Truth Magazine

By Bill Collett

As we look about us in the world today, it becomes evident that something needs to be said about the physical appearance of many professing to be the children of God. Although Paul teaches us (Rom. 12:1) that we are not to be conformed to this world, many “so-called” Christians have become so as daily their appearance reflects a rejection of what the scripture teaches concerning “modest dress.”

The strong moral fiber of the American woman is under attack today as never before. There seems to be an upsurge in downgrading. Television tells her that “she’s come a long way baby.” She now has the right to smoke in the public the same as the man. She can walk to the local bar and order a whiskey sour just as freely as the man. She is being informed today that. it is only just and right for her children to be cared for by a hireling so that she can stand toe-to-toe and compete with man in the business world. She no longer has to shrink back when men start to tell crude or filthy jokes and stories. Today, because of her freedom, she can listen, laugh and even tell a “heart stopper” herself.

The movie industry tells her that the more free she is with her body, the more modern, mature and sophisticated she is. Even many church or religious bodies are encouraging her to rebel against the repression of society who suggests that her place is in the home keeping house, bearing children, and loving her husband. Truly, the woman that is caught up in the modern influence has “come a long way baby.” The question is, “Which way?”

No where or in no way is the strong moral fiber of American womanhood put more to the test than through the modern fashions of the day. The fashion designer tells her the more she is willing to reveal, the more attractive she is to the eye of the public. But what about the eyes of God? How does the Christian woman dress in order to please God?

Let us lay a foundation of godly principles upon which our subject can rest.

First, from the introduction of sin into the world, nudity has been a symbol of shame. Nudity was not a symbol of shame in the beginning. For notice with reference to Adam and Eve in the garden the scripture says, “And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not shamed” (Gen. 2:25). However, when sin was introduced into the world, nudity became a symbol of shame (Gen. 3:10; 21). Nudity is also used symbolically to represent the shame of one who is separated from God (Isa. 47:3; Rev. 3:18).

Second, being properly clothed has always represented uprightness and purity (Rev. 3:4-5; 7:13-15). In the scriptures, one who is properly clothed is one who is in his “right” mind and uses good common sense. A good case in point is the demon-possessed man in Luke 8:26-35, who did not wear clothing. After Jesus cast the demon out, notice what verse 35 says about him. “And the people went out to see what had happened; and they came to Jesus, and found the man from whom the demons had gone out, sitting down at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind; and they were frightened.”

Third, clothing down through the ages often reflects the character of the wearer (Ex. 28:40-43; Pr. 7:10). “A psychiatrist is thought to be concerned only with the ‘inside’ of people but the ‘outside’ tells us a lot too-unconscious factors guide your choice of clothing as surely as though you were following a blueprint and you wear what satisfies your true feelings about your self-whether you consciously know it or not. Just as a painting reveals the artist’s state of mind, your appearance can reveal yours and send out a message to everyone who sees you. Your state of mind may change from day to day, or year to year, and your clothes will reflect it. This phenomenon has proved most helpful to me as a psychoanalyst in understanding the person I’m trying to help” (“Why you dress the way you do,” an article in This Week Magazine, May 27, 1962 by Dr. Alexandra Symonds).

It has also been proven that proper attire also improves character and behavior. “Children are keenly aware of their appearance. It is surprising how often their behavior matches their dress-a boy in a new suit behaves like a new boy-parents should consider the results they wish to achieve when they purchase their children’s school clothes-children tend to act out the parts for which they are dressed. Boys who let their hair grow long or wear dirty jeans, are, too often, disciplinary problems. Neat haircuts and reasonably clean clothes result in fewer disciplinary problems and more learning-dressed as good school citizens, they proceed to play the part (Article in The Houston Post, August 09, 1965, by Leslie J. Nason, Ed. Un. of California).

The God of heaven does not leave the Christian woman floundering in a world of doubt as to the type of clothing that she is to wear. The scripture gives her certain guidelines that enable her to know the attire that pleases God (1 Tim. 2:9, 10). Brother E. M. Zerr in his commentary has this to say on these verses: “Apparel is from ‘Katastole’ which Thayer defines, ‘a garment let down, dress, attire.’ It is evident that modest or proper apparel means a woman’s clothing should not be such as would expose her body in a way to suggest evil thoughts.”

Notice the difference in instruction of the scriptures. To men, Jesus said, “But I say to you, that everyone who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Mt. 5:27). To women, Paul wrote, “Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing . . .” (1 Ti. 2:9). Why the difference in instruction? When we understand that man is stimulated sexually by sight, and woman by touch, we understand the difference in instruction.

Parents should explain the difference in sexual stimulation between men and women to their children as they reach the age of understanding so they will not ignorantly lure. The Christian’s attitude toward dress should not be, “To what extent can I go?”, but “How can I best dress so as to be recognized as a servant of God?”

Truth Magazine XIX: 46, p. 731
October 2, 1975

By Jim Gunter

Quite frequently, nowadays, because of the host of things that have divided God’s people, we hear such expressions as “sound Christian,” “sound preacher,” and “sound church.” I believe these expressions to lie warranted, not simply because they might have impressive tones, but because Christ through His apostles tells us to be such.

Often times we may hear the term “conservative”‘ used, and has been employed., by this author on a great number of occasions. While this term may be all right, and I am not being critical of those who use it, it seems to me, by the language of the New Testament, that “sound” would be the more appropriate.

This term is employed as an adjective in the New Testament, a great number of times; sometimes having to do with one’s physical health and sometimes dealing with teaching or doctrine. The Greek word for the adjective is hugies and for the verb is hugiaino (W. E. Vine). With regard to physical health, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon states: “of a man who is sound in body; to make one whole i.e. restore him to health.” Concerning teaching or doctrine, he states: “teaching which does not deviate from the truth; wholesome, fit, wise.” Vine says, “true and incorrupt.”

Therefore, a “sound” church is a local body of God’s people that does not deviate from the teaching (doctrine) of “truth”; it does not teach false or corrupt doctrine.

Now it’s only logical to reason, that for a church of Christ to be “sound,” its members must be “sound.” Thus when a group of baptized believers practice those “things which become sound doctrine” (Tit. 2:1), they would of necessity be a “sound” church. But then, on the other hand, when those same people begin to teach and practice things that are not “sound, ” things that are not found in the New Testament, then they begin to lose that “soundness.” Let us now examine two such churches of the first century that are mentioned in the word of God.

The Church At Ephesus

The apostle Paul had much to do with the work at Ephesus. On his return trip to Antioch from his second journey, he preached the gospel there for the first time. This was only a brief stay (Acts 18:19-22). However, when he made his third journey, he spent considerable time at Ephesus, in fact a period of well over two years (Acts 19:8, 10, 22).

According to Acts 19:20, the work there in Ephesus prospered greatly. There were also various others laboring with the apostle, two of which were Timothy and Erastus (Acts 19:22). All together, the amount of time that Paul spent at Ephesus was at least three years (Acts 20:31). In addition to this, Timothy also had spent a lot of time there while Paul was elsewhere. During this time, he received letters from Paul to warn the brethren there not to teach any other doctrine (1 Tim. 1:3).

Surely, these brethren in Ephesus had been established in the “Faith,” since Paul had personally worked with them for at least three years and had left Timothy with them for some time. In Eph. 1:15, 16, Paul even speaks of their faith in the Lord and love for the saints. However, as he was on his way to Jerusalem from his third journey, he stopped at Miletus and sent for the elders of that church to come to him (Acts 20:17). His discourse to them is found in vv. 18-35. Notice some of the words of warning to them: (vs. 28), “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all, the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” Perhaps the saddest words are the ones that follow in vv. 29-31, “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.”

Now, one would have to think that this church, with both Paul and Timothy working with them for as long as they did, would remain a faithful or “sound” church. Without a doubt, Paul and Timothy had certainly done all that they possibly could to establish and ground them in the truth. However, the very thing that Paul had so earnestly warned them of in Acts 20:29-31 happened. A number o f years later, that church had lost its “sound-ness and the Lord Jesus spoke against it. In Rev. 2:4, 5, Jesus said, “Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love. Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.” Today, that church no longer exists in Ephesus.

The Church At Rome

The church at Rome had its beginning perhaps not too long after Pentecost in 33 A. D. In Acts 2:10, we learn that on the day of Pentecost, there were Jews and proselytes there from Rome, who had come to Jerusalem for this great annual event. Thus, they heard the gospel of Christ, as it was preached for the first time. It is highly probable, that some of these Romans were among the three thousand that obeyed the gospel on that day (Acts 2:41), and shortly after Pentecost, returned to Rome and met as a church of the Lord thereafter.

From the language that Paul uses, it would certainly seem that this church at Rome was a very strong church and “sound” in the “Faith.” In Rom. 1:8 he said, “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the.whole world.” It was further said to their credit in Rom. 6:17, 18 that they had “obeyed from the heart;” they were very earnest and sincere in their obedience to the Saviour. However, even though their faith and sincerity warranted commendation from Paul, he saw fit to warn them in this same letter of the threat to their “soundness.” In Rom. 16:17-19 he said, “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary -to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad. therefore on your behalf:’but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.”

In the last years of Paul’s life, he sailed to Rome to stand trial before Augustus Caesar. Exactly how many years Paul spent in Rome before he was put to death, we are not told. However, we are told in Acts 28:30, “And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him . . . .”

What became of that church, you say? Well, you and I today are eye-witnesses of what became of her. The church there began to teach and practice things unbecoming to “sound doctrine” (Tit. 2:1). It is my firm conviction, that the church at Rome had to be an integral part of the “Mystery of Iniquity” that had already begun to work in Paul’s lifetime (2 Thess. 2:7). It is also my earnest conviction, that Roman Catholicism, followed by Denominationalism, is the inception and outgrowth of the great apostasy or ‘Falling Away” described by Paul in vs. 3.

I was brought up in the labyrinth of Denominationalism and was content in being enslaved by it for the first 31 years of my life. However, I will be ever grateful to The God of Heaven, that through His Word, I was able to find my way out. But, at the same time, does it not follow that if I depart from His Word (sound doctrine), that I will find myself right back within its throes again? As members of the Lord’s Body, we do not engage in the use of mechanical instruments of music in our worship to the Father, for only one reason-we do not find authority in the New Testament for its use. To be consistent, should we not judge all our teaching and practices on the same basis?

May we, as we strive to please God in this life, learn the lesson of obedience to God, from what happened to these two churches. May we also keep ever before us, the words of the apostle John (2 Jn. 9), “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.” Surely, this must be the doctrine that Paul spoke of as “sound” doctrine (Tit. 2:1). Thus, it would only follow, that a church which taught this doctrine, would be a “sound” church.

Truth Magazine XIX: 46, pp. 729-730
October 2, 1975

By Bob Walton

Every great hymn has a story. The story contained in the song “When The Roll is Called Up Yonder” is its proclamation of a great Bible truth. It is one of those songs that stirs sweet memories because it has been sung by countless thousands who have staked their every hope in the story it tells.

The chorus of this great song begins with “when the roll”–; not “if” or “maybe,” but of the certainty that the roll will be called up yonder. While no one knows when, the Bible is replete with evidence that this inevitable event will occur. Peter affirms that the Lord’s coming will be as a “thief in the night” (2 Pet. 3:10). The lesson of the parable of the ten virgins is preparation for the Lord’s coming; the culminating thought of this parable is: “Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour” (Matt. 25:13).

The song further indicates a roll “up yonder,” and certainly this is a Bible thought. John portrays the awesome judgment scene with the dead standing before the great white throne to be judged. He further reveals, “The books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works” (Rev. 20:11-12). Hence we see the “roll” being presented as the book of life. Now this book of life will be put along side “the books,” which is the New Testament. This New Testament is elsewhere referred to as “the words of this life” (Acts 5:20), or “the word of life” (Phil. 2:16). Thus the two records in the day of judgment will be “the words of life” and “the book of life.”

Now this book of life is a register of names-a roll; God’s roll book in Heaven, recorded in the omniscient mind of God. Paul alludes to this great truth in speaking of his fellow workers in Philippi “whose names are in the book of life” (Phil. 4:3). Since there is a roll book or register in heaven, we need to inquire as to whose names are written therein. In so many of the old Bibles, there is a family register; a list of family names. Just so it is with the book of life; that “roll up yonder,” it is a list of family names. The Hebrew writer speaks of “the general assembly and church of the firstborn whose names are enrolled in Heaven . . .” (Heb. 12:23). Jesus told the seventy that the real occasion of rejoicing should be “that your names are written in heaven” (Luke 10:20).

On the other hand, we are also told whose names are not in the book of life. John says that the names of those who worship ,the beast (the Roman Empire) were those “whose name hath not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that hath been slain” (Rev. 13:8). No follower of a false system of religion has his name on “the roll up yonder.” We thus have from the word of God a definite contrast of whose names are written and whose names are not written in the book of life.

Since God has a register in heaven, how may our names be enrolled therein? Again, we compare with “the old family Bible” at home. When a child was born, his or her name was enrolled in the family register. It is the same with the spiritual family. One must be “born again” in order to be enrolled in the family register. When one is in Christ, he is a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17); we get into Christ by being born again (John 3:5), thus becoming a child of God by faith by being baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:26-27). In so doing, the name of this one is added to the family register in heaven. Thus until one meets the requirements for enrollment by being born again, his name is not on “the roll up yonder.”

Once a name is recorded in the book of life, is it possible to blot out that name? God’s word affirms that such is possible. In order not to have that name blotted out of the book of life, one must overcome. To the saints at Sardis, the angel said, “He that overcometh shall thus be arrayed in white garments; and I will in no wise blot his name out of the book of life . . .” (Rev. 3:5). Once our names are enrolled, it is imperative that we “hold fast the beginning of our confidence firm unto the end” (Heb. 3:14). John further warns that the man who tampers with God’s word by either adding thereunto or taking therefrom, “God shall take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city, which are written in this book” (Rev. 22:18-19).

From these Bible truths it is evident that there is a definite relationship between “the roll up yonder” and the destiny of every soul. “And there shall in no wise enter into it (heaven) anything that is unclean, or he that makest an abomination or a lie: but only they that are written in the Lamb’s book of life” (Rev. 21:2). On the other hand, “and if any was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire” (Rev. 22:13). If our names are written in the book of life, we can enter heaven; if they have not been written therein, or have been blotted out, we will be cast into the lake of fire. May we recognize this contingency between the book of life and our eternal destiny.

One final admonition concerning “the roll up yonder:” it is quite possible that my name be on the “church roll down here” and not on “the roll up yonder.” Many people live under the delusion that if their names are on some church roll, then all is well. But let none of us labor under this notion; but let us be sure that our names are in the book of life; that “roll up yonder,” and that we live in such a manner that our names will not be blotted out.

What a joy and consolation derived from singing this grand old hymn-provided we can truthfully sing, “when the roll is called up yonder I’ll be there.”

Truth Magazine XIX: 46, pp. 728-729
October 2, 1975

By Lloyd P. Atherton

Does the above question have a familiar ring to it? Of course it does. It is frequently used by denominationalists in an attempt to maintain and sustain such unscriptural practices as sprinkling or pouring as a substitute for baptism, mechanical instrumental music in worship to God, etc. Apparently this is a better argument(?) than many of us have supposed for we hear this question propounded by many professed Christians. It is appalling to hear a child of God ask, “Where does the Bible say not to . . . ?” with regard to social drinking, mixed bathing, the use of tobacco, dancing, immodest attire, ad infinitum. But what prompts such a question, anyway?

Let me suggest that it is a failure to strive to be perfect in Christ. Jesus commanded, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” (Matt. 5:48). Paul advised the church at Colosse of Epaphras’ prayer “that ye may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God” (Col. 4:12). Hence we see that Christians are to be perfect.

But what is involved in being perfect? W. E. Vine, in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Vol. 3, pp. 173-174, defines “perfect” as “having reached its end, finished, complete, perfect.” As it relates to persons Vine says, “(a) full grown, of full age, adult, mature; (b) complete”. Thus we are not talking about sinless perfection. Christ only was perfect in that sense (confer 1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15). A Christian cannot claim to live above sin for “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 Jn. 1:8). Being perfect involves spiritual growth and maturity; coming to completeness in Christ. When one obeys the gospel, he must “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby” (1 Pet. 2:2). We are to “grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18a). A very real, and I might add, critical problem in the lives of far too many professed Christians is a failure to grow to maturity and completeness. Although many have obeyed the “first principles,” they have not done anything further to promote growth and development. Having merely gone through a form of obedience with a consequent failure to feed upon and drink from God’s word, they are suffering from spiritual malnutrition and retardation.

The Hebrew writer dealt with this very problem. Notice it: “For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil” (Heb. 5:12-14). This is a good commentary on the condition of so many in the church today. Many need to be retaught the first principles. They are spiritual infants. They are not able to discern (differentiate) between good and evil because of a failure to exercise their senses. Notice that those who are able to eat strong meat are said to be “of full age.” This is from the same Greek word that is translated “perfect” in Matt. 5:48 and in Col. 4:12. (Contextually, in Matt. 5:48 Jesus is saying that our love must be perfect or complete, even as the Father’s love is complete; in Col. 4:12, reference is to maturity-see Vine’s definition above). Again we see the problem demonstrated; brethren who are not striving to be perfect (mature, full grown and complete) in Christ as required by God.

Concerning our question “where does the Bible say not to . . . ?”, the Lord did not list everything that was good and everything that was evil. No book could contain such. Imagine the difficulty and confusion that would have existed for first and second century man, etc., if the Lard had included in the Bible every specific evil that applies to twentieth century man, so many of which would have been unknown to the earlier centuries, and vice versa. The Lord laid down principles which must govern the lives of Christians. This requires us to exercise our senses. Unfortunately, far too many do not want to be governed and/or are opposed to spiritual exercise (with the possible exception being that of jumping to conclusions). Being carnally minded and not minding the things of the spirit, they are calling good evil and evil good. When challenged concerning their involvement in activities condemned by Bible principles, the major thrust of their defense is the timeworn question, “Well, where does the Bible say not to . . . ?” Isaiah had to deal with this problem in his day. Consider what he had to say. “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isa. 5:20-emph. mine, lpa). According to the apostle Paul in Romans 8:6-9, if we are in the flesh we cannot please God. If we do not possess the spirit of Christ we are none of his regardless of what we may think or what we may claim!

Let each of us be full grown, of full age, adult, mature, complete, in. Christ Jesus. Let us be new creatures in Christ (Cf. Eph. 4:17-25). Let us mortify, or put to death, the deeds of the flesh, the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man (Cf. Col. 3:5-10). After primary obedience to the gospel, let us strive to walk in “newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). God’s word reveals that our character must be transformed. What we are must be different from what we were. Our nature must be consistent with the nature of Christ. When we appropriate the truths of God’s word unto ourselves, our character will be changed from the carnal man to the spiritual man. As a consequence our conduct, our doing will be changed. We will seek to follow Christ in all things. We will submit our will to the will of Him who died for us. We will not seek to justify our practices by what the Bible does not say, but rather, we will learn and apply these Bible principles to our lives so as to be in harmony with God’s will as revealed in His word, whether it be precept or principle. Brethren, let us be perfect!

Truth Magazine XIX: 46, pp. 727-728
October 2, 1975