Truth Magazine

By A. A. Granke, Jr.

The work among the faithful who assemble at Angeles City, near Clark Air Base, Philippines is progressing well, we are pleased to report. The diligent efforts of the members have resulted in thirteen souls being added to Christ, from the first of January until the end of April of this year. Attendance is also increasing, and fifty-two were present for the morning worship Sunday, 30 April 1972. We are striving to become a self-supporting congregation and have recently undertaken partial support of Castorio F. Gamit, the regular preacher. Vicente P. Lintag recently resigned his secular employment to enable him to fully devote his time and energies to the cause of Christ. This is a courageous step, indeed, because the employment situation in the Philippines is critical, and it could be difficult to regain such a position at a later date. We believe the combined abilities of brethren Gamit and Lintap will be a valuable asset to the work here. Our program also includes plans for Juan S. Cunanan to begin a new effort in nearby Mabalacat with the help of other members here, in the near future.

How You Can Help

We need the help of our brethren. We will be grateful to you for remembering us in your prayers. The Filipino people are very religious in nature, and many are receptive to the Truth. With the Lords help we can reach more souls. There is another way you can help. Many American brethren receive periodicals published by Christians, and after reading them, discard them in the trash can. Most of these readers probably pay a commercial trash hauler to remove their refuse for them. Do you realize that for about the price of having a bundle of such journals removed to be burned, buried or otherwise disposed of – just a few cents – brethren in the Philippines could be reading and distributing your used materials? Most Filipinos cannot afford a subscription of their own. As an example, a $5 subscription, which costs more here due to international mail rates, costs the average Filipino almost a weeks pay. I recommend placing a box in a convenient location such as the church house vestibule, or having a member collect your bulletins and journals to send to Filipino brethren. If you send your bundles to me, I will be glad to see they are distributed throughout the Philippines.

My address is considered domestic mail, as the APO at Clark Air Base is an adjunct of the San Francisco Post Office.

Philippines – Bound Servicemen

If you are in the U.S. Armed Forces and are being reassigned to the Philippines, or if you know a Christian who is, I may be of help. If the destination is Clark Air Base, I will be happy to help you locate our meeting place, and arrange transportation for you, and help you become adjusted to your assignment here. There is a faithful congregation here, but there is also a larger, better known, digressive group near the base. If you are being assigned to another installation in the Philippines I will assist you in making contact with the faithful in that place.

There are faithful churches near most U.S. installations in the Philippines, but in many cases there are apostate congregations slightly more conveniently located, and usually having more Americans attending them. For these reasons many faithful brethren assigned in the Philippines identify and assemble with these latter groups. It is important to remember that while a Christian is in fellowship with error he is not a faithful child of God. Even if your unfaithfulness is just for the short time you may be stationed here, your growth as a Christian will be stunted, and you cannot expect to leave here as strong in faith as you would have been if you had been faithful. Faithful service to God is not so difficult that you must consider endangering your soul by serving Satan. Faithful brethren are willing to help you while you are here. Since we have no way of knowing you are coming, and when to expect you, please write us in advance.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 39, pp. 8-9
August 10, 1972

By Dudley Spears

After a week in Baguio City we returned to Manila and made our plans to go to Mindinao. We left Manila at 5:50 a. m. on Saturday, April 15. Davao City was our destination which we, reached in a little less than two hours flying on Philippine Air Unes Coach. There were about 10 or 12 brethren there to meet us. They had rented a jeepney and traveled some 60 miles to meet us. The trip home made their journey over 100 miles. Those who have never ridden over the roads of Mindinao in a jeep cannot appreciate how much was involved in these brethren making such a long trip. The roads are barely passable in some places and in others very dangerous. Gangsters and bandits still roam the countryside in Mindinao.

We rode for a little over six hours in the jeepney, stopping often for repairs and water. At one point we all had to dismount and walk across a weak bridge. All along the journey the roads were hot and dusty, but we finally arrived in MLang, Cotabato. Due to the early rising and the length of our trip we were exhausted. We stayed in MLang at a hotel that Saturday night and worshipped with the brethren in M*Lang the next morning. About 60 were present for both Bible study and worship. I taught the class and Brother Needham preached.

 

After dinner we rented another jeepney for the trip to Lambayong. We were scheduled for our first series of classes and speeches in Lambayong. Lambayong is about a three hour ride from MLang, over the same kind of roads just described. It is in the center of a large Muslim population. The brethren there live in the constant expectation of an outbreak of hostilities between the Ilongo tribe and the Muslim tribe. It is an age-old feud that is being politically exploited today, but nonetheless, a very present danger to many of our brethren. Some of them have had to evacuate their homes as a result of hostilities breaking out. Within 6 kilometers (about 4 miles) of the new building in Lambayong where the brethren worship, thirty native houses were burned out during hostilities and violence. A Muslim was ambushed in his house on the first night of our stay in Lambayong. Brother Needham was speaking at the time we heard the gunshot. It is a place of violence and danger at the present time. In the face of this our brethren are still carrying on New Testament Christianity though sometimes faced with great danger.

We arrived at near 5:30 p. m. Our trip was greatly delayed by some repair work that was being done to a bridge along our way. The storms last year had swollen the streams to the point that many of the bridges were weakened. We waited at least and hour and a half for the repairs to be made. Needless to say, our patience got one of its many workouts.

The journey from MLang to Lambayong takes one through the heart of the Muslim territory. While many stories of violence may be somewhat exaggerated, we observed that there is at least quite some basis for such stories. Every Muslim male we saw on the way was armed with a knife-a long knife. We were told that all of them were also armed with firearms. I did not doubt a word of it. Just here let me clarify something that is often reported in our newspapers. The news media often refers to the “Muslim-Christian” wars. Actually they mean the “Muslim-Ilongo” wars. The Ilongos are a tribe and so are the Muslims. The word “Christian” is erroneously used by most reporters.

In Lambayong, we had the largest assemblies gathered for our lessons. Both of us confined ourselves to teaching about preachers and their work during the day sessions. Each session, like everywhere we taught, was followed by a question and answer forum. Again, we found that the preachers present were very well read and studious. Some of the questions they asked were quite difficult to deal with. Jim and I tried to deal with their problems in the light of the Bible. We feel that much good was the result. Several preachers confessed to wrong-doings. Lest there be some speculative embellishing of that statement, let me hasten to say that there are some irregularities, but most of them present were the result of a lack of knowledge rather than rank dishonesty. There are (or were) some problems of dishonesty we found but these have, for the most part, been exposed and remedied. This is not to excuse such, but by way of explanation it should be remembered that many times American congregations have been remiss in checking closely into the work they support. It is no comfort, but the conservative brethren are certainly not alone in this problem. Should any of our institutional brethren want to make much ado out of this, they will find they are living in a glass house.

After several (20, I think) baptisms, we went back to MLang for our last series of lessons. Many of the brethren who attended in Lambayong came for the classes at MLang. Again we stayed in the hotel in MLang. We had stayed in a native house in Lambayong and were graciously treated by the aunt and uncle of Brother Virgilio Villaneuva, local preacher in Lambayong. They gave us every kind consideration they knew how to give and treated us in the very best possible way.

There were new faces that greeted us in MLang. Brethren who were not able to come to Lambayong came to MLang. The lectures began on April 21 and closed the following Sunday afternoon. While the largest assemblies gatheredat Lambayong, we probably had more preachers at MLang then we did anywhere in our trip. There were at least 70 present for the entire series of lessons. We baptized several in MLang, including two preachers from the Christian Missionary Alliance. In all, there were 63 baptisms dining our trip, five of them being preachers of denominational groups. Having done the work we wanted to do, we left a day or so early for our return to Manila and our trip back home.

We left Manila on April 27. 1 cannot tell you what emotions filled me as I left. It was a great experience. For the most part, in fact the greatest part by far, the preachers who stand for the truth in the Philippine Islands are the most dedicated and sincere people you will find anywhere in the world. I have no way to adequately express my gratitude to all concerned, but here goes a try. First I am thankful to God that our long trip was both successful and safe. I am thankful to have a family that could do without me for over a month. I am thankful for a companion like James Needham. He is, in every way, a devoted worker for the Lord and His cause. I am thankful to all who helped me sending finances with- which to make the trip. I am thankful to Rodi Tan, Victorio Tibayan and Andrew Gawe who more or less took the lead in looking after us while we were on Luzon. I am thankful to all who met us at the Davao airport and to Romulo Agduma for the same treatment while we were on Mindinao. To all who had a part, prayer or interest in the work, I am eternally grateful.

Next week will be my last installment in this series of articles. In it I want to make a small evaluation of the work here and offer a few suggestions to all that are interested in the work among Christians in the Philippines. I hope you will be looking for the article.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 39, pp. 6-8
August 10, 1972

By Cecil Willis

In the April 20, 1972 issue of the Gospel Guardian, there appeared a lengthy article entitled “Theological Liberalism at Abilene Christian College.” This article was written by a young man who then was a student at ACC, Randall Mark Trainer. Brother Trainer has since graduated and now lives in Austin, Texas.

Apparently there have been some who have been questioning the soundness of Brother Trainer, for he recently urgently asked me to publish an article stating what he believes on several fundamental points. He stated that some rumors persisted indicating that he had denied the faith, on certain salient points. He indicated that these rumors preceded his Gospel Guardian article. I have since published his article in order that Brother Trainer might have it publicly known what he believes, and lest he be misrepresented.

In the article under consideration, Brother Trainer used three columns of type defining what he meant by “liberalism.” By the time he finished narrowing his definition one would have a difficult time finding much “liberalism” anywhere! In this article, and in some others to follow, some things will be said and some evidence cited which will disagree with the conclusions drawn by Brother Trainer.

After narrowing his definition of “liberalism,” Brother Trainer concluded: “I must honestly report that I have seen very little evidence of its presence. To be specific, I know only two or three students whom I would consider theological liberals, and no faculty members whatever. Neither does there appear to be a trend in the direction of theological liberalism . . . . I have been in the classes of six professors in the Bible Department (Carl Brecheen, Everett Ferguson, Bill Humble, Robert L. Johnston, Thomas Olbricht, and J. W. Roberts). If any of them has presented anything even remotely akin to theological liberalism, I am unaware of it…. If some brotherhood watchdogs have discovered an onslaught of theological liberalism in the church of our Lord today, they must have found it somewhere else than Abilene Christian College, at least as far as I can tell. On the contrary, if and when theological liberalism does become a serious threat to the church, I hope and expect that our brothers at ACC will be in the first ranks in the battle against it.”

That is a right good testimony, isnt it? A speech like that would make good advertising propaganda, wouldnt it? At least, the ACC Administrators thought it would. John C. Stevens, the President of ACC, photographically reproduced the Guardian article, and widely circulated it through the brotherhood. It served his purposes well. The Firm Foundation, whose editor is on the board of ACC, also published the article, as did the Christian Chronicle. Apparently it has given our liberal brethren throughout the country a good deal of comfort. I might suggest to our young Brother Trainer that it could well be that naive articles like this may be what has caused his convictions to be suspect in the minds of some, though he acknowledges there were some suspicions before he wrote the article.

But there are a number of evidences that contradict the glowing report given by Brother Trainer. For several years, Ira Rice has been carrying on a campaign against some of the liberals among the liberal element in the church. Paradoxically, few men have been more liberal in several different ways than has Brother Ira Rice. In the December 31, 1967 Far East Newsletter, Brother Rice presents some inside testimony evidencing that there was considerable liberalism within the ACC faculty. His proof was the testimony of an ACC Bible faculty member, Eugene Clevenger. Brother Clevenger formerly was a faculty member at Florida Christian College, and I studied under him, as I did under Brother Bill Humble, now the Dean at ACC. Neil Lightfoot, who is a now a faculty member at ACC, and I were schoolmates at Florida College. Tony Ash, now with Pepperdine, formerly was an ACC faculty member, and also a schoolmate of mine at Florida College. I mention the names of these brethren, since some of their names will appear in the letters which I am about to quote.

Clevengers Letters

On October 5, 1967, Brother Clevenger wrote Brother Rice to commend his book Axe on the Root, which book was devoted to the exposure of modernism within the liberal element of the Churches of Christ. Clevenger then said: “Since you called my name in the book with regard to the R. B. Sweet Living Word Commentary, I thought you might be interested in a letter which I wrote David Stewart on April 29 of, this year. I am enclosing a copy of the letter. Neil Lightfoot has also withdrawn from the Commentary, and I am hoping that others of us who are not in agreement with the views of such men as I named in the letter will also withdraw. I want you to know that I sincerely appreciate the Christian vigilance and courage which you have and are manifesting, and I am with you 100%. If I can help you in any way, please let me. . . .”

Then follows Clevengers letter addressed to David Stewart who then was Director of Publications for the Sweet Publishing Company of Austin, Texas, the publishers of the Living Word Commentary.

“Dear David: This is to inform you that I have decided not to write the Living Word Commentary on Ephesians, Colossians and Philemon for the following reason.

“I was conscious from the beginning that many of the writers of this commentary were theological liberals, but I thought that if men like Frank Pack, Raymond Kelcy, Neil Lightfoot and a few others could join with you in this effort, I could too. However, after considering the matter carefully, I have about concluded that the liberals have gained control of the R. B. Sweet Company, and my opinion is that you have a few conservative brethren as writers to make the set respectable to a broad segment of the brotherhood.

“I have decided not to have a part in this cooperative effort with such liberals as Everett Ferguson, Abe Malherbe, Tony Ash, Dick Batey, Bob Johnson, Pat Harrell, Don McGaughey, J. W. Roberts. The time is fast approaching when the position of such men as are on the Bible faculty of Abilene Christian College must be made known to the brotherhood, and I have decided that I for one, will do what I can to expose the liberalism that prevails in the Bible Department here at ACC.

“I ask you, therefore, in view of my feelings on the subject and in view of what I plan to do in exposing some of these brethren, to withdraw my name from the Living Word Commentary. I may add, if anyone wants to know the reason for this withdrawal, you are at liberty to tell them what I have said in this letter. Sincerely yours, (s) Eugene W. Clevenger.”

Rice then wrote Clevenger in reply, in the course of which letter, Rice stated: “The evening your letter of October 5 reached me (being relayed to me in Nashville by -my secretary in Dallas), the family and I had been invited to dinner at the B. C. Goodpastures. Since I was leaving the following morning for my next World – Missions Workshop (at Karnes / Knoxville, Tennessee), I took it along with me to discuss with Brother Goodpasture. In handing it to him, I commented that this may be the break-through, which is sorely needed, to get those who really believe sound doctrine to stand together against the rising apostasy. When he had finished reading it, he agreed.

“In fact, he asked me if it would be all right for him, too, to write a word of appreciation and encouragement to you. I told him I thought this would be most appropriate. Perhaps by now you may already have heard from him.

” . . . I just must not let another day go by without telling you how grateful I am for your stand and your willingness to stand up and be counted on the side of truth. Please tell Brother Neil Lightfoot that I honor him for having withdrawn from the Commentary. God bless you both.

“In your writing to me, may I assume that I am free to publish and/or quote from your letter and enclosure? This would go far toward encouraging the brethren generally to take a stand….

“In looking through the list of those you had named to Brother David Stewart as liberals, I knew all of them to be such with the exception of two — Bob Johnson and J. W. Roberts. I have documentation on most of the others. I just dont know Bob Johnson well enough to say what his views are. And I was unsure concerning brother Roberts.

“Gene, any documentation you may have regarding the views of any of these brethren, please let me have it. I would not wittingly misrepresent them or any one at all. I do not fear to publish what I can prove. However, I have had to withhold several names so far simply because I could not prove what I really believe concerning them. As documentation comes to hand, one by one their hands must be called. There is no compromise possible between truth and error. I know you will help on this all you can….”

Well, to say the least, there is a wide diversity between what Brother Clevenger said he saw in the ACC Bible faculty and what our young brother said he found there. More will be said about this situation next week.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 39, pp. 3-5
August 10, 1972

By John W. Hedge

The church which Christ promised to build (Matt. 16:18) was built in the first century and individuals became members thereof. (Acts 2:47) The time and place of its establishment were foretold by Old Testament prophets (Is. 2:24; Zech. 1: 16) along with its permanency. (Dan. 2:44) It was said to have been purchased by the blood of Christ (Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:25) and that God was to be glorified in it “throughout all ages, world without end.” (Eph. 3:21)

These passages of scriptures establish the value or importance of the church of the first century. To say that it was brought into existence at the cost of the life of the Son of God, and yet hag nothing to do with the saving of mankind, is equal to saying that the Lord paid too high a price for a non-essential. It is significant to notice that everything which Christ has done for the individual to the end that he might be saved, he has done equally as much for the church. Did he love the individual? The New Testament tells us that “he loved the church and gave himself for it.” (Eph. 5:25.) Did he purchase redemption for the individual? Did he not purchase the church? (Acts 20:28) And the apostle speaks of “the redemption of the purchased possession,” which is the church. (Eph. 1: 14.) So, since Christ has done as much for the church as he has for the individual, it must follow that the church is all-important in the scheme of redemption. Without it Christ would have no “Bride.” Without it there would be the Shepherd and the sheep but no “sheepfold.” Without it Christ would be “head” but without a “body.”

In the beginning of the church of the first century, it was never referred to as a denomination or combination of such. It was in existence for many, many centuries before denominational churches were heard of. Today the common idea prevails that “the Church of Christ” is composed of all the “Christian Denominations of Christendom.” Well it was not composed of such in the beginning, and if “the church of Christ” did exist in its beginning separate and apart from denominational churches, I wonder when God began to use another and different kind of material to constitute “the church.” The church of Christ is “one Body” and Christ is head of it, while denominational churches are many bodies with many religious “heads” or religious leaders. Thus the church of the first century is the very opposite of denominational churches.

The church of the first century represents the power and wisdom of God in bringing it into existence. To place it on equality with the denominational churches founded by men is equal to recognizing men as being equal with God. No man can equal God in wisdom and works; otherwise he would become a god himself. To say that man can establish a denominational church which is “just as good” as the one which Christ built in the first century is not only unscriptural but is unreasonable as well. Just as Christ “was in the world and the world knew him not” (Jno. 1: 10), so the church which he built in the first century is “in the world” today but the world knows it not. There is no good reason why men should be blind to its existence, and they will not be if they will turn to the New Testament in which both Christ and his church are revealed. The church that Christ built in the first century is as enduring as Christ himself for he is the Head and Savior of it. The institutions of men come and go with the years, but there is a kingdom which cannot be shaken or moved-the church of the first century.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 39, p. 2
August 10, 1972