Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

Well, have you ever thought about it? Students are out of school. Several are off work on Saturday morning. So, why not plan a Saturday morning service during your gospel meetings?

Very few churches conduct morning services during the week for various reasons. (Or should I say, in some cases, “excuses?”) But how many churches are there that could not profitably plan a Saturday morning assembly during their regular gospel meeting? Surely, most places would have enough who could be present to make it worth the time and effort. Carting a preacher several hundred miles should cause us to want to milk him for all the word of God we can squeeze out of him, and a Saturday morning service gives one more opportunity to profit from his preaching.

No, I am not trying to run your gospel meeting schedule for you. I just thought this might be an idea that would be worthy of consideration. What do you say?

Truth Magazine XVIII: 1, p. 14
November 7, 1974

By Norman E. Fultz

Several years ago, an article entitled “The Preacher Asks For A Raise” made the rounds in church bulletins. It began immediately to explain that a raise in finances was not meant, but rather a raise in attendance, interest, etc. But this present article is talking about a raise in finances, for very likely indeed your preacher will need a raise in income this year.

Through the years we preachers have had a real reluctance to talk about our finances, and in many instances the ignorance of the brethren relative to preacher support is because of our reticence to inform them. Most preachers had rather switch locations than ask for a raise, and in too many instances the brethren have not been far sighted or business like enough to provide the raise without his asking. There has generally been reflected on the part of brethren what appears to be a fear the preacher may be too well supported, that he might not be able to handle a really livable wage. Brethren, I want to share a few thoughts whose time have come.

We surely already know the scripturalness of financially supporting the preaching of the gospel. But in case some may be unable to recall such, let’s allow Paul’s arguments to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 9:4-14), his statement of receipt of wages (2 Cor. 11:8), and his commendation of the Philippians (Phil. 1:5; 4:15-18) for their support, to suffice.

There are a number of factors which good judgment demands must be considered in the support of a preacher. To some extent, the size and ability of the congregation are factors; yet groceries, housing, clothing, utilities, gasoline, car payments and other expenses of the preacher are not priced to him and his family according to the size of the church with which he works. Those items cost him just the same as they do the preacher who works with a church on the other side of town which is twice the size and whose support may be twice as much. Nor does it follow that the preacher working with the small group is necessarily doing less work than he with a large church, and therefore should receive less. If the congregation cannot afford adequately to support him, perhaps he could receive additional support from another church until local ability increases, though I have known of instances where the church considered it a blow to their pride to even think such. In some cases, the preacher may take secular work to augment his income; and I do not think a preacher ought to consider himself too good to do just that when necessary. And some preachers who do have very good support need to learn a little more charity and to be less critical toward those who find it necessary to “make tents” on the side.

But our primary thought here is the need for brethren to keep the support adequate with an occasional raise to offset increasing costs. Many labor for the same wage for years. To illustrate: I personally worked with one congregation four and a half years and was receiving the same when I left as when I began, and it was not <t tub of butter. In fact, when my wife took a job for a while, the elders stopped our house rent and we had to pay it. We moved to another work for $15 less weekly because I thought living costs would be much less in that area (They were not.) and because of the inability of the church and the prospects for a good work. During the two and a half years of fruitful work there, the financial ends never did meet, but in order to at least get them a little closer together, I often went out and sold a few Dickson Bibles. I then got an increase in support by moving to another work where the support was almost exactly the same as I had received in the prior location. I am sure many preachers could recite similar experiences. Brethren, just those moving costs turned to preacher support might save a lot of unnecessary moving and ease some preachers’ financial strain.

The preacher carries a financial load most people in public work do not appreciate. An article in The Commercial Appeal (August 28, 1973), reported that fringe benefits paid to employees average 25 per cent of their wage and in one group it was 41 per cent. These fringes are in the form of life and health insurance, retirement programs, profit sharing, etc. The preacher pays his own hospitalization which costs about one-third more than group insurance and gives him far less benefits. He pays his own life insurance, and he usually has no employer paying half his social security, nor contributing dollar for dollar into a profit sharing fund, nor giving him a nice year-end bonus. And remember that the preacher’s check is his gross and that is the amount most compare with their own net income.

Social security is a big expenditure for the preacher as a self-employed person and is getting bigger each year. For 1973 the rate was 8 per cent on a maximum of $10,800. The rate for 1974 is 8 per cent on $13,200. And remember that the preacher has to pay social security on the fair rental value of that house provided him in those cases where churches own the house in which he lives. In recent years, I have heard of a few churches that help the preacher with his social security at year’s end.

The preacher has the same increased costs of living as do those whose contract provides for an automatic cost of living raise or whose employer is knowledgeable and appreciative enough to give his employees a raise, but the preacher generally does not get a systematic increase. A very recent news article reported an 8.8 per cent increase in cost of living last year. And it said that it cost a person with a $12,000 income last year about 51,168 more to live than the year before. Well, there may not be a lot of $12,000 a year preachers, but their costs would be proportionate.

Most preachers have a good deal of driving to do. Increases in gasoline costs will hit hard whether for local work or in driving to gospel meetings across country. So, brethren, that standard amount you have been supporting a man in a meeting for the past several years has diminished in size. Especially would I encourage consideration for those preaching brethren who devote most all their time to gospel meeting work and whose travel expenses are therefore monumental.

Yes, brethren, your preacher will need a raise this year in all probability. May I encourage an objective, businesslike consideration of the matter of preacher support with a view to making it possible for him to do the work without having constantly to worry about finances?

Truth Magazine XVIII: 1, pp. 13-14
November 7, 1974

By Dan Walters

The eight statements of our Lord beginning with the word “blessed” which occur in Matthew 5:3-10 are commonly known as “the beatitudes,” from “beatus,” the Latin word for “blessed.” These declarations describe qualifications that one must possess in order to enter into and remain a faithful citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven. They deal with religion, or man’s relationship with God, more than with pure ethics. In fact some of the statements make little or no sense when regarded simply as moral laws intended to bring happiness on earth. The principles taught here must be understood as pointing toward the coming Gospel Dispensation to be ushered in on the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (See Acts 2 for fulfillment.)

Verse 3 says, “Blessed are the poor. in spirit: for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.” Here is a realization of one’s lost condition. One who is rich in spirit has a haughty attitude and believes himself to be in need of nothing. He trusts in his own righteousness. In order to convert anyone, it is first necessary to convince the person of his lost and hopeless condition outside of Christ. He must be made to see that he has no spiritual resources of his own. He must see himself as a little child totally dependent on the heavenly Father. (Mk. 10:15).

Verse 4 states, “Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.” Here is the attitude that leads to repentance. The mourning is sorrow over one’s sin. “Godly sorrow worketh repentance.” (2 Cor. 7:10). One must realize that his sinful life has offended an almighty and a loving God. The tragedy of sin must be clearly seen before one can make a decision to turn from it utterly.

Verse 5 reads, “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.” Here is the state of humble submission to God’s will. Meekness is opposed to arrogance or self-seeking. Let no one suppose that the meek individual is a milquetoast. Moses, the mighty general and statesman, is described in Num. 12:3 as being meek above all men on the earth. Moses was humble in God’s sight and sought to do His will without question or dispute. The meek person will accept the Gospel terms of pardon without rebelling against any of them. He will then continue to do “all things according to the pattern.” (Heb. 8:5).

Verse 6 declares, “Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.” Here is a recognition of need for spiritual blessings which only God can provide. One must not only recognize his own spiritual destitution, but must also have a burning desire to be justified in God’s sight, to be reconciled to Him, to experience the blessings He has reserved for His children. All spiritual blessings are to be found in Christ. (Eph. 1:3). In obedience to the gospel we are baptized into Christ and into His body, the church. (Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 12:13; Col. 1:18).

Verse 7 affirms, “Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.” Here is the knowledge that our own salvation depends entirely upon God’s mercy in forgiving our sins, and we must extend this forgiving spirit to others. If we had earned or deserved our own salvation, then we could be harsh and unforgiving with others who transgress. But since salvation was offered to us purely through grace and mercy, we must, in order to be followers of Christ, be merciful to others even when they have done us great harm. If we reject the principle of mercy, then God will reject its application to us (Matt. 18:23-34).

Verse 8 teaches, “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.” Here is the emphasis upon the change of heart brought about by conversion, as opposed to the outward formalism of the Jews’ religion. 1 Pet. 1:22 teaches that we purify our souls in obeying the truth. When we are converted we are born again and are then new creatures, freed from the old corruption. (1 Pet. 1:23; 2 Cor. 5:17). Jesus taught that evil deeds proceed from evil hearts. Conversely, a pure heart leads to a pure life. Christians are warned to keep themselves unspotted from the world. (Jas. 1:27).

Verse 9 tells us, “Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.” Here we see the peace that comes through the spreading of the Gospel of Christ. The Gospel is called the “gospel of peace.” (Eph. 6:15). This does not refer to a political or civil peace. The purpose of the Gospel is to reconcile men to God, thus making peace. (Eph. 2:15,16). A result of this first peace is a second peace which will be found to exist among those who share salvation in Christ, since they are taught to love one another and to keep unity. (Eph. 4:2,3). There is also the mental peace known to the individual Christian. (Phil. 4:7). It is not right to attempt to bring peace between Christians and the enemies of Christ by compromise. After all the Prince of Peace is the one who announced, “I came not to send peace, but a sword.” (Matt. 10:34).

Verse 10 comforts with these words, “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Here is encouragement to help Christians endure inevitable persecution by the forces of this world. 2 Tim. 3:12 says, “All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.” This is true in every age. Matt. 5:12 teaches that the righteous of the Old Testamen were persecuted in their time, and we are their spiritual descendants. Methods of persecution vary, but persecution never ceases. Even today it is common for faithful soldiers of the cross to have “all manner of evil” spoken against them falsely. Verses 11 and 12 are merely enlargements upon this last beatitude. We are told to rejoice in the face of such persecution, knowing that our reward in heaven will greatly outweigh any suffering that we may experience here.

Truth Magazine XVIII: 2, p. 18
November 14, 1974

By Larry Ray Hafley

QUESTION:

From Tennessee: “Why did Ananias call Saul, Brother,’ before he was baptized (Acts 9:17; 22:13)? Was it just a custom of the Jews to call another Jew, Brother?’ “

REPLY:

An affirmative answer to the second question will suffice to answer the first query. The Jews distinguished between “brother” and “neighbor” by applying “brother” to Israelites by blood and “neighbor” to proselytes. They did not permit either title to be given to Gentiles (ISBE, Vol. I, p. 525). The following verses in the book of Acts are usages like those cited by our inquirer:

Acts 2:29-“Brethren” refers to those earlier “Jews” and “men of Israel” (Vss. 5, 22).

Acts 3:17-“Brethren” includes those called “men of Israel” (Vss. 12, 13).

Acts 13:26-“Brethren” are those addressed as “Men of Israel” and “children of the stock of Abraham” (Vs. 16).

Acts 22:1-“Brethren” here contemplates those identified as “Men of Israel” (Acts 21:28).

It is obvious that Ananias uses the term “brother” in this manner, for he proceeds to say, “The God of our fathers (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob-cf. Acts 3:15)” (Acts 22:14).

The Baptist Argument

The question posed by our querist was likely spawned by an old denominational argument which is used chiefly by Baptist preachers. It says that since some, like Saul of Tarsus, are addressed as brethren before baptism, then one is saved and is a brother in Christ before baptism. This is the whale point. It is an effort to do away with the essentiality of baptism “for the remission of sins.” Below is an excerpt from a letter written to Wayne Camp, President of the Illinois Missionary Baptist Institute and Seminary. Mr. Camp has never attempted a reply to the remarks which follow.

“Wayne, I may call you my brother in one sense, though not in Christ, or in a spiritual sense. There was a sense in which Paul could refer to his Jewish enemies as brethren’ (Acts 22:1). He was a Jew, and so were they. This is evidently all the term signified. But you do not believe the mob that cried, `Away with him’ (Acts 21:36) and sought to kill him was being addressed as his spiritual brethren in Christ, do you? Still, there was a sense in which he could call them brethren. Likewise, in Acts 2:29 and 7:2, Peter arid Stephen addressed unbelievers as `brethren.’ This does not indicate that the audiences upon those occasions were saved, for they were not (Acts Z:22, 23, 36-38; 7:51-60). Neither you nor I believe they were saved, yet they were called `brethren.’

“Just so, when Ananias addressed Saul as `Brother Saul’ (Acts 22:13), this did not indicate that Saul was in Christ or saved. It obviously did not mean that Saul had received the forgiveness of sins because three verses later Ananias said, `arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord’ (Acts 22:16). This statement would be unexplainable if.’ we take the view that `Brother Saul’ shows that his sins were already washed away.

“Calling Saul `Brother’ did not mean that Saul was in Christ, because Paul later said he was `baptized into Jesus Christ’ (Rom. 6:3-`us’ includes Paul), and at the time he was called `Brother’ he had not yet been baptized (Acts 22:13, 16), hence, before his baptism he was not in Christ.”

Further, even the Baptists could not afford to say the term “Brother” refers to a Baptist brother. One of the requirements to be a Baptist is baptism, but as we noted, Saul had not been baptized when he was called “Brother.” Now, if the Baptists want to accept an unbaptized man who is still in his sins as their spiritual brother, they are welcome to do so (Acts 22:13, 16). If they do not wish to do so, their argument on the term “brother” is lost.

Truth Magazine XVIII: 1, p. 2
November 7, 1974