Truth Magazine

By Gary Bagwell

Just imagine a young boy or girl being lost. Think of all the sleepless nights of the parents and the kinfolks. It is frightening isn’t it? Oh, but what a great jubilation when you find that child and he is all right. One can’t begin to imagine the thoughts, despair, concern of losing a child or the joy, happiness or elation of finding that child, unless he has experienced it for himself. I have friends who did experience this, so I can relate to it on a small scale. There are some lessons we can learn from the parable of the prodigal son – let us look at those.

The very first lesson I learn is that young people (teenagers) many times want their freedom. The attitude is, “I know what is best for me, so I want my own way. I want to have my freedom. Mom and dad, I no longer need you or want you telling me what to do. I am old enough now to make my own decisions.” Please notice in this parable though he wanted his freedom and he never needed his father anymore he asked his father for the portion of goods he had coming (money; the share of his estate). “I want my money (what is mine). I am leaving home for greener pastures.” That was the prodigal son’s first mistake. In Proverbs 1:8-9, Solomon said, “Heed the instruction of thy father and forsake not the law of thy mother. For they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck.” The first lesson to be learned then is that young folks should listen to their parents!

The second lesson I learn from this parable is that parents are not always to blame when children go astray. There is nothing within this parable that places the blame on the Father. Another example of this is Samson’s parents. Manoah and his wife (as far as we know) brought Samson up right and yet he went into sin. Judges 13-16 tells us of Samson’s evil ways. When godly parents, those who fear the Lord, bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord and still their children go astray, it is not the fault of the parents. Children have volition and even the right kind of teaching and training does not take this away.

The third lesson I see, is that sin is not as beautiful as it appears. The prodigal’s attitude was, “I am leaving home; I have to have my freedom.” But, one day he came to himself. After he had spent all his living and the famine came, he then realized for the first time what it meant to be in want, hungry and destitute. He had too much month left at the end of the money. He said, “My father has plenty, even the servants are taken care of and I perish with hunger.” Sin is expensive. “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23).

Fourthly, I see true forgiveness in this parable. The boy’s father was willing to forgive him even though this young boy had brought shame and reproach to the family name.

Notice verse 20 – “the father saw the son coming home yet a great way off. He had compassion on him, he ran and fell on his neck and kissed him.” The son made his confession to his father – how he had sinned against heaven and against his father and how he was no longer worthy to be called his son. “But the father said to his servants, bring forth the best robe and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand and shoes on his feet: and bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat and be merry: for this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found. And, they began to be merry.” None of this ever would have happened if the prodigal son would have only listened to his father and heeded his advice.

The father in his parable is like God our Father who stands by at all times waiting to receive us if we have sinned and if we will confess our sins and then repent of them. He will pardon us and treat us as though we have never sinned – as he did his son in this parable.

In conclusion (a word of caution to the young people), make sure you “honor your father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth” (Eph. 6:2-3). Be friends with your parents, get to know them, love, them, respect them. If they are Christians, you have two of the most wonderful blessings God could have given you. Do not take them for granted and hurt them by doing things that would cause them heartache and grief. As you grow older and have your own family, you will realize what it means to be a parent and what a tremendous responsibility it is. Be grateful for godly parents; obey them and tell them you love them often. The prodigal son had to live with the mistakes he had made and the memories even though he had been forgiven. Be respectful to parents and heed their advice. God will bless you for it.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 12, p. 363
June 16, 1988

By Steve Wolfgang

Footnote Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind. How Higher Education has Failed Democracy and Impoverished the Souls of Today’s Students (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987), pp. 75-77.

Allan Bloom, currently a professor at the University of Chicago, has had a distinguished academic career, teaching also at Yale, the universities of Paris, Tel Aviv, and Toronto. During the 1960’s he was a professor at Cornell, resigning in protest over the capitulation of that school’s administration to campus radicals.

His Closing of the American Mind became an unexpected bestseller, indeed, something of a cultural phenomenon, during 1987. While we do not endorse everything in the book, several pages are well worth reflecting upon.

This phenomenon [the addiction of youth to rock music – SWI is both astounding and indigestible, and is hardly noticed, routine and habitual. But it is of historic proportions that a society’s best young and their best energies should be so occupied. People of future civilizations will wonder at this and find it as incomprehensible as we do the caste system, witch burning, harems, cannibalism and gladiatorial combats. It may well be that a society’s greatest madness seems normal to itself. The child I described has parents who have sacrificed to provide him with a good life and who have a great stake in his future happiness. They cannot believe that the musical vocation will contribute very much to that happiness. But there is nothing they can do about it. The family spiritual void has left the field open to rock music, and they cannot possibly forbid their children to listen to it. It is everywhere; all children listen to it; forbidding it would simply cause them to lose their children’s affection and obedience. When they turn on the television, they will see President Reagan warmly grasping the daintily proffered gloved hand of Michael Jackson and praising him enthusiastically. Better to set the faculty of denial in motion – avoid noticing what the words say, assume the kid will get over it. If he has early sex, that won’t get in the way of his having stable relationships later. His drug use will certainly stop at pot. School is providing real values. . . .

TV, which compared to music plays a comparatively small role in the formation of young people’s character and taste, is a consensus monster – the Right monitors its content for sex, the Left for violence, and many other interested sects for many other things. But the music has hardly been touched, and what efforts have been made are both ineffectual and misguided about the nature and extent of the problem.

The result is nothing less than parents’ loss of control over their children’s moral education at a time when no one else is seriously concerned with it. This has been achieved by an alliance between the strange young males who have the gift of divining the mob’s emergent wishes – our versions of Thrasymachus, Socrates’ rhetorical adversary – and the record-company executives, the new robber barons, who mind gold out of rock. They discovered a few years back that children are one of the few groups in the country with considerable disposable income, in the form of allowances. Their parents spend all they have providing for the kids. Appealing to them over their parents’ heads, creating a world of delight for them, constitutes one of the richest markets in the postwar world. The rock business is perfect capitalism, supplying to demand and helping to create it. It has all the moral dignity of drug trafficking, but it was so totally new and unexpected that nobody thought to control it, and now it is too late. Progress may be made against cigarette smoking because our absence of standards of our relativism does not extend to matters of bodily health. In all other things the market determines the value. (Yoko Ono is among America’s small group of billionaires, along with oil and computer magnates, her late husband having produced and sold a commodity of worth comparable to theirs.) Rock is very big business, bigger than the movies, bigger than professional sports, bigger than television, and this accounts for much of the respectability of the music business. It is difficult to adjust our vision to the changes in the economy and to see what is really important. McDonald’s now has more employees than U.S. Steel, and likewise the purveyors of junk food for the soul have supplanted what still seem to be more basic callings.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 12, p. 366
June 16, 1988

By Larry Ray Hafley

Dr. Compton’s article is full of personal speculation and human imagination, but it is devoid of divine revelation. The Bible says nothing about the rapture as defined by Dr. Compton. It says even less about the day after. Note that Dr. Compton prescribed no passages of Scripture which tell us what will happen the day after his alleged rapture. We only have his word for it, but that is not good enough (1 Pet. 4:11). Dr. Compton, please cite just one verse that deals with the day after the rapture. Can you do it? Will you do it?

The Chief Text

Since most of Dr. Compton’s article hinges on his misunderstanding of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, that text must be examined. Contrary to the Doctor’s opinion, the text says nothing about some “remaining in the graves,” nor does it state that “The wicked dead will not be raised at that time.” Simply read the passage.

Paul shows that the dead in Christ are not to be sorrowed after like those who have no hope. Some believed that one who died before Christ came would miss the blessings and benefits of his coming. Paul lays that fear to rest. Indeed, the righteous dead will rise first, before the righteous living, to meet the Lord. Paul was not contrasting the righteous dead and the wicked dead.

Men divided the Bible into chapters and verses, so we often separate areas that are related to one another. Continue reading into 1 Thessalonians 5. Obviously, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:4 is contextually united. Compare the comforting conclusions of 4:18, “Wherefore comfort one another with these words,” and 1 Thessalonians 5:11, “Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.” So, when the Lord comes and the righteous are “caught up,” at the same time the wicked will be overtaken and destroyed. This is also the teaching of 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10. See that text.

God is going to repay tribulation to the troublers. He is going to repay rest (a noun, not a verb) to the troubled. But when? (1) “When the Lord shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them (the sinners)” and (2) “when he shall be glorified in his saints … in that day.” (3) “When Christ who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory” (Col. 3:4). But what about the wicked? They are not in Colossians 3:4. Yes, but they are in 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10. (4) Both the righteous and the wicked are in Matthew 16:27. “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.”

So, when the Lord comes with the angels, then (not later) he shall reward every man (not part, not some), but “then,” “every man.” There is no sequential, sectional coming, hence, no rapture.

“No General Resurrection”

Dr. Compton says, “There is no such thing as a general resurrection.” Well, another Doctor, Dr. Luke (Col.4:14), quoted the apostle Paul who said, “there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust” (Acts 24:15). Note, “a resurrection,” singular, “of the dead” no “just the righteous,” but Dr. Luke’s word to that of Dr. Compton. If you are following Dr. Compton, you ought to change Doctors.

Dr. Compton, in his treatment of Matthew 25:31-46, says it “refers to the judgement of the nations, and has nothing to do with the rapture or a general resurrection, but refers to a judgment of the nations as to their treatment of the Jewish nation.”

Where did Dr. Compton learn this? His word is not our authority. Look at the text of Matthew 25:31-46. “All nations” will be there. When the Lord said, “Go teach all nations,” he referred to all nations of men, to “every creature” individually (Matt. 28:19; Mk. 16:15; Acts 10:35,43). So, all nations will be there, i.e., “every creature” will be present.

Further, the division of the sheep and the goats is not national, but individual. Those being judged are persons, not nations. There are no “sheep nations” versus “goat nations” in the text. Judgment is rendered to individuals on the basis of their treatment of one another (vv. 40, 45). The Lord did not say to a nation, “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my nations, ye have done it unto me.” Absolute ly nothing is said about the nations as to their treatment of the Jewish nation.

Are the “cursed” of verse 41 nations or individuals? Are the “righteous” of verse 46 nations or individuals? Individuals are judged by how they have treated their fellow man (vv. 34-35). Neither blessing or cursing is based on how the Jewish nation was treated. Read the text.

Finally, the judgment of Matthew 25:31 is that of Matthew 16:27. Both involve the “Son of man.” Both include his coming in “glory.” Both incorporate his coming “with his angels.” Both encompass the judgment of “every man (not nation) according to his works.”

Both the righteous and the wicked will be raised on the last day in the same hour (Jn. 5:28,29). Observe that -A “all that are in graves shall hear his voice and come forth.” The believer will be raised “up at the last day” (Jn. 6:39,44, 54; 11:24). Also, those who do not believe, those who reject Christ and his word, will be judged “in the last day” (Jn. 12:48; cf. 5:29; 2 Cor. 5:10).

“Not Just Any Time”

The second coming of Christ, Dr. Compton contemplates, “could not happen just anytime,” nor could it “happen just any moment.” See Matthew 24:36-39. The wicked will be taken and punished; the righteous will be taken and blessed. As with Noah, there is no “day after” for the wicked. “Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh” (Matt. 25:13). Sounds like to me, Dr. Compton, the second coming could happen “just anytime.”

Conclusion

Remember the title of Dr. Compton’s article. He cited not one single verse that deals with the day after his rapture, no, not one. His surmising and theorizing is all of his own devising. We want the Scriptures that tell us about “the day after the rapture.” Surely, he knows of one. We promise to pass it along if he surrenders it.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 12, pp. 369, 374
June 16, 1988

 

By Joe Polk

In brother Hoyt Houchen’s recent article answering a question regarding 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, I saw some things that bothered me. A reader wanted to know if it is wrong to take legal action against brethren who have defrauded them.

In his response, brother Houchen first looked at the original wording of the text. He noted that the expression “go to law” was translated from the Greek word krinesthai, a word that originates from krino, meaning “to judge.” This was supposed to support his premise that we are not sure that the text even refers to legal action.

That really is incidental to me. The jist of the matter is that the Corinthians should not let the unbelievers “judge” their disputes – court or no court!

Brother Houchen went on to supply another argument. He noted that our court system, being a product of our government, is a blessing of God (Rom. 13:1-7). The institution is not unrighteous; therefore, he goes on to say that the issue is “who” judges, not “what. ” In other words he is saying that courts are not under consideration.

Brother Houchen, back up and look carefully at what you said. You said that the judicial institution is not “unrighteous.” That is neither here, nor there. First of all, people are righteous and unrighteous, not institutions. That is evident to both of us. No one can affirm that just because the institution is under the domain of God that it is then made up of the righteous! It is safe to say that the vast majority of those who make up the legal system of this country are unrighteous in God’s eyes. Yea, how many Christians do we know who are judges? I’d guess that one hand will suffice that count.

It seems evident to me that when there are unbelievers doing the judging, we had better settle matters ourselves. Anyone who would affirm that because God set up our government then it is righteous and those within it cannot be considered in 1 Corinthians 6:1-8 is stretching the Scriptures into more than God intended.

Another argument that brother Houchen brought up dealt with the duties of the church and judicial system. It was contended that the church wasn’t to meddle in judicial affairs and that the judicial system wasn’t designed to handle church affairs. Are you saying, brother Houchen, that brethren who defraud brethren are no longer under church jurisdiction because they violate the “law of the land”? I urge you to note that if brethren cheating brethren were not under consideration in chapter 6, then Paul didn’t know it. He mentions that they were involved in cheating!

I have respect for brother Houchen and feel that he is a knowledgeable man. I’m afraid that there is, however, a trend among preachers today. This trend is calling us to “read” between the lines” to find truth, because the Word of God alone isn’t clear.” I urge all brethren to look to the Scriptures and read them objectively. I have nothing against word studies, contextual studies, and the like; but I feel that they are to clarify the letter, not change it.

Paul knew that the Corinthians were defrauding one another. Regardless of whether they went to “court” or not is incidental. They went before unbelievers’ That was the wrong! Whether we go to court before unbelievers or next door, the point is the same. Paul is giving them instruction on where to settle their problems! Are we to come along and say, “I wonder where they went before unbelievers?” The point is that they should have stayed within themselves!

If they were to settle disputes regarding cheating and the like, why aren’t we? I’m afraid that brother Houchen has gone the wrong way with this passage. Paul exhorted them where they should’ve taken the matters. Is he not telling us the same?

I exhort brother Houchen to consider these things carefully. I’m certain that he wishes to mislead no one. I trust that he will consider objectively and make a change if convinced from Scripture that he should. Should his understanding convince him that he is right, we are still brothers. Neither he nor I would divide or slander on such a matter. I can still rejoice in his work of love in the love of Christ.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 12, p. 367
June 16, 1988