Truth Magazine

By Luther Blackmon

I must be getting old. I can remember when students in school had no rights at all hardly except to do what they were told. The teachers ran the school and were backed up by the parents. There were no “sit-in” demonstrations and “protest marches” on the “campus.” There were no bearded beatniks and long-haired “intellectuals” (?) around then to inform the students of their rights in the matter of free speech. There were no television cameras to catch and reflect the physiognomy of the loudmouthed agitators who stand before the microphones with all the poise and dignity of a goat looking through a new gate (except for the brilliant look on the goats face). My! I just dont know what kept this old nation from falling apart in those dark days.

But with a few old fogies like Wm. McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft (I really dont remember those fellows) and Woodrow Wilson, we managed somehow to pull through with all our rights intact. But there was something lacking. There were not 3,000,000 mothers with children less than six years old then who worked and let someone else take care of the children, and 5,000,000 with children over six who worked. There were not a million youngsters between 16 and 25 unemployed, most of whom were dropouts. Seventy-five million 15 years old and over who drank alcohol, and an average of one out of sixteen becoming an alcoholic. There wasnt much in the way of girls dropping out of school to get married in a hurry, like now when it is reported the 85% of the girls that drop out of school to get married are in trouble. Readers Digest reports that the illegitimacy rate is up 60% in the past 25 years. Things were dull then, in the estimation of our modern “swingers.” But Ill let you in on a secret. I know some who would be glad to surrender some of their “rights” for a chance to live their lives over. There are three things indispensably necessary to happiness: 1. Love (to love and be loved.) 2. Self respect. 3. Peace of mind. You cant buy these, and they dont come in bottles and are not found in night clubs and motels.

But the youngsters are not so much to blame as their elders. People are the products very largely of their training and the environment in which they grow up. But young people and a lot of the older ones need to be made to understand that with every right comes corresponding responsibilities. I want my rights. But my rights do not include the privilege of neglecting my responsibilities or hurting others. The chief of police in a large American city expressed deep concern over the fact that the sympathy of the public is more on the side of the criminal than the victim. The sadistic murderer and rapist have the right to a fair trial. But we might remember that his victim had also rights. I strongly believe that a person has the right to be employed without regard to the color of his skin, his ethnic background. But he also has the responsibility to be qualified for the job. The workman has a right to a fair wage. He also has the responsibility of giving an honest days work. I have heard brethren speak of the companies that provide their livelihood as though they were their bitterest enemies.

I have known members of the church who wanted to walk on the very edge of the world of sin, even to engaging in things everyone recognizes as sinful, but who wanted to retain the respect and fellowship of other Christians. They may think it is their “business” what they do, but they must remember that it is my business, which I associate with. We might have the constitutional right not to bathe, but we shouldnt feel hurt if people exercise their right to shun us. I knew a member of the church who tried very bard to hurt my influence as a preacher because I refused to have anything do with him. He was guilty of the grossest kind of sins and showed no sign of repentance. I exercised my “responsibility” to refuse to hive anything to do with him. Eph. 5: 11; I Co. 5; 11; 2 Thess. 3:6. If you keep your ear to the ground you will soon discover that the people who yell the loudest about their rights, care the least about their responsibilities.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 42, p. 2
August 31, 1972

By Mike Willis

Introduction

When one turns to study the field of archaeology and its relation to the study of the New Testament, immediately he realizes that he has much less material relative to his study than if he had chosen to study the relationship of archaeology to the study of the Old Testament.

There are some very logical reasons for this apparent lack of material. First of all, the time period covered in the Old Testament is approximately two millenniums while the New Testament is confined to a bare century. Secondly, a large portion of the New Testament deals with matters which cannot be confirmed by the archaeologists spade. “Archaeology cannot produce extensive evidence from the world of the New Testament for the life of Christ offers nothing that would leave any material traces on this earth: neither royal palaces, nor temples, neither victorious campaigns nor burned cities and country sides. Jesus was essentially a man of peace; he taught the Word of God. Archaeologists have recognized their task to be that of reconstructing his environment and rediscovering the villages and cities where he lived, worked, and died.” (Werner Keller, The Bible as History, New York: William Morrow and Company, 1956, p 340) Thirdly, the New Testament deals with a group of people held together by a spiritual union instead of a group in national union. Obviously, a nation is more apt to leave material evidence for the archaeologists because of its political ties whereas a spiritual union will leave little or no trace. Therefore, this held of study is more limited than the field of archaeology and the study of the Old Testament.

Lest I leave the impression that this study is altogether unimportant, let me list some areas in which the study of archaeology has aided in the study of the New Testament. Since neither the New Testament nor the Old Testament claims to give a complete history, archaeology has added much hitherto unknown historical information. At the same time, this has given us a wider general background in which to place the events recorded in the New Testament. Thus, archaeology has given us many facts which generally corroborate statements of the New Testament. Recent discoveries of New Testament passages on papyri in Egypt have also affected the dating of several of the books of the New Testament. Also, as would be expected, in several places specific statements of the New Testament have been corroborated by recent archaeological work.

Thus, our subject of study offers great potential. I now proceed in the next article to show how archaeological research has helped in the study of the New Testament.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 41, p. 13
August 24, 1972

By Robert H. Farish

Through the years theories of salvation have been advanced which arrayed grace against Obedience or obedience against grace. These theories beard and read would cause one to think that the two were antithetical rather than complementary. Care should be exercised to speak and write on the indispensableness of obedience without losing sight of the glorious grace of God; like care should also be taken to speak and write in praise of the grace of God without detracting from the essential character of obedience. Why cant people see that although obedience does not merit salvation, yet salvation cannot be had by any responsible person apart from obedience? God has joined the two, divine favor and human obedience; it is grace plus obedience of faith equals salvation.

Grace And Obedience In Romans

Paul wrote to the saints at Rome and declared that “we have had our access by faith into this grace wherein we stand” (Rom. 5:2). Peace with God, hope of the glory of God and the power to rejoice even in our tribulations are blessings mentioned as belonging to those of us who have by faith moved into the favor of God.

It is the opinion of this writer that erroneous impressions have been left, in some cases, by speakers and writers dealing with grace and obedience of faith separately. There is always the danger of emphasizing one at the expense of .the other when considered separately. This can result in a distorted concept which leads to presumption on the one hand, or self-righteousness on the other. People presume on the Grace of God when they lightly regard “doing the will of the Father; while others regard “doing the will of the Father” as earning salvation for themselves and thus are self-righteous. One despises obedience while the other despises grace. In this effort I wish to study not grace alone, nor obedience of faith alone, but grace and obedience together. We will learn that salvation is not of debt; neither is it for those who do not the things which Christ commanded.

The apostle declared that he received his apostleship “unto obedience of faith among all nations” (Rom. 1:5). Thus in his introduction to the Roman letter he states that the design of his being made an apostle was to bring men to obedience of faith, and in his conclusion he states that the gospel “is made known unto all the nations unto obedience of faith” (Rom. 16:28). The great treatise on “access by faith into grace” is bracketed by “obedience of faith.” Ponder this as we study grace and obedience.

In the book of Romans the word grace appears twenty-two times (A.S.V.). In some of these references, it is a specific favor e.g., “grace and apostleship” (Rom. 1: 5), but in most places it is the favor of salvation. The saint is “justified freely by his grace” (Rom. 3: 24); “it is of faith that it might be by grace” (Rom. 4:16); it is by faith that he had his access into the grace (favor) wherein he enjoys peace with God and hope of glory (Rom. 5:2); the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, “abound(ed) unto many” (Rom. 5: 15); “they that receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness, reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:17). See also Rom. 5:20, 21; 6:1; 6:14, 15; 11: 5, 6 to be impressed with the fact that the grace of God occupies a prominent place in the Roman letter.

The careful student will avoid concentrating so intently on “grace” in the letter that he loses sight of its complement-Obedience – Doing the will of God. So we turn now to observe statements in the book of Romans which point up the essential place of obedience.

(Rom. 2: 4-8): “Or despiseth thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasuresth up for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according to his works: To them that by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life: but unto them that are factions, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation. . . .”

Note that, in the judgment, God is going to render to every man according to his work – those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory, honor and incorruption will receive eternal life. On the other side those who are factious and obey not the truth but obey unrighteousness will receive wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish. Note that the latter is for every soul that worketh evil.

But take another look at that word which is so unpopular with those who would presume on the grace of God – the word is “work.” The apostle states that every man will be rewarded according to his “work.” The work in view is clearly obeying the truth for the contrasting term is “obeying not the truth.”

But this same apostle in this same letter states, “But if it is by grace, it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace” (Rom. 11: 6). Now when a commentator says, “He mean 8 that grace and works are absolutely antithetical and mutually exclusive,” if he is including the “works” of Rom. 2:6, he is guilty f arraying the Holy Spirit against the Holy Spirit. But if he will allow the Holy Spirit to define the “works” which are excluded by grace as the works of the law, “because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified” (Rom. 3:20), then he will have the proper contrast before his eyes. Grace and the works of the Law of Moses are antithetical, but grace and “obedience of faith” are complementary. Man can dispense with neither, save to his destruction.

Rom. 6:16, 17: “Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves as servants unto obedience, his servants ye are whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But thanks be to God, that, whereas ye were servants of sin, ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching whereunto ye were delivered.” In this reference the apostle points out that obedience establishes whose servant one is. One may gay that Jesus is his Lord yet in the absence of obedience, his claim is exposed as false. This is not only true of the Christian who must “work out his own salvation” (Phil. 2:12, 13) but also in the conversion of an alien as well. The grace of God and obedience of faith are both essential in turning to Christ. These saints before conversion, i.e., before they “became obedient from the heart to that form of doctrine . . .,” were “servants of sin.” This clearly describes their state before conversion. Their conversion is described as obedience from the heart and their state after obedience as free from sin. The order given by the Apostle is: (1) servants of sin (2) obedience (3) free from sin and servants of righteousness. The grace of God has provided no detour. Obedience of faith is the only route to freedom from sin.

Contextual study reveals what was involved in obedience from the heart to that form of doctrine. “Or are you ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him through baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:31. The act of obedience which the apostle had in view was their being “baptized into Christ.” Yet there are those who contend that grace and baptism are antithetical and mutually exclusive. Those who are sympathetic or tolerant of such a view of grace and obedience, for the good of themselves and those they influence, should ponder the apostles teaching on the necessity of baptism for freedom from sin, in this treatise on “access by faith into grace.”

Rom. 10: 1-4: “Brethren, my hearts desire and my supplication to God is for them, that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For being ignorant of Gods righteousness, and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness to every one that believeth.”

Some of Pauls Jewish brethren, due to their ignorance of Gods arrangement, failed to “subject themselves to the righteousness of God.” The concerned student will want to know what it is to “subject” oneself to the righteousness of God! These Jews were ignorant of Gods righteousness due to their rejection of the gospel, “for therein is revealed a righteousness of God. . . .” (Rom. 1: 17). The apostle shows that they had heard the gospel – “Did they not hear? Yea, verily” (Rom. 10:18). They could have believed for He has before shown that “belief cometh of hearing” (Rom. 10:17). They are described as disobedient. “But as to Israel he saith, All the day long did I spread out my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people” (Rom. 10:21). These here described as a disobedient people are the ones that Paul said failed to subject themselves to the righteousness of God. Pauls prayer “that they might be saved” (Rom. 10: 1) shows that they were not saved – they are not of those of whom the apostle wrote that “we have had our access by faith into this grace wherein we stand.” Their failure to subject themselves to the righteousness of God is described as disobedience.

These quotations from the treatise on “access by faith into grace” powerfully and clearly establish the essential place of “obedience of faith” in salvation by grace.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 41, pp. 11-13
August 24, 1972

By Ezekiel Akinemi

It has been published in the May, 1972 issue of the Gospel Defender, which I publish, that certain individuals have constituted themselves as the Registered Trustees of the Church of Christ in Nigeria. Brother Eno Otoyo of the Christian Technical School, Oyubia – Oron, who is the present leader of the board, confessed that the board was formed in 1955 for certain purposes.

A document was signed on July 23, 1955 by His Excellency, J. W. Robertson, then the Governor-General of Nigeria, stating that three men were “duly appointed Trustees of Church of Christ, Nigeria.” The three men were “Huffard, Peden, and Horton.” Some other features of the document worth quoting are:

“Aim and Objects”

“The aim and objects of the Church of Christ in Nigeria are:

1. To teach Christianity.

2. To train and develop leaders in religious and moral thought and work.

3. To encourage and assist the advancement of education in Nigeria.

“Trustees”

1. The Trustees of the Church of Christ in Nigeria . . . shall be appointed at a general meeting of the missionaries of Churches of Christ in good standing and residing in Nigeria. 2. Such Trustees (hereinafter referred to as “The Trustees”) shall be three in number and shall be known as “Church of Christ-Nigeria, Registered Trustees.”

3. The Trustees may hold office for life.

4. Upon vacancy occurring in the number of trustees, a general meeting will be held to appoint another eligible member of the Church of Christ in Nigeria.

5. The Trustees shall apply to the Governor General for a certificate of Incorporation under the Land (Perpetual Succession) Ordinance chapter 107.

6. If such certificate is granted, the Trustees shall have the power to accept and bold in trust all land belonging to Churches of Christ subject to such conditions as the Governor-General may impose.

“Common Seal”

1. The Trustees shall have a Common Seal.

2. Such Common Seal will he kept in the custody of the Secretary who shall produce it when required for use by the Trustees.

3. All documents to be executed by the Trustees shall be signed by at least two of them and sealed with the Common Seal.”

The document further stated that the Church of Christ in Nigeria is a Corporation. The existence of this “Church of Christ Incorporated” under the rule of a Three-man “Registered Trustees” was known only to a handful of men until recently when the Trustees started to exercise their power of central control over the churches of Christ in Nigeria. Here are two instances of such exercise:

1. Last year, two evangelists from the U.S. brethren Leslie Diestelkamp and James W. Sasser applied for visas to come to Nigeria, but they were denied entry. Two congregations in Lagos sought to bear Immigration Responsibilities on behalf of these evangelists, but they were turned back because the current chairman of the “Registered Trustees,” Mr. Eno Otoyo, has signed a letter addressed to the Federal Immigration Office, Lagos, to The Nigerian Embassy, Washington, D.C. and to the Nigerian Consulate, New York, instructing them to refuse these men entry into Nigeria.

2. The Church of Christ in Owerri, East Central State, has consistently refused the false teaching of Jim Massey and rejected the overtures made to it by Stephen Okoronkwe, principal of the Onicha Ngwa Bible College, by Moses Okpara, Administrator of the Nigerian Christian Hospital, Onicha Ngwa and by  J. W. Nicks, another evangelist from flie U.S. Brother John Obijuru is a strong, faithful preacher who works with the Owerri church.

After Jim Massey and his clique failed in their struggle to seduce the Owerri church from the truth, they started to intimidate Brother Obijurn and the church by every diabolical means they could muster, in order to break their resistance against error. I quote one evidence of such intimidation in a court action taken by the “Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria,” on February 21, 1972, in the High Court of Owerri, against Brother John Obijuru:

“Plaintiff-Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria.

“Defendant – John Obijuru”

“Claim: The plaintiff claims from the defendant as follows:

1. Possession of the church buildings and premises of the plaintiff situated at Owerri judicial Division.

2. An injunction restraining the defendant, his servants and agents from entering the said church building and premises again.

Dated: 9 October, 1971

Issued: 7 Feb. 1972, to appear in court-21, Feb. 1972.”

To those who understand the truth and abide in it, the above revelation must be shocking. When these things became known to some faithful preachers in Lagos, the West, the Midwest, the East Central and the South East State, approach was made to those who currently hold the office of-Registered Trustees for the Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria. There were two meetings held at Uyo on March 17 and April 17, 1972. In the first meeting Timothy Akpapan gave the names of the Trustees as Eno Otoyo of the Christian Technical College at Oyubia-Oron, D. M. Anako of the Bible College, at Ukpom, Stephen Okorornkwo of the Bible College at Onicha Ngwa and N. A. Udo of Uyo. Since none of these men were present in the first meeting, a second was held on April 17 where Eno Otoyo confirmed the formation of the “Registered Trustees for the Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria.” He also admitted that certain U. S. evangelists have been refused entry into Nigeria by the Trustees.

The error of such activity was shown, and we pleaded that Eno Otoyo should get the board to dissolve forthwith. He rejected all of our pleas. Later efforts by brethren E.Ekanem of Uyo and E. J. Ebong of Lagos to persuade the Trustees to disband were in vain.

Brethren, the “Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria” with a three-man rule is another denomination. No more, no less. Think of the Roman Catholic with its Ecumenical Council and the Pope of Rome as chief, the Church of England with the Synods of “Reverends” with a President as the chief, then think of the “Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria” with a Council of “missionaries” and a three-man board of trustees headed by Eno Otoyo.

Remember the court action taken by the “Church of Christ Inc.) Nigeria” against a faithful preacher of the gospel, who, with the Owerri church has withstood their error. You know that a brother is not supposed to take his brother to court (I Cor. 6:1-8). Then imagine the “Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria” suing a faithful member of the Lords church in court without any just cause! All these are proof positive that “The Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria” is simply another sect which has fallen from the faith.

You remember their chief propagandist, Jim Massey, who came to Nigeria some months ago with a massive ten-page article, teaching brethren that they could arrange for one church to supervise the work of the other churches. He told us that other churches can send money to one super church so that the super church does the work of the churches, taking the oversight thereof. He also has argued that it is right for one man to be appointed as “Missionary Agent” who will receive money from many churches and allocate the money to preachers at his own discretion. In other words, he teaches that one man can be a supervising evangelist who will check on any laxity among preachers by controlling their salaries. This must remind you of the district or diocesan bishops of the Church of England. Eno Otoyo, D.M. Anako and Moses Okpara have been made paymasters on many occasions. They probably are still in that position.

In addition to the above false teaching and practice, Jim Massey teaches that hospital business should be in the budget of the church 15:13) because the hospital does good to men! But I think he forgot to include the suppliers of electricity, water, roads, and mail in his budget, for all of these are also good for men!

The same Jim Massey even wanted to make us believe that the church, with its God-given personnel, is not sufficient or competent enough to carry out the work of evangelism and benevolence, hence he advocates the building of institutions such as “The School of Preaching.” In a recent American publication Massey reports that the Sunset church in Lubbock, Texas plans to open such a school in Lagos “in response to urgent requests from J. C. Thomas, Jr., who has been in Lagos five years.” You hear of the Baptist Seminaries and the Roman Seminaries where they brain up their “Reverends, Pastors, and Fathers.” “The Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria” schools of preaching in the East have also been turning out “diplomats of digressive preaching.” But such diplomats are like fake doctors who prescribe wrong medicine for the sick. Is Lagos prepared to swallow such? I think not.

Do the churches of Christ in Nigeria have any need for “Registered Trustees” in order for the churches to exist? There is no need for it at all on a joint basis, since each local congregation is independent of the others. There is no functioning organism through which all churches can act together. It is left to each congregation to meet the requirement of the local authority or State Government in its area if such registration is at all demanded.

Brethren, what are we to do with the fallen away brethren who refuse to turn back to God? It is simple. We must follow the word of our Lord in Rom. 16:17 and 2 in. 9-11: “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have teamed; and avoid them.” “Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Pather and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed; for be that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” “The Church of Christ (Inc.) Nigeria,” with its three-man Executive rule is another plant which the heavenly Father hath not planted, and it shall be rooted up (Mt. 15:13).

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 41, pp. 7-9
August 24, 1972