Truth Magazine

By Arthur M.Ogden

“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church” (1 Cor. 14:34-35). These are the words of the apostle Paul as directed to our brethren at Corinth. That was over 1900 years ago. Is it still binding today? This is the question before us in this study.

Many brethren do not believe the passage under consideration is binding today. I am not of this persuasion. Being of a conservative mind, I find it difficult to deny the binding force of any passage, and be consistent in recognizing the binding force of other passages. Not only is that true, but I refuse to join the crowd of liberal thinkers in the church and in the denominational world who have thrown this passage and others to the wind, and are now permitting woman to have an equal role with men in religious service. This passage is not a threat to Christian women who desire to serve God in their proper realm. To the contrary, it helps to define for us the lawful realm of their activity and enhances the truth. I will think a long time before I turn loose of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35.

A Universal Command

While the I Corinthian letter was written to the church at Corinth, it is universal in nature and application. “Unto the church of God which is at Corinth . . . with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours” (1 Cor. 1:2). The commandments of this epistle are the same as those taught by Paul in every church (1 Cor. 4:16-17). Even the regulations of 1 Corinthians 14 “are the commandments of the Lord” (14:37), and applicable “in all churches of the saints” (14:33). It could not possibly be more generic than that, so therefore, the commandments of 1 Corinthians 14 are applicable today.

I realize that some of you are saying that since Paul was discussing spiritual gifts in this chapter, which gifts have been done away (1 Cor. 13:8-10), that the commandments given to regulate those gifts likewise ceased. If that is what is under consideration in the chapter, I too agree, the commandments ceased, but I challenge the accuracy of the assumption that Paul is regulating spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 14. Here are my reasons:

(1) All needed regulation of the gifts were given to each individual endowed at the time the Holy Spirit gave the gifts. The Holy Spirit determined which one, how many, and how much of the gifts would be given to each individual (1 Cor. 12:11). ‘The commandments of chapter 14 had nothing to do with regulating those gifts.

(2) The gifted individual himself’ regulated the use of his gift once he had received it. This is evidenced by Paul’s statement, “The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets” (1 Cor. 14:32). Each person endowed had the power over his gift to control it, or God would have been the author of confusion (14:33). ‘That is why they were called gifts, They were given to each individual to rise at will within the proper confines of law.

(3) The regulations of chapter 14 are designed to control the individual who had the gift; not the gift itself. Paul’s charge, “if there be no interpreter, let him keel) silence in the church” (14:28) was designed to control the man who had the gift of tongues when he was in the assembly of the church. ‘The same thing was true also of the prophets (14:29-30). Paul did not regulate the gifts in the chapter, but rather those endowed with the gifts who were participating in the service herein described. The gift was not curbed, but the man possessing it was curbed while in the church.

(4) Not all of those regulated had spiritual gifts. To say that the women of verses 34-35 were inspired, is assumption pure arid simple. It is not inferred, much less necessarily inferred. If they were inspired, then every Christian woman was inspired, because Paul said, “it is a sharne for women (generic) to speak in the church” (14:35). Every Christian woman was under the restrictions of this passage.

The Purpose of These Restrictions

I believe that a careful examination of the text of 1 Corinthians 14 will show that Paul was regulating order in the assemblies of the church. He said, “Let all things be done decently and in order” (v. 40); that there be no confusion (v. 33); that all things might be done unto edifying (v, 26); “that all may learn, and all may be comforted” (v. 31), Is it not necessary to likewise maintain order today? If so, by what rule; and if not, why not?

It is often reasoned that the commandments of 1 Corinthians 14 are not binding today, but that certain principles do obtain. May I ask, what principles obtain, and are they binding today! and if so, are those principles “the commandment of the Lord” (14:37)? Does the principle “if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church” (v. 28) obtain today if one from a foreign country desired to address the whole church in a foreign tongue, and if so, is it a commandment of the Lord? Does the principle of one speak at a time obtain today (v, 27, 29), and if so, is it a commandment of the Lord? And if these principles obtain today, does not the principle of verses 34-35 likewise obtain today, and if it does, is it not a commandment of the Lord? Most will agree, but what point have I made, if I say, “1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is not binding today, and then turn around and say that its principle is binding? You only meet yourself coming back.

I maintain that there is no essential difference in their assemblies and ours today. While it is true that many of the participants in those services were miraculously inspired, for this was their only means of receiving the revelation, we can do the same things in the assemblies non-miraculously today that they did by the Holy Spirit. One may speak in a foreign tongue. One may edify, exhort, and comfort (14:3) as the prophets of 1 Corinthians 14, delivering the same message on the same occasion, and for the same purpose by using the inspired Word, the perfect revelation. I cannot think of one single reason why a man possessing a spiritual gift would need to be regulated when speaking in the assembly of the church, that would not also be true of the man today speaking the same message from the inspired Word of God. The Christian man must be regulated in the assembly of the saints regardless of where he gets his revelation.

It is Specific and Generic

“Let your women keep silence in the churches . . . for it is a shame for women to speak in the church” (v. 34-35) is both specific and generic. It is specific as to where she is to keep silent, in the assemblies (that is: those under consideration), but it is generic as to who. All Christian women are under the commandment, and in all such like assemblies. The generic nature of the command covers every Christian woman in every place that compares specifically to that restricted (cf. v. 23). Therefore, every Christian woman today when “in the church” is commanded to “keep silence.”

Someone will say, “women cannot sing, then.” If we are going from the sublime to the ridiculous, we had just as well say, “she cannot sneeze either,” or “whisper to her baby.” The truth of the matter is that Paul was discussing those who addressed the assembly, and this is the thing under consideration. If the commandment to “keep silence” forbid her to sing, it would likewise forbid the prophets and the tongue-speakers to sing, for both of them are commanded to “keep silence” under certain conditions (v. 28, 30). The context determines the matter in which women were to keep silent. “It is not permitted unto them to speak.” They were not permitted to address the assembly.

Women in Submission

Paul said, “they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saitb the law” (v. 34). Women are still to be “tinder obedience” today. (1) They are to be obedient to God (Heb. 5:8-9), (2) recognize the general headship of man (1 Cor. 11:1-5; 1 Tim. 2:11-12), and (3) submit to the rule of their husbands (Eph. 5:22-24; Tit. 2:5; 1 Pet. 3:1-6). God’s law relative to a woman I s relationship to Himself and to Man has not changed. She is still under the same charge to be “under obedience” as she was then. Therefore, front the standpoint of her relationship to God and Man, she is still tinder commandment to “keep silence in the churches . . . for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”

For these and other reasons, I believe that 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is still binding today. “Let us walk by the same rule, let us ii-iind the same thing” (Phil. 3:16).

Next article “1 Corinthians 14: Truth, The Roadblock To Error.”

Truth Magazine XX: 42, pp. 663-665
October 21, 1976

By William C. Sexton

H. Richard Niebuhr, a “Neo-Orthodox Theologian”(1) in 1935, gave what I believe to be a very good definition of idolatry and worldliness. I would like for us to consider it, and then I would like for us to see just how much of these evils we see in the religious world today, 1976. He said:

“The essence of worldliness is neither civilization nor nature, but idolatry and lust. Idolatry is the worship of images instead of that which they image; it is the worship of man, the image of God, or of man’s works, images of the image of God. It appears wherever finite and relative things or powers are regarded as ends-in-themselves, where man is treated as existing for his own sake, where civilization is valued for civilization’s sake, where art is practiced for art’s sake, where life is lived for life’s sake or nation adored for nation’s sake. It is a false morality, which sets up ideas that do not correspond to the nature of human life and promulgates laws that are not the laws of reality but the degrees of finite, self-aggrandizing and vanishing power.”(2)

According to this writer, idolatry is placing something first, before God, the Creator and ruler of the world. Worldliness is looking to some creature of this world as the ultimate source, rather than God, who has made the world and the things that are of this world.

This man was challenging the theologians of the Liberal theology, which had dominated the Protestant religious camp from 1860 to 1920, to recognize that they had left the source of truth, God, Jesus Christ, and the Bible. He was calling upon the “church” to recognize that it was a “captive” to three “-isms”: (1) Capitalism; (2) Nationalism; (3) Humanism. Liberal theology for 70 years had looked to man to save himself through his scientific efforts-the evolutionary forces were at work, making changes that were “improvement.” The accumulation of wealth was evidence that one was moral, wealth.” The United States of America that God had chosen to establish The meaning a just and right society. the failure of the League of Nations, and of 1929, these Liberal theologians had nothing left to which they could hold to support their “hope.” This man and the Neo-Othodox Theologians began to criticize the Liberal theology stand. This is not to say that these men went the right distance and to the degree they should have. However, they were right, I maintain in this respect. Liberal theology was idolatry and worldliness; it was destructive to the church and to individuals.

However, if one will look closely, idolatry and worldliness of this type is reigning in practically every place today. Denominationalism, as a whole, places its ultimate faith in its creeds; its aim is almost completely limited to making people more comfortable here and now; and the salvation of which it speaks is of this world. Most denominations are looking for a time when Christ will rule and reign here on earth. They look to a “subjectivism,” wherein the significance is “how you feel,” not have you obeyed the objective truth of the Bible. Their worship, I suggest, is of man and his works, not of God, His Christ, and His truth the Bible.

Likewise, many in the “church of Christ,” have this same idol and are practicing this same worldliness. Ezekiel had to deal with a group of men who came to him with “idols in his heart,” (Ezek. 14:4) and they received an “answer” according “to the multitude of his idols.” I suggest, brothers and sisters in Christ, and friends and neighbors, that we need to consider the idolatry and worldliness of our day. Cry out against it, and be sure that we have not placed our trust in something or someone OTHER than God, these we had better do if we would be saved and be a force for good.

Endnotes

1. Sydney E. Aldstrom, Theology in America. (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1967), p. 586.

2. H. Richard Niebuhr, The Church Against the World (Chicago: Willett, Clark & Company, 1935), pp. 123-156, quoted in Aldstrorn, pp. 509-510.

Truth Magazine XX: 42, pp. 662-663
October 21, 1976

By Cecil Willis

For the past several weeks it has been our endeavor to survey the word of God pointing out what the Bible teaches on the subject of baptism. Thus far we have seen that only those who were capable of hearing, understanding, and rendering obedience to the gospel were subjects of baptism. In another lesson, it was seen that only the act of immersion in water in order to receive the remission of sins constituted the action of baptism as taught in the New Testament. We then attempted to study several separate passages that have direct bearing upon the action or purpose of baptism. We studied Mk. 16:16 which says, “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned.” Here it is stated that baptism is in order to one’s salvation. We reflected on Acts 2:38, “Then Peter said unto them repent ye, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins.” It is said that baptism is for the remission of sins. The statement of Ananais to Saul, the one-time persecutor, but later, the apostle, also states the purpose of baptism. Ananais told Saul to “arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Baptism is in order to wash away one’s sins.

Now this week we want to note one other passage in the New Testament that states explicitly the purpose of baptism, and then we intend to notice some of the things that baptism is said to do, as stated in the New Testament.

Baptism Saves

If there were no other passage in all the New Testament that had any bearing on the design or purpose of baptism, the one that we are about to suggest should be enough to satisfy those who are ready to accept a plain statement of the Lord, as to the purpose of baptism. Peter began by speaking of those spirits that were now in, prison, “that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved through water: which after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 3:20,21). Peter began by telling us about those that were saved from the world of sin at the time that God destroyed the world and its inhabitants by a flood. Noah had been previously warned by God of the impending flood, and had been given the responsibility to build an ark, to the saving of his house. Ile also was given instructions as to how this ark was to be built, and he minutely and meticulously followed God’s rules. As the floods came, as God had said they would, Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives, were all that were saved. These eight persons were saved from the wickedness of the world by water. Peter in so many words said that these eight people were saved by water.

There is frequently a great deal of discussion as to how it was that these eight people were saved by water, but yet and still it is unequivocally and unambiguously stated that they were saved by water. However it might have been that this group was saved by water, be it remembered that Peter by the inspiration of the Spirit stated that they were saved by water. From this premise, he than proceeded to state that in a like figure, or similarly to the way in which they were saved by the water, baptism saves us. He said, “the like figure, wbereunto baptism doth also now save us.” If any statement of the Lord is made plain, and if language has any uniform meaning at all, then it follows that one of the things that baptism does for an individual is save him.

Sometimes people will object and reply that it is not really said that baptism saves one, but it is just a figure, but actually what is said that in a like figure to the way in which Noah’s family was saved in the ark by water, so also is the sinner saved by water in obeying the commandment of baptism.

It is also stated in this passage that it is not putting away of the filth of the flesh that saves a man, but it is the answer of a good conscience toward God. Peter was saying that it is not the washing of the body in the water that saves one, but it is the act of obedience that gives him a good conscience before God that procures his salvation. The import of this passage is made plain by asking the question, “Can one have a good conscience before God when he knows that he has not done what God commanded?” The answer is, “Certainly not!” One could not live with the assurance that God was approving him if he knew that he had violated a specific commandment of God. Neither could one have a good conscience before God when he knew that God commanded him to be baptized, and when he knew that he had not done what God said. Therefore, it is one’s obedience to the commandments of God that saves him, one of which commandments is that of baptism. So, by obeying the commandment to be baptized, one knows that he has done what God told him to do, so he has a good conscience, and God knows that he has done what He told him to do, so He saves him.

So one thing that baptism does, to which we call attention is that it saves one. Of course there are literally millions over this land, and possibly even many who are reading this who would differ with the statement that baptism saves you, but remember friends, that you are not differing with me, but with Peter. Peter said, that baptism doth also now save you. It ought to be pointed out that baptism alone does not save one, but it with all the other commandments of the Lord is the system of salvation. But even though it does not alone save you, it follows that one cannot be saved without it, for it is a commandment of the Lord, and Peter says it does save you.

Baptism Establishes Kingdom Citizenship

Another thing that baptism does is to put you into the kingdom of God. God has a kingdom, headed by Christ, and comprised of all those who do His will. There are certain blessings stored up for those who are in the kingdom, and certain punishments reserved for those who choose to remain outside the kingdom of God. The only way for one to receive the blessings prepared for those in the kingdom is to get into it. Jesus Christ plainly stated the conditions that must be met before one may enter the kingdom. As Jesus preached to Nicodemus, the teacher of the Jews, he told him: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except one be born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (Jn. 3:5). Jesus had just told this man that he must be born of water and the spirit in order to enter into this kingdom of blessings. Nicodemus was told to obey the instructions of the Spirit, and to be begotten into a new life by the Word of the Spirit. A part of the rules of citizenship into the kingdom of God, as here stated by Jesus is to be born of water. One cannot enter into this kingdom except that he be born of water.

Someone answers, “Yes, one must be born of water, but it is not here stated that baptism is the birth of water.” I agree that in so many words, it is not stated that baptism is the birth of water. I know of but two interpretations that men have placed on the expression, to be “born of water.”‘ One group of men maintain that the birth in water is baptism, while others contend that the birth in water is the natural birth. Nicodemus was one of this latter group. He thought that the birth in water involved his going back and being brought forth again from his mothers womb but Jesus corrected him of that mis-impression. He told him that he was not referring to a physical birth, when he commanded the birth of water. Denominationalists sometimes contend that the fluid accompanying a natural birth is a birth of water, but it is not. Technically, it is amniotic fluid, and is not water at all. Had Jesus not corrected this error of concluding that the birth of water was the natural birth, a technicality would have, for the fluid is not water.

The only birth commanded by the Christ that involves water is baptism, and Jesus here said that one must be born of water before he may enter the kingdom of God. I have heard many who have said, that even though Jesus said to be born of water, he did not really mean water. How far are men willing to go to avert the commandments of God? Jesus said to be born of water. Think just a moment, please, about this statement that Jesus did not really mean water. Suppose that He had meant to tell Nicodemus, as well as us also to be born of water, what would He have said? If water does not mean water, what would he have said if He had meant water? Friends you must admit that the commandments of the Lord are plain, and here He told the man to be born of water, to be baptized, or he could not enter into the kingdom of God. So a second thing that baptism does is to make one a citizen in the kingdom of God. One cannot receive the blessing of salvation outside the kingdom of God, and one cannot receive the blessings of the kingdom except he be baptized. This is the same thing as Peter said in 1 Pet. 3:21, the passage we studied earlier where he said that baptism doth also now save you.

Baptism Puts One in the Body

A third thing that the scriptures teach that baptism accomplishes is that it puts one in the body. As Paul discoursed on the analogy between the human body and the church of the Lord, or the body of the Lord, he told us how one enters the body of the church. He said, “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For in one spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to drink of one Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:12,13). He said that we were all baptized into one body. We are not told in this passage what the one body is, but in other passages we are told. But in this scripture we are told that we enter the body by being baptized into it. Whatever the body is, we must enter it by baptism. In Eph. 1:22,23, Paul told us what this body that one enters by baptism is. He said that God put all things in subject under the feet of Christ, when he raised him from the dead, “and gave him to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” Paul said that Christ is the head of the church which is His body. In Colossians 1:18, the same truth is stated, but in slightly different words. Here he said, “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead: that in all things he might have the preeminence” (Col. 1:18). Christ is here said to be the head of the body, which is the church. In both these passages, the church and the body are identified with each other. They are made synonymous.

Paul said that one is baptized into one body, and that the body is the church. If one enters the body by being baptized into it, then he does not enter it as denominationalists teach. They teach that you are to be voted into the church. The writer Luke said that those that were saved were added to the church (Acts 2:47) and he recorded in Acts 2:38 what Peter told them to do to be saved. He told them to repent and be baptized. We see the great harmony in scriptural teaching when we read that one is to be baptized in order to be saved. Then we read that the saved are added to the church, and then the great apostle Paul summed up this process by saying that one is baptized into the body, which is the church.

The significance of baptism is further pointed out when one understands that the church is the body for which Christ died. Paul said to the elders of the church at Ephesus, “Take heed unto yourselves and all the flock over which the spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of the Lord, which is purchased with his blood” (Acts 20:28). The church is purchased with the blood of Christ, and it is the body of Christ. It is in the body of Christ that the blood flows. It is in the church that one may receive the benefits of the shed blood of Christ, which is said to have been shed “for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28). If one is to receive the remission of sins, it must be by the blood of Christ, which was shed in His death. Paul said that we are baptized into His death (Rom. 6:3,4). So baptism puts one into the body of Christ, or it puts one into the church of Christ, but only the saved are added to the church, so baptism saves one and at the same time, he is added to the church, the organization purchased with the Lord’s blood. Baptism into the church, by the authority of Christ, is salvation by the blood of Christ!

Conclusion

So in summary, here are the things that baptism does, as we have tried to point out in our lesson this week. Baptism saves one (1 Pet. 3:21); it puts one into the kingdom of God (Jn. 3:5), and it puts one into the church (1 Cor. 12:13), which is the same as the kingdom. We are pleading with you to cease listening to the teaching of men, who would tell you baptism is inessential, but study the passages that we have suggested,,as well as the rest of the New Testament to see why you should be baptized, and what baptism does for you.

Truth Magazine XX: 42, pp. 659-662
October 21, 1976

By William V Beasley

“You are being influenced by the writings (books) of men!” is an accusation made by unthinking Christians against their preaching brethren. This is said as if to be guilty of such was equal to complete unfaithfulness, or, at least, the first step in complete apostasy. None of us, myself included, should want to become unfaithful or to take even the first step in apostasy-but, we hasten to ask, is the possession of, study of, learning from, reading of and/or use of books written by men a sign of unfaithfulness or apostasy?

To being “influenced by the writings (books) of men” I must plead guilty. Many such have influenced me and this many times. That was the purpose, in fact, that I purchased such-to be influenced by what the books contained. I would hate to think I had wasted the hundreds of dollars so spent. Pleading guilty to being influenced by the books of men is not to say that I have gullibly accepted everything therein presented. Such is not the case and I trust never will be. Sometimes the influence has been to see how far afield man can go and thus to strengthen our determination to “let God be found true, but every man a liar” (Romans 3:4).

In much the same manner I (along with countless others) have been influenced by speaking person-to-person with other people, but, once again, it was not a hook, line and sinker acceptance of everything presented. Some of my brethren have a phobia of written commentaries and will, while making oral comments on the meaning of a passage of scripture digress enough to tell you how terrible it is to use (mention) commentaries. The primary meaning of “commentary” is “a comment.” When we explain what a passage means we have thereby authored (or plagiarized) a commentary on that passage. The type of communication (oral vs. written) used is the only difference in principle between the two types of commentaries.

Granted people, even our brethren, have misused the writings of men. When asked what a passage of scripture meant, one brother said something like ‘ “I’m not sure what that means. I don’t remember what Brother McGarvey had to say about it.” In listening to preaching, private instruction, personal conversations, reading books (commentaries, etc.) we need to receive such with all readiness of mind, and search the scriptures daily, whether these things be so (see Acts 17:11).

Truth Magazine XX: 42, p. 658
October 21, 1976