Truth Magazine

By Bruce Edwards, Jr.

Most Christians seem to be quite talented in observing the faults of others, knowing exactly what “should have been done” in this or that case and also exactly how something “should have been said.” The problem, it would seem then, is to find an adequate outlet for these enormous talents. Most of us have definite and strict opinions on nearly everything (including whether we ought to have “definite and strict opinions”): And most of the time we wait until things are “done wrong” (at least in our eyes) before we say anything about it. Excuses exist aplenty! “It really was none of my business” (of course now that “it” has happened it is!); “Well; brother so-and-so is supposed to be the expert on those things” (but now we are!); AIf I had been leading it, this would have never happened” (ironic, is it not, that the ones that react the strongest after something is done are always the last ones to volunteer for anything in the first place!).

What we all need to do is, “put our faith where our mouths are!” All of us are well endowed with the power of speech; we talk, talk, talk … the problem is that we never get anything done! We are satisfied with living in a theoretical world-because on that plane anyone can have “all the answers.” We must realize though that life is lived in real, down-to-earth, day-to-day practical circumstances!, We can all “take care of” that hypothetical Baptist or Methodist we meet in the classroom, but how about the one that lives next door? It is easy to amen a prayer asking for “reapers to be sent” but how about getting out our own sickles? We all need to reread what James told us 1900 years ago: _-`-`But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves…. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed” (Jas. 1:23, 25).

Truth Magazine, XVIII:42, p. 14
August 29, 1974

By Ralph Edmunson

We are called “antis”; not by ourselves, but by those who are in opposition to us and can not find any Bible principle to uphold them in their digression from the scriptures.

Because we oppose any and all innovations to the Lord’s spiritually revealed plans; and because we oppose all departures from that plan, the devil’s disciples refer to us as “the againsters,”–“antis.”

Is it a crime to be “against” things that are wrong? Is it a sin to be “anti” evil? Surely those who shout “anti” the loudest are “anti” some things.

Those people and those churches today who are supporting the “Herald of Truth,” church supported “orphan homes,” and other centralized combines among the churches of Christ can be placed in one of two categories: either they do not know what is going on; or, knowing, they are the devil’s representatives attempting to draw away disciples after them in the fashion of Paul’s prediction in Acts 20:28.

The introduction of the Missionary Society in 1849 divided the churches of Christ and resulted in two groups-the so called “Christian Church” and churches of Christ. These churches of Christ were following the Bible before and after the division. They did not change. The churches of Christ that are opposing the “Herald of Truth” today are teaching the same that churches of Christ were teaching when they opposed the Missionary Society.

We still ask: Where is the Bible authority for centralization and church support of human organizations? The issues are the same whether the specific- digression is the Missionary Society or the “Herald of Truth.”

After this third (current) division has finally been forced on the churches by scheming brethren who are insistent on broadening the organization of the church, there will still be a host of faithful brethren who strive to speak where the Bible speaks and who try to remain silent where the Bible is silent–thus obeying 1 Pet. 4:11: “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God.

After the uproar caused by calling us “non-progressives,” “againsters,” “antis,” and many other uncomplimentary epithets has subsided to some extent, we will still be churches of Christ, concerned with following the simplicity of the Lord’s plan. We will still be calling for Bible authority for centralizing the resources of many congregations in the hands of one group of men, whether they be the elders of one church or the directors of some human organization. We will continue to ask for Bible authority for supporting human organizations, however worthy, out of the church treasury.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:42, p. 13
August 29, 1974

By Ron Halbrook

(Editor’s Note: No little has been heard lately about the value of lessons taught by satire. Following is an article in satirical form written in response to Edward Fudge’s widely circulated booklet and article, AAnswers to Questions@).

Brethren, it is actually reported that some among you say sin consigns one to hell, and I partly believe it. Some have become so unyielding that once they acknowledge a thing is “sinful”-in the biblical meaning of the term-they are single minded in preaching that said action will cause one to be lost. They will turn neither to the right hand nor to the left in this declaration. Brother “Walk The Tightrope” has brought this appalling news to our attention and we are greatly indebted to him for warning against such fanatical hewing to the line. In preaching on sin, we need to leave room for “yea, yea” and “nay, nay” lest we make it appear God’s Word consigns to hell without further ado all who continue in sinful activity.

Here is the report as it came from the press recently:

I believe that it (instrumental music) is (sin), in the accepted definition of “sin” as “missing the mark.” My previous answer clearly shows that. Some, however, have apparently wanted to play judge and jury, and assign to hell without further ado all who use instrumental music in worship. This I have refused to do, and, when it has been clear that this was the meaning being given to “sin” I have refused to use that word. I have always believed, however, that instrumental music “misses the mark” of God’s will, and that-in that biblical meaning of the term-it is sinful. (Edward Fudge, “Answers to Questions,” Gospel Guardian May 16, 1974, p. 8)

Judging from this report, it appears some brethren have lost that all-important distinction clearly made in (?) (Book), (?) (Chapter), (?) (Verse) (the exact reference slips my mind at the moment) between continued sin which consigns to hell without further ado and continued sin which does not so condemn. Likely brethren have overlooked the distinction because they reason as follows:

1. Major Premise: “The wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23).

2. Minor Premise: Instrumental music in worship is sinful (in the “biblical meaning of the term”).

3. Conclusion: The wages of worshipping with instrumental music is death. Brother W. T. Tightrope has called us back to that scriptural proclamation of the gospel which affirms the major and minor premises but denies the conclusion. In some cases, of course it is “yea, yea;” but in some cases there is “further ado” resulting in “nay, nay.” In other words, to state it simply, the conclusion is yea and nay, yes and no! But, as reported, weaker logicians persist in thinking it must be “yea, yea” or “nay, nay” and that each answer excludes the other.

Now that this startling report has been brought right out into the open, the light that once escaped us is now dawning in our heart. (1) There really are some brotherhood watchdogs and regulators troubling Israel; look what a cry is raised just because some teach the principle of the old Jerusalem gospel which distinguishes between sins which condemn and sins which do not. (2) Those who accept the above stated conclusion without further ado are playing “judge and jury”-they must think they are God. These single-eyed, simple-minded brethren do not yet have the humility to admit that the major and minor premises can be “yea, yea” but the conclusion still be yea and nay. (3) When the conclusion is “yea, yea” or nay, nay” exclusively, opposing groups develop; the circle of fellowship can be enlarged if those who insist on “yea” wil permit “nay” (in some cases) and if those who insist on “nay” will permit “yea” (in some cases)-i.e., let both groups unite under this conclusion: “yea and “nay”.

(4) Love demands the conclusion “yea” and “nay;” therefore, those who resist that conclusion are almost surely motivated by bad motives such as prejudice, financial gain, increased paper circulation, ambition for. Power, (5) Those who resist the obvious “yea-and-nay conclusion cannot prove the certainty of their invariable “yea-yea” conclusion (never mind that the premises are admitted). Therefore, it seems certain that their continued outcry is abusive, political, dealing in mere personalities, bestial, and cannibalistic. That is the most charitable thing that could be said about it.

Brethren, if the full impact of Brother W.T. Tightrope’s report has not hit you yet, consider this. That one should turn neither to the right nor the left in declaring that sin consigns one to hell is a fault “not so much as named among the Gentiles.” Neither Catholics nor Protestants are guilty of such; is it fitting that the people of God alone should be guilty of such deeds?

Truth Magazine, XVIII:42, p. 12-13
August 29, 1974

By Peter McPherson

The words “pervert,” “subvert” and “convert” sound alike, but they have different meanings. Let’s study each of these terms.

APervert@

“Pervert” means “to turn away… to distort, twist… to transform into something of an opposite character” (W.E. Vine). Jesus was charged with “perverting” the nation, and forbidding to give “tribute to Caesar” (Lk. 23:2,14). Such a charge was manufactured and thus false. Elymas, on the other hand, was a true perverter. Paul interrogated him thus: “wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?” (Acts 13:8-11).

Perverters On The Prowl

“Error does not just float around up there in the air disassociated from its propagators” was a solid and sound bit of advice that was penned to me in a personal letter from Cecil Willis a number of years ago when I questioned the “spirit” of Truth Magazine. This is not to say that 1 agree with “the way everything has been said,” or to be so naive as to think that perhaps “someone else couldn’t have said it better.” But now it is questionable to me that the policy of generalities “as the manner of some is” (Heb. 10:25) is more effective than the policy of being specific as was Nathan when he said “thou art the man” (2 Samuel 12:7). That perverters of the gospel do so intentionally or unintentionally is not the real issue, but the real issue is that they are teaching error. When false theologies are advanced and advocated, when they are set forth as a system of religion and attract a following, when they are made a plank in the platforms of the Unity, then both the error and the errorists must be reproved and rebuked (Eph. 4:1-5; 2 Tim. 4:1-5).

Perverting the Purpose of Baptism

Most all denominations of men teach that baptism is nonessential to salvation. Yet the Bible clearly teaches that baptism is “for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). But since many of these denominations do immerse people in water for various reasons, some of our brethren want to extend to them “fellowship.” To be specific Carl Ketcherside is one such advocator. To do so plainly rejects the purpose of Bible baptism as of any importance, and thus “the right ways of the Lord” are “perverted.”

Perverting the Plan of Grace

Though it will be denied by many of those so charged, there are still those who teach that God’s grace is unconditional. When it is admitted that a child of God can go to heaven, even with one sin on his soul, it then is admitted that God’s grace is unconditional. Yet His grace is conditional (Titus 2:11-14; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Cor. 6:1; I Cor. 15:10; Gal. 5:4). I have heard it said that since we are members of the body of Christ, then we have the automatic cleansing blood of Christ flowing through the spiritual body cleansing and carrying off impurities. That position is based upon the human body comparison in 1 Cor. 12 to the bodv of Christ, but it is taking the figures used past their intended projection, and thus cannot be said by “faith” for “faith comes… by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). Any position on God’s forgiving grace that does not take into consideration His conditions of that forgiveness is obviously false. Conditions for forgiveness of a Christian’s sins are acknowledgment of them, repentance concerning them, confession to God on behalf of them, and prayer for forgiveness (Matt. 6:12; Acts 8:22-24; 1 John 1:7-9; 1 Thess. 1:7). Known and unknown sins are acknowledged by asking God to “forgive us our trespasses” (Matt. 6:12). The church at Galatia had its “grace perverters” (Gal. 1:6-10; 5:1-4), and they have appeared in the church again and again. We have “some” today. The error is “abounding”!

Perverting the Plain Organization

In the place of local church autonomy revealed in the Bible (Phil. 1:1; Acts 14:23; 1 Pet. 5:1-2), brethren have set up inter-church relations and activities such as the Sponsoring church concept, wherein one church becomes a brotherhood receiving station. They build and maintain human organizations by contributions from the local treasuries of the Lord. All such arrangements are sheer perversions of the plain and simple plan. Many give in to the big promotional brethren to avoid “the offence of the cross” (Gal. 5:11). They cannot tolerate the pressures that come to bear upon one standing firm with a “thus saith the Lord.” It is sad to see some who “suffered so many things” (Gal. 3:4), such as being labeled trouble-makers, anti’s, orphan haters, church splitters etc., now giving in, switching rather than fighting, to avoid “resist(ing) unto blood, striving against sin.” (Heb. 12:4).

“Subvert“

“Subvert” means “to pack up baggage. . hence, from a military point of view, to dismantle a town, to plunder; is used metaphorically in Acts 15:24 of unsettling or subverting the souls of believers” (Vine). The following passages mention subverters and their tactics (Acts 15:24; 2 Tim. 2:14; Titus 1:11; 3:11).

Subverters “Unsettle” Souls

Subverters tear down what others hold to without giving them a sure foundation to build upon. That is what some brethren are doing when they give a long list of the divisions among “all segments of the Restoration Movement.” They offer no alternative, except “every man do that which is right in his own eyes”. . nothing but anarchy.

They set forth nothing positive and concrete. Only they subvert and unsettle babes in Christ and weaken the faith of precious souls (Matt. 13:12; Matt. 18:6). Advertising such accumulative teeny-weenie or biggy-wiggie problems solves nothing; it only adds one more to the list. That list is for the subverting of souls and for the making ready of the Ketcherside “fellowship everyone and everything” doctrine, or else it will have that result anyway! It will have the same effect ‘upon the weak as would the atheist’s compilation of freak storms, of damaging earthquakes and of levelling hurricanes have on the doubting, the ignorant and the unlearned (2 Pet. 3:15).

Such tactics as publishing a human compilation of divisions, real or imagined, and parading them before the churches of Christ is thoughtless subverting. What if someone in the New Testament days got together a long list of the Corinthian church problems and divisions and placed them in the public square with the question: “Are you generally conservative or liberal?” (cf. Article by Wm. Wallace, Gospel Guardian Vol. 26, No. 1, May 2, 1974, pp. 6-7). Now the New Testament does give the error manifested not only at Corinth but in the other localities as well. But more than that those churches are told in no uncertain terms to clear up their messes. They are instructed to “repent… or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place.” (Rev. 2:5; 1 Cor. 1:10; 2 Cor. 6:14-18; 1 Cor. 14:37). God apparently gave those churches and individuals in error a time limit in which to get right!

Stop Subverting

What impression is left by the itemized list? For us to giveup the restoration idea? To accept every position and doctrine that comes along and that anyone wants to advance? What possible good could that list accomplish? Whatever problems and divisions that do exist today among the churches of Christ need not be braggingly or disgustingly highly heralded but diligently discussed. We are to “work out our own salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12). We must always look to the pattern and remember that there is the ideal for us to reach for, both as an individual child of God (Phil. 8-9; 1 Cor. 11:1) and as a congregation (Rev. 3:7-13; Philippians). Anything other than this is to fall far short of the truth. Many of the so-called differences are matters of personal conscience and are in the province of human judgment which God allows. (Rom. 14) And Wallace knows this too. Then why did he not make this clear and greatly shorten that list? Again I say, he is unsettling souls. Others are matters of disciple growth and development (Matt. 25:15; 1 Pet. 2:2; 2 Pet. 3:18; Heb. 5:12-14); many do not affect the congregation as such (the collective resources) and thus can be tolerated without cleavage, and some are false theological views that will damn both the blind leaders and their followers (Matt. 13:14; Acts 3:17; Lk. 12:47,48; 2 Thess. 1:8).

“Convert“

“Convert” simply means “to turn” (Vine). It does not always denote the actual total process of regeneration. In Matthew 18:3 where the King James Version has “unless ye be converted,” the idea is not unless ye be regenerated or born again as per gospel obedience. In that text the disciples had a false notion about the coming kingdom and positions in it (Mk. 9:33-37; 10:35-45). Jesus told them that they had better get the idea of who is “the greatest” out of their heads. They had “to turn”! If they were going to be in the kingdom and be a part of His plan, they had to change their attitudes a whole lot.

Converted Christians

Whenever we learn new Bible truths and come to maturity concerning various spiritual topics, we have to change our attitudes and practices to conform to these new truths. We have “to turn.” The Christian that is not studying the Bible is not learning and thus cannot grow. He will not change very often. He will not have fresh convictions from the word and thus he will not be changed too much. Among other things the Bible has been given to us “for correction” (2 Tim. 3:16). When we are corrected on “this” or “that” and then we change our course of action, we have turned… have been converted. This is a sign of spiritual maturity, not weakness, when we learn and turn.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:42, p. 9-10
August 29, 1974