Truth Magazine

By Johnie Edwards

God did not choose angels to teach men the gospel nor did he send the Holy Spirit in a direct manner to make men believers, but he chose men to teach men. It is important that every Bible teacher realize his place, get in it and be satisfied with it! The place and the importance of the Bible teacher can not be emphasized enough.

The Teacher Must Know The Truth

It is the place of every Bible teacher to, first of all, know the truth. There is no substitute for that. Jesus said, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (Jn. 8:32). A teacher cannot teach that which he does not know. I know of no other way to know except to study. I must be willing, as a teacher of the Word of God, to put forth the necessary effort to be filled with the knowledge of the Scriptures (2 Tim. 2:15). In knowing truth the teacher must also know how to use that truth. Remember Paul told the Colossians, “Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man” (Col. 4:6).

Must Teach The Truth

It is one thing to know the truth and another to teach it! Paul said, “And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). The truth must be taught in our classes if young men and young ladies are to know and obey. Teachers must understand that we are what we have been taught and there is much at stake when we enter a classroom to teach the Word of God. No wonder James said, “My brethren, be not many masters (teachers), knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation” (Jas. 3:1). Many churches of Christ are not very strong due to the diet on which they feed!

Teachers Must Be Able

To be able is to be capable and it is the place of every Bible teacher to be able. The church in a lot of places is lacking in qualified Bible teachers. Often times a person is put in a teaching position with the only “qualification” being he was willing to teach! Teachers must “be able to teach” (2 Tim. 2:2).

Faithfulness Is Necessary

A teacher may know the truth, he may teach the truth, he may be able to teach the truth but lacking in an important ingredient, faithfulness. When a person is put into a place of teaching the Bible, he must be faithful (2 Tim. 2:2). One who is not faithful in attending the services and in others areas of being a Christian has too much influence to be allowed to set such an improper example before others. Putting a person in the place of teaching in order to get him to be faithful in attendance is but asking for trouble.

Teach Thyself

It is the place of Bible teachers to practice what they teach. Paul said, “Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?” (Rom. 2:21) Jesus first did and taught (Acts 1:1). So must Bible teachers.

There are a lot of good qualified Bible teachers among us and we commend each and every one. Let’s all, as Bible teachers, find our place, get in it and stay in it.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 10, p. 293
May 19, 1988

By Danny Graham

All Christians are familiar with the events that occurred on the day of Pentecost. These events are described for us in Acts 2. That day was certainly an important day. It was the “birthday” of the church here on earth.

However, there seem to be quite a few misconceptions held by people in some religious groups about just what went on that day. In this article, instead of spending time talking about what did happen, we are going to look at some things which many people seem to think happened on that day which in reality did not.

Holy Spirit Baptism On All Believers. There are some people who believe that all believers in Jesus Christ will receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. To understand this subject properly, we need to go back into Acts I and see what Jesus said about it. According to Acts 1:2, Jesus was talking with his apostles shortly before he ascended into heaven. In verse 5, he promised them the Holy Spirit would baptize them in a few days. He says the same thing in different words in verse 8 when he says they would receive power when the Holy Spirit came upon them. Jesus here did not promise this to anyone other than the apostles.

Acts 2:1 says “they” were gathered together. Who are they? According to Acts 1:47, the verse preceding, it is Matthias and the other eleven apostles. Verses 1-4 of chapter 2 show that the apostles were the only ones to receive Holy Spirit baptism on the day of Pentecost.

The Promise of the Kingdom Being Established Later. There are many religious people who believe that Christ will return to earth in order to establish his kingdom. Peter preached something different. He said that the resurrection of Christ and his ascension to God’s right hand was in fulfillment of God’s promise to David that the Christ would sit upon his throne. Read verses 25-36. There is no promise anywhere in the New Testament that Jesus will return to build his kingdom. It is already built, and he rules over it from God’s right hand.

The Holy Spirit Saving People Through Direct, Miraculous Intervention. Some men today teach that the Holy Spirit must work on you from within before you can be saved. They often describe it as an experience better felt than told. Is that what happened on the day of Pentecost? Verse 37 shows that those who ultimately were saved were indeed pricked in their hearts. But, what did the pricking? Was it miraculous power from the Holy Spirit? No, it was “when they heard this.” That is, the preaching of the gospel saved men then just as it does today. That is because the gospel is God’s power to salvation (Rom. 1:16).

Salvation by Faith Only. There is no doubt that the 3000 on the day of Pentecost believed what they heard. Not only did it prick them in their hearts, but it motivated them to ask Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (v. 37) There is no doubt they believed. Yet, they felt they were not saved. In answering their question, Peter did not say they were already saved because they had believed. Faith alone does not save (Jas. 2). Peter thus told them to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins (v. 3).

Baptism of Infants. Those who believe in and practice the sprinkling of infants sometime use the argument that since so many were baptized that day, some of them must have been infants. Of course, that just is not so. Remember, Peter had told them to repent first. An infant has no sins to repent of, and furthermore, he does not have the capacity to repent. But notice also verse 41. It says that those who gladly received his word were baptized. Only one who is old enough to appreciate the gravity of his actions can make such a decision.

People Joining the Church of Their Choice. This is something that people are often encouraged to do. The idea inherent in this suggestion is that any church that professes to follow Christ is acceptable to him, so you can join whichever one you enjoy the most. Verse 47 says the Lord added the saved to the church. First, there is no joining. The Lord adds. Second, we do not become part of just any church, but of the one true church that Jesus built. Are you part of that church?

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 10, pp. 289, 311
May 19, 1988

By Mike Willis

Whether we recognize it or not, the men who lead the congregation in public worship have an impact on the congregation. Many look up to the men who lead public worship in the congregation as leaders to be imitated. This is true of preachers, Bible class teachers, those who serve the Lord’s table, or lead public prayers. Sometimes men are chosen for these roles who are not examples worthy to be imitated.

I would like to suggest some qualities which should be present in the men who take a public role in worship. This is not to imply that those who are young and inexperienced should never be used in worship. However, where men who do not have these attributes are used regularly, the congregation becomes convinced that one can be faithful to God without these attributes. Hence, I would like to suggest that men who lead the public worship should manifest these attributes:

1. They must demonstrate faith. As a young preacher, Timothy was exhorted to “exercise himself in godliness” (1 Tim. 4:7). He was warned not to become entangled in the affairs of this life to such a degree that he could not serve him who called him as a soldier (2 Tim. 2:4). The men chosen in Acts 6 to take care of the daily ministration were men “full of the Holy Ghost” and “full of faith” (Acts 6:3,5). Barnabas had such an impact on the church because he was “full of the Holy Ghost and of faith” (Acts 11:24).

A congregation rarely excels its leadership. If the leadership of the congregation is without zeal and half-committed, the congregation is usually the same way (although the congregation may have a few with life in it). A half-committed leader will not inspire anyone to do anything for the Lord. When a congregation uses men in the public worship who do not attend half of the services, who habitually come to Bible class without preparation, who show no interest in the worship service, etc., that congregation is making a statement to its membership that one can lack these attributes and still be acceptable in God’s eyes.

On one occasion, I was a member of an organization which elected its officers at an annual business meeting. On one particular occasion, the organization recommended for its president a man who rarely attended. No one wanted the job and every person suggested for the office respectfully declined. When this man was nominated, the one suggesting his name commented, “Let’s nominate him since he is not here to decline the nomination.” Needless to say, an organization with this kind of leadership will accomplish little or nothing.

What is true in secular organizations is also true of the church. When the leaders of the local church are so entangled in the affairs of this life that they have no time to serve the Lord, when they are so wrapped up in baseball or school activities that they miss many of the services, or when they just don’t care enough to be present, the congregation will have a spirit of indifference spread like a gangrene through its members.

2. They must manifest moral purity. Timothy was to be an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity” (1 Tim. 4:12). He was instructed to “flee youthful lusts” and “follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace” (2 Tim. 2:22). By so doing, he would be “meet for the master’s use” (2 Tim. 2:21). Those who administered the daily ministration in Acts 6 had to be men of honest report (6:3).

Those who take active roles in the local church must be men and women whose moral lives are above reproach. When men are used to serve the Lord’s table who are known to social drink, do not dress modestly, etc., the congregation will be influenced to think that one can do all of these things and be pleasing in the sight of God. Social drinkers, fornicators, etc. do not need to be leading singing, teaching Bible classes, making announcements, or leading public prayer; they need to be told to repent and be converted.

3. They must have God’s cause on their hearts. Nehemiah’s concern for the Lord’s people demonstrates another quality of good leaders. When Nehemiah learned that the walls of Jerusalem were broken down, he “sat down and wept” (Neh. 1:34). His countenance was so saddened by the condition of his people that the king he served noticed it. He asked, “Why is thy countenance sad, seeing thou art not sick? This is nothing else but sorrow of heart” (Neh. 2:2). Nehemiah had the cause of God on his heart.

Many of those who serve the Lord’s people are not saddened by problems facing the Lord’s church. After all, they come to church on Sunday morning and forget about the church until the next Sunday morning. As they leave the building, they quickly lay aside all thought of the Lord and his church, turning again to the affairs of life. We need men like Nehemiah who have the cause of the Lord on their hearts.

4. They must recognize the impact of their influence on others. Teachers were warned, “My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation” (Jas. 3:1). Teachers have an influence on others, not only by what they teach in class, but also by how they live. What does a teacher say to the children in his Sunday morning Bible class when he misses a night of the gospel meeting to play baseball? What does a teacher say to her Wednesday night class when she is too lazy to get up on Sunday morning to attend Bible class, slipping in just in time to observe the Lord’s supper?

Brethren, we do the cause of Christ a grave injustice by using those who are half-committed to the Lord in public roles, such as teachers of Bible classes, song leaders, leaders of public prayer, announcers, ushers, or any other capacity. These jobs need to be done by men who truly care about the Lord’s work.

Excuses Offered For Using Half-Committed Members

Here are some reasons given for using half-committed members in the public services:

1. To encourage these members to come. Some have the mistaken idea that we should give half-committed members a Bible class to encourage them to come to all of the services. This is getting the cart before the horse. Where did one ever get the idea that the job of teaching Bible class be given to encourage a person to attend? Certainly it did not come from the Bible.

2. To use every member as a teacher. Some have the mistaken idea that every member should be used to teach. 1 Corinthians 12:29 plainly states that not every Christian is capable of being a teacher; some of those who are capable of becoming qualified to be a teacher do not have the desire to become one.

3. No one else will do it. Sometimes half-committed men are given a Bible class because no one else will take it. I am not speaking of the humble, dedicated Christian who is. reluctant to step forward because of his humble assessment of his own abilities. I am speaking of Christians who are too lazy to assume responsibility; so, rather than taking the extra work of teaching more frequently, some lazy Christians are content to use half-committed members in public roles. What a sad plight the church is in where this spirit predominates! If we are going to object to using members who do not regularly attend, we must be willing to do the extra work resulting from removing them from these roles.

Problems Created By Poor Leadership

There are problems created by poor leadership. Here are a few of them:

1. Poor examples. Paul was able to write, “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ” (1 Cor. 1:11). Could we recommend to our children, “Follow the example of your Bible class teacher, the man who makes the announcements or leads the opening prayer”? We do, whether or not we expressly say that.

2. Causes indifference to permeate the congregation. Even as false doctrine (Gal. 5:9) and immorality (1 Cor. 5:6) can spread like leaven in a congregation, so also can indifference. Using men who are not committed to the Lord contributes to the spread of indifference in the congregation.

3. Unprepared classes1no learning. A half-committed teacher will do a slipshod job of teaching a class. The result will be a class in which the Bible is not taught and the class does not learn. Using half-committed teachers will eventuate in an untaught membership, a biblically illiterate congregation.

Conclusion

What kind of leadership exists in the congregation you attend? As we wrestle to overcome the problems of indifference and apathy, let us begin by using in leadership roles those whose personal zeal for the Lord’s kingdom is apparent and whose moral character is impeccable.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 10, pp. 290, 310
May 19, 1988

By Larry R. DeVore

All the promotional articles concerning Restoration Forums and “unity meetings” in recent years have had one recurring theme: that, we, as “heirs” of the restoration movement, have a “common heritage” from the past, and therefore ought to be united. They mean by “we” the Christian Churches (Disciples); the Independent Christian Churches (often called Churches of Christ in the north), and the churches of Christ (non-instrumental).

But does a “common heritage” indicate we are all going to inherit the same thing (eternal life)? Not necessarily. We may wear the same name and not inherit the same things. I have a “common heritage” with everyone named “DeVore” (it is French), but that doesn’t mean I will inherit anything from some rich DeVore (if there is one). In Wooster, there are a number of congregations with this “common heritage” from the restoration movement. There’s the Central Christian Church (Disciples), a full-fledged denominational body using instrumental music and practicing open membership. Also, the Parkview Church of Christ (of the I.C.C.) which uses instrumental music is in our town. A church meets in a school (affiliated with the institutional brethren). And the Burbank Rd. church of Christ (non-instrumental and non-institutional) exists in town. These churches are not in fellowship with one another. These churches have different viewpoints and different approaches to the Word of God.

Because of these different viewpoints and different approaches to the Scriptures, it seems to me, we do not really have much of a “common heritage” as might first appear.

Let me illustrate this with a story from the late J.D. Tant, pioneer preacher, who loved and contended for the truth.

In the 1880’s, brother, Tant held a meeting at Georgetown, Texas. By 1895 the brethren there had divided over the instrument, resulting in two congregations; North Georgetown (non-instrument), and South Georgetown (instrumental). Brother Tant proposed a way in which both churches could work together in peace while he held a gospel meeting for them.

He proposed to the South Georgetown elders two proposals: (1) He would preach a week’s meeting, and they could conduct the song service and use the organ, but he would preach one sermon telling why he objected to the organ. Or (2) they could move the organ out for the week; then brother Tant and the song leader would hold the meeting, and they could work together and sing together, and teach sinners the way of life. The latter proposal was readily accepted by the elders (paraphrased from J.D. Tant, Texas Preacher, pp. 107-108).

However, he had not reckoned with the women of South Georgetown. “A woman arose in the south side church and said she had worked hard to get the organ in the church and ‘she would see every member in North Georgetown dead and in hell’ before she would agree to set the organ aside. When the elders backed down, Tant conducted no evangelistic meeting there” (Search for the Ancient Order, Vol. 4, p. 224).

What “common heritage” do you have with that woman, or her spiritual heirs? I know, I do not have anything in common with that. That attitude and approach to spiritual matters is completely different from mine and a host of good brethren I know of today.

I am not charging that everyone in the Christian Churches has this attitude. But I am saying that the attitude which produced that “outburst” in 1895 is still around in 1988.

The only unity that is pleasing to God is that “unity of the Spirit” Paul spoke of in Ephesians 4:3. Why was that woman in 1895 and members of the Christian Churches today not willing to set aside the instrument(s) of music? Consider this:

Who made the mechanical instruments of music? Man did.

Who plays these instruments? Man does.

Who likes to hear these instruments? Man does.

Man plays them and likes them and therefore doesn’t want to give them up.

On the other hand!

Who gave man his voice? God did.

Who commands man to sing? God does (Eph. 5:19).

Who likes to hear man sing praises to God? God does (Heb. 13:15-16).

So it comes back to the basic question: Do we want to please God or man? “For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ” (Gal. 1:10).

Unity “forums,” “seminars,” “dialogues,” meetings,” etc., are not going to accomplish anything lasting for good unless we are willing to give up what we like, and what we desire, and what we want. and determine from the Scriptures what God wants, desires, likes, yea; demands from those who claim to follow him. We must want to please God and to go to heaven more than we want the inventions of men.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 9, p. 274
May 5, 1988