Truth Magazine

By Hoyt H. Houchen

For many years we had “dreamed” of a trip to Bible lands to view places where Jesus, Paul, and others have been. This “dream” was partially realized last June 10-23 when several of us were able to visit Greece, Turkey, the islands of Patmos and Rhodes, Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Cyprus.

One of the highlights of this delightful tour was a visit to Baalbek, Lebanon, about fifty miles east and a little north of Beirut and about thirty-five miles north and slightly west of Damascus, Syria. It is beautifully nestled between the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon mountains at an altitude of 3,580 feet above sea level. To quote Julian Huxley: “Baalbek is the show place of Lebanon.”

“Baalbek” means “town of Baal” and the name seems to have been of Phoenician origin. The Seleucids called the city “Heliopolis” (“the city of the Sun”). One of the great wonders of this place is the enormous stones which were used by the Romans in erecting three temples in honor of Jupiter, Bacchus, and Venus. These temples were a part of a massive complex, the work probably starting as early as Augustus and continuing for three centuries. The sight of Baalbek was most likely chosen by the Romans because it was strategically located in the heart of the Fertile Crescent on the cross roads of the ancient civilizations and midway between the Nile and Euphrates rivers. When the Romans occupied this part of the world, they acknowledged Baal and erected a temple in his honor, referring to it as Jupiter (not to be confused with the Greek-Roman Jupiter, Zeus). It has been said that at Baalbek are “the tallest columns ever built, the largest stone blocks ever used, and the boldest architectural engineering feat ever carried out by man.” We saw immense hewn stone blocks which formed a part of the foundation for the temple of Jupiter, each weighing about 400 tons. A part of the west wall of the temple is made up of three huge stone blocks known as the “Trilithon,” each estimated to weigh 800 tons. It is no wonder that it was impressive that only a few days before our visit here, about 75 of us, Christians, stood on Mars Hill in view of the Acropolis and the ruins of pagan idolatry, and Brother Homer Hailey cited Paul’s sermon recorded in Acts 17. And now in a secluded area at Baalbek, in the midst of ruins which stand as a reminder of what was once the greatest concentration of pagan worship that the world has ever known, our group gathered on Lord’s day to pay homage to the one true and living God, the one in whom “we live, and move, and have our being” (Acts 17:28). Invited to speak on this occasion, I spoke on “The Power of God” and included some of the following comments in my brief discourse.

Baal was one of the chief gods of the Canaanites. Elijah made the test on Mount Carmel (1 `Kings 18) between God and Baal. Jehovah God answered from heaven with fire, the altar to Baal was consumed, and 450 prophets of Baal were slain.

Baal was the god` of fertility and in the Spring of the year there was much sex activity among his worshipers, immorality was practiced and many women sacrificed their virginity. In the Fall of the year the god was said to die and this was a time of mourning and funeral rites. Animals, food, and drinks were sacrificed to Baal, human sacrifices being rare, only in times of extreme stress or calamity.

Paul enumerated the pernicious sins of the Gentile world in Romans 1 and of the Gentiles he wrote: “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves: for that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen” (Rom. 1:22-25). When men have attempted to seek God through the avenue of nature, they have inevitably become idolaters.

Pagans have always worshiped their gods by the structures and art of human hands such as we saw at Baalbek, Ephesus, and other places. But tributes of architectural structures are not limited to the pagan world. We visited mosques in Damascus and Jerusalem ornamented by intricate and gorgeous mosaics in homage to “Allah” and we saw inside of monasteries which featured tedious wood and stone carvings, rich and laborious paintings, and skillfully carved images and statues. The one true God whom Christians worship is not to be served by such devices of men. In his discourse on Mars Hill, Paul told the Athenians: “The God that made the world and all things therein, he, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands (Acts 1.7:24).

Idols have never turned men to God, but men have turned from idols “to serve a living and true God” (1 Thess. 1:9). This conversion was made possible only by the power of the gospel (Rom. 1:16). Lydia and her household were converted by the preaching of the word (Acts 16:14, 15). God has demonstrated His power in a number of different ways at different times, but the only power that He exercises in the converting of the human soul is the gospel of Christ. When men obey it they are saved from past sins and they are in relationship with God.

We observe that while scenes in lands which we visited are of special interest to the Christian, and while we were thrilled to walk in places where Jesus, Paul, and others had walked, it is more important for all of us to walk in their steps by emulating their lives (Matt. 5:13, 14; Tit. 2:11,12; 1 Pet. 2:21) so that someday we can go to heaven. This is what this life upon earth is all about.

Pagan monuments of antiquity, magnitude, and magnificance now stand in ruins as a result of wars and earthquakes. Only a few columns, stone blocks, cornices, artifacts, and entablatures now remain. But the word of God continues to convert and dwells in the hearts of those who obey it.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:48, p. 12, 14
October 10, 1974

By Edward Bragwell]

Amazing Grace is a good old song. I have sung it from early childhood. If some of the printed matter on “grace” that I have read lately is true, then it must be more amazing than I had thought.

This newly defined grace is a kind of warmed over, but just half-baked, version of the Calvinistic concept of grace imputed righteousness. It allegedly covers some of a Christian’s sins unconditionally. Yet, it is not broad enough to cover an alien’s sins nor sins wilfully or knowingly done by Christians.

In order to dramatize their point, these brethren talk a lot about a Christian who ignorantly goes over the speed limit (a sin-Rom. 13:1-5). wrecks, and is killed. Will that man be lost? Now, that is nearly as good as the one about the man going to the creek to be baptized, a tree falls on him and kills him on the spot! Will that man be lost?

But back to our unfortunate speedster. Let us just have a big crash while we are at it. While we are just pretending maybe all that will really be hurt will be some foolish notions of brethren. Since these writers do not tell just why the poor fellow was speeding maybe they won’t mind if we supply the reason. He was speeding because he was too busy talking to his passenger to notice the speedometer. You see, his passenger had just learned that Jesus is God’s Son and was to be told about repentance and baptism. This poor fellow was killed too. Wait, there is a second car in the wreck. It is driven by a good brother who knows he is going too fast, but he was in a hurry to get to the church building to baptize a man. The second driver was killed too.

Now if I understand this newly defined grace, the first driver is covered by an ignorance clause. His passenger is not covered because, though ignorant and sincere all right enough, he was not yet in Christ. The second driver is not covered because, though he thought he had a good excuse, he knew that he was speeding and that it was wrong. You see, the first driver gets in under the doctrine that the perfect life of Christ is imputed to those in Christ to cover their sins. Christ lived a life perfect enough to cover the sin of the ignorant speeder, but not perfect enough to cover his passenger’s (though he was more ignorant than the driver) nor does it cover the wilful sin of the second driver. Amazing Grace indeed.

There is a man to whom God does not impute sin (Rom. 4:8). The reason that sin is not imputed to him is not some special arrangement for God to overlook sin, but because his sin is forgiven (v. 7). Forgiveness of sin is conditioned on repentance, both for aliens and children of God. The alien must REPENT and be baptized (Acts 2:38). The erring child of God must REPENT and pray (Acts 8:22; cf. 1 John 1:7-9). A grace that promises salvation to one child of God without repentance and to another only after repentance is amazing. Sins of ignorance and weaknesses of the flesh are supposedly taken care of by the perfect life of Christ-but not sins known to be sin by the sinner. I wonder what happens to a brother who knowingly sins but is too weak in the flesh to avoid it.

The DEATH of Christ covers our sins, when we meet the terms of pardon (Matt. 26:28; Rev. 1:5; Acts 22:16; 1 John 1:7-9). But the Bible simply does not teach that the perfect LIFE of Christ stands before God as a substitute for our imperfect lives. We are made righteous by the redemption of the blood of Christ (Col. 1:14). This is how grace covers our sins. It forgives them when we repent and turn from them.

What about sins that we do not know about? David prayed. “Cleanse thou me from secret faults.” (Psa. 19:12). “Secret faults” were not merely sins done in secret. They are contrasted to presumptuous sins (verse 13). He knew that such sins were against him, so he prayed to be (acquitted – NASB) cleansed of them.

If a Christian’s sins through ignorance are simply not taken into account by the Lord, then Paul did brethren a disservice by writing several times: “I would not have you ignorant.” Preachers had better stop right in the middle of the Great Commission. They should teach enough to baptize folks in order to place them under the perfect life of Christ-but stop short of “teaching them all things whatsoever (Jesus) commanded” lest they learn and can no longer be covered by the ignorance clause of this new law of grace.

Brethren, all this talk about God’s overlooking sins of ignorance and fleshly weakness is a cover up. It is but a rationale for fellowshipping baptized believers who practice unscriptural works, items of worship and organizations for the church. That is the root of the matter. Let us riot forget it. We are not judging anyone’s motives, but merely stating what is clearly evident on the surface from the writings of these men.

The ones whom I know that are teaching this new-found brand of grace, to their credit, still teach some conditions of fellowship. One must have been baptized (immersed) for the remission of sins. One must be sincere, just ignorant and fleshly weak. Yet, if we suggest that there are other conditions, we become guilty of setting up ourselves as judges. But, the very area of judgment where one has not the right to pass judgment, the area of motives and attitudes, is where they pass judgment. They try to pass judgment on how much one knows and whether he is sincere or not. One may know what one does and that such is wrong, but only God can know for sure why he does it and if he knows better. If one plans to widen fellowship (and benefits of grace) to include all good honest, sincere, but mistaken brethren-regardless of how unscriptural their congregations have become-he is going to have to play God a lot. He is going to have to pass judgment on his brethren’s heart so he can fellowship the sincere and ignorant ones and cast out the insincere and knowing ones. He has his work cut out for him.

I am thankful for God’s grace. With Paul, I can say, “By the grace of God I am what I am” (1 Cor. 15:10). I shall continue to sing about it. I plan to pray “without ceasing” that God will continue to extend his grace in the forgiveness of my sins, all my sins, as I repent and strive to know and do better. He is faithful. He will forgive (1 John 1:7-9).

I also pray that I will in no way encourage a brother to depend on his sincerity or ignorance to get him by. Of course, we must leave final judgment to God. He knows all the facts. If He wants to save both speedsters and the unbaptized passenger, that’s fine with me, but I am not going to be presumptuous and hold out promise to anyone that God will save them from any sin without repentance. I will let God handle such_ cases, if they exist, and continue to teach what the Bible says that one must do about his sins, whether he be an ignorant or knowledgeable brother or alien sinner. “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.” (2 Thess. 3:18):

Truth Magazine, XVIII:48, p. 11-12
October 10, 1974

By Larry Ray Hafley

From Maryland: “What kind of kingdom was the thief on the cross thinking about – a material, earthly kingdom or a spiritual kingdom as Christ taught his kingdom would be? Was the thief better informed about the nature of Christ’s kingdom than the apostles were? (Read Acts 1:6). Was the thief a Jew? Did the thief ask to be saved, or did he ask to be remembered.?”

The Text In Question

“And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Does not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Lk. 23:39-43).

Response To Questions

1. Nature Of The Kingdom In Thief’s Mind: Though it may not be possible to determine with absolute certainty and finality, I believe the thief partially conceived a spiritual kingdom. He may not have possessed a perfect purview of the prophetic kingdom as we know the church (1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Pet. 2:5; Jn. 18:36), but he perceived it as being spiritual in some sense or to some degree. To what extent did the thief contemplate the spiritual nature of the kingdom?

If the thief had had a purely, physical, material kingdom in mind, he never would have said, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.” First, the apostles, with a materialistic concept believed the physical death of Jesus would doom their kingdom hopes. Is this not evident in Peter’s rebuke? After Jesus prophesied of His demise at Jerusalem, Peter said, “Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee” (Matt. 16:21-23). Yes, the Lord also said He would be raised, but they did not hear this (Mk. 16:11; Lk. 24:11). Second, the disciples on the way to Emmaus thought physical death was the end of the physical kingdom “we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel” (Lk. 24:19-21). In effect, “His death ruins our dreams of a physical kingdom.” Third, the thief knew Jesus was going to die (vv. 40, 41). As such, he could not have conceived of a strictly worldly kingdom, for Jesus was dying, not coming into a political kingdom of pomp and power. So, he understood something above a purely physical kingdom. That he comprehended a spiritual reign and rule in the hearts of men I do not believe.

How much of a true conception of the kingdom’s essence did the thief have? I do not know. And I suspect that you know only a little more than that!

2. The Thief Better Informed: Without contradicting the first section of this response, let me reply, “I think not.” One may speak what he does not fully appreciate., Peter’s perfect confession of Christ appears inconsistent with his imperfect kingdom conception (Cf. Matt. 16:16; 16:21, 22). Peter could say, “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life,” and “Thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God” (Jn. 6:68, 69). Yet, he could also be found carnally contending for a chief seat in an earthly kingdom (Matt. 20:20-24; Luke 22:24). He spoke of the universal scope of the promise of the gospel, but it took the events of Acts 10 and 11 to divine for him the meaning of “every creature” (Mk. 16:15; Acts 2:39). Even the prophets of antiquity spake that which they could not view through the veil (1 Pet. 1:10-12).

The thief in his dying moments spoke without realizing the full import and impact of his request. To be sure, he did not speak as the Spirit gave utterance, but he spoke of a kingdom that was not necessarily vanquished by the death of Jesus. This was more than the disciples had grasped (Matt. 16:21-23; Lk. 24:19-21). The apostles evidently had the ability to know more perfectly the character of Christ’s kingdom than did the thief. To say, however, they were in a favored position to know is not to say they necessarily understood to the degree of their opportunity. They had every reason to be far above the thief in their knowledge of the kingdom, but the reasons do not establish the proposition. The truth is they did not know as one may judge they should have known. Yes, (Read Acts 1:6).

3. A Jewish Thief. Let me ask our querist, not for an answer, but for the sake of thought, “Was he a Gentile’?” Would the Romans have executed a Gentile on the cross for thievery? As I understand it, the cross was reserved for the vilest criminals. Is it likely that a fellow Gentile would be crucified for thievery? Is it not more probable that a Jewish thief might suffer this dread death rather than a Gentile? “. . . and for the Jews Pilate had only contempt” (Blailock, The Century of the New Testament, p. 90). I imagine he was a Jew, but I am not disposed to debate the matter.

4. Remembered Or Saved: Remembered, obviously; but what did he mean by “remember me’?” He was not asking the Lord simply to think about him. “Remember me” is equivalent to a request for future favor, for consideration in His kingdom. The thief knows he will soon die. Can any believe he was merely asking to be thought about after his death.? No, he was asking not to be overlooked in the kingdom. (Thus, whether the term “Lord” should be in the text or not, he saw Jesus as a divine being.) He does not ask to sit on the right hand or the left. He asks that he be not forgotten. This means, “Tender me some recognition when you come in your kingdom.” It does not seem out of order, therefore, to place the idea of salvation in the thief’s plea.

Conclusion: These questions are unusual and interesting, but let us be slow to become anxious over them. Regardless of the thief’s thoughts or the extent of his knowledge, not to mention his race, we can know the nature of the kingdom, and we can know how to be citizens and subjects of it. What the thief knew or did not know affects us very little and should concern us even less.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:48, p. 10
October 10, 1974

By 

Franklin T. Puckett will teach a special series of lessons on “Calvinism and Modern Adaptations” for two weeks this spring from February 25 through March 8 in Florence, Alabama. Young preachers may find a particular interest in these lessons.

Brother Puckett will deal with the traditional doctrines of Calvinism (T.U.L.I.P., etc.), misconceptions about what Calvinism teaches, the danger of it in various denominational writings and the place of Calvinistic thinking in certain current problems and discussions such as imputed righteousness, grace, indwelling of the Holy Spirit, etc.

The suggestion for such a study was made last spring as Brother Puckett finished an in-depth class in the first five chapters of the book of Romans which was attended by over two dozen preachers who live within 100 miles of Florence. This class was a three hour study every Friday morning for three months (A study beginning at Romans 6 will resume the first week in January with an additional class in Beginning Greek which will be taught on Friday afternoon. These classes will run from January through March). Because of that class last year and the enthusiasm of the students, arrangements were made to start this additional concentrated two week study with intensive twice-a-day sessions for those who would be interested.

Brethren around Florence who are aware of the financial problems of younger preachers are willing to open up their homes to those who write and make definite plans to come. Some 14-16 men can be housed this way. Breakfast and supper will be provided in some homes. Also, there will be some sleeping accommodations for men who would stay together in a lakeside home and buy their own meals. Arrangements can be made to accept the invitations into these homes by writing Franklin T. Puckett, P.O. Box 1166, Florence, Alabama 35630 (Phone: 205-766-6179). Please specify which type of these accommodations you would prefer.

Classes will begin on Tuesday, February 25, and end on Friday, March 7, which will assist anyone who needs to come from a distance. If a question should arise about the value of these studies and whether it would be worth it to a local congregation to allow their preacher time to be gone for this, we suggest the congregation direct an inquiry to Brother Puckett to determine the intensive nature of these studies as well as the practical and current use of this material in a local work.

Brother Puckett is supported by the College View Church of Christ in Florence and is free to travel for meetings and to teach as he sees the need. This is a brief opportunity for a few young men to study with him.

Harold V. Corner, 521 Cumberland Street Florence, Alabama 35630

Truth Magazine, XVIII:48, p. 9
October 10, 1974