Truth Magazine

By Lindy McDaniel

Trying to harmonize the concepts of “law” and “grace” has been a difficult task for Bible students for hundreds of years. The difficulty primarily centers on the writings of Paul, and especially as students grapple with the problem of harmonizing Paul’s writings with those of James. Paul wrote: “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law” (Rom. 3:28). However, James said: “You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). Some have concluded that salvation by God’s grace excludes obedience. Others maintain that one must obey God in order to be saved.

It is a dangerous practice to attempt to interpret some of the difficult writings of Paul apart from other scripture that hear on the same subjects. Peter warns: “Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our beloved Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote, to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard lest, being carried away by the error of unprincipled men, you fall from your own steadfastness” (2 Pet. 3:14-17). Paul’s writings have been perverted, resulting in great harm.

Salvation By Grace

Paul taught that salvation is by grace and not by works of law. He wrote: “Now to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteous” (Rom. 4:4-5). Again, “For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under’ law, but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! ” (Rom. 6:14-15). “But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace” (Rom. 11:6). “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast” (Eph. 2:8-9).

Salvation By Works

Salvation is also attributed to works in the following passages: “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (John 3:36). “And the word of God kept on spreading; and the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7). Paul even emphasizes obedience in his great epistle on salvation by grace through faith written to the Romans: “. . . through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles, for His name’s sake” (Rom. 1:5). “For the report of your obedience has reached to all; therefore I am rejoicing over you, but I want you to be wise in what is good, and innocent in what is evil…. but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith” (Rom. 16:19,26). Evidently, Paul had no trouble reconciling “faith” and “obedience.” Also study carefully James 2:14-26, 2 Cor. 10:5; Gal. 5:7; Gal. 6:4; Phil. 2:12-13; 2 Thess. 1:6-8; 1 Tim. 6:17-19; 2 Thess. 3:14-15, etc.

Not Under Law

Paul wrote that the Christians in Rome were not under law, but under grace” (Rom. 6:14). Does this mean that Christians are not under any law whatsoever, or that obedience has nothing to do with justification?

Paul wrote much about “the law” or “law” and it is important to understand that he almost always had in mind the “law of Moses.” John wrote: “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ” (John 1: 17). Those addressed by Paul were familiar with the “law of Moses,” but they did not have access to all of the New Testament writings, which contain “the faith” revealed through Christ. The great controversy of apostolic days was whether or not the “law of Moses” was to be bound upon the Gentiles in order for them to be saved (see Acts 15:1, 6-11; Gal. 2:16-2 1; 3:1-3; 5:14). It is quite obvious that Christians are not under the Law of Moses; but this does not mean that Christians are without Law.

Furthermore, we are not under any law system that demands perfect obedience in order to be saved. The Mosaical Code was that kind of law system. Paul wrote: “For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘cursed is every one who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.’ Now that no one is justified by the law before God is evident; for, the righteous man shall live by faith.’ However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, ‘he who practices them shall live by them!’ Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us-for it is written, I cursed is every one who hangs on a tree’ ” (Gal. 3: 1013). Law condemns every man who has sinned, and all men are convicted as lawbreakers; but Jesus Christ has delivered us from the curse of the law.

Even though Christians are not under the Mosaical Code, or any law system that demands human perfection, we are under law to Jesus Christ. Paul wrote: “And to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the Law, though not being myself under the Law, that I might win those who are under the Law; to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, that I might win those who are under the Law” G Cor. 9:20-21). Paul, even though lie was a Jew, did not consider himself to be tinder the law of Moses, but he was under law to Christ. Paul brought himself under the first, not as being necessary to salvation, but as a custom. However, he was bound by the law of Christ, which is also called “the law of liberty” (James 1:25).

The scriptures teach that all men are tinder the rule of Jesus Christ. Jesus said: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18). Paul wrote of Jesus Christ: “And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For in Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-all things have been created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together” (Col. 1: 15-17). “. . . who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to him” (1 Pet. 3:22). The whole world is under the authority of Jesus Christ.

If grace has released us from the obligation of law, as some contend, then it would be impossible for a Christian to sin, for “where there is no law, neither is there violation” (Rom. 4:15). “Every one who practices sin also practices lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness” (I John 3:4); but there can be no lawlessness unless there is a law. But all men have been pronounced guilty before God (Rom. 3:23), and besides all of this, even Christians do sin: “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Christians are not free from law. But they are free from the curse of the law through Jesus Christ. If and when they sin, they may gain forgiveness through the blood and advocacy of Jesus Christ (see 1 John 1:7-10; 2:1-2).

Law And Justification

Some argue, “Yes, the Christian is under law, but he is not under law as a basis of justification.” In answer to this, let us first realize that the principal foundation of justification before God is “Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.” God’s grace, and our justification, centers on Jesus Christ, the son of God (see 2 Cor. 5:19; 6: 1; 8:9; Heb. 10: 5-7; 10:10, 14, etc.). This fundamental fact being understood, the important question is simply this: “Must a person obey God in order to be justified by the blood of -Jesus?” To this question, I emphatically say, “Yes!” That obedience to Christ is essential to salvation is abundantly clear in scripture. Peter writes: “Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls for a sincere love of the brethren, fervently love one another from the heart” (1 Pet. 1:22). See also Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Rom. 6:17-18; etc.)

If a person is not under law as a condition of salvation, then his violation of law would not affect his salvation; yet the scriptures teach that the “lawless” and “ungodly” cannot inherit eternal life. “For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus” (Tit. 2.11-13). “Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying” (Rev. 22:15).

A Christian may be “overtaken in a trespass” and need to be restored (Gal. 6: 1), or he may so sin as to lose his inheritance in Jesus Christ (Gal. 5:4; Heb. 6:4-8; Heb. 10:26-31; 2 Pet. 2:19-22). Thus, obedience has a direct bearing on our relationship with Jesus Christ. No, the Christian is not “free” from law.

Again, God will judge us according to our deeds done in the body. “And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds” (Rev. 20:12). Read also Rom. 2:5-16; 2 Thess. 1:6-8; and I Peter 4:17.

Faith And Obedience

Again, it is argued, “The Bible teaches that we are justified by faith apart from works of the law” (see Rom. 3-28; Rom. 4:4-5; Eph. 2-89; Tit. 3:5-7, etc.). The “works” under consideration by Paul in these passages are those works which are meritorious in nature. By doing such works, a man may be said to have earned salvation. Since all have sinned (Rom. 3:23) and continue to commit acts of sin 0 John 1:8), earning justification is rendered impossible. Justification is a gift and cannot be earned by human effort (Rom. 11:6). From these facts, some have foolishly concluded that it is not necessary to obey God in order to receive justification; but nothing could be further from the truth.

“Faith And Obedience”

The gifts of God, although never earned by human effort, are frequently conditioned upon human effort. God healed Naaman, the Syrian Commander, of leprosy; but before this was accomplished, Naaman had to dip seven times in the river Jordan (see 2 Kings 5:10-14). God gave Jericho into the hands of the Israelites, but it was required that they march around the walls a total of 13 times as prescribed by God (see Josh. 6). God gives us food and raiment; but these “good gifts” are not obtained apart from human effort. Apart from God’s grace, Naaman could not have been healed of leprosy; the Israelites could not have captured Jericho, and we could not be fed and clothed. These are simple but powerful illustrations of the grace of God. Do not be deceived into thinking that, free gifts” cannot be conditioned upon human effort.

Salvation can be compared to a drowning man who is rescued. His small boat capsizes and sinks, and he is left helpless in the water unable to swim. A rescue boat approaches and a rope is thrown out to him. He grabs the rope and is pulled out of the water into the boat. He has been saved by the rescue men. Yet it was necessary for him to grab hold of the rope. Are you willing to “grab hold of the rope,” or do you foolishly think that God is going to do it all for you?

Our justification is conditioned upon faith. Human works of merit are centered on man, whereas faith is centered on God. Faith is the ground of our complete confidence in the unseen realm based upon the testimony of God (2 Cor. 5:7; Heb. 11:1-2; Rom. 10:17). Faith is expressed in obedience to God (Heb. 11: 4, 7, 8, 17, 24, 27; James 2:14-28). Thus, the Christian “walks by faith” (2 Cor. 5:7).

Again, it is protested, “Justification is based upon faith alone, and not obedience!” “Of course,” they reason, “faith always produces good works.” This is like trying to separate cause and effect or the tree from its fruits. Such distinctions have resulted in much confusion. Faith is perfected through works (James 2:22). The tree is always known by its fruits (Matt. 7:26). How can a man know that he has faith unless he is willing to do what Christ commands? Faith apart from works is dead (James 2:26).

Those who emphasize the necessity of “faith” while denying the necessity of “obedience” are making a serious mistake. Faith apart from works has no more power to save than works apart from faith. Inward perfection is no more possible than outward perfection. The concepts of salvation by “faith only” and salvation by “works only” are both “legalistic” in that attention is centered upon man himself. But genuine faith is centered upon God. This kind of faith does not question God’s grace, purposes, or plan of human redemption. It is a trusting and obedient faith. It never argues around God’s law; it seeks only to obey it. What kind of faith do you have?

Some preachers among us are beginning to accept “denominational” concepts of “grace” and “love.” They are teaching that justification is conditioned upon faith apart from obedience to the laws of Jesus Christ. They admit that baptism is included in the “principle of faith” as a condition of salvation; but they deny that “observing all things whatsoever the Lord has commanded” is embraced by the principle. It is said that obedience to Christ inevitably flows from faith, but it is faith itself that saves. With the exception of baptism being included in the principle of faith, this is what many “denominations” have been teaching for hundreds of years. Are we ready for this?

TRUTH MAGAZINE XVII: 24, pp.5-8
April 19, 1973

By James W. Adams

It has been said, “No wind is favorable to a ship without a destination.” Many times, why a thing is done is quite as important as what is done. There is enough controversy among brethren without my adding to it with a series of articles written for no higher purpose than to be different or to argue. Argument for argument’s sake in the realm of the spiritual, where men’s souls hang in the balance, is obnoxious and destructive. Nor do I throw my hat into the proverbial “ring” of present brotherhood agitation and controversy to enhance my personal reputation as some sort of champion of “orthodoxy.” I am not by nature controversial, although some may find this hard to believe. Most of the controversy in which I have engaged during the past two decades has been pushed upon me, and I did not have any more sense than to assume the responsibility of contributing whatever talent I may have in the field of writing to the defense of principles which I believe to be Divine, hence vital and eternal. With all my faults, which the grace of God and the blood of Jesus are going to have to cover if I am to be saved in heaven, the Lord knows that selfish ambition for notoriety has not been one of them. There are enough real issues and always have been without the necessity for manufacturing any straw men to combat. For the record’s sake, let it also be noted that there exists between me and the brethren who shall figure prominently in this review no personal animosity or personal difference of any kind.

Unusual Forbearance Manifested

There has been manifested by “conservative” brethren an unusual degree of moderation relative to Ketchersidism even when it has seemed to gain some ground among “us.” Men and issues have not been exposed and vigorously attacked as has been true of other error and errorists. It could he that we have been criminally negligent in this regard. The time has come when we can no longer follow this course. Even a tyro in Bible knowledge should recognize the fact that there is an abundance of Scriptural warrant for a forthright attack upon issues, men, and movements, which threaten the interests of Divine truth and Divine institutions. Jesus twice cleansed the temple with consummate zeal when its sacred purposes were corrupted by misguided men (John 2:13-17; Mt. 21:12-16), and scathingly denounced, in language literally vitriolic, the scribes and the Pharisees for their fallacious concepts ‘and perverted practices (Mt. 23:1-33). A great portion of the material in Paul’s letters to churches and individuals was aimed at the corruption in doctrine, worship, and life among them. Paul hesitated not to deal both with issues and with men. John, “the apostle of love,” in his epistles, attacked with vehemence the errors and their teachers among the brethren. The “gospel according to John” was written to provide apostolic Christians with evidence of the deity of Jesus with which to combat gnostic heretics. The seven letters to the churches of Asia in “The Revelation” which were written by John deal forthrightly (with one exception) with doctrinal and practical error, the teachers of that error, and those who were seduced by them. James addressed a letter to Christians, which was largely designed to expose, refute, and eradicate gnosticism among the brethren. Peter, in his general epistles, deals pungently with error and its teachers. Jude likewise exposes and seeks the eradication of error and its teachers among the brethren. Need I say more?

The Existing Situation

In articles one through five of this series, I have taken a great deal of time and used much space to set forth in minute detail the existing situation as I see it. Many hours were spent in seeking to present this matter in exactly the right manner in order that “all the bases may be touched.” There has been altogether too much ambiguity leading to accusations of being “misunderstood” and “misrepresented.” I desire above all to be right, and second only to that, to be understood. While it will not be my intention to be offensive, neither will I be deterred from a clear discussion of these matters by a desire to be non-offensive. In few words, I will not pamper the aversion of some spuriously pious brethren to forthright, face to face confrontation and head to head encounter with men whom I conceive to be false teachers who are leading brethren down the “broad road ” to ruin.

The Objectives of this Series

(1) I propose a thorough examination and review of W. Carl Ketcherside, his fallacious theories relative to unity and fellowship among the children of God, and his underground unity movement, which is fast maturing into a unity cult. Just as the best politics is to make one’s fundamental plank in his platform absolute opposition to all politicians, so the most effective party shibboleth in our day of acute division is to make the fundamental plank in one’s spiritual platform absolute opposition to and renunciation of all parties. Jehovah’s Witnesses, so-called, seek to advance the interests of their religion by affirming, “all religion is of the devil.” Ketcherside, among other things, is an astute politician. I know of no better among the brethren. To put it simply, Ketcherside’s movement is a cult to end all cults. This I propose to demonstrate in the course of this series of articles.

(2) I propose a thorough exposure of the error being circulated on the subjects of “salvation by grace through faith,” the immediate operation of the Holy Spirit upon the Christian, and certain views and practices relative to unity and fellowship which are refinements of Ketcherside’s position. Actually, these three are but different facets of the same issue.

(3) I propose to cite names, document statements, and identify places. While I regret the necessity for doing this, it must be done. This is not a hypothetical situation with which we are dealing; hence it cannot be dealt with theoretically. It is real and actual and will be dealt with specifically and practically. I will not knowingly misrepresent any person, and will be governed always by what I conceive to be true, New Testament love (agape) or brotherly love (philadelphos) or both as the situation may require, but I will not tolerate equivocation which seems to be the forte of current neophytes to whom reference has been made previously.

A Word to the Neophytes

Brother Connie W. Adams (no relation of this scribe, but I would be most happy to acknowledge it if it were so) stated my sentiments exactly in his recent article, “Old Song, New Singers,” Truth Magazine, Vol. XVII, No. 13, p. 202, Feb. 1, 1973. If you have not read this article, by all means do so. You young preachers are no longer boys. When you begin to tamper with matters that materially and adversely affect the faith of Christians and the practice, purity, and unity of the Lord’s churches, you are functioning in a man’s world. Therefore, you need to grow up spiritually, clear up what you say, shut up until you do, or be prepared to accept the consequences of your position!

My Respects to Anticipated Emotional Sympathizers

I have been in controversy in the papers before and am not unacquainted with the temper of some of the brethren, hence I anticipate that there will be some Casper Milquetoasts and some emotionally indulgent sympathizers who will decry my exposure of our neophytes by reason of their age and shed maudlin tears over my unvarnished attack upon Ketcherside by reason of his carefully polished urbanity and folksy, political backslapping. If any of our readers belong to either or both of these categories, get out your crying towels, for you are going to need them.

There has been too much “double talk.” Statements have been ambiguous and reasoning circuitous. The time for such is past. Let us get down to the “nitty gritty” of this matter. If Ketcherside has the truth and our neophytes who are dancing to his siren song are correct, now is the time to find out. This we shall attempt to do. To the accomplishment of this task, let us address ourselves.

TRUTH MAGAZINE XVII: 24, pp. 3-4
April 19, 1973

By Earl E. Robertson

Edward T. Hiscox, in his book, Standard Manual For Baptist Churches, says on page 22, under the heading of “Church Membership,” “It is most likely that in the Apostolic age when there was but ‘one Lord, one faith, and one baptism’ and no differing denominations existed, the baptism of a convert by that very act constituted him a member of the church, and at once endowed him with all the rights and privileges of full membership. In that sense, ‘baptism was the door into the church.’ Now, it is different. . . .”

So, the “Doctor” affirms that some things in spiritual matters have changed since the days of the apostles. He tells us that in the days of the apostles “there was but one Lord, one faith, and one baptism.” This is true (Eph. 4:5). He tells us that “no differing denominations existed.” This is true also, if he means denominations claiming to follow Christ. There were various sects in Jesus’ day: the Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, et al. But these did not make claim to be followers of Jesus Christ. Further, the “Doctor” tells us that “baptism was the door into the church.” All of this was true in the days of the apostles.

But to our chagrin, he says all this has changed! This raises many questions. If in apostolic days the “very act” of baptism constituted one a member of the church, and that baptism was the door into the church (as we can certainly read such in our New Testaments), we can say without fear of successful contradiction that such was by divine authority. That is, the Lord authorized such; he had Paul to write that baptism puts one into the one body (Cor. 12:13, 20) and that one body is the church (Col. 1:18). But if such were true in apostolic days, when did this authority change? What assembly changed it? By what or whom did this change come? Why did it change? Is God pleased with the change?

As one searches his New Testament to find where such a change was to take place or where such did take place, he is surprised to find no change either contemplated or having taken place! What the New Testament says at its beginning about baptism putting one into the Lord’s church (body of Christ) is exactly what it says about the same subject at its close. The doctrine had not changed. So, this leads us to conclude that some people were dissatisfied that what the Lord says about baptism “being the door into the church,” and have created their own way about the matter. But we must emphasize that baptism is still the act of obedience that puts one into Lord’s church. We do, however, admit that the baptism Christ commanded will not put one into a denominational church-it puts one into the church of Christ only. When the truth of Jesus is preached, believed, and obeyed, his baptism been submitted to, that individual is then in the Lord’s church (Acts 2:37-47). So if baptism today does not put one into the church of Christ it is because it is not the baptism Christ commanded. Dr. Hiscox is wrong in contending that baptism is no longer the way into the church of Christ. The Baptist church has no legislative power to direct the Lord’s Church. It might be a legislative body, but its legislation is directed to the Baptist church and not the Lord’s church. The Lord Jesus Christ is head over his church (Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22-23)-not the Baptist church. The Baptist church exists contrary to Christ’s teaching, not because of it. Jesus’ word is the seed of the kingdom (Luke 8: 11), and the kingdom is the kingdom of Christ (Col. 1: 13). If he is king over his kingdom (and he is), then the citizens are his subjects and his word rules them. Therefore only those who subject themselves unto his authority are granted citizenship in his kingdom (church), and baptism into his church is within this authority (Matt. 28:18-20; 1 Cor. 12:13).

 

TRUTH MAGAZINE XVII: 24, p.2
April 19, 1973

By Larry Ray Hafley

In an Associated Press article we hear the Pope denouncing fads and defending tradition. “Pope Paul VI denounced what he called ‘fads’ against tradition in the Roman Catholic Church … He restated his belief that progress for the church comes along the path of tradition.” (St. Louis Globe-Democrat, Sept. 28, 1972, p. 17).

Could it be that the Pope is unaware of the fact that traditions are nothing but senile fads? Traditions of Catholicism are just fads that got old. If “the progress for the church comes along the path of tradition,” how “comes along” the Pope to denounce the source of, said tradition? Can he not see that the “path of tradition” is worn and marked out by the footprints of fads? Infant baptism, mechanical music, and the counting of beads were once “fads.” They are now traditions. Fermented fads become the wine of tradition. Even the Pope’s office was once an ambitious fad, which was renounced more strongly than any modern fad in Romanism, but now it is an ancient tradition. Why, if all fads had been summarily expelled, Pope Paul VI would never have had his job! Our friend, the Pope, had better be careful not to name a specific fad of the day and, denounce” it, for in a hundred years it may be one of those hallowed traditions in “the path” of progress.

Well, did not Paul say, “hold the traditions?” Yes, but which traditions? The ones “which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle” (2 Thess. 2:15). Unless a thing can be heard from the lips or read from the epistles of the apostles, it is not that which is to be held. The “progress for the church” indeed “comes along the path of tradition,” apostolic tradition, or teaching. Other traditions, such as Popes and Catholicism, are “along the path” that is wide and broad and “that leadeth to destruction.” So, we “restate” our “belief” that “the progress of the New Testament church comes along the path of New Testament tradition.”

 

TRUTH MAGAZINE XVII: 23, p. 13
April 12, 1973