Truth Magazine

By Connie W. Adams

In the October 14, 1971.Truth Magazine, I reported excerpts from a letter which Kenneth J. Wilkey, President of Philippine Bible College, wrote to a gospel preacher on the island of Palawan. Near the close of that article I stated that he “is bolder at a distance than he cares to be in person. He was in M’lang, Cotabato the week before the debate between J. T. Smith and Eusebio Lacuata and came back the day after we left, but for some strange reason could not be there the week of the debate to encourage his Filipino brother in the debate.”

It has been called to my attention by brother Lacuata that brother Wilkey was not with the American brethren who came to M’lang the week before the debate. My statement on this is therefore in error and I hereby offer my apologies to brother Wilkey. I should have verified the matter rather than relying on impressions which were not correct. Also, to set the record straight, the American missionaries from Luzon did not return to Mlang the day after we did as implied in this article and stated by me in two articles in other papers. I have sent corrections to both of them. Here is what happened. These men were in M’lang the week before the debate to preach in the plaza. They had obtained permission to conduct services there beginning the day after we left. It was common knowledge in M’lahg that they had such permission. Brother Lacuata writes that he suggested they return to Luzon because of the rain. There were there the weeks before the debate. They were not at the debate to encourage Lacuata. They did not use their permit to return and preach the day after we left. I have never intentionally misrepresented anyone. My apologies to all concerned. I hope this puts the record straight. My thanks to brother Lacuata for calling this to my attention

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 22, p. 2
April 6, 1972

By William C. Sexton

I feel that every sane person wants to be happy in this life. Most every one, I believe, desires also to contribute to the well-being of humanity. Yet, it is evident that 1114″ 4o not know how to be happy; they have no-t-16findthe formula, or, having found it lack the faith and courage to apply it.

No doubt many persons do not really know what happiness is. If asked to define happiness, they could not give an adequate answer. Is it contentment? Is it having every fleshly desire filled? Is it being without work to do? Is it being without responsibility?

Without leaving any misconceptions about having all the answers, I do want to consider a passage of scripture which I feel is important in this respect. (I Pet. 3:10-12). Peter ways: If a person would see “good days,” he must do certain things, or we might say follow certain rules.

Real happiness is no accident. It does not just come to some and evade others. If one expects to reap a corn crop, he must first prepare the ground, then plant good seed in the proper season, cultivate it and wait till harvest time. And with all this, the wise farmer will recognize that there are many other factors over which he has no control; God makes it all possible. The same is true, I affirm, for the person who desires to reap a harvest of happiness. It does not just happen by chance. Certain things must be done, if one expects to “see good days.”

Man alone, with his wisdom, cannot produce lasting happiness (Jer. 10:23). The Creator has set forth the formula; if man will follow, I am convinced he has the greatest chance possible of obtaining lasting happiness — here and now and it reaching into eternity.

The “good days” of which Peter speaks, means a fruitful and meaningful life. It is what we might call a “successful life,” judged in light of eternity and considering the whole of man. In order to accomplish this goal, seeing good days, one must:

1. Control his tongue and the mind behind it. “Let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile.” It is out of “the abundance of the heart” that “the mouth speaketh” U. 6:45). The person who violates this rule cannot we “good days.” Look around and gee if this does not hold true in real life. Will you be persuaded? Quickly remove from your mind every suggestion of deceit  “speak no guile.” If it is not first in the heart, it cannot emerge from the mouth.

2. Be negative toward “evil” — that which is contrary to God’s will, and be positive toward that which is “good.” The Lord knows man in his entirety; and He also understands exactly what man needs to be satisfied; likewise, His directions are to that end. Man is tempted by a great amount of “evil” in the world. Often he endeavors to justify his acts by saying, “everybody is doing it.” So what? That does not make it right, beloved! One must do more than just avoid evil; he must be active in that which is “good,” according to God’s standard. No one can be genuinely happy “doing nothing.” Constructive activities — worshipping, serving, and living for God — are a necessity.

3. He must seek peace! Peace must be pursued; effort and time must be spent in this endeavor. Peace is being in harmony with God, doing His will and trying to move others to comply with the same. One must be a Christian to be at peace with God (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:16; Acts 11:26). Others, therefore, must be brought to a knowledge of His will, and they must be caused to render obedience to it, if they are to be at peace with God. Each person is to live peacefully with all men, if he possibly can (Rom. 12:18).

4. Be made righteous by the gospel (Rom. 1: 17). Only when one is made righteousness by complying with the good news of the covenant of Christ, does he have the right and privilege of talking with God and being sure that he is heard. However, when he carefully complies fully with the terms of pardon, he is forgiven and has the blessing of God. This is the person who has lasting happiness. Yes, he’ll have a heavy heart at times and be required to suffer hardship and endure pain, but in his heart he’ll have a peace of mind that can praise God while being bound with chains (Cf. Acts 16:25).

Beloved would you see good days? Are you familiar with the formula? Do you have the faith to apply it? I would to God that all men had a mind to see good days and were familiar with the formula and would apply it in their lives. However, I only have the power to express my concern and the words of God. You alone have the power to secure to yourself these good days. Won’t you, therefore, act immediately? I pray that you Will.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 19, pp. 11-12
March 16, 1972

By Roland Worth, Jr.

Those who claim the power to perform miracles today are open to challenge on several grounds. For them to dismiss the objections in arrogant unconcern is always possible. The “True Believer” is blind to all things he dislikes; those not obsessed with their belief will be of a more open mind.

(1) “Miraculous Healers” seldom if ever meet the Biblical pre-requisite for the healing powers they claim to exercise. The pre-requisite for possession of the healing ability was belief (Mark 16:17) but the preceding verse indicates that belief must be expressed in baptism in order to be of spiritual value. Hence baptism must precede the healing power. The significance of this is two-fold. The text (Verse 16) indicates that the baptism is to be for rather than because of the remission of sins. Any other purpose for being baptized would not result in securing healing powers. Furthermore, the word “baptize” means immersion, as even the non-Greek student can see in such passages as Colossians 2:12 and Acts 8:38. Any other act than immersion could not qualify a man for the gift of healing power. Since both the right motive and the right act (immersion) are required, a fatal stumbling block is thrown in the path of “healing” advocates.

(2) Healers emphasize the healing rather than the preaching. What is advertised in the paper and what message is spread by word of mouth when a “healer” comes to town? “A faith healing meeting.” That preaching will go with it is little mentioned; it is almost an irrelevancy. Yet in the first century the emphasis was considerably different. Miracles were used to vindicate the message being taught (John -4:48; 11:39-44). Indeed, John wrote his gospel out of the conviction that even a written account of Christ’s miracles could convert (John 20:30-3 1). But in today’s society, the healings have seemingly become an end in themselves.

(3) Healers emphasize monetary contributions rather than the service they are providing. It may not be true of all of them, but haven’t you noticed a tremendous “push” to have their listeners contribute? If passing the plate once doesn’t yield a satisfactory amount, they’ll pass it a few more times. Then there are the “healing” pens, handkerchiefs, and such like-all of which (let us be honest) are little more than gimmicks.

In their preoccupation with money, they seem more like the corrupt elements of the medieval Catholic clergy than like the apostles of Christ.

To support a man who is providing you the service of preaching is approved (I Corinthians 9:3-12) as is supporting destitute Christians (Romans 15:25, 31). But giving support for men to travel “healing” is something unknown to the New Testament. Peter’s first post-resurrection healing found him without a cent to his name (Acts 3:6) and there is no evidence that his healings ever earned him a penny.

(4) Healers often fail. In the New Testament we find only two cases where healings were anything but spontaneous. In one case the apostles could not heal an epileptic. Christ promptly pointed out that it was their lack of faith, not that of the epileptic, that made the healing impossible (Matthew 17:20). Modern “healers” are the opposite: they place the blame for their failure on the person they are trying to help.

In the other instance (Mark 8:22-26) a blind man’s eye-sight was restored. Although he could now see, he still could not focus his eyes right; Christ touched the man’s eyes again and the problem immediately corrected itself. The delay was a mere matter of seconds. Even if the eyes had never been able to focus rightly the healing was such that no modern healer could imitate it.

Contrast these two “difficult” healings (both of which resulted in a complete recovery) with the ignoble record of modern “healers.” When we compare the thousands who come for healing with the few who are “healed,” we can only conclude that the successful “healing” is the exception not the norm. Medical doctors have a far better “track record.”

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 19, pp. 11-12
March 16, 1972

By Larry Ray Hafley

Mr. Wayne Camp, President of the Illinois Missionary Baptist Institute and Seminary, was asked the following question in his weekly newspaper article (Feb. 10, 1971), “What is your opinion of one giving an account of his experience when he is trying to win someone to the Lord?” His answer:

“The Bible has several accounts of people who tell their experience of salvation. When Paul was being prosecuted for preaching the gospel of Christ he gave his personal experience (Acts 22). When he was before Agrippa, he also told him about his experience. He was so convincing that Agrippa declared: ‘Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.’ See Acts 26. When Paul wrote to 77mothy and to the church at Philippi he gave them an account of his conversion (I 77m. 1: 12-14; Phil. 3: 7-10). David seems to be giving his experience and that in a wonderful way, in the first three verses of Psalm 40:1-3.”

Mr. Camp attempts to justify the giving of personal experience accounts by the Scriptures. In that, he is to be commended. He cited divine testimony written and inscribed by the Spirit of God, but this does not justify our use of our personal experiences. The “experiences” to which he referred in the Book of God are the ones we are to use. We can be agreed on the experiences selected by the Holy Spirit, but when each of us begins to give his own view, we confront confusion and contradiction.

We must “learn not to go beyond the things which are written” (I Cor. 4:6). “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God” (I Pet. 4:11). Use the “experiences” stamped with the unerring veracity and infallible authenticity of the Holy Spirit.

Note the result of relying upon our personal experiences instead of upon the accounts in the word of God.

“Sir, how do I become a child of God?”

First Answer: “Well, if your parents had sprinkled water on you when you were an infant, you would already be one. That was my experience. “

Second Answer: “I went to a certain church, and they told me to pray and beg God until I felt I was ‘taken over’ by the Holy Spirit. Finally, after several nights of trying to get ‘under conviction’, I felt an inner glow, and I just knew I was saved. That was my experience.”

Third Answer: “I got real sick one time and was afraid I was going to die, bat one night Jesus just came into my heart. I told a preacher and they voted on me and I was accepted into their church. That was my experience.”

Each of these accounts represents the experiences of individuals. Which one may we depend upon to know if we are saved or not? Feelings, personal experiences, may be deceitful, but the word of God is sure and settled. To convert one to Christ, plant the seed of salvation, for “faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10: 17). My personal experience will not save. Christ and His word can (Jno. 8:32; 17:17)!

Let us study the “personal experiences” selected by the Holy Spirit. Let these be our guide in leading people to the Lord.

(1) Acts 2: The word was preached (v. 41. They were convicted by the word (v. 37). They repented and were baptized “for the remission of sins” (v. 38).

(2) Acts 8:5-12: The word was preached, and the people believed it and were baptized (v. 12). They were saved, for Jesus said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mk. 16:16).

(3) Acts 8:26-39: The Eunuch heard the word; he believed and was baptized, and then rejoiced.

(4) Acts 16:30-34: The jailer heard the word; he also believed and was baptized and then rejoiced.

These are “personal experiences” upon which we can rely! Why not accept the Bible standard as the pattern for our lives? Paul said that his “experience” is the one we should use. It was given “for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting” (I Tim. 1: 16). Let us use Paul’s experience and not our own.

Mr. Camp cited Acts 22, but he will not accept Paul’s experience as there recorded. Paul was told to “arise, and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Baptist doctrine says, “arise, wash away thy sins, and then be baptized.”

Paul was saved by God’s own “purpose and grace” (2 Tim. 1:9). He was “justified by faith” (Rom. 5: 1). He was “baptized into Christ” (Rom. 6:3). If he was saved before he was baptized, he was saved before he was IN CHRIST, for he was “baptized into Christ.” Paul received “redemption through his blood” IN CHRIST (Eph. 1: 7). So, he was not redeemed by the blood of Christ until he was “baptized into Christ” (Rom. 6:3). Paul’s experience included obedience to the words of Ananias, “arise, and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16).

We should be satisfied by the “personal experiences” which were recorded by the Author of the Bible. They are our pattern (2 Jno. 9; Phil. 4:9).

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 21, pp. 9-10
March 30, 1972