Truth Magazine

By Joe Neil Clayton

All of the amazing experiences of the children of Israel in the wilderness were crowned by the fantastic conquest of Jericho. Joshua went through all the preliminary motions of normal military procedure by sending in the spies, but God intended to overthrow Jericho by extra-military means.

We are told that “By faith the walls of Jericho fell down” (Heb. 11:30). We are not to presume that every soul of the Israelites had perfect faith in the method God had chosen. He said to march around the city once each day for six days, and seven times on the seventh day. No spear or stone was to be thrown, no arrow launched, no voice raised. What possible good could such foot-weary activity accomplish? Yet, God speaks of “things that are not, as though they were,” and he said, “I have given into thy hand Jericho.” (Joshua 6:2).

When all of the instructions of God had been followed, the walls of Jericho “fell down flat.” The great ring of Israelites ascended into the city, and finished the business with sword and fire. The faith of the congregation is credited for the victory.. So, collective faith is a force to be reckoned with. Even though, we emphasize that it is likely that all did not have faith, yet, the contagion of the faithful was sufficient for God to work his miracle.

The apostle Paul saw benefits in collective faith for churches. He thought that as the faith of the Corinthian church grew, he could be magnified to further “abundance, so as to preach the gospel even unto the parts beyond” them (1 Cor. 10:15-16). He saw that the collective faith of the church of the Thessalonians was such as to cause them to spread the gospel, “not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but in every place…” (1 Thess. 1:8). It would be impossible to believe every soul in these churches had an ideal measure of faith, if we take human nature to be the same then as it is now! Yet, these examples demonstrate what collective faith can do.

At the same time, the sins of a few can have a powerful effect upon the force of the collective. The Israelites, flushed with the victory over Jericho, were soundly defeated before the lesser city of Ai. The reason? Israel had committed a trespass. No, not every one in Israel, but only one man. Achan kept for himself some of the booty captured in Jericho, all of which was to be “devoted” to God. God was implored by Joshua, and the collective guilt was revealed by Him (Joshua 7:10-12).

Why should the sin of one man cause the downfall of a whole nation? We might easily conclude from this that guilt can be transferred from one individual to another, but this idea would violate many other Bible passages. It is just as easy, however, to see that God used this method to magnify the influence of sin in the collective. It was wrong for them to tolerate sin in their midst. They must rid their number of its influence before their conquests could succeed.

Paul spoke of this problem to the Galatians. He said, “. . . who hindered you that you should not obey the truth? . . . a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump . . . he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment” (Gal. 5:7-10). He warned the Corinthians of the same fault. The “one” who had his father’s wife must be delivered unto Satan. “Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump” (1 Cor. 5:1-7). So, the toleration of sinful individuals can rob the collective, the church, of its full force. It can be defeated.

Perhaps the churches of today are not gaining conquests for the very reason that Joshua’s army was defeated, and because of the lack of collective faith. Should not this example remind us of our duty to make these corrections? Yea, verily!

Truth Magazine, XVIII:31, p. 12-13
June 6, 1974

By Al Diestelkamp

Christians throughout the ages have moved about from place to place for one reason or another. This is good, because it enables the gospel to be spread to places where it would otherwise not go, and increase in areas where workers are few and far between. Early Christians, faced with severe persecution, after being instructed for a time by the apostles, were “scattered abroad.” Then we learn that “they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word” (Acts 8:1, 4). Persecution has not in our era caused brethren to move, but large corporations move thousands of families each year from one end of the country to the other. Some of the transferred employees are Christians, who suddenly find themselves in strange surroundings in their efforts to serve the Lord.

It is surprising, the number of Christians who will accept transfers to other parts of the country, go there and buy a house, move in, and then begin to look for a faithful congregation with which to work and worship. This might be an acceptable approach if you are being transferred to some area where the Lord’s church is strong, but if the move is to one of the large metropolitan areas in the north, it can be very discouraging unless you delight in driving great distances. This is not meant to discourage brethren from accepting transfers to the north (quite the contrary-I wish more would), but to suggest that more effort be put into investigating the whereabouts of faithful brethren before you “leap.” Especially is this important if your transfer is to one of the five massive metropolitan areas located in the northeastern seaboard region of our nation. If you choose a suburban home near New York City, Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Boston or Baltimore, you may find it rather inconvenient to attend the one or two congregations in each of these areas.

When contemplating a move, let me suggest that you let your fingers do the walking-no, not through the Yellow Pages, but through the ads in the gospel papers published by faithful brethren. Contact (before you choose a residence) brethren in that area and get their help in locating a truly sound congregation.

I am convinced that at least one faithful congregation in each metropolitan area would do well to advertise in one, or all of the gospel papers that carry such ads. The insinuation by some that this is a “back-door” means of supporting publishing ventures is false and misleading. It is no more that than placing an ad in the Yellow Pages is a “back-door” attempt to support that publication. They are both valuable means of advertisement that usually prove to be worth every penny spent. In our own case in the Philadelphia area, Christians come from all over that great area (including Camden, N.J. and Wilmington, Del.) to the only congregation which is actively opposing present liberal trends. Several of these Christians have expressed the fact that they would not have known of the existence of the Avondale church, except for such an ad.

In addition to the obvious benefit to the congregation here; the ads have served many vacationing brethren who were willing to go out of their way to be able to worship with like-minded brethren. This in itself would be incentive enough to continue such ads, but even this small service reaps plentiful blessings in the form of encouragement we receive from these good brethren.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:31, p. 12
June 6, 1974

By Luther Blackmon

“And the peace of God which passeth all understanding shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.” (Phil. 4:7)

I like to lie in bed on stormy nights and listen to the rain beat on the roof and the wind moan through the trees outside. I think the reason I like this is because it gives me a feeling of security, or safety, to be protected from the elements. But this same storm that gives me a feeling of satisfaction and well-being may mean the death of another man somewhere. In like manner, the same tensions, heartaches, hardships, vicissitudes and uncertainties of life that are driving millions to seek escape in alcohol, dope, and the marts of sinful pleasure, are bringing others closer to God. When the pressures of living in this modern world are too much for the flesh alone, the faithful Christian finds a refuge in the promises of God. “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest; take my yoke upon you and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart and ye shall find rest unto your souls, for my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” “But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things, (material) shall be added unto you.” (Matt. 11:28-30; 6:33).

Many millions of dollars are being spent every year to maintain some semblance of peace in this turbulent world. In my humble opinion, the time is not far distant when the world will be thrown into a holocaust that will destroy civilization (?) as we know it. My reasons for this opinion are two: (1) From the strictly human side, it seems to me that two ideologies as antagonistic as those represented by the United States and Soviet Russia cannot long survive together in a peaceful world. Somebody is bound to get trigger-happy one of these days and set the fuse. It just isn’t human to have a new gun and not want to shoot it, and both sides in this affair are armed with every means of destruction that human wisdom can invent, (2) Looking through the eyes of the Old Testament prophets as they pronounced the everlasting doom of such ancient nations as Egypt, Syria, Assyria, Babylon and the Northern Kingdom of Israel because of their sins, it seems unlikely that He will continue to put up with this vaunted display of human wisdom and idolatrous worship of man’s achievements, to say nothing of the blasphemous disregard for decency and righteousness that is causing the nations to rot inside.

But whether he lives in quiet surroundings or in circumstances that strike fear to the hearts of brave men, the faithful child of God will have an inward peace that the world, and the half-hearted Christian can neither have nor understand. He is not terrified by the thought that the Russians might drop a bomb and destroy the city where he lives. If his doctor should tell him today that he has but a few months to live, after the shock of the news had passed, he would face it as calmly as one “who wraps the drapery of his couch about him and lies down to pleasant dreams.” He likes to live, but he is prepared to die. And whether in life or in death, he will glorify God. Whether in sickness or in health, in poverty or in wealth, whether his time be months or many years, he will be grateful and will use it as a sacred trust. In this man’s heart will abide the “peace of God that passeth understanding.”

But this kind of peace does not come to the Christian who is so busy in the pursuit of “things” that his heart has become a spiritual refrigerator, and the church is only a “place” where he comes for one hour each week to be “served” the Lord’s supper. I wish some of the members of the church could be made to realize what a mistake they made when they traded the “Peace of God” for a piece of the world that they can’t keep for very long, and that will be burned up when the day of the Lord comes. (Written Feb. 12, 1961)

Truth Magazine, XVIII:31, p. 11-12
June 6, 1974

By Harry E. Ozment

(EDITOR’S NOTE: See the May 9th and May 16th issues for the first two articles in this five article series on Calvinism.

Historical Background

A fundamental part of Calvinism is the doctrine of “Total Hereditary Depravity.” The doctrine actually had its beginning with Roman Catholicism and was the doctrinal springboard for infant sprinkling. The Teaching of the Catholic Church, p. 339, states: “. . . it is Catholic teaching that, as the result of his (Adam’s) sin, all men, except Jesus Christ and his blessed mother, are born . . . subject to death and concupisence, and deprived of grace.” Hereditary depravity is so essential to Calvinism, however, that it is now considered an integral part of Calvinistic theory. In fact, several prominent Protestant denominations teach “total hereditary depravity” in their creeds and manuals.

Definition

This doctrine, sometimes called “Original Sin,” simply teaches that the guilt of the original sin of Adam and Eve is inherited by each person at birth, so that with sin within the child’s heart, it is considered totally depraved or completely corrupted. The Presbyterian Confession of Faith explains the theory: “By this sin (eating the forbidden fruit) they (Adam and Eve) fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of thee soul and body. They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.” (Chapter 6) This doctrine, therefore, presents three ideas that require examination:

(1) Sin is inherited.

(2) A child is in sin at birth.

(3) A child is totally depraved at birth.

Errors of the Doctrine

I believe that no man can actually look into the face of a newborn infant and honestly believe and declare that the child’s soul is stained completely black with sin. Certainly, the parents would not do such. The very thought of it is repulsive. This is why many churches that practice infant sprinkling now claim to do so in order to “dedicate the child to God.” Although even this is without Bible authority, this nevertheless indicates their efforts to disassociate themselves from such a distasteful doctrine as Hereditary Depravity. However, such a doctrine is not only distasteful-it is, more important, unscriptural because it:

1. Contradicts a plain Bible passage. God said through Ezekiel: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son.” (Ezek. 18:20) Calvinism forthrightly and squarely contradicts this scripture. Theory has it that the son shall (and does) bear the iniquity of the father, while scripture has it that “the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father.” The issue resolves itself into whom are we going to believe God or Calvin! Some Calvinists, however, delight in confusing the issue by referring to Exo. 20:5: “For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.” Do these passages contradict each other? Of course not. The truth lies in the fact that Ezek. 18:20 is speaking of the imputation of guilt of sin, while Exo. 20:5 is speaking of the imputation of consequences of sin. The child might, and often does, inherit the consequences. of his father’s sin. For example, a child of a convicted killer might suffer at the hand of society because of his “bad name.” The child, however, would not inherit the guilt of his father’s sin (thus having to die in the electric chair)-simply because the child did not commit the murder.

2. Denies the Bible definition of sin. Although Calvinists do not admit it, they in effect deny John’s definition of sin: “For sin is the transgression of the law.” (1 Jn. 3:4) Transgression involves individual action-one must go beyond or fall short of the law in order to “transgress.” A newborn infant does neither-therefore, he does not “transgress.” Hence, according to John’s doctrine of sin, an infant cannot sin because he does not transgress. Calvinists would add to John’s definition of sin and have us believe, “Sin is the inheritance of the transgression of the law.” They need to read Rev. 22:18-19 and Gal. 1:6-9.

3. Destroys the Biblical description of children. Jesus said, “Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt. 18:3) I believe Jesus is here teaching the importance of conversion. He did not mean to teach that children are members of the church. Rather, he taught that unless we, as accountable,persons before God, change our hearts and lives to the innocence and humility of a child, we cannot be added to the church. The Old Testament psalmist describes children as “innocents” (Psa. 106:38), as does Jeremiah in Jer. 2:34; 19:4. Calvinistic scholars deny these inspired words. According to their doctrine, there is nothing about a child that a person trying to enter the kingdom should imitate, for a child is totally depraved. Would you believe this doctrine, or the doctrine of Christ?

4. Renders redemption and reconciliation impossible. Thayer defines “redeem” as “payment of a price to recover from the power of another.” Thayer defines “reconcile” as “restoration to favor . . . the blessing of the recovered favor of God.” Both terms involve the same idea-recovery. When an item is said to be “recovered,” it is necessarily inferred that the item had formerly been in the recoverer’s possession. When a child is born into this world, he is in a pleasing relationship with God (safe). When the child grows into accountability, however, he transgresses the law and sins (Eccl. 7:20; Rom. 3:10, 23; I Jn. 1:8, 10). When the blood of Christ is applied to his soul through baptism, this individual is then “recovered” into a pleasing relationship with God (saved). This process is called “redemption” or “reconciliation.” Redemption (or reconciliation) therefore necessarily implies that the redeemed was formerly in a pleasing relationship with his Redeemer. Calvinism denies this, and in so doing, they deny the possibility of redemption and reconciliation. Paul, though, delivers a death blow to this idea, for in Colossians 1, he shows that redemption and reconciliation both are possible: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:… and, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled . . . .” (vv. 14. 20-21). If the words of Paul are true, Calvinism is impossible.

5. Rejects possibility of degeneration. “Degenerate” simply means to pass from a higher to a lower type or condition. The Bible. teaches that such is true of some men. For example, Paul said, “But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse.” (2 Tim. 3:13). If Calvinism is true, how can this be possible? If men are totally depraved at birth, how can they become any worse? Either Paul was a liar, or Calvinism is a false religion.

6. Makes God the source of depravity. The inspired writer said in Heb. 12:9, “Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live.” Just as our flesh contains traits of our earthly fathers, so our spirits contain traits of our heavenly Father (e.g., immortality). Therefore, if a person inherits a depraved spirit at birth, he inherits it from God! This would make God the source of all iniquity! How blasphemous! Jesus said, “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” (Jas. 1:17)

7. Assigns sin to nature of Christ. The New Testament reveals that Christ took upon himself the likeness of man. Paul said, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.” (Phil. 2:5-7; cf. Heb. 2:16-18) If the “likeness of man” at birth consists partly of sin, was Christ a sinner when born of the virgin Mary? If so, Peter was wrong in 1 Pet. 2:21-22: “For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: who did not sin, The Roman Catholic Church, which teaches “Original Sin,” anticipated this difficulty with their doctrind”; and so, in 1854 they formulated the doctrine of Immaculate Conception. This doctrine simply states that Mary was born without “original sin” and therefore did not pass any depravity on to Jesus. However, this idea has no scriptural foundation whatever-it is merely an arbitrary law designed by the Roman Catholics to rescue them from a position “between a rock and a hard place.”

Sin and corruption are certainly a part of every responsible individual (1 Jn. 1:8, 10). This, however, is certainly not inherited C it is committed by each respective person as a result of his own choice. Jesus said, AVerily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin@ (John 8:34). And Jude wrote, ABut these speak evil of those things which they know not; but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves@ (Jude 10).

Truth Magazine, XVIII:31, p. 9-11
June 6, 1974