Truth Magazine

By Max Tice

I remember the first business meeting I ever attended as a young Christian. Some of the brethren had a disagreement over how certain deacons had been chosen. The climate in the room quickly grew significantly warmer as heated accusations and sarcastic comments were being exchanged. I came away feeling somewhat disillusioned and wondering how these could be the same people with whom I had worshiped so often. Little did I realize that this was only a foretaste of bitter experiences yet to come.

Having been a Christian now for over thirty years, I have both witnessed and heard about many scenes in which brethren have displayed less than exemplary and often out-right disgraceful behavior toward one another. These episodes have been especially common in Bible classes and business meetings. Imagine the effect of such conduct upon young Christians and visitors. Imagine also the demoralizing impact upon a local church. Although it is inevitable that brethren will sometimes disagree, it is far from necessary that they wrangle and misbehave. In James 4:1, James asks, “What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members?” In other words, such things are the product of allowing fleshly lusts to have free reign. Whenever a little thoughtlessness and twisted reasoning are added to these evil desires, then shameful conduct is an absolute certainty. Habits are formed which lead to misbehavior under the slightest provocation.

It is in the hope of promoting peace, that I would like to discuss some of these habits and the means by which they can be broken. I humbly ask you as a reader to own responsibility for your actions. Please do not say, “I’ll be sure to give this article to brother. He’s the one who needs it.” What about you? Do you have any of the habits which are described below?

Failure to Listen to Others

I have sometimes witnessed two brethren arguing with one another who were in complete agreement on the topic under discussion. Why were they arguing? Because they did not know they agreed? Why didn’t they know? Because somebody wasn’t listening. Some brethren are terrible listeners (with a capital terrible)! When they recite what they think someone else has said, it is often the very opposite of what was actually said. Although an entire room full of people may try to tell a brother he has misunderstood another party, he will continue wasting everyone’s time while blasting away at his supposed opponent.

Brethren there is a very simple solution to this problem, assuming that one does not just wish to fight. It is called paying attention. If someone tells you that you have misunderstood what was said, maybe you have. Ask for clarification.

Failure to Listen to Self

I have a strong feeling that if some brethren could watch themselves on video, they would be surprised at how they “come across” to other people. If only they could hear their ill-natured tone and inflammatory language, perhaps they would make some changes. Proverbs 12:18 states that “there is one who speaks rashly like the thrusts of a sword, but the tongue of the wise brings healing.”

Insistence on One’s Point of View

In both Bible classes and business meetings, there are sometimes brethren who have not outgrown the immature self concept of egocentrism. Everything must revolve around them. They seek to dominate discussions, and their point of view has to be right. The controversies which they generate are not really about the meaning of a Bible verse or some decision by the elders or the men of the congregation. They are about ego! These brethren feel a need to control others. Their behavior may be driven by insecurity, jealousy, or pride. The cure for this personality defect can be found in heavy doses of brotherly love and a biblical (rather than a twisted) concept of self.

Exaggeration of Questions Importance

With some brethren, nearly every question is a “matter of life and death.” Those who take the “wrong position” must be fiercely debated in the interest of sound doctrine. For example, consider all of the heated exchanges that have arisen over whether or not people baptized in John’s baptism be-fore Pentecost need to be rebaptized (not that they know too many to whom this would apply). This does not mean that such questions are unworthy of Bible class time. There are many subjects which do not affect basic issues of faith and God’s requirements for our salvation that are interesting to study. Yet, we must not exaggerate their importance. They are worth a limited amount of discussion. However, they are not worth embarrassing arguments with exhibitions of hot temper and rude remarks.

The Tendency to Judge Others

One reason some brethren get so angry during business meetings and Bible classes is their habit of judging others. They assume there are hidden agendas behind proposals. They imagine that the reason for a disagreement over a Bible passage is that the other party has no respect for God’s Word.

In short, they believe that any number of evil motives most likely drive other people’s words and actions. While these assumptions may sometimes be correct, they may also amount to jumping to completely erroneous conclusions. Both Jesus and James warned against unjust judging of others (Matt. 7:1,2; Jas. 4:11, 12). James asked the question: “Who are you who judge your neighbor?” Indeed, who are we to play God and pretend to know with certainty the innermost thoughts of another man’s heart?

Conclusion

Whenever we behave in such a way as to unnecessarily alienate our brethren and cause visitors to our classes to wish they had never come, we should be ashamed. We are allowing worldly lusts, thoughtlessness, and twisted reasoning to take control. Although we cannot avoid having disagreements, we can certainly avoid shameful conduct. If Christ lives in us, it will be so!

Guardian of Truth XL: 7 p. 22-23
April 4, 1996

By A. A. Granke, Jr.

As Christians ought (1 Tim 2:1-4), we have been praying for our government and all men, that they might come to know the truth, and that God would help our leaders make right decisions which accord with his will. “For righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people” (Prov. 14:34). In regard to the abortion issue, here are eight reasons why we should realize that God has been hearing and answering our prayers (James 5:16), that there is more reason than ever to keep praying (1 Thess. 5:17), and that we ought to be abundant in our thanksgiving to God for honoring our requests (Phil. 4:6).

1. Last August, Norma McCorvey was baptized in a Dallas, Texas, swimming pool. She renounced her lesbian lifestyle, now even opposes all abortion, and works for Operation Rescue headquarters, in Dallas. Not by any means the only woman to abandon the pro-abortion cause on religious grounds – indeed, many others have done the same; but as the “Jane Roe” of the infamous 1979 U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision which established murder of the unborn as a “fundamental Constitutional right,” she is, by far, the highest profile defection from their ranks.

2. Feminists and social liberals are beginning to recognize flaws in their pro-abortion position, and are emphatically saying so. For ex-ample, in the October edition of The New Republic, America’s fore-most liberal magazine, feminist Naomi Wolf criticized the abortion movement. She wrote:

To its own ethical and political detriment, the pro-choice movement has relinquished the moral frame around the issue of abortion. It has ceded the language of right and wrong to abortion foes. The movement’s abandonment of what Americans have always, and rightly, demanded of their movements – an ethical core – and its reliance in-stead on a political rhetoric in which the fetus means nothing are proving fatal.

We are also in danger of losing something more important than votes. We stand in jeopardy of losing what can only be called our souls. Clinging to a rhetoric about abortion in which there is no life and no death, we entangle our beliefs in a series of self delusions, fibs, and evasions. And we risk becoming precisely what our critics charge us with being: callous, selfish, and casually destructive men and women who share a cheapened view of human life.

Any doubt that our current pro-choice rhetoric leads to disaster should be dispelled by the famous recent defection of the woman who had been Jane Roe. What happened to Norma McCorvey? To judge by her characterization in the elite media and by some prominent pro choice feminists, nothing very important. Her change of heart about abortion was relentlessly “explained away” as having everything to do with the girlish motivations of insecurity, fickleness and the need for attention, and little to do with any actual moral agency.

Norma McCorvey should be seen as an object lesson for the pro choice movement – a call to us to search our souls and take an-other, humbler look at how we go about what we are doing. For Norma McCorvey is in fact an American Every woman: She is the lost middle of the abortion debate.

3. Abortion advocates are even beginning to notice the disingenuousness of their rhetoric, and to concede what Christians have argued all along, the obvious fact that abortion is killing, and human beings are the victims. George McKenna answered the following questions in an article appearing in the September issue of the ultra-liberal magazine, Atlantic Monthly:

“The Clinton Administration, the first administration clearly committed to abortion, seems to be trying hard to promote it without mentioning it.

Why, in a decade when public discourse about sex has become determinedly forthright, is “abortion” so hard to say? No one hesitates to say “abortion” in other contexts – in referring, for example, to aborting a plane’s takeoff. Why not say “abortion of a fetus”? Why substitute a spongy expression like “termination of pregnancy”? And why do abortion clinics get called “reproductive health clinics” when their manifest purpose is to stop reproduction? Why all this strange language? What is going on here?. . . What is it about abortion that is so troubling? The obvious answer is that abortion is troubling because it is a killing process … [Abortion clinics’) primary purpose is to kill human fetuses.

4. In November and December, powerful medical testimony by nursing, OB/GYN, and anesthesiology experts and drawings depicting partial birth abortion (PBA), also known as “dilation and extraction” (D&X), displayed in committee hearings and on the floors of the U.S. Senate and House, fueled several months’ debate which concluded with both chambers passing legislation outlawing PBAs. Although the President intends to veto it, it was the first legislation either house had passed banning any method of abortion, since the Roe v. Wade decision, in January 1973, and it is one of several key pro-life issues awaiting disposition in the present balanced budget impasse, where much more is at stake than a mere seven dollars, in seven years!

5. Other legislation regulating abortion has also been passed by Congress and signed by the President, including:

An appropriations bill for the Treasury Department, Postal Service, and other agencies, prohibiting coverage for abortions under federal health insurance, except in cases of rape or incest, or to save the mother’s life.

An appropriations bill banning abortions at all U.S. military facilities worldwide.

6. In the public debate, the tide is turning against abortion, as evidenced in November 1994, when pro-life candidates won election in all Congressional and Senatorial contests against pro-abortion candidates and incumbents nationwide.

7. Pro-abortion politicians are surrendering the field of battle. The freshman Congressmen’s determination to uncompromisingly represent their constituents’ pro-life, anti-abortion views, to date, has contributed to decisions by twelve pro-abortion U.S. senators not to seek reelection in 1996, including Democrats Shroeder (Colorado), Bill Bradley (New Jersey), Paul Simon (Illinois), and Re-publican Alan Simpson (Wyoming).

8. Victories won nationally reflect even more victories won at the state level, as legislative and executive measures favoring righteousness succeeded in at least 21 states, during the past year. Here are a few of them:

 Beating Congress to the punch, the Ohio House voted last spring to outlaw partial birth abortions.

 Legislation requiring informed consent for abortion was enacted in Indiana, Louisiana, and Montana. An informed consent bill passed both houses of the Missouri legislature, but was vetoed by the governor. The Rhode Island Senate also passed such a bill, and similar legislation cleared committees of the Alabama Senate and the North Carolina House.

 Illinois, Montana, and Tennessee enacted new laws, and Louisiana amended its statue, to mandate parental notice or consent before an abortion can be performed on a minor. Similar bills have passed both houses of the Iowa legislature, as well as the Delaware, North Carolina, and Washington Houses of Representatives, and the Oregon Senate. Parental notice or consent legislation has also cleared senate committee hurdles in Alaska and Texas.

 Montana enacted legislation outlawing abortion by anyone other than licensed medical doctors. All but a handful of states now have such laws, notwithstanding abortion industry exertions to promote authorization for abortion procedures by others besides physicians.

 A bill passed by the Washington House requires doctors to inform women seeking abortion of numerous studies suggesting that women who undergo elective abortion prior to their first live birth face an increased risk of breast cancer. It further orders the state health department to compile and summarize research on this possible connection. Pennsylvania has allocated funds to analyze current studies of the link, as well.

 Although, Roe v. Wade prevents states from criminalizing abortion, most states consider it a felony homicide to kill an unborn child by any other means, including death resulting from motor vehicle accidents. South Dakota came on line with new legislation last year, and Georgia and Kansas increased their penalties. Such laws clearly imply that if Roe ever falls, the days of legalized abortion in America are numbered.

Conclusion

Obviously, the cause of righteousness has not gained all we could hope for, but these are steps in the right direction for which we ought to give thanks. Let us diligently continue to watch, pray, and work while it is still day.

Guardian of Truth XL: 8 p. 8-9
April 18, 1996

By Mike Willis

“Give unto the Lord the glory due unto his name; worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness” (Psa. 29:2).

Holiness has a beauty all of its own. There is something marvelous about a character that is pure in heart, without guile, devoted to the Lord’s service, lovely, and loveable. The beauty of holiness is “the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit” (1 Pet. 3:4). The beauty of Christ’s holiness has attracted men to him for nearly twenty centuries.

In What Does Holiness Consist?

1. Holiness consists in consecration to God. A person must be to-tally devoted to the Lord’s service. Those things designated “holy unto the Lord” were those things consecrated to his service. It might be one’s house that was vowed to the Lord (Lev. 27:14), an animal, or the produce of his field that was set apart as his tithe (Lev. 27:28,30). Anything specifically separated to the Lord’s use was “holy unto the Lord.”

That which is “sanctified” is “set apart” to the Lord. Christians are “sanctified” when they obey the gospel. Paul wrote, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:9-11).

Jesus spoke of this kind of dedication to the Lord in these terms: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment” (Matt. 22:37-38). This is a spirit totally committed to the Lord.

Paul manifested this kind of holiness when he explained that his life was a “living sacrifice” to the Lord. “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service” (Rom. 12:1). He also wrote, “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me” (Gal. 2:20). This is a beauty in seeing a person so totally devoted to the Lord.

2. Holiness consists in becoming like God. Peter wrote, “But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation” (1 Pet. 1:15). Peter explained that we imitate God’s divine attributes when we add faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, etc. to our character. `By these ye might be partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:3-10).

We learn to love what God loves and hate what he hates. “Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way” (Psa. 119:104). The wise man wrote, “These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: a proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, an heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, a false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren” (Prov. 6:16-19). Sometimes, we look upon sin as something to be played with that has no ability to inflict harm on a person. Rather, sin is so dangerous, that it can only be hated. We therefore hate fornication and adultery, because we have seen what it does to families. We hate drug addiction and drunkenness, be-cause we have witnessed how it destroys lives. We hate lying and stealing, because we have seen how it eats the heart out of one’s character. We hate all forms of lasciviousness because of how it leads to other immoralities. We see the damnation of hell to which all of these lead and we hate sin. Anyone who does not hate sin is not God-like.

Look at what God loves. He not only loves righteousness but also those who practice righteousness. Sometimes the world describes those who are righteous as “geeks,” “nerds,” “right wing fundamentalists,” and similar epithets. But God loves the righteous and so should we. Paul wrote, “Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God” (2 Tim. 1:8). Perhaps there were some who were ashamed of Paul, like there are some who are ashamed to be associated with those who are righteous. If we are going to be God-like we will love both righteousness and those who practice righteousness.

Becoming like God also leads to developing the virtues of righteousness. We learn to be patient like God. The quick-tempered person has not become God-like. Think how God would act toward those who sin (that includes me), if he had the quick-tempered nature some of us have. We learn to love like God. God’s love is self-sacrificing and is full of grace – that is, it is given toward those who do not deserve it. We can be God-like when we show love to those who have done nothing to deserve our love.

Conclusion

When a person who meets the descriptions listed above brings his worship to God, he is doing what the verse in Psalm 29:2 is saying – worship God in the beauty of holiness. We would be wise to give more attention to bringing the “beauty of holiness” when we come to worship than fretting so much on whether or not one’s shoes match one’s skirt or purse, whether or not the tie and suit matched, and other things pertaining to one’s outward appearance.

Guardian of Truth XL: 8 p. 2
April 18, 1996

By Ferrell Jenkins

Easter is a widely-observed annual celebration commemorating the resurrection of Christ. You probably have noticed that Easter comes at a different time each year. “Easter is the first Sunday after the first full moon that falls on or next after the vernal equinox (March 21 in the Gregorian calendar); if the full moon happens on Sunday, Easter is celebrated one week later. Easter Sunday cannot be earlier than March 22 or later than April 25; dates of all other movable church feasts depend on that of Easter” (Webster).

The Origin of Easter

Some church historians assert that Easter observance began in the first century, but they must admit that their first evidence for the observance,,. comes from the second century (Schaff, History of the Christian Church II:207; Latourette,` A: History of Christianity, 1:137). There soon arose a bitter controversy over which day Easter was to be celebrated. Some were observing it on any day of the week, and others were celebrating it only on the nearest Sunday. This indicates that they had no instruction from the Lord on this matter. By A.D. 325 the council of Nicaea de-creed that it should be on Sunday, but did not fix the particular Sunday. The exact time of observance was deter-mined by later councils.

Is Easter in the Bible?

The word Easter is only found one time in the English translation of the Bible and there it is a mistranslation. The King James rendering of Acts 12:4 used the phrase “intending after Easter.” Albert Barnes, a noted Presbyterian commentator who wrote in the nineteenth century when the King James version was widely used, said, “There never was a more absurd or unhappy translation than this. The original is simply after the Passover. The word Easter now denotes the festival observed by many Christian churches in honor of the resurrection of the Saviour. But the original has no reference to that, nor is there the slightest evidence that any such festival was observed at the time when this hook was written. The translation is not only unhappy, as it does not convey at all the meaning of the original, but because it may contribute to foster an opinion that such a festival was observed in the time of the apostles” (Barnes Notes on the New Testament, XI, 190). The word translated Pass-over, and the one used in Acts 12:4, is pascha. It means “a passing over” and is used with reference to the Jewish festival of Passover which was celebrated on the 14th of the month Nisan. This same word is used in Matthew 26:2; Mark 14:1; Luke 2:41; 22:1; John 2:13, 23 and other places, and in every instance is translated Passover in the King James Version except Acts 12:4. More recent versions correctly use the term Passover in Acts 12:4. It is absurd to think that Herod Agrippa I wanted to celebrate the resurrection of Christ. The Scripture says that he “laid hands on some who belonged to the church, in order to mistreat them. And he had James the brother of John put to death with a sword .. he proceeded to arrest Peter also” (Acts 12:1-3).

New Testament Christians Did Not Observe Easter

The famous fourteenth edition of Encyclopedia Britannica says, “There is no indication of the observance of the Easter festival in the New Testament, or in the writings of the apostolic Fathers. The sanctity of special times was an idea absent from the minds of the first Christians” (VII: 859). The apostle Paul warned against the observance of feast days, new moons, etc. (Gal. 4:10-11; Col. 2:16-17). Another reliable source says, “In apostolic times the Christians commemorated their Lord’s resurrection every Sunday, by meeting on that day for worship. When Paul refers to Christ as our passover (1 Cor. 5:7) his language is metaphorical and cannot be regarded as containing any allusion to a church function” (A Dictionary of Religion and Ethics 140). For many people, Easter has become the one time of the year they attend church services. Concerning urging of Catholics to receive Holy Communion the question was asked, “They must go at least once a year if they would be regarded as Catholics?” “Father” Smith answers, “Yes, during Easter time” (Father Smith Instructs Jackson 159). Many forget the admonition of Hebrews 10:25: “not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more, as you see the day drawing near.”

Importance of the Resurrection of Christ

Let no one imagine that we oppose the resurrection of Christ. It is the bedrock of Christianity and the deity of Jesus rests upon it (Rom. 1:4). Christians today meet every first day of the week, as did the early Christians, to observe the Lord’s Supper (Acts 20:7). The first day of the week is a memorial to the resurrection of Christ. The death, burial, and resurrection of Christ serves as the form of an individual’s death to sin, burial in baptism, and resurrection to walk a new life as a new creature in Christ (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Rom 6:3-11; Col. 2:12).

Conclusion

“Whoever speaks, let him speak, as it were, the utterances of God” (1 Pet. 4:11). The celebration of Easter began too late, and without the expressed authority of God!

Guardian of Truth XL: 8 p. 1
April 18, 1996