Truth Magazine

By O. C. Birdwell

Some time back I was asked to discuss the following question: “Does John 10:28, where Jesus says ‘and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand,’ not teach that a child of God can never be lost?”

In dealing with this question, let us notice the context of the verse upon which the question under consideration is asked. The verse quoted above is 28. The one just before it in the passage says, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:” (v. 27). Then after the verse in question we read, “My Father, who hath given them unto me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand” (v. 29).

Is the phrase “and they shall never perish,” contained in verse 28, conditional or unconditional? Please read the context again. Notice that Jesus said that they hear His voice and follow Him. The eternal life promised is based on the conditions given. The inference by some is that sheep cannot be led astray or caught. If this be true, why is there need for a shepherd? Paul said, “I know that after my departing grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them” (Acts 20:29). Will such drawn away disciples be lost? Obviously so, or else Paul would not have been so concerned, Hence, the sheep must continue to hear His voice, and continue to follow Him in order to receive the reward.

Does the statement “No one shall snatch them out of my hand” mean that ‘ man cannot separate himself from the salvation that is in Christ? Jesus does not say this. He says, “no one shall snatch them out of my hand.” There is a big difference.

Another favorite proof text of those who teach the impossibility of apostasy is Romans 8:35. This passage asks, “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or anguish, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?” Paul continues and says, “For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” It is quite clear, therefore, that nothing can separate us from the love of God. While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. His love, and the love of God (John 3:16), was shown before, and apart from, any response of our own. Hence, His love toward us is not dependent on our action in any sense. But will man be saved solely through the love of God and Christ? If so, there will be universal salvation, because God’s love is for all men. If anyone is lost, he will be one whom God loves, for He loves all the world.

From these passages it is seen that nothing can separate us from the love of God and Christ, and that no one can snatch us from the hand of God. But does this teach unconditional salvation and the impossibility of apostasy? It does not. Read the following scripture: “Behold Jehovah’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save: neither his ear heavy that it cannot hear: but your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, so that he will not hear” (Isaiah 59:1,2). Now hear the New Testament writer James: “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempteth no man: but each man is tempted when he is drawn away by his own lust and enticed. Then the lust, when it hath conceived, beareth sin: and the sin, when it is full-grown, bringeth forth death” (James 1:13,15). Notice the order: (1) drawn away by own lust; (2) lust bringeth forth sin; (3) sin bringeth forth death. Our own sin and iniquity can separate us from God and Christ, and bring forth death.

But one may respond by saying, “I thought we were kept by the mercy and loving-kindness of Jehovah.” Yes, but such is to those who “fear him,” and “such as keep his covenant” and “remember his precepts to do them” (Ps. 103:17, 18). Again, another objection goes something like this: “What about the power of God? Are we not kept by His power?” Surely, but the gospel is the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16), and the gospel must be obeyed (2 Thess. 1:8). Also, one may turn from “the gospel” unto a different gospel (Gal. 1:6). When such is done the benefits of the gospel are forfeited.

Many claim that man cannot fall, that there is no danger; but in trying to prove it they always quote passages about the promises of God, every one of which are based upon the condition that one hear the voice of the Shepherd, obey Him, and abide in His teaching. Such is the case with the passage in John 10:28.

Truth Magazine XX: 43, p. 683
October 28, 1976

By Arthur M. Ogden

Many have concluded, that if 1 Corinthians 14 is binding today, Christian women could not scripturally teach a class of other women or children when the church is arranged in various Bible Classes to study God’s Word. This they conclude because Paul said, “Let your women keep silence in the churches” (v. 34). They assume that “in the churches” means any assembly or class the church may arrange, and upon the basis of this assumption either (1) forbid Christian women to teach Bible Classes, or (2) deny the binding force of the chapter, depending upon which way their reasoning takes them.

The conviction of this scribe is that both conclusions are wrong, and have been reached without proper contextual considerations. To extend a passage beyond its legitimate boundaries is error indeed, but to fail to recognize the right to extend a passage to its lawful limits is likewise error. We must “rightly divide the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). 1 Corinthians 14 defines for us the proper realm of its application in such a way as to show that the Bible Class arrangement is not and cannot be considered as the realm of its specific application, arid that those who would so apply it must take it out of its context and apply it contrary to its context. In this article, I shall show its proper place of application, and why it cannot be applied to the Bible Class arrangement.

It, our last article, we pointed out that Paul was regulating order “in the churches” (1 Cor. 14:26, 31, 33, 40), But what does Paul mean by “in the churches?” Common sense tells -us that Paul is not talking about the church in either the universal or local sense, because if he were any woman obeying the gospel, being added to the church and identified with a local congregation, would have to shut up and never open her mouth again as long as she lived, and he is not talking about the church building because the word church is never used in the Bible to identify a church building or meeting place. The only other sense in which the word ekklesia (church) is used in the New Testament is to identify an assembly that has been called together, and that is the meaning of the expression “in the churches” in this text. It means in the assemblies that God has called together.

Look now at the context of 1 Corinthians 14. In verses 4, 5, and 12, Paul discusses the “edifying of the church.” When we come to verses 18-19, we find the expression “in the church” first used, “I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in art unknown tongue.” In verse 23, “If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?” This is where Paul defines “in the church.” It is the whole church come together into one place. It is further identified and regulated in verses 26-35.

According to this chapter, three acts of worship are identified as practiced in this assembly: (1) edifying (v. 26), (2) praying, arid (3) singing (v. 15). Paul’s language in 1 Corinthians 11, “when ye come together in the church” (v. 18), and “when ye come together therefore into one place” (v. 20), indicates that this is the same kind of assembly in which the Lord’s Supper was observed; that is, an assembly of the whole church together in one place. We also conclude that it is in this same assembly that we contribute on the first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:1-2). Other passages use the same kind of language to describe an assembly of the whole church (Acts 20:7-8). We have always concluded, and rightly so, that in the absence of other Bible authority, the Lord’s Supper and The contribution are to be observed on the first day of the week when the whole church is together. We understand that by Bible authority, edification, prayer, and singing may be engaged in at other times other than the first day of the week, and at times other than when the whole church is together, but we do not understand that this is true of the Lord’s supper and giving. They are to be done upon. the first day of the week in air assembly of the whole church. We defy any man to change it.

This is the place where Paul said he would not speak in tongues (v. 19), and in which he tells all tongue speakers to “keep silence in the church” if no interpreter is present (v. 27-28). This is the same assembly in which Paul instructs certain prophets to hold their peace (v, 29-30), arid the same assembly in which the women were to “keep silence” (v. 34-35). The place where Paul said for them to “keep silence” is the place where the whole church is together in one place.

This Assembly Further Identified

Careful examination of the context of 1 Corinthians 14 will reveal a number of things that must be remembered which identify this assembly from other arrangements the church might use to carry out its mission. (1) The arrangement of 1 Corinthians 14 is a Divine Arrangement regulated by commandments (14: 37) in which Christians are to do together the things commanded to be done together in an assembly of the church. (2) It was an arrangement where the whole church was together, with the unlearned and unbelievers welcome (v. 23). It was not restricted in attendance. (3) It was an arrangement where only one was to speak at a time (v. 27-31), and (4) all other were to keep silence (v. 28, 30). (5) The design of this arrangement was that all (the same as the whole of verse 23) learn and be comforted (v. 31). With only one speaking at a time, all learned the same lesson in this arrangement. (6) Here the women were to “keep silence” (v. 34-35). They were not permitted to speak; even ask a question. They were not to address this assembly, but rather to be under obedience.

The Bible Class Arrangement

Having considered the identifying features of the assemblies described in 1 Corinthians 14, and the governing principles of these assemblies, let us now seek to apply them to the Bible Class arrangement. We are told by some that the Bible Class arrangement is the same assembly as that of 1 Corinthians 14. If it is, we should be willing to treat them as the same in all points. If one of the commandments apply to Bible Classes, then all must apply. Let us see if we are willing to accept the consequences.

(1) Since it is claimed that both arrangements constitute the assembly of 1 Corinthians 14, then we ought to be able to observe the Lord’s Supper and take up the contribution in the Bible Classes. Can we? Can the Adult Class observe the Lord’s Supper and contribute when they see fit, and the Young Men’s Class and the Young Women’s Class do the same? If you answer that question “No”, you have recognized and admitted that the Bible Class arrangement and the assemblies of 1 Corinthians 14 are not the same, and if you answer that question “Yes,” you have admitted that we can take a human arrangement, for that is what Bible Classes are and substitute them for the Divine Arrangement. The consequence is that you have done away with God’s arrangement. If we can substitute one human arrangement for God’s arrangement, we can substitute another arrangement and put all the requirements of worship in the home, and thus do away with any assembly. We have fought the Bible Class contribution all of our lives, and the reason for it is that there is no Bible authority for its practice. While the Bible Class arrangement may scripturally be used as an expedient in carrying out the mission of the local church, it may not be substituted for any God ordained arrangement, nor may the regulations given to govern commanded things be used to regulate the realm of expediency.

(2) If the Bible Class arrangement is the same as the assembly of 1 Corinthians 14, then all regulations placed upon that assembly must apply to the Bible Classes. Only one could speak at a time therefore, and all other teachers would have to remain silent while all learned from the one speaking. If not, why not? If christian women must keep silent because Bible Classes are the assembly of 1 Corinthians 14, then likewise only one may speak at a time. We must keep the lamb’s legs equal.

I suggest that the Assembly of 1 Corinthians 14 and the Bible Classes are not the same, and for the following reasons: (1) One is a Divine Arrangement, while the other is a Human Arrangement. (2) Bible Classes are restricted in attendance, while the assembly (1 Cor. 14) is not. (3) Only one may speak at a time in the assembly, while many may speak at the same time in the various classes as each teacher teaches. (4) All other teachers except the one who has the floor must keep silence in the assembly, while no teacher remains silent during Bible Classes. (5) All learn the same lesson in the assembly, while each unit learns a different lesson in the classes. If the Bible Class arrangement is different in these five points, what makes one think it is the same when it comes to christian women? I (you) have no right to so abuse the Word of God, and extend it beyond its legitimate boundaries.

One of the stoutest advocates of tile “No Women Teacher” theory is on record as saying, “they did not have Bible Classes in the Corinthian church.” I do not know how he knows that, but since he does, I wonder what it is that makes him think 1 Corinthians 14 regulates Bible Classes? How could Paul have regulated something that did not exist?

Conclusion

It is my conviction that the truth will destroy every false doctrine. Every false way will fall before the sharp edges of this two edged sword (Heb. 4:12), but you must handle the sword right (2 Tim. 2:15). You may cut the other fellow if you take hold of the wrong end of the sword, but you will also cut yourself. This is true of every passage, and expecially true of 1 Corinthians 14. The truth on this passage supports my position that a woman may teach classes of other women and children, and it destroys the position of those who oppose it, and there is no way that I am going to turn loose of it.

Our next article: 1 Timothy 2:11-12, Its Truth And Its Power.

Truth Magazine XX: 43, pp. 681-682
October 28, 1976

By Mike Willis

When Paul referred to Epaphroditus and Archippus as his “fellow-soldiers” (Phil. 2:25; Phile. 2), he introduced another descriptive term which in some way reveals what a Christian is. Thus, in our study of the descriptive terms of Christians, we must include the word “soldier.” ‘The first idea which comes to one’s mind when he reads the word “soldier” is the idea of war. The primary idea denoted by the comparison of a Christian to a soldier is the idea of war.

The Enemy: Satan

The arch-enemy of Christ and Christianity is Satan. Our warfare is against him and his host. Paul said, “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world-forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Eph. 6:12). “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, and we are ready to punish all disobedience, whenever your obedience is complete” (2 Cor. 10:3-6). Thus, our warfare is not a carnal warfare; we are not asking men to clean their guns, load them, and shoot every wicked person. The Crusaders completely misunderstood the nature of our warfare.

Though the warfare is spiritual, the enemy is nonetheless real. Satan is not the figment of one’s imagination; he is not a mythological creature, He is actually going about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devout. (1 Pet. 4:8). He is trying to “sift you like wheat,” even as he did Peter (Lk. 22:31). The book of Job reveals to us somewhat of the activity of our enemy Satan. Thus, the enemy is real; his wickedness far exceeds that of Communism, Nazism, etc. His strategies in the warfare are unscrupulous. He is perfectly willing to mix truth and error (Gen. 3:4-5,22), to misquote Scripture (Mt. 4:6), to masquerade as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), to promise that good may come through the practice of evil (Lk. 4:6-7), or to attack us through our natural desires (Jas. 4:1; 1 Pet. 2:11). He is not an honorable enemy. There is a war in progress; Christ has called us to be one of His soldiers in extinguishing the enemy.

Armor of the Christian

Just as the Roman legionaire wore protective garments to ward off the attacks of the enemy, so also the Christian soldier wears his protective armor. Paul said, “Stand firm therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; in addition to all, taking up the shield of faith with which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming missiles of the evil one. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (Eph. 6:14-17). God has provided ample armor to counteract the onslaughts of Satan. Let us be careful not to forget the purpose of the armor–to assist the soldier in battle, No soldier wears this kind of clothing (breastplates, helmets, shields, etc.) unless he is engaged in a war. The Christian must not forget that the reason fie wears this clothing is because he, too, is engaged in war.

The admonition of Paul is particularly applicable to our times. He said, “No soldier in active service entangles himself in the affairs of daily life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier” (2 Tim. 2:4). Far too many Twentieth Century Christians have forgotten that a war is in progress. They are like the watchmaker who enlisted in the army and began to repair watches on the side. As more and more people became aware that he could repair watches, his business continued to expand. One day the commander called the army for battle. When the watchmaker did not answer the roll call, the commander came looking for him and found him in his tent repairing watches, When the commander said, “Come on, we’re ready for battle, the watchmaker replied, “I can’t go right now; I have to finish fixing this watch.” The watchmaker had forgotten why he had enlisted in the army. Similarly, too many Christians have forgotten why they enlisted as soldiers in the army of Christ. They have become so involved in bowling, lakeside cottages, television, baseball, etc. that they have absolutely no time to fight against Satan. (Actually, Satan has already taken them prisoners!) A good soldier will not form alliances which hamper his fighting ability. Any alliance which hampers us in the fight, whether the thing under consideration be sin in itself or not, must be broken.

Too, a good soldier expects to suffer hardship. Paul commanded, “Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Cluist Jesus” (2 Tim.2:3), Soldiers know that they sometimes have to endure hardships. They are able to get by on rations, to go without a mattress and box springs, to forego television, to know that they are being shot at, etc. They know that service in the army might bring bodily injury or even death. Nevertheless, they are willing to suffer hardship as soldiers. Similarly, some Christians have been called upon to suffer death as a soldier in the ariny of Christ. Part of being a soldier is the knowledge that hardships of war might come to us.

But, most of all, the soldier is a fighter. He fights the enemy, hoping, to destloy him. How might we engage in battle against Satan? We can fight social evil by writing our congressmen about important legislation, writing the TV media about bad programming, complaining to merchants about pornography, and boycotting filthy movies and television programs (and by praising the good ones). We can win territory for Christ by evangelizing our relatives and friends or by restoring our fallen brethren. We could perhaps add other ways to engage in battle against the enemy (e.g. stopping the mouths of false teachers), but these are sufficient to let us know that we must take up our weapon, the sword of the Spirit, and use it against the enemy. Letting it rust in the scabbard will not stop the advance of Satan.

The Assurance of Victory

Unlike other wars, the outcome of this one was settled long before it ever began. Jesus Christ will conquer: we do not have to worry about what will happen to us should Satan win the war. John saw the victory as he wrote, “And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried out with a loud voice, saying to all the birds which fly in midheaven, ‘Come, assemble for the great supper of God; in order that you may eat the flesh of Kings and the flesh of commanders and the flesh of mighty men and the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them and the flesh of all men, both free and slaves, and small and great.’ And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies, assembled to make war against Him who sat upon the horse, and against His army. And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone” (Rev. 19:17-20). The final outcome of this spiritual conflict has been forever settled, We who fight for Jesus will be the victors. We shall overcome; victory is assured!

Conclusion

When Paul’s death was visibly imminent, he wrote, “For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of cighteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved his appearing” (2 Tim. 4:6-8). Can you say as Paul said, “I have fought the good fight”? Or, have you become so involved in the entangling affairs of this life that you have forgotten the battle? Are you watching while others do the fighting, suffer the injuries, and even die for Christ? Are you a spiritual pacifist? Christ has enrolled you in His army, The battle is in full array. Take up your armor and proceed to the fray.

Truth Magazine XX: 43, pp. 679-680
October 28, 1976

By Jeffery Kingry

Romans 13 has been used occasionally to lend credence to the doctrine that approves a Christian’s active participation in war. As Foy E. Wallace put it ai he commented on this passage, “If the civil government is legally and morally right, the military is automatically and equally so, for the civil government cannot exist without the military to uphold and support it. This statement is so self-evident as- to be a virtual truism” (Wallace, Sermon On The Mount And The Civil State, p. 138). Brother Wallace went on to point out that his views changed because he could not reconcile in his own mind the inconsistency of, as he put it, “How God could approve the institution, but not approve the Christian’s acting in that institution.”

On the surface, if certain assumptions and liberties are granted from the text of Romans 13, this passage would prove a conflict to one who stood opposed to war. Let us consider, though, just what the passage does authorize. We are able to use wisdom and balance in applying hermenutic principles to other passages. Let us try to use the same effort here.

Subject to What?

Romans 13 demands that the Christian submit himself to higher powers (i.e. human government and authorities). In what way are we to subject ourselves? Absolute submission in every part of our life is not called for, as we can easily recognize. The wife is told to submit (to subject) herself unto the husband “as unto the Lord” (Eph. 5:22). This is parallel to the Christian’s submitting unto government as “a minister of God to thee for good” (Rom. 1:4). We would not think of taking Eph. 5:22 out of context to force a woman to submit to her husband’s demands to sin. It is assumed that the woman is subject to her husband only within the realm that the husband has authority to demand submission. A woman’s first responsibility is to serve God (1 Tim. 4:12; 2 Tim. 2:22). Saints are to obey “them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves” (Heb. 13:17). But we know that elders, or those who have “the rule over you,” who sin are to be rebuked before all (1 Tim. 5:19-21), and that elders would one day need to be withstood as false teachers (Acts 20:29-31). The child is instructed to submit himself to his parent’s will “in the Lord” (Eph. 6:1). Again, this is not a blanket approval by God for every demand that a parent might make upon a child. A youth has a first responsibility to serve God (Matt. 10:32-39; Rom. 14:23).

Does this mean that all these passages that enjoin submission are empty commandments because God makes exceptions? No. But it does mean that our first submission of will is to God, and any other submission of will is to be accomplished within the framework of authority that God gave to those “higher powers” whether they be to governments, husbands, parents, masters, or elders.

How is Government a Minister?

What then is that area of authority given to Government in which a Christian must submit himself? Paul was not considering Government exhaustively in Romans 13, for if he were he would have qualified his statement in verse 3, “rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.” It is so obvious “as to be a virtual truism” that government is not always a terror only to the evil, as the scriptures abundantly testify (Acts 5:17ff; 7:lff; 8:14; 9:1,2; 16:22-24 etc.) Obviously, what Paul meant in this verse and throughout is that government, as God ordained it, is “a minister unto thee for good.” The ideal of government is a power which makes and enforces a system of law upon a society. This power is backed up by the power or authority of penalty even unto death: “But if thou doest that which is evil, be afraid, for he beareth not the sword in vain.” The sword is hardly a symbol of punishment, but of death. Government has the right to take the life of the criminal under law. In protecting the innocent, the law-abider, from the criminal the government acts as “the minister of God to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”

Note however, that government’s authority to act with God’s approval (“A minister of God to thee for good”) is only within a certain framework: “Do . . . good, and thou shalt have praise of the same . . . do evil, be afraid . . . he beareth not the sword in vain. “Government docs not act with God’s approval when it permits or encourages wholesale slaughter of its citizens for the preservation of its own continuation. Neither does it act with God’s approval when it persecutes and prosecutes the law-abider while permitting injustice by failing to restrict the evil-doer. Government steps beyond its God-given bounds when it acts outside of law, either internally or against another sovereign nation. The function of God-approved civil power is something attended to continually which we support by our taxes (13:6). This function could hardly be war! it is a generic function “attended to continually” by all nations.

In Every Nation

Even a dictatorship, a monarchy, or socialistic government maintains laws against adultery, theft, perjury, extortion, and other such anti-social behaviour (13:8,9). The evil-doer is prosecuted under law in every nation, in every time, as God wills. Christians are not therefore to oppose such powers. On the contrary the Christian is to “cast off the works of darkness . . . and put on the armour of light walking honestly, as in the day” (13:12,13).

But war is a work of darkness by any standard of judgment. Even those who support a Christian’s right to participate in such readily agree “war is hell.” (Why is it Brother Wallace can see a conflict in the operation of government and opposition to war, yet mentions no conflict in the authority of war and its inherent sinful character?) War is not an act of restraint and vengeance executed upon the evil-doer; it is outside law and without law. Far from resembling the police, courts, and law-making institutions, it better resembles wild-west range battles, Ku Klux Klan lynchings, and mob destruction such as was witnessed during the French revolution, the Russian revolution, and the Spanish civil war. No effort to establish guilt before sentence was ever made of the populations of Dresden, Hiroshima London, or Pearl Harbour. And even if individual guilty or innocence could be established-what would have been proven? Merely that one man was a facist, another a communist, a socialist, or a democratic republican. Racial differences, economic disparities, political variations, personality differences could be established-but criminal action? If this be cause for war, we must for consistency, kill some of our brethren who differ with us on these points-as indeed we did during the War between the States.

Romans 13 is a “proof-text” but not for those who would justify the taking of life outside of law, without restraint, in the name of patriotic “justifiable” war. (I challenge any brother to find any “justifiable war” fought by Americans). Romans 13 is Paul’s admonition to respect authority when it upholds what is good. But, it will never justify the Pandorian box of horror men call “War.”

Truth Magazine XX: 43, pp. 678-679
October 28, 1976