Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

Due to a misunderstanding of Romans 6:14, some conclude that Christians are not under any kind of law. We are not under law for justification (Rom. 6:14; 10:1-5; Gal. 2:11-3:29). Does the grace and truth Christ brought contain laws which we are bound to obey (Jn. 1: 17)? Is grace incompatible with law as light is to darkness?

(1) Absolutely not, for without law there would be no need for grace. “Where no law is, there is no transgression” (Rom. 4:15), “for sin is the transgression of the law” (I Jn. 3:4). And without sin there would be no need for grace (Rom. 4).

(2) “Do we make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law” (Rom. 3:31). True grace, true justification by faith, establishes law, Hence, false grace, phony faith, voids law.

(3) We are to “look into,” “be under” (subject to) and “fulfill” (obey) the law of Christ, because by it we shall be judged (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2; Jas. 1:25; 2:12).

(4) One cannot receive the crown of life “except he strive lawfully” (2 Tim. 2:5). How can one strive lawfully without law?

(5) “Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Lk. 6:46) The very concept of “Lord,” its essential nature, implies law. “The things which I say,” equals Christ’s commandments (Matt. 28:20), and they are law (Rev. 22:14; Heb. 5:9).

(6) All agree that Luke 24:44-49 refers to the New Testament system of salvation by grace. “It is written, ” Jesus said (Lk. 24:46). Where was it’ 4 written” “in the prophets” that salvation through Christ would be “among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Lk. 24:44,47)? One place is Isaiah 2:2,3 – “all nations . . . from Jerusalem.”

Further, note: “And he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths, for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem” (Isa. 2:3). The terms, “ways,” “paths,” “the law,” and “the word of the Lord,” are equivalents. So, the law went forth, “out of Zion … .. beginning at Jerusalem” (Isa. 2:3; Lk. 24:47). Salvation by grace, repentance and remission of sins in the name of Christ, is the law that went forth out of Zion, beginning at Jerusalem. It is the gospel (Mk. 16:15).

(7) Isaiah 42:1-7 refers to the Christ. It, among other things, describes his nature, mission and ultimate success. Isaiah says, “and the isles shall wait for his law. ” Matthew says, quoting the same passage, “and in his name shall the Gentiles trust” (Matt. 12:21). Have Gentiles received “light,” “salvation” and “eternal life” (Acts 13:47,48; Isa. 42:6; 49:6)? If so, they have received his law, or trusted in his name. If Gentiles are not under law, they have not trusted in his name, nor have they received light, salvation or eternal life.

(8) Christ now reigns on “the throne of his father, David” (Lk. 1:32,33; Acts 2:29f.). Does a king reign without law?

(9) Jeremiah prophesied of the New Testament (Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 8:8-13; 10:15-18). The Holy Spirit said, “This is the covenant that I will make with them I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them” (the laws). To those who say we are not bound by laws, we inquire, are we bound by the new covenant?

Also, the “word of God,” “the word of the kingdom” (Matt. 13:19; Lk. 8:11), is sown in the heart (Lk. 8:12). That word in the heart is the law written in the heart (Lk. 8:11,12, Heb. 8:10; 10:16).

(10) “The law of the Spirit” is the gospel of Christ (Rom. 1:16; 8:2). Are we under the gospel, subject to it?

Law cannot justify, for all have sinned. Grace through Christ provides forgiveness to all who have sinned. Under law for justification, sin reigns unto death. Under Christ, grace reigns through righteousness which it provides. This the good news of the gospel (Rom. 5:21).

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr.

“. . the genuineness of your faith, being more precious than gold that perishes” (1 Pet. 2:7).

The Christian’s faith is too precious to be either destroyed or misdirected. Without it, it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). We must keep it and try to pass it on to our children (2 Tim. 1:5). Satan, through his agents, works day and night to weaken and destroy it. He abuses various legitimate disciplines of thought – science, philosophy, education and even religion – to try to undermine our confidence in the word of God, the source of our faith.

Many institutions in society (educational, literary, broadcasting, theological, political, etc.), influenced by false philosophies, overtly and covertly attack our faith. This should challenge every saint, be he parent, teacher, preacher, elder or otherwise, to guard his faith and the faith of those under his influence. Only by diligent study and skillful use of the word of God can we counter these flagrant attacks upon our faith.

The immeasurable power of the testimony of God, unadorned by human wisdom or fleshly might, is sufficient to create and sustain genuine faith. Paul, knowing this, determined to present the testimony of God in a way so that our faith “should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.” Notice 1 Corinthians 2:1-5:

And I, brethren, when I came to you, did not come with excellence of speech or of wisdom declaring to you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. I was with you in weakness and fear, and in much trembling. Any my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.

He not only warns against corrupting the word itself, he cautions against presenting it in a way that would focus one’s faith on the wisdom of this world, rather than on the intrinsic power of the gospel message. The testimony of God, of itself, even presented by “uneducated and untrained men” (Acts 4:13), is powerful enough to counter all adverse influences of the wise, mighty and noble of this world.

Paul, unlike some of the other apostles, was neither uneducated nor untrained (cf. Acts 22:3). He possibly had as good an education as was available to a Jewish lad of that day. When it came to fleshly credentials and attainments, he could hold his own with the best. Read what he wrote in Philippians 3:4-8:

If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. But indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ.

However, the “excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus” meant more to him than all his fleshly credentials. His preaching and teaching were designed to draw attention to his knowledge of Christ rather than his fleshly wisdom, relationships and attainments. He encouraged others to do the same. He did not cater to those who desired wisdom, though he was capable of doing so had it been appropriate (1 Cor. 1:22). He even concedes that “not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble,” were called by his preaching (1 Cor. 1:27). The bare testimony of God, without carnal enhancements, just did not appeal to their carnal minds. Yet, he showed no indication to wrap it in carnal enticements in order to make it more appealing.

If Satan cannot keep us from speaking the testimony of God, he will undermine the effectiveness of the gospel in a more subtle way. He will cause us to promote the truth in a way as to produce a misdirected faith. Carnal incentives are dangled before the public to do just that. It. is easy to convince ourselves that such means are justified because of the end we believe they will produce. We tell ourselves that we can not get their attention with just the gospel unadorned by fleshly incentives. So, we will draw them in by carnal means, then give them the testimony of God.

Churches use a variety of ways to appeal to carnal interests. Social and recreational activities are featured to impress and draw those who love organized parties and recreation. Well-known “Christian entertainers” are brought in to impress and draw fans of the entertainment world. Outstanding “Christian athletes” are featured to draw and impress sports fans. “Christian scientists” (not members of the Christian Science denomination) are used to impress and draw the scientifically minded. They may even feature a “Christian philosopher” to draw and impress those interested in philosophy. Speakers’ high academic credentials are advertised to impress and draw the academically minded.

What is wrong with all of this? Is it wrong for the church to use a speaker or teacher who is also an entertainer, or an athlete, or a scientist, or an educator? Should we avoid using one with a bachelor’s, master’s, or doctor’s degree? No, on all counts, if he is a faithful Christian who speaks the “testimony of God.” His message is neither weakened nor strengthened by his fleshly credentials per se. I have good friends who fit into some of the above categories who are outstanding teachers and preachers of the word. It is when such fleshly credentials are displayed before the public in an effort to enhance one’s acceptability as a speaker of the gospel that causes us concern. This produces a subtle shift of emphasis away from faith in the divine revelation to faith in human wisdom.

We are seeing more and more brethren emphasizing the fact that their speakers and teachers are scientists, educators, engineers, politicians, criminologists, sociologists, physicians, psychologists, sports figures and holders of various academic degrees. Is this not an effort to attract the carnally minded? If it is not then pray tell me why advertise the fleshly credentials of speakers and teachers? It seems not to be enough anymore for one simply to know and be able to speak the truth in love on the subject under study. This has little appeal to carnal minds in and out of the church. One must be academically or technically trained and degreed in some field that the audience can at least remotely (sometimes very remotely) relate to his subject.

A wiser and older preacher gave me some pretty good advice when I was a very young preacher still going to school. He told me to get all the higher education that I had sense enough to use. Then when I went out to preach to forget that I had it and try my best to keep the brethren from finding out. I still like that advice.

If one will hear and accept biblical truth on any subject from a Ph. D., a scientist, engineer, or an educator when he would not otherwise do so, his faith is misdirected. It stands in the wisdom of the men and not in the testimony and power of God. It stands in the carnal credentials of the messenger rather than the credibility of the message. This is the very thing that Paul sought to avoid in his preaching. Why? “That no flesh should glory in His presence” (1 Cor. 1:29) and “that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of god” (1 Cor. 2:5).

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 21, pp. 643-644
November 3, 1988

By Ron Halbrook

The New Testament record of Jesus Christ is factual, laden with historical references and allusions (Lk. 3:1-2; Jn. 18:39; Acts 11:28). The ministry of Jesus “was not done in a comer” but was carried out in the public arena where it could be fully examined (Acts 26:26). When Jesus arose from the dead, “he showed himself alive … by many infallible proofs” (Acts 1:3). “For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty” (2 Pet. 1:16). The New Testament preserves the testimony of men who saw, heard, and touched Jesus Christ, men who thoroughly researched and examined the things they wrote for accuracy (1 Jn. 1:1-3; Lk. 1:1-3). This record has stood every imaginable test for 2,000 years!

Jesus as a confused guru and a sinner, John the baptizer as a cultist, Judas Iscariot as a hero, Mary Magdalene as a prostitute, Paul as a hypocrite and a liar. “The Last Temptation of Christ” is a movie of the life of Jesus based not on the New Testament but upon a novel by the same title written in 1955 by Nikos Kazantzakis (died 1957). The author was censured by the Greek Orthodox Church, of which he was a member, because of his blasphemy. Early in life this Greek writer embraced Darwinian evolution and lost his faith in Jesus as the divine Son of God. He forged a picture of Jesus as a symbol of all men who make “idealistic service” their “spiritual career.” Such men must overcome the ultimate or “last temptation” of comfort and happiness in order to face an unselfish life of “Pain, loneliness and martyrdom” (sketch of author’s life and thought by Peter Bien, translator of English edition of book in 1960; Houston Chronicle, 12 August 1988, sec. A, p. 23).

Though the story is defended as a novel, film director Martin Scorsese, a Roman Catholic, says the film is an affirmation of his faith in Jesus and “is my way of trying to get closer to God” (Time Magazine, 15 August 1988, p. 34). Paramount Studios dropped this film in 1983 after investing two million dollars in it. Universal Studios took the project in 1987 and finished it in June of 1988 at a cost of ten million. The two-hour-forty minute movie was released 12 August 1988. We are not surprised that the long decadent movie industry is willing to desecrate the life of Christ to make money.

Bewildered, unstable, and confused minds have fabricated a story of Jesus as a man of bewildered, unstable, and confused mind. The story tells us nothing about the true Jesus but much about modern man who has lost his way and mirrors himself in this film. Jesus is portrayed as weak and filled with doubts and lust. He turns away the sick, admits to sinning, and persuades Judas, who appears to be a hero, to betray him.

Some of the actions, dreams, and fantasies of Jesus pictured in this film are those of a voyeur (one who obtains satisfactions from viewing sex acts). Both Mary Magdalene and Jesus are scandalized by a scene which portrays her as running a brothel and prostituting herself with countless men. Jesus stands in line waiting to see her, watching her conduct her immoral business, and then enters the darkened room where she lies undressed. There he begs her forgiveness for the wrongs he has done her in life.

A thirty-minute scene pictures Jesus dreaming and hallucinating on the cross about marrying Mary Magdalene, having sexual intercourse with her, and having children. She dies, so he marries Martha’s sister, Mary, but commits adultery with Martha and bears children by both women. The film is supposed to show that Jesus did not live out this last temptation, but it is degrading both to Jesus and to modern man to paint such vivid scenes of marital intimacy and sexual immorality upon which the eyes of people can feast. The Bible warns of men “having eyes full of adultery, that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, . . . who loved the wages of unrighteousness” (2 Pet. 2:14-15).

Joan Connell of the Knight-Ridder Newspapers says that only those who believe the biblical picture of Jesus as “a perfect being” will be greatly troubled by that “little” portion of the film which is “blasphemous, heretical or obscene.” After all, she says the Jesus of this movie “is a man who has known sin, fear, failure, and guilt” like all other men. She observes,

Blood gushes everywhere – from brutalized humans, sacrificial animals, even mystical apples into which Jesus bites. There’s violence and gratuitous nudity – such as John the Baptist’s earthly, vaguely pagan ceremonials on the banks of the River Jordan.

The meaning of Jesus’ life is “nasty and brutish, brief and tragic,” but the world is full of victims whose fives have such meaning and who are, like him, “a blend of the human and the divine” (Houston Chronicle, 13 August 1988, sec. F, p. 1). The Jesus of this movie is not the Savior of men lost in sin but rather is a man himself lost in sin like all other men and so in need of a Savior!

Let us consider several contrasts between the cunningly devised fables of misguided men and the true accounts preserved in the historical record of Scripture.

Cunningly Devised Fables	Historical Record of Scripture
1. John the baptizer is a hysterical cult leader.	1. John baptized people for the remission of their sins and taught the necessity of living an honest and unselfish life. Rather than creating a cult, he sent people back to their normal places in life. Rather than grabbing money he lived in the simplest manner (Matt. 3:1-12; Lk. 3:1-18).
2. Jesus is pictured as a wild-eyed guru who is confused about his mission, message, and method.	2. From the time Jesus began his public ministry, preaching, “Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” until he arose from the dead and gave the Great Commission, he never once faltered or failed in his work. He finished to perfection the work God gave him to do (Lk. 19:10; Matt. 4:17; 28:18-20; Jn. 9:4-5; 17:4; 19:30).
3. Jesus confessed to sinning: “I am a liar, I am a hypocrite.” He confessed to Mary Magdalene, “I know the worst things I’ve done, I’ve done to you.”	3. Jesus affirmed that he spoke only the truth and challenged his enemies, “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” He never wronged Mary or anyone else, “But was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Jn. 8:32, 45-46; Heb. 4:15).
4. In confusion and doubt of himself, Jesus said, “Lucifer is inside me.”	4. Jesus said his enemies were filled with Satan, but he himself was the Great “I AM,” “the Son of God,” – “I and the Father are one” – “making himself equal with God.” He proved these claims with miracles (Jn. 8:44, 58; 9:35-38; 10:25, 30; 5:17-18).
5. Jesus turned away the sick.	5. Jesus never turned any sick person away. He healed “all manner of sickness and all manner of disease” – he healed “all sick people” who came to him (Matt. 4:23-25).
6. Jesus uses blood and bloody scenes in a sensational way. Blood pour from an apple he eats. The grape juice used at the last supper turns into literal blood. Jesus rips his own heart out of his chest and holds it up dripping and pulsating before his disciples.	6. Sensationalism stirs the superficial interests of curiosity seeks and emotionalists. Jesus calmly and forcefully taught in a manner which caused people to understand the truth, to be convicted of their sins, and to make intelligent decisions in obedience to his word. He never resorted to violence by tearing out his hear, but he used lilies and birds as object lessons. The Bible forbids eating and drinking blood (Matt. 6:26-28; 7:28-29; Jn. 6:44-45; 7:45-46; Lk. 23:8-9; Gen. 9:4; Acts 15:29).
7. Women are among the disciples who sat with Jesus at the last passover feast.	7. “Now when the even was come he sat down with the twelve.” (Matt. 26:20).
8. Judas Iscariot is so loyal to Jesus that Jesus had to persuade his faithful friend to betray him as part of God’s plan.	8. Judas stole from the Lord. His greed led him to betray Jesus. Knowing the treachery in Judas’ heart, Jesus told him it would have been better if he had never been bon (Jn. 12:6; 13:26; Matt. 26:14-25).
9. Paul is a hypocrite and a liar.	9. Paul said, “I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.” He preached only “words of truth and soberness” (Acts 26:23-25).
10. Jesus dreams of rebuking Paul for preaching and Jesus arose from the dead. Paul answers that the facts are unimportant in people’s faith.	10. Jesus appeared as the resurrected Lord and told Paul to preach the gospel, including the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul stressed the factual nature of Christ’s resurrection (Acts 9:1-22; 22:1-21; 26:1-29; 1 Cor. 15:1-8).
11. Mary Magdelene is a prostitute who runs a brothel.	11. Not once anywhere is Mary said to be an immoral woman.
12. Jesus dreams of marrying Mary Magdalene and of having sexual intercourse with her. She dies, so he marries Martha’s sister, Mary, but also commits adultery with Martha.	12. To say that Jesus “was in all points tempted” is one thing but to say that he had lengthy and detailed dreams and imaginations as a taste of the pleasures of sin is blasphemy. He condemned such (Matt. 5:28; Gal. 5:19; Phil. 4:18).
13. Jesus announces that his death will pay for his own sins, not for the sins of other men.	13. Jesus denied that he ever sinned, but said that he would die so that other men could have “the remission of sins.” “For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost” (Jn. 8:46; 3:16; Matt. 26:28; Lk. 19:10).

In summary, this movie convicts Jesus as being part lunatic and part liar. When the Jews demanded the death penalty and crucified him on the charge of blasphemy for claiming to be the very Son of God, they were right. Jesus was fully man, but not fully God. Jesus was wrong about his unique claims and the unbelieving Jews were right. Such views please Satan rather than God.

In other words, this movie mauls and maligns the Messiah just as unbelievers did 2,000 years ago. Jesus still says to men of such hardened hearts, “If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins” (Jn. 8:24). To all of us Jesus says, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mk. 16:16). Until we obey Christ, we are lost in our sins as a part of Satan’s kingdom. We are in fellowship with all the servants of Satan, including those who maul and malign the Messiah. Jesus said, “He that is not with me is against me” (Matt. 12:30). Have you taken your stand with Jesus?

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 20, pp. 656-626, 632
October 20, 1988

By Weldon E. Warnock

Alexander Campbell said that instrumental music in worship to all spiritually-minded Christians would be “as a cowbell in a concert.” Martin Luther stated that an organ in worship to God is “an ensign to Baal.” But, lo, and behold, the “erudite” Independent Christian Church preachers believe instrumental music in worship to be the personification of godliness and holiness.

Orientation For Heaven

Given Blakely, Christian Church preacher, said in discussions with John Gibbs at Joplin, MO, April 8-9 , !987: “If the purpose of the church is to orient people for heaven, the representation of musical instruments’ employment in the singing of God’s praise before His throne in heaven is inescapably indicative of their acceptability in the church” (The Banner of Truth, June 1987, p. 15).

According to Blakely we get ready for heaven by using instruments of music in worship on earth. It baffles me how a man of Given Blakely’s intelligence, as well as his colleagues, can be serious about literal instruments of music in heaven. What would a spiritual being do with a material harp? Surely he knows that Revelation is a figurative, symbolic book and the instruments mentioned therein are no more physical than the incense in heaven.

Revelation 5:8 depicts those with harps as also having vials or bowls of incense. “. . . having everyone of them harps, and golden vials of odours, which are the prayers of the saints.” In Revelation 8:3 we read, “And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.” Wonder what fragrance the incense is that these Christian Church preachers offer with their prayers in worship at their altar? Indeed, they have incense, they must have incense, they need incense in order to orient them, according to Blakely, for heaven.

This “as a cowbell in a concert” or “an ensign to Baal” is, to these modern Nadab’s and Abilitils, an orientation for heaven. So, brother and sister, grab your instrument and begin getting yourself ready for the home of the soul. Perhaps you can beat a drum, or pound on a tambourine, or pluck a jew’s-harp. But play you must!

Too, if what is done in heaven should be practiced here in the church to help our orientation for heaven, we might ought to live celibate lives because there is no marriage in heaven (Matt. 22:30).

Legalism

These Christian Church preachers chide us for being legalistic. Fred O. Blakely, editor of The Banner of Truth, reviewing the Given Blakely and John Gibbs discussion on instrumental conducted at Joplin, MO, stated in the June 1987 issue:

Brother Gibbs ably represented the historic Church of Christ (andinstrumental) view of God as, in principle. operating under the reign of Christ very much as He did during the Mosaic regime. The new covenant, in this concept, is another system of law, with Moses being replaced by Christ as the Lawgiver and Executor of the covenant. On the other hand, Brother Blakely contended for the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith in Christ, as distinguished from the inflexible rule of law under Moses. The resultant freedom from the legalistic principle, which is everywhere recognized and proclaimed by the Apostles. . . .

From these comments, and from others I have read in Blakely’s journal, they obviously would not know a legalist from a posthole digger. They do not like being “fenced in” or circumscribed by the law of God. Nevertheless, we are under law, the law of Christ, Blakely, Don Dewelt and others to the contrary, as the apostle Paul plainly teaches (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2; Jas. 2:12).

Their tune Is the same old one we have heard for years – the Man and not the Plan. They sound like the country song by Tom T. Hall which says, “Me and Jesus have got our own thing going.” They want to do as they please under the guise of “freedom in Christ.” But freedom in Christ is not lawlessness. Disrespect for law destroys freedom as is evident among us today.

In analyzing the Given Blakely-Alan Highers debate on instrumental music at Neosho, MO, Charles Cobb said, “It was that Brother Highers represented years of stagnated religious tradition. On the other hand, Brother Blakely spoke out of a living and discerning relationship with Christ” (The Banner of Truth, July 1988, p. 16). Wasn’t that nice of Given Blakely – so Christ-like, yet poor old Highers just appealed to the authority of Scripture for his practice. Such sounds about like a pious-acting evangelical preacher who has no Bible authority, but “I love Jesus!”

My friend, you cannot separate Jesus from what he taught. If you think so, then take a peck at Matthew 7:21-27; Luke 6:46; John 12:48; Acts 2:42; 1 Timothy 4:16; 2 John 9-11, and many more. It is totally ludicrous, and absurd on top of that, what these fellows are teaching.

An Affinity For Modernists

The Independent Christian Church preachers do not think much of the avid anti-instrumental music brethren (branding us as legalists, lacking the spirit of Christ and void of the Holy Spirit), but they seem to have an affinity for the modernists and loose-thinkers. One of those modernists they extol is Leroy Garrett. For example, Dwaine Dunning quoted Leroy Garrett at the Neosho debate: “A hermeneutics of silence is like a geography of nowhere, or a physics of nothing.” Isn’t that rich? With that kind of convoluted logic it is a wonder that Garrett can get out of his driveway. A map tells us what roads will take us to what place, and if we depart from that concept, we will wind-up out in the boondocks, just like Garrett has done, religiously. I might also add that Garrett writes in One Body.

But to show what kind of bed-fellows these Christian Church preachers have, notice the following excerpt from Leroy Garrett’s own paper, Restoration Review (January 1987):

When something in the Bible is contrary to the spirit of Christ or does nothing for us in terms of enlightening us about God and his will for us and thus wholly irrelevant to our lives, then it cannot be the word of God to us. I find this to be the case of one entire book of the Bible, Zephani , a book that says next to nothing to me (Quoted from Spiritual Sword, April 1988, p. 47).

These are the people who “love the Lord,” they say, but they don’t think very highly of the integrity and authority of the Scriptures, unless they appeal to them at the moment.

Those Who Use Instrumental Music

There are several reasons why instrumental music in worship to God is unjustifiable, unscriptural and sinful. The Christian Church preachers cast them aside with impunity and holler, “freedom in Christ.” Those who use the instrument:

1. Are not walking by faith. Paul wrote, “For we walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7). Faith comes through hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17). Hence, we walk by what the word of God teaches. We can sing by faith (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16), but we cannot play instruments in worship by faith. There is not one Scripture in the New Testament that commands, infers or exemplifies instrumental music in worship.

2. Reject the basis for unity. We read, “Now I beseech you brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you” (1 Cor. 1:10). To “speak the same thing” is unity of doctrine, and “that there be no divisions among you” is unity of practice. Neither one of these can be realized unless we speak as the oracles of God (1 Pet. 4:11) and adhere closely thereto. Nobody can speak as the Bible speaks and advocate instrumental music in worship. Where is the passage?

3. Make void the worship to God. Jesus declared, “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and truth” (Jn. 4:24). The term “in truth” means, according to truth, God’s word, for no worship can be true worship which is not patterned after his word. Jesus stated, “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (Jn. 17:17). No instruments of music can be found in the word of God for worship in this dispensation. Instrumental music constitutes will-worship (Col. 2:23) and vain worship. The Bible states, “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:9). Instrumental music fits into this category.

4. Operate on the silence of the Scriptures. Given Blakely said at Joplin, MO, “Were one to begin at Genesis and read through Revelation, he would not find a single time when the employment of musical instrument in God’s praise by people of faith was spoken against, condemned, or rejected” (The Banner of Truth, June 1987, p. 15). Blakely’s warped thinking would allow sprinkling for baptism, coffee, cakes, pies, and bacon on the Lord’s Table, counting of beads during prayer, baptizing babies, burning incense, washing feet, and any other thing not specifically forbidden. They need to find where it is authorized, not where specifically forbidden. The principle of the silence of the Scriptures is explicitly set forth in Hebrews 7:14. Among the Israelites, the tribe of Levi was chosen to give attendance at the altar, to make sacrifices. Moses never said, “Judah may not serve at the altar,” but by designating Levi, Judah and all the other tribes were eliminated. Jesus being from Judah, could not qualify. Hence, the priesthood and the law were changed. Jesus is now our High Priest.

5. Follow traditions of nien. Instrumental music was first introduced into worship of so-called Christendom in about 666 A.D. by Pope Vitalian (Chambers Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, p. 112). John Calvin said, “The papists, therefore, have foolishly borrowed this, as well as many other things, from the Jews” (Commentary on Psalms 33). The Christian Church borrowed their instruments from the foolishly, I might add.

Jesus said, “Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition” (Mk. 7:13). The Christian Church preachers are the ones guilty of imposing traditions, not we who oppose the instrument. Earl West wrote that the first instrument introduced into the church of Christ, according to the historical record, was at Midway, KY in 1860 (The Search for the Ancient Order, Vol. 1, p. 312).

6. Ignore the authority of Christ. “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do aft in thename of the Lord Jesus Christ” (Col. 3:17; cf. Matt. 28:18). The name of Jesus is not attached to an instrument in worship. If so, we could open the Bible and turn directly to it. But instead the Christian Church preachers run back to king David instead of King Jesus, or they pervert the Greek, or they go to the imagery and symbols of heaven, but they can’t come forth with a New Testament text for divine authorization.

7. Go beyond that which Is written. Paul wrote, “that in us ye might learn not to go beyond the things which are written” (1 Cor. 4:6, ASV). The Bible is an inerrant, verbally inspired, complete, sufficient and relevant book. God omitted nothing he wanted us to know and do. We are regulated by that which is written. There is nothing written about instrumental music in worship, therefore, we go beyond the boundary of the inspired precepts when we so employ it (cf. 2 Jn. 9-11).

Alan Highers wrote, “The conclusion of the whole matter (with respect to instrumental music) is this- Unity with those who use the instrument is predicated upon a single choice – either they give up the instrument, or we give up our opposition to it. What other alternatives are there?” (Spiritual Sword, April 1988, p. 48) But brethren we who oppose the instrument can no more give that up than we can our position on baptism, the elements of the Lord’s Supper or assemblying on the r1rst day of the week. These things are not for compromise. May we have the resolve to stand!

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 21, pp. 641, 662-663
November 3, 1988