Truth Magazine

By Don Potts

The most repulsive word in the tongue of men or angels is death! Death is a subject we avoid like a plague, but of those of you now reading this article, some of you may not live to see 1976 come to an end. What death has done for our friends, he will surely do for us. Each one of us can say with Job, “For I know that thou will bring me to death and to the house appointed for all living” (Job 20:23). Some of us may die sooner than others, but all at last will hear his call. We are marching in a great procession toward the grave, judgment and eternity! But death is everywhere, the fields that yesterday were green are today brown and lifeless. The tree whose branches were filled with lovely foliage and blew so gracefully in the summer wind, a thing of true beauty; now it is nothing but a lifeless trunk. Our childhood found us the very essence of strength and vigor, but today our faces are wrinkled, our hair is turning gray and steps that once were quick and lively have slowed their pace. Soon those once strong and beautiful bodies will perish in the grave.

Perish the thought you say, talk about something more pleasant. But still, death as an irresistible force, like a marching army on the field of battle coming nearer, and nearer, and finally life’s battle is over. When death finally comes, the undertaker embalms our lifeless body with hope to preserve our body for just a few more days. The body is dressed in the finest of garments, the face is painted to resemble life, and hopefully, to hide the presence of death. When the casket reaches the place of burial, artificial grass is placed over the cold clods of fresh dug earth and the banks of the grave decked with flowers to hide the hideous face of death. Yet, our efforts to stay the cold, chilly hand of death are in the end, futile. “There is no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit; neither hath he power in the day of death: and there is no discharge in that war” (Eccl. 8:8).

In the last 24 hours it is estimated that approximately 206,000 souls have died, and if the world should stand another 24 hours, 206,000 more souls will meet their maker. There is no way to avoid the inevitable. “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned” (Rom. 5:12). One of England’s queens cried out on her death-bed, “Millions for an inch of time!” All the money in the world will not buy one second of time when death summons. I once read of a beautiful statue in a St. Louis museum, a statue which teaches a great lesson. The statue depicts a sculptor at work on probably what he thinks will be his masterpiece. But death appears and beckons to him and he must go, leaving his masterpiece unfinished. How many masterpieces have been left behind, unfinished because of the sudden interruption of death. In Taylor’s paraphrase of Psalms 146:4, he renders it like this, “For every man must die. His breathing stops, life ends, and in a moment all he plans for himself is ended.”

The Death of the Righteous

Death befalls all, but not to all alike. It is human to fear the unseen, but could it be that death to the righteous is one of lifes most rewarding experiences9 Suppose a child in his mother’s womb is about to be born, and suppose he has complete use of his mental faculties. Knowing that soon he is to be removed from that state of security and all that is so familiar to him, he is filled with fear and anxiety! What kind of dreadful world will he awake in? But, once born, he finds that all he once feared is the most rewarding experience he has ever known. He finds himself in a world of beauty that is beyond his wildest dream. For the righteous dead, this is true. The Psalmist said, “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his Saints” (Ps. 116:118). True, it is a sad experience for the loved ones of that departed soul. They must readjust their life to their absence, and it is natural for this to bring heartache and tears. But the shortest verse in the Bible tells us “Jesus wepe’ (John 11:35). When Jesus saw Mary weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled and the record tells us, he wept. In the dampest, darkest, drearest, blackest night, when the crepe hangs on the door, when the vibrating heartstrings of the deceased family cries out in desperation, Thank God, Jesus cares!!

“Does Jesus care when I’ve said ‘goodby’

To the dearest on earth to me,

And my sad heart aches till it nearly breaks,

Is it aught to Him? does He see?

“Oh yes, He cares, I know He cares,

His heart is touched with my grief;

When the days are weary,

The long nights dreary, I know my Savior cares.”

Yes, thank God and take courage! As the apostle exhorts, “I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope” (1 Thess. 4:13-18). For the righteous, it puts us one step closer to our eternal home. “. . . Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them” (Rev. 14:13).

The Death of the Sinful and Rebellious

For those who go on in their sins it will be a day-of sorrow! When death comes, his soul-the real you-will leave the physical temple and wing it’s way into the eternal flames of a burning Hell! Paul spoke of “the sting of death.” The soul that has been careless, indifferent, unconcerned and rebellious will have a sad awakening! When the drunkard in his dying minutes audits up his life and sees his poor weeping wife, who in the hours of intoxication he abused, and his children who went hungry, ragged and uneducated, what a sting!

Imagine, if you can, the man who lived a life of immorality as he recalls all the innocent young ladies he has robbed of their purity. Some of them in a fallen state of ruin, bodies diseased, aged, wrinkled and worn! He may also see the illegitimate children he has fathered and whose lives he has shamed. Or, perhaps in that dying hour to see all the souls of murdered babies, slaughtered by the hands of physicians in abortions, who have vowed to give their lives in the preservation of life. Oh, the terrible sting of sin!

On the other hand, here is the man who has heard the gospel expounded, and listened to the sweet invitation songs of the Saints, but hardened his heart and said “No” to Christ. In Hell he may very well see the weeping, tormented souls of loved ones he might have saved, but he would not. For such, death will be a dark, lonely, horrible experience! Go to the bed of the dying sinner and see the anxiety, the dread, the despair, which surround him. Gibbon, just before he died, said, “All is now lost . . . finally, irrecoverably lost . . . All is dark and doubtful. I know not where I’m going.” Sin stung! The French infidel lay on his deathbed, looking up at his physician said, “I’m abandoned by God and man. I’ll give you half of what I am worth if you’ll give me six more months of life.” And the doctor responded, “That cannot be.” Death stung! Why? Because of his sin of unbelief!

Thomas Paine, as he came to his dying hour exclaimed, “0 Lord, help me, for I cannot bear to be left alone! Please Lord!” “The sting of death is sin” (1 Cor. 15:56). My friends, thanks to Christ you need not die the death of the wicked! Christ came that you might have life and have it more abundantly (John 10:10). John tells us that that life in in His Son (1 John 5:11). By being baptized into Christ you can have access to that life. (Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:26,27).

Is there one pondering the thoughts of this article, who at this hour is unprepared to die? You know the truth, but through hardness of heart you have turned down a loving saviour who died for you. What a treacherous path you tread. “He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy” (Prov. 29:1). Brethren, we cannot live wrong and die right!

Truth Magazine XX: 28, pp. 442-443
July 15, 1976

By Jimmy Tuten, Jr.

The New Testament church is a called out body of people who have been redeemed by the blood of Jesus. They were called by the Gospel of Christ (2 Thess. 2:14). Having responded to the call of God, members of the church were translated from darkness to light (Col. 1:13). They must now walk as children of light (1 Jn. 1:5-7).

As a body of saved people, the church sustains certain relationships. These relationships present to the mind certain characteristics and concepts about the nature of the church. In this writing we observe these relationships in order to give the reader a better qnderstanding of what the church is. In this way a greater appreciation of the Divine institution for which Christ died can be brought about.

(1) In relation to God, the church is the family of God. The churches of Galatia were made up of people who had believed and been baptized (Gal. 3:26-27). As such they were called “children of God” (Gal. 3:26). As the children of God they constituted the family of God. If we are not children of God we are children of the devil. “In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: Whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God . . .” (1 Jn. 3:10). These children who belong to God stand in relation to God. They are His! In relation to each other they are brethren. The Bible says, “for both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren” (Heb. 2:11). Various inspired writers often referred to members of the church as “brethren” (1 Cor. 6:8; 1 Pet. 5:9). “Brethren” is a vital term. It signified a family relationship; a relationship to God. As such it means the same today. It is a great honor to be part of the family of God. Only then can we address Him as “our Father” (Matt. 6:9).

(2) In relation to construction, the church is called the building of God. Paul said, “ye are God’s building” (1 Cor. 3:9). This is a rich feature, full of meaning. It is a feature Paul elaborates on in verses 10-23. He would have us take heed how we build on the foundation (1 Cor. 3:12-15). There is the danger of building on human wisdom. Instead of building with imperishable truth, some may build with perishable material or even forsake the true foundation altogether. This is a danger to be guarded against. The congregation is the temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16). Woe to him who builds to make it something else!

(3) As to form of government, the church is a kingdom. Contrary to the doctrine of premillennialists, the kingdom of God does in fact now exist. The writer of Hebrews says, “wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved . . .” (Heb. 12:28). John said, “who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom” (Rev. 1:9). Paul says we are translated into the kingdom (Col. 1:13). The now existent kingdom is identified with the church. This is evident from the fact that Paul says there is “one body” (Eph. 4:4). When this statement was written the church existed (Acts 2:47). So did the kingdom (Heb. 12:28). Yet the inspired apostle Paul said there is “one body.” This shows that the church and the kingdom are the same. In Matthew 16:18 Jesus said, “I will build my church”. In the next verse he referred to the keys of the kingdom. There is only one door and the keys of the kingdom fit the door of the church. The door of the kingdom is the door of the church. The term “church” presents the feature as seen in the nature of the members, i.e., the called out people. The body is called a church to emphasize this “called out” feature. It is a kingdom because it is ruled on the principle of a monarchy. The institution over which Christ rules is the church (Eph. 1:22). As head of the church, Christ is King (1 Tim. 6:15). He is head of the church and ruler over the kingdom at the same time. Thus the church is a kingdom. The church is identified as the kingdom. They both exist now as one institution. We can be members of the church (Acts 2:38, 47) and citizens in the kingdom (Eph. 2:19).

(4) In relation to the work accomplished, the church is the vineyard of The Lord. Paul referred to the church as a “husbandry” or tillage (1 Cor. 3:9). This metaphor, applied to the local church, suggests diligent toil (in this case of the apostle Paul and his fellowworkers) and spiritual fruitfulness. To stress that we are all laborers in the kingdom (Matt. 21:43), the Lord stressed the laborer in the vineyard aspect (Matt. 21:28-31, 33-43). In this we sow seed (Matt. 13:3-9, 18-23), as well as bear fruit (Jn. 15:8; Gal. 5:22-24). Jesus expects us to work in the church. That is why He has hired laborers into His vineyard (Matt. 20:1). We can rest assured that our Death! labor is not in vain in the Lord (1 Cor. 15:58). God help us to always abound in the work of the Lord.

(5) In relation to Christ., the church is the bride of Christ. In the Ephesian letter Paul demonstrated the responsibilities of the husband and wife. After doing this he said, “this is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church” (Eph. 5:32). To the church at Rome, Paul said, “wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead . . .” (Rom. 7:4). These verses clearly demonstrate that the church is the bride of Christ. As a wife reverences and obeys her husband, members of the church are to reverence and obey Christ. The wife wears the name of the husband, so the church wears the name of Christ. Hence, it is called the “Church of Christ” to show that Christ owns the church (Rom. 16:16). This is an endearing and beloved relationship. It should be cherished by those who are saints.

Conclusion

Friend, you can be a member of the church. As the “house of God” (1 Tim. 3:15), the church is God’s family. You become a part of God’s family by becoming a child of God. The Bible says, “for ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Gal. 3:26-27, emphasis mine, jt). Believe and be baptized today. You will become a child of God and a member of the greatest institution on earth, the church of Christ (Acts 2:38, 47). The church was purchased at the cost of the blood of Christ (Acts 20:28). Surely you want to be a part of it. We plea for the distinctiveness of the New Testament church.

Truth Magazine XX: 28, pp. 441-442
July 15, 1976

By Keith Clayton

Don’t you think we ought to do as the first century Christians did! Doesn’t Acts 2:46 and 20:11 contain the authority for Saints’ gathering together for the purpose of consuming a common meal? What about the “love feast” that early Christians engaged in?

These are a sample of the questions that are received by myself from people who are used to the denominational social concept of the Gospel. Being a Congregationalist and Episcopalian for the first 24 years of this earthly life, I can understand why people will be disconcerted at the idea that the church does not engage in “dime a dip” suppers. If one were to rightly divide the whole counsel of God, he would find that there is no authority for the church collective to engage in suppers, or any other purely social events (such as, marriages, receptions, guitar lessons, funerals, etc.). I lump most social events that others would have the church of our Lord to be involved in as the social gospel, or a gospel other than the spiritual one delivered by Jesus. People today are socially conscious. In other words, people think that everything should be done in a mass societal effort (Boles Home, Missionary Society, Herald of Truth, et.al.). People within, and outside the church sometimes confuse the difference between what an individual’s responsibilities are, and what a particular group’s responsibilities are. The church is an organization, whose founder is God, that is designed to do His work-save souls-not socialize. There is only one, so far as I know, social purpose that the church collective can engage in, and that is relief of destitute Christians (and Christians only. The individual Christian has obligations to fulfill that the church cannot and should not be involved in (i.e. helping neighbors, giving blood, etc.).

The church’s meeting house is not sacred, as seems to be the present denominational thought, but rather, is an expediency for the Lord’s people to gather in and bring in alien sinners into an atmosphere conducive to learning the Word of God, unto salvation. We must stop at this juncture and think, if a meeting house is erected (at great cost) for doing God’s work, then dare we use it for any purpose that Jesus, our master, has riot authorized? Shall we be guilty of the sin of presumption? I pray not!

Let’s examine Acts 2:46 and 20:11 to see if therein contains a request from the word to have common meals at the assembly or if we (the church) should gather, as a matter of faith, for the consumption of a common meal. Notice in Acts 2:46 that a set of circumstances existed, peculiar to that time. It was the day of pentecost, or shortly there after, and the church was just being established. The Christians were going from house to house (as opposed to from assembly to assembly) and bringing their meals with them (each brought his own meal). These are clearly individuals rejoicing because of their recent salvation. This is not authority for the church to do the same. Example: A brother moves to Milton, Vermont, buys a house, and settles in to work for the Lord. I find out and go to his house, bring some food and rejoice and we edify one another in the Faith. Is that the church meeting for a common meal, or is it individual brothers in Christ?

In Acts 20:11 we have another example of the churches meeting to hear a portion of the word of God, delivered by the apostle Paul. Note, the church did not gather for the purpose of eating a common meal, but rather to hear of things pertaining to Godliness. It so happened that Paul preached an extended amount of time and the people were hungry, and Paul had to go on a journey, so they nourished their bodies, as was necessary to sustain life. It does not follow that since the church collective can plan their worship such that a meal will have to be consumed. It does follow that individual Christian families can, and should gather in such manner and should prefer Christian fellowship and association.

Now we arrive at the “love-feasts.” The love-feasts are a very nebulus sort of aspect of early Christian life. It is possible that early Christians were, as individuals, exhorted to favor members of the Lord’s body over worldly persons (Gal. 6:10). Not very much is known about these love-feasts and it is only merationed twice in the New Testement, and one of those two times there is negative consequences of the feast (2 Peter 2:13). We certainly do not know enough to definitely say that Jesus wants us to engage in lovefeasts, as the church of Christ collectively. Here is what I know of them. Jude 12 and 2 Peter 2:13 both make only passing mention of the fact that such a feast existed, but nothing substantial can be derived as to whether is was a function of the church or individuals. Any historical accounts and commentaries that I have read on the subject would lend support to the notion that these feasts were taken on by individual Christians and not the assembly of Saints collective. The love-feast was an effort of “rich” Christians to share their wealth with less fortunate brothers and sisters. One way they did this was to share their food with less fortunate brethren. When we, today, help out less fortunate brethren, we are doing the same thing, we just do not call it a “love feast.” It is notable to observe that in 2 Peter 2:13, the love-feast had turned into a blemish on Christians. The word for love-feast, in this passage, has been translated differently in different versions. The New American Standard, for example, renders it as carouse, which is not a spiritual thing that Christians should be engaged in, individually or collectively (Gal. 5:19-21). The context of Peter 2:13 has to be considered because it shows that although something may seem good, it may not be expedient because of what the possible future implications are (read 2 Peter 2:12-16).

If a person has talked much about the subject of “eating in the meeting house,” I’m sure 1 Corinthians 11 was mentioned. Of course, the main thrust of verses 17-34 is abuse of the Lord’s Supper. Paul gives some precautionary advice on the subject and that is to not eat common meals at the assembly. I believe that a secondary application can be inferred. I think that we can infer that since Paul gave advice to eat at home, the mission of the church is not social, but rather, spiritual. If it were permissable to eat common meals at the assembly, Paul would have said to separate the Lord” Supper from your common meals, but, he did not! He said to eat your meals away from the assembly, at home (vs. 22 & 34).

Truth Magazine XX: 28, pp. 439-440
July 15, 1976

By Roy E. Cogdill

Our Lord prayed for unity (John 17:20-23). Unity, therefore, is His will and should be the desire and prayer of every Christian. We need to examine this prayer, however, to be sure we are interested in the kind of unity and upon the basis that will please Christ. Anything other than that will be a waste of effort. For men to cry aloud for the religious world to unite and disregard the principles that Christ has laid down as His will is to be guilty of hypocrisy. Are we interested in unity? Will we accept the basis laid down by the Lord in order to attain it or aren’t we that much interested?

Scope of Unity

Firstly, notice the scope of the prayer for unity Jesus prayed. “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word.” When the gospel preached by the apostles of our Lord makes believers-genuine believers-Christ’s prayer is that they might be “one.” Unity among all true believers should be the objective of all who are interested in doing the will of the Lord and who are willing to pray “Thy will be done.” This does not mean those only who already had believed or just those who would believe in the First Century but it means just what it says: “them that shall believe on me through their word.” Just as long as faith is being planted in the hearts of men through the gospel preached by the apostles, the Lord’s prayer is that they who have such faith may be united. This means in this generation and all generations to come.

Extent of Unity

Secondly, the kind or extent of unity which is the Lord’s will, is made evident in this prayer. “As thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.” Jesus wants believers in Him to be united even as He and the Father are united. Unity in any other case or to any other extent will not meet the requirement. This is why “union without unity” will not fill the bill. Federation is the order of the day in this generation. More and more, politically, power is being centralized in the federal government. In economic institutions also, centralization is the order of the day. Even so in religion, the interest people have in unity and their efforts to attain some sort of compromise so that money, control or authority, and cooperative arrangements can be combined on a compromise basis and federation-union-can be accomplished. But in all modern movements it is union without unity and certainly does not begin to approach the kind of unity for which Christ prayed. Men who differ in conviction, spirit, purpose, and as to method, cannot be united in organic federation and have the unity described by Christ, “that they may be one, even as we are one.”

Purpose of Unity

Thirdly, the purpose to be accomplished by this unity is also specified in the prayer. “That the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” Division creates unbelief. The very hotbed from which infidelity and atheism arises and in which it flourishes is the division, denominationalism, and sectarianism that exists in the world today among the professed believers in Christ. No wonder that those who have not studied for themselves and committed themselves to the Word of God as their only rule of faith and practice should be confused by the contradictory claims of over three hundred religious denominations, each of which claim to be the “church of Christ” and to be built by a divine pattern. There is absolutely no room in the prayer of Christ for such division. God condemns it and Christ prayed that it might not exist. We cannot be deceived into thinking that religious denominationalism is all right, if we have any respect for the Word of God.

God’s plan is plain and specific. You will find it in Ephesians, chapter four, verses one through six. As we pointed out in the article last week, the first fundamental in unity upon God’s plan is One God and Father of all. The second indispensable principle for unity acceptable to God is One Lord.

We have no difficulty determining the identity of this “One Lord” whom all believers must recognize in order to partake of the unity of the Spirit and be acceptable in the sight of the Lord. Christ is Lord! He is the only Lord that believers can recognize. Unity cannot be pleasing to God if this principle is compromised. But there must be universal recognition among “all who believe through their word” that there is one Lord, only one, and that all must bow before the same Lord if the unity of the Spirit is accomplished. There can be no compromise here.

Christ accepted this title during His personal ministry (Matt. 7:21, 22; 9:38, 22:21-45; Mark 5:19; Luke 19:31; John 13:13). Peter declared on the day of Pentecost “God hath made Him Lord” (Acts 2:36), and at the house of Cornelius, “He is Lord of all” (Acts 10:36). Jude speaks of men denying “the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ” (Jude 4). Paul speaks of him repeatedly as the Lord Jesus (Acts 30:35; 1 Cor. 11:23; 1 Thess. 2:15, 5:9, 10; 1 Thess. 2:19). Thomas confessed Him as “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28).

This expression “Lord” signifies having power or authority. In accordance with it being used in connection with Jesus Christ in New Testament Scriptures Jesus said, “All power-is given unto me in heaven and in earth” (Matt. 28:18). Paul declared that Christ is “the head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all” (Eph. 1:23). Peter preached that the Jesus whom they had crucified had been made both “Lord and Christ” and commanded that they believe it assuredly or beyond a doubt. James tells us that there is but “one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy” (James 4:12).

Any program of unity then that would recognize more than one Lord, or source of authority, or law, would be contrary to the divine will and, therefore, would be worse than no unity at all. Shall we accept some compromise between Catholicism and (so-called) Protestantism that recognizes both Christ and “Lord God, the Pope”? Catholics have held their long ecumenical conferences and have made the impression in the world that they are liberalizing their religion and are moving toward a recognition of other religions and perhaps even a federation with certain other religious bodies in the future. Does anyone think that they will discard “Lord God, the Pope” and unite with those who believe there is “One Lord Jesus Christ” and all authority and law giving power belongs to Him? This would destroy Catholicism in its entirety for every doctrine and practice peculiar to the Catholic religion has come from the councils of men and not from Christ and the Apostles. This can easily be proved by their own historians. They are not about to give up “The Pope” and their claim that he is the “Vicar of Christ” and “Lord God, the Pope.” They expect someone else to do the compromising, as they always have.

But the same thing is true of Protestant denominations. They each have their centralized authorities and their human creeds that they do not expect to surrender. Will the Methodist Episcopacy accept the authority of the Presbyterian Synods and surrender their own form of governing authority? Who can expect it? And even if they did, what would be accomplished? There can be no compromise on any human form of authority, government, or organization. All human sources of authority and forms of governnient must be discarded, if we are to be Christian. The acceptance of any human compromise means the rejection of Christ as the only Lord. The recognition of any human authority means the rejection of the completeness of His power and authority in the Church.

It appears that brethren who know anything about New Testament teaching could see this and know that when they affect their federations and amalgamations in the guise of “cooperation” when Christ has authorized nothing of the sort they have rejected the Bible principle that “He is Lord of all” and “head over all things to the church.” Some loose, liberal thinking brethren even talk today about “we do not need authority for everything we do” and go merrily on their way in affecting such organizations as “The Herald of Truth,” “World Wide Radio,” “Campaigns for Christ,” benevolent societies, educational societies, and everything imaginable. Who is Lord of all these human enterprises and organizations? Christ is not!

Truth Magazine XX: 28, pp. 438-439
July 15, 1976