or any act of providence were a miracle, then such miracles of Jesus could not be accurately numbered. It is true that Brother Phillips tries to separate the signs and wonders of New Testament times from “miracles” of today. But the point is that his definition of a miracle does not come from the Bible.

Miracles are harmonious with nature only in the sense that both come from God and both fulfill God’s purpose. But miracles do contradict nature in the sense that they defy certain natural laws which at all other times remain in operation. A miracle can best be called a temporary suspension of natural law.

Brother Phillips tries to prove that the miracles of Jesus were compatible with natural law by saying that they “were predicated on the fact that God had already ordained in nature similar events.” Of the first miracle of Jesus he says, “God has been making wine out of water since He first caused it to rain.” Nonsense! God has never done any such thing. Wine is composed not only of water but of acids and sugars which could never be derived from water in a million years by natural processes. Brother Phillips mentions other miracles which seem to fit his theory, but there is one miracle he completely ignores: the time that Jesus walked on the water. The natural laws of gravity and of the relative density of water and of human flesh preclude the possibility of anyone walking on the water as long as such laws remain in effect. One or more of these natural laws had to be suspended in order for Jesus to walk on the water. The only other possibility is that another unknown force came into play which allowed the body of Jesus to overcome normal hindrances. Such an additional force would nullify the effect of natural law and thus be equal to its suspension.

Brother Phillips tries to show that miracles still occur by saying, “Any answered prayer is assistance from. God. Any assistance, from God based upon petition: could not be called a natural occurrence. Any supernatural occurrence is a miracle. If not, then we pray in vain.” He is unable to see how God can operate within the framework of natural law, without doing anything supernatural, and still cause certain events to occur which would not have occurred without His help. Why cannot the God who made nature use nature without going beyond any of the limitations He has imposed? There are many choices within nature. A man may live, or he may die. A flood may occur at a certain place at a certain time, or it may not. If God chooses to sometimes influence these choices in order to answer prayer, why must this be called a miracle or labeled as supernatural?

Brother Phillips would have us pray for miracles today. And I mean “honest-to-goodness” miracles. He says,. “For many prayer has become little more than meaningless formality bordering on blasphemous hypocrisy. It is no longer unusual to observe at the bedsides of those terminally ill a half-hearted, standing request for God to give the patient a restful night. Instead there should be the fervent, humble, dependent cry for the Father to heal the afflicted one.” Remember that this hypothetical patient is “terminally ill.” That means he is definitely dying and that there is no hope of his recovery. Still we are told to pray for his recovery-which would be indeed a miracle. Why not have the lame and the blind and the dying to come together in a public assembly and there let the preacher pray for them? Is there really any difference? If Brother Phillips is not advocating miraculous divine healing of the type accepted by Pentecostals, then he should explain himself. If I can pray for God to work a miracle and heal a dying man, then why cannot I pray to walk on the water in order to save a drowning swimmer?

No, brethren, we cannot have it both ways. Either miracles still occur or miracles have ceased. If they still occur, then we had better see about a union with the Holiness people. If they have ceased, then we should neither pray for them nor expect them. Brethren, some of us are not merely drifting; we are being swept along in the rapids and are about to plunge over Niagara Falls without even a barrel!

Truth Magazine, XX:5, p. 11-12
February 5, 1976