Truth Magazine

By Bill H. Reeves

The warfare between truth and error is between Christ and Satan (Rev. 17:14). Involved is the “wisdom that is from above” and the wisdom that “is earthly, sensual, devilish” (Jas. 3:15). False teachers and false brethren (2 Pet. 2:1; 2 Cor. 11:26) employ the carnal tactics of human wisdom in their opposition to those who insist upon submission to Divine wisdom. Paul says (2 Cor. 2:11) that Satan seeks to gain advantage over us; to this end he uses “devices.” We should not be ignorant of these devices, or schemes. Human wisdom has just so much capacity; so, when we learn its principal devices, there are no more new ones to surprise us! The details may change a little, but that is all. In this article I want to list some major tactics employed by human wisdom, so that the reader can be well informed concerning them and able to readily recognize them in his battle for Truth.

Devices

First, let’s look at 2 Corinthians 2:11, “devices.” The Greek word, noema, means mental perception, thoughts and purposes. The “devices” or “schemes” are the forms which the thoughts take. When I preach in Spanish, coming to 2 Corinthians 2:1-11 read the word maquinaciones (machinations = a scheming or crafty action or artful design intended to accomplish some usually evil end). In our everyday English, “device” and “machinery” are well-known ideas. Satan has his machinery at work; we are not to be ignorant of these devices!

Experience In Living

Long life on earth allows one to accumulate a lot of experience about the way humans act. One becomes almost a prophet as he predicts what turn events will take, because he has seen for many years human wisdom at work. Carnal tactics are employed by those who refuse to submit to Divine wisdom, and human wisdom has only so many (principal) devices, or tactics. I was baptized fifty-two years ago; I have seen a lot of changes in the brethren throughout the years. Having lived through the “issues” of the ’50’s, concerning centralization (sponsoring-church-concept) and institutionalism (churches donating to human institutions for the accomplishment of church-work), now that I am again directly involved in this same battle in the Spanish-speaking field, I can readily recognize the age-old, carnal tactics, being used by liberal brethren among the Hispanics. Recently I completed a 48-page work in Spanish entitled, Tactics and Methods of Liberalism. I not only listed the principal carnal tactics being employed by liberal brethren today, but documented, such from personal letters, bulletins and other articles published by them, and from personal encounters with my erring brethren. In this English article, I will list the tactics and give some sample cases, but will not tire the reader with the many proofs that are at hand in the Spanish-speaking brotherhood.

Carnal Tactics

I. Ignorance and Prejudice. Liberal brethren (both Anglo-American and Hispanic), who have not informed their converts of the division which took place in the ’50’s and ’60’s, are now telling them about the “antis,” because in the Providence of God the truth on these issues is reaching a great many brethren throughout the Spanish-speaking world. But these “leaders” are not explaining the issues to the brethren, but rather using prejudicial terms to hopefully to prejudice their minds against us. The Hispanic brethren at large do not know what “anti” means, as it is being hurled about. The context in which they hear it implies that the “anti” is something bad! The term is being used simply to stigmatize brethren.

Sample: Brother Enrique Martorell, of Toledo, Spain, when he heard that brother Wayne Partain and I planned a preaching trip to Spain in December, 1984, sent a circular letter to the churches of that country, saying that we are “anti everything and more.” This had the desired effect; the churches were frightened and prejudiced against us, but had no earthly idea as to what the issue is that divides us.

Sample: A few years ago, brother Otto Alvarez, of Merida, Yucatan, Mexico was called an “anti” because he opposed a certain practice locally. Not knowing what was meant by that (since the term was simply used derogatorily), and having heard of some brethren 900 miles away who also had been called that, he traveled the distance to consult with them. And thus he learned why he had been called an “anti.”

Sample: In March, 1985, brother Alfonso Castillo of Guatemala wrote a brother in New York City and said that brother Partain and I had been in El Salvador and in Guatemala, teaching a different doctrine and causing uproars. He wrote: “I do not know if these men belong to the church of Christ . . . I am writing you for information.” The brother condemns us, states that he doesn’t know if we are even in the church of Christ, or not, and then solicits information! A fine judge he is – acting on ignorance!

II. False Representation. Before preceding, I call to the reader’s attention something that he will see over and over in his lifetime; that is, the false teacher is always guilty of that of which he accuses his opponent!

Sample: The day before brother Partain and I were to arrive in that city, the large, 300-member, liberal church in San Jose, Costa Rica circulated a special sheet to the church. It referred to us only as “men,” not brethren. It quoted a certain brother in New York City as saying that brother Partain had passed through that city like a hurricane, destroying the work of the Lord, leaving churches of some 110 members with barely 40. “This is the result of the terrible division that the anti’s came to do,” he wrote. The circular said: “These men will be trying to knock on your doors to deceive you. They will come to you with the appearance of piety and with smooth words . . . but their goal is destruction . . . . .. In March, 1984, we were in Costa Rica to hold a gospel meeting with a particular congregation that had formally invited us. That we did, and returned home. But the leaders of the liberal church did their best to misrepresent us. I wrote the four churches in New York City, purportedly decimated by brother Partain, and each one replied, flatly denying the ridiculous charges and stating that we are welcome there any time we can visit them. (I was with them during May of this year.) The congregations are from 20 to 60, at the most, in membership. Brethren from the one church in NYC, where the informant was a member, sent a letter to the liberal church in Costa Rica. This letter denied that said member had written any such thing about brother Partain. The Costa Rica church made no correction of the matter. Its leaders simply wanted to misrepresent us in order to control the minds of those who follow them.

In every controversy of any kind, one should always ask himself: What is the issue? and correctly define it in his own mind. Then, he should be sure that the opponent is dealing with the real issue, because if the opponent is not honest, he will either evade the issue, or misrepresent it! Don’t allow yourself to be caught up in a discussion without a proposition! Don’t allow yourself to be drawn away from the real issue, or off onto a false issue.

Note some false issues in the centralization and institutional controversy: “It’s a matter of methods,” “legalism,” “divisionists,” “destroying the peace,” “binding opinions,” etc.

Churches would do well to have classes on defining the issues, first of New Testament days (Judaism, Gnosticism) and then in history since then (Romanism, Protestantism, Modernism, the Missionary Society and instrumental music issues of the last century, Premillennialism, Centralization and Institutionalism). Many brethren are incapable of correctly defining these issues; no wonder the enemy of truth has it so easy in misrepresenting them!

III. Hatred. The very ones who so loudly accuse us of not “loving the church,” or “loving your brethren,” are so filled with hatred. The false teacher doesn’t like anyone to stand in his way. The Gnostics of New Testament days, egotistical, arrogant and conceited as the worldly-wise always are, hated the brethren who insisted upon apostolic doctrine (see passages in 1 John 2,3,4). With educated language the false teacher often pours out his contempt on those who stand in his way.

In the Spanish work on Tactics I quoted from letters from a number of “leaders” among my liberal brethren who, in writing to others about us said such things as: “They are dangerous Pharisees, introducing themselves subtly and with apparent humility,” “they are ravenous wolves in sheep’s clothing,” “Flee from them, flee from the Antis … . what they teach are pure lies,” “due to the hypocritical entrance of the antis . . . who sow the well known seed of hate and distrust,” “men whose god is pride, contention, and deceit,” “sacks of pus.”

The very ones who shout so loudly that we aren’t showing proper “love” have been so loveless themselves. It is always that way: they are guilty of the very kind of thing of which they accuse their opponents! It reminds me of a bulletin article (of a conservative church) I read recently, in which the preacher-editor raked over the hot coals some other preachers who allegedly had “raked over the hot coals Bro. _________ for positive preaching.” They’ll do it every time!

IV. Appeal to Numbers. “We must be right; look how many of us there are!” Such is the appeal of the false teacher. Contrast that with John 6:66,67. Jesus, who is truth, did not need followers to prove that he was truth. Truth stands alone, if no one wants to stand with it! Truth is not determined by numbers. But numbers is a favorite tactic of the carnal mind.

Brother Guy N. Woods used to say of the “antis,” “They are dying on the vine” (that is, not many left; not going anywhere). In September 1984, brother L. Haven Miller wrote to brethren in Spain, concerning brother Wayne Partain and me, and our going to Spain to preach, “I have known these two men for forty years . . some years after they graduated and were working in the Cause of Christ, they fell in with a group, a small minority, among churches of Christ in the U.S. which insists that certain types of cooperation among churches is very bad and is prohibited.”

The (carnal) purpose of stating “a small minority” is to frighten the reader and prejudice his mind. Being a carnal tactic, of course it is not concerned with consistency and truth. True disciples of Christ have never been a majority in this world. The New Testament church suffered an apostasy, and the majority became the Roman Church. Is the Roman Catholic Church therefore the true church?

Brother Jose Cuellar, in a publication in Puerto Rico several years ago, in an article entitled, “What Makes The Church Grow?” at the close mentioned without comment that the Madison, Tennessee church has 7,000 in Sunday Bible School, has 350 teachers, and that on a certain Sunday was going to try to reach 8,000. The obvious effect of such a statement is that of glorying in numbers.

The devil uses “numbers” to his advantage. Let us not be ignorant of his devices!

V. Lies. What is gained by lying? Well, human wisdom says that it can be very profitable at times. It succeeds in closing the minds of those who refuse to inform themselves. It prejudices their minds against those considered enemies of the promotion at hand. Of course, in time the lie is exposed and the liar suffers.

In Latin-America a number of different “leaders” in several different countries were circulating these lies against us “antis” who are preaching in Spanish and going into Central and South America: We don’t believe in sending money to preachers in Latin-America, we are “one cuppers,” we don’t believe in Bible classes, we don’t believe in having church buildings, we don’t have any place to preach in the U.S., so we are going to Latin-America, we are not even members of the church of Christ, etc. There are many liberal brethren who know that these are lies, but have not stopped their circulation.

VI. Cowardice. Many of the very ones circulating lies about us in Latin-America have absolutely refused to speak to us (they really love us, right?) even when we have gone to them in person. In one case pictures of several of us “anti” preachers, or a list of our names, have been posted on bulletin boards, warning the brethren to avoid us, and one of the preachers who did that refused to speak to brother Partain and to me, even though the three of us were invited by a congregation to preach on the same occasion (and we preached!)! When he finished his sermon, he walked out. But later, after we had left the country, he returned, and rebuked the church for inviting us. That church told him not to come back!

A preacher in the Yucatan peninsula of Mexico went to an “anti” church and told the brethren he would debate “10 Bill Reeveses at once.” The church informed me, and I sent formal propositions for debate to him and to the church. More than a year later I sill haven’t heard from him. Brother Larry White, of Louisiana, who has preached much in Central America, misrepresented me to brethren in El Salvador. I proposed that he and I debate our differences there, sent him a copy of the letter with the proposition, and never heard from him. Brethren in Nicaragua circulated that brother Wayne Partain “refused to dialogue” with them, so Wayne sent propositions for a public debate there, and made a trip there to fulfill his part, but the liberal brethren went silent.

I will say that brother DeWayne Shappley hasn’t refused to debate. He and I had a debate in Puerto Rico, but only one brother showed up with him, and he is more liberal than DeWayne, because he advocates “fellowship halls,” with food and fun paid for by the local church.

VII. Neutrality. A few outstanding “leaders” in the Spanish liberal brotherhood have opted to be “neutral” in the controversy. Among them is the well-known Juan Monroy, of Madrid, Spain. He is very influential, being a very educated journalist. He is used by the liberal brethren throughout Latin-America, specially in big “campaigns” and for graduating ceremonies of brotherhood PreacherTraining Schools. Take a look in the book What Lack We Yet? (p. 259) Brother Monroy was picked up by liberal brethren at the “Church of Christ booth” of the World’s Fair in New York City, and put to work in Spain. He is sectarian to the core: believes in Original Sin, fellowships Protestants, speaks of “absurd discussions between conservatives and liberals,” etc.

One of the stock-in-trade arguments used by many liberal brethren in Latin-America, not to involve themselves in the present-day controversy, is to reply: “This problem is in the United States; it’s not here. You brethren there solve your own problem.” This effort to try to remain “neutral” is what they have been taught. They say this, because this is what they have heard!

We have shown them that the problem is everywhere that the teachers of unauthorized practices have gone, and that they are fellowshipping error. The main reason such practices as church-supported institutions and centralized projects are not common in Latin-America is because of the lack of money there to invest in such. It is like a church which doesn’t have a piano because it lacks the money to buy one!

VIII. Intimidation. This is a popular tactic with those who want to control the minds of followers. Their threats don’t have to be necessarily direct in order to be effective.

Sample: The men of a church in San Jose, Costa Rica, invited me for a study of the issues. After two or three hours of study, we were all of one accord in the basic teachings considered. After I was gone, brother Juan Garcia, the selfstyled leader of the large, liberal congregation in town, went to that church and told the brethren that if they continued to allow Bill Reeves to visit them and teach, that he would no longer consider them a church of Christ! And it worked! They were intimidated. (For Christians in the U.S. to appreciate the power of such a threat, they have to know just how much control the big, downtown, central, “mother” church in the capital city has over the other churches in the country, controlling U.S. money for church buildings, preachers’ salaries, songbooks and literature, etc. The head “missionary” in the country wields tremendous control.)

This is not an exhaustive list of carnal tactics, but I believe that these are principal ones, and need to be recognized for what they really are! If one doesn’t have the truth, what does he have? What is left for him to use? Our Latin brethren, being of a more temperamental nature than Anglo brethren, usually don’t try to mask their feelings. When they use carnal tactics, it is more glaring and evident. However carnal tactics are not the private property of any particular culture. We must recognize them and expose them. We must be careful lest Satan, using them, gain advantage over us.

Brethren, have studies on rightly defining “issues” (questions, matters, Acts 15:2,6). I find, as I go about among the churches, two great lacks in this respect: older brethren are not able to accurately state in simple language what the “Institutional Issue” is, and younger brethren are not informed on it by preaching and teaching, so they have little or no interest in it. Let us also have more studies designed to help all of us to recognize Satan’s devices!

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 3, pp. 80-82, 87
February 2, 1989

By Forrest D. Moyer

Looking carefully lest there be any man that falleth short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby the many be defiled (Heb. 12:15).

We have studied quite a bit lately about the grace of God and the fact that no one can merit salvation. We can only be saved because God loved us and through his grace provided a way for our justification. We are saved by grace (Eph. 2:8-9); we stand in grace (Rom. 5:2); we have our daily forgiveness through going to his throne of grace (Heb. 4:14-16). When we get to heaven, we can truly sing, “Amazing Grace” and “Wonderful Grace of Jesus.” How precious is that grace which God has so richly “lavished upon us” (Eph. 1:7-8).

But the Hebrew writer gives to each of us a very solemn warning: “Be careful lest you fall short of the grace of God.” Therefore, it is possible for us to “miss out on” God’s grace. The writer said that it is! Paul also said that it is possible for us to “nullify the grace of God” (Gal. 2:21) and that we can “fall from grace” (Gal. 5:4). Let us never feel that since God loves us and that his grace has forgiven us of our every sin, gross as they may have been, it is still possible for us to “fall short of that grace.” How could we do so?

In the passage under consideration we see some possible ways of our falling short.

(1) We could be defiled by a “root of bitterness.” This is a metaphor borrowed from plants where roots are essential. Moses referred to such in Deuteronomy 29:18 – “a root bearing poisonous fruit and wormwood.” Here, then, are people whose words and life are bitter before God and corrupting to people. The pagan and Judaistic influences of their day tended to draw people away from the grace of God. Today, there is worldliness, humanism, and all kinds of false doctrines that are poisonous to the souls of God’s people. Let us be especially careful.

(2) We could fall short of God’s grace by fornication (v. 16). God’s grace can forgive fornication as is seen in the lives of some of the Corinthians – “such were some of you” (1 Cor. 6:9-11). But his grace is not a free ticket to practice immorality. We cannot pre-suppose the grace of God or be guilty of the sin of presumption. Some have reasoned that since God’s grace will forgive that it does not matter if we go ahead and commit sin. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Some people in the early church were “turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness” (Jude 4). There are many today who look upon sexual misconduct whether before or after marriage as of little consequence. Paul tells us that those who practice such cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven (Gal. 5:19-21). John says that such will have their part in the lake of fire (Rev. 21:8). If you are involved in sexual sin, repent right now and live a life of moral purity lest you fall short of God’s grace.

(3) The writer speaks of “any profane person” such as Esau (v. 16). The word used here is bebelos and means unhallowed. It is used for profane in opposition to consecrated. “Bebelos is used for the person who is uninitiated and uninterested in contradistinction to the man who is devout” (Barclay). A profane life is one lived without thought of or interest in God. All of its goals and plans are only earthly. If we like that, we fall short of the grace of God which is designed to help us have a “heavenly calling.” All that Esau was concerned about was to satisfy his hunger with the pottage that Jacob was cooking. “Who cares about the future? I am concerned with right now, and I want this!” Oh, how often this becomes our attitude and it leads to our downfall and to our “missing out on the grace of God.” A person’s character is just as strong as the weakest link in it. If, in weak moments, we are concerned only with the present physical appetite, we become a “profane person like Esau.” How bitter were the consequences in his life and in ours when we lose sight of God’s goodness to us. This is why it is so important for us to stay out of situations where we can be tempted, for when the fires of appetite burst out of the furnace of our mind and the flames start to burn, we lose sight of the holy and become “profane like Esau.”

(4) Really, the way we fall short of God’s grace is by “refusing to hear Jesus” (v. 25). Those who refused to hear Moses did not escape. “Much less shall we escape who turn away from him who warns from heaven” (v. 25; see Heb. 10:26-29). If we reject Jesus, we are rejecting God’s grace – “insulting the spirit of grace” for he came and died as the means of establishing the grace of God. Being a Christian is doing whatever Jesus requires of us. If I reject him, I have spurned that matchless grace.

No, don’t think for one moment that God’s grace automatically takes care of all our sins and rejections of his will. “Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? May it never be” (Rom. 6: 1). Let us have full faith in the God of grace and accept his grace that will forgive and save us and take us to heaven. But let us never take it for granted and “fall short of the grace of God.”

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 3, p. 77
February 2, 1989

By W. Frank Walton

A member drops out of sight. After a long while, someone asks, “Where’s brother Blank?” Someone gets around to talking to this absent brother, but by now he’s spiritually “cold” and might not be revived. In another congregation, harsh, hateful words are exchanged in a business meeting. It was all a misunderstanding but now it’s too late – another congregation will be formed and brethren who worshiped together will probably not see or speak to one another for quite a while. Yet, in another church elders are to be selected. But feelings are hurt when ancient incidents are dredged up, which should have been resolved years ago. Now, this church might not have elders for years to come.

What do these situations all have in common? An urgent need to heed Romans 15:14: “And concerning you, my brethren, I myself also am convinced that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, and able to admonish one another” (NASB). Paul knew brethren in Rome were spiritually strong enough to work out any difficulty among themselves. They were sincere and good-hearted. They knew God’s will because they were informed. They would care enough to communicate spiritual warnings to one another. Could Paul have the same confidence in you and the brethren with whom you worship? Do we care enough to give loving correction or constructive criticism? Are we willing to accept it?

Brethren often don’t feel comfortable in being open and honest with one another. Some are so “touchy” that their feelings are easily offended, egos bruised or pride deflated. We all admit we have our faults, that we could do better, and that we could use constructive criticism. But we feel personally attacked so that we don’t welcome helpful comments.

Many times we know of some problem that needs to be pointed out and dealt with, but too often it’s swept under the carpet and overlooked. We’re obligated to lovingly correct a sinning brother (Lk. 17:3). “Admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with all men” (1 Thess. 5:14). This takes initiative, concern and involvement to speak the right word at the right time. Will we care enough to communicate concern to one who is apathetically wandering away from Christ? Will we speak a kind, encouraging word to refresh a struggling soul? Also, patience in personal relationships helps us cut some slack for others. We need to be as understanding with them as we are with ourselves and as we wish others to be with us.

What are some practical things to remember in admonishing (warning, correcting) and communicating with one another?

Things To Avoid

1. Don’t assume too much or the worst. Don’t put them on trial as being guilty until proven innocent. “Love . . . thinks no evil” (1 Cor. 13:4,5, NKJV). Get your exercise, in other ways instead of jumping to conclusions. “He who gives an answer before he hears, it is folly and shame to him” (Prov. 18:13). Get all the facts.

2. Don’t be disgusted with others, thinking they’ll never change. No person is hopeless. What’s the worst thing you’ve ever done? God loved us when we were ungodly rebels (Rom. 5:8). God never gives up on us.

3. Don’t dredge up the past as today’s ammunition. God doesn’t bring up the past against us (Heb. 8:12). Since we’re his children, let’s not imitate the Devil who is “the accuser of our brethren” (Rev. 12:10). Any hostile critic or thoughtless person can pass along inaccurate, unfair or baseless innuendo. You’ll find what you’re looking for in others, if you want to badly enough. Gossip is the Devil’s brew. Such “corrupt communication” (Eph. 4:29) pollutes the air of brotherly relationships. Don’t talk to everyone else who isn’t involved about the problem.

4. Don’t belittle, ridicule, talk down to or “tell someone off for their own good. ” Rash, acidic words can’t be recalled. Admonishing someone isn’t just getting an obligation off our chest. This is cold and uncaring. Instead of thinking, “I just don’t understand how they could do this,” try to empathize. Understand we all have weakness and blind spots. Don’t just find fault and exaggerate: “You always . . . you never . . . every time I turn around, etc.” But find a solution – together!

Guidelines To Remember

1. Let’s form closer brotherly relationships. “Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor” (Rom. 12:10). We’re not just to tolerate one another. It’s hard to confront a stranger. But love shows we’re following Christ. Our common hope draws us closer together as family. Family love is optimistic and persistent. It “bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails” (1 Cor. 13:7-8a). Love is demonstrated in outgoing care for one another’s welfare. When this is obvious, we can be open and honest with one another. We won’t fear to speak what’s weighing heavily on our minds.

2. Criticism should be directed at the performance (the act) and not as an attack against the person. Most brethren are basically good, or they wouldn’t even bother claiming to be part of God’s household.

3. Be reasonable, fair and realistic. Look at all the names listed in your directory. Imagine all the trials, temptations and problems each one faces daily. Before Ezekiel preached to the exiles, the Lord wanted him to empathize with his audience: “I sat where they sat” (3:15, NKJV). Think, “How would I feel if this fault was pointed out to me?” Don’t expect more of others than you do of yourself.

4. Show in the Bible why something is wrong and needs to be corrected. Help them to see in God’s “mirror” of truth. This helps to show it’s not just a matter of personal opinion or taste.

5. Give reasons for change from the Bible. “If you fix your mind on the right things, you won’t be tempted so much and your attitude will change” (cf. Rom. 12:2; Phil. 4:8; Prov. 23;7). Or, “God promises us that if we put up a fight resisting the devil, instead of listening to his temptation, that he will flee from us” (Jas. 4:7). “If we feed our faith, it will be stronger and won’t fail us” (Lk. 22:32). Being “filled with all knowledge” helps us to apply Scripture to each situation. But give incentives for them to change . We have the potential to do better. Encourage them by painting the picture of them overcoming (Jas. 1:22-25).

6. Tone is important (Prov. 15:1). It’s not always what we say, but how we say it that helps effective communication (Col. 4:6). Each person is different. It takes practice and prayer for wisdom to sense the unique situation of each person. Be perceptive and kind in finding the right words and place to talk. Be non-threatening and on their side. “How can we work on this? What do we need to do to change the situation for the better?” Anticipate their reaction so you can defuse defensiveness. “You might be thinking this . . . I know how you feel . . . I know what you mean … I’ve had a hard time with this too … I’ve made the same mistake before and now what you’re facing . . . I wish I had someone to talk with me to help me, but I had to learn the hard way.”

Make sure they understand the reasons for the correction or warning. Make sure they know you care about, identify with and understand them and the problem.

7. Commit yourself to help. “But encourage one another day after day, as long as it it called ‘Today,’ lest any one of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin” (Heb. 3:13). We all need each other and constructive criticism. We all are sinners, since we all have faced temptation and have succumbed to the Devil’s wiles. We can draw support and count on one another to help in time of need (Gal. 6:1-2). In the Lord’s army, we shouldn’t shoot our wounded. Let’s lift one another up as we march arm in arm toward heaven’s glory.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 3, pp. 83-84
February 2, 1989

By Kenneth E. Thomas

Recently on a radio call-in program supported by a local church of Christ, the movie, “The Last Temptation of Christ,” was discussed. If the movie does indeed portray our Savior as only a man who was guilty of fornication (or any sin for that matter) as it is reported to do, I certainly want to raise my voice against such a portrayal of the Son of God as much as any other Christian who believes in the sinless perfection of Jesus (1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15; etc.). One caller asked the host of the program if he did not agree that those who did not write letters of protest to the theaters who were showing the film were guilty before God of bidding God speed to their error? Neither of the hosts disagreed with the caller and one agreed that those who do not are guilty of sin. They based their conclusions on Ephesians 5:11 and 2 John 9-11.

Not By Carnal Warfare

I suggest that these brethren are as wrong as they can be! If they are correct then Jesus did indeed sin because, if we are duty bound before God to lead protest marches and letter writing campaigns and other economic means of forcing such people to give up said practices, Jesus had the responsibility to lead protests and letter writing campaigns against the many immoral places such as the brothels and other ungodly places in the Roman Empire which were operating during his time here on earth. Yet, you never read in Scripture nor in secular history that he ever so conducted himself, nor required such of his disciples, but rather said, “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would My servants right” (Jn. 18: 36). When Peter was defending Jesus against his captors in Gethsemane with carnal means, drawing Ins sword and cutting off the ear of Malcus, a servant of the Jewish high priest, Jesus said to Peter, “Put up your sword” (Matt. 26:52; Jn. 18:11).

One of the greatest Christians ever, Paul, an apostle of Christ writing by divine inspiration stated, “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:3-5). When brethren attempt to reform the world by economic boycotts or use other pressure tactics and carnal weapons, they become guilty themselves of violating the scriptural way of advancing the cause of Christ, the proclamation of his word to a sin-sick world (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16). Men and women must first be converted to Christ then taught how to live for him. To try to force the world to live by the will of Christ through whatever the means, is to be guilty of “casting your pearls before the swine (unconverted, ket) . . . they will only turn and rend you” (Matt. 7:6).

The Social Gospel

We (who call ourselves “conservative”) stand opposed to the “social gospel” approach of attempting to convert folks to Christ as unscripturally trying to change society using physical, rather than spiritual, means to that desired end, the preaching of the truth of the gospel, God’s drawing, saving, and transforming power (2 Thess. 2:13-14; Rom. 1:16-17; Col. 3:14; Rom. 12:1-2). Then some turn around and attempt to force society into conforming to the will of Christ by using all manner of pressure tactics. Brethren, this is practicing the social gospel just as surely as are the folks who offer all manner of physical enticements to get people to become Christians! My brethren who oppose the social gospel should know better than this!

Change The World By Changing The Man

You’ve probably heard the story of the man trying to put a jigsaw puzzle of the world together without success. His young son, knowing that on the back side of the puzzle was the picture of a man; turned the pieces over and put together the picture of a man. Then he turned the puzzle over and the world was also intact. “See, Dad, when you get the man straight the world’s alright too, exclaimed the lad.” How true! We need to be busy teaching the truth. We should refuse to view obscene movies and read pornographic literature or listen to filthy lyrics of any music, whether country, pop, or rock and roll so far as our own habits are concerned. We must instill in our offspring the same principles since we are responsible to train them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4).

Get Into Their Homes

If only more Christians were in the homes of our friends, relatives, and associates engaged in Bible study classes telling them of the Savior of all mankind, we could have a much greater impact on society than we are at present, and we would not have time to picket the smut peddlers. We would convert them to Christ if possible and then they would not buy, view, or sell such garbage.

They Get Free Advertisement

Recently on TV someone connected with the controversial film under discussion, said, “All of this opposition by Christians will assure us of a box office boom.” We should work as leavening in flour in society, gently and quietly affecting those whom our lives touch; we should preach against the film certainly. We should reprove, rebuke and exhort every kind of error, but force unbelievers? No!

If as an advocated in the radio program under consideration we must get involved in trying to. force people not to show this film, we must do the same wherever alcohol is sold or where gambling is practiced, etc. Consistency would demand us to use the same measures against all ungodliness. But as already pointed out, our roll should be to preach the powerful word of Jesus to a lost and sin-cursed world and leave the results up to the Lord (1 Cor. 3:6; Acts 8:4; 1 Thess. 1:8-10).

It is possible that a kind well-written letter to the proper ones who could control the production and distribution of things which any thinking person must know can have a detrimental effect on society, could do some good and I am not opposed to such. I do not however believe that one must write such a letter or be guilty of sin. Certainly if we try to run people out of business by getting to their pocketbooks rather than their hearts, more harm than good will result.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 3, pp. 79, 87
February 2, 1989