Truth Magazine

By Irven Lee

One of the most popular doctrines taught in the name of religion in America today is that we are all right. One faith is as good as another, we are told. It is admitted that there are some differences, but the idea is that we differ only on trivials that do not matter. In fact, according to the popular concept, doctrine or teaching does not matter. Many say that they do not like “doctrinal sermons.” Is this the same as saying that they do not like sermons that teach? Doctrine and teaching are synonyms. Then teachers should not teach.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isa. 55:8,9). The Lord revealed His will to man because doctrine and religious practice do make a difference (Rom. 10: 1-3; Gal. 1: 6- 10; Rev. 22:18, 19). The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but this does not make it right before God. “There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Prov. 16:25). “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God” (1 Pet. 4:11). There are many verses that deal with the sin of teaching the wrong doctrine, and no hint that whatever we teach pleases God (Gal. 1:6-10).

We should search the scriptures to see what is right (Acts 17: 11). Danger is present so we should try the spirits and beware of false prophets. (See Matt. 7:15; 1 John 4: 1; 2 John 9-11; 2 Pet. 2:1-3; Acts 20:29-31; Col. 2:8; Heb. 2: 1; Rom. 16:17; Matt. 15:9, 13, 14; Rom. 10: 1-3). Please do not teach men to be careless, and to take their own salvation for granted. Please do not be unconcerned about finding the narrow way of truth and holiness in your own case. Few there be that find it, but the Lord has pointed out the way of truth with clear marks of identity. It takes the hunger and thirst after righteousness to cause one to seek the right way of the Lord. Ignorance is dangerous and inexcusable (Hosea 4:6).

Some teach that we are saved by faith only, and some teach that salvation is not by faith only. Are both right? Is it all right to teach a man the wrong side of this issue? (Read James 2: 14-26.) The Bible emphasizes obedience just as it emphasizes faith (Matt. 7:21; 2 Thess. 1:7,8; 2 Cor. 5:10; Heb. 5:9; Mark 16:15,16). The Bible does not teach both sides of this issue. There ought to be more concern and more searching for the truth on the matter. Many things other than lack of faith are mentioned as keeping one from inheriting life. (Read Rom. 13:1,2; James 1:26; 1 Cor. 6:9,10; Gal. 5:19-21; Rev. 21:8.)

Some teach that baptism has nothing to do with our salvation. Others say we are baptized for the remission of sins. These two ideas cannot both be right. We want to know God’s will in the matter, do we not? We need to know the truth for it is truth that can make us free. Search and see. (Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom. 6:1-18; 1 Peter 3:21.) We should, as it were, leave no stone unturned in making our calling and election sure (2 Pet. 1:10). Does one have more freedom to say that baptism, which is evidently a clearly stated command of God, is not necessary than to say that honesty is not necessary? The teaching on both is from heaven from the One with all authority.

Some teach that one cannot fall after having saving faith. Others say that we need to take heed lest we fall. Both cannot be right. We either can or we cannot fall. It is high time to search and see. (2 Peter I: 10; 2: 18-22; Luke 8:13; Phil. 2:12; 1 Cor. 10: 12; Heb. 3:6, 1114; 4: 11.) We should walk circumspectly because all roads do not lead to heaven. If a man can fall, and is in great danger of falling, is it an innocent thing to tell him that he cannot fall?

Religious people differ in name, in the type music offered to the Lord, and forms of church government. Some partake of the Lord’s Supper every first day of the week while others leave it off for months at a time. Do these things matter? These are called little things, and men say that they do not matter. Bricks are small building blocks, but there are large buildings that could be taken down one brick at a time. Every detail of instruction given by the Lord and His apostles concerning His church has been changed by some denomination or another. Why did He give the instruction if these things do not matter? We, as was Moses concerning the tabernacle, are given a pattern which we should follow (Heb. 8:5). The Bible gives us ‘all things that pertain to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3).

To mock at baptism, which is a picture of His burial and resurrection, and to deny its significance is no little thing. Is sprinkling the same as the burial and planting mentioned in the scripture? (Rom. 6:4,5; Col. 2:12.) It is not minor if commanded by the Lord. None of His commandments is to be treated lightly (I John 2:3,4; 5:3; John 14:15,21,23). Christ purchased His church with His blood, and built it according to God’s eternal purpose. His testament describes in detail its terms of membership, its work, its form of worship and of government, and its standards of conduct for its members. Who has the authority to change a single detail? The facts are there for those who would follow the pattern and walk by faith. Seek and find.

TRUTH MAGAZINE XVII: 21, pp.11-12
March 29, 1973

By Larry Ray Hafley

It is thought by some that if one presents a predicament to an opponent of the gospel that is embarrassing or humiliating or offensive that he does not proceed in a proper spirit. Is this true? Is it impossible to put false teachers and their doctrines in a bad light without also casting a negative reflection on the truth? Some so think, but it is not true, and anyone who believes it to be demeaning or undignified to put errorists and error in a shameful position does not do much toward honoring Christ. Jesus regularly and frequently crucified the Pharisees and their leaven and put it to an open, public shame, and who would charge the Lord with stepping below the level of dignified dialogue?

The Lord took advantage of situations that allowed him to put down human hypocrisy and traditions. He healed on the Sabbath, but before doing so he challenged those who dared to question the propriety and lawfulness of it (Mt. 12:10-13). This no doubt cut them to the quick.

The greatest controversialist who ever lived was Jesus. His words were honed in truth. Antagonists were rebuffed and rebuked with such incisive, pervading skill that they felt offended and were squelched in painful silence. See Matthew chapters 12, 15, 21-23. If some of the darlings of the day had been present when the Lord withered his objectors with arguments of multi-horned dilemma or berated them with questions revealing their rather unglamorous condition, they would have blushed in that sweet spirit of pompous piety and wagged their heads saying, “There must be a better way to do it.”

Well, if there is a better way, the Lord did not know it, and the apostles did not practice it. At least Paul’s contention kept him in jail or fleeing for his life. Usually the ones close on his heels were “the devout and honorable women and chief men of the city” who raised persecution and expelled him out of their coasts (Acts 13:50). Note that the “dignified” ones opposed the apostles then, and their descendants, however inadvertently, do so now.

TRUTH MAGAZINE XVII: 21, p. 10
March 29, 1973

By Connie W. Adams

For a long time now, Vernon M. Newland, editor of The Crusader, a paper which sets forth the views of the conservative Christian Church, has been publishing a “statement” which is really a challenge concerning the words psalmos and psallo. It is his contention that it has never been proved that these words had come to exclude the instrument by New Testament times. Some of our readers may recall that a year ago in this column we pointed out the error of his assumptions concerning these words and offered to engage him in oral or written discussion or both. We offered the columns of this paper to carry such an exchange, provided he would also carry it in his paper.

Several months passed without a word from him. We mentioned the matter again in this column. Editor Newland did not so much as show the courtesy to reply to my letter. He has not mentioned it, or my articles in his paper, to the best of my knowledge (others have sent me copies of his paper). Further, both William H. Feist and I sent money over a year ago for a year’s subscription to his paper. Neither of us has ever received the first copy nor have we received our money back, though I mentioned this a few months ago in this column. We therefore suggest that our editor friend not only needs help on psalmos and psallo, but also needs at least a short course in common courtesy and a long one on basic honesty. I am not only willing to deny that the New Testament authorizes the use of instrumental music in worship under the terms psalmos and psallo, but I am also willing to affirm that it is dishonest to accept money for a product without either providing the product or returning the money. What say you, editor?

The 301 Cubit Ark

Mission magazine carried an article by this title in the December, 1971 issue of that paper. It was written by Dr. Lanny Hunter, a dermatologist in Flagstaff, Arizona, and apparently an active church worker in his area. I have never read an article by one professing to be a member of the church, which contained more error per cubic inch than this one piece. The writer reveals a denominational concept of the church and gives evidence of having absorbed more “theology” than scripture. He laments the “isolation” of the church from the mainstream of denominationalism and says that while we may have kept out some undesirable things, we have also denied ourselves many good things, which would elevate us and make us more effective in God’s service. He fears that this leaves us “no standard by which to judge our religious efforts except ourselves and our own interpretation of biblical literature” and adds that such “prolonged isolation” may result in a “robust religious mediocrity.” Paul said “let us walk by the same rule” (Phil. 3:16). That implies two things: (1) the presence of a standard and (2) the ability to recognize it in order to walk by it. Denominationalism is a plant, which the Father did not plant (Mt. 15:13) and therefore does not constitute an acceptable standard by which to measure anything.

He attacks the “restoration principle” which assumes “that the Bible provides a pattern on which a restoration can be made.” He calls in question the idea of having command, example or necessary inference to establish scriptural authority. He said “Suffice it to say, there is nothing in the New Testament canon which states that future generations must go back to the Bible for detailed instructions for work and worship. Nor is there any scripture which gives substance to the assumption that command, example, or necessary inference’ is the interpretative key to grasping the significance of scripture.”

This is no-patternism in its rankest form. It is the gateway to every form of error denominationalists can contrive, but more than that, it leads to infidelity as its final consequence. If there is no pattern for work and worship, then there can be no violation of such, and man is left to his own ingenuity to implicate the church in whatever work he thinks would be good and to engage in whatever form of worship may please his taste. As far as the question of how something is proved scriptural, Acts 15 demonstrates the use in the early church of all three avenues of arriving at authority. Peter argued from necessary inference when he showed that God gave the same gift when the gospel began among Gentiles that be did when it began among Jews, and that “therefore” they should be received on equal terms. Paul and Barnabas argued from approved example by showing that God had confirmed their work among Gentiles with signs following. James cited the direct statement of Amos as applicable to the point in question. The issue was settled and notice of it was sent to all the brethren. But Hunter does not believe that what happened among them establishes a “normative” situation for the action of Christians in this age. He thus relegates the New Testament to the theological scrap pile.

Hunter is afraid that we have reduced the New Testament documents to “key-punch cards” manipulated by “theological systems analysts” in order to “program Christians in exhaustive, minute detail.” It is sometimes hard to tell about brainy theologians, but I think he was abusing us!

All through the article he scores the idea of viewing the New Testament as a pattern for the present. he does not have any more respect for the Old Testament for he implies that it would have been perfectly correct to have built the ark one cubit longer than God said, had it appeared to Noah the prudent thing to have done. Yet, Noah “by faith prepared an ark to the saving of his house” (Heb. 11: 7). Men of faith do exactly what God tells them. The Old Testament provides many worthy lessons for us (Rom. 15:4). Likewise, the New Testament provides 11 all things which pertain to life and godliness” (2 Pet. 1: 3). In scripture God’s man is given everything to make him complete (2 Tim. 3:1617). Peter said, “if any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God” (I Pet. 4: 11). Jude said the faith was “once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3, NASV).

It would take a much longer article to reply to every false statement in this piece of ultra liberalism. But hold on, tight. Mission gives awards each year to the best articles which they have carried. Hunter’s article was hailed as “article of the year” in 1971! That should not be too surprising in a journal which gave the “article of the year” award a year or so before to a piece advocating theistic evolution. If Hunter is correct, then the scriptures are not all sufficient and any of the details of his article are but side issues. That anyone professing to be a gospel preacher would give such an article the time of day, much less acceptance is a sad commentary on the fortunes, which beset the people of God today. I have even heard of some young men who say they are enlightened, who think this article was a brilliant and thought provoking work. All I can say is that I pray the churches, which love the truth and want to walk in the old paths, may be spared such brilliance!

TRUTH MAGAZINE XVII: 21, pp.9-10
March 29, 1973

By George T. Eldridge

Mothers do not realize the power they have in their hands, or the influence they exercise over children. All students of the Word of God know as they study the women of the Bible that nations and even the church (1) cannot have any more spirituality, (2) cannot be any more godly or (3) be any more righteous, good, and kind than the quality and character of mothers. All these qualities start in the home. We must have women who fear the Lord.

When we find women fearing God, we find homes, as the home ought to be. Unless that quality is in mothers and wives, the church (1) cannot rise to her militant battle cry, (2) cannot grow spiritually, and (3) cannot baptize people. As you study the Bible and read history, you recognize truly the hand that rocks the cradle ultimately influences the world. Her influence can be for good or it can be for bad.

Murder

Every individual that was involved in an assassination in my lifetime came from a bad home. Examine the assassin of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King. Every murderer came from a broken home. Every one had a mother who did not fear God. Look what happened and what was brought upon our nation. In each home, we could not find mothers who feared the Lord. Because of that home, the teachings from those mothers, and the examples those mothers imprinted upon their children of the church not being important and righteousness being secondary, each child grew into manhood and became an assassin. Godliness was unknown. The Bible was not read by those mothers nor was it encouraged.

For Good

Unless the mothers in the church fear God, the church will not be what she ought to be. Women have always been and will always be an integral part of humanity because she came from the side of man. If humanity is to be purified, if humanity is to be brought to greater heights of godliness and righteousness and if men and women, boys and girls are going to be brought to the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world, it is imperative that we have mothers in the church who are enlightened spiritually. Women who fear God shall be praised.

With godly mothers, this sin-sick world of ours and this sin-sick community of ours can be brought closer to God. The answer is up to women seated in the pews of churches today. Why? It is in mothers’ hands where we have so much influence; so much teaching, which is important to the children, and so much needed encouragement needed by husbands. Because of “higher education” and because of every evil mentionable flowing freely in our land, which are not condemned wholeheartedly by churches today, chaos is in the world.

Man’s Rib

Genesis 2 records where woman came from and why she is here. That scripture teaches a lesson needed today. Unless we get back to its depth, its purity, and its holiness, man will never be brought closer to God and the church will never be, as she ought to be spiritually. When you read of man being the head of the woman, you have to realize the woman is the crown. As Solomon said: “A woman is a good crown to her husband,” in everything which is holy and godly (Prov. 12:4). Man came from the dust, but the woman was doubly made.

The woman is of the dust, too, but she came also from man’s rib!! Look where the rib is on the man’s body. The rib is not in man’s head so that man might be ruled by the woman or be bossed. The woman was made out of man’s rib. The rib is not from man’s foot so that he might trample upon her and for him to mistreat her.

There is no lower specimen of human life than a man who would abuse a woman. I knew an individual, and thanks be to God that I was not there when such occurred, who defended wife “beating.” He was in the church. There were some sisters who condoned it. That low specimen of a man placed black and blue marks on his wife. He “spanked” her. He “beat” her. The woman was not made from man’s rib for him to beat her or for him to use her as a punching bag. Regardless of what a woman might be, man has no justification to beat her as he would “beat” an animal. Woman came from man’s side, his rib. Woman is equal with man.

She is equal in standing beside him in times of trouble, in times of fear and in providing a home. That home is one of comfort, of godliness, and a home where God is first and this old sin-sick world cannot penetrate. Woman came from man’s rib. The rib is under man’s arm. A woman is to be protected, even to the man giving his life for her. The woman is to be cared for and honored. The rib is close to man’s heart so that woman might be loved. We men need to awaken to that truth and show our love more everyday.

Social Favor

Regardless of how much favor and social grace your daughter might possess and regardless of her beauty, your daughter is lost in sin unless she serves God according to the Bible (Prov. 31:30).

Without God

Life is empty without God. Morals become laxed. Society generates into all types of filth and perversion. The woman, therefore, is not respected when she does not demand godliness first in what she thinks, says, and practices. Nothing is more heart tearing and tear bringing than to see a mother permitting her children to grow up without spiritual values being first. Mothers: unless the church and all that God stands for is your first requirement (your first desire), everything, even life, is without any value!

Child Rearing

When your child reaches the step in life where he starts exercising freedom, the power of decision making, and the power to stand on his or her own feet, will your child be interested first of all in godliness and in God’s church?

Concerning her child’s behavior, mothers come to preachers with the request that he speak to her child about godly living. They do not see where they have failed. An elder

provided the answer once, when a sister got mad at me due to her children’s living. This godly elder said, “We know what Sister did wrong. She permitted her daughter to go to the dance. She permitted her daughter to go to mixed swimming. She permitted her daughter to parade around in what God condemned Eve for wearing. That is what is wrong with Sisters children. She did not emphasize Bible things like she did worldly living.”

Raise a child in God ‘s way and the odds are with you that when he is old he will not depart from godliness. Many mothers in Churches of Christ today do not recognize that. Mothers in Roman Catholicism willingly permit their children to be trained in early, early life in Roman Catholicism. Because of pre-teen and teenage training, we know the difficulty of converting them out of Roman Catholicism. You have many children supposedly raised in homes of parents who are members of the Church of Christ, yet too many of the children grow cold in the faith or become lukewarm. Why? In the formative years, which are the pre- teen years, the mother did not instill into those children the fear of God, letting the church be first, letting the Bible ride their lives and guiding the relationship.

Final Word

Mothers: Awaken. Rise to the teaching of God. Continue in Biblical living. Your influence must not be underestimated. Rise to the level and plane, which God requires of all fine mothers. Through your influence, man passes to either useful service now in the church and to humanity or indifference to God and to little benefit to mankind. Which will it be? You must make the decision.

TRUTH MAGAZINE XVII: 21, pp. 7-8
March 29, 1973