Truth Magazine

By Glendol McClure

Recently, a preacher who was invited to hold a gospel meeting was asked by the preacher of the congregation inviting him what he thought about having the meeting in a neutral place and not mentioning the name of the church due to prejudice on the part of denominational people. Is such a method boldly preaching the gospel of Christ to a lost and dying world as Jesus and his apostles did? Consider this:

“What shall we say then?” If a Jew is in the audience; shall we avoid preaching “Jesus Christ and Him crucified” because of the prejudice of Jews (1 Cor. 2:2)? “God forbid” — Mark 8:38; Romans 1:16; 9:33; 2 Timothy 1:12.

“What shall we say then?” If a Muslim is in the audience, shall we avoid teaching the Deity of Christ because of the prejudice of Muslims? “God forbid” — Matthew 10:32, 33; Acts 8:37; Romans 10:17; 1 John 4:2, 3, 15; 5:1.
    
“What shall we say then?” If members of denominations are in the audience, shall we expect the preacher to avoid preaching on the identity and purpose of the Lord’s church because the denominational world teaches, “one church is good as another,” or for fear of “embarrassing our visitors” or being accused of “blasting denominations”? “God forbid” — Matthew 16:18; Acts 20:28; Ephesians 2:21, 22; 4:1-16; 5:22-33.

“What shall we say then?” If we have evolutionists or atheists in the audience, shall we avoid teaching that God exists and that he is the creator of all things, because of the prejudice of evolutionists and atheist? “God forbid” — Genesis 1-2; Psalms 8:3, 4; 40:5; 74:17; 95:5; 100:3; 104:24, 30; Isaiah 40:28; 43:7; John 1:3; Acts 17:24-29; Romans 1:19, 20: Colossians 1:16. 

“What shall we say then?” If immoral people are in the audience, shall we avoid preaching “repentance for the remission of sins” because they may be prejudiced regarding certain moral issues such as adultery, fornication, homosexuality, polygamy, abortion, drinking alcohol, stealing, etc.? “God forbid” — Matthew 5:32; 19:9; Romans 1:21-32; 1 Corinthians 6:9-20; 7:1, 2; Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 4:28; Colossians 3:1-10; 1 Peter 4:1-4.
 
“What shall we say then?” We must declare “ALL the counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). We must “preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke and exhort with all long suffering and doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:2). If we seek to please men, we will not be the servants of Christ (Gal. 1:10). We must “speak the truth in love” and teach all things commanded by God for man to do (Eph. 4:15; Matt. 28:19, 20; John 14:15, 21; 15:10; 1 John 5:1-3; Rev. 22:14). Now, what will you say then?
                                 
3318 Saint James Pl., Antioch, California 94509

From an Old Preacher’s Journal

It was late March, but unseasonably cold. After the morning service we were invited to take lunch with one family and supper with another.  The lunch and afternoon visit were pleasant and routine. Then it was time to drive on over to visit and eat with the other family. By late afternoon, the day seemed to be getting damper, darker and colder by the minute.

I was thinking how cold that church building would be when we arrived for the evening service.  The one room church building was “heated” with a large black stove that stood in the center aisle, right in the middle of the building. The flue went up the center of the back wall.  Hence, the stove and the flue were connected by about 20 feet of stove pipe. The pipe was supported by three or four wires that came down from the ceiling, some eight or ten feet above. The stove was perhaps five feet tall. There was a large ash box at the bottom. The fire box bulged out like a fat man’s belly all around. The stove was flat on top, with a removable lid. In an effort to dress the thing up a bit, the manufacturers had put an upper and lower ruffle of chrome plated iron all around. All of that chrome decoration was also removable.

As our journey took us past the church building, I had a brilliant idea! I would stop and throw a bucket of coal in the stove. Than it would be much warmer when we arrived for services. The brethren always bought the cheapest coal they could find. It was dumped out in a pile behind the church building. After a few months taking the best lumps out, the coal pile resembled more of a dust pile. My knowledge of stove firing was very limited, so I preceded to throw in a whole bucket of that “slack.” And it never occurred to me to shake some of the ashes down or to open the lower damper a little.

With a great deal of self satisfaction we proceeded to our supper appointment.  The visit was very pleasant and then we all assembled back at the building for the evening service.

A nice crowd gathered. It seemed a little warmer than usual and the service proceeded in a normal way. I went to the pulpit and it was time to preach. Unbeknown to me, one of the brethren had likely shook out some of the ashes and opened the damper a little. The bucket of coal dust that I had put in the stove had now smoldered for some time.  Gas built up in the stove and suddenly it got a breath of air from the damper below and that stove blew up with a mighty explosion! It blew the door of the ash box open! It blew the door of the fire box open and it blew the lid off the top! It blew all the ornamental chrome off the sides, and worst of all, it blew the stove pipe down!

After the explosion, the fire roared out the top and in an instant the stove was red hot. With fire blowing out of the top of the stove and out of the place where the pipe connects, it was obvious that if something was not done at once, we could lose the building.

The men all worked frantically to reassemble the stove pipe and get it reconnected. They did this with remarkable speed and in a few minutes the real emergency was over. By this time the building was filled with blue smoke and the temperature was unbelievably hot.

The brethren opened all the doors and windows and I proceeded to preach my sermon. I never, never told a soul in that church that I was the one who fired the stove!

By the way, the sermon subject that night was “The Devil.”

By John Isaac Edwards

Someone has said we need a new kind of preaching in the new millennium. If you think a new kind of preaching is needed, would you be so kind as to tell us what this new kind of preaching should consist of? I don’t believe you can improve on this kind of preaching:

1. Heart Pricking Preaching. The preaching of Peter on Pentecost was of such a nature that folks “were pricked in their heart” (Acts 2:36). If we want people in the new millennium to ask, “What shall we do?” (Acts 2:37) and be moved to obey the gospel as folks did in the first century, then we need heart pricking preaching in the new millennium!
2. Bold Preaching. Acts 4:31 records concerning Peter and John, “They spake the word of God with boldness.” A lot of preachers are too timid to take a stand and preach the truth, afraid of ruffling feathers. Thus, compromise and soft preaching that leaves everybody with a “fuzzy feeling,” are the order the day. Preaching that says it like it is, without fear or favor of men, is needed in the new millennium!
3. Cut To The Heart Preaching. When the counsel of Gamaliel heard the preaching of Peter and other apostles, “They were cut to the heart” (Acts 5:33). The word of God is the “sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 5:17 and is “sharper than any two-edged sword” (Heb. 4:12). Much of the preaching being done today reflects a dull blade! Cut to the heart preaching may not be very popular, but it’s the kind of preaching faithful men will be found doing in the new millennium.
4. Scriptural Preaching. I am amazed as I attend gospel meetings at the deficiency of Scripture in many sermons. A lot of preaching any more has little scriptural content. I read where Philip “opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus” (Acts 8:35); and where Paul “reasoned with them out of the scriptures” (Acts 17:2). Whatever happened to this kind of preaching?

I don’t know what kind of preaching you think is needed in the new millennium, but I maintain that the kind of preaching done in the Bible is the kind needed at all times. This is the kind of preaching this preacher will be doing in the new millennium.

115 N. Brandywine Ct., Salem, Indiana 47167

By Connie W. Adams

It is more and more the line of brethren who appear to be somewhat that in reality we are all false teachers on something, if that term simply means those who teach something which is not according to truth. You see we all disagree with some others on various and sundry points. According to the thinking of these brethren, “false teacher” can only be used to describe a teacher of dishonorable character. Some of us have insisted that when we so described a brother, we were referring, not to his character but to the content of his message. But that does not satisfy some of the leading minds.

It reminds me of the turn Carl Ketcherside took some years ago when some brethren referred to premillennial or institutional brethren, or even some who espoused the use of instrumental music in worship as “brethren in error.” He ridiculed the idea by saying, “We are all brethren in error; just on different things.” Would someone tell me the difference in that idea and the one that says, “We are all false teachers; just on different subjects?”

It appears to me that this approach which is tied to the notion of unity in diversity and that growing out of a false (excuse me wrong) concept of Romans 14 and what that includes and does not include have bought into more of the unity movement of yesteryear than many may realize. There were many at the time that battle was raging who elevated themselves above the fray and gave some sympathy to those who were systematically forsaking the faith and criticized those who were trying their best to stand for what was right. Now again there are some who are too good to join in the battle against compromise and who, from their elevated vantage points can criticize those caught in the struggle.

One well respected brother has already said that he does not know of anyone among the brethren these days that he would call a false teacher. Let that soak in! How about Olan Hicks? How about Stanley Paher who has written a book branding many brethren as “sharks” while he defends the rest as “dolphins”? What of those who are teaching people to remain in adulterous marriages?

I have a question which I wish such brethren would ponder. If a man of honest character and pure motives teaches me to remain in a relationship which will cause me to lose my soul eternally, and I accept that teaching and act upon it, won’t I be just as lost and eternally miserable as if I had acted upon the teaching of a man who is a rascal and who teaches with the  basest of motivations? Are not the eternal results the same whether the teacher is sincere or insincere?

Jesus said, “Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits” (Matt. 7:1-5-16). You may not always be able to tell them by their demeanor. But we sure can look at the fruit that comes from the teaching. Peter warned of “false prophets among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you” (2 Pet. 2:1). Given the views of some prominent men these days, the time of false teachers was in the first century but now it is different. We don’t have to worry about that any more. You see, we are all false teachers on something and so we can stop worrying about it.

If this does not minimize error, pray tell what it would take? And yet, some of these men want to smile at us and say, “You know, there really is not all that much difference between us.” Oh yes there is! If some of you want to lay claim to being a false teacher on the ground that we all are, or being a brother in error because we all are, then you are welcome to it. “I pray thee: have me excused.” If I teach something which you know to be false or hold to an erroneous position, then please tell me what it is so I can correct it.

Let me tell you what these tactics are. They are sin shelters. They are excuses for those who are not teaching the truth on marriage, divorce and remarriage, and for those who are angry because the error of such men has been exposed. They say they do not agree with the error, but they certainly do not like it that some among us have opposed and exposed it. Well, we ought to love each other! Well and good. But we ought to preach the whole counsel of God and we ought not ostracize and castigate those who have had the effrontery to take a stand clearly enough to be understood. Some of those who have sounded the sweetest and lectured the rest on the true meaning and our working of love have led the way in doing exactly that.

Folks, truth can be known. So can error. If that is not so then none of us has any hope of going to Heaven. I am as concerned about cranks and fanatics and the dangers they pose as anyone else but I am not going to discard “the present truth” in the process — truth which can be known, appropriated, and defended. We could not hope to “contend earnestly for the faith” (Jude 3) unless we can first identify what it is. Will any of our learned brethren dispute that? Every debate that every gospel preacher ever had with a proponent of error was conducted on the premise that truth and error are not the same and that honest hearts can see the difference.

While those who disagree with what I have said are pondering these words, I leave you with this question: On what basis would any of you, who make this argument about false teachers being limited to ugly characters, ever describe Billy Graham as a false teacher? Or are you ready to join hands with Rubel Shelley in endorsing him?

Box 69, Brooks, Kentucky 40109