Truth Magazine

By Steve Roe

According to the United States Navy there are three religions that cover all matters pertaining to God: Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish. If a person was not Catholic, Jewish, or heathen, he was referred to as Protestant and subsequently followed the Protestant rules set down in the Chaplain’s Manual. All religious matters aboard ship must be cleared with the Chaplain’s Office, such as use of the ship’s chapel, times for meetings, religious activities, baptisms, etc., before they become legal.

As the brethren of the Saratoga carried on the work of the Church by teaching others, it became necessary to baptize. On the last cruise, a canvas baptistry was made in the Philippines and this cruise, a collapsible iron frame was built. The things that we lacked, only the ship could supply: water, a place to set up, and permission to carry on religious activity. This introduction sets the scene for the congregation’s first major problem aboard the Saratoga-the Chaplain’s Department denied us the right to baptize! That is not all; they took away the right to partake of the Lord’s Supper!

According to Chaplain Witt, the Head Chaplain, the Chaplain’s Manual and the Naval Civil Liberties Act (both of which he never showed me) state that none will be allowed io baptize or to administer the Lord’s Supper without proper proof of “lay-leadership” or “ordination.” A what? A letter stating that one or more of us have been properly schooled or trained and qualified to carry on the work of our particular “denomination.”

Sometimes it is hard to understand how people become so involved with the doctrines of men that they forget about the Word of the God that they claim to serve. It is impossible for me to understand the reason for letters and diplomas of ordination. I cannot see how a letter of this nature makes me a better Christian than my brother and better equipped to baptize (unless there is a weight lifting course along with it). The truth of the matter is this: the Bible just does not teach anything that resembles the necessity of being ordained by a better or higher mortal being, but rather “ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people” (1 Pet. 2:9). Were these “ordained ministers” of this passage? They are the newborn babes of verse 2. Peter was talking to Christians. Christians in general are the royal priesthood!

The Bible speaks of several ordinations. Christ was ordained by God (Acts 10:42). Paul was ordained by Christ (1 Tim. 2:7; Acts 9:15). The law was ordained by angels (Gal. 3:19). God ordained a mystery or hidden wisdom (1 Cor. 2:7). Paul told Titus to ordain elders in every city (Tit. 1:5). The word “ordain” means to choose for a particular use. It holds no sanctity among the celestial realm, as some wish to believe. Christ came to save the world Ono. 3:17). Paul was chosen to take the Gospel to gentiles, kings, and Jews (Acts 9:15). The elders are ordained to be overseers of the Church.

As in many other things, the denominational world has sliced up the Word of God and pasted it back together in the manner that best suits them. Mankind evidently has enough knowledge to reject the plan of God and replace it with “a much better idea.”

No, the Christian does not need a letter of ordination to administer the Lord’s Supper. He does not need a degree in theology to baptize a person into Jesus Christ. The apostles were commanded to “Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things which I have commanded you” (Matt. 28:19, 20).

As the chain of events took place, Brother Harold Dowdy of the South Jacksonville (Fla.) Church wrote a letter of “ordination” for the brethren aboard the Saratoga, explaining our beliefs on the subject and stating that as Christians, we were qualified to carry on the work of the Church. It was accepted.

Editorial Postscript

The preceding article by 23 year old Steve Roe indicates that Christians, who really desire to do so, can worship, study, grow, and even convert others, under very unique and sometimes adverse circumstances. All the members of the Saratoga church are young in Christ, as well as young in years. Brother Roe has been a Christian longer than any of the other members, and he was converted only four years ago. All of the other members have been Christians for a year or less.

In an accompanying letter, Brother Roe reported: “Several of us intend to become gospel preachers. We seem to mature a bit faster while at sea than we do ashore, because of the great amount of time on our hands to study. We feel equipped to defend the truth against instrumental music, institutionalism, and the Ketcherside movement, to name a few. Just recently we challenged the Pentecostal group aboard to debate on the Holy Spirit. They refused because they said it would split the Pentecostal Church.”

We joyfully commend the zeal and enthusiasm of these young brethren, and trust that they will continue with their desire to preach the gospel and in their preparation to do so.-Cecil Willis

Truth Magazine XIX, 8: p. 114
January 2, 1975

By Jimmy Tuten, Jr.

Isaiah 1:2-3 records God’s message to the people of Judah. The context then displays lamentation of Isaiah over the people’s wickedness and impenitence. As a nation they had been called to holiness, but had sunk in sin and wickedness. They were literally laden with guilt and iniquity. Isaiah says, “oh, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters” (1:4). Again, “from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it” (1:6). From the top to the bottom the nation was diseased. As a whole they were like a festering sore.

The conditions in our nation at the present time are very much like that of Isaiah’s day. We are a nation beset with many scandals. Corruption is everywhere both on a national and local level. Many lives have already been affected and many more are threatened. Before we breathe a sigh of relief over Nixon’s leaving office or act gleeful over his ouster, we had better be introspective of our own lives. Morality is no respecter of persons. Sin is sin no matter where it is found and how insignificant it may appear. Are we as individuals dishonest? Do we lie, cheat, or rob others? Watergate is a symptom of a national illness. We had better wake up. Unless we as individuals and as a nation turn to God, and unless we maintain the right standard of morality, we will see more Watergates. The solution of our national problems is not the ouster of a president, but a complete change of ways on our part as individuals. The best policy yet is to “provide things honest in the sight of all men” (Rom. 12:17).

Truth Magazine XVIII: 7, p. 109
December 19, 1974

By By Warren Bell

There is no such thing as love at first sight. Real love is not built upon mere sight. We may see one’s talents and appearance, and these we may admire, but true love is a .tender and strong attachment to the inward person. We love personality and personality must be learned, admired and respected before there can be love. We must mark the difference between love and lust.

We are living in a day of unbridled lust. The theater, the television, many magazines and others have formed a vile alliance to break down restraints of modesty and the Bible’s standards of courtship and marriage. Because of dull, impersonal preaching, and careless, unspiritual parents, much of this influence has colored the conduct of “Christian” young people. Consequently, on front room sofas, in parked automobiles, in after-church walks, young people fondle one another’s bodies, pervert their God-given desires and often take the next and natural step, fornication. They seem to think that such urges aroused to the breaking point, are signs of true love. That is not so! My young brother, a hundred different women could arouse the same desires within you. Love is based upon who she is; lust is based upon what she is! Christian courtship is based upon Christian standards and petting among unmarried persons is not Christian!

1. Petting breaks down the will and destroys self-control. It stirs a desire that petting itself cannot satisfy. Petting is not an end in itself but is preparatory. Normally the body prepares itself for its various functions. When a hungry person smells food, it starts saliva flowing in his mouth and gastric juices in his stomach. Fear causes certain glands to secrete extracts which prepare the body for violent action. So petting stimulates the body and prepares it for mating. This is the purpose of petting in God’s plan. It will always fulfill its purpose, but outside of marriage it leads to sin.

“There can come a moment between a man and a woman when control and judgment are impossible, and self-respect can be eternally damaged. A woman’s first protection against this betrayal is to appreciate that the speedup of her emotions is not only possible but natural and normal. Her best defense is to have no confidence at all in her ability to say nay at the appropriate moment. The belief that any woman can cooly halt lovemaking at some point before she is wholly committed is a tiger trap devised by romantics . . . not enough mothers warn their daughters that kissing is intended by nature to be an appetizer, not an entire meal,” says Marion Hilliard, M.D., Chief of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto.

Whenever a Christian is in a situation where he cannot trust himself to act according to reason and Christian standards, he is in the wrong place!

2. Petting stimulates `inordinate affections.” “Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth: fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection.” (Col. 3:5). Inordinate means not in order, out of place, not kept within bounds. God put petting in the bounds of marriage. He said that a woman’s body belongs to her husband. (1 Cor. 7:4). If you are not her husband, then you keep your hands off of her! Hundreds of couples will carry to their graves the tarnished memories of courtships that went beyond their proper bounds and broke over the limits of Christian and decent restraint. Let one’s desires be aroused to the breaking point and often his will power will break down, and his passions will out-pull every religious and moral restraint and will not stop until gratified in fornication. The best Christian in the world, if he is not strong enough to keep from petting, may not be strong enough to keep from fornication.

3. Petting is lasciviousness. The works of the flesh will keep people out of heaven. “Now, the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and such like; of which I forewarn you, that they who practice such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” Lasciviousness is “wanton acts or manners, as filthy words, indecent bodily movements, unchaste handling of males and females.” This describes petting! How many of you fathers have given your boys counsel of this kind? How many of you mothers have been outspoken on these matters to your girls? Why haven’t you? Why do parents think that their children are different? Why do parents close their mouths because of a false modesty and let their own children burn their fingers, stain their consciences, and break their hearts because of little or no teaching on these matters? Your children are going to learn the facts of their bodies and emotions. It is God’s plan that they learn it from you over the open pages of God’s book. If they do not learn from you, they will learn from other children and often with a lot of gutter-gossip, obscene suggestions, lewd stories and distorted facts.

4. Petting prevents thinking that is pure and honorable. “Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue and if there be any praise, think on these things.” (Phil. 4:8). In petting there is always the urge to go farther. It causes sin in the heart. It will do this to any normal person. Young people who cannot sit apart and talk about things near to their hearts and be happy in one another’s presence probably do not have true love. They are only attracted sexually and physically to one another.

Courtship can be all that God wants it to be or it can be an unpleasant memory. Will you consecrate yours to God’s honor and to your purity? When two are in love, each will want the best that God has for the other.

Warren Bell, Nov. 12, 1965. The Examiner, Leitchfield, Kentucky.

Truth Magazine XVIII: 7, pp. 108-109
December 19, 1974

By Bruce Edwards, Jr.

The next pair of spiritual gifts in Paul’s catalogue in 1 Cor. 12:8-11 concerns prophecy and the discernment of spirits. A study of “prophecy” is particularly relevant today, not only because of the Charismatic Movement, but also with respect to the conviction of many sincere brethren that Paul’s discourse regarding the veil in 1 Cor. 11 is applicable today among sisters. This conviction usually hinges upon a specialized definition of prophecy and the nature of prayer in the context. Whatever “prophesying” meant in 1 Cor. 11, it certainly has the same meaning in 1 Cor. 12-14 and thus may be properly classed among the charismata. We have already established that these gifts are supranormal, supernatural endowments of the Spirit.

Gift of Prophecy

According to Thayer, prophecy is “discourse emanating from divine inspiration and declaring the purposes of God, whether by reproving, and admonishing the wicked, or comforting the afflicted, or revealing things hidden; especially by foretelling future events.”(1) Although the “prophet” often foretold the future, “he was more a `forth-teller’ than , a `foreteller.'”(2) Summarizing, Charles Hodge suggests, “To prophesy, in Scripture, is accordingly, to speak under divine inspiration; not merely to predict future events, but to deliver, as the organ of the Holy Ghost, the messages of God to men, whether in the form of doctrine, exhortation, consolation, or prediction.”(3) We can gain some insight into the role of the New Testament prophet by examining his Old Testament counterpart. The essential meaning of the word “prophet” readily is seen in Exodus 4:16; God told Moses that Aaron would be his “spokesman . . . a mouth.” As a prophet, Aaron was a “mouth” for the reluctant Moses. A prophet of God would then be a mouth of God. Homer Hailey suggests that when God raised up a prophet, “He would put His words in the prophet’s mouth and that the prophet would speak them in His name (Deut. 18:9-22).”(4)

King David’s activity illustrates well the role of the prophet: “The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, and His word was in my tongue” (2 Sam. 23:2). As a prophet under the inspiration of God, David taught, sang, and prayed (cf. Psalms 22, 64, 66, 119). The remainder of the Old Testament is replete with examples of prophets who testified, “The word of the Lord came unto me” or “Thus with the Lord.” Clearly, their claim to prophecy was a claim to inspired speaking. Turning to the New Testament, we find that the exercise of this gift was no different. From 1 Cor. 14 we learn that the gift of prophecy involved direct teaching, prayer, and the singing of psalms (vss. 26-33); seen in the context of the nature of prophetic activity one can better appreciate Paul’s statements in 1 Cor. 11.

But despite the clear testimony of Scripture concerning the meaning of “prophecy,” “prophesy,” and “prophet,” many still persist in suggesting that “prophesying” can mean (in the case of men) “reading and commenting from the inspired writings, giving one’s own thoughts as best he can without inspiration,” Hence uninspired teaching, or (in the case of women) “quietly following in one’s own mind someone else’s prophecy (teaching)’, prayer, or song.” From a purely Scriptural standpoint, this is a highly untenable position bordering on the absurd. Prophecy was spoken activity and inspired activity at that; nowhere in the Scriptures is there the least hint that “prophesying” can mean anything less than speaking by the direct inspiration of God. An objection is sometimes raised to the effect that “since there were some false prophets, this proves that prophecy does not always mean inspired speaking.” This can only charitably be called an argument. The very claim of false prophets was that their message was inspired by God; the true prophet had God’s words in His mouth, the false prophet did not. This was the basis upon which a prophet’s words were evaluated (Dent. 18:15-22; Jer. 28); if his words came true, then he was considered a “prophet,” an inspired speaker from God.

Prophecy and the Veil

Three times in 1 Corinthians 14 Paul calls for “silence” in regard to the exercise of an oral spiritual gift. The first time, he prohibits speaking in tongues if there be no interpreter present (vs. 28); the second time, he prohibits the prophets from constantly interrupting one another (vs. 30). The third time, Paul prohibits women from exercising their spiritual gifts at all in the assembly (vs. 34). Each of the prohibitions deal with the cessation of vocal spiritual gifts; we need not wrest the temp “silence” here to mean “behave with quietness or tranquility” or “partake of a reserved and submissive demeanor”! Quite literally, Paul means to “Shut up!” The first two prohibitions prevent the use of the gifts in specified circumstances, but under no circumstances does he allow the women to exercise their gifts in the assembly. Understanding the prophetic work makes it easy to understand why the prohibition was given; women had the equal power as men to perform their gifts (cf. Acts 21:9). But in accordance with God’s order (see also Eph. 5:22-24; 1 Tim. 2:8-15) they had to refrain from speaking in the assembly (1 Cor. 11:3-10). On this point we quote at length from Ron Halbrook:

“When the nature of the prophetic work is understood, one can appreciate the problems that arose at Corinth regarding the women’s role. Seeing she was empowered to speak just as man was, she reasoned that she could arise and lead the assembly just as the man did. The same Spirit who empowered her guided Paul to remind her that miraculous gifts do not set aside the ordered relations God ordained for man and woman. Seeing she was empowered to speak just as man was, she reasoned that she might appear with her head uncovered’ whenever praying or prophesying just as he did. God had empowered and authorized her to speak, but did not approve of her speaking with her head uncovered’ anymore than speaking in the church.’ 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is written to show that the principle of order for man and woman is not to be set aside while ‘praying or prophesying.’ The same God who authorized the latter, ordained the former.”(5)

The same man or woman who “spoke by inspiration (prophecy)” in 1 Cor. 11 also “prayed by inspiration (also prophecy).” This is not a case of inspired speaking and uninspired prayer. The two inspired acts are. linked inseparably in the Greek.(6) Thus we submit that Paul’s teaching in 1 Cor. 11 regarding the use of the veil has no relevance today because the exercise of those gifts which the instructions regulated has passed away.

The Pre-eminence of Prophecy

In 1 Cor. 14 Paul establishes that prophecy is a greater gift than that of tongues. Verses 2-6 suggest that the upbuilding of the whole assembly is God’s de sign; the prophet is always in a position to edify the church — the tongue speaker is not, except he interpret. Thus prophecy is more functional and much more to be desired (vss. 18, 22, 29, 31, 39). One may legitimately question the distinction between “prophecy” and the “word of wisdom” mentioned in vs. 8, since they apparently concern the same function. The most reasonable difference seems to be that the possessor of the “word of wisdom” would be more exclusively concerned with the utterance of those general truths about the church’s mission applicable to any church, while the prophet would be more concerned with the immediate needs and specific situations of the local assembly of which he is a part. The role of the prophet seems limited to divine revelations of temporary significance, proclaiming what the church needs to know and do in special circumstances. His message was one of edification, exhortation, and consolation (1 Cor. 14:3; cf. Rom. 12:8), sometimes including prediction (Cf. Acts 11:28; 21:10ff.). Some prophets were “itinerant (Acts 11:27ff., 21:10), but there were probably several attached to every church (Acts 13;1), as at Corinth.”(7)

Discernment of Spirits

The discernment of spirits was quite obviously complementary to the gift of prophecy. In the Old Testament, the danger of false prophets was stressed (cf. Dent. 13;1-8), as well as in the New Testament (cf. Matt. 7:15; 22, 23). This gift enabled the possessor to discern between false and true testimony, judging the claims of divine inspiration (1 Cor. 14:29). We can sympathize with the early church; these brethren had no completed, available standard for reference (1 Cor. 13:8-13). “Not to one inspired person did God reveal it all, but to this one, to this one, to that one, some teaching and revelations given through apostles and some through prophets and other inspired persons. Orally it was delivered in one congregation partially, and then in another, to one group of people and then to another.”(8) A prophet addresses the assembly; who is to say whether his message is froze heaven or hell? he who possesses the gift of discernment is able to determine just that.

We can better understand then the admonitions of Paul (cf. 1 Thess. 5:19-21; 2 Thess. 2:2) and the warnings of John (1 Jn. 4:1) for the threat of damning error from the invasion of false teachers was an everpresent danger to the flock. The discernment of spirits was necessary among the early Christians who faced the problem of “false brethren brought in privily.” We would do well to equip ourselves for the same task today by conscientious study and devotion to the word.

We have thus seen the purpose of these two gifts as they relate to the functioning of the early church. It would be a serious mistake to redefine “prophecy” in an unScriptural way in order to fit it into an unnatural system of practice based upon 1 Cor. 11. Prophecy and discernment were both supernatural charismata made operative through the work of the Spirit, a specific work which He no longer performs in this dispensation of time. Let us understand their former functions and purpose and rejoice in the fruit of their activity: the completed revelation of God.

Endnotes

1. Joseph Henry Thayer, Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament (Marshallton, Delaware: The National Foundation for Christian Education, n.d.), p. 554.

2. Homer Hailey, A Commentary on the Minor Prophets (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972), p. 16.

3. Charles Hodge, An Exposition of the First Epistle to Corinthians (New York: Robert Carter and Bros., 1858), p. 207.

4. Halley, loc. cit.

5. This reference comes from an unpublished graduate school paper in the possession of this writer.

6. We refer the reader to any standard Greek grammar for Paul’s use of the participles in 1 Cor. 11:4, 5. The participles are in the present tense in their verbal quality, and nominative, singular, masculine (feminine in vs. 5) in their adjectival quality. Participles are “verbal adjectives” and consequently the verb or-action and the noun or class specified, are influenced by the participle. The force of these participles in the text is shown in the following translation: “every-praying-or-prophesying-woman (or man) when she (he) prays or prophesies.”

7. W. G. Putnam, “Spiritual Gifts,” The New Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids: Win. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1962), p. 1213.

8. Frank Pack, Tongues and the Holy Spirit (Abilene: Biblical Research Press, 1972), p. 121.

Truth Magazine XVIII: 7, pp. 106-108
December 19, 1974