Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

The “Do Your Own Thing” philosophy is not new. It is a way of life for pigs, dogs, apes, and roosters, that has been adopted by certain sets of men in all generations. It was described in Noah’s day when “God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (Gen. 6:5).

Those who promote the doing of “your own thing@ are advocates of moral anarchy. Their guide is their appetite, their goal is to gratify it, and their God has been “turned off,” “tuned out” and replaced by a flower or a dream produced by drugs. The Holy Spirit through “His own thing,” the pen of the apostle Paul, defined this sordid sort as “they` (that) are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart; they have become callous and have given themselves up to licentiousness, greedy to, practice every kind of uncleanness” (Eph. 4:18, 19-RSV):

What breeds and begats this depravity? There are causes too numerous and nebulous to mention, however, it is clear that a lack of respect for authority in general has been the germ, of “Do Your Own Thing.” The youth of today were raised by parents who were told that spanking your child will warp his personality. (When my dad spanked me; I assure you that something more than my personality was warped!) They, were told not to deprive, deny, or discipline their children lest they damage their “natural curiosity.” All too late we seethe fruits. The twig has been bent. Now the appeal to authority to quell the rebellion is helpless; hapless and hopeless. So grows the tree.

In any sphere of life it must be understood that to neglect to use authority is to destroy it. It cannot be shelved an then be placed into service, for its power dissipates and disappears when it is shunned. “The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame” (Prov. 29:15):

A second cause is found in the attitude of “the clergy” toward the individual’s religious rights and responsibilities. Two ideas have been advanced: (1) It does not matter what one believes, just so he insincere. (2) Each person should join the church of his’ choice. The former is the father, begatter of the latter. Both statements encourage religious promiscuity. They say in effect that one should “shop around” until he finds a system that suits his particular religious whim. A simple, succinct summary of the two suggestions is, “In religion, do your own thing. “Thus, in the home and in denominational doctrine we find the roots of unrestrained self determinism. Is it surprising, therefore, that we have a sizeable segment of society set on; “doing their own thing”? “I trow not.”

Whenever the authority of God is supplanted by force or tradition, it is destroyed. A religion founded on what is time honored has very little power over those who suddenly decide not to worship the inventions of the centuries. Hence, the Catholic Church faces revolutionary revision. Its agony, however, will not revive the authority of God. The struggle is against institutions that long ago shadowed the direction of Deity. The internal warfare is over the traditions themselves, not over whether or not God approves or disapproves of them. Concern for God’s will (authority) died when the tradition was born.

“Do Your Own Thing” is seen as both a cause and an effect. It is a cause of contemporary confusion and the effect of the age old attempt by man to steer his own steps. (Prov. 3:5-7) Its ultimate meaning is to seek to satisfy self, and those who parrot and practice it are championed by every barnyard bull.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:44, p. 8-9
September 12, 1974

By Larry Ray Hafley

“Send all questions to the writers of this column.”

About two years ago, Brother Willis requested that I center my work on these pages with articles that answer the false dogmas, decrees and doctrines of the denominations. That chore was accepted and will be continued, the Lord willing. Now, editor Willis requests that I also undertake a question and answer column. “I will turn the defunct Question and Answer column over to you…. How about writing an introductory article stating that I have assigned that department to you, and commenting on anything you think pertinent to such a column. Also ask for questions …. I would like you to try to provide me about two articles a month for this department…. Are you >game’ to take the assignment?” (Letter from Cecil Willis, March 30, 1974.)

I accept this request. However, I have done so with “fear and trembling.” Nothing I have ever attempted to do in the work of the Lord has been undertaken with greater hesitance and reluctance. A question and answer column is difficult for the very ablest of brethren. How much the more so for such a worm as I? I have not the faith of Abraham, the heart of David, or the wisdom of Solomon. I do not possess the integrity of Job, the fearless knowledge of Paul, or the unwavering obedience of Christ. I feel like Jonah; I desire to hop a ship to Tarshish when contemplating this query column. But does it not necessitate a great degree of the above qualities just to be a Christian? So, in my weaknesses and wantings, in my faintings and failings, but also in prayer with much entreaty, I initiate this effort.

Other Question Columns

James P. Needham in Torch Magazine and Marshall Patton in Searching The Scriptures have question columns like unto the one we suggest. These men do work that is peer in my judgment. This column will not, indeed, cannot be a rival to these two fine sections in the afore-mentioned papers. I shall simply accept questions related to religious and spiritual matters and give answers to the best of my limited and imperfect ability. Surely, none can neither ask nor expect more than this. I sincerely wish that I could promise all wisdom and all knowledge in all cases. I can only promise to do my best. My best will be short of the mark to many who are deeper in faith and in the faith, but it will be the best of which I am capable. Your prayers, patience, longsuffering, and mercy are requested.

Dangers and Pitfalls

A column of this kind has many dangers. Some are known. Some are unknown.

1. There is the danger of pride. One may attempt to answer when he does not know the solution. His pride may cause him to be afraid to say, “I don’t know.” Or one may be self deceived and puffed up to the extent that he thinks he knows when he truly does not. It is pitiful to see one stammer and stumble about trying to blindly bluff his way through a question when he does not know what he is talking about. It is pride that so debases a man.

Further, pride can lead one to egotistical announcements and pompous pronouncements. In other words, “my answer is always the only answer.” In setting forth a matter of personal preference, one must take heed lest he become so inflated with pride that he thinks his way is the only way. Not .all issues or questions will be as plain, clear and unequivocal as one might desire, thus, it is imperative that one refrain from the arrogance of issuing papal edicts. I shall speak for myself. In areas of judgment, I may set forth my opinion in a straight-forward manner, but I sha11 seek to avoid making my conscience your guide.

2. There is the pitfall of quarrels and strife. An endless war of words can easily be stirred by a question and answer column. I do not intend to conduct a running gun battle with every fast draw artist who seeks to see if he can beat me to the draw. First, time will not permit me to do so. Second, my own desire will not allow me to do so. Third, and most importantly, Scripture will not tolerate my doing so (2 Tim. 2:23). This does not say that I refuse to be questioned and examined (1 Thess. 5:21). But this column is not designed for lengthy written debates “whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, (slander) evil surmisings” (I Tim. 6:4). My judgment may not always be the best, but as long as I direct this column, I shall determine the amount of attention any question shall receive. Some may require more than I shall give. Others may run longer than they should. I accept the blame and pray for wisdom and discretion to do better.

3. There is the danger of insincerity. “Then ‘went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk” (Matt. 22:15). Such ploys did not die with the Pharisees. Jesus could not be encircled with His words. I can be and likely will be. So, if that is the game of the hypocrite, have at it. I may not see you for what you are. I may play your little game and lose. It will not bother me so badly to get burned. I have been stung before, but what good is to be done for the cause of truth if I am gouged and goaded into verbal traps? If I become ensnared, that is regrettable, but if the truth be entangled, that is damnable. Ruin me, if you will, but do not do it at the expense of the word of God.

4. There is the danger of error. Of course, anytime anyone begins to teach, there is the danger of error, but it seems that such a possibility is magnified in a question and answer forum. What if my answer is the cause of some soul being led into error and condemnation (Jas. 5:19, 20)? What if my words cause a brother to stumble or to draw back into perdition? It is possible that my weakness and ineptness may lead some soul down the wrong path-oh, what a fearful thought! So, I urge every reader to take what is said in the light of what the Bible teaches. Lay aside your feelings and weigh what is herein written on the balance of the scales of the word of God. Reject me and my word and rather receive Him and His word.

Potential Good Of A Question And Answer Column

1. It may answer questions. It is just that simple. A question regarding the Bible may be rightly answered. Souls may grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord. To God be the glory.

2. It may stimulate Bible study. If this column simply stirs someone to further Bible study, it will be worth the time and effort. Occasionally an answer may be given that you wish to check further, so you get your Bible and research the matter. If our words merely cause you to reflect more often and meditate more deeply in the word of God, then our labors will not have been in vain.

3. It may turn one from error. I have been helped to see the truth on a number of questions and issues by the response of a brother to a Bible question. Perhaps this can be achieved in this particular series. “Let him know that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins” (Jas. 5:20),

“The End Of The Beginning”

So, we solicit your Bible questions. Questions cannot all be answered privately, and we shall take them as they arrive. My address is at the head of this column. Send questions for this column to me, not to brother Willis or to Truth Magazine. If you cannot type your question, please write it so it can be read. It would be appreciated if you would sign your name to the question and enclose your address. Anonymous questions shall be regarded as suspect and may be disregarded. Names of questioners will not be used or revealed in the column.

Now, look for “That’s A Good Question” on a regular basis in Truth Magazine.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:44, p. 12-13
September 12, 1974

By William R. John

Brother Edward Fudge has recently authored a publication entitled, “Answers To Questions” in which he does just what the title suggests regarding the present issue of the “Fellowship Question.” I believe this brochure to be as clear and concise as any writing of Brother Fudge’s which I have read. Even the uneducated mind, such as my own, can grasp the meaning of what he writes in this article.

While I have read the whole pamphlet, I am not going to make comment on each portion of this article. However, I wish to address myself particularly to the very first question of the brochure. This question states, “What do you teach about `fellowship’ especially regarding fellowship with brethren in error?” Brother Fudge answers this question by stating in part that “The New Testament does not equate fellowship (joint participation, sharing) with being ‘one’ in Christ. Oneness in Christ is a state’ of being which exists among all who are ‘in Christ’ and it cannot be separated from that state (Emphasis Mine-W.R.J.).”

It seems that Brother Fudge would have us believe that fellowship does not really have much to do with our being “one” in Christ. If this is so, I believe we can then render much comfort to the inclination to simply “agree to disagree” even though we lack the activity of fellowshipping one with another as children of God. After all, our “having fellowship” or not having it, as Brother Fudge puts it, will not “necessarily affect our essential ‘oneness’ in Christ.” Concerning the first question, this is exactly how he concludes his answer: “On the other hand, the fact that brothers cannot ‘have fellowship’ in one particular act in good conscience does not necessarily prohibit their ‘having fellowship’ in some other activity of which they both approve in the light of the Scriptures. Nor does it necessarily affect their essential ‘oneness’ in Christ, for that never did depend on their daily sharing in every single act and item.”

The basis for our “oneness” in Christ is directly related to John 17;20-22. Christ prays for the apostles and those who would become Christians “that they all may be one” as the Father is in Christ and Christ is in the Father and “that they also may be one in us.” He prays further “that they may be one, even as we are one.” The “oneness” that exists between the Father and the Son is made quite evident by these verses, but how is this “oneness” consummated? “Oneness” is’ made complete by fellowship, joint participation, sharing, and agreement. In other words, at what point are the Father and the Son not involved in fellowship, joint participation, sharing; in what point do they disagree? Brother Fudge if you will show me in what way the Father and the Son do not have fellowship, then I will uphold the point you have made that fellowship “does not necessarily affect our essential ‘oneness’ in Christ.”

We surely can see then what God desires for Christians. He desires for us to be just like Himself and Christ. Not that we are to become deity, but that we be one with deity in purpose and will. Men are drawn into that oneness with God, Christ, and with one another and thereby have fellowship together by doing the will of God and by knowing the doctrine of Christ. In John 7:17, it says, “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” Our will must coincide with the will of God. Then and only then do we have oneness and fellowship.

The principle of Amos 3:3 must hold fast; “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” When two men disagree, this does not only just reflect against their ability to “have fellowship,” but it is also a reflection against the “oneness” of Christ and in Christ which provides men with the resource to be agreed and- united. How many scriptures admonish Christians to have one mind or the same mind? Rom. 15:6; 1 Cor. 1:10; Phil. .1:27, 2:2, 4:2; and i Pet. 3:8, 4:1 admonish us to be united by having the same mind. When we are “of the same mind in the Lord” (see Phil. 4:2), we are one together with Christ, we have fellowship (joint participation, sharing), and we are exactly as God desires us to be. You see, Brother Fudge, “oneness in Christ which is a state of being which exists among all who are in Christ” is produced by the fellowship we have together with Him and with one another in all things pertaining to life and godliness (See 2 Peter 1:3).

The problem many have concerning fellowship comes from a failure to really recognize what God desires for man. Let us use the problem of sin as an illustration. God desires that mankind may become guiltless. He gave His Son to accomplish this, but at the same time gave us responsibility toward living above sin. We cannot become guiltless without the grace of Christ, but neither can we live above sin unless we accept our responsibility. Many have never accepted their responsibility, so they are lost. Some have initially accepted their responsibility, but the “going got rough” and so they’ have turned away. Sin is either minimized or justified in the mind of many. Therefore, men are lost.

In like manner, God desires that His children by united. He gave His Son so that this could be accomplished, but at the same time gave us responsibility toward unity. We cannot be united without the grace of Christ, but neither can we be united unless we accept our responsibility. Many have never accepted their responsibility, so they lost. Some have initially accepted their responsibility, but the “going got rough” and so they turned away. Unity is now being minimized and lack of unity is being justified, in the mind of many. Therefore, many of God’s children will be lost. I hope Brother Fudge is not one of these.

Dear reader, study for yourself. Is not that commanded in 1 Cor. 1:9 a fulfillment of the desire of Christ as expressed in John 17:20-22? If not, then why not?

Truth Magazine, XVIII:44, p. 11
September 12, 1974

By Jeffery Kingry

Where does one draw the line between godly ambition and selfish ambition? Is it possible to tell the difference between a zeal that is sincere and one that is bitter? James seemed to think so. When he wrote concerning the wisdom that should characterize the teacher of truth he said, “Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? Let him show out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying (pikros zelos) and strife (eritheia) in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth” (Jas. 3:13,14). Paraphrased another way James was saying, “Who seeks to be known as a wise and understanding teacher? The method is to demonstrate that wisdom by the loveliness of one’s character. Let that character demonstrate that all is prompted by a gentle spirit. But, if your wisdom is characterized by a zeal that is bitter (pikros zelos) and by selfish ambition (eritheia), do not be arrogant of your accomplishments, for you are false to what God’s truth demands of a teacher.”

I make no pretenses at being a Greek scholar, but the scholarly books that are available to all agree that there is a fine line of definition in zelos between “to envy, be jealous” and “to imitate emulously, strive after with zeal” (Thayer, p. 271). Zelos is a word that can and is used to describe a sincere zeal to copy and follow that which is good (cf. 2 Cor. 7:7; Rom. 10:2).

The same thing is true of the word eritheia. It originally meant “To spin wool, work in wool” (Thayer. p. 249. The meaning eventually came to be applied to “one electioneering or intriguing for office–a courting distinction; a desire to put oneself forward” (Thayer, ibid). It is a word that means to work for hire, and that eventually came to be used to describe one who used every base method available to gain selfish ends.

The truth does not lie in semantics, though, as much as it does in human nature. James is warning us of that sharp, bright, and extremely quick “wisdom” that works so hard for the wrong ends, and points out to us how susceptible teachers of truth are to such. There is a fine line between a sincere desire to copy the good in other men, and a jealous, envious, copying of the deeds of other men to attain or surpass the status of the one envied. There is a fine line between praise and pay for a work well done, and working for the praise and pay.

James points out for the teacher’s self-examination that the true wisdom, the true zeal, the true ambition is something that is pure from all selfish motive. The divine wisdom brings men together with each other in God. This wisdom is not jealous of its own rights and self-justification, but offers the same reasonableness to its critics as it would like to receive itself. God’s wisdom is easily approached, far from arrogant or self-inflated. The wisdom from above is sensitive to the needs of others and gives of itself without any partiality or falseness (Jas. 3:17).

But that other kind of zeal, ambition, and knowledge which is selfish seeks worldly prestige, power, and return. It is always characterized by disorder. Instead of producing peace among men, it produces hard feelings, isolation, and a divided mind (Jas. 3:15,16). As long as this` `kind of motivation and attitude prevails, good and happy lives founded in right living can never find fruit. It takes a truely wise man sowing the seeds of right-relationships between men and God to harvest the fruit of righteousness. One cannot reap unity in Christ by sowing selfishness (3:18).

In preaching, teaching, writing, and in our relationships with one another, we would do well to remember James’ admonition. We can teach the truth, and lose our reward because of our attitude or method (Phil. 1:15-16). It is possible to “say it the wrong ay.” To be sure, the responsibility to obey truth, no matter how it is taught, is a responsibility of the hearer. But the fact that we teach truth does not absolve us of using all the wisdom, longsuffering, gentleness, and care we are able to muster as teachers. God judges not only the act, but the thought and the intent of the heart as well. The goal in our teaching is to bring men to truth; not to win a cheap personal victory over another (2 Tim. 2:24-26). We teach truth and oppose error because we wish to see those enslaved by error to come out to the light. We are to use the verbal tool that best fits the job – but one tool does not fit every situation (Jude 22,23).

That kind of teaching that is more concerned with promoting self than truth is damnable-and ought to be. That kind of teacher who puts on a zeal for truth in order to garner prestige as a “killer” in debate is headed straight from hell. That kind of bitter rebuke that is intent on destroying another, rather than restoring, is common with the snarling of beasts of prey. For us to deny that such exists among our brethren is to deny the motivation behind the words of James. The words of the Spirit are not empty admonition, but are directed towards the nature and inclinations of man. We can assure one another by saying that such sins do not affect any of us (1 Jno. 1:8), but we would only be deceiving ourselves. It was not for naught that the Lord warned us, “Be not many of you teachers, knowing we shall receive greater condemnation.”

Truth Magazine, XVIII:44, p. 10
September 12, 1974